Answering a Got Questions Video, Part 1

What is the origin of the Roman Catholic Church?
Got Questions Ministries | 18.X.2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCdrGWurdoQ
Les commentaires ont été désactivés pour cette vidéo. (So, I do not enable direct clicking to this video).

"Even a brief reading reveals" - universal negatives like the following? Taken from a still at 0:36

No mention (in NT) of:

• the papacy
• worship or adoration of Mary
• praying to saints
• apostolic succession
• the ordinances of the church functioning as sacraments
• infant baptism
• confession of sin to a priest
• purgatory
• indulgences
• or the equal authority of church traditions and Scripture.

Now, generally speaking, I don't think an extensive corpus should be analysed for universal negatives like "no mention of" by any brief reading.

You may of course argue, these things are searched for and none of them mentioned by that exact term.



You cannot find "papacy" in any single verse in a Catholic Bible, but in this version, neither can you find "Jeremiah".

Computers are not all knowing superminds, they process mindless information (like letters in a book are mindless in and of themselves) and do it very quickly, but with no circumspection either as to synonyms or as to spelling variants.

It is very easy to find Jeremias in the same Bible. But only if you search for "Jeremias" with that spelling. The computer could not find "Jeremias" when "told to" search "Jeremiah", so why should we expect it to find "papacy" under synonymous terms not at all same word, but just same meaning?

So, even an allscanning but non circumspect computer search like the one I did for papacy (the search engine is obviously not searching the Challoner comments, otherwise it would have been easy to find papacy under one of them) will not reveal the concept you pretend to look for if you don't use the right terms for it.

The fact is, one of the instances is a strawman against Catholicism, namely the second one, we do not worship the Blessed Virgin with adoration, we give her an honour clearly inferior to that given God, namely honour due to saints more to Her than to any other (in Greek it is called hyperdulia, while adoration is called latria).

So, the list as actually given contains one fraudulent claim against the Catholic Church, namely the claim it practises Mariolatria. We have actually condemned sects that do that, like some sectarians have considered Her a Fourth person of the Trinity or Incarnation of the Holy Ghost, we have condemned that. We would also condemn Mariolatria of the Hindoo type, where some Hindoos would consider the Blessed Virgin a manifestation of a Hindoo goddess.

Now, for the other claims, I hope to prove that there is indeed a mention. I will also give such for a corrected version of this claim.

I do not claim each mention is as direct as to be incontrovertible on the ground of "sola scriptura", but I do not take the ground of sola scriptura.

And this brings us to the last item, for which there is a pretty direct mention.

I

the papacy

mention

Matthew 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

Unlike previous verse, where some quibble on who is "rock", this is no place to doubt on who receives the keys of the kingdom from Christ.

Acts 1:15 In those days Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren, said: (now the number of persons together was about an hundred and twenty:)

Had Jesus explicitly said there would be a replacement for Judas? No. St. Peter is exposing two places of psalms:

"Let their habitation be made desolate: and let there be none to dwell in their tabernacles."
[Psalms 68:26]

"[May his days be few:] and his bishopric let another take."
[Psalms 108:8]

The first might indicate Judas should NOT have a successor, but St. Peter evidently considers that part as fulfilled about Haceldama instead, and only the second argues he SHOULD have one. St. Peter decides which is operative to decide, and the men obey.

II

adoration hyperdulia of Mary

mention

Genesis 3:15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Luke 1:41b - 43 And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

St Mary had obviously had some kind of initial if not misgiving at least fear and hesitation about blessed art thou among women. (Luke 1:28b) This designation had been used twice previously in a very warlike connection. Obviously she had not cut off the head of any human Holophernes or hammered a nail through that of any human Sisera.

When Elisabeth says Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb She knew from Genesis 1:15 what kind of enemy she would crush the or even had crushed the head of. The one whose seed Her Son would crush the head of. Or will, since Apocalypse 19:20 has not yet happened, as we generally suppose.

But after that, St Elisabeth reacts to the Blessed Virgin like King David to the Ark:

II Kings 6:9 And David was afraid of the Lord that day, saying: How shall the ark of the Lord come to me?

Noted by Dave Armstrong:

New Catholic Register : Amazing Parallels Between Mary and the Ark of the Covenant
Dave Armstrong | Feb. 13, 2018
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstrong/amazing-parallels-between-mary-and-the-ark-of-the-covenant

III

praying to saints

mention

Here I will have to analyse the concept, and then I'll search each part.

When I sit down in a car (not mine, I have no driver's licence), make a sign of the cross, and say "dear St Christopher, pray for us" - what am I doing and what am I counting on?

I am adressing a man who died as a martyr. Some have even denied historicity of his existence. I am trusting the Catholic Church, Roman martyrology entry for him, on July 25th, just below St James:

In Lycia sancti Christophori Martyris, qui, sub Decio, virgis ferreis attritus, et e flammae aestuantis incendio superna Christi virtute servatus, ad ultimum, sagittarum ictibus confossus, capitis obtruncatione martyrium complevit.

Trusting that this happened is however not the issue.

The issue is, this means he already died. I am adressing a departed man, a man who has died.

I then count on God bringing him to me (probably in some version of Narnian time, since presumably otherwise St Christopher would be at some pains to keep up with all adressing him every day) or on God telling his soul in heaven "Hans Georg wants your prayers for himself and this driver (and other passengers), what do you say on the matter?", hoping that St Christopher will feel our car journey should be safe, and hoping that Christopher will pray and God will hear his prayer for the car journey.

First of all, have I "asked the truth" or asked for a service? Is St Christopher "dead" or "living in Christ"?

I answer, I have asked a service of someone who, even if he died is not dead, but eternally lives in Christ. Why is this important? Well, if I had "asked the truth of the dead" I would be running afoul of ...

"Nor charmer, nor any one that consulteth pythonic spirits, or fortune tellers, or that seeketh the truth from the dead."
[Deuteronomy 18:11]

So, what I am seeking from St Christopher is not "the truth" but his prayers, and he is not "dead" but living in Christ.

"Jesus said to her: I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, although he be dead, shall live:"
[John 11:25]

Also, I am not entering into a seance, I am performing a prayer, in the sense I count on God to make the contact which will remain invisible to me in this life, ordinarily speaking.

Now, I mentioned two versions on how St. Christopher could know of my prayer.

God, the Son, made Man and made Sacrifice for my sins, could be taking him along:

"These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were purchased from among men, the firstfruits to God and to the Lamb:"
[Apocalypse (Revelation) 14:4]

Or, St. Christopher could be watching me from Heaven. Like OT saints were already in the days of St Paul:

Hebrew 11:36 - 12:1 And others had trial of mockeries and stripes, moreover also of bands and prisons. They were stoned, they were cut asunder, they were tempted, they were put to death by the sword, they wandered about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being in want, distressed, afflicted: Of whom the world was not worthy; wandering in deserts, in mountains, and in dens, and in caves of the earth. And all these being approved by the testimony of faith, received not the promise; God providing some better thing for us, that they should not be perfected without us. And therefore we also having so great a cloud of witnesses over our head, laying aside every weight and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us

So, wait, what does "over our head" mean? Watching us from heaven?

This would seem they are both watching and praying for us:

Apocalypse 6:9-11 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held. And they cried with a loud voice, saying: How long, O Lord (holy and true) dost thou not judge and revenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given to every one of them one; and it was said to them, that they should rest for a little time, till their fellow servants, and their brethren, who are to be slain, even as they, should be filled up

So, I obviously count on this "rest a little while" to not be actual sleep, or slumber, but peacefully waiting and watching. As St Christopher actually was slain ... now souls under the heavenly altar, which is Christ Himself, clearly reflects the practise of relics under altars of stone, as the Catholic Church still does. If without necessity you are celebrating the Eucharist NOT on an altar containing relics of martyrs, while the Mass may still be valid, you are committing a sacrilege.

IV

apostolic succession

mention

I already mentioned the succession of Judas, where St Matthias replaced him as Apostle, as one of the twelve.

But in more general terms too, the Apostles definitely had successors, and have so to the end of time:

Matthew 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

How is this promise truly fulfilled?

• a) None of the eleven nor St Matthias died? False.
• b) The world was already consumed while at least some of them were still alive, year 70? Has been argued, but I have seen no match to all of the details in Apocalypse 19 and 20 about how this is to happen.
• c) It refers to them being alive in Christ after dying? While this also fulfils the promise, this would seem out of place as primary fulfilment, especially since in Heaven they are not directly engaged in teaching the nations, though they certainly pray for those who do.
• d) It is not fulfilled - if so, Christianity is false.
• e) It is fulfilled by ... tadah ... Apostolic Succession. When speaking to the eleven, He was speaking about themselves but including their successors.

Btw, just so you don't imagine it is simply a succession of all the faithful, look at verses 16 to 18:

And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.

Obviously, a few days later St Peter is adressing 120 faithful, we know from St Paul there had been an earlier occasion with 500 ones (most of whom are still alive). So, the eleven (perhaps adding up top thirteen with disciples of Emmaus, see Mark 16) are definitely NOT all of the faithful.

On the contrary, the eleven definitely are clergy taken out from among the faithful:

Luke 6:12-16 And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and he passed the whole night in the prayer of God. And when day was come, he called unto him his disciples; and he chose twelve of them (whom also he named apostles). Simon, whom he surnamed Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon who is called Zelotes, And Jude, the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.

Luke 9:1 Then calling together the twelve apostles, he gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.

"And after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come."
[Luke 10:1]

Meaning, there is clergy lower than the twelve (or on Ascension day eleven) and still above the general number of the faithful.

Also, the fides ex auditu passage ... my godfather's godfather converted bc of that one ...

Romans 10:14-15 How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things!

This means, sent as or by apostles:

"He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you."
[John 20:21]

So, Jesus sent the Apostles, as such, are others sent by them?

Acts 13:1-5 Now there were in the church which was at Antioch, prophets and doctors, among whom was Barnabas, and Simon who was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manahen, who was the foster brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. And as they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work whereunto I have taken them. Then they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away. So they being sent by the Holy Ghost, went to Seleucia: and from thence they sailed to Cyprus. And when they were come to Salamina, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. And they had John also in the ministry.

It would seem, as one priest converted from among Anglicans had to say "prophets and doctors" were a name for certain types of bishops who were not themselves apostles. Obviously ordained and consecrated by these directly or with intermediates. While St Paul was chosen as Apostle, i e eyewitness of the resurrection, by Christ only, on the Road to Damascus, it is here that he received the episcopal powers which the other earlier Apostles had so far not given him.

But if Apostles and there successors are supposed to consecrate successors, we might expect some kind of mention of this?

I Tim 3:1-10 A faithful saying: if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, Not given to wine, no striker, but modest, not quarrelsome, not covetous, but One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity. But if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God? Not a neophyte: lest being puffed up with pride, he fall into the judgment of the devil. Moreover he must have a good testimony of them who are without: lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. Deacons in like manner chaste, not double tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre: Holding the mystery of faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved: and so let them minister, having no crime.

While St Paul was chosen for Apostolic ministry before being a neophyte, as we saw, he was not quickly admitted to the service - but when he was, his mission by the Church counted as mission by the Holy Ghost.

One might object that next verse mentions women - and these are not clergy. One can answer that St Paul was either talking of widows and virgins, what we now refer to as nuns, or of wives and female relatives already there, not just daughters but also mothers or sisters or aunts or nieces living in same household. Or even of both.

Later on in the chapter:

These things I write to thee, hoping that I shall come to thee shortly. But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

• a) St Paul was hoping soon to instruct St Timothy orally, with more detail, hence importance of Church traditions, but ...
• b) giving a very brief written instruction just in case, and this instruction related to the "house of God ... pillar and ground of the truth".

So, in other words, a community not having a series like this going back to the Apostles is not having the pillar and ground of truth.

And, here I take a rest, and publish this first, since otherwise the page would have difficulties uploading and it is probably already some job scrolling it, so I recommend writing the articles out.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. John Cantius
20.X.2018

PS. Today's saint is probaly for the idea of Jeszcze Polska nie zginela, but unlike Poland, the Church cannot be absent "from the map" a single day. Matthew 28:20 does not allow for partitioning and three foreign or even one foreign occupation over the whole Church, nor does the last sentence in Matthew 16:18./HGL