Is Ravi Zacharias antiCatholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aydan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aydan

Guest
Recently I saw a video of Ravi Zacharias answering the question is Catholicism a cult? I was really confused by his answer. Is he known to be anti-Catholic? I will link to the video here for those that would like to see his answer. Also if there’s anyone who could provide some clarification on the answer here I would greatly appreciate it because I really want to understand exactly what he means.


Thank you and God bless.
 
I like Ravi. He was clearly put on the spot as many in his audience have heard this accusation before and, I am sure, some believe it. I appreciate his irenic response, but I wish he had said something more like this:

“Anyone who understands the history of Christianity knows that, until the Great Schism and the later Protestant Reformation, all the world was Catholic. The modern Catholic Church, while it has continued in the fundamental errors which caused the Reformation, can in no way be considered, theological or sociologically, a cult. While we certainly have our sharp and fundamental theological differences, we must recognize and be grateful to the Catholic Church for many things. For example, but for the Catholic Church we would not have true understanding of Christ. We also have to regard the possibility of the salvation of Catholics with some care and humility. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or outside the church there is no salvation, was a teaching from the very beginning. But how to understand this is a vexing problem even today. To deny the possibility of Catholics being saved is to hold that our version of protestant Christianity is “the true church” outside of which there is no salvation. But a Catholic–or anyone else, for that matter–can reasonably wonder, given the many versions of protestant Christianity, which one is the true church. Maybe we are best advised to follow our separated Catholic brothers and sisters in being hopeful but agnostic about the salvation of those outside our fold and not make any absolute and dogmatic judgments about this.”
 
Most of what I have seen and heard from him, he is, but not as much as some other folks.
 
You mean Constantine the Great right? By the way, Catholics don’t worship idols. We have Crucifixes and we worship he who died on the Crucifix. But we don’t worship the actual material that makes up the statue. That would be creepy.
 
You mean Constantine the Great right? By the way, Catholics don’t worship idols. We have Crucifixes and we worship he who died on the Crucifix. But we don’t worship the actual material that makes up the statue. That would be creepy.
Please don’t feed the troll. ‘Catholicbible’ already started a thread earlier with this accusation, and since that thread was closed has apparently decided to move on to taking potshots in other threads.
 
Last edited:
I’m cautious about throwing around the term ‘anti Catholic’. As far as I understand it, Mr Zacharias is of the school that wouldn’t condemn someone for being Catholic, but would believe they are saved in spite of Catholic distinctives rather that because of them. I could be wrong.

I was thinking about this earlier actually. Christians all pretty much believe we are saved in a state of grace, we just disagree how that state is achieved and maintained, it seems to me.
 
The total cost of the suits those three men are wearing would buy a fairly nice new car. In principle, all bible preachers must be anti-Catholic. To a lesser extent, all non-Catholics must be anti-Catholic, or at least Christian relativists, if such a condition can exist.

If one chooses not to be Catholic, then the separation from the Church must somehow be justified. Moral judgment and theological/doctrinal Innovation then follows, as it did at the “reformation.” Yet, 500 years on, “Protestantism” is impossible to define.

Fr. Mitch Pacwa sums it up very nicely: In both the religious and spiritual realms, the “reformation” was an assault on the Holy Eucharist.

Once the Eucharist is gone, unity is gone. Which spirit desires that?
 
Thank you to all who answered my question. I’m not that familiar with him or his ministry and I found his answer to be quite confusing, to say the least. I feel like I have a clearer understanding now. For the accusation that Catholics worship idols I’m not going to waste time with that because it’s been so thoroughly debunked so many times by scholars. Besides, in my opinion, it has no bearing on my original question
 
Iggypkrebach,. Please understand that evangelicals see the Reformation in a very positive light. The Protestants stopped the greatest power grab in the known world and placed bibles in the hands of all who want to hear God’s word. The idea is that God wants to use all of his body not just Roman Catholic. Today there is no need for evangelicals to be Protestant because they now have what Roman Catholics tried to keep for themselves. Spiritual authority.
 
Everyone needs to read and follow the 10 commandments in Exodus 20. I am a Catholic that prays and worships Jesus Christ and God only.
Good. That needs to include ‘thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor’, e.g. drop the false charge that the Church promotes idol worship.
 
Catholicbible:
Everyone needs to read and follow the 10 commandments in Exodus 20. I am a Catholic that prays and worships Jesus Christ and God only.
Good. That needs to include ‘thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor’, e.g. drop the false charge that the Church promotes idol worship.
LOL best comeback ever!
 
Everyone needs to read and follow the 10 commandments in Exodus 20. I am a Catholic that prays and worships Jesus Christ and God only.
As do we all.

But you make several errors. Prayer is not worship, it simply means ‘to ask’.

You pray to someone every time you ask them for something, even if it a Latte at a Starbucks.

You can see that in Shakespear. Hamlet Act I, Scene II. Queen Gertrude (Hamlet’s mother) addresses him “Hamlet, I pray thee, go not to Whitenburg”.

Do you consider that statement to be a case of idolatry? Or is she simply asking him ( I pray thee) for something, namely to remain with her.

Catholic worship ONLY God. We might pray to angles and Saints, but simply making a request. Nothing unchristian about asking someone to pray for you, is there?
 
You are a wealth of falsehoods. . . I will pray for you to grow up. We worship the Holy Trinity only.
 
Last edited:
That is called requesting them to pray to Jesus FOR you. Your opinion is straight line Baptist, not catholic. Ever hear of something called charity? You are going way over the top to present a seriously flawed line of logic. Haven’t you ever asked someone to “put in a good word for you” ? It’s the same thing. You’ve brought this up on your closed post as well, takecyhe hint, tilt at some other windmill for a while.
 
Praying to Mary or virgin of Guadalupe is Idol worship.
You say you are Catholic but someone has obviously been feeding you anti-Catholic ideas.

To “pray to a saint” is NOT to worship him or her, but to ask that saint to pray to God for you. It’s no different in the Catholic view than asking a fellow believer on earth to pray for you.
 
Exterminated? Catholics didn’t kill Nestorians or Donatists. They debated them and exterminated their arguments but they didn’t kill them. I’m sure you can find a few instances where there was some violence, but on the whole there was no genocide going on. Also, no one regards these Heresies as Christian. In fact, most if not all of them denied an essential teaching of Christianity. Most denied an aspect of the Trinity. Arianism, for instance, denied that Christ is eternal. That’s why even Protestant historians can say that all Christians before the Great Schism were Catholic.
 
It looks like you missed seeing my post about the definition of the verb 'to pray", so I will repeat it again

Prayer is not worship, it simply means ‘to ask’.

You pray to someone every time you ask them for something, even if it a Latte at a Starbucks.

You can see that in Shakespear. Hamlet Act I, Scene II. Queen Gertrude (Hamlet’s mother) addresses him “Hamlet, I pray thee, go not to Whitenburg”.

Do you consider that statement to be a case of idolatry? Or is she simply asking him ( I pray thee) for something, namely to remain with her.
 
I would answer no, he is a protestant so obviously he has a different understanding of doctrine and history but based on that clip he’s not “anti-Catholic”
Couple points: he does make a reference to a time prior to the reformation where there were only two groups (east and west) and the implication I got was that they were both Christian but with different understanding of doctrine/history. Therefore fast-word to present day he would have similar belief vis-a- vis Protestant-Catholic relations, he obviously sides with protestants but I didn’t read into this Catholics aren’t necessarily not Christian. Another inference I took was some Catholics choose to stay within the church to perhaps change it from within and that’s fine(maybe even encouraged?) from what I gleaned from his comments.

From a practical/realistic protestant pov…it doesn’t make much sense to try to “convert” over a billion Christians to your brand of Christianity when there is a hope that people that already subscribe to your pov(to some degree) can perhaps change it from within?
 
Last edited:
Okay, maybe I should have rephrased that. The Catholic Church never killed heretics. Sure individual Catholics did but individual Catholics have done horrible things. They aren’t perfect.
But, anyway, the fact that Christ was created automatically says that he is not eternal. Eternal meaning without beginning and without end. Arius himself states that, “God has not always been the Father; there was a moment when he was alone, and was not yet Father.” (Church in the Christian Roman Empire, I, 80). That is a pretty huge departure from Christian theology and pretty essential. As we say in our Creed, Christ was begotten, not made. A distinct difference in Catholic theology.
The Catholic Church sure didn’t think they were being picky when they condemned Nestorianism. Christians believe that Christ has one nature but two persons. Nestorians claim that Christ has two natures. Another distinct difference in Catholic (and Christian) theology. Pretty essential since it would drastically change how we think of Christ.
Donatism is an interesting point since they didn’t primarily deny any doctrine. As you said they denied that priests who have fallen into mortal sin can administer valid sacraments. And they also believed that you had to be baptized again if you came over to their sect. The thing is, you still can’t say that not all Christians before the Orthodox and Catholic split were not Catholic. For all intents and purposes it was. Even with the Donatists since they didn’t deny anything other than the validity of the sacraments preformed by a sinful priest. That’s like saying that if there were only Catholics and members of the Society of Pius X, then Catholics were not the only Christians.
 
I used to listen to Ravi a lot before my conversion. He has some wonderful stories from all his travels. One thing I noticed though (after my conversion)…he quotes an awful lot of Catholics in his teachings/talks. Augustine, Aquinas, Muggeridge were the most common. You have to wonder how some of these people, like Ravi, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, CS Lewis etc don’t convert. They surely seem to know their stuff and love the Lord.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top