“The priest speaks, and Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.”
– “Father” John O’Brien
The Faith of Millions
“Jesus died to institute the priesthood. Had he not died, where should we find the victim that the priests now offer? It was not necessary for the Redeemer to die in order to save the world; a drop of his blood, a single tear, or prayer, was sufficient to procure salvation for all . . . but to institute the priesthood, the death of Jesus Christ was necessary.”
– Alphonsus Ligouri
The Dignity and Duties of the Priest
Christ Alone Wyoming 
Oh my….blasphemy seems too nice a word! I am APPALLED that anyone would suggest that the Almighty, Sovereign God bows his head in obedience to anyone!
LikeLike
I’m so glad you posted that, (and Katy you are right too!)
Did we realize that this is exactly what the “Traditions of the Elders” teaching Jesus gave in Matthew 15 and Mark 7 is about?
Yep, the Jewish Elders had set the Talmud up such that it was considered higher then the Torah. In fact you can see that one of the Elders in Jewish history actually makes the claim that God gave the Law to them, and that THEY posessed the Law and that God was no longer the authority but they were for They posessed the Law! So in modern times we see by this article that the sin of man still exists…You shall be as God!
Now for the blind spot today…We can see it from Rome, but we think it does not exist in the daughters of Rome, IE those religious organizations that came out of Rome, and in which Rome labours to have return to the mother! Can we see it in the WOF movement? Yes! Can we see it in the NAR/Latter Rain/Kingdom Now/IHOP folks who must fix the world BEFORE their jesus can return? Yes! Can we see it in the Emergent Stream? Yes! Can we see it in the Willow Creek/Purpose Driven models? Yes!
But we don’t even consider looking, nor its effect in our “denomination,” do we? The messages to the churches in The Revelation of Jesus Christ chapters 2 and 3 show us that it was there then, and scripture is filled with the men who beguiled the believers back then, including Diotrophese. But we think we would not be deceived…So, what exactly is the broad road to destruction, and where are those “churches” today?
LikeLike
What about the priesthood of the Eastern church, the Orthodox church? Or the Church of England?
LikeLike
What about them? They are no different then the rest of the niclolaitan deed workers as a group.
LikeLike
I agree with Katy. Is “damnable blasphemy” redundant?
LikeLike
@Katy: What do you think God does when he listens to our prayers? Jesus is God, yes, but He is not so proud as to ignore His children! Luke 11 is incredibly clear on that fact. The only “power” a priest has is that which is given to Him, by God, just as Christ told Pilate that beautiful, sorrowful Friday of his Passion.
Are we not all called Children of Our Father? Yes! We are! (At least, I am.) Just as a Father will humbly do what is needed for His children – changing diapers, cleaning up throw up, taking them to and from practices, and making sure they get what they need – so too does God do what is needed for us. He humbles himself just to LOOK at us, and He abased Himself to come to save us.
LikeLike
@Brianna,
I say this in kindness (as it’s hard to tell someone’s tone on the computer)…but I do *not* believe that God bows His head in humble obedience to a priest…just as my earthly father does not bow his head to me in obedience.
God will do whatever He sees fit for His glory…because He alone is worthy.
LikeLike
This is utter blasphemy, and people follow this evil denomination?!?!? Christ bows to NO ONE, He did not make atonement for the sake of some evil priesthood that feeds off of young boys {then pays out millions in lawsuits and covers over the sin}, He made atonement for sin…period. Here lies the problem, Roman Catholics { and all who are unregenerate} do not grasp their radical depravity, they do not know how wicked they, and we all are. They do not comprehend the attributes of God, namely, His holiness, or His majesty, sovereignty, power and might. How can wicked men stand before a holy God? They cannot, there has to be a sacrifice, something/one had to step in and make atonement for sin. Only God the Son could be an acceptable sacrifice for sin, only Christ could appease God’s wrath for those He elects to save.
The Roman Catholic church takes God and makes Him less that what He truly is, man is either equal to or exalted over God; this is something you will find true in all false religions. Their ‘god’ is NOT the God of the Bible, their god is fictitious and saves no one. But, it does make the Roman Catholic church filthy stinking rich, it also makes the Roman Catholic church filthy and stinking, steeped in sin, greed, power, corruption. It’s followers are brainwashed and bible illiterate; God states He turns people over to deception because they refuse to love the truth. Those who reject truth and cling to church tradition and lies like what we see in this post are destined for the broad way; remember, both the narrow and the broad way are marked ‘heaven’. Only the narrow way is the true entrance. I pray followers of this huge satanic cult will open their bibles and search for truth, compare what the RCC teaches with what the Bible says, cry out for truth.
Where is their scripture to back these heretical claims?
LikeLike
All true believers are part of the priesthood. 1 Peter 2. The wicked leaders of rome are part of a counterfit, satanic priesthood. This same spirit has been at work in her harlott daughters as others mentioned. Look at who put bunyan in prison. It wasn’t rome though it was the roman spirit.
I long to see true brethren put off all of her practices, traditions, and influence that were left un-reformed.
LikeLike
@fleebabylon, the time is soon coming where true believers will absolutely remove all leaven gathered both before and after the Reformation. The Bride will then (and only then) be presented with neither spot nor wrinkle as we read. Let us cry out Daniel’s prayer (9:4-19) daily, that we may be counted worthy to withstand “the last contest of the righteous”.
LikeLike
Brianna,
There is a distinction that i think you are not making regarding God answering our prayers. When He does answer the prayers of the righteous, it is not “in obedience” to our demands. Rather, God provides from His limitless abundance to those who understand they can do nothing–and they have nothing–apart from his providing hand.
What Rome says, however, is that the priest can demand what he wants from God and then God is bound, neck and heel, to the wishes of the priest (and Mary). This strain of thought is still alive, as evidenced by the teachings of those groups Mickey Merrie listed above.
LikeLike
you are taking ONE quote from a priest who was born in the 30’s WAY out of context and fueling animosity, further misunderstanding, and hatred. Neither of these quotes are doctrine or professed by the Church, yes priests can be in error, and everything they say, do or write does not always give the best witness to Christ and His Church. (Crusades, Inquisition, simony, misuse of indulgences, Sex abuse, etc.) But this goes for all Christians… everything we do isn’t always the best witness to Christ. If we Catholics are truly your “enemies” as you allude to…should’nt you be loving us and praying for us? Luke 6:26-45 sums it up.
with love and prayers
LikeLike
Andy:
So what you’re saying is the two priests quoted were wrong, and that their birth in the 30’s is somehow significant in regards to truth or error?
How WAY out of context were these quotes supposedly taken? You did not provide the “proper” context that would prove your allegations.
Commenter Brianna seemed to think the quotes were accurate; instead of charging us with taking things out of context, or obfuscating with the notion that the priest’s were born in the 30s, she tried to defend the quotes.
You say that neither of these quotes are Roman Catholic doctrine. So the first quote does NOT accurately portray what Romanist priests do at every mass around the world?
If what these priests said (who wrote and published books) were in error, can you direct me to where their mother church publicly pointed out the error of these priests and corrected them?
I never said (or intended to allude) that you Catholics are our enemies. But Catholic doctrine is an enemy of the cross, and those who promote false doctrines are as well. If exposing false teaching, pointing out those who promote a false gospel, and taking a firm stand on sound doctrine is “fueling animosity,” then you must really have an issue with the likes of John the Baptist, Paul, and Jesus.
Loving and praying for Catholics, and pointing out the error of Catholics to them and others to help them avoid the results of following a false gospel (or any counterfeit religious system) are all commands of Scripture. As well as calling you to repent, turn from Rome’s false gospel, and turn to Christ.
I wonder how much “loving and praying” that Catholics were doing for their (not alluded to but stated) enemies while they were burning them at the stake for refusing to bow the knee to the pope and for daring to translate or possess a Bible in their own language. And all with the blessings of the popes of course.
Perhaps your defense of Rome would be better served on your own blog as no one here is interested in putting the yoke of Rome back on their shoulders.
LikeLike
Hey pilgrim,
I do apologize for a delay in my response. I was working hard today in ministry, I’m sure you know the feeling….
You are correct, I didn’t mean to imply, although I see now I did, that the time of his birth or life has something to do with truth or error. I was just perplexed that it wasn’t from a recent writing someone came across, but it seemed like something someone dug up, or something fundamentalists just continue to circulate to spark debate, although I guess either is still fair enough.
I do agree with Bryanna, and I never said these priests were wrong. I simply stated that they were not doctrinal statements from the Catholic Church… You took two priests interpretations and illustrations and made it appear as if they were the 11th and 12th commandment of the Catholic faith.
I agree,Fr. O’Brien’s language may be a set back…But, I don’t disagree with what was said. Let’s take a look at the word “obedience” it comes from the Latin oboedire – ob = towards; oedire = “to hear” to hear, or to listen. And even the Hebrew word shama – “to hear, listen.” Do we not as Bryanna said, know that God listens to and hears our prayers? YES, He is omnipotent and does NOT need men, or even more-so doesn’t need to listen to men. But even you must admit He chooses to answer or our prayers and answer us when we call upon Him.
Jn 16:24- “Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full.”
Mt 21:22″…whatever things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.”
Jer 33:3- “Call to Me, and I will answer you, and show you great and mighty things…”
Jn 14:14-“If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.”
Jn 16:23- “…whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you.”
So is that blasphemous? To say that God listens to our requests? Which I think is the main point Fr. O’Brien is getting at, SURELY We do not believe, as others have commented, that the priest is greater than God, or God LITERALLY bows down to us, or that we have control over God, etc.
What Catholic doctrine is an enemy of the cross? Btw, I love Paul, John the Baptist(a lot actually) , and of course Peter, 🙂 but I love Jesus more. And I appreciate this conversation (Proverbs 27:17 As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.)
I could list many attacks on the Catholic Church or humanity or sinful activity from Protestant sects….but I don’t think I need to. Yea, we as a Church have done TERRIBLE things. We are whores, adulterers, thieves, murderers, tax collectors and drunks…. but Jesus uses us, and redeems us….i.e.; Romans 3:23….The fact that there has always been scandal in the Church…Judas betraying Jesus, The Disciples fleeing Christ at the garden of Gethsemane, Peter denying Christ, Thomas refuses to believe in the Resurrection, etc… Romans 3:3-4 -“For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? Certainly not!”…2 Timothy 2:13- If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.
As for context…I’m not sure why you are using Acts 15:9-11 to prove your point(which i’m not even sure of…Catholicism is like circumcision?), Acts 15:9-11 is Peter condemning the requirements for new converts to follow the law of Moses….
Acts 15:1-2 – And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question. ” (I do love that Paul went to the Apostles, and Elders…Primacy of Peter anyone?) 🙂
I hope this was ok, you had those follow up questions, so I wanted to answer. But then you said I should answer on my own blog? Not sure what you wanted…Sorry!
Pray for me, and I for you. 🙂
Pax et Bonum.
LikeLike
andychurray said
” Yea, we as a Church have done TERRIBLE things. We are whores,”
For once you are speaking 100% the word of God…
Revelation 17:4-6 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality. And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations.” And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her, I marveled greatly.
LikeLike
Dear Andy:
I hear ya’ on the lack of time thing.
1). Regarding older writings: Older writings from religious organizations are always preferable to examine rather than the newer writings and/or revelations, after revisions have been employed to polish the older, unfavorable writings, teachings, and doctrines. If you want to know what a religious organization really believes, seek out their oldest writings.
2). You said,
I did no such thing. I simply quoted them. Other than the title of the post, I offered no other commentary, so if you interpreted the quotes as the 11th and 12th commandments, that was on you. They verbalize exactly what Rome believes, and I simply quoted them.
3). You said,
True. He chooses to either answer our prayers or not. However, he is not obligated to answer them, nor is He obligated to do what we ask or demand, and I do not see any example of such anywhere in the New Testament church. This idea of “if I do . . .” then “God must . . .” is not biblical and is eerily similar to the Word of Faith heresy seen in most TV preachers that claim God is obligated to respond to man: “If you give me money . . .” then “God is required to bless you.” Both instances in which anyone claims God is obligated to man are grave errors.
4). In reference to God answering our prayers, you asked,
No, as long as you understand that God is NOT obligated to any man. But this quote is pretty clear that God IS in fact obligated to the priest. Additionally, the references you cited are not in the context of “calling down” the Lord from His throne to be re-sacrificed again and again and again and again. The fact that Jesus, our High Priest who once and for all offered Himself as a final sacrifice negating the need for any further (bloodless) sacrifices and negating the need for any further need of priests (Hebrews covers both issues very clearly), shows that the very foundation of this debate is in err, Andy. God is not only NOT obligated to man, but He is certainly NOT obligated to re-sacrifice Himself at the behest of man who holds a position that Christ Himself made obsolete. To do either is blasphemous and makes those who practice it and perpetuate it, enemies of the cross.
5). You asked,
See my answer above (in addition to calling any man “holy father,” the astounding edification of the supposed “co-mediatrix queen of heaven,” the need for our works to be added to the work of Christ’s sacrifice, the bowing down to graven images, the praying to the dead for help, purgatory, indulgences, etc.).
6). You said,
There is a difference between someone acting contrary to Scripture on their own accord and those acting contrary to Scripture at the church’s command.
Examples of acting contrary to Scripture on one’s own accord: 1). A professing Christian Protestant robs a convenience store at gun point. No one can reasonably hold his church at fault for his actions; 2). A Roman Catholic priest molests a child. No one can reasonably hold his church at fault for his actions.
Examples of those acting at the church’s command/guidance: 1). A Fundamental Mormon man commits polygamy following in the teachings and examples set by Mormonism’s founding prophet Joseph Smith (and second LDS prophet Brigham Young among many others); 2). Roman Catholics hunt down, imprison, torture, and execute people for possessing a Bible in their native tongue at the direction (and with the blessing) of the popes.
In the first two examples the individuals acted of their own volition apart from Scripture and their church’s own beliefs. The second two examples are of individuals who were following the directives of their church leaders with their church leaders’ approval. Big difference!
7). Interesting that you mention Acts 5:1-2, “And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved . . .’” since Romanism today is the Judiazers of yesterday. The same error that Paul called anathema then (Faith in Jesus + fill in the blank), is the same error of Rome today (Faith in Jesus + fill in the blank).
8). You said,
Because Rome requires its adherents to follow the Law for salvation too. Lip service is paid to being “saved by grace alone,” but in Romanism you still must be baptized and follow the list of other requirements of Rome. Judiazers in Paul’s time = Grace + Circumcision. Romanists today = Grace + Baptism. Same error, different name, different face.
9). My point about writing in defense of Rome on your own blog was because there’s really not a point to extolling the virtues of a works-righteousness religion on a Christian blog. There’s really no reason to waste your time or mine. It’s the same reason I don’t argue or debate on Romanist blogs. Now, there may have been a time years that I would have, but who has time for that?
10). Pray for you? Absolutely. Already have been my friend.
Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Solus Christus
– Pilgrim
LikeLike