Gairney Bridge

With all of the fervor of the recent visit to America by the Bishop of Rome (I’m currently boycotting the use of the “P” word), we sometimes lose sight of the historical nature of the conflict between Protestant and Roman Catholic theology. In a few words, it is deeply disturbing to me to see so-called Protestants, supposed children of the Reformation (Protestants being those who “protested” Rome’s distortions of the gospel), fawning over Ratzinger/Benedict. Yes, I know Vatican II soften many of the hard edges of the RCC, but the last time I checked the anathemas of Trent are also still on the books.

A while back I posted some of the “old school” measures taken by Benedict that hearken back Rome’s meat-and-potato days (see here). My buddy Benjamin, the Backwoods Presbyterian, has done a great service by pointing back to the Reformers and their immediate heirs on why they considered the Bishop of Rome to be “The“Antichrist (see here and here ; for another similar article, summarizing these views, see here). I shy away from using the “A” word on Biblical grounds (John refers to many antichrists in his day [1 John 2:18], and the defining characteristics are that they deny the Father and the Son [1 John 2:22] and do not acknowledge that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh [2 John 7]; since these antichrists were many, since they initially existed in John’s day, and since the Bishop of Rome, to the best of my knowledge, is not a Gnostic, there are some problems with an immediate comparison), and I realize that this differs with Chapter 25, paragraph 6 of the Westminster Confession of Faith (but this section has also been removed from the ARP’s Confession of Faith, which is simply a tweaked WCF; see here for the various changes in American versions of the WCF). However, I also fully acknowledge that the Church of Rome proclaims what can only be termed a false gospel (but, then again, so do many liberal Protestant churches). While I fully admit that there are Christians in the Church of Rome (a good friend of mine was converted upon the faithfully testimony of a nun, for instance; however, she is also no longer RC), just as there are faithful Christians still remaining in various liberal Protestant churches, this does not change the fact that there are enormous problems with what the RCC confesses and what the Bishop of Rome teaches.

Consider this recent news story, for instance. Indulgences?!? Again?!? Here are a few quotes from the story:

• “An indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due for sins committed. A plenary indulgence is the remission of all punishment.”
• “Cardinal Stafford said the indulgence can also be applied to the souls of the faithful in purgatory.”
• “Cardinal Stafford said that to obtain the special indulgence one must fulfill the normal requirements set by the church for all plenary indulgences; these include the person going to confession within a reasonably short period of time, receiving the Eucharist and praying for the intentions of the pope, all in a spirit of total detachment from the attraction of sin.”
• “Those visiting a holy place dedicated to Our Lady of Lourdes in another part of the world Feb. 2-11 also should pray the Lord’s Prayer, the creed and the special jubilee prayer or a prayer to Mary.”

Same verse, same as the first.