Welcome to the Weekend Roundup! – News & Views – 8/31/19

We’ve been watching the increasing polarization within the Roman Catholic church since the day progressive pope Francis was elected. Bergoglio’s pragmatic strategy, to “bend” and de-emphasize doctrine in order to make the church more appealing and viable in an increasingly secular world, is anathema to rigid church traditionalists and conservatives.

This new television show from CBS debuts Sept. 26 and will feature a team of three characters, including a Catholic seminarian, who “investigate the (Catholic) Church’s backlog of unexplained mysteries.” In light of the scandal tsunami involving abusive priests and their enabling superiors that’s currently overwhelming the RCC, the team may want to start their investigation into “evil” at the closest Catholic diocesan office.

Disaffected Catholics are shaken by the scandals that are rocking their church. Pray that many will leave Catholicism and trust in Jesus Christ as their Savior by faith alone.

Last February, pope Francis and the Muslim Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed el-Tayeb, co-signed the “Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,” which states that a “pluralism and diversity” of religions is “willed by God.” This newly appointed multi-faith committee will pursue inter-religious dialogue and cooperation in accordance with the goals of the February document. There’s no sign of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in any of this.

Because of their church’s teaching that Mary and thousands of dead “saints” act as spiritual mediators, Catholics are especially susceptible to full-blown necromancy aka spiritualism. I’ll be submitting a post on this topic in a couple of weeks.

Readers of church history know that the Waldensians were a proto-Reformation group that got their start in France and Italy in the 12th century. They were brutally persecuted by the Catholic church. However, the Waldensians drifted into Bible-denying liberalism and modernism decades ago. Pope Francis keeps trying to apologize to the Waldensians on behalf of the RCC, but they won’t accept.

Steve at Triablogue has some good thoughts regarding the evolution of Catholicism.

Catholic “visionaries” are constantly coming forward with claims of new appearances by Mary that Catholic bishops must examine for “authenticity.” There’s no sign of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in any of this.

Netflix will be releasing “The Two Popes” on December 20th and the trailer can be accessed via the article above. From the trailer, this appears to be a pro-Francis puff piece that contrasts Benedict XVI’s fondness for cold doctrine and elaborate ceremony with Francis’ “warm humanity.” Yes, but what about Jesus Christ?

Hipster mega-churches must constantly be on the outlook for breaking new trends in order to remain on the “cutting edge.”

27 thoughts on “Welcome to the Weekend Roundup! – News & Views – 8/31/19

  1. Re: Is the Catholic Church 2000 years old?

    I read triablogue very often. The guys there are mostly Reformed. I’ve learned a lot from them.

    LOL. This claim of a 2000 year old pedigree (by Romanists) presupposes that the Roman Church was co-extensive with the ancient Catholic Church, and that the Roman Church has not changed one bit since then, in both doctrine and character.

    When one takes the time to do a critical examination of both scripture and history, the conclusion is that this claim belongs in a world of fantasy.

    Newman claimed that to be deep in history is to cease being Protestant. But I see a huge amount of cognitive dissonance from his actions. If his claim were true, there would not be a need for him to come up with his silly “development of doctrine”.

    But we know

    Liked by 2 people

      1. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2018/06/weathercock-apologetics.html?m=1

        An interesting testimony:

        “James McCloud6/18/2018 1:55 AM☍

        I was born into a Catholic family, confirmed in faith, became a lay apologist on social media forums and other places debating Protestants and slamming them with Matt 16:18, James 2:24 etc; completely convinced of all the truths of Catholicism – except for its idolatry of Mary (which at that time I viewed as obsession with Mary). I ignored the latter for quite a while, until I couldn’t. I was mesmerised by the Catholic Church. I was extremely proud about how old she was, that Peter was her first bishop, of all the theologians she produced, the authority she had from Christ, the wonderful art and architecture she produced – there was nothing wrong with her – err, except for her emphasis on Mary and Marian prayers which I found nowhere in the Bible at the time (which was puzzling). I actually sensed the presence of God in the Catholic Church, so all was otherwise okay – I thought. 

        There were some other problems also like this one: I found it strange that after receiving the sacrament of reconciliation (confession), many priests would tell me to recite the “hail marys” or some Marian prayer as penance- and while at first I did it, later I started disobeying the priests’ suggested Marian penance – instead making a small prayer to the God I offended. I disobeyed them because they did not make any conceivable sense. I saw no point in praising Mary (hail mary) or asking for her intercession (holy mary) when it was God who I had offended with my sins, and I had direct access to Him.

        During these years, I was also researching Islam, and Christian Islamic apologetics wasn’t common at all for referencing. David Wood’s ministry either hadn’t started or I did not know about him. Therefore I had two choices: either study Islam to challenge it (via Sam Shamoun’s website or using the Islamic sources themselves) or study Church history to defend Christianity. I chose the latter as I loved my “mother” church (which was the Catholic Church), and would have only enjoyed knowing more about her.

        Gradually the information I got from history did not align with what I believed to be true, unless I wanted to engage in Olympic level mental gymnastics. I had assumed earlier that there could be good reasons to venerated the saints like the apostolic churches doing it – but it wasnt the case at all. I believed that the papacy was actually traceable in the first century, and Peter was literally the first pope, but he wasnt. There was no papacy until a century later when the concept started taking shape. I gradually started realising the nonsense that I had been sold, and the mental gymnastics Catholic apologists employed to defend their beliefs.

        I had watched White’s debates as a Catholic, and he did not persuade me, because I was convinced in my beliefs. In fact I thought White was hammered black and blue by all the Catholic apologists. But later after my own historical foundations were shaken and weakened, I listened to White’s “Great Debates”, and now I could see clear as day all of his major objections. 

        This somehow ties up with Wood/White’s controversy. I had heard White’s gospel presentation many times, and still thought he was wrong because I was firmly rooted in my assumptions about my faith. Those assumptions had to be shaken by facts, and only then his presentation started making sense to me. And I was still a Christian who believed in the Life, Death and Resurrection of our Lord and his inerrant Word. How much more difficult would it be for a Muslim to cross over?

        This also goes to show the mental gymnastics one does to justify his position. That is why I believe that one’s position should be grounded in both scripture and facts. I had access to scriptures before, but I interpreted it as a Catholic.

        Thought of sharing.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. 1.) “Bergoglio’s pragmatic strategy, to “bend” and de-emphasize doctrine in order to make the church more appealing and viable in an increasingly secular world, is anathema to rigid church traditionalists and conservatives.”
    Interesting they got what their infallible magistrium voted for…

    2.) “The Catholic Church is not getting my sympathy – or my money”
    That should have ended a long time ago…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for the comments!

      1 – RE: they got what their infallible magistrium voted for…

      Yeah, when I was a kid, we were told by the nuns that the Holy Spirit guided the conclaves of cardinals when they elect a pope. Conservatives and traditionalists would say God permitted Satan to have his way when the 2013 conclave elected Francis.

      2 – RE: That should have ended a long time ago…

      Yup, the priest scandals began making bigtime headlines in 2002 and exposed the hierarchy as being complicit.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. 3.) “Multi-faith committee set up to spread Pope Francis’ claim that God wills ‘diversity of religions’”
    More proof Romanism isn’t a New Testament religion.

    4.) ” However, the Waldensians drifted into Bible-denying liberalism and modernism decades ago”
    Wow sad to hear Waldensians are now liberals…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. 3 – RE: More proof Romanism isn’t a New Testament religion.

      Pragmatic Francis is attempting to quell the anti-(c)hristian violence in the Middle East but also pushing the inter-faith movement with the RCC in the driver’s seat. One could not imagine the apostle Paul signing a ‘diversity of religions’ accord with the pagan high priests in the cities where he planted churches.

      4 – RE: sad to hear Waldensians are now liberals

      Yeah, they suffered all of that persecution for many centuries only to betray the Gospel when there was no persecution.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. ” One could not imagine the apostle Paul signing a ‘diversity of religions’ accord with the pagan high priests in the cities where he planted churches.”
        You’re totally right. Unimaginable!

        Liked by 1 person

  4. Good morning, Tom! I sent you an email about that post you commented on-I removed it-I think I misread what he was saying! Thank you SO much! I did comment on his post this morning:
    “Good morning, Clyde!
    I had reblogged this but this post sounds as though we can pray for the dead. I took it down so as not to confuse anyone.
    Maybe you didn’t mean it that way?”

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Good morning, Beth! I got your email and responded. Here’s what I wrote:

      Yes, that last paragraph was the problem. Clyde is advocating praying for the salvation of people after they have died. That is thoroughly un-Biblical. I’m sure Clyde meant no “harm,” but he’s introducing a concept that has no basis in Scripture. Thanks for removing it!

      Have a nice rest of your weekend, Beth!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thank you! May you and your beautiful wife,too! One of our grandsons is turning 4 so it’s birthday party day! If the rain keeps up the party is here if not we are going to a park! Thankful to God for making me versatile 😁👍🏻🙏🏻

        This is Clyde’s response:

        When people speak of praying for the dead they generally mean asking God to work in that person’s life now, after he has died. That kind of praying is useless. But if we don’t know whether a dead person was saved we can ask God to bring salvation to that person while he was still alive. We are actually praying for a living person, even though the prayer wasn’t made until after he had died.

        I can see why you find this idea confusing. I am barely able to understand it myself.”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Thank you and I hope you all have a great time celebrating your grandson’s birthday today! We had a party yesterday for my wife’s b-day and I ate too much junk which guaranteed that I was going to wake up at 3 a.m. this morning.

        Thanks for posting Clyde’s response. His notion is un-Biblical and dangerous. Not only do I think such a prayer is completely ineffective but it opens people up to the Catholic concept.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I’m hoping to hold the junk consumption down!! Happy birthday to your wife!!!

        Yes to what you said!!! I’m so thankful you said something to me!!! I was “thinking” I was seeing it a different way than what he was saying… you know what I mean???

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Thanks for the birthday wishes! She had a grand time yesterday!

        Yes, I can certainly understand reading someone’s post and not picking up on all of the points. I don’t follow Clyde but after our exchange I googled his site and found the original post. It starts off as a post critical of purgatory but at the end he introduces his novelty of praying for the dead. Several others that I know surprisingly “liked” the post so they either didn’t understand what he was proposing or they didn’t read the whole thing.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s