i now live in a predominately non-Catholic area and was shocked to hear some evangelist on a Christian TV station (3ABN) preaching about how the pope is the anti-Christ. since then i have become aware of how common this belief is amongst many "so called" Christian coworkers, acquaintances and friends.

i am learning more and more about my faith so that i can refute them properly, and anything that strengthens my faith is good. but i do find that simultaneously a new form of hatred is emerging in me towards other Christian churches. i know not to be angry with the people, but towards the deceit that has been given to them. however, here is where i need some guidance.

i believe that truth can be found in all religions, however the Catholic Church has ALL the truth. so this leads me to believe that some other churches have part of the truth while some have part of the truth hidden amongst lies. (philosophers, can this be correct?)

i used to take such joy in seeing anyone of any faith see love and give love. i felt sorry for them for not having my beliefs, but some just refuse to accept. fine. but now i am not sure if it is correct to view other churches as anti-Christian because they have hurt the catholic church by separating and infusing Christ's words with lies. this new hatred has me now thinking that these other Christian groups are made up of incredibly slow people that could never understand anything ever written by Aquinas... and that idea has GOT to be wrong. i know that i too am ignorant, but i cannot even have an intelligent conversation with most of these people. is it possible that God wanted these other churches to exist so that the simpletons could know Jesus in a less complex way? or am i just taking too much pride and satisfaction from knowing that my belief in the Catholic Church is the real deal? is it worth our time to even talk with these people that spew this pope/anti-Christ garbage?

-- jen (notnow@privacy.edu), January 08, 2005

Answers

Bump to New Answers to invite comment.

-- (bump@bump.bump), January 08, 2005.

Dear Jen,

Rather, truth mixed with misunderstanding.

Perhaps the unclean spirits who first sowed heresy and schism in the Church helped create the original lies. But I think at least most (Christian) *humans* are honestly deceived, err with good will, and are just sadly mistaken.

The sins and political intrigues of some imperfect popes and bishops in the late Medieval period did not help matters; the Church *did* need reform--as eventually happened at Trent, and later even more at Vatican II. But it was a climate in which people were more apt to be misled.

Perhaps the John Michael Talbot song about "One Lord, One Faith, and One Baptism" is correct when, after praising Jesus for giving Peter and the Twelve the Keys of the Kingdom, he laments that later shepherds abused the sheep, so the Lord "came out against them and scattered His people of faith". Perhaps division is a fruit both of sinful leaders and sinful theologians and sinful laity.

In my high school days I had been indoctrinated to think the pope was the antichrist. I believed that in good faith. Later, the Holy Spirit and the clear witness of Church history in the early centuries showed me otherwise. I don't think I was a simpleton, but I was given wrong data and incorrect interpretation that colored my thinking and emotion.

The first step in my love affair with the Catholic Church wasn't someone arguing against my false ideas. In my case, it was when I listened to "The Lord's Supper", an audiotape by John Michael Talbot which is based on the sacred Liturgy of the Mass. That music and those songs moved my heart and mind like nothing else could. I heard him sing the prayer of confession with, "Now I see you, blessed Mary, sweet virgin--with all the angels and the saints who have come before. Now I ask you, *all* of my brothers and my sisters, to pray for me. Will you pray for me?" And the choir answers so powerfully, "We will pray unto the Lord, unto the Lord our God!" Right then and there I was opened up to the Communion of Saints and the intercession of Mary--something I would intellectually have opposed earlier.

I think reading C.S. Lewis removed most of my other anti-Catholic baggage. And learning that J.R.R. Tolkien was a Catholic (and helped convert Lewis to Christianity) helped too.

Pray for those who misunderstand, that God will give them grace to understand more deeply. And remember, there *is* truth mixed in with the misunderstandings. As Pope Pius XI said of devout protestants, "Rock mined from gold-bearing ore, itself contains gold."

Cordially,

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 08, 2005.

Dear Jen,
Our faith is the loving faith, because Christ gave us a new commandment: ''Love one another as I have loved you.'' You've had to live where love isn't offered the true followers of Jesus Christ; where the Church isn't welcome. Those who can't BE Christ's Church can only hate the true Church.

--Strange to realise; the self-ordained minister KNOWS he's phony! If anyone would like to argue this point with me, I can show you. It's on account of the preacher's insecurity and vulnerability that he makes heroic stands against the mother Church. In order for his own claim to the Spirit of God to ring true, he must plant seeds of doubt against her. He has to incriminate her; She challenges him and his livelihood! He will never admit that detail, but it's obvious. Only a very few protestant leaders pay lip service to our Pope. It helps their own self-esteem, I guess. Yet they all descend from a long line of Catholic-bashers, particularly English- speaking ones. We have to be patient with them today. Ignore the irritating ones, they no longer impress anyone. ''They know not what they do.''

Faithful Catholics, on the other hand, are responsible for every thought, word and deed. We DO obey Jesus' commandment: ''Love one another as I have loved you.'' If we allow ourselves the luxury of detesting them, love is defeated; anger wins over our hearts. We have to be careful. Just pray for the coming of Jesus and His glory. So will I, Jen. God bless you.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 09, 2005.

Jen,

It is certainly not possible that God wanted any other churches to exist, teaching a portion of truth mixed with untruth, and thereby drawing people away from the one true Church He personally founded for all mankind. If that were the case, Jesus would not have prayed to His Father, "that they may all be ONE; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be ONE in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me".(John 17:21) Jesus in this prayer states that the unity of His one true Church will serve as a sign to the whole world that His Church is genuine. The existence of other churches, mere human traditions lacking divine origin, is directly opposed to the stated will of God.

You stated that truth can be found in other churches; and that is correct as far as it goes. However, stating it that way disguises the reality of the matter. It isn't that God revealed some truth to other churches, but revealed the fullness of truth only to His own Church. Rather, God revealed the fullness of truth to all men through the one Church He founded for them. Other churches possess only partial truth not because God intentionally revealed less truth to them. God never wanted any people to have any less than the fullness of truth. But manmade churches rejected much of what God had revealed. That's why they have only partial truth. Not because God offered them less, but because they threw away large portions of what God revealed. This cannot be the will of God, who desired that unity in the fullness of truth would bind all Christians together as members of one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

The beauty of His Church is that all men can receive the fullness of truth to the extent of their personal capacity. Certainly not all people can fully appreciate the theological arguments of Aquinas. But that isn't the point. The fullness of truth includes, for example, the profound revealed truth that the Eucharist is literally the Body and Blood of our Savior. While most of us cannot appreciate that reality at the same level that the great Doctors of the Church and some of the holiest saints did, each of us can appreciate it at our own level. In my parish there are a couple of retarded adults who approach the Eucharist every sunday with great reverence. Do these Catholics possess the fullness of truth? Yes! They certainly do! They can't even pronounce "transubstantiation", much less explain it. They can't spell "Eucharist" or "Jesus" or even their own names. But they know that when they walk up that aisle, they are receiving Jesus. That is the fullness of truth which they as Catholics have available to them. They understand it at their own level, and in so doing they know more than a PhD in a church which has rejected that truth. None of the members of that church, no matter how intelligent or educated, share in the fullness of truth that these handicapped Catholic gentlemen share in.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 09, 2005.

thank you for your responses. i am ashamed that i called non-Catholic (partial) believers simpletons. well, that's not altogether true; part of me still believes it, but i feel i condemn myself to being a simpleton as well if i do nothing to help educate others and continue to learn myself.

i know to love others. i just don't know if i should despise the other church's teachings or to be grateful that at least they are teaching that Christ is the Son of God and to love your neighbor. unless i get some deeper insight into this i think i will continue to believe the latter just so long as they say nothing against the CC.

i have also wondered (just as michael wrote) if the separations are our just punishment due to the scandals of our Church. however, i don't think i can really buy that either as that would seem to say that Christ let satan break up His Church and i can only believe that Christ allowed the break up due to human free will.

-- jen (notnow@privacy.edu), January 09, 2005.

Yeah, Jen, human free will was certainly involved. Photius, Cardinal Humbert, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Leo X: lots of folks with big egos. I just guess that Satan has his fingers involved when loss of truth (heresy) or loss of love (schism) are involved....

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 10, 2005.

Hey Jen,

When I converted to Catholocism from evangelicalism I was shocked at the people who came out against me with a vengeance, and I was equally shocked at the ones who accepted it with joy. Go figure!

Anyway, just love them in their weakness. Remember, scripture says somewhere to be patient with the brother or sister who is weak!

Most of the time, the vehement dislike by Protestants towards Catholics is that they have been taught certain things since they were children and have never questioned their beliefs. Additionally, Protestantism itself was born out of a spirit of rebellion. That rebellion is seething in some Protestants and they don't even know it. Why? Who is the author of rebellion? Yep, Satan is the author of rebellion and division. And scripture says "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft." Ooooh, that's a powerful delusion they are under. So, have mercy, have pity, pray for them, and let God's grace work through you.

The writer above made a really good point: The Protestant minister's very existence as a Protestant minister hinges on his ability to demolish the Church to which he PROTESTS! -- No protest. . . no Protest-ant!

Gail

BTW, I'm going to have to get that John Michael Talbot CD mentioned above! Sounds awesome!

-- Gail (Rothfarms@socket.net), January 11, 2005.

It's really far more simple - deceptively simple. Ask this nut where the bible EXPLICITLY says "the pope is the anti-Christ".

Then watch as he claims it only INFERS it... aha! so he needs to INTERPRET scripture to pull that meaning out.

Well then bucko, two can play that game.

Read the only two places in scripture that deal with the term: anti- Christ (hint, both written by St John) and analyse how neither refers to Peter, or to a Church official. Both refer to someone who DENIES THAT THE CHRIST CAME IN THE FLESH. i.e. denies the incarnation of the Son of God.

Now no Pope has denied that God became man, hence, no Pope ever was anti-Christ.

People who pride themselves with being "scriptural" sure base alot of there dogmatic beliefs not on scripture but on a very poor interpretation (read: distortion) of scripture.

You might also ask him where the name of his particular church group can be found in the bible and where HE gets authority to be a teacher of scripture!

If He's a self-proclaimed pastor or made so by other self-proclaimed pastors, then he's UNBIBLICAL. No one in scripture deputized themselves. They all needed to receive mandates from the hands of the other apostles, including St.Paul.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), January 11, 2005.