The Council of Trent and its support of paganism.

[historyb]

Informative. People need to know this.

Why do people need to know lies?

 

[Paul Christensen]

I can't read great big long involved paragraphs, sorry.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Why do people need to know lies?

So that they are not deceived. Paul and John instructs us to test all things and every spirit. We need to know what we are testing and comparing them with Scripture.

 

[historyb]

So that they are not deceived. Paul and John instructs us to test all things and every spirit. We need to know what we are testing and comparing them with Scripture.

Evangelicals are extremely deceived

 

[Paul Christensen]

Evangelicals are extremely deceived

That's merely a generalisation that bears no substantive proof. It is the same as my mother sitting in her lounge and saying, "Everyone in the town believes [such and such], suggesting that the whole population of the town believes what she believes.

Just the same as me saying that the Episcopal (Anglican) church is just another form of Roman Catholicism. (something I don't actually believe but using it just as an example of generalisation, or in other words: "darkening counsel without knowledge"

 

[historyb]

That's merely a generalisation that bears no substantive proof.

So is this whole thread. Actually this whole thread is nothing but veiled hate as many threads here

 

[Paul Christensen]

So is this whole thread. Actually this whole thread is nothing but veiled hate as many threads here

I don't think so. Just because we have our disagreements it doesn't mean that we hate each other. The gay community can slag off Christians to the max as being homophobic, but as soon as a Christian quotes the Scripture to show that the gay lifestyle is sin, they accuse Christians of using hate speech. When I was at university in my 30s, I witnessed absolute hate speech against Christians; yet none from the Christian community there.

I think a lot of this hate speech stuff is accentuated to shut Christians up from preaching the gospel.

 

[quietthinker]

My Bishop says of those who hate the Holy Eucharist that they may be Christians but they are starving themselves to death.

It appears your bishop is deceiving you.

 

[quietthinker]

Why do people need to know lies?

These are no lies neither is it hate speech historyb. It is the Great Babylon being exposed and the more so as the consumption draws closer.

 

[aspen]

Your cut and paste skills are quite stunning Hobie.....

do you think yourself, as well?

 

[Hobie]

Or they could actually read some history from reputable scholars and/or the documents of the Church.

Peace!

All of them say the same thing, that the church held it to fight the growing Protestant Reformation, it was basically the tool they used in the Counter-Reformation, doubling down codifying the paganism.

 

[Hobie]

Here is a site on this issue with the things it did, check the one on Easter as I didn't realize that's why they fiddled with the calendar...
Nine Things You Should Know About the Council of Trent (Contra Reformation)

 

[Philip James]

doubling down codifying the paganism.

Hello Hobie,

The Church is not pagan. You have been decieved by the traditions of men.
But you need not remain in the land of confusion,

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

 

[Hobie]

Hello Hobie,

The Church is not pagan. You have been decieved by the traditions of men.
But you need not remain in the land of confusion,

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

Well lets take a look at Easter and see how the church brought it in. It began as what seems as an oversight, as the danger of allowing the Christians to join in pagan solstice celebrations was overlooked as the new pagan 'converts' joined the church and swelled the numbers under the bishop of Rome. But other Christian leaders saw the danger of worship according to the old pagan festivals and tried to stop it in what came to be known as Paschal/Easter controversies. The first recorded such controversy came to be known as the Quartodeciman controversy.

Eusebius of Caesarea (Church History, V, xxiii) wrote: "A question of no small importance arose at that time [i.e. the time of Pope Victor I, about A.D. 190]. The dioceses of all Asia, according to an ancient tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon [of Nisan], on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should always be observed as the feast of the life-giving pasch (epi tes tou soteriou Pascha heortes), contending that the fast ought to end on that day, whatever day of the week it might happen to be. However it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this point, as they observed the practice, which from Apostolic tradition has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the Resurrection of our Saviour." So the bishop of Rome began the practice of fixing the celebration of Passover for Christians on Sunday and it spread through the old areas of the Empire.Polycarp the disciple of John the Apostle who was now the bishop of Smyrna, came and confronted Anicetus, the Bishop of Rome who had allow the changes in the Passover and other changes to bring in converts.According to Irenaeus, around the 150s or 160, Polycarp visited Rome to discuss the differences that existed between the other centers of Christianity in Asia and Rome "with regard to certain things" and especially about the time of the Pasch or Passover which in Rome were now the Easter festivals.

Irenaeus says that Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, observed the fourteenth day of the moon, whatever day of the week that might be, following therein the tradition which he derived from John the Apostle. Irenaeus said that on certain things the two bishops speedily came to an understanding, while as to the time of the Pasch and the change to Easter, each adhered to his own custom. Polycarp following the eastern practice of celebrating Passover on the 14th of Nisan, the day of the Jewish Passover, regardless of what day of the week it fell while the bishop of Rome let it be observed on Sunday.

So the Bishop of Rome ignore the warning and continued to allow the Passover to be observed on Sunday at the pagan Spring Equinox festival connected to the goddess Eostre the "goddess of sunrise" so this is how the Pasch was change to the festival of Easter. But not only was it just the festival but had been elevated as more pagan converts came in, they were allowed to worship on the pagan day of worship which they were used to, while Christians continued to worship on Sabbath.

 

[Hobie]

Here is the text from Eusebius...

Eusebius - The Quartodeciman Controversy

 

[Illuminator]

.

Anti-Catholics often suggest that Catholicism did not exist prior to the Edict of Milan, which was issued in A.D. 313 and made Christianity legal in the Roman Empire. With this, pagan influences began to contaminate the previously untainted Christian Church. In no time, various inventions adopted from paganism began to replace the gospel that had been once for all delivered to the saints. At least, that is the theory.

Pagan Influence Fallacy
Opponents of the Church often attempt to discredit Catholicism by attempting to show similarities between it and the beliefs or practices of ancient paganism. This fallacy is frequently committed by Fundamentalists against Catholics; by Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and others against both Protestants and Catholics; and by atheists and skeptics against both Christians and Jews.

The nineteenth century witnessed a flowering of this “pagan influence fallacy.” Publications such as The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop (the classic English text charging the Catholic Church with paganism) paved the way for generations of antagonism toward the Church. During this time, entire new sects were created (Seventh-day Adventists, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses)—all considering traditional Catholicism and Protestantism as polluted by paganism. This era also saw atheistic “freethinkers” such as Robert Ingersoll writing books attacking Christianity and Judaism as pagan.

The pagan influence fallacy has not gone away in the twentieth century, but newer archaeology and more mature scholarship have diminished its influence. Yet there are still many committing it. In Protestant circles, numerous works have continued to popularize the claims of Alexander Hislop, most notably the comic books of Jack Chick and the book Babylon Mystery Religion by the young Ralph Woodrow (later Woodrow realized its flaws and wrote The Babylon Connection? repudiating it and refuting Hislop). Other Christian and quasi-Christian sects have continued to charge mainstream Christianity with paganism, and many atheists have continued to repeat—unquestioned—the charges of paganism leveled by their forebears.

Whenever one encounters a proposed example of pagan influence, one should demand that its existence be properly documented from primary sources or through reliable, scholarly secondary sources. After receiving documentation supporting the claim of a pagan parallel, one should ask a number of questions:

Is there a parallel? Frequently, there is not.

The claim of a parallel may be erroneous, especially when the documentation provided is based on an old or undisclosed source

Is the parallel dependent or independent?
Even if there is a pagan parallel, that does not mean that there is a causal relationship involved. The idea that similar forms are always the result of diffusion from a common source has long been rejected by archaeology and anthropology, and for very good reason: Humans are similar to each other and live in similar (i.e., terrestrial) environments, leading them to have similar cultural artifacts and views. For example, Fundamentalists have made much of the fact that Catholic art includes Madonna and Child images and that non-Christian art, all over the world, also frequently includes mother and child images. There is nothing sinister in this.

The fact is that, in every culture, there are mothers who hold their children! Sometimes this gets represented in art, including religious art, and it especially is used when a work of art is being done to show the motherhood of an individual. Mother-with child-images do not need to be explained by a theory of diffusion from a common, pagan religious source (such as Hislop’s suggestion that such images stem from representations of Semiramis holding Tammuz). One need look no further than the fact that mothers holding children is a universal feature of human experience and a convenient way for artists to represent motherhood.

Is the parallel antecedent or consequent?
Even if there is a pagan parallel that is causally related to a non-pagan counterpart, this does not establish which gave rise to the other. It may be that the pagan parallel is a late borrowing from a non-pagan source. Frequently, the pagan sources we have are so late that they have been shaped in reaction to Jewish and Christian ideas.

Sometimes it is possible to tell that pagans have been borrowing from non-pagans. Other times, it cannot be discerned who is borrowing from whom (or, indeed, if anyone is borrowing from anyone). For example: The ideas expressed in the Norse Elder Edda about the end and regeneration of the world were probably influenced by the teachings of Christians with whom the Norse had been in contact for centuries (H. A. Guerber, The Norsemen, 339f).

Is the parallel treated positively, neutrally, or negatively?
Even if there is a pagan parallel to a non-pagan counterpart, that does not mean that the item or concept was enthusiastically or uncritically accepted by non-pagans. One must ask how they regarded it. Did they regard it as something positive, neutral, or negative?

For example: Circumcision and the symbol of the cross might be termed “neutral” Jewish and Christian counterparts to pagan parallels. It is quite likely that the early Hebrews first encountered the idea of circumcision among neighboring non-Jewish peoples, but that does not mean they regarded it as a religiously good thing for non-Jews to do. Circumcision was regarded as a religiously good thing only for Jews because for them it symbolized a special covenant with the one true God (Gen. 17). The Hebrew scriptures are silent in a religious appraisal of non-Jewish circumcision.

Similarly, the early Christians who adopted the cross as a symbol did not do so because it was a pagan religious symbol (the pagan cultures which use it as a symbol, notably in East Asia and the Americas, had no influence on the early Christians). The cross was used as a Christian symbol because Christ died on a cross. Christians did not adopt it because it was a pagan symbol they liked and wanted to copy...

...Historical truth prevails
Ultimately, all attempts to prove Catholicism “pagan” fail. To make a charge of paganism stick, one must be able to show more than a similarity between something in the Church and something in the non-Christian world. One must be able to demonstrate a legitimate connection between the two, showing clearly that one is a result of the other, and that there is something wrong with the non-Christian item.

If you read your history and you will find the Catholics seven sacraments are not from what scripture gives us, but some truth mixed with falsehood derived from pagan rites and ceremonies. The seven sacraments came from another origin not from scripture, so baptism, confirmation, Eucharist (mass), penance/reconciliation (indulgences), extreme unction (last rights), marriage, and orders (ordination) came from pagan sources. The seven sacraments were not even formally decreed until the Council of Florence in 1439, the Council of Trent then declared to be anathema to not hold Rome's position that it was Christ Himself who instituted these seven sacraments. The idea of pushing the sacraments is that it supersedes the shedding of Christ's blood in His death upon the cross, and His death is of no value unless it is somehow dispensed and applied "sacramentally" by the Catholic priesthood.

Catholics are taught that the sacraments are indispensable for salvation, but baptism is considered the most important. Catholics doctrine is that a person enters into the spiritual life of the Church through baptism or really baptismal regeneration (that a person can be saved through baptism) so they practice infant baptism because they believe baptism erases original sin so the priest has power to do that. But scripture makes clear that we cannot be saved by works, and these sacraments even baptism in this form are not taught in the Bible.

The Mass is not from the Bible either, it like the others, has pagan origins. In the Roman Catholic mass, the Eucharist or “host” is a symbol of the sun from the old pagan worship. The round disc in the crescent moon was a symbol of ancient Babylon, and is found in all the ancient religions. Mass was never part of the early church, the mass did not become an official doctrine until pronounced by the Lateran Council of 1215 and then reaffirmed by the Council of Trent. The sacrifice of the mass is the central point of Catholic worship, as seen by the fact that those not attending and abstaining from mass are considered to have committed a mortal sin.

In the final analysis, nobody has been able to prove these things regarding a doctrine of the Catholic faith, or even its officially authorized practices.

Is Catholicism Pagan?

 

[Illuminator]

Francis Beckwith, former president of the Evangelical Theological Society:

"...Then I read the Council of Trent, which some Protestant friends had suggested I do. What I found was shocking. I found a document that had been nearly universally misrepresented by many Protestants, including some friends.

I do not believe, however, that the misrepresentation is the result of purposeful deception. But rather, it is the result of reading Trent with Protestant assumptions and without a charitable disposition.

For example, Trent talks about the four causes of justification, which correspond somewhat to Aristotle’s four causes. None of these causes is the work of the individual Christian. For, according to Trent, God’s grace does all the work. However, Trent does condemn “faith alone,” but what it means is mere intellectual assent without allowing God’s grace to be manifested in one’s actions and communion with the Church. This is why Trent also condemns justification by works.

I am convinced that the typical “Council of Trent” rant found on anti-Catholic websites is the Protestant equivalent of the secular urban legend that everyone prior to Columbus believed in a flat earth.

Francis Beckwith Interview – Jimmy Akin

 

[Illuminator]

YW, history is my background so when I come up on how it changed what the scripture says, it catches my attention.

The first 40 popes (roughly) were killed by pagan Romans. Has that ever caught your attention?

 

[Hobie]

It was all to stop the Reformation, nothing to go back to the truths of Christ and the apostles, but to continue worship from another origin..

 

[Paul Christensen]

It appears your bishop is deceiving you.

I agree. The Scripture says that faith comes by hearing the Word of God, not participating in a ritual called the Eucharist. There is nothing about the Lords' Table that provides sustenance for believers. It is an observance to remember what Jesus did on the cross for us in shedding His blood to take upon Himself the penalty for our sins. His blood was offered up to the Father once and for all when He went to Him during the three days His body was in the tomb. Then He rose from the dead to assure us that because He rose, we will rise from the dead in the same way when the angel's trumpet sounds one day.