Why I Hate Religion, But Love Jesus — The Smackdown

YouTube Preview Image

It’s worth beginning with this: I agree with this guy on a lot of points. He reminds us Catholics of a striking truth; that without a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, religion is a joke. He speaks the truth that Christ died for our sins, once and for all. I can’t help but think, in the midst of all this, that this hating-religion-loving-Jesus thing is the logical consequence of Protestantism. For a 21st-century Protestant looking at a thousand-something churches, I imagine there is an immense temptation to say “It’s all a wash. I will follow Christ, not a religion,” and be done with it. I empathize with him, knowing that if I were a Protestant I would be in full agreement: There is either one, true religion or there is no religion at all.

But nevertheless, there are two main problems with this video. 1. Jesus Christ would strongly disagree with it. That is to say, the creator of this video is very, very wrong. 2. He’s very, very wrong with some great video editing, good background music, a strong emotional appeal, catchy rhyme, and all in relatively well-timed YouTube moment. He’s wrong in style. When a man gains immense popularity by making blanket statements stylistically, how likely is it that his followers will read a rebuttal making specific statements prosaically? I don’t know, but rebut I must, for it is the duty of the Catholic to resist fashion and fads, no matter how unfashionable he looks doing it.

Catholicism: Taking the long, boring route to Truth since 37 A.D.

So onto the first bit of silliness — the idea that Jesus came to abolish religion. Unforgivable. He literally said the opposite: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” What were the Law and the Prophets? Judaism. What is Judaism? A religion. What did Jesus specifically say he was NOT going to abolish? That’s right. A religion. (Aaand you just got Kris Kringled.)

This is made apparent not only in the words, but in the actions of Jesus Christ. Whether you believe in the sacraments or not, there is no doubt that Christ established ritual. It’s one thing to ignore Christ’s statement to “eat my body.” It’s another to ignore his command to “do this in memory of me.” Christ commanded that we have ritual. The early church followed this ritual, they obeyed his command to “do this in memory of me.” We know this because Paul says: “Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ?” Does the mere Christ-follower-religion-hater obey Christ’s command to eat his body and drink his blood, and to do it in memory of Him? I do not mean ask whether they believe in the True Presence of Christ in the bread and wine, I simply mean to ask whether they follow the ritual Christ established at all? If not, it would seem that to be a Christ-follower is to ignore the commands Christ bids you follow. And there’s more of this Christ guy being ridiculously religious.

He established a priesthood in the Apostles. If that word freaks you out, I’ll rephrase: He gave certain men very distinct roles.

Christ gave them the power to forgive sins: “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.” (John 20:23)

He gave men power to make decisions concerning doctrine: “I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 18:18)

He built a Church: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)

He called men to the sacrament of Baptism. These are not things available to the mere Christ-follower, unless he truly believes that whatever he binds on earth will be bound in heaven, and all the rest. So knowing that Christ so clearly established a Church, with rituals, with priests, and with sacraments, our man’s statement “What if I told you Jesus came to abolish religion?” can only be answered with, “What if He told you you were wrong?”

“If religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?” says he. And honestly, this seems to be his only real charge against religion, all else is mere personal experience. While it is true that a war may be fought over an excess of hatred, it is equally true that a war may be fought for an excess love of freedom. A man may strike another man because he is filled to bursting with bitter, archaic beliefs. He may also strike a man to stop him from killing a baby. The fact that religion starts wars could equally be held as evidence that religion is good as evidence that it is bad. For men desire good and will fight for it far more often than they will fight for bad. Did Christ not say “I have not come to bring peace, but the Sword?” And of course this is true, I know it on a personal level: I would not be tempted to fight the man who slanders me. I would be tempted fight the man who slanders my God. Christ brings me the Sword. Would I be morally justified in my desire to fight? Probably not. The point is simply that it is I who am accountable the fight, not my religion. If it is a bad thing to fight, my religion is the good for which I would forget myself and be bad. That is no more reason for rejecting religion than for rejecting your wife, who — when threatened — might very well lead you to kill.

Do not take away the ennoblement of the poor.

He goes on: “Why does [religion] build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor.” I’m getting serious ‘by-religion-I-mean-Catholicism’ vibes from our man. First of all, religion does not fail to feed the poor. What — if you don’t mind me asking — is the number-one most charitable organization in the universe? The Red Cross? Nope. The Secular Humanist Aid and Relief Effort? Hahahahaha, but no. It’s the Roman Catholic Church. As for the building big churches bit, I could give an entire post on how silly of an attack that is, and how insulting it is to the poor man, but I already did. For now I’ll just say this: Go to a man in poverty who attends a beautiful church and offer to tear down the beauty that surrounds him, to melt down the gold so he can buy more food. You will never see a man more insulted.

He then gives himself away. “[Religion] tells single Moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve had a divorce.” Alright. This is one of those few times I actually get annoyed. First of all, unless you’re the WBC, there is not a single Christian denomination that says that there is any possible way you could get God not to love you. This is a basic premise of Christianity. We are never unloved. We may reject God, but He never, ever, ever rejects us. So I’ll take his “God doesn’t love…” bit to actually mean religion is against divorce. But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church. So when this man says ‘religion’ — in this case — he means The Roman Catholic Church. And it’s true, we have the terrible habit of believing Christ meant what he said:

“They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.” “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied. “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.”‘

So once again, I must ask, why is it that following Christ while disdaining religion leads to the direct contradiction of Christ’s teachings? It’s a silliness of modern Christianity, to love Christ partially — “Ah yes, he saved me, died for me, opened the gates of Heaven for me, and I accept him as my personal Lord and Savior, but not what he said about that whole no divorce thing. That was just whack and unloving.”

A common theme throughout the video is our man’s complaint that religion is just behavior modification, a list of rules to follow, and thus doesn’t get to the core of the matter — the call to love Christ as a response to his sacrifice on the cross. First of all, this is an absolutely valid critique of what religion should not be. If it is just a set of rules and not a love affair, it is dead. You can’t have works without faith any more than you can have faith without works. But the idea that following rules is inherently contradictory to loving Christ flies in the face — yet again — not of religion, but of Christ. He says, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” Love of Christ requires obedience to his commands. You cannot have one without the other.

Our man then clarifies — He loves the Bible. This is interesting. Did Christ hand out Bibles before he ascended into Heaven? No. The Bible is the product of a religion. A religion called Catholicism.

“If Jesus came to your church, would they let him in?”

Um, yes. We actually snagged a picture.

So this is awkward.

But in all seriousness, the last part of the video is awesome. It’s a darn good explanation of how Christ died for our sins, how we are saved not by our own merits, but by his Grace. I’m not sure why it goes against Christ to be a religion that teaches exactly what our man is teaching in this video.

“Because I believe that when Jesus said ‘It is Finished’, he meant it.” When Jesus said it is finished he died, and yes, without a doubt, his sacrifice was found acceptable to God. It truly is finished — nothing can take away the fact that we have been redeemed. But we can choose to reject this redemption. That’s why after the Resurrection, Christ appeared to Peter — upon whom he had said he would build His Church — and told him “feed my lambs.” Christ knew we would need instruction, guidance and example. Jesus established a Church to proclaim to the end’s of the earth that “It is Finished.” He established a religion to make known his salvation. I reject the video’s message, not simply because it wades in the shallows of theology, forever fearing to plunge into the depths of what Christ actually did here on Earth, but because it is lonely. It is a call to figure out the mysteries of God on one’s own, with nothing but a book one must deny was given to him by religion. No, this is silly. God gave us a Church to aid us on the journey, so that we might be one. To love Jesus and hate religion is equivalent to calling upon a doctor and smashing all his instruments when he arrives.

This my basic critique. It is not a true defense of the concept of religion, which I defend not so much as something good or bad, but as an urge as primordial and wonderful as sex and song. It isn’t a small thing that we seek to understand, it is the framework of our universe, by which we understand everything else. But as usual, the Internet isn’t big enough for all that. Still, it’s only fair that if we started with a stylized, anti-religion video, we can end with a stylized pro-religion video:

YouTube Preview Image

  • Chris

    This is amazing! Honestly, today a Protestant that I know on my FB just posted the first video you linked to. I’m telling you, man. It’s divine providence that you wrote this post. Thanks!

  • Pioswimmer05

    Oh.my.goodness. This is why I stalk this blog basically every day. THANK YOU for this wonderfully spoken TRUTH! You have been blessed with quite a gift, my friend.

  • BadWolf

    Your paragraph on why fighting is moral didn’t address the man’s question of why religion has been an instigator of the evil of war.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

      Everything and Anything can be ‘an instigator of the evil of war.’ Religion, Philosophy, Love, spices, money, power, land, Science, Atheism, oil, animal rights, human rights… Man can pick a fight over anything. It’s not Religion that is the problem, it’s *us*

    • Marc Barnes

      Reread my paragraph. I don’t claim that fighting is always moral, merely that men fight for good things more than bad. Religion may very well be an instigator of war. So may liberty. The ‘why’ is that religion is seen as a good worth defending.

      • BadWolf

        What he means, I think, is bigger than man on man fights. He’s talking about the widespread plague of human destruction waged by some members of the church and stirred by the highest levels of authority in some places on the globe during some points in history. The church has given license to it’s congregants to commit some of the worst crimes against the humanity during these times out of greed and a misuse of scripture. The people had no problem doing that because they were taught only to do what the men in the shiny robes said, not understand scripture. They were never taught what God wanted them to be, HIS children. Not the bastard children of a malfeasant institution. That’s what he’s saying. I think.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

          “The church has given license to it’s congregants to commit some of the worst crimes against the humanity…” etc., etc.

          Governments have done the same. See Communism, Socialism, etc. Lots of people were misled into treating their fellow human beings in a less than human way by the Secular Authorities.
          Military regimes have done the same. Remember “I was just following orders.”?
          Philosophies and Sciences have done the same… like Eugenics and the Milgram experiment.

          ANYTHING can be used to mislead people, and most things have. Not the fault of Religion. This video is, I’m sure, well-meaning, but totally off the mark.

          • BadWolf

            You’re right. The wars of our era have all been for material things, or for sport. The church has tried it’s hand in these things more than a few times, claiming justification based on it’s authority alone. Is it safe to be in a religion that conflicts with scripture and polarizes the world for it’s own profit?

          • Underpantsmonkey

            But isn’t religion was suppose to be that thing that “fixed” us from those corrupt ways and brought us together? Higher authorities in the Church were suppose to keep us on track. I don’t think anyone can deny that people can be misled by someone else. But, when the misleading people are in the Church (the higher authorities) that’s the problem. That’s the issue the man had in the video. The Higher authorities are suppose to keep us on track and lead us to be better than those petty fights or huge wars. Let’s be serious, there is only so much the Church can do for outside conflicts. The real issue isn’t if the Church would back up one side (or neither) in a war, but when wars (or fights or anything along those lines) are instigated or furthered because of the higher authorities in the Church.

            Basically, we understand that people can be easily misled. The fact that they can be misled in many forms shouldn’t take away from the issue that the Church has misled people in the past to perform actions they shouldn’t perform. So what if government can mislead people as well, shouldn’t the Church aim to be higher than that? Aim to act better than those who can’t to set the example and lead us to a truly good life? When they fail at doing that, that is an issue. That is what the man in the video brought up (from my understanding).

          • You didn’t answer his question

            Saying that governments also waged war by misleading their people is not a proper argument to answer why religion causes war. Yes it is shameful for governments to do that, and I’m not trying to full out defend the sovereign rights of states to wage war, but govt’s wage war to protect their people’s national interest in International Relation theories.

            Religion on the other hand, proclaims to give peace to our lives. It helps us to be connected with the divine. Waging wars in the name of Christ is counterintuitive to the supposed purpose of religion, whereas at least one can argue that a government has to protect its people/national interests.

            Ultimately war is a bad thing. But with Religion, its a double standard where war is the total opposite of what religion entails.

          • War Historian.

            As I said in a comment earlier,

            “Just because most modern wars haven’t been about religion doesn’t necessarily mean that over the course of history, religion hasn’t been the main cause of war.

            From the time of Christ to just a few centuries ago, most wars or state-sanctioned violence has been about religion. From 1400-1800, monarchs constantly proved themselves to be “the most Christian king” and launched massacres in the name of religion.

            Actually, wars solely about ideology and/or economics did not become popular until 1800 or the Napoleonic era.”

      • RPAW

        How does one respond to Jesus telling Peter ,” Put away your sword, he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.”? Thank you :)

        • Marc Barnes

          …with obedience. ( :
          I do not argue that war is good. Only that it might be fought over something good.

          • Catholics and War?

            The point I have trouble with in your rebuttal is that your war argument is by far the weakest. Not once did you mention the just war theory that was proposed by both Augustine and Aquinas and enshrined in the Catechism. Yes, people can fight over something good, but only in the circumstances that there is an evil that threatens the good of humanity, and that all other methods have been exhausted.

            Yes it is relativistic, but if you examine the countless religious wars that have been waged since the Crusades, the Just War Principles have not been the case. Wars were waged against the Muslims, against those who were outspoken and differed in views, those who were at the forefront of leading science, and those who favoured the Protestant Reformation. In almost all of those cases, the victims were innocent and posed no serious threat. Yet, countless monarchs like Alexander I of Russia, Louis XIV of France, waged wars in the name of Christ.

            Your paragraph made it seem as if when we deem anything to be “good” which is very relativistic, we have the grounds to wage a war.

            I understand though that it wasn’t your intention to sound very aggressive in “fighting for good”.

            I’d like to say that you’ve written a great piece of work and that although I must disagree with your war argument, I understand it probably wasn’t your intention.

        • PC Geek

          Howdy RPAW

          To answer your inquiry:

          “Living by the sword” is not the same thing as simply using one.” “Living by the sword” means to make a living by violence – aka being a robber, bandit, revolutionary…this is not the same thing as a man making an honest living and using a sword to protect himself.

          As was the case with war in general, it all comes down to protection from unwarranted aggression (good) vs. being the aggressor yourself (bad).

          Note that in the particular Biblical event in which this happened, Christ was about to be arrested and Peter was about to defend him from begin arrested – but of course we know that Christ’s subsequent Passion, death, and Resurrection required Him first to be arrested, so Peter definitely needed to back off in this case. He was interfering with God’s plan in this case.

          A great article about some of this “sword” stuff in the NT – with some links to some great historical discussion to give some idea of the conditions that the apostles faced after the end of the earthly Ministry of Jesus. If you are interested in this (and it seems like at least some of the posters here are, but of course I could be wrong) then definitely check it out.

          http://www.tektonics.org/lp/noswords.html

    • stephen

      Actually, he did.
      “The fact that religion starts wars could equally be held as evidence that religion is good as evidence that it is bad. For men desire good and will fight for it far more often than they will fight for bad.”

      • BadWolf

        With that logic, is war good?

        • Timothy Lochner

          Badwolf, that’s an excellent question. Let me propose this to you: A neighboring government is invading your country. You could A) Go to war and protect your people or B) Let them invade, kill, rape, steal, or whatever else they intend on doing.

          The point is that war is not good or bad. It simply is. The reasons why you go to war are good or bad. Anything could be the foundation of that reason.

          This applies on a micro level as well. If a fellow man is being attacked in the streets, I have an obligation to defend him, even if it means coming to violence (relative to the situation–no bringing a missile launcher to a knife fight). The moment that the offender has turned and retreated, however, I have no right to continue after him with violence. I would even suggest that I shouldn’t even attempt to detain him until civil authorities came, but that may be a finer issue than what we’re dealing with here and one that I’m not equipped to address.

          I hope this helps answer your question. Let me know if I can clarify anything or answer anymore questions.

    • MayerRules

      “I should say that there ought to be no war except religious war. If war is irreligious, it is immoral. No man ought ever to fight at all unless he is prepared to put his quarrel before that invisible Court of Arbitration with which all religion is concerned. Unless he thinks he is vitally, eternally, cosmically in the right, he is wrong to fire off a pocket-pistol.”
      -GK Chesterton, From the Illustrated London News July 29, 1911

    • David Casper

      Actually, yes, he did address that, by pointing out that in the case of authentic Christianity (read: Catholicism), it is not the religion that commands or instigates war, it is the individual person who is misguided enough to start a war thinking that his religion demands it of him. The teachings of the Church specifically dictate that one must not instigate war. This is “just war theory,” and it is most prominently laid out in the writings of Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.

      There are some religions that do instigate war, but Catholicism is not one of them. Catholics may have instigated war in the past, but for whatever reason that might have been, it is certainly not because their religion demanded it. If you have an objection with a religion that does mandate the instigation of war, then take up that objection with that religion – not with all religions in general.

      • Catholics don’t wage war?

        Read above. Popes and clergy have had enormous influence on European politics and power. Even if Catholic monarchs waged the war themselves, many were sanctioned by the church with moral and financial support.
        Now tell me, Catholics do not instigate war? Because all of my evidence points to the opposite.

        • Georg Laing

          People instigate wars. Some of them are Catholic, some of them are Protestant. Some of them are Iroquois Indians. The point is, just as it is not always moral to go to war, it is not always immoral.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

      Last I checked, more wars were started over economics and land then religion. In fact, modern wars have almost always been politically motivated. Name some religious wars in modern day, would you?

      The only one I can think of would be the Afghan war but even that war isn’t entirely religiously motivated (although one could argue it is).

      PS: Religion isn’t the CAUSE of any war. Religion is the EXCUSE that bad men use but if religion was taken away these men would still start wars.

      • War Historian.

        Just because most modern wars haven’t been about religion doesn’t necessarily mean that over the course of history, religion hasn’t been the main cause of war.

        From the time of Christ to just a few centuries ago, most wars or state-sanctioned violence has been about religion. From 1400-1800, monarchs constantly proved themselves to be “the most Christian king” and launched massacres in the name of religion.

        Actually, wars solely about ideology and/or economics did not become popular until 1800 or the Napoleonic era.

        • Georg Laing

          Since you are a war historian, do you care to provide proof that “most” wars were fought because kings were trying to prove that they were “the most Christian king”?

    • PC Geek

      The whole “religion causes war” thing has no more historical credibility than than the claim that Church was against Science (responsible for it’s creation actually).

      For example, check out the list of wars in Wikipedia – you will find very few of them have anything to with religion – in most cases, even if religion is involved, even a cursory glance at the history of the conflicts shows that resources, land, greed, power, or politics was the source of the conflict, with religion (perhaps) being slapped on as ex-post-facto rationalization to attempt to appeal to emotions to get people to fight.

      The only time Christianity can be a motivator to war would be a war of defending the innocents against violent aggression – aka the macro/societal equivalent of you shooting a man who broke into your house with a ski-mask and a knife at 3am and tries to rape your wife. We have a duty to protect innocents, but Christianity is explicitly against wars of conquest and resource grabbing. Even if someone used Christianity as a motivator in a war, it was rarely applied correctly.

      Plus, as has been stated many times, people will fight over anything and everything so if anything people should be surprised that there are not more wars.

      Please stop being so historically ignorant. As a good starting point, check out chapter V of the (free) portion of this particular book (e-copy linked here)

      http://www.voxday.net/mart/TIA_free.pdf

      You atheists gotta stop using the same old canards if you want people to take you seriously.

      • War wasn’t about religion?

        Wrong on all accounts. I am a university student studying history and International Relations and I know that countless monarchs like Alexander I of Russia, Louis XIV of France claimed to be Christian kings who fought those who were Muslims, against those who were outspoken and differed in views, those who were at the forefront of leading science, and those who favoured the Protestant Reformation. In almost all of those cases, the victims were innocent and posed no serious threat.

        That and the era from the 1500s till 1648 was continuous religious wars (which is why the era is coined, “The Age of Religious Wars”) sponsored by the Catholic Church itself. In Germany, Protestants of different sects were persecuted in order that their respective princes would return the state back to Catholicism. The Spanish Armada was launched to bring England back into Catholicism. Huguenots were massacred in France. The Thirty Years War pitted each European state against one another in alliances of Catholic vs. Protestant. In almost all of the previously mentioned conflicts, the state sanctions the act of violence and is supported by the Catholic Church either through moral support or actual financial support.

        One quotation from a Catholic General who was just about to massacre a town of both Protestants and Catholics said this, “Kill them all; God will know his own.”

        You do make a point that war was about “resources, land, greed, power, or politics” but up until 1800s, religious belief was the #2, if not #1 reason for each of these wars. Remember, war isn’t as simple as slapping one reason onto it. Many monarchs believed they were dutifully achieving more than one reason by waging war.

        Our history is full of sad mistakes. Instead of denying that these happened, let us accept them and move forward by interacting with people of other faiths and not criticize them.

        • Georg Laing

          It seems you forget that during some of those “religious wars”, Catholics and Protestants fought side by side against Catholics and/or Protestants. If it was a purely, or even predominantly religiously motivated war, this would’ve been utter folly.

        • PC Geek

          Sigh…you obviously did not read the source material I linked to or you would not have written that response…hopefully you are not too far into your studies yet and are just writing in ignorance. The author there totally shatters the religion  war myth.
          Note that modern historic consensus is that in many of the wars often believed to be religious in nature (a tiny % of all wars anyway) that religion was at best a superficial motivator or minor contributing factor. As the crusades are the major ‘religious war’ that comes to mind, I think the following quote from historian John Julius Norwich applies (talking about the 1st Crusade) “The entire Crusade was now revealed as having been nothing more than a monstrous exercise in hypocrisy, in which the religious motive had been used merely as the thinnest of disguises for unashamed imperialism.” Similar stuff applies to many of those other so-called religious wars. Even the ‘Wars of Religion had a strong component consisting of the struggle between the House of Guise and the House of Bourbon for the French throne…so there was tons of politics there too. Even so, the few wars where religion played a part are a tiny fraction of wars in history. Religion was not the #2 reason, more like #23294823048903 or so.
          Also note that in all the writings of the world’s major military strategists, from Sun Tzu to Clausewitz and everyone in between, we never see any mention of how to use religion in a military context. If religion was such a motivator to war and a motivator to get the troops to kill the enemy, you would think some of the world’s most famous generals would have brought it up at some point…of all the classical strategists, only Machiavelli brings it up at all, and even then mentions in as a useful tool for discipline and morale (aka we don’t need to be afraid since God is with us) – no mention of it making the troops bloodthirsty maniacs.

          Overall notes:
          1,) Of all wars in history (not just cherry-picking on small tiny % of all history) *very few* had any religious cause, so even if you were right above it still does not prove what you seem to think it does.
          2.) As Georg mentions below, the sides in these wars were often not as sectarian as you would seem to believe – there are plenty of examples of Protestants and Catholics teaming against other Protestants and Catholics, and even cases were Christians worked with Muslims against other Christians.
          3.) Often times what appears to be a religious conflict is actually a tribal/ethnic/political one…and religion also happens to be along the fault lines. It takes care to truly discern the motivations of the combatants. You will not find religion as a motivation in the great majority of cases…maybe sometimes as ex-post-facto rationalization, but that is it. It is quite easy to say “God is on my side” when I really mean “I want something very badly, so I will just make God in my own image and claim that He wants what I want.” Did any of these leaders correctly apply Scripture or Church teaching in trying to drag God along for the ride? Note David Casper’s post below.
          It takes far longer than a blog post to really discuss this issue in any meaningful depth which is why I referred to some reading as follow up. If you disagree with my source, then please provide evidence as to why.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-Francis/1679165045 Joseph Francis

    Fantastic! Thank you for breaking this down so well!

  • Ben

    Thank you very much for writing this!! I continue to come to your blog and it honestly helps me in my everyday life. Thank you!!!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=35803000 Fernando Espinoza

    Thanks for this amazing post. Keep up the good work, brother!

  • Mssweene

    Thank you. His video didn’t make sense to me and now I understand what he was trying to say. .

  • http://www.michael-carper.com/ Michael Carper

    This is awesome. It was everything I was thinking and so much more.

  • enness

    I found this video strange and contradictory. All the criticisms seem obviously leveled at the Catholic Church, but then the guy says “Don’t get me wrong, I love the church.” What church? The Church? He also uses that “museum for holy people vs. hospital for sinners” phrase that I have never heard used in any context other than Catholic writing.

    • TCISACW

      Sounds more like he’s addressing the stricter fundamentalist protestant churches and the multi-million dollar mega-churches to me. Nowhere does he mention Catholicism or specific Catholic doctrine, and God only knows that the Catholic Church has given the world plenty to work with if they want to attack it specifically.

      • Aasuddjian

        The Catholic Church is the only Christian denomination that has really been at all involved in war, and is also one of the only ones that speaks out against divorce.

        • TCISACW

          Yes, but given that our most recent wars involve Islam, that’s a pretty far stretch on your part. He’s not specifically even addressing Christians, although he’s making the case for a relationship with the divine as opposed to a legalistic religiosity from a Christian viewpoint. There is nothing to indicate that he’s pointing to the Church any more than he is other strict religions. Of course you or Marc or anyone could ask him and he’d probably tell you, but it’s so much more fun to assume and then condemn, right?

          • Morgangilcrest

            but what else would he mean when he said “they build big churches but dont feed the hungry”
            if a church isnt feeding the hungry its the problem of the religion, its the problem of the people not doing it. read Matthew 13, the weed parable

          • Ashlie115

            DO WE ALL LOVE JESUS ?
            DO WE ALL.BELIEVE IN.GOD?

            THEN WHAT ARE.YOU FIGHTING ABOUT ?!?!?!

            JUST THINK WWJD IN THIS SITUATION?
            I KNOW HE DEFINITELY WOULDN’T BE TALKING TO PEOPLE THE WAY YOU ARE.TALKING TO EACH OTHER …

          • Elizabeth

            I understand your point TCISACW, but I think this argument about the likely subject of criticism is a bit silly. It would be absurd to argue that Catholicism is not part of his criticism. No, he doesn’t say it out loud, but Catholicism fits well within his parameters and religion’s parameters. Is he talking about other religions and Protestant denominations too? Absolutely.

            Maybe I’m wrong, but I think Marc was trying to write from a Catholic perspective and was trying to show how Catholicism was very much a primary subject of this video. Some of his arguments can and are applied in the defense of Protestants too. The bit about Marc’s own personal thoughts if he were Protestant amount to his own likely personal thoughts and actions if he were Protestant. He’s a smart guy — He gets that not all Protestants think exactly alike, but that he can sympathize with one particular line of thinking.

            He was incorrect in his statement about Catholics standing alone on the divorce issue. Catholicism is extremely visible on a global level for this, but is not alone in this. I think we can point out this error, he will likely agree upon second thought, and we can move on, because the rest of the argument still stands when adding in other religions that condemn divorce.

            It’s also unfair to say that a reasonable Catholic response to this video, which is quite viral, amounts to condemnation. You may not agree with every point, but it is absurd for Catholics and other religious alike to blow it off and assume that the video author means every other religion except Catholicism (or fill in the blank). We grow in faith and knowledge when we discuss and challenge each other’s ideas.

        • TCISACW

          Also, there are fundamentalist Christian churches that speak out against divorce every bit as much as Catholicism does. Of course, he could just be including the Catholic Church with other strict, legalistic denominations or relgions. Again, there is nothing specifically Catholic in any of his criticisms.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

          Well, ok, but we were they only Christian denomination *around* for the wars you’re referencing (the Crusades, right? It’s always the Crusades…) so it’s not like there was a large pool to choose from. I’m sure our Baptist/ Mormon/ Methodist brothers would have leaped at the chance to protect the Holy Land (well, not the Amish. But I respect that about them.)

          • TCISACW

            Um, I was thinking of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, actually, which have their roots in radical Islam.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1157591535 Emmanuel Cabahug

          Not entirely true, Aasuddjian. The Catholic Church teaches that a country has the right to self defense against an agressive nation. Second, if you read the official teaching of the Church says that war must be avoided. In history, it is secular nations that actually wages war over land. Here are some quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. “Avoiding war

          2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war.105

          2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.

          However, “as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.”106

          2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

          - the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

          - all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

          - there must be serious prospects of success;

          - the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

          These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

          The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

          2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.

          Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace.107

          2311 Public authorities should make equitable provision for those who for reasons of conscience refuse to bear arms; these are nonetheless obliged to serve the human community in some other way.108

          2312 The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict. “The mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties.”109

          2313 Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.

          Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide.

          2314 “Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man, which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation.”110 A danger of modern warfare is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern scientific weapons especially atomic, biological, or chemical weapons – to commit such crimes.

          2315 The accumulation of arms strikes many as a paradoxically suitable way of deterring potential adversaries from war. They see it as the most effective means of ensuring peace among nations. This method of deterrence gives rise to strong moral reservations. The arms race does not ensure peace. Far from eliminating the causes of war, it risks aggravating them. Spending enormous sums to produce ever new types of weapons impedes efforts to aid needy populations;111 it thwarts the development of peoples. Over-armament multiplies reasons for conflict and increases the danger of escalation.

          2316 The production and the sale of arms affect the common good of nations and of the international community. Hence public authorities have the right and duty to regulate them. The short-term pursuit of private or collective interests cannot legitimate undertakings that promote violence and conflict among nations and compromise the international juridical order.

          2317 Injustice, excessive economic or social inequalities, envy, distrust, and pride raging among men and nations constantly threaten peace and cause wars. Everything done to overcome these disorders contributes to building up peace and avoiding war:

          Insofar as men are sinners, the threat of war hangs over them and will so continue until Christ comes again; but insofar as they can vanquish sin by coming together in charity, violence itself will be vanquished and these words will be fulfilled: “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”

  • wootwoot

    YEEEESSSS!!!!!!!!!! Haha I love it!

  • http://oxyparadoxy.blogspot.com/ The Ranter

    Jesus left us a Church – not the Bible. The Church gave us the Bible. Thanks for the in-depth piece, Marc. :-) http://oxyparadoxy.blogspot.com/2012/01/its-your-pride-stupid.html

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

      That was no rant sir! I feel deeply let down after a name like you have. ;)

      • Lazy Ray Finkle

        I see what you did there. :D

      • Lazy Ray Finkle

        I see what you did there. :D

    • nocamo1

      Dear Seeker of God’s Will, For your eyes only!

      “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.”
      Revelations 22:18

      “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

      Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

      Now all has been heard;
      here is the conclusion of the matter:
      Fear God and keep his commandments,
      for this is the duty of all mankind.
      For God will bring every deed into judgment,
      including every hidden thing,
      whether it is good or evil.”
      Ecclesiastes 12:11-14

      “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.”
      Deuteronomy 4:2

      “See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.”
      Deuteronomy 12:32

      “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
      Proverbs 30:6

      “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome”
      1 John 5:3

      “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

      “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
      Matthew 23:1-12

      “The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

      So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

      He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

      “‘These people honor me with their lips,
      but their hearts are far from me.
      They worship me in vain;
      their teachings are merely human rules.’

      You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

      And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
      Mark 7:1-13

      “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
      And what does the LORD require of you?
      To act justly and to love mercy
      and to walk humbly with your God.”
      Micah 6:8

      I want to hear your honest response to these words from the Bible. It’s easy to argue with man’s opinion and to split hairs. It’s a whole other thing to hear God’s words and respond to them.

    • Anonymous

      False Doctrine! The Holy Spirit inspired men to write Holy Scripture. See 2 Timothy 3:16,17

  • Peter

    “So onto the first bit of silliness — the idea that Jesus came to abolish religion. Unforgivable”
    Listen – first off, as a Catholic shouldn’t nothing be unforgiveable? I was raised Catholic, attended Catholic schools and have been steeped in it’s dogma for over 20 years but since the age of 12 have had the urge to speak back at priests during service for a multitude of reasons, mostly just me following my heart and my gut in thinking that many parts of this religion were and still are wrong. And by wrong I mean they do more to divide, separate and condemn people than they do to collectively pick up the broken pieces of humanity. Until Catholics can accept atheists, agnostics, theists etc. and focus on working with them instead of what their belief systems are you won’t get anywhere.

    I still respect Catholocism in many ways but overall it seems to be a more divisive than uniting force, and blogs like this further that. Until religions stop focusing on completely ancient and irrelevant details that needlessly divide people and just work to help humanity in general ABOVE ALL ELSE, it won’t be anything different. You are missing this man’s point, which he has made clearly and succinctly. A true Catholic would spend their time working to help others instead of inciting controversy over the supposed meaning of silly words.
    The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are.

    • Paula

      Dear Peter,

      “First of all, religion does not fail to feed the poor [i.e. do good works]. What — if you don’t mind me asking — is the number-one most charitable organization in the universe? … It’s the Roman Catholic Church.” Marc has clearly stated that Catholics, more than any other religious or non-religious people, are, as you demand of them, “spend[ing] their time working to help others.” In other words, Catholics are doing what you ask of them: they are being good people and helping others. In fact, we’re doing it more than anyone else!

      p.s. Incidentally, the fact that the Catholic Church is recognized as the world’s most extensive charity is not Marc’s opinion — it is a universally (albeit sometimes grudgingly) agreed-upon truth.

      • Mhay2014

        I have nothing against Catholics and the Catholic church. However, I am a Protestant and believe the most important thing is to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ (that’s why when He died on the cross the curtain in the Holy of Holies split – anyone can freely come to him).

        but back to what I was saying – NO, the Catholic church does not fail to feed the poor. But just a small point – it is the largest charitable organization because of its sheer size.

        • Mikey

          Seriously? Look at Life Teen International. That’s where high schoolers and teens and people all over the world first encounter what it is to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.

          But I see that you being a protestant would ever be able to experience, considering your denomination does not believe or practice Jesus’ even teachings during the last supper, which is actually in all 4 gospels, which I’m sure you know being a protestant and can recite your bible back and forth.

          Rather, we as Catholics get to experience his true presence in a session of Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.

          Jesus even said to Simon Peter, “You are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Mat 16: 13-19.

          Jesus did not say, “you are Peter and on this rock I shall build my church and get 1000 other churches branching off of it” no, no indeed he did not say this. In fact the only church that is universal in the “Christian” faith.

          What makes the Catholic Church Unique:
          Sacraments.
          Persona Christie.
          Vatican City.
          Catholic.
          One.
          Holy.
          Apostolic.

          Plus, the whole video looked like a Cornerstone production. Which this video is indeed the product of the protestant teaching.

          Oh, and I’m actually fairly sure that the Catholic Church may be huge, the only reason we are able to unite to provide food and services is because we truly are the only faith that’s ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, AND APOSTOLIC. Hence why so many people love the church.

          • Paula

            Dear Mikey,

            Preach the Truth with *charity*, my friend :) Remember, they will know we are Christians *by our love*!

          • AggieCatholic

            One of the greatest acts of love and charity one can give to another is opening his eyes to the Truth.

          • Paula

            Dear AggieCatholic,

            I agree entirely! But it is also entirely possible to open others’ eyes to the Truth *without* using disdaining sarcasm toward those one is attempting to convert.

          • Emartin1066

            Wait… just a thought… China is big, as big as the church… and united… and they provide services sometimes in the form of food… China is ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, AND APOSTOLIC. dun dun dunnnnn

          • Mikey

            Sarcasm is wonderful. Next time make sure you know what all of the words you type mean. Considering that China is not universal, or holy. Nor can you trace lineage back to when it first began. Well you probably could, it just does not meet all 4 criterium. Get your stuff right before you try and talk to me in a condescending tone, prick.

          • Emartin1066

            lol. not very christian of u sir to call me a prick is it? u knw holy is a wholly relative term right? I can say that my laptop is holy because i think a divinity touched it or a priest blessed it. there is no way to prove something is holy therefore it is entirely dependent on the person. certainly a Muslim says Mecca is holy but a christian may say its just a giant stone. the same goes for universal, it’s universal cus u say its universal. once again a Muslim could easily argue that its religion is universal too. and just because catholic=universal in latin or whatever also does not mean its universal.
            U can attach a word to anything but it does necessitate truth.
            So I believe my condescending tone was quiet warranted because u sound silly=”and I’m actually fairly sure that the Catholic Church may be huge”

          • Mikey

            http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

            http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm

            Has your laptop done any of that? Or has Mecca done anything like that? No.

            Do Muslims all have the same exact ceremony every time they meet? No
            Or did Jesus build the Catholic church, or the Muslim religion? That is the Catholic Church, sir.

            Do you use proper Grammar? No.

            And are you sure? Because I’m fairly sure there are just as many people gathered in the non-denominational churches, as well as any other world religion around.

            Please explain why they are not the largest charitable organization in the world.

            And well, it’s alright to call someone a prick if they are one, which you sir, are ignorant and arrogant.

            And yes, your “condescending tone was quiet warranted.” Because I’m the one that spells correctly, does not bring ludicrous statements into the argument, and is intelligent enough to have legitimate arguments.

            And I can say that the Catholic Church is truly universal, I don’t need to say it just to say it. There is proof that it is indeed universal, every single mass said in the world is the same aside from the minor changes from dioceses. Please explain to me how everything in China is universal? (And no, because they’re Communists is not anywhere near a legitimate answer) because they are not all the same. One store is not exactly like the other. Don’t worry, I’m very educated on China too, I have taken classes solely about Asian heritage and cultures. China being one of them.

          • Emartin1066

            actually their are many accepted rites of the mass within the catholic church, all that is universal in a mass is technically a priest saying “this is his body, this is his blood” as the church posits that those words create the body of christ. the mass was not even at all similar within the roman catholic rite until the protestant reformation (the council of trent) which is around then they decided to make them more similar to one another.
            Being the largest charitable organization indicates absolutely nothing other than it is the largest charitable organization. obviously when the church started it was not even a charity or if it was it would be one of the smallest. so does that mean the church was less valid in its early days? my grammar? once again what does this indicate. that i am stupid? or that i do not consider this formal writing, im sry that it disturbs u so. As to u citing what u believe to be a miracle, i will explain some science. Within the scientific community the way they arrive at what most call fact is in fact from consensus. when the majority of the scientific community agrees on something they would say it is an accepted theory. the way they arrive at consensus is through many repeating the same experiment or for the theoretical through many reviewing the equations. Therefore I would need to see more than two scientists results from testing esp. considering results defy conventional reasoning.
            As for china, it was a joke. my point was that saying universal does not mean universal. things that are accepted universals are things like mammals have lungs and are warm blooded as all mammals have those characteristics. so i suppose all masses have things in common that u could say are universal but u cannot say with truth that Catholicism is universal because 1st of all one would ask in regards to what? in regards to acceptance certainly not as there are thousands of religions. even to say that that is because they do not knw the church’s teachings well enough is inaccurate, as a former cradle catholic i believe i am quite aware of its teaching and certainly don’t accept its absurdities.
            The church claims it is founded by Jesus but Jesus does not claim he founded the catholic church. u will then refer me to peter which means rock and Jesus said in Matthew that he founds his church on peter and then the church fathers back this up. u can choose to believe whatever u want but i would ask u to consider how oppressive the church has been throughout history and then ask how can something i see as so connected with God have committed so much evil (as well as some good)? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wycliff read his death

          • Emartin1066

            also watch this in regards to your miracle claim and be sure to wait til he explains David Hume’s logic please. under four minutes of your day
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmxAGhC-gLU&feature=related

          • Emartin1066

            lol. not very christian of u sir to call me a prick is it? u knw holy is a wholly relative term right? I can say that my laptop is holy because i think a divinity touched it or a priest blessed it. there is no way to prove something is holy therefore it is entirely dependent on the person. certainly a Muslim says Mecca is holy but a christian may say its just a giant stone. the same goes for universal, it’s universal cus u say its universal. once again a Muslim could easily argue that its religion is universal too. and just because catholic=universal in latin or whatever also does not mean its universal.
            U can attach a word to anything but it does necessitate truth.
            So I believe my condescending tone was quiet warranted because u sound silly=”and I’m actually fairly sure that the Catholic Church may be huge”

          • Anonymous

            You are completely wrong and very deceived my friend. The Catholic Church (the system, not the people) is Babylon! The Reformers of centuries past believed the same and were burned at the stake for that belief!

            Search the Scriptures to see if this is so…. if you dilligently study you will see it it true.

          • Anonymous

            You are completely wrong and very deceived my friend. The Catholic Church (the system, not the people) is Babylon! The Reformers of centuries past believed the same and were burned at the stake for that belief!

            Search the Scriptures to see if this is so…. if you dilligently study you will see it it true.

        • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

          Because God promised to protect us. So, we give to his poor and destitute.

        • Paul

          Christ’s person, the Person of the Word of God, is united to His Body. You can’t have a personal relationship with Christ if you exclude his body. People are Christians only by belonging to Christ’s body. But St. Paul tells us that Christ’s body is the Church. The Church is therefore the extension of Christ’s humanity throughout history, through which we can have a personal relationship with Christ. But Christ’s body is visible, structured, ordered, having different members with different functions, and just like the body of Israel was based on the 12 tribes, so the body of Christ is founded by the 12 apostles, whose offices are passed down in the Catholic Church through apostolic succession, passed down through the bodily laying on of hands. Through apostolic succession, Christ’s body maintains its form, visibility, and integrity. Through the bishops, we have access to the sacraments, through which the grace of God flows, especially the Eucharist which, as the body of Christ, is the real presence of Christ on earth, and which continually constitutes his Church. So, if you don’t have a relationship with the Body of Christ, the Church, you don’t have a personal relationship with Christ. If you have only a partial relationship with the Body of Christ, the Church, then you have only a partial personal relationship with Christ. Personal relationship with Christ means full communion with the Church Christ founded, which is found only in the Catholic Church. Catholics who are in a state of grace, therefore, are the only ones who have a fully personal relationship with Christ.

          • Paul

            Founded on, not founded by.

          • susan

            That was REALLY well done Paul (!!!)…I’m saving it (along with Marc’s article) for reference.

        • Anonymous

          I have nothing against Catholic people, BUT I do have something against the Catholic SYSTEM. It is the ‘spirit of Antichrist’! And it is beginning to ONCE AGAIN raise it’s ugly head!!!

      • Emartin1066

        And yet what is the wealthiest institution in the world… i bet if the red cross had a billion members, the enormous amount of money the church has, and its infrastructure/network then one could say the same thing you said about the church and apply it to red cross. next time pray to god for some brain cells before u type what u think is a point. lol (why do u say “universe”? do you know of some alien charities or something?)hahaha

        • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

          Except it doesn’t. If only the Atheist for the Poor down the street had a billion members…but it doesn’t. :)

          • TCISACW

            The Catholic Church doesn’t have nearly the numbers they claim to have. They include baptised infants who’ve long ago left the Church. The numbers of actual practicing Catholics is much, much smaller than the Church will admit.

            Also, if you took all the charitable contributions of all the Protestant denominations (as well as those of the non-denoms) and added them together, you’d probably come up with a larger number than the Church is credited for.

          • Emartin1066

            lol. i win i guess, cus yr big

          • Emartin1066

            *u win haha

          • susan

            Emartin1066 and TCISACW….Beavis and butthead.

      • Guest

        To be honest it is not universal. Just because it might seem so in certain parts of the world, does not make it Universal.

        • Paula

          Dear Guest,

          From http://www.dictionary.com... “catholic: 2. universal in extent; involving all; of interest to all.” I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear in my previous post. Perhaps I should have just stated: “catholic” is a synonym of “universal”.

          Again, I’d like to clarify that how Catholicism is practiced in different parts of the world and what individual Catholics ‘believe to be the truth’ (notice the *lowercase* of ‘truth’, meaning it is not objective Truth) is irrelevant. The Catholic Church adheres to only one set of teachings: those given to us by Jesus Christ, who is the Savior of the world. The point is this: the beliefs stand separate from the believers.

          Incidentally, I can’t help but mention the following (I’m a Latin teacher so I love talking about etymology!): “universal” comes from two Latin words: unus, -a, -um meaning “one” and verto, vertere, verti, versus meaning “turn”. So, literally speaking, something described as “universal” is “turned/rolled into one (unit)”.

    • http://oxyparadoxy.blogspot.com/ The Ranter

      LOL wut? You must have missed the part of Marc’s post where he talks about the Catholic Church being number 1 in terms of charitable giving – and almost every single time the Catholic groups are the first ‘on the scene’ when a major disaster happens. And we do this regardless of the faith (or no faith) of those who need help.

      “Silly” words? Words matter, and the context in which we use them matters.

      And usually when people say “the Church does more to divide, separate and condemn people” means “I get mad because the Church/the Pope/a bishop/a priest says such-and-such action is a sin and I wanna keep on doing such-and-such action.” And evidenced by your statement “I still respect Catholocism [sic]“, you must have gotten called on some sin, and that pissed you off. At least be honest about why you left, not make up some song-and-dance to obfuscate from the real reason.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFGDCW6H2BEL6WI52Z4N4OWGBA gillian

        think widows mite- its easy for a church who has filled its coffers on the backs of the poor to give the most – Still leaves them the most doesnt it – lets see the pope and all the cardinals giving up their personal wealth ( which is amazing) and putting on the sack cloths

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

          The Vatican and all the artistic treasures contained therein are NOT the ‘personal wealth’ of the Pope and the Cardinals. From what I have read, many popes and cardinals (and priests and saints and unknown, holy people) DO put on the ‘sack cloths,’ and fast, ans give away tremendous amounts to the poor, etc. Most of the clergy of the church, as far as I know, are actually not at all well off… just ask your local parish priest what he gets paid!

          • http://www.facebook.com/davidharryprosser David Prosser

            I’d love to refer to Luke 6:24 in that everyone has an attitude of judging others, Jesus came to show his Love, first and foremost :)

          • Emartin1066

            ummm, go and sell all that u have and give to the poor… ring a bell. oh and who owns the vatican and the vatican museum? oh right the vatican..

          • AggieCatholic

            Actually the Mystical Body of Christ does, the Universal Church. It is much the Vatican museums’ as it as a Christian in the Middle East. Like the article said: A devout poor man would fight you if you started to tearing the beauty of his Church trying to give him money. Here’s Christ’s thoughts on that: And He sat down opposite the treasury, and began observing how the people were putting [a]money into the treasury; and many rich people were putting in large sums. 42 A poor widow came and put in two [b]small copper coins, which amount to a [c]cent. 43 Calling His disciples to Him, He said to them, “Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all [d]the contributors to the treasury; 44 for they all put in out of their [e]surplus, but she, out of her poverty, put in all she owned, [f]all she had to live on.”

          • Emartin1066

            lol. umm so the deed’s name is in “the mystical body of christ” sure… another point is why do i have to pay money to go into the vatican musuem? i went when i was catholic, so why did i pay for something i own. I also wonder if I could just borrow some of those artifacts for a bit too, seeing as I owned them collectively. for some reason i think the Vatican would say no. c my point?

          • Mikey

            Once catholic, always catholic. You cannot “unbaptize” yourself, that’s impossible.

            And so you’re saying you want to borrow priceless ancient artifacts? That’s just like going into the Smithsonian and asking to borrow a dinosaur fossil, or the hope diamond. Again, your arguments are ridiculous.

          • Emartin1066

            someone claimed that the Vatican artifacts are owned by quote “the mystical body of christ” and not by the Vatican or pope. if this is true and lets say I am part of this mystical body as i was baptized, then does it not mean that I have partial ownership of some of those ancient artifact? my point is that of course not, if i were to grab some old pope staff and say “its cool im with the mystical body of christ” i don’t think security would buy that.
            once catholic always catholic? lol. i can never escape its clutches! damn! well F**K the catholic church. i don’t believe what the church teaches and a communion wafer is a wafer (though a very tasty one at that, haha). so call me whatever u want to call me, prick, catholic, fallen catholic. i just knw i believe in the truth, not the bullcrap the catholic church spews and then calls truth

          • Mikey

            Once catholic, always catholic. You cannot “unbaptize” yourself, that’s impossible.

            And so you’re saying you want to borrow priceless ancient artifacts? That’s just like going into the Smithsonian and asking to borrow a dinosaur fossil, or the hope diamond. Again, your arguments are ridiculous.

          • Emartin1066

            lol. umm so the deed’s name is in “the mystical body of christ” sure… another point is why do i have to pay money to go into the vatican musuem? i went when i was catholic, so why did i pay for something i own. I also wonder if I could just borrow some of those artifacts for a bit too, seeing as I owned them collectively. for some reason i think the Vatican would say no. c my point?

          • Guest

            Plays golf and wears Ralph Lauren. Has a nice expensive watch to match too.

        • Chris

          Quoted from “Selling the Vatican”: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2011/02/selling-the-vatican.html

          Read the entire article for context, otherwise this is irrelevant.

          “[Y]ou can’t deny the Pope lives in a mansion.”
          “And you can’t deny that if he didn’t, the Catholic people would put him in one. ”

          Quite loosely, if the Pope and Cardinals were to be seen walking around in sack cloths 1) Catholics would have them put in good clothing and 2) if they actually did, you all would ridicule them for being “overly pious” or simply for being fools rather than for showing modesty! Those who ridicule often cannot be contented one way or another.

          • Emartin1066

            lol. ever here of free will. humans can refuse. do u really think if Jesus were alive today he’d be living at the vatican? I think he would prefer a small cheap apartment. or do you really think he’d be living in one of, if not thee most expensive housing in the world (if put on market)?

        • Lex

          Look up “The Shepherd’s Trust”. It is a charity for priests who have reached mandatory retirement age, because they don’t have a pension to live off of. Many elderly priests out there have to live in the care of family after retirement.

          In case you’re wondering, the Pope only gets paid a single coin for each year that he was Pope- payable upon death.

          • Emartin1066

            And in case you’re wondering the pope lives at the Vatican or castle gandalfo(idk spelling). which if they were for rent would be in the millions. i bet some of the many gypsies walking around Roma would love to stay there for the night…

          • Father Selvester

            Actually, most people are not aware that the Pope only lives in a small part of the building known as the Apostolic Palace, on the top floor. He lives in an apartment in that building that consists of about ten rooms including a chapel, a library, a vestibule, a medical room (where he can be seen by a doctor or dentist) and space for his two secretaries. He doesn’t even get the whole thing to himself. It is roughly the size of the average house that most middle class Americans live in. The pope’s most valuable personal possession is an upright piano which he plays to relax. The Popes used to live across Rome in the Quirinale Palace but when Italy was unified they moved to the Vatican and gave the Quirinale to Italy. And what did Italy do with it? Turn it into homes for the poor? No, it is the residence of the President of Italy. The leader of any small banana republic lives more luxuriously than the pope. You have NO idea what you’re talking about. How do I know that the pope’s apartment is rather modest? Because I have been in it…more than once.

          • TCISACW

            And Christ lived where he could find a place to rest his head — with friends, in the desert, heck, he was born in a stable.

            The Pope lives in the kind of comfort few American families know. Sure, the square footage of the space he actually utilizes on a daily basis may be the size of the average American middle class home (which is much larger than the average home of the rest of the world population), but he has cooks and maids and servants, even people who dress him. He never has to do anything, he’s never had to worry about supporting a family, or losing his job.

            He lives a life of luxury, wheher it’s material luxury, or having the luxury of time, or having the luxury of never being responsible for the immediate needs of a single other human being.

            Same goes for you.

            Man up and get a job, marry and support a family. Then get back to us about how the Pope is just a regular Joe livling a low-profile, relatively simple life.

          • Carter

            Whoa now. I’m just glad to know that in between saying Mass and defending the teachings of Christ against an increasingly uncaring and materialistic world, a holy 84 year old man of God is praying for the likes of you and me.

          • TCISACW

            See, that’s nice and all, but when Catholic then go on to delete any comments referencing genuine human rights violations perpetrated by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church — documented factual violations — the Magdalene sisters, the forced baptisms of Jews, the removal of babies from Spanish parents with whom the Catholic Church disagreed politically (and then telling those parents their children had died — how sick is that?) — their big phony pretend prayers mean less than nothing.

            Catholics tip their hand when they pull that crap. Their Catholic Church can’t be the One, True anything other than a pile of manure if it has to rely on that sort of tactic.

          • Emartin1066

            assuming your a priest so I can understand that u may not have had to study economics so let me give a quick lesson. There’s this thing called opportunity cost which basically means what one could be doing other than what they are currently doing. for example there is a cattle rancher outside Yosemite park that makes 100,000/year but the land he ranches off of is worth (due to its proximity to the park) well over 15 million. therefore his ranching has an opportunity cost of 14.9 million. the same goes for the pope but to the extreme as the vatican is a prime location as well as its incredible historical value.
            For a man who is called the vicar of Christ and is called to live as Jesus lived it is hypocritical to live in such costly apartments. If Jesus lived as a carpenter then how can one who is less than Him (the pope) live so much better and richly than Christ himself. think of the earlier popes like peter and polycarp (i think). they did not reside in a “palace” as u called it

          • Emartin1066

            assuming your a priest so I can understand that u may not have had to study economics so let me give a quick lesson. There’s this thing called opportunity cost which basically means what one could be doing other than what they are currently doing. for example there is a cattle rancher outside Yosemite park that makes 100,000/year but the land he ranches off of is worth (due to its proximity to the park) well over 15 million. therefore his ranching has an opportunity cost of 14.9 million. the same goes for the pope but to the extreme as the vatican is a prime location as well as its incredible historical value.
            For a man who is called the vicar of Christ and is called to live as Jesus lived it is hypocritical to live in such costly apartments. If Jesus lived as a carpenter then how can one who is less than Him (the pope) live so much better and richly than Christ himself. think of the earlier popes like peter and polycarp (i think). they did not reside in a “palace” as u called it

      • TCISACW

        Accusing people of things you have no idea are true or not, or assuming they’ve done things, or been involved in a specific type of encounter, and then judging them according to your ugly assumptions is a sin. Just sayin’.

        The Church, certainly in recent decades, has itself done very great damage to the Body of Christ. Many, many Catholics began to see the truth about this hierarchy they’d been told to hold in nearly the same reverence they’re to hold Christ. That’s not us. That’s you. To throw it back in someone’s face only proves the point that too many Catholics themselves are the cause of division for you to have a leg to stand on in these types of discussion.

        You claim you know this person’s “real reason”. Then state it and substantiate your claim. Otherwise, shut up get your sorry ass to Confession, ‘k?

        • http://oxyparadoxy.blogspot.com/ The Ranter

          All I stated was that he probably got called on some sin and that got him pissed off (i.e. the “real reason”). And I’m already going to confession next week, but thanks for the tip.

          • Paul

            Dude, in my experience, most of my friends who left the Church are just guilty of a sin that is holding them back… the blame the Church for other things, but you’re right, as Scripture confirms, it is always sin that separates from God. (and his Church) :)

          • TCISACW

            So, “most”, but not all, of your personal friends (exactly how many people are we talking about here? 3? 7? 12?) are separated from the Catholic Church due to sin, therefore all those who disgree with the Catholic Church do so only because they’re engaging in sinful behavior they want to continue engaging in?

            That’s what the Catholic Church teaches?

            Can you please show me the evidence you have for this — statistics, sections of the CCC, studies, whatever hard evidence you have that allows you to apply your personal opinion and assumptions, along with a small handful of anecdotes, to the entire non-Catholic population of the world?

          • TCISACW

            Uh, yeah. That’s called assuming. Stating that “the real reason” he has differences with the Church is because he’s engaging in sinful behavior and wants to keep it that way is assuming a very nasty thing about another child of God.

            Funny how when Catholics openly sin, it’s fine, but if a non-Catholic merely expresses disagreement with the institution to which Catholics belong, it’s open season and Catholics are free to make pretty ugly assumptions about their motivation and claim the “real reason” behind their disagreement is sinful behavior.

            And you still can’t figure out why people think religion, and yours in particular, sucks? Really?

            It’s people like you. That’s the reason. In case you were wondering, or even cared, which I doubt.

          • Name…

            “Funny how when Catholics openly sin, it’s fine, but if a non-Catholic merely expresses disagreement with the institution to which Catholics belong, it’s open season and Catholics are free to make pretty ugly assumptions about their motivation and claim the “real reason” behind their disagreement is sinful behavior. ”

            Saying that all Catholics do this is also an assumption… I don’t do this, and while I don’t agree with what you were replying to, you’re being almost as nasty as the people you are denouncing.

            “And you still can’t figure out why people think religion, and yours in particular, sucks? Really?”

            You’re completely right, that it’s people “like that.” If all Catholics truly followed the teachings of the church and the bible, then there would be no reason to hate it, in my opinion. It’s the people who do wrong in the name of the church or don’t practice what they preach that make you or others hate it so much. Catholics are told to love and accept everyone, no matter their sin. Love and acceptance, in my experience, have never caused someone to hate. But, as is obvious, not everyone actually follows the teachings. I just do not want people to hate something that I truly love when the people you know as Catholics are the ones screaming, “I’m Catholic/religious!” and telling everyone they’re going to Hell for such and such a sin. It’s not fair to judge religion on that when the true believers and followers are the ones in the background trying to help people rather than condemn them. But I guess that’s the main face of it, and I can’t blame anyone for hating it when they’ve been on the receiving end of the screaming, I just wish they knew the Catholics and religious people of other churches I know.

        • Emartin1066

          Your ugly! Just sayin’. (i hope the just sayin softens the blow enough)

          • TCISACW

            So are your rapist, human rights violating priests and nuns, nyah-nyah!

            How old are you? 6?

          • Emartin1066

            maybe…

          • guest

            Rapist Priests? Human violating? You should do some research. Not all Priests are rapists, just the very very few corrupt ones. In fact, less than 1.5% of 60,000 Catholic Clergy have been accused of child molestation (according to the Washington Post). Child molestation and rape happens everywhere and other churches. I wonder why the Catholic Church gets the most scrutiny?

          • TCISACW

            “Do some research?” LOL! That’s rich. I AM the research, honey.

            Yes, some priests are rapists. And a LOT of bishops are guilty of making sure those priests had an endless supply of children to rape.

            Human rights violations? Now you’re the one who needs to do the research. Start with the Magdalene laundries for one of the more recent examples of egregious human rights violations perpetrated by the Catholic Church. Then research the forced baptisms, the forced removal of babies from parents whose politics the Catholic Church didn’t like, etc. Go on. You go do the research and get back to me about how it was just a couple of people here and there who did bad things.

            The reason the Catholic Church gets so much scrutiny is because they claim, on the one hand. to be “the One, True Church”, to have the “fullness of the Truth”, to be the only means of salvation, etc., etc., etc., yet they were (are — it continues, google Finn/Kansas City) guilty of one of the longest reaching conspiracies to cover up, aid and abet known child molestors. That’s why.

            You can’t crow about how you’re the One True Final Authority On All Things and then commit those sorts of crimes and NOT be scrutinized.

          • nocamo1

            Marc, You deleted my comments? SMH. : (

          • Marc

            nnooooo, i have never deleted a single comment in my life!!!! its wordpress!!!

      • TCISACW

        Here ya go, here’s the thing you said that you then diluted to “all I said was he probably….”

        evidenced by your statement “I still respect Catholocism [sic]“, you must have gotten called on some sin, and that pissed you off. At least be honest about why you left, not make up some song-and-dance to obfuscate from the real reason.

        That’s not a mere “all I said was he probably…”. That’s you asserting that his words were EVIDENCE that he MUST HAVE gotten called on some sin and that pissed him off.

        That kind of arrogance is what causes many people to shy away from organized religion.

        • Mikey

          All churches are corrupt. Hell look at the Islamic, Muslim, Jewish, and any other religion. All of the religions of the world are corrupt. Some are even having civil wars between them.

          Protestants are indeed some of the worst, seeing as a few services I’ve been to have all been centered around giving your money so they won’t have to move locations.

          • TCISACW

            Yep, all organized religions — heck all ANYTHING organized by human beings — is prone to corruption.

            Religion uses the name of God, however, to justify their corruption.

            All organized religion is bad.

          • Dennis Mahon

            Yep, all organized religions — heck all ANYTHING organized by human beings — is prone to corruption.

            Yet, no matter how bad they may be, we still need them.

          • TCISACW

            No, we don’t. There are many non-religious people who are doing just fine without you. And there are clearly many religious people who are nasty, arrogant hypocrites.

        • Amelie

          In many, many cases (and ALL the cases that I know personally) of people leaving the Catholic church, it is basically because of “getting called out on some sin, and that pissed (them) off”. It seems to always come down to either (1) following the world and wanting to do whatever you want to do or (2) misplaced charity rooted in (1) :

          Premarital sex – promiscuity – contraception – abortion – divorce – remarrying/annullment issues – gay marriage – ordination of women – degradation of women by the male hierarchy, etc.

          Basically, I think The Ranter is right and I’ll say further that most of us today are self-entitled little brats. If you encounter someone who engages in or supports one of the issues listed above, you are fully expected to tell them that that’s just A-OK! To disapprove is to be full of hate, all of sudden. But luckily, the Church doesn’t follow the whims of the world.

          • TCISACW

            Only God knows what’s in any person’s heart.

            When you claim that, because of a handful of anecdotes, you KNOW that the reason ALL people reject the institution of the Catholic Church is because they’re sinners and want to remain in sin, then you are committing a very grave sin yourself.

            You. Do. Not. Know. Full stop.

            When you claim you do, you claim something that belongs to God and God alone.

          • Emartin1066

            u r uber smart bro. thumbs up!! keep spreading the truth

      • Marmar

        The only reason the Catholic church is me most extensive charity is because it has another agenda aside from helping the poor and needy: proselytism.

        • Marc Barnes

          Right, that’s it. Mother Theresa — all part of the vast, Papist conspiracy.

        • Syenoor

          If Catholics openly speak of their faith and the teachings of the Church then they are screaming about their religion and forcing it down people’s throats; if they try to be good people, take care of the poor and give to the needy, then they have a hidden agenda.

          CATHOLICISM IS A FAITH. Of course we believe we are right. If we didn’t we wouldn’t be Catholic; we’d be Muslim or Hindu or Agnostic. Of course we want you to believe as we do, but we will feed or clothe you, even if you reject God. Charity work does not count as proselytism. Charity work is what Jesus told us to do, regardless of the persons religion, race, gender, etc.

    • Jay E.

      “The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are. ”

      Wait… so to be a true Catholic is to look like you’re not a Catholic? Shouldn’t we be able to tell the real Catholics by seeing who are “trying to be good people”?

      See 1 Peter 3:15

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=629394929 Ryan Harner

      “The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are.” – Amen dude. All I gotta say is “unforgivable” is an expression. He doesn’t literally mean its unforgivable.

    • http://profiles.google.com/anitavforvictory Anita Moore

      Peter said:

      “I still respect Catholocism in many ways but overall it seems to be a more divisive than uniting force, and blogs like this further that. Until religions stop focusing on completely ancient and irrelevant details that needlessly divide people and just work to help humanity in general ABOVE ALL ELSE, it won’t be anything different.”

      Jesus said:

      “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me….” Matthew 10:34-38:

      Peter further said:

      “The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics.”

      How true can they be as Catholics if nothing about them distinguishes them from the rest of the world?

      I submit that you could not have been really steeped in Catholic dogma, if it was possible for your heart and your gut to lead you out of the Church.

      • Emartin1066

        his gut? what was a Baptist dangling a sandwich on a line outside his parish church?

      • Guest

        “The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics.”

        I do hope that you are pretending to take this literally. It is a figure of speech. Just like “the only innocent in a corrupt society are those who are in prison”. Again. Not meant to be taken literally.

        Please don’t judge others heart or much worse, their gut. Seems very “unCatholic” don’t you think?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

      Catholicism is divisive? Catholicism teaches that all Protestants are legitimately baptized and legitimately Christian. Protestants teach that anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian (or at least, that Catholics aren’t christian)… Protestants are continually splitting into more and more and more churches. In fact, they are so divided in their believes that non-Christians converting to Christianity are often confused and overwhelmed by the different beliefs they are shown, all in the name of ‘Christianity’.

      Varying Catholics may say different things but the doctrine and dogma of the Church is the same the world over. Protestants cannot say the same about their many, many, many denominations.

      Do you still maintain that Catholicism is divisive?

      Furthermore, name some ancient, irrelevant details that stop a Catholic from loving God, their neighbor and themselves?

      • DylanM821

        //Catholicism teaches that all Protestants are legitimately baptized and legitimately Christian. Protestants teach that anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian (or at least, that Catholics aren’t christian)… Protestants are continually splitting into more and more and more churches.//

        All of this is missing an extremely important word: SOME. SOME Catholics believe Protestants are completely saved, some believe we aren’t. SOME Protestants believe and teach that if you’re not part of their denomination, you’re not saved; some don’t. SOME Protestants say that Catholics aren’t Christians, some don’t.

        //Protestants cannot say the same about their many, many, many denominations.//

        Yes we can, because we see a difference in the overarching teachings of a church (which unites all people who proclaim the name of Jesus) into the Church of Christ, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ. Under these overarching, vitally important themes are slight differences and disagreements, such as infant baptism, the way in which communion is received, what kind of music (if any) should be played, etc. These things do not matter in the grand scheme of God’s redemptive mission for the world and mankind, but they are divisive enough to affect certain people, which is itself inherently illogical. Make sure the brush you paint with isn’t too broad; it’s unbecoming of Christians.

        • Paula

          Dear DylanM821,

          The teachings of Jesus Christ (and, similarly, the nature of the Truth), as guarded and proclaimed by the Catholic Church, do not vary from person to person, they do not depend or hinge upon any individual’s “personal” interpretation of them. If, for example, the Catholic Church professes that all Christian baptisms are valid, and I, as a Catholic, “disagree” with this particular teaching (let’s pretend that I do, because I don’t in real life), well, my opinion does not in the least change the *validity* or the *reality* of the teaching. In other words, your argument that ‘*some* Catholics say this while others say that’, well, it’s sort of irrelevant what individual Catholics say or think when it comes to doctrine. That’s why the Catholic Church is *called* Catholic: it is universal.

        • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

          The Catholic Church teaches…doesn’t rely on what individual Catholics believe. A Catholic is responsible to forming their mind to the Church. The Church is not a democracy, it is a Monarchy led by our faithful leader King of Kings, Jesus Christ with his Mother at his right hand. Our faithful Steward, the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, leads us on earth into truth and salvation by commission of the King by being given the kings of the kingdom.

          • nocamo1

            There in lies a summary of the doctrine of the Catholic Church and why one cannot say a Catholic is one type of Christian and an XYZ is another. Just because it’s spaghetti sauce don’t make it RAGU!!!!!!

          • TCISACW

            A Catholic may be responsible for forming their mind to the Catholic Church, but a Christian is one who freely chooses to accept the salvation Christ offers.

            You make Catholicism sound like a cult. Oh, wait…

          • Amanda292

            You may accept Christ’s salvation all you want–obviously, He died for you just as He died for all people–but if you truly loved Jesus, you’d want to show Him your love and devotion by following Him, right? Jesus says, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” (Jn 14:15). Well, if you were to make a complete list of every one of Christ’s teachings, you would undoubtably end up with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The Church has been around since Christ’s resurrection, and she understands better than any other denominations what true salvation means–which is why I, and many others, choose to listen to what the Church has to say. No, I’m not just a mindless drone within an institution; I’ve actively accepted Christ as my savior just as much as you have. But when it comes to preaching, and more importantly, LIVING the Gospel, the Catholic Church has had a lot of practice doing so–2000 years’ worth, give or take a few. We don’t “form our minds” to the Church because we’re brainwashed or mislead, but because we know that it’s the quickest and most effective path toward union with God–so why would we choose anything else?

          • TCISACW

            Christ’s teachings, God’s Word, are what all Christians follow — or should follow.

            The Catholic Church adds on layers of unnecessary legalism, and requires — demands — belief in these added on layers as if they carried the same weight as Christ’s words. The Catholic Church requires one not only to believe what they’re teaching now, but what they might teach in the future. That goes against what Christ gave us — freedom from the bonds of legalism.

            If you freely choose Catholicism, fine, but what happens if the Catholic Church begins to require you to do something that goes against your conscience? If your answer is that your conscience must be wrong and you must work at accepting the teaching, then you are indeed brainwashed.

          • nocamo1

            Dear Seeker of God’s Will, For your eyes only!

            “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.”
            Revelations 22:18

            “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

            Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

            Now all has been heard;
            here is the conclusion of the matter:
            Fear God and keep his commandments,
            for this is the duty of all mankind.
            For God will bring every deed into judgment,
            including every hidden thing,
            whether it is good or evil.”
            Ecclesiastes 12:11-14

            “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.”
            Deuteronomy 4:2

            “See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.”
            Deuteronomy 12:32

            “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
            Proverbs 30:6

            “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome”
            1 John 5:3

            “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

            “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
            Matthew 23:1-12

            “The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

            So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

            He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

            “‘These people honor me with their lips,
            but their hearts are far from me.
            They worship me in vain;
            their teachings are merely human rules.’

            You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

            And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
            Mark 7:1-13

            “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
            And what does the LORD require of you?
            To act justly and to love mercy
            and to walk humbly with your God.”
            Micah 6:8

            I want to hear your honest response to these words from the Bible. It’s easy to argue with man’s opinion and to split hairs. It’s a whole other thing to hear God’s words and respond to them.

      • Jetman527

        Yet the pope has made a statement that only true salvation is through the Catholic church. That goes against all biblical doctrine. Furthermore, salvation is through Jesus Christ not baptism.

        • Ahawkins77

          Actually its very biblical….Jesus says in John 14:6…”I am the way the truth and the life, nobody comes to the Father except through me.” Jesus found the Catholic Church and He remains present in it til the end of time. The Church IS the body of Christ, therefore salvation IS through Him, through His church. BTW- the Pope didn’t make the statement, the church does. AND furthermore Salvation is through Baptism read John 3:5, Mark 16:16, ACTS 2:38. Know your bible then we can talk!

          • William Cottrell3

            Jesus didn’t found a the catholic church…. the Romans did. Know your history.

          • CRoCk

            No actually Jesus did start the catholic church by establishing Peter as the first pope… “oh the religion is called roman Catholicism it must be founded by the Romans…” don’t talk about history

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QNCHYA35JFGQWQ55HSUDZQNZAU DavidF

            It doesn’t matter what any of the religions are called. They’re full of scared, small people too insecure to face the realities of the real world around them without a creation story.

            If you take a single logic class in high school or college, you’ll see the clear logical fallacy in having a God who knows everything AND is all-powerful.

          • ahhhuey

            Someone is in the wrong blog…

          • Ampaxx

            Hmmm, Plato, Aristotle, Liebniz, Kant, Hegel, Godel; Not to mention Aquinas, Bonaventure, and all the medieval philosophers missed that. Darn.

          • Zaireunderorion

            Ew, positivism…

          • Zaireunderorion

            Unrelated but, it is hella fun to shout “KAAAAANT” like Kirk screams “KAAAHN”

          • Logically…

            yea Ive taken a couple logic courses recently (philosophy minor) and I believe you are referring the circular fallacy that many philosophers have struggled with trying to prove the existence of God..It is not to my knowledge that anyone who’s studied logic has proved the un existence of God….FYI. I’ve also studied a bit of anthropology in other cultures and well..creation stories are part of the human condition in most of every society FYI it transcends to mostly everyone then and now..not just the “scared little people”

          • guest

            Funny, I was attending College at TCC VA Beach and they were teaching the same garbage. History taught to Americans, Lies, Lies and more Lies.

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            I actually have a degree in philosophy.

            I don’t see it, please produce your “logical” argument.

          • Zaireunderorion

            Same here. Gotta get that doctorate eventually…shudders.

          • Howard

            I don’t know your life story or what caused you to develop this attitude, but I’ll pray for you man.

          • In contrast..

            ‘Logically speaking’ friend, do you not agree that your opinion is the product of one mind?
            Is not each and every religion the products of many more minds than you? If so, who are you to comment in your finite capacity of reason and perspective? Even Plato said “I know one thing, that I know nothing.”

            True humility from pride of the intellect goes against logic friend. As do many things you do each and everyday.

          • PC Geek

            LOL

            Really? And pray tell what logical fallacy is that?

            don’t tell me you are going to advance the old “Can God make a rock so heavy He can’t lift it?” canard…please spend 5 minutes on Google first before you keep embarrassing yourself…

            Sometimes my faith is strengthened more by reading the blathering of the a-tards than by reading the wise pondering and reflection of the faithful…if this is the intellectual horsepower of atheists today than their little movement is in serious trouble.

          • Marc Barnes

            actually loled…

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            Roman Catholic was first used during the Protestant Reformation…so if a Protestant says it…must be true. I’ve never been to Rome in my life, how they consider me a Roman Catholic boggles my mind.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=118700104 James Layne

            Too irresistible to pass this one up. This myth is repeated so often, and it has absolutely ZERO historical veracity. I am a convert to Catholicism. I used to be a Baptist. You can bet your bottom dollar I investigated this claim before I made the jump that all of my childhood and family counseled against.

            If the Romans created the Catholic Church, why were the first 30+ popes of the Catholic Church martyred by the Romans? Or are you confusing the conversion of the Roman Empire to Catholicism in the fourth century with the founding of the Catholic Church? If that’s what you’re doing, which you probably are (I hear it repeated all the time), then it is you who need to study your history. As Newman said, to study history is to cease to be protestant.

            Saint Augustine, writing in the same century that Constantine was converted to the Catholic Faith, numbers every Pope from Saint Peter to his day. In 107 A.D., Saint Ignatius of Antioch said “Where the Bishop is, there is the Catholic Church.” Saints Peter and Paul laid the foundations of the Church, and this alluded to in Scripture.

            The early Church of the second century already had the Sacraments, the Papacy, veneration of our Blessed Mother, a sacrificial priesthood, etc., all of which flowed perfectly from the synagogue, not from the Pagan Roman Empire.

            It is Protestants who removed seven books from Scripture, not the Catholics. It is they who often employ the utterly false myth that because the Church proudly calls itself “Roman” to show its apostolic roots that it somehow began as a result of the efforts of the Roman Empire. That is utter nonsense, and anyone versed in history can tell you that.

            As a matter of fact, I converted in great part because I can name the founder of every Protestant Church, including the Baptist Church of which I was a member. But nobody could offer me the name of the founder of the Catholic Church, if it was not Jesus Christ. You cannot do so, and nobody else can. I challenge anyone to do so. I say this not to prove myself right, but to counsel you as a brother.

          • Guest

            You are awesome, sir. I am very grateful you chose to share your story here.

          • Logically…

            I was in the same boat James…Im the only Catholic in my immediate family. Glad we found what we were looking for in our Church brother!

          • Jervin

            Love it Bro

          • Carter

            Wow, James!

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

            I really enjoyed your remarks James, as I am also considering the Catholic Church, so I found them enlightening. couple questions. What are the 7 books missing from the KJ version you are referring to? and how dis you resolve Mathew ch 6? as well as the Idol commandment? these are serious question I’m seeking answers not trying to score points.

          • Zaireunderorion

            He is referring to a bunch of Old Testament books. The New Testament, which was compiled by the Church has stayed the same (though Luther wanted to get rid of James because it talks about works plus faith). These scriptures include Maccabees 1 & 2, Baruch, Sirach, Tobit (from which we get the name Tobias. sic em animorphs), Judith (which has become one of my faves), a portion or Esther, and The Wisdom of Solomon.
            I will say the original KJ version had those in it, but they were taken out (if I remember correctly).
            Matthew Ch 6 refers to a lot of different things, you’ll have to be specific.
            Also, it kind of takes practicing, but I find using images can help one’s concentration. One aspect of the Crucifix is the fact that you have a visual aide when you meditate on Christ’s suffering. Idolatry is replacing God with pretty much anything else, so these images can do that with some people, but having them isn’t the problem. Just like having access to weaponry is not the reason people kill.

          • Rspennington

            Actually, he was right. The Romans did create the RCC. It was in the 11th century when they broke away from the Orthodox Catholic Church.

          • Thomas

            The fact of the matter is that early Christians WERE persecuted by Roman authorities, this means they had to be living in Rome. Ergo, Romans were the founders of the church.

          • Zaireunderorion

            Ahem, Several of Paul’s letters are to churches outside of Rome (one to Rome, obviously). So, yes, the Roman Empire did persecute Christians early on (partly because of the Eucharist and the fact they wouldn’t worship the Emperor), but it doesn’t follow that the Romans founded the Church. The Church clearly started in Christ’s old stomping grounds and spread.
            Sidenote: by the logic of the previous post one could say that the Japanese or anyone who ever persecuted the Church founded it, instead of reacting to what they perceived the Church to be about or doing.

          • Zaireunderorion

            GOODNESS, YES! I have done the same thing and sometimes I lose my cool because it isn’t like I didn’t research things. I went into a Baptist school (Baylor U. SIC EM) a non-denom protestant and come out Catholic in everything but the ability to take the Eucharist. Which I took care of the year after my graduation. Blessings, sir.
            In fact, blessings on our Protestant, Muslim etc. friends as well.

          • GnarJanky

            Haha really? do you really believe that? Go look at what Nero did to early Christians and then tell me that the Romans started the Catholic Church

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            Jesus built his Church on St. Peter…the Pope of the Catholic Church. St. Augustine said he wouldn’t believe the Scriptures if it wasn’t for the authority of the Catholic Church. Jesus, in the Bible…written by Catholics inspired by the founder of Catholic Church…builds his Church on St. Peter and promises to protect it forever.

          • nocamo1

            Quote bible…?

          • nocamo1

            Seriously, I spent my whole life in the Catholic Church up to early adulthood and no one quoted scripture except the priest, well I guess that makes sense since he was allowed into God’s presence and able to understand and interpret God’s word, whereas the lay person though they could read cannot. I am not saying you are wrong in any of your “knowledge.” But knowledge of history and geneology doesn’t save us. Knowing God and his will does. This is layed out in scripture.

          • Tiny

            Greetings dear brothers and sisters in Christ.

            Indeed we all have many views of the Catholic church.

            Whilst we are all entitled to our own personal views, it would be good to do our research by gathering information from credible sources so as to provide a concrete substantial basis for such claims against the church.

            An important thing to do before posting would be to understand the (credible) information in context(why such things are done e.t.c.) before forming judgement and the consequent ‘accusations’.

            I do not mean to offend you by this post dear sir/madam, but may I ask, have you taken the information you know or your afforementioned experience into context?

            Following which I’d like to ask, now at this older age, have you gone back to follow up on clarifying these doubts you have?

            If you truly are a seeker of truth, it would highly benefit you to seek to understand on a deeper level about what really went on in the faith. Especially if the intention is to offer comment on a faith that you are currently part of or were from previously.

            I would like to humbly suggest reading about Vatican II and the consequent post Vatican II teachings to get a better understanding on the church’s stance to your doubt.

            Also my Christian brothers and sisters, I would like to suggest thoroughly reconsidering your motives and intentions of posting such comments and accusations against the Catholic church. If you have questions about or issues with the Catholic church, it would be best that you clarify them with credible sources(i.e. Vatican website e.t.c.). It’s best to know what the stance is from the origin is it not?

            It would not hurt to phrase your doubts as questions too, as strong and nasty words usually incite anger and equally strong responses. Christianity is a religion of love at it’s core is it not? Have you been spreading love? Nonetheless, I think the Catholics on this page seem to be quite nice.. Also, there are some Christians on this page who have helped clear the air too, which I think is commendable.

          • Amelie

            I sense some issues here, no doubt stemming from improper catechesis. Else you wouldn’t have been so easily seduced by the supposed impressiveness of those who can rattle off scripture, chapter and verse.

          • Rspennington

            Christ did not build His Church on St. Peter. That is not what that passage means as understood by the early Church Fathers. They stated that it meant either Peter’s confession, that Christ is the Son of the Living God, or that Christ was referring to Himself as the Rock. The whole thing about it referring to Peter is about as phony as the Donation of Constantine.

          • guest

            If you go further in the next line…”I will give you the keys to heaven…” is Christ still talking to himself or about Peter’s confession?

          • Rspennington

            What He gave to Peter He gave to all of the Apostles at other times. Peter actually had to be rehabilitated as an Apostle after his denail of Christ. Christ gave them all the power to bind and loose:
            St. John Chrysostom, Homily 54 on Matthew -
            “What then says Christ? “You are Simon, the son of Jonas; you shall be called Cephas.” “Thus since you have proclaimed my Father, I too name him that begot you;” all but saying, “As you are son of Jonas, even so am I of my Father.” Else it were superfluous to say, “You are Son of Jonas;” but since he had said, “Son of God,” to point out that He is so Son of God, as the other son of Jonas, of the same substance with Him that begot Him, therefore He added this, “And I say unto you, You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;” that is, on the faith of his confession.”

            As to the keys, in his Letter to Heliodorus, St. Jerome mentions the keys, as well as the feeding of Christ’s sheep, as being for all the clergy: “Driven from this line of defence you will appeal to the example of the clergy. … Far be it from me to censure the successors of the apostles, who with holy words consecrate the body of Christ, and who make us Christians. Having the keys of the kingdom of heaven, they judge men to some extent before the day of judgment, and guard the chastity of the bride of Christ. But, as I have before hinted, the case of monks is different from that of the clergy. The clergy feed Christ’s sheep; I as a monk am fed by them.”

            So there you go.

          • Zaireunderorion

            Well, yes, cause the Pope cannot preach at every Church at the same time…

          • guest

            Here is a timeline of the Church (30AD to the present) layed out for you by Dr. Bob Schihl (Theologist):

            http://www.catholicapologetics.org/Slides/General%20Church%20History%20Timeline_files/frame.htm

          • Ahawkins77

            Oh William I know my history AND I back up what I say with facts. Show me your facts William… My son has his degree in military history with an emphasis on the Roman Empire. Any questions you would like to ask him? James Layne has a great response to your claim. God bless you my friend in Christ.

          • Beckyboll

            OOPS unliking this hit the WRONG button! The ignorance you spew about what you know nothing is astounding. Educate yourself before you speak.
            http://www.catholicbible101.com/

            Here, lots of accurate information here. Seek and you shall find that you are inaccurate.

          • Erinemilie

            AMEN!

          • ADam

            Too bad for the thief on the cross then….guess he really isn’t in paradise with Jesus because he wasn’t baptized by the Catholic church…

          • Katherine

            He was “baptized by desire”. From the internet: “The baptism of desire applies both to those who, while wishing to be baptized, die before receiving the sacrament and “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do His will as they know it through the dictates of conscience” (Constitution on the Church, Second Vatican Council).” So actually yes, he was baptized.

          • nocamo1

            He was not baptized. He was accepted into heaven by the Lord of the universe that commanded we be baptized. No one argues whether or not we need to be baptized or whether or not we should be, but Satan the deceiver wants us to be divided over why. The beautiful thing about God’s grace and free will is that we don’t have to force others to believe what we sincerely believe and if we believe incorrectly, God will make it clear. If then we dig our heels in despite the Lord making it obvious, again believers don’t have to judge or condemn, Jesus says to leave room for his wrath. He didn’t come to judge or condemn but to save. Either we will seek and find his will or we will not. Ultimately what is most important is that we have a relationship with him, draw near to him, seek to understand his will for us. ALL the other stuff will be worked out. Jesus rose from the dead…all the other stuff will be worked out. But let us not deliberately disregard him. That is to say, our brother may believe something we think is off the wall, way wrong. We still must love one another. And we owe it to ourselves, our faith, our church, our Lord to make sure what we do lines up well with his intentions. I am a financial advisor and work with attorneys to help people set up their estate plans. When they write their wills it is a binding document. After they are gone, we cannot go back and change it. It spells out the desires of the deceased. There is a very special, mystical way in which it is to be read, you know how? With our eyeballs. That is to say, you cannot read into it and you cannot read outside of it. It is spelled out in black and white. And if a person with an earthly estate can have their will read in such a manner, surely God’s can too!

          • Lilymdl27

            Adam, how well have you studied the Catholic church’s doctrine? Her foundation? Lived out what she truly teaches and not what you hear fallen men do? not much I suppose. Correct me if I’m wrong.

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            Actually he was baptized, baptized by fire. The exception proves the rule, the exception isn’t the rule.

          • Ahawkins77

            Adam, You forget thst Jesus is God and God is not bound by the Sacraments, we are. Though Jesus Himself was baptized, he wasn’t in need of baptism like we are , but he did so to set an example for you and me. If you truly want to imitate Christ, be baptized! BTW- The Catholic Church NEVER says who is not in paradise, it only can proclaim who is, a Saint. To say the good theif is not in paradise it to imply he is eslewhere and the Church would NEVER make that statement, nor should you.

          • Amelie

            The church wasn’t established until Pentecost. Had the thief instead been around at that time, he presumbably would have been baptized in the new church Christ established. Through the apostles. With the guidance of the holy spirit. Lasting until the end of time. Against which the gates of hell shall not prevail.

          • Heuchler55

            Wasn’t baptized by the Catholic Church? Christ was the one who issued the command to baptize if you wanted to enter Heaven. So, we are left with the logical problem of did Jesus lie when He said that the good thief would be in Heaven, did He lie when He said we needed baptism, or are we misunderstanding something and there was a baptism. Personally, I would prefer to believe that the Truth itself didn’t lie to us meaning that this man was in some way baptized. So, the belief that there is a different form of baptism that can lead to one’s salvation(either the baptism of blood for Martyrs or the baptism of desire which fits the best in this scenario.)

          • Guest

            I agree with you salvation is through Him and through His church, but who is to say that a baptist can’t obtain salvation by worshiping at his/her baptist church? I’m almost certain if he follows John 14:6 he will get to the Father regardless of where he worships.

            I don’t remember reading in the bible that Jesus founded the CATHOLIC church. I don’t know if you have ever been taught this, but at my Catholic high school in my Christian ethics class, a long time ago I was told that a church is a body of believers with the same purpose, to worship our one, true God who gave us eternal life.

          • Guest

            Jesus Christ started a Church. That Church was a visible Church founded by Christ on the Rock of St. Peter (the 1st Pope, see Matthew 16:18). Peter’s name was given by Jesus in Aramaic as “Kepha” which means “Rock”. We have 265 Pope stemming from Pope Benedict XVI all the way back to St. Peter. The Church that Christ founded and the Catholic Church are one and the same. If you read the early Church Fathers you will see that the teachings all line up with Catholicism. In fact, the word Catholic was first used in 110AD by St. Ignatius of Antioch a contemporary of the Apostles: “Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” Please read all the historical documents of the early Christians. They are all solidly Catholic. In fact, when did the Bible come together as one bound book (the new testament)? It was at the Council of Carthage and confirmed by the Council of Hippo in 397 AD. Thus you accept the authority of the Catholic Church when you accept the NT! (All this from a me – former Protestant :))

          • nocamo1

            I am sorry, to hear anyone quote that scripture and say that it establishes Peter as some sort of figurehead and creates a special central leadership role going forward is a stretch. Cerainly something significant happened at that moment. (See Acts 2:38, the first mass conversion since Jesus death, Peter essentially tells them, “here are the keys come on in” and 3,000 did). The “Pope” as we know him today, the one at the Vatican is like a king. He lives in a palace. He has security detail. Come on reasonable people. The so-called “first pope” in the bible was rebuked by Paul his fellow missionary minded apostle for caving into the judaizers and that is where the similarities between today’s pope and Peter end. “I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments. For though I am absent from you in body, I am present with you in spirit and delight to see how orderly you are and how firm your faith in Christ is.” (Colossians 2:4-5) and “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!
            10 Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.”

            If I were trying to please people I would not be a servant of Christ.

            Forgive me if I am discouraging seekers and believers in anyway. Please. It is not for them my comments are meant for. See James 3 “Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. 2 We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check.” When people make claims of fact that conflict with scripture they are wearing the teacher hat. One thing is to humbly state an opinon. Another is to promulgate falsity altogether. The one that insists on perpetuating teachings not firmly rooted in scripture needs to come face to face with the truth (found in scripture) for the sake of the gospel. Again, don’t take my word for it. If we believe the bible is his word, we will read it and cross reference what man says against what scripture teaches; what God says to us by the written word of the prophets who were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:21. That is why I am taking pains to back everything I say with scripture. So, you can see where I get my ideas from and you can check for yourself to see if that is what is meant by the word or not. May the Spirit of the Lord guide us all as we seek to glorify him. Blessings to everyone on this page! Power, glory and honor to you Lord.

          • Kara

            But what do you say to people that, as you suggest, check for themselves and come to a different conclusion? You’re all reading the same words from the bible, which to you is the final authority, but finding different meanings and getting different messages. Who can say which interpretation is correct?

          • TCISACW

            Christ already answered this. By their fruits, you will know.

            It’s a wonderful thing that those who are truly seeking Christ can read His word and express and manifest His word differently.

            Some will be wrong — and we will know by the fruit of their interpretation. They will lead people astray (wolves in sheep’s clothing). It is up to us to be the light that leads them back to Christ.

            The hierarchy of the Catholic Church, too often, has been those wolves in sheep’s clothing. Other leaders have also used Christ’s name, His word, to further their own ends and to lead people astray.

            The Catholic Church is not the final authority on God or God’s Word, or Christ’s teaching anymore than any other human being or human organization is.

          • Ahawkins77

            By their fruits you shall know them. Let’s see….The Catholic Church is 2 billion strong, is the largest charitable organization on the planet other than a country, feeds more children and educates more children than any other organization, founded hospitals around the world, started the university system, A Jesuit priest came up with the big bang theory (boom), Has been in Haiti for 54 years , helping the Haitians before anyone else even noticed them! Need i say more! That’s a lot of fruit!

          • TCISACW

            Yes, and it’s similar to the acts of many other organizations. However, the recent sex scandals, other controversial acts, such as permitting the Magdalene laundries, such as forcibly baptising Jews, such as stealing babies from their political foes and telling the parents their babies had died, and so on, are so horrendously inhumane and evil, no amount of money they can throw at education or hospitals can undo them.

          • Erinemilie

            TRUE!

          • Zaireunderorion

            You’re right…Protestants have never done anything terrible. Catholics aren’t pretending to be perfect. We just preach what we were given. Forgive the snark, I just find it irritating to deem that some bad actions outweigh all of the good that is done.

          • Erinemilie

            They have some fruit that is not so good too, that no one seems to be mentioning here.

          • nocamo1

            Jesus doesn’t lie. Seek and you shall find. It is not for man to judge you. We will all stand before him one day. We are accountable for seeking to understand him. All who call on the name of the Lord will be saved (this is not a declaration of the mode of salvation, but a statement of fact and a quote directly from the Book). Jesus will not leave you hanging. I am praying for you Kara! God bless you sis! Peace.

          • Erinemilie

            Amen!

          • Rspennington

            That is simply false. The early Church Fathers did not understand the Rock upon which Christ founded the Church to be Peter, but rather Peter’s confession or Christ Himself. That passage has been twisted by the RCC to support its version of primacy which was unknown for most of the 1st millenium.

          • nocamo1

            Sad. Many religious people here in defense of their religion are attacking other believers and yet…extremely valuable gems like this (on this Rock, Peter, your faith is a great example and others who do the same will find me) are overlooked. It grieves my heart, because Jesus himself is being overlooked, our Lord and master, our savior who suffered on the cross for us to be able to experience heaven on earth as well as after we pass on.

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            Where does the Bible come from? The Catholic Church. Boom.

          • Howard

            Huh? The Catholic Church uses the Bible BUT then decided to create their own scriptures. They don’t think the Bible is sufficient enough for some reason.

          • Nick

            Can you defend your statement that the Catholic Church created their own scriptures? I’ve heard that said before, and it has never been accurately defended to me. Where are you getting this information from? And I would prefer more than just a simple accounting of these books “appearing out of nowhere”. I would like to know what source you discovered this from. Because, according to the Council of Trent, the Church clearly stated what was scriptural and what was not, in answer to claims by Protestant Reformists seeking to CHANGE what was already there. So, did the Catholic Church add to Scripture, or did the Protestant Reformists seek to take away from it?

          • nocamo1

            Catechism.

          • Zaireunderorion

            The Catechism isn’t scripture…it is just putting things down in order, so to speak.

          • Erinemilie

            Excuse me? The Bible is the Word of God! Written over thousands of years, by men inspired by the HOLY SPIRIT!! thank you very much

          • Ahawkins77

            Difference being you are “almost certain” and I am “certain”. Of course a Baptist worshiping Jesus Christ in a Baptist church can attain salvation. If he is worshiping the Jesus Christ revealed in Scripture he is on the right path. Obviously you did not read my post. THe Baptists church IS PART of the Catholic Church, it’s just not in FULL COMMUNION. A Baptist, or any other Christian is a Catholic in imperfect communion with the church that Christ found. AND yes you are correct that we are the body of Christ. The Catholic Church teaches that the body of believers is the church and so is the building and so is the heirarchy. Its not one or the other its both/and! God bless you my fellow Christian

          • Guest

            Where in the bible does it say that Jesus found the Catholic Church? Does he specifically say build a catholic church. No he told Peter to build a church so all people, ALL PEOPLE, could come to worship him. And you’re right, it is said that the only way to salvation is through Him, not through the catholic church. I am baptized Lutheran. I am proud of my religion. I strongly believe in it. But I will not sit here and tell you that you will not find salvation because you do not have the same faith as me. Just like you can’t sit here and tell me that I won’t find salvation because I was not baptized in your church. I love the Lord. I worship him and follow him the best way I can. And I know that no matter what he will love me. And that is not based on what religion I have decided to follow. It is not based on how many times I’ve gone to confession or how many times I’ve said Hail Mary’s. It is no one’s place to judge others for their faith or how the decide to incorporate it into their daily lives. The place to judge belongs to Him and Him alone.

          • Ampaxx

            Here’s a little awkward truth, the Church predates the Bible. I agree with your last statement though, and I doubt that anyone could explain to you the doctrine of no salvation outside the Church in an internet combox. If you really want to understand what the Catholic Church teaches, you’d have to open a Catechism. I doubt many people here arguing against Marc’s points have any understanding of what the Catholic Church truly teaches.

          • Ahawkins77

            To correct your statement….The Catholic Church predates the Bible….I will add…as we know it today. The Scriptures of the Old Testament predate the Catholic Church. What the Catholic Church did was discern the Canon of Scripture from some 1500 or so writings that claimed to be inspired. The Catholic Church, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit gave us the Bible that Catholics use today. We have 73 books. Protestants have 66, interesting numbers huh! Protestants removed 7 books, another interesting number! 7 is a number of fulfillment or completeness while 6 is a number of incompleteness. INTERESTING isn’t it?

          • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

            Jesus said that He (Jesus not Peter) would built a Church upon Peter. St. Peter is the first Pope of what Church? Catholic Church. What Church claims to be established by Jesus Christ? The Catholic Church. Let’s not be ridiculous.

          • Rspennington

            You would do well to read the early Church Fathers. None of them thought that Christ was referring to Peter personally as the Rock upon which He would build His Church. Some believed He was referring to Peter’s confession. Others believed He was referring to Himself as Christ the Son of the Living God which Peter was the first to acknowledge. But none of them support Rome’s claim that He was granting Peter some type of unique chrism. It’s just not true and that was not at all the understanding of the early Church.

          • Erinemilie

            What Scripture refers to Peter as a pope? How do you know Jesus established the Catholic Church? The Church is all people who are believers in Christ. If you are saved you are a part of the Church. Jesus established the Church. I have never read anything referring to Peter being a pope or Christ establishing the Catholic church in my Bible.

          • Zaireunderorion

            The term pope does not come til later. The office clearly came before then. It makes sense if you keep the analogy of the body. Without a head i.e. the brainpan the body will not function properly. Though with our knowledge now, we can say the Pope is more like the brain and the Church like the spinal cord?

          • Ahawkins77

            Please do not misunderstand for it sounds from your response that you do no know, so please let me explain. You are right and you don’t even realize it. Matthew 16:18…”And i say to you, you are peter and upon this rock i will build my church.” Notice Jesus doesn’t say “A church” …. or ” churches”. …or “Peter, go build a church”…Jesus says, “…I will build my church.” So, the church is His, I hope we can agree on that. Now. did you know that Catholic means Universal? Literally! Catholic means ALL PEOPLE, just as you said. The Catholic Church is for ALL PEOPLE, in ALL PLACES at ALL TIMES! THe Catholic church is the only church that can say that. It spans over 2000 years from Christ to today, it is in every country and embraces people from all nations. Don’t think Sounthern Baptists can make that claim, nor can any protestant church make that claim because they all came into existence after the Reformation. HOWEVER, since the Catholic Church is the fullness of Faith, all the protestant churches, including the Lutheran Church is part of the Catholic church. SO, you, my friend in Christ, are in the Catholic Church, just not in full communion. We do have the same faith, faith in Jesus Christ, it just so happens that as a Catholic I have accepted ALL that Christ taught and if you are not catholic , but protestant you have accepted SOME of what Christ taught. I’m not judging and I am not giving opinion, I am telling you what the church teaches. This is never about dividing but about uniting, for the Holy Spirit unites and the Evil one divides. You and I are united in faith in Christ and I gladly stand shoulder to shoulder with you on this, my fellow Christian!

          • guest

            Sorry I misunderstood.

          • karoline

            “We do have the same faith, faith in Jesus Christ, it just so happens that as a Catholic I have accepted ALL that Christ taught and if you are not catholic , but protestant you have accepted SOME of what Christ taught.”

            Friend in Christ, what is it that the catholic Church teaches that protestants have not accepted? (i.e. what is behind that SOME of what Christ taught?) I know you are not judging, I would just really like to know (I’m not judging the other way either:)

            God bless!

          • Ahawkins77

            Karoline,
            My sister in Christ, I will try to make this simple but there is always the chance that I will be misunderstood. Thank you for your gracious inquiry. Just remember these are not my thoughts or opinions but the Churches teaching as compared to what some/most or all protetants teach/believe. And remember I am simplifying but I am always happy to expound if asked to do so. Here goes….What Catholics accept and most other protestants do not are , The Papacy, the priesthood, Mary and the doctirnes that concern her and her Son, we accept all 7 Sacraments most protestants accept two or so. We believe in the necessity of Baptism and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Most protestants do not. We have 73 books in our bible, Protestants have 66 ( they removed 7 during the reformation). We believe in faith and “good works”. protetants believe in “faith alone”. We believe in the communion of Saints, meaning the church is in communion throughout time and space, with all believers, death does not separate us. Protestants do not believe this understanding of the communion of Saints. We believe in Purgatory, Protestants do not…..I suppose thats what comes to mind for me at the moment and as I said i would gladly discuss further any of these. But i have to go right now and will check bak later. Peace and good will…your sister in Christ

          • Jon Jon

            http://catholicteens.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/would-you-want-a-book-with-missing-
            pages/#comment-56

            Check out this blog post. It can help support the number of books a protestant bibles has compared to Catholic Bible. Concerning purgatory I believe it can be found in 2Maccabees 12:43-46 and 1Corinthians 3:11-15.

          • karoline

            Thank you for your reply, sister in Christ. That shed some more light to it my inquiry. Most of what you mention is unknown to the community I come from (i.e. we don’t believe in it the way Catholics do), but some of it is celebrated (for instance five or six of the sacraments).

            I do believe that the history of my Christian faith began with the Catholic church. Even though I’m not Catholic, my community (non-denominational) consider them our (early) Church fathers. We must not forget our history. Again, thank you for your reply!

            God bless!

          • ~justAsinner

            [We believe in faith and "good works". protestants believe in "faith alone"]

            I’m not a protestant, I’m a catholic, only in papers. But recently, I go to a different church. If we are asked what religion we have, we wouldn’t be able to give a definite answer because we don’t care about religion. We care more on studying the bible and our relationship with Christ.

            You are right. We believe in faith alone. But because of that faith, we do good works to please and glorify God. We just don’t believe that we will do good works to be saved from our sins. That’s all.

            I recently asked my sister, who is a very religious catholic, whether she will go to heaven or not. She answered, “I don’t know”. When a brother in-Christ asked his catholic mother if she is already saved, his mother answered, “I’m trying to be.” These kind of answers sound fishy, that there is something wrong.

            When I was a mere 4 yrs old kid, I grew accustomed to talking to God, believing that He was always there beside me, listening. But when I knew that Confessions can only be made possible through the priests, I grew distant from my faith. And I stopped talking to God.

            At occasions, during mass, I would see people praying to the statues, forcing their way to go near the statues and touch them believing that they are holy. There were many instances on the news where a stampede would happen just because of a statue! Those kind of images made me realize how foolish those people were, and it made me grew farther away from my Catholic faith.

            When I was a child, parents would force me to go to church. People, even my parents, would threaten me to be good so that I won’t go to hell. During meals, my family would always pray, “Bless us our Lord..” repeatedly. My family’s religion is Catholic but I never once saw them open the bible, nor read the bible. The bible was always kept in that special cabinet with glass as if for decoration purposes only. I never heard them talk and amplify about how God is truly amazing and awesome. When I stepped on a bible accidentally, my parents scolded me telling me that the book itself is holy. Thus, I became afraid of the bible itself, and I only read bible story instead.

            Because of my previous religion (Catholic), I became an atheist, and that was during my high school years.

            My college is a Catholic School. Every year, we are required to go through theology class. But not even once was I convinced with the teachings. Imagine, I was forced to memorize the bible! I didn’t even understand what I memorized. During the lessons in sacraments, I didn’t like Baptism and Confirmation. These sacraments happened in my life without me knowing what they really are. Baptism is when I was still a baby. Did I accept Christ then? No. Confirmation was when I was in Grade School. Did I wholeheartedly accept Christ then? No. That’s because these sacraments are forced upon me, not by my own free will.

            When I went to a Christian Church for the first time, that was the moment when everything changed. It was from my bible study that I knew about salvation. That all I have to do is to accept Jesus, that I don’t have to pressure myself into good works to be saved.

            When I knew about God’s love for me, his faithfulness to me no matter how many times I’ve rejected, denied, and persecuted him for how many years, I’ve had a change of heart.

            In the church that I’m joining right now, I learned many things. I learned that I’m already saved not by good works but because of my faith in Jesus Christ. Because of God’s overflowing love for me, the overflowing love will be directed towards my neighbors. I also learned about idolatry and that God’s punishment is perversion, which is why there are many gays and lesbians nowadays. Because of that, I am now compassionate for them and I don’t have any discrimination against them.

            I don’t know why but after experiencing that, after knowing the truth, I began to love God. Loving him is to know him more, to surrender my life to him, to obey his commandments, and to share how great he is. Everyday, I pray from the bottom of my heart and not just out of vain repetition. During meal times, I will pray my own prayers while my family will pray the “Bless Us Our Lord..”

            I’m not against Catholic, nor am I against any other religion. I am just against people telling me that Roman Catholic is the only way especially when it was the reason why I became an atheist in the first place. Right now, I’m experiencing persecutions from my own catholic family. They won’t even let me go to church and worship God for the sake of not going with my family, as if the reason for going to church is the family and not God. That’s just wrong, isn’t it? Very wrong. Where is free will here?

            What I can’t see from most Catholic people that I know is the application of their faith. My family is already a proof of that.

            I’m not grateful for the Catholic Church in my country at all, for it was this church that turned me into an atheist in the first place. But hey, it’s different for everyone. I’m just saying that this is my encounter with God. And that what you said about protestants only believing in faith is not completely wrong but it’s not right either. I believe that because I love the Lord, I want to glorify him and please him by doing good works. With this logic, my want to help others became authentic.

            By the way, I have this sister in Christ who was fired from her work as a teacher because of the fact that she is not a Catholic. Guess which school.. yeah.. my own catholic university.

          • Anonymous

            You can start with transubstantiation. As far as I know only the Catholic Church (and the Orthodox churches as well, I believe) hold transubstantiation at the core of the Mass. The Protestant churches do not acknowledge transubstantiation. To the Catholic, Jesus saying, “This is my body,” and, “This is my blood,” are literal (not metaphorical) claims.

          • Rspennington

            We do not call it “transubstantiation” but, essentially, we believe the same thing. But consider, when you write “only the Catholic Church (and the Orthodox churches [sic] . . .) you are referring to about 1.3 out of 1.8 billion Christians worldwide. “Only” may not be the correct term. Maybe, “over 70%” would be more accurate.

          • BV

            I believe only the Greek Orthodox Church uses the term “transubstantiation.” Even with that, I don’t think they define the term with the rigor that Roman Catholics do.

            No matter, it’s a terrible doctrine anyways. Worth a good damning.

          • Ahawkins77

            Can we be nice? I am not here to damn anyone or their beliefs and i would like the same respect paid to my beliefs. Thank you and God bless.

          • BV

            The Protestants/Catholic dialogue is way beyond “being nice” to one another, sorry to say. Also, I’ve met plenty of Romanists who have no interest in “being nice” to me or paying respect to what I believe. IIWII.

            Transubstantiation is nonsense. Substance? Accidents? What are those? We have no knowledge of these concepts, and therefore I have to wonder why the Roman church insists that it is the CONTROLLING doctrine for the mystery of the Eucharist.

          • Ahawkins77

            Dear BV if we can’t agree to be nice and respectful we can’t have fruitful dialogue. I respect your beliefs. but that doesn’t mean we have to agree on them. If you do not understand trasubstantiation doesn’t mean it does not exist. I don’t understand calculus. doen’t mean it doesn’t exist! why is this post ultra skinny?????

          • Zaireunderorion

            Probably, in part, because the Eucharist was confused with cannibalism by Romans and was used as one of many reasons to kill Christians. The early Church died for the Real Presence. It wasn’t until peaceful times when one could sit and think about how to describe it.

          • Rspennington

            No, I go to a Greek Orthodox Church, we don’t call it transubstantiation either. Essentially we believe the same thing but we do not tie it down with a medieval scholastic explanation. After the consecration of the bread and wine, acts of veneration toward it are considered worship since it has been transformed into very God of very God.

          • Anonymous

            Catholic born and raised, attended rigorous and very thorough theology classes for over ten years. Trust me, we use the term transubstantiation. Learn a bit more about a religion before you criticize.

          • guest

            My comments are being deleted?

          • Ahawkins77

            why?

          • Patrick

            Not surprised. I have not read your comments but mine also have been deleted. Boy we must have made them mad or the common sense approach must not be appreciated.

          • TCISACW

            Yep. Same here. References to anything that sheds the Catholic Church in a bad light, even if they’re true, are being deleted. Guess the Catholic Church can’t stand up to the truth.

          • guest

            There are literally dozens of comments in this thread that say negative things about the Church. Must be something else.

          • guest

            There are literally dozens of comments in this thread that say negative things about the Church. Must be something else.

          • Erinemilie

            I have seen a few of my comments deleted too…the Truth hurts!

          • nocamo1

            I thought the same but scrolled down and saw some. I would email Marc. I think he’d be man enough to admit it if true. If so, that be sad.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

            Inter faith squabbles are fruitless. As someone who has found God out side the Catholic church, and observed Catholic’s in practice’s I find many things conflict with Jesus teaching things that have kept me from the catholic church, things like Idol worship and a complete lack of following Mathew chapter 6. In the past I have taken to referring to Catholic’s as Heathens as in Mathew Chapter 6 describes their method of Confession and prayer. I might add up until just the last 15 years to meet a catholic that had actually read the bible would almost be considered a miracle. No doubt the church is taking strides to correct it’s hold on the word.

          • Dplunkt

            Sorry Darth, there is no Idol worship in the Catholic Church, everything you said could be said about non-catholics. As for Mathew Chapter 6 first, we say the Lord’s prayer I rarely see evangelicals say that prayer. We fast protetants typically don’t. Serving two masters; ever heard of name it and claim it. And finally all Catholics read a reading form the old Testiment, a reading from the new and a Gospel reading EVERY Sunday.

          • Anonymous

            The Pope is the very definition of an idol…

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7HRXGUB77SJWC4AGCHPTSARHL4 S

            The Pope occupies an office established BY Jesus Christ, according to the Bible. Did Christ set up an idol? I think not.

          • Anonymous

            Where is the biblical quote that explains who a pope is and what he does?

          • Ahawkins77

            Matthew 16 and following. Read and we’ll talk

          • Guest

            How exactly did Jesus set up the Pope’s office? We are all Priests in his service! Jesus also said not to call anyone on earth our father, we have but one Father in heaven.

          • nocamo1

            Right on Preach it!

          • Zaireunderorion

            Then you shouldn’t call your father father etc. Christ clearly had to be using hyperbole there. Paul thinks of himself as father to several of the churches he helped establish and that is in the Bible. Clearly the understanding is something else.

          • Neville

            Only if you don’t understand Catholicism at all!

          • Anonymous

            Show me a biblical verse that commands a pope and explains his duties and I will change my statement.

          • Ahawkins77

            read matthew 16 and following. john 20:21-23

          • Trish

            Did I miss it? I didn’t see anything about a pope in Matthew 16…

          • Trish

            Did I miss it? I didn’t see anything about a pope in Matthew 16…

          • guestt

            wrong again

          • Guest

            The Pope is not an idol because Catholics do not worship him or look to him as our God; rather, he, like all clergy, has taken upon himself the lifelong task of ensuring that Christ’s followers understand His teachings and know how best to serve Him on Earth. Christ is our King, but the Pope acts as his “assistant,” for lack of a better word, aiding all people toward the promise of salvation. Unfortunately, several popes in the past were corrupt, but Catholics by no means infused their poor choices into the doctrine of faith or idolized their negative behavior. They are fully human, just with an important job. People need structure; without such, life would be chaos.Just as Americans have government leaders, Catholics have a hierarchy priests to help them live a life fully in the way of Christ. The Pope is simply the highest order of these priests.

            You may be referring to when the Pope speaks “ex Cathedra,” or from the Chair of Peter, in which case we do believe that the words are coming straight from Heaven–but of course, this has only ever happened on two occasions in the whole history of the Church.

          • nocamo1

            “For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.”
            Eph 5:23

            “And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church”

            Ephesians
            1:22

            Not the pope. Read scripture for yourself. Jesus didn’t come to establish a hierarchical order of priests.

            One loved by the Lord,

            “..you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.”
            1 Peter 2:9

          • nocamo1

            No hierarchy BUT You have access, you are a priest, you, you, you have been exalted, you have a direct line to the lord, you are responsible for building up the church, God didn’t entrust this duty to a small group of men, but to his entire church.

          • Ahawkins77

            really? please explain. You can’t just make a statement like that without backing it up. I would like to hear why you are saying this. Then we can talk.

          • nocamo1

            A H. You are a diligent believer, please study these scriptures like a Berean and then reread Erin’s post:

            Regarding a man on earth “heading up” God’s church:
            “For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.”
            Eph 5:23

            “And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church”

            Ephesians
            1:22

            Not the pope. Read scripture for yourself. Jesus didn’t come to establish a hierarchical order of priests.

            One loved by the Lord,

            “..you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.”
            1 Peter 2:9

          • Trish

            I grew up in an evangelical church and we pray the lords prayer and fast as well. I’m not sure what the argument is here…

          • Mom

            I think he is referring to the Madonna (statue of Mary)

          • Guest

            No idol worship? Do you not have shrines dedicated to the Blessed Mother? complete with flowers laid at her feet and incense burning? Do you not pray to the saints and to Mary? Do you not have statues of Mary and other people. People mind you who have died?and by the way, I am a Christian and I say the Lord’s prayer all of the time.

          • Zaireunderorion

            I hardly think using a statue to help you focus is the same as worshipping an idol. We do not believe that they are God or above God. We ask saints and Mary to pray to the Lord Our God for us. (by the by, I am a former protestant)
            Now, it can be said that there is a danger towards idolatry within the Catholic Church because we happen to use statues and pictures. That much is apparent from the syncretism found in voodoo and Santeria. We can certainly go wrong, but the practices themselves are hardly the problem.

            And death is hardly the end for true love, which is the only right thing to call what Christ has for his Church and all people. Christians have to necessarily believe that we are eternal. The difference is that Catholics don’t believe that our communion ends because of bodily death. The reason we pray to saints are for the same reasons we ask our living brothers and sisters to pray for us. It’s part of the communion. Saints are just people we are fairly sure have already made it into heaven.

          • Tymcycak

            In the Catholic Church “Idol worship” does not exist. If it did, I would be worshipping false gods. People who worship material things, like cars or money are wrong. I pray for the living and the dead through the saints as intercessors to Jesus Christ. Statues of the saints help remind me of them during prayer .

          • Tsolodon

            Jesus is the only intercessor. He is who we go through to get to God. This is why we pray, ‘In Jesus’ Name, Amen’

          • Chrisjwimmer

            WHO needs an intercessor.. WHY would you want an intercessor… what good does an intercessor do? We got a direct line to our savior… I know I don’t need a party line… no operator connecting my calls… was Catholic 20 years.. last 40… no intercessor.. just more mumbo jumbo…to have them in my book

          • Neville

            If that is what you believe then you will be a hypocrite if you pray for others or ask them to pray for you!

          • Ahawkins77

            “I will pray for you.” peace and good will my friend

          • Rspennington

            Jesus is the only Mediator. We can ask the saints to intercede for us. There was an effort around 15-20 years ago to make the Mother of God Co-Mediatrix along with the other Persons of the Trinity. If it had been the understanding of the RCC that prayers for her to intercede for us were mediation, such a movement would be superfluous. Thankfully the movement did not succeed or it would have driven another wedge between Rome and other Christians.

          • Trish

            …so praying to saints is biblical? I thought we prayed to God through Jesus…I dont recall praying to saints being in the scriptures.

          • Guest

            It isn’t biblical.

          • Zaireunderorion

            Sigh, it is biblical. In the Hebrew Scriptures (see: Old Testament as it was during Christ’s time) there is mention of praying to the dead and for the dead.

          • Trish

            …so praying to saints is biblical? I thought we prayed to God through Jesus…I dont recall praying to saints being in the scriptures.

          • ~God’sDaughter

            “Mother of God” ? I thought God is the beginning, so why is Mary considered as Mother of God? I agree with Mother of Jesus as a man, but mother of God? I don’t think God will be happy to know that we consider a human (Mary) as His mother.

          • Kristy Ziegler

            God is the Alpha and the Omega. The Beginning and the End. I, too, used to misunderstand the “Mother of God” reference. Catholics do not believe Mary gave birth to God or made God in that she came BEFORE God, but as the mother of Jesus, she was given the title since Jesus is God made man. And God is perfectly happy to consider Mary His mother – he picked her! Believe me – coming from a former Protestant perspective – there is more depth in Catholic teaching that our little Protestant mindset could ever let us imagine. The Bible – the Word of God – has come to life to me in ways I could have never imagined. It took seeking God and lots of prayer. And it took me seeking out the depth of the teaching to understand it. It’s a beautiful place, my dear. And I encourage all to take a GOOD look at the Catholic Church. It’s more than you ever imagined.

          • ~justAsinner

            No thank you. My family has been Catholics since generations before my generation now. Sadly, it was the Catholic Religion itself that made me an atheist, and I rejected God for how many years. After joining a Christian church for the first time, that was when I encountered God and became hungry for his word. My country is a Catholic country, but we have the freedom to choose our own religion. Still, there are persecutions that I’m experiencing and these persecutions even come from my own family. It’s just sad because my family believe that they have to do good works to be saved. I also believed that when I was in Catholic. So you see, growing up in a Catholic community and going to Catholic schools didn’t make me accept Jesus Christ. What I really dislike about Roman Catholic is that I was forced to do the sacraments and rituals without even understanding them or at least not through my own will. I’m not against Catholic, but because of their practices, I became an atheist. So, no thank you.

          • nocamo1

            “Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.” Romans 8:34

            Why take a shortcut when you can take a direct route? Cut out the middleman.

          • Rspennington

            Bother the RCC and the Orthodox Church are very clear on the veneration due to images. The respect paid to images is not to the image itself but its prototype. You would rise to meet the President of the United States. In older times, bowing, etc. was the custom. We venerate the saints. This is not worship but a gesture of respect (in Greek, “dhoulia”). We give great reverence to the Mother of God because she bore God in her womb (“hyperdhoulia”). Worship (“latria”) is reserved only for God.

          • Beckyboll

            http://www.catholicbible101.com/

            Here is a very informative site which can explain and dis-spell most of the “myths” floating around about the Church due to rampant ignorance.

          • Neville

            As far as idol worship, sometimes it seems like some (SOME!) protestants worship their bibles!

          • Ahawkins77

            Dear Darth,
            I sure hope our open and honest dialogue is not being interpreted as an “Interfaith squabble” The kind of dialogue going on here should help us to understand each other and foster unity and that my friend if FRUITFUL discussion. I think it is unfair for anyone to look at what another person is practicing and criticize the action before knowing what their doing. Please sight me an example so we can discuss honestly. I’m not sure what you mean when you say “idol worship” please explain? I also am not sure what you mean by not following Matthew chapter 6. Are we talking about praying the Our Father, storing up treasure on earth, serving two masters, worrying about tomorrow..again site examples and i will do my best to help you understand the Catholic position. Peace and good will.

          • Rspennington

            The thing is that the Church Fathers taught that when Christ said “upon this Rock I shall build My Church”, He did not mean Peter personally. Some thought He meant upon Peter’s confession, some thought He was referring to Himself as the Rock. In Greek, He uses two different but related words for “rock”, one to refer to Peter and another to refer to the Rock on which He would build His Church. St. James, the brother of the Lord, presided over the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem, not Peter. During the first millenium, the primacy of Rome was not based on the text about the rock, it was given to Rome by the rest of the Church because Rome was the old capitol city of the empire, both Peter and Paul were martyred there and, up until the 9th century, it enjoyed a fairly good reputation for keeping the catholic faith.

          • Advocate of Truth

            There was a post way back up in the first comment about Catholics being divisive. I think this whole comment section clearly demonstrates the notion. Now to blow your mind:
            #1 – Jesus Christ never existed and was a creation of man, pulling from myth and previous cultural beliefs. The Bible is no more true than Grimm’s Fairy Tales.
            #2 – God is not a person and we certainly weren’t created in His image. “God” is the energy the binds the universe. This God made the rules, and the rest moves forward according to those rules (read: free will). God existed long before man (yea, hate to burst any bubbles out there, but the earth is more than 6,000 years old).
            #3 – Catholicism is the biggest joke known to human kind. I say this bluntly, but it is and was a control mechanism designed to “herd the sheep”, or maybe lemmings? It’s not my fault 1 billion people are brainwashed.
            #4 – There is no such thing as Hell, not to mention Purgatory. That is another tool to create fear in the masses to abide.
            #5 – There are more gospels than those by Mark, Luke, Matthew and John. They messed up a lot of Christ’s message (whether you believe in Him or not) by removing other key gospels.
            #6 – Religion is the fuel behind most wars. Even World War II. Love thy enemy, right? Yea……..

            That’s all I have to say about that.

          • Advocate of Truth

            There was a post way back up in the first comment about Catholics being divisive. I think this whole comment section clearly demonstrates the notion. Now to blow your mind:
            #1 – Jesus Christ never existed and was a creation of man, pulling from myth and previous cultural beliefs. The Bible is no more true than Grimm’s Fairy Tales.
            #2 – God is not a person and we certainly weren’t created in His image. “God” is the energy the binds the universe. This God made the rules, and the rest moves forward according to those rules (read: free will). God existed long before man (yea, hate to burst any bubbles out there, but the earth is more than 6,000 years old).
            #3 – Catholicism is the biggest joke known to human kind. I say this bluntly, but it is and was a control mechanism designed to “herd the sheep”, or maybe lemmings? It’s not my fault 1 billion people are brainwashed.
            #4 – There is no such thing as Hell, not to mention Purgatory. That is another tool to create fear in the masses to abide.
            #5 – There are more gospels than those by Mark, Luke, Matthew and John. They messed up a lot of Christ’s message (whether you believe in Him or not) by removing other key gospels.
            #6 – Religion is the fuel behind most wars. Even World War II. Love thy enemy, right? Yea……..

            That’s all I have to say about that.

          • BV

            The word “catholic” actually means identity plus universality (see The Riddle of Roman Catholicism by Jaroslav Pelikan). Roman Catholics, for some reason, seem to insist on dropping the first part of the definition. I suppose Protestants (as if that word is a helpful category these days) seem to insist on dropping the last part of the definition.

            But no matter, we’re all talking in circles here. What does it mean to be “the Church”? We’ve only been arguing over that word since the Reformation (at least).

            Also, I have to take issue with you that the Roman Church is the only church spanning the past two thousand years. The Eastern Orthodox Churches (gasp!) have been there too. Rome was not the only patriarchate in the early days of the Faith.

          • Jon Jon

            All i got to say is AMEN!!!

          • Monarch

            While I agree with what you said and explained above. You forgot the 2nd half of Jesus’ words “Peter, you are rock and upon this Rock I will build my Church AND the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” There is only one Church that can trace it’s roots back to Jesus. As a convert to Catholicism pointed out (further down in this discussion) That he could be told the founders of all the Baptist denominations but no one could tell him the founder’s name of the Catholic Church.,that’s because it was Jesus. If Jesus told us the Gates of HELL would not prevail against HIS church who are we to doubt that? The CAtholic Church has survived, herasey, the reformation, etc. and still exists. It can be traced to the Apostles. Ask people who have converted Dr. Scot Hahn, Deacon Alex Jones, etc. They will tell you they had set out to prove the Church wrong and the more they read, the more they realized, the Church was the one true Church of Jesus.

          • Rspennington

            Actually, the RCC cannot trace its doctrinal roots back to Christ and the Twelve, only its apostolic succession. It has insisted on promoting certain doctrines that were not part of the catholic (in the sense which St. Vincent of Lerins used the word) faith. To invent new teachings which contradict what has “always been believed by all and everywhere” is one of the definitions of heterodoxy. However, compared to low church Protestants, we Orthodox feel much closer to Catholics. It may take several hundred years for them to come around to our way of thinking. But they seem to be moving in that direction to some extent incrementally. I have read statements of the current Pope before he became Pope that all the RCC can expect of the Orthodox is what was agreed upon in the first millenium. If he could agree that that is what we should expect of the RCC then we would have a reconciliation. I have also heard either he or the last Pope refer to the possiblity that the councils of the RCC since the Great Schism could be recast as local councils. Well, I’m not holding my breath but we Christians are supposed to remain hopeful.

          • Ahawkins77

            Please do not misunderstand for it sounds from your response that you do no know, so please let me explain. You are right and you don’t even realize it. Matthew 16:18…”And i say to you, you are peter and upon this rock i will build my church.” Notice Jesus doesn’t say “A church” …. or ” churches”. …or “Peter, go build a church”…Jesus says, “…I will build my church.” So, the church is His, I hope we can agree on that. Now. did you know that Catholic means Universal? Literally! Catholic means ALL PEOPLE, just as you said. The Catholic Church is for ALL PEOPLE, in ALL PLACES at ALL TIMES! THe Catholic church is the only church that can say that. It spans over 2000 years from Christ to today, it is in every country and embraces people from all nations. Don’t think Sounthern Baptists can make that claim, nor can any protestant church make that claim because they all came into existence after the Reformation. HOWEVER, since the Catholic Church is the fullness of Faith, all the protestant churches, including the Lutheran Church is part of the Catholic church. SO, you, my friend in Christ, are in the Catholic Church, just not in full communion. We do have the same faith, faith in Jesus Christ, it just so happens that as a Catholic I have accepted ALL that Christ taught and if you are not catholic , but protestant you have accepted SOME of what Christ taught. I’m not judging and I am not giving opinion, I am telling you what the church teaches. This is never about dividing but about uniting, for the Holy Spirit unites and the Evil one divides. You and I are united in faith in Christ and I gladly stand shoulder to shoulder with you on this, my fellow Christian!

          • Guest

            Catholics do not re-Baptize when you convert, you can be Baptized in any Church and it is valid as long as you are Baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If done this way, you are technically Baptized by Jesus himself. The word “Catholic” means universal. Did Jesus say build many churches with many different beliefs? No, he didn’t. There is only one true church. As long as you follow Jesus and ALL of his teachings, you are also Catholic. You’re just in the wrong church, so come home my Catholic friend.

          • TCISACW

            Christ’s “one, true church” is His body of followers, not one institution.

            One is not Catholic if one follows Christ. One is a Christian.

            One is a Catholic if one follows the CCC and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.

          • Ahawkins77

            Let’s connect the dots TCISACW…

            Christ’s “one, true church” is His body of followers, not one institution.

            This is true, to an extent….because….YES, you are correct that we are all part of the body of Christ, but some of those parts aren’t listening to the HEAD. We all have to work together, just like a body or it just doesn’t work. Try with your own body to do something without maybe your arms, or your legs, or your eyes… How much better you can do things when all parts of your body works together. Well its the same with the church. Can you imagine how Christians could change the world if we all worked together? Rather than being divisive, let us unite.
            Since Christ found the Church and that so happens to be the Catholic Church I am a Catholic and I am a Christian, I am a Catholic Christian. Again it’s not either or it’s both/and!
            no one follows the CCC any more than one follows the Luther Catechism, Which BTW, I find contradictory to Sola Scriptura, a tenant of Protestansim. On the other hand, the hierarchy of the Church is “inpersona Christi” Meaning the priest is in the person of Christ and so to connect the dots I am following Christ!

          • TCISACW

            There is zero validity to the Church’s claim that priests are stand-ins for Christ Himself.

            Yes, as I’ve said, there are Catholics who are fine Christians. That’s neither here nor there. There are Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, atheists, agnostics, Wiccans, etc., who also lead lives that reflect Christ’s teaching and, in that sense, are fine Christians as well.

          • Ahawkins77

            TCISACW,
            You need to back up your statements with facts. you cannot just say, There is “zero validity to the Churches claim” Have you read the scriptures? Do you know what a type and an archtype are? Have you read Genesis?, Exodus?, Leviticus?,Dueteronomy?, Numbers? What do you know about the priesthood and why it was established. what do you know about Jesus being preist, prophet and king. Do you know about laying on of hands? what a priesthood is for and who the high priest IS? Who are the Apostles and why did Jesus have 12 of them? Why did Jesus even have an inner circle? Its all over the Gospels. What sets the Apostles apart from the rest of those in Scripture. And just what is the Last Supper all about? Shall we talk?

          • TCISACW

            What, are you Joan Rivers now?

            The Catholic Church’s claims that their priests are stand-ins for Christ is completely anti-Christian.

            No one can stand in for Christ, no one can act AS Christ.

            No one, at least not unless they can be beaten, crucified, die and come back to life three days later. Until then, priests are just a bunch of men, no better, no worse than anyone else — although they strike me as a soft, lazy lot.

          • Zaireunderorion

            We don’t believe that priests are better than anyone, just that they have a specific job conferred on them by Christ. A priest can be a sinner as well as anyone. That hasn’t changed since Old Testament times.

          • Amelie

            I think people sometimes don’t understand that “The Church” Jesus instituted through His apostles is known today as the Catholic church. It’s the universal Church, hence “Catholic”.

            It was only when factions starting rejecting teachings or tampering with doctrines of the Church, and then breaking away and forming separate bodies, that the Church had to distinguish herself. There are writings from the 1st or 2nd century by St. Ignatius referring to the Church as the “Catholic Church”.

            So, yes, when you read about the early Church in the New Testement, please be assured that it is referring to the one, universal, or Catholic church.

          • TCISACW

            No. The institution that calls itself the Catholic Church (capital C Catholic) isn’t remotely close to the church Christ founded, the church He had in mind, when he left his disciples.

            The Catholic Church has morphed over the years from a small group of everyday people who met in homes, small groups, and who preached His message (although history shows us that there was dissent among those of the early church, just as there is dissent today), to a widespread political body, to a religious organization that heavily influenced local governments (modern Europe), to the cultish, legalistic religious organization it is today.

            If you look at the harsh words Christ had for the Pharisees, if you look at the actions of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, it is clear that the Catholic Church today is everything Christ would have been against.

          • Amelie

            You may not like the Church (obviously!), but, guess what? It’s still the church Christ founded. You can’t change that.

          • TCISACW

            Claiming that the institution of the Catholic Church, as it exists today, is the church Christ intended to found doesn’t make it so.

            Sorry, but Christ really does get the last word here.

          • Tymcycak

            Disagree!

            Details, please before you display such presumptive knowledge (and ignorance)!

          • TCISACW

            Um, have you been living under a rock…? You’re not aware of the transgressions of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church? Google “Grand Jury Report, Catholic Church” and add, oh, Boston or Philadelphia to that search. Start there. And then work backwards.

            The hierarchy’s actions are actually worse than those of the Pharisees.

          • Zaireunderorion

            The Church must predate the Bible because the Bible didn’t just fall out of the sky. The second half had to be written and clearly Christians existed before an established book was compiled. They used Hebrew scriptures, but the New Testament came later (though people did possess parts of it in their individual communities).

          • Erinemilie

            PLEASE! Read the book of Acts. It details the beginning of the Church. The early believers followed the Law of Moses closely. Jesus was the promised JEWISH Messiah! Paul was a rabbi! They did not worship Mary. She, was there along with them worshiping God. They don’t even mention her past the event of Pentecost. The Apostles did not want to be worshiped either. There was no pope. There were elders and deacons of the church. They did not encourage the people to have an earthly mediator between them and God either. They broke bread together, studied the Scriptures and took communion and observed the practice of Baptism, which actually means immersion. not sprinkling. Furthermore, there is no mention anywhere of individuals going to an apostle and confessing sins and the apostle telling them to recite certain prayers to obtain forgiveness. Just saying.

          • nocamo1

            Well said Erine.

          • Tymcycak

            The two terms are not contradictory; one can be Christian and be Catholic (and vice versa).

          • Lindseyjustice22

            Never in there did it say that you had to be catholic to find salvation. We share the same faith. Catholics are Christians too, just like Lutherans are Christians. Just as a side note, the Catholic church was the first Christian church. Check any world history book

        • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

          Baptism saves you now. – 1 Peter 3:21

        • Boris G

          Not sure where u read that statement but the actual teaching of the Catholic Church is that the Fullness of truth resides within her and that other sects and Denominations share in that truth to lesser and greater degrees. So seeing as Catholics are responsible for putting together the bible and passing on whatever other beliefs are held in common with all Christians then it would be fair to say that salvation is THROUGH the Catholic Church either directly or indirectly – whichever u like but as the Saints attest going directly is the easier and surer way.

          • TCISACW

            How can “the saints” (by which you mean, I suppose, the people the men of the Catholic Church have decided may be saints) attest to anything about salvation? They’re dead and no one knows how they were ultimately judged by God.

            Salvation is through Christ, not the Catholic Church.

            The Catholic Church is not God. It is a bunch of arrogant, prideful, weak men who don’t know anything more than anyone else, who’ve been proven over and over again to be as corrupt as the men of any other institution. They are always, first and foremost, about themselves and their creature comforts, about power, about personal wealth, about the law.

            They are the Pharisees Christ freed us from. The church he instituted via the Apostles is a far cry from the glittering, power-hungry, corrupt organization that men have created over the years. They usurped His church and re-created the legalistic, pharisaical structure He destroyed in the first place.

            No Catholic priest, bishop, cardinal or Pope can grant salvation to anyone. But they sure hope you believe that if you give them money and let them control your mind and tell you what to think, they can.

          • Ahawkins77

            It is really unfair for you TCISACW to make such blanket statements about the church, the pope and the priesthood. I agree there have been bad popes, preists and the like in the church, simply because the church is made up of sinners and I count myself as one of them. But…in spite of all the fallen men who have been in the hierarchy the church remains after 2000 years. I would say that is because she is guided by the Holy Spirit. No other institution could have lasted such scandal. Just look around you and see what distruction occurs when men fall from high places. It has been made clearly evident lately especially in 2011 with the fall of many tyrants and dictators. But the Catholic church remains, inspite of the sinners simply because it is both human and divine. The men will Always fail us, the Divine will not. peace and good will my friend.

          • TCISACW

            There are other religions that have lasted longer than the Catholic Church. That it has been around for 2000 years (although it hasn’t always been the same institution over those 2000 years) means nothing as far as proof of their “One, True” claims.

            Yes, the institution of the Catholic Church consists of imperfect men, no better than anyone. Same for all organized religions. They consist of imperfect people, none better than anyone else.

            The only perfect being is Christ. That’s where your eyes belong, not on a piece of bread locked into a little glass picture frame. Or gobbled up and pooped out, for that matter.

          • Zaireunderorion

            This is where Luther would carve into the wooden table in Latin, “This IS my body, This IS my blood” even the starter of the Protestant Reformation believed in the Eucharist. The Eucharist was also a reason the Romans persecuted Christians because the uninitiated reported cannibalistic meals. People have died for it. It isn’t simply a piece of bread. The belief is so strong that priests will finish the sacred meal or eat it off the ground if it is dropped.
            Yes, the only perfect being is Christ, but Christ established the sacred meal that you are describing at just a piece of bread. If it was just a piece of bread how can one take it unworthily. The Church has never said that it is perfect and has always said that it is the Holy Spirit that guides and not what men think. I find the plethora of Protestant churches (once again, a former protestant) to be proof against the Faith moreso than the Catholic Church is because at least the Catholic Church is in agreement. (aside: there are like 27 different rites than just the Roman rite in the Church and all are considered valid. This contrasts with Protestants, back in their heyday, who said only their small church held the truth. They do this less so now, but it did happen.) Is Baptism just a symbol or not? Do you HAVE to speak in tongues to be Christian? What about different spiritual gifts…?

        • Guest

          extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is no longer the position of the Catholic Church in regards to our brothers and sisters of other faith traditions, and in particular our Christian brothers and sisters. Please read Unitatis Redintegratio, a Vatican II document
          http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

          • Rspennington

            That’s part of the problem. Whenever they decide to change something that they become convinced was never true, but which they nonetheless taught, the start out by introducing the modification as, “As the Church has always taught. . .” Many people think that Catholics hold views that the contemporary RCC does not hold. But part of that is that the RCC once did hold these views, sometimes within living memory of those who ascribe them to the contemporary RCC. It used to be that Rome upheld the catholic doctrine that a unity of faith is required before intercommunion is possible. Now, probably with the motive to entice Orthodox to Rome, they allow Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox to commune if the ask to. This is very uncatholic in the traditional sense. But it is a good example of how they make it up as they go along. What should worry Catholics is this: The RCC is just one bad Pope away from becoming the Episcopal Church.

        • guestt

          Do you have a valid source that he said this?

      • Guest

        Hi, I’m a Protestant. Throughout my life I have attended Baptist, Presbyterian, and Non-Denominational churches, among other, and I have never once heard anyone say that Catholics are Christians. I want to personally offer you an apology for what ever delusional person/people told you that we believe that. No two people are alike; we like to worship in different ways, and that is okay, because God isn’t grading our worship skills. Thus, the different denominations. It doesn’t matter if you’re Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc etc. What matters is that you have a personal relationship with Jesus. THAT is the key ingredient to Christianity. Without that relationship, all you are left with is an empty religion.

        • Jacob Baugher

          Catholics are Christians…..

          • Rob Knight

            My guess is that is what he meant. I’m hoping he forgot a couple of letters and meant to say “never once heard Catholics AREN’T Christians”. That’s the take I get from the rest of his post anyway.

          • loveJesusfor ever

            I am sure what he wrote is esactly taht… That he NEVER HEARD Catholics were Christian! … and for some time I thought the same… until I was taught the right way. Im am proud to be Catholic :)

          • Apacete

            Saying that Catholics are not Christians is like saying that Coke is not a cola or Colgate is not a toothpaste.

          • CatholicTeen

            Catholics were the original Christian denomination that Protestants branched off from. Catholics put together the Bible. Jesus founded Catholicism through Peter. They are as “Christian” as it gets.

          • Just Saying

            No offense, but this just isn’t the truth. There is was no “Roman Catholic church” until one bishop in Rome started to become dictatorial over all the other bishops in the world. This took place in the 4th century. He created a centralized church. Jesus didn’t. If we want to be tremendously technical, the Eastern Orthodox church with has its roots in the Middle East probably go further as the “original church.” The Catholics split from them as a power hungry move.

          • Matthew Roth

            Catholics didn’t split from the Eastern Orthodox; the Eastern Orthodox split from Rome, breaking the Tradition held from the early Church that the bishops would defer to Rome when an issue arose. The Patriarch of Constantinople was quite the innovator with the idea of first among equals, considering that the Western and African bishops never believed this.

          • Sorryivotedforobama

            I’ll stop responding, Matthew has it right!

          • Rspennington

            Not true. There was no such thing as papal infallibility in the first millenium. Rome introduced the filioque in defiance of the Second Ecumenical Council which established the Creed. The Eastern Church was larger than the Roman Church at the time . Constantinople did not innovate the idea of first among equals. That is the most ahistorical thing I’ve heard in a while.

          • Jtmmeasner

            Rome had primacy from the beginning. St Clement of Rome warned the Corinthians to stop their infighting or sufferdicipline. The Orthodox church has no authority

          • Rspennington

            Also, there was never a tradition in the Church of deferring to Rome on questions of Faith. A Council of the Church condemned Pope Honorius as a heretic. Rome had a primacy of honor to preside in love. It also had certain prerogatives to preside over some appeals. It had nothing remotely like infallibility or universal, absolute, immediate. You should really read something other than Catholic propaganda. Even Catholic authors have begun moving away from some of Rome’s historical teachings. In fact, Rome itself has gradually watered down its official teaching on Original Sin since the inherited guilt part of the doctrine was unknown in the East and not even widely taught in the West until around the time of the Great Schism. I admire Rome for certain stands it takes and I believe that Rome and the Orthodox can marshall a common front against secular humanism. But Rome has strayed from the Apostolic Faith.

          • Connor

            Though they officially split in 1054, the Church more or less grew apart due to little communication between the pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople. There wasn’t enough common ground between them to agree, so they decided to split off.

          • Julian

            Really? Would you please back up this claim with historical references? And if what you say is the case, do you mean to state that 4 patriarchates were in error and only the Pope was correct? Can you explain why the Pope was not present at any of the 7 Ecumenical Councils? Why were none of the 7 Councils ever held in Rome? Deferring to Rome? Are you sure?

          • Mike

            You are completely wrong, Jesus told his Apostles “the first CATHOLIC priests” to start the CATHOLIC church.

          • Sorryivotedforobama

            Apostolic and catholic church was actually in his SMS to everyone. Go re-read Nicene Creed.

          • emma

            The Catholic Church wrote The Nicene Creed! We recite it at every mass-whyare you (a Protestant I am guessing) quoting the Creed as if it came from the Protestant Church?It is Catholic.

          • capt jim mcintyre

            Today it is very hard to tell protestants from Catholics.
            They both do the Constantine 3rd cent AD,/ 15th cent, Council of trent, Pagan Sunday Worship, and Sprinkle Babtisms
            –Check closer you will find that they DRINK AND BOTH LOVE FOOTBALL AND WAR!
            Whosoever reads and heads His word, and trust on the name of Jesus Christ as King, Redeemer, and FRIEND, shall be saved!

          • Guest

            It was through the fault of man that the members of the Church become corrupt, not because of Divine Interference. Individual men are to be held accountable, not the Church as a whole.

          • emma

            Grab a history book and study the Catholic council beginning as early as 250 AD. Also study Emperor Constantine, who made Catholicism (around 400 AD) the official state religion. Also read:
            -Justin Martyr (90 AD)
            -Polycarp (disciple of the Apostle John [the one whom Jesus loved])
            -Irenaus (contemporary of Polycarp)

            these guys came around 50 years after Jesus and reference an already established, up and running Church, governed by Bishops, deacons, and the Pope. They also reference the Holy Eucharist, the Mass and liturgy, and the baptizing of infants.

            BAM!

          • What?!

            dictatorial?? Power Hungry?? How can you say that the Church is power hungry? What is the Church supposed to do with this “power”? It isn’t like the Pope is shouting out commands to all Catholics to kill anyone that doesn’t believe in what we believe! (And I’m not singling out any religion about the killing thing, I’m just speaking about how dictators have ruled in recent history)

          • What?!

            And for the record, that part about the Protestants breaking away from the Catholic Church is true! THEY wanted to worship the way that THEY wanted to do it! THEY made THEMSELVES the founder of their own religion! I recently read a post from a Protestant that said Catholics are all about themselves. HELLOO, who were the people who decided that they didn’t like how Jesus set up the Catholic Church? The protestants. And who was that guy who put HIS OWN WORDS into GOD’S mouth? None other than Martin Luther, the founder of the Protestant religion! And sorry about going off on my fellow Christians, but I thought that that needed to be said.

          • Lois Lyda

            As the orthodox put it, the pope was the first protestant (since he “protested” against the unified church and split from the other 5 bishops to do his own thing . . .

          • Rspennington

            Precisely!

          • Rspennington

            Precisely!

          • Zyklonz Power

            Lol agreeable dude.. and funny simple thing is that… the other denomination use the HOLY BIBLE – ONLY (to be precises gospels)that is compiled by VATICAN!!!- not saying cahtolics though.. and they use it as the THE BASIC FOUNDATION ONLY!!!! whereas they don’t agree with catholics… errr i find this is rather funny

          • http://www.facebook.com/pedraviva Livingstone Pherr

            That wasn’t needed to be said.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/SCZ3Q57SUGGVT5S5NFVVZDCAVE Flame

            I agree. Read from this link http://bit. ly/RrP5Lw

          • Zyklonz Power

            read the history brother….. before you comment… i think what matthew said is the right one..

          • Informed

            I’m sorry but i think you need to retake a history class or two because your information is invalid. Christians were trying to make sense of things as Jesus had been gone for some time. The Christians of the time held councils to determine orthodoxy and heresy and it just so happen to be that the majority of the Roman Empire decided that what the “eastern orthodox” christians were teaching was heresy. I think you should research a little bit more before you make such bold claims.

          • Rspennington

            Not true at all. The eastern church was larger than the western church at the time of tbe great schism. The other four patriarchates sided against Rome’s usurpation of power. Even Catholic authors are coming to the conclousion that some of Rome’s historical claims are unfounded. The east’s faith cannot be heresy, it is carved into walls of tbe Vatican (in the form of the Creed without the filoque). I admire Rome for some of its efforts but it happens to be wrong on the whole Petrine thing. No one is really listening to them on the subject anymore.

          • Informed

            I’m sorry but i think you need to retake a history class or two because your information is invalid. Christians were trying to make sense of things as Jesus had been gone for some time. The Christians of the time held councils to determine orthodoxy and heresy and it just so happen to be that the majority of the Roman Empire decided that what the “eastern orthodox” christians were teaching was heresy. I think you should research a little bit more before you make such bold claims.

          • Sue Freivald

            you really need a good course in secular history — it would clarify the collection of misconceptions and errors you have just stated — and being secular, might even be acceptable to you in your anti-Catholic framework.

          • Sue Freivald

            you really need a good course in secular history — it would clarify the collection of misconceptions and errors you have just stated — and being secular, might even be acceptable to you in your anti-Catholic framework.

          • YoYoPerlman

            Actually, the Church in Rome and in the West is as old as the Syriac and Orthodox traditions. For a long time, the western church grew much more slowly. Secondly, the schism between the two (Catholic and Orthodox) occurred in the 11th century not the 4th. Lastly, there is justification from Jesus for founding the Bishopric of Rome(“Peter, you are the rock upon which I shall build my church).

          • Patrick O’C

            dear “just saying”…i would have to disagree. Many of the Eastern Orthodox churches are willing to refer to the Bishop of Rome as “first among equals” which indicates a recognition of some form of primacy. that “4th century nonsense” is just protestant propaganda and has little to do with authentic history.
            Be well.
            Patrick O’C

          • Jtmmeasner

            That’s bull. The Eastern Orthodox did not exist for over a thousand years after the Catholic church was founded by Jesus. In fact, the name “Catholid was used by Ignatious of Antioch as far back as A.D. 110. You really need to study church history and stop listening to protest fundies who refuse to accept the truth. Read the church fathers, and you will learn too.

          • JoyfulCatholic

            After Pentecost, the disciples went out after receiving the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Good News to the world. At that time Rome was the center of the empire and the place you would go to spread news far and wide. So, Peter took Paul and they went to Rome which is where Peter more fully established the Catholic Church b/c Peter was the “rock” on which Jesus founded the Church. To go to Rome in that time period and announce that someone other than Ceasar was God was blasphemy which is why Peter was crucified upside down b/c he told them to he did not deserve to be crucified in the same manner as Jesus. But I digress.

          • Julian

            Actually, the Rock is not Peter, but rather Faith is. Several Holy Fathers including St. Augustine, St. Ambrose and St. John Chrysostom maintain that teaching.

          • Alphonse13

            Jesus is not the “founder” of Catholicism–that is about absurd as one can get

          • sandradee_78

            there was nothing that said ” jesus is the founder of the catholic church” it said jesus was the founder of the church.. that is christianity. we are all christians, but Catholicism and baptists and protestants have different practices.
            not absurd at all.

          • emma

            you say that ‘Jesus founding the Catholic Church’ is ridiculous-where do you get evidence or logic for the above post? I could call that equally ‘ridiculous,’ although that word is derogatory and doesn’t discuss the issue. And if the Church Jesus founded covered all Christians, where were the Protestants up until 1500? Of right, they broke off from the Catholic Church.

          • nocamo1

            Show me Catholic in the bible.

          • Anonymous

            The bible itself is catholic. Maybe you can show me the trinity in the bible?

          • Songweaver611

            In Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus gave His
            disciples the Great Commission, stating that they were to teach and
            baptize in the names of the Godhead, “Go ye therefore, and teach all
            nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
            of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
            commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the
            world. Amen.”

          • Lovepoet21

            realize that everyone was Catholic (even Martin Luther) until he decided to leave the Catholic church. And he only left because there was a corruption of men within the church, not the faith itself. He still believed in the Catholic practices.

          • Asdhkl

            How is this absurd? Can you leave your ridiculous comments to yourself

          • guest

            no, if people leaves their “ridiculous” comments to theirselevs then we’d never get anywhere

          • guest

            no, if people leaves their “ridiculous” comments to theirselevs then we’d never get anywhere

          • Cecmattingly

            Paul refers to the catholic church in the New Testament to refer to the church Christ founded since other churches not completely following Christ’s teaching were already appearing. This church Paul refers to is what we call the Catholic Church today. The Catholic Church can trace each pope through apostolic succession back to Peter, the first pope of the Catholic Church who was appointed by Christ.

          • Sorryivotedforobama

            Sorry, the Armenia Apostolic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches get that distinction.

          • http://profiles.google.com/kaiserpha Patrick Allen

            They “get it” equally with the Roman Catholic church, along with all churches in communion with it.

          • seniorsaint

            I would like to reccomend that you read a little booklet entitled “Trail of Blood.” by B.H. Carroll. It is easy read and will enlightenl you as to the beginning of the Catholic Church. It will also inform you who started it and why. You may be quite surprised.

          • ang

            trail of blood is nonsense.

          • catholicmomma

            This article refutes the “Trail of Blood” and its bad history.

            http://www.catholic-convert.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/TrailOfBlood.pdf

          • Gary Sellars

            Absolutely not so (with the possible exception of being the original Christian denomination).

            That’s what Catholicism teaches you but if you really have an ear to hear God through His Word, you learn that the Catholics, like EVERYONE else, are not perfectly faithful to accurately represent all the truth.

            God Himself is responsible for giving us the Scriptures. The Scriptures credit the Jews for the responsibility of preserving them.

            Since the New Testament Scriptures were finished before they were assembled, they do not (and could not, unless prophetically) attribute any organization or people with the assembly of the New Testament. Many don’t recognize the self-aggrandizement of Catholic Church is their taking credit for Scripture instead of giving God His due glory.

            Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has a well established record of unfaithfulness to God and His Word that far exceeds the brief points I’m going to make here in my meager attempt to give proper credit to God, where it belongs.

            1) The Catholic Church wrongfully takes credit for the Bible just like they do for Peter being the first pope even though there is NO evidence but the testimony of the Catholic Church to support it. If that’s not clear, let me say it this way:

            Taking the authority of the Word of God alone, which is THE AUTHORITY, there is NO REASON to give the Catholic Church ANY of the credit it gives itself. Rather than the honor it gives itself, history gives it an overwhelming weight of shame, guilt and sin against Christ and His Church.

            2) For good reasons, many credit the Great Whore of Revelation, drunk with the blood of the holy, with being the Catholic Church.

            The Catholic Church is responsible for the murder of millions of Christians because they would not submit to Catholic heresy, and DENY their faith in the Word of God! This overwhelmingly egregious sin AND fact, which Pope John Paul II FINALLY confessed and for which he asked forgiveness, STANDS as the most glaringly obvious evidence that the Catholic Church’s presumptuousness in its claims for itself and is testimony that it is, in fact and in truth, the creation of sinful men and not God AND is the height of arrogance against God that it continues to try to con the world with its exaltation of itself instead of giving glory to God and humbling itself as what it is — the work of men, which God, because He’s wonderfully gracious, has used, just as He used the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin, even though they too were often the enemies of God.

            Again, lest there be any confusion, I’ll state it plainly: The Church of Jesus Christ is an ORGANISM of which Jesus IS HEAD and the Catholic Church LIES and dishonors God by claiming that it is His organization. The exact same sin is committed by the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

            There’s not two cents worth of difference in the absurdity of the claims of the three heretical organizations. The ONLY difference where the Catholic Church is superior is in its fundamental faith in the blood of Jesus, whereas both the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses DO NOT give the blood of Jesus its due place as the full payment for the redemption of man.

            This one major correct doctrine makes the Catholic Church legitimate AS a denomination, even though they’ve added a host of heresies to the most grievous sin of the murder of millions of true Believers, such as “penance” and “indulgences” to their long list of sins against God and His Church.

            3) The lies about the Scriptures (such as denying the clear teaching of Jesus’ four brothers and at least two sisters).

            4) The failure, as an institution, to embrace the wider body of Christ, and acknowledge that the body of Christ is larger than the Catholic Church and in fact, doesn’t include ALL the Catholic Church, JUST AS it doesn’t include ALL the members of ANY denomination or Church. The body of Christ, like I said, is an organism made of those who have been born again (John 1:13, 3:3,7) something the Catholic Church, to my knowledge, has NEVER acknowledged — sinfully pretending that IF you’re Catholic, you’re a Christian!

            Well, that’s as absurd as saying, if your name is “Ford,” you’re a car! Thus, they DON’T give God His rightful glory and acknowledge that the “new birth” is a Scriptural experience, which comes ONLY FROM GOD and NOT FROM ANY Church.

            The honor and glory for the TRUE CHURCH goes to God (because it is the work of God BY His Spirit) and not the work of the very corrupt and sinful Catholic Church.

            If this point isn’t clear, let me say it unequivocally — membership in the Body of Christ is IRRESPECTIVE of one’s relationship with the Catholic Church! You’re NOT a Christian because you’re a Catholic just as you’re not a Christian because you’re Baptist or Presbyterian, or Methodist. One is ONLY a Christian because they’ve been born again by the power and will of God.

            I think I’ve made enough points, each one irrefutable by men of integrity and honor who love God and His Word and give Him His due glory.

          • Anonymous

            When you said that the points you gave are “irrefutable by men of integrity and honor” it’s basically POISONING THE WELL.
            Some of your points are flawed when you take scripture into account. While it is true that Catholics are like everything else and that scripture comes from God, saying that “ they do not (and could not, unless prophetically) attribute any organization or people with the assembly of the New Testament” is not necessarily true. It’s because back in the old days, early Christians came together and celebrated mass through breaking of bread. The term Catholic was not coined yet, but those early Christians are the forefathers of Catholicism.
            It is true that the glory should be to God, but what you are doing is basically stating an opinion against the Catholic church, which as you imply, hogs the glory.
            Your 1st ¬and 2nd point can be refuted by scripture. Matthew 16:18-19: “18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[b] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[c] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[d] loosed in heaven.” That ultimately says that Peter was indeed the head of the Church and Peter (the first pope) was given the authority to set rules for the Church. Jesus Himself gave authority to the Pope. That was the Catholic Church, and protestants broke away from it because of the undeniable corruption in the old days. Also, do you not see that the pope asked for forgiveness for his PREDECESSORS, which like anyone, is not perfect? I see no reason why it is a sin to be in a Church that Jesus himself instituted. If anything, it is you who talks contrary to scripture. You might want to read Matthew 16:18-19.
            Also, the sacrament of penance was instituted by the pope, who was given the authority for the Church. Again, I am basing from Matthew 16: 18-19. I don’t understand how that can be a heresy, as you say.
            Your 3rd point is basically involving translation. I don’t know if you are aware but in the Aramaic language, they only have 1 word for brother, son/son-in-law and cousin. That goes for their female counterparts too. So in translation, the biblical scholars just translated what was written and it is up to the priests to interpret the theological meaning of scripture to the people. Joseph or Mary may have had nephews and nieces, so saying that Jesus had other blood brothers may not exactly be true.
            Your 4th point – I don’t know where you are getting that assumption. The body of Christ is offered to all, it is our option if we want to take of it. It DOES NOT belong to ONLY one denomination or group of people NOR does the Catholic church claim to be the only recipients of Christ’s body. What we believe in is that we take in the Body of Christ when we celebrate the Holy Eucharist like it says in 1 Corinthians 11:24 “and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” The host is not something we just consider a symbol, but the Body of Christ himself like He said. We do that in memory of Him, not because we are the “ONLY ONES” to receive His Body.
            Be careful in saying that the “new birth” is solely a scriptural experience. In Titus 3:9-10 it says “But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with Him” So I want you to reconsider your statement in breaking off the Church and want something only from your scriptural experience. Jesus instituted the Church, so saying things against it is going against the Gospel and just considering your opinion alone. Be careful.
            But in any case, it is true that we are Christian through God Himself.

          • NonDenominational Christian

            and then kept the bible to themselves. until the bible was mass printed by a protestant, the only people who were even allowed to read it were the priests. and they only read the parts that kept them empowered. it wasnt until after the bible was mass produced that true enlightenment struck the people. and that is when they began to protest the very narrow minded teachings of the catholic church. catholics Are Christians, i have never been taught or told that they arent. that statement is ridiculous.

          • Carlzkie143

            so Jesus said “They are as “Christian”,how come that your name became catholic?

          • http://www.facebook.com/eman.surin Eman Surin

            You r wrong! You must know why Dr. Martin Luther (protestants) branched off of Catholics? When an original thing gets polluted or contaminated it needs refining/cleaning. Protestants are a refined lot, AND in fact Catholics are a polluted/contaminated lot, remaining.

          • Albert J Wrigglesworth

            I don’t remember Peter calling himself a Catholic.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=28303357 Madison McClendon

            A basic reading of what he intended to say reveals that it was a typo. The author clearly intends to rebut the notion that Catholics aren’t Christian, and express his sorrow that other Protestants may have said or believed something like that.

            Charity in all things, friends, charity in all things. He clearly meant to type “aren’t” and made a mistake. The context makes that all very clear.

            That said, saying “Catholics aren’t Christian” is about as terribly awful a statement as “Protestants believe that anyone who isn’t a part of their sect aren’t Christian.” There are certainly Protestant churches that feel that way, but there are a great many that don’t, and painting every non-Catholic church community as thinking in the same way is awfully disrespectful towards the religious and spiritual lives of a great multitude of the faithful throughout the world.

          • Carlzki143

            so fi you are catholic?what is a catholic?

          • Guest

            All Catholics are Christians, not all Christians are Catholic

        • kaqchikel

          If you have never heard that Catholics are Christians, what have you heard? Silly people! Did they tell you we are Moslems?

          • Beckyboll

            I have heard it most of my life. While I have never, ever gone up to another person of a different denomination and bashed their religion or faith. But I have been lambasted for it for decades , all by other so-called Christians. I have had more respect from athiest/ agnostics concerning my Catholic faith. Sad to day. I was raised Catholic, large family, and my father who was a DEVOUT Catholic, I never heard one derogatory comment from him or any other member of my family, nor do I recall any priests, parishioner, catechist, or member of my church ridicule another faith , as protestants and evangelicals have done to me. The amount of Catholic bashing online and in the media is why it has become known as the “last acceptable prejudice.” This video does nothing but fuel hatred of Catholics,and mislead those searching for answers.

          • Heatherbeth_5

            interesting… Then why are Catholics taught that only Catholics go to heaven? You don’t see that as a bash to other denominations? Open your eyes. And for the record I was raised Catholic, went to a private Catholic school. So please don’t preach to me.

          • Beckyboll

            First off, once again, uneducated speaking untruths. The Catholic Church does not teach that, never has, never will. I suggest you not repeat myth and fokelore, but pick up a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and educate yourself.

            http://www.catholicbible101.com/

            Here is a very uninformative site to separate fact from fiction.
            As a cradle Catholic, and a elementary school catechist, I guess I would know what I was taught and what is being taught!

          • TCISACW

            Um, actually it has. You’re clearly very young and don’t know your own Catholic Church’s history.

          • guest

            As a cradle Catholic, etc., you should know your own history a bit better. The Catholic Church does not teach that NOW obviously, but they most certainly did. In fact, they taught that non-Catholics go to Hell for most of the Church’s existence.

            Pope Eugene IV: “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church…can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels”

            Pope Boniface VIII: “…we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

            It wasn’t until Vatican II (in the 1960′s) that they began saying otherwise. You need to be more careful when you accuse people of being uneducated.

          • http://www.facebook.com/kickintheface Jacob Timothy Michael Hughes

            There is a difference between the Pope and the Church. The pope is not held up as infallible in all matters, or in all circumstances. With Vatican II they defined what it means to be “outside of the Catholic Church”.

          • guest

            Nothing you said changes what the previous poster was arguing. As the leader and spokesperson for the Catholic Church, what he says about its teachings on salvation carry a lot of weight, even if the Pope and Church are distinct.

            Vatican II had to define that because of the shift in thinking regarding non-Catholics and their potential for salvation. (Even with the new official definition though, most interpretations of Vatican II”s statement believe it is only saying that non-Catholics ignorant of Catholicism are saved. Thus, intelligent, non-ignorant Protestants still get left out.)

          • Doubledad

            I might also add that the two Popes you quote are from before the Reformation, so in effect they were speaking to non-christians or heretical sects, they were not condemning Protestant christians because there were none. What is it you kept saying? Oh yes, “know your history own history a bit better”.

          • guest

            As I’m sure you did at some point, I too took high school history, so I do know when the Reformation was.

            Just because there was no official split for Protestantism doesn’t mean no other Christian factions existed. (I never used the word “Protestant” and neither did the person to whom I responded and neither did the person to whom they were responding!) But the quote about everyone needing to be “subject to the Roman Pontiff” speaks for itself. In addition, both quotes were after the East-West Schism, so even if you ignore the small sects that existed, there were very clearly other Christians to whom these Popes were referring.

            I’m also quite certain I never said “know your history own history a bit better” as you attempted to quote me because that’s grammatically incoherent. I did say ONCE (not “kept saying”) that a cradle Catholic should know her faith’s history because she claimed the Catholic Church “never has” taught that only Catholics go to Heaven, when that is clearly untrue.

          • guest

            As I’m sure you did at some point, I too took high school history, so I do know when the Reformation was.

            Just because there was no official split for Protestantism doesn’t mean no other Christian factions existed. (I never used the word “Protestant” and neither did the person to whom I responded and neither did the person to whom they were responding!) But the quote about everyone needing to be “subject to the Roman Pontiff” speaks for itself. In addition, both quotes were after the East-West Schism, so even if you ignore the small sects that existed, there were very clearly other Christians to whom these Popes were referring.

            I’m also quite certain I never said “know your history own history a bit better” as you attempted to quote me because that’s grammatically incoherent. I did say ONCE (not “kept saying”) that a cradle Catholic should know her faith’s history because she claimed the Catholic Church “never has” taught that only Catholics go to Heaven, when that is clearly untrue.

          • nocamo1

            No need to be snarky. Try to be reasonable. It is likely there were other believers not necessarily associated with the Catholic Church (we can safely infer this without poring over historical references, can’t we?). Why be nasty and rude. Can’t we have respectful debate and discussion regardless of whether or not we agree?

          • nocamo1

            bazinga.

          • Beckyboll

            Sorry you so misinterpreted your education. Clearly you weren’t applying yourself. I am not preaching to anyone.

          • Guest

            The Catholic Church does not teach that only Catholics go to heaven. It teaches that anyone who belives in Jesus Christ with their true heart and follows His teachings will be saved. In addition, if a person is from another non-Christian religion, such as Buddish, they will not be judged or sent to “hell”/remain in purgatory for not knowing of Christ, our saviour as Christians know Him to be. And no one is preaching. It is important if we are all going to have an educated conversation to respect each other without attacking the other person’s point of view. Let’s remember that no religious institution is perfect and that as humans we are all guilty ofmistakes.

          • Guest

            *Buddhism

          • CFrench

            “It teaches that anyone who belives in Jesus Christ with their true heart and follows His teachings will be saved.”

            No, I’m pretty sure it teaches that anyone who dies in a state of grace without the taint of mortal sin is saved. Given that the only mechanism by which mortal sin may be absolved is through a perfect act of contrition (rather difficult to achieve in itself, as the name implies) or an imperfect act of contrition made to a priest in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, that pretty much reinforces the old teaching of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. No Penance, no Mass, no Extreme Unction? (At least no valid forms of those sacraments.) It’s not a rosy picture for the state of the non-Catholic’s soul. I don’t know what kind of idealized crypto-protestant catechesis you received, but there’s more to receiving the gift of salvation than what you depict here. If that were all there was to it, why should any of us bother to attend Mass or receive any of the other sacraments, anyway? I’m sure I’ll be accused of being legalistic, but that’s what the Church teaches and has always taught, V2 or no.

          • TCISACW

            Where does Christ tell us that He will not forgive us our sins, or that we are damned to hell should we not confess them to a priest, or make a “perfect” act of contrition (as judged by whom? A mere man?)?

            This is where the Catholic Church has invented extra stuff out of thin air, and for the sole purpose of creating an atmosphere of fear and controlling other people’s lives.

          • http://www.facebook.com/pray.the.rosary Lisa Alekna

            Sure… inventing things – btw – do you know where Jewish Law comes from? All the dietary laws and the customs and so on? Interpretation of their Holy Scripture, by recognized experts, to clarify and the Law given to them by God, through Moses.

            The Catholic Church has done the same thing – lead by the Holy Spirit to clarify questions, sort out misconceptions, establish Traditions – and so on. Including developing the Creeds as statements of Faith, developing the canon of the Bible, and clarifying issues of theology as heresies came and went (such as the Hypostatic Union of Christ’s dual nature)

          • TCISACW

            Jewish Law is pretty clear and stands on its own. Catholic “law” is subjective and agenda-driven. It borrows from Christ’s words, but adds things that are not there.

          • youngRCwoman

            Sorry but that responce show that you havent read much of the Old Testement. If you read more than a couple of scatered verses you will see pretty quickly with out some sort of interpretation in order to make sence of it all. No worries though that is a common mis conseption :D

          • guest

            yup I am pretty sure the bible says dont add or subract!

          • nocamo1

            9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

          • TCISACW

            @youngRCwoman

            Sorry but that responce show that you havent read much of the Old Testement. If you read more than a couple of scatered verses you will see pretty quickly with out some sort of interpretation in order to make sence of it all. No worries though that is a common mis conseption :D

            Like
            Reply
            1 day ago
            in reply to TCISACW

            No, actually, it’s not a “common misinterpretation” (of what, I’m not sure, since you haven’t mentioned anything specific).

            I’ve read the OT many times, as well as the NT.

            Also, you should probably work on your spelling before acting so smugly.

          • Patrick

            go to Catholic.com and search “confession to priest” if you want an answer… otherwise just stick to saying that you don’t know why the Church teaches what it teaches…don’t make stuff up

          • http://www.facebook.com/pray.the.rosary Lisa Alekna

            There’s always “invincible ignorance” … I think that what people forget is that God’s grace is bigger than anything we can conceive of….

          • youngRCwoman

            Listen if you were taught that by a private Catholic school you probably went pre Vatican Counsel II. I think you need to look at what the Church teaches for yourself and realize that your Catholic education is a life long thing not just something you get told for 12 years of your life and then think you have all the answers! The Church actually teaches that we do not know who goes to heaven, we are not the judge of those who do and don’t. We can only say that we know for sure that one who has lived a life of faith and died recieving the sacrements of the Catholic Church go to heaven. Everyone else we DON”T KNOW!

          • TCISACW

            If Catholics themselves are being taught incorrectly at Catholic schools, that’s the Catholic Church’s fault. Maybe, if the Catholic Church wanted fewer people to reject them, they’d do better to start working on their internal issues rather than implying that non-Catholics, or people who reject organized religion are “stupid” (which is exactly what the “destupidification” tag on this post does — call everyone who isn’t marching in lockstep with the author “stupid”. Real bad way to witness this Catholic Church y’all claim is the One, True Whatever.

          • http://www.facebook.com/kickintheface Jacob Timothy Michael Hughes

            The fact that the very nature of education involves talking to 12 year-olds mean you can’t get too deep into theology. That’s why the Church can’t teach kids everything about the Church. Yes, the Catholic Church does teach that there is no salvation outside of the Church. The reason for this is simple: Through our Baptism, the Church is the body of Christ. There is no salvation except through Christ. Now, it is possible to have what is called “a baptism of desire”. This means that someone has desired God, but may not have know where to go. The Church teaches that the best way to go to heaven is through itself, because its members make up the body of Christ.

          • TCISACW

            So you’re asserting that it is Catholic teaching that baptism received outside of the Catholic Church is not valid, and that non-Catholic Christians are not members of the body of Christ?

            Just what I thought.

            Good luck justifying that to God come judgment day. I’m sure you’ll explain to Him perfectly how you and the men you worship have the authority to supercede Him and dictate who may or may not be allowed into heaven.

          • http://www.facebook.com/kickintheface Jacob Timothy Michael Hughes

            I said baptism. As long as a Baptism is done in the manner that Christ prescribed(In the name of The Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit), then it is valid.

          • http://www.facebook.com/kickintheface Jacob Timothy Michael Hughes

            I said baptism. As long as a Baptism is done in the manner that Christ prescribed(In the name of The Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit), then it is valid.

          • Ethan

            God is not bound by the sacraments… don’t worry. BUT, if your pride keeps you from coming to the Catholic Church even though evidence strongly presents itself that the Catholic Church is the true church than pride cannot be dismissed.

          • guest

            No salvation except through HIS sacrifice HIS blood HIS obedience HE said nothing about a church saving you! He said whomever believes that HE is THE ONE SON OF GODShall not perish but have eternal life The church isnt mentioned in HIS statement about salvation.

          • Ethan

            To clarify… Protestants, whether they like it or night are Catholic in a way, they just are our separated brothers and sisters. I think it was Vatican II that said God is not bound by the sacraments. Also, the Church teaches that we are all seekers of truth in that if someone honestly doesn’t come to the conclusion that the Catholic Church is the one true church they can be saved, because it wasn’t by their fault.

          • Crmontiel24

            umm…WHO told u only catholics went to heaven? wrong, girl, wrong.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-McLaughlin/100000545980481 James McLaughlin

            All persons who are Baptised are considered Catholic whether they are aware of it or not. The Church teaches that enterance into the Church is by way of Baptism. There is only one baptismal mystery. The effectiveness of the Sacrament is drawn from the prayer of the Church. It is taught that power of Baptism spirates (breathes) out of the Eucharist; that is, the Most Blessed Mystery (Sacrament) which is Christ Himself.

            In Latin we call this Opus Dei. In English, translated, that means the Work of God.

            May God Bless You.

          • Kyle

            Actually James, LDS baptisms are not recognized by the Catholic Church…

          • http://www.facebook.com/pray.the.rosary Lisa Alekna

            I am a nearly 50-year old life-long Catholic and I have NEVER heard anyone, including teacher-nuns or priests, say ANYTHING remotely like that. Try reading “Nostra Aetate” http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

          • Ahawkins77

            I believe i explained this in an earlier post. I am sorry you didn’t learn this in Catholic school. The Catholic church does not teach this. They do teach no salvation outside of the Church but that doesn’t exclude anyone. Read your catechism. Anyone who truly seeks to live a good life and for no reason of their own does not know the gospel message can be saved by Gods grace. I believe that is an all encompassing statement. bless you my sister in Christ.

          • nocamo1

            Why is it that Catholics feel this video was directed at them? Let’s get down to the brass tacks of this whole thing…he is rebuking (which biblically we are allowed to do) religiosity for religiosity’s sake. Take it for what it’s worth. It’s a point of view of a fired up young kid, who CLEARLY loves Jesus. If it doesn’t apply, by all means, let it fly.

            Do Catholics feel they fit the mold of a group of people being religious for religiosity’s sake? If not, why get so offended and take this personal? If so, then take a look at the heart of what this young man is trying to say. He isn’t Jesus. He isn’t perfect. He is talking about having a heart for the core of who Christ is regardless of worthless traditions (see your new testament for references made by the apostles re: worthless traditions, because they are there).

            If we love the Lord from the heart, I believe we will appreciate this boys words, actions, faith, attempts. I find it incomprehensible that this boy would be rebuked for calling out false religion in Christs Universal Church. If you are not false, you should feel very comfortable with his words regardless of how perfecly he makes his case.

            Quite frankly, I think this video is so controversial because he tapped a lot of peoples’ guts, because they know deep down inside, they are religious for religiosity’s sake (do you not remember the Pharisees and how they tried to silence Jesus). The rest who may not at all be guilty of overtly disregarding the Lord, are inmeshed in the culture, but are sincerely trying to follow Jesus (remember Nicodemus and Joseph who retrieved Jesus body after his death) are perplexed, but should not be harmed by the rebuke of false teachers. This is for the good of the faith, for according to Paul in his letters to Timothy, it is the job of believers, however young or old, to defend it.

            I know you will find a million +2 things wrong with what I say… but fess up. Don’t you think it’s ironic that the Catholic church and reps of it are up in arms – HE NEVER NAMED ANY RELIGIONS! And he certainly never said, “Catholicism, this is for you.” He could be talking about the XYZ denomination church on his corner for all you know.

            It’s like cops walking onto a subway car in NYC loaded with dozens of people saying, “stop you theif we are onto you” and the guilty party has a spontaneous utterance, “oh no!”, jumps up and bolts. If you are innocent of any wrong doing, why would you need to respond in such a defensive manner? Don’t you see that at that moment, you have more in common with Pharisees and Jews of Jesus time than you realize? For you historians out there, according to scripture, the Jews chanted Crucify Him! Crucify Him! That’s exactly what it feels like you want to do to this kid for speaking his heart and conviction from the bible. In light of this, I find all this debate very saddening. Don’t argue with me. Argue with the Holy Spirit and God’s word. For your info, I have been on both sides, the fired up kid and the religious pharisee. FYI. I behaved like a Pharisee or the people this boy is targeting while being a member of church that traces it’s roots to Protestantism.

          • guestt

            First of all, Catholicism isn’t afraid to call itself a RELIGION, it is the one with Churches, Commandments, Nuns and Priests, those elements which are attacked in the video. Were he referring to other Religions he would have called things by their names, such as Temples, disciplines, ETC.

            Secondly, because it has been an everlasting predicament of Protestants to be pro-Jesus, anti-Religion, Protestants have only been protestant of ONE church and that is the Catholic Church.

            So, don’t try to be all cynic with your logic because it really won’t work.

          • nocamo1

            “So, don’t try to be all cynic with your logic because it really won’t work” Where did that come from? Are you mad because I am trying to use logic? Sorry if I came off cynical, I wasn’t trying to. Best regards and peace to you friend.

          • Syta

            uummmm….have you seen the images posted on this site !?!??! lol what

          • Syta

            grrr… my post was erroneously posted… but anyway, Jesus was Religious, He is a priest, He is THE highest priest. He celebrated Passover, which w/o His death has no meaning. He came “not to abolish the Law but only to fulfill it” Don’t you see how he the continuation and the fulfillment of the Jewish religion. Laws in the Church are for us, not for God. Jesus said himself that not one word will be changed in the Law. One must read the Bible in its entirely.

          • Erinemilie

            Exactly! I never once heard him say Catholic. I have seen so many Protestant churches steeped in a Works view of salvation, this video could apply to ANY facet of religion.

          • Beckyboll

            I was actually responding to “aqchikel comment:
            If you have never heard that Catholics are Christians, what have you heard? Silly people! Did they tell you we are Moslems? ” Not the video per say.

          • El Tigreblanco de Apologetica

            Because the Catholic church is the Religion that Christ left, there is no Luther before the 1800′s is there?

          • http://sometimesveritas.blogspot.com/ Jaison J. Raju

            The video appears to be focusing religiosity.

          • YYZ

            You are correct in saying that the original video did not name any particular religion. With that, it is safe to say from the nature of the video he is in fact incompassing ALL religions.
            From there, somebody who is learned in Catholicism, it would be easy to pick out pieces from the poem that could in fact be directed at the Roman Catholic faith. Also, this retort to the video did not simply defend, it also made points against the video with support from things OTHER than the Roman Catholic faith.
            Just my 2 cents on the comment you made.

          • Beckyboll

            I was actually responding to “aqchikel comment:
            If you have never heard that Catholics are Christians, what have you heard? Silly people! Did they tell you we are Moslems? ” Not the video per say.

          • Ethan

            Ya, but he is using references that don’t apply to the culture at the time the bible was written for… for example, huge churches, the crusades, marriage. Plus, the only denomination that has a stance against divorce is Catholicism.

          • nocamo1

            Catholicism doesn’t say divorce is wrong: “”I hate divorce,” says the LORD God of Israel, “and I hate a man’s covering himself with violence as well as with his garment,” says the LORD Almighty. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith.” Malachi 2:16 If I believe in the bible, no matter what religion I belong to, I believe this.

            and in Matthew 5:31

            “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’[a] 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.”

            This is not something a denomination can claim. It is something a believer can claim. That’s why I don’t think this kid’s attack isn’t against a particular religion, but it’s the idea of any religion stripping God out of the equation and making it’s practices and beliefs about the religion and not about “the word of God.”

            Give glory to God, his words, laws, precepts and not to ourselves, or our particular religious organization.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-McLaughlin/100000545980481 James McLaughlin

            Interesting. You might like this food for thought.

            The argument that says “a personal relationship with Jesus” is all that matters or most fundamentally matters I can argue makes Muslims into Christians, and their respect for the Blessed Mother makes them into full-blown Catholics.

            A personal relationship with Christ doesn’t exist until you have reached the Beatific Vision after the Resurrection of the Flesh. Check the absolute defintion of what a Christian is and it will make clear that one is not Christian until completion. Of course, we ordinarily use the phrase loosely. The Sacrament of Completion is Confirmation, which finalises its action only at the End of Time.

            Mary is the only one who has a personal relationship with Christ because She has Her own Flesh. It is Her Son.

          • Erinemilie

            The followers of the Way were first called Christians in Anitoch, Acts 11:26….why would they have called them Christians in the BIBLE if we couldn’t become Christians intil completion? I do respect Mary, but I don’t worship her. She is barely mentioned in the Bible. Jesus never told us to worship, or “respect” her. It isn’t anywhere in the Bible. We are told if we love Him we will obey his commands. He never commands anything regarding his mother. Our focus should be on The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit.

          • http://www.facebook.com/pray.the.rosary Lisa Alekna

            The earliest document we have in which “Catholic” is used to label the Church is a letter from Ignatius of Antioch, who wrote around A.D. 107, while being taken to Rome for execution (and therefore martyrdom)

          • Casey

            LOL !! I agree.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6BSVN45XULRKH4YIE2Q626WDA eddiethegeek

          Agree – a personal relationship with Jesus is what matters. It is the starting point. But it needs to be a love relationship. And if it is a love relationship, one gives oneself entirely to the Lord. If it is a love relationship, one cannot help but serve the Lord wherever he is found, in the poor, the homeless, the naked, the imprisoned, as He Himself taught us (Mt 25). So the movement is Faith –> Love –> Charity. That is what the Catholic Church teaches, for that is what Our Blessed Lord Himself taught.

          • Ethan

            Let your religion be less of a theory and more of a love affair. G. K. Chesterton!

        • Shannon719

          Protestants don’t divide over worship style (okay, well, sometimes). They divide over theology.

          • http://www.facebook.com/pray.the.rosary Lisa Alekna

            Or personality, or music ministry, or parking availability – pretty much anything at all…

        • Ben Bentrup

          Scott Hahn once put it like this: if that piece of bread up on the altar is not truly transformed (in substance) into the body of Christ, Catholics are idolators, to be pitied and opposed. Protestants don’t believe in the transubstantiation, so by definition they must think us heathens when we worship God in the Eucharist.

        • Guest

          Protestants protested against the Catholic church because they CHOSE to believe what they wanted to believe. Thus creating there own secular church, in which all have heretical beliefs. Hersey against the Catholic Church is anti-Christian and therefore anti-Christ. I’m sorry but it DOES matter and saying that Catholicism is all one in the say with all protestant denomination is utterly wrong. Did you even read the article above?

          • Guest

            Protestant churches don’t have heretical beliefs, and I say that because I have gone to many, and I know for a fact that the basis of each is to glorify God, now, what part of that is heresy?

          • Ahawkins77

            Guest, Just in case you didn’t know here is the definition for you

            heresy – definition of heresy by the Free Online Dictionary …

            http://www.thefreedictionary.com/heresy

            a. An opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs, especially dissension from or denial of Roman Catholic dogma by a professed believer…..

            So….now that you know the definition here is where protestants are in error…

            the necessity of Baptism
            the perpetual virginity of Mary
            the authority of the Papacy
            the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist
            the priesthood
            all 7 sacraments
            and that’s just to name a few

            God call us to worship Him in Scripture,BUT, He tells us how to do so. He does not tell us worship me however you wish. He is verrrrry explicit on how, when and where we are to wroship Him. Peace my friend.

          • Krazy18884

            Jesus had brothers do you read your bible Mary is not a VIRGIN!!!!!!

          • guest

            He says true worshippers will worship not in a certain place but in spirit and truth

          • TotallyNotKrazy

            What a nice name

          • Cecmattingly

            the word brothers in hebrew was not literal. It was used broadly to imply a relation. It could be a cousin, 2nd cousin, etc.

          • Guest

            The Bible states that Joseph did not KNOW Mary until after the birth of Jesus….She was only a virgin until she gave birth to the Messiah. Then she had a normal marriage to Joseph. They had other children.

          • Eddie25

            When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home. – John 19:26-27

            Can you tell me why Jesus would say this if He had any brothers or sisters? He was basically telling John to take care of Mary from here on out.

          • Ethan

            Also, why wouldn’t Jesus give the care taking to his so called, “brother or brothers” according to the Jewish culture at the time? No he gave the care taking to John, which has no reference to brethren at all… which if you look at the Greek brethren can mean 2nd cousin.

          • nocamo1

            So what did sisters mean since he also had sisters. Read your bible and stop listening to your catechism writers/defenders.

          • nocamo1

            Matthew 12:46 He had siblings.

          • nocamo1

            Holy cow, so now you have the authority to say that the word of God doesn’t say what it says…I fear for you. Do you remember the serpent in the garden and what he told Eve what God did not say…do you know what happened to her and Adam when they listened to Satan’s scripture/word twisting? (For anyone that wants to argue semantics that there was no scriptures written at that time; God spoke directly to them and his word is his word written or not, it holds the same weight – see the life of Abraham for a reference). I pray for you friend and I urge you for the sake of Jesus Christ and his church to stop lying and twisting his word! If you fear God and submit to his Lordship, you will not say his word does not state what it clearly does. Or do you take lightly his warning in Revelations 22:18. I fear for you and pray for your repentance.

          • nocamo1

            Matthew 12, Matthew 13. Let God’s word speak. Not man.

          • Connor

            I’ll say it again, though it will be disregarded again. There is no word for cousin in translation. We know Jesus had cousins.

          • nocamo1

            He had sisters too. The problem here is not that some reject scripture, it’s that some lay claim to scripture and when others point it out they are accused of attacking “the faith” when in fact they are attacking false doctrine (e.g., perpetual virginity of Mary? where in the bible does it say this? these are mans’ teachings – any one who has read the bible once through for themselves without someone telling them how to interpret will see through the errors. Anyone who seeks to please man is vulnerable to deception by men).

          • http://indefinitecrisis.wordpress.com/ Michael H

            Hey, Lutheran, high church Protestant here. Fun fact!

            1) Baptism is a necessity
            2) The Bible does not make any direct claims to this, and to accept as the inerrant Word of God kind of makes it, well, superceding. In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty and what not.
            3) I believe in the authority of the papacy as I believe in the authority of Scripture – among all the places where one might gain guidance and insight to the Divine, our spiritual elders and anointed leaders heard a respected position in the Church. We could go back to the Great Schism and think “Hey, maybe the Pope wasn’t the sole authority.” I would probably swim the Tiber tomorrow if the idea of ex cathedra infallibility was systematically removed from the CCC and the Pope was one of many Bishops but as the Bishop of Rome heard, shall we say, tie-breaking authority on disagreements and doctrine that was not in perfect union. Alas, this is not the case because he functions as the head of the Church in himself when Peter, whose Office he inherited, could be humbled by Paul during the Judaizing controversy in Acts. So much for early church history.
            4) We confess the Real Presence. It’s pretty awesome. We don’t confess transubstantiation.
            5) Certain men are called by God and ordained by Him to lead his flock. They are elevated with the consent and assent of the people (the Orthodox rite for bishops includes the congregation shouting “Axios” – “he is worthy” in Greek) but installed by the divine authority of the Church. Celibacy runs counter to Paul instructing Timothy that a bishop ought be the husband of but one wife (meaning they could be married) and instructing the Corinthians that if a man is to burn with passion, he ought be married – and yes, one can point to the sexual abuse scandal of the latter 1900s to talk about priests burning with passion.
            6) Lutherans love all seven sacraments but only define two as Sacraments because only two were directly instituted by Christ – baptism at the Great Commission and Holy Communion at the Last Supper. But marriage, holy orders, extreme unction, confession and confirmation are all good and important things in the life of the believer and therefore in the life of the Church.

            Lutherans are really weird Protestants though.

          • Jules

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran-Roman_Catholic_dialogue

            This is a cool wikipedia article that gets at the same idea you are getting at. Catholic-Lutheran dialogues have been going on for decades about what we agree on/disagree with and we agree with a lot of the same things. Neat stuff!

          • unlearned, but learning

            (in reply to these replies) I’m enjoying seeing what others think. It’s helping me get a better grasp of this great divide between Catholics and Protestants!

            First off, thank you “Cecmattingly” for your logical conclusion with your reasons, “[it] CAN mean 2nd cousin.” Can be is a good foundation for an argument. I’m not trying to be a jerk, despite my sarcasm (oops). But since you are really passionate about this, I wanted to point that out so when you talk to someone in person, you won’t lose their attention, but rather set up a promising conversation.

            This is of course followed by “Eddie25″ giving the reasoning that because Jesus didn’t give Mary to these “brothers” or “sisters” then OBVIOUSLY, she’s a virgin. I’m a little confused. Maybe I’m short on drawing logical conclusions. So you intelligably conclude that because Jesus can’t possibly have siblings because He asked John, who is at the cross with Jesus, faithful to the end, to take care of Mary. And all this because Mary has to be a perpetual virgin because having sex with Joseph would taint her holiness and bring her into status of “fallen man” with the rest of mankind? Please correct me if I’m wrong with the doctrine of how we become sinners (that the evil is passed down through the seed from man).

            So Isaiah said incorrectly that “We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way;
            and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all” and the Psalmist quoted in Romans 3:10 “As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one…” (read it in context; I haven’t changed the meaning)? But Mary is the only exception. And here’s the only arguement I can see against mine: Mary is the ONLY ONE to carry Jesus, a SINLESS SAVIOR. Best argument possible. No one who believes in the virginal birth can argue that.

            So did Mary need a savior? I’m not asking you, I”m asking her: “and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour” (Luke 1:47). In case I was accused of using a translation not true to the “original” (another not-so-friendly joke between protestant and catholics), that’s the catholic translation found at catholic.org. So Mary needed God as her Saviour. So why? If she has no sin, then she doesn’t need saving FROM SIN. This video made it clear that Jesus hates SIN and that’s why He came. Also, Jesus didn’t push Mary as His birth mother, or even esteem her to the level that the church has today. Mark 3:31-35. Jesus didn’t hail Mary as the fountain of grace. He didn’t teach that we pray to her to pray on our behalf. He taught us to do God’s will. He even esteems those who do His will over Mary and his “brothers.”

            I know there are a lot of defenses, so I would like to hear them. Please don’t say, “It COULD mean,” because it is for THAT REASONING that catholics attack Protestants: loose, liberal translations of the Bible and what it COULD mean.

            Lastly, who taught Martin Luther? Did he WANT to break away? Why did he break away? So he could believe what he WANTED to believe?… maybe. You tell me (with facts, not schoolyard convo excerpts).

          • AttentionDeficitCatholic

            Alright, looking at comments from months ago, noticed you had some interesting questions that were left unanswered, so I’ll try answering one or two of them:

            First of all, the whole bit of logical analysis for Jesus having John watch over Mary after His death: you have it basically right, but I’ll try to explain it so that it is easily intelligible. I believe Jewish tradition would have Mary being cared for my her oldest living son, so with Jesus dead, it is safe to assume that if He had any brothers, it would fall to him to care for Mary. However, Jesus gave care of her to John. Not proof of Jesus’ lack of siblings, but mere circumstantial evidence (it would not be the strangest thing Jesus has ever done to give care of Mary to somebody other than his brother). However, it is just one piece of the puzzle.

            Second of all, yes, Mary did indeed need of Savior from sin. And yet, Catholics believe that Mary was conceived without Original Sin, and as a result did not have the weakness that man has thanks to the fall, and thus committed no Actual Sin in her life. How exactly does that work? Well bear with me here: Jesus saved Mary from sin, as the graces won from His Passion were applied to her ahead of time. God is not bound by time, as He exists in eternity, outside of time’s confines. As such, He made Mary a special case so that she would be a proper Ark and Tabernacle in which to carry God Himself for nine months.

            To quote a wonderful Doctor, “People assume that Time is a strict progression of Cause to Effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it’s more like a big ball of wibbley-wobbley, timey-wimey… stuff.”

            I hope you end up reading this after all that time of silence, and I hope it sheds some light on the subject!

          • mazsa

            Mary said (according to Scripture) “All generations shall call me blessed, for He who is Mighty has done great things for me.” Mary’s cousin Elizabeth said–when Mary went to visit while pregnant with our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ–”Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Actually, the Koran has quite a bit more regarding Mary than the Bible does. Can we at least agree it’s too bad they left out the REASON she’s such a premier woman: Mary is the mother of God-made-Man=Jesus! That is her “claim to fame” and no disrespect to her. Jesus “gave” her to John. Since we’re all family, then Jesus gave her to me. Madonna…my lady.

          • Fds

            Actually protestants protested against the Catholic church because it was doing things like saying you could pay your way into heaven. What Bible verse was it where Jesus established indulgences again?

        • emma

          I disagree with “It doesn’t matter if you’re Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc etc.” If the Eucharist is real “for my flesh is real food and my blood is true drink” then we should DARN SURE be Catholics. Jesus Real Presence in the Eucharist requires our attention, obedience, and worship if we are to take ourselves seriously as Bible reading Christians.

          However, I do agree with your “What matters is that you have a personal relationship with Jesus. THAT is the key ingredient to Christianity. Without that relationship, all you are left with is an empty religion.”
          ^But be careful to not throw the baby out with the bathwater! We literally cannot love Christ without being obedient to His Church. “If you love me, keep my commandments.” “I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.”

          The Church is Jesus’ bride!!! He must be mighty offended when we tear down his bride and say we ‘hate’ it. :)

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KDQFQTMD56CJAKMLXRFYUDNCPQ Montague

            Of course it is important – it was one of the first divides that protestants face, the importance of the Eucharist… but it cannot be the Only and Necessary means of “dispensing” Grace – Vatican II, of course.

        • Zyklonz Power

          Read and widen your knowledge brother.. yes.. probably in the place you stay every catholics says i am roman catholics.. but the history said the first christianity start from catholics. and by all means catholics is christian well you can say christian catholics..

        • Brandon

          I would argue that it does ultimately matter what denomination you are. Sure, if you are continually and genuinely seeking the truth, and always conclude that you are in the right religion, then I believe you are doing all you can. However, I would suggest that if you were to so fervently seek the truth with an open mind, then you would conclude that the Catholic Church is the true Church; after all, Jesus founded it. It does matter what you practice. How can you practice a religion that condones divorce? As Christ did not. How can you practice a religion that condones same sex marriage? As Christ did not. No one should accept “truths” blindly. Instead, all people, Catholics included, should test and search for the true validity of what is taught to them as truth. That does not mean to determine it for yourself, as truth is not relative. What that means is to look at what others have said, look at what the Bible says, look at what Christian tradition says. Would you pretend to know more about medicine than your doctor or more about law than your lawyer? Why then would you think you know more about theology than theologists, more about truth than people who have extensively study it?

        • Brandon

          I would argue that it does ultimately matter what denomination you are. Sure, if you are continually and genuinely seeking the truth, and always conclude that you are in the right religion, then I believe you are doing all you can. However, I would suggest that if you were to so fervently seek the truth with an open mind, then you would conclude that the Catholic Church is the true Church; after all, Jesus founded it. It does matter what you practice. How can you practice a religion that condones divorce? As Christ did not. How can you practice a religion that condones same sex marriage? As Christ did not. No one should accept “truths” blindly. Instead, all people, Catholics included, should test and search for the true validity of what is taught to them as truth. That does not mean to determine it for yourself, as truth is not relative. What that means is to look at what others have said, look at what the Bible says, look at what Christian tradition says. Would you pretend to know more about medicine than your doctor or more about law than your lawyer? Why then would you think you know more about theology than theologists, more about truth than people who have extensively study it?

          • guest

            JESUS said he is THE TRUTH!!!! THE TRUTH not part of it or some of it TRUTH does not exist outside of HIM, also THE HOLY Spirit guides you into all truth and you are to test everything by SCRIPTURE not a teacher preacher or pope everyone is personally responsible!

          • Ethan

            If we are guided by the Holy Spirit to interpret scripture… then why are there so many denominations with so many interpretations on scripture? Something has to be in conflict with the Holy Spirit obviously, perhaps are sinful nature, thus pride? Jesus knew this so he established the Church set up with authority, which is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

        • Emma Knightley

          Dear Guest,
          “What matters is that you have a personal relationship with Jesus. THAT is the key ingredient to Christianity.”
          That cannot be the one and only key to Christianity because as a fallen people, we have a tendency to make others into what we perceive them to be; this happens with friends too, but also with Jesus Christ. (Take for example, how some people think he is a socialist while others think he is a capitalist.)
          Also, that is not a Biblical belief. St. Paul says in 1 Tim 3:15 that the church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” and Jesus Himself told us in John 14:6 that He is Truth. The Church and Jesus go hand in hand. Love without guidance is called blind love and it can often lead one to stray even when that person has good intentions.
          God bless!

        • Connor

          It’s not typically common, and there are divisions even among the same denominations as to saying Catholics aren’t Christians. Typically, the more mainstream denominations tend to stay away from this accusation.

        • Ferdenad

          Shake your head up and down, then side to side. And, finaly did christians appear on the planet in 1550? Eventhougth the Catholic faith may not be Christian to you, they were the first to acknowledge and believe in Jesus Christ?

      • Guest

        I’m not sure what protestant you have been talking to, but I have never heard of a protestant or protestant church labeling other denominations as not Christian. I caution you on your generalization; even if one denomination believes what you say, not ALL protestants believe it.

        • Anonymous

          The hate-religion video says so.

        • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

          Well, besides Catholicism not being a denomination, you are one lucky man as personally. If I don’t hear “you’re a part of the Whore of Babylon” I wonder if I’m being too protestant.

      • Mateoangelo

        I’m not saying that Catholicism hasn’t tried to reach out to Protestantism especially recently, but history says that the Protestantism grew out of the greediness of the clergy in the 1500s, where they purposely swindled money from the unsuspecting masses in exchange for granting them indulgences into heaven. We now know that was a mistake, but that doesn’t stop the fact that the Catholic Church has been divisive throughout history, and this is just one era. Not only did they persecute Martin Luther, but his followers as well, using their political power in Europe to start countless wars in order to maintain Catholicism as the official religion.

        Look, I’m just as Catholic as each of us here, but we cannot deny the dark spots of our past. The official teachings of the Catholic Church, as unifying as they are, are being overshadowed by the crazy beliefs of some “Catholics” in the public sphere, ie. Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich. What they, and many other conservative Catholics claim our values to be are just as divisive.

        • guest

          What’s wrong with Rick Santorum??? I haven’t heard him state any beliefs that are not what the Catholic Church teaches. He is 100% pro-life meaning no birth control, no day after pills, no abortions in the case of rape. He is for Marriage, meaning 1 man and 1 woman. These are important to Catholics. What crazy beliefs are you talking about here?

          • TCISACW

            Santorum takes those positions to the extreme and dehumanizes gays with his words. Claiming that gay people are just like people who want to have sex with animals, and claiming he’d like to see anti-sodomy laws reinstated, and reinstated to the point that the state may enter your home and check out what you’re doing with your partner in the privacy of your bedroom, is going too far. He’s essentially trying to create a Catholic Taliban. He’s doing a lot of back pedaling now because he realizes voters in 2012 don’t give a rat’s ass about anything but the ecnomy and jobs, but, thanks to the internet, he can’t ever unsay the things he’s already said.

        • Tymcycak

          Protestant rulers made their faith the “official religion” in countries in Europe, not only Catholics, who were also persecuted as in England. Henry VIII seized property of the Catholic Church when he made himself head of the Church of England.

      • Emartin1066

        All religions divide… esp ones that claim that they are the most truthful. A religion that claims the least would divide the least… i.e. if my religion is people should breath there would be no division but when a religion claims the myriad of things Catholicism does it inevitably leads to division (even among itself as what one catholic believes can be so different from others). If i make no claim religious or otherwise what then exists to divide us?

      • HiTower92

        I don’t know what Protestant religion you are talking about, but my Methodist Church welcomes Catholics as Christians just as much as ourselves. Make sure to get your facts straight from your opinions please. And Protestants came to be because they broke away from the Catholic Church because they had issues with the teachings. The reason that there are so many is because everyone has a different specific opinion of how the facts are. I dont agree specifically that Catholics are MORE divisive, but they certainly aren’t completely ONE either

        • guest

          “And Protestants came to be because they broke away from the Catholic Church because they had issues with the teachings.” They had issues with the teachings of Jesus. The word PROTEST is in the word Protestant. PROTESTERS of Jesus! Funny stuff! LOL

          • TCISACW

            No, Martin Luther had issues with the corruption prevalant in the Catholic Church. He had no issue with Christ. It was because he followed Christ that he called the Catholic Church out on its practices.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

        Nicole “Protestants teach that anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian”
        That is completely untrue!!!!! as someone who has traveled and lived in many different communities gone to just about every denomination there is I do not know of a single one that says nor believes that, maybe some of the members do , but should I condemn every Catholic for the untruths of Nicole? I think not.

      • Larscobra04

        I’m protestant, but have visited Catholic churches 100′s of times. My family is Catholic. I have never EVER been taught, nor thought that Catholics are not Christians. The word says that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved. If anyone has every said that you are not saved or a Christian because you are Catholic they are incorrect. Also, I have NEVER ever been taught that nor heard that from the pulpit.

        • tre

          Agreed! “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” It is the blood of Jesus that saves us but one must ACCEPT it and CONFESS it. Your life will be transformed when you do. Not by your doing but because God transforms the heart. You are a new creation. The old is gone and the new has come. It is a decision every individual must make for themselves whether Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant, etc. I am a Jesus follower.

          • Anonymous

            What about people who cannot talk?

      • Mccreav

        Umm there is more than one type of Catholicism and they all don’t have the same doctrine so to say that about Protestant you would have to look at Catholicism and see the same thing is there as well

      • Jonas

        Protestants, in my fairly broad experience, do NOT teach that “anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian”. More particularly about Catholics, Protestants note that being a Catholic does not in itself make one a Christian; nor, of course, does being a Baptist or a Presbyterian.

      • Bereancf

        Actually it is the other way around! Some of the Popes declared that only nobody can be saved outside the Catholic Church.

        Pope Innocent III said in A.D. 1208:
        “With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved.”

        Pope Pius IX said in A.D. 1854:
        “It must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no on can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood.”

        But in 1965 that was changed:

        Pope Paul VI in 1965:
        In 1965 at an event known as “Vatican II” a change took place. Pope Paul VI delivered a message that elevated protestant evangelical believers from being lost to being “separated brethren.” Unfortunately, it was also suggested that even non-Christians, in faiths such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam, might also be saved

        What happened? Did God changed his mind? God said in the Bible (Malachi 3:6) that He does not change.

        Why are some people now saying that it is the Protestant that is teaching that dogma? Amazing! But, when you review history it has always been the other way around. So many people has been persecuted by the Popes during the Reformation period.

      • Hannah Vickery37

        I am a protestant and we do not teach that if you aren’t a part of the “protestant” denomination, then you are not a Christian. At least for my church, that is quite the opposite. All Christian denominations are guilty of being “divisive” and all are proud to be “united”. I know the Catholic church is not corrupted now and that the truth is very evident in the present-day, but the whole reason protestants even began to seperate from the church was due to individuals recognizing the corruption within Rome in the Middle Ages and suggesting corrective action, yet the Church refused to do so and instead exiled those individuals. Thus, they created their own sector of the Church and began practicing in their own way with influences from the Catholic Church. Now I’m not saying their way of practicing was right or that today more and more denominations begin to spread, as yes, you are right in this case, but before you go blaming the protestant divisions just please consider past history as well.

      • Jazzy

        I’ve been a Protestant my whole life and have never heard anyone say that Catholics aren’t Christians. We may disagree with you on some things (praying to Mary, for instance), but we absolutely do not believe that your entire denomination is not Christian. I’ve never heard that opinion before, and I’m so sorry for it. You most definitely can be Catholic and a Christian.

      • Guest

        I think you’re missing the point here. I don’t think he’s saying Catholics are bad, or its bad to be part of a religion like Catholicism. I fully agree with what he’s trying to display. The point of the video is to tell people who are completely against churches and “that religious stuff” that, that’s not what it’s all about. Underneath all the rules of churches and the outer shell, JESUS is what’s at the very center. One thing Catholics, Baptists, Protestants, Lutherans, etc. have in common is GOD. That’s what it’s all about and that’s what this video is about. He’s not trying to offend anyone, he’s trying to REACH OUT. Which is what God calls us all to do…

      • Sunsetphotography20

        Amen, Sista! I’m guessing this guy wasn’t necessarily putting down the Catholic Church. He probably doesn’t know enough about it to even know what it stands for; as well as anyone who puts down our “religion”.
        If they would truly check it out and are sincerely searching for the truth–they would likely draw the same conclusion that Scott Hahn and so many others have when they came to believe Jesus when he said, “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church”–which has continued to this day; and will continue until Jesus returns.

      • Susanmclemore

        Amen, Sista! I’m guessing this guy wasn’t necessarily putting down the Catholic Church. He probably doesn’t know enough about it to even know what it stands for; as well as anyone who puts down our “religion”.
        If they would truly check it out and are sincerely searching for the truth–they would likely draw the same conclusion that Scott Hahn and so many others have when they came to believe Jesus when he said, “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church”–which has continued to this day; and will continue until Jesus returns.

      • http://www.uncommonsensecommentary.blogspot.com/ BlueDeacon

        If “Catholicism teaches that all Protestants are legitimately baptized and legitimately Christian,” then why am I as a Protestant denied communion in the Catholic Church? Meanwhile, I can commune in almost every other Protestant denomination. (That issue has kept me out of the Catholic Church.)

      • Fds

        See, I like parts of what you’re saying in this post but then you go and lose me with these incredibly generalized absolutist statements like “there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church.” and “Protestants teach that anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian”. Both are completely false

      • DougO

        “Protestants teach that anyone who isn’t part of their particular sect aren’t Christian (or at least, that Catholics aren’t christian)”

        Sorry. This is a flat-out lie.

    • Cookiezoo1992

      It seems the argument you make about dividing people could be used for any belief system with a large backing. It’s also kind of irrelevant, because the Catholic and Protestant church are obviously already divided within Christianity.
      I actually find the people least accepting of me when they find out I am Catholic are my Protestant friends! While I may not agree with their beliefs entirely, I agree with their God and their Savior and accept them as Christians, but some feel the need to attack my church. In each religion, creed, denomination and church(or lack of) there will be people who are more fervent and outspoken, and people who are more reserved and open. Fact of life.
      Also, this video is not a divisive attack, but a video to unify Catholics that are being led astray by a man quite obviously attacking Catholicism. I can gaurentee you that Catholicism is more uniting across humanity than flawed individual Christianity, hence the word “individual”, which the man is promoting by denouncing religion.
      Finally, I just thought I’d restate the idea that any religions with a large backing will divide people! They have different ideals, and these ideals appeal to different people. One of the most beautiful (and perhaps tragic?) things about religion is that you can choose for yourself.

    • ame

      I think the writer was using “unforgiveable” in the hyperbolic, literary sense. Not in the literal sense. He would, as a Catholic, know he has no power in of himself to say what sin is forgiveable or unforgiveable as God does, God who reveals Himself through the Holy Spirit, with the Church has His staff to guide, unto men and women.

    • Hailstorm93

      Peter, it’s not a “service.” It’s the Mass. That is all.

    • Smwbmpfjm

      Silly words? God called all into being with words, Jesus taught us with words, either they are profound and necessary and true, or they are madness. Catholics defending and articulating what they believe are not silly. Saint Paul used words and dealt with the same things we deal with today, ancient and modern. Catholics are not too busy trying to be good people. They are Catholic. Ergo, they witness by their lives, their words, their adherence to the sacraments, to the prayers, obligations, rules, the Eucharist. They cannot deny their faith to make other people comfortable. They will not pretend they do not believe what they believe. They will serve because they believe. They will act out of Love of Christ for others. That is what a True Catholic does –you mistake the result for the cause. The reason they are why the are is Christ. It is not negotiable, the reason they are Catholic is they follow Christ.

      • Emartin1066

        And what are u mistakin? so protestants who say they follow CHrist are either secret catholics of liars? you mistake too much. (i like how u defend your argument by saying “It is not negotiable”, must mean u win, right? lol)

    • Lindsey

      So, a Catholic explaining why they believe what they do and don’t believe is basically wasting their time because they should instead be out feeding the poor at that very moment? Why must it be one without the other? Catholics (and others) should be able to have deep, in-depth conversations about what we believe. AND, we should also be doing what we can to feed the poor, visit the sick, bury the dead, and all the other corporal works of mercy. Not to mention the spiritual works of mercy. We are all called to those, perpetually. I think it’s silly to say the true Catholics are unrecognizable as Catholics.

    • Lex

      “A true Catholic would spend their time working to help others instead of inciting controversy over the supposed meaning of silly words… The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are.”

      While you are right on a certain scale, Peter, there has to be a point in which a Catholic has to stand up for their faith and their beliefs, just like any Christian; not because of obligation, or feeling threatened, but because the truth (as we have understood it) deserves to be communicated, no matter how many people disagree. And the controversy was not incited by “true” Catholics. The controversy was incited by the person who made the video in the first place.

      So Catholicism seems to you a more divisive than uniting force. Like the author of the spoken word video, you are looking at things from a very generalized view, and an incomplete one at that. The dividing force does not come from the Church or its leaders, but by the individual human being who cannot come to terms with the teachings of Christ as taught by the Catholic Church. I’m not saying everyone should blindly follow the teachings of Christ as taught through the Church, but I like many of my Catholic counterparts, have come to know what we know through study, prayer, faith, and works. And all the teachings of Jesus from 2000 years ago, (which is actually a fulfilment, and completion the teachings found in the Torah and Talmud), are still relevant today. For example: Love God, and say “hi” to him every now and then. Honor your parents. Don’t steal. Don’t murder. Help the poor. Heal the sick. Love someone so much that you would give your life for them so that they may live. Stand up for what is right and just. Pass it on to the next generation.

      Not only, as people have mentioned already, is the Catholic Church the most extensive charity in the world, but they do more than help those in poor in their state of life; the Church helps those who are poor in spirit: those who are broken and need a Saviour, including those who don’t think they are; those who are starving for truth, etc.

      There will always be those who disagree with the Church, and there will always be those who wish it would go away. I may get flamed for this statement, but unless us imperfect, yet dedicated Catholics actually do stand up for the truth, then those imperfect, yet dedicated opponents of the Church will over-run us and not allow our free-willed point of view to be discussed and debated in this manner. And this debate is something the Church has gracefully allowed since the beginnings of Christianity, no matter how wrong or right the opposing party may be.

      • Emartin1066

        beautiful statement up til the end… Galileo, inquisitional. i like these lesser known juicy ones though. here “The Council of Constance declared Wycliffe (on 4 May 1415) a heretic and under the ban of the Church. It was decreed that his books be burned and his remains be exhumed. The exhumation was carried out in 1428 when, at the command of Pope Martin V, his remains were dug up, burned, and the ashes cast into the River Swift, which flows through Lutterworth. This is the most final of all posthumous attacks on John Wycliffe, but previous attempts had been made before the Council of Constance. The Anti-Wycliffite Statute of 1401 extended persecution to Wycliffe’s remaining followers. The “Constitutions of Oxford” of 1408 aimed to reclaim authority in all ecclesiastical matters, specifically naming John Wycliffe in a ban on certain writings, and noting that translation of Scripture into English by unlicensed laity is a crime punishable by charges of heresy. ” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe#Last_days
        so ya.. debate and the church don’t usually fit, i can list hundreds more if u wish

    • Luke627

      But Jesus did not come to unite people but to divide them, to reveal their hearts, and many hearts are harden by Jesus, as it says “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.Matthew 10:34-38
      34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.35 For I have come to turn

      “‘a man against his father,
      a daughter against her mother,
      a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
      36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’[c]

      37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

      • Emartin1066

        you sound intelligent. seriously u do (this was the 1st good rebuttal to all the other crap people (esp catholics) have been trying to spew out)

      • Georg Laing

        The man loves Christ, his father doesn’t. The daughter loves Christ, her mother doesn’t. The daughter-in-law loves Christ, the mother-in-law doesn’t. The one who takes up his cross and follows Christ is right, the other isn’t. The formers are all united in their love for Christ.

        By dividing the nations, Christ unites those who are His children, while the rest divide even further among themselves.

        He has chosen His Church from AMONG the people, and this is divisive, yes. But it doesn’t stop there. He goes on to UNITE His Church. And what is the Rock upon which He unites His Church?

    • Jacob Baugher

      Peter, I’m sorry you didn’t have a good priest growing up. The truth is that Catholics DO accept everyone. As for your accusation that religions focus on completely ancient and irrelevant details: what about abortion? what about modern politics? what about feeding the poor? we create pregnancy centers to combat the growing power of planned parenthood. We help those who no one else will touch. and (by the way) you’re the one focusing on irrelevant details. You started off your post by calling him out on syntax…sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to do unless you’re grading a paper.

      http://jacobhbaugher.wordpress.com/

    • Marc Barnes

      Dear Peter (which means rock),

      ‘Unforgivable’ was just an expression. I apologize — I’m a fool for using such a loaded word.

      The fact that you followed your heart and your gut out of the Catholic Church isn’t something that I find particularly insulting, simply because it doesn’t mean anything. I followed my heart and gut INTO the Catholic Church. Another man may very well have followed his gut and heart into Hinduism. The point is simply is simply this: What your heart tells you is unimportant compared to what is true. Follow the truth. This is life, not Disney.

      I don’t know if it’s fair to say the Catholic Church has done more to divide and separate humanity than they have helped them, simply because the Church remains the largest common religion. By definition, it is the largest unifying force in the world.

      “Until Catholics can accept atheists, agnostics, theists etc. and focus on working with them instead of what their belief systems are you won’t get anywhere.” — I’m afraid I have no idea what this means. That we should work with atheists? Work in the sense of what? I think I agree, but still, do clarify.

      As for the rest, all I can say is this: If by “ancient and irrelevant details” you are referring to any of the things mentioned in the post, such as — the Eucharist, the intentions of Christ, salvation, the forgiveness of sins, the nature of religion etc., then I am afraid we simply have different conceptions of what’s irrelevant. See, when one man tells me “God is truly present in the Eucharist, you can consume Him here on Earth,” and another tells me, “He is not, it is just a symbol,” I do not consider this disagreement irrelevant. I find this to be more vital than my own life. Either the God of the Universe can be consumed or he cannot. There are few things that matter more than this. It is the same with the other things mentioned in my post. If the Truth will set us free, then I would rather incite a controversy seeking it than remain a quiet, unseen Catholic who makes sure no one is made uncomfortable by his words.

      Yours.

      • Emartin1066

        or is Disney life?

      • Georg Laing

        Best. Reply. Ever.

    • guest

      this man constructed no “points” or arguments … but he didn’t have to construct an argument in order to persuade the typical American; he just needed to assemble a loose and baggy collection of rhymed slogans. And that’s enough to make us say, “Yeah, that’s right. I shouldn’t have to do stuff in the name of religion. … I should just be a good person and help others, cuz’ gosh darn it that makes sense to me. And any priest that makes me feel uncomfortable is simply wrong. Cuz it’s all about how I feel in the end.”

    • Marc Barnes

      Dear Peter (which means rock),

      ‘Unforgivable’ was just an expression. I apologize — I’m a fool for using such a loaded word.

      The fact that you followed your heart and your gut out of the Catholic Church isn’t something that I find particularly insulting, simply because it doesn’t mean anything. I followed my heart and gut INTO the Catholic Church. Another man may very well have followed his gut and heart into Hinduism. The point is simply is simply this: What your heart tells you is unimportant compared to what is true. Follow the truth. This is life, not Disney.

      I don’t know if it’s fair to say the Catholic Church has done more to divide and separate humanity than they have helped them, simply because the Church remains the largest common religion. By definition, it is the largest unifying force in the world.

      “Until Catholics can accept atheists, agnostics, theists etc. and focus on working with them instead of what their belief systems are you won’t get anywhere.” — I’m afraid I have no idea what this means. That we should work with atheists? Work in the sense of what? I think I agree, but still, do clarify.

      As for the rest, all I can say is this: If by “ancient and irrelevant details” you are referring to any of the things mentioned in the post, such as — the Eucharist, the intentions of Christ, salvation, the forgiveness of sins, the nature of religion etc., then I am afraid we simply have different conceptions of what’s irrelevant. See, when one man tells me “God is truly present in the Eucharist, you can consume Him here on Earth,” and another tells me, “He is not, it is just a symbol,” I do not consider this disagreement irrelevant. I find this to be more vital than my own life. Either the God of the Universe can be consumed or he cannot. There are few things that matter more than this. It is the same with the other things mentioned in my post. If the Truth will set us free, then I would rather incite a controversy seeking it than remain a quiet, unseen Catholic who makes sure no one is made uncomfortable by his words.

      Yours.

    • InAwe

      “The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. ”

      Perhaps the greatest lie of all time. The Great Commission would disagree.

      • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

        Dropping knowledge!

    • Soccer20chica

      Ancient details are important. It’s how we got to where we are now. It’s what Jesus came to fulfill. He came to fulfill prophecies and to guide his people. The Catholic Church has remained rooted in these things. Priests can bind and loose, and Christ made Himself the ancient tradition we practice today, which is the mass. All are welcome, and all are invited.

    • Jon

      Yes all things are forgivable my brother.

      I think that what you are arguing with comes from a case of Moral Relativism, which most of our society now days is struggling with. We are all doing something in our lives we know is wrong but want to justify by letting others do as they so please even know we it is wrong morally.

      http://chris-stefanick.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13&Itemid=27.

      The thing is Catholics do accept atheists, agnostics, theists, ext. God himself even accepts them. They are the ones that are running away from the truth putting themselves farther and farther away from the Catholics and God himself. Read Luke 15 and really dive into what it is to be a child of God. We are the ones running from him but he is always there waiting for us with open arms to bring us back into his “Family”.

      The thing about feeling condemned by others is that we as Christians/Catholics are not condemning anyone, the thing that is happening “your gut instinct” knows possibly that what you are doing in your life is wrong but through sin we are always, like I’ve said before, furthering ourselves from God, who is just wanting to love us with open arms. We are all striving for Heaven and I hope that you would agree with that. Sometimes I feel like maybe someone is saying something that sounds condemning but they are not condemning me at all, but I’m having a battle inside my heart saying they are wrong and maybe they are right, but heck I like doing that, aaaaand I’m just going to keep doing that because I think it’s ok for me.

      As a young Catholic missionary it is sad that the Catholic school system did a bad job teaching why the teachings of the Catholic Church are put into place for a reason and its sad to see that you think that the teachings of the Church are out of date. If you actually sat down and really dive into what the teachings of the Catholic Church truly are I believe deep down in my heart that you will fall in love with the Church and what it stands for. The teachings come from Christ, the Holy Spirit, and God the Father, which is God himself 3 in 1 as you well know. So God’s teachings will never be out of date, because he is infinite and outside of time.

      Also we as Catholics want all to go to Heaven and I hope to make it there and I hope to meet you up there someday. The Catholic Church exists to evangelize and to correct falsities that are spoken against it, and because of that I think that it is a good job for this blogger to be standing up for his/her Church, and we can’t sit on the sidelines and just live our lives for ourselves and like you said be quiet about our faith and live a busy life not letting it be known we are Catholics, because if you truly love Christ and his Church there is no way in the world you can keep all that joy bottled up just to yourself. You would want to share it with all people and worry about them more than yourself. We are made to be in a relationship with God as his children and help lead our brothers and sisters to Heaven and into this awesome family that God has created for us to be one with him.

      God Bless you Peter and I pray that you will read this and hope to meet you someday in Heaven.

    • Allison

      Peter you have one great point at the end of your comment, that a Catholic should be someone who care for others that you see so much of Christ in them that you don’t even realize they are Catholic. Great point!! This is very true, but along with that a Catholic is someone who stands up for what they believe in and love. Why else would the Catholic faith have so many martyrs? I will pray for you, I’m sorry that you have not found the truth in your Catholic faith.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      So just what are Catholic’s suppose to being working with atheist on ? how to further remove God from our lives dude get real!

    • Dplunkt

      Your kidding right? We’re supposed to accept athiests who deny Jesus? There is such a thing as truth, a real objective truth. And if we don’t stand up for truth it’s not “inclusive” or loving it’s hateful, selfish and cowardly. ABOVE ALL ELSE we worship Jesus partly by not accepting the false gods of sex, money and power promoted by secular humanists and antiCatholics. Much of what was said in that video was simply false, religion has NOT caused wars, most were caused by Politic, greed for land and wealth. The top 20 wars in human history were not religous. And as for helping humanity in general what institution has done more? Government?

    • Theresa

      Hi Peter,
      I don’t want to try to refute what you’ve said because I see that something about Catholocism has caused you a great deal of pain and that is not something that can be healed with logic. I’m sooo sorry that something someone did or said has prevented you from seeing the great beauty of Catholocism and I pray that someday God will allow you to experiance the beauty of the Eucharist and of Confession without reservation. I am sooo grateful for these gifts from God, and I hope someday you will be too.
      Theresa

      oh and..check out Luke 13:6-9 if you have time…pray about this consistently for a year before you cut it down. God bless you!

    • Solson

      Peter, how can you possibly know what “a true Catholic” would do when you’ve shut yourself off from the depth and breadth of 2000 years of the truth because – apparently due to YOUR experiences, filtered through YOUR likes, dislikes and opinions – you have chosen YOUR path despite the fact that whole lot of people a whole lot smarter and more inspired than you or me developed the doctrine given by Christ Himself? There are many things in the Catholic faith that we may not understand (and we should pray that someday we DO understand them), but to reject them outright, especially due to personal biases (which we all have) is nothing less than spiritual arrogance.

      I pray that, at some point, you are able to put yourself aside and see and experience that depth and breadth we call Catholicism.

    • ABF3

      Peter, I believe you are wrong and misled. Your claim that the Catholic Church is a “divisive” force seems to be rooted in your apparent Protestant beliefs. Protestant Churches were all created as offspring from the one true church, Roman Catholicism. New Protestant churches were created when a group of people did not fully agree with the Church’s teachings. These “religions” were created out of convenience to a group of people’s OWN personal beliefs. Religion is not convenient! It is not to change with the times. Or at least not if you believe that it is the truth! How can you change the Truth when society makes it convenient?

      Keep in mind, Roman Catholicism is the one true church because it is the only church founded by God. “Religions” and their founders: (Lutheran – Martin Luther; Presbyterian – John Knox; Baptist – John Smyth; Episcopalian – Samuel Seabury; Mormon – Joseph Smith). So it is obvious that we have beliefs that seem outdated to Protestants, because our religion doesn’t change when people want it to. We may focus on “completely ancient and irrelevant details” to you; just remember that our Church stays true to our rituals and beliefs the way God taught us. It’s been the same for 2,000 years and will be the same forever. Call us “backwards” and “divisive,” but remember that when a person in your “church” gets possessed or attacked by Satan, the people your “church” has to call is a Roman Catholic Priest. A man who represents the one true Church on earth, and has been given power through God.

    • Cathmom06

      I am pretty sure that the author’s words tend to drip with sarcasm for humor’s sake. I am pretty sure his use of “unforgivable” is such a case.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Meredith-Wise/672300105 Meredith Wise

      “Listen – first off, as a Catholic shouldn’t nothing be unforgiveable?”

      This is why we spend time on the “supposed meaning of silly words.” In English we can speak of “unforgivable” errors in argument or taste – the word doesn’t have always have to imply sin, much less the sin against the Holy Spirit.

    • Jpoles07

      First of all I agree with Nicole. Secondly, are you proposing that it is wrong for one to defend their beliefs just as you are trying to defend your’s? That seems a little hypocritical to me, especially since all the author of this article is doing is pointing out where she disagrees with the poem; why she does; and giving solid biblical evidence to support the argument. That seems fair to me.

    • Mary Fitter

      Catholicism is divisive? Only because humans don’t want to be obedient. Protestantism has grown because of our lack of obedience. When someone doesn’t agree with this teaching or that teaching, they go and start a new church of their own. This is why there are thousands of Protestant denominations and churches.
      Catholicism has remained the same with the same teachings. People divide themselves from the Catholic Church because they are being disobedient.

    • John Doe

      I agree with all but “Until Catholics can accept atheists, agnostics, theists etc…you won’t get anywhere.” The Church accepts these people, but you are probably referring to the individuals that identify themselves as Catholics but do not conform with Catholic beliefs.

      • John Doe

        And what appears to create division is just the fault of man, not of the Church. This could happen in any religion. See below.

    • fxuyvtr02

      The Catholic Church is the only true Church. You can criticize her members, but in rejecting the Church you reject Christ. Good luck with that.

      And this silly statement: “Until religions stop focusing on completely ancient and irrelevant details that needlessly divide people and just work to help humanity in general ABOVE ALL ELSE, it won’t be anything different.”

      Details like the moral code which Jesus DEMANDS everybody live by? Mean ol’ Catholic Church. How dare she take Jesus’ words at face value? Doesn’t she know He was just playing around? He really meant to say “be nice.”

      Look, you can’t help people if you’re not giving them the Truth. You can go out and “help” people all you want: without faith in Jesus Christ and an acceptance of His desire for EVERYONE to be part of His Holy Church, your works are dead.

      The guy who made this video is completely ignorant of the Bible and the history of the Church. No serious Christian should be listening to this junk.

      • nocamo1

        Dear Seeker of God’s Will, For your eyes only!

        “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.”
        Revelations 22:18

        “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

        Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

        Now all has been heard;
        here is the conclusion of the matter:
        Fear God and keep his commandments,
        for this is the duty of all mankind.
        For God will bring every deed into judgment,
        including every hidden thing,
        whether it is good or evil.”
        Ecclesiastes 12:11-14

        “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.”
        Deuteronomy 4:2

        “See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.”
        Deuteronomy 12:32

        “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
        Proverbs 30:6

        “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome”
        1 John 5:3

        “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

        “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
        Matthew 23:1-12

        “The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

        So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

        He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

        “‘These people honor me with their lips,
        but their hearts are far from me.
        They worship me in vain;
        their teachings are merely human rules.’

        You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

        And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
        Mark 7:1-13

        “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
        And what does the LORD require of you?
        To act justly and to love mercy
        and to walk humbly with your God.”
        Micah 6:8

        I want to hear your honest response to these words from the Bible. It’s easy to argue with man’s opinion and to split hairs. It’s a whole other thing to hear God’s words and respond to them.

    • Anonymous

      You went to Catholic school and they didn’t teach you the correct use of “it’s” and “its”? I don’t believe it.

    • Anonymous

      You went to Catholic school and they didn’t teach you the correct use of “it’s” and “its”? I don’t believe it.

    • Yanet

      Base on your comment of The true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are.” We are not meant to be good, we are all call to be HOLY, (see Matthews 5; 48-”So be perfect just as your heavenly Father is perfect” and Leviticus 20; 26).

    • Christ in our daily lives

      Hi,
      I like what ive read on here, I am catholic youth and I needed to read this, thank you. I was wondering if you would like to follow my blog in order t help me in case i get the teachings wrong.
      Thankyou,
      “Christ in our daily lives”

    • Obinnamah

      Your comments are quite an expose, but what are the ANCIENT and IRRELEVANT details that the Church(Catholic) focus on?

    • Jessica

      Well… I read the first paragraph and was officially offended. I’m a protestant. Actually, I’m a protestant who found my church on my own after being raised Catholic. I guess you could say I was sick of the guilt, sick of the “organization” feel. Sick of hearing my friends that were Catholic say that they only could go to Catholic church or else “it didn’t count.” What is there to count?? Why do you have to go to church every Sunday? Why can’t I spend my Sunday morning in devotion, prayer, and praise. And maybe do it with a group of friends? (“For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.”) I don’t even know if I would call myself a Protestant anymore… I simply am a Christ Follower.

      Quite honestly, to be blunt, I believe this video is about Catholic churches, and other extremely conservative churches that are acting more as organizations, where you need to do this and that to be accepted in the congregation. Raised Catholic, I now attend a Non-Denominational Church, and switching was the best thing I ever did. I don’t think of “Non-Denominational” as a religion, but instead, a bunch of people exploring the beauty of Christ. Becoming Christ Followers. Without rules, without prejudices, accepting all people, and focusing on living as Jesus did, instead of focusing on what “organized religion” has been telling me to do my entire youth.

      Currently in America, 51% of Christians are Protestant, 25% are Catholic. Do stats mean anything in a situation like this? Maybe.

      All I know is that all the people I have spoken to who say that they do not go to church, their reasoning is because they hate organized religion. Maybe instead of putting down this poet, we could recognize that he is simply telling the truth about society? And please, let’s not knock his artsy style… he simply was using that to draw people in, so he could then tell them the real message. Jesus will always be greater than any religion. And He is ALL we need.

    • Brandon

      If you have been steeped on the dogma of the Catholic Church, then you should know she seeks to unite all people in Jesus Christ. All people are welcome to explore our Church and her teachings and invites them to join us as fellow Catholics. Does that mean that humans within the Church are all perfect? Far from it. Without Christ, no one has a chance for the perfection required for heaven; “Be perfect, as my heavenly Father is perfect.” We are all sinners, Catholics, other Christians, atheists, agnostics, theists, etc. You cannot discount an entire institution because people within it have made mistakes. I encourage you to go back and examine the dogmas that you are steeped in. You will find that the Roman Catholic Church is one built on selfless, unconditional love. That is what all Catholics should strive for and model (knowing that we will fall short and will keep trying, nonetheless). After all, that is what our Founder, Jesus Christ, does…loves selflessly and unconditionally.

    • Patrickoconnell Music

      Dear Peter,
      What you’ve said cannot be more blatantly disproven by facts. For example, the USCCB works with democrats and various leftist organizations on numerous issues…immigration reform for one instance. But they oppose those same organizations with regard to abortion or same-sex marriage.
      In the same way, they oppose right-wing organizations on many labor laws, or immigration but they work with them on what they have in common.
      They same goes with atheists and agnostics. My aunt is a nun and nurse with the Sister of Charity who run a hospital in Ireland and she works with a agnostic doctor. So I don’t know what you are talking about with regard to Catholics refusing to work with others who disagree.

      “until relgions stop focusing on ancient and irrelevant details…” I think Marc understood the man’s point very well. You don’t understand the Catholic point. The Catholic Church’s mission is not to ameliorate all the ills of the world. (however, it does a heck of a good job working toward that). The purpose of the Catholic Church is to guide people to “know, love and serve God” first and foremost. How do we “KNOW” GOD? Those fussy dogmatic, doctrinal details are essential to a proper understanding of God. How do we “LOVE” and “SERVE” God? In our worship, by being the largest charitable, scholarly organization on the planet, by affirming sound moral and philosophical truths in the public sphere, etc etc etc.

      Peter, the Church has sought the kingdom of God first and the rest has been added unto Her.

      I hope this did not come across as too forceful and direct. I hope you will begin to take a SERIOUS look at the Catholic Church and not settle for secular propaganda.

      May God bless you in your journey. Please keep me in your prayers.
      Patrick O’Connell

    • Patrick O’Connell

      Dear Peter,
      What you’ve said cannot be more blatantly disproven by facts. For example, the USCCB works with democrats and various leftist organizations on numerous issues…immigration reform for one instance. But they oppose those same organizations with regard to abortion or same-sex marriage.
      In the same way, they oppose right-wing organizations on many labor laws, or immigration but they work with them on what they have in common.
      They same goes with atheists and agnostics. My aunt is a nun and nurse with the Sister of Charity who run a hospital in Ireland and she works with a agnostic doctor. So I don’t know what you are talking about with regard to Catholics refusing to work with others who disagree.

      “until relgions stop focusing on ancient and irrelevant details…” I think Marc understood the man’s point very well. You don’t understand the Catholic point. The Catholic Church’s mission is not to ameliorate all the ills of the world. (however, it does a heck of a good job working toward that). The purpose of the Catholic Church is to guide people to “know, love and serve God” first and foremost. How do we “KNOW” GOD? Those fussy dogmatic, doctrinal details are essential to a proper understanding of God. How do we “LOVE” and “SERVE” God? In our worship, by being the largest charitable, scholarly organization on the planet, by affirming sound moral and philosophical truths in the public sphere, etc etc etc.

      Peter, the Church has sought the kingdom of God first and the rest has been added unto Her.

      I hope this did not come across as too forceful and direct. I hope you will begin to take a SERIOUS look at the Catholic Church and not settle for secular propaganda.

      May God bless you in your journey. Please keep me in your prayers.
      Patrick O’Connell

    • Patrick

      Dear Peter,
      What you’ve said cannot be more blatantly disproven by facts. For example, the USCCB works with democrats and various leftist organizations on numerous issues…immigration reform for one instance. But they oppose those same organizations with regard to abortion or same-sex marriage.
      In the same way, they oppose right-wing organizations on many labor laws, or immigration but they work with them on what they have in common.
      They same goes with atheists and agnostics. My aunt is a nun and nurse with the Sister of Charity who run a hospital in Ireland and she works with a agnostic doctor. So I don’t know what you are talking about with regard to Catholics refusing to work with others who disagree.

      “until relgions stop focusing on ancient and irrelevant details…” I think Marc understood the man’s point very well. You don’t understand the Catholic point. The Catholic Church’s mission is not to ameliorate all the ills of the world. (however, it does a heck of a good job working toward that). The purpose of the Catholic Church is to guide people to “know, love and serve God” first and foremost. How do we “KNOW” GOD? Those fussy dogmatic, doctrinal details are essential to a proper understanding of God. How do we “LOVE” and “SERVE” God? In our worship, by being the largest charitable, scholarly organization on the planet, by affirming sound moral and philosophical truths in the public sphere, etc etc etc.

      Peter, the Church has sought the kingdom of God first and the rest has been added unto Her.

      I hope this did not come across as too forceful and direct. I hope you will begin to take a SERIOUS look at the Catholic Church and not settle for secular propaganda.

      May God bless you in your journey. Please keep me in your prayers.
      Patrick O’Connell

    • Patrick

      Dear Peter,
      What you’ve said cannot be more blatantly disproven by facts. For example, the USCCB works with democrats and various leftist organizations on numerous issues…immigration reform for one instance. But they oppose those same organizations with regard to abortion or same-sex marriage.
      In the same way, they oppose right-wing organizations on many labor laws, or immigration but they work with them on what they have in common.
      They same goes with atheists and agnostics. My aunt is a nun and nurse with the Sister of Charity who run a hospital in Ireland and she works with a agnostic doctor. So I don’t know what you are talking about with regard to Catholics refusing to work with others who disagree.
      Peace,
      Patrick

    • Patrick O’C

      Peter, just one more thing:
      “until relgions stop focusing on ancient and irrelevant details…” I think Marc understood the man’s point very well. You don’t understand the Catholic point. The Catholic Church’s mission is not to ameliorate all the ills of the world. (however, it does a heck of a good job working toward that). The purpose of the Catholic Church is to guide people to “know, love and serve God” first and foremost. How do we “KNOW” GOD? Those fussy dogmatic, doctrinal details are essential to a proper understanding of God. How do we “LOVE” and “SERVE” God? In our worship, by being the largest charitable, scholarly organization on the planet, by affirming sound moral and philosophical truths in the public sphere, etc etc etc.

      Peter, the Church has sought the kingdom of God first and the rest has been added unto Her.

      I hope this did not come across as too forceful and direct. I hope you will begin to take a SERIOUS look at the Catholic Church and not settle for secular propaganda.

      May God bless you in your journey. Please keep me in your prayers.
      Patrick O’Connell

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Evans-Juice-Julce/550841363 Evans Juice Julce

      Praised be Jesus Christ.

      Peter, you wrote: “Listen – first off, as a Catholic shouldn’t nothing be unforgivable?”[sic]

      The blogger, Marc, is not saying that he knows positively that the poet will be sent to Hell for being wrong on this point.

      Marc is saying that the poet says something that DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS JESUS’ VERY OWN WORDS. You missed the point. It’s figuratively unforgivable.

      Even though Jesus said “I came not to abolish the Law and the Prophets,” the poet uses even the same verb “abolish” to say that IS what Jesus came to do.

      Pay close attention.

      This blog doesn’t seek to divide just for the sake of making people upset. Rather it seeks to bring the Truth to the light.

      If everyone says the sky is the color green or brown or polka-dotted, it may seem “divisive” to claim that the sky is blue. But someone has to speak truth and distinguish it from fallacy.

      [I know some smart aleck is tempted to respond that the sky is not actually blue but because of the reflection and refraction of light....blah, blah, blah...you know what I mean].

    • Anonymous

      very true… if you have not watched him yet –check out Joseph Prince .. Radical Grace teaching and life changing … it is like being born again all over with this revelation. This young man in the video has received a revelation of this Grace and I love it….Others are not able to get this revelation unless given from the Lord

    • Stephen

      “You are missing this man’s point, which he has made clearly and succinctly. A true Catholic would spend their time working to help others instead of inciting controversy over the supposed meaning of silly words.”

      This man has attacked my faith and is spreading a message that, as this blog clearly points out, is simply not true. All of the “facts” that he offers are incorrect. And your solution is that I should ignore him and let him slander me and my religion like that?

      And what do you mean by the “supposed meaning of silly words”? There isn’t much to suppose. He makes his message quite clear, it has a definite meaning, and it is not true. And why do you criticize us for quibbling over silly words, when that is the very first thing you do in your post?

      Peter, much like the man in the video, I believe your heart is in the right place and that you truly strive to live a Christ-like life. But I think you are both mistaken in the philosophies you are promoting.

    • Sophie

      Jesus already said that He did not come to bring Peace but division. What does He mean by this? That there will be people who will disobey His commands and desires. The only way to true PEACE is to follow His teachings in the Church. And there is always a war between good and evil between the Son of God and the devil. So there will always be division. GO through the Gospels and you will see that wherever Christ goes , He is creating division. BUT for the GOOD OF MAN. WHen you try to stop people from plunging into the abyss of hell, you will face struggles, fights. That’s why St. Paul stated that he fought a good fight and finished a race. It’s a FIGHT! Not a surrender to tolerance of wrong doctrines and evil doings which is tantamount to surrendering to the DEVIL and his minions.

    • David McManus

      So what you are saying is that despite your developmental years, you don’t believe the Church. Just say it. But how insane is it to say that Catholics should abandon the deposit of Faith given by Christ to the Apostles in order to agree and get along with Atheists. We are not called to “get along.” We are called to LOVE them, as Christ loves. Paul said that “what we are teaching is not the 0pinion of man, but the infallible Charism of Christ. So hold fast to this Sacred Tradition which Christ gave to us, and which we not pass on to you, whether we pass it on in writing or by spoken word.” I grieve that you were in the Church all of that time, and never allowed it into you. But be honest. You don’t believe the Church. Start with the Truth. And the next step is to be honest with yourself about whether or not you really understand why the Apostolate (The Church) teaches what she teaches. I am confident that you will find that you do not understand Her teaching. If you ever “Catholic” you can never be anything else.

    • David Mcmanus

      So what you are saying is that despite your developmental years, you don’t believe the Church. Just say it. But how insane is it to say that Catholics should abandon the deposit of Faith given by Christ to the Apostles in order to agree and get along with Atheists. We are not called to “get along.” We are called to LOVE them, as Christ loves. Paul said that “what we are teaching is not the 0pinion of man, but the infallible Charism of Christ. So hold fast to this Sacred Tradition which Christ gave to us, and which we not pass on to you, whether we pass it on in writing or by spoken word.” I grieve that you were in the Church all of that time, and never allowed it into you. But be honest. You don’t believe the Church. Start with the Truth. And the next step is to be honest with yourself about whether or not you really understand why the Apostolate (The Church) teaches what she teaches. I am confident that you will find that you do not understand Her teaching. If you ever “Catholic” you can never be anything else.

    • for Him

      Word. :)

    • Toni

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2010/11/dear-protestants-2-why-we-should-fight.html

      Yes, the Church is divisive – it divides good from evil, truth from lies, just from the unjust, etc, etc. Just as, in the Bible, God separates the sheep from the goats, purifies gold in the fire, etc, etc.

      • Toni

        Sorry, allow me to rephrase: Just as, in the Bible, God speaks of separating the sheep from the goats, purifying gold in the fire, etc, etc.

  • Butterflytoes

    LOVED this!! So very beautiful! Thank you! A rock solid response

  • MeanLizzie

    Did Jesus say “it is finished” or did he say “it is consummated?”

    Consummated means a great deal more — it gets to the heart of the whole mystery of the Incarnation, and the marriage between Christ and his church.

    This is a very good piece, Marc. Yer man in the video makes good starts but the invitation is always to go deeper — to cast out into the deep. He doesn’t quite manage it.

    • Aasuddjian

      Actually, Jesus didn’t say either – he spoke Aramaic.

      • Georg Laing

        LOL

  • Katy

    Marc. One word. Brilliant!

    This video is going viral and it has me so angry. You just said everything I was feeling and more. I also very much got the vibe that by religion he meant Catholicism. And I was thinking the same thing you were about the “If Jesus came to your church, would they let him in?” comment. You had me laughing out loud.

    Thank you thank you thank you for this!

  • Paula

    Outstanding post, Marc. Full of Truth while remaining very charitable. Thanks for being such a champion of Christ and His Church!

  • Renee

    This is great, Marc. Thanks.

  • Katy_rose1

    Thank you for this post. I saw the video earlier today and was so riled up I needed to step away from the computer. You summed up what I would have loved to say and did it in a non-confrontational way. Thanks!

  • Anonymous

    It seems however, that if man had the power to forgive people their sins, and decide, they would be intruding on relationship between God and Man. Man is imperfect. Able to make many mistakes, Jesus was a perfect person. Jesus forgives us of our sins, not an imperfect man.

    that is just how I see it, as I have always been confused on this point. I would love it if you could clarify this.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

      But Catholicism doesn’t teach that a man forgives your sins. In the confessional it is Christ who forgives. The priest acts In Persona Christi (that’s the whole ‘binding-and-loosing’ part that Jesus said.) And to Catholics, that is indeed Christ in the photo, under the appearance of bread (not a cracker. Crackers are different, and crispy, and would shed crumbs everywhere, which is why we don’t use them!)

      • Anonymous

        ahh okay thank you very much:)

      • nocamo1

        Sooooo, you get blood on your chin when you take communion? I know this sounds sacriligous (sp?), but you are not biting flesh and your are not drinking blood. The point Jesus was making when he shocked his listeners with “eating his flesh” and “drinking his blood” was that they would have to accept all of his teachings, even the ones they could not understand on face value IF they truly believed him to be the Messiah. The ones that didn’t, or couldn’t walked away. They, unfortunately, never got to understand that Jesus was making a point and speaking figuratively. Yes the sacrifice of Jesus is the central componenent of the gospel, hence why Jesus actually created a ritual around it to for us to remember it. “Do this in rememberance of me.” Thus the ritual or act of communion should not be downplayed. But we do this so we don’t forget who we are, why and that we are saved. Not because we are actually eating flesh and blood. That is taking Jesus words way out of context. I am curious to read where this specific teaching was first expounded on outside of Jesus’ statement. I am convinced, we are not eating flesh as much as remembering that Jesus actually sacrificed himself for us so that we can stay on track and not take it for granted.

    • Justin Malcolm

      If you believe what we are told, Jesus said “this is my body”. So, “the cracker” is not a symbol; it is Jesus. If you do not see it as Jesus then you simply do not believe. Whether you believe or not does not go very far to establishing any real truth. There is lots of fodder for debate on this point but really not much ground on which to build a common foundation.

      • Anonymous

        so this confuses me a tad more. If I said “this cookie is my body.” you cant actually think that for a moment some part of me outside myself is part of this cookie or this bread. I do not think that a literal translation here is what Jesus was getting at,.

        Sorry im just full of questions! :)

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

          Well, no, if *you* say it, of course most people are going to back away slowly (and I’d watch out for any who didn’t…) but when GOD says it, it’s time to pay attention. After all, many of Jesus’ followers fled after He said this. He said it over and over, and never said, “Hey wait! I was just sayin’ it REPRESENTS My Body! Come back!” What He did was to turn to His closest friends and ask if they, too, were going to leave Him.

          It’s a great and powerful mystery, the mystery of the Eucharist.

          And, again, you’re a bit off. Cookies, like crackers, are crumbly. It’s bread. Not cookies, not crackers, not Pez. Bread.

          • Anonymous

            haha thank you very much :) i love this kind of discussion! definitly will be keeping an eye on this blog! if there are any other ones that ya’ll would suggest i’d be real interested!

          • Anonymous

            You have great questions! I would definitely recommend this book (The Lamb’s Supper by Scott Hahn) and this blog (Shameless Popery – incredibly well-researched posts on all different points of Catholic teaching) and this forum (Catholic Answers) to keep exploring these further. God bless!

        • Marc Barnes

          Jesus’s resurrected body is not limited to space and time — as he showed by appearing where-ever he wanted, walking through lock doors etc. So when he says this is my body, he means it. That’s why he made it so incredibly clear…unless you eat my body and drink my blood you shall not have life within you.

          • nocamo1

            You cannot be serious? Are you? If you are joking, please stop. If you are actually eating his body, what in the world would be the point of that and please do tell. Let’s be real. Eating his body would require you actually eating his body. Eating a piece of bread is eating something that is representative of his body. Why for the purpose of reinacting, in some small way, what Jesus did for us. It is symbolic.

          • Runswithforks

            Pot to kettle… “you must be joking” Me? I’m a little tea cup watching this and thinking, “prove that Jesus even LIVED none the less that he worked miracles, was born of a legit virgin, and was DIVINE, AND rose from the dead after ACTUALLY dying.” Seriously, just pointing this out cause it seems (from my perspective) like a kid who believes in Santa being outraged that another thinks he feeds his reindeer magic corn.

          • PC Geek

            There is a ton of evidence supporting the historicity of the Gospels, and no serious historian, Christian or otherwise, doubts the existence of Jesus.

            Some reading to start you off:

            http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jexfound.html

            A very high level summary: There is more evidence that Jesus existed than almost any other figure of the ancient world from Alexander the Great to Ceasar.

            Now in terms of divinity, again, a topic that will require some reading to study in any appreciable depth. A good place would be the archaeological evidence attesting to the veracity of the Bible – wherever the Bible has been put to the historical test, it has passed, and passed as well as (and often far better) than other historical documents that we trust implicity – and thus we can accept it as reliable witness on those parts that we cannot prove.

            http://www.tektonics.org/archmony.htm

            There is far more than just this, but if you are looking for evidence, this is a good place to start. I am sure that you can also research the topic on your own if you have any interesting in learning about it.

          • PC Geek

            There is a ton of evidence supporting the historicity of the Gospels, and no serious historian, Christian or otherwise, doubts the existence of Jesus.

            Some reading to start you off:

            http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jexfound.html

            A very high level summary: There is more evidence that Jesus existed than almost any other figure of the ancient world from Alexander the Great to Ceasar.

            Now in terms of divinity, again, a topic that will require some reading to study in any appreciable depth. A good place would be the archaeological evidence attesting to the veracity of the Bible – wherever the Bible has been put to the historical test, it has passed, and passed as well as (and often far better) than other historical documents that we trust implicity – and thus we can accept it as reliable witness on those parts that we cannot prove.

            http://www.tektonics.org/archmony.htm

            There is far more than just this, but if you are looking for evidence, this is a good place to start. I am sure that you can also research the topic on your own if you have any interesting in learning about it.

          • nocamo1

            Awesome site PCG. Added to my favs.

          • Carter

            really, eating just a piece of bread would be silly. This is God we’re talking about! When Jesus told the crowd of disciples several times that they would have to eat His flesh and drink His blood, most of them were just as aghast as you are, and they walked away. Which is why Jesus repeated it over and over and didn’t reword it.

        • guest

          If you were to say it, no I would not believe it. However, we are speaking of Jesus, the Son of God. He is able to do all things. The Eucharistic sacrifice is the “tradition” or “ritual” (I do not like the use of those words, but am working with a small vocabulary) that separates Catholicism from many Protestant churches. Each Mass Jesus sacrifices himself, and gives up his body and blood for us.

        • Nocamo1

          “do this in remembrance of me” i don’t believe we are actually eating him. I think by partaking in the communion, something profound is occurs in our psyche to cause it to be an actual communion or coming together with Christ. That is, we are taking a moment to focus, not on our earthly selves, but on Jesus our Lord. Who was Emmanuel. God with us. God becoming flesh. Dying for our sins on the Cross. Us, remembering our commitment to him. Remembering who and what he called us to be. The bread reminds us that he gave up his body and everything that goes with having a body (family, kids, a fulfilling, good-paying job, hope for retirement, wealth, non-sinful pleasures that we are free to engage in). He laid it down for us. God’s son. Not only did he give it up, he did so in a violent way. Received God’s wrath so we wouldn’t have to. The juice represents the blood that cleansed us 1 time for all eternity from the stain of sin on our souls. “When he died, he died once to break the power of sin. But now that he lives, he lives for the glory of God.” Romans 6:10

          • nocamo1

            not just a cracker, but not flesh and blood.

        • Mary Magdalene

          Three things, ahammer.
          1. You aren’t Jesus, so unlike Him, your proclamation that a cookie is your body has no merit because you are not God as Jesus is and you cannot miraculously change the substance of a cookie into your flesh. But Jesus can, because He is God. :)

          2. Jesus didn’t just say that the Bread is in fact His Body just one time. Nay, He said it 8 times in a row. He repeats that you must eat His Body and drink His blood EIGHT times. That usually means He is dead serious.

          3. After He says this crazy thing 8 times in a row, you see that “many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?” 61Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you?” and then “As a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him” (John 6). These ‘disciples WALK AWAY from Jesus because they REFUSE to eat His Body and drink His Blood. And what does Jesus do about that? Does he run after them, telling them “Don’t leave! I was just being symbolic!!” ??? NO. Jesus does not ever say that. He lets them leave!

          Those who refuse to accept that Jesus really meant what He said at the Last Supper are mirror images of those disciples who left Jesus as John 6 depicts. Either you believe what Jesus said, or you walk away from Him. I choose to trust Him at His word.

  • Chandler Noyes

    The pope is not Jesus. He is a heroic, godly FIGURE, but does not hold a candle to Jesus.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

      Marc is pointing to the Consecrated Host as Jesus, not the Pope. I love the Pope, but of course he isn’t Jesus! (and he’d certainly agree!)

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

      No one said he was God. :)

      And as Alexandra pointed out – Marc was pointing to the Host (which we believe is not just a symbol but the actual BODY of Jesus) as Jesus, not the Pope.

  • John Henry

    Phenomenal. Thank you.

  • AE

    Heavens. Thank you. I foolishly commented on this video last night around 10pm. At 2:30 this morning, I was still replying to facebook comments that were all from my protestant friends. I’m making my final point on facebook then sending them all here. Thank you!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFGDCW6H2BEL6WI52Z4N4OWGBA gillian

    You post is nothing more than i would expect from a die heart RC and you completely and in my opinion miss the point of his video – Jesus took on the religious leaders of his day and I think if he came today he would pretty much do the same . So many focus on the pomp and ceremony of Church and little to do with what counts

    In fact I would say so much of it could be directed at the Roman catholic church and the more established protestant Anglican churches
    SO much harm has been done in the name of religion and so in the name of Jesus , so many wars , abuses etc its horrifying
    They judge to maintain control and its not wonder so many turn away .

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

      I don’t think Marc misses the point, but I do agree (and I think Marc would, too) that Jesus would ‘take on’ many, many religious leaders (of all faiths, and lay members, too) if He returned today. It is the fact that we fail to live up to what He taught us that is the problem, not *what* He taught us. Again, Religion is not the problem, it is we who have the problem.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFGDCW6H2BEL6WI52Z4N4OWGBA gillian

        I like the guys video, I understand it ,I dont think the point he is trying to make comes across clearly but i think he means more the religious pious people who control many denominations and churches and how things are done rather than the religion of Jesus Christ as being the problem
        Its something i cant even explain well myself but i understand it but i know for fact that we don’t make it easy for our young ones to feel they belong in church , that it makes me sick to the stomach the wealth ,power and control of churches while so many still suffer .
        Jesus came with a simple message , he gave us simple instructions and some how we have turned it into a crazy thing called church where people have to say things a certain way , do things a certain way , dress a certain way – no need for it at all

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

          “Jesus came with a simple message , he gave us simple instructions..”

          Spot on.

          He *did* leave us a Church, though. He says so Himself. And if Catholics are a bit pre-occupied with ‘how to say things’ (as I, myself, am) then I hope for most of us it is because we simply want to do exactly what He told us to do. It’s important, I think.

          I certainly would agree with you (I think this is what you mean) that people can be unkind, and uncharitable, and a host of other mean things, when upholding that view. I try not to be, but I know I often fail.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

      He took on the religious leaders and he told his followers: Listen to these corrupt leaders. Do as they say, not as they do… because while he took them on he also respected their position. Bible? Read it again would ya?

    • Adriel

      “SO much harm has been done in the name of religion and so in the name of Jesus , so many wars , abuses etc its horrifying”

      Can you name some of these things that were done in the name of religion? Surely if there are “so many” and they’re “horrifying” they’ll come quickly to mind?

      “if he came today he would pretty much do the same”

      I have good news for you. He’s here, physically present, every day, all over the world. If you’d like to see him attend a Mass in your area.

  • Antoniorivas28

    If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. (James 1:26, 27 KJV)

    In the bible the word religion and Jesus aren’t always opposed to each other, that is why I would probably be careful with always putting religion versus Jesus as some who have been hurt by a church(es) would love to always do. The Bible talks about pure religion and vain religion, and let’s not ever forget that Jesus came to establish and die for his bride the church.  I hope that people who have been hurt by the church aren’t looking to the video as a good explanation of why they either don’t like church or don’t attend church.

    That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. (Ephesians 5:26, 27 KJV)

  • guest

    Thank you for this great blog entry. I had seen this video posted on Facebook and wished that someone would make a response to it. You did! You were an answer to my prayer.

    Thank you! :)

  • Jax17

    while you also have some very good points, religion is stil corrupt, with many scandals and churches are “man-made” and are not a “museum for the good people, but a hospital for the broken.” I am Catholic, not Protestant and agree with a lot of what he said in the video. You have your own opinion, I have mine, and the creator of the video has his opinions, too. Just because you say that the video is extremely not true, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alexandra-Molnar-Suhajda/727220213 Alexandra Molnar-Suhajda

      Say, rather, that man is corrupt, with many scandals. It is we who make the problems, not the teachings of Jesus… and, of course, while churches are made up of people, it was Jesus who created The Church, not man. What you believe to be The Church, of course, is your opinion!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EFGDCW6H2BEL6WI52Z4N4OWGBA gillian

    sorry but if you are standing for God there is no room for approach – We as Christians know better and i feel shame when i think that -some of the worst things in the world have been done in the name of religion and that is what this guys is getting at – peoples hearts have to change , they have to have a heart for the people just like Jesus

  • http://campuskritik.blogspot.com/ a_famous_historian

    Nice, but as a Protestant I was actually just as suspicious of the video as you were as a Catholic. I think the problem is that by ‘religion’ he means ‘works-righteousness’ (which all Christian churches reject) and in turn confuses works-righteousness with ritual – and of ritual, it is true, the Catholic Church has more than most denominations even while it firmly rejects salvation by works.

    But ultimately the video just strikes me as somewhat illiterate: there was no word corresponding to our ‘religion’ in the first century. But Christ definitely did institute forms of observance, so he’s just wrong.

    • http://withashout.net Aaron J.

      My thoughts exactly. (If it means anything, I’m an Evangelical.)

    • Spirit_lifters

      I hope you meant “salvation by works alone” when you said “salvation by works”. The Catholic Church has always held that is is through Jesus alone that we are saved. It is through Grace given by God that we are able to reach the salvation that God gives us through faith and works, not on works alone.

    • Lindsey

      Good point. I had the same thought; that somehow, the guy has begun to interchange the word “religion” with “ritual.” And, rituals can be good, they can be meaningless, or they can be bad. But not all rituals are bad. And there are rituals that are very, very good. Praying each day, regularly, would be an excellent ritual, I think we would all agree.

  • Essamelody

    I agree with your post but just want to point out that not all Protestant’s think this way. I am Protestant and I had issue’s with this video as it does not represent the true meaning of religion. Also, I know a number of Catholic people (I went to a Catholic High School) who adhere to the same sentiments expressed in the video.

  • Therese_carmella

    WOW – Just wow. This is a GREAT response to the vid!! I have no words. Awesome job. Besides this, I think everybody should check out Audrey Assad’s Facebook page for a similarly awesome response. Keep up the truth!!

  • Jmsteve4

    Haha, I posted this here yesterday (maybe this morning actually. I don’t remember. All I know was I was trying to avoid homework)! I feel like a part of something… Obviously I’m not the first person to put it here but hey. And isn’t it amazing how fast videos get spread on facebook? This thing reminded me of the “Two Lesbians had a baby and this is what they got” or whatever it was called as soon as I saw it.

  • Jay E.

    I second the comment from Pioswimmero5. This is dang good.

    The amusing thing about this man’s video is how darned religious he sounds.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=629394929 Ryan Harner

    Can you please make a counter argument video and post it on Youtube???

    • Marc Barnes

      I’m thinking about it… ( :

      • Mary Magdalene

        PLEASE DO IT MARC! :)

      • Georg Laing

        Yes, please do!

  • Sarah

    This is exactly what makes the guy from the video hate religion. All people do is argue about their religion and rules and how they are ‘more’ right, when it is ultimately about having a relationship with Jesus Christ. I think if we started focusing on making God famous, instead of our religion, we would do great works for His Kingdom.

    • Guesty

      Right, as opposed to what the guy in the video is doing when he thinks he’s more right for hating religion- enough so as to go and make video of his argument?

    • Ed

      It’s not just about our “religion and rules.” People discuss ideas of rituals and commandments because they seek truth. I agree that having a relationship with Jesus Christ is the most important thing…but if I have a relationship with someone, isn’t it important for me to understand their ideas, and, in the case of Christ, their commandments and ideals? I don’t like heated arguments because they’re divisive and hurt relationships, but I think some argument or discussion is important when one is seeking the truth. God is already famous; I just hope his fame presents him as he would want to be presented. If I’m not clear, I’d be happy to explain.

      • nocamo1

        Dear Seeker of God’s Will, For your eyes only!

        “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.”
        Revelations 22:18

        “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

        Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

        Now all has been heard;
        here is the conclusion of the matter:
        Fear God and keep his commandments,
        for this is the duty of all mankind.
        For God will bring every deed into judgment,
        including every hidden thing,
        whether it is good or evil.”
        Ecclesiastes 12:11-14

        “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.”
        Deuteronomy 4:2

        “See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.”
        Deuteronomy 12:32

        “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
        Proverbs 30:6

        “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome”
        1 John 5:3

        “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

        “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
        Matthew 23:1-12

        “The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

        So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

        He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

        “‘These people honor me with their lips,
        but their hearts are far from me.
        They worship me in vain;
        their teachings are merely human rules.’

        You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

        And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
        Mark 7:1-13

        “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
        And what does the LORD require of you?
        To act justly and to love mercy
        and to walk humbly with your God.”
        Micah 6:8

        I want to hear your honest response to these words from the Bible. It’s easy to argue with man’s opinion and to split hairs. It’s a whole other thing to hear God’s words and respond to them.

  • http://profiles.google.com/anitavforvictory Anita Moore

    Some constructive criticism: when you quote from Scripture, always include the citation. In fact, whenever quoting any authority, always include the citation. :)

  • http://remnantofremnant.blogspot.com/ priest’s wife

    yes yes and more YES- I love my personal relationship with Christ and hope to be stronger- but I love HIS CHURCH too!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nicole-Rose-Tupper-Brown/638045509 Nicole Rose Tupper-Brown

    You sir, have a new fan. :)

  • Jake

    “mostly just me following my heart and my gut in thinking that many parts of this religion were and still are wrong. And by wrong I mean they do more to divide, separate and condemn people than they do to collectively pick up the broken pieces of humanity.”

    — I understand where you’re coming from, but let’s remember Jesus put Peter/Petrus in-charge of His church for it to be unified. According to Luke 12:49-53, Jesus talks about division; it’s something that He knew will happen.

    I agree with some of his statements about merely being a Christian by title and the “I want that man” part. But think about it, why would a true Catholic hate Catholicism that Jesus himself established? default7909 {“method”:”validate”,”params”:[],”id”:1,”jsonrpc”:”2.0″}

  • Tess3825

    It’s his opinion. He chose to put it out there just as you did only he did it in a way that isn’t alot of reading and more people will watch. But I understand your points too, you chose to defend your stand but again it’s his opinion and anyone in this country can put just about anything on the Internet whether it is real, fake, right, wrong, correct or incorrect. So why the debate. Just don’t watch it and believe what you believe

    • Marc Barnes

      Because truth matters more than comfort.

    • jordan

      Because ideas have consequences.

  • Victoria

    Just saw this video yesterday and was a bit peeved. I was really hoping you would write about it- thank you. :D

  • Lexiflo37

    Read Galatians. It says it all

    • Guest

      Agreed. Galatians is what first came to mind.

  • Jake

    Hey Marc.

    If you are going to call this young man out for,

    “2. He’s very, very wrong with some great video editing, good background music, a strong emotional appeal, catchy rhyme, and all in relatively well-timed YouTube moment. He’s wrong in style. When a man gains immense popularity by making blanket statements stylistically, how likely is it that his followers will read a rebuttal making specific statements prosaically? I don’t know, but rebut I must, for it is the duty of the Catholic to resist fashion and fads, no matter how unfashionable he looks doing it.

    Then perhaps you should take a look at your own site. Your rebuttal isn’t quiet as prosaic as you think. One could call out the slick web page you use, your style of writing and the pictures and videos you post to get your opinions across as, dare I say, fashionable or trendy or perhaps a bit faddish?

    Not only do you call him out for content of the video but you call him out for the way he chose to present his opinion. “…He’s wrong in style.” Really? And you’re not?
    “…When a man gains immense popularity by making blanket statements stylistically,…” how interesting, by the number of readers you have I would say that you are a man of “immense popularity.” So interestingly enough, you are sort of judging yourself.

    But, in light of all that I have just typed out, it really doesn’t matter HOW the young man in the video or you for that matter preach the name of Jesus, it is the name of Jesus that is being preached that is important!

    The Word of God will not return void.

    • Ed

      I don’t think he meant that his manner of presentation is wrong. I think he meant something more along the lines of “his ideas are wrong, but he presents them in a stylish manner.” I think he meant that the style is actually good but that the ideas are wrong. I had to read the statement a few times before I got that.

      • Jake

        I would have to disagree Ed. Marc’s writing is fantastic, written with charm, wit, humor and sarcasm but what it isn’t, is unclear.

        Yes, he says his ideas are wrong (point #1) followed by point #2. where he flat out says, “his style is wrong” which was preceded by his description of the media the young man chose,

        “…with some great video editing, good background music, a strong emotional appeal, catchy rhyme, and all in relatively well-timed YouTube moment.”

        How this can be misinterpreted given Marc’s mastery of the English language and writing ability escapes me.

        He then moves on to make the comparison between the young man’s chosen media to the style of rebuttal that his followers most likely would not read, that being
        1. Specific statements.
        2. Boring.

        This statement is the ‘set-up’ for the rest of his post but it gives a little insight into Marc.

        By stating “…how likely (assumption on Marc’s part) is it that his followers will read a rebuttal making specific statements (alluding to the young man’s fallacy (in Marc’s opinion) in making “blanket statements”) prosaically (meaning Marc’s rebuttal or the comments section found on You Tube being dull or boring) ?”

        Marc is essentially blasting this guys’ chosen method of media when Marc himself is guilty of being ‘stylized’.

        Isn’t it all the rage right now to have a blog site? Doesn’t Marc use, video, images, hip words and trendy colloquialisms to get HIS message, opinion or thoughts across to his readers? Isn’t Marc ‘immensely popular”? Aren’t his reader’s rebuttals prosaic by nature?

        Perhaps Marc is a bit jealous of the quality of the video and wishes he could do that or had the time and or money to do it?

        But if Marc is serious about criticizing the method chosen because it is too stylish then perhaps Marc should revert to offering his opinions via parchment and quill.

        But my point in all of this, is to say that it DOESN’T”T MATTER how the name of Christ is preached. It’s all good.

        Philipians 1:15-18 Paul says…

        “It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill.
        16 The latter do so out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel.
        17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains.
        18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.

        Be you Catholic or Protestant, it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things.

        Have a good one brother.

        Jake.

  • Gabri Patti

    Thank you for this article! I just received this video from a protestant friend, and as I was praying about how to respond to him I came across this post in my blog feed. God is good :)

  • Trish

    #1 I don’t understand why you feel as though this guy specifically attacking the Catholic church. (If I were interpreting his words in the same context that you did, I could argue that he is attacking any other church on the planet.) I am a Christian, not Catholic. Divorce is also on our “list of sins” so to speak. It sounded to me like he was referring to certain denominations who pretty much disown you after you’ve been divorced, no matter the circumstances. Do those people not deserve to experience the love of God through us? That’s just ridiculous. How else are they to come to a relationship with Jesus Christ?
    #2 About the “if Jesus came into your church” bit…that is SO not what he was talking about. He was referring to a church that turns its back on people because they’re different. (i.e. dress, speech, etc.)
    #3 The Bible is not a product of “religion” as he is using the word. It is a product of The Church, true followers and worshipers of God.

  • Meredith Austen

    I know that it is important to you to make everything about the Catholic church, but if it is any consolation the entire time I watched it I kept thinking, yep that sums up the mainline Evangelical churches. They have big churches too you know and while I am glad that you have another chance to rail against Protestants, you might not want to take this so personally. Or at least, if you want to have any helpful dialog to bring people back to the church, it might be useful to not lump all Protestants into one, huge group and then only focus on the non-Orthodox parts. Then again, you might actually have to confront what the Reformation was actually about and you might realize that Calvin and Luther and others were right. But what fun would that be when you can instead just slander Protestants?

    • Adrian

      This is a Catholic response, so I see why everything he stated is about Catholic Christianity. Furthermore, I don’t see any slander against Protestants at all in this piece. Please point that out to me.

  • Shelly

    I am not Catholic but I agree with you! Although, I have to disagree with you when you discuss divorce in regards to the protestant church. Only because I have seen firsthand how divorcee’s are often ostracized from their church communities- especially if it happens while they are attending church regularly or are involved. I don’t think that this man meant it as a direct hit at Catholicism because I have seen this rejection in Protestantism as well. The other thing that I thought when reading was that most churches, protestant or catholic, have some kind of work with the poor and marginalized of society. Most aid organizations have a Christian foundation, although many people don’t even realize this a lot of the time. BUT, that basically comes down to doing one’s homework, which is the exact reason I think this guy in the video doesn’t hit the mark. Having lived as a missionary in several different countries, I am also struck with the individualism that comes through in this man’s view of Jesus and his faith. In other cultures you wouldn’t get that so strongly, although the more influence the western world has, the more it seems to be changing. Anyway, I enjoyed reading your blog (First time) and appreciate that you have explained the faults of the video in a funny and interesting way.

  • Tim

    A coherent and well-written rebuttal.

    You might reconsider two points, however:

    1. The “hating-religion-loving-Jesus” thing is not a “logical consequence of Protestantism.” Sure, the overwhelming number and variety of of denominations and unaffiliated/non-denom church bodies can lead a seeker to throw up their hands and say “one is as good as another.” But that eliminates those who use great care in their search for Truth precisely because there is such variety. And then there are the Protestants who stop to ask what they are protesting, and look to the Church for clarification on exactly why there was division in the Schism and Reformation. Without exception, I have heard Luther held up by clergy as a pious and devout – if somewhat misguided – priest who hoped to heal abuses and deficiencies within the Church so that ultimately more souls could be saved. He wanted to reform the Church, rather than fracture it further.

    2. Catholicism isn’t the only Christian body that opposes divorce. Regardless of its sacramentality, Christ directs us to hold marriage as sacred. Rome does stand alone on the indissolubility of marriage and the permissibility of divorce. But these are matters of Scriptural interpretation, are they not? Like aspects of Eucharistic theology, can we agree that these are critical, essential, irreconcilable points of differentiation between RC and Protestantism, but are still non-salvific?

    Spot-on otherwise.
    Thank you for posting!

    • Bookgirl32

      We’d have to agree on what is or isn’t “non-salvific” first. Many (not all) protestants tend to view salvation as one specific event in time that happened or did not happen. Catholics view salvation as a process that is only completed upon our death, with ALL revealed info from God pertaining to that process in one way or another. And you would be hard pressed to find a Catholic (that truly understands their faith) who would claim that anything at all about the Eucharist is “non-salvific”. Remember we believe the Eucharist IS Christ Himself, so . . . He’s kind of salvific. :)

      • Tim

        My understanding of the theology is that yes – Christ is present in the Eucharist. But participation in it is no guarantee of salvation. Don’t take my word for it, though. The Catechism identifies several fruits of communion (CCC 1391-1401), but since salvation isn’t one of them, I will hold my position that (on its own) it is non-salvific.

        How and where we receive salvation is another kettle o’ fish, as they say.

        The point I really wanted to make was that Marc was over-reaching a bit when he claimed Catholicism is the only church that opposes divorce. Its theological stance on divorce may be unique, but it is not the only church that opposes it.

        • Bookgirl32

          I do agree with you on the divorce thing, and almost pointed it out, but didn’t know if it would be needless nitpicking or not. The Catholic (and I think Orthodox) churches are the only two, that I’m aware, that believe if a marriage took place, divorce cannot even be a reality. So yes, that’s unique. But I agree, I don’t find many Protestant churches who would “support” divorce.

          I also think it’s great that you read and quoted the catechism. Taking the time to try to look at it from our perspective is really apppreciated in my book. And, yes, what is necessary to go to Heaven, simplistically, is Baptism. But, like I said, in the Church salvation is a process, one in which through a lifetime, the Eucharist is essential in receiving the sanctifying grace to persevere in that process. What I’m saying is that if you met a Catholic adult in good health who did not think receiving the Eucharist was necessary, it would be a Catholic who probably was not that interested in actively cooperating with God in his gift of salvation, since the Eucharist is God’s greatest gift to us, His own body and blood. So again, the Eucharist is Jesus Christ Himself, body and blood, so it is salvation personified.

  • Guest

    “So I’ll take his “God doesn’t love…” bit to actually mean religion is against divorce. But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church.”

    The Orthodox Church is also against divorce and I would consider it a “major”, as you call it, Christian denomination. I agree with you that this person made plenty of mistakes in his video. His video is not an attack on Catholicism, but rather on any Apostolic (read: traditional) church. However, we can take some positive from the video and work towards being more like the founder of our faith (Christ) than some of His misguided followers, especially of recent times.

  • VGisondi

    awesome!! i literally LOL’ed at the part where you said Jesus visits our church every day- literally.

  • guest

    stop hating this is what the guy believes i agree with him in every way so if you have a problem with him then dont watch his stuff no need to say anything else

    • Paula

      Dear guest,

      I presume you are suggesting that *Marc* is “hating…what the guy believes” — it’s a little bit difficult to tell who is doing the hating given the number of pronouns you use without a clear antecedent in your statement (they all refer to “the guy” but to which guy? Marc? Or the YouTube poet?). In any case, in Marc’s defense (if indeed it turns out that you are criticizing him), he is not hating *anyone* by writing this post or by speaking up about the Jesus-loving-but-religion-hating poet’s video. Marc is simply observing and commenting on the inconsistencies presented by the claim that one can love Jesus but hate religion.

  • Claytonbaswell

    May i start by saying I love Catholics! They are wonderful people and truly some of the most incredible Christians that i Know. Their faith & tradition is awe inspiring. Yet as any other denomination they have inescapable essence at work called humanity, as do all denominations within the Ecumenical body of Christ. I think Lewis sums it best in regards to this subject in his book A Grief observed!

    “Images of the Holy easily become holy images-sacrosanct (untouchable). My idea of God is not a divine idea. It has to be shattered time after time. He shatters it himself. He is the great Iconoclast. Could we not almost say that this shattering is one of the marks of His presence? The incarnation is the supreme example; it leaves all formerly held ideas about the messiah in ruins. And most are offended by the iconoclasm; and blessed are those who are not.”- C.S. Lewis, A Grief Observed.

    Just a thought regarding that which is “untouchable”, we must remember that nothing is the same after Jesus touches it…. may we be open to his touch.

    - Love & Peace.

    • Georg Laing

      Love this comment. But just as Christ is the Great Iconoclast of ideas that came before, He is the great Iconographer of all holy things since, precisely because of His Incarnation.

  • Sam

    Do you not think this is missing the point of what the guy is actually saying, to some degree? He isn’t against the church – in his own words he loves it – and I think possibly you are seeing anti-catholic bias where there really is none. What he seems to be ranting at, at least in my eyes, is rather what religion can too often be. It’s not the church as a whole he is complaining about, it’s the actions of uncompassionate individuals who follow all the rules and traditions, whilst showing none of the love and humility of Christ. As Romans tells us, Jesus came to set us free from the law, and this poem seems to channel a lot of what Jesus him self said regarding the Pharisees of his day.
    Again, it is not saying that the church, or even the doctrines of the church are a bad thing, but just that it should be ‘an ocean [of grace] not a museum for good people’. It’s not the processes of religion at fault, it’s the attitdues of individuals he has met that sadly prevent religion from being all it could and should be. A religion of a broken people, humbly seeking a deeper relationship with our Lord Jesus could follow every sacrament or ritual and I think he would have no problem with it.

    • Guest

      Amen.

    • Guest

      I like this, and couldn’t agree more. I found rebuttal very weak and thought they author did a very poor job of deciphering the message that the video was aiming to get across. Love and follow Jesus, prioritizing laws above your personal relationship with Christ is idolatry.

      • Georg Laing

        Loving Christ but ignoring His commandments is not loving Christ.

  • Conscience

    Your FIRST reason to slam this guy, how Judaism is a religion and Jesus blah blah blah…
    Ok, The Law is the Bible, or did the self-absorbed Catholic forget that? John 1:1
    As for your prophets.. Does Matthew 7:22-23 mean anything to you? Jesus belonged to no religion, for all worldly religion is exactly that, man-made. The true church of god is perfect, how is Catholicism lately? Not perfect? Hmmm, must be another institution of man. I can go on for hours, and days. I studied and questioned instead of simply believing. Go ahead and question your faith. If it’s to shakey to put up a half-decent fight with logic or intelligence, then it’s a worthless faith in a worthless system, for God can never be defeated.
    @Peter, TESTIFY BROTHER!!!

  • elleblue

    Thanks for this post, I love it! I have heard many Catholics say the same thing as this young man because of the sexual abuse issues. When someone explain this reasoning I always say, but being Catholic is about your relationship with Christ and his Church. Scandals are going to happen because or original sin and we are going to fall, repeatedly. However, that why Christ died for us! That where hope comes in!

    • Ashlie115

      Why are u guys taking it as if he’s talking about catholic churches? Does it sound.like how ur church is? Everyone is entitled to their own feelings and opinions Idk why u ppl are all fighting with each other. In all seriousness aren’t er suppose to love our neighbor? Ur not.suppose to pass judgement but I feel as if u all.are passing judgement on each other because of different views each other has. So please if u guys have views say them.kindly and let.each other.know.in a way that its not a debate. But a.simple.conversation. who knows u may be able.to.change someone’s mind. But bashing each others religion isn’t going to do.anything bit leave a even worse taste in someone’s mouth.

      I personally like the video because I.felt.like finally someone.is saying somethihg good about.god. maybe he.can.make a change .and because of other reasons but I am not willing to fight over it I love god and that is that. It all starts and ends with ur heart

      • Jenna

        Hey.. I’m really sorry but I make it a personal rule not to read things that refuse to use the word ur. So I didn’t actually read this. Just wanted to explain that I do that because 1. it makes the speaker look like they are not intelligent enough to be debating any of this, which is a bias I am workin gon gettin gover sonce eeryone should have a say, and 2. because it makes it look like the person did not put enough time into thinking about and writing this. If they did, they wouldn’t need to use abbreviations. Also, it sort of just hurts my head…

  • Ajarat

    @Paula
    Hypocrite. What is the wealthiest organisation in the Universe? Now, go read Mark 12:41-44 and/or Luke 21:1-4, and tell me again about how much the catholic church gives, as if it matters. What else have they given us? 1400 years where individuality was punishable by torture and death in the name of “Salvation.” Is all they give really charity, or are they simply attempting to appologise for that? Or are they returning to the community all the ill-gotten wealth they amassed through murder, rape, theft and whichever other demented ways your priesthood managed to come up with? This, Catholicism, is above that tho, right? The church, which believes in confession and pennance, is above paying for what God would call truely heinous behaviour. Yes, this is an infallible church of God and of UNCONDITIONAL love. Jesus believes in all that is/has/will be catholic.

    • Paula

      Dear Ajarat,

      On the contrary: the Catholic Church loves and professes and acts upon all that Jesus commanded. Individual Catholics may not (and, if that’s the case, then they are really only “Catholic” in name not in substance), but the Church itself always adheres to the Truth.

  • Blah

    Ultimately, he was just expressing his opinion. Although he claims, “I hate religion but love Jesus,” this is somewhat controversial. He raises many good, practical points that the youth can relate to. The right to express his intellectual freedom is now challenged by the viewers. However, he does endorse the ideals and morals of Christianity, a religion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Miles-Cole/530338634 Miles Cole

    Marc, I want to thank you for putting all this time into spreading the truth of Christ and His Church…you have inspired me to decide to start my own blog.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002575951941 Sunny Kim

    At the end of the day, I feel that the “division” between Catholics and Protestants, whether within their own communities or between themselves, dissolves in an inconceivable line that only hints at differences, if we truly are only for our God and for His people on earth. I think that debating on the rights and wrongs of either community is detrimental for us as Christians, how different would it be from the Jews rejecting Gentiles in the time of Christ? The welcoming religion known as Christianity led to the conversion of said “Gentiles” and “Jews” alike, and Jesus, seeing us today, would be heartbroken to see His people divided by these differences instead of praising Him through our love in word, thought, and action.
    I have many Protestant friends that always give their best to love, and they see me as their Catholic friend with the same love exampled by Christ. We do not see one another in school as someone with a different religion; rather, we look to our actions and hold one another responsible in living out our lives through, with, and in Christ.
    Ironically, trying to “fix” the problem by picking on our differences can only lead to a more profound division among us. God bless us all, for He did not come to save us and see us as divided people, but to save us and be one with Him.

  • M Ketelhut

    Rock on! This is awesome. Charitable. Honest. Truthful. Intelligent. Whew! Best thing I’ve read all week!!

  • Paladin

    THANK YOU for posting this!!!!
    So many members in my Youth Group posted this, and I needed a clean concise answer! Thanks! :D

  • Poinky03

    Ha :] I agree!! Wrote a poem response thats basically said the same things you just said :)

  • Anp1215

    awesome, shared.

  • Benbtaylor23

    Let me begin by saying I am Protestant, so I disagree with some of the basic theological ideas in this, but I’m not here to discuss them. For the most part I feel this article is right and the video is right. Here is where I feel the problem comes in: I think the article missed the point of the video. I feel this is evidenced by the article’s constant equation of the church to religion when the man in the video clearly states that he loves church yet hates religion.

    This is where I understand the line to be drawn for this man: Christianity is when one’s life is changed by Christ, so the changed one obeys the tenants of Christ. This idea is mirrored in James 2, where it says that faith without works is dead. On the other hand, to this man, religion is the construct of rules that can be followed without any real conviction. Look at Matthew 15. Jesus quotes Isaiah saying “These people draw near to Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” Elsewhere Jesus refers to the Pharisees as white-washed tombs; their outsides looked nice, but inside they were dead and rotting. This directly parallels with the portion of the video that compares religious people to mummies.

    I believe this video is railing against people who believe their religious acts will save them. So often religiosity is viewed as the totality of moral acts that are done. The Pharisees were super-moralists, and nearly all of them are in Hell. Just as their following of the law (or their appearance of following the law) did not save them, neither can church attendance, prayer, baptism, communion, or any other religious ordinance save us apart from Christ. Religion (in the sense it is used in the video) does cause wars and do bad things, because that idea of religion does not care about grace or Christ’s love and mercy, it merely cares about who is right and who is wrong.

    To summarize basically everything I’ve just said, it does not go against Christ to be religious. It does, though, go against Christ to be simply religious without any heart change. Romans 10 does not stop after saying one must confess with their mouth that Jesus is Lord, but goes on to say that one must believe in their heart that God has raised Him from the dead. That is what I believe the point of this video to be. Religion for the sake of religion is wrong, religion for the sake of Christ (which I’m sure the speaker would cast in his own terms) is something completely different.

    These are my thoughts, for what they’re worth. God bless, and have a great evening.

    -Ben

    • Marc Barnes

      “It does, though, go against Christ to be simply religious without any heart change.”
      Couldn’t agree more!

  • Jeff Tuttle

    So his porn addiction is cured by not going to church…? Oh and Catholics are whores according to the Old Testament!

  • priestwannabe

    I honestly feel like some the people who left comments didn’t read every single word.

    But there is one thing I’d like to clarify: Correct me if I’m wrong, but a numerator goes over the denominator (no dummy)– Catholicism would be at the top and should not be considered a denomination.

    • Elizabeth

      No, Catholicism is not a denomination. I’m trying to remember now where I saw the best explanation for this — I think it was in “One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic”. Denomination means “man made”, and the Catholic Church was not made by man, but God. Protestant churches are referred to as denominations, because they are man-made churches that split from the Catholic church…but now I must go find my book and look up the more intelligent explanation :).

    • Lazy Ray Finkle

      As a Protestant, I am a part of Christianity just like you. I was never taught Catholics were beneath me or above. We’re all brothers and sisters in Christ.

      You’re on the same field as me, sir. We’re in this together.

  • Underpantsmonkey

    I think you missed the point slightly on his question of if or if not Jesus would be allowed in the Church now. Based off the man’s assumption Jesus wished to abolish religion, if Jesus came back and wished to abolish the Church as we know it, would the Church let him into their doors with open arms? The man did not mean would the Church allow Jesus inside if they knew without a doubt it was Jesus. This can be debated a lot, I think it just depends on your point of view, I just thought it would be food for thought to look at the video’s point a little differently. Of course, it still depends on how you think as to what answer you will come to.

    As for the very beginning of the video. I also think the man’s point is not that Jesus’ teachings did not lead to the creation of the Church, but rather what the church could be is not what Jesus aimed for. The church consists of so many people from all over the world so of course the Church acts differently depending on the area you live in. Therefore, you will get different perspectives on some things (and granted, some people in those areas may be led to sin and corruption more so than others). The man argues in those areas where the church is being corrupted is very against Jesus’ attentions and is driving everyone even further apart. Instead of having a united group of people who embrace peace and all that jazz, you can have varied groups of people who could argue against each other and be hostile to each other, give into sin, and break people apart (i.e. WBC does this pretty well)

  • Josh

    I do not agree with some of this. and I do not agree with some of that dudes video.

    Both of you have odd views of big churches. I doubt the “Spoken Word” guy was talking about big catholic churches. First of all, it is common knowledge that the RCC is the biggest charitable organization in the world. Secondly, mega churches in protestant circles tend to get a bad wrap. There are definitely some that just plop themselves in upper middle class America and call it a day, but there are others who actually reach out and do what ever they can to help.

    I definitely disagree with the little transubstantiation reference…that was awkward ;)

    Thanks for your insights though…interesting stuff

    • Jmsteve4

      Well I think that he was just taking the point that we let anyone in for granted. Though perhaps he should have realized not everyone here has read his earlier posts.

  • Mercierjulie

    I see that there are a few complaints that this man is making against religion: The fact that we aren’t meeting every physical need of those around us, some people fake “holiness” and some people feel not included or welcome at church because of their divorced status. These are REAL CONCERNS. People go hungry, lots of women and men are leading sinful lives, yet acting holy, and there are people getting divorced and feel ostracized. THIS IS NOT RELIGIONS FAULT! All this tells me is that we really need to do a better job ministering to the individual. The church can reach the masses, and it follows Christ’s command, but how about reeeally loving our neighbor as ourselves? What about our ability to reach out in love and minister with boldness at the big, real, ugly issues as lay people??? We all have a vocation to love and evangelize and reach out. The Catholic Church is an incredible institution, but I think more members need to take real leadership, like maybe just talking to a stranger at church and smiling at them. We can only pray that the holy spirit would inspire us to be true disciples in the truth of the faith that Christ left to us!

  • Don’t assume who he targets

    A bit of an assumption on your part that the young man was targeting Catholic churches when he mentioned building huge churches. He might be referencing churches in the US that feature escalators, coffee shops, gyms, and more. Here is a list of the largest US Churches: http://www.sermoncentral.com/articleb.asp?article=Top-100-Largest-Churches

    In a world list, the Catholic Church would lead the list in size, but most of those churches was built centuries ago.

    • Elizabeth

      Coming from a very mixed family, some Protestants love to target Catholic churches for their size and beauty. It is a very common attack and, therefore, it is easy for Catholics to jump to this conclusion. You are right, though, there are other large churches, as well as Protestant denominations and other religions that are targets of this video. I agree with that.

      It is absurd to think that this video does not target Catholics, though. I think the proper interpretation here is that this video targets Catholics, and it targets other religions and various established denominations of Christianity. A lot of people are stuck on this point — that we can’t assume the video is targeting Catholics. It is. We need to move beyond that point, agree that it targets others as well, and start discussing the merits of the video and the rebuttal.

      • TCISACW

        “Targeting” means he’s specifically speaking to Catholics. He’s not. He may be referring to Catholics along with other Christian denominations, but he’s not specifically targeting Catholics.

        He’s also really speaking about religiosity, about legalism, about ritual over relationship.

        The reaction from the Catholics, however, does seem to highlight his points about hypocrisy much better than his video does.

        • Elizabeth

          One can target more than one group of people, especially when multiple groups fall under the author’s complaints. He is targeting Catholics, targeting Baptists, targeting any religion that has ever been part of a war, any religion with established traditions or large buildings, etc., etc.

          Yes, he is also talking about those things. This blog actually points that out — That some of the negative characteristics that often arise from human nature are the things that religion should not be, even if we fail in this regard sometimes. Even individuals sin and fail. This is not exclusive to groups of people. Catholics agree that, as does the author of this blog, that religiosity, legalism, and ritual can be negative without Jesus.

          I’m sorry you have a low opinion of Catholics. If you want to get a message across to readers or engage in fruitful dialogue, you would probably be more effective without the condescending tone that comes across in your writing.

  • Adriel

    Haha. As soon as I saw that commenter post the video yesterday, I had a feeling you weren’t gonna just let that slide. I myself immediately started formulating a complete rebuttal but you know what (I suspect you do)? These trends pass away.

    An ideology like this (and this isn’t the first time I’ve heard this; apparently it’s quite trendy), by definition ensures its own demise. The logical consequence of “anti-religion Christianity” is more, and more, and more (and more), separation, isolation, and disagreement between the Christians involved.

    It’s only a matter of time before some of these modern Christians say, “You know it’d be nice to have a strong leader to guide us. And for that matter it would be cool if there were a group (maybe even tons) of men and women who dedicated the entirety of their being to living the faith and serving God and his people. Oh and we should get back the believing and practicing the faith like the earlier church did. And maybe there should be a more compelling reason to attend weekly “services” than “it feels right.,” etc., etc.

    And when that happens, we’ll be here. We’ll always be here. Jesus promised that. Hope to see many of you “come home!”

  • Anonymous

    Actually, the bible commands you follow it. Catholicism has literally made up things not in the bible, therefor Catholicism is against the bible. Religion is the devils tool, according to the bible.

    • Bookgirl32

      The Bible doesn’t “command” anything, the Bible is a book. It’s a divinely inspired inerrant book, yes, but it’s still not alive. God commands, and last I checked, nowhere in the Bible did He claim to have limited Himself to the Bible. He said it contained truth, and that He would set up a Church to support that truth (pillar and bulwark type of support). If it could support itself, why would it need a Church?

      • Nocamo1

        “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if if anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.” and “23 When the man of God had finished eating and drinking, the prophet who had brought him back saddled his donkey for him. 24 As he went on his way, a lion met him on the road and killed him, and his body was left lying on the road, with both the donkey and the lion standing beside it. 25 Some people who passed by saw the body lying there, with the lion standing beside the body, and they went and reported it in the city where the old prophet lived.

        26 When the prophet who had brought him back from his journey heard of it, he said, “It is the man of God who defied the word of the LORD. The LORD has given him over to the lion, which has mauled him and killed him, as the word of the LORD had warned him.”

        We don’t have authority to change God’s word. We do have authority to speak it.

      • Anonymous

        1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.

        Seems like a command to me. One that you aren’t obeying you sinner.

        Also, the 10 commandments, you know, the biggest COMMANDments in the bible? You know what the FIRST one is?

        “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me.”

        The Bible says you shall have no other gods before the biblical one. Other religious texts speak of separate gods and have the exact same, don’t worship anyone else commandment.

        A church, is not the same thing as an entire religion. The original hebrew bible, even says churches are just groups of people who worship, nothing more. Catholicism has no biblical basis for making anything up.

        The pope is the biblical definition of a false idol. Seriously, show me versus from the bible that support a man who can make things up and decide which parts of the bible to follow and I will agree with you on this point. However, if the Pope is appointed by God, then God is one sick man. The pope and the vatican sent out a gag order to hush the molestation and rape in the catholic church, and then they exported priests who had raped boys and gave them a safe haven. Godly actions indeed.

        • Bookgirl32

          Wow, the Christian charity in this post is just overflowing. You could say Timothy commanded that, or God commanded that through Timothy, but, again, the Bible itself didn’t command it. Again, it’s inerrant, but it isn’t infallable, it can’t take action, it’s a book.

          P.S. Sams, which Church gave you that Bible?

          • Anonymous

            So, god wrote the bible and commanded things with it. That is what I mean when I say the bible commands things. The book has COMMANDS in it. That is what I meant. The author (an all perfect being who allowed his book to be pretty poorly written) commands things with it. He also commands though the bible that you only follow him. The bible (God) claims it is the only word of god, and all others are false several times.

            How can you justify trying to teach me, when the word of god clearly states it is wrong?

            That bible? The king james version is the most common, however there is actually no agreed upon “real” bible. But if you go back to the found hebrew writings, you can cross-reference a bunch of books. Timothy is one of them.

            Also, the Catholic church has ADDED commandments recently, and the Pope constantly claims new things to be signs from god. However if we look at:

            Deuteronomy 4:2
            Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

            It is clear that God says no one should add commandments. Unless you can find me a verse where he claims a POPE can talk to him and add stuff to the bible. That I would love to see.

            However, I highly doubt your next response is going to be in anyway a logical response to anything I just said.

          • Bookgirl32

            “The bible (God) claims it is the only word of god”
            Where? Quote the verse claiming the Bible is the only word of god.

          • Anonymous

            “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book”
            —Revelation 22:18-19

          • Bookgirl32

            Okay? And that has “the Bible is the only word of God” where? I don’t see it. It just says not to add or take anything from the book of Revelation (of course they couldn’t be speaking of the entire Bible considering that 1: there were Gospels not even written yet at that point and 2: it would be a few hundred years before the canon of the Bible was established anyway). Even if you could somehow interpret it as referring to the Bible in it’s entirety, it doesn’t say a thing about it being the only word of God.

          • Anonymous

            If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came; and the Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35).

            Scripture, meaning, the Bible… If there are other words of god, where in the bible does it say they exist, and what evidence of these other words are there? Not that there is any evidence of the bible in the first place…

            Proverbs 30:5-6
            5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
            6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar

          • Bookgirl32

            “Scripture, meaning, the Bible…”
            And the Bible says where that the word “Scripture” refers to the entire Bible? For that matter, where in the Bible is the table of contents? Where in the Bible does it tell you what books you are to consider “the Bible”?
            2 Thessalonians 2:15
            “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. ”

          • Anonymous

            The hebrew word for scripture means bible. There is no correct bible so far, the only proven bible is the original ones being found. However, your quote was completely out of context. There is no evidence that God wants a pope. Especially one who protects child molesters and lives in riches like a sick old man.

          • Bookgirl32

            Replying up here so you can read it. Sorry, there is not mention, in any language, of the word “Bible” in the Bible. The Hebrew word for scripture means just that, scripture. The word Bible came from Greek for “little book”.

        • Hank

          Bible worship is idolatry as well.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, but not a false idol (according to the bible, which I don’t worship.) However, the catholic church claims to be based on the word of god (the bible) yet it has a false idol, the pope, who has done many illegal and immoral things.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DIBJMZGBGJVW5GMVXEOCZLMM3A Trish

    I doubt that a mother struggling to feed her starving children would refuse the church offering to tear down their golden shrines so that her children could eat.

    Also, I doubt that God is more glorified by the golden palaces of the Vatican than He would be by his people worshiping in modest buildings and using the rest of the money to feed the orphans and the widows.

    Just my opinion.

    • Tabithasells

      Golden palaces? Have you ever been to the Vatican? No golden palaces there.

    • Richard Monteverde

      “I doubt that a mother struggling to feed her starving children would refuse the church offering to tear down their golden shrines so that her children could eat.”

      You say this like it is an either/or situation. It has been shown through the Church’s charity that we can both have very beautiful churches & shrines and feed the poor. If it ever came down to do we feed the poor or have beautiful churches I believe we would sell every Church and just go back to our roots and hold Mass at the homes of the faithful.

    • http://catholiceconomist.wordpress.com/ Buster

      I guess you won’t be too upset when your husband gives you a “modest” ring and a “modest” wedding so that he can feed the poor. When one loves another they give extravagant gifts.

  • Noobio1010

    loll he doesn’t mean “religion” in the sense your considering it, often times religion is coined as a term that represents pious and legalistic christians who simply forget about the grace and love and purpose of Jesus.

    • Elizabeth

      If he doesn’t mean religion, as in the actual definition of religion and in the context that our society understands the word “religion”, then he is a very poor artist, a terrible communicator, and needs to change his wording extensively. The definition of religion is not “pious, legalistic Christians who simply forget about grace and love and the purpose of Jesus”, and the majority of the population would not understand it as such. I, however, suspect that he does mean religion in the sense of this blog’s considerations, and that you are misinterpreting his message.

  • Theboldcatholic

    BC – I saw this video a while back. I am so impressed by this rebuttal. You truly have a gift. God Bless you and this blog. Keep up the good work.

  • guest

    i guess there must be a difference between christians and catholics then.

  • Justin

    Why do YOU make it seem like he’s referring to the Catholic church. He said church. As a protestant I honestly feel like Catholics in general like tradition and rituals. In my opinion you all pray to the picture of Jesus. You pray to Mary….One religious Catholic guy said, it is better to be safe than sorry so that is why it is also good to pray to Mary. I know why you guys pray to Mary and I honestly think it’s silly. Mary was a HUMAN! God sent Jesus to earth so that He would be our mediator. Why do we need Mary or the angels as our mediator to Jesus? Then who would we pray to, to ask Mary to ask Jesus to ask God for whatever we want? It is just silly! God forgive me if I said anything wrong. But if you believe in Jesus and trust Him with all your heart, does it matter if you are a protestant or catholic? Also if I understand correctly, you people believe that after death some people may go to heaven or not and those who dont will burn and will eventually get to Heaven. Where in the Bible does it state that? So really you need to ask yourself if your heart is really for Jesus or is it just based on pure tradition and rituals?

    • Pietra

      Dear Justin –

      You mention that you’re Protestant, so I assume you’re not a moral relativist. So you would therefore agree that the greatest test of truth does not lie in the mere whims, feelings, and opinions of men – which can change by the hour – but in the revelation God has granted us. Let’s look at this statement by statement:

      “Why do YOU make it seem like he’s referring to the Catholic church.”

      It is not Marc who makes it seem that way, but rather the YouTube poet himself.

      “As a protestant I honestly feel like Catholics in general like tradition and rituals.”

      Well congratulations, your feelings have tuned in to the truth. You got that right, we sure do! Tradition (with a capital T) has been a great way to pass down the Truth for two millenia. It’s pretty awesome. St. Paul agrees (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

      “In my opinion you all pray to the picture of Jesus.”

      In my opinion, your name is Fredreich Guggenheim and you ate fried shark with pistachio ice cream for dinner today.

      “You pray to Mary….”

      Yes we do (quite happily)! But I think you’re confusing praying and worshipping here.

      “One religious Catholic guy said, it is better to be safe than sorry so that is why it is also good to pray to Mary.”

      One religious Catholic girl said, I’m a little confused now.

      “I know why you guys pray to Mary…”

      Oh good! So then you know that the word “pray” literally means “ask” (as in “I pray thee, good Sir, lend me a loaf of bread!”), and just as you would ask any of your friends to pray for you when facing temptation, suffering, or challenges, we ask our very-much-alive friends in heaven to pray for us! Really. That’s what we do. Last line of the Hail Mary: “Pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death.” Mary, the saints, and the angels pray for us. It’s really awesome having friends who will pray for you from Heaven!

      “…and I think it’s silly.”

      Oh. Well sadly, there you’ve gone wrong. Like I said, I think you’re confusing praying and worshipping – make no mistake, we’re not idolaters, we don’t worship pictures or statues or saints. But we do very much honor and venerate Mary. Why? Simple. Christ followed the commandment “Honor your father and mother.” He honored His mother – and rightly so. We seek to imitate Christ. Should we not honor His mother?

      “Mary was a HUMAN!”

      Yes she was! And a very good one at that. She was amazing. She was the Tabernacle that held the Word made Flesh – she was the instrument God used to bring Himself physically into the world He created. You’ve got to admit, that’s pretty incredible.

      “God sent Jesus to earth so that He would be our mediator. Why do we need Mary or the angels as our mediator to Jesus? Then who would we pray to, to ask Mary to ask Jesus to ask God for whatever we want? It is just silly! God forgive me if I said anything wrong.”

      You’re right, He did! We don’t NEED Mary and the saints to pray for us, there’s nothing that says we can’t talk to God, but as I stated before, if you’ve ever asked someone to pray for you, you’ll understand why we ask the saints to pray for us.

      “But if you believe in Jesus and trust Him with all your heart, does it matter if you are a protestant or catholic?”

      Well…there was sorta that moment when He established His Church and promised He’d never leave it alone. :-) (“For you are Peter and on this Rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the Kingdom, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.” Matthew 16:18, for the win.)

      “Also if I understand correctly, you people believe that after death some people may go to heaven or not and those who dont will burn and will eventually get to Heaven.”

      More or less, that is what “we people” believe, yep! Well technically, everyone goes to “heaven or not” cause there’s two places where you could possibly end up for eternity, and one is heaven, and one is not. We call the whole burning thing Purgatory. The good news – if you’ve made it there, you’re going to heaven. Think of it this way. If you were doing maintanance work around your yard and got invited to a beautiful party, you’d probably want to take a shower and get dressed first. That’s what purgatory’s for. It’s the washing machine to cleanse us, the refiner’s fire to purify of the cheap metals and leave us with the gold (Malachi 3:1-3, 1 Corinthians 3:15).

      “Where in the Bible does it state that?”

      To start with, 2 Maccabees 12:44-46, Revelation 21:27, (again) 1 Corinthians 3:15, 2 Timothy 1:16-18…there are many more. But where in the Bible does it state that the Bible is the sole source of Truth? Just curious.

      “So really you need to ask yourself if your heart is really for Jesus or is it just based on pure tradition and rituals?”

      That, my friend, is a very good question. Another good question though: when I face the dark night of the soul (St. John of the Cross reference, see Psalm 22 for an example), and I am unable to muster the emotions I felt before in my heart, do I stop everything because I don’t “feel” like it anymore, or do I persevere with the tradition and everything He’s given me besides? Or am I automatically a complete fake of a Christian if I can’t “feel” Him all the time?

      • PC Geek

        Faith in Christ is an exercise of the Will, not the feelings. Many of the best saints had times, even extended times, when they did emotionally feel connected to God -our human natures, of which emotions are a part, are fallible.

        Our obedience and faith are shown to be the strongest when the rest of our faculties desert us but we still remain. Think about it – is it more credit to be nice to a friend of yours when you are in a good mood and super-cheerful or when you have had a really rotten day? The latter requires far more conviction and discipline – doing the right thing even when you really don’t want to is part of what faith and conviction are about.

        You are not a fake Christian on account of such…as a matter of fact you are an authentic one if you can “stay on board” even when you don’t feel like it – your convictions being stronger than emotions, which can sway back and forth based on so many things in your life.

        CS Lewis had a great quote about this – his book Mere Christianity should be required reading for all Christians, regardless of denomination. (It is called “Mere” since it does not deal with the specifics of any denomination but the common core of Orthodox Christianity.)

        “They are told they ought to love God. They cannot find any such feeling in themselves. What are they to do? The answer is the same as before. Act as if you did. Do not sit trying to manufacture feelings. Ask yourself, ‘If I were sure that I loved God, what would I do?’ When you have found the answer, go and do it. On the whole, God’s love for us is a much safer subject to think about than our love for Him. Nobody can always have devout feelings: and even if we could, feelings are not what God principally cares about. Christian Love, either towards God or towards man, is an affair of the will. If we are trying to do His will we are obeying the commandment, ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.’ He will give us feelings of love if He pleases. We cannot create them for ourselves, and we must not demand them as a right. But the great thing to remember is that, though our feelings come and go, His love for us does not. It is not wearied by our sins, or our indifference; and, therefore, it is quite relentless in its determination that we shall be cured of those sins, at whatever cost to us, at whatever cost to Him.”

        Lewis, C. S. (2009-05-28). Mere Christianity (pp. 132-133). Harper Collins, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

    • Jmsteve4

      1. No one is forced to pray to Mary. Any ritual allows you to replace a hail Mary with something else. Though I don’t know that all Catholics realize this. The information is out there though.

      2. The basic concept is Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell. You go to Hell if you actively deny God and refuse to follow his commands- basically you refuse to accept the gift of Heaven because you’re more concerned with pleasing yourself temporarily. Purgtory is a when a person has sinned and repentd but still has to make up for what they did. I’ve heard the metaphor that ech sin is like a nail punched nto your sould, and by repenting you allow God to take the nail out. however, you still need to fill that hole, and that means you need to work. It ties along with the concept of good work being good for you, except this time it’s in the afterlife. And you go to heavan by agreeing to follow God’s commands and recieve his gift. Don’t quote me as authority here, that’s just my basic understaning.

      3. The Bible doesn’t state everything literally. If we followed a literalist aproach to the Bible, it wouldn’t make sense and somethimes would lie. But it does mention heavan and hell, even if not purgatory. It’s saying we don’t need to be concerned with that. We don’t have control over it, so we just have to be the best we can and hope that God in His goodness will forgiv e us for our failings.

      4. Jesus didn’t make the Bible. Jesus made the Church, which made the Bible (organized it at least). So the Church has the authority over what is good, and that includes tradition. It’s sad how people will use a catholic book as a basis for their faith but refuse to acknowledge when it says that the Church is in charge.

    • nocamo1

      It’s all about the bible baby. A recurring theme I see is, and I am actually learning something, is that because the cc can lay claim to having taken part in putting the bible together (the act of canonizing or determing which books were bible worthy), there is an underlying sense that they also have authority over it. This would explain why trying to quote scripture to correct them falls on deaf ears. There is an underlying arrogance. You can feel it when you talk and talk and talk and realize you are getting nowhere, no matter which compelling scripture you quote and you just don’t know why. Why would someone that knows key points in God’s Word so well fight so hard against seemingly simple and clear isntructions. You are quoting something they feel they have dominion over. Dominion to interpret and alter. By they I mean those that subscribe to that way, not necessarily who worship our Lord Jesus acceptably in that environment (remember the first Christians went to synagogues until they were driven out). I fear for the former in my previous statement. Let’s be honest here, if you feel you have power over something, the Bible. You own it it’s yours, you control it, manipulate it, feel you created it in a sense. It makes sense that you would tell it what to do and not the other way around. All this while sincerely believing that you love God, and many wanting to, and many actually do (by love, I mean mind, body, soul, word and deed). But I digress back to my point that the dogma, the teaching, the foundation is not the same as that of the first century church. That’s part of what is scary. Because the physical cc can trace it’s roots back to the 1st century, it is very easy to say that the spiritual heritage is the same (and very difficult to argue against, hence why it persists). That is the historical physical church does go back to Jesus’ day, of course. But if one digs deeply into scripture, you will see there is much more dissonance than harmony. When a train goes off course, it is no longer bound for it’s intended destination. That’s not to say that all do not “worship the Lord acceptably”, but if you actually open up the scriptures, you (not Justin above) but you the universal you, including me, will see the stark warnings given by Paul regarding false teachings. AGAIN, we can all repent, this is actually GOOD NEWS! See Paul’s rebuke to the Corinthians in the first book of the same name. Grace and Peace to all, as he would sign off, Love in Christ, Nocamo1

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Wendy-Marie-Macagno/137000752 Wendy Marie Macagno

    Your response to this video was spot on . Thank you for sharing!

  • Clari

    I’m sorry you sound arrogant. The laws and the prophets established on the Old Testament do not represent Judaism…it represents the law spoken by God to the prophets, it does not represents a religion per se but the law of God and the prophecies of his son. These laws are followed by many different religions denominations. It is true that Christ came to abolish the way things were done because they were wrong…eye for an eye said the law before him, after him turn the other cheek, forgiveness. You obviously did not get the message and is wrapped up in having a religious label on your forehead good luck!

    • Marc Barnes

      Outside of obedience to the law and the prophets, what do you think Judaism comprised of? Worship? It’s prescribed in the law. Sacrifice? Law. Personal prayer? Law. Moral commands? Law. It’s all law.

  • Guest

    1. “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

    2. Speaking as a Protestant who attended four years of theology classes in Catholic high school and regularly goes to a large Baptist Church, I can tell you that, without a doubt, the maker of the video is not only talking about Catholicism when he says “religion”. And frankly, your accusations of such come off as more than a little bit self-absorbed. I see huge PROTESTANT churches going up around me all the time that strive to be the biggest and the best so they can attract more people, believers and non-believers alike. They spend millions of dollars on high-tech and usually unnecessary accessories for the church, while in the surrounding streets and countries people starve to death and freeze in the night air. It might be mean to tear down the beauty surrounding a poor man, but building something expensive and new which that poor man will never feel comfortable setting foot in, is even worse. Who are you to say he wasn’t talking about those religious people who still feel the need to build these huge churches?

    I could go into more, but I doubt it’s worth it because you’re obviously very passionate about your viewpoint. My main concern is that you’re completely overlooking the whole point of the video. Jesus came to bring LIFE, not rules; he came to get rid of the laws that bound us to our sin. Yes, it is important to behave like Christ-followers, and yes, it is good to have fellowship and grow with other Christians within the Church, but telling people that they must follow certain membership rules or perform certain rituals is exactly the opposite of what Jesus wanted. Christianity is supposed to be a RELATIONSHIP with our Creator, not a religion. It doesn’t matter if you are Catholic or Protestant, all God asks of us is that we serve him and follow his heart. And that is exactly what this video says. You might not be able to see it just yet, but this guy gets it.

  • James Doyle

    I don’t know if you’re even going to bother reading this. I sure hope so, because what I have to say is very important. I’m only going to disagree with one of your points, since I could address all of them, tell you why they’re wrong from an ethical standpoint, and have a long post go unread.
    I’ve been to Rome twice, and what I saw appalled me. The entire city is filled with people sitting on the street, begging for food and money. You can’t claim that the Church supports the poor when they let everybody on their very doorstep go unfed, unclothed, and unloved. If you were a truly good Church then you would melt down every ounce of gold in every cathedral and use it to end world hunger for good. You are not the most charitable organization in the world, and to say that the earthly beauty of gold and jewels is worth more than a full belly is truly disturbing. Then again, why should any of us care about your church? You have your wealth here on Earth; the truly righteous, the ones who don’t adorn themselves with metals and silks, will be the ones to inherit the Kingdom. I believe it was a man named Jesus who first said that – you might have heard of Him!

    • Paolo

      I lived in Rome for a while as a student. There was a gypsy woman who sat begging by the entrance of the school, run by a Catholic religious order, every single day. It was heart-breaking. I used to bring her some money and some food most mornings, until I was asked to stop by one of the professors. Needless to say I was appalled, until I listened to his reasons why. He told me that the school had, on several occasions, offered to hire on this woman as an employee, to set her up with an apartment away from the gypsy slums, and try to help her to live a better life. She continually refused. She has been sitting there for 15+ years and will not take the help that the religious order offers to her. Truth be told, I think she makes more money off naive students than she would as an official employee.

      I guess the moral of that story is to simply say this: the fact that the poor exist, even in the backyard of the Church, does not mean that the Church does not care/try to help/want them to live well. Both poor and rich need a conversion of heart. It seems to me that giving a hungry person some oranges that grow all over Rome would be more helpful then a chunk of gold.

      Lastly, I have repeatedly heard a point that you imply. It always seems to go something like this: big, beautiful, ornate churches are sinful expressions of Christianity. I still don’t understand this and, quite frankly, I think it’s a little silly.

      • Georg Laing

        It reminds me of the lady with the expensive perfume.

  • Etammaru

    You totally missed the point – if you don’t have Jesus and love….you have nothing but whitewashed tombs….

  • Taliattm

    love this

  • Aeroflyer416

    “aaand you just got Kris Kringled.”

    Literally made me LOL.

    Awesome job Marc!

  • WonderfullyHis

    I’m sorry but you have basically no refferences in here. Where did you find these two quotes:

    1. ”I tell you the truth, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

    2. “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

    • Anonymous

      “Whatver you loose on earth…” Is from Matthew 18:18. “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it” is from Matthew 16:18. For other fantastic Scripture references relevant to catholic teaching check out this site, ScriptureCatholic.com

    • Pietra

      The Bible. Shocker, right? ;-) St. Matthew’s Gospel, to be exact. It’s actually one quote, found in chapter 16, verses 17-19.

      “And so I say unto you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” <3

  • Lindsey

    Stunning. You said it all so well.

    And, I remembered, after reading your first couple paragraphs, that my 84 year old grandfather, a life-long Christian, told me this summer, “I am done with religion. I believe in the Trinity, I believe Jesus died for my sins. I believe the Word of God. But, I am done with religion.” You are so right that this is an angst that’s incredibly protestant. He grew up Lutheran, changed his life at a Billy Graham revival in his 20′s, attended Reformed and Presbyterian churches all his adulthood. Now the Presbyterians are doing things as an organization, what he sees as “religion,” that he feels rocked by, at the core (understandably). He feels alone and that it’s basically him and God. Please pray for him. I am Catholic now (adult convert) and we can only get so far in conversations before things fall apart (due to drastically different use in language and our experiences). It makes me feel sad that he does not feel he belongs to a church body on this earth but rather only a mystical body that he won’t see till heaven.

  • Doug2002me

    I don’t really believe in organized religion. To me, just following what others claim is truth without questioning it is just silly. This guy actually makes sense to me, even though I don’t think his facts about Jesus and his ideals are correct. I feel like the Catholic and Christian religions are too exclusive and do not actually give true thought to others outside of what I conceive as the true “good people”. Sure, they may give to the poor and others at times, but for many of them in their own minds, they judge all that don’t live up to their own ideals and morals. I am at a different level though. I judge those who judge without realizing that I am no better than those who judge because I judge them. I also do not think that any judgement really does any good. Only helping others, which is what I think Jesus was trying to get others to do, really helps anyone. Organized religion only has one true strength in my opinion, which is community. In the world of today, we are all connected to each other, but at the same time, we are disconnected from the real world. By the real world, I mean: True poverty, starvation, economic struggle, and the future real world problems locally and globally. We can communicate with people around the world and buy technology beyond our wildest dreams. But can we help our neighbors? Can we even get along with out neighbors? I have lost many friends do to differences in political ideas and morals. Why? We all want the same thing in the end, which I think is peace and prosperity. The difference is that some people have hatred in their hearts without even knowing it. Some people are still to this day racist, sexist, and homophobic for no other reason other than some person vendetta, outrageous religious belief, or unreasonable theory that these people are bad for society. It makes me sad and angry. However, it shouldn’t be my place to hate or judge. It is my duty as a human being to try to do better myself. Fuck all of the people who think that I have to acknowledge some silly religious ritual to be a good person or to be loved by God/Jesus. When I say “fuck all the people”, I really mean forget you, I don’t mean it in a hateful way. I just mean, look at yourself in the mirror. Start worrying about yourself in a constructive, critical way, and start looking at others in a positive way. I hope this only inspires people to do better, and doesn’t offend anyone.

    -Concerned Human Being

    • Pietra

      Thanks for your concern. I don’t pull the “offense” card, but if I did, it’d be because of your disappointing choice of words there at the end. In my opinion, you would be so much more effective if you didn’t need to rely on profanity to get your point across. It is quite saddening to read the words “it should not be my place to hate or judge…**** all the people who think that I have to acknowledge some silly religious ritual to be a good person or to be loved by God/Jesus.” Generally, calling large groups of people profane words falls in the category of hating and/or judging.

      Also, those people who you just insulted, who think that you have to acknowledge some silly religious ritual…I’m not sure who you’re talking about, but they sure aren’t Christians. Atheists are generally good people, and we all know they don’t acknowledge any religious rituals, silly or otherwise. And no one has to do anything to be loved by God – in fact, His love is so radical that no one can do anything to separate themselves from that love.

      We know the Real World of which you speak. Our brothers and sisters are in the Real World. They’re our family. We constantly, actively help feed them, clothe them, deliver their babies, cure their diseases, build their houses, dig their wells, educate their children, jump-start their businesses. Best of all, we bring them hope – and all this without regard for their beliefs, morals, or places within our “ideals”. I personally have helped do these things. You cannot tell me the Church is a judging machine and nothing more.

      I’m terribly sorry you feel like Catholicism and Christianity are exclusive. I do hope you are able to get around to doing some thinking, however, and not leave this weighty matter to mere feelings. I propose a field trip – check out your local Catholic Church for Mass one day (weekday lunch break, Sunday morning, any time you’re free, really) and tell me how hateful, hypocritical, and exclusive we all really are. If you were wrong – well, you won’t have a wrong opinion anymore. If you were right -then you were right, and you’ve lost nothing but an hour of your time.
      Do it. I challenge you.

      “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” – Fulton J. Sheen

  • Jpkenkel

    See I was happy to read this article (mostly because I am a college student, persecuted daily for my Catholicism). However, reading all of these comments between protestants AND catholics makes me feel discouraged.

    Some of us go to Mass. Some go to service. Some worship in their own fashion.

    Sure, our differences are evident. Sure, each of our denominations have certain members that are “fake Christians”. But we (CHRISTIANS AS A COLLECTIVE FAMILY) need to become unified! When will God’s disciples learn to set aside miniscule, meaningless differences and love one another? When will we realize that our belief in the Lord makes us one family? ALL denominations are guilty of this, so don’t try to deny it. We can’t expect to make even a dent of difference in the world if we go on like this. God is Loving. God is Merciful. I would think it’d be obvious that we should try to be like Him.
    When we learn to set these differences aside, I believe in my heart that a beautiful thing will happen:

    “Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
    (Ephesians 4:14-16)
    Hmm. Think about it.

  • http://twitter.com/PeterDCXW Peter D. Williams

    Excellent post. And an absolutely brilliant blog, if I may say. Funny, well written, and truly superb in content. If interested, my own very brief rebuttal on Facebook and via Twitter (which I will post tomorrow) was this:

    I agree with some of what this guy is saying. His rightly affirms the importance of a personal relationship with God, through His Son. I disagree fundamentally however, with the content and language of his (very Driscollian) thesis.

    Religion is worship of God or gods (Oxford English Dictionary definition). Christianity involves worship of God. Therefore, Christianity is a Religion. QED.

    Religion *is* the Relationship, & involves receiving salvation through Baptism (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:4-6; 1 Peter 3:21), Confession (John 20:21-23; 1 John 1:9), & our good works, which justify us (James 2:20-26; Galatians 5:6) not as done in natural righteousness (Titus 3:5) or ceremonial Works of the Jewish Law (Romans 3:20), but done in and by the Grace of God Who works in us (Philippians 2:12-13) and rewards us, by our merits, with eternal life (Romans 2:6-11; Galatians 6:7-9).

    Jesus saves. Through (*true*) Religion.

  • Michelle

    I am hearing a lot about how great the Catholic Church is. That video that you posted starts of with all the accomplishments of the Catholic Church. I am not saying that the Catholic Church hasn’t done good, because it definitely had, but I think the video that started all of this is saying just that. It’s not about what the Church has done, it’s about what JESUS has done. Why are you boasting in the Church’s accomplishments. Is it necessary to point out that you are the largest charitable organization. Where is your humility. Shouldn’t your actions themselves be enough. This probably sounds super harsh but I think that you are missing out on the point of the video. It shouldn’t be about coming home to the Church, it should be about finding Christ. The video is affirming our call to action. It is not about the buildings or the numbers. It is about social justice. It is about helping the widows and orphans and the poor without the need to be noticed. It is about working humbly and glorifying God in the process because this isn’t about us. I think the speaker in the video nailed it… its about God’s grace, not what we can do.

    • Bookgirl32

      Where you’re not understanding us is in definition of “the church”. When “the church” is mentioned in the Bible as “the body of Christ”, we believe that “church” is the Catholic Church, not just loose gathering of all humans who happen to believe in Him. So, in other words, for us, the Church’s accomplishments ARE Christ’s accomplishments. I know you might not agree, but does that make sense?

      • Alan Chusuei

        But which of the Church’s accomplishments ought to be attributed to Christ? Admittedly, this may be a difference in ecclesiology. For evangelicals, the Church is not entirely co-extensive with Christ himself, at least, not in the way that I think Catholics believe it is

        • Bookgirl32

          It’s not, that’s what I’m saying. Just trying to give you an understanding of where we’re coming from. We believe that the Catholic Church, the visible one led by Christ through the Pope, the actual specific institution of the Catholic Church on earth, is exactly “the church” Jesus was referring to in when he told Peter in Matthew 16:18 “upon this rock I will build my church”. I’m not trying to convince you of that belief (at least not in this post :) ) but trying to help you get past what would understandably look like us attributing too much to a simply human group of people when looked at from your perspective. So if it’s Jesus’ Church, that He is the head of, that is His spouse, that he promised to protect against “the gates of Hades”, then attributing anything to “the Church” (as we see it) would actually be a natural extension of Jesus, since His Church aligns itself only to His will and therefore would only point to Him, and credit Him, not take away from Him, as He is the head and it is His body.

      • Michelle

        I guess as people who believe things a little differently, we will disagree and I mean no disrespect when I say any of this because I know that the Catholic Church has done wonderful things. I also think however, that the Catholic Church has changed throughout the ages significantly and is not the same church that pieced together the Bible, ect. I am not saying this towards every Catholic, and I am not saying that this isn’t the same for Protestant churches, but I think that there is a lot more corruption in the church and that the focus is off in so many believers, Catholic and Protestant alike. That being said, I think that the body of Christ is referring to all followers of Christ, not just the Catholic Church. I am not Catholic but I think that I am part of the body of Christ, and therefore the church. I have accepted Christ and what He did for me on the Cross, and try to live my life for Him through His grace. I’m definitely not perfect but it’s all for Him, right? I have a personal relationship with Him. I’m learning everyday and do not think that I know everything so I really like to read things like this to develop what I believe. To be honest, I am still trying to wrap my mind around your statement “the Church’s accomplishments are Christ’s accomplishments.”

      • Michelle

        Oh, and I also just read your post below Alan Chusuei’s post and can definitely see where you are coming from!

  • KristyZ

    What a wonderful way to lay it all out and explain things! I love “This is so awkward”! I am still laughing about that one. I wouldn’t have understood it whatsoever before becoming Catholic. Thank you for sharing your gift!

  • Chris

    I’m not quite sure why Protestants are so sure of that their beliefs are the best when Jesus established the Roman Catholic Church (whether you like it or not, this is your root) and the Protestants broke away. The founder of Lutheranism is Martin Luther; the founder of the Roman Catholic Church is Jesus Christ himself. You cannot claim that Jesus was the founder of Protestantism because a man created each break away religion from the True Church. I expect this to be torn apart, but that is only because people are often unwilling to accept logic because it means “losing” rather than accepting. <– That statement will consequently be torn apart as well.

    • Sir.

      Sir, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses as a criticism against the excesses of the clergy, and the abuse of indulgences in exchange for money. Luther did not break away simply because he felt he wanted to. In fact, Luther wanted to remain in the Catholic Church and reform it, along with other thinkers like Thomas More and Desiderius Erasmus.

      However, at the threatening of the Vatican to put a price on his head, his beliefs stemmed into a separate religion. The Catholic Church in fact worsened the situation by not addressing the flaws that were being pointed out by Luther until it was too late.

    • Lazy Ray Finkle

      And here I thought Jesus was the founder of Christians everywhere.

  • T.R. in Tacoma

    I read this blog to see what ‘the other side’ had to say about it, and just like the video some good statements were made. But then I get to the other reader comments and realized why I have come to distain organized religion, a thousand groups of people- all of which think that they have ‘the one true religion’- arguing the minor deficiencies of the other thousand groups of people. Was this the intent of Jesus, bickering over the details until we die, hoping we picked the right one? Not at all, nothing could be further from the truth. I have come to live my life to my fullest potential and do what good, I as one man, can do. Walk in his path, love humanity as an entirety and don’t have sex with your neighbor’s wife…

  • http://twitter.com/thelifeofbrian The Life of Brian

    I started reading this blog post but then I puked a little in my mouth. You see, the fact is, there is no in or out crowd, there’s no saved or unsaved, that’s all a lie. All are simply loved. The path is not narrow, and if you think it is, you have nothing of substance to base that on. Christian fundamentalists make me a little nauseous… but thats what happens when you ingest poison…

    • Hank

      Jesus said the path is narrow.

  • http://profiles.google.com/mplmpl Michael Lindner

    If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe but yourself.
    - St. Augustine

    • http://twitter.com/thelifeofbrian The Life of Brian

      You can’t believe in the Gospels unless you interpret them. And you can’t honestly, diligently, interpret them if you just take everything literally. That’s just laziness, pure and simple. Don’t be a lazy literalist.

  • Alan Chusuei

    As I read through the comments here, it’s extremely important to remember the artist’s possible context and parlance here.

    Without doing a lot of research, here are my assumptions about the artist, and thus my comments about what the artist is saying. If these assumptions are wrong, then I can adjust accordingly based on the author’s

    1) He’s some form of evangelical Protestant. By definition, this does mean historically some level of response (or protest) against the Catholic church. However, this split of denominational authority from the RC Church in our day and age does not necessarily mean he is speaking out against the RC Church directly.

    2) The use of the word “religion” is not defined the same between Catholics and Evangelical Protestants. I was raised Catholic, and now I am what you would call an evangelical Christian. I think Catholics use the word “religion” in the highest regard, meaning a moral/ethical code that is representative of the character of Christ. Another way to put it, to be “religious” is to follow the teachings of the church in a way such that Christ is very much manifest in the Body of Christ. This can be seen in the writings in the book of James, where he refers to “true religion,” which is the taking care of widows and orphans and being unpolluted by the world. (James 1:27) I doubt that this sort of caring for the least of these is what the artist is taking issue with.

    In evangelical Christianity, the word “religion” is defined pejoratively, where “religion” is the use of ritual or activity which has no real basis other than to purport a sense of self-righteousness before God. As one person mentioned before, evangelicals refers to this sort of “religious” activity as “works-righteousness”, where such activity cannot make one righteous before God. Being “right before God” is a cornerstone of the evangelical formulation of Christianity, and thus having “religion” in the evangelical sense of the word means a disconnect from the God of Jesus Christ, in whom alone righteousness can be earned. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

    This sort of parlance does not mean “religion,” as pertaining to the normative Catholic use of the word, is bad at all. Neither do I think that Catholics would agree that having “religion” in the evangelical sense is desirable at all. Thus

    I can see how the high-church aspect of Catholicism (highly ritualistic) can often be seen as being “religious” (in the bad evangelical sense of the word). But that jump need not, and should not be made. And as some have pointed out, many Protestant churches are just as ritualistic, and rightfully deserve the characterization that this artist is speaking of. In my personal opinion, any church or person (Protestant or Catholic) that is “religious” (again, bad sense) is precisely the target of the artist’s critique.

    This is how the artist can say that he loves the church, but hates “religion,” for in the evangelical context, the two are not necessarily the same.

    After writing this, I think the artist needed to be a little more careful with his language concerning the word religion. But I think he is speaking out of the evangelical context, and artistry sometimes means tradeoffs in the clarity of that which is spoken, for the sake of impact and effect.

    • Yukikitty123

      I have to say that I agree with you. I’ve watched the video several times and come to the conclusion that the artist is referring to a dead “religion” where ritual and do’s-and-don’ts become the sole focus rather than a particular facet of Christianity. Far too often we get caught up in the motions and forget the purpose–much like when Christ was referring to the Pharisees as hypocrites who outwardly appeared righteous but instead were filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness (Matt 23:28). In fact, the artist in the video even uses analogies of the Pharisees when he’s talking about “religion”! That isn’t to say that ritual and tradition is a problem in and of themselves, but what does because a problem is when you let yourself lose focus of Christ. That is when your relationship stops becoming a living, breathing lifestyle but rather just a “religion” that’s more alive than Islam and Hinduism and any other religion you’d like to add.

      So, yes, I totally agree with you on that some people have been the artist’s meaning of the video confused. I think that the artist should have used more clear language, but it’s a “viral” video that’s done the purpose it’s meant to–bring those who’ve let themselves become caught up in “religion” back to the purpose behind that religion, Christ.

  • Aimee

    Hi,
    I’m Catholic and I don’t separate myself from anyone of other religions and I am always looking for ways to help other people everyday. The main message of Catholicism is LOVE. Thats it. Period. Following the “rules” are only ways that Jesus tells us are loving towards Him and bring us closer to Him (and happier). There are so many misconceptions about Catholicism. The only way you will ever be able to give yourself completely to serving others is if you are in love with Jesus and have a close relationship because that is what gives the actions passion, meaning, and motivation. I admit I have not achieved this perfect relationship yet- none of us are perfect. I agree with you that forgiveness is so important. I’m glad you posted because I completely understand why people feel this way. Finally, I just want to say that there’s no way to believe something unless you believe it to be right. I believe Catholicism is the true religion and I believe I am right. Am I definitely right? Maybe not. But I believe that I am. I will never treat someone differently because of religion, I only love more that’s it.

  • Abarnette4253

    Everyone is saying we as in catholics do this and that we are the best blah blah this is what Jefferson is saying in his video exactly!!!! Come together as one..
    All Christians praise God! No Christian religion is better than any other!

  • colleen

    where’s the picture he ‘snagged’ of jesus in his church…i’m a litle confused by that statement w/ the pic under it…

    • Richard Monteverde

      We Catholics believe that Christ is actually present in the Holy Eucharist, in both body and blood, not just symbolically.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks Marc. You inspired this post: Religion Vs. Relationship. Try also “Mashed Potatoes Vs. Gravy”

  • russ

    here’s my two cents on the video:
    http://youtu.be/DI5kC58dRIg

  • nicole

    I think this review missed the part where he gave the definition of what he ment by religion at 3:08 he says religion is man searching for God, meaning man trying to accomplish a set of tasks to gain favor and be closer to God, basically salvation by works which like the review said is something all christian denominations reject. He isnt rejecting the church, rituals, or knocking any specific denomination, right after giving his definition he even says he loves the church – also not mentioned in the review, what he is showing is that there is no other way to God except through Jesus. Also when he says why is religion so great if its started so many wars, builds huge churches but fails to feed the poor, and tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve had a divorce, i think he is addressing issues that people who do not believe in God have with the church, people who may not understand that salvation is through Jesus and not through accomplishing a to do list.

    • nocamo1

      Dear Seeker of God’s Will, For your eyes only!

      “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.”
      Revelations 22:18

      “The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails—given by one shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

      Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

      Now all has been heard;
      here is the conclusion of the matter:
      Fear God and keep his commandments,
      for this is the duty of all mankind.
      For God will bring every deed into judgment,
      including every hidden thing,
      whether it is good or evil.”
      Ecclesiastes 12:11-14

      “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.”
      Deuteronomy 4:2

      “See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.”
      Deuteronomy 12:32

      “Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.”
      Proverbs 30:6

      “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome”
      1 John 5:3

      “Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

      “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
      Matthew 23:1-12

      “The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.

      So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

      He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

      “‘These people honor me with their lips,
      but their hearts are far from me.
      They worship me in vain;
      their teachings are merely human rules.’

      You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

      And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
      Mark 7:1-13

      “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
      And what does the LORD require of you?
      To act justly and to love mercy
      and to walk humbly with your God.”
      Micah 6:8

      I want to hear your honest response to these words from the Bible. It’s easy to argue with man’s opinion and to split hairs. It’s a whole other thing to hear God’s words and respond to them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1424113805 Tom Tozer

    I hate modern poetry, but I really hate modern poetry.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1472790264 Richard Gerard Evans

    It sounds like he is channeling Anne Rice, although she is still alive…and I get his thinking. I was caught up in it and basically de-railed much of my Faith walk a couple years ago by trying to separate Sacred Tradition, which brought us the Church in the first place through Jesus, who restored and completed the Tradition of Judaism, rather than destroying it, and Sacred Scripture. In short I was becoming Protestant again and not even noticing.

    Either the Chuch has full authority over Christianity or Christianity has no real basis. It is one of the two. Does that mean I believe that there are not Protestant Christians? Not at all. But it does mean that their walks can become derailed precisely by wrongly answering the authority issue. That is honestly the one thing that separates us. We either can make this thing up, Bible in hand, or look to the Church to guide us, Bible and Catechism in hand. There is not a third choice.

  • Guest1

    You have completely misinterpreted the video. You are ignoring the part where he said he loves the church, therefore, he can’t be proposing that religion and the church are synonymous. His reference to religion is empty works, much as the law in the old testament was mans (impossible) attempt to get to God, so is empty religion the same. If your religion and rituals are married to a relationship with God and are used in the way Christ intended, then he isn’t talking to you: you are actually the protagonist of his video. And it’s just not true to say that the only church that disagrees with divorce are the Catholics. It is a far leap to say that just because he said “big church” he is referring to Catholics as well. There are protestant churches with thousand and tens of thousands of people. I personally think you agree with him more than realize, you just misinterpreted what he was trying to say. He isn’t saying to throw out tradition; he’s simply saying that tradition without proper motives (“religion” in his video) is what Christ cam to abolish (or complete with grace).

  • Coleydavis

    who cares what others think and say… GOD IS SO GOOD!!!!

  • Jill

    Why would you say Catholicism is the only religion that is opposed to divorce? That sounds ignorant to me. I am a southern baptist and we are also opposed to divorce. But we do believe God forgives.

  • Parker

    is it so hard to recognize that the goal of nearly all religions is to move people to live virtuous lives? Why do you have to fight over it? It seems so silly. Can’t you just accept that despite the different interpretations, there is a common goal?

  • Guest

    How Satan must celebrate when the Christians fight amongst themselves…

    I’m Catholic. I’m proud to be Catholic. I love Jesus, and I am grateful for His constant Presence in the Eucharist, available to me 24/7 in the adoration chapel at my parish. And I know that the Church is His Bride, and that her number one mission is to gain souls for Him. I believe in truth, and that Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and that the Holy Spirit works in the Church to teach us truth. I believe that in 2,000 years of being guided by the Holy Spirit, the wisdom of the Church is greater than any wisdom I possess, and I trust her. I agree with this video poet that the Church is not a museum of saints but a hospital for sinners. And I know that we humans are flawed, and need grace, and mercy, and forgiveness.

    I know Satan is a divider. I’m praying for Christians to see through his lies and reunite, joining the Church in her mission to save souls for Him.

  • http://tonyescobar.org Tony Escobar

    This article is ON POINT!

  • Hannahwischmeier

    All of this arguing is what I think the video was talking about. Religion is not a contest. It is not Protestants verse Catholics. I beleive that faith is an extremely personal matter. My relationship with god cannot be shared or understood by anyone but myself because it is so personal. Therefore, I don’t think there is any point to me saying ‘my religion is better because of x, y, and z.’ Worship god in the way that you feel closest with god. However, do not ridicule any other fellow Christian because they do not worship in exactly the same way. A person has every right to build their relationship with god as they see fit and best for them.

  • andrew mendoza

    I’ll be teaching what you wrote and showing the video in my confirmation class! Thanks!

  • Jane Hartman

    Without religion, specifically the Catholic church, we would all be making up our own ways to get to heaven. Religion gives us the “how to” to help us get to know our Lord through the sacraments, the scriptures, the beauty of itself. Without religion, we would be lost. Those that think they can do the “lone ranger” type of Christianity are wrong. Christ established the church to keep us on the “narrow way” and by disrespecting religion we lose our way.

  • Ask

    “It is a call to figure out the mysteries of God on one’s own, with nothing but a book one must deny was given to him by religion. No, this is silly. God gave us a Church to aid us on the journey, so that we might be one.”

    If you need other people to explain God to you, you are far from Him. The point is not to understand That which cannot be understood, but to love Him. And how would you get to know a friend if you always hung out in a group? Everything Christ ever did taught us individually to act individually, reject rules and establishments, love and honor God, and retain the pure essence of truth.

  • Collin

    This is the best response I have found so far. Great Job!

  • erin

    Hmmm. Love how it always turns into a Catholic/Protestant debate. This is why people hate religion. People need to stop being so defensive and just move forward. The Catholic church and Protestant churches have both made mistakes…let’s not get hung up on whose “right”…let’s focus on allowing Christ to transform our lives instead.

  • Anonymous

    Cradle Catholic. We didn’t invent the Church, neither did Jesus. Talk to the folks in the Orthodox Church, they split from the Catholics because of bad Catholic behavior. You who seem to have no clue what the Church’s behavior has been (check out Ireland and the Netherlands for what the Church is feeding right now. . . Priests who sexually abused children). This guy has a better sense of reality than the idiot who wrote this piece of unsanctified garbage. Benedict is not in direct line with Peter, he’s anything but. He’s not in danger, he won’t be strung up, he’s nothing but a man who couldn’t do anything except teach ignorant things about sex. Who authored this piece, it should be reported as misrepresentative and abusive, as well as not well researched and ignorant.

  • Heidi

    I appreciate your response, but perhaps we can allow for a little more charitable interpretation of the intentions of this video? I don’t think this guy is saying “Gosh I love Christ but I just don’t believe in the church.” I think this guy is saying “I hate empty ritual, and Christ did too.” You seem to be assuming that the word “religion” here means “the Catholic church” based on the one short bit about divorce. “But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church. So when this man says ‘religion’, he means The Roman Catholic Church.” Okay, as a Protestant may I please say that that is stuff and bull! What do you mean by it? But beyond that, I think the focus of this video is exactly what you admit to him being right about in your very first sentence. The sad truth is that many “religious” people are judgmental and hypocritical and don’t have the love of Christ in them. This drives people away from “religion” because they feel that Christians really do hate them because they are divorced etc. I’m not saying that any denomination actually claims this, I’m saying that people within denominations are flawed and some of them miss the point entirely. So I think this is a perfectly legitimate way to combat the negative stereotype of Christianity and Christians, Catholic or Protestant.

  • rosmiles

    Well it’s a good thing religion isn’t divisive.

    • Pietra

      I know, right? Same with sports, cultures, nationalities, morals and ethics, and heck, liberty. Anything worth fighting for, really. We should just abolish them all, for goodness’ sake!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1533495968 Michelle Myers Shirley

    Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

    38 This is the first and great commandment.

    39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

    40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

  • john1010

    Brilliant! Long live the Pope!

  • Wallsofworship

    OK, my biggest problem with Catholocism and why I chose not to follow it, though my moms side of the family is all Catholic, is that they pray to Mary and the Saints. I don’t understand where that is at that that is part of the Worship of God through His son Jesus Christ. I am a Christian, through and through, but that is my hang up with Catholocism. Sure people can point out Gallileo, or the many members of the church who were abusing their powers of little boys or what not. Truth is, every group, whether religion, race, what have you has bad apples, so I don’t use that as an indictment of the whole religion. So, please, in all sincerety, enlighten me on this Worship of Mary and the Saints, when God said clearly that you shall have not other God’s before me. There’s the Trinity, and that is all you should concern yourself with as far as my knowledge goes.

    • Jmsteve4

      We don’t worship Mary… we emulate her, and we ask for her intercession, but we in no way shape or form think she is God. I suggest you take some inquiry classes, or buy a catechism, or hey even just look up some apolagetics online, before you assume things about the Catholic religion, or any actually.

      • Wallsofworship

        It wasn’t an assumption, it was a question. It wasn’t an accusation, it was an inquiry. Why go look it up when I can ask all these knowledgable Catholics? If I am wrong about what my moms side of the family, or what I perceived them as doing, than so be it. No need to be snark and defensive. God Bless! I appreciate you clearing that up. So now I have another question. Why do you pray to them to pray for you. Essentially, it is prayer for prayer. Also, you emulate Mary, someone who is deceased and speak to her. Does that mean I can talk to my deceased grandfather and ask him to pray for me? Can you provide with scripture where it says that I can talk to anyone that has passed from this Earth other than Jesus? Isn’t that kind of like a seance(spelling)? I understand my questions may come off as sarcastic, but they are sincere.

        • Guest

          In times of crisis do you not ask your friends and family to pray for you? It’s the same thing with the Blessed Mother and the saints. They are in heaven so they have a more “direct line” to God and that’s why we ask them to pray for us. As far as asking the deceased to pray for you that would only be possible if the Church had undergone investigation (which takes years) of that persons life and officially declared them a saint. Here is an aritical you might be interested in discussing this issue. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/praying-to-the-saints Hope this helps! Have a good day!

          • Wallsofworship

            The only “article” I’m interested in reading regarding this issue, is either my Holman Christian Standard Bible, My New Int’l Version, or my old reliable King James Version. Please, tell me, dear friend, where in any of those three books, might I find the answers I seek.

        • James

          Basically, saints are people who are in heaven. They have a direct connection to God. If you believe that one of your family members is a saint pray to them. If a miracle happens report it to the church because that is how the church finds out people are saints.

          The Catholic Church teaches that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was born without original sin and was sinless in life, therefore she is basically the closest to God any normal human can get. Therefore if you have her on your side you are probably in good shape. It is through her humanity that she passed to her son, that we gain our salvation. If Jesus wasn’t human his sacrifice would not have helped humanity.

          • Wallsofworship

            I didn’t ask what the Catholic church teaches…I asked you to show me where I might find it in the Bible. You know, that book of truth, breathed into life by the one true God. I was also reading a reply above about someone’s Peter infatuation (no pun intended), but aren’t all those symbols and statues not idolotry. Please explain, where IN THE BIBLE any of what you replied with is located.

    • WeStandForGod

      Catholics ask Mary and the saints to pray FOR us.
      Take a good look at the prayer before saying we pray TO them.
      What may seem like prayers are mere calls for them to pray FOR us and our families.
      It’s like asking your neighbour, your friend, your teacher etc to pray for you.
      What’s wrong with that?

  • Smr

    Wow!!! This is how holy wars get started. Wish you all would find some battlefield somewhere and destroy each other so the rest of the planet of nonbelievers could live in peace.

    • Pietra

      Welcome to the battlefield! You’re free to close the webpage if you want to “live in peace”.

      But seriously, we’re not actually destroying each other. We are discerning the truth as a community through discussion and debate. It’s quite fun, actually.

  • nocamo1

    Where does it say in the bible that Peter was the first Pope? Where does it say we need subsequent Popes? When the apostles (or priests as the author intimates) were given the authority to “bind on earth what was bound in heaven,” if we follow this logic AND God’s word, then it must be accepted that the common believer has the exact same authority to “bind on earth what was bound in heaven” because it is written (ironically by Peter himself) in 1 Peter 2:9 “But you are not like that, for you are a chosen people. You are royal priests, a holy nation, God’s very own possession. As a result, you can show others the goodness of God, for he called you out of the darkness into his wonderful light.” Peter was not talking to the 12 disciples at that moment, friends and believers, he was talking to ALL disciples at that moment. Us too! (which is actually pretty exciting). Point being, the problem I (and many others) have with the Catholic Church and it’s hierarchical priesthood is that the institution is designed to set the “priests” apart from or above other believers. This flies in the face of what their so-called “first pope” said. It also has promulgated the belief that the lay believers do not have the same authority the so-called priests have. Another way of putting it is, the fact that Catholic Priests are called priests and the congregants are not is itself a falsehood. It automatically implies that the congregants are not and we have already seen from scripture that this is simply not the case. (Anyone who tries to twist this into something else isn’t arguing with me, they are arguing with scripture. So please take up your cause on your knees with your God. Don’t take my word for it, ask him yourself. In so many words I am affirming I am NOT the authority. But please be a Berean Acts 17:11 – I dare you to read it*). So, if that is the case and Peter holds such a high place in the Catholic church, why dismiss his teachings? This is not to say that the Catholic church is going to hell and none are saved. There are numerous examples of believers whose practices are skewed or teachings are off or have flat out sinned and scripture implies there is hope, healing forgiveness, etc. but friends, let’s in a peacable, loving, humble, gentle way, in light of God’s mercy and truth, call a spade a spade.

    *Ok, I caved, you might not have time to read it. From “The Expository Files” http://www.bible.ca/ef/expository-acts-17-11.htm .

    “Concerning the people in the Macedonian city of Berea, Luke relates a very refreshing evaluation: “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honorable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.” (Acts 17:11-12). When the word of the Lord was preached to these people, they manifested outstanding characteristics that all individuals would do well to practice. There are various and sundry reactions to the preaching of God’s word. The Bereans demonstrated the proper attitude that hearers should have. Consider the outstanding qualities that they evidenced by their actions and then ask yourself if there are any Bereans today.”

    Sorry so long.

    - Nocamo1

    • Wallsofworship

      I am interested in seeing a response about this as well.

    • Pietra

      To begin: as you can probably tell by my screen/Confirmation name, I am quite in love with St. Peter. I’m sitting here writing this with an icon of him on my wall (under my crucifix), a statue of him on my windowsill (next to my holy water), and a medal of him blessed by Pope Benedict XVI around my neck (tangled up with my scapular, lol). It’s 2am and I have school in the morning so I should probably make this quick, but I’d love for you to love him as much as I do, so let me see if I can set some stuff straight here. :-)

      We are indeed a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of His own, that we may announce the praises of Him who called us out of darkness into His wonderful light! (LOVE that verse!) I’ve never heard anyone in the Church deny the priesthood of the baptized – in fact, we refer to it constantly. We, as the Body of Christ, get to continue the priestly duties God assigned to His people in Exodus 19:6 (the verse Peter was quoting) – serving and worshiping Him. And as if it could get any better, this time around we have the new covenant as fulfilled by Jesus. You are so right, this is incredibly exciting!

      However, just as there was a separate priesthood in the old covenant (the men of the Levite tribe, the sons of Levi), there is one now. The ancient priesthood bears detailed resemblances to our current one that not many know about (for instance – all-male, at least temporarily celibate, could only handle the Bread of the Presence or enter the Holy of Holies if they followed certain criteria…etc.). We didn’t invent the idea of a separate, hierarchical priesthood. That came from the the Old Testament, plus what Jesus gave us in the New as part of his fulfilled covenant.

      Peter’s primacy among the disciples and even the apostles is clear throughout the New Testament. But he was just an idiotic, illiterate Jewish fisherman who always said the wrong thing at the wrong time (Luke 9:33-34). And yet in the Gospels and Acts alone, his name occurs 195 times, more than all the other apostles put together. What gives? Clearly, God had something planned for this guy.

      Okay if I keep going in this vein I’ll be here all night. VERSES, then!

      Proof of the Primacy of Peter (why this guy was different than everyone else): Luke 22:32, Peter’s faith will strengthen his bretheren. John 21:17, Christ gave Peter His flock, as chief shepherd. Acts 2:14, he led the Apostles in preaching on Pentecost. Acts 2:41 – he recieved the first converts. Acts 15:7, led first council. Galatians 1:18, Paul visited the chief apostle (Peter).

      Proof of an Apostolic Church (why we have priests, deacons, bishops, and a pope): John 15:16, Jesus chose certain, special men to be His Apostles. John 20:21, He gave them His own mission. Matthew 16:18, Jesus built the Church on Peter, the rock. <3 Ephesians 4:11, Church leaders are hierarchical. (Told you we didn't make it up!) 1 Timothy 3:1, 8; 5:17 identifies roles of bishops, priests, and deacons. Titus 1:5 has a commission for bishops to ordain priests.

      Proof of Apostolic Succession (why we have an unbroken line of popes, bishops, and priests 2,000 years old): Acts 1:20, the disciples acknowledged the need for another to take the office of the apostle gone astray. Acts 1:25-26 Matthias took on Judas' apostolic ministry. 2 Timothy 2:2 – what you heard from me, entrust to faithful teachers. Titus 1:5 contains a call to appoint presbyters in every town. 1 Timothy 4:14 refers to the gift conferred with the laying on of hands – the same action we use today to ordain priests.

      There are oh-so-many more but it's three in the morning. Perhaps tomorrow? For more info for now, if you're curious, here's a great link to one of my favorite websites explaining some of your questions much better than I do – http://www.catholic.com/tracts/browse/Church

      Thank you for being curious and not attacking, it's refreshing to see such questions stated so eloquently! Your question gave me a chance to stretch my apologetic muscles here too – and of course wax poetic about St. Peter and the priesthood. :-) Hope this helps, and again, I really wish I could go on and on and on – the priesthood is seriously the most beautiful thing I've ever seen in the world – possibly tied with the vocation of married life and eclipsed only by the Eucharist. I hope this clears up a little, and if not, I'll be around tomorrow!

      St. Peter, pray for us! <3

  • Phillip Hoovestol

    It’s funny… I’ve noticed in my experiences that conservative Christians are SUPER defensive people when you start questioning things :P The video never specifically attacks or even names the Catholic Church, but by reading the article you would think the guy blatantly proclaimed, “THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NOTHING BUT PURE EVIIIIILLLLL!!!!” when he in fact said he loved the Church.
    I think you pretty much missed the whole point of the guy’s poem. Yes Jesus came to “fulfill” religion, however he did this not by making it big and grand and adding his own lists of rules, but pointing out the essence of religion and the true meaning, not by following rules and rituals but practicing love, kindness, and giving to the poor. This, Jesus’ life and teachings, SCREAMS humility, which sometimes seems like the opposite of what religions tend to do. I saw a comment someone posted on this article that I thought was absolutely true. He says that he thinks the true Catholics are the people who you would never know are Catholics. They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are or show off their faith to the whole world. I mean sure they teach that faith is supposed to be an outward thing, but that doesn’t mean running around the world reading scripture, trying to convert anyone you meet by condemning their non-catholic, and therefore “immoral” ways. On the contrary, it means loving and accepting everyone for who they are and what they believe the way Jesus loved everyone and died on the cross for everyone, even the people who were crucifying him.
    But I’m kinda strayin from the topic now.. let’s get back to the article:
    “there is not a single Christian denomination that says that there is any possible way you could get God not to love you.”
    “Love of Christ requires obedience to his commands. You cannot have one without the other.”
    Now I might be missing something, but doesn’t that kinda contradict itself? Cuz I’m pretty sure not every single person follows the rituals of Catholicism, yet you need them to have Christ’s love, yet Christ is God, yet it is impossible for God not to love you. Or wait, maybe the first quote was only referring to Christians; but if that really is way you see it, I’ll honestly and respectfully disagree.
    ALSO, I’m pretty sure Jesus did not in any way promote violence, and if you really think Jesus would support wars that have been fought in his name or just in general, and if you’re really trying to defend those wars, that’s just imperialistic and arrogant. Iiiiiiiinnnnnn faaaccccttttt, according to the Gospels, when they were trying to capture Jesus and Peter cut off one of the guard’s ears, Jesus healed the man TRYING TO CAPTURE HIM TO BE CRUCIFIED and condemned Peter for acting out of violence, specifically saying “Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.” Oh but wait, “did Christ not say ‘I have not come to bring peace, but the Sword?’” Ya.. I guess so.. however I’d say that was more of a figurative statement referring to Him destroying the current status quo at the time of immorality, intolerance, social injustice, and of course hypocritical religion.
    In terms of all the rituals and stuff, I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with them. I just disagree when the author says you HAVE to do them to have faith. Those things aren’t NEARLY as necessary as personally practicing love and kindness which is what Jesus spent most of his time teaching. For all we know, the rituals he set in motion could have been symbolic or something, but really it doesn’t matter. I think if you just practice the VIRTUES taught by both Jesus and the Church, you’ll be fine, regardless of what exactly you believe or practice.
    What it gets down to is that the Church is NOT perfect. They DO do great things (hahahha, do do :P) also yes Jesus established the Church himself, but since then it is an institution put in the hands of human beings capable of imperfection. Yes, I’m sure in the course of history they have improved, but still.. not perfect, and it seems like people get so caught up trying to defend this imperfect they forget the whole point: love, forgiveness, compassion, charity, humility, etc., to the point where you’re actually defending violence and murder. At the end of the day, when the church does something that collides with my personal faith and conscience, I’ll have to go with my conscience.

    • Kudos.

      You, sir. Kudos to you.
      You have brilliantly articulated each one of my points, including the “Sword” debate between the two pieces of Scripture.
      I think that in the context of the bible quote that says “I have not come to bring peace, but the Sword,” he really means that as disciples of Christ, we will face challenges that as you said, the “status quo” will throw at us, and we must be ready to face those challenges with love.

    • Georg Laing

      //Yes Jesus came to “fulfill” religion, however he did this not by making it big and grand and adding his own lists of rules, but pointing out the essence of religion and the true meaning, not by following rules and rituals but practicing love, kindness, and giving to the poor. //

      And this is different from religion how?

      //They are too busy just trying to be good people instead of trying to qualify the reason why they are or show off their faith to the whole world.//

      So works-based righteousness is only wrong when professing Catholics practice it? What happened to “believe with you heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord.”

      //On the contrary, it means loving and accepting everyone for who they are and what they believe the way Jesus loved everyone and died on the cross for everyone, even the people who were crucifying him.//

      He did not accept people for what they believed. He accepted them because He created them and LOVES them. He wanted to CHANGE their beliefs because He loved them.

      //“there is not a single Christian denomination that says that there is any possible way you could get God not to love you.”
      “Love of Christ requires obedience to his commands. You cannot have one without the other.”
      Now I might be missing something, but doesn’t that kinda contradict itself? Cuz I’m pretty sure not every single person follows the rituals of Catholicism, yet you need them to have Christ’s love, yet Christ is God, yet it is impossible for God not to love you. Or wait, maybe the first quote was only referring to Christians; but if that really is way you see it, I’ll honestly and respectfully disagree.//

      The first quote deals with God’s love for us, which is UNSHAKABLE. The second quote deals with our love for God, which is extremely volatile.

      //In terms of all the rituals and stuff, I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with them. I just disagree when the author says you HAVE to do them to have faith.//

      You can have faith without works. It’s dead though. See James 2:14-26.

      //Those things aren’t NEARLY as necessary as personally practicing love and kindness which is what Jesus spent most of his time teaching.//

      Practicing love and kindness is not ritual? Granted, practicing love and kindness without love and kindness is EMPTY ritual, but it’s ritual nonetheless.

      //At the end of the day, when the church does something that collides with my personal faith and conscience, I’ll have to go with my conscience.//

      Hence the 20,000+ Christian denominations we have today. Congratulations, you are your own pope.

  • Best

    Just for clarification. Catholics DO NOT teach that you must be IN the Catholic Church to receive salvation/reach heaven. We think of the Catholic Church as a “box” that contains all of the tools to help us reach heaven such as the Sacraments. You do not NEED all of these things to accept God’s salvation, but they are usefull. However, if the Sacraments are sources of grace, which they are, are you really giving your life entirely to Jesus by not receiving all of the grace possible? Once again, Catholics do not teach that Protestants cannot go to heaven…that would be absurd.

  • Kheatr

    If this video results in one person wanting to understand more who Jesus was, I will celebrate, regardless of how that person chooses to worship.

  • Poophead

    Well, I look forward to seeing all you Catholics and Protestants in heaven one day.

    • Lazy Ray Finkle

      I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  • Teamorthodoxy
  • James Schaeffer

    Remember that the fellow in the “rap” loves the church. He knows that Christ gave it to us. This is one of the most modern, poignant, piped in to God dissertations that I have seen. My faith is much clearer and stronger because of it. This is intellectual Catholicism at it’s finest.

  • Mark

    If a thing is true, then to fall away from it, even in the slightest, is to fall into falsehood.

    If Christ is Who He claimed to be,
    if Christ alone, through His humanity, reveals the complete mystery of human nature,
    if the truth of ourselves lies in understanding Christ,
    if mankind would never have known that truth unless Christ established a Church to investigate and perpetuate that truth,
    if that Church was divinely inspired to compile a Book as one means to help to lead men to Him,
    if intellectual honesty and spiritual integrity demand that we accept that that Church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church,
    if His Church is what she claims to be,
    if Christ is Truth,
    if Truth said that nothing will prevail against His Church,
    then…
    to fall away from Catholicism, in any direction, is to fall into falsehood.

    • Runswithforks

      That thinking leads to virginity testing. http://bikyamasr.com/53028/egyptian-women-cane-morality-police/

      Think ’bout it. These people believe they’re LITERALLY following Gods rules and wishes in an acceptable manner. LITERALLY.

      Why not just assume that EITHER Christ isn’t who he claimed to be OR that Paul wrote the story wrong when he jotted it down over OVER 30 years AFTER Jesus supposedly died. Can YOU accurately remember what happened 30 years ago? I know I can’t remember 5 to the details of who visited me after my 1st child was born… And I HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS to help prompt my memory. Face it. Paul was either crazy, a liar, a man who simply mis-revered the events around his friends death, or possibly all 3. Maybe he didn’t even have a friend named Jesus.

      • Pietra

        Hate to break it to you, but Paul never wrote about the Crucifixion or the Resurrection…you must be thinking of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Paul was a Jewish pharisee who hated Christians for several years after Christ died, till he got knocked off his high horse. Literally.

        • Georg Laing

          Actually Paul did write about those things, but I get your drift.

          • Pietra

            Yeah, you know what I’m talking about. My point being – “maybe [Paul] didn’t even have a friend named Jesus” – well of course he didn’t. His conversion happened after the crucifixion.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

          forgive runwithfork, he’s searching but knows not what for, though he claims he’s for the betterment of the world he only finds himself arguing with people about subjects he knows nothing about. in other words runswithfork is currently unaware that he is looking for God, and thats why he finds himself here instead of at some pawn shop selling everything he owns to give away for the betterment of the world.,

        • Trish

          What?…Paul was a disciple of Christ while he lived on the earth…ya know that whole God changing Saul’s name to Paul on the road to Demascus? Why would you say that he hated Christians until after Jesus died? I am confused…

          • Trish

            Ok, never mind…lol. Kinda forgot my Biblical timeline there for a minute…

      • PC Geek

        Once again, you are making the atheists look very bad here – you don’t even know the most fundamental things about the belief you are criticizing…

        How could Paul have Jesus as a friend on Earth when Christ was crucified earlier? You gotta pay attention to what you are writing…

        People as better memories back in those days as they had to since literacy was very low and almost all information transmission was oral and had to simply be remembered. We live in a culture with high literacy and so much information storage – our memories never developed to the degree that ancient people’s had to.

        Anyway they were plenty of eyewitnesses and others around. Do some reading on the issue and you can see that Paul’s account is highly reliable. It would be pretty hard in any case to forget details about the Son of God himself coming down to the Earth regardless of how long ago it happened. Plus it was the Gospel writers who primary talked about Christ’s earthly ministry, not Paul…once again you are totally clueless.

        Please stop embarrassing yourself.

      • PC Geek

        Once again, you are making the atheists look very bad here – you don’t even know the most fundamental things about the belief you are criticizing…

        How could Paul have Jesus as a friend on Earth when Christ was crucified earlier? You gotta pay attention to what you are writing…

        People as better memories back in those days as they had to since literacy was very low and almost all information transmission was oral and had to simply be remembered. We live in a culture with high literacy and so much information storage – our memories never developed to the degree that ancient people’s had to.

        Anyway they were plenty of eyewitnesses and others around. Do some reading on the issue and you can see that Paul’s account is highly reliable. It would be pretty hard in any case to forget details about the Son of God himself coming down to the Earth regardless of how long ago it happened. Plus it was the Gospel writers who primary talked about Christ’s earthly ministry, not Paul…once again you are totally clueless.

        Please stop embarrassing yourself.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NRS3JQI32YWB2PHBTG7VLCWIXM Canbuhay

    To my Evangelical friends, we have a lot of stereotypes about RCs and we can’t argue with them without making sure we know what is and isn’t true of them. I suggest you look up good sites of people who know how to RCs like this:

    http://www.cwrc-rz.org/

    To my Catholic friends, please be fair with your criticisms. For example, you keep saying the church’s teachings are always united but clearly talk to any Charismatic Catholic and then to Latin Mass Catholic and you’ll see why many outside your church are skeptical.

  • Trev

    To all the professed believers, Christ-followers, Christians, or however you prefer to label yourself as a sinner saved by the Grace of God and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ:

    I love the sharing of ideas and the earnest search for truth, but what I’m seeing from so many of these posts is absurd. So many of you have great points to make, but we can’t seem to remain civilized – or even loving – with our own brothers and sisters! I can’t help but wonder what the non-believer thinks of the conflict among this Faith community as we attack one another. Friends, this shouldn’t be!

    I want to say that I think there are some great truths in both the video and the article, with some misunderstandings in both as well. But be sure of this: you can argue about which denomination causes the most division all you want, but that’s no longer the issue.

    We’re dividing ourselves.

    Let the exchange of ideas continue, but let it happen as we unite in Love and in Christ.

    -Trev

    • Runswithforks

      You are dividing yourselves because each of you worships the one true god… and he exists in your own head. EACH of you are convinced you’re right and EACH of you think the other is mislead by satan. Even though you are all calling Jesus the son of god, you may as all be worshiping gods by completely different names… because I bet each of your gods has a different view on divorce, child beating, wife beating, circumcision, homosexual marriage, wearing polyester, eating pork, prayer in public, dating outside your religion, and birth control ( among other things). Just sayin’

      • PC Geek

        Your ignorance is painful and astounding…disagreements over what the God of the Bible says does not equate to thinking the others worship a different God. Plus, if you read the comments, it is clear that the Christians of different denominations don’t think the others are led by satan.

        Stop making a-tards look worse than they are.

        • PC Geek

          In most cases, they believe that they are all saved and will see each other again.

          People can have amicable differences, you know…plus Catholic teaching does not say that all no-Catholic Christians are damned…

          Please try to educate yourself before you start posting.

  • Sophia

    I don’t believe in religion at all. I believe that my personal relationship with Jesus is how I am saved. I have grown up in a baptist home and my mother was a catholic till she was 19. Im sorry but the fact that catholics pray to idols makes me think they are not the best sources on biblical issues. And don’t try to tell me they don’t because they pray to Mary and as far as I know she is not the one true God and therefore is being looked at as an idol. And God does want us to go to church, but they term we use for church is not the same as in the greek bible (the language God wanted the bible to be in) The original term for “church” ment nothing more then a gathering of believers. So if I go to my friends house to chill with them and some other believers Im actually at church in God’s eyes. And a question about the divorce issue, if a woman is being beat by her husband and he is cheating on her she is supposed to stay with him and live through constant abuse? If a child is being abused they are taken from that home but if a woman is being absued she just has to take it cause she’s married and that’s is she has no other options?
    there is alot I don’t agree with that the catholic church preaches.
    but in the end if a catholic has God in their heart Ill see them someday in heaven, just like how ill see ever other denomination in God’s family. So why is what this guy is saying wrong (which its not) if in the end Christ is our goal?

    • James

      Dude, Catholics may pray through saints but not really to them… We ask saints to pray for us. Also, the first time you hear someone coming and talking to anyone in the Catholic Church telling them they are/were being abused and the answer be “just take it” then post the divorce stuff, but at the same time marriage is a commitment for life, whether or not you commit to someone who sucks.

  • G Maluz

    The response to this video already disgusts me, and I’ve only read the first two parargraphs… “Jesus Christ would strongly disagree with it.”………. Who are you to speak on behalf of Jesus Christ? Unless you were alive 2000 years ago and had a strong relationship with the man, or are in fact Jesus Christ himself speaking in 3rd person, you should NOT be speaking on his behalf

    • Pietra

      Keep reading. As Marc so eloquently shows in the next paragraph, based on Christ’s statements recorded in the Gospels, we can generally discern that when he made a statement like “I have not come to abolish religion” He didn’t mean “I have come to abolish religion”.

  • Blondieaw7

    It is Him who will see us for what we have done and who we are. It is Him who will be there on our dying day to accept us.

    He died for me, so I will live for him.

    That is my ‘religion’.

  • Jack

    Interesting that you immediately put the law under the class of religion. If you look at Mark 7, that is the religion Jesus ‘abolished’, I think you are reading too much into the video to say it is about how jesus interacts with the law and the prophets. John 2 19-21 is also helpful I believe.

  • Pietra

    Ohmygosh, Marc, 340 comments – your brilliant writing has definitely touched a nerve here.

    I feel like Harry, Ron and Hermione in the Gringotts vault trying to respond to these – they keep expanding, and getting hotter.

  • Patrick

    Just one question. Why is it that at almost any other church other than a few militant off breeds and the Roman Catholics, is it that I am accepted at the Lord’s table? Tell me where in the Bible you find Jesus saying “This is my body and blood given for you … if your Catholic.” ……………..Can’t find it can you? That’s because it is NOT there. His body and blood was shed for all of us. It is the Lord’s table not the Pope’s. And what’s with all this claiming that you snapped a picture of him, so the Pope is Jesus reincarnated, every couple of generations? Better check your ego on that one too. Look I am not here to call anybody out but the truth of all this is that Jesus came to save us all from ourselves, all of us. Faith, tolerance and love of all were His creed, not this “We are right and you are wrong” crap. The last thing this world needs right now is a bunch of name calling and finger pointing. Church is not inside four walls and stained glass windows with gold trim. It is an action we take every day in every way. It is a road we walk together, a journey – not a destination once or twice a week, spread the words of Christ and you spread what He came to give, love and forgiveness. We all are guilty of sins whether it is accepting divorce or committing murder. “The meek shall inherit the Earth” is not meant to say the quiet will run the world it is meant to say that we are to love our enemies for in that love we will find salvation. Did Jesus not invite the tax collectors and the pharisees to dine with Him? Why? Because He knew that by accepting those sheep who were lost He would teach all that every one of us are worth of loving……… NOT just those who cape themselves SuperC on Sunday/Saturday/Wednesday. The world as a whole needs to get over themselves and get on with being devout followers of His word, “I am my brother’s keeper” Who is my brother? All of mankind not just those who can afford to tithe. The true Christians are those who believe in what Christ was doing…… taking action against hatred, classification, and racial injustice. Spreading the word of the Lord. I shall speak for myself and my family with pride in saying “That as for me and my house we will serve the Lord” I will follow His light not the light of self-acclaimed interpreters of the His Gospel. Time to throw the box into the recycle bin and step away from the accepted norms of yesteryear. Christ did not go into the temple to say “Hey guys, excuse me but I think you might be going about this all wrong … maybe.” He went there to pick a fight, and pick a fight we shall. He said we will meet opposition in His name and opposition we have met, only they have now cleverly disguised themselves as ‘True’ followers … poppycock!!! If you are truly following Christ’s teachings you will step away from the shroud and cloaks of old and SCREAM to the world “ENOUGH is ENOUGH!!” Time for a change because what’s been happening aint working and we are sinking fast …. Yes He will come again to judge, where will you be? Following close behind Him or behind your stained glass window stuttering “OH!! … that’s what you meant when you said ‘For All’ .. now I get it … is it too late?” And for your sake He will say “No. My child I love you still, now come follow me and I will make you fisher of men, all men.” God’s Blessing’s and the peace of Christ be with you all.

  • James

    Nice. Funny and insightful.

  • Runswithforks

    “For now I’ll just say this: Go to a man in poverty who attends a beautiful church and offer to tear down the beauty that surrounds him, to melt down the gold so he can buy more food. You will never see a man more insulted.”.

    UM…??? Go to a man in poverty who attends a beautiful church and ask him if he’d tear down the rival church next door (which is equally beautiful) and ask him if he’d tear it down to get food. The problem is that people will build the churches instead of feeding people. It’s zero sum. If you spend money on a building, youre NOT spending it on food. It doesnt matter if the Roman Catholic Church is #1 in charity. What matters is that glorifying god is more important than helping people. If all the people were fed… THEN it would be time to spend money on glorifying god. As is, people who have money in the fan club are spending on the expansion of the buildings while there are starving folks INSIDE and OUTSIDE the clubs gates.

    Ya all need to stop trying to compete with the “other” religions by making your buildings as snazzy as possible. You’re wasting money and energy that could be better spent on REAL problems.

    • Pietra

      Our most gloriously beautiful churches were built in the middle ages, when there were no “other” religions to “compete with”. Sadly, you’ve gotten your wish these past few decades, but thanks be to God, glorious architecture is making a comeback.

      First off though – what on earth is a “rival” church?? We’re all in the same Christian family here, we’re all trying to get to heaven! But even if there were rivals – lol, who are we “competing” with? The soccer-stadium megachurches? The middle school-cafeteria non-denoms? The 80′s wood-paneled shacks? The strip-mall blue jean deals? The big-as-a-convention-center-but-not-a-religious-symbol-in-sight jobs? If it’s a matter of “competition” against other Christian denominations, we’ve got them soundly beat with our eyes closed, one hand tied behind our back, and reciting Augustine’s Confessions in Latin at 60 words per minute.

      But it isn’t. It’s a matter of glorifying God. Beauty necessarily lifts our minds and hearts to God, since He is Beauty Himself. Therefore we make beautiful things to glorify Him. We need Beauty as we need food, or our souls will starve. If you’re still interested, go read this blog’s other posts on Beauty for more information. “Selling the Vatican” http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2011/02/selling-the-vatican.html might also interest you.

      Have a beautiful day! :-)

      • Runswithforks

        How bout Judaisim or Islam or Buddihisim, or… the Christian church next to yours with the better sound system and the hip pastor who is drawing a crowd and more money in tithing but THEY don’t think homosexual marriage should be illegal and they encourage unhappy couples to get divorced.

        It doesn’t take much thought to see why there are so many churches. Ya’all don’t NEED that many. HALF would still hold the entire population of the united states… but ya gotta have the best one if you wanna make the green.

        • Pietra

          Again, our most gorgeous, God-glorifying churches were built in, say, France and Italy. In the 1300s. There were no “competing” religions for thousands of miles on any side.

          “It doesn’t take much thought to see why there are so many churches. Ya’all don’t NEED that many. HALF would still hold the entire population of the united states… but ya gotta have the best one if you wanna make the green.”

          A sadly uneducated statement. In my neighborhood, there are three (large!) Catholic churches in a row, each less than five miles from the next. One has seven Masses per weekend. One has nine. My church, with seating capacity of 2300 over two buildings (we just had to add 500 seats) had THIRTEEN Masses per weekend over the summer. Each of these Masses is full to bursting, standing room only some days. I do not exaggerate. I do not live in a majority-Catholic area. We simply need the space.

          Having been inside all those worship spaces you refer to above (synagogues, mosques, cathedrals, pagodas, and mega-churches), I think I can make an educated statement here: the idea that the Church has architecture “competitions” to drum up converts from those other religions is almost laughable. If they come it’ll be because of the Truth, I hope, not because of something so silly as a sound system! And cathedrals are so radically different than pagodas that it’s almost crazy to imagine switching because one had great stained glass but the other had better gold statues – of 8-armed gods. They’re really not comparable.

          Face it: our views on social issues have NEVER been popular with the secular world, but we’re still alive and kicking very hard after 2 millenia. Almost makes you wonder if it’s not just these idiotic little humans running the show…

  • Jacob Suggs

    Awesome response altogether, but

    ““If Jesus came to your church, would they let him in?”

    Um, yes. We actually snagged a picture.”

    Along with “taking the long boring path to truth since 37 A.D,” is amazingly awesome.

    • Georg Laing

      “So this is awkward.” HAHAHAHAHA!!!

  • Philip Donald

    Thanks Marc. I feel I can share this link because it contains both the video clip and a coherent rebuttal. As a half-way protestant (Anglican) I felt uncomfortable sharing the video as it reduces what Jesus came to do, to ‘dying for our sins’ which is a gross oversimplification of the Gospel. In fact, if you ask many protestants what is the Gospel, they will tell you “Justification by faith” or “Jesus died for my sins”. Unfortunately, if you ask many Catholics (and Anglicans for that matter) what the Gospel is, they will tell you the same (although I imagine a higher percentage would give you a more coherent reply). For a good synopsis of the Gospel, see 1 Corinthians 15: 1 – 4 (dying for our sins is in there, but what that meant then is entirely different from a juridical view of punishment and reward that most people think within, especially since the 18th century).

    A point to ponder regarding religion and the law and the prophets is what Jesus meant by fulfilling the Law and the Prophets. For that we need to go back to Genesis and see essentially that God created a good world with humans as the pinnacle of his creation. This was all very good. We then rebelled and things got messy. So God called Abram to set things straight. (I’m trying to avoid the regular words we use in terms of doctrine because we seem to have so much invested in the terminology that we have forgotten the original meaning of these words). The law and the prophets were gifts given to these people (the descendants of Abraham) so that they could be a light to the nations. This law and these prophets included not only ceremonial instructions, but also economic and political instructions. The chosen race was not any more religious than the nations around them, and their special instructions were not only ceremonial (or religious). God established a nation, not a religion. Jesus was the fulfillment of what God was trying to achieve with this nation. As the Messiah of this people, Jesus is also the world’s true Lord. Those who are ‘In Christ’ are the members of his body and we are called to continue the work, which was started not with Jesus, nor with Abraham, but with Adam (see 1 Corinthians 15 once again with Paul’s references to the first Adam and the final Adam). We can use various words to speak about this people that has been called into being, such as: church, nation, temple, body, or just people. The church that we have now (in it’s various forms and expressions) is one of the ways through which Jesus finds expression in the world today. It is not the only way, I agree with the Catholic doctrine that salvation exists outside the Church (the exception, not the rule), but that it is more likely to be found in the Church than outside of it. But I would suggest a redefinition of the word religion is needed if we want to debate whether Jesus came to establish or abolish a religion. I would say he did neither (in terms of most people’s understanding of the word religion).

    Jesus came to fulfill the role of a nation called out to be the light of the world, and to launch a new people, who are called to continue that project and to redefine themselves around Jesus.

    This brings me to another gripe regarding the video, one I share with you. The concept that what matters is my personal relationship with Jesus, not the community I belong to. This is part of the 18th century enlightenment understanding of Christianity. Our relationship with Jesus can not be exercised without belonging to his (pick your word) church, people, nation, body or temple. If I have a relationship with Jesus, I need to be part of the body of other people who also have a relationship with Jesus. We are different parts of the same body. The official doctrine of 99% of churches is that we belong to one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and the official doctrine of those churches is that the Roman Catholic Church is part of that one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Most Protestants do not know their official doctrine (they think it is only about their personal relationship with Jesus).

    Unfortunately, what most Protestants know about Roman Catholicism is what they learned in history (if they even teach the reformation and counter reformation in schools nowadays). Their idea is that the Roman Catholic Church still sells indulgences etc and they are blissfully unaware of Vatican One and Vatican Two (many Roman Catholics are unfortunately unaware of many of the resolutions which emanated from Vatican Two as well).

    My biggest gripe with the video, however, is the lack of mention of resurrection. Just about everything we believe about Jesus, but most certainly his Messiahship and his divinity (the two concepts are not interchangeable, they mean different things, although they find expression in the same person) hang on his resurrection. We have got to get back to understanding the event which launched Christianity if we are to present a coherent synopsis of Jesus, his birth, life, death, resurrection and the movement he launched. Most Christians, Protestant and Catholic alike, need to rethink Christianity around all aspects of Jesus, not just his death and his Church.

    Thanks for taking the time to write a response and may we keep engaging with each other, rather than shouting from the side-lines. I am glad to have a brother like you in Jesus’ greater family (another word you may want to use).

  • anonymous

    I just love how all of you people call yourself catholics and christians when you’re all running on your mouths and arguing about it trying to prove yourself right. isn’t pride also a sin?
    Also, in a simple form everyone can understand..didnt Jesus teach us LOVE and RESPECT?
    how is saying someone is WRONG respect? how do you know what YOU think is right? who are you to judge anyway? and arguing someone isn’t the best way to change what they think.
    it’s actually acting on your words.

    • Neville

      There’s no right and wrong in this world anymore. Disagreement apparently comes from intolerance which apparently comes from hate, right?

  • Runswithforks

    Reading the comment thread here is like reading kids debating HOW Santa gets around the earth in one night. It’s all absurd because there is no Santa and the whole thing just makes more sense if you realize it’s a story. Too bad there is no grown up to tell grown ups that they need to let go of childhood things and take responsibility for the world they find themselves in. That hunger and war thing… um yeah… totally un-necessary.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      Runswithfork, what are you looking for? your here thats not by your desire to live a God free life, you are here because you are searching and you are searching because you know you are missing something if only you knew what you were missing then maybe you would find it.
      Keep searching but instead of looking outward look inward you might be surprise by what you’ve known before you were even born.. Good Luck to you sir or mam and may you find what you are looking for.

  • GoldenBear15

    As someone who converted to Catholicism last April, I find myself completely agreeing with this article. I’m the only practicing Catholic in my family (aside from some grandparents here and there), and could not be prouder with my faith life. I love the rituals, and the symbols they use. One thing that strikes me in terms of what many are confused about is the veneration of Mary. We never pray to Mary (or the saints or the angels) asking them to answer our prayers, but instead we are asking them to intercede to God the Father for us. For me, it’s comforting to know that we have certain religious figures to look up to, and certain people we can aspire to be like. Mary wasn’t just some random person that God decided to place his Son in for nine months. She was specifically designed – immaculately conceived – and prepared for the great salvation she would bring into the world!

    So, in a nutshell, here’s my story: I became a Roman Catholic because of the love that it shares throughout the world. Whether I’m in Peru (yes, I’ve been to masses in Peru), or my college (UC Berkeley – often known as one of the most liberal environments in the country), or my hometown in Southern California, I know that I’m going to be receiving the same readings anywhere I go. Sure, the homily of the priest may be different, but the liturgy is the same worldwide, which I think is the most beautiful thing. The Catholic Church isn’t founded on one man’s opinion of the Scripture, but instead refuses to yield in any of its teachings in order to keep a pure foundation on the Gospel message! It’s hard to say that about other institutions when I came from a Protestant Church that broke off from another Protestant Church after one man disagreed with the elders and huffing in protest decided to go and form another one of his own 20 minutes down the road. Now, how is that rooted?

    For me, I found my faith in the Catholic Church. I found it in the traditions, the sacraments, the (worldwide) community, the consistency, and the ability to carry on God’s Gospel message for centuries.

    • Ole Toby Boy

      So… no dissent within the Catholic Church? No differing thoughts or interpretations?

      • GoldenBear15

        As far as I can recall, I think that’s called the Protestant Reformation.

    • Ole Toby Boy

      So… no dissent within the Catholic Church? No differing thoughts or interpretations?

  • Sam

    I enjoyed the video when I watched it (even though I didn’t agree with everything) and I enjoyed this article and agreed with most of it.
    I’m Catholic, and I love being Catholic. And in some ways maybe his video pointed at what he considered to be flaws of the the Catholic Church. However, I think his video was more about getting people out there to let Jesus into their hearts. I believe religion is important. You need that community that you can share ways of worship and love in just as much as you need to have your own personal beliefs and relationship with God.
    But above all else, I think God is LOVE. He is LOVE more than he is rules and religion, he is LOVE more than he is beliefs and relationships. His LOVE is the most important of all. I think the ultimate goal of the video was too get people who have been turned away by the conflicts of religion to LOVE God, not to make grounds for religious debates. And any video that brings people closer to Christ’s LOVE is A OK in my book. I think Marc wrote this article because he LOVEs God. I think that no matter what your exact believes or religions are as long as we respect one another, promote kindness and LOVE that’s whats important. Let’s figure out how to uncondtionally LOVE first and then worry about the logistics of who’s right and wrong later.

    WHERE IS THE LOVE YALL?
    I DON’T KNOW

  • Meenashamaly

    Great read, and it makes a lot of sense.

    I do love the original video, and this is a poet expressing his own experience and his own point of view, and the power with which he delivers it is fantastic – I’m a poet and spoken word artist so I can identify directly with this form of self expression. But that’s exactly what it is: SELF-EXPRESSION. It’s why HE hates religion and loves Jesus. And I don’t blame him for saying what he says at all, because I believe we should have the freedom to express what we believe, in spite of who may or may not like it – that’s exactly what the Apostles did when they went to preach the Word of God. Not a whole lot of people liked it, judging by how many of them were martyred (and before I get attacked for this, I’m not trying to draw a direct comparision between the poet and the apostle, I’m merely highlighting the principle itself).

    What I do love about this article is that it highlights with enough evidence that religion is not the enemy of God but a work of His hands. I especially love the line “To love Jesus and hate religion is equivalent to calling upon a doctor and smashing all his instruments when he arrives.” It pretty much sums up the essence of your points wonderfully.

    I will just highlight one tiny thing that wasn’t entirely accurate about the divorce thing: I’m Coptic Orthodox, and the Orthodox Church is just as opposed to divorce for the exact same reason you mentioned: What God has joined, man cannot separate.

    God bless.

  • Dona J

    I am not Catholic. I like your response to the video.

    But there are certain lines that I thought was very ignorant of you.

    “But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church. So when this man says ‘religion’, he means The Roman Catholic Church.” I say wrong! There is more than one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce.

    “Our man then clarifies — He loves the Bible. This is interesting. Did Christ hand out Bibles before he ascended into Heaven? No. The Bible is the product of a religion. A religion is called Catholicism.” The Holy Bible is put together by early church fathers in church councils. Not ‘Catholics’. I think such names did not even exist then. Anyways, what I am saying is that The Bible is not the product of Catholicism but of The Early Church.

    • Hank

      The Catholic church is the continuation of the Early chuch.

      • Dona

        What I am saying is that who ever wrote the response should have either said the Early church or named all the churches who came from the Early church because the Bible was not put together by just Catholics.

  • Sarah

    I don’t want to go on some long drawn out tangent. So all I am going to say is that you don’t know if Jesus would approve of this videoor not. He is the only one that can judge it for himself. And nobody on earth knows what his judgement is.

  • SL

    We all love Jesus. Why argue about the nitty gritty stuff.

  • Dona

    I am not Catholic. I like your response to the video.

    But there are certain lines that I thought was very ignorant of you.

    “But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church. So when this man says ‘religion’, he means The Roman Catholic Church.” I say wrong! There is more than one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce.
    “Our man then clarifies — He loves the Bible. This is interesting. Did Christ hand out Bibles before he ascended into Heaven? No. The Bible is the product of a religion. A religion is called Catholicism.” The Holy Bible is put together by early church fathers in church councils. Not ‘Catholics’. I think such names did not even exist then. Anyways, what I am saying is that The Bible is not the product of Catholicism but of The Early Church.

  • Dona

    I am not Catholic. I like your response to the video.
    But there are certain lines that I thought was very ignorant of you.
    “But there is only one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce: The Roman Catholic Church. So when this man says ‘religion’, he means The Roman Catholic Church.” I say wrong! There is more than one major Christian denomination that is opposed to divorce.
    “Our man then clarifies — He loves the Bible. This is interesting. Did Christ hand out Bibles before he ascended into Heaven? No. The Bible is the product of a religion. A religion is called Catholicism.” The Holy Bible is put together by early church fathers in church councils. Not ‘Catholics’. I think such names did not even exist then. Anyways, what I am saying is that The Bible is not the product of Catholicism but of The Early Church.

  • Paul R Estavillo

    I am a second career 68 year old Catholic High School Religion and History Teacher who once during my service in the Vietnam War angrily confronted and opposed the Church. I bought all that malarkey perpetuate by anti-religion professors about religion causing most wars. This idea is simply not true, especially when one studies the data objectively. For example, using common sense and focusing only on the 20th century, more deaths were caused in that than all of human history combined. Furthermore, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and the Japanese Empire did not start aggression over religious reasons. This guy reminds me of a catchy Rap singer who can mesmerize our youth at the stage of life when they are pushing the envelope of the establishment and tradition. He fires off volleys of generalized phrase with no chance for debate. How dare he second guess or understand what our Lord is saying to us. Resounds of sola scriptura Protestants do when they splinter off into thousands of denominations, because of the way each of them interprets scripture. I will pray for him.

  • logical

    For me, it’s not really the religion that’s bad. It’s the people. Most religions, especially the Roman Catholic church, have good intentions, but the people rarely practice them.

    I step into mass and see people who are just there because they have to, not because they want to. I see and hear hardcore Catholics bash other religions, even if those religions are also of Christian denomination. I, a catholic myself, have once mentioned that I admired the mode of worship of Protestantism. After making such statement, I hear non-stop rants from other Catholics saying that it’s wrong, and that it’s not the right path. One of those people even tried to stop me from leading a Christ-centered organization just because I mentioned that. This post itself is being close-minded.

    I still respect the religion, don’t get me wrong. It’s just that it’s kind of hard for me to see it in a good way when people are like that. I have undying faith in the Lord, and I have experienced many things that have made my faith solid. I have seen and experienced the gift of tongues, and it was not under the bounds of a traditional catholic church. I witnessed this in a protestant-like worship. I’m not saying that you cannot witness this as a catholic. I’m just saying that there are so many possibilities that a simple mass cannot explain.

    The way I see it, God is too great to be constrained into a single religion. It says in the bible that God is limitless. How will God be limitless if religion itself is putting a limit to His existence? To His greatness? There is no way I will ever question God’s power, and that’s why I keep an open mind to all religions, and to all possibilities. Faith is what’s keeping me strong. Hopefully, we all realize this.

  • http://twitter.com/sdcbear Deb Millard

    I think you make some really good points, but overall you are missing something.. the title is not “Why I Hate Catholics, But Love Jesus”. He is attacking “religion”, really it’s the more “legalistic” side of Christianity, and the things you are bringing up, are definitely both protestant and catholic issues. Protestants build huge churches, have huge issues with divorce and definitely DON’T take care of the poor! Just to name a few of the shortcomings… So… not sure why you are taking this personally. Is what he did “perfect?” No… but I do think it brings up some fantastic issues in an incredibly fresh, very powerful way, and nit-picking it just takes away the power, the edge, and the chances of it making the difference it should, and could make.

  • Mesmith85

    A love affair indeed! My love of Christ & Holy Mother Church (which go hand in hand) Knows no bounds (of which Im aware & pray I never find) !!!

  • russ

    Dona said:
    The Bible is not the product of Catholicism but of The Early Church. NO, you are wrong about that. It’s just history and you can look it up.
    That Early Church was referred to as The Catholic Church as early as 107 AD.
    The bible was not put together and canonized until 393 at a meeting of Jesus lovin believers at a gathering called the Council of Damasus of the Catholic Church. It’s not triumphalistic, it’s just true.

  • Anonymous

    Wow. Christian-bashing from a christian – complete with false statements, wrong conclusions, and a ridiculous premise. The attack is in full swing people.

  • Anonymous

    Wow. Christian-bashing from a christian – complete with false statements, wrong conclusions, and a ridiculous premise. The attack is in full swing people.

  • Vmanjoker

    Really, this article is so biased is not even funny. The views are obtuse to say the least.

  • Kathleen Dunn17

    THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!

  • Anonymous

    The leadership of every major religion in the West is busy cheerleading and enbling massive 3rd world immigration to the West, in every case against the wishes of the majority of their members.

    failing to meet the needs of their members and seeing dwindlinng attendance and empty seats, the leades see importing foreign worshippers as a way to stay in business.

    To make matters worse, the church and synagogue leaders berate and chastise their members that do not want more immigration. Somehow they get to wear a moral crown for caring more for “others” while ignoring the poor here now, that see their wages and job opportunities depressed for decades.

    I love God, but the church can stop ethnically cleansing the native born populations via massive unending immigration of mostly unsassimilating immigrants in the name of their religion.

    Charity begins at home.

  • Junkmail100

    Matthew 7:21-23

  • Anonymous

    So,which god are we addressing now ? There have been so many throughout history. What makes your god anymore real, since like all the others produces no evidence for it’s existence ? Your religion is one of thousands. which brings one to ask if a god were so real and wished to be known to the world he made, then why does his message cause such disagreement.
    The Catholic church has spent the better part of it’s existence holding humanity back from advancements in science and medicine . The Catholic church is a haven for pedophiles. The Catholic church openly kills people everyday by telling them that condoms spread H.I.V.. IF your church actually behaved like the fictitious christ character, it might give away all it’s immense wealth to the poor.
    Grow up. Your going to return to the darkness of the universe one day , just like me. Try making life here better for your self and those who follow and leave your imaginary friends at home.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      So lucy how is it that you of all people find your way here today being one thats Grown up and trying to make life here better? I’m perplexed by not only your comments of ill knowledge let alone pure ignorance of that in which you speak, but more so of your hypocritical remarks which only expose your hate instead of this wanted striving for working towards the betterment of other peoples lives? Why don’t you take some of your own advise sell your computer and all possession and give ti away as you suggested the Church do and lead by example.

  • Mike221

    What a well measured and judicious dismantling.
    How hilarious it is for people to blame Catholicism for the world’s ills.
    Its no different then criminals who blame cops for the mess they make of thier lives.

    As if its the church’s fault that your a faithless piece of human refuse who cant keep your family together. Sorry honey there’s these things called human standards. The pain you feel for not living up to them should be some indication that you need to try harder. Divorce is a cop out. Its spousal abandonement plain and simple. But what if he beats me or he’s on drugs. You got him to marry you but you cant figure out some way to get him to stop beating you? Yeah right. People need to grow up.

    I also love these fools who say that God couldn’t be on Tebow’s side becuase the Almighty would never take sides in a football game.
    If I wax God and I looked out through all that I created and found one tiny insignifigant creature bold and pure hearted enough to ask me to help him while all the other sniveling faithless insignifigant and ungrateful creatures around him laughed and mocked him for his folly I might be tempted to throw him a bone.

    Go Denver!
    Even though I’m from the Bronx Thank God I’m A Country Boy Too!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      Amen and Amen!!!!

  • ZackBauer

    It’s all fiction, take a deep breath.

  • guest

    Here is a timeline of the Church (30AD to the present) layed out for you by Dr. Bob Schihl (Theologist):

    http://www.catholicapologetics.org/Slides/General%20Church%20History%20Timeline_files/frame.htm

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      I wish I could read that someone needs to enlarge the images.. it’s unreadable.

  • Citizen Deux

    What if, by some chance, it’s all fabricated? We know the bible is a compilation of various texts. We know the authors of the gospels could not possibly have known Jesus personally and we know that the bible (like the torah, q’uran and a host of other texts) is highly derivative of earlier collections of myth and story. So what if it’s all just that – derivative myth with no basis in fact or reality? The arguments are many for the abandonment of not only religion but a misplaced faith in a dogma or creed. The argument that religion started good wars becomes utterly specious if one applies the litmus of falsehood to the underlying beliefs. A conflict over Jerusalem between christians and muslims becomes the equivalent of horrific bloodshed over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

    What I am pointing out is that this video is more reflective of a desire to find a moral and ethical connection for one’s life rather than within a framework of medieval proscriptions. Ultimately, Jesus becomes the touchstone for living a selfless and caring life.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      there are no if’s Deux, ask any Jew they will tell you about Jesus, he lived and he died on the cross the record is clear.

  • Anonymous

    ” I’m getting serious ‘by-religion-I-mean-Catholicism’ vibes from our man. ”

    I love your post..thank you for saying what I would have if my attention span were long enough to connect these ideas together.

  • Anonymous

    I am sorry to see this really excellent post be taken into a Protestant vs Catholic war in the comments.

    I also have some recent doubts about this “personal relationship with Jesus” concept. It is a completely modern concept. Not that having the kind of spirituality that people think of as a “personal relationship” is wrong — not at all– but most of history, including at least 1000 years after Jesus himself came and went, people had a relationship with the Creator that was *not* what people think of as “personal” today. It was, at its best, sober, reverent and obedient, lived in integration with a community life that involved celebration of the gifts of G-d. Sometimes, as in some saints, it was mystical and passionate. And, like today, it often melded with other human twistedness to be weilded like a club for the glorification of people rather than G-d.

    But “personal relationship with Jesus?” Some people’s vision of what that means might actually be idolatrous, saying that The Lord cannot save us but through some kind of emotional experience. Feh.

  • http://twitter.com/PrayingTheMass Jeffrey Pinyan

    At the beginning of his video, he says that saying someone is blind doesn’t mean you necessarily have vision… and then at the end of the video he says that “religion” makes you blind. So, that’s him saying “religious” people are blind, right?

    Anyway, it would help if he had defined what “religion” is and what being “religious” means. The Bible isn’t so opposed to religion as he thinks.

  • Pridgenkad

    Interesting read. My suggestion deals not with your content but editing. Please have someone else proofread this and correct some errors in missing and extra words, etc. It detracts from the argument for me and many others. Otherwise, thanks for sharing.

  • dj

    I haven’t read all the comments, but I don’t see any comments about Divorce and the Catholic Church.

    Although the Catholic Church “disdains” divorce, they do accept those divorced who have not remarried to receive all the Sacraments as those who were never divorced.

    This is because the Catholic Church doesn’t recognize divorce from a Civil Court. In the Church’s eye you are still married.

    Catholics can go through the process of receiving an Annulment from the Catholic Church which declares that there never was a marriage.

    However, many divorced Catholics, who have never remarried, have been under the wrong impression that they can no longer practice their religion and stop going to Church.

    I have been part of a Catholic Ministry at my Church for divorced Catholics who have never remarried. You have no idea how many divorced Catholics are surprised to hear that they are welcome to receive the Sacraments.

  • Guest

    I agree with the author, but I wish he didn’t feel like it was a “Catholic” thing, as I am a Baptist and feel pretty much the same way as him..For example, you felt the gentleman’s reference to big churches were against Catholics as well as the statment about divorce. We (Baptists) also have big “megachurches” and are against divorce for the exact same reasons you mentioned. It was a well written response, and one doesn’t have to be a Catholic to appreciate it.

  • Guest

    You do realize that you turned most of his words into personal attacks targeting you, as a Roman Catholic? Honestly that seems to be the main fault you found in this video, but what if it’s just in YOUR head that when he says “religion”, he’s referring to Catholicism? There are so many other possible things that he could be referring to, just keep that in mind and perhaps, try not to use such a victimized tone..

  • karmen

    “Why does [religion] build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor.”

    This just kind of reminds me of what Judas suggested when the woman poored oil on Jesus’ feet. (John 12: 1-8)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

    Very good peice, actually motivated me to go to the comehome page and send off a letter to a local Parish. As someone who has traveled a lot and been a Protestant one find a great differences in practice. Though I have some reservation with the Catholic Church practices my wife and I have been considering it, and this posting motivated us to take action this morning, now we await the Parish Preset response .

    • Anonymous

      I converted to Catholicism 20 years ago as an adult…as it was in an area with a severe Priest shortage, I never had a single conversation with a Priest til my Confirmation day. You may not get a response you find encouraging from the Priest (although I hope you do). You may very well still get a leading from the Holy Spirit.

      There are so many good online resources that didnt exist 20 years ago…God bless you on your journey home.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=601300267 Zak A. Portelli

    Perfect response, I love the bit with the Pope elevating the Eucharist.

  • Guest

    Praise the Lord brothers and sisters. The comments and arguments on this page can volley back and forth forever if we portray them from our own selfish and temperamental nature. There is no argument or correct side; the Word of God is the only living and real source of any Truth. To stray from or alter this in any way diminishes the purpose of this Divine romance from God to His children. One point I would like to make is that the entire Bible stresses the importance and wonder of oneness. One God, one church, one body, no division.
    12 Now I mean this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ.
    13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized into the name of Paul?
    14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
    15 That no one may say that you were baptized into my name.
    These verses from 1 Corinthians show that the Lord is not interested in His body being separated into divisions. The body of Christ which is the living corporate organism comprised of all genuine believers is the body of a magnificent head; Christ Himself. Just as your foot is not a separate being from the rest of your body, so is a believer not of separate material from the rest of the believers. We are all for Christ under His headship. Another point I would like to make is that religion is a man-made practice. Religion is man attempting to please God. This does not seem like a negative thing but is not what the Lord truly wants. While yes, it is necessary for the Christian life to follow the Lord’s teachings in areas such as the bread and cup and baptism, we must make Christ our life, our daily living. This can be seen in Genesis with the story of Cain and Abel. Cain made an offering to God from the fruits of the soil out of his own mind and knowledge. Abel gave something pleasing to the Lord. A fat offering. The fat from the animal was not made out of his own doing, but that of the Lord’s. If we take the Lord as life before attempting to please Him with good works, we experience knowledge, not something of the Spirit. But if we take something of the Lord, yes, this is where we experience life, not a religion. This can also be seen with the tree of life and tree of the knowledge of good and evil. When we partake of the tree of life as God intends, we experience the reality of the Lord in every aspect. However, when we partake of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, we experience death out of the things of this world. Lord we want to take you as life! We want to eat of the tree of life! If we experience the Lord in such a way using our human spirit, we are able to see these Truths of the living Word of God. I am not seeking an argument or debate, simply sharing life. Praise the Lord.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      Very well said.

  • Stanmajic

    Eastern Orthodoxy pre-dates Roman Catholicism… historic fact. The Catholic church didn’t officially come into the world until the “official” schism of 1054 AD. So actually, if you want the true church of Jesus Christ, Eastern Orthodoxy is the way to go. Orthodox means true- doctrine. It’s unchanged.

    • http://www.prayingthemass.com/ Jeffrey Pinyan

      Which Orthodox Church should I go to? One that permits divorce and remarriage, or one that does not? One that permits abortion, or one that does not?

      Or how about a really important issue, like how the priest holds his fingers when he makes a sign of blessing over the people?

  • Anonymous

    You people won’t even let a non-Catholic Christian share in your Communion, which is hypocritical. Blocking someone from fulfilling his Christian duty is pathetic. Jesus didn’t say, “do this in memory of me, but only if you haven’t eaten for the past 4 hours and only if you join the Catholic church,” did he?

    • Christy Hampton

      When you go to communion you are making a statement with your body that you are “in communion” with the community. That you believe everything they believe. How can you go and say “AMEN — I believe” and yet not believe? You lie in that action – and take side with the devil, who is the father of lies. The Catholic Church protects you from that fate.

      Besides, the Bible says to discern first before receiving – “So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.” (1 Cor 11:27-29)

  • Meting66471

    Your focus is very ritualistic and not of the foundation of what Jesus built upon, relationships! Explain the Catholic religion with Jesus’ ministry in mind and not mane, if you truly can?

    • Jodmire7

      I agree completely!

  • guest

    I was greatly disheartened to read the “rebuttal.” This scathing response only shows me how quick we can be to draw the sword instead of love. I too was annoyed by this video. He definitely has some valid criticism of religion…or more specifically christianity, but he goes to far. But, so does this response. My first thought after watching this video, was what experience did this young man have that made him to jaded? Such strong opinions are not born out of nothing. This young man has clearly been hurt by the Church. There is a difference between the ideal teaching and ethos of the church that we ascribe too, and the reality that we are a sinful church and we have much to repent of. This young man must have experienced the latter. The young man needs to experience the welcomingness and humility of the church, not be engaged in a toxic debate. A video like this needs to be meet with a humility that members of the church have acted very sinfully and a desire to act more christlike, not a self-righteous response. But, since the author of this post chose to debate, I cannot but voice my disgust of his/her statement:
    “If Jesus came to your church, would they let him in?”

    Um, yes. We actually snagged a picture.”

    are you kidding me? You clearly have missed the complaint of the young made in the video. I wholeheartedly believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. But I cannot believe that this young man’s question was referring to the “real presence.” Rather, if I think his really questions is, If Jesus, the man who spent his time with prostitutes and tax payer and who had incredibly liberal teachings, came into your church, would they let him in?” Now this is something to think about.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

      “incredibly liberal teachings” Liberal by what standards? anti abortion, anti prostitution. Why do you think he was liberal? he did he not say to the prostitute go forth and sin no more? same thing the legal system tells them no? sorry Jesus wasn’t a liberal.

  • Guest

    When I first saw the video I did think of radical protestant individualism, but I could not help to think as well that it was more than a little Nietzschean.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Darth-Prophet/100001194619384 Darth Prophet

    karline I take great offense at that as you claim to have taken all of Christ Teaching yet ignore Mathew 6th completely not just ignore it you go completely against, let alone the commandment against Idol whorship, Again I will give the Church much credit that since it’s formation By Caesar it has finally allowed after Nealy 1500 years it’s followers to read the bible, glad you can finally catch with the rest of modern man.

  • Rocky

    Hmm, to equate Religion to “the Law and the Prophets” misses the point…Jesus said “your traditions have made the Word of God of no value to you”. That’s the bulk of the difference between somebody who “Follows Jesus” and somebody who “Follows a Religion”. This doesn’t mean that the law, the prophets, or traditions should be done away with. to the contrary, they have great value when placed in the right perspective. But at the end of the day it comes down to these questions…What are you a disciple of, Christ or a church? Where do you place ultimate authority? Where is your faith, God or men who are appointed? Do you follow Jesus Christ or a Religion that claims to be founded on Christ? None of this is to suggest that Catholics don’t follow Christ. But IF you suggest that those who don’t follow the Catholic church aren’t following Christ then clearly you are following a religion and not Jesus Christ.

  • Mpsmith68

    Religion is a weapon of mass destruction. Just because you say you have it under control doesn’t mean that it cannot be grossly misused to do grievous harm. The root cause is the innate superiority that religion, not Jesus, instills in it’s followers. “We are right, everyone else is wrong.” If you follow that line long enough, you get to fanatics and leaders willing to kill, maim, torture, and even rape in the name of religion.

    I believe in Jesus. I believe in the innocence of mankind and for the potential for each person to do great good. I have faith that we want a better future for ourselves and for each other. But I fear that religion and other institutions of a similar nature obfuscate and corrupt mankind’s ability to see the forest for the trees. Where mankind should see friendship and opportunity these institutions teach us to see enemies and discord. Where we should see avenues toward peace many times these institutions themselves beat the drums for war. Wars against Islam, wars against Christmas, wars against Atheism, and on and on, and all the while never an apology for their own faults and misdeeds.

    I have faith. I have faith in Jesus, in myself to make the right choice, in my family, my friends and this great world we live in. The only ones to ever let me down have been religion and politics.

    I used to be you.

    I use to be a Catholic.

  • OldWorldSwine

    Makes me want to ask, “Why this waste? This video equipment could have been sold for a month’s wages and the money given to the poor!”.

  • Guest

    I think you’re misinterpreting what the speaker means by “religion”. When he says “religion”, your hear “Church”, but he is not saying he hates the Church or that Christ came to abolish the Church. He is using the term “religion” to mean anything that we do that appears to be “christianly” but is in fact contrary to Christ’s desire for us (think Pharisees). In fact, I believe the speaker actually agrees with most of your points. For example, you take him to task for complaining about building big churches but failing to feed the poor. Yet he is not saying that all churches fail to feed the poor — he is saying that some churches and some Christians fail to feed the poor, and when they do so, they are not acting as followers of Christ. In short, you believe he is criticizing you and your church, but he is not.

    • Guest

      I agree with this comment. One place I read that by “poor” he means poor in spirit or poor in life which would make a lot more sense than poor money-wise. And by “feed” he means give them the truth in the gospel. I don’t know, just a thought.

  • Quiz

    I was flummoxed when this blew up on my news feed – there was so much bad with it that I didn’t
    Even know where to begin, let alone whether it was worth it. I realized it was too big to ignore but being somewhat illiterate I just had no words. Thank God for your insight – your page went right up on my FB, thank you!
    My evangelical in-laws gave me a subscription to Relevant Magazine, and in a recent article quoted a study showing 80% of unmarried Evangelical young adults actively engage in sexual activity, and the percentage of all unmarked adults in the same age range is 88%. Now I have no idea what the percentage is for Catholics of the same qualification, but I think this is a perfect example of where this thought of a spirituality vs. “religion” has taken us. We are no different than the culture we aren’t supposed to be “of”. The fact that so many people find this guy inspiring is very very sad to me.

    • Quiz

      Ha spellcheck – not unmarked….unmarried.

  • Rocky

    One other point…when Jesus said to Peter, ‘On this Rock I will build my church’, He wasn’t referring specifically to Peter, but rather to what Peter had just said. read the entire scripture and it says basically this…

    After Jesus asked ‘who do you say I am’ Peter answered, ‘you are the Christ’. to which Jesus replied, “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven! On THIS Rock I will build my church!”

    This agrees with Mathew 7 where Jesus talks about building the house on the Rock. He says, ‘whoever hears these Words of mine and does them will be like a house built on a rock’.

    Calling Peter Cephas, meaning Rock, does not mean that is the rock the church is built on. It is built on the revelation of Christ. That is why Jesus said, ‘call no man teacher, your teacher is Christ’. And in another place, ‘and they shall be taught by God’. When Jesus tells Peter ‘feed my lambs’ he is speaking to this scripture…’let every Word be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses’. He tells the disciples, ‘go out into all the world and BE MY WITNESSES’.

    Faith comes by hearing
    Hearing comes by the Word of Christ
    The Word of Christ is established by the testimony of two or three witnesses

    The Holy Scriptures and The Holy Spirit are the two reliable witnesses. We, the church, are the body of Christ, witnesses to these things, growing into the head, which is Jesus Himself. DO NOT equate the body of Christ, the church, with religion. They aren’t the same thing. One is a set of practices, rituals, interpretations, habits, etc…the other is Christ. In fact, the better question to ask yourself is this…what is Christ? hint, it isn’t Jesus’ last name, nor is it a title given only to Him…

  • Rocky

    spititual things are spiritually discerned, let He who has ears hear what the Spirit has to say.

  • Praise the Lord

    Lord save the people of religion!

  • Patrick

    Fantastic response to this ridiculous nonsense!!! Thomas Aquinas would quite pleased with you, and so is Jesus

  • Ken

    Well done! AMEN!

  • http://www.facebook.com/luke.charley Luke Charley

    So very good. I have been just bombarding people’s facebook pages with this link. This is the real pursuit of truth. God Bless you.

  • Anonymous

    Hard –nay impossible, as this may be for Marc to believe, he is mistaken. God didnt create mankind to start a bunch of stupid religion(s), he created beings (us) with which to have a RELATIONSHIP.

    Like any good defender of the Pharisees, Marc goes to great and sadly misguided lengths to defend his ‘church’ or ‘religion’.

    Catholicism is innately arrogant. The idea that Jesus founded Your Church primarily if not exclusively, and everyone has to do it Your Church’s Way. I know Catholics think Their Church is the Way Jesus would have wanted things done, but the Pharisees (who ‘gave us’ the OT [by Marc's flawed reasoning]) thought THEY were they Way that Abraham and Moses would have intended, too.

    God bless, good luck, and we’ll see you at the Resurrection.

    • Krisinger1

      Instead of wanting to reply to fast and speak (or write)–stop and read the article again. You must have passed over the correct point–He gave us a Church–”Peter, Upon this rock I will build my church”–and the sacraments, and guidance and a plan for man to follow through his earthly life until he reaches (hopefully) heaven. Jesus gave humans a church because of his plan for us and knowing that we are human.

      • TCISACW

        Calling Peter the rock upon which He will build His church — His body of followers — is not the same as saying He intende for His church to look like the instition of the Catholic Church as it exists now.

        His priesthood — his “rock” — consisted of married men. But the Catholic Church had to supercede his vision of a priesthood and require celibacy (for purely material reasons, btw). Christ told us to ask forgiveness of “one another”, and that He forgave sins, but the Catholic Church claims that only the Catholic Church can forgive certain sins and that if one dies without the Catholic Church forgiving them, you will go to hell.

        The institution of the Catholic Church is a far, far cry from what Christ instituted when He called Peter the rock upon which He would build His church.

    • Lazy Ray Finkle

      See you and the rest of ya there.

  • Bishop Andrew Gentry

    Well what I think the young man is saying is that Jesus did in fact fulfill the Law and in so doing he pretty much made religion irrelevant!but not faith!!! Nor did Jesus abolish the idea of community which is the Gathering of His followers! Jesus makes it very clear that where two or three are gathered in his Name he is in the midst of them and where that occurs the Chruch occurs. It is not in institutionalism or triumphalism, or in a monarchical state nor the private possession of a hierarchy.

    • Anonymous

      How do you define your faith without religion?

  • Slangster99

    I don’t usually make comments, but feel I need to here.
    And conscious that anything written can often be misinterpreted, realise that what I write is in a tone of gentleness.
    Having listened/watched the video and read (most) of your thoughts, I sense 2 things.
    1) You have missed his point
    and 2) you are assuming when he refers to religion he means Catholicism.
    I’m pretty sure he doesn’t.
    My understanding is when he refers to ‘religion’ he is referring to anything that says we can make ourselves ‘right’ with God, ‘earn’ our salvation…however you want to put it. He’s talking about people who are going thru the motions….you know, it’s all about what you ‘do’ rather than what Christ has ‘done’.
    that’s my first observation.
    My second is this: I watched this and the Catholic church didn’t even enter my mind. Rather, I thought of a friend of mine who was told by a church minister they were unclean becasue they had a child out of marriage; or college students i know who were brought up being told “good Christians don’t dance”. and as far as i know, you will find people who think like this in pretty much every CHristian denomination. Who miss grace because of works.
    Hope you find these thoughths helpful.

    blessings.

  • Philip

    Awesome post, thanks!

  • Micah

    Well, as a Protestant, I sort of take umbrage at some of the statements that seem anti-Protestant, or intended to marginalize Protestant churches or believers in this post. The Catholic church is the ONLY ONE that takes issue with divorce? Really??? Apparently, you have never experienced the Protestant churches at which I have fellowshipped!

    Anyway, though, what was actually said about the content of this video that is circulating all over youtube and facebook is much appreciated! This video has troubled me for exactly the reasons enumerated in this post. I think the word “religion” has accumulated cultural baggage in our society, and that a more rational approach is to reclaim a biblical definition for the word (as in, James 1:26-27), rather than dump the whole idea and institution of religion. Especially since Jesus clearly didn’t want to dump religion. Even his problems with the Pharisees were not a problem with their religion, but rather their high attention to the external aspects of the religion and their appearance before others, and their utter unwillingness and inability to internalize the truths in a way that transformed them from the inside out. I really appreciated the ability of this blog writer to clearly think through and articulate the issues.

  • Anonymous

    There was exactly one bit of sense in this entire piece and it was in the second sentence: religion is a joke. A bad one.

  • Brian

    Hey, Marc. I have read your blog before, but I do not remember seeing so many comments to your articles. Is my memory failing, or am I right in thinking that the number of comments to this article is unusually large?

    • Christy Hampton

      Lately on his posts about same-sex attraction or atheism he’s gotten a lot of comments – I always assumed it was a joint effort by some group to “prove” he was wrong by saying “your a jerk” as many times as possible.

      I wonder if the maker of the video has seen this post and replied and is buried in here somewhere.

    • TCISACW

      It’s a facebook thing…

  • WKM

    I used to think the same way. I grew up in the Methodist denomination and later was a part of Baptist, Episcopal, Non-Denominational, Bible “church”..etc… I could have said everything this person is saying, in fact, I probably did and even more. But on my own with just me and Jesus, just me and Jesus, I often found myself at odds with things Jesus said and did in scripture. He always attended Church as a faithful Jew. He chose 12 men to do his work, not one. He chose Peter to start HIS Church. And the early Church is full of doctrines, meetings, decisions, all led by the Holy Spirit and grounded in TRADITION. The bible itself came out of this TRADITION. There were over 200 years of CHURCH before there was a New Testament. These and many other things led me to the Catholic Church. I now have a relationship with the Jesus who started the Church, and now it’s about Family, the Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit..Now it’s about our Mother, the Apostles, the Tradition. The one thing this young man said that makes my skin crawl is the whole, “Religion starts all the wars.., Religion builds beautiful buildings instead of feeding the poor.”,, No my friend, Religion, Catholicism, does more to feed the poor around the world than all the governments and individuals combined. It also has done more over the past 2000 years to bring peace, education, art, and God’s mercy than any other institution in the history of man.

    • Anonymous

      Personally WKM, I was led out of the RCC by God. I believe it was because of nonbiblical doctrine..more recently the movement to make Mary a CoRedemptrix. They claim church tradition is equal to the Bible BUT those traditions contradict the Bible. How could a perfect God give us an imperfect Bible as the Catholics claim?

  • Bldchick28

    I totally respect everything you are saying, but I think the point he was trying to get across in the video I that people use religion wrong. Like about the divorced woman.. a lot of ‘religious’ people do look down upon single moms & divorce. Where as if you have a real relationship with Christ & you don’t let religion get in the way you know she is equally loved & forgiven by Jesus. The argument could go on & on but thats just how I took why he was saying.

    • Anonymous

      You are right…what you said reminded me of the tax collector (considered evil) and the Pharisee (who was very uppity about his righteousness). The tax collector only needed to repent…he did and was saved. The Pharisee wasn’t saved because he was too self righteous. I think that issue is a big one for many churches.

  • guest

    Joel Osteen has a VERY large church and he’s anything but Catholic…Hillsong in Australia, again, VERY large church, and pretty much the opposite of the Catholic Church. it’s just a thought, I liked much of what you said, but as you accused the video of doing, well, you basically just did the same thing. Chew up the fruit, spit out the seed, but be careful that you don’t always see stuff through your own paradigm, in this case a Roman Catholic one.

  • Magicbymccauley

    Equivocation.

    The Law and Prophets are not a religion. The law and prophets are PART of Judaism. Saying that Jesus supported religion because he supported the Law and the Prophets is like saying I’m a Christian because I support the golden rule. The spiritual text and the cultural institution are not the same thing.

    Rituals are not religion either. Though rituals are A PART of religion the fact that Jesus performed rituals, healings, prayer and meditation didn’t mean that he was pro religion. You are again equivocating.

    If I meditate, does that mean I’m a Buddhist? Of course not. Simply engaging in a ritual doesn’t mean you are a member of any religion. The fact that you think ritual=religion is a demonstration that you are desperately grasping at straws to justify the institution you owe fealty to.

    Saying the Pledge of Allegiance is a ritual. So does that mean being an American is a religion? Preposterous.

  • Mark

    I think there is way too much argument here. If two individuals both believe what is stated in the Nicene Creed, they are brothers/sisters in Christ regarless of what building they walk into on Sunday morning.

    • Anonymous

      Mark: I humbly submit that it is the personal relationship with Christ that is important. There will be many believers who hear “depart from me I never knew you.” The test of a Holy Spirit led church should be the holy lives of the people in it.

      My husband doesn’t understand how Tim Tebow could have missed the usual college drinking, sex, etc. life…and says that everyone has skeletons. I had to laugh…he just doesn’t know how people live when they are filled with the Holy Spirit. It is obvious that some churches are not holy based on the lives of the leaders…sometimes the shepherds are more sinful than the flock.

      • Mark

        LAOL, I completely agree with you. I was speaking more to the hundreds of comments that were trying to pit Catholicism against Protestantism. Now there are certainly non-denominations out there that would have a problem with the Nicene creed…and I think both Catholics and Protestants would have to question their true beliefs.

        Also, being in Denver, I liked the Tebow comment!

  • Magicbymccauley

    You said:

    “He built a Church: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)”

    This is often touted by the Catholic Church as a justification for religion. It is completely false. The word in Greek for “church” is “ekklesia”. “Ekklesia” does not mean “church”. An “ekklesia” means a “gathering of people in the street. When you preached on the streets it was customary to stand on an object, a box, stump, or rock. Jesus is saying that Peter is a rock he will stand on to build his movement. All the rest of the statement is just you falsely importing your beliefs and superimposing it onto what Jesus said.

    • Anonymous

      I’ll take a Church over a “movement” and so did the first Christians and Church Fathers.

  • Pedro

    Obviously you like to take all the mans views in your own way and maybe not the way that he sees it. atleast get your facts straight too. when jesus said the law that doesnt necessarrily mean the religious law and the law your thinking of. and catholic churches simply isnt the largest charity in the world , its united way. either way sure its high up, but when you truley think about it, the typical and mostly historical though catholic cares alot more about his position in the church and what his church looks like than how can i help someone in need

  • http://evangelizela.com/ Ricky Jones

    Marc, this is the best commentary on this video I have read, and there are many. Thank you for standing up for the truth brother!

  • Beckyboll

    I love Jesus AND my Church/religion! It is where I first met Jesus, and have never stopped loving him.

  • Angela

    I don’t think this video is a mandate against any one particular church or denomination. I think the core of what he is saying is that denomination and other things that we have used to define Christianity are not ultimate. What is ultimate is faith in Jesus. Is it sad that our church has become so divided, yes, but it has happened and what we need are more people saying that the 1 important thing we must agree on is that Jesus is the only way to God! The other things come in second. Does this mean that they aren’t important? No, things like feeding the poor, loving people despite their sins, teaching the Bible, partaking in the sacraments, building up other believers, equipping others to love with a sacrificial love and so many other things are important and I think they flow out of a true love for Christ. He is the one who empowers us to move beyond where we are to reach others and grow deeper in our faith.
    I think you can be Catholic, Baptist, Reformed, Lutheran, Methodist, Congregational, Church or Christ, Apostolic, Pentacostal, Non-Denominational, Presbyterian, etc… and be Christian-be a true believer of Christ. But in those same denominations there are people who are not believers. It isn’t more prevalent in one denomination.
    I have attended a lot of churches in my life and I have come to this point and realized that the most important thing is that we realize that we are working on the same team. If we love Jesus then we have 2 commandments: love God and love others. What would it look like if that was what the church did unconditionally?
    The only problem is the church is full of imperfect humans. Good thing we have an almighty God who is over, under and through all.
    Oh and the Bible isn’t the result of religion. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

  • Anonymous

    The Bible says that in the end times, there will be many false teachers and that many will be deceived. That is why we must pray for wisdom and discernment each day. I see many people fleeing the RCC each year and I don’t know why; perhaps God is leading them–he led me away to a “Bible as doctrine” Church. The relationship with Christ means everything…not a relationship with a particular Church. The one thing a believer doesn’t want to hear is “Depart from me I never knew you” and a church or its doctrine has little to do with knowing Him.

  • guest

    Thanks for this thoughtful discussion. We please God by our faith in Him, and in his Son, Jesus. We do this without proof, and despite the rational arguments of nonbelievers. And the author is correct to point out that the faith walk is full of areas to fall off the path– we alone come to belief as an individual, not a group. Yet, we as individuals are called to collectively assemble as a body of believers, to carry out God’s purposes on earth. Yet there are examples where the individual remained “alone” for long periods, very long periods: Anna in the temple; David in the pasture with his sheep; Joseph in the well; Paul in the prison cell; many many others. I conclude that my relationship with Jesus is first, and my collective actions come next. Blessings on all readers of this article.

  • Liz

    Jefferson, the guy in the video just posted this on his wall on facebook…

    “If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife. If a normal dude has right to get pissed when you bash His wife, it makes me tremble to think how great the weight is when we do it to Jesus’ wife. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.”

  • Corey

    To say your the only MAJOR Christian denomination that is opposed to Divorce is absolutely crazy, and ridiculous. Almost every Christian Denomination is going to be against divorce. This man is not attacking the Catholic Church at all. People on here that are arguing should not be, those have place their trust in Christ are all part of the body of Christ. Yes i disagree with many Catholic Theological Beliefs, as well as other Christian denominations, but the reality is, that when we get to heaven, there will not be religion, there will not be denominations or sects. It will be us following a Holy and Just and all powerful God, and spending time with Jesus (among other things, that is not a full theological description of heaven in any means) Realize that i truly believe you are taking this man out of context, he is trying to separate Jesus from Religion. and Man made religion.

    • Anonymous

      Going against divorce and allowing it are two different things. Catholics do not recognize divorce.

      • TCISACW

        No, they prefer to call it “annulment” and charge for it so they can keep the fees as opposed to lawyers…

        I’ve seen annulment in action. The more zeros on the end of that number on the check, the faster it turns around, and you only need a “real” reason if you don’t have hard cash.

        • Anonymous

          Divorce says that you were once married, but now you aren’t. Divorce is a matter of civil law.

          Annulment says you were never truly married in the first place. Something necessary for a valid marriage was missing. Annulment is a matter of Church law.

          http://www.beginningcatholic.com/catholic-annulment.html

  • K_emiry

    Same old argument, Catholicism vs. Protestant. How many years has this been going on for?? If we follow Christ we need to stop squabbling, arguing and pointing fingers at each other and start being a light unto the rest of the world. Regardless of any of our ‘denominations’ or divisions or disagreements we need to show Christ’s love to people who have not seen it or experienced it. This is starting to remind me of Matthew ch. 18 when the disciples argue as to who is the greatest. What a pointless waste of time that disagreement was. Unity in Christ is far more important as opposed to worrying about pride, denominations, history, or any of our disagreements we have.

  • Guest

    Reading all of the comments below… this is why everyone gets the wrong idea about religion. It is all politics to way too many people. Each individual is a member of their Church because they believe what their specific community professes to be true.

    Religion is what makes the basis of our faith stronger. The most important thing is that we strive to know God, but in doing this we need to learn what he continuously is teaching… to know is religion, to believe is faith. However, establishing a relationship is key. You cannot know another human being without conversing with he or she, this is the same in relation with God. And ANY religion will agree with that.

    Forget constantly cutting down religious denominations other than your own. People will believe what they see fit. Stay strong in your beliefs, study what has already been revealed to us through the Bible, and strive for that relationship that will never let you down. In the end, it isn’t going to matter who had all the correct doctrines (and dogmas) anyways… It will come down to how YOU lived your life.

  • Gypseepam

    excellent article with scriptural back up :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-McLaughlin/100000545980481 James McLaughlin

    Friends,

    Before encountering this post which in reply to the absurd paid for commercial advertisement for wrist watches (aka this video attack on religion containing a link therein to his wristwatch company) I drew up a line-by-line True/False analysis.

    On my analysis, I count 3 instances of openly preaching 3 different but related heresies: Manicheism, Determinism, and the other one the name escapes me at the moment (It’s a type of God thinks of you heresy). I plopped the Total Depravity and Free-Will attacks into the Manicheism category. I count 3 veiled attacks on 3 different Sacraments: Baptism, Confession, and the Eucharist. I count 2 attacks on the Blessed Virgin Mary. Consistent attacks on the Virtues. Consistent driving of a wedge between peoples. And, a consistent hiss out of hell. It all reminds of some of the things I’ve heard from obsessed people (especially those who have active and encompassing un-reconciled addictions).

    The long list of half-truths is too much to post here. I will relay the most offensive and obvious. The half-truths include: Jesus is God. Church is established by Man. A huge Church has been built. John the Baptist was ridiculed. It depends on Him. God and Religion are distinct from one another. Jesus is the Opus Dei. The slave and son argument. Jesus sets us free (ignoring the obvious Yolk of Christ).

    The most biting is the “It is finished!” bit. To which I respond: Ita missa est.

    • TCISACW

      Careful, there…this blog author is paid and their are advertisements for all kinds of things on the sidebar, depending on where you live. The “paid for” attack works both ways.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1100201870 James Ian Worrall

    Alright. I could go on for a while making my point flashy, begging people read it. But, instead, I will make it short, sweet, and to the point. The majority of what you say has some basis behind it, but you take it too far. You have to understand that the video was meant to be poetic, so don’t take everything he says literally. Try to think of the metaphors within his words. As you do this, also think about how Jesus is poetic. Jesus taught many teachings while putting the words into metaphors. Not everything is meant to be taken literally. That statement extends to life, as well as the bible.

    So, overall; you make some points, but don’t take things so literally.

    • Anonymous

      “Jesus came to abolish religion.”

      How figuratively should we be taking this?

      • Ole Toby Boy

        Seeing as how it was a poem, probably a lot. I did a double take when I heard it too.

        Also, check out his twitter feed. He elaborates a lot more on what he meant and how he should have been more specific.

      • Ole Toby Boy

        Seeing as how it was a poem, probably a lot. I did a double take when I heard it too.

        Also, check out his twitter feed. He elaborates a lot more on what he meant and how he should have been more specific.

  • Patrick

    You asked the question about ‘ritual’ and I answered it. So you delete my post. Too valid of a point I assume. So I’ll ask you again, “Why is it that in any other church, other than a few militant off-breeds and the Catholics, I am welcome at the Lord’s table?” Where in the Bible do you find Jesus saying “This is my body and blood given for you …. if you are Catholic.” ………I’ll wait while you look ………… COULDN’T find it huh? That’s because it’s not there and I have confirmed this with many Catholic Priests and Ministers of other denominations. And what’s with this ‘we snapped a picture of Him’ .. so you’re saying that The Pope is Jesus re-incarnated …… every couple of generations? Check your ego friend, that’s not at all what Christ is teaching us. I say ‘is’ in the present tense because He is still alive and living well within the hearts and actions of many true followers. We follow His light not the candle behind the pulpit. Good day brother and sisters. God’s blessings and the peace of Christ be with you all.

    • Anonymous

      If you don’t believe it is actually His body, why should you eat it?

      “This is my body (not a symbol of my body), which is given up for you. Do this is memory of me.”

      • TCISACW

        You’re kind of glossing over that “in memory” bit, aren’t ya? Christ used bread as a metaphor on more than one occasion. He wasn’t suggesting we re-sacrifice Him and cannibalize Him over and over and over and over again. He wasn’t suggesting that the only way He is truly present in our lives is as a sliver of bread we ingest, digest and, well…you can figure out the rest.

        Christ is the LIVING God, not a bit of dead flesh and sip of blood.

        • Anonymous

          Well we can’t gloss over John chapter 6 either. What church is still doing this in memory of Him?

          It’s not a re-sacrifice of Christ, but a celebration of Christ’s sacrifice sacrifice, the “pure offering”. It isn’t the only way He is present in our lives, but it is the most real. This was plain to the Jews at the time, the first Christians, the Church Fathers, and the first 1500 years of Christianity.

          • TCISACW

            Other mainline Protestant denominations still do this “in memory” of Christ. Consubstantiation is a legitimate interpretation of this scripture. Transubstantiation? Makes no sense whatsoever. Christ did not ask us to murder Him a thousand times a day and eat his actual flesh.

            He is the RISEN God, the LIVING God, not dead meat. He’s not some little bitty thing your priest says a magic spell over and then becomes actual flesh and blood.

            Is Christ with us in spirit via the Eucharist? Sure. But are we actually eating flesh and drinking blood, the human flesh and blood of Christ who already died and rose again and now is in his Godly form in heaven? Please. Save that fairy tale for those who can only deal with a tiny, insignificant, dead little god they can lock up in a box and take out when it suits their purposes, one they can control and manage and mete out as a goody-treat to the minions who do the hierarchy’s bidding like mindless little sheep.

          • Anonymous

            Transubstantion: “This is my body”
            taught by:
            the Didache
            Clement
            Augustine
            Ignatius of Antioch
            Justin the Martyr
            Ambrose
            The Church Fathers
            2,000 years of Christianity
            Jesus and His Apostles

            Consubstantiation: “This is my body plus bread”
            taught by:
            Martin Luther

            http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alejandro-Rivera/100001493331395 Alejandro Rivera

    poaned

  • http://twitter.com/piapiabee Pia

    Favorite ridiculous lines from the video: 1. “I ain’t judging.” What exactly are you doing then? 2. “I love the church.” What church? How is church not religion?

  • Tony

    First: the number of wars instigated by religion is minuscule. People fight for glory, wealth, land, food, fear, and revenge. The American Indians, who were always fighting each other, did not fight for religion. The Roman Empire did not fight for religion. The British did not fight the French in the Hundred Years’ War over religion. We did not fight Hitler and Tojo over religion. The Serbs did not instigate the First World War over religion. The vast majority of wars in the history of the human race have nothing at all to do with religion. Outside of Islam, which spreads by the sword, one is hard put to find any at all; the best candidate is the Thirty Years’ War, which was not about religion so much as it was about nationalism.

    Second: the idea that Catholics do not take atheists and others seriously is plain wrong. Read some Catholic theology, will you please?

    Third: the Catholic Church is RIGHT, absolutely right, on the sexual issues of our day. Don’t think so? Visit a prison sometime and ask the men about their family lives. Find out how many of them came from broken (or never established) homes. Then come to me and tell me that divorce and fornication are just peaches and cream.

    • PC Geek

      Fantastic post and 100% spot on! Now if only our misnamed ‘war historian’ would take a look-see…

    • PC Geek

      Fantastic post and 100% spot on! Now if only our misnamed ‘war historian’ would take a look-see…

  • Dgainesjr

    Belonging to a religion, whether Catholic or Protestant does not make one a Christian. Protestants and Catholics will outnumber the Atheists in Hell. The one and only thing that makes one a Christian is salvation by faith in Christ alone, regardless of one’s religious affiliation.

  • Just Saying

    I think the entire point of the video was missed. He wasn’t attacking the Catholic church, and he isn’t against the concept of church. The basic call of the protestant movement is that tradition and ceremony shouldn’t trump our relationship with Jesus. Yeah, actually the Catholic church is very guilty of that. The picture of communion claiming that is Jesus coming into your church is quite blasphemous, because than you are claiming Jesus isn’t there at a protestant church service?

    Jesus did say he didn’t come to abolish the Law, but he does say he came to complete it. The point of the law was for Israel to find righteousness and through it reach the world for God. So effectively, by dying on the cross to be our righteousness, Jesus completed the Law. We no longer have to live under it.

    Maybe this video is seen as an attack on Catholicism specifically because Catholics are a bit conscious of the fact that, yes maybe we have taken religion a bit too far and fogged the personal relationship part.

    • jm

      agreed

    • Anonymous

      “The picture of communion claiming that is Jesus”

      Jesus: tanking the bread and said “This is my body. Do this in remembrance of me.”

      “We no longer have to live under it.”

      No Ten Commandments?

      Where did Jesus say start your own church(es) and break from the one I founded if you think things have gone wrong? On the contrary:

      “if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan …”

      “Holy Father, keep them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are… I have given them the glory you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may be brought to perfection as one…”

      One, Holy, Catholic (katholikos), Apostolic Church

  • Dodo David

    Nowhere in the above You Tube video does the young man mention the Roman Catholic Church. Instead he talks about the difference between Christianity and the rules that people make in their attempt to earn God’s favor. What the young man says can be applied to what is happening in Protestant churches.

    The message of the video is the one that the Apostle Paul gives in the book of Ephesians. A person is saved by grace through faith. Salvation does not depend on a performance of good works. Salvation also does not depend on which church that you belong to. Yes, a person can have salvation and be a Christian without being a member of the Roman Catholic Church. The universal Church consists of all believers in the Messiah, those who are Messianic Jews, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican and Protestant, as well as those who are Roman Catholic.

    Now, I have nothing against a person being Roman Catholic, but I do have something against a Roman Catholic using a church-neutral video as an excuse to bash the result of the Reformation.

    By the way, prior to 1054 CE, the Patriarch of Rome shared authority will the other Patriarchs. Then in July of 1054 CE, the Patriarch of Rome and the churches under his control separated from the other Patriarchs and their churches. The split resulted in the formations of the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Thus, it would be an error to claim that in 37 CE just one male sinner ruled the entire Church. Indeed, the 15th chapter of the Book of Acts reveals that decisions about orthodoxy were made by the Apostles as a group, not just by Peter.

    • Anonymous

      As we find through Acts, the Gospels, and the Church Fathers, that group was led by Peter, as Christ intended.

      • Susan

        Please give exact and clear references in Acts and the Gospels that “the group was led by Peter”. The one mentioned, “Upon this Rock, I will build My church” refers to Peter’s answer that Jesus is the Christ. It isn’t about Peter at all. It could have been anyone. It was the concept of Salvation through Christ alone that is the foundation of the church.

  • Adriel

    Do I sense (or maybe just hope for) a follow up post re: anchoring oneself to timelessness vs falling for the charm of snobbish modernity? Or maybe “personal relationship” facts and myths? How about one highlighting the modern Protestant/Catholic disconnect (it’s not all “y’all worship Mary and the saints” anymore you know)?

    Either way the Facebook/YouTube/Trendy Non-Denom crowd is here at your disposal and they don’t usually come out like this unless Toby Mac and Jeremy Camp are playing at the local mega-church so get ‘em while you can Marc!

    OH AND A NOTE TO THOSE WHO ARE DISMAYED BY THE “BICKERING” AMONG CHRISTIANS IN THESE COMMENTS: Go back and read Acts. No sooner had Jesus peaced out then had the first Christians begun arguing amongst themselves about what it meant to be Christian. Dialogue, even heated, occasionally rude dialogue, is a given, especially regarding stuff as important as this. Truth mostly wins out, and in the meantime we get to understand each other a little better. So roll up your sleeves and join in the fun!!

  • Alphonse13

    He built a Church: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18

    Jesus had just asked the apostles who the crowds said He was–they answered–some say Elijah, some John the baptist, some the prophet—– Jesus then asked Who do you say I am” Peter answered, You are Christ, the son of the living God. The “rock” Jesus was referring to was the truth of who He was, the Messiah–Peter was not the rock because the Greek uses “petra”—–the female to be build upon. As for the Church, well no such word existed in the Aramaic language so it was probably added in the transcribing of same. Jesus’ entire ministry revolved around the relationship one may have with God. And lastly, Christianity is not a religion–it is a relationship–the Catholic Church is simply a tradition

  • jm

    I think you have taken the video out of context along with the religion of Catholicism that took the bible out of context. One thing that annoyed me about this post was when you put the picture of a cross and trying to say that, that is Jesus. First of all the is an object, a cross with an image of Jesus still nailed on the cross. Is that the Jesus you praise and adore the one that was on the cross or should it be the one that rose from the dead? And the whole following fads and fashions. Please please you are using the internet to make and fad and fashion to not agree with the video. AWKWARD…..

    • Guest

      This this person was referring to the Eucharist present in the picture… not the cross. Catholics believe the Eucharist is the body of Christ. Therefore at each liturgy, Catholics gather in the presence of Jesus Chirist himself.

  • Pietra

    Regardless of what I thought of the video in question (some good, some bad), I was saddened by the degree of sectarian Protestant-hating (and Catholic-hating) in the original post and subsequent comments. I think there are better arguments available that are less degrading to yourself and others. What a waste of everyone’s time.

    • Pietra

      Wait, there’s another Pietra? Hi! This could get confusing though.

  • topher

    First off I thought the video was great… And I think you missed the point… As well as did several below. Just because you call yourself a Catholic…Baptist…Methodist…whatever… doesn’t mean you are automatically a Christian (Christ Follower). From my point of few as the American Church we are not doing enough for the poor the lost any of it. We are so worried about what people see in our building in our looks our jobs our status… We can call ourselves Christians util we are blue in the face but do our actions match what we are claims. When I agree with the video doesn’t mean that he is 100% spot on but what it means is he is tired of this whole argument of what religion you are when in fact its again is not about a religion its about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Yes he may go to far in say Hate religion and Love Jesus… I think they do go together but Christ needs to be the center and the head of all we do. Religion tends to put Jesus Last and our need wants and desires first and what we think we need to do or don’t do to Love Jesus. If we truly Love Jesus and do what he calls us to do… do we need religion…no… (we need the church yes, we need the bible yes, we need Jesus oh yes… If you took his video as an attack of the Catholic Church then you are mistaken… Or maybe it just sparked a flame under all who watch it and say wow I’m not following Jesus I’m following Religion and I need to get my priorities right!

  • The Fish

    Wow, what an excitable subject! It is the 2000 year more or less battle of what is to be the rule and guide of life.

    Catholocism and Protestantism is, at heart, the same tree. Both have branches that have left the core teachings and have confused the issue. I’ll give you a simple truth – “Catholocism” has 2000 years of man’s thoughts battling with God’s word and “Protestantism” has 500 years of man’s thoughts battling with God’s word. Protestant simply means those who “protest the error in the Catholic church” over the proceeding 1500 years.

    Since many in the “Catholic” part of the church were unwilling to go as far as the “Protestants” were in cleaning house of man-made teachings and practices, there became the two groups. Even today, inside the two overall groups, there is a wide variation of practices and beliefs, as humans are constantly straying, being sinful and inconsistent individuals.

    The Reformation was good for Catholics and Protestants – if you have any doubts, you need to read Philip Shaff’s history of the Christian Church. In Rome, before the Reformation, the church had on staff 6,000 courteasans to entertain the men traveling to Rome for religious duties/purposed. It was also common to have a mistress in the middle ages for the priests to get buy with not being able to marry.

    One of the precursors/causes of the Reformation was the printing press, which put a bible into everyone’s hands who could get one. This was a major reason the Catholic Church finally began a purification process, as the public could see the sin, having the word of God themselves.

    Here is the way the 3 major sections of Religion shows itself today:

    Catholocism: Word of God + Teachings of Priests
    Protestantism: Word of God
    Charismatic: Word of God + Human “experiences”

    The difference is Protestanism, in its original form simply said “the bible is our only trustworthy guide to God.” It denies that any man has any spiritual authority other than in the very, very limited role outlined in the New Testament. And everyone is a Priest, as everyone has immediate access to God, through just the one Mediator, Jesus Christ. No Saints, No Mary.

    It also refused to believe in the continuance of the Charismatic gifts, believing it had died out, as it was believed to be hinted at in 1 Cor 13, where the gifts are said by Paul to cease, but Faith, Hope and Love will remain. Since Faith and Hope are not eternal, they will cease when a person dies and meets God, it could only mean that the gifts would indeed die out with the deaths of the persons the Apostles laid hands on.

    Today’s version of the gifts is simply false, being human expression and desire. There is nothing wrong with wanting to be godly or have a godly experience, it is simply Pastors have (eroneously) taught this is suppose to happen, so people agonize in their spirits untill they can express something. Again if you read Church history, you will find that the first person to speak in England and the first person to speak in Scotland (unrelated congregations) both admitted years later, in retrospect, that it was not God who spoke, but their emotions. It was too late however, and the movement had already started.

  • Erinemilie

    I am a Christian and I have always been confused about the statues of Mary in every Catholics yard, and in front of the churches….didn’t God forbid us to worship idols? I also understand that Catholics pray to Mary and the Saints….this is also wrong according to the Bible. We are to pray to GOD the Father, in Jesus Name. Never Ever are we told to pray to anyone else. I think Mary would have been appalled to think that people would one day worship her and pray to her instead of God. I have nothing against Catholics, I am just confused by many of their practices. I love Jesus and I read the Bible and apply it to my beliefs and my lifestyle. I am saved, I am baptized and I take communion. Period.

    • Anonymous

      The Catholic Church does not teach Mary-worship. Catholics honor Mary, just as Jesus does, as the Mother of God and our spiritual mother with Jesus as our brother. Mary knew the Jesus the longest and the best and she lead us to Him now as she did 2,000 years ago.

      Have you ever asked someone to pray for you? They usually don’t reply, “Don’t ask me! Go to God!” The saints pray for us before the throne of God: “he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God” -Rev. 8:3-4.

      “and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints” -Rev. 5:8

      We are one body in fact, not two separate ones in Heaven and on Earth. They are very much aware of what happens on earth and want what’s best for us.

      St. Paul tells us it is good to intercede for each other in 1 Tim. 2:1–4.

      Idol worship and Mary worship are strong misconceptions of what the Church does and teaches. I’d recommend this for an accurate description:

      http://www.catholic.com/tracts/praying-to-the-saints

      • TCISACW

        Then why did JPII raise Mary to the status of “Co-Redemptrix”? And don’t tell the Legion of Mary people that she’s anything less than a god (goddess?) in her own right…/eyeroll.

        • Anonymous

          When does “Co-redemptrix” equal “goddess”? We are all called to be co-mediators and cooperate with God’s grace in the redemption of souls by leading others to Christ, THE Mediator. Mary does the same, however being His (and our) Mother, she’s a little closer to Him than the rest of us.

          Every King has a Queen (not goddess), and Mary is the Queen Mother, “full of grace,” chosen out of all humanity to carry and raise the Son of God. “Do as he tells you.”

          • Susan

            Mary is a human sinner in need of redemption just as any of us are. Jesus doesn’t need a “co-redemptrix”. His blood alone is enough. Again… my opinion based on Scripture alone and not at all the point of this video!

            The point of the video is not to bash Catholicism. You are missing the point and apparently feeling very defensive because you’ve been at the receiving end of “Catholic bashing” and this video hit an unintended chord. I’m sorry. You shouldn’t have to deal with that (though we really all have a right to search scripture and disagree on issues such as praying to the deceased, so long as we DO agree that Scripture is the ultimate authority and Christ really IS our Redeemer and the only way to the Father).

            The point of the video is to confront all professing Christians for being like the Pharisees who actually had Jesus crucified. It was also to pull in those UNbelievers who are frustrated with “organized religion” (read legalistic dictatorship) and who are seeking a true relationship with a Living God. This is exactly what Jesus wanted for all of us! It’s a tool to save the lost, but it’s being used as a tool by the enemy to divide the church through this blog.

          • TCISACW

            ONLY Christ redeemed us. Only Christ. Anything else denies Christ his due, and when you deny Christ, you deny God.

            Revering Mary properly is one thing. Raising her to equal status with Christ is something else entirely.

          • Anonymous

            “Co” does not mean “equal”

  • Anon

    I believe Hebrews 10:11-14 says it all “Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. 13Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, 14because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” Relationship with Christ ALONE = Salvation. No religion needed.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry, but “Christ alone” is a religion, and a religion compiled the text you quoted.

  • guest

    no, the LAW is then TEN commandments.. not religion

    • Anonymous

      Doesn’t the Law of Moses include a little more than that?

  • http://www.facebook.com/johnnykickstart John Flynn

    Here’s his latest post….he is obviously a man with a heart for God and means well….

    “If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife. If a normal dude has right to get pissed when you bash His wife, it makes me tremble to think how great the weight is when we do it to Jesus’ wife. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.”

    • Anonymous

      Luther may have meant well, but I don’t think he meant to have 40,000 denominations and “non-denominations” either.

  • Guest

    Although I like some of the points raised in this critique, being Catholic myself, I do urge a lot of you to read this critique (especially if you are Catholics yourselves):

    http://roadsfromemmaus.org/2012/01/12/why-i-love-true-religion-because-i-love-jesus/

    It was written by an Orthodox priest and uses a lot of the churches teachings to dissect the video. Read his comments as well, as he will answer some of the posts written.
    Great man, and great understanding of the Christian faith.

  • guest

    Although I like some of the points raised in this critique, being Catholic myself, I do urge a lot of you to read this critique (especially if you are Catholics yourselves):

    http://roadsfromemmaus.org/2012/01/12/why-i-love-true-religion-because-i-love-jesus/

    It was written by an Orthodox priest and uses a lot of the churches teachings to dissect the video. Read his comments as well, as he will answer some of the posts written.
    Great man, and great understanding of the Christian faith.

    • Anonymous

      This was a good post as well, although everyone is picking apart this video. Even the secular atheists are having a ball dismantling it. Jefferson is creating a very confusing “religion.”

  • Thebabilonias

    Thank you for this article, more people with jaded, blinded and ignorant views on the church should read this. God bless you.

  • Dona

    Looks like my comments are being deleted. hahaha WOW!

  • Mccreav

    This dude is wrong on sooooooo many levels. First point he makes about man being able to forgive sin, Christ is the only way to be forgive and that power is not given to any man on earth. In the scripture he has stating man can forgive sins, it’s to forgive your neighbor who wronged, for as it says in Matthews” Forgive those that have wronged you as my father has forgive you; and you forgive not man, neither will my father who is in heaven”. When Jesus said this, it wasn’t giving power to man but establishing the first and second greatest commandment, love thy God with all your heart and sol and love thy neighbor as you love yourself. In that alone tells you its God that has the power to forgive man of sin, not man. The second point he makes about doctrine, that scripture about doctrine at is not about doctrine at all but the good and bad works you do upon the earth for it says in Matthews ” A tree will be known by the fruits it produces” . Thirdly, when he quotes Jesus as saying ” I came with a Sword”, the sword is the word of God the only offense in the amour of God that Christians put on everyday in spiritual warfare which can be found in Ephesians 6:10. And doesn’t the beatitude says, ” Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called Children Of God”? Doesn’t match up with Jesus slashing people in the face. Lastly concerning the rituals, Jesus said to repent and accept Him. The bread and wine is to be done in memory of Him but not to used as a ritual of forgiving sins. There are some points he defends and I agree with such as divorce, but he did misinterpret scripture and fail to look at scripture in Revelation that states the Anti Christ will claim to have the power to give men of sin since isn’t something you want to be associated with.

  • Guest

    Although I like some of the points raised in this critique, being Catholic myself, I do urge a lot of you to read this critique (especially if you are Catholics yourselves):

    http://roadsfromemmaus.org/2012/01/12/why-i-love-true-religion-because-i-love-jesus/

    It was written by an Orthodox priest and uses a lot of the churches teachings to dissect the video. Read his comments as well, as he will answer some of the posts written.
    Great man, and great understanding of the Christian faith.

  • http://andrewensley.com/ Andrew

    Awesome. Thank you so much for clearing up the confusion.

  • Titaniumshield0

    I just saw the vid, and I liked it.
    I have neither the time nor the inclination, to discuss and/or rebut on a point by point basis.

    I do want to mention, that those whom you refer to as “protestants”, do indeed have sacraments!
    BTW – I’m NOT a “protestant”, because I’m not protesting you.

    We take Communion, we get Baptized… and of course Marriage is a sacrament!

    We do however place a greater emphasis upon “faith”, and “relationship”, than we do on “rules”… and yes, of course we have rules too!
    Stealing is still wrong, cheating on your wife is still wrong, and getting drunk is still wrong. ect…

    Another point, in the example about the divorced girl being “unloved”.
    I’m sorry to say, that many individuals who call themselves Christians aren’t as forgiving as God is.
    In many churches, and many church circles, one’s “past” does make a difference.
    So in that sense, religion does make her “unloved”.
    I think THAT is the point, that the vid is trying to make.

    And let’s be honest… who among us can love like Jesus loves???
    I can learn from His example, and try to imitate Him in my flawed human way.
    But, I can’t really LOVE, as He does.
    And I’d be surprised if, that statement conflicts with Catholic theology.

  • Moonlighting

    Thanks for linking this wonderful video, I didn’t know it. Even if your attempt at rebuttal seemed uninspired, petty, grumpy, and lawyerly by comparison, which means exactly what Jesus was not, I am grateful to you for having the courage to post the initial video, as powerful as it was.

  • Anonymous

    Some more good analysis:

    Bethke asks: “What if I told you …. just because you call some people blind / Doesn’t automatically give you vision.”

    I’d say, yes, Jefferson. That is absolutely true … and ironic, in a poem where you are calling two millennia of religious Christians blind and suggesting that you have vision.

    Bethke asks: “I mean if religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?”

    I would answer — apart from the fact that those who oppose religion have killed more in one century than the religious killings of two millennia — that there’s a logic fail, here.

    Bethke asks: “Why does [religion] build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor.”

    Again, Jefferson, you need to be careful, since you love Jesus.

    You might as well ask:

    “Why did the baby Jesus receive ornate gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh instead of feeding the poor? Why was Jesus presented in the Temple, if the money for the Temple should have gone to the poor? When he was lost, why did his parents find him in the Temple preaching, instead of serving the poor? Why did he angrily drive the money-changers out of the Temple saying ‘zeal for my Father’s house consumes me,’ instead of angrily driving the tax-collectors to serve the poor saying ‘zeal for the poor consume me’?”

    And you have to realize, Jefferson, that if you put this question to Jesus, he will give you the same answer he gave the apostles when they saw Jesus annointed with costly perfume and asked, in Matthew 26:8-9, “Why this waste? It could have been sold for much, and the money given to the poor.” (Look up his answer!)

    And I have a question for you. Why are you spending all this money on a fancy video, when it could have been given to the poor?

    “[R]eligion says do; Jesus says done
    Religion says slave; Jesus says son
    Religion puts you in bondage; while Jesus sets you free
    Religion makes you blind, but Jesus makes you see.”

    Apart from some factual problems (Actually, Jesus says “do” quite a lot, and he swaps the word “friend” for “slave,” not “son” for “slave”) I think we need to defend the name of Jesus here.

    Jesus was a lover of the Temple, a fulfiller of the law, the one who established the Church, and the one who calls the Christian Church his body.

    While “religion” has as many downsides as any human thing, Christianity became a “religion” from the beginning: From St. Peter setting dietary rules to St. Paul setting the Eucharistic formula, to St. John writing to the churches that they need to get their act together, etc.

    In fact, the afterlife is described in the book of Revelation as a religious liturgical service.

    Bethke should ask himself: “If it turns out that Jesus really did found a religion, will I love him still?”

    http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=24948

  • Amanda

    Believing this was directed towards the Catholic Church is completely ignorant. The message of this poem is very clear: there are too many people claiming to be Christians who don’t act like it. Instead of picking out details you can come up with some kind of argument to, try looking at the big picture, because nowhere in this did you take note of what he was really saying.

    Moving on. The quote, “We may reject God, but He never, ever, ever rejects us.” Except for the homosexuals of the world, but should we even count them as people? I was raised Catholic and according to many Christians, not just Catholics, homosexuality is some sort of disease worthy of eternal damnation. And to say a gay person is going to burn in Hell for being born a certain way is like a down syndrome person will too.

    I read this critique and I read some of these comments and the ones on Youtube, and it’s the same thing on all of them. “Religious” people commenting telling him he’s wrong and people arguing and trying to prove who is right. I might not be the most religious person nowadays, but I know that God does not want this.

    And honestly, maybe if the Catholic Church used “some great video editing, good background music, a strong emotional appeal, catchy rhyme, and all in relatively well-timed YouTube moment”, it might have actually been able to keep me interested and make me still want be a member of the Church.

    • Anonymous

      Despite what the politicians would have us believe, the Catholic Church has written and taught extensively on same-sex attraction as well as defining the role of sex and sexuality in our lives: it’s more meaningful than “do what you feel is right for you” and more fulfilling than “we’re all going straight to hell!” See Theology of the Body for the beauty of Church teaching on our sexuality.

      No video editing required, Jesus in the Eucharist is enough for me! Hope you return!

  • John

    Sometimes I think we all get a little side-tracked and caught up in rhetorical arguments. Are there some serious issues at stake? Yes, absolutely. But we all need to keep in mind that we are all in agreement that Jesus preached about true love – love for God, love for each other, and love for the less fortunate.

    “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’” (Matthew 22:37-38).

    Regardless of what religion you profess, this concept of love seems to be a major, if not central, factor. If everyone spent as much time helping the poor as they do debating these issues, imagine the progress that could be made, with God’s help, the lives that could be changed.

  • Susan

    I don’t think the point is whether Catholics are Christians. Each person has their own relationship with Christ/Creator and none of us can judge that but the King. I know many self-professing Christians who are in no way living any externally recognized evidence of a life surrendered to Christ — no matter which denomination they happen to be attending at the particular time. But that isn’t my call.

    And Jesus did not start a new religion!! Jesus was a Jew. He was neither Catholic nor Protestant. St. Paul calls him a Priest by the order of Melchizedek (even predating Judaism). His message was a message about the Kingdom. He lived out His role as Christ, Savior, Redeemer and First Born of Creation… Beloved Son of the Living God, and yes, prophet. He is the cornerstone and foundation of our faith. He is our Intercessor and our Priest. We are not to hold anything above Him or the Father — especially not the opinions of mere man.

    I think the point is that what our current culture has seen historically as religion has failed at certain times in history, because we are human, and not God. Unfortunately, the Catholic church, like ALL organizations, has, at times, been corrupted. As a Believer who grew up Catholic, and has studied under other denominations, read through the Bible numerous times, and who has lead people to Christ, I’ve had church history thrown at me as an excuse not to accept the Gospel.

    This is completely understandable, so at times, it’s important to recognize that Christ is not about a specific denomination. With some people, it’s important to get to the basics of our need to be reconciled to God, beyond excuses about some organization who they PERCEIVE has failed them. His Church really is not necessarily about a building, but is the invisible thread that unites the hearts of all brothers and sisters who seek the truth in Him, whatever their denomination.

    I do understand the feelings of defensiveness, but I don’t believe we are called to divide over this. We are called to unite and show the world the Kingdom of love and unity and relationship with Him. Our King is not a man, but God. Or, as Christ put it, “My Kingdom is not of this world.”

  • J_Mo

    Hey friends. Can’t we all just get along? reading these comments has given me a headache. I mean, if we all love Jesus in one way or another why the heck is everyone so quick to point out the flaws in one person’s religion argument to stand up for their own… The irony here is you are all commenting on a post to disprove the video… and you’ve all just divided yourself and made proclamations about your religions to prove the points of the original video that this writer was trying to disprove… If you follow Christ and love him, your neighbors, and your enemies as yourself is that not enough to get through the pearly gates?? #onelove

  • Gilo

    One thing that I am SURE Christ would be against is exactly THIS!! Everything you are doing right now is what Christ would disapprove of! Regardless of what religion we are part of, if you love Christ then we have to stop this! Otherwise you are only affirming everything this guy has said in his video. His attack was not only on religion, but on those who call themselves religious, and that is all of us.

    We are Christ lovers, then let’s behave like Him. Let’s pray for those who need prayer and lets allow Christ to do his part because no matter how many arguments we can come up with, we will not convince anyone of anything. Conversion is above all and act of grace! We have to understand that Christ is the only one Who can do that. Whether we are in a “wrong” faith or not, Christ will do His will regardless and He will deal with those “in the wrong faith” in His own time.

    Lets all of us just love like he taught us to love. Like Saint Francis said “Preach the gospel at all times, and -only when necessary- use words”

    There will always be disagreements, but let’s focus in what unites us. That is what John Paul the great was after in meeting with religious leaders everywhere. God in his eternal love and mercy embraces us all. Lets open our hearts and do the same.

    So lets all follow Him, love Him, obey Him in his commandments and preach his gospel. If anything, lets support each other in bringing Christ to those who do not know Him. Remember Christ said: “He who is not against you, is for you”… We are all for Christ and his salvation, therefore we all ALL for each other!

    God Bless you all, and may all mighty God continue to guide you and protect you.

    • Jmsteve4

      Why can’t we do both? God does act through people, right? So arguing (and I mean more like debating not screamng at eachother) can be a way he wants us to convert people back into one universal religion. Not that everyone has to do that all the time.

      • Lazy Ray Finkle

        But what is the universal religion? How do we know which one to turn to?

      • Lazy Ray Finkle

        But what is the universal religion? How do we know which one to turn to?

    • Adriel

      “One thing that I am SURE Christ would be against is exactly THIS!! Everything you are doing right now is what Christ would disapprove of!”

      My friend, you are adding to THIS by saying THAT. Here’s a better perspective: it is ok to bicker and argue. I don’t see people condemning each other to Hell, nor making personal threats, etc.

      So actually, I support your attempt to add your voice to the mix! And the CAPS and quotes are a nice touch. Keep it up, and fight for truth!

  • Aleria

    I just keep thinking about when you said “….consequence of Protestantism.” That sounds like you are pushing all of this on Protestants. I don’t think this guy is anything but someone who loves Jesus. It doesn’t seem like he identifies himself with any organized group at all.

  • Ruth

    Interesting discussion. I am a Christian, follower of Christ. I love this video and the truth that he shares. If you are offended by his claims about religion, then you have totally missed the point or points.

  • Jerry

    Wrongo…if you do not do what Jesus says, then, according to Him, you cannot be his disciple. These immature evangelist wanna-be’s (who love to see themselves on social media) have created a “Jesus” in their own minds that behaves and rules just as they would..uhmm, this is idolatry. In fact, Jesus rules over the world, the Church, and all nations of peoples by the rule of His Word, which defines the parameters and ethics and true religion. The wanna-be’s have no use for sacraments, commandments, or the organized Kingdom of God on earth–the Church. They do, on the other hand, want to be led by emotion, thresholdism (“Jesus is coming soon”), and individualism (me and Jesus got this thang goin’ good). Take it from the elder believer in that this type of religion espoused by our video-dude is not the doctrine on which you would want to rear your covenant children. It leads NO WHERE.

  • CGYStamp3d3r

    I admit, I used to believe — along with MANY Evangelicals (including so-called “nondenominational” Christians) — a whole trainload of misconceptions about the Catholic Church. I was raised a United Methodist and later became a born-again Baptist… so what happened? On 03 April 2010, at age 33, I was received into the Roman Catholic Church. As I said to a friend on Facebook, I tried to watch the video… and I really did TRY to see its point and like it… but unlike most of my friends who did like it, repost it, comment on it… I COULD NOT agree with it. For starters, it’s wrong in that — like most Evangelicals — it denies that Christianity, regardless of what you call it, FITS THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF THE WORD “RELIGION.” Many will say “well yeah it fits the definition but it really isn’t that at all.” It’s almost as if they’re saying “well… it looks, walks, talks, smells, eats, and works like a Clydesdale… but it’s really a laughing hyena.” Also, it was too much of the “I’m the sole arbiter of what is and is not Christian for me and here’s my individual Christian opinion of what’s wrong with the Church” attitude that turned me off to the Protestant and Evangelical churches in the first place. No offence intended to the non-Catholic Christians reading this, but many Christians in my personal life would go out of their way to condemn the Catholic Church for everything wrong in the video in a New York minute while turning a blind eye to any fault of their own beliefs and churches.

  • Jmsteve4

    Wow… this thing has gotten more replies than all of the recent atheism articles. I guess that’s what happens when peole post the article as rebuttals on facebook. Well maybe some people will keep with the site- it’d bring some different perspectives to some of the debates on here, and it’d be educating a ton of people about Catholicism, which is always a good thing. Cool. =)

  • Joe

    Ecclesiastical Nihilism at its best. Each believer building his own church on his own personal preferences.

  • Grant

    The man in this video is correct it is NOT about religion it is all about a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Jesus didn’t create these so-called religions. He just simply went around to places and preached the gospel. He also healed people and helped the poor. We should all focus on what good things He did and continue doing the same thing in Jesus’ Name. Jesus also preached about loving people and NOT about hatred. We should all demanstrate the love that Jesus has for us and bring it to everybody we come in contact with.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Jeff.Faria Jeff Faria

    So onto the first bit of silliness — the idea that Jesus came to abolish religion. Unforgivable. He literally said the opposite: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

    You’ve completely and utterly missed the point of what he said. In fact, you’ve missed it so badly there’s nothing I could say that could bring you around to it. All I can say is, this is something you need to understand outside of whatever/whoever you now rely on if you are ever going to understand it.

    • Pietra

      Could you maybe just give us lowly unenlightened folk an idea of what the real point is? Cause for all clear definitions, that paragraph you referenced above concisely and exactly corrects the poet’s misguided statement.

  • Dominik Mockus

    The biggest complaint with this blog is:
    1. Research was not done on the hidden meaning of this poem. The author of this blog (the “blogger”) is doing exactly what Jefferson Bethke (from the video) says he hates: People who only “show” their religion, those that make the motions but do not, in their hearts, care. The blogger took the words of Bethke literally, making the same mistake as the Pharisees and Saducees did: Following the letter and not the meaning. I quote from Bethke’s Facebook:
    “If you are using my video to bash “the church” be careful. I was in no way intending to do that. My heart came from trying to highlight and expose legalism and hypocrisy. The Church is Jesus’ bride so be careful how you speak of His wife. If a normal dude has right to get pissed when you bash His wife, it makes me tremble to think how great the weight is when we do it to Jesus’ wife. The church is His vehicle to reach a lost word. A hospital for sinners. Saying you love Jesus but hate the Church, is like a fiancé saying he loves his future bride, but hates her kids. We are all under grace. Look to Him.”
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jefferson-Bethke/339101236109342?sk=wall
    2. The blogger has shown a lack of diplomacy, even mocking Bethke. As I Catholic, I do stand behind some of his argument if it was that – but from complaint 1, it should be obvious that there is no argument. Bethke talks about how he hates false religion, and I agree with that. The blogger completely destroys his credibility by mocking Bethke’s beautiful poem – a poem that the blogger does not understand.

  • loxofgold

    @ Peter: By “unforgivable” I think he meant “can’t be dismissed without looking into it” – not that it’s an unforgivable sin.

    As far as the Catholic church bringing division by sticking to the truth – the bible has a lot that says Christians must always uphold and proclaim ALL of Christ’s teachings and prefer absolutely nothing to Him.

    As far as this video saying we can never be worthy of Christ – true; we cannot earn salvation or God’s love by our own deeds. Only by Christ are we saved. But in order to be able to RECEIVE his gift of salvation, we must comply with his grace, follow his Will, and observe his teachings. Also, we can become “unworthy” by our sins or rejection of His commandments. I think the guy in the video would agree, but he didn’t seem to get that we have to conform to Christ to be saved.

    Scripture references:

    Matt 5:18-19
    “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
    - This means that all truth and all of God’s commands are relevant and pertinent. We cannot neglect the truth / the Gospel in order to people please. We cannot compromise when it comes to Christ’s unchanging, eternal, and absolute truths. We should never think we are “worrying about the wrong things” by upholding God’s truths.

    John 15:4-6
    Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.
    - This says we cannot earn salvation and will most definitely not have it if we don’t abide in Christ. We must “abide” in Christ in order to bear fruit and be saved.

    John 15: 9-11
    “As the Father loved Me, I also have loved you; abide in My love. If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.
    - This says that in order to “abide” in Christ and be saved, we must KEEP HIS COMMANDS. Not just proclaim him Lord and Savior.

    Matt 32-33
    “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    - We must uphold Christ as our Lord to be his disciple.

    Matt 34-36
    “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law— a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
    -This shows that to TRULY follow Christ means expecting to be divided in relationships with those who do not follow Christ. That’s not to say Christians reject non Christians; but Christians don’t endorse other beliefs and cannot compromise their own for the sake of ecumenicism. We don’t curse the darkness (the evil in the world), but we are an unchanging light to the World. If by saying that Catholics reject non-believers you mean that we don’t pretend that their beliefs are alright – you are correct. We uphold the truth and reject sin, while loving the sinner.
    Christ says himself that there will be divisions and that His followers will be rejected just like he was.

    Matt 37-39
    “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. ”
    - If we prefer ANYTHING whatsoever to Christ and his truth, then we are not worthy of him. This includes human relationships. Again, we can’t compromise our faith and beliefs for the sake of people pleasing.

    Galations 5:19-21
    Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
    - This says again that those who remain in sin (and therefore don’t remain in Christ) will not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven – so again your salvation depends on your adherence to God’s will / law.

  • Guest

    I kind of think everyone here is kind of proving exactly why Jesus didn’t come to start a religion. People get lost in it. Jesus came to provide salvation. it doesn’t really matter what religion you are, if you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. “No one comes to the Father except through me.” Not through ritual or religion. Through Jesus Christ. Congregation and fellowship are important, but it’s really all about the ultimate sacrifice on the cross, and I think that’s what the maker of this video was trying to say.

  • Anonymous

    It’s really great that you are testing everything that you hear and not just taking it blindly. However, I just wanted to point out that I think you may have misunderstood his meaning. By “religion” I didn’t get the vibe that he was singling out Catholics, that actually didn’t even cross my mind. There are churches of every denomination who have black marks (i.e. Westboro Baptist Church, and many more). His bash of religion was not against the law. I think he meant the kind of fake, “Sunday Christians” (who exist in ever denomination) type of religious folk. It is clear though, that he fully upholds the commandments of Jesus Christ, in acknowledging that we are to love our neighbor, etc. Your tone really alarmed me which is the only reason I decided to comment. It was rather hateful “…you just got kris kringled” was perhaps the most alarming statement, among several others. You have very valid points, but keep in mind that this guy obviously really truly loves Jesus and, though he may have made a few minor wording mistakes, the message of his video was largely very true. Just thought I’d give my input, but props for your testing of all things to make sure they line up with the Bible. Maybe just take a different approach…

  • Sims1

    this man chooses to follow and honor jesus and the meaning of what Jesus stands for. Its no different than to admire Dr. Luther King for what he stood for or any person in history who did great things and carries a personal meaning with them. The text that he took from the Bible he offered as an interpretation to support his beliefs, which religion does as well. It doesn’t make it wrong until someone uses those words to oppress/hurt others. because that is not what religion is about its to give hope to those who need it, to make sense of the world, and love. I do not think that he is fully wrong nor fully right, nitpicking every little thing about what he has said and saying that he is completely wrong, well now that being a little closeminded.

  • Rocket Surgeon

    You folks admit to knowing protestants – amazing.

  • Mikekonderla

    I actually agree with your claim that Jesus didn’t come to abolish religion as a whole. However, I disagree with just about everything else. Jesus did not build a chruch on Peter. Peter (greek petros) is the equivalent of a then common Hebrew/Aramaic name and nickname Kefa or Cephas which means stone or rock. When Jesus said “on this rock I will build my church” the rock in question is petra which is the feminine form of the word and means a really big rock like cornerstone.

    If Peter is the rock he and for that matter the other great apostle Paul don’t seem to know that.

    1 Peter 2:4
    And coming to Him as to a living stone which was rejected by man but precious in the sight of God.

    1 Corinthians 10:4
    And they all drank the same spiritual drink for they were drinking from the same spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ.

    Prophecies and passages in the Hebrew Scripture concerning the rock were viewed by the apostles as refering to the Messiah. I believe Jesus is the rock on which the church is built, not Peter.

    As for your claim about the preisthood or roles for specific men, again with what Peter says:

    1 Peter 2 :9

    But you are a chosen nation, a royal preisthood, a people for God’s possesion…

    Do you think this applies only to clergy?

    And now with what Jesus said

    Matthew 23 : 8

    Do not be called Rabbi, for you have one teacher and you are all brothers. Call no man on earth Father for you have one Father who is in Heaven. And do not be called leader for you have only one Leader and that is the Christ. Whoever will be greatest among you must be your servant. Whoever exalts Himself will be humbled, but whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

    Are you sure Jesus established a clergy? A preisthood yes but certainly not a clergy. The preisthood he established is inclusive of all beleivers. It wasn’t until a hundred years after Christ that bishops (which was more like a gaurdian then a clergyman) started being exalted to a higher status then so called “lay” people.

    As to your arguement concerning the Eucharist ritual:

    Luke 22:15

    I have earnestly sesired to share this passover meal with you before I suffer…

    As you briefly mentioned or at least alluded to, Jesus of Nazereth is Jewish. He wasn’t creating a new ritual involving bread and wine. That was part of the passover and is carried out every week during the Sabbath meal. Jesus added a new dimension to this ritual by teaching that it was symbolic of his flesh and blood (just as the Pachal lamb is symbolic of his attoning sacrifice on the cross). The ealry followers of Jesus or the Church if you prefer celebrated the Jewish passover in commemoration of the Messiah. It wasn’t until the council of Nicea in 325 AD that the romanizing elements of the new religious hierarchy (created in contridiction of Jesus’s command in Mat 23) finally did away with passover and any other latent elements of the Jewish faith of Jesus and the apostles. Paul sought to defend the rights of ethnic minorties within the Church, which in his days were non-Jews. But in subsequent generations Gentile Christians turned on their Jewish brethen and created a system of religion which had virtually nothing to do with Messianic message of Jesus and his apostles. Through Jesus God sought to open the doors to people of all backgrounds and bring them to Himself, but “Christians” rejected the simple, peaceful and ultimately Jewish teaching of the Messiah choosing power and authroity instead of humility and brotherly love.

    Closing quotes:

    Matthew 20:25-26

    …you know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.it is not to be this way with you, but whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant.

    Mark 12 : 29-30

    And Jesus answered: the foremost (command) is this, “Hear O Isreal! The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (My comment: not three in one). And you shall love the LORD your God with all of heart, and with all of your soul, and all of your mind and all of your strength.”

    James 1: 27

    Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress and to keep one’s self undefiled by the things of this world.

    Galatians 5: 14

    The whole Law is summed up in this one statement: “love your neighbor as yourself.”

  • Sambamham

    I think the writer is missing the point of the young man’s video.I did not see that he was referring to the Catholic Church or any particular church for that matter.I heard him saying he was opposed to the legalistic and judgemental attitudes that are often present among many Christians and in many churches.For you to have spent so much time defending the indefensible is probably a good indication he struck a nerve with you.Listen to the video again and see it not as an attack on Catholicism but as a prophetic word that Jesus might be bringing to His followers today.

  • Robert Trca