The History of Catholic Heresies

I had so often been left to believe that Catholics had invented new doctrines throughout the Middle Ages. This is an eye opening article that explains and cites the earliest references to various Catholic doctrines.

Young, Evangelical, and Catholic: How Quickly Catholic Heresy Took Over the Church (Immediately) [Updated]

Some quotes from: St. Elizabeth Ann Seton

"The gate of heaven is very low; only the humble can enter it."

“I will go peaceably and firmly to the Catholic Church: for if Faith is so important to our salvation, I will seek it where true Faith first began, seek it among those who received it from God Himself.”

________________
from Wikipedia
Elizabeth Ann Bayley Seton, S.C., (August 28, 1774 – January 4, 1821) was the first native-born citizen of the United States to be canonized by the Roman Catholic Church (September 14, 1975). She established the first Catholic school in the nation, at Emmitsburg, Maryland, where she founded the first American congregation of Religious Sisters, the Sisters of Charity.

From Pope Benedict XVI Lenten Message 2013:

"Concerning the relationship between faith and works of charity, there is a passage in the Letter to the Ephesians which provides perhaps the best account of the link between the two: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God; not because of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (2:8-10). It can be seen here that the entire redemptive initiative comes from God, from his grace, from his forgiveness received in faith; but this initiative, far from limiting our freedom and our responsibility, is actually what makes them authentic and directs them towards works of charity. These are not primarily the result of human effort, in which to take pride, but they are born of faith and they flow from the grace that God gives in abundance. Faith without works is like a tree without fruit: the two virtues imply one another. Lent invites us, through the traditional practices of the Christian life, to nourish our faith by careful and extended listening to the word of God and by receiving the sacraments, and at the same time to grow in charity and in love for God and neighbor, not least through the specific practices of fasting, penance and almsgiving."

"Jesus Isn't a Cracker"

Recently, I overheard a critique of the ancient Catholic doctrine of the actual corporeal presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

"Jesus isn't a cracker" were the simple but weighty words that were uttered. This bitingly brief comment caused me to ponder upon some of the other absurdly ridiculous doctrines that Catholics claim are so essential to the Christian Faith.

1) God spoke the entire Universe into being with His Word (CCC 338 Nothing exists that does not owe its existence to God the Creator. The world began when God's word drew it out of nothingness; all existent beings, all of nature, and all human history are rooted in this primordial event, the very genesis by which the world was constituted and time begun.)

2) a Virgin gave birth to a child...even though everyone knows this is scientifically impossible.

3) God became man, born to that Virgin as a baby in a manger....yet even as an ancient Roman critic of Christianity once asked "Why would God need to become man?  To see what we are doing down here? doesn't He already know everything?"

4) This God-man walked the earth, performed many miracles including healings, walking on water and multiplying a few loaves of bread to feed thousands of people, twice.....again, all of these things are scientifically impossible, what absurdity to believe such a thing!...right?

5) Then, this same man bore the sins of all of humanity by offering up his own body on a Roman cross as a pleasing sacrifice to God His Father...

6) On top of that, Catholics actually believe that this man who was now dead, lay in a tomb for three days but then rose from the dead, was seen by and spoke with many. Then ascended to heaven and now sits at the right hand of His Father.

I could go on....but let's revisit the doctrine of Jesus being truly present in the bread and wine (called transubstantiation by Roman Catholics theologians). Why would anyone believe in such an unlikely thing...in fact the Gospel of John in the sixth chapter tells us that most of the disciples of Jesus left him over this very teaching....

John 6:53-58 ESV
So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever."

These are perplexingly controversial words. If Jesus had wanted his disciples to understand that he was only speaking symbolically, would he have said "my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink" and would he have not spoken up and clarified to his confused disciples (as he usually does in the Gospel narratives) before they walked away from him in the end of chapter six?

But, if he was actually saying that he would one day give us his body to truly eaten by those he loved (as the Israelites were instructed to eat the entire Passover Lamb) how could he have said this any clearer than he does in this passage (several times emphasizing that his disciples needed to eat (literally chew in the Greek) his body and drink his bloody which is true food and true drink and all of the Last Supper narratives (in Matthew, Mark, Luke and 1 Corinthians)

Luke 22:19-20 ESV
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.

It is often said by critics that these verses show that he was saying that by us doing it in remembrance of him...that it is only symbolic. But that is not a logical conclusion for he says that "This" bread is the very same as the body that is being given up for us (on Calvary). It is OK for this doctrine to be "a hard saying" for it was from the first time Christ taught it as we see in John six. We are not told to completely understand it but to "eat" and "drink" often, remembering his everlasting sacrifice.

Is it really so absurd to believe that the Creator of the Universe who spoke the everything that is out of nothingness, after being born to a Virgin, he walked on earth dwelling among men, multiplied bread and fish to feed the multitudes, healed lepers, the lame, the blind and raised the dead, etc...could make himself fully present in his body, blood and divinity to His beloved Church to feed her, nourish her and cause her to grow in His Grace. For this is what the earliest Church Fathers believed ( http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html ) and has been believed in all of faithful Christianity (until the 1500's) and is still believed by and attested to in the ancient liturgies of both Roman and Eastern Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, who broke from Rome in the 11th century, the Oriental Orthodox (Coptic, Ethiopian, Indian, Armenian, etc) who broke from Rome in the 5th century. Despite the rampant rumors among various Protestants, this was NOT an invention by the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages. No, it was an essential doctrine from the beginning. See how clearly St. Ignatius of Antioch writes of this doctrine, who to the Smyreans wrote in c.100 AD:

"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."

*The website cited above as many similar quotes from the Early Church.

I think it is significant to remember that until the rise of Protestant theology the largest denial of this doctrine came from the Docetist and Gnostics who denied that Christ had actually come in the flesh but only seemed to appear in the flesh. For what would the Spiritual Holy God, they said, have to do with this sinful material world?

Anyhow, this blog will explore this huge issue (and other theological issues) in various ways. But let me be clear in my conclusion....

Yes, of course, it is a very absurd belief to hold that Jesus IS a "cracker" (more correctly He, in his full body, blood and divinity, are physically present in the forms of bread and wine in the Eucharist.) But I think if any truth seeking Christian considers the matter honestly they will admit that it is an infinitely much more absurd thing to believe that the Most Holy God, creator of heaven and earth became man and walked among us sinners.

Yes, absurd...but true.

1 Corinthians 1:27 ESV
But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;