In light of all this buzz about the ‘Pope’ resigning, and the new “Pope” taking his place…I have a few questions. Not to sound like Luther (when he falsely maligned the Vicar of Christ in his day), but I do have some concerns. And so do many others, many able-minded Christians.
How can I, as a conscientious Christian (young though I am)…how can I align myself with someone who prays in a temple with Jews and Muslims, when I know that we can only come to the Father through Christ? And what kind of example is that supposed to be to the faithful? How can I stand by and applaud someone who supports changing the words of Scripture to suit a theology that is NOT sound (‘for all’ instead of ‘for many’). The words of Christ were clear. Why would we change this? To suit an ecumenical theology that is not at all in line with what has been taught and known for centuries.
The Church is one, holy, apostolic and Catholic (universal). This Lutheran theology of ‘faith alone’, which was condemned centuries ago…why is this finding a place in what is supposed to be the true faith?
The difference between Luther’s complaints and mine are this: He protested the teachings of the True Church, the Church instituted by Christ, when a true Vicar sat on the Chair of Peter. The teachings then had been the same for centuries and did not change on account of his belligerent falsehoods.
Now the ‘Church’ which sets itself up as the Bride of Christ denies the very thing which should make her THE Bride of Christ: oneness! By proclaiming that there is salvation outside of the church (this is NOT referring to the true and ancient teaching of baptism of blood/desire) she denies her identity as the Bride of Christ, and cannot, therefore, be called such. Not only that, but she audaciously changes the liturgy, altering the Sacred Words of Scripture, indeed, the very words of Christ her Spouse, to suit a doctrine that has not been believed or condoned since the time of Luther, and certainly not by the Church, whom Luther attacked!
These are my two main complaints, the only ones I feel knowledgeable enough about to elaborate on, but two that nonetheless disqualify this ‘novus ordo’ abomination from being the true and spotless Bride of Christ, along with her pseudo-‘Popes’, who think it right and beneficial to the faithful to take up the yoke with non-believers, refuting outright the Way, the Truth, and the Life, without Whom there would be no salvation and no way to come before the Father.
This is why I cannot ally myself with Rome as it is in the present. If it were the true Rome, the Rome of Christ’s institution, I would love her dearly. But she lacks at least one of the four marks of the true Church (oneness), and therefore I disown this abomination as a usurer and a false church.