Tag Archives: pope

False teachers

Reason #96

4 Comments

You don’t need any new reasons to leave the Catholic Church.  Luther’s 95 theses covered everything you need to know.  But the Catholics’ unrepentant homosexual priest situation is yet another reason to leave.  Not only youths but adults were serially abused throughout the world, leaders deliberately covered it up and continue to do so, and many leaders live in open relationships of sodomy.  This has happened with the knowledge of Bishops and the Pope and their distractions are pathetic. (Look! We’ve discovered weather! The climate changes, so we have to deal with that right now! We don’t time to talk about that pesky homosexual infestation in the church!)

The media is schizophrenic when it comes to Catholics.  Usually they reflexively bash them, but this vast network of homosexual priests has little, if anything, to do with pedophilia.  Therefore the media is ignoring the story.

This article, The Catholic Church Is Breaking Apart. Here’s Why., is good news.  It outlines the situation well, though you have to ignore some of the pro-Catholic assumptions of the author (e.g., it still isn’t “Peter’s throne.). Ironically, as open as he is about the homosexual situation he seems tone-deaf as to how it undermines so many assumptions that Catholics have about Popes, doctrine, etc.  But his premise is sound: The Catholics have the biggest problem they’ve had in 500 years.  Their only hope is to hide and deflect, which they have been doing along with their media accomplices. The Pope is indistinguishable from any other pro-LGBTQX / pro-Communist “Christian” Leftist.

During his time on Peter’s throne, Francis has worked to dismantle many orthodox positions in an attempt to radically reorient the church toward—by total coincidence—the long-held preferences of those four radical cardinals. For instance: He has criticized Catholics for being “obsessed” with abortion, gay marriage, and contraception. He has derided Catholic women for having too many children and behaving “like rabbits.” He sent a papal blessing to the lesbian author of the Italian version of Heather Has Two Mommies—a tract for children extolling the virtues of same-sex parenting.

All of this is in addition to his bizarre insistence that “never has the use of violence brought peace in its wake” and that the benefits of free-market growth have “never been confirmed by the facts.” (In case people didn’t get the message, Francis posed for pictures with a crucifix made of a hammer and a sickle.) Yet as bad as free market capitalism is, the pope insists “the most serious of the evils that afflict the world these days are youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old.” Which is a . . . curious view of our fallen world.

. . .

At the same time, the math is pitiless: According to our best data, a mammoth CDC study done in 2013, 1.6 percent of Americans identify as gay. Yet 80 percent of the abuse cases involve priests abusing other males. You can include all the caveats you like—maybe there’s selection bias, maybe the percentage of homosexuals in the priesthood is many times higher than 1.6 percent, maybe not all male-on-male abuse is perpetrated by men who would identify as gay. But the correlation is still high enough that it is impossible to ignore.

And despite the fact that everyone wants to insist that abuse by priests has nothing to do with homosexuality, it’s strange that the people who most want to open the church sacramentally to homosexuality are the ones strenuously ignoring the abuse. Priests such as Cardinal Cupich are certainly acting like they think there’s a linkage and that if the church were to crack down on abuse and the bishops who enabled it, it would somehow endanger their project.

I still hold that some in the Catholic church are saved because they have somehow heard of the real Jesus and have repented and believe in him (and of course there are countless people in Protestant churches who aren’t really saved – I know, because I used to be one of them!). Yet even those Catholics are still living under an exhausting works-based salvation theology and can’t enjoy the assurance of salvation that Christianity provides.

I encourage people to get out. The Reformation happened for a reason – actually, 95 of them – and the Catholics still get vitally important doctrines like justification completely wrong. And the Mary-worship, indulgences, purgatory, praying to the dead, the lie that you need the church to interpret the Bible for you and should’t read it for yourself, etc. all mock Christ and the cross.  Their recently unmasked pro-perversion doctrines are just another reason to go.

If Protestants were smarter they’d leverage this and make a major outreach to Catholics.

P.S. If any Catholics are wounded by this, remember that your faith explicitly says that Protestants are anathema because of our views.  I’m not offended if you think that, but I am amused if you didn’t know it and then take offense that I’d criticize Catholicism.

P.S.S. This is just a side note, but if/when Francis comes out as gay I won’t be a bit surprised.

P.S.S.S. There are also huge problems within Protestantism, of course, which is why I spend most of my time on them (I rarely write about Catholics). But those problems aren’t with Protestantism per se, but with bad doctrines and behavior within the church.

Christian worldview

Don’t miss the upside about the Pope’s Socialism and climate nonsense

2 Comments

First, remember how fun it is to remind the “Christian” Left that their new Socialist BFF is still anti-abortion and pro-real marriage.  They love the Pope for agreeing with their anti-biblical economic policies, but ask them to convince you that they’d care what the Pope said about science if he disagreed with them.  Or have them ask the Pope how he feels about killing unwanted children then selling their body parts.

But there’s more!  And it is much more important.  His extremism will cause many Catholics to reconsider their religious views.  Example: Politics: So, the Catholic Church has a major problem right now. …And the Pope is only a part of it | Best of Cain.

The Pope is as well-versed on basic economic concepts and climate change as he is on the foundations for his role and on the solas.  While the Catholic organization is pretty explicit on not letting people take a cafeteria approach to its beliefs, lots of people look the other way on the Papal infallibility thing and other doctrines they don’t care for.  But this guy is getting so far off the rails that more people will reconsider everything he stands for.

It is sad how he and his fellow Leftists want to pull up the drawbridge on the poor and not let them have electricity and other things that would dramatically improve their standard of living.  But it is for the good of the poor, right?

Bible

Purgatory and indulgences: Still around. Still anti-biblical.

10 Comments

I wish this was a parody: Vatican offers ‘time off purgatory’ to followers of Pope Francis tweets.

Many people think that the false teachings about purgatory* and indulgences have gone away, but the Catholic religion still adheres to them.  The distinctions below should appear to be arbitrary to you, because anti-biblical teachings like these are man-made and inevitably loosely defined.

I note that they are anti-biblical (the opposite of the Bible) and not just non-biblical (not in the Bible) because they are works-based and teach that what Jesus did on the cross was helpful but not sufficient.  Any implication that Jesus’ death and resurrection weren’t enough to save you is a sure sign of a false teaching.  If you say you need Jesus plus your works, that is false.  If you say you don’t need Jesus, or that He is just an option, that is false.

In its latest attempt to keep up with the times the Vatican has married one of its oldest traditions to the world of social media by offering “indulgences” to followers of Pope Francis’ tweets.

The church’s granted indulgences reduce the time Catholics believe they will have to spend in purgatory after they have confessed and been absolved of their sins.

The remissions got a bad name in the Middle Ages because unscrupulous churchmen sold them for large sums of money. But now indulgences are being applied to

the 21st century.

They should have had a bad name for mocking the cross and being false teachings.  The idea that they were only bad when peddled by unscrupulous churchmen charged too much just added to the falsehood.

But a senior Vatican official warned web-surfing Catholics that indulgences still required a dose of old-fashioned faith, and that paradise was not just a few mouse clicks away.

“You can’t obtain indulgences like getting a coffee from a vending machine,” Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli, head of the pontifical council for social communication, told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera.

Indulgences these days are granted to those who carry out certain tasks – such as climbing the Sacred Steps, in Rome (reportedly brought from Pontius Pilate’s house after Jesus scaled them before his crucifixion), a feat that earns believers seven years off purgatory.

That sounds a lot closer to getting a coffee from the vending machine than it does to the Bible.

But attendance at events such as the Catholic World Youth Day, in Rio de Janeiro, a week-long event starting on 22 July, can also win an indulgence.

Mindful of the faithful who cannot afford to fly to Brazil, the Vatican’s sacred apostolic penitentiary, a court which handles the forgiveness of sins, has also extended the privilege to those following the “rites and pious exercises” of the event on television, radio and through social media.

“That includes following Twitter,” said a source at the penitentiary, referring to Pope Francis’ Twitter account, which has gathered seven million followers. “But you must be following the events live. It is not as if you can get an indulgence by chatting on the internet.”

Yeah, what kind of silly process do you think this is?!  I had to double check and ensure I wasn’t quoting from The Onion.

. . .

“What really counts is that the tweets the Pope sends from Brazil or the photos of the Catholic World Youth Day that go up on Pinterest produce authentic spiritual fruit in the hearts of everyone,” said Celli.

If the spiritual fruit is authentic then the first thing they will do is leave the Catholic religion.  I know many people who go to Catholic churches who sound like Protestants in their theology.  They don’t hold to the false teachings but go out of habit.  Or their organizations may be led by “bad Catholics” (by which I mean good) who never teach things like this.  I wish they would move to churches that are God-honoring.

I realize that it may be initially frustrating to hear about such things, but I encourage people to consider what a great tool it is to educate Catholics about what their religion really teaches.  So many of them think that the church doesn’t really teach about indulgences, purgatory, Marianism, praying to the dead, etc.  When they slip up and show how they still hold to these doctrines we should help them publicize it.

Like I always say, the Reformation happened for a reason.  Actually, 95 of them.  And they haven’t changed.

* pur·ga·to·ry (in the belief of Roman Catholics and others) a condition or place in which the souls of those dying penitent are purified from venial sins, or undergo the temporal punishment that, after the guilt of mortal sin has been remitted, still remains to be endured by the sinner.

Bible, False teachers

What was he thinking?

41 Comments

Update: From the “this is awkward” category, the Vatican clarified that not only do they believe that atheists go to Hell, but so does anyone outside the Catholic church.

—

So the Pope is taking a Second look at letting atheists into heaven?

“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

The Pope made one of two mistakes. The first is really bad, the second is off-the-charts bad.

1. He was very sloppy in his use of “redeemed.” If he didn’t mean it in terms of eternal salvation, then he mislead a lot of people.  He was basically channeling Major Burns from the M*A*S*H TV show and saying, “It’s nice to be nice to the nice.”  It could logically lead to a conversation like this:

Pope: You, my atheist friend, have been redeemed by God with the blood of Christ!  Let’s do good works together.

Atheist: Huh?  You mean that even though I don’t trust in Jesus and don’t even think God exists that I’ll spend eternity in Heaven with him with no punishment for my alleged sins?

Pope: Oh, no, my bad — you are still going to spend eternity in Hell as punishment for your sins.  But in the mean time we’ll do a few good deeds together and your torment in Hell will be slightly less unpleasant!  When I said “redeemed by the blood of Christ” I meant _________. [Sorry, this blogger can’t even think of a pretend way to finish that sentence.]

2. He ignores that the New Testament has over 100 passages noting that Jesus is the only way to salvation (it isn’t just John 14:6). That isn’t what makes it true, of course. His resurrection does that. But it does mean to claim to be a Christian means that you should hold that view. Anything else would be silly.

I don’t expect good theology from him (OK, more specifically, I expect bad theology from him), but I do like his pro-life and pro-family views.  But once again he fails on the salvation issue.

The Reformation happened for a reason. Actually, 95 of them. And they haven’t changed.

—-

Update: More from the Pope’s speech.

“They complain,” the Pope said in his homily, because they say, “If he is not one of us, he cannot do good. If he is not of our party, he cannot do good.” And Jesus corrects them: “Do not hinder him, he says, let him do good.” The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of ​​possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good.” “This was wrong . . . Jesus broadens the horizon.” Pope Francis said, “The root of this possibility of doing good – that we all have – is in creation”

He appears to be twisting the passage about people casting out demons in Jesus’ name (Luke 9). But that wasn’t some random good deed that atheists might do (even though it wouldn’t be truly good if done out of self-interest). They were <em>casting out demons in Jesus’ name</em>. He implies that atheists are regularly doing that!  I shouldn’t be surprised when people like him can’t get the simplest passages right.

And then there is this:

Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible.

We are not all “children of God.” John 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.

And the article wraps up with him praying to a dead person.  In an odd way, I appreciate that the guy who is allegedly God’s #1 man here on earth is so clearly and profoundly anti-biblical.  It removes any doubt about core Catholic doctrines being false — at least for those who actually read the Bible.

Christian worldview

Dear Catholics who voted for Obama,

29 Comments

Does this bother you at all?

  • The Democrats consider anyone who holds Catholic views on marriage to be “haters.”  The Pope himself would not be eligible to speak at Obama’s inauguration.
  • The official platform of the Democrats is to have unrestricted abortions funded by taxpayers.  They aren’t pro-choice, they are pro-abortion.
  • They are forcing your organizations to pay for birth control, including abortifacient drugs, and to permit same-sex couples to adopt children.  They would rather your hospitals and adoption clinics close down rather than relent on these issues.

If you vote for Democrats you should quit calling yourself Catholic.  They strenuously oppose your organization on the key social and moral issues of the day, and are working overtime to take away your religious freedoms.

Note: There is a reason I’m not Catholic — actually, 95 of them — but I have always appreciated their pro-family, pro-life views, and I know many “bad Catholics” who hold to the Protestant (i.e., biblical) view of justification.

Roundup

Roundup

Leave a comment

Friendly reminder: Everyone will spend eternity somewhere.

—

Do gun-free zones prevent multiple-victim public shootings? – No!  This common sense, people.  You just need to stop and think like a bad guy for about 10 seconds.  Just because people are criminals doesn’t mean they don’t process things through a risk / reward filter. 

“Contrary to public perception, Western Europe, most of whose countries have much tougher gun laws than the United States, has experienced many of the worst multiple-victim public shootings. Particularly telling, all the multiple-victim public shootings in Western Europe have occurred in places where civilians are not permitted to carry guns. The same is true in the United States: All the public shootings in which more than three people have been killed have occurred in places where civilians may not legally bring guns.”

The article has a list of MVPSs in Europe. They all occur in gun-free zones, where guns are prohibited by law.

When a government bans guns, the only people who have guns are criminals. And they know that there is no one to stop them when they open fire. That is why violent crime more than doubled in the 4 year period after the UK banned handguns.

—

Free audio Bibles – you can download the New Testament from the Faith Comes by Hearing site or Podcast it via iTunes. 

—

Thorough yet concise overview of Pope stuff — “several examples of how many popes acquired their office, the behavior of popes, and the unbiblical teachings of popes . . . the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope . . . questions to ask about the papacy”

—

How to find a church – Christians need to be in church.  There are remarkably few valid excuses not to do so.  If you can’t find a good church, then find the one that is the least bad and try to improve it.

—

Study says kids of Lesbians are “healthy” and have “fewer behavior problems” – Well, gee, if a study says it, then it must be true and we should make that the new societal ideal.  Or perhaps there are some other things you should know about the study . . .

—

Abortion activist complains, "There aren’t enough of us" – of course, the sad and morbidly ironic reply is, “Maybe if you hadn’t pushed for all those abortions . . .”

—

The sound of ice cream trucks went from being joy-inducing to really annoying 37 years ago.  This would make them more interesting. 

—

 

Digg This
Christian - misc.

Guest post: A Catholic says, “Thank God for the Protestants and Evangelicals.”

Leave a comment

While I always contend that the Reformation happened for good reasons and they are still valid, I thoroughly enjoy LCB’s diplomatic and well-thought out comments. Therefore, I’m publishing this guest post of his. Dive in!

—–

It’s been a rough few weeks to be Catholic. Really rough. “I wonder what’s going on with the Eastern Orthodox these days” type of rough. For many devout American Catholics (and I don’t mean the Nancy Pelosi type of devout) it’s been brutal. Worse than the “Long Lent” of 2002 (when the Boston Globe set off the scandal here in the States, as the period is often called in Catholic-shorthand). In this Easter season, for the first time in my life, I am thanking God for the Protestants and Evangelicals in general. Not just particular Protestants and Evangelicals (who I have been thankful for in the past), but the entire groups. I know a number of other Catholics who are feeling the same.

Central to the agony of the last few weeks has been a series of unrelenting and baseless attacks upon Pope Ratzinger. The media, unable to connect the man to wrongdoing, has instead adopted a policy of radical slander, ad hominem attacks, innuendo, and even outright lies. Run a false headline on the front page one day, print a small retraction of the entire story the next day on page Z-99, in 6 point font. Run a quote from a plantiff’s lawyer as if it were unbiased, only mention 30 paragraphs later (or not at all) that the man has made millions on sexual abuse lawsuits, and is currently trying to permit the Vatican to be sued in US court. I could go on. And on. And on.

The worst part has not been the Catholic Church’s liberal branch (AKA “The 5th Column”) who have gleefully joined in on the assaults. We’ve been living with them being the main quoted Catholic “balance” in AP and NYTs articles for two generations now. The worst part is that the media has been so brazen in attacking Catholicism that Catholics who are trying to defend against the attacks can’t manage to get any coverage at all. Bishops and Cardinals speak out to correct mistakes, no coverage. Bill Donahue screams something into a microphone (seriously, I like him, but he needs to learn about the “inside voice” rule), no coverage. Catholic intellectuals release detailed counter-points, no coverage or publication.

The pall of silence and non-coverage of authentic Catholic responses to the attacks has is so bad that the Catholic League has resorted to taking out a full page ad in the NYTs in order to present its rebuttal to the NYTs own coverage. Let that sink in for a minute. The only way Catholics can now reply to the NYTs hatchet jobs is by spending $50,000+ for a full page ad.

But there are voices that the MSM will listen to, and will still publish, and is even writing articles about. These voices are the Protestants and Evangelicals who are speaking out in defense of truth, who recognize that this assault is about much more than abuse that occured in Wisconsin in the 1950s. It’s about an attempt to silence a voice that speaks with moral authority. In the midst of this constant media assault the Protestants and Evangelicals are arriving on the field of battle (since, in the end, it remains we Christians vs. the World and its prince) even as our own 5th column is turning on us like never before. And the Protestants and Evangelicals are saying (quite loudly at times) “It is wrong to smear the good name of a good man who has a decades long reputation of trying to fight this problem. Smearing people with lies is wrong, and what you in the press are doing is wrong.”

It hasn’t just been in the media, either, where my fellow brethren in Christ have shown their dedication to Truth above all else. It’s been in a multitude of personal interactions and local sermons where good men and women have spoken out against what they see to be wrong. Where my voice is ignorned (“Oh you’re just a Catholic of course you’ll say that”) the voice of my brethren has been heard and they have given a mighty witness to Christ in the process.

Now UN Judges are calling for war crimes charges to be brought against Pope Ratzinger. Dawkins and Hitchens are funding a legal team to try and have a warrant issued against Pope Ratzinger before his visit to Britain… and they may likely find a sympathetic judge who will do just that. The charges? “Crimes against humanity” and a great many Anglicans are rising up in defense of the Pope (that’s a sentence one doesn’t type every day) on this matter.

So, for the first time in my life, I am saying “Thank God for the Protestants and Evangelicals.” Not just particular individuals, but for the groups entirely. The witness of standing up for what is right is a mighty witness for Christ– especially in this Easter season. It’s been a long road since October 1517. The attacks and persecutions against the whole of Christianity have consistantly brought the brethren closer together in Roman Times, under the Ottomans, during the French Revolution, in the Soviet Union, and in modern China. In times and places of great trial Christians with extreme doctrinal divides have united in defending Truth and presenting the Gospel of Christ and His saving love to the world in ways that have radically changed history.

It is my sincere prayer that, just as Christ’s suffering on His Most Holy Cross brought about mankind’s unity with one another (in the Body of Christ, the Church) and with God the Father in and through the power of the Holy Spirit, that so too may our current suffering bring about greater unity among we separated brethren and bring about the conversion and salvation of many souls throughout the world. Especially those that seek to attack Christ and the Church.

Politics

Unconscionable

Leave a comment

Pedophiles should be in prison for life or dead.  Their recidivism rate is extremely high and they claim many victims, often ruining them for life.  The Pope and the Catholic church are rightly under fire again for more pedophilia cover-ups.

People in leadership who hide pedophiles should be in jail as well, and fired from their jobs at a minimum.

While much sexual abuse involves straight males and young girls, the Catholic church’s issues do not follow that pattern:

In a statement, read out by Arhbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi at a meeting of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva on 22 September 2009, the Holy See stated that the majority of Catholic clergy who had committed acts of sexual abuse against under 18 year olds should not be viewed as paedophiles, but as homosexuals who are attracted to sex with adolescent males. The statement said that rather than paedophilia, “it would be more correct to speak of ephebophilia; being a homosexual attraction to adolescent males” ……. “Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90% belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17.”

The move angered many gay rights organisations, who claimed it was an attempt by the Vatican to redefine the Church’s past problems with paedophilia as problems with homosexuality.

Play all the word games you like, but that fact is that the majority of the abuse involved adult males having sex with young males.  This shows the danger of political correctness.

This is not just a Catholic problem, of course.  Abuse occurs all over.

And as the Hillbuzz gang points out, the MSM never tells the masses about Islamic pedophilia:

First of all, before we say anything negative about the Catholic Church, we would like to point out the simple fact the MSM does not, ever, report on the millions of young boys who are raped on a daily basis in the Middle East, in the name of Islam, by Muslims who consider sex with young boys to be their right.  All of us here studied Islam in college, and no study of Islam is complete without a look at what Muslim men do to young boys.  “Women are for children, boys are for pleasure” is a very common phrase in Islam. Harems of young boys have things done to them no priest has ever done, in any country.  But, in terms of calling Islam out on its many sins, the MSM issues just the sound of crickets.

They also had some interesting anecdotes about suspected gay kids being pushed into the priesthood.

Christian worldview

Guest post: Is science more infallible than the Pope?

Leave a comment

From Neil: Some of the many terrific commenters here don’t have blogs of their own, so I welcome guest posts from time to time to get other views and generate discussion.    Welcome to a guest post by LCB.  Usual caveat — if I disagree with something in a guest post and care enough to write about it, I’ll do so in the comments section. 

———-

Those that don’t know I am a staunch Roman Catholic generally figure it out pretty quickly, between citing the Popes and Aquinas, to my extensive posts on the importance of liturgy no matter the denomination. I even have a Catholic bumper sticker. My Catholicism stands out.

In the last few days Neil has had some great posts on Liberal Christianity, the mis-interpretation of Scripture, and proselytization. This is a topic that Neil and I have chatter about quite seriously in the comment sections. An excellent book on the topic is J. Gresham Machen’s “Christianity and Liberalism.” Almost a century old, it remains a seminal work. Its essential premise is this: Liberal Christians use the same words as Orthodox Christians, but they use them in fundamentally different ways and assign to them fundamentally different meanings. Neil has previously linked to an excellent podcast on this book (and I hope he inserts it here, I don’t have the link). [From Neil: Couldn’t find the link.  I recall that it was from an Apologetics.com Podcast.]

In our conversations I have expressed (and I suspect that Neil agrees) that Roman Catholicism has had an epic internal struggle against liberal Christianity. Though we have strong disagreements on the topic of Roman Catholicism, this is something that almost all persons can agree upon. At one point we even had an anti-modernism/liberalism oath that people were required to take. This struggle is similar to the struggle that the oldline/mainline/deadline Protestant branches have had. It has played out on a worldwide stage, and the most formidable Catholic minds of the last century have been involved in our internal debate. This debate has raged across Protestantism too. From Schweitzer’s conversion and African journey to Bonhoffer’s final prayer on the floor of Flossenburg, the best of men have risked everything over this.

It’s also important that we consider the stakes of the battle with Liberal Christianity, no matter the denomination. Hundreds of millions of souls, billions of souls, are at stake. Western Civilization itself, and it’s ability to stand against Islam on theological and philosophical grounds without surrendering, is at stake. That’s kind of a big deal.

Yet, the battle is really a 3-way battle. Orthodox Christianity vs. Liberal Christianity allied closely with Secular Liberalism.

We Orthodox Christians (broadly speaking, those that will assert that Jesus is Lord and that we depend on Him alone for salvation) make various claims of infallibility. All agree upon the infallibility of Scripture. We Catholics make some additional claims, but the best known is a claim that “The Pope is Infallible.” Those that have studied apologetics or Catholicism even a bit know that this is a limited claim. If the Pope says “Sure is a nice day” it doesn’t mean the day is nice. If he says “Cats are the best pets” we know he certainly is in grave error on that matter.

The classic definition is “Infallible on matters of faith and morals.” And even then, only when he is trying to be infallible does it count. The classic way that a Pope exercises this authority is when he speaks on behalf of all the world’s Bishops (he is “first among equals” of the Bishops, based on the principle that Peter was “First among equals” of the Apostles). To claim infallibility is a serious claim. When the Pope has clarified, on behalf of all the world’s Bishops and through the teaching authority of the Church, that abortion is always and everywhere wrong, he is saying “It is impossible for me to be wrong on this matter because this truth is revealed by God through the Apostles since the earliest days of the Church.” You may agree or disagree partially or fully, but all can certainly agree that to make such a claim of infallibility is a tremendously serious matter that should be evaluated with equal seriousness.

At this juncture one may think, “What is he leading up to? Why all this laying of groundwork to talk about science?” And those are excellent questions. I have laid this groundwork so as to make clear what the ally of Liberal Christianity– Secular Liberalism– is claiming. Liberal Christianity often uses the claims of its ally to bolster their own case.

They are claiming the infallibility of science. That science can not be in error and is a source of revealed truth.

Consider, if you will, the way a Catholic (like myself) would present an argument from authority on certain religious matters. “XYZ is true.” And you ask, “Why is that? How do you know” and I reply with firmness “Because the POPE says so.” It’s not a circular argument, I’m not proving what I assume. Rather, I’m simply assuming the Pope has the authority to make such claims. Arguments like this are a special type of “argument from authority” because I am claiming that this authority can never, under any circumstances be wrong. An argument from Scripture works the same way, especially among those that describe themselves as Bible Believing Christians. “XYZ is true” “Why is that” “Because SCRIPTURE says so.”

But, whereas Scripture is written, the Pope is a man. What is written in Scripture will stay written in Scripture and won’t be changing anytime ever. The Pope can speak anew. And once he clarifies what is in Sacred Tradition, it can’t be un-clarified.

Now consider how the Liberal Christian and the Secular Liberal attacks with a similar argument from authority. “XYZ is true” “Why is that?” “Because SCIENCE says so. There is a SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS.”

That is an astounding claim. When the Catholic Church holds an ecumenical council (which, when it chooses to be infallible, is also infallible) it must at least take an actual vote of all the Bishops in attendance. And those Bishops (rather you agree or not) are at least claiming to have a special ability by virtue of their ordination as Bishops to teach on matters of faith and morals. I know of no scientist that claims holding a Ph.D provides a special grace endowed by God to avoid error when teaching.

Yet, taken as a collective, SCIENCE is invoked as if it is infallible. And even more astonishingly, a field that has nothing to do with faith and morals claims infallibility of matters of faith and morals. The Pope’s claim is at least understandable (in that it makes sense that a Pope might claim such authority in matters of faith and morals, but not in geography or math). But what claim does science have over faith and morals? How can a field unrelated to faith and morals possess expertise, infallible expertise, on those matters? It strains logic and reason past the breaking point.

Let’s be clear here. The Liberal Christians and Secular Liberals are claiming a greater level of infallibility than the Pope. Whereas the Pope may speak anew only on matters of faith and morals, Science is claiming the ability to speak anew on all matters of all sorts, unrestricted by expertise or competence in the area.

Even the Catholic claims of infallibility are tempered and restrained. They are restrained by Scripture (and can not be contrary to Scripture), they are restrained by Sacred Tradition, they are restrained by Ecumenical Councils, and they are restrained by the many Bishops. But the Liberal Christians and Secular Liberals are claiming absolutely unrestrained infallibility in the name of Science. Whereas the Catholic teachings are bound by previous teachings, the Liberal Christians and Secular Liberals are free to overturn any of their previous teachings at any time in favor of new teachings. How? Science.

Why is abortion acceptable? Science. Why can Scripture be ignored? Science. Why don’t miracles happen? Science says so. Even though data doesn’t exist, how do we know the globe is warming? Science. How is the globe warming and cooling at the same time? Science. How is contradictory evidence for the same thing always proof of the pre-determined conclusion? Science. Why is it wrong to proselytize? Science. Why is morality whatever we want it to be? Science.

When we consider this matter carefully, we even see who the targets of this attack are. The targets are anyone who makes truth claims that aren’t based on Holy Science. Orthodox Christianity? Unacceptable. Liberal Christianity where everything is just a metaphor and Holy Science is allowed to be the final source of all truth? Acceptable. Philosophy? Stupid and ignorant, unless it places Science first. Political conservativism that allows people to worship something other than science? Trash, ignorant people that ignore science. Secular Liberal politics? Scientifically acceptable, since science is placed first.

Consider some of the most common criticisms of Orthodox Christianity in general. “They are anti-Science.” And what was a common criticism against Bush? “He was anti-Science.” Catholicism- “They are against abortion, and thus against science. They even persecuted a scientist!” Those that make moral claims about homosexuality? “Science disagrees.” When a serious reply is pressed on these matters what are some of the common replies? “You are just a flat earther” “You probably think the earth is the center of the solar system” “What next, demons cause sickness instead of germs?” Even in the face of a challenge to their premise, they simply return and reassert the premise louder and add more ridicule.

And if you continue to dare challenge Holy Science, you are promptly informed “Well, you aren’t a scientist” (often by a non-Scientist). Unless you are repeating the claims of scientists, you aren’t even allowed to have an opinion on a matter that Scientists have decided the truth on. Non-adherents are not permitted to question the truth, adherants are not permitted to question the truth. The truth is unchanging, until Scientists change it, and then the new truth remains unquestionable.

Notice the constant appeal– to Holy Science. And what is the insult– “You are ignorant of science!” Why science? because science is more infallible than the Pope.