The “Unholy See” of Roman
Catholicism
.gif){kind=small}
Buff
Scott, Jr.
Author - Columnist - Reformer
[With wife Rosita]
Crushing Blows
One of the most crushing blows against
Catholicism’s claim that Peter was the first pope is that Peter never once made
such a claim. He wrote two of the Bible’s letters, I Peter and II Peter, but in
neither does he identify himself as pope, pontiff, bishop, “Holy Father,” or
“Bishop of Rome.” Instead, he introduces himself as an apostle and servant, the
same titles and level of function as the other apostles.
Additionally, in Acts 2, on the birthday
of the Christian community, where Peter is recorded to have spoken extensively
about the risen Lord, not once does he refer to himself as pope or “Head of the
Church.” I find this rather baffling, for all popes, since the office was
formed in about the third or fourth century, have
identified themselves as pope or pontiff in all of their documents.
At this junction, we must inquire: Why
did Peter fail to interject himself as pope? The answer is obvious. He was
neither pope nor “Head of the Church.”
But here is another matter all Catholics
should seriously consider. The wise men who were led by God’s star to see the
child Jesus “bowed down and worshipped Him” (Matthew 2:10-12). If God intended
that Mary be venerated, why didn’t the wise men bow down and worship them
instead of only Him? Why was Mary not bowed down to? Even the Catholic
Bible has the wise men bowing down to Jesus only. Either the biblical testimony
is wrong and the Catholic Hierarchy is right or the Catholic Hierarchy is wrong
and the biblical evidence is right. It cannot be both ways.
Too, nowhere in scripture are we able to find one example of Mary, or even an image of Mary, being bowed down to
and/or venerated. This cultic practice was invented centuries later by the Roman
Catholic Hierarchy, not by God. It is of the earth, not of heaven.
Also
About halfway through this essay, you will
find, “Who Founded The Papacy—God Or The Forces Of
Evil”? This segment is perhaps the most significant. Please give it your
ear.
Preface
The bulk of this essay is being composed
during the closing hours on earth of Pope John Paul II (April 2, 2005). He died
six hours ago this day. Of all the popes who have
ruled over the Roman Catholic sect since her development in about A. D. 200,
Pope John Paul’s leadership was perhaps the most pleasing. Yet during his
tenure, he led a religious regiment that was—and is—fraught with maladjusted
ecclesiastics in the likes of pedophiles and homosexuals. What was supposed to
have been a “Holy See” under his leadership continued to be, as before, an army
of sexual perverts and a haven of rest for sensual Catholic leaders.
This is not to say that all ecclesiastics
within the “Unholy See” are or have been morally “impaired.” However, we are
obliged to face reality and concede that, overall, the
Papacy and her seed have a history of moral decadence.
Although Pope John Paul II seemed to have
been a moral leader, the Papacy’s history is riddled with corruption and
immorality. Her moral depravity, eccentric doctrines, and idolatrous rituals
began at an early age and continue to this day. With all due respect to my
Roman Catholic, friends and readers, if you will hear me out, I will confirm my
charges.
Overview
No, I do not harbor hatred in my heart for
those of the Catholic faith; or for those of the Protestant faith. I nurture a
strong dislike for the sectarian systems and partisan religious institutions
that have brainwashed and enslaved them. Most Catholic and Protestant
laypersons are free from pretense and wish only to honor God. The sectarian
institutions in which they are caught up have corrupted the way of the Lord and
dragged them along with them.
Even our Protestant President, shortly
after the Pope’s demise, made a big theological blunder when he said, “Pope John Paul II occupied
the throne of St. Peter.” He knew better, for his
Protestant upbringing taught him differently, but it seems he wanted to pacify
his Catholic audience.
For your information, I am neither
Protestant nor Catholic. I’m a free man in Messiah Jesus. No church, sect,
cult, denomination, pope, self-proclaimed “Reverend,” priest, preacher, pastor,
or minister has one bit of control over my life and my profession as a
reformer.
I was brought up in and rigidly indoctrinated
by one of the strictest of sects. But years ago, I laid down my sectarian arms
and defected the institutional church in favor of freedom in Jesus. Being free,
and not tethered to any of the numerous religious institutions, allows me to
“speak my piece” about and “shoot straight from the hip” at the sinister
blemishes and blotches of the religious establishment—both Protestant and
Catholic.
In this feature, my research and remarks
will largely be confined to the Catholic Hierarchy and her ecclesiastical
offspring. I have other features on this Web site that address the evils of
Protestantism. I would encourage you not to reach unwarranted conclusions about
my research pertaining to the rampant spiritual and moral deformities of Roman
Catholicism until you’ve heard me out.
Virtually all of my quotations will be
lifted from approved Catholic publications and books, which received the imprimatur
(Latin for “let it be printed”) of a Bishop, an Archbishop, or a Cardinal, for “No
book treating on religion (de rebus sacris)
can be published till it has been examined by the Bishop’s orders and received
his imprimatur” (Cath. Dic.,
Addis, 85).
From The Archives of Catholicism
During the week of August 3, 2003, The CBS
Evening News reported that a document from the archives of the “Holy See”
had surfaced, formulated in 1962 by a high-ranking Catholic Cardinal, which
directs all Bishops to conceal and keep secret all sex acts between Catholic
clerics and the children they sexually abuse, plus sex acts between the clergy
and brute animals.
In my research, I have found the
The data you are about to read will not
be found in newspapers or spread across everyone’s TV screen. Even the Fox
News channel, as newsworthy as they are, will not air the information which
follows, for their news organization appears to be Catholic oriented—very much
like The Des Moines (
·
Pope John XXIII was
worldly-minded, crafty, unscrupulous, and immoral (Catholic Ency., Vol. VIII, p. 434).
·
Pope Innocent VIII had
seven or eight illegitimate sons by different women. He sold Catholic offices
to the highest bidders (Catholic Ency., Vol.
VIII, pgs. 19-20).
·
Pope Alexander VI is
called the worst pope. He had eight illegitimate children by different women.
Four of his children were brought to Rome
·
Pope Sergius was father of Pope John XI by Morozia,
one of the worst women in history. He declared as valid the fourth marriage of
Leo VI, Greek Emperor (Catholic Ency., Vol.
XIII, p. 729).
·
Pope John X was made
Archbishop when he was five years of age (Catholic Ency.,
Vol. VIII, p. 425).
·
Pope John XI, son of
Pope Sergius III, was made pope by his mother at
twenty years of age (Catholic Ency., Vol.
VIII, p. 426 & De Montor, Vol. I, p. 247).
·
Pope John XVII had
three sons (Catholic Ency., Vol. VIII, p.
429).
·
Pope John XII is
described as “a coarse, immoral man.” He was stricken with paralysis while
committing the act of adultery (Catholic Ency.,
Vol. VIII, p. 426).
·
Pope Benedict IX was
the nephew of two preceding popes and one succeeding one, and was made pope at
12 years of age. “He was a disgrace to the chair of Peter” (Catholic Ency., Vol. IV, p. 17, and Vol. II, p. 429).
·
Pope Julius II was
wicked and had three illegitimate daughters and bribed the Cardinals for the
office (Catholic Ency., Vol. VIII, p. 562).
Numerous other popes, cardinals,
archbishops, bishops, and priests were wicked and immoral. History testifies to
this fact. Yet these same men claimed to be successors of Peter and
representatives of God. Instead, they have been disciples of evil who practiced
and promoted moral and spiritual corruption. Even in our generation, newscasts
are informing us about homosexual and pedophile priests and bishops and their
molestation and cover up of little boys.
“Holy” or “Unholy
Fathers”?
The Catholic Hierarchy has paid out billions
of dollars to settle cases of sexual molestation and homosexuality. How unholy
must these “Holy Fathers” (popes) become before they lose their “holiness”? How
unfaithful must these “Holy Fathers” become before “the faithful” become a
laughing stock of the nations? If this is what Jesus founded, I’ll settle for
atheism instead. But praise His Name, He did not
usher in a religious system that is and has been pregnant with all manner of
evil from its very genesis. But here is more data about the Catholic Papacy and
her practices and teachings:
·
It was not until after
the fifth century the Roman Church was completely organized. She did not have
an Archbishop until the end of the fourth century, and it was centuries later
before she had Cardinals and Popes (Catholic Ency.,
Vol. IX, p. 61, and Catholic Ency., Vol. IV,
p. 44). Yet this “Holy See” claims that her Popes and Cardinals can be traced
back to the first century A. D. and that Peter was the first Pope. This is
Catholicism against itself.
·
According to Ancient
Civilizations, (2002, Times Books), between 327-750 A. D., Rome , Antioch , and Alexandria
·
“The
religious use of incense was unknown in the primitive Church” (Cath. Dic., p.
437).
·
“In the Middle Ages
and in modern times various sects have repudiated infant baptism. It is difficult to give strict proof from Scripture in favor of it”
(Catholic Dic., p. 61).
·
Infants were not
baptized during the early years of the Christian community. “There is no
express mention of the baptizing of infants in the New Testament” (Question
Box, p. 243).
·
When the Catholic sect
began to teach the doctrine of original sin in the fourth and fifth centuries,
it became necessary to initiate infant baptism. “When in the fourth and fifth
centuries the doctrine of original sin and consequently the necessity of
baptism for all became better known, the practice of infant baptism progressed
rapidly” (Legislation on the Sacraments in the New Code of Canon Law, p.
72).
·
The use of “Holy
Water” and incense was borrowed from the pagans. “Moreover, the
use of holy water and incense was also no doubt suggested by similar customs
amongst pagans around them” (Catholic Ency.,
Vol. III, p. 76).
The Worship Of Images
And Popes
The Roman Catholic clergy and their followers
will tell you they do not bow down and pray to and worship images, statues, and
idols. But according to Catholic history, they do.
·
An image bowed its
head to St. John Gaulbert while he kneeled and
prayed before it (Butler’s Lives of the Saints, p. 247). Yet
Catholics deny they bow before and pray to images, statues, and idols.
·
Catholics deny
worshipping the pope. Their own history testifies against them. Kissing of the
pope’s foot was done as early as the eighth century and was done as an “act of
reverence by which all the faithful do honor him as the Vicar of Christ” (Catholic
Ency., Vol. XII, p 270).
A religious “act of reverence” is the same as
an act of worship. Yet Peter, who is alleged by Catholics to have been the
first pope, refused to allow Cornelius to bow down to and worship him. He told
Cornelius who bowed before him, “Stand up! I am only a man myself” (Acts
10:25-26). The Catholic Bible says, “Stand up! I’m not a god!” Catholic Popes,
then, must consider themselves God, as they expect others to bow to
them.
Every pope in history has expected others
to bow down to them, including Pope John Paul II—the exact opposite of
what the apostle Peter told Cornelius. Catholics and their clerics dishonor the
very Bible they claim to have written by rebelling against its teachings. They
do the same by bowing to and worshipping images, statues, and idols. Based on
this information, Catholicism resembles paganism more than it does
Christianity. But here’s more:
·
There were no statues
in Catholic meeting structures prior to A.D. 325. “To avoid even the appearance
of idolatry, no statues were placed in the early churches” (Short History of
the Catholic Church, p. 65). This translates into the truth that idolatry
is prevalent in Catholic Churches today, for statues and images abound.
·
“Though the veneration
of images was a gradual growth in the Church—owing to the prevalence of heathen
idolatry and the caution required to prevent their use from being misunderstood
by the pagans—sculptured memorials of the Blessed Mary are found as early as
the third century” (Practical Preaching for Priest and People, pgs.
89-90).
“Veneration”?
Isn’t that the same as “worship”? According to my dictionary, “veneration” is
worship. Yet Catholics say they don’t worship images and statues. Their
Catholic clerics disagree with them. But if this isn’t enough, they need to get
a Catholic Encyclopedia and turn to Vol. VII, p. 667, which reads:
“The whole tradition of venerating holy
images gradually and naturally developed.” Again, this was printed with the
imprimatur (Latin for “let it be printed”) of Catholic authorities.
What Does God Say?
At this point, we need to ask: What does God
say on the subject of erecting images and idols? I think you will find the
answer to this question interesting. Listen up.
“Therefore watch yourselves very carefully,
so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of
any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman” (Deut. 4:15-16).
Common sense informs us that God is not
talking about images and statues and sculptures of a political, historical, and
social kind. The statue of Abraham Lincoln in
God is speaking of the images and statues
and idols that are fashioned for religious purposes! When statues or
idols of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the apostles or anyone else
are made for religious purposes, spiritual corruption and idolatry are
the result. So says the God of creation. Within the confines of Catholicism,
and occasionally Protestantism, are found all of the above—plus more. If this
is not idolatry, I’ve lost my senses. “You shall not bow down to them or
worship them” (Gen.20:5).
I would ask my Catholic friends: What
part of this don’t you understand? Even the Catholic Bible has God
condemning images, statues, and idols that are made for religious purposes. Yet
Catholics violate the same scriptures they claim to support. So do many
Protestants.
Statues And Images vs.
Religious Paintings
But what about
religious paintings? If I were to
install a religious painting in a church structure for religious purposes,
as statues and images are installed in Catholic Churches
One of my Catholic friends said, “There
is no difference between what Catholics do and what Protestants do when they
(Protestants) get down upon their knees to pray.” There’s a world of
difference. Protestants bow and get down upon their knees to pray to a live
and active God. Catholics bow, cross themselves, and pray to a lifeless,
spiritless, and hollow piece of earthen material. Surely we can see the
difference.
Who Founded The
Papacy—God Or The Forces Of Evil?
Catholicism reeks of counterfeit miracles,
signs, and wonders. One of their statues bled, another bowed its head, a crucifix
talked, and the feet of another crucifix moved. All of this information is
found in authorized Catholic books and publications. The apostle Paul called
these wild claims “counterfeit miracles” (1 Thess.
2:9). And this brings me to an important part of this essay.
In 2 Thessalonians, chapter 2, verses
1-12, Paul addressed the “coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our being
gathered to him.” He admonished believers “not to become easily unsettled or alarmed
by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that
the day of the Lord has already come.”
Paul reminded them that that “day” will
not come until the rebellion (apostasy) occurs and the “man of lawlessness is
revealed.” This man will “oppose and exalt himself over everything that is
called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple,
proclaiming himself to be God.”
The system was already at work in Paul’s
time, but the mighty
Identifying This Apostate System
Needless to say, there was no apostate system
within the Christian movement until Catholicism began to germinate in about the
second or third century. There were local pockets of apostasy, but no general
apostasy until 2-3 hundred years later. It was at that time that Roman
Catholicism bloomed to stardom. These passages do not refer to Nero and the Judiazers, because this apostate system was to develop within
the redeemed community (Acts 20:29-30).
Note the marks of this apostate system,
as recorded in 2 Thessalonians, chapter 2, and then tell me which
ecclesiastical institution bears these marks.
·
He will exalt himself
over God.
·
He will set himself up
in God’s place.
·
He will claim to be
God.
·
He’ll do counterfeit
miracles and every sort of evil.
·
He’ll continue his
dirty work until the Lord comes again.
No apostate system in history bears these
marks except the Roman Papacy. Keep in mind there was no general apostasy from
the Christian faith, and no widespread abandonment of heaven’s new arrangement,
during the first century. This being the case, the counterfeit system Paul
described—Roman Catholicism—still exists for Jesus has not returned and
“overthrown it with the breath of his mouth and destroyed it by the splendor of
his coming” (v. 8).
If I have established my claim that the
“Holy See” and her popes compose the apostate system of which the Apostle Paul
prophesied, and that Satan is behind it all, the photo below is not off-center,
nor is it of the “bad taste” variety.
When the Roman Empire lost its grip upon the
nations, Catholicism began to blossom. From then on, its leaders sat in “God’s
temple [place], proclaiming [themselves] to be God” (v. 4). That’s why this
system’s popes expect to be called “Holy Father” or God himself. But here's
proof positive that Catholic popes consider themselves God:
“That which was spoken of Christ...‘Thou hast
subdued all things under His feet,’ may well seem verified in me. I have the
authority of the King of kings. I am all in all and above all, so that God, Himself and I, the Vicar of God, have but one consistory,
and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What therefore, can you make of
me but God?” (The Bull Sanctum, Nov. 18, 1302, found in the registers of
Boniface VIII in the Vatican archives, “Reg. Vatic.,” L, Fol. 387, The
Catholic Encyclopedia, © 1913 by the Encyclopedia Press, Inc.)
There you have it! Pope Boniface VIII
admitted he was God! All popes have occupied the same position since the popery
was established. That’s why they expect others to bow to them and kiss their
ring. So I ask all my Catholic friends: Who will you serve,
the God of creation or the god of the
We now know without any question the
“critter” the apostle Paul prophesied of when he said a religious system would
arise that would “exalt himself over everything that is called God or is
worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple [place], proclaiming
himself to be God” (2 Thess. 2:1-12). Again, there is
no religion that has ever existed that fits this description except the Roman
Papacy. About 300 years after the Christian community was ushered in, she rose her ugly head to deceive multitudes. She is still deceiving
multitudes.
Catholics need to realize the term “Holy
Father” is used only once in the scriptures, and it refers only to God the
Father (John 17:11). Not even Jesus was called Holy Father. To apply this holy
term to a mere man, such as the pope, is the worst kind of blasphemy. Again, no
religious system in history fits the description Paul gives except Catholicism.
Forbidding Marriage & Certain Foods
This is the same apostate system Paul said
would forbid marriage and order their followers to
abstain from certain foods. Listen to the great apostle Paul.
“The Spirit clearly says that in later
[future] times some will abandon the faith [apostatize] and follow deceiving
spirits and things taught by demons....They forbid people to marry and order
them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with
thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth” (1 Timothy 4:1-4)
Not long after Paul’s death the
“holiness” of an unmarried life began to be taught in the Christian community and
eventually resulted in a celibate clergy. The ascetic practice was later
extended to foods. These descriptions and symptoms of an apostasy apply only
to one religious order—the Catholic Papacy. And none of these practices
materialized until two to three centuries after Jesus and His apostles
ushered in the community of faith. It was at that time that an apostate system,
Catholicism, made her formal entrance—as per the historical record.
Speaking Clearly
Forgive me for being so blunt at this point,
but I am compelled to speak what is upon my heart. In truth, the Catholic sect
is half paganistic and half Judaistic.
Even the “smoke bomb” (as I call it) priests dangle around the Eucharist is paganistic. Other ritualistic practices are just as weird
and “out of this world.” These paganistic rituals do
not express heaven’s wishes or symbolize God’s will. They are foreign
innovations.
In A Nutshell
We will now consolidate everything up to this
point. I ask you to review the following items carefully for their
authenticity, based upon the data that has been presented.
·
The Roman Catholic
Church’s genesis cannot be traced back to the first century A. D.
·
As an apostate system,
she developed gradually and began to be seen as a visible entity in the second
and third centuries A. D.
·
She has a colorful
history—one that is pregnant with immorality, sexual perversions, child
molestations, and doctrinal corruptions.
·
She is half paganistic and half Judaistic,
and almost zero authentic, true Christianity.
·
She is the apostate
system the apostle Paul predicted would develop and promote all kinds of
counterfeit miracles, signs, and wonders.
·
There is not, nor has
ever been, any religious system in history that is pertinent to Paul’s
prophesies except Roman Catholicism.
·
There were no Popes,
Cardinals, or Archbishops in the first century A. D.
·
Peter is never
referred to as a pope. He could not have been a pope because the apostle Paul
“opposed him to his face” (Galatians 2:11-12).
·
If Peter was pope, he
should have been Paul’s superior. But it was Paul who opposed Peter. Even the
Catholic Bible has Paul opposing Peter.
·
The Catholic Church
and her leaders violate the same scriptures they profess to have written.
·
The new covenant
scriptures were composed by the apostles and first century believers, not
by Roman Catholics.
·
The scriptures were
composed two to three centuries prior to Catholicism’s birth.
A Different Sentiment
Below is a letter from one of my many
readers, which expresses a different sentiment. While I respect his sentiments,
I must disagree with his conclusions. Had past reformers delayed speaking until
their words might be publicly acceptable, there would have been no reformation.
“Buff, I just want to comment on the use of
your Reformation Rumblings column at this time when most of us are
mourning the loss of Pope John Paul II. I enjoy reading your Rumblings
column and will continue to do so, but you must try to step back and see how it
comes across at times. Just ease back at this time and let us work through the
next 24 hours as the pope is buried. Then you can get back to promoting your
reformation.”—Steve (London ,
England
My Reaction
Let me see if I can straighten this thing out
about the pope, his demise, and the extensive and elaborate news coverage that
accompanied everything. As to the pope’s departure, humanitarian decency is
expected from everyone—as is true with every world leader. But religiously, he
was not a Vicar of Jesus or His chosen vessel. The liberal Catholic media blew
this thing completely out of proportion.
Instead of covering the story in a normal
fashion, which would have been perfectly acceptable and expected, the
liberal media actually promoted, publicized, preached, and rigidly advanced
Catholicism. Even Charlie Gibson, Anchor man for Good morning America,
announced from the
If listeners and viewers were so gullible as to not be able
to see the difference between reporting the news and media
evangelism, then I fear for our country. It is on a course that will take
us back to the Dark Ages when the Roman Catholic’s “Holy See” dominated,
repressed, ruled, and manipulated a large segment of the then-known
world—during which time they persecuted and murdered hundreds of thousands of
non-Catholics who refused to bow their knees to the Papacy in Rome.
This is history—plain, concise history.
Go to your Public Library and research the history of the Roman Catholic Church
and your doubts will soon vanish. Why in heaven’s name do you think Martin
Luther fled for his life? The Roman Hierarchy wanted to kill him because he saw
the truth about the “Unholy See” and began to oppose it. As you know, Luther
became a Catholic defector.
When the day arrives that Catholicism
becomes the predominant religion in
Wake up,
The Catholic Controlled Media
Let me wrap this thing up by saying a few
words about a beloved Protestant evangelist and the media. When Billy Graham
passes on, you and I know the media will not give him and his history the
coverage they are giving the pope, in spite of the fact that he has influenced
millions more people through his long years than Pope John Paul did.
You know why? Because it seems the
liberal, major media are composed of Roman Catholics—Charles Gibson, Diane
Sawyer, Peter Jennings, Bill O’Reilly, Brian Williams, Shepard Smith, and a
host of others. The media is as lop-sided as lop-lop-sidedness can be. I will not
be drawn into their web, as many millions were, considering all of the gullible
people from all over the world who swept down upon
Well, one thing for certain: Roman
Catholicism received more free publicity over the past few days than she ever
has. And that’s precisely what she wanted. The Cardinals and other Catholic
ecclesiastics donned their best vestments for the occasion and flaunted their
ritualistic and paganistic religion all over the
globe—thanks to the liberal Catholic media.
C o n c l u s i o n
Just Who Are “The Faithful”?
News anchor persons Shepard Smith, Bill
O’Reilly, Peter Jennings, Jim Maceda, Dan Rather, Sharyl Attkisson, Brian Williams,
Bob Schieffer, Charlie Gibson, Diane Sawyer and
others make free usage of “the faithful” when they report the activities of
Catholics—such as: “The Holy Father addressed the faithful,” “The faithful
stood in the rain for hours to see the Holy Father,” and on and on the nonsense
rings in the ears of the gullible. It fitting, then, to inquire, Just who are “the faithful”?
“The faithful” are those of the Catholic
faith. Non-Catholics are not included. Only those whose allegiance has been
given the pope are faithful. Since Protestants have not nor will not hand over
their loyalty to the “Supreme Pontiff” of the “Holy See,” they are “the unfaithful.”
This exclusivistic attitude breeds
further animosity between Protestants and Catholics. I have never known a sect
or cult that did not parrot the following slogan, either directly or subtly:
