Way of Life Literature = Ridiculously, Laughably Anti-Catholic

[JBenjamin82]

Has anyone ever heard of this group? Here’s what they say about Catholicism and the Church Fathers:

wayoflife.org/database/churchfathers.html

The funny thing is, they admit that the Fathers’ views line up with Catholic views, but they say that the Fathers were heretics and that Fundamentalist Baptists existed from biblical times. Conveniently, there’s a scarce amount of evidence to back up their claims, but that doesn’t seem to bother them.

I may join a discussion on this at some point in the future, so does anyone have any pointers on what I should say/argue? I’m sure I’ll bring up the canon of the NT at some point because I don’t see how the early Christians could have been hardcore Sola Scriptura Christians when the NT wasn’t even officially compiled until the 4th century. I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of early Christians didn’t have access to all twenty-seven books of the NT until then. Most individual Christians didn’t even own their own Bibles until after the invention of the printing press.

Anyway, what do y’all make of that link? LOL.

P.S. Here’s their general link on Catholicism:

wayoflife.org/database/rccheader.html

 

[spencer2]

I have Pentecostal relatives who were once catholic and believe their denomination is the direct discendant of Peter and the apostles. Amazing what people can make themselves believe.

 

[JBenjamin82]

I have Pentecostal relatives who were once catholic and believe their denomination is the direct discendant of Peter and the apostles. Amazing what people can make themselves believe.

I know, right? Did they try to provide proof, or did they just throw that out there as fact without trying to provide evidence to back up their claim?

 

[Church_Militant]

The funny part is that the only way they can trace any line back to the early church is through their Catholic roots.

I always look at Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp’s writings which are some of the very earliest and ask if they agree with what they wrote. If not, then their doctrines and such don’t agree with either the ECF or the New Testament.

For example:

• The Eucharist IS Scriptural
• Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?

 

[JBenjamin82]

The funny part is that the only way they can trace any line back to the early church is through their Catholic roots.

Exactly. A Fundamentalist Baptist blog I read posted a quote from Charles Spurgeon claiming Baptist perpetuity. Spurgeon evidently claimed that the Baptist denomination can be traced back to apostolic times, but that persecution by Rome (it’s always Rome, isn’t it?) made it go underground until after the Reformation. Not too surprisingly, no evidence was provided to back up this claim. They claim that Roman Catholics destroyed the evidence of their existence. LOL.

I always look at Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp’s writings which are some of the very earliest and ask if they agree with what they wrote. If not, then their doctrines and such don’t agree with either the ECF or the New Testament.

 

[JustaServant]

They claim that Roman Catholics destroyed the evidence of their existence. LOL.

That is the essence of revisionist history.
They claim a group that agrees with them existed throughout church history. When the only ‘examples’ of what the group believes come from the CC, they dismiss it because it came from the ‘enemy’ (actually heard a guy say that once), any ‘positive evidence’ of what they believe was quickly destroyed. So it’s like believing aliens built the pyramids, evidence is not necessary for ‘belief’.
Way of Life is run by an independent fundamentalist ‘missionary’ who really should be pitied if anything.
He lives in a very small world, and it gets smaller every year.

 

[ChadS]

I wouldn’t bother trying to dialogue with them. You’ll only end up frustrating yourself and making them happy they got under your skin. They’re confirmed in their beliefs and wouldn’t see it any other way. I suspect they have answers for all of the replies Catholics can give them.

ChadS

 

[catsrus]

claimed that the (fill in the "religion) denomination can be traced back to apostolic times, but that persecution by Rome (it’s always Rome, isn’t it?) made it go underground until after the Reformation.

Every non-Catholic so-called denom claims this…read jws, mormons, every protestant, etc. And then, magically!, in the 16th -19th century, God began sending messengers to all these odd men and giving them various conflicting messages of what truth is. :yawn:
I don’t even attempt to “discuss” with most of these people anymore.

 

[UniversalistGuy]

Has anyone ever heard of this group? Here’s what they say about Catholicism and the Church Fathers:

wayoflife.org/database/churchfathers.html

The funny thing is, they admit that the Fathers’ views line up with Catholic views, but they say that the Fathers were heretics and that Fundamentalist Baptists existed from biblical times. Conveniently, there’s a scarce amount of evidence to back up their claims, but that doesn’t seem to bother them.

I may join a discussion on this at some point in the future, so does anyone have any pointers on what I should say/argue? I’m sure I’ll bring up the canon of the NT at some point because I don’t see how the early Christians could have been hardcore Sola Scriptura Christians when the NT wasn’t even officially compiled until the 4th century. I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of early Christians didn’t have access to all twenty-seven books of the NT until then. Most individual Christians didn’t even own their own Bibles until after the invention of the printing press.

Anyway, what do y’all make of that link? LOL.

P.S. Here’s their general link on Catholicism:

wayoflife.org/database/rccheader.html

Why would you want to join in a discussion with them at some point in the future? What would be your motive?

 

[The_Old_Medic]

There is absolutely nothing “ridiculous” about this kind of literature.

Far too many Catholics see it the way that you do. That is very unfortunate, because this is the belief of a majority of the protestant religions out there. They quite literally see the Roman Catholic Church as being exactly what this literature claims, and they see all of us, and all of our clergy, as nothing less than Satanic influences.

In their eyes, we are not Christians at all.

If you think that their belief system is something to be laughed at, you will get nowhere with them.

I know, I came out of beliefs that mirrored those of these Baptists. Attacking their positions will get you exactly nowhere with them. My family, my entire extended family, still follows those beliefs.

Those beliefs are honestly held. You will never get anyplace by attacking them, or by quoting from any Catholic version of the Bible. They consider our Bible to also be corrupt.

You have to reason with them based on the King James Bible, And, in order to do that, you have to know the KJB backwards and forwards.

 

[benidict]

I cannot believe these fine folks actually said the Waldenses were bible believeing Christians!!!LOL! what are they smoking! the waldenses forbade marriage, encouraged fornification, since it was viewed as temporal. and encouraged the practice of Homosexuality!!:hypno: this is just too hilarious to read any further. they had me right there. i guess they are hoping their adherents do not study history. this stuff is amazing. no self respectin fundy would in this day and time, appeal to the Waldenses! wow! Peace all

 

[benidict]

Why would you want to join in a discussion with them at some point in the future? What would be your motive?

I agree. although it may be an entertaining exercise, it would be fruitless. these folk are undoubtably set in cement. and although they may hear what he was saying, they would not listen. i know the type! Peace

 

[JHow]

I think the article makes a pretty good case that the early church fathers were very catholic guys. That is a more honest position than trying to make them out as proto-baptists or some such. If you take them (ECF) off the table, you just have to move on to Paul and the NT writers and explore how catholic they are. I mean, where do they think the fathers got all their ideas from?

 

[Brian_Culliton]

I would venture to guess that the folks responsible for that article have never examined those early church writings they are condemning. I have been a strong advocate for early church study for over ten years. Anyone who broadly condemns the (ECFs) or broadly references them as supporting their own ideology is either disingenuous or ignorant of the early church.

 

[JHow]

…Anyone who broadly condemns the (ECFs) or broadly references them as supporting their own ideology is either disingenuous or ignorant of the early church.

You appear to be objecting to “broad” appeals to the ECF. Is your point that the term ECF applies to too many writers from too many periods, or that they don’t reach concensus on all points, or that depending on how you classify them you might include gnostic or heretical writers? Doesn’t the use of the classification “father” already imply that, broadly speaking, they founded a family of some sort and can be seen as parents in a way? (Thus implying that any argument that follows will be a “broad use” as such?) In the article, would it have been better for the writers to say: “You should avoid reading Origen, Augustine, etc.”, listing them by name?

Not trying to bombard you with questions, just trying to tease out your objection.

 

[Nicea325]

Has anyone ever heard of this group? Here’s what they say about Catholicism and the Church Fathers:

wayoflife.org/database/churchfathers.html

The funny thing is, they admit that the Fathers’ views line up with Catholic views, but they say that the Fathers were heretics and that Fundamentalist Baptists existed from biblical times. Conveniently, there’s a scarce amount of evidence to back up their claims, but that doesn’t seem to bother them.

I may join a discussion on this at some point in the future, so does anyone have any pointers on what I should say/argue? I’m sure I’ll bring up the canon of the NT at some point because I don’t see how the early Christians could have been hardcore Sola Scriptura Christians when the NT wasn’t even officially compiled until the 4th century. I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of early Christians didn’t have access to all twenty-seven books of the NT until then. Most individual Christians didn’t even own their own Bibles until after the invention of the printing press.

Anyway, what do y’all make of that link? LOL.

P.S. Here’s their general link on Catholicism:

wayoflife.org/database/rccheader.html

Absurd stuff! Baptists existing from Biblical times? Please! No different than JW’s claiming the existed prior to Jesus. One person or several can fabricate history and the sad truth is many will believe it. Pure madness.

 

[JBenjamin82]

Why would you want to join in a discussion with them at some point in the future? What would be your motive?

A woman who believes these things wrote a blog post that was anti-Catholic. I wrote a short (and polite, I hope) response. If she had replied, I’d have considered discussing things with her further if possible. As to my motive, it was simply to try to show her that what she said was incorrect and that the Catholic Church isn’t the enemy of the Bible that she seems to think it is.

 

[JBenjamin82]

There is absolutely nothing “ridiculous” about this kind of literature.

I agree that anti-Catholicism is alive and well, and I also agree that that’s far from a good thing. It’s not anti-Catholicism in and of itself that I find funny; it’s just that some arguments against Catholicism are so absurd that I can’t help but laugh. I don’t mean it in a condescending way, and I’m not trying to imply that the people who hold those beliefs are stupid or anything like that.

Far too many Catholics see it the way that you do. That is very unfortunate, because this is the belief of a majority of the protestant religions out there.

Again, I am not simply brushing those beliefs off with a laugh. I take anti-Catholicism very seriously, and I realize that some Christians – though I certainly wouldn’t say all or even many in this day and age – are very anti-Catholic in their outlook.

If you think that their belief system is something to be laughed at, you will get nowhere with them.

I definitely try not to come across as patronizing or elitist when speaking to anti-Catholics, but you do have a point with that. If/when I speak with them, how should I attempt to correct their misconceptions about Catholicism? Would it be better to say nothing and just pray for them?

You have to reason with them based on the King James Bible, And, in order to do that, you have to know the KJB backwards and forwards.

Very true. I’ve noticed that as well, and I’ll keep that in mind.

 

[Barbkw]

From David Cloud’s “Friday News” section:

POPE SAYS GOD BEHIND THE BIG BANG (Friday Church News Notes, January 14, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

The Roman Catholic Church, which once put Erasmus Darwin’s evolutionary book Zoonomia on its index of forbidden books, has long since capitulated to a similar doctrine.

Pope Benedict XVI recently said that while evolution is true, God is is its author.

He said that the scientific theories on the origin of the universe are not in conflict with “faith” but they cannot explain “the beauty of the world, in its mystery, in its greatness and in its rationality” (“God was behind Big Bang,” Reuters, Jan. 6, 2011).

The pope “sees no reason why God would not have used a natural evolutionary process in the forming of the human species.”

This is because the pope doesn’t believe the Bible.

Not only is Genesis 1-11 plainly written as history rather than poetry or allegory, but Jesus and the apostles authenticated it as history.

In Luke 17:26-32, for example, Jesus mentions Noah, the Ark, the Flood, Lot, the destruction of Sodom by fire, and Lot’s wife.

Elsewhere Jesus mentions the Creation (Mk. 13:19), Adam and Eve (Mat. 19:4-6; Mk. 10:6-7), Cain and Abel (Mat. 23:35; Lk. 11:50-51), and Abraham (John 8:39-40).

Christ always treats Genesis as history, and it is impossible to honor Him as Lord and Saviour and disregard His teaching.

In Matthew 19:4-5, Christ mentions both “accounts” of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 and treats them as history.

Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus, preached evolution in his two-volume Zoonomia; or, the Laws of Organic Life (1794-96). He believed that an intelligence created the first “living filament,” from which all life evolved.

 

[Barbkw]

Catholics frequently make Cloud’s news list

"ROME’S MARY ON THE CROSS AND ON GOD’S THRONE (Friday Church News Notes, January 14, 2011, www.wayoflife.org fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) -

Nothing more clearly demonstrates the apostasy of the Roman Catholic Church than its doctrine of Mary.

According to Rome, she was immaculately (sinlessly) conceived, participated in Christ’s suffering for mankind, ascended bodily to Heaven, was crowned Queen of the universe, and intercedes for sinners.

During a radio message concluding the Jubilee of the Redemption, April 28, 1935, Pope Pius XI gave Mary the title Co-redemptrix.

At least five times Pope Paul II referred to her by this title in his papal statements. In his general audience on April 9, 1997, he said that Mary “collaborated in obtaining the grace of salvation for all humanity” (Vatican Information Service). This pope dedicated himself and the whole world to Mary.

The influential book The Glories of Mary by Alphonsus Mary de Liguori, a Catholic saint, calls Mary our Life, our Help, our Advocate, our Guardian, our Mediatress, our Salvation, and the Hope of Sinners.

Chapter 5 says “Mary’s intercession is necessary for our salvation.”

This book was tested 20 times by the rules of Pope Urban VIII and Pope Benedict XIV and was said to contain not “one word worthy of censure.” It was pronounced to be without error by Pope Pius VII and by Pope Leo XII. Pope John Paul II acknowledged Liguori’s influence in his own idolatrous affection for Mary. Liguori’s book continues to be published today with the imprimatur [Latin meaning “let it be printed”] of various Catholic authorities.

Inside the Santa Maria Maggiore (Saint Mary Major) basilica in Rome, Mary sits on the right hand of Jesus on His throne being crowned by Him as Queen of heaven.

Outside of the basilica, Mary hangs on a cross with Jesus. Mary also hangs on the cross in the Church of the Mother of God of Polish Martyrs in Warsaw.

In the Saint Stanislaus Kostka church in Chicago, Mary is seated in the place of God on the Ark of the Covenant."