Were Peter and the apostles wrong to select Matthias as Judas’s replacement?

My wife and I finished our reading of Deuteronomy the other night. Like the other books of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy’s not the easiest of reading, especially if you don’t have any Bible aids. As the Israelites prepared to enter the Promised Land, Moses repeated the Law to them, requiring their obedience but also emphasizing trust in the Lord. Moses, personifying the Law, was not allowed to enter the Promised Land himself. It was left to Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus (“Jehova saves”) to lead the Israelites into the Promised Land, one of my favorite foreshadowings of Christ in the Old Testament.

Last night, in preparation for our journey into our next study, the Acts of the Apostles, I did a deep dive (at least for me) into the first chapter accompanied by my Bible dictionary, two commentaries, and concordance and I came across some interesting information that I’d like to share.

In chapter one, in the opening verses, the apostles witness the ascension of Jesus into Heaven and then return to Jerusalem and wait to receive the Holy Spirit as Jesus had commanded them. In verses 15-22, while still waiting for the Holy Spirit, Peter, always an impetuous fellow, proposes to the 120 believers gathered in the upper room, that they must choose an apostolic replacement for Judas Iscariot. Two men are nominated, Joseph-Barsabbas-Justus and Matthias. A prayer is said, lots are cast, and the lot falls to Matthias, so he is chosen as Judas’s replacement in vs. 26. but that’s the very last time we read of him.

I’ve read this chapter many times previously and always accepted it pretty much at face value as written, but John MacArthur and J. Vernon McGee had some interesting observations in their commentaries. First, MacArthur observes that this was the last instance of the casting of lots by believers in the Bible. He writes, the casting of lots was “a common OT method of determining God’s will” that was “made…unnecessary” by the “coming of the Spirit.”

So should Peter have waited for the Holy Spirit rather than plowing forward?

In his commentary, J. Vernon McGee proposes the selection of Matthias was possibly an error, that the apostles should have waited for the Holy Spirit and His leading on this matter rather than forging ahead. He suggests that the Lord subsequently chose His own replacement for Judas by selecting Saul/Paul, “an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead” (Gal. 1:1).

But the opponents of the “Paul over Matthias” viewpoint say the twelve apostles were chosen to eventually reign over the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt.19:28) as opposed to Paul, who was distinctly chosen to be the apostle to the Gentiles (Rom.11:13). Paul didn’t meet the apostles’ criterion for apostleship but did the Lord have His own criterion?

McGee presents his argument as his own personal conviction and obviously not as essential dogma. It’s an interesting viewpoint and I’d be interested to hear if others have come across it as well. This situation with the differing opinions on the Matthias-Paul question is probably “old news” to many of you but it was the first time I had encountered it.

Cardinal Pell charged with sexual abuse

One of this morning’s international headlines was the news that criminal charges involving the sexual abuse of multiple minors over a span of decades have been brought against cardinal George Pell (pictured), the leading Catholic prelate of Australia and one of pope Francis’s top advisers.

This scandal has been brewing for years. Pell was initially accused of covering up the sexual abuse of other pedophile priests until multiple victims came forward claiming Pell himself was a predator. Many of Pell’s victims were altar boys so this hits close to home for me. See the story below.

Pope Francis has been aware of the criminal investigation against Pell for several years and yet has continued to retain him as the Prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy (aka the Vatican Treasurer in simplespeak), one of the most important positions in the Vatican.

When will the abuse end? When will the cover-up, leading to the church’s highest office, the pope, come to an end? Why didn’t the Catholic church confront this pedophile priests and cover-up scandal thirty years ago when news reports first began to surface? As this latest story reveals, any and all claims by the church that it is seriously attempting to solve this “problem” are without any merit. I believe this monstrous scandal is one of God’s marks upon this apostate church.

My heart sincerely goes out to the victims of Pell and other Catholic clerics. It could have easily been me, an altar boy from 1966-70.

For Catholics who believe consecrated bread wafers are changed into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ and impart salvific graces to all those who consume them, Pell probably dispensed hundreds of thousands of Jesus wafers during the course of his “career.” What good did it do for anyone? None. Salvation comes by faith alone in Jesus Christ as Savior, not by a legalistic religious institution administered by sinful men.

---

Sex abuse scandal has followed Cardinal George Pell for decades
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/06/29/sex-abuse-scandal-has-followed-cardinal-george-pell-for-decades/?utm_term=.6531f41be5db

1) Diet update, 2) James White update, and 3) Lloyd-Jones video

Today’s one of those rare days when I have more than one topic to write about, but rather than publishing them separately, I’m combining them into one post and I’ll try to be very brief:

*Diet update: Back on May 1st, I announced to the WordPress world that I had started on the famous “Sal’s Birdland Diet” in order to lose 33 lbs. See here for original post. Eleven weeks later, I’m happy to report I’m halfway to my goal after losing 17 lbs. but I’m about 5 lbs. behind plan at this point. The diet went pretty well initially but I had reached a plateau the last three weeks (see above chart). I guess I had gotten a bit lazy in my discipline (like ordering fried calamari and a wedge salad topped with gobs of creamy blue cheese dressing and crumbled bacon for dinner at a restaurant a few weekends ago). This past week I really buckled down in order to break through the plateau and it worked. I have noticed this diet experience has many parallels to our spiritual walk with the Lord. When we’re lazy, half-hearted, or double-minded in regards to our relationship with the Lord, we can expect a spiritual plateau and even spiritual decline. I’ll let you know if/when I hit my target, hopefully in about 8 or 9 weeks. By the way, my size 38″ pants now keep creeping downward whenever I power walk so in the interests of decency and propriety, I’ll need to do some pants shopping at J.C. Penney for some size 36″s in another week or two.

*James R. White & Dialogue “Controversy”: A week ago I wrote about the mounting controversy over Christian apologist James R. White’s two interfaith dialogues with a Muslim Imam. See here. I’m of a mind that apologists should debate false religionists rather than dialogue with them. But White believes dialogues are beneficial in the spreading of the Gospel and affirms he will continue with this approach despite the opposition. See here for White’s recent interview with Messianic Jew, Dr. Michael Brown, in which he defends the dialogues. If we disagree with Dr. White’s approach, we should do so charitably.

*Martyn Lloyd-Jones video biography available for download: I’ve been so blessed after “discovering” the ministry of D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899 – 1981), the godly and beloved Welsh-English preacher and defender of the Gospel of grace of the previous generation. I’m currently reading his compiled sermons on the Sermon on the Mount and its been a tremendous blessing although very slow reading because it’s so deep. I was skimming through Paul Washer’s Twitter account and several months ago he had mentioned that a video biography of Lloyd-Jones, “Logic on Fire: The Life and Legacy of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones,” was available for download. See the trailer here. To download the video for 48-hours for $6.00, see here. The DVD is also available at Amazon for $39.95+ shipping, see here. Review to follow.

 

Pushing aside the little guy for the “greater good”

Wild River
Directed by Elia Kazan and featuring Montgomery Clift, Lee Remick, and Jo Van Fleet
20th Century Fox, 1960, 110 minutes

Director Elia Kazan had visited the Cumberland area of Tennessee in the early 1930s as an idealistic, young communist. He admired the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), part of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, which tamed the flood-prone Tennessee River while providing much-needed hydro-electric power. For many years, Kazan desired to make a film about the tensions involved in the push for the greatest common good as represented by the TVA versus the disruption of individuals’ lives caused by the project.

Plot

It’s the 1930s and the TVA is on the verge of damming the Tennessee River and flooding several river valleys. Chuck Glover (Clift), a TVA bureaucrat based in Washington, is sent down to Garthville, Tennessee with the mission of removing the last remaining holdout, eighty-year-old Ella Garth (Van Fleet), who has no intention of selling her soon-to-be-flooded river island. Her widowed granddaughter, Carol (Remick), is attracted to the urbane Glover and the two quickly form a relationship. Glover persuades Ella’s Black tenant farmers to leave the island along with their families but the matriarch remains adamant. At the same time, resentment mounts among the local White citizenry towards Glover’s policy of paying Blacks the same wages as Whites to help clear trees. Carol aggressively pursues the ambivalent Glover, asking him to marry her at the very moment the rednecks arrive at her house in order to send Glover packing. He can only admire Carol’s spunky defiance of the gang of good ol’ boys and asks her to elope. A federal marshal is finally brought in to evict Ella from the island. She is provided a small house on higher ground but dies of heartbreak shortly after. On their way to Washington D.C. via airplane, Glover, Carol, and her two children view the river and the only portion of Garth Island still above water; the family cemetery containing Ella’s fresh grave. Glover admired Ella for her foolhardy stubbornness but she stood in the way of “progress” and had to be sacrificed.

Commentary

Kazan filmed “Wild River” on location in the towns of Charleston and Cleveland, Tennessee. Close to one-hundred locals were used as extras. Emotionally crippled Monty Clift barely held it together throughout the filming. Kazan’s accounts of the actor’s performance are quite interesting. While Kazan bragged that he bullied Clift into remaining sober throughout the shoot, town lore has it that the McClary sisters regularly snuck liquor up to his room at the Cherokee Hotel. Twenty-five-year-old Lee Remick is superb as the young, love-starved widow. When she confidently and aggressively courts Clift, it’s all he can do just to sit alone, gape-mouthed, on the couch, leaving every viewer scratching their head. Jo Van Fleet is fantastic as Ella, skillfully portraying the eighty-year-old matriarch at the age of forty-five. Albert Salmi is entertaining as the alpha good ol’ boy. Overall, it’s a wonderful cast which includes several Kazan regulars.

“Wild River” was one of Kazan’s favorite films although its limited art house release guaranteed unprofitability. Fox was convinced 1960 movie audiences would not be interested in a film about the TVA. The movie was rarely shown on television and was only recently (2013) released on DVD.

Kazan had attempted to write the film script himself but eventually hired seasoned screenwriter, Paul Osborne. Kazan especially admired the conflict between Glover and Ella in which both held to positions that were simultaneously right and wrong. Relations between Blacks and Whites in the 1930’s segregated Deep South are portrayed quite candidly for a movie made in 1960.

I’ve seen “Wild River” many times but I appreciated watching it for the first time in HD on Blu-ray. Commentary is provided by Time magazine film critic, Richard Schickel, who doesn’t hide his deep admiration for “Wild River” or for Kazan and Remick. This is a pretty good film but Remick’s performance as someone attempting to straddle both “tradition” and “progress” was Oscar-worthy outstanding.

Additional thoughts from a believer

The Black workers on Garth island and Carol and her children regularly sing old Gospel hymns, with “In the Garden” featured most prominently. Kazan contrasts Christianity and “traditional” values (which includes negative attitudes such as racism) with utopian Liberal Progressivism. I’m all for improving people’s physical circumstances but true redemption can’t be found in either progressive or conservative politics. Jesus Christ transcends politics and physical conditions. But in all fairness to Kazan, one of the main messages of this film is that even the most “successful” progressive social engineering project will have its share of victims.

Roman Catholic Ecumenical and Interfaith Outreach – Established 1964

Did I get your attention? Some may find the photo and caption above to be slightly heavy-handed, but the very real danger of ecumenism with Rome far eclipses any Hollywood nightmare.

“When such (ecumenical) actions are undertaken prudently and patiently by the Catholic faithful, with the attentive guidance of their bishops, they promote justice and truth, concord and collaboration, as well as the spirit of brotherly love and unity. This is the way that, when the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion have been gradually overcome, all Christians will at last, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, be gathered into the one and only Church in that unity which Christ bestowed on His Church from the beginning. We believe that this unity subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time.” – from Unitatis Redintegratio (Latin for “Restoration of unity”), promulgated by pope Paul VI on 21 November 1964, as part of the proceedings of the Second Vatican Council

Married couple at church

Sometimes when a married couple is sitting together at church it goes down like this:

 

He’s thinking: “I hope she paid attention to this sermon because she really needs to get down from her pedestal.”

 

She’s thinking: “I’m so glad Mr. “It’s-ALL-About-Me” heard this sermon. Let’s see if he changes at all.”

 

Ever been there? I have.

 

Praise the Lord for our spouses! Let’s pray for them every day and then pray that WE become the partner the Lord wants us to be!

 

“Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.” – Ecclesiastes 4:12 (Three strands = God+husband+wife)

Coming soon to a Protestant church near you: the “Ecumenical Rite of Mass”

If you’re at point A and you want to get to point B, what must you do to achieve your goal?

The Catholic church has been in protracted discussions with several Protestant groups for decades, trying to find an acceptable pathway to reunion. Pope Francis’s ingenious sleight of hand in last year’s “Amoris Laetitia” document, which subtly reversed infallible dogma and opened the door to communion for Catholic remarrieds, prompted liberal German cardinal, Walter Kasper, to anticipate hopefully that the next papal document would allow “shared Eucharistic communion” with Protestants (Avvenire, December 10, 2016).

But what exactly would the steps be to “shared Eucharistic communion”? Differences would have to be overcome. Protestants, for the most part, believe the elements of the Lord’s Supper, bread and wine/grape juice, symbolize the body and blood of Jesus Christ while Catholicism teaches its priests transform the bread and wine into the literal body and blood of Christ. But some Protestant views on communion are closer to Catholicism’s than others. While Anglicans and Lutherans don’t believe in the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, the literal changing of the elements, they do believe in the “real presence” of Christ in the elements, what they term as “consubstantiation.” It would make sense that Catholicism would initially target those two denominations for shared communion.

The news article below from a Catholic source reports of rumors that the Vatican is working with representatives of the Anglican church and liberal Lutheranism to create an “Ecumenical Rite of Mass” that would be acceptable to all three groups. Portions of the rite would be said in silence by the respective parties in order to accommodate the differences in belief. The article points out that cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio, “a close collaborator of pope Francis and currently the President of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts,” has already primed the pump by suggesting the sacraments may be more malleable than previously taught. Watch as Francis works more of his magic.

Ecumenism is making deep inroads into evangelicalism. Some pastors and para-church leaders now openly embrace Catholicism as a Christian church EVEN THOUGH Rome still teaches the same false gospel of sacramental grace and merit that it has always taught. Neither Catholics or evangelicals benefit by the muddying of the Gospel of salvation by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

Ecumenism will advance. An “ecumenical rite of mass” is certainly in the works and will come about.

Lord Jesus, come quickly!

---

Vatican reportedly working on “Ecumenical Rite of Mass” for joint worship with Protestants
https://catholiccitizens.org/news/71788/vatican-reportedly-working-ecumenical-rite-mass-joint-worship-protestants/

Welcome to the Weekend Roundup – News & Views – 6/24/17

Some may consider the picture of pope Francis photoshopped into the Godfather to be a bit much, but I thought it was appropriate for the first two stories:

• Vatican considers excommunicating the mafia

For centuries, organized crime was the great benefactor of Catholicism as blood money poured into church coffers. The Mafia and the church once fit together like hand in glove. When pressed, Catholic spokespersons said of Mafia goons and labor union thugs, “We don’t ask them about their business, and they don’t ask us about ours.” Mafia dons were often pious churchmen and their weddings and funerals were officiated by leading prelates. Mafia killers were buried without a second thought in blessed Catholic cemeteries next to pedophile priests, while unbaptized babies, divorced remarrieds, and psychologically-disturbed suicide victims were barred. As the Mafia slides into obscurity, this “consideration” is far too little, way too late.

• Rome show smashes myth Virgin model was Borgia pope’s lover

And while we’re speaking about organized crime, there was the papacy of pope Alexander VI – Rodrigo de Borja – who ruled from 1492 to 1503. The ABSOLUTE corruption of Rome under Borja and the aftermath hastened the rise of Luther and the other 16th-century Reformers through the power of the Holy Spirit.

• A Catholic reads the Bible for the first time

I’m always encouraged when I read stories about Catholics buying Bibles and reading them. Hopefully, they’ll soften their hearts, accept Christ, and come out of religious legalism. But the fact remains that the “one true church” discouraged personal Bible reading and study for centuries. Catholic defenders claim their church gave the world the Bible and yet the church denied it to everyone but their clergy. If you read the Bible with an open heart and the Lord’s enlightenment you’ll understand why that was the case.

• As Church Shifts, a Cardinal Welcomes Gays

If you’ve been following Catholic news reports as I have this month – LGBTQ Pride Month – you’ve witnessed an overwhelming number of stories dealing with the Catholic church’s increasing acceptance of “alternative” lifestyles, not at the Vatican level but at the diocesan and parish levels.

• Can relics unite Catholics and Orthodox? Pope Francis thinks so.

Who would have thought Francis would be able to line up the Lutherans, Charismatics, and Pentecostals a lot more easily than the Eastern Orthodox. But the Patriarchs have long memories. They’re still smarting over the sacking of Constantinople by the infallible pope’s armies of the Fourth Crusade in 1204. Too bad most Protestants have forgotten the past.

• Four cardinals press Pope Francis to clarify divorce-remarriage stand

The four traditionalist cardinals – Carlo Caffarra, Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke and Joachim Meisner – are once again demanding that Francis clarify his ambiguous teaching in “Amoris Laetitia” regarding communion for remarrieds. Francis ingeniously, yes, INGENIOUSLY, circumvented previously “infallible” dogma via an obscure footnote in an effort to recover alienated remarrieds who were previously barred from communion. But the defenders of Wojtyla/Ratzinger-style ecclesiastical conservatism aren’t laying down without a fight. Oh, and Catholics are so comforted to know they are guided by an infallible, unified Magisterium?

• Who killed Sister Cathy, and faith in the Catholic Church?

Contemplating the level of corruption inside the Catholic church that enabled a murderous pedophile like father Joseph Maskell to die a free man, this ex-priest has nothing good to say. See my review of “The Keepers” here.

• Luther the Reformer?

I’m actually encouraged by these continuing “pot shots” at Luther from the ultra-traditionalist Catholic website, Church Militant. They don’t get it. Luther would be the first to admit, it wasn’t about him and a religious institution, it was about Jesus Christ and the Good News! of salvation by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. Few contemporary Catholics relate to this type of pre-Vatican II militancy anymore. Eighty-percent of American Catholics can’t be bothered with attending obligatory mass every Sunday.

• Italian atheists vow to fight pro-crucifix court ruling

Imagine Roman Catholic crucifixes hanging in U.S. public school classrooms? That’s the case in Italy and in at least one other European “Catholic country” that I’m aware of; Poland. I obviously don’t agree with atheists on a lot of things but sponsorship of a particular religion by a tax-supported government institution in a democracy is totally untenable.

• Unforgivable Sin Actually Dancing, Baptist Scholar Claims (satire)

…And finally, for all my fellow Baptists out there, here’s a little fun from the Babylon Bee at our expense.

Solving the “Willis Weatherford” Caper

I thought some might enjoy this very unusual tale of how and why I began this blog two years ago, so here goes:

During my “prodigal” years away from the Lord, I attempted to fill my spiritual emptiness by reading and posting reviews of books on Amazon; mostly historical non-fiction dealing with Poland and Polish-Jewish relations. I continued posting reviews after I returned to the Lord but the books that I was reading after my “homecoming” were mostly related to Christianity. Among the books I reviewed was one which criticized the mixing of Christianity with nationalism, a topic dear to my heart as readers of this blog are aware. But mainly I reviewed books which examined Catholicism, including *Norman Geisler’s disappointing ecumenical treatise, “Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences.”

One day the pastor of our Southern Baptist church and I were discussing Christian nationalism and I mentioned the book on that topic that I referred to above. A short time later I started receiving rebuttal comments on my review of Geisler’s book from a “Willis Weatherford” who used words and phrases that were uncannily similar to what I was accustomed to hearing from our pastor. I immediately suspected the pastor had gone to Amazon to check out the Christian nationalism book, saw my review, and followed my profile to the Geisler review. After I mentioned to “Willis Weatherford” that his writing was oddly similar to our pastor’s phraseology, the comments stopped. Out of curiosity, I googled “Willis Weatherford” and discovered the gentleman is widely revered as a Christian folk hero down in Tennessee and North Carolina where our pastor grew up and attended seminary. But nothing was ever said between the pastor and I about this episode because I wasn’t absolutely sure of my suspicions.

Our pastor’s ecumenical attitude regarding Catholicism was very much in line with Geisler’s. Over the course of a year he had approvingly referred to such notable Catholics as Thomas Aquinas, Blaise Pascal, G.K. Chesterton, Malcolm Muggeridge, and Peter Kreeft, all of which was becoming increasingly problematic for me. When I confronted him about his admiration for Aquinas, the pastor quickly brushed aside my objections.

Several months later, I was involved with the church’s name change committee and when there was a need for a lengthy article to be written, the pastor immediately piped up, “Give it to Tom, he likes to write.” Wow. One of the deacons, a close friend of the pastor, then turned to me and said something to the effect of, “You like to write so much, you ought to start a blog.” Double wow. I sat there with a knowing smile on my face. The thing was I had NEVER mentioned my Amazon reviews to either one of those guys, thus confirming my suspicions.

But I still didn’t confront the pastor with the “Willis Weatherford” incident because I was already anticipating leaving the church due to his ecumenism (as well as a few other reasons). But the deacon’s comment is what gave me the motivation to eventually start this blog. A month after we left the church, excatholic4christ was born. It had become very clear to me after one year in that church that another voice was needed warning against ecumenism with Rome and inviting Catholics to accept Christ.

If anyone is interested in reading the exchange between “Willis Weatherford” and myself regarding the ecumenical compromise of Norman Geisler and others, I’ve posted it in the comments section.

*Ecumenical theologian, Norman Geisler, has mentored notable apologists, Ravi Zacharias, William Lane Craig, Frank Turek, and Lee Strobel, who espouse ecumenism with Rome as well.

“Gregorian masses” – just more religious calculus

In the interest of thoroughness I’d like to elaborate a bit on a previous post in which I referred to “Gregorian masses” (see here). I usually try to pursue the rationale behind Catholic rituals and ceremonies beyond the superficial to their self-refuting conclusions but for some reason I failed to carry forward my argument regarding Gregorian masses to its finality.

Briefly, Catholics are taught they must spend an indeterminate amount of time in “purgatory” to be cleansed from the guilt of “venial” (minor) sins and to pay the penalty for any remaining temporal punishment for “mortal” (major) sins already forgiven by a priest. Catholic theologians once taught the flames of purgatory were as excruciating as those in Hell but contemporary teaching now tends toward viewing purgatory as more of a way-station where deep-longing has replaced suffering.

According to Catholic theology, time in purgatory may be shortened by receiving “indulgences” from the church. “Plenary” (full) indulgences pardon all of the punishment/cleansing due in purgatory up to the point of reception while “partial” indulgences remove only an indeterminate portion. Indulgences may be applied to oneself or to deceased loved ones in accordance with official guidelines.

Are you still with me? The vast majority of Roman Catholics could not explain their church’s teaching on indulgences.

Catholics are taught that individual masses offered up for the deceased souls in purgatory will shorten their stay, although no one can say for how long. The suggested “stipend” for a mass intention is $10-$15. A tradition arose in the 6th century which claimed that thirty masses offered for a deceased person over thirty consecutive days, termed “Gregorian masses,” would be sure to release a soul from purgatory. See here. But the tradition stipulates the thirty masses cannot be said intermittently. They MUST be said over the course of thirty consecutive days for the plenary indulgence to be granted. The suggested “offering” for this series of masses ranges from $150-$300 depending on the priest or monastery a person deals with.

Okay, so now we finally get to carry this ritual to its illogical conclusion as I should have done initially.

Let’s just suppose a pious Catholic named Joe pays…er…I mean, contributes $300 to his parish priest to offer up thirty consecutive masses for the soul of his deceased mother who may or may not be in purgatory. The priest subsequently says twenty-nine masses over the course of twenty-nine consecutive days for the soul of the mother. But on the twenty-ninth day, immediately following mass, a flash fire destroys the church, killing both the priest and Joe. The result? The thirtieth and final Gregorian mass in the series was never conducted. So what is the status of Joe’s mother? Must she remain in purgatory as the Gregorian mass tradition stipulates since the series was not completed or will her remaining time in purgatory be pro-rated based on the 29 masses that were said?

And let’s not forget about the suffering soul in purgatory whose relatives are too poor or too cheap to shell out $300 to the priest for Gregorian masses. What about him? Why do the wealthy receive preferential treatment?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) does not mention Gregorian masses so this tradition is NOT an official teaching of the church although it has very wide acceptance. If you google “Gregorian mass” you’ll see many advertisements from monasteries offering this service. Why doesn’t the infallible pope weigh in on whether this popular tradition of thirty consecutive masses actually releases a soul from purgatory or not?

Catholics will charge that I’m being outrageously petty here for the sake of argument but, no, if you build a legalistic religious system, you must account for all contingencies. Catholic rituals, ceremonies, and traditions are refuted by logic and God’s Word.

I’m so grateful my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, released me from the chains of Catholic legalism and ritualism. Jesus paid the penalty for ALL of my sins on the cross.

Accept Jesus as your Savior by faith alone and ask the Lord to lead you to an evangelical church in your area that preaches God’s Word without compromise.

“As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” – Psalm 103:12

---

What does the Bible say about Purgatory?
https://www.gotquestions.org/purgatory.html