I have been browsing the internet and come up noticing that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ. What does this really meant?

Thanks.

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 27, 2004

Answers

Response to What is Vicar of Christ meant?

Traditionally, the vicar or "chief steward" was the first in command among the servants of a household. He was responsible for the other servants, made the daily decisions regarding the running of the household, and answered directly to the master of the house for the proper running of the household. Both as a functional necessity and as a symbol of authority, the vicar alone was entrusted with the keys to the household. When the master of the house was absent, his personally appointed vicar would exercise full authority over the household, in the master's name. The Vicar did not administrate by his own personal authority, but rather was specifically empowered by the master to exercise HIS authority during his physical absence; and the members of the household understood that when the vicar spoke, it was the master speaking.

This is why Christ used this powerful imagery in appointing His own personal representative on earth, the human head of His own Church. The Pope exercises authority over the faithful, not his own personal authority but that of the master who appointed him. He exercises this authority only during the physical absence of the master, which in this case means until the end of time. Both as a functional necessity and as a symbol of authority, the Pope alone was entrusted with the keys to the kingdom. And he was told by Christ that whatsoever he binds upon earth is bound in heaven. Whatsoever he requires of the household, it is the Master's voice.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 27, 2004.

Paul,

are you saying that the Pope has the power of Christ? I remember reading the bible once saying that Jesus gave Peter that authority. Where in the bible saying that Peter is the Pope of Rome?

Was it correct that in history, the Pope exercised this authority by killing the christians? Was this persecution a "binding" authority on earth and God will do the same on heaven? If the Pope has this kind of authority, he could make himself king of all nations, declaring he is Christ. Would this be blasphemy in God name?

I also remember that before Christ went to heaven, he said a Counselor (the Holy Spirit) will come. He will instruct, teach and etc. His followers. This tells us that the Holy Spirit is here with us. There is no need for someone else to be in His place.

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

Henri, was your mild and sincere-sounding opening question just a trick, something to provide you with an opening for your subsequent anti-Catholic, anti-papal litany of questions? I don't know whether or not to trust you.

Henry IX

-- Henry IX (Defender@fThe.Faith), May 28, 2004.

Henry IX,

I am not ant-catholic. It is my curiosity and seeking to know why there are so many different churches today. Which one is the true church? I don't know. This is why I am seeking for the truth.

I am a believer of the bible. I do believe in the Trinity and I believe the Catholic Church does too.

I am sorry if my responses seems to offend any of you.

Henri

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

Henri,

"are you saying that the Pope has the power of Christ?"

Yes, the Pope has the power of Christ, to the extent that Christ has transmitted that power to Him. Obviously the Pope is not God. Christ is God. Therefore Christ has much greater power than the Pope. Nevertheless, the power the Pope does have is divine power, granted to him directly by God in the person of Jesus Christ. How else can you interpret "whatsoever YOU bind upon earth is bound in heaven"? How else can you interpret "I give unto YOU the keys to my kingdom"? How else can you interpret "Simon, YOU are ROCK (a title previously applied only to God Himself) and upon THIS ROCK (upon YOU) I will build my Church"?

"I remember reading the bible once saying that Jesus gave Peter that authority. Where in the bible saying that Peter is the Pope of Rome?"

A: The Bible makes it clear that the Apostle Simon became the chief of the Apostles, the bishop above all bishops, when Christ spoke the above words to Him. From that moment the Apostle Simon is referred to in scripture as "Peter" - "the Rock", or sometimes as "Simon Peter" - "Simon the Rock". Scripture refers to the Apostles as "Peter and his companions", making it obvious that he stood out from all the others in authority and leadership. We know from the Bible, as well as from the writings of the earliest Church Fathers that Peter ministered in Rome. We know from the earliest Church writings that Peter was Bishop of Rome, and that Peter and Paul were martyred there. We know from history that the current Pope is in a direct line of succession from Peter.

"Was it correct that in history, the Pope exercised this authority by killing the christians? Was this persecution a "binding" authority on earth and God will do the same on heaven?"

A: Popes are men, and men are sinners. The Pope is not God. Even the holiest Popes, like the present Pope, are sinners. And a few Popes unfortunately were notorious sinners, a disgrace to their divinely appointed office. However, the power of binding upon earth has nothing to do with the Pope's personal morality. The power of infallibility is a gift to us, the Church, not a gift to the Pope himself. It guarantees that what the pope teaches as binding doctrine has a divine guarantee of truth, IN SPITE of the Pope's sins and weaknesses. Jesus said the truth would set us free. That promise would be meaningless unless He also gave us a definite, infallible means of knowing what the truth is. The Pope, and the teaching authority of the Magisterium is that guarantee. This is why the Catholic Church consistently teaches the fullness of truth for 2,000 years, and it is why those who separate themselves from the Church quickly disintegrate into thousands of conflicting denominations, each teaching its own version of "truth" - which obviously demonstrates that none of them really has any way of knowing with certainty what the truth is.

"If the Pope has this kind of authority, he could make himself king of all nations, declaring he is Christ. Would this be blasphemy in God name?"

A: No he could not, for his infallibility extends only to official teaching on doctrinal and moral issues binding on the universal Christian Church. In any other area of the Pope's life he can make mistakes, and can even be unethical or immoral, the same as any other man.

"I also remember that before Christ went to heaven, he said a Counselor (the Holy Spirit) will come. He will instruct, teach and etc. His followers. This tells us that the Holy Spirit is here with us. There is no need for someone else to be in His place."

A: Really? Do you suppose that the Holy Spirit would teach two churches contradictory doctrines? Do you think He would teach 100 different churches 100 different conflicting versions of the "truth"? Obviously not. Therefore when you see 100 different churches teaching 100 different versions of the "truth", you know immediately that this CANNOT be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does indeed instruct and teach the followers of Christ - and the one Church Christ founded is the sole means He established to provide that teaching and instruction. That's why He told the leaders of that Church, and no other, "he who hears you hears Me; he who rejects you rejects Me".

"It is my curiosity and seeking to know why there are so many different churches today."

A: Christ predicted that this would happen, and He explained why ...

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths". (2 Tim 4:3-4)

It has happened just as Christ predicted.

"Which one is the true church? I don't know. This is why I am seeking for the truth."

A: Well for starters, we know that the True Church was founded by Christ in the first century. So the first step would be to make a list of all Christian churches that can demonstrate a 2,000 year history - every church that can show documents produced by it and documents written about it in every century from the 21st back to the 1st. Once you have done that, you will find you have a very short list. Here is the complete list ...

The Holy Catholic Church

"I am a believer of the bible. I do believe in the Trinity and I believe the Catholic Church does too."

A: Yes the Catholic Church has taught about the Trinity from the first century. That's why the Catholic Church allowed references about the Trinity to be placed into the Bible at the time the Church compiled it. However, with all due respect, what does it mean when you say you are "a believer of the Bible"? Every Protestant church makes exactly the same claim - yet their teachings conflict at every turn. What does "believing the Bible" mean? Just having beliefs that you formed from reading the Bible, even if they conflict with the beliefs of many others? Or does "believing the Bible" require that you first know with certainty what the Bible actually means? If that is the case, you would obviously need an objective, infallible source to reveal that information. No Protestant church has such a source available. Which is why new denominations appear every month. Which is why Protestant theology is in a state of doctrinal chaos. And which is why the Catholic Church continues to teach in unity and in truth after 2,000 years.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 28, 2004.

Paul,

Thanks for the explaination. However, I'm still not fully convince that the Catholic Church is the only true church found by Christ and the only source for sound doctrine. I just cannot accept that the Pope has Christ authority and can do devine power. You said yourself that the Pope is a sinner. We know sinner cannot forgive the sin of men, but only God.

Even if God speak to me and give me the authority to forgive sin; I cannot say that I can forgive sin. The authority is from God and He is the only one who can do that.

I read carefully in Matthew about the "binding" on earth and "heaven" only implies to reconcilation between two persons. If a person sin against his brother (in Christ), and the sin person does not listen when the two come together to resolve the issue. Then more people are brought together and he still not listen, then brought the church resolve the issue. If this man still does not listen, then the church can punish this individual. Therefore, if the decision is to remove him from member of the church, the same would happen in heaven by removing from the book of life. This is my understanding of "binding" on earth and heaven.

But it seems that only the Pope has this authority is not very convincing to me.

It also seems to me that the Catholic add ideas (praying to Mary, the saints and angels) in addition to the bible. I even heard from some of my people that the Catholic Church allow them to perform shamanism (our traditional spiritual worship). Surely, this is against God but the church allows it.

If the Pope is Peter is successor, Vicar of Christ is wrong. It should be Vicar of Peter. Someone day, a Pope would rise and declares himeself Christ because of this title, "Vicar of Christ". This would lead to destruction of the church. Who would believe that?

Thanks all for the response. I learn much.

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

"We know sinner cannot forgive the sin of men, but only God".

A: Yes, only God can forgive sin. On that we agree. What we don't seem to agree on is that God can forgive sin any way He chooses to do so. You restrict God. It's ok for Him to forgive sin as long as He does so according to your plan. But that was not His plan, as shown by the fact that He gave that power to selected men.

"Even if God speak to me and give me the authority to forgive sin; I cannot say that I can forgive sin. The authority is from God and He is the only one who can do that."

A: Yes, the authority IS from God, and if God tells you that you can use that authority, then you can. Again, cannot God do as God wishes?

"if the decision is to remove him from member of the church, the same would happen in heaven by removing from the book of life. This is my understanding of "binding" on earth and heaven."

A: Such a decision would certainly fall under the heading of "binding and loosing", but the passage obviously refers to far more than just that. Jesus told Peter "whatsoever you bind on earth". "Whatsoever" is the most general, all-inclusive term He could have used. It means "anything and everything". It isn't restricted to one kind of situation.

"It also seems to me that the Catholic add ideas (praying to Mary, the saints and angels) in addition to the bible."

A: What the Catholic Church teaches was in effect before the Bible existed. The contents of the New Testament came from Catholic teaching, not the other way around. The Catholic Church alone compiled the bible, and it admitted into the Bible only that which conformed to its teaching, since its teaching was already the Word of God, having been received directly from the lips of Jesus Christ, Who is God. The fact that the Church did not put ALL of its teaching into the book it was compiling doesn't make one portion of its teaching any less authoritative than another part. There is nothing in the Bible that indicates we are to believe only what is in its pages. That is a 16th century manmade Protestant tradition that no Christian ever heard of before then. On the other hand, the Bible does tell us that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15). And it does tell us that whatsoever the Church binds on earth is bound in heaven. Therefore, if you truly believe the Bible, you believe the Church. One necessitates the other.

"I even heard from some of my people that the Catholic Church allow them to perform shamanism (our traditional spiritual worship). Surely, this is against God but the church allows it."

A: No, the Church absolutely does NOT allow it. Your people are misinformed. Or, perhaps they think the Church allows it because they ran into some confused Catholic priest who does allow it, in direct opposition to Church teaching. That, unfortunately, is possible. But you always have to clearly differentiate between what "the Catholic Church" allows or teaches, and what some supposedly Catholic individual, even a priest, allows or teaches.

"If the Pope is Peter is successor, Vicar of Christ is wrong. It should be Vicar of Peter."

A: Peter did not give Himself the power of binding. It was not Peter's keys that were entrusted into his care and that of his successors. It was not Peter's Church which was built upon him, but Christ's Church.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 28, 2004.

Thank you, Henri, for the frank reply to my question. I pray that you will have a mind open to the fullness of the truth found only in Catholicism. Henry IX

-- (Defender@fThe.Faith), May 28, 2004.

Paul M., excellent answers. I just had one comment on something you said.

Paul M. said: How else can you interpret "Simon, YOU are ROCK (a title previously applied only to God Himself) and upon THIS ROCK (upon YOU) I will build my Church"?

Something very important that is excluded here is the fact that Abraham is also called "rock" in the Old Testament.

Isaiah 51 (KJV) "Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness and who seek the LORD : Look to the rock from which you were cut and to the quarry from which you were hewn; 2 look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth. When I called him he was but one, and I blessed him and made him many.

Thus, just as Abraham was the Father of the Jewish faith (as is shown throughout Scripture), so also Peter is the Father of the Christian faith. This is evidenced by the fact that Jesus changed his name (Peter literally means "rock"). Throughout the Bible, the title "Rock" is applied to God alone, but solely in these two cases God shares that role with humans -- Abraham and Peter.

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

Emmily,

Are you implying that the Catholic Church is the church Jesus talked about "upon this rock I'll build my church"...and nothing can destroy it?

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

henri, that would be what emily is referencing... speaking of which, em, did you get my email?

okay, back to henri... I'm not sure you get the point of the role of vicar, or the concept of acting in personae Christi. that is, that the pope, the bishops and therefore the preists have an apostolic power. that power does not belong to them as a person, rather to their Holy office, which is ordained by God.

Thus the power to forgive sins is directly from God... it is God who forgives the sins in the action of the priest. can the pope declare himself to be the Christ... no, not validly. the full power of God was not given to him to excercise. what powers does the pope have? infallable dogmatic interpretation, forgiving of sins, binding of sins, casting out demons, consecration of the eucharist in communion, adminstrating wedding vows, cleansing the sick, providing last rites, blessing people/objects. beyond that, theres not much more the pope has the authority to do. the pope UNIQUELY has the authority to infallably interpret dogma... others are shared by the bishops, priests, and even some lay people for some.

as a hint, when you have questions that seem to go against the church, its best to be patient and ask them one or two at a time, otherwise it just seems like an attack to us...

-- paul h (dontsendmemail@notanaddress.com), May 28, 2004.

Paul H,

thank you for clarify of the authority of the Pope. By reading some of the responses, I was thinking if the Pope has the power of Christ, he could raise the dead, make the blind see again, walk on water, calm the storms and etc.

Anyway, thank you. I am much like a jew who rejects anyone who says he is Christ or God.

-- Henri (kxhenri@yahoo.com), May 28, 2004.

"Are you implying that the Catholic Church is the church Jesus talked about "upon this rock I'll build my church"...and nothing can destroy it?"

A: Henri, it is not necessary to "imply" anything here. It is a historical FACT that there was no Christian Church on earth but the Catholic Church for 1,000+ years after Christ. "Catholic" and "Christian", during all those long centuries, were simply synonyms.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 28, 2004.

Henri, please go to a book store that sells religous books. Ask for or order these two: "Catholic and Christian" by Alan Shreck for an easy understanding of Catholicism and where Catholic beliefs come from, the other: "An Essay on the Development of Christain Doctrine" by John Henery Cardinal Newman, a MASTERPIECE on the early church and how Catholicism doctrines have never been corupted or "added" to the Bible. Note: Newman was a former Protestant, an Angelican before converting to Catholicism, and basicly, what he discovered changed his life FOREVER in Christ.

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), May 28, 2004.

I have been reading some the questions and responses and I am a little confused. You state that Peter is the Rock -- not, Christ, yet, Peter was rebuked by Paul -- for his un-Christian behavior toward the Gentiles. How can that Rock support the church. (Galatians 2:11)

And, in the passage where Jesus supposedly calls Peter the "Rock" -- a few verses later Jesus calls him "Satan". How can this be -- if Peter is supposed to be the Rock. (Matthew 16:23)

I think rather it is Peter's correct confession -- calling Jesus, the Christ, (Savior)the Son of the Living God (Lord) -- that the church is built upon. Matthew 16:18 --

And, you state the Catholic church has never changed its doctrines, yet the worship and adoration of Mary -- was not used in the early church for more than 1870 years. This could be called idolatry. No where in the Scriptures is Mary ever worshiped, adored or treated in any authoritative manner.

As a matter of fact, Jesus said, "Who is my mother?" But, those who do the will of My Father in heaven. (Matthew 12:48-50)

And, while we are at it, what about not eating meat on Fridays -- which Pope gave that dictate? And the worship of the saints and Mary which is a direct conflict to the Scriptures that there is only One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Tim 2:5)

And, what about the 10 commandments -- in the Vatican Press edition of "Catechism of the Catholic Church" -- on page 496-497 -- it shows clearly in the church's own texts, how the second commandment, "You shall have no other gods before Me", was eliminated (namely the forbidding of worship of other men and idols)-- and then the 10th commandment, "Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife, or goods", the Catholic church carefully makes into two commandments, which really are just one commandment. What is that? (Exodus 20:2- 12; Deuteronomy 5:6-21)

In your own book and in your own words, it shows how the second commandment was taken out, and the 10th commandment was expanded to become two commandments instead of just one -- so the number of commandments would be the same.

And, as far as the Reformation -- one of your own, and Augustinian monk, who tried to reform the pagan practices and behavior of the Papacy as well as the leaders of Rome, was brougth before the court to testify and no one could refute his words, so they tried to kill him.

When the political and religious climate became ready for a reformation -- God brought it about, to bring the truth back to the people. Not to mention the others who were murdered by the Catholic church -- for the terrible act of translating the Scriptures into the languages of the common people -- so all could see how they have been corrupted.

I await your answers on any or all of these subjects.

Sincerely,

Rev. Richard Valkanet

-- Richard Valkanet (rvalkanet@livingwatersag.org), July 22, 2004.

"You state that Peter is the Rock"

A: No, Christ Himself stated that the Apostle Simon was "Peter" - "the Rock". Christ looked directly at Simon, and said to him "thou art Rock". You do know that "Peter" literally means "Rock", right? And you do know that the Apostle Simon was never known as "Peter" - "Rock" - until that very moment, right? And that Simon was known thereafter as "Simon Peter", which means "Simon the Rock". And you do know the meaning of "thou", right? It means "YOU". It doesn't mean "Me", and it doesn't mean "your profession of faith". "Thou art Rock" means "YOU Simon are Rock" and cannot possibly mean anything else.

"Peter was rebuked by Paul -- for his un-Christian behavior toward the Gentiles. How can that Rock support the church. (Galatians 2:11)"

A: So what? A bishop has the right to disagree with an action or opinion of the Pope, and to offer an alternative. Christ's making Simon the head of the Church didn't make him flawless. He was still a man and so was Paul. Do you suppose that placing a man in headship over the Church would mean that no-one would ever have a disagreement with him? Or that he would never make a mistake? This interaction between Simon Peter and Paul means absolutely nothing.

"And, in the passage where Jesus supposedly calls Peter the "Rock" -- a few verses later Jesus calls him "Satan". How can this be -- if Peter is supposed to be the Rock. (Matthew 16:23)"

A: Simon Peter, in his great love and zeal for the Lord, had inadvertently allowed himself to become a source of temptation to Jesus. That was why Jesus called him "tempter". Again, Simon was not perfect just because he was head of the Apostles and the Church. No Pope since has been perfect either. They are men after all. What matters is that he continued to be called "Simon the Rock" even after that faux pas; the apostles continued to be referred to as "Simon Peter and his companions"; and Simon Peter continued to exercise supreme authority over the Church. Paul even went to spend time with Simon Peter, learning from him and receiving his blessing, before starting his own public ministry.

"I think rather it is Peter's correct confession -- calling Jesus, the Christ, (Savior)the Son of the Living God (Lord) -- that the church is built upon"

A: Many Protestants make this same error. It is not an error that flows logically from the text however. Rather, it is a calculated error, the only possible straw that can be grasped at in a desperate effort to avoid the obvious real meaning of the text. the text however says "THOU", not "Thy confession". Could it just be possible that Jesus actually meant WHAT HE SAID?

"And, you state the Catholic church has never changed its doctrines, yet the worship and adoration of Mary -- was not used in the early church for more than 1870 years. This could be called idolatry."

A: The worship and adoration of Mary has NEVER been allowed in the Catholic Church, for exactly the reason you stated - it would be idolatry. Catholics worship and adore ONLY the one true God who founded our Church. The worship of anyone or anything else is strictly and specifically FORBIDDEN. We do however HONOR the mother of God, the human being through whom the Savior of mankind came into the world; and early writings show she was honored in a special way from the beginning. Actually from the moment God Himself called her "full of grace" and "most blessed among women". We honor other people too, who have done far less for mankind than Mary, like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. But we don't worship them.

"And, while we are at it, what about not eating meat on Fridays -- which Pope gave that dictate?"

A: Rules governing fasting are not doctrines. Therefore changing such disciplines does not constitute changing doctrine. Disciplines are created by the Church to help its people grow in faith. Since such rules and regulations are made by the Church, they can be changed by the Church. In contrast, the doctrine of the Church was given to the Church directly by God. He is its source. The Church is its steward. Therefore the Church does not have the authority to change any doctrinal truth. Truth cannot be changed - except to untruth. To do so would be to call God a liar.

"And the worship of the saints and Mary which is a direct conflict to the Scriptures that there is only One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Tim 2:5)"

A: Again, there is no such thing as worship of saints. It is forbidden. Besides, who would want to worship a human being when we have the one true God as our Lord and Master?? If you are referring to the ancient Christian practice of asking the saints to pray for us, this has nothing to do with worship. When you ask your pastor or your best friend to pray for you, are you worshipping them?? It also has nothingb whatsoever to do with Mediation. Christ is the oine Mediator between God and man because it was He alone whose death and Resurrection closed the gap which existed between God and man as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve. That was the work of mediation, and obviously Christ was the only Mediator. Praying for another person is not mediation, it is intercession, and every Christian in heaven and on earth is called to be an intercessor. Hopefully you pray for other people? If you can do so, why can't the mother of God, or other Christians who stand before the throne of God? In fact, Scripture says they do. (Rev 5:8)

"And, what about the 10 commandments -- in the Vatican Press edition of "Catechism of the Catholic Church" -- on page 496-497 -- it shows clearly in the church's own texts, how the second commandment, "You shall have no other gods before Me", was eliminated"

A: "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me" was not eliminated. It is part of the First Commandment. If you remove this dictate from the First Commandment, all that is left is a statement , "I am the Lord your God". It is no longer a commandment at all.

"and then the 10th commandment, "Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife, or goods", the Catholic church carefully makes into two commandments, which really are just one commandment."

A: They are not one commandment. One is a dictate against sins of lust, the other against sins of greed. It makes no more sense to combine them than it would to say "Thou shalt not steal or kill".

"And, as far as the Reformation -- one of your own, and Augustinian monk, who tried to reform the pagan practices and behavior of the Papacy as well as the leaders of Rome, was brougth before the court to testify and no one could refute his words, so they tried to kill him. "

A: Pagan practices? If you are going to refer to the human founder of your tradition, maybe you should read some of his writings. Father Luther's criticisms concerned administrative practices, not pagan practices. He was a firm believer in the Most Holy Eucharist and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. He thoroughly accepted the Sacrament of Confession (to the point of overdoing oit at times). And he had a strong devotion to the Mother of God. He actually didn't have any significant doctrinal problems with the Church he loved and served. As for the administrative issues, he was not alone in his criticism of such excesses and abuses. Many in the Church condemned such practices. What separates Luther from the others is that the others remained in God's Church and worked to bring about needed reform, while Luther's pride and arrogance caused him to rebel against the Church of God, ultimately founding his own church, though that was not his original intention. And once you separate yourself from the Biblical pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15), heresy is inevitable. It was only after that separation that Luther became doctrinally unsound, and unleashed upon Christianity the most destructive movement it has ever had to face.

"When the political and religious climate became ready for a reformation -- God brought it about, to bring the truth back to the people."

A: The Bible says the Holy Spirit is a spirit of order, not confusion. Where the Holy Spirit leads, there is unity and truth, for the Holy Spirit cannot conflict with Himself. To suggest that the division, fragmentation, and doctrinal chaos of Protestantism is a work of God is blasphemous. Jesus prayed "that they all may be ONE, even as you Father and I are ONE". Protestantism has shattered the plan of God for His Church. What "truth" was brought to the people? Baptist "truth"? Calvinist "truth"? Pentecostal "truth"? Anglican "truth"? Methodist "truth"? Presbyterian "truth"? Congregationalist "truth"? "Non-denomination" "truth"? Sorry, this ungodly situation and the rebellion that spawned it has nothing to do with the will of God.

"Not to mention the others who were murdered by the Catholic church -- for the terrible act of translating the Scriptures into the languages of the common people -- so all could see how they have been corrupted".

A: The Catholic Church had translated the Bible into 14 different languages before Luther was BORN. This didn't help the common people to any great extent however, since more than 95% of the common people were illiterate. The Church however did translate the Scriptures into Latin, by the hand of Jerome - his Vulgate version being the most accurate translation ever made in any language from the original Greek and Hebrew. In this way the Church ensured that the Bible could be read by every literate person, since any person of the time who was sufficiently educated to know how to read could read Latin. The Bibles which were burned (occasionally along with their authors) were corrupt, often heretical, versions. The Church had the obligation before God, and still has that same obligation today, to protect the purity of the Word of God that was given to it by God (not that I approve of the methods that were sometimes used).

"I have been reading some the questions and responses and I am a little confused."

A: More than a little!

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 22, 2004.