John MacArthur and the Vatican Porn Collection

[stinkcat_14]

John MacArthur has an article where he is at it again with his distortions. Anyway, in the following article:

ondoctrine.com/2mac0095.htm

He states the following:

I was fascinated to read in Lorraine Boettner’s book on Roman Catholicism this quote. “The largest collection of books in the world on the subject of sex is in the Vatican library.” Who checks them out? What are they, in there doing some scholastic work? These poor people. This is a horrific sentence. Better they should go to prison and have some time limit when they’re going to get out and live a normal life

Actually, Boettner’s source is Emmett McLaughlin who cites Alfred Kinsey as the suggesting that the Vatican library is full of porn.

Now of course, if MacArthur had done a simple google search, he would have found the following from a sources that is certainly not catholic:

straightdope.com/classics/a1_074.html

I guess he doesn’t want the truth to get in the way of a good story.

 

[lak611]

John MacArthur has an article where he is at it again with his distortions. Anyway, in the following article:

ondoctrine.com/2mac0095.htm

He states the following:

Actually, Boettner’s source is Emmett McLaughlin who cites Alfred Kinsey as the suggesting that the Vatican library is full of porn.

Now of course, if MacArthur had done a simple google search, he would have found the following from a sources that is certainly not catholic:

straightdope.com/classics/a1_074.html

I guess he doesn’t want the truth to get in the way of a good story.

I read MacArthur’s article. What bothered me even more was this statement “In fact, I read an interesting article. It was an editorial op ed piece in – I think it was the L.A. Times – in which a man was writing and saying the whole problem with this, the whole problem is the church’s problem. The church has forced this. The church has forced this to happen; this abuse of boys, this pedophilia. Because the church says homosexuality is a sin – this is the bizarre character of this op ed piece – it says homosexuality is a sin and, therefore, for homosexuals who are Roman Catholics to be accepted by the church, the only thing they could do is become priests. And so the church, by identifying homosexuality as a sin, forced homosexuals who wanted to be good Catholics into the priesthood.” MacArthur did not even name his source. At least what you mentioned was an unreliable source that he quoted, but this MacArthur doesn’t even give any sources for some of the garbage that he is telling people. The sad thing is that many people believe this junk.

 

[Integritus]

If you go to MacArthur’s website “Grace to you [unless you’re a Catholic]”, there’s a very lengthy letter he wrote explaining how upset and bitter he is that so many leading and prominent Evangelicals in the United States are now working with Catholics and truly consider Catholics to be true Christians. In this letter, he essentially attacks the Holy Mass and the priesthood, yet he tries to play the “I mean no offense to Catholics” card.

MacArthur is a frequent guest on the Larry King show on CNN (the leading primetime news interview show) when the topics of discussion pertain to religion or faith.

I remember when Larry King did a show discussing the A&E reality show that documented 4 young college students who were deciding whether to become Catholic priests. Larry King had the 4 boys, John MacArthur, a liberal Catholic priest who also is a frequent guest for religious matters (who made a comment “no I don’t believe that” that Jesus intended to found a Church on Peter which is the Catholic Church), and another Catholic priest. Well… I was quite amazed, as I think MacArthur was too, at the spiritual-depth and knowledge of the other priest, a quite young man from Missouri. This priest was a convert from Evangelicalism and said “when I was an Evangelical, though I felt great love for Jesus, I never once contemplated on becoming a pastor. Yet, when I became a Catholic, I knew that being a priest is what I wanted to do.” MacArthur, though very wisely hiding his anti-Catholicism, was mildly speaking against priestly celibacy. The young priest then exposed MacArthur as, let’s just say “forgetful”, when he discussed that not only Jesus was celibate, who is the High-Priest, but that so was Paul who explains it in Letter to Corinthians as the “preferred manner” and " I would wish for you to be like me", but also that there were many celibate Chirstians in the first centuries after Jesus and still to this day, and that even the Jews had celibate orders among women and men.

MacArthur was struggling for words after that.

 

[lak611]

:whacky:

I read MacArthur’s article. What bothered me even more was this statement “In fact, I read an interesting article. It was an editorial op ed piece in – I think it was the L.A. Times – in which a man was writing and saying the whole problem with this, the whole problem is the church’s problem. The church has forced this. The church has forced this to happen; this abuse of boys, this pedophilia. Because the church says homosexuality is a sin – this is the bizarre character of this op ed piece – it says homosexuality is a sin and, therefore, for homosexuals who are Roman Catholics to be accepted by the church, the only thing they could do is become priests. And so the church, by identifying homosexuality as a sin, forced homosexuals who wanted to be good Catholics into the priesthood.” MacArthur did not even name his source. At least what you mentioned was an unreliable source that he quoted, but this MacArthur doesn’t even give any sources for some of the garbage that he is telling people. The sad thing is that many people believe this junk.

MacArthur quotes an unnamed op ed piece that he “thinks” was in the LA Times** in his article. He even says that he thinks it is “bizarre”. How can anybody take this man seriously!:whacky: :bigyikes:

 

[Integritus]

Just look at the ignorance of MacArthur:

*“You may have heard of this, the Assumption, or the Ascension. This doctrine didn’t find a place in the actual canon of Catholic theology until 1950. It was November the first, 1950, Pope Pious XII made it official that Mary ascended into heaven. Quote, “The bodily assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into heaven is a dogma of the divine and Catholic faith.” Born without sin, lived without sin, lived as a virgin and left this world by ascending into heaven.”
*

On his own website, he’s bashing Catholic teaching on the Assumption of Mary, yet he keeps saying the “ascension of Mary”. These words are really black and white that a 6-year old could learn the difference.Not to mention, how wrong he is about the history of this doctrine.

Catholics believe Mary was assumed into heaven at the end of her earthly life. We believe Jesus ascended into heaven after his resurrection. The difference between these two is that while Jesus ascended under His own power, Mary was assumed by the power of God.

There are two examples in scripture of people being assumed into heaven by the power of God (ref. Gen 5:24; Heb 11:5; 2 Kings 2:1-13). Mary’s presence in heaven is also described in Revelation chapter 12 indicating the author’s vision of her with “a crown of twelve stars.”

 

[PhilVaz]

We covered this MacArthur article in a non-Catholic religions thread (page 4 where I started quoting that article). This “scandal of the priesthood” article was preached in 2002 during the height of the priest abuse scandal. The man is not trying very hard to understand Catholic teaching and be fair.

Phil P

 

[Image_of_God]

How far will he go with this nonsense?
(Edited by Moderator)

I was shocked that an anti Catholic would go this far.

Is he even real?

 

[lak611]

Is he even real?

Unfortunately, yes. Here’s a link to his website gty.org/index.php. At first it seems innocent, but there is a whole section about “evangelizing Catholics.”

 

[Image_of_God]

Mr. Francis, did I post something too offensive? I am sorry if I did.

…no means to offend MacArthur. I am actually glad you edited it out…I had to think about it before I realized why you did it.

 

[Image_of_God]

Unfortunately, yes. Here’s a link to his website gty.org/index.php. At first it seems innocent, but there is a whole section about “evangelizing Catholics.”

I hope that Catholics don’t convert.

 

[Mijoy2]

Mr. Francis, did I post something too offensive? I am sorry if I did.

…no means to offend MacArthur. I am actually glad you edited it out…I had to think about it before I realized why you did it.

Gee now you have raised my curiosity .

After reading MacArthur’s article I had to refrain from posting at all. If I stated what was on my mind it most certainly would have been editted.

The man’s words against Catholicism are anything but Christian like.

 

[Image_of_God]

Gee now you have raised my curiosity .

After reading MacArthur’s article I had to refrain from posting at all. If I stated what was on my mind it most certainly would have been editted.

The man’s words against Catholicism are anything but Christian like.

He is probably a former Catholic.

 

[Integritus]

Just look at the ignorance of MacArthur:

Thanks Michael Francis for the edit, and forgive me. Sometimes defending our Mother from attacks can make us become too heated.

 

[Image_of_God]

Thanks Michael Francis for the edit, and forgive me. Sometimes defending our Mother from attacks can make us become too heated.

Or the Church.

 

[Zooey]

Well, your Friendly Neighborhood Methodist has just read that article, too…I can’t decide whether I want to or to:crying: !!
I really…Is the man that ignorant? I mean, he is quoting Lorraine Boettner. So he’s not the Sharpest Knife In the Drawer…
But it’s ridiculous!! If a Little Methodist Girl From a Small Town, can read that & poke holes in it big enough for http://bestsmileys.com/horses1/16.gif, what is MacArthur’s excuse???
And he read “an article” that said that because Catholics believe homosexuality is a sin–What?? Does he not think the same thing?? He’s supposed to be a pretty conservative pastor…I mean, :ehh: sheesh!! :whacky: :whacky:

 

[Church_Militant]

We don’t have to call names. Always deal with the argument and not the person.

Deal with the facts. It’s always the most devatstating thing that you can do to any anti-Catholic argument, especially when they are not based upon facts themselves.

Everything else is the work of the Holy Spirit, right?

Jesus said, “I am the…truth…
Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.”

 

[lak611]

I really…Is the man that ignorant? I mean, he is quoting Lorraine Boettner. what is MacArthur’s excuse???

I tried to find Emmet MacLaughlin, one of the other people he quoted, but could not find any books about the Catholic priesthood by that person.

Then there’s the unnamed source from the New York Times, plus the unnamed source from “maybe” the LA Times (he’s not even sure ). He must really think his followers are ignorant if he uses sources that cannot even be found!

 

[stinkcat_14]

Here is some info on Emmett McLoughlin:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_McLoughlin

Apparently, he is was a Catholic priest who defected, but before he died he returned to the Church.

 

[kaycee]

John MacArthur has an article where he is at it again with his distortions. Anyway, in the following article:

ondoctrine.com/2mac0095.htm

He states the following:

Actually, Boettner’s source is Emmett McLaughlin who cites Alfred Kinsey as the suggesting that the Vatican library is full of porn.

Now of course, if MacArthur had done a simple google search, he would have found the following from a sources that is certainly not catholic:

straightdope.com/classics/a1_074.html

I guess he doesn’t want the truth to get in the way of a good story.

Hmmmm, is’nt that Boettner’s fault, not MacArthur’s???

 

[lak611]

Hmmmm, is’nt that Boettner’s fault, not MacArthur’s???

No, it still is MacArthur’s fault for not choosing reliable sources. If I picked an unreliable source for a research paper when I was in college, the professor would not let me off the hook!