How is it that the Catholic Church is evil?

[RileyG]

SDA believes in soul sleep, so to them communion with the dead is believed to be impossible. An argument over that issue can be a topic for another thread. Please let Bob make his points

Thank you. I was just very confused by that comment.

 

[Clare73]

I think Christianity would be much better off if we could be united by what we share in common rather than being divided by our differences. It is we that divide the body of Christ by calling the other "less than."

Keeping in mind Paul's admonition: "Watch your faith and doctrine, closely." (1 Tim 4:16)

That man by his own power has anything to do with his saving faith is contra-NT teaching.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

What you say is a proposition. Which means it is your interpretation. It is true that man and his effort has nothing to do with salvation, it is the gift of God. That is also the position of the Catholic Church as explained in the Council of Trent.

What is at issue is does man have any responsibility once he is saved by God?

Jesus gives us plenty of warnings and teaching in the parables. The man that has one talent and does nothing is condemned by the king and what little he has is taken away.
The New Testament tells us to work out our own salvation and it says we will be judged by our works. It does not tell us to believe and do nothing.
Jesus tells us to ask, seek, and knock. Those are works. He tells us to pray. That is a work.
He also warns us not to compare our selves with others as His ways are not our ways and He looks on the heart. The widow with two pennies was praised more highly by God than those that gave large sums. The woman who washed His feet with her tears was placed above the others, as He said he who is forgiven much, loves much.
Love is active and requires a response. He warns us not to pay lip service and do nothing, as He says only those that do the will of the Father will enter heaven

The Catholic Church agrees that it is not by the effort of man that we are saved. What is your position of what a saved man is to do?

 

[boughtwithaprice]

I accept people have different beliefs and the liberty of choosing what they will. But I’m not required to sanction their choices or walk in unity with things I don’t agree with. Nor do I expect them to change. If a path seems right to you walk it out. If another seems better follow that road. But don’t expect everyone to agree with your choices or accept them. It’s unrealistic.

That holds true in the world and the church. You will never have 100% support or agreement on anything. It’s a reflection of free will. You’ll never get everyone to accept everything under the banner of Christ. You’ll always have dissent on something. If every denomination united today the church would split. There are many who wouldn’t sit under that umbrella.

You’re not going to change their mind and you’ll have to accept it. You don’t have to like it of course. But we’ll never come together.

~bella

That is a sad statement that you make. It is true if we retain our natural tastes and desires we will never all agree, but what does Jesus tell us to do?

If a man come after me, let him deny himself and begin to follow in my footsteps. The path of a Christian begins with self denial, so how is it that our personal preferences should mean anything?

If they do, then we are obviously not practicing the self denial to which we are called.
The primary Christian virtue is humility, the demonstration of which is obedience. We are all to be each others servants. The question is who do you obey?

 

[bèlla]

That is a sad statement that you make. It is true if we retain our natural tastes and desires we will never all agree, but what does Jesus tell us to do?

Beloved, do not believe every spirit [speaking through a self-proclaimed prophet]; instead test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets and teachers have gone out into the world.

If my spirit does not align with your theology or practices I’m not required to follow you. I won’t deny your right to believe as you do. But we will never be one.

If a man come after me, let him deny himself and begin to follow in my footsteps. The path of a Christian begins with self denial, so how is it that our personal preferences should mean anything?

We choose our paths for many reasons. If there was no appeal to the one you’ve chosen it’s unlikely you would have remained. To suggest there is no personal interest involved is false.

If they do, then we are obviously not practicing the self denial to which we are called.
The primary Christian virtue is humility, the demonstration of which is obedience. We are all to be each others servants. The question is who do you obey?

My allegiance is to God foremost. Man isn’t infallible and must be tested. The problem you’re having is simple. You don’t regret your decision. You’re wrestling with the consequences of that choice and your inability to move the needle. Perhaps you’ve underestimated the depth of disagreement and disinterest in what you’ve proposed. There‘s no incentive to do as you’ve asked because we know it will fail. That doesn’t prevent us from having discourse or interacting as we’re doing now.

But I will not place myself in settings with teachings I don’t agree with or sit under that spirit. And if you understood the latter we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I’ve gone too far with the Lord to be misled. If the Holy Spirit desired the same He’d tell me Himself. He doesn’t have to use the internet to get my attention. We talk all the time and this isn’t His agenda.

~bella

 

[BobRyan]

Communion with the dead? I think you mean Communion of Saints?

Communion with the dead - 958 under the heading of Paragraph 5. The Communion of Saints


946 After confessing "the holy catholic Church," the Apostles' Creed adds "the communion of saints." In a certain sense this article is a further explanation of the preceding: "What is the Church if not the assembly of all the saints?"477 The communion of saints is the Church.

947 "Since all the faithful form one body, the good of each is communicated to the others.... We must therefore believe that there exists a communion of goods in the Church. But the most important member is Christ, since he is the head.... Therefore, the riches of Christ are communicated to all the members, through the sacraments."478 "As this Church is governed by one and the same Spirit, all the goods she has received necessarily become a common fund."479

948 The term "communion of saints" therefore has two closely linked meanings: communion in holy things (sancta)" and "among holy persons (sancti)."
Sancta sanctis! ("God's holy gifts for God's holy people") is proclaimed by the celebrant in most Eastern liturgies during the elevation of the holy Gifts before the distribution of communion. The faithful (sancti) are fed by Christ's holy body and blood (sancta) to grow in the communion of the Holy Spirit (koinonia) and to communicate it to the world.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."498 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Beloved, do not believe every spirit [speaking through a self-proclaimed prophet]; instead test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets and teachers have gone out into the world.

If my spirit does not align with your theology or practices I’m not required to follow you. I won’t deny your right to believe as you do. But we will never be one.



We choose our paths for many reasons. If there was no appeal to the one you’ve chosen it’s unlikely you would have remained. To suggest there is no personal interest involved is false.



My allegiance is to God foremost. Man isn’t infallible and must be tested. The problem you’re having is simple. You don’t regret your decision. You’re wrestling with the consequences of that choice and your inability to move the needle. Perhaps you’ve underestimated the depth of disagreement and disinterest in what you’ve proposed. There‘s no incentive to do as you’ve asked because we know it will fail. That doesn’t prevent us from having discourse or interacting as we’re doing now.

But I will not place myself in settings with teachings I don’t agree with or sit under that spirit. And if you understood the latter we wouldn’t be having this discussion. I’ve gone too far with the Lord to be misled. If the Holy Spirit desired the same He’d tell me Himself. He doesn’t have to use the internet to get my attention. We talk all the time and this isn’t His agenda.

~bella

Thank you for your reply Bella. You speak from the heart. I am sorry if I come across as teaching, that is not my intent. I wish to understand. The reason that I am here is to get to know what I don’t, not to force what I know upon you.
You say that you do not place yourself in settings where there is teaching with which you do not agree. Would there be anyone that could teach you something to which you must ascent, or do all teachers required to bow before you?
I desire not to be one, but am wondering if you could conceive of one?


We have no tolerance for falsehood, but there must be things we do not know, or is it possible to have been taught wrong or mislead? How would you know? I only wish to know your standard of discernment

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Communion with the dead - 958 under the heading of Paragraph 5. The Communion of Saints


946 After confessing "the holy catholic Church," the Apostles' Creed adds "the communion of saints." In a certain sense this article is a further explanation of the preceding: "What is the Church if not the assembly of all the saints?"477 The communion of saints is the Church.

947 "Since all the faithful form one body, the good of each is communicated to the others.... We must therefore believe that there exists a communion of goods in the Church. But the most important member is Christ, since he is the head.... Therefore, the riches of Christ are communicated to all the members, through the sacraments."478 "As this Church is governed by one and the same Spirit, all the goods she has received necessarily become a common fund."479

948 The term "communion of saints" therefore has two closely linked meanings: communion in holy things (sancta)" and "among holy persons (sancti)."
Sancta sanctis! ("God's holy gifts for God's holy people") is proclaimed by the celebrant in most Eastern liturgies during the elevation of the holy Gifts before the distribution of communion. The faithful (sancti) are fed by Christ's holy body and blood (sancta) to grow in the communion of the Holy Spirit (koinonia) and to communicate it to the world.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."498 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective.

Thank you for that Bob. I do not wish to use this thread to argue for those points, but you clearly disagree with them, may I ask your reasons ?

 

[BobRyan]

Thank you for that Bob. I do not wish to use this thread to argue for those points, but you clearly disagree with them, may I ask your reasons ?

Well I think it is fairly well accepted that many non-Catholic denominations do not pray to the dead, or for the dead or have anything like "Communion with the dead".

So then - we would not have purgatory or indulgences or seek intercession from the dead.

Heb 9 says "it appointed unto man once to die and then comes the judgment" - so we don't think there is anything we can do for the dead that would in any way change their circumstances.

In addition we do not think that the dead are in a position to benefit us in any way that is greater than what Christ, the Angels , the Holy Spirit etc are already doing.

Notice that you don't see anyone in the bible praying to the dead, asking favor of them or praying that their dead loved ones to be released from some sort of problem that a dead person might be in -- while dead.

And -- and of course in the "sola scriptura" model we also have Isaiah 8:19
19 When they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?

And for me personally there is that Eccl 9 situation
5 For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Well I think it is fairly well accepted that many non-Catholic denominations do not pray to the dead, or for the dead or have anything like "Communion with the dead".

So then - we would not have purgatory or indulgences or seek intercession from the dead.

Heb 9 says "it appointed unto man once to die and then comes the judgment" - so we don't think there is anything we can do for the dead that would in any way change their circumstances.

In addition we do not think that the dead are in a position to benefit us in any way that is greater than what Christ, the Angels , the Holy Spirit etc are already doing.

Notice that you don't see anyone in the bible praying to the dead, asking favor of them or praying that their dead loved ones be released from some sort of problem that a dead person might be in -- while dead.

And -- and of course in the "sola scriptura" model we also have Isaiah 8:19
19 When they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?

And for me personally there is that Eccl 9 situation
5 For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything

Yes I agree that we do not consult the dead as a way to consult on the future or to ask for material favors. That is completely anathema to Christian thought as James 4 clearly teaches us


3- You ask, and receive not; because you ask amiss: that you may consume it on your concupiscences [James 4:3] 4 Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God. 5 Or do you think that the scripture saith in vain: To envy doth the spirit covet which dwelleth in you?

6 But he giveth greater grace. Wherefore he saith: God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. 7 Be subject therefore to God, but resist the devil, and he will fly from you. 8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners: and purify your hearts, ye double minded. 9 Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned into mourning, and your joy into sorrow. 10 Be humbled in the sight of the Lord, and he will exalt you.


I am sure you may find some people who say that they are Catholic and will pray incorrectly, but that is not what the Church teaches. We do not consult the dead as on sight reporters. Even if there were a spirit that would claim to share knowledge of heaven, we have a high risk of being deceived and it is not worth it.

The interesting question is that why are the dead compared to sleep? We know that when we sleep, we dream. We have a consciousness that knows nothing about what is going on in the world, yet dreams do involve thought and sometimes we think we are concious until we wake up and know it was a dream. How do you know that the dead do not have a dream like consciousness where they know God and the angles yet know nothing of Earth?

 

[bèlla]

Thank you for your reply Bella. You speak from the heart. I am sorry if I come across as teaching, that is not my intent. I wish to understand. The reason that I am here is to get to know what I don’t, not to force what I know upon you.

What could you possibly force on me? I’m not a captive and if I don’t like the way the conversation is going I’m free to leave. No one knows everything and we’re all students with varying degrees of knowledge and experience. We all have something to learn and share.

You say that you do not place yourself in settings where there is teaching with which you do not agree. Would there be anyone that could teach you something to which you must ascent, or do all teachers required to bow before you?
I desire not to be one, but am wondering if you could conceive of one?

Why would you assume I want them to bow to me? Are you being facetious? I’m not a goddess or a heathen. Why would I encourage behavior the Lord despises? Idolatry is a sin.

There is a difference between gleaning something from a book, watching a video, and knowingly being in someone’s presence whose position spiritually is questionable or ill-suited. I have no difficulty chewing the fat and spitting out the bones when desired. But that doesn’t mean I will subject myself to unnecessary warfare to do so.

We have no tolerance for falsehood, but there must be things we do not know, or is it possible to have been taught wrong or mislead? How would you know? I only wish to know your standard of discernment

Are you assuming I’m uniformed or have no direct experience with the things I oppose? I don’t take that position haphazardly and I’m quite familiar with catholicism and have spoken of my experiences as a child favorably. I had more access to priest and private instruction than the majority would ever have in that setting and it wasn’t in the church. I was in the public areas in their quarters and enjoyed our discussions.

When I’m weighing a subject I began with the word. Sometimes a conversation ensues between myself and the Holy Spirit. Oftentimes the experience recalls a scripture or raises a question. I don’t immediately act always. I file many things away for future reference until I’ve reached a point where address is a must. There’s usually a knowing. A disquiet in my spirit or an alarm that won’t abate.

By the time I reach my conclusion there’s a lot of evidence to support my position. It isn’t randomly done and only applies to my household. I make no attempt to convince others to follow suit and believe spiritual matters are personal. We must find the answers for ourselves.

My position on catholicism and other paths isn’t the result of bad experiences, misinformation or anything along those lines. It’s a reflection of who I am in Christ and the woman I’m becoming with His grace. You don’t have my calling, gifting or anointing and I don’t have yours. No one can say authoritatively what road is best in light of those things beyond the Lord. While my convictions may differ from yours they’re well suited for the work He’s called me to perform. That is my priority.

~bella

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

To my Protestant brethren.


Here are the Pope’s monthly intentions for the month of June as published by the US conference of Catholic Bishops. These were written by Francis, but as far a I can tell they are not revised by Leo XIV. He will publish his in 2026.

June​

That the world might grow in compassion
Let us pray that each one of us might find consolation in a personal relationship with Jesus, and from his Heart, learn to have compassion on the world.



Given that Our Lord said a house divided against itself cannot stand, and Satan does not cast out Satan, what are your best arguments against the Catholic Church? What basis would you use to call the Catholic Church evil, assuming that you do so?

I only want to reach understanding and am not here to insult you or lord myself over you, I only want to know

To my Catholic and Orthodox brethren, I ask that you merely listen. If you wish to post in this thread, please message me directly before you do. This thread is to allow the case to be made and their evidence presented. We can evaluate it when fully heard

There are things that the Pope says thar are correct, but there are things that are not, to put it nicely.

For example Pope Francis saying that 'all religions are a path to God' is a false Gospel. He removes the exclusivity of Christ alone being the only way to Father.

Calling Pope 'holy father' is another thing that's wrong. There is only one Holy Father and that's Lord God. Christ spoke against calling anyone Father other than God.

Millions upon millions of people every day pray to Mary. They pray to her to save them. They pray to her to protect them. They pray to her to help them, to comfort them, to rescue them, to bring them to heaven, and she has never heard one of those prayers. Ever.

Now tell me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a severe violation of the first commandment, “To have no other gods but the true and living God.” ??

People kiss her image. They kiss her statue. They kiss her picture. They crawl on their knees in penitential pain as some kind of preparation to come before statues of her. They pray to her regularly using the rosary. The rosary is a series of 10 prayers. There are five of the tens, making 50 prayers and there are five prayers in between. The 50 are to Mary, the five are to God. There are five Our Fathers. There are 50 Hail Marys. For every time you pray once to God the Father, you pray 10 times to Mary for five to God, 50 to Mary.

Pope Pius XII accurately reflected the church’s view of the Virgin Mary when the Pope stood up to give this following pontifical prayer –

“Enraptured by the splendor of your heavenly beauty and impelled by the anxieties of the world, we cast ourselves into your arms, O Immaculate Mother of Jesus and our Mother. Mary, we adore and praise the peerless richness of the sublime gifts with which God has filled you above every other mere creature from the moment of conception until the day on which, after your assumption into Heaven, He crowned you Queen of the Universe. O crystal fountain of faith, bathe our hearts with your heavenly perfume! O Conqueress of evil and death, inspire in us a deep horror of sin, which makes the soul detestable to God and a slave of hell! O well-beloved of God, hear the ardent cries which rise up from every heart in this year dedicated to you. Then tenderly, O Mary, cover our aching wound. Convert the wicked, dry the tears of the afflicted and the oppressed, comfort the poor and humble, quench hatred, sweeten harshness, safeguard the flower of purity, protect the holy Church. In your name, resounding harmoniously in heaven, may they recognize that all are brothers, and that the nations are members of one family. Receive, O sweet Mother, our humble supplications, and above all obtain for us on that day, happy with you, that we may repeat before your throne that hymn which is sung today around your altars. You are all-beautiful, O Mary! You are glory, O Mary. You are the joy, you are the honor of our people!”

Now if that is not worship, I don’t know what worship is. And worship belongs to God alone.

Or calling Mary the queen of heaven. There is no queen of heaven. There has never been a queen of heaven. There is most certainly a King of Heaven, the Lord of hosts. He alone rules in heaven. He does not share His rule or His throne or His authority with anyone. The idea that Mary, the mother of Jesus, is the queen of heaven has no scriptural basis whatsoever.

Or calling Mary Lady. There is no Lady, just Lord God.

The Catholic Mass where they sacrifice Lord Jesus again...

Disagreeing that faith alone saves

Disagreeing about Scripture alone

The lost goes on....sadly

We share some Christian beliefs and there certainly are areas of agreement for sure, but there are many other that we disagree with, and we going to call them out.

 

[Kathleen30]

To my Protestant brethren.


Here are the Pope’s monthly intentions for the month of June as published by the US conference of Catholic Bishops. These were written by Francis, but as far a I can tell they are not revised by Leo XIV. He will publish his in 2026.

June​

That the world might grow in compassion
Let us pray that each one of us might find consolation in a personal relationship with Jesus, and from his Heart, learn to have compassion on the world.



Given that Our Lord said a house divided against itself cannot stand, and Satan does not cast out Satan, what are your best arguments against the Catholic Church? What basis would you use to call the Catholic Church evil, assuming that you do so?

I only want to reach understanding and am not here to insult you or lord myself over you, I only want to know

To my Catholic and Orthodox brethren, I ask that you merely listen. If you wish to post in this thread, please message me directly before you do. This thread is to allow the case to be made and their evidence presented. We can evaluate it when fully heard

The council of Trent has never been rescinded. The Jesuit oath still holds firm as it ever did. Nothing has changed

 

[bèlla]

That’s a can of worms on its own. That’s the thing about words and putting things in writing. It can come back to haunt you later on. That’s a viper spirit in action.

~bella

 

[Valletta]

The council of Trent has never been rescinded. The Jesuit oath still holds firm as it ever did. Nothing has changed View attachment 365995View attachment 365995View attachment 365996View attachment 365996

Not just the Jesuit oath was fabricated, but they had a fabricated Knights of Columbus hoax as well. The Jesuit oath hoax began in anti-Catholic literature of the 1800s.

 

[Kathleen30]

Not just the Jesuit oath was fabricated, but they had a fabricated Knights of Columbus hoax as well. The Jesuit oath hoax began in anti-Catholic literature of the 1800s.

Could you show me the evidence for the Jesuit oath being fabricated

 

[Valletta]

Could you show me the evidence for the Jesuit oath being fabricated

I'm no expert., I don't rely on Wikipedia as a definitive source, sometimes they are right and sometimes wrong, but an article at
Jesuit conspiracy theories - Wikipedia includes the oath and you can look up sources. The article says the fake text originally dates back to the 1600s (news to me) and gives two sources:

• Arthur Goldwag (2012). The New Hate: A History of Fear and Loathing on the Populist Right. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. pp. 48–49. ISBN 978-0-307-90707-3. Kreidler, Marc (2013-04-01). "This Week in Conspiracy: For Fear of a Jesuit Planet | Skeptical Inquirer". Retrieved

“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” ​

― Fulton J. Sheen

 

[Kathleen30]

I'm no expert., I don't rely on Wikipedia as a definitive source, sometimes they are right and sometimes wrong, but an article at
Jesuit conspiracy theories - Wikipedia includes the oath and you can look up sources. The article says the fake text originally dates back to the 1600s (news to me) and gives two sources:

• Arthur Goldwag (2012). The New Hate: A History of Fear and Loathing on the Populist Right. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. pp. 48–49. ISBN 978-0-307-90707-3. Kreidler, Marc (2013-04-01). "This Week in Conspiracy: For Fear of a Jesuit Planet | Skeptical Inquirer". Retrieved

“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” ​

― Fulton J. Sheen

The oath has always been contested.Some say a fabrication others says it’s real and true. But when considering that the Jesuits have lived up to the reputation of the oath, being kicked of some 80 places be they states of countries including many Roman Catholic ones and even being suppressed by a pope for a time does leave much to be desired. And of the council of Trent. The authority of that still sands upon every Protestants head today m. Why should we trust you if it be peace that you seek while that remains ?

 

[BobRyan]

SDA believes in soul sleep, so to them communion with the dead is believed to be impossible. An argument over that issue can be a topic for another thread. Please let Bob make his points

Actually
1. "Communion with the dead" is the text of the catholic Catechism itself on this topic as noted here #2
2. As I pointed out it is not just SDAs that do not engage in praying to or for the dead or making requests of them and who do not claim to hold "Communion with the dead" a large number of non-SDA groups do not do that. So I think it is worth noting as a difference.
3. I agree with you that in the SDA teaching is that a person who dies is immediately at the appearing of Christ along with saved loved ones since "the living know they will die but the dead not nothing" Eccl 9:5 - so for those who die - death is over in a millisecond.

In my post I do not spend any time quoting SDA documents just noting that this difference on the subject of "Communion with the dead" is noted as a general point where a lot of non-Catholic groups do not pray to-or-for those who have died nor do they make requests of them . This is true even of those groups that do not hold to the 1 Thess 4:13-18 teaching on soul sleep.

 

[BobRyan]

The interesting question is that why are the dead compared to sleep? We know that when we sleep, we dream. We have a consciousness that knows nothing about what is going on in the world, yet dreams do involve thought and sometimes we think we are concious until we wake up and know it was a dream. How do you know that the dead do not have a dream like consciousness where they know God and the angles yet know nothing of Earth?

Good question

Eccl 9 says "the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing" Eccl 9:5
So it would seem to one who dies that they are instantly sent to the 1 Thess 4:1318, Rev 19 appearing of Christ.

But if it is a "long dream state" then the dead might be conscious of being asleep for 1000 years or something like that - a 1000 years of dreams (in the case of those who have been dead for a while). But Phil 1 does not go along with the 1000 years of sleeping idea in my opinion