The M+G+R Foundation

About "Leaving" the Roman Catholic Church


Prepare Yourself for the Manifestation of the False Christ



INTRODUCTION

In early October (0) , Rod Dreher, an American Roman Catholic journalist - who had written a lot about the abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church and expressed his disgust with the Hierarchy - announced that he has become a member of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
 
Many of the Roman Catholic responses have been astounding ... including some that clearly paint the picture of the Roman Catholic Church as an authority cult.  According to several different commentators, it is the same thing to follow the Church as to follow Christ.  Furthermore, to be Catholic requires submission to all past, present, and future teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.  This goes back, at least, to the writings of Cardinal Newman in the mid-1800s.

We will quote key commentaries from the press. At the end we will comment upon this most spiritually dangerous situation.


PURPOSE

The purpose of this publication is to show those who care to know how the Roman Catholic Church Administration (and those who serve these Administrators and their very worldly  agenda) are training their "guilt guns" on the spiritually undernourished, ill-Evangelized and quasi-perpetually disoriented Faithful.

With this kind of spiritual attack by the defenders of "the Church" (not defenders of the Faith), very few will act as God Wills they do before it is too late for them..

Bold added by The M+G+R Foundation.


I. An ex-Anglican convert (Alvin Kimel) to the Roman Catholic Church says (1) :
  
Quotes:

"In light of Dreher’s departure from the Catholic Church, I only have one question: Was he in fact a Catholic? I do not have access to Dreher’s heart and soul, and I certainly do not condemn him for his decision. I regret that he has left the Catholic Church, and I grieve the sins of the Church that led him to renounce the divine authority of the Vicar of Christ. I pray that I may never be so tested.

My interest at this point is purely theoretical. How are we to understand a person who enters into the communion of the Catholic Church and then departs from that communion? John Henry Newman raises precisely this question in his Grammar of Assent: (1a)

A man is converted to the Catholic Church from his admiration of its religious system, and his disgust with Protestantism. That admiration remains; but, after a time, he leaves his new faith, perhaps returns to his old. The reason, if we may conjecture, may sometimes be this: he has never believed in the Church’s infallibility; in her doctrinal truth he has believed, but in her infallibility, no. He was asked, before he was received, whether he held all that the Church taught, he replied he did; but he understood the question to mean, whether he held those particular doctrines “which at that time the Church in matter of fact formally taught,” whereas it really meant “whatever the Church then or at any future time should teach.” Thus, he never had the indispensable and elementary faith of a Catholic, and was simply no subject for reception into the fold of the Church. This being the case, when the Immaculate Conception is defined, he feels that it is something more than he bargained for when he became a Catholic, and accordingly he gives up his religious profession. The world will say that he has lost his certitude of the divinity of the Catholic Faith, but he never had it.

To become Catholic, to be Catholic, is to surrender one’s private judgment to the magisterial teaching of the Church. It is to believe that what the Church teaches and will teach as belonging to the deposit of revelation is from God. One may investigate the rational grounds for de fide dogmas; but one may not doubt them nor inquire whether or not they may be true. As Newman remarks, a Catholic “cannot be both inside and outside of the Church at once.”

I wonder how many priests and RCIA instructors understand what Catholic assent is. I wonder how many converts to Catholicism have been instructed in the irrevocable, definitive, full assent to magisterial teaching that is being asked of them when they enter into the communion of the Catholic Church."


Note added on June 10, 2012: Rev. Alvin Kimel joined the Orthodox Faith in August 5 2011.

============================

II. An earlier post by Kimel on the same subject (2)

The occasion for this post was the surfacing of rumors 5 months ago that Dreher was about to become Orthodox:

Quotes:

"A hundred and fifty years ago Newman clearly saw that the ideology of modernity must, logically and inevitably, lead to relativism, skepticism, and atheism. He also saw that the claims of a historically-given divine revelation cannot be rationally defended against modernity in the absence of a divinely-directed institution that can infallibly identify the content of the divine revelation. As Newman put it so well in his Essay on the Development of Doctrine; "A revelation is not given, if there be no authority to decide what it is that is given.” Newman became convinced that the Catholic Church, the communion of churches gathered around the bishop of Rome, did in fact enjoy this divine authority and charism to accurately identify and proclaim the apostolic revelation. Hence Newman’s famous words in his Letter to the Duke of Norfolk (2b): “We must take things as they are; to believe in a Church, is to believe in the Pope.”

Newman’s logic is compelling and inexorable. If the Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ, then we must believe in the Catholic Church, or give up Christianity altogether. Or as Newman wrote to William Todd in 1850: “To deny Catholicism is logically to deny religion.”

and

"Thus Newman would emphatically urge his correspondents who were seriously contemplating conversion to the Catholic Church, to count the cost, including the cost of intellectual submission. “Can you accept as from God whatever the Catholic Roman Church has taught and shall teach?”

and

"This formulation—“the act of faith in Christ and the Church is one act of faith”—helpfully states, I think, the understanding of Newman. Christ is so united to his ecclesial body that surrender to the Church is surrender to Christ, for the Church is the “oracle of Christ.” She dogmatically speaks in his name, with his authority, under the guidance, direction, and protection of his Holy Spirit. Hence Newman (2c) can provocatively and offensively insist: “A man may inquire before he is a Catholic, he may not after.”"

and

"To be Catholic is to refuse to doubt the de fide teachings of the Catholic Church, for to doubt these teachings is to doubt Christ himself: “It is, then, perfectly true, that the Church does not allow her children to entertain any doubt of her teaching; and that, first of all, simply for this reason, because they are Catholics only while they have faith, and faith is incompatible with doubt. No one can be a Catholic without a simple faith, that what the Church declares in God’s name, is God’s word, and therefore true. A man must simply believe that the Church is the oracle of God; he must be as certain of her mission, as he is of the mission of the Apostles” (Faith and Doubt (2d)).

It is hard for me to think of anything more scandalous today than the Catholic proscription of doubt."

and

"We return to the problem that provoked this article—namely, the Catholic who is tempted to abandon the communion of his Church because of her scandals. This is an impossible possibility. A Catholic can only seriously entertain this possibility by stepping outside the circle of faith. At that moment he has ceased to believe. At that moment he has placed his immortal soul in peril."

================================

III.  It is claimed that joining the Roman Catholic Church is, if correctly understood, a one-way trip (3).

Quotes:

"But the important matter for a potential convert is this: properly understood, conversion to Catholicism is a one-way trip.

To become Catholic is to accept Catholicism totally, and submit your personal judgment to the Church. If you do that, and accept the infallibility of the Church, then your trip to Rome is one way. There is no logical means by which you can turn back.

Was this presented to me in RCIA? Was I told that this was a one-way trip once I accepted the Church? I was not. It wasn’t until a few years later that I encountered the idea of submitting my will to the Church with regards to its teachings. I was not deterred by this, and with my free will I accepted the Church under those terms as well. No convert should entertain the idea of Catholicism as a simple change of venue for their Sunday worship. It’s far more profound than that."

and

"There have been many a time that I’ve sat in the pew on Sunday and wondered what on earth the priest was thinking. “Was that actually heresy, or did I hear that wrong?” The Church isn’t perfect. It’s made up of a collection of fallible human beings. Individuals within the Church are capable of doing evil, just like everyone else on earth. That’s ok. The Church herself is not capable of fallibility. That fact is ensured by the Holy Spirit. For that reason, I willingly submit to the Church. No one should swim the Tiber without understanding what it means to stand on this bank. It sounds a whole lot scarier than it really is, but it is something that needs to be considered."

==============================

IV. A canon lawyer seems to want decrees of excommunication to be issued against people who leave the Roman Catholic Church (4).

Quotes:

"1. By all accounts Dreher has committed a formal act of schism; according to 1983 CIC 1364, he is liable to latae sententiae excommunication. But, as I and others have often said, the provisions of 1983 CIC 1323-1324 render very complicated, often nugatory, one's confidence regarding automatic censures in a particular case; it is tiresome to have to stop every time and debate the intricacies of the canonical penal process at the expense of focusing on the offensive behavior that needs correcting. I repeat: it is time to abandon the latae sententiae operation of sanctions, and to restrict the application of penalties to ferendae sententiae procedures.

2. Dreher brought his wife and, more to the point, his young children with him into the Orthodox Church. Even assuming that parents can remove their children from the Church (at least in a way that such children would later need to be readmitted formally to enjoy the benefits of full communion), the "sincerity" of a parental decision to deprive a Catholic child of his or her religious heritage does not rehabilitate that decision. 1983 CIC 1366 authorizes "a censure or other just penalty" against parents who "hand over their children to be . . . educated in a non-Catholic religion."

3. Apparently most Orthodox Churches receive Roman Catholics into their communion by the celebration of the sacrament of confirmation or chrismation (4a). The Catholic Church, in contrast, presumes the validity of Orthodox chrismation and does not re-confirm those coming into full communion with us (instead, Orthodox converts to Catholicism make a profession of faith). Assuming the 40-year-old Dreher was already confirmed in the Catholic Church, if he underwent this Orthodox rite (I cannot verify (4b) either point in his case), his "second" confirmation would be invalid and objectively sacrilegious as an attempt to re-confer a seal sacrament (1983 CIC 845, 1379).

In brief, there seem to be several aspects of this matter that warrant closer attention.

Let me say, I don't think that all the ills of the Church are reducible to violations of canon law, nor is perfect adherence to law a guarantee of sanctity; but I do think that disregard for Church law has caused or worsened many of the problems we face today. Dreher would be right to decry the anomian attitudes that pervaded various hierarchies in recent decades.

But no one should think that serious violations of canon law are unique to the clergy, nor should one underestimate the harm caused when someone, especially of a high profile, violates Church law in protest against those who violate Church law."


COMMENTS

Our general and infallible (yes, we have said "infallible") comments regarding what the above Vatican "Party Line" sampling promotes, are not from us.  That is why they are truly Infallible.  They are from God - directly. To wit:

Matthew 12:  30 He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. [Understand this in the light of Mark 9:37-39 below]

Mark 9:  37 John answered him, saying: Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, who followeth not us, and we forbade him. 38 But Jesus said: Do not forbid him. For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name, and can soon speak ill of me. 39 For he that is not against you, is for you.

Luke 9: 52 And he sent messengers before his face; and going, they entered into a city of the Samaritans, to prepare for him. 53 And they received him not, because his face was of one going to Jerusalem. 54 And when his disciples James and John had seen this, they said: Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? 55 And turning, he rebuked them, saying: You know not of what spirit you are.

Matthew 12: 1 At that time Jesus went through the corn on the sabbath: and his disciples being hungry, began to pluck the ears, and to eat. 2 And the Pharisees seeing them, said to him: Behold thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days. 3 But he said to them: Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and they that were with him: 4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the loaves of proposition, which it was not lawful for him to eat, nor for them that were with him, but for the priests only? 5 Or have ye not read in the law, that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple break the sabbath, and are without blame?

Mark 2:  27 And he said to them: The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.
[Just like the Church was set up for man and not man created for the Church: man was created for God and the Church IS NOT God.]


Matthew 23:  2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. 3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not. 4 For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men's shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them. 5 And all their works they do for to be seen of men. (5)

Matthew 16:  23 Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men. [This was before the Pentecost]

Galatians 2:  11 But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I (Paul) withstood him (Peter = Cephas = Head) (6)  to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12 For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the 
circumcision. ...  14  But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? [This was after the Pentecost]

Matthew 24: 5 For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many.

Ephesians 2: 20 Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.

Then, the Truly Infallible One went one step further and warned His Children, through Luke 12, about those who promote the aforementioned Vatican "Party Line". To wit:

Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed: nor hidden, that shall not be known.. ... 4 And I say to you, my friends: Be not afraid of them who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. 5 But I will shew you whom you shall fear: fear ye him, who after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell. Yea, I say to you, fear him.

Personally, we choose to obey, and recommend to all to do the same, the key teaching of Peter, which is clearly stated in Acts 5. To wit:

29 But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men.

Wherever the Vatican "Party Line" deviates from the crystal clear core teachings of Jesus Christ, they are to be rejected just  as our immune system rejects the worst infection or, as Jesus clearly identified it: The leaven of the Pharisees


EPILOGUE
 
The Truly Infallible One said- [Luke 11: 5] Woe to you (canon) lawyers, for you have taken away the key of knowledge: you yourselves have not entered in, and those that were entering in, you have hindered.

It is our duty and responsibility - without question - to pray for those who are, in effect, pushing the true Children of God in the direction of Gehenna.  Didn't the Only Infallible Master also teach us through Matthew 5 44 to ....Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you...

For a glimpse of what their future may be, thus, how necessary our prayers on their behalf are, once again, we had recourse to the Infallible One through Matthew 11:

21 Woe to thee, Corozain, woe to thee, Bethsaida: for if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in you, they had long ago done penance in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you. 23 And thou Capharnaum, shalt thou be exalted up to heaven? thou shalt go down even unto hell. For if in Sodom had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in thee, perhaps it had remained unto this day. 24 But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.

Capernaum's transgression was unbelief; lack of faith in Jesus Christ. In spite of the mighty works which Jesus Christ did in Capernaum they refused to believe in Him.  Remember Fatima? La Salette? Rosa Mystica? Kibeho? That alleged "prudence" is sheer unbelief ; lack of trust in Jesus Christ

1 Corinthians 1: 9 For it is written [Isaiah  29:14]: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the prudence of the prudent I will reject.

The true Children of God do not believe in the Vatican sanctioned "Just Wars", i.e. Killing with a Divine License; however, the true Children of God must believe and practice: Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:...

That is the only remedy that will stop evil on its tracks.

Do you see now why millions upon millions of Masses and Rosaries offered have been, and continue to be rejected by God?  If you still cannot, please, allow the Prophet Isaiah to explain it to you better.

If you do not believe this, then, we beg of you, do us all a favor: Do not call yourself a Christian.


NOTES                                          

Please note: Some of the quoted sources have been moved to other locations or simply disappeared from the net. We do not have the time nor resources to track down all of the missing sources. If you do not trust our word, just move on.

(0)  Week of Oct 9, 2006
(1)  (New) Source
(1a) Grammar of Assent
(2)   Source
(2a) Essay on the Development of Doctrine
(2b) Letter to the Duke of Norfolk
(2c) Newman
(2d) Faith and Doubt
(3)   Source
(4)   Source
(4a) About Orthodox Churches receiving Roman Catholics into their communion.
(4b) Verification
(5) This partially explains what He manifests through miguel de Portugal who defends the basic tenets of the Catholic Faith like the Church Administrators do not even try to do, while denouncing the excesses and ridiculous claims of the Administration as well as their self-serving teachings which go directly against the teachings of Jesus Christ.
(6)  For example a "Cephalogram" is an x-ray view of the head. The Vatican spin-masters turned cephas into "rock" to pretend that the Church was founded upon the rock of Peter when it was founded upon the Rock of Christ, which Peter identified as such. Then, to fulfill Jesus' prophecy  in Matthew 24:5 it was claimed that the Pope of Rome WAS Christ on Earth. To "Represent" and to "Be" are two totally different situations. and, in this case, a matter of Life and Death.


Published on October 21, 2006 - European Union - USA

Copyright 2006 - 2012 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved.


Related Documents

About Papal Infallibility

The True and Valid Petrine Ministry

The M+G+R Foundation Position Regarding the Catholic Faith

Truth About Some Popes

           The Changes that God Allow in the Roman Catholic Church

The Orthodox Corner

Foundation of the Faith

What Went So Terribly Wrong With Catholicism?

The M+G+R Foundation
About Us

UPDATE BOARD Listing the Latest Updates to this Domain

Our Research Department

 HOME PAGE - English

 HOME PAGE - Español

HOME PAGE - Portugues
 

Back Up HOME PAGE
 

 


Future Use

Please Note:
If the above dated image does not appear on this document, it means that you are not viewing the original document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt the authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server again and click on the "Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to view the original document.

If you wish to contact The M+G+R Foundation, please Click Here and follow the instructions.

You may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it.