Anyone read Secrets of Romanism?

[PhilVaz]

enemy << I will read it but it will take me a long time to get back to you on it! >>

I’m a slow reader also. So I’ll see you on the board in 2010 then for your review. The Catechism will take you even longer to read (800+ pages).

Phil P

 

[Bishopite]

JSmitty2005]Have any of you guys read the anti-Catholic book Secrets of Romanism (for research purposes, of course)? It’s by Joseph Zacchello, supposedly an “ex-priest.”

I have the book and have read it. Be prepared and if you need any help just ask. There are a number of very good apologists on this Catholic forum and someone will have the answer. I used to agree with Zachello but after objectively juxtaposing Protestantism with Catholicism I came to understand the fullness of truth in the Catholic faith.

Zachello attempts to give the pro/against arguments for the Catholic faith but his “pro” arguments are written in a way to water down the Catholic position and his supposed refutation chapters are filled with half truths and all out lies against the Catholic Church; what he pagoratively calls the “Roman Church.” He also quotes Protestant Rev Hislop on Catholicism being pagan, yet Hislop has not only been shown by Protestant apologists as being in err, but has also recanted his statement against Catholicism; at least I had heard that.

To be honest, I could easily refute all of his arguments and I’m just a novice apologist, well, perhaps I’m a bit better than a novice. Anyway, here are a few quotes from the book. The first quote I highlighted when I was studying the Catholic faith as a Protestant.
The second quote is SO funny and quite ironic as you’ll see.

This first quote is from his refutation of “Is the Roman Catholic Church the Church of Christ?” chapter 1.

“There are more basic doctrinal divisions in the church of Rome than among the Protestant denominations. True Protestants differ mostly on unessential matters but are united on the vital question of what is necessary to be saved.” (Zachello page 10)

Let’s apply Zachellos statement to a few Catholic teachings and then back to Protestantism.

Are Catholics in agreement on these Catholic doctrines?

Communion (Eucharist)? Yes
Baptism? Yes
Sunday worship? Yes
Sacraments? Yes
Women clergy? Yes
Lose of salvation? Yes

If a Catholic doesn’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches on these issues then he/she isn’t in “union” with the Catholic Church and possibly Latae sententiae [self-excommunicated] which means they aren’t in union with the Church.

Are there true divisions within Protestantism even on what Zachello calls “unessential matters?” Uh…nope.

Communion? No. Some say it is only a symbol some say it is more than that, a spritual presence of Christ.

Baptism? No. Some teach baptismal regeneration, others symbollism and others teach baptism isn’t necessary at all for salvation. Some teach padeobaptism [baptizing babies] others say it is against Scripture.

Sunday worship? No. Some (SDA’s) teach worshiping on the Sabbath most other Protestants worship on Sunday.

Sacraments? No. Some don’t adhere to sacraments others have up to two, e.g. Anglicans, reformed Protestants.

Women clergy. No. Some have them, some don’t.

Lose of salvation? No. Some teach “once saved always saved” others teach salvation can be lost if one turns from Christ.

continued…

 

[Bishopite]

Continued from post #22.

The second quote from former priest Joseph Zachello is ironic indeed and here is why:

This is Zachello’s response to purgatory titled “Is there a Purgatory?”

“Matthew 5:25 does not refer to Roman purgatory but that a sinner is a debtor of God, the Creditor. The sinner is cast into prison until he pays the last penny, which is forever because he has nothing wherewith to pay. The word “until” does not necessarily imply a definite or temporary period of time. In many passages of the Bible the word “until” clearly denotes what is done,without any regard to the future. For instance, God says: “I am till you grow old” (Isa. 46:4). Who would thus infer that God should then cease to be? And again: “Sit thou on my right hand till I make thy enemies they footstool” (Ps. 110:1). Shall His Divine Son sit no longer after his enemies are subdued?”

You see what Zachello is saying? The irony is, in his attempt to disprove Mt 5:25 speaking of purgatory, he actually refutes Protestants who argue against the perpetual virginity of Mary and use Mt 1:25…he [Joseph] knew her [Mary] until she bore a son!

Protestants say that Mt 1:25 shows Joseph and Mary had relations after the birth of Jesus, however if we follow Zachello’s reasoning about the word “until” and apply that to Mt 1:25, then it DOESN’T at all prove that they had relations after Jesus was born, in fact using Zachello’s words “the word “until” does not necessarily imply a definite or temporary period of time”

He is actually correct in the use of the word “until” and you may want to point this out to your friend.

Zachello’s book is full of these types of incorrect reasoning. You may want to read it just to be able to refute some questions and accusations that may be leveled against you.

 

[mercygate]

phantomsilver:

Thanks for the non- enemy comment

Phil-

I just want to warn you…i read like a turtle! (Jsmitty2005 can vouch for that) I will read it but it will take me a long time to get back to you on it!

Better be careful if you value your Protestantism. That book is so screwy in its bizarre allegations against the Church that it has literally driven people to Catholicism!

 

[Bishopite]

Correction.

I said in post #22 "Are there true divisions with Protesatantism even on what Zachello calls “unessential matters?”

I said Uh…nope and I should have said YES! Sorry.

 

[scylla]

I am reading it right now, since I just got it from Amazon. You are right Bishopite, it is filled with misrepresentations and is very misleading. If I were a Catholic who didn’t know my faith real well, it would be easy to be led away with this book.

I say how it dismisses at the time 3500 or so Protestant denominations and compares that to arguements within the Church and concludes that different orders within the Church such as Dominicans and Fransiscans are divided like Protestantism. Where they will disagree is how they dedicate themselves to Christ. Different orders have different practices in how to live their vocations. This has nothing to do with salvation but on how they are organized and live their lives. Some to poverty, some to shared property etc…
Some get out of hand and need correction or get into arguements into how better to follow Christ. But they will always agree in doctrine and are loyal to the Pope. This is the unity the Catholic Church provides, an ability to practice your faith in different ways, and a unity in doctrine.

To someone outside the Church it might be easy to think that different orders within the Church might be compared to Protestantism. This need to be looked at with a non-biased understanding to see how this is within the Church, just like you will see some differences of opinion within a Baptist congregation ultimately the preacher is the source of unity. Or they start a new Baptist congregation is the differences are so great. We believe in One Catholic Church with the Pope as our pastor and our founder of Jesus Christ.
In the Catholic Church most every difference has been defined, if it gets to be too great then a definiton of belief is stated. This is why we have councils and proclamations of dogma. Such as the definition of the Trinity. It is not like there wasn’t a Trinity before they defined it it just needed to be defined, so there would be unity in belief. Kind of like the how the Church defined the books of the Bible, Purgatory, etc…

God Bless
Scylla

 

[Bishopite]

[scylla]I am reading it right now, since I just got it from Amazon. You are right Bishopite, it is filled with misrepresentations and is very misleading. If I were a Catholic who didn’t know my faith real well, it would be easy to be led away with this book.

Zachello is a very clever and deceptive writer. His book would, perhaps fool those Catholics who don’t know their faith, yet he certainly can’t fool all of us who do.

 

[JSmitty2005]

Bishopite:

Correction.

I said in post #22 "Are there true divisions with Protesatantism even on what Zachello calls “unessential matters?”

I said Uh…nope and I should have said YES! Sorry.

Speaking of divisions in the essentials, check out this article:

Disunity on the Essentials

 

[javelin]

phantomsilver:

hello everyone!

Just to let you know this is the “enemy” girlfriend…lol, and i haven’t started reading it yet.

Welcome to the Forums, phantomsilver! I hope you find much to help you ponder the mysteries of our Savior, and that your efforts fill you with Truth.

God Bless,
javelin

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Smitty, I just emailed

Dear Sir: this one anti-catholic guy, one Dr. Joseph Zacchello claimed that he served as a priest in New York after studying in Rome. Is there any record of him ever being a priest in New York? He is the author of Secrets of Romanism ( 1949 ).

In Christ Our Lord
Daniel Marsh

ny-archdiocese.org/

to the webmaster@nyarch.org

to see what they say.

If anyone knows how to email the bible school in rome to check his claims please do so.

 

[JSmitty2005]

Daniel Marsh, Thanks for emailing them! I’m anxious to hear what they say.

-Jon

 

[Bishopite]

phantomsilver:

hello everyone!

Just to let you know this is the “enemy” girlfriend…lol, and i haven’t started reading it yet.

You are NOT our enemy and we really do welcome you. We are all in the same boat, so to speak, for we all just want what the same thing,the truth. We believe that we can prove we have the fullness of truth to anyone who is willing to look at it objectively and honestly.
If and when you do read it, please ask us to answer any of Zachello’s claims about Catholicism or any of your personal questions. I personally have read the book and have it, but it is filled with many errors and I would be more than happy to answer any of them as I did in a few prior posts.

 

[scylla]

I have read a couple chapters of this book so far and wow is all I can say…, it is depressing and I needed to take a break.

The problem with answering some of these books, is books like this use the shotgun approach in attacking Catholicism. (as Jimmy Akin describes it)

It is so easy to state negatives like this and it takes a whole lot more work to explain and prove the truth.
an example directly from the book,

“Romanism and paganism bear to each other the most exact and extraordinary resemblance. Had paganism its temples and altars, its pictures and images? So has popery. Had paganism its tonsured priests, presided over by a pontifex maximus or soveriegn pontiff? So has popery. etc…”
quoting over 20 lines of this same type material from another book called Romanism and Reformation, by H. Grattan Guinness.

If you have this book look a little closer,
Where this book is supposed to use the Bible to prove the Catholic Church, check into the verses it cites in proving Catholicism wrong. Almost every verse citation is explained to their own interpretation and many times just listed as the book with verse instead of quoting the Bible in context.

The attacks are very similar to the other anti-catholic books I have bought and are very misleading to people who aren’t grounded in the faith or who are outside the Church. Which it is intended to do, since who would want to even consider the claims of Catholicism to be true if it is satanic or pagan?

I will work hard today (clear my mind) and then try and spend a couple hours finishing this book, if I can power my way through it.

The good thing about it is there are questions at the back of each chapter designed to ask catholics. Any well informed Catholic should be able to show there are logical and clear answers to every sincere question. Maybe I will just focus on those questions as some are pretty easy to answer.(not that I am well informed, I just know how to search Catholic answers)

In Christ
Scylla

 

[Jaypeeto3]

I have a paperback copy of this book and it is one of the silliest things I 've ever read. It’s right up there with the MARIA MONK
book from the 19th century. Look up the name RALPH WOODROW under books at amazon.com, he has two books out, one called Babylon Mystery Religion which he wrote when he was under antiCatholic influence, and later (Karl Keating would know the title of it), years later, he wrote a book REFUTING and DISAVOWING his anti-Catholic book!!! So, some people really can and do see the light.

SECRETS OF ROMANISM belongs on the trash heap.

Love,
Jaypeeto3

 

[Brendan]

zian:

Remember those bumper stickers that said “Question Authority”.

I’ve always giggled at the bumper sticker.

Notice it’s making an Authoritative statement that one is expected to accept without question.

So the correct response to that sticker should be

“Why should I?”

 

[JSmitty2005]

Brendan:

zian:

Remember those bumper stickers that said “Question Authority”.

I’ve always giggled at the bumper sticker.

Notice it’s making an Authoritative statement that one is expected to accept without question.

So the correct response to that sticker should be

“Why should I?”

Patrick Madrid addresses these very bumper stickers in his talk Answers to Lies Society Tells You. It’s a pretty good little lecture, have a listen!