Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the church of Rome's erroneous assertion that other Christian communities are defective or not true churches and Roman Catholicism is the only path to salvation. However, the church of Rome is a false church practicing false Christianity. It is illiberal in the Isaiah sense. It has never brought forth. It practices classism. It is not a vehicle for bringing in the Christian Commons. It has served worldly Empire ever since the time of Constantine.
Benedict's reassertions freaked out the ecumenicists.
Of course, ecumenism or ecumenicalism is an error when it serves the purpose of misdirection away from the strait gate and narrow way of small-c communism. The pope for instance lives in gaudy splendor while millions starve. The popes have always been afraid to speak truth. They have always only spoken half-truths. They have never taught the message of Jesus Christ.
The bishop of Rome was co-opted by Constantine who then dictated his terms to that church and then all churches or else he'd have their heads. Rather than offer their necks rather than disavowing real Christianity, they caved into temptation and have been living the lazy fleshly life ever since.
Benedict also recently reinstituted the Latin Mass. The Catholic traditionalists were happy.
Do they think God is impressed by mass in Latin while his lambs and sheep go hungry and thirsty in body and soul? What a waste of emphasis!
The reassertion states "Christ 'established here on earth' only one church."
Correct, and it wasn't the Roman church.
The document goes into apostolic succession.
Succession is spiritual, not by mere matter of fleshy proximity. Real apostolic succession was broken by Constantine and those who caved into him.
The church of Rome has its doctrine of primacy. They base it upon the assertion that Peter was handpicked by Jesus to head the Church.
However, we see in the Acts of the Apostles that Peter himself did not have primacy over James for instance. He didn't have it over Paul who rebuked Peter to his face.
The popes have failed to heed the words of Jesus Christ.
And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all. Mark 9:35
Joseph Ratzinger is not a man for the poor. No pope ever has been.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)