Former Catholic Priest Condemns the Catholic Church and Scott Hahn

[Worthy5]

Sorry but that is the furthest from the truth. We are guided through many different avenues, but un like catholics, we do not have any one other than God telling us what is right and wrong.

God is our only heirachy for he is the one and only infallible.

Christalone, let me say that you are free to believe and attend the church you want, it is a free country. But for argument, the Protestant methods simply come up short. Human beings have throughout time organized their affairs with institutions. Institutional wisdom is that which prevents complete subjectivity (individual passions, whims and limited knowledge) of the individual that leads to increasing levels of disorder and uncertainty. Institutions create at least an intersubjectivity if not objectivity (not certain such thing exist) leading to levels of order and certainty in practices and knowledge. All written language is subject to multiple interpretations and context. (By the way are you reading the NT in the orginal Greek? You know something always gets lost in translation) Thus, that is why lawyers argue all day over what a statue means but only the Court has the given authority to decide definitively what the law is. It is reasonable to believe that Christ commissioned the Church with that authority, an authority that is needed. What basis do you have to state that you know what God is saying, your reading of scripture-sorry that is just your opinion. God Bless

 

[Christalone]

God’s church is the body of believers (born again Christians) and not an established religion. And no one has a right to claim that their church is a true church over another.

 

[Christalone]

Christalone, let me say that you are free to believe and attend the church you want, it is a free country. But for argumentation, the protestant methods simply come up short. Human beings have throughout time organized their affairs with institutions. Institutional wisdom is that which prevents complete subjectivity (individual passions, whims and limited knowledge) of the individual that leads to increasing levels of disorder and uncertainty. Institutions create at least an intersubjectivity if not objectivity (not certain such thing exist) leading to levels of order and certainty in practices and knowledge. Moreover, all written language is subject to multiple interpretations and context. (By the way are you reading the NT in the orginal Greek? You know something always gets lost in translation) Thus, why lawyers argue all day over what a statue means but only the Court has the given authority to decide definitively what the law is. As best we know, Chirst commissioned the Church with the authority, an authority that is needed.

Further, this salvation by faith alone idea. Sounds seductively good and clever but is it not possible that the argument is attractive to some because anyone’s general notion (agnostic, atheist) of what a fundamental characteristic of God would be is that he is all powerful. Thus, this idea of " faith alone in Him" is all we need just plays to that intuitive concept. Would that not explain the atttractiveness of that position? It is a metaphysical question, but is that enough for one as a Christian(even given the question remains in doubt for that person) to abandon the historic Church and Her sacramental realities. Is not the practice of the sacraments a more real daily reality that can help one to become a better Christian than a concern over an esoteric debate over a metaphysical question. A distinction should be made between metaphysical debates and daily forms of practice.

As I have the right to my opinion so do you and for argumentation, catholics place them selves on a pedestal and blantantly claim authority above others which is the biggest farce that ever was.

Sorry you do not believe that faith alone saves, and that you do not believe what the bible says, and have to have someone dictate what you must believe. Sounds like a drone to me.

God does not make drones, man does. God does not make you better than me or me better than you, we are created equal, we are created in His image, not the image of what man wishes to see.

The biggest difference between catholics and protestants is that catholics believe they are superior, and not equal. And this is why there is so much division.

 

[Christalone]

But God can choose how to organize His church and establish a hierarchy if he so wished. He appointed Peter as chief apostle and as pope, and guided apostolic successors for the 400 years before the Bible was canonized by using tradition.

Really? And where is that in the bible? And did not Peter have a mother-in-law which would void his position of pope?

 

[Worthy5]

God’s church is the body of believers (born again Christians) and not an established religion. And no one has a right to claim that their church is a true church over another.

Your statments seem to contradict each other, you define what God’s church is then you say no one has the right to claim what the true church is. I am not asserting any right on you-I am not saying that U.S. law should say that the CC is the only true Church and that all citizens (you) must believe that and be members. I am excercising my right under the law to believe as I choose in matters of religious faith and practice that the CC is the true Church commissioned by Christ. Whether you choose to believe that is up to you. But, there is enough historic evidence for me to reasonably believe that the Church is just that. You still have the problem (in my view) of the general problem of the interpretation of written language. The CC has provided a foundation and provides an institutional intersubjectivity.Now you can choose not to accept it but the Church has at least asserted its foundation If you say that, in the Protestant tradition, an individual can discern it for himself-okay. That is not my preference. If it is yours fine. I am glad I live in a country that allows both. God Bless

 

[Christalone]

Your statments seem to contradict each other, you define what God’s church is then you say no one has the right to claim what the true church is. I am not asserting any right on you-I am not saying that U.S. law should say that the CC is the only true Church and that all citizens (you) must believe that and be members. I am excercising my right under the law to believe as I choose in matters of religious faith and practice that the CC is the true Church commissioned by Christ. Whether you choose to believe that is up to you. But, there is enough historic evidence for me to reasonably believe that the Church is just that. You have still not provided a basis for why your opinion of scripture is superior to someone elses. The CC has provided a foundation and provides an institutional intersubjectivity.Now you can choose not to accept it but the Church has at least asserted its foundation If you say that, in the Protestant tradition, an individual can discern it for himself-okay but that leads to uncertainty in belief and practices as demonstrated by all those Christian denominations. That is not my preference. If it is yours that is your choice. I am glad I live in a country that allows both. God Bless

Please show where in Scripture it says that the catholic church is the true church.

 

[Christalone]

People mistakenly think that there is an earthly organization that is the one true church. The true church is not an organization, not a series of buildings, but the body of true believers. The true church consists of those who are regenerate; that is, it consists of those who are the true Christians. There are, however, churches that are Christian and churches that are not Christian.

But you might ask how we can tell if a church is Christian or not? The answer is simple once we understand what makes someone a Christian or not.

But you might ask how we can tell if a church is Christian or not? The answer is simple once we understand what makes someone a Christian or not. Once we know what is essential, we can then look at a church and see if it is Christian or not.

**Primary Essential Doctrines **

Cannot be denied and still be Christian since the scriptures openly declare that to deny them is to bring judgment.
Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4). The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9). There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)

**Secondary Essential Doctrines **

Not explicitly stated in Scripture as essential but they are derivatively necessary.
God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (See Trinity)
Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation).
Non-Essential Doctrines
Can be believed or not and it does not affect whether or not one is Christian or not.
Predestination, election, limited atonement, and free will
Communion every week, monthly, or quarterly, etc.
Saturday or Sunday Worship
Pre, mid, post tribulation rapture.
Premill, Amill, post millenialism, preterism.
Continuation or cessation of the charismatic gifts
Baptism for adults or infants

Therefore, we can see that if a church or denomination would deny that Jesus is God in flesh, or physically risen from the dead, then it would not be Christian. Furthermore, we could have two different churches that disagree on the non-essentials, but are still Christian since they affirm the essentials.

 

[Worthy5]

Please show where in Scripture it says that the catholic church is the true church.

We are working from different premises. As a Catholic, I believe that scripture is not the only source of revelation. There is also sacred tradition. But come on you know the passages, " You are Peter and on this rock I build my church". A passage in Timothy talks about the church as the " pillar of truth". Christ saying, " they who hear you (apostles) hear me". You are missing the point, playing scripture hardball cannot get you to any certainty given the problem of the interpretation of language, context issues and translation issues (sorry I cannot read Greek, can you?). The historic record from mutlple sources of history is clear though as much as possible. The reality is that it was the Catholic Church that develop through history as the source and reality of Christianity. Martin Luther came around 1517 or so. What authority did he have? What tradition you want to follow is up to you but playing scripture hardball is, in my opinion, somewhat intellectually disingenuous. If your faith choice works for you then great but its the mischaracterizations of the CC (made by some not necessarily you) that seems uncalled for. If you are confident in what you believe then why the need to attack the CC. God Bless

 

[look3467]

This argument is ageless.

God meets the needs of all His creatures in many forms and in many ways not necessarily seen by narrow mindedness.

Listen, there are defections in every organization.

Even in the midst of the Son of Gods presence, of the 12 apostles chosen, one defected by betrayal.

Defections make not for the truth, but the reasons for the defection are worthy of consideration, if not condemnation.

Considerations, may be something to look at for soundness and credibility.
Condemnations are for defections where personal attacks, bodily harm and or false accusations.

My view.

Blessing’s, AJ

 

[Worthy5]

People mistakenly think that there is an earthly organization that is the one true church. The true church is not an organization, not a series of buildings, but the body of true believers. The true church consists of those who are regenerate; that is, it consists of those who are the true Christians. There are, however, churches that are Christian and churches that are not Christian.

But you might ask how we can tell if a church is Christian or not? The answer is simple once we understand what makes someone a Christian or not.

But you might ask how we can tell if a church is Christian or not? The answer is simple once we understand what makes someone a Christian or not. Once we know what is essential, we can then look at a church and see if it is Christian or not.

**Primary Essential Doctrines **

Cannot be denied and still be Christian since the scriptures openly declare that to deny them is to bring judgment.
Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4). The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9). There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)

**Secondary Essential Doctrines **

Not explicitly stated in Scripture as essential but they are derivatively necessary.
God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (See Trinity)
Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation).
Non-Essential Doctrines
Can be believed or not and it does not affect whether or not one is Christian or not.
Predestination, election, limited atonement, and free will
Communion every week, monthly, or quarterly, etc.
Saturday or Sunday Worship
Pre, mid, post tribulation rapture.
Premill, Amill, post millenialism, preterism.
Continuation or cessation of the charismatic gifts
Baptism for adults or infants

Therefore, we can see that if a church or denomination would deny that Jesus is God in flesh, or physically risen from the dead, then it would not be Christian. Furthermore, we could have two different churches that disagree on the non-essentials, but are still Christian since they affirm the essentials.

Okay thanks, that all sounds good. Sounds like you are laying down a system of faith…doctrine…dogma. Interesting. God Bless

 

[Kolbe300]

I hope my wife will find me attractive when I’m bald because I swear I may just rip my hair out if I read one more “it’s not easy hearing the truth” remark as if that justifies bullying. As if the very fact that people are offended somehow “proves” that you’re telling them “the truth”. Hey, I could say you’re fat and your mother dresses you funny and that may well hurt but it ain’t necessarily because I’m conveying any “truth”. It’d be because I was being rude and hurtful.

Ask yourselves: what is the purpose of apologetics? If you say anything along the lines of converting others, I believe you are mistaken. Apologetics is a–and I’ll type this out slowly so you can get it–DEFENSIVE art. It explains why we believe what we do. It is NOT a “this is why you’re screwed up” attack but more of a “I see you have a misconception about our belief” defense. It should, at its best, clear up misunderstandings non-Catholics have with US; it should NOT be used to highlight misunderstandings they have within their own faith structure. Yes, there are differences. But rather than pontificating on why sola scriptura is a wrong-headed, self-aggrandizing exercise in theological masturbation, rather point out that “here’s why we Catholics believe in the value of Sacred Tradition…” Do you see the difference? This is not an advocation for “warm and fuzzy” but a recognition that bullying is not inspired by the Holy Spirit. Apologetics is not a prideful act of “see, I’m so right and you’re so wrong, nyah nyah nyah.”

What does this screed on the misuse of apologetics, or the misuse of the word “apologetics” have to do with the value of this board to potential converts? It serves as an example of just why, while CAF is indeed a slice of the Catholic pizza, it is a narrow slice and does not seem to include all the toppings available. If this were the only experience one had of Catholicism, one would have a very misleading view. (See also, the tale of the blind men and the elephant.) Much to the chagrin of many here who seem to elevate CAF and EWTN to the level of it’s on cyber-arch-diocese, the Catholic Church is a very large tent with room for a myriad of expression and experiences. THAT, I believe, is why anam and folks like her would benefit from a break from such places for their own spiritual health. This echo chamber is getting rather stuffy and claustrophobic.

That is a fantastic post. Good luck with the hair loss!

Please show where in Scripture it says that the catholic church is the true church.

Hi ChristAlone,
I hope you are well. We won’t find a sentence in Scripture saying that the Catholic Church is the true Church. What is found, however, is the establishment of “a” (singular) church. As I’m sure you know, the New Testament is bursting with evidence of that establishment. A previous poster mentioned 1 Tim 3:15 where Paul is giving instructions: “But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.”

Sacred scripture tells us that the pillar and foundation of truth is THE (singular) Church. One Church, one pillar, one foundation, one truth. In the 17th chapter of John we can read just how important Jesus felt it was that the body of believers, as you mentioned, is one in all things as He and God are one in all things. In my opinion, describing the Church as the body of believers was a very good description prior to the reformation. Something has gone terribly wrong when the body of believers cannot agree and be one **in all things **, as Jesus prayed.

As Catholics, we believe that there is one place where mankind can find the fullness of Christian truth. One truth, one foundation, one pillar, one Church. It is the Church that Jesus Christ established and I challenge you, as others may have before, to take a look at some of the writings of the early church fathers, along with your study of the Bible. Their writings show how essential that “pillar” is, and in doing so it will be hard not to notice just how Catholic they were.

Thanks for taking part on the forum. I’ll be out of town and unable to reply for a while.

Peace!
Kolbe

 

[jmcrae]

Really? And where is that in the bible?

In Matthew 16:18-19, and again in John 21:15-19.

And did not Peter have a mother-in-law which would void his position of pope?

The discipline of clerical celibacy had not yet been put into general practice. But the Church received the power to set discipline from Jesus Christ when He told the Apostle, “What you bind on earth is bound in Heaven, and what you loose (liberate) on earth is loosed (liberate) in Heaven.” Matthew 18:18

 

[Jaypeeto4]

But Catholics have the original, CORRECT, interpretation of the scriptures,
as left behind by the apostles who wrote and sermonized about them the world over,
and the teachings of the church Fathers who went to their deaths to defend those teachings.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

**I just discovered this website, started by a former Catholic priest, Peter Bennett:

bereanbeacon.org/RC_Apologists.php

Bennett chastizes Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid, and other converts for falling into apostasy. Elsewhere on this site, he solicits testimonials from former Catholics. Much of what is said against the Catholic Church and Scott Hahn is just plain false or lifted out of context. He is alarmed by the many books, cd’s, and talks given by these converts and seems bent on countering them. As a Catholic, Evangelical tapes and CD’s do not bother me unless they spout anti-Catholic falsehoods. I used to listen to them all the time before the Catholics got into the media. I would not condone Catholics spreading falsehoods about Protestantism either. **

So this thread is about Richard Bennett, formerly an RC Priest.
Don’t worry, anyone with an ounce of correct understanding of the Catholic Faith would NEVER (at least not honestly) fall for the claims of Richard Bennett and other ex-Catholic apostates. Mr. Bennett needs our prayers because he has gone into nearly total spiritual darkness and is spending his life attacking the one true apostolic Faith. His sin is infinitely more serious than those who have been raised evangelical or other protestant. Many if not most of THEM are in good faith. Bennett cannot possibly be, unless he has lost his mind? That places his soul in eternal peril, for God will not go lightly on a man who has defected from the True Faith and now spends his career slamming it.

 

[jmcrae]

I have corresponded with Richard Bennett.

One time he wrote to me in all seriousness that he had never encountered the Scriptures in all his years as a priest. I was astounded. I asked him, “What were you reading from during the Liturgy of the Word at Mass?” “Where do you think the readings for your Divine Office, that you prayed seven times a day, came from?” I also mentioned to him that I am under the impression (from watching a movie about St. Joseph Cupertino) that priests are required to have at least the New Testament completely memorized - what happened there?

I got no response.

 

[bobzills]

**I just discovered this website, started by a former Catholic priest, Peter Bennett:

bereanbeacon.org/RC_Apologists.php**

Bennett chastizes Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid, and other converts for falling into apostasy. Elsewhere on this site, he solicits testimonials from former Catholics. Much of what is said against the Catholic Church and Scott Hahn is just plain false or lifted out of context. He is alarmed by the many books, cd’s, and talks given by these converts and seems bent on countering them. As a Catholic, Evangelical tapes and CD’s do not bother me unless they spout anti-Catholic falsehoods. I used to listen to them all the time before the Catholics got into the media. I would not condone Catholics spreading falsehoods about Protestantism either.

So this thread is about Richard Bennett, formerly an RC Priest.
Don’t worry, anyone with an ounce of correct understanding of the Catholic Faith would NEVER (at least not honestly) fall for the claims of Richard Bennett and other ex-Catholic apostates. Mr. Bennett needs our prayers because he has gone into nearly total spiritual darkness and is spending his life attacking the one true apostolic Faith. His sin is infinitely more serious than those who have been raised evangelical or other protestant. Many if not most of THEM are in good faith. Bennett cannot possibly be, unless he has lost his mind? That places his soul in eternal peril, for God will not go lightly on a man who has defected from the True Faith and now spends his career slamming it.

You have done a good job attacking the character of Mr. Bennet, but I don’t see where you have ansered any of his objections. This is known as an ad hominem argument, where you attack the person as having lost his mind since he disagrees with you.

 

[Worthy5]

As I have the right to my opinion so do you and for argumentation, catholics place them selves on a pedestal and blantantly claim authority above others which is the biggest farce that ever was.

Sorry you do not believe that faith alone saves, and that you do not believe what the bible says, and have to have someone dictate what you must believe. Sounds like a drone to me.

God does not make drones, man does. God does not make you better than me or me better than you, we are created equal, we are created in His image, not the image of what man wishes to see.

The biggest difference between catholics and protestants is that catholics believe they are superior, and not equal. And this is why there is so much division.

Come on Christalone, quit trying to characterize all catholics as thinking they are superior because you have run into a few people who were catholics that gave you that impression. This disingenuous argument that the behavior of one catholic represents the faith as a whole is balony. Besides that is your interpretation of their behavior towards you.

Do you even read the arguments that are made here. Catholics as a whole are not claiming authority, it is the bishops in union with the Pope as commissioned by Christ. And this authority is on essential matters of faith and morals only not everything under the sun. Catholics as drones, please, another example of protestants mischaracterizing catholics. Are you a drone if you follow what a court’s interpretation of a legal statue means?

You still have not accepted the problem of language interpretation and the fact that no where does the Bible reference itself as a final authority-not that it could be even if it did. You are not making arguments just stating mischaracterizations. Did I say I did not believe the Bible. No. The problem is what exactly is it saying, and who has the authority to determine this.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

As I have the right to my opinion so do you and for argumentation, catholics place them selves on a pedestal and blantantly claim authority above others which is the biggest farce that ever was.

Interesting. I thought one of protestant’s biggest objections to Catholicism is that we blindly submit to the authority of the Pope? (Not that this is true either.) Seems that we’re literally damned if we do and damned if we don’t?

Christalone:

Sorry you do not believe that faith alone saves, and that you do not believe what the bible says, and have to have someone dictate what you must believe. Sounds like a drone to me.

The bible does not say that faith alone saves. It says not by faith alone are we saved. I’m sorry that you’ve taken so much of what the bible says out of context to support your protestant doctrine.

Christalone:

God does not make drones, man does. God does not make you better than me or me better than you, we are created equal, we are created in His image, not the image of what man wishes to see.

Wait. Are we drones or are we superior human beings? See above. Maybe we’re superior drones?

Christalone:

The biggest difference between catholics and protestants is that catholics believe they are superior, and not equal. And this is why there is so much division.

I think that pride does more to separate us than any other sin. And there is no lack of pride on either side of the Tiber - this I grant you. But the Church does not teach the superiority of one Christian over another. It claims the fullness of truth which, to be fair, is akin to protestant church communities claiming they reflect “true” Christianity reformed to exclude the alleged “pagan” influences of the “dark” ages.

You can go round and round shouting accusations. But I don’t think it will get you far here.

Peace,
Robert

 

[mercygate]

If they really knew Jesus as i do (and other devout Catholics) they would not leave…

in other words, if they knew the Real Presence they would not leave…

this is one thing i am not happy with the RCC about… they don’t teach people TRUE & complete (orthodox/scirptural) CAtholicism… they seem to have the attitude that people will find their way without being taught or something… NOT true… as my life & others’ lives attest…

i have been Catholic all my life but it was LATE in the game before a priest told me about the benefits of spending serious time @ the RP…

and if i had known about that, i would not have left the Church… and gotten lost… committed sins that i am still paying for & others are also paying…

I pray ALL devout Catholics here will tell others about the RP… and everything else we Catholics have…

One day when I was whining about the state of catechesis in the Church, the light bulb went on and I signed up for CCD. Best decision I ever made.

 

[BernadetteM]

In Matthew 16:18-19, and again in John 21:15-19.

The discipline of clerical celibacy had not yet been put into general practice. But the Church received the power to set discipline from Jesus Christ when He told the Apostle, “What you bind on earth is bound in Heaven, and what you loose (liberate) on earth is loosed (liberate) in Heaven.” Matthew 18:18

Your above quote is the crux of the whole matter with protestants. They only accept what is convenient for them. As all humans many cannot accept authority in any area of their lives. Humans have problems at work because they don’t like being told what to do by their boss. It is really the same principal in faith. Peter was given the authority to bind on earth and God would accept his decisions in Heaven. Until one can accept this it is impossible to be true to His Church. As I said it is human nature to rebel against all authority. I think until a person can accept authority there is no hope that they will see the truth of the Catholic Church.

I don’t know anything about Mr. Bennett, but we must remember he is human and to be a priest is to be obedient and just as many who are not clergy can’t accept authority, I am sure that their are priests and bishops who also rebel against it. If Mr. Bennett had this problem he would have to rationalize his departure from the Church and demonize It to make himself feel less guilty for disobeying Christ.

God Bless

Bernadette