The Catholic Undertow

Mary Ann Collins, A Former Catholic Nun

Chapter 9

False Credentials

The Roman Catholic Church claims that it goes back to the time of Jesus Christ. However, as we have seen, it only came into being in 314 A.D. when Emperor Constantine and Bishop Silvester made an alliance.

There is evidence that Evangelical Christians, with beliefs similar to those of modern Baptists, were around in the second century, more than a hundred years before the Roman Catholic Church was created.For a fascinating and informative study of early Evangelicals, read Dr. Bill Jackson’s book, The Noble Army of “Heretics.”[1]

Malachi Martin was a Catholic priest, an eminent theologian, and a professor at the Vatican’s Pontifical Institute. He describes the wide variety of beliefs and practices within the early Church. He says that there was as much variety back then as there is between different denominations now.[2]

Catholic apologists portray Protestant churches as being unstable, constantly splitting into new denominations, and full of wide-spread disagreement. They contrast this with the Roman Catholic Church, which they portray as being solid and unified. They say that when people interpret the Bible for themselves, it results in chaos and division, as shown by the many Protestant denominations. They conclude that, therefore, Protestantism doesn’t work, and interpreting the Bible should only be done by the Catholic hierarchy.[3] In other words, Protestants should become Catholics.

However, the picture of Protestant division, and the picture of Catholic unity, are both greatly exaggerated. The “chaos” is an illusion. And the resulting conclusion is therefore not valid.

BASIC UNITY AMONG PROTESTANTS

There are some beliefs that define Christianity. These include things such as the Incarnation (Jesus Christ is truly God and truly man), the Atonement (Jesus Christ died for our salvation), the Resurrection of Jesus, the Second Coming of Jesus, and the authority of Scripture. These are not negotiable. Any person who does not believe them is not a Christian.

(There have always been people who claimed to be Christian, but who weren’t. The Apostle Paul called them “false brethren” in 2 Corinthians 11:26 and Galatians 2:4.)

Some things are negotiable. These include things such as the form of baptism, the kind of worship music, the form of church structure and organization, defining the relationship between free will and predestination, and beliefs about what will happen during the End Times. These are important issues. They can affect the quality of a person’s Christian life, but they do not determine whether or not a person is a Christian. These are areas in which Christians can agree to disagree.

Differences among genuine Protestants (as opposed to “false brethren”) occur in the second area, the negotiable things. These differences could be compared to flavors of ice cream. There are many kinds of ice cream, but they are all ice cream. They aren’t pie, or cake, or salad. In real life, people know the difference between eating ice cream and eating something else.

Some Catholic apologists say that there are 25,000 different Protestant denominations. Dr. Eric Svendsen has made an in-depth study of this claim. There is no valid foundation for it. His book, On This Slippery Rock, has a chapter about it, which you can read online. Dr. Svendsen also has an online article about diversity in Catholic beliefs.[4]

I looked up “churches” in the Yellow Pages of my local telephone directory. There were listings for Catholic churches, Orthodox churches, a few cults, and 73 varieties of Protestant churches. Some Protestant listings seemed to be variations of the same thing. For example, there were nine different listings for Baptist churches.

Let’s compare this to something in everyday life. There is a huge difference between cats and dogs and horses. Now, if you narrow it down to dogs, there are many different varieties. Within each variety, there are subgroups. For example, there are different kinds of collies and different kinds of poodles.

Catholic apologists act as if the differences in Protestant churches are like the major differences between cats and dogs and horses. In reality, they are like the differences between different kinds of dogs (variations in the same kind of thing.) Often, they are like the differences between different kinds of poodles, or different kinds of collies (small variations in things that are essentially the same).

WIDE DIVERSITY AMONG CATHOLICS

The appearance of unity among Catholics is misleading. There are actually major differences in theology and practice. However, no matter how much they disagree, they call themselves by the same name (Roman Catholic) and they say that the Pope is their leader. This gives a false impression of unity.

In spite of verbally saying that the Pope is their leader, there are Catholic priests and theologians who openly defy the Pope’s authority. Malachi Martin wrote about some of them in his book, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church.[5] There are also some radical feminist nuns who openly defy the Pope. (They are discussed later in this chapter.)

There are conservative Catholics who want to go back to the way that things were done before the Second Vatican Council. This includes having Mass said in Latin.

One conservative Catholic group believes that Pope John Paul II is not a valid pope, because he has promoted heresy (things that are contrary to Catholic doctrine that was “infallibly” declared by previous popes).[6]

There are Catholic theologians who teach liberation theology, which equates “salvation” with armed revolution. There are gun-toting Catholic priests who fight alongside communist guerrillas, working for communist revolution.[7] I first heard about them from a Latin American friend who personally witnessed the destruction and confusion that they have caused.

As we will see, some Catholic priests and nuns teach things that are clearly contrary to foundational Christian beliefs, such as the Atonement (Jesus died to save us from our sins). Yet they are still allowed to teach in the name of the Catholic Church, and to hold positions of influence and authority.

BIOETHICS

The Catholic Church has traditionally been a champion of the sanctity of life. However, some Catholic priests at a prestigious Catholic university are actively working to undermine the sanctity of human life, both theoretically and in practical ways.

Georgetown University is run by Jesuit priests. It is the home of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, which is headed by a Jesuit priest. Some of its faculty members are also Jesuit priests.

The Kennedy Institute of Ethics actively promotes abortion and euthanasia. It is also working to have “death” be redefined to include people in “irreversible” comas, so that doctors can get better quality organs for transplants. This is documented in the book, Culture of Death, by Wesley J. Smith.[8]

The Kennedy Institute of Ethics trains doctors, nurses, lawyers, legislators, teachers, and hospital administrators. Every summer, it gives an Intensive Bioethics Course, which is attended by people from around the world. It has branches in Asia and Europe. According to the woman I spoke with, it has the most comprehensive library of bioethics literature in the world.

NEW AGE TEACHINGS AND PRACTICES

The “New Age” is actually a resurgence of old paganism that has been “westernized” and dressed up in modern vocabulary. It denies foundational Christian doctrines and basic Christian morality. It is also contrary to the official teaching of the Catholic Church. However, in spite of this, there are Catholic priests and nuns who openly promote New Age beliefs and practices. This is an area in which there is a wide diversity of beliefs among Catholics.

I have an online article called “New Age Catholicism”. It has detailed, carefully documented information about this. Most of it comes from Catholic books and Catholic websites.[9] I am only giving a small sample of that information here.

There are some radical feminist nuns who participate in pagan rituals, and worship “the goddess.” [10] You can read about it in Donna Steichen’s book Ungodly Rage: The Hidden Face of Catholic Feminism. She is a Catholic journalist who spent 12 years getting first‑hand information in order to write this book.

Randy England is Catholic. He wrote The Unicorn in the Sanctuary: The Impact of the New Age on the Catholic Church. According to England, New Age concepts are taught at Catholic retreats, prayer workshops, and educational conferences.

Thomas Merton was a Trappist monk. He taught that every form of mystical experience is valid, no matter what its source. He praised Hinduism and Buddhism. Merton wanted to see the religions of the world become united.[11]

Some priests and nuns are teaching trusting Catholics to do Hindu meditation, to use visualization techniques, and to cultivate spirit guides. Randy England says that spirit guides are demons. Therefore, a person who cultivates spirit guides is actually invoking demons and inviting them to control his or her life.[12]

A Jesuit priest teaches priests, nuns, and lay Catholics to do Eastern meditation, using spirit guides. Priests and nuns teach prayer techniques that are not prayer in the Christian sense at all. Rather, they result in altered states of consciousness, and susceptibility to demonic influence. A Franciscan priest teaches Catholics to “manipulate” reality with the assistance of “spirit beings” (demons). He is especially influential with nuns. Catholics are taught that their “spirituality” will be improved by New Age techniques such as yoga, practices from Eastern religions, and occult meditation. Some Catholic schools no longer teach the Ten Commandments and foundational Christian doctrines, such as the Resurrection.[13]

Catholic authority figures are teaching beliefs and practices that are opposed to Catholic doctrine. They use the name of the Catholic Church, but they teach things that are opposed to Catholicism. In the world of business, this would be called false advertising, or fraud.

FIRE INSURANCE

Another area of diversity is beliefs about some old-fashioned, Catholic devotional practices. I will illustrate this with one example.

Can Catholics be sure of getting into Heaven if they wear a specific religious item, which shows devotion to Mary? Modern theologians and apologists will probably tell you: “Of course not!” However, as we will see, there are Catholics who believe that Mary will protect them from Hell if they follow her directions. There is an old saying that, if Jesus won’t let you into Heaven by the front door, then Mary can get you in through the back door.

According to tradition, on July 16, 1251, the Virgin Mary appeared to Saint Simon Stock, holding a Brown Scapular (two pieces of brown cloth attached by strings). She promised him that any person who dies wearing the scapular will not go to Hell. This promise is for people who belong to the religious order of the Carmelites, or who are associated with them. Catholics can be enrolled into the Carmelites by any Carmelite or authorized Catholic priest. In 1965, Pope Paul VI encouraged all Catholics to wear the Brown Scapular and pray the Rosary.[14]

Catholics who wear the Brown Scapular can also qualify for the “Sabbatine Privilege,” if they fulfill certain religious requirements. The “Sabbatine Privilege” is a promise that if they go to Purgatory, Mary will get their Purgatory time shortened.[15]

There are other Catholic devotional practices that have promises attached to them. They often involve the use of medals, rosaries, pictures, different kinds of scapulars, chaplets, and specific prayers. There is a “five-way medal” that consists of a cross, with medals at the end of each of the four arms. This enables people to wear a cross, and four different medals, at the same time, in a neat and orderly way. There are also “four-way medals.” (You can see them online.)[16]

I have known Catholics with a wide range of approaches to these devotional practices. Some considered them to be old-fashioned, or even superstitious. Others took them quite seriously. I knew one woman who was so devoted to praying the rosary that, even when she was carrying on a conversation, her rosary beads were going through her fingers.

You can go to online Catholic stores to see pictures of medals, chaplets, scapulars, statues, holy cards, bottles for holy water, and other religious objects. (The Notes give some website addresses.)[17] If you have never seen such things before, you may be surprised at what you will find.

CATHOLIC SEMINARIES

Roman Catholic seminaries have a wide diversity of teaching and practice. Some of them teach traditional Catholic doctrines, morality, and piety. However, many do not.

Michael S. Rose is a devout Catholic and a professional investigative reporter. He wrote the book, Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church. It is a plea for reform in Catholic seminaries.[18]

You can read the book’s Introduction online. You can also read book reviews, and feedback from seminarians and priests who read the book.[19] I encourage you to check this out for yourself.

Rose interviewed over 150 people. His book only shows the tip of the iceberg, because many men were afraid to let him write about their experiences. Others allowed him to write about them, but insisted that he change their name to protect them.

Chapter 5 (“The Heterodoxy Downer”) tells of seminary faculty members who denied doctrines that are absolutely foundational to Christianity, or taught things that are contrary to basic Christian doctrine and morals. Following are some things that were taught by faculty members in seminaries:

• The death of Jesus was not a sacrifice for our sins.
• The Atonement never happened.
• The Bible should not be taken seriously.
• God is a woman. (A nun taught this.)

One seminary taught Matthew Fox’s “creation-centered spirituality,” which denies the existence of sin, the Atonement, and other foundational Christian doctrines. It teaches many New Age beliefs. It says that Christianity needs to get rid of any beliefs that hinder it from being united with pagan religions. It promotes a one-world religion. Fox is a priest who works in close association with a witch, a Voodoo priestess, and a shaman.[20]

Some seminarians were required to engage in New Age practices, including using Ouija boards, tarot cards, and crystals.

One seminarian sued his seminary for false advertising. He said that it claimed to be Catholic, but it wasn’t.

The kind of doctrine and behavior described in Goodbye, Good Men is contrary to what is taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It demonstrates the wide diversity of belief and practice among modern Catholics.

THE PROBLEM OF MISTAKES

Should men and women interpret the Bible for themselves? They might make mistakes. This is a problem, because nobody is immune from making mistakes. But mistakes can be corrected. We serve a living God, who loves us. He is able to correct us if we get off track. Look at these prayers from the Bible:

“Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.” (Psalm 19:12)

“Order my steps in thy word: and let not any iniquity have dominion over me.” (Psalm 119:133)

“Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.” (Psalm 139:23-24)

Men and women who study the Bible and interpret it for themselves may sometimes make mistakes. But if people do not know the Bible well, and they are not used to understanding Scripture for themselves, then they will be easily persuaded by authority figures who teach unbiblical things. In order to test a teaching, people need something solid to compare it to.

Catholics are used to trusting priests and nuns, and accepting whatever they teach them. Catholics have not been taught how to compare teachings with what the Bible says, in order to test whether or not the teachings are Scriptural.

The possibility of making mistakes is something that we have to deal with all the time. For example, there are no perfect parents. Fathers and mothers make mistakes. But that doesn’t mean that children should be raised by “experts,” in institutions, instead of being raised at home by their parents. “Experts” make mistakes, too.

The learning process always involves the risk of making mistakes. Hebrews 5:14 says that it is “by reason of use” that people “have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” In other words, it takes time and practice to learn to discern things for ourselves. But God expects us to do it. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 says: “Prove [test] all things; hold fast that which is good.” In other words, test everything, and only keep what is good.

Romans 8:28 says that “all things work together for good to them that love God.” That includes our mistakes. God is big enough, and powerful enough, and loving enough to make even our mistakes work out for our good. He is able to keep us from falling. (Jude 1:24)

The Catholic approach says: “You might make a mistake. I’ll do your thinking for you.” This puts people at the mercy of priests and bishops, who make mistakes (as we all do). It becomes especially serious if a Pope makes a mistake and imposes his mistake on the entire Catholic Church.

The Protestant approach says: “Even if you do make a mistake, our God is able to turn it around and use it for good. Do your best, and with the guidance of the Bible and the Holy Spirit, you will be able to grow into a mature Christian.” This approach has a self-correcting procedure. If a church leader makes a doctrinal mistake, other people will check it against Scripture and point out the error. Therefore, Christians are not at the mercy of mistakes made by other people.

THE NUMBERS GAME

People tend to be impressed with size. “Bigger” and “better” often go together in advertising slogans. But is this how God sees things? Can we assume that the Roman Catholic Church must be right, because it is so big?

Goliath was huge, powerful, and a seasoned warrior. He was admired by the Philistines and feared by the Israelites. People were impressed with Goliath, but God wasn’t. God used a young shepherd named David to kill the giant. (1 Samuel 17:1-54)

When Gideon fought the Midianites, he started out with 32,000 men. That sounds like an impressive number, until you read that the Midianite soldiers were a multitude that filled the valley like a plague of locusts. But God told Gideon that he had too many men, and he was to send home every man who was afraid. Two-thirds of Gideon’s men left (22,000 out of 32,000). Then God disqualified all but 300 of the 10,000 men who remained. That left Gideon with only 300 men, which was only one percent of his original soldiers. (Judges 7:1-9)

In God’s eyes, which men were the faithful soldiers through whom He could do miracles? The 31,700? Or the 300 who defeated the Midianites? If you read what happened, you will see that God was with the one percent.

Could the difference be even greater than a hundred to one, and still have God be with the minority? Well, what if the 31,700 had decided that, because the 300 were different, they must be “heretics,” and therefore they should be killed?

Jesus spoke about a large crowd of people, who go the wrong way, to their destruction. He compared it with a small group of people, who go the right way, which leads to life. Jesus exhorted His listeners, saying:

“Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14)

If you look at the context in which Jesus said this, He was speaking to the multitudes in Israel. These were not pagans who served horrible demon “gods.” These were God’s chosen people, in covenant with Him, the people who had the Scriptures, the people to whom God had sent the prophets. And Jesus warned them that there was a broad, popular way, which most people would choose, that would lead to destruction.

Jesus spoke of Godly people who would be despised, and false people who would be widely accepted. He said:

“Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12)

“Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.” (Luke 6:26)

Obviously, being part of a small minority that is spoken against does not necessarily make people right. Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian leader, but he turned his church into a cult. He was dead wrong. He led his followers to destruction.

My point is that you cannot use numbers to decide whether or not religious leaders are right. We need to see if their teachings agree with Scripture. Our plumb line is the Bible, not the calculator.

CONCLUSION

Although Catholics have a common name, and acknowledge a common leader, there is actually a wide variety of beliefs and practices within Roman Catholicism. For a concrete example of this, compare Mother Teresa of Calcutta with radical feminist nuns who worship “the goddess” and participate in pagan rituals.

Although there are variations in Protestant churches, genuine Protestants (as opposed to “false brethren”) are in agreement about the foundational doctrines of Christianity. Their differences concern the negotiable areas that are mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, and the practical application of how to nurture, develop, and express our Christian life.

The Catholic Church claims nearly a billion members. This is huge, compared with the number of Protestants. However, size does not mean that Catholics are right. The Bible is our standard for discerning truth. Our yardstick is the Bible, not the calculator.

PRACTICAL APPLICATION

The Bible makes it very clear that there is no salvation apart from believing in Jesus Christ. However, many of the beliefs and practices described in this chapter deny that truth. They are attempts to find salvation without Jesus.

According to the Bible, there are only two kinds of people--children of God and children of the devil. (Matthew 5:9; Luke 20:36; John 8:44; John 11:52; Romans 8:16; Galatians 3:26; 1 John 3:10) Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation. The Bible says:

“I [Jesus] am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26)

“There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:16-18)

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3:36)

In the Garden of Gesthemane, Jesus prayed to the Father, begging His Father to spare Him from having to drink the cup of suffering. (Matthew 26:39; 26:42) If there was some other way to save us, don’t you think that the Father would have told Jesus? Don’t you think that Jesus and the Father both intensely wanted to find some other way to save us?

But there was no other way. In order to save us, Jesus had to go through the indescribable agony of being mocked, humiliated, abandoned, betrayed, tortured, and killed. And He loves us so much that He was willing to do it for us.

If there was some other way, then why did Jesus die for us? If being sincere, or doing good things, or meditation, or wearing the Brown Scapular, or “creation spirituality,” or prayer techniques, or devotion to Mary, or anything else could do the job--then Jesus didn’t need to die for us.

Nobody in his right mind would go through that kind of suffering if it wasn’t absolutely necessary. And no loving father would allow his son to go through it if it could be avoided.

There is no other way. That’s why Jesus died for us.