Catholicism and Satan

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tannhauser
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tannhauser

Guest
I have come across this website, and it makes quite a sustained attack on Catholicism. Firstly it gives this, which is apparently from Catholic Canon Law:

If the Pope should become neglectful of his own salvation, and of that of other men, and so lost to all good that he draw down with himself innumerable people by heaps into hell, and plunge them with himself into eternal torments, yet no mortal may presume to reprehend him, forasmuch as he is judge of all, and is judged of no one."
Decreti, pars i. distinct. xl.can.xi.

I am unsure how accurate this is, but it’s rather disturbing.

Secondly: Jeremiah 7: 18, this refers to the Queen of Heaven, and the disobedience of people, provoking the Lord’s anger… why do we call Mary the Queen of Heaven in this case?

Also: John 17:11 : Jesus refers to His Father in Heaven as ‘Holy Father’ : WHY then do we refer to the Pope as Holy Father? Surely this cannot be right.

1 John 2:27 : 'And as for you, let the unction, which you have received from him, abide in you. And you have no need that any man teach you; but as his unction teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie. And as it hath taught you, abide in him.

Why then do we have so many encyclicals and catechisms and councils promoting Traditions that teach us… why even do we have ‘Infallibile Dogmas’ that teach things not explicitly in the Bible… God spoke in Scripture: ‘Add not any thing to his words’ Proverbs 30: 6 : surely insisting things about Mary i.e. that she was entirely without sin - something not explicit in Scripture, is adding to His word? There is a difference surely between interpreting and going beyond what Scripture alone tells us…
 
… specifically those dogmas that appear to deviate from the actual, written word of God (e.g. Mary’s sinlessness)
Click to expand...
First of all, Mary’s Immaculate Conception and her lack-of-sin makes perfect practical sense. Why would God choose a woman tainted with sin to give birth to His own Son?

Secondly, there is support in Scripture:

[The LORD said to the snake (sin)] “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel." – Genesis 3:15

One alone is my dove, my perfect one,
her mother’s chosen,
the dear one of her parent.
The daughters saw her and declared her fortunate,
the queens and concubines, and they sang her praises --Song of Songs 6:9

And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.” – Luke 1:28

Then the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.” – Luke 1:30

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the infant leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth, filled with the holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, "Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.” – Luke 1:41-2

[Mary said,] “For he has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.” – Luke 1:48

Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus. – Revelation 12:17

Ex 25:11-21 - ark made of purest gold for God’s word
 
Also, regarding calling the Pope “Holy Father”:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=134475

And regarding Mary as Queen of Heaven:

catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9812fea2.asp
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37077

And thirdly, I can’t find where that quote is from. When I copy/paste the quote into Google, I find nothing other than anti-Catholic websites. I copy/paste the source (Decreti, pars i. distinct. xl.can.xi.) and still…nothing other than anti-Catholic websites. I’m very weary about this, because I find NOTHING about it.

EDIT: Maybe someone with better searching skills can help.
 
Sorry for triple-posting:

I looked at your link, and scrolled towards the middle to various quotes to various popes.

Context is everything, friend. Regarding the quote from Pope Boniface VIII, it actually says that “Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Is there a real substantial difference as to what Jesus-is-savior.com says? Not really. But you know what they fail to mention? The political strife at the time!

Boniface VIII was in a VERY heated debate with French King Philip IV. And when I mean heated, I mean, essentially, Boniface excommunicated Philip IV after Philip denied exportation of money towards Rome…money that Rome desperately needed. Furthermore, clerics were being taxed and given no voice in civil laws and jurisdiction. Essentially, was the pope superior to the king, or visa versa? Boniface released Unam Sanctum declaring the former.

fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html

EDIT: Also, take a look at the rest of that website…the owner thinks 9/11 was an inside job…This person is ignorant beyond all reason…
EDIT (again :p): The owner of the website is doing the ol’ “upside down cross!!! ZOMG!!!111!!ONE!” routine. Please… :rolleyes:
 
Hi The_Scott. Thank you for your kind replies. I ought to emphasise, that I have not posted these questions up to provoke Catholic attention, but rather as a Catholic, concerned by these attacks in websites… I am sure you’ll agree, that prima facie, that seem ‘almost credible’…

Well, thank-you.
 
Tannhauser said:
I am sure you’ll agree, that prima facie, that seem ‘almost credible’…
Click to expand...
Almost credible? Hardly. Maybe if your middle name is Gullible and you have no ability to think critically or do research.
 
Tannhauser said:
I have come across this website, and it makes quite a sustained attack on Catholicism. Firstly it gives this, which is apparently from Catholic Canon Law:

If the Pope should become neglectful of his own salvation, and of that of other men, and so lost to all good that he draw down with himself innumerable people by heaps into hell, and plunge them with himself into eternal torments, yet no mortal may presume to reprehend him, forasmuch as he is judge of all, and is judged of no one."
Decreti, pars i. distinct. xl.can.xi.

I am unsure how accurate this is, but it’s rather disturbing.
Click to expand...
Um, no this is not from Canon Law. And, if you google it, you will find that it only appears on anti-Catholic websites which quote each other not any source document.
Tannhauser said:
Secondly: Jeremiah 7: 18, this refers to the Queen of Heaven, and the disobedience of people, provoking the Lord’s anger… why do we call Mary the Queen of Heaven in this case?
Click to expand...
Do you not know why Mary is Queen of Heaven?
Tannhauser said:
Also: John 17:11 : Jesus refers to His Father in Heaven as ‘Holy Father’ : WHY then do we refer to the Pope as Holy Father? Surely this cannot be right.
Click to expand...
You claim to be Catholic. You don’t know the answer to this either?
Tannhauser said:
Why then do we have so many encyclicals and catechisms and councils promoting Traditions that teach us… why even do we have ‘Infallibile Dogmas’ that teach things not explicitly in the Bible… God spoke in Scripture: ‘Add not any thing to his words’ Proverbs 30: 6 : surely insisting things about Mary i.e. that she was entirely without sin - something not explicit in Scripture, is adding to His word? There is a difference surely between interpreting and going beyond what Scripture alone tells us…
Click to expand...
Oh brother. I don’t think you are Catholic at all.
 
1ke said:
Do you not know why Mary is Queen of Heaven?

You claim to be Catholic. You don’t know the answer to this either?

Oh brother. I don’t think you are Catholic at all.
Click to expand...
1ke,

Give the man the benefit of a doubt. Maybe he’s genuinely asking these questions. Surely you know at least one Catholic who isn’t educated or as informed about Church teachings as you are.

Better to give him the answers and let him understand the Truth than to dismiss him. 🙂

Scott
 
1ke said:
Um, no this is not from Canon Law. And, if you google it, you will find that it only appears on anti-Catholic websites which quote each other not any source document.

Do you not know why Mary is Queen of Heaven?

You claim to be Catholic. You don’t know the answer to this either?

Oh brother. I don’t think you are Catholic at all.
Click to expand...
:hmmm:Troll???
Peace, Carlan
 
The_Scott said:
1ke,

Give the man the benefit of a doubt. Maybe he’s genuinely asking these questions. Surely you know at least one Catholic who isn’t educated or as informed about Church teachings as you are.

Better to give him the answers and let him understand the Truth than to dismiss him. 🙂

Scott
Click to expand...
Thank you for the charitable way you thumped me up-side my head. 🙂

Yes, certainly, we should give people the benefit of the doubt. I find it difficult to believe a Catholic doesn’t know **anything **about their Catholic faith. But, OK, it’s possible.

You would think a person who genuinely wanted to know more about their faith might spend time reading Catholic sources, and ask questions based on what they have read, not this well-known anti-Catholic website. Does that not seem reasonable?
 
That’s not from Canon Law. There, problem solved.

Now, as for Mary’s Immaculate Conception, we can have a talk about that if you like. I think the biblical evidence is so profound that you will be moved to accept it, even if you don’t become Catholic. 😛

Matthew 15:9 ‘in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’

We actually read this verse in light of the heresies that have challenged the Church since the beginning. And yeah, that includes Protestantism.
 
Tannhauser said:
…Secondly: Jeremiah 7: 18, this refers to the Queen of Heaven, and the disobedience of people, provoking the Lord’s anger… why do we call Mary the Queen of Heaven in this case?

…
Click to expand...
Jeremiah 7:18

The children gather wood, their fathers light the fire, and the women knead dough to make cakes for the queen of heaven, while libations are poured out to strange gods in order to hurt me.

NEWS FLASH !! …:okpeople:… We Catholics not only read the Bible, sometimes we read the footnotes too …🙂
  • 4 [18] Queen of heaven: the Assyro-Babylonian Ishtar, goddess of fertility, whose worship was introduced under King Manasseh and was revived after Josiah’s death. Cakes shaped like stars (Ishtar was identified with the planet Venus) were offered in her honor.*
What about the rest of the sentence?
I’ve never heard of any even remotely Catholic concept concerning us trying to “hurt” God. I seem to remember being taught from a very young age that we couldn’t hurt God - apart from what He chose to suffer during His Sacred Passion until his Death.
 
1ke said:
You would think a person who genuinely wanted to know more about their faith might spend time reading Catholic sources, and ask questions based on what they have read, not this well-known anti-Catholic website. Does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...
I understand perfectly. And I agree, it’d be better to go to, say, vatican.va than at this site.
But still. At the very least, if he is a troll (not saying he is), it’d sharpen your own apologetic skills. 👍
 
And, forum rules require **one **topic per thread. Which one would you like to discuss in this thread?
 
1ke said:
Um, no this is not from Canon Law. And, if you google it, you will find that it only appears on anti-Catholic websites which quote each other not any source document.

Do you not know why Mary is Queen of Heaven?

You claim to be Catholic. You don’t know the answer to this either?

Oh brother. I don’t think you are Catholic at all.
Click to expand...
I know Psalm 118: 105 'Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my paths.’ and Matthew 18: 4-8 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child… But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me… but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh.’

Perhaps you ought to think about that before you start boasting how the light of the Lord’s Word is in your own full possession, and accusing people of not possibly being Catholic. Good-day.
 
Tannhauser said:
**If the Pope should become neglectful of his own salvation, and of that of other men, and so lost to all good that he draw down with himself innumerable people by heaps into hell, and plunge them with himself into eternal torments, yet no mortal may presume to reprehend him, forasmuch as he is judge of all, and is judged of no one." **
Decreti, pars i. distinct. xl.can.xi.

I am unsure how accurate this is, but it’s rather disturbing.
Click to expand...
The first thing that should clue you in is the fact that the sentence is only half complete. It contains a prepositional phrase, but no object. Documents produced in the code of Canon law are laboriously reviewed to be sure they are accurate and no such error would exist in such a document.

Second, the referenced document is widely known as a forgery. It appears ONLY in anti-catholic sources. No catholic source will return this quote as a result listed in any document in church history. The source, Decreti, is merely the word “decree”, of which there are thousands. No site I have found has listed any actual source document title for this quote. The closest is listing Corpus Juris Canonici, but a search of this collection of decrees reveals this quote to be nowhere in sight.

In other words, this is a made-up decree by someone with an anti-catholic agenda in order to slander the church. Even if it weren’t however, I see nothing inherently wrong with the preposition, provided that if there were an object that it were appropriately constructed theologically.
Secondly: Jeremiah 7: 18, this refers to the Queen of Heaven, and the disobedience of people, provoking the Lord’s anger… why do we call Mary the Queen of Heaven in this case?
Click to expand...
Queen of Heaven in this case does not refer to Mary, who is not an object of worship, but rather refers to the sacrifices being offered to a pagan goddess. By contrast, in Jewish culture, the mother of the king is the queen. If Jesus is King of Heaven, then Mary is the Queen of Heaven. To deny that Mary is the queen of heaven is likewise to deny that Jesus is the King of Heaven. This is the proper understanding of why we are given a mother in Mary.
Also: John 17:11 : Jesus refers to His Father in Heaven as ‘Holy Father’ : WHY then do we refer to the Pope as Holy Father? Surely this cannot be right.
Click to expand...
This argument has been beaten to death. The word used in the statement “Call no man Father” is ABBA.

ABBA is a greco-aramaic honorific, Ba meaning father (greek) and A- being the aramaic honorific which renders a title (such as father) into a proper name (Father… capitol F). The command that Jesus gives, rightly translated with proper understanding of the language, is “Call no man “God the Father” but your “God the Father” in heaven.”

This is borne out as again and again we see people called both father and spiritual father throughout the Bible. Even a basic understanding of Greek and Aramaic clears this up.
1 John 2:27 : 'And as for you, let the unction, which you have received from him, abide in you. And you have no need that any man teach you; but as his unction teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie. And as it hath taught you, abide in him.
Click to expand...
Catholics have no teaching from man. We are taught by the church, which is an institute of extreme unction and is the body of Christ on earth. This is why we are told to stay away from the teachings of men (aka, distinctly protestant teachings)… because “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.” (1 John 2:19)
Why then do we have so many encyclicals and catechisms and councils promoting Traditions that teach us… why even do we have ‘Infallibile Dogmas’ that teach things not explicitly in the Bible… God spoke in Scripture: ‘Add not any thing to his words’ Proverbs 30: 6 : surely insisting things about Mary i.e. that she was entirely without sin - something not explicit in Scripture, is adding to His word? There is a difference surely between interpreting and going beyond what Scripture alone tells us…
Click to expand...
No infallible dogmas contradict scripture. They further define what scripture tells us based on Magisterial Authority and Sacred Tradition. The bottom line is that Sola Scriptura was never God’s intention and on it no church can stand because it is a false doctrine.

Your understanding of the quote in Proverbs is likewise fallacious, since if that were the case, the entire New Testament must be regarded as fallacious and be thrown out.
 
Tannhauser said:
I am unsure how accurate this is, but it’s rather disturbing.
Click to expand...
It’s a fabrication. In case you haven’t noticed, not everyone claiming to be “Christian” is such.
Secondly: Jeremiah 7: 18, this refers to the Queen of Heaven, and the disobedience of people, provoking the Lord’s anger… why do we call Mary the Queen of Heaven in this case?
Click to expand...
Are you saying there is no Father God because the pagan greeks had a father god?
Also: John 17:11 : Jesus refers to His Father in Heaven as ‘Holy Father’ : WHY then do we refer to the Pope as Holy Father? Surely this cannot be right.
Click to expand...
Why do you refer to your father as… uh… your father, if you have but one Father in heaven?
Why do you refer to anyone as holy if only God is holy?
1 John 2:27 : 'And as for you, let the unction, which you have received from him, abide in you. And you have no need that any man teach you; but as his unction teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie. And as it hath taught you, abide in him.
Click to expand...
That unction is called Holy Orders and as it is passed on by the imposition of hands (see 1 Tim 4:14), it doesn’t exist outside of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.
Why then do we have so many encyclicals and catechisms and councils promoting Traditions that teach us…
Click to expand...
Read 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

And have you even read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Like any well researched work, it has footnotes, and most of those are to none other than the Holy Bible. Something you’ll discover quite quickly (if you actually care to learn about what it is you are criticizing) is that there is not one Catholic doctrine that has no scriptural support. Just plug whatever you want to search for (like “Assumption of Mary”) in that search box and read what it says, including the footnotes, then check your Bible and see for yourself.
why even do we have ‘Infallibile Dogmas’ that teach things not explicitly in the Bible…
Click to expand...
For the same reason that you go to church on Sunday in a church building. Where’s that in the Bible? It isn’t—the Sabbath is Saturday and all of the early Christians worshiped in their own homes. By the way, why do you even have a church building? Why does it have pews and an altar? That’s your Sacred Tradition and you got it from the Catholic Church.
God spoke in Scripture: ‘Add not any thing to his words’ Proverbs 30: 6 : surely insisting things about Mary i.e. that she was entirely without sin - something not explicit in Scripture, is adding to His word?
Click to expand...
First of all, the Bible does say that Mary is at a special state of enmity with the devil, and that enmity is the same kind that Jesus has against the devil; thus, just as Jesus is without sin, so is Mary. Please read Genesis 3:15 if you don’t believe me. In fact, do it anyway. Read your Bible, not these anti-Catholic websites.

Actually, speaking of which… Where do you get the idea that this particular stack of books is the Bible, and for that matter, that the Bible is the Word of God? According to the Bible, the Word of God is Jesus Christ, not a book. That the Bible is the Word of God is one of those infallible dogmas of the Catholic Church that you borrowed, just like your church building.
 
1ke said:
Thank you for the charitable way you thumped me up-side my head. 🙂

Yes, certainly, we should give people the benefit of the doubt. I find it difficult to believe a Catholic doesn’t know **anything **about their Catholic faith. But, OK, it’s possible.

You would think a person who genuinely wanted to know more about their faith might spend time reading Catholic sources, and ask questions based on what they have read, not this well-known anti-Catholic website. Does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...
Well… that makes little sense: only referring to Catholic sources. I wouldn’t have even considered the question of ‘why do we call the Pope, Holy Father’, if I had not chanced this website.

And actually I know rather a lot about my faith, how horribly presumptious of you to assume otherwise, based on a few questions that I have asked. I have a Douay Rheims, and a Catechism, and a few Encyclicals; and I attend Church regularly and regular the Sacraments. You horrible, unkind, presumptious man!
 
The_Scott said:
1ke,

Give the man the benefit of a doubt. Maybe he’s genuinely asking these questions. Surely you know at least one Catholic who isn’t educated or as informed about Church teachings as you are.

Better to give him the answers and let him understand the Truth than to dismiss him. 🙂

Scott
Click to expand...
Yes, Scott, and in my case if I am wrong and uncharitable in this case … mea culpa,mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Peace, Carlan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top