From an email to a friend, Earl writes (only point 1 discussed here):

1. Read the classics: dial up amazon.com and search for the works of James McGregor Burns, Henri Nouwen, Warren Bennis, etc. While we can debate “what’s a classic?,” books of this sort will get you into the game in a hurry.

I just don’t get the attraction to Henri Nouwen.

Why would any true Christian want to point others to the writings of a heritic? I know that is a strong claim but it’s the truth.

Henri Nouwen, the now deceased Catholic theologian, hardly seems an appropriate spiritual mentor for bible believing Christians.

Consider the following quote from Nouwen:

Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not. Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God. — From Sabbatical Journey, Henri Nouwen’s last book page 51, 1998 Hardcover Edition

The above quote from Nouwen is in direct contradiction to the biblical record as to how one must be saved (justified). Ephesians 2:4-9 makes it abundantly clear that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. There is only one path to Christ and any message to the contrary is a false gospel.

Galatians 1:6-9 says that the preacher preaching a false gospel is accursed.

(HT: Developing a Reading Plan)

The full text of the article BRAININESS: GOOD BUT NOT SUFFICIENT follows with some comments at the end. Emphasis in italics mine.

“Modern Reformation” is a bimonthly magazine published by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. Its editor is Michael Horton, and among its advisors and contributors are W. Robert Godfrey, Ron Rosenbladt, R. C. Sproul, Timothy George, Douglas Groothuis, Carl F. H. Henry, and John Warwick Montgomery. If you read the more scholarly Evangelical journals, you will recognize some of those names.

Once upon a time, “Christianity Today” was the intellectual center of Evangelicalism, but CT long ago ceased to devote its pages to serious writing. Today it represents Evangelicalism Lite–not a liberal version of Evangelicalism but an intellectually lightweight version. “Modern Reformation,” which is a dozen years old, has filled much of the gap.

A recent issue was devoted to the theme “We Believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.” And these Evangelicals do, but it is one thing to believe in something and another thing to locate it. I admire the seriousness that infuses the articles in this special issue, and I wince in sympathy at the lack of success in finding that one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

In his contribution, Michael Horton tries to define what is meant when one says the Christian Church is “catholic.” “At one end of the spectrum are Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and specific Protestant bodies that often claim simply to be the catholic church without remainder.” This won’t do, he says, because the real Church is not mainly a visible body, and these churches are all visible.

“On the other end are most evangelical and pentecostal groups that, in their ‘nondenominational’ denominationalism, understand the church as simply the sum total of individuals who are truly born again.” That won’t do either.

The answer is to be found among the “churches of the Reformation,” Horton says. They “reflect a somewhat mediating position.” They have visible elements, such as “faithful preaching and right administration,” but they also take into account that the true Church is present wherever the gospel is preached. These Reformed (Calvinist) churches thus are one step up from the atomism of nondenominationalism but one step down from the rigor of the pre-Reformation churches of the East and West.

As I said, I wince when I read such arguments. I wince because the arguments are so unconvincing, as splitting-the-difference arguments usually are. I don’t want to pick on Michael Horton. Those writing in “Modern Reformation” on the three other marks of the Church are in the same predicament.

Paul C. H. Lim, for instance, laments that a friend has left Evangelicalism for Rome, but this only encourages Lim “to take a journey of his own to discover what true unity means and why, as a Protestant, he can assent to being part of ‘one, holy, catholic, and apostolic’ church.”

Well, Mr. Lim can assent to that, but he is not assenting to a fact, because the church he belongs to does not in fact have those four marks. Wishing does not make it so, and, reading between the lines and taking into account the evident intelligence and sincerity of the writers, I am led to think that they know–either consciously or subconsciously–that their position is not tenable.

Some Catholics think that Protestantism, being a truncated form of Christianity, must appeal only to people of restricted intelligence. Sure, there are many fine people in Protestantism, but those with brains move elsewhere. It’s not as simple as that. I know many highly intelligent Protestants, including several of the men whose names are listed above, and their remaining Protestant is not a matter of a lack of brains.

Why do they seem convinced by arguments such as those in this issue of “Modern Reformation,” when I and others think the arguments are so weak that, in a way, they prove the opposite of what they were intended to prove–that is, that they prove the necessity of joining the real Catholic Church (I mean the one headed by the Pope)?

Why are these intelligent people happy with arguments that others find flawed–and not just flawed on the periphery but flawed in their core? I have no answer for that. The situation may be something like that famous line drawing of a vase. Squint your eyes just so, and the image becomes two faces. Squint again, and it’s back to a vase. So near, yet so far.

Mr. Keating in saying the following presumes we trust he understands and is part of the one true church, that being the Roman Catholic church.

I wince in sympathy at the lack of success in finding that one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church…. I wince because the arguments are so unconvincing.

Keating argues that the Reformed understanding of the church is unconvincing yet offers no defense of his own position on the definition of the church.

Keating goes on to say, speaking of those in the Reformed camp:

I am led to think that they know–either consciously or subconsciously–that their position is not tenable…. Why do they seem convinced by arguments such as those in this issue of “Modern Reformation,” when I and others think the arguments are so weak that, in a way, they prove the opposite of what they were intended to prove–that is, that they prove the necessity of joining the real Catholic Church (I mean the one headed by the Pope)? Why are these intelligent people happy with arguments that others find flawed–and not just flawed on the periphery but flawed in their core?

It’s interesting to me that Keating expects readers to move in his direction simply because he and others think the Reformed view of the church is weak. Keating is hardly convincing to me. Really, who does Mr. Keating think he is?

In the absence of Keating’s defense of his idea of ‘the church’ and his lack of reference to scripture, I will provide here a summarized explanation of the Reformed understanding of the church with scripture references.

systematic theology, chapter 44, the church: its nature, its marks, and its purposes — Wayne Grudem

The church is the community of all true believers for all time. This definition understands the church to be made of all those who are truly saved. Paul says, “Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). Here the term “the church” is used to apply to all those whom Christ died to redeem, all those who are saved by the death of Christ. But that must include all true believers for all time, both believers in the New Testament age and believers in the Old Testament age as well. So great is God’s plan for the church that he has exalted Christ to a position of highest authority [not a Pope] for the sake of the church: “He has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all.” (Eph. 1:22-23).

Jesus Christ himself builds the church by calling his people to himself.

A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, chapter 20, the nature and foundation of the church

…. we can assert here that the church in Scripture is composed of all the redeemed in every age who are saved by grace through personal faith in the sacrificial work of Jesus Christ, “the seed of the woman” (Gen. 3:15) and suffering Messiah (Isa. 53:5-10).

The church is one by virtue of its union with Christ. All its members are baptized by one Spirit into one body having one Head and one Lord. There is one building with one foundation, one flock under one Shepherd. Dissensions and divisions among Christians obscure the oneness of the body of Christ. Hence, we have various appeals in the epistles for unity through patience and love [not through a Pope]. The church’s “oneness,” as both fact and ideal to be achieved, is taught particularly by Jesus and Paul. [John 10:14-16; John 17:20-23; Romans 15:5-6; Galatians 3:28; 1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 1 Corinthians 12:12-13; Ephesians 2:14-16; Ephesians 4:3-6; Philippians 2:2; Colossians 3:12-14]

To rap this up, I would just say there is an overwhelming body of biblical evidence to support the Reformed concept of ‘the church’ as being the body of Christ; those who are partakers of Christ and the blessings of salvation that are in Him.

Hagee had been criticized for reportedly calling the Catholic Church “The Great Whore,” an “apostate church,” the “anti-Christ,” and a “false cult system.” He had also accused the Catholic Church of nurturing anti-Semitism. Hagee repeated allegations of Pope Pius XII’s indifference to Nazism and linked Adolf Hitler’s anti-Semitism to his Catholic education.

In the May 12 letter to the Catholic League and its president Bill Donohue, Rev. Hagee said he was writing to “clarify my views” and “advance greater unity between Catholics and Evangelicals.” Link to the letter can be found here.

Apparently Hagee is OK with ignoring Galatians 1:6-9. I suppose Hagee thinks the Roman Catholic Church preaches a biblical gospel.

Gospel preachers of old like Spurgeon and M. Lloyd-Jones held that Rome does not preach a biblical gospel.

Links of Interest:

1. Catholic League declares end to Rev. Hagee controversy
2. Meeting Reverend John Hagee
3. Hagee’s Letter of Apology (PDF)
4. League accepts Hagee apology – 2008 Presidential Campaign
5. McCain Backer John Hagee Apologizes to Catholics
6. Pastor John Hagee says he’s sorry for anti-Catholic remarks

Along with others, many evangelical Christians will be watching with interest. The long pontificate of the globe-trotting John Paul II is all an entire generation of evangelicals now remember as background, and Benedict is a comparatively unknown figure.

Writing immediately after Benedict’s election, I wrote these words, referencing the Pope’s previous role in the Vatican as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger:

Yet, there is no reason to believe that the election of Pope Benedict XVI will do anything to breach the divide between evangelicals and Roman Catholics on issues related to biblical authority, the Gospel, and a host of other essential theological questions. We hold no expectation that this pope holds views of justification and the Gospel that are any more harmonious with evangelical conviction than those held by his predecessors. Indeed, Ratzinger’s theological brilliance may be deployed in ways that will cause evangelicals even greater frustration.

As the Vatican’s most influential theologian, Cardinal Ratzinger was already known for his brilliant and incisive critiques of modern secularism and postmodernism’s retreat from truth. At the same time, he was also a staunch defender of the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church – doctrine he had defined and defended as Cardinal Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Thus, I did not expect that Pope Benedict would move to breach the theological divide between evangelicals and Roman Catholics. Indeed, I would have been most surprised if, now elected as Pope, Benedict would reveal himself as someone other than who he had been as Cardinal Ratzinger.

I have not been surprised. Pope Benedict has continued his incisive work on the challenge of modern secularism. His speech at Regensburg, Germany in 2006 and his baptism of a prominent Muslim convert this past Easter were clear signs that this is not a Pope primarily concerned with ecumenical relations. Even so, his statements about the address and the baptism – and the general question of Islam – were perfectly in keeping with Catholic doctrine since Vatican II. Evangelicals can admire his boldness without appreciating his inclusivism.

Perhaps the most clarifying moment since his election came last July when the Vatican released the document known as “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church” – a document that reasserted the claim that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church.

The secular press and a good many non-Catholic church leaders expressed outrage and offense at the Pope’s comments – assuming that such teachings were simply out of place in the modern world. But Benedict was restating the tradition and teaching of his church – and he did so because he cared for those he believes are outside the blessings of grace he is certain are given to those in the communion of his church – and to that communion alone.

I actually appreciated the Pope’s concern. If he is right, we are endangering our souls and the souls of our church members. Yet, I am convinced that he is not right — not right on the papacy, not right on the sacraments, not right on the priesthood, not right on the Gospel, not right in understanding the church.

The Roman Catholic Church believes that evangelicals are in spiritual danger for obstinately and disobediently excluding ourselves from submission to its universal claims and its papacy. Evangelicals are concerned that Catholics are in spiritual danger for their submission to these very claims. We both understand what is at stake.

The divide between evangelical Christians and the Roman Catholic Church remains — as this Pope well understands. And, in so many ways, this is a Pope we can understand. In this strange world, that is no small achievement.

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is the ninth president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary—the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world. The “On Faith” panelist is a theologian and ordained minister and has served as pastor and staff minister of several Southern Baptist churches.

(HT: On Faith)

Related Links:

1. Mohler: Pope Benedict’s convictions underscore Catholic-Protestant divide
2. The Pope Comes to America — Evangelical Thoughts
3. What Divides Catholics and Protestants?

Following this interview with Mike Huckabee there was an intimation of anti-Catholicism by several pundits and commentators.

Here are some details from a second interview with Mike Huckabee addressing some concerns of Catholic Online readers.

However, shortly after its publication, you spoke at a Church in Texas, on a Sunday morning. Of course, there is nothing unusual about that.

What caught the attention of many of our readers and viewers was a concern that the Pastor of the Church has written some material that insults the Catholic Church and has been labeled by some as anti-Catholic.

Our readers understand that you, like all of the candidates, are running for the Presidency. In other words, we know that you seek to govern the whole Nation and, of course, you must reach out to all Americans.

However, there has, unfortunately, been a history of anti-Catholicism in this Nation that we all love.

Your campaign quickly noted the presence of Catholics in many of the top positions of your campaign staff. However, the issue and the concern raised by your visit, has not gone away.

Would you comment upon your visit and on your views concerning Catholics in America?

GOVERNOR HUCKABEE: “I am invited to speak at thousands of diverse venues each year. My willingness to address a group says nothing about whether or not I agree with every tenet, policy or belief espoused by a group.

To be honest, I have never thought about having “a view” about Catholics in America.

Rather, I have enjoyed strong, personal relationships with many Catholics over the years and I would hate to think about my life without those relationships having been there.

For more than a decade, I marched side-by-side with Catholic Bishops in Arkansas’ annual March for Life.

Throughout my years as Lieutenant Governor and Governor, I enjoyed a very close relationship with leaders and members of the Catholic Church in Arkansas.

My pro-life record is largely the result of this close working relationship.

My relationships with Catholics predated my entry into politics. When I was pastoring a Baptist church in Texarkana, I had the opportunity to work closely with the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word at the St. Michael Hospital near my church. I was always welcomed warmly by the sisters when I visited the sick.

As a pastor, I held joint services with my neighboring Catholic congregation, was invited to speak in Catholic churches for special services, and had regular breakfast meetings with the Bishop of the Arkansas Diocese, Bishop Peter Sartain, now in Illinois.

Those early years of ministry showed me the value of working with caring people whether or not every one of our religious tenets line up exactly.

In short, if I held any animosity toward Catholics, I don’t think Justice Scalia would have ever taken me up on my invitations to go duck hunting.

As I mentioned before, many of my top-level staff and closest advisors are Catholic, including my national campaign manager, national campaign director, my policy advisor and my campaign’s chief operating officer

Having read this follow-on interview, as an evangelical Christian, I have some concerns regarding Mike Huckabee’s faithfullness to biblical Christianity.

1. Huckabee says he has never had a ‘view’ on Catholics in America. This is a shocking statement to me. As a former Baptist minister, Huckabee sure should have had a ‘view’ on Catholics in America and around the world. Did Huckabee some how forget about the Reformation and what it was all about. If the Reformers where correct in their views, and I think they where, the Catholic Church is nothing short of apostasy. This should be no small matter for a Baptist minister. I guess it was for Huckabee.
2. Huckabee held joint services with neighboring Catholic congregations and spoke at Catholic churches. Sounds very ecumenical to me. I don’t see a Baptist pastor, holding to a biblical standard, being yoked together with an apostate church.
3. Huckabee does say his willingness to address a group does not mean he agrees with everything the group believes. I am sure Huckabee does not agree with everything that a group may believe, however, it does seem he considers Catholicism as truly Christian.

This kind of talk from Huckabee makes me wonder what he is willing to do to become President. As true Christians, we should never compromise our stand on the Gospel. In my view, Huckabee may not see it, but I think he has compromised the Gospel.

To be sure, the President has to uphold freedom of religion. However, if he claims to be a Christian, he must not compromise the truth of the Gospel in upholding the freedom of others to practice their religion.

To conclude this post I would like to commend Huckabee for his position on ’social issues’ such as abortion, marriage, family, etc.

Just eight out of 22 Ministers are prepared to say they are Christians, while two admit to being atheists.

Read the complete story here.

You may download the MP3s here:

1. Bleating Wolves: Evangelicals & Catholics Together, John Robbins
2. The Structure of the Roman Church-State, Richard Bennett
3. A Brief History of Roman Persecution, Richard Bennett
4. The Roman Church-State Doctrine of Authority, Robert Zins
5. Justification and the Roman Catholic Doctrine of Salvation, Richard Bennett
6. The Occult and Roman Superstitions, Timothy Kauffman
7. The Political Thought of the Roman Church-State, John Robbins
8. The Economic Thought of the Roman Church-State, John Robbins
9. Romanism and the Westminster Confession, James Bordwine

Disclaimer: I have not personally listened to all 9 lectures.

Why be a Catholic?

If you want to invent your own religion, do not be a Catholic. If you want to teach the Church rather than let the Church teach you, there are plenty of other churches for you, churches that welcome theologies without miracles, moralities without absolutes, and liturgies without adoration. Please do not be a Catholic unless you believe the Church’s claim to speak in these area in the name of Jesus Christ.

There is no such thing as a “cafeteria Catholic“. Catholics do not pick and choose among the Church’s doctrines and laws; we receive them gratefully from God, we “eat all the food Mother puts on our plate”.

A “cafeteria Catholic” or a half Catholic or a 95 percent Catholic is a contradiction in terms. If the Catholic Church does not have the divine authority and infallibility she claims, then she is not half right or 95 percent right, but the most arrogant and blasphemous of all churches, a flase prophet claiming “thus says the Lord” for mere human opinions. It must be either/or, as with Christ himself: if Christ is not God, as he claims, then he is not 95 percent right or half right or merely on of may good human prophets or teachers, but the most arrogant and blasphemous false prophet who ever lived. Just as a mere man who claims to be God is not a fairly good man but a very bad man, a merely human church that claims divine authority and infallibility is not a fairly good church but a very bad church.

The only honest reason to be a Christian is because you believe Christ’s claim to be God incarnate. The only honest reason to be a Catholic is because you believe the Church’s claim to be the divinely authorized Body of this Christ.

So, I guess if you are Baptist or say Methodist you are a member of an invented rather than biblical church/religion.

Presumably, the Catholic Church has something to teach us non-Catholics. Maybe the unbiblical doctrines of purgatory, the immaculate conception, papal succession, or the need of baptism for salvation just to mention a few.

I, along with many, do not accept the claims of the Roman Catholic Church with regards to their “devine authority” or “infallibility”. I do not accept any such claim that the Roman Catholic Church is “the divinely authorized Body of this Christ”. All who trust in Jesus as Saviour and Lord are members of Christ’s Church (the non-physical, universal church), not the Church of Rome.

I suppose, based on Dr. Kreeft’s own words, that the Catholic Church, because she does not possess the authority she claims, is a bad church, the most arrogant and blasphemous of all churches. This, Dr. Kreeft’s words, not mine.

I have not read Getting to Know the Church Fathers yet but I plan to. It is my hope that this book will better inform evangelicals on the ‘Church Fathers’.

The following is a description of the book:

Many evangelical Christians know very little about the early church fathers. Others have heard just enough to be suspicious of them and their treatment of Scripture. Still others are becoming interested in this neglected but significant community of believers.

In Getting to Know the Church Fathers, patristics scholar Bryan Litfin introduces readers to ten ancient Christians and dispels the misconceptions that have tainted many evangelicals’ view of them.

Litfin’s personal and accessible approach to the church fathers–including Augustine, Ignatius, Origen, Perpetua, and Tertullian–reveals the riches of the Christian tradition and how much Christians today have been shaped by them in the ways we worship, pray, study Scripture, and live as a community.

Each chapter tells the story of one figure’s life and work, and concludes with probing questions for discussion or reflection, guides to further reading, and a fresh, vivid translation from the church father’s original writings. The book is ideal for students, professors, church groups, and others seeking to learn more about historic, orthodox Christianity.

Author Information: Bryan M. Litfin (PhD, University of Virginia) is associate professor of theology at Moody Bible Institute.

Our position is that the Reformation is not over. What do you think? Share your thoughts with us.

Here are two post on the topic:

1. Dr. Sam Storm, Is the Reformation Over?
2. Ignatius Insight: Has The Reformation Ended?

Most, if not all these issues, have been dealt with at great length and to our satisfaction by others. Therefore, in discussing these topics, we will make considerable use of these references.

The following are some of the questions/issues and our response along with any references to external sources. Again, in order to be a good stuard of the time God gives us, we will not replicate the work that others have laboured to provide to the Body of Christ.

Question #1

Here are the questions. I would like to stick to this discussion for awhile and then move to another topic that we are in disagreement about. Your comment on agreeing to disagree is precisely my point with some of these questions. In the assumed(cant be proved by scripture) sola scriptura belief system of Protestantism you can never get past two fallible men throwing scripture verses at each other. There is no higher authority to appeal to because the individual is ultimately the final authority, which i believe is unbiblical. That is why i continually ask, why i should believe Shane’s fallible interpretation of scripture over anyone elses? You are giving me your interpretation, which since you are not infallible could be wrong. Since you could be wrong, you could be wrong about the Catholic Church, which is why i wonder why your interpretation is better than anyone else’s???? Anyone with any belief can prove their beliefs from scripture, ie look at all the denominations is Protestantism. everyone of them is going by the bible alone. So why are you right and everyone else is wrong? Do you pray more than them? Do you have more schooling than them? Is the Holy Spirit speak in an audible voice to you? (you could answer these above question too, if you would please).

Answer #1

Yes, we without reservation admit to our fallibility and the fallibility of every man who has lived, is living, or will ever live this side of heaven. Jesus Christ was the only perfect man who ever did or will walk on the earth. Jesus was afterall God. ( Col. 1:19, Col. 2:9, Matt. 1:23 ).

To the issue of proving a point with scripture, everyone having possibly different interpretations, fallibility, who is right and who is wrong, etc. this is what we would say. First, be a Berean. In Acts 17:11 the writer of Acts commended those in the synagogue of the Greek city of Berea for being more fair minded than those in Thessalonica, because while they were eager to receive the Word, they also checked it against what the Apostle Paul taught them in order to see if his teaching was according to the Scriptures or not. We expect no less, truth can be found and it is the responsibility of each individual to seek and find the truth. The bible says if we seek God we will find Him (Acts 17:27, Jeremiah 29:13, Proverbs 8:17). We are also told in the Word that ‘knowing the truth will set us free’ (John 8:31-32).

Question #2

How do we view the following ideas: the primacy of Peter (the apostle of apostles), Papal succession all the way to Peter, and ‘the keys to the kingdom‘.

Answer #2 (Online Source)

Two thousand years ago Jesus said to Peter, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loose in heaven.” This reference to the “keys of the kingdom” is found only in Matthew 16:19, however the authority to “bind and loose” is given to all the disciples in Matthew 18:18. Many biblical scholars believe the “keys” are symbols representing the authority to govern and minister theocratic principles on earth. However, the interpretation of this verse has been the subject of debate for hundreds of years.

Within the Roman Catholic tradition, doctrines have developed that give the papacy authority to delegate the power to forgive or retain sins through a sacramental system of penance and absolution. The Catholic Encyclopedia states, “The power to confer or withhold forgiveness might well be viewed as the opening and shutting of the gates of heaven.” It was used both as “admission to” as well as “excommunication from” the kingdom. The power to “bind and loose” also gives the Popes authority to pronounce doctrinal judgments, making disciplinary decisions in the Church and even canonize saints. This authority and power prescribes what and who Catholics must believe and how and when they must worship.

The Vatican teaches that Peter’s keys have been handed down to his successors throughout the centuries. This has given credence to the papacy to govern the kingdom of God, which they believe, is the Roman Catholic Church. As a result, Peter and his successors are said to have special spiritual powers as Christ’s representative on earth.

Proponents of the Roman Catholic tradition point to history as supporting evidence for their interpretation of the keys of the kingdom. However, most of their historical support comes from tradition dating back only the fourth century.

An accurate historical and grammatical interpretation must consider the use of terms at the time of the writing of the original text. The concept of the kingdom and the keys must be understood from their usage in the first century. Peter and the disciples understood the kingdom to be the visible rule of Christ over the earth, not the spiritual rule of Christ over His invisible church. The king would rule from Jerusalem, free Israel from political bondage and destroy her enemies. After Israel rejected the offer of the kingdom, Christ began to teach about it from a different perspective. He taught that it would be a mystery, invisible, and progressive. It would be both present and future and could be entered only by regeneration. The kingdom would not be limited to the church, but would work through the church to proclaim the good news of God’s redemptive rule.

After the events of Pentecost, Christ’s teaching and the indwelling Holy Spirit, gave the disciples a clearer understanding of this kingdom. The real authority of the keys given by Christ is ultimately in the revelation of God’s principles from the Scriptures for His theocratic kingdom. Men of God were able to discern the correctness of doctrine and practice using the whole counsel of God (Acts 17:11). An example of this is found in Luke 11:52, where Jesus denounces the Pharisees for misrepresenting God and the Scriptures with a religion of their own making. As a result they were shutting the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. “Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.”

The ultimate power to open and close the gates of heaven is the Gospel, which “is the power of God for the salvation of all who believe” (Romans 1:16). Peter’s first proclamation of the Gospel on the Day of Pentecost, in Acts chapter 2, opened the door of the kingdom to thousands. Since then, the disciples, and all Christians who have succeeded them, have been opening and closing the doors of the kingdom with the Gospel. Those who hear it and believe it are forgiven (loosed) of their sin and enter the kingdom, while those who reject the Gospel remain unforgiven (bound) of their sins and can not enter the kingdom (John 3:36).

The contrast between the Catholic interpretation of the “keys of the kingdom” and the historical-grammatical interpretation is significant. One centers around the teachings of men and is based on tradition and reason, while the other centers around the Word of God and is based on His revealed will and reign.

In a section of Advance called Famous People of Faith (Interesting tidbits about famous followers of Christ), you will find a favorable reference to G.K. Chesterton.

Chesterton became a Catholic later in life and continued championing Christian values through his life and writings.

Excuse me, did they say Chesterton championed Christian values? I don’t think so! Let me share with you just a few of the false ideas the Catholic Chesterton held to and died with I presume.

1. Church tradition equal to or even above Holy Scripture (the Bible)
2. The possibility of theistic evolution
3. A faith-plus-works doctrine of justification (salvation)
4. The Catholic Church can forgive sins
5. the Real Presence of Christ in the Mass
6. Prayers to dead saints for the release of dead loved ones from Purgatory
7. Writings suggest he did not support the literal inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures
8. Infallibility of the Pope
9. Traditional Catholic doctrine of Mary
   1. veneration of Mary
   2. Immaculate Conception (Mary born without original sin)

Do I really need to say anymore. Why would an evangelical christian denomination like the Foursquare Church point anyone to such a biblically confused person as Chesterton. I will say, it is no suprise to me. I suppose the Foursquare Church is not unlike others in the ‘charismatic’ movement who embrace the Catholic Church.

This article talks about a new, innocuously titled book, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light (Doubleday), consisting primarily of correspondence between Teresa and her confessors and superiors over a period of 66 years, provides the spiritual counterpoint to a life known mostly through its works. The letters, many of them preserved against her wishes (she had requested that they be destroyed but was overruled by her church), reveal that for the last nearly half-century of her life she felt no presence of God whatsoever ? or, as the book’s compiler and editor, the Rev. Brian Kolodiejchuk, writes, “neither in her heart or in the eucharist.”

Over the next several weeks, we will make a humble attempt to discuss this new book and Mother Teresa in light of scripture. We will not have the same perspective as many, but we invite you to come along with us and share your thoughts. Your comments will be moderated. Just about the only thing we will not allow is foul or suggestively foul language.

So, the full title of the book is, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light (The Private Writings of the “Saint of Calcutta”

Here is the text of the front inside cover:

During her lifelong service to the poorest of the poor, Mother Teresa became an icon of compassion to people of all religions; her extraordinary contribution to the care of the sick, the dying, and thousands of others nobody else was prepared to look after have been recognized and acclaimed throughout the world. Little is known, however, about her own spiritual heights or her struggles. This collection of her writings and reflections, almost all of which have never been made public before, sheds light on Mother Teresa?s interior life in a way that reveals the depth and intensity of her holiness for the first time.

Compiled and presented by Father Brian Kolodiejchuk, M.C., who knew Mother Teresa for twenty years and is the postulator for her cause for sainthood and director of the Mother Teresa Center, Mother Teresa brings together letters she wrote to her spiritual advisors over decades. A moving chronicle of her spiritual journey?including moments, indeed years, of utter desolation?these letters reveal the secrets she shared only with her closest confidants. She emerges as a classic mystic whose inner life burned with the fire of charity and whose heart was tested and purified by an intense trail of faith, a true dark night of the soul.

Published to coincide with the tenth anniversary of her death, Mother Teresa is an intimate portrait of a woman whose life and work continue to be admired by millions of people.

In Part 2, we will provide an outline of the book, and cover the Preface, Introduction, and Chapter 1.

Its no surprise that commentators at BreakPoint find no issues regarding Mother Teresa’s faith.

Jason Bruce, in his post, The Crisis of Mother Teresa, quotes Mother Teresa where she says “You don’t have to be a saint to do good? you need willing hands not clean ones? If we wait for our souls to be totally clean, our time on earth will be swept away”

To that I would like to remind Mr. Bruce that all born again Christians are saints.

Jason ends his piece with this, “What an excellent example of faith in the trustworthiness of God.”

Gina Dalfonzo, in her post, Dark night of the soul, writes … “Anyway, getting back to Mother Teresa’s spiritual crisis, another commenter, Carter Johnson, goes so far as to suggest that maybe her feelings of emptiness meant that she was following the wrong Gospel.”

Dalfonzo doesn’t seem to even give a second thought to the suggestion that Mother Teresa might not have know the true God. Dalfonzo finally points us to none other than Chuck Colson himself and his piece, A Suffering Servant.

Colson says … The very essence of faith, you see, is believing even in the absence of evidence. And it is the only way we can know Christ. We can conclude rationally that God exists, that His Word is true, and that He has revealed Himself. But without that leap of faith, we will never know God personally or accept His will in Christ.

So what do the letters of Mother Teresa reveal? For one, they reveal the true cost of discipleship. To follow Christ is to embrace suffering and the Cross. And, at times, to say with Jesus, ?My God, my God, why did you abandon me??

This is an interesting description of faith in light of scripture:

Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

You can find several post regarding Colson’s ecumenical tendencies here.

Advertisement: Support this site! Visit Westminster Books.

(HT: JT)

What are we to make of Mother Teresa’s crisis of faith? That is a question I have been repeatedly asked in recent days. This week’s TIME cover story by David van Biema caught the attention of millions around the world, and it raises some of the most important questions about the Christian faith.

In a new book, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light, previously undisclosed letters raise basic questions about her understanding of the Gospel. David van Biema’s article, “Mother Teresa’s Crisis of Faith,” brings many questions to light.

I have written a column on these questions at “On Faith,” the project of The Washington Post and Newsweek magazine. Here is the main portion of my article:

The recent revelations of Mother Teresa’s spiritual struggle should remind all believing Christians that our faith is in Christ — not in our feelings.

The disclosure of previous secret letters from Mother Teresa indicates that she was deeply troubled by doubts and a sense of Christ’s absence. The fact is that many Christians struggle with doubt. Indeed, the most thoughtful believers are most likely of all to understand what is at stake, and thus to suffer pangs and seasons of doubt.

Doubt can be healthy. It can drive believers to a deeper knowledge of what we believe and a deeper embrace of the truth of the Gospel. It can deepen our trust in God and mature our faith. At the same time, doubt can be a form of sin . . . a refusal to trust God and his promises.

This can also be the root of depression, especially spiritual depression. I would not presume to read Mother Teresa’a heart or soul, but I can reflect on the questions raised by her experience.

The Christian Gospel is the good news that God saves sinners through the atonement accomplished by Jesus Christ — his cross and resurrection. Salvation comes to those who believe in Christ — it is by grace we are saved through faith.

But the faith that saves is not faith in faith, nor faith in our ability to maintain faith, but faith in Christ. Our confidence is in Christ, not in ourselves.

There is a sweet and genuine emotional aspect to the Christian faith, and God made us emotional and feeling creatures. But we cannot trust our feelings. Our faith is not anchored in our feelings, but in the facts of the Gospel.

As an evangelical Christian, I have to be concerned that part of Mother Teresa’s struggle was that she did not consider herself worthy of salvation. She was certainly not worthy of salvation. Nor am I. Nor is any sinner. The essence of the Gospel is that none is worthy of salvation. That is what makes salvation all about grace. As the Apostle Paul taught us, the wonder of God’s grace is that while we were sinners, Christ died for us.

Our confidence is in Christ, not in ourselves. We are weak; He is strong. We fluctuate; He is constant. We cannot trust our feelings nor our emotional state. We trust in Christ. Those who come to Christ by faith are not kept unto him by our faith, but by his faithfulness.

I possess no ability to read Mother Teresa’s heart, but I do sincerely hope that her faith was in Christ, and not in her own faithfulness.

Be sure to read the article and reader comments — and also see what others have to say at “On Faith.”

Galatians 1:6-9 (English Standard Version)

No Other Gospel

6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel — 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

All the above being said, the following cover article in the Sept. 3, 2007 edition of Time Magazine is an interesting read.

Jesus has a very special love for you. As for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great that I look and do not see, listen and do not hear.
— Mother Teresa to the Rev. Michael Van Der Peet, September 1979

Read the complete article here.

Related Resources:

• The Myth Of Mother Teresa
• The Death of Discernment In The Church
• Mother Teresa’s ‘40-year faith crisis’
• Mother Teresa’s diary reveals her crisis of faith
• Apprising Ministries

Transubstantiation is derived from the Latin term tansubsubstaniato, meaning ”change of substance”. This term was incorporated into the creed of the Forth Latern Council in A.D. 1215

Transubstantiation is defined by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent as follows: “By the consecration of the bread and wine, a conversion (or change) is made of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord, and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of His blood; which conversion is, by the holy Catholic Church, suitably and properly called Transubstantiation.”

The Catechism of the Council of Trent expands this belief by stating: “In this sacrament are contained not only the true body of Christ, and all the constituents of a true body, such as bones and sinews, but also Christ whole and entire”. It also explains, “Christ whole and entire, is contained, not only under either species, but also in each particle of the same species.” (Species = bread and wine)

The Church of Rome teaches that when the priest in the Mass blesses the bread, it is no longer bread but Jesus Christ himself and similarly the wine is Jesus Christ himself.

In the final analysis, it is important to note that David Lister calls on Roman Catholics to go back to the Word of God and search for the truth.

Read the complete post here.

With Evangelical and Pentecostal representatives joining in at an 8-12 August consultation in Toulouse, the joint Vatican-World Council of Churches study process on religious conversion gets one step closer to its goal of a common code of conduct in seeking converts to Christianity.

Did you get that, … a common code of conduct in seeking converts … What on earth are they talking about, I had this strange notion that the bible was clear on how we should reach the lost. Why is this group wasting so much time, energy, and money on something that is already clearly addresses in scripture? (Shane Trammel)

Please share your thoughts on this topic with us.

You can read the complete post here.

Related Link:

Report from inter-religious consultation on “Conversion – assessing the reality”

I recently found this letter from James Dobson to Father Frank Pavone (Roman Catholic). It is very clear to me that James Dobson accepts the Roman Catholic Church as a Christian denomination. We must consider the sobering reality that many ‘Evangelical’ para-church ministries and churches all over America are embracing Rome with open arms. This should give all true Christians reason for concern.

The following is the text of the letter. You can download a PDF of the real letter here.

August 24,2006

Father Frank Pavone
Priests For Life
P.O. Box 60200
Staten Island, NY 10306-0200

Dear Father Pavone:

On behalf of the entire staff of Focus on the Family, I want to take a few moments to extend best wishes to you and to all of your friends and supporters gathered in Amarillo. Today marks a milestone event in the history of Priests for Life and the Catholic Church of America, and it is an honor to pass along our congratulations on the establishment of Missionaries of the Gospel of Life.

Your tireless work on behalf of the preborn gives witness to the strength of your dedication and has served as an encouragement to me, personally, to keep up the good fight. You are to be commended for the conviction and passion with which you have taken an unwavering stand in opposition to abortion. And by partnering with Christians from across the spectrum of the Body of Christ, you have not only advanced the pro-life movement, but you have effectively demonstrated the importance of banding together in order to confront the Culture of Death prevalent today. Only when we build a Culture of Life in its stead will we successfully put an end to the senseless killing of little ones in the
womb.

Now you will have an even greater opportunity to fulfill this vision. As you prepare seminarians who will devote their ministry exclusively to this battle, I am confident that the impact of your efforts will only increase. You are a dear friend to me, Father Pavone, and I look forward to our ongoing collaboration. May God continue to use Priests for Life and the Missionaries of the Gospel of Life to call the Christian community to an even deeper commitment to saving innocent babies. Richest blessings!

Sincerely,

James C. Dobson, Ph.D.

Jill Carattini
Jill Carattini graduated with a degree in Theology from Hope College in Holland, Michigan where she also attended Western Theological Seminary. She has enjoyed living and working in diverse ministry settings including urban ministry and university campus ministry. She has also spent time in a Native American community working within a local church in rural Oklahoma. Jill has studied in the Middle East, participating in a program aimed at understanding the culture, history, and politics of the Middle Eastern conflict. She enjoys studying and reading widely in areas of theology, sociology, and psychology. Among her favorite thinkers are Malcolm Muggeridge, Henri Nouwen, and many of the early church pilgrims, though the writings of C.S. Lewis have been most formative in her own thought and writing. Jill is a native of Pentwater, Michigan, and currently resides with her husband Tony in Atlanta, Georgia. Jill Carattini is a senior associate writer at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

I have serious concerns given RZIM’s reputation for conservative evangelical apologetics. I don’t know Jill Carattini’s personal doctrinal positions (Reformed, Roman Catholic, etc.) but I am concerned that she puts so much stock in the men listed in her bio. Malcom Muggeridge, Henri Nouwen where both Roman Catholics and C.S. Lewis was very sympathetic to the Catholic faith.

In Jill’s article “With All the Saints” I quote.

If you have ever read anything of Saint Simeon the Stylite, undoubtedly, you have not forgotten him. Simeon was the first of a long succession of “pillar hermits” who held a great reputation for holiness in Eastern Christendom. Practicing a rather peculiar form of asceticism, Simeon sat atop a freestanding, fifty-foot column for 36 years. Upon his pillar, Simeon devoted himself to silence, prayer, fasting, and the writing of letters.

Saint Francis of Assisi lived his life on land, but like Simeon, with his heart firmly planted in the heavens. He is celebrated as the gentle saint with the all-embracing love of nature. He ate with lepers, sang to flowers, and preached entire sermons to birds. Saint Francis served Christ passionately, giving away everything–his wealth, his clothes, his rights. Even his asceticism was clothed with a sort of divine romance; he often referred to “Lady Poverty” as his wife of surpassing beauty.

There is something within the lifestyles of the early Christian saints, mystics, and martyrs that wakes me from my comfortable slumber and woos my soul to rise. Their stories are filled with a curious intensity, so far from the Laodicean neutrality that is widely prevalent today. Many lived lives full of visions of Christ’s suffering, others spent months or years in caves wholly devoted to prayer and fasting. In each story, however extreme or strange the expression of faith, I am touched by the incredible thirst of a soul, the passionate pursuit of God, and the delight of a life lived in the presence of Christ the King. At a time when we can look around us and see the dire thirst of the world, such lives depict a deep well of hope–a well these men and women drank deeply of themselves–indeed, living their lives solely to pursue.

These men, no matter how pious and ascetic, did not follow or walk in the presence of Christ. At least not the Christ of Holy Scripture. Roman Catholicism is not a Christian Church, they are an apostate church. Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma denies the essential truths of Orthodox Christianity.

This is the question we are left with. Can a ministry be faithful to the truth when they have ministry staff steeped in Roman Catholic literature and doctrine?

Helpful links:

Apprising Ministries Articles on Roman Catholicism

Proclaiming The Gospel Ministries

Berean Beacon Ministries

Symphony of Scripture

Has Ravi Zacharias Gone Contemplative?

Today I personally believe that while Jesus came to open the door to God’s house, all human beings can walk through that door, whether they know about Jesus or not. Today I see it as my call to help every person claim his or her own way to God.

What an outrageous statement!

For those Christians out there who question why we do what we do, maybe this quote will help you understand in a new way why we do what we do.

Why is this important?

Many pastors and professors are greatly attracted to Nouwen’s deep thinking. In fact, one of his biographers revealed that in a 1994 survey of 3,400 U.S. Protestant church leaders, Nouwen ranked second only to Billy Graham in influence among them.

The embrace of the Roman Catholic Church and its purveyors of false doctrine continues to grow among ‘Protestant Evangelicals’.

Church, we must pray and ask the Lord to remove the scales from the eyes of those so easily deceived. If there was ever a time we needed to pray and be a herald of truth, it is now.

Now is the time, this is the hour, now is the season to move !

Henri Nouwen quote courtesy of Lighthouse Trails.

The first time the late singer-songwriter Rich Mullins heard former Franciscan priest Brennan Manning on tape as he drove through the edge of the Flint Hills in Kansas, his eyes filled with tears. He steered the truck to the side of the road. There, as he later wrote, the message “broke the power of mere ‘moralistic religiosity’ in my life, and revived a deeper acceptance that had long ago withered in me.”

Dallas Willard, who penned The Divine Conspiracy and Renovation of the Heart, once wrote that Manning’s writing “throws firebrands into your soul.”

Singer and writer Michael Card calls Manning when he’s “in a bad place” and has named his oldest son after him. The priest’s book Lion and Lamb: The Relentless Tenderness of Jesus “healed my image of God,” Card told Christianity Today.

Psychotherapist and spiritual director Larry Crabb turns to Manning for advice.

Eugene Peterson, who wrote The Message, describes Manning’s Reflections for Ragamuffins as a “zestful and accurate portrayal that tells us unmistakably that the gospel is good, dazzlingly good.”

Members of U2 read Manning’s books.

Singer Michael W. Smith “can’t even remember” how many copies of The Ragamuffin Gospel he has given away. Author Philip Yancey considers Manning a good friend.

From a message The Overwhelming Love of God delivered at Newsong Church we find:

• The message is opened up by a story from St. Francis of Assisi (Roman Catholic)
• Starting at around (8:58) minutes into the message, we begin to get a glimpse of how Manning defines the Gospel (not a real Gospel) at all. Manning says that ‘after thousands spending literally thousands and thousands of hours of prayer, meditation, silence, solitude, living in caves, monasteries deserted places, I am now absolutely convinced that on judgment day the Lord Jesus is going to ask us one question and only one question. Did you believe that I loved you, that I desired you, that I waited for you day after day, that I longed to hear the sound of your voice? The real believers will answer yes Jesus; I believed in your love and tried to shape my life as a response to it.

This is Manning’s false Gospel, a Gospel where God is loving and forgiving but never a judge, disciplinarian or punisher, contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture. Do we really believe there will be a dialogue like this with our Judge.

• At around (13:24 min) Manning begins to explain his time as a volunteer prisoner. He spills a French phrase which translated is, “Cry the gospel with your life, communicate through friendship”. That is, you can’t communicate through preaching and teaching cause the people your with don’t go to church anyway.

Since when does someone have to go to church in order that we may teach and proclaim the true Gospel to them. The Apostle Paul writes to the Romans, “I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world.” — Romans 1:8

Paul says in Romans 1:14-15, “I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. Paul said that he came to preach Jesus Christ and him crucified.

We should walk out our lives as Christians, displaying the life of Christ in us, that we know. However, it is the proclamation of the Gospel we must do at all cost. Manning would do well to study Romans 10:5-21 (The Message of Salvation to All).

• At (15:05 min) we hear of Manning’s own ‘decisive moment’ …
• At (19:09 min) Manning begins a discussion of how God relentlessly pursues us. (No discussion of sin, righteousness, etc. is mentioned.)
• Finally, at (21:20) Manning guides the congregation in a mind emptying state of prayer. (Manning is a contemplative mystic that you can take to the bank.)

My friends, The Ragamuffin Gospel is not the Gospel of the bible. It is a false Gospel designed by the enemy to deceive. It should not suprise you that well known ‘evangelicals’ have embraced Manning and the doctrines of demons he purveys. It is important however to understand and take a stand against such deception in the Church. We must not loose sight of the clear command found in Jude 1:3 to contend for the faith. Brennan Manning is welcome in many evangelical churches throughout the nation and his calendar is full at this very hour with such opportunities to spread the lies of the Satan.

Before you buy your next book, CD, or DVD, from the likes of Rich Mullins, Michael W. Smith, or any ‘Christian Artist’ or author, do your homework. To that end, find the following links that will faithfully help you in such research.

1. http://www.apprising.org/
2. http://www.svchapel.org/Resources/BookReviews/book_reviews.asp?ID=218
3. http://www.christianresearchnetwork.com/
4. http://www.pro-gospel.org/
5. http://www.symphonyofscripture.com/
6. http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/
7. http://www.stevenjcamp.blogspot.com/
8. http://www.lighthousetrails.com/
9. http://blog.shanetrammel.com/
10. http://watcherslamp.blogspot.com/

To print: Click here or Select File and then Print from your browser's menu

Justification by Faith by: John MacArthur The Reformation doctrine of justification by faith is, and has always been, the number one target of the enemy’s attack. It provides the foundation of the bridge that reconciles God and man-without that key doctrine, Christianity falls. But the doctrine that the Reformers so painstakingly clarified, even spilled blood over, has become so muddled today that many Protestants barely recognize it. Sadly, there are some who react against a clear presentation of justification, calling it nothing more than useless hair-splitting. The superficial interests of the seeker church have caused doctrinal issues to be downplayed and deemphasized-what “unchurched” person wants to come hear about theology? Under the influence of pragmatism, the seeker-sensitive movement has traded God-honoring doctrinal clarity and biblical purity for entertainment and motivational speeches. Social and political concerns have brought evangelicals and Catholics together in recent years to unite against the forces of secularism. Under the influence of ecumenism, it’s difficult for either group to remember what it was that divided them in the first place. The pragmatists and ecumenicists are aided in their forgetfulness by new theological movements that redefine justification in more Catholic terms. Under the influence of liberalism and postmodernism, proponents of the New Perspective on Paul, the Emergent Church, and others have so confused and redefined the doctrine of justification that it has become shrouded in darkness once again. The Christian church today is in danger of returning to the Dark Ages. The seeker movement has Christianity turning in its Bibles; the ecumenical movement urges Christians to use worldly means to accomplish temporal ends; and current theological movements look through the lens of philosophy-Enlightenment rationalism and postmodern subjectivism-rather than Scripture. The departure from sola scriptura has led to the departure from sola fide-justification by faith alone. Back to the Beginning In the 1500s a fastidious monk, who by his own testimony “hated God,” was studying Paul’s epistle to the Romans. He couldn’t get past the first half of Romans 1:17: “[In the gospel] is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith” (KJV). One simple, biblical truth changed that monk’s life-and ignited the Protestant Reformation. It was the realization that God’s righteousness could become the sinner’s righteousness-and that could happen through the means of faith alone. Martin Luther found the truth in the same verse he had stumbled over, Romans 1:17: “Therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, the just shall live by faith” (KJV, emphasis added). Luther had always seen “the righteousness of God” as an attribute of the sovereign Lord by which He judged sinners-not an attribute sinners could ever possess. He described the breakthrough that put an end to the theological dark ages: I saw the connection between the justice of God and the statement that “the just shall live by his faith.” Then I grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which through grace and sheer mercy God justifies us through faith. Thereupon I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise. The whole of Scripture took on a new meaning, and whereas before the “justice of God” had filled me with hate, now it became to me inexpressibly sweet in greater love. This passage of Paul became to me a gate to heaven. Justification by faith was the great truth that dawned on Luther and dramatically altered the church. Because Christians are justified by faith alone, their standing before God is not in any way related to personal merit. Good works and practical holiness do not provide the grounds for acceptance with God. God receives as righteous those who believe, not because of any good thing He sees in them-not even because of His own sanctifying work in their lives-but solely on the basis of Christ’s righteousness, which is reckoned to their account. “To the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness” (Romans 4:5). That is justification. Declared Righteous: What Actually Changes? In its theological sense, justification is a forensic, or purely legal, term. It describes what God declares about the believer, not what He does to change the believer. In fact, justification effects no actual change whatsoever in the sinner’s nature or character. Justification is a divine judicial edict. It changes our status only, but it carries ramifications that guarantee other changes will follow. Forensic decrees like this are fairly common in everyday life. When I was married, for example, Patricia and I stood before the minister (my father) and recited our vows. Near the end of the ceremony, my father declared, “By the authority vested in me by the state of California, I now pronounce you man and wife.” Instantly we were legally husband and wife. Whereas seconds before we had been an engaged couple, now we were married. Nothing inside us actually changed when those words were spoken. But our status changed before God, the law, and our family and friends. The implications of that simple declaration have been lifelong and life-changing (for which I am grateful). But when my father spoke those words, it was a legal declaration only. Similarly, when a jury foreman reads the verdict, the defendant is no longer “the accused.” Legally and officially he instantly becomes either guilty or innocent-depending on the verdict. Nothing in his actual nature changes, but if he is found not guilty he will walk out of court a free person in the eyes of the law, fully justified. In biblical terms, justification is a divine verdict of “not guilty-fully righteous.” It is the reversal of God’s attitude toward the sinner. Whereas He formerly condemned, He now vindicates. Although the sinner once lived under God’s wrath, as a believer he or she is now under God’s blessing. Justification is more than simple pardon; pardon alone would still leave the sinner without merit before God. So when God justifies He imputes divine righteousness to the sinner (Romans 4:22-25). Christ’s own infinite merit thus becomes the ground on which the believer stands before God (Romans 5:19; 1 Corinthians 1:30; Philippians 3:9). So justification elevates the believer to a realm of full acceptance and divine privilege in Jesus Christ. Therefore, because of justification, believers not only are perfectly free from any charge of guilt (Romans 8:33) but also have the full merit of Christ reckoned to their personal account (Romans 5:17). Here are the forensic realities that flow out of justification: We are adopted as sons and daughters (Romans 8:15) • We become fellow-heirs with Christ (v. 17) • We are united with Christ so that we become one with Him (1 Corinthians 6:17) • We are henceforth “in Christ” (Galatians 3:27) and He in us (Colossians 1:27) How Justification and Sanctification Differ Justification is distinct from sanctification because in justification God does not make the sinner righteous; He declares that person righteous (Romans 3:28; Galatians 2:16). Notice how justification and sanctification are distinct from one another: Justification imputes Christ’s righteousness to the sinner’s account (Romans 4:11b); sanctification imparts righteousness to the sinner personally and practically (Romans 6:1-7; 8:11-14). • Justification takes place outside sinners and changes their standing (Romans 5:1-2, sanctification is internal and changes the believer’s state (Romans 6:19). • Justification is an event, sanctification a process. Those two must be distinguished but can never be separated. God does not justify whom He does not sanctify, and He does not sanctify whom He does not justify. Both are essential elements of salvation. Why differentiate between them at all? If justification and sanctification are so closely related that you can’t have one without the other, why bother to define them differently? That question was the central issue between Rome and the Reformers in the sixteenth century, and it remains the main front in renewed attacks against justification. Justification in Roman Catholic Doctrine Roman Catholicism blends its doctrines of sanctification and justification. Catholic theology views justification as an infusion of grace that makes the sinner righteous. In Catholic theology, then, the ground of justification is something made good within the sinner-not the imputed righteousness of Christ. The Council of Trent, Rome’s response to the Reformation, pronounced anathema on anyone who says “that the [sinner] is justified by faith alone-if this means that nothing else is required by way of cooperation in the acquisition of the grace of justification.” The Catholic council ruled “Justification … is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just.” So Catholic theology confuses the concepts of justification and sanctification and substitutes the righteousness of the believer for the righteousness of Christ. What’s the Big Deal? The difference between Rome and the Reformers is no example of theological hair-splitting. The corruption of the doctrine of justification results in several other grievous theological errors. If sanctification is included in justification, the justification is a process, not an event. That makes justification progressive, not complete. Our standing before God is then based on subjective experience, not secured by an objective declaration. Justification can therefore be experienced and then lost. Assurance of salvation in this life becomes practically impossible because security can’t be guaranteed. The ground of justification ultimately is the sinner’s own continuing present virtue, not Christ’s perfect righteousness and His atoning work. What’s so important about the doctrine of justification by faith alone? It is the doctrine upon which the confessing church stands or falls. Without it there is no salvation, no sanctification, no glorification-nothing. You wouldn’t know it to look at the state of Christianity today, but it really is that important. Adapted from makeThe Gospel According to the Apostles, © 1993 and 2000 by John MacArthur. All rights reserved. • Grace to You (Monday, March 21, 2005)

Brought to you by OnePlace.com. More Articles can be found at: http://www.OnePlace.com/Articles

from Mike Gendron, Proclaiming the Gospel (Online Source)

Have you considered the spiritual health of your church in these days of tolerance and compromise? Is the leadership earnestly contending for the faith against the current wave of ecumenism? A. W. Tozer used the illustration of circulating blood to describe the health of a church. “The red corpuscles are like faith – they carry the life giving oxygen to every part of the body. The white cells are like discernment – they pounce upon dead and toxic matter and carry it out to the drain. In a healthy heart there must be provision for keeping dead and poisonous matter out of the life stream.”

Using Tozer’s analogy, churches that are dead or dying are the churches that no longer have the ability or the desire to discern truth from error. If they cannot identify toxic doctrinal error, the poison can never be removed from the body. And if it is not removed it will continue to circulate, bringing confusion to believers and false hope to “seekers.”

The Emerging Church
Based on the reports we hear from our subscribers all over the world, there are many churches on the edge of apostasy. Many are subscribing to the latest post-modern fad called “the emerging church” which attempts to reach the emerging generation with a new way of “doing church.” If you key “emerging church” in your favorite search engine, you will see numerous entries declaring that worship should now be a mystical and holistic experience using images, candles, stained glass windows and even darkness to enhance spirituality. One of the leaders of the movement is Brian McLaren, pastor and author of the controversial and award winning book, A New Kind of Christian. The book expressly argues that the Bible should not be regarded as infallible or authoritative. McLaren seeks unity between Catholics and Evangelicals and applauds Chuck Colson for leading this unbiblical movement.

The emerging church places more importance on mystical and sensual worship experiences that unite rather than essential biblical doctrines that divide. Churches that move from a Word-driven message to an image-driven message only contribute to the “dumbing down” of professing Christians. Few will be able to discern the difference between the true Gospel and a counterfeit gospel. The end result will be unsanctified churches which tolerate, embrace and encourage unbelievers instead of edifying and equipping a new generation of believers.

Emerging But Not Discerning
Irving Bible Church, located between Dallas and Ft. Worth has emerged into a church without discernment. The pastor, Andy McQuitty, has publicly stated that both John Paul II and Mother Teresa are most assuredly in heaven. In the May issue of the church’s monthly magazine Chatter, he featured a 11 ” by 14″ picture of these two influential Catholics who deceived the world with another gospel. McQuitty called the differences between Catholics and Protestants “theological pettiness.” He said, “it is just plain silly to write each other off as far as true Christianity is concerned. We’ll have plenty of time in Heaven to figure out who was right about Purgatory and Mary.” McQuitty can’t see why both faiths can’t cooperate “in building the Kingdom of our common Lord Jesus Christ.” He described John Paul as “a Man of God, not a man of this world, who became popular by testifying to the unpopular truths of Jesus Christ.” According to McQuitty, the pope was “a great man whom all Christians should admire, thank and emulate.” Finally he wrote, “I confess as a protestant pastor that my spiritual life and faith has been enriched by this Catholic pope who taught me that being a hero isn’t about success or power.”

Evidently Irving Bible Church (IBC) has a few discerning souls who prompted McQuitty to send out this public e-mail. “A few of you have raised concerns, most of which can be boiled down to this question: ‘Is IBC becoming Roman Catholic?’ To which the answer is, ‘No way, Jose.”‘ He wrote: “I understand where the question comes from, though. The introduction at IBC of certain elements such as candles and liturgies and communion wafers and the reference to communion as the “Eucharist”, combined with the recent death of Pope John Paul II and the attendant recognition that his life received here, has caused some (particularly those who were raised Catholic and had a less than happy experience) to bristle.”

McQuitty sounds like many Catholics who think we left the Roman Catholic Church because we “had a less than happy experience.” No, we left when our Sovereign Lord opened our eyes to see the true Gospel as He revealed it in His supremely authoritative Word. As with other born-again former Catholics, we all left because we could no longer stay in a false religion that deceives its people on life’s most critical issue – “What must I do to be saved?” We all left in obedience to God’s word, to worship Him in Spirit and Truth (John 4:24). If we were a member of Irving Bible Church, we would have to leave that church as well because the pastor has demonstrated no discernment and an unwillingness to be corrected by Scripture. A pastor without spiritual discernment cannot protect his congregation from Satan’s continuous attacks on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Some will say that I am being judgmental and that I have no right to do so. But how can Christians contend earnestly for the faith unless they make judgments on what “the faith” is? How can Christians defend and proclaim the Gospel without discerning what “the Gospel” is? We see a biblical example of one brother judging another when Paul publicly corrected Peter who was not being “straightforward about the truth of the Gospel” (Gal. 2:11-14). A. W. Tozer said: “Among the gifts of the Spirit, scarcely is one of greater practical usefulness than the gift of discernment. This gift should be highly valued and frankly sought as being almost indispensable in these critical times. This gift will enable us to distinguish the chaff from the wheat and to divide the manifestations of the flesh from the operations of the Spirit.”

Christians Are Exhorted To Judge
Many Christians are unaware of their responsibility to judge and test all things. Paul exhorted: “I pray that your love may abound still more and more in real knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve the things that are excellent, in order to be sincere and blameless until the day of Christ” (Phil. 1:9-10). Christians need to take discernment and judgment seriously in this life because of the great responsibility that awaits us in the future. Paul reminds us: “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, matters of this life?” (I Cor. 6:2-3). Paul even commended the Bereans for rightfully judging his teaching. “They received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11). The apostle John warned and exhorted Christians: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (I John 4:1). Clearly, all Christians are called to judge righteously by using the Word of God as the plumb line for discerning truth from error.

Discernment Is A Discipline
New babes in Christ must discipline themselves to go beyond the “milk” of the Gospel and begin chewing on “solid food” by studying the whole counsel of God. “For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” (Heb. 5:13-14). Spiritual discernment is a discipline and a privilege that only Christians can exercise. Paul wrote: “But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he who is spiritual judges all things.” (1 Cor. 2:14-16).

How Are We To Judge?
John wrote: “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Jesus said: “For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you” (Mat. 7:1-5). The instruction Jesus gives for judging others is to make sure you are not guilty of the same error or sin! Paul echoed these words when he wrote: “Do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment upon those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God?” (Rom. 2:3). When we judge, we must judge righteously and with pure hearts!

The Goal of Discernment
As we practice the gift of discernment let us question our motives. Is our objective to be obedient to God’s word for the purpose of helping, healing, correcting, warning and sharing in the spirit of love? Does our discernment lead people towards truth and righteous living? Are we concerned for the purity of the body of Christ? Have we come to acknowledge that when the gift of discernment is not exercised, the church cannot be purged of error and sin and the name of Jesus Christ cannot be fully glorified and honored as the Holy Head of His Body, the Church.

The critical issue in the Church today is the purity of the Gospel. That alone is the rudder that must guide the Church through stormy waters that have been stirred up by every wind of doctrine. Take away the ability to discern objective truth and churches turn into cafeterias serving whatever junk food people want instead of the disciplined diet they need for spiritual life and health. Without a steady diet of the whole counsel of God, churches become entertainment centers for goats instead of sanctuaries for the Shepherd’s sheep (Mat. 25:32). Unregenerate people, who are never exhorted to examine their faith, will continue attending church to enjoy the music, entertainment and “feel good” messages. Unless these people are confronted with their sin, their need for a Savior and the eternal consequences of a spurious faith, they are destined to hear these terrifying words from Jesus: “‘I never knew you; depart from Me” (Mat. 7:23).

May God help us all to be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Read the story here.

Do you remember when Catholics were a distinct segment of America, and many people wondered what to make of them? Those days are long gone, according to our new survey, which shows that Catholics are not only the largest denominational group in the country, but are now part of the social mainstream. We studied 97 facets of the lives of Catholics and compared them to national norms. The outcome is striking – and, in some cases, disturbing. Find out why by reading this week’s Barna Update.

Here are some interesting findings from the research. Keep in mind we understand statistics are just that, statistics. An approximation of what is true.

The survey explored three dimensions of people’s faith: behaviors, beliefs and attitudes. Catholics were significantly different from other Americans in each of those areas. Two out of three Catholics (68%) said their religious faith is very important in their life – the same as was true among non-Catholic adults – but how their faith is manifested is quite divergent.

1. Catholics were less likely than average to look forward to discussing their religious views with other people, to attending church services, and to reading the Bible. In fact, Catholics were only half as likely as other Americans to say they look forward “a lot” to reading from the Bible.
2. The typical Catholic person donated about 17% less money to churches; was 38% less likely than the average American to read the Bible; 67% less likely to attend a Sunday school class; 20% less likely to share their faith in Christ with someone who had different beliefs; 24% less likely to say their religious faith has greatly transformed their life; and were 36% less likely to have an “active faith,” which Barna defined as reading the Bible, praying and attending a church service during the prior week.
3. Catholics were significantly less likely to believe that the Bible is totally accurate in all of the principles it teaches and only half as likely to maintain that they have a responsibility to share their faith with others.
4. Catholics are 37% less likely to be born again than are adults not associated with the Catholic faith.
5. Catholics were twice as likely to view pornographic content on the Internet and were more likely to use profanity, to gamble, and to buy lottery tickets.
6. The survey data portray Catholics as people whose lifestyles and thought patterns are more influenced by the social mainstream than by the core principles of the Christian faith.
7. While Protestants in America have experienced the same type of spiritual compromise over the course of time, there remains a substantial gap between Protestants and Catholics regarding matters of faith, if not lifestyle and thought.

“The trail of Catholicism in America is a clear example of culture influencing faith more often than faith influencing culture,” Barna continued. “The faith of tens of millions of Catholics is affected by the prevailing culture more than by the central principles and teachings of the Bible.

Read the full story here.

After reading this article, I was pleasantly suprised to discover the view of Dr. Saucy on this topic. Dr. Saucy stops short of calling the Roman Catholic Church apostate but does share his concern from an evangelical protestants perspective. I do not know Dr. Saucy’s views on all aspects of Evangelical doctrine, let that be said now. I am however very pleased at Dr. Saucy’s stance with regards to “Evangelicals and Catholics Together”.

Here is a sampling from the article.

In 1994, 40 Roman Catholics and evangelical Protestants signed a controversial document titled, “Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium.” It affirmed agreement on basic articles of the Christian faith and urged cooperation in world evangelization and on social issues, like fighting abortion. Charles Colson (founder of Prison Fellowship), Bill Bright (founder of Campus Crusade for Christ) and James I. Packer (theologian) signed it. Mark Noll’s book, Is the Reformation Over? (Baker Academic, 2005), brought the movement back into the spotlight. Biola Connections spoke with Robert Saucy, Biola University’s distinguished professor of systematic theology, to learn more.

You can read the complete article here.

What makes this article stand out is that it comes from the world of Academia. In the world of Christian Academia, it is rare today to get a clear, distinct view on a matter. It is also rare to get such an othodox reponse.

I want to openly commend Dr. Saucy for taking such an unpopular stand on a very important topic.

May God receive all the praise.

– Shane Trammel

Helpful links on Romanism:

Blog of Shane Trammel

Apprising Ministries

Symphony of Scripture

Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries

Berean Beacon

The Berean Call

Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

Archive of radio program can be found here.

Host: Jim Schneider
Guest: Mike Gendron

Mike Gendron is the Director of Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries. He is the author of books such as Preparing Catholics for Eternity, and Roman Catholicism: Scripture Verses Tradition.

The Emergent Church movement is growing. It’s a church that rejects the current seeker friendly movement and instead offers an experience with God. The problem with this is that subjective experience is replacing the objective truth of God’s Word. It’s this desire for an experience with God that has the Emergent Church taking on some of the traditions of medieval Roman Catholicism. In fact, because of subjective experiences, some evangelicals and Protestants, from lay people to pastors, are bypassing the Emergent churches and going right back to the Catholic faith.

Learn more concerning how these two religious branches are connected, where and why the Catholic faith contradicts Scripture, and more on this edition of Crosstalk.

More Information

Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries
P.O. Box 940871
Plano, TX 75094
972-495-0485
http://www.pro-gospel.org

To obtain a copy of Preparing Catholics for Eternity send a donation of $15 or more to:
Crosstalk
3434 W. Kilbourn Ave.
Milwaukee, WI 53208
1-800-729-9829 M-F 8am-5pm Central

Order Online

As you read this piece, consider this quote from Thomas Bokenkotter, in his book

A Concise History of the Catholic Church.

From page 1, paragraph 1 of the introduction:

The Catholic Church is the oldest institution in the Western world. It can trace its history back almost two thousand years. It began in Jerusalem as a small nucleus of disciples who shared faith in the resurrection of Jesus, their crucified leader, and it spread quickly to countless cities of the Roman Empire. Its inflexible opposition to Roman culture, morals, and religion aroused the savage fury of the state, and many Church’s members perished when they refused to conform. But its spiritual power was only magnified by persecution, and its progress remained constant. Finally it won a decisive victory over the old paganism when it drew to its side the Emperor Constantine himself, who in 312 attached its emblem–monogram of Christ–to the banners of his troops and granted it complete religious liberty.

How dare the Roman Catholic Church suggest it was established in the first century. Those first century Christians lost their lives proclaiming the true Christ who saves by faith in Him alone, through His grace alone and they where not Roman Catholics. These first century Christians would be appalled at the very sugestion that they had believed and taught anything close to what the Catholic Church teaches.

This so called history’ from Thomas Bokenkotter’s book only serves as continued proof of the lies the Roman Catholic Church presents to the world. The very core or foundation of the Catholic Church is steep with lies, deception, and doctrines of demons.

Call it Catholic bigotry if you must. Just consider these words from Jesus.

31 So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” — John 8:31-32

One man Mr. Colson seems to really promote is Peter Kreeft. Kreeft is labeled as a Christian philosopher, author, speaker, and professor of Philosophy at Boston College. With no help from Colson and other “evangelical” leaders and publishers, one finds out that Kreeft is also a very devout Roman Catholic.

Colson had this to say about Peter Kreeft’s book, “Ecumenical Jihad” (a critical review of this book)

“Peter Kreeft is one of the premier apologists in America today, witty, incisive and powerful. On the front lines in today’s culture war, Kreeft is one of our most valiant intellectual warriors.”

Never mind the fact that Peter Kreeft is also the author of “Catholic Christianity” where he presents as biblical the following heresies:

• Justification by faith and works
• The literal presence of Jesus body and blood in the Eucharist
• Affirmation of Purgatory
• Sacraments as a means of grace
• Doctrines of Mary (Immaculate Conception, her Assumption in heaven, her role as “Advocate”, Mediatrix of All Graces, and her role as Co-redemptrix.
• Apostolic succession
• Power of the Church to transmit Christ’s forgiveness (sacrament of forgiveness or absolution)
• Prayer for the dead

Must I go on? Kreeft expounds many more heresies but we will leave it for another time.

I will leave you with this. We must be in prayer that God will open the eyes of the Church. We know that we are in the last days, so be watchful and in prayer that you are not deceived. Be on your guard and support ministries that have integrity and stand for biblical truth. Much of what you see in the popular Christian media (Print, TV, Movie, Music, and Internet) has only an element of truth in it. When you peal back the layers, you see the deception, the lies, the half-truths, the doctrines of demons. Popular is the key element here. There are many ministries that are faithful to biblical truth. The fact remains these ministries are not popular and obscure to many. My prayer is that you would search out ministries that will remain faithful in the face of opposition and support them with your prayers and financial support.

In His Army,

Shane Trammel

http://blog.shanetrammel.com/2007/05/16/last-one-off-earth-turn-out-the-lights/
http://blog.shanetrammel.com/2007/05/30/handbook-of-christian-apologetics-not-what-it-may-seem/
http://blog.shanetrammel.com/2007/05/09/just-how-deep-has-the-catholic-church-penetrated-into-evangelical-circles/

In this report, Pastor Erik Raymond explains why Omaha Bible Church is not participating in this “evangelistic” endeavor.

I, as Pastor Ken, commend Erik for his stand for truth.

– Shane Trammel

As you read the complete story, take note of the Pope’s inclusive language with regard to Muslims.

The Pope also underscored the Catholic Churches particular commitment to furthering education in Pakistan, “regardless of faith”. “Christians and Muslims both worship the One God, the Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth. It is this belief that moves us to unite minds and hearts as we work tirelessly for peace, justice, and a better future for mankind”.

Read the complete story here (Online Source).

The following comes from a recent trip the Pople made to Brazil to rally the troops (Catholics in the region). You may want to pay special attention to the parts in italics, emphasis mine. Of special notice is the Pope’s focus on Mary and the Rosary. Your comments are welcome. — Shane Trammel

Summary: As he recites the Rosary with priests, men and women religious, seminarians and deacons, Benedict XVI asserts that the witness of a well lived priestly life brings nobility to the Church, calls for admiration among the faithful, is a source of blessing for the community, is the best way to promote vocations, and is the most authentic way to invite other young people to respond affirmatively to the Lord’s calling. He affectionately greets all the families around the world.

Aparecida (AsiaNews) (Online Source) – In line with the “school of faith” which is Mary, “may the missionary fervour, the passion for an increasingly contemporary approach to evangelization, the authentic apostolic spirit and the zeal for souls always be present in your lives!” said Benedict XVI in greeting the priests, men and women religious, seminarians and deacons of Brazil who came for the 5th General Conference of Latin American and Caribbean Bishops at the Nossa Senhora da Conceiçao Aparecida shrine and who recited the Rosary that ended the fourth day of the Pope’s trip to Brazil.

“Remain in the school of Mary” was the idea around which he developed his reflection. “Take inspiration from her teachings; seek to welcome and to preserve in your hearts the enlightenment that she, by divine mandate, sends you from on high.”

“I greet the dear priests who are present,” he added, “and I keep in my thoughts and prayers all the priests spread throughout the world, especially those in Latin America and the Caribbean, including the Fidei donum priests. What great challenges, what difficult situations you have to face, with such generosity, self-denial, sacrifices and renunciations! Your faithfulness in the exercise of the ministry and the life of prayer, your search for holiness, your total self-giving to God at the service of your brothers and sisters, as you expend your lives and energy in order to promote justice, fraternity, solidarity and sharing—all this speaks powerfully to my pastoral heart. The witness of a priestly life well lived brings nobility to the Church, calls forth admiration among the faithful, and is a source of blessings for the community; it is the best way to promote vocations, the most authentic invitation to other young people to respond positively to the Lord’s call. It is true collaboration in building the Kingdom of God!”

Similarly, Benedict XVI turned his attention to each group within the Church community, from the religious to the laity and the families, “who are gathered here to represent all the dearly beloved Christian families present throughout the world. I rejoice especially with you and I offer you an embrace of peace.”

By way of conclusion he invited everyone to consider the Church as “our home.” “The Pope therefore wants to say to all of you: The Church is our home! This is our home! In the Catholic Church we find all that is good, all that gives grounds for security and consolation! Anyone who accepts Christ, ‘the way, the truth and the life’ in his totality, is assured of peace and happiness, in this life and in the next! For this reason, the Pope has come here to pray and to bear witness with you all: The coherence of the faith also requires it is worth being faithful, it is worth persevering in our faith!, however, a solid doctrinal and spiritual formation, which thus contributes to building a more just, humane and Christian society.

The book, ‘Handbook of Christian Apologetics’ is said to categorize and summarize all major arguments for all the major Christian teachings. But be warned, this book is authored by two very dedicated Roman Catholics (Peter Kreeft & Ronald K. Tacelli). Of special interest in this volume is the unbiblical treatment of the doctrine of justification (salvation).

This book is published by InterVarsity Press (IVP), a division of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship (IVCF). Most would categorize IVCF as evangelical in nature. However, after further investigation, it is very clear that IVCF and its publishing arm are decidedly ecumenical. IVP describes itself as “Broadly Evangelical”

As a division of an interdenominational ministry, InterVarsity Press does not emphasize or exclusively advocate positions of one denomination, theology or interest-group over another. Rather, recognizing that Christians equally committed to the Bible disagree on various topics, we publish across a range of evangelical positions. This intentional openness arises historically out of taking seriously InterVarsity‘s mission field—the university—which embodies a spirit of liberality that has traditionally characterized the search for truth while also encouraging sound reasoning and fair persuasion. In the case of InterVarsity Press, the Bible remains our standard while we humbly acknowledge our human limitations in understanding and applying it.

Notice this information on a past conference:

Exploring Common Ground II
Dates: Mar 5, 2004 – Mar 7, 2004
Hosted by: IVCF and the University Ministry Depts. of Lewis University and the University of San Diego

From the conference brochure:

“Over the past several years, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and Catholic campus ministries at several Catholic universities have developed partnerships in ministry, with great benefits to both. In 2002, two schools with formal cooperative relationships joined in a conference to learn more from each other — Exploring the Common Ground.

“In 2004, Exploring Common Ground II: The Gifts We Bring to the Table will seek to foster increased understanding among Catholic campus ministries and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. The conference will include nationally recognized speakers who will discuss historical, theoretical, theological, and practical issues in partnership. In addition, there will be a variety of prayer experiences, Bible study, small group discussions, and comments from current and former InterVarsity students who will speak about their experiences on Catholic campuses. Through all, we seek to recognize the gifts of the Lord and to share them with each other.”

This book is just one more testament to the level of deception in the Church. By the title alone, 99.99 % of all considering the purchase of this book would never have any reason to question its biblical accuracy. What’s more, one would never have any knowledge the authors where Roman Catholic. In most cases, this type of deception is intentional. God is raising up ministries like ours and others to help true Christians be more informed of the deception making its way into the Church.

Peter Kreeft

About the Author

Peter J. Kreeft (Ph.D., Fordham University) is professor of philosophy at Boston College where he has taught since 1965. A popular lecturer, he has also taught at many other colleges, seminaries and educational institutions in the eastern United States. Kreeft has written more than forty books, including The Best Things in Life, The Journey, How to Win the Culture Wars and with Ronald Tacelli Handbook of Christian Apologetics.

Ronald K. Tacelli

About the Author

Tacelli, S.J., is associate professor of philosphy at Boston College and has published articles in the Public Affairs Quarterly and Dowside Review.

Links of Interest:

http://www.sxws.com/cwrc-rz/thlarchive/thla-016.php

http://www.cwrc-rz.org/articles/article-001.php

http://www.apprising.org/archives/2006/09/rome_hasnat_cha.html

Is it possible that someone actively and ernestly contending for the Faith could be perceived and thus labeled a bigot? I think the answer is YES !

In todays religious climate, it is very unpopular to make a clear stand for truth. The Church is bursting at the seams with false teachers, yet addressing the problem openly and biblically is considered unloving and hateful. Even more, lovers of Truth, willing to fight against false religious systems like the Roman Catholic Church, are labeled hatemongers.

Many Christians today are weary of the long war over truth. They are uneasy about whether doctrinal disagreements and divisions are a blight on the spiritual unity of the church and therefore a poor testimony to the world. These and similar questions are constantly heard nowadasys: “Isn’t it time to set aside our differences and just love one another?” “Rather than battling people with whom we disagree over various points of doctrine, why not stage a cordial dialogue with them and listen to their ideas?” … Conflict is not always avoidable. That is Jude’s whole point in writing his epistle. To remain faithful to the truth, sometimes it is even necessary to wage “civil war” within the church — especially when enemies of truth posing as brethren and believers are smuggling dangerous heresy in by stealth. — John MacArthur, The Truth War, pg. 73

“Weary” Christians are all to willing to set aside essential doctrinal truths in the name of unity. The ecumenical movement (reconciliation with Rome), is gaining momentum daily and in my humble opinion is a sign of the end of days. For those who champion truth, we must stand up and be counted regardless of the cost to our own well being.

Evangelical Christian leaders of all stripes are in record number affirming ecumenical statements of faith and proclamations of unity. It is said by these leaders that the tie that binds Evangelicals and Catholics together is the saving work of Jesus. The truth however is this, Orthodox Evangelicals and Roman Catholics have a very different concept of ’salvation through Jesus’ or Justification. It is this very real difference that creates an enormous gulf between them. This gulf will remain until Rome dismantels here man-made, man-centered religious system. The only hope for Rome is that she returns to an orthodox, biblical understanding of Justification (by faith alone, in Jesus alone, as understood through His Word alone).

Rise up, join the fight for truth, be a part of this worthy battle. May the Lord be glorified as we proclaim the truth in all humility and love.

– Shane Trammel

Noteworthy Links:

1. http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/05/rick_warren_joi.html
2. http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/05/roman_catholici_2.html
3. http://www.symphonyofscripture.com/?p=73
4. http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/?p=175
5. http://www.helpforcatholics.org/
6. http://www.apprising.org/archives/2007/05/the_roman_catho_1.html
7. http://christianresearchnetwork.com/?p=2005
8. http://watcherslamp.blogspot.com/2007/05/sbc-pastor-echoes-silence-of-sbc.html

This is a very helpful resource to those interested in understanding more about Catholicism.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5  |  Part 6  |

It’s clear that the anti-religion crowd is growing desperate, the result of all their angry rejection of the hope of the Gospel.

The question I have is this: which Gospel is Mr. Colson talking about? As one of the main architects of ‘Evangelicals and Catholics Together’, one must wonder which Gospel Colson would point the ‘anit-religion’ crowd to. The Gospel as articulated in ‘Evangelicals and Catholics Together’ is a false Gospel and does not have the power to save.

Read Chuck Colson’s Breakpoint Commentary for May 16, 2007 here.

You can find more information about ‘Evangelicals and Catholics Together’ at the following links:

Evangelicals and Catholics
http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=4454
http://www.aomin.org/Evangelicals_and_Catholics_Together.html
http://www.seekgod.ca/ect.htm
http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj6a.pdf
http://www.founders.org/FJ17/article4.html

By Greg Warner

Published May 8, 2007

WACO, Texas (ABP) — Renowned evangelical philosopher Francis Beckwith has become a Roman Catholic and, as a result, has resigned as president — and also as a member — of the Evangelical Theological Society. Beckwith, associate professor of church-state studies at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, said the decision he made to seek “full communion” with the Roman Catholic Church grew from his desire to find “historical and theological continuity” with the early Christian church.
Beckwith has been a member of the Evangelical Theological Society since 1984. He said his return to Catholicism was unexpected.

“[M]y work in philosophy, ethics, and theology has always been Catholic-friendly, but I would have never predicted that I would return to the Church, for there seemed to me too many theological and ecclesiastical issues that appeared insurmountable,” he said in his blog. “However, in January, at the suggestion of a dear friend, I began reading the Early Church Fathers as well as some of the more sophisticated works on justification by Catholic authors.

“I became convinced that the Early Church is more Catholic than Protestant and that the Catholic view of justification, correctly understood, is biblically and historically defensible. Even though I also believe that the Reformed view is biblically and historically defensible, I think the Catholic view has more explanatory power to account for both all the biblical texts on justification as well as the church’s historical understanding of salvation prior to the Reformation all the way back to the ancient church of the first few centuries.

Notice, Beckwith basically says much of his decision is based on reading the works of men rather than the Scriptures.

Read the complete article here at Associated Baptist Press.

SPECIAL REPORT – Mel Gibson Reveals True Purpose of the Passion – Leading People to Catholicism! from Lighthouse Research Trails

The Passion of the Christ: Definitive Edition is now available. This two DVD set includes a tract that presents theological commentary by Mel Gibson, Father* William J. Fulco, Father* John Batunck, and Catholic apologist Gerry Matatics. The discussion is an analysis of the film explaining the Roman Catholic view that “Mary” shares a role in redemption and that “Jesus” is present in the Eucharist, along with numerous other comments supporting Roman Catholic extrabiblical dogma.

HT: From Watcher’s Lamp

Here is a rendering of the programming page for Life Is Worth Living on TBN.

Bishop Fulton J Sheen — Life Is Worth Living Life Is Worth Living; His timeless insights give wise, personal and inspiring guidance on the problems affecting our lives in today’s world cover an amazing variety of subjects. He discusses education, Christianity, relativity, and world affairs. He speaks about love, conscience, fear, motherhood and work. Bishop Sheen offers his timeless insights to give wise, personal and inspiring guidance on the problems affecting our lives in today’s world. For more than 30 years,

Archbishop Sheen was the most famous Catholic leader in the United States with a worldwide radio and TV broadcast ministry. When it came to authoritative Church teachings, Catholics and non-Catholics listened to the Bishop because he was someone they could trust to ‘tell it like it is.”

You can visit the website at www.catholicfamilycatalog.com/fultonsheen.htm

If you like this show, you may also like:

Pastor John Hagee | Billy Graham | Juanita Bynum | Kirk Cameron | Dr. Myles Munroe

We are told that Bishop Sheen’s teachings are authoritative and can be trusted by Catholics and non-Catholics alike. This is an absurd statement. On the contrary, Bishop Sheen is rather a source of damnation and apostasy to all those who would follow his teachings.

Here are just a few of the False Doctrines discussed in the program Life Is Worth Living:

• Purgatory
• Praying for the Dead
• False Doctrines of Mary (read Mary And The Moslem)
• The Mass (the real Body and Blood of Christ)
• Baptism (Sheen teaches baptism as salvivic)

Why does TBN put such nonsense on their network? Again, I am encouraging all bible believing Christians to cease all financial support of TBN or ministries associated with TBN. This would include ministries who broadcast their programming on TBN. I am praying for God to raise up a Christian TV network that will be faithful to the truth of the Word of God.

When leading Lutheran theologian Richard John Neuhaus converted to Catholicism in 1990 the move sent shock waves through Lutheran circles in the United States because of his prominence in that Church. Neuhaus was ordained a Catholic priest by his bishop, Cardinal John O’Connor of New York.

Charles Colson and Fr. Richard John Neuhaus authored the ecumenical documents Evangelicals and Catholics Together and Evangelicals and Catholics Together II. The approval for the wording was required to come from Cardinal Edward Idris Cassidy, president of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for promoting Christian Unity. Other noted Evangelical Protestants who have signed this document include (Dr. Bill Bright, Os Guinness, Max Lucado, T. M. Moore, J. I. Packer, Pat Robertson)

Recently Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary hosted a conference ‘20/20 Collegiate Conference – Sex and the City of God’. Fr. Richard Neuhaus and Dr. Peter Kreeft, both Roman Catholics, where Plenary speakers at this conference.

Dr. Peter Kreeft also spoke at a conference sponsored by Prison Fellowship (Chuck Colson).

Dr. Peter Kreeft wrote a book Ecumenical Jihad — consider the following from Southern View Chapel

This book could be quickly dismissed as a good example of pluralism (the view that all religions are legitimate ways of worshipping God), which is so foreign to Scripture as to deserve little attention. What makes Ecumenical Jihad worthy of notice are the endorsements by Chuck Colson (”Peter Kreeft is one of the premier apologists in America today, witty, incisive and powerful. On the front lines in today’s culture war, Kreeft is one of the most valiant intellectual warriors.”) and J.I. Packer (”This racy little book opens up a far-reaching theme. With entertaining insight Kreeft looks into the attitudes, alliances, and strategies that today’s state of affairs requires of believers. Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox alike need to ponder Peter Kreeft’s vision of things – preferably, in discussion together. What if he is right?).

Must I continue …

There is no question that the Roman Catholic Church is making inroads into Evangelicalism like never before. If you understand the apostacy of the Catholic Church, this should cut you to the core. Those in the true Church (all true followers of Christ) must wake up and begin to pray for direction and wisdom in this hour. We must proclaim the truth like never before and begin to expose this infiltration to those we know and influence.

The Roman Catholic Church represents a mission field of over 1 Billion souls. Does this concern you? It concerns me more than I can express. It is a problem that most of the Church doesn’t even understand.

May God expose the darkness and bring forth His marvelous light.

Disclaimer: As I understand it, Keyes is a Roman Catholic. With that in mind, take what value you can from the article but know I consider the Roman Catholic Church apostate. I have studied Roman Catholic dogma, doctrine, and teachings extensively and find them in serious error with regard to the essential doctrines of biblical Christianity.

Alan Keyes
April 28, 2007

Link to source: http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/keyes/070428

Shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Gonzales v. Carhart (the case that involved a challenge to the federal law restricting so-called partial birth abortion), I received an email reporting the decision with a copy of the ruling attached. Unlike many whom the media identify as leaders in the pro-life movement, I felt no inclination to leap for joy at the news that the Court’s opinion upheld the constitutionality of the law.

In the first place, I have never been convinced that the legislative action in question had much significance for the pro-life cause. I believe it was mostly intended to provide cover for pro-abortion Republican politicians, who could offer their vote for the PBA restriction as a fig leaf to cover the shame of their supposedly pro-life supporters who put partisan politics above their obligations of conscience. In the second place, it seemed unwise to react to the decision before carefully considering the argument that produced it.

Abominable affirmation

Having done so, I cannot join in, or even understand, the approbation which others have expressed for this decision. It is in fact an abominable affirmation of the Court’s unconstitutional decisions in Roe and Casey. With grotesquely meticulous care, the man whose pivotal vote preserved so-called abortion rights in the Casey decision (Justice Kennedy) carves out an exception intended to prove and strengthen the rules set forth in Roe and Casey.

As my good friend Judie Brown put it recently (at a Colorado Right To Life dinner in Denver), Kennedy played the part of a skillful gardener, cutting back the evil planted by Roe/Casey in order to strengthen and extend its roots, hoping no doubt to make it harder to overturn in any subsequent ruling. While allowing for a state interest in restricting one brutal way of murdering the nascent child, he makes it clear that this restriction is tolerable under Roe/Casey only because abortionists still have access to other equally brutal modes of killing.

At one point, with what seems like dogged satisfaction, Kennedy describes such an alternative in almost clinical detail, no doubt because he knows that in doing so he implicates all the justices who join his reasoning in explicit support for the right to use this alternative to kill the child, even though it is just as horrendous as the one restricted by the “partial birth” legislation.

Arcane logic

This reminds me of the careful logic that I’m told is often characteristic of serial killers, psychopaths who follow arcane rituals in order to distinguish their killings from anything so profane as ordinary murder. In like fashion, Kennedy makes clear that the abortionists who rip the child limb from limb while it is still within the womb are doctors helping a woman to exercise her “right to choose” — while those who mangle the child when it has emerged past a certain point are violators, subject to the restrictive force of law. Though the child is in principle the same person in both situations, the Court’s glassy-eyed observance of its own fanatically arcane and ritualistic logic is supposed to establish some invisible line of demarcation separating one act of murder from the next.

This decision is not a harbinger of hope for an end to the Court-imposed reign of terror in the womb. It is evidence of a legal elite gone mad, hopelessly lost in the maze of its own psychopathic logic. We might think them pathetic if we did not have to live in a nation whose conscience is compromised and confused by the holocaust their insanity has unleashed.

Compromised abettors

After reading the text of the decision, my heart sank at the thought that all four of the supposedly pro-life appointees to the Court had voted to accept its lethal implication. Then I saw the saving grace of Justice Thomas’s brief but clarion concurring opinion, in which he stated simply that although he voted for the decision’s result, he continues to reject the Roe/Casey regime it relies upon, in the conviction that “the Court’s abortion jurisprudence, including Casey and Roe v. Wade, . . . has no basis in the Constitution.” Justice Scalia joined in this morally and constitutionally essential declaration.

But these two stood alone. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, the two G. W. Bush appointees who supposedly offer hope for an eventual return to constitutional sanity, were silent. They let the Gardener of Evil speak for them, with the clear and tragic implication that they concur in his mad, immoral effort to make Gonzales v. Carhart the exception that firmly proves and establishes the murderous rule of so-called abortion rights.

Since all things are possible with God, we must hope that events will disprove this implication. As things now stand, however, Gonzales v. Carhart offers clear evidence that G. W. Bush’s appointees to the U.S. Supreme Court are the compromised abettors of unconstitutional abuse that some of us feared they might be, rather than the constituents of constitutional restoration for whom we still pray.

It points to the sobering probability that the Supreme Court now has a 7-2 majority in favor of persisting in its unconstitutional assertion of the right to murder our posterity. It confirms the truth that I have long asserted, that we cannot expect the restoration of the Constitution to come from the usurping branch of the federal government whose ambitious members have engineered its overthrow.

Ultimately up to us

If we want constitutional rule, we must act so that the other branches can unite to restore it. We must elect to Congress and the Presidency only those candidates who pledge to respect the constitutional imperative “to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,” and to abide by the oath of office that requires them to use their constitutional powers to that end.

We need representatives in Congress and the White House who will say “yes” to the Constitution and “no” to the judges and justices who discard it. And we need fervently to pray for God’s help in finding the courage, discernment, and faith to be the kind of citizens who will vote for and support them, no matter what.

We will finally get the leaders America needs only when we resolve to become the citizens of conscience and principle that we ought to be. For God and our posterity, now is the time.

© 2007 Alan Keyes

My pastor did say that religion would not save you and it is only through Jesus. The unfortunate thing about his statement is that Catholics will say the same thing. There is an intentional deception in the Catholic Church that says, we share Jesus with the non-Catholic churches. They will say that Jesus is the only way, but their theology, doctrines, dogmas, and actual practice and beliefs tell a different story. Catholics do not hold that regeneration/salvation/justification is by faith alone, from Jesus alone, through His grace alone. This is the truth of the Gospel. All other gound is sinking sand.

Church, wake up, and hold your pastors accountable to the truth of the Gospel. The truth is the Roman Catholic Church is a massive mission field. Over 1 Billion (yes, that’s B) people in the world claim to be Catholics. For many in our churches today Catholics are considered brothers and sisters in Christ rather than people lost and in need of a Savior. It’s not a matter of love. What greater love can we express than to share the truth with those who don’t have it?

I am pleading with the church, understand that Catholics need the truth just as much as the Hindu, the Mormon, the Buddhist, the Muslim, and all other lost souls who live without Jesus and a life seperated unto Him.

Read here what Pastor Ken Silva has to say about the Church of Rome.

Google Video Link Here

HT: Ben Davis, Symphony of Scripture

At Symphony of Scripture, Ben Davis has taken the time to provide some great notes to go along with this video. Enjoy.

Hus, the Czech reformer, came from peasant parents in southern Bohemia, a small town called Husinetz. Hus took to John Wyclif’s views of the church as an elect company with Christ, not the pope, its true head. Bethleham Chapel near the university gave Hus an unrivaled opportunity to circulate Wyclif’s teaching including his criticisms of the abuses of the power in the papacy. On the walls were paintings contrasting the behavior of the popes and Christ. The pope rode a horse; Christ walked barefoot. Jesus washed the disciples’ feet; the pope preferred to have his kissed.

The Archbishop of Prague grew restless and complained to the pope about Hus. Root out the heresy, replied the pope. Hus agreed to attend the Council of Constance and appear before a council. He had hopes of presenting his views to the assembled authorities, but upon his arrival he found himself instead a victim of the Inquisition. Hus must recant or be burned. You can quess what happened. Hus was condemned for ‘heresies’ he never taught.

Hus was willing to yield himself to the teaching of the church, when instructed by Scripture in what way his teaching was wrong. For Hus truth was supreme:

I have said that I would not, for a chapel full of gold, recede from the truth. I know that the truth stands and is mighty for ever, and abides eternally, with whom there is no respect of persons.

Finally, 6 July 1415, the day for his burning came. Said Hus: “God is my witness that the evidence against me is false. I have never thought nor preached except with one intention of winning men, if possible, from their sins. In the the truth of the gospel I have written, taught, and preached;

today I will gladly die.

In the Second Edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II states:

IT IS A CAUSE FOR GREAT JOY THAT THE LATIN TYPICAL EDITION OF THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS BEING PUBLISHED. It is approved and promulgated by me in this Apostolic Letter and thus becomes the definitive text of the aforementioned Catechism. This is occurring about five years after the Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum of October 11, 1992, which, on the 30th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council, accompanied the publication of the first, French-language text of the Catechism.

It is approved and promulgated by me … thus becomes the definitive text … Wow, what arrogance proceeds from the man made office of the pope. It has always been my conviction that the only definitive text is the Word of God. However helpful and useful it may be, no text could ever be definitive or without error when compared with the Word of God.

This arrogance by no means began with the above mentioned edition of the CATECHISM and with Pope John Paul II.

As far back as 1566, Pope Pius V, made these statements regarding “The Catechism of the Council of Trent”

AUTHORITY AND EXCELLENCE OF THE ROMAN CATECHISM

The Roman Catechism is unlike any other summary of Christian doctrine, not only because it is intended for the use of priests in their preaching, but also because it enjoys a unique authority among manuals. In the first place, as already explained, it was issued by the express command of the Ecumenical Council of Trent, which also ordered that it be translated into the vernacular of different nations to be used as a standard source for preaching. Moreover it subsequently received the unqualified approval of many Sovereign Pontiffs. Not to speak of Pius IV who did so much to bring the work to completion, and of St. Pius V under whom it was finished, published and repeatedly commended, Gregory XIII, as Possevino testifies, so highly esteemed it that he desired even books of Canon Law to be written in accordance with its contents. In his Bull of June 14, 1761, Clement XIII said that the Catechism contains a clear explanation of all that is necessary for salvation and useful for the faithful, that it was composed with great care and industry and has been highly praised by all, that by it in former times the faith was strengthened, and that no other catechism can be compared with it. He concluded then, that the Roman Pontiffs offered this work to pastors as a norm of Catholic teaching and discipline so that there might be uniformity and harmony in the instructions of all. Nor have the Sovereign Pontiffs in our own days been less laudatory of the Catechism. Pope Leo XIII, in an Encyclical Letter of September 8, 1899, to the Bishops and clergy of France, recommended two books which all seminarians should possess and constantly read and study, namely, the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas and “that golden book,” the Catechismus ad Parochos. Regarding the latter work he wrote: “This work is remarkable at once for the richness and exactness of its doctrine, and for the elegance of its style; it is a precious summary of all theology, both dogmatic and moral. He who understands it well, will have always at his service those aids by which a priest is enabled to preach with fruit, to acquit himself worthily of the important ministry of the confessional and of the direction of souls, and will be in a position to refute the objections of unbelievers.”

Mother Teresa (known also as Mother Teresa of Calcutta) was born in what is now called Yugoslavia/Bosnia in 1910. Born to Albanian parents she was at that time known as Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu. The labor for which she became renowned began on January 6, 1929 when she arrived in Calcutta, India to work with the poor and needy. When she died in September of 1997 she was the director of a worldwide missions organization known as the “Missionaries of Charity.” There are currently over 500 missions in more than 100 countries around the world. She was the recipient of numerous awards including the most prestigious of all awards, the Nobel Peace Prize. She was revered around the world as an example of Christian love and charity and as someone who dedicated her life to the noble cause of advancing the gospel to the poor and needy of the world while caring for their physical needs. Her legacy will doubtless be as one of history’s great humanitarians.

Upon examination, though, the Mother Teresa portrayed by the media and popularized in our culture is glorified (soon to be beatified) and almost deified. A close examination of her beliefs and the work she did shows that her legacy may be little more than fiction.

You can read the rest of this excellent treatise concerning the myth of “Mother” Teresa perpetrated on the unsuspecting by the apostate Church of Rome here.