Catholic Bashing

Since the news is buzzing with the news of the retirement of Pope Benedict XVI, I thought it might be a good time to revisit a sampling of the greatest hits of one of the greatest purveyors of anti-Catholic sentiment, Jack Chick.

174 thoughts on “Catholic Bashing”

      1. Graham Greene wrote a book set in a socialist regime in South America that was trying to destroy religion by executing Catholic priests – “The Power and the Glory.” Powerful novel.

        1. Ah, yes, Graham Greene. A great writer, and a fascinating person. He was a Catholic of the “Sin freely, that grace may abound” school.

        2. Beautiful, beautiful novel. I discovered that about two years ago. How in the world did I miss this growing up?

        3. Greene’s book was actually based on real events during the Mexican Revolution/Mexican Civil War of 1910-1920, where the Mexican government (at least one of the factions struggling for power) DID try to stamp out the Church.

  1. “Holy Papa”? Really??? That’s so goofy πŸ˜†

    The door-knockers in our church used Chick tracts, but even as a kid in the IFB I thought Jack Chick was a couple fries short of a Happy Meal. The tracts are so over-the-top I don’t know how anyone could take them seriously.

    But maybe that’s the point, if you think about it. The folks who read this drivel and are convicted by it are those who would fit right into the IFB.

      1. Young Frankenstein trivia:

        My first job out of college in the late Seventies, my boss was the sister-in-law of Teri Garr, the actress in the “Look at Those Knockers” scene. She said that the Christmas after the movie came out, the whole family got together to buy Teri a gag gift — a HUGE pair of brass door-knockers.

      1. Yes, I did not mean to offend any of our Spanish or Italian Catholics here–it was exactly that silly context that made me laugh. Chick achieved the opposite of what he was intending, I think. He is trying to make Catholicism look foolish, but it’s only a reflection of his own idiocy.

      1. Dark Dungeons trivia:

        When that tract first came out, my regular D&D group got a big kick out of it. (I didn’t, because Chick Tracts had messed me up years earlier.)

        The crack I remember best was from my Dungeonmaster: “So that’s what a typical DM looks like? If I’d run into a DM who looked like that, I’d have married her.” (Incidentally, many years later said DM did marry another gamer.)

  2. How many of these little religious comic books have I given away?
    And in the back of everyone of them you will find the path to decisional regeneration.

    I hold to the truth that God is so much bigger than the one portrayed in these tracts and he can even use something like a Chick Tract, inspite of it being a Chick Tract.

    *I have to mention the celestial Jumbotron that everyone will be watching in heaven as well. πŸ™„

  3. What is so tragic is that the Chick comics are so badly researched. The first seven ecumenical councils were held in the territory of what is now the Eastern Orthodox Church. Papal primacy and theories of infallibility did not surface until much later. St. Ignatius of Antioch, a contemporary of the Apostles, set down the ideas of the real presence of Christ in communion and the role of bishops.

    What is so tragic about the Alberto series is that Alberto has been proven to be a fraud. A lot of factors brought forth the Bolshivik Revolution in Russia, but the Jesuits were not part of the mix. In fact, in the tract about the Jesuit involvement in the Russian Revolution, Alberto seemed to make things up as he went. For example, Rasputin died very early in 1917. Alberto has Rasputin handing the Communists the church wealth years later. The period of the most severe persecution of the Church was in the late 1920s through to the beginning of World War II. The Communists got the church money by pillaging the churches and tearing them apart brick by brick.

    There is no record of Alberto ever being a priest in the Archdiocese of Madrid nor any other diocese of the Spanish Catholic Church.

    1. Badly researched?
      Spongebob Squarepants is loosely researched, too.
      I mean, each Chick tract is little more than a paranoid hallucination, so “badly researched” is an unusually mild way of describing them.

      By the way, the claim of Papal infallibilty (which only extends to teaching authority in matters of faith) started in the late 19th century (quite recently for a nearly 2000-year-old institution), when Pius IX decided his theological interpretations were infallible.

      1. One episode had SpongeBob wearing a “Stalag-mitre”, a souvenir hat he’d got in a cave, talk about being built on the Rock. But that means–gasp! 😯 oh no, SpongeBob is CATHOLIC, oh the horrors. Coincidence? I don’t think so, esp since he’s already supposed to be 😯 :mrgreen: HOMOSEXUAL! πŸ™„
        Jack Chick and SpongeBob SquarePants, what a concept. 😈

    2. Some of us would argue that papal primacy and all the other papal doctrines are present in the primitive Depositum Fidei, which was closed with the death of the last apostle. These doctrines were then elucidated with greater and greater clarity and precision throughout the centuries, beginning with the Early Church Fathers. Cf. the parable of the mustard seed. And J.H. Newman, *Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine.* Not evolution, not change, not “addition,” not accretion. Development.

      That is why some of us are Catholic rather than Orthodox. (With all due respect to our Orthodox brethren. ;))

      1. Roman Catholics saying that all the current doctrines have existed without significant change since the time of the Apostles is oddly reminiscent of those Baptists who claim that the Apostles, Paul, and such figures as Saint Patrick and Saint Francis of Assissi, were all Baptists, not Catholics.

        1. Um, I think Blessed Cardinal Newman’s arguments are a tad more sophisticated than that. I highly recommend the book. πŸ˜‰

        2. I’m aware of those arguments, but not persuaded by them. I don’t have time to take them on in detail today, and there really isn’t space here.

          So can we agree to disagree?

          I find Gary Wills’ books on the Catholic Church highly readable and authoritative, if you want to look at well-reasoned, well-researched counter-arguments to positions like Newman’s. I’m not saying you’ll change your mind, but you should find it interesting.

        3. Cardinal Newman is awesome! I go to Catholic.com for answers as they are mostly converts from Protestantism and former pastors. They translate a little clearer for me, (ok a little more for the lay person). GK Chesterton argues brilliantly for the Church also. I think the first ever apologist Justin Martyr did a grand job explaining doctrine to the Emperors nephew, I believe it was Marius? or somehting like that. He was a student of one of the disciples taught by John. He describes the services and everything in great detail. Love him.

        4. I looked up “Papal Infallibility” on Catholic.com today, as a matter of fact. I’m not saying that site is wrong, but know that it represents a very Conservative faction of the church (the Catholic equivalent of Fundamentalists, to make an imperfect but fairly close analogy), and that there are other views among faithful and well-informed Catholics. Many of the quotations they use for support need a whole lot more context than they give there.

        5. Of course we can agree to disagree. πŸ˜‰

          Obviously, if you were persuaded by Newman’s arguments, you would be Catholic. That doesn’t mean they aren’t pretty persuasive, though — scarcely in the same league as the Landmarkers’ arguments. Even Newman’s enemies conceded that he was one of the foremost patristics scholars of his day, if not *the* foremost.

          Agreeing to disagree,

          CGC

        6. Re Catholic.com: Well, if it’s faithful to the Magisterium, then it’s essentially representative of Catholicism. That’s the only criterion that counts. That’s why we *have* a Magisterium — to resolve conflicts and reduce confusion. Think of it as the Guide to the Perplexed. :mrgreen:

        1. Evangelical Protestants would have installed a monarchy. That is how they run their colleges, church and schools.

        2. There’s also a big difference between evangelical protestants and fundamentalists. Look at the differences between Grand Canyon or Golden Gate University and Bob Jones University.

        3. My church is Southern Baptist, firmly evangelical, and we have a board of elders. The evangelical schools in town that I can think of do not have crazy restrictive rules, and the dress code is no more strict than the local uniform requiring public schools. The girls can wear dresses, but also slacks or shorts, and the boys can wear either slacks or shorts (fingertip length!) The evangelical high schools and colleges that I know of are accredited and not under the dictates of one pastor!

    1. Re: supreme court. It’s interesting to note that 4 of the 6 are the established conservative wing of the court and 1 of the 6 is the usually-conservative swing justice. Sotomayor (younger than all other Catholic justices except Roberts) definitely represents the neo-liberalist wing of American Catholicism.

      As an attorney, I have been fascinated by how Catholicism’s approach to interpreting the Bible influences how some Catholic justices interpret the constitution. (Of course, on today’s court, individual justices’ political views tend to trump their religious views, which is simply a factor of the diminishing role of religion among the elite. I suppose a more charitable view would be to say that the utter WASPishness that has characterized the education of basically every justice on the court today has pushed some justices like Roberts and Scalia further away from a Catholic perspective.) Anyway, I think Justice Brennan’s support of a more expansive interpretation of the constitution was based, at least in part, on the Catholic church’s greater degree of comfort with shaping its understanding of the Scriptures over time versus the Protestant allegiance to the idea of biblical literalism (and the corresponding support for Constitutional textualism).

      [Never mind the fact that neither biblical literalism or constitutional textualism are possible to achieve in actuality – that’s another issue for another day. Maybe if Ginsburg retires during Darrell’s Obama year we can discuss this more fully on that blog. πŸ™‚ ]

        1. gonna have to take my laptop to the clinic, I believe it has the Click…. picked it up googling for Chick Tracts. 😯

  4. It probably is a bad thing that I kind of want to read more. Don’t worry, though, it’s not because I think it’ll be good–it’s because sometimes, doing something incredibly painful is kind of satisfying. And hilarious.

    The Dungeons and Dragons one is classic, of course, but there’s one about vampires, isn’t there? And another about Mardi Gras? I remember being pretty funny too!

    1. Then there is the anti-gay one showing a man from Sodom about to rape a child that is borderline pornographic. Jack Chick seems to have forgotten the admonition of Phil. 4:8 to “think on things” that are good, pure, and wholesome. He really is a pervert.

        1. Hmm, almost makes you wonder if the whole Chick Tract enterprise is a parody of sorts. Mr. Chick may be the grandaddy of all Poes.

      1. Then there is the anti-gay one showing a man from Sodom about to rape a child that is borderline pornographic.

        That’s called “Porn for the Pious”.

  5. We drove by a Catholic church on the way home from our church this past Sunday. It had rained and a large amount and some large puddle were available on the road.

    The little twinge of my old fundie came out and wanted to play splash-a-catholic. I mean since they were only sprinkled, they needed a good dose of baptism right? 😈

    My wife wouldn’t let me, she told me to put my
    fundie away and never get it out again.

    Slowly the old fundie is drifting away and a new man is emerging. Every once in a while I’ll judge someone just by looking at them. I have to remind myself daily to put my fundie away.

  6. I have been out of Fundyland for 30 years, (man I’m old) and I still have twinges now and then. I believed Jack Chick and used to give out his tracts. God has a sense of humor though as I am now a Catholic. From Fundy to Catholic, who’d of thunk? Big Gary its good to see there are people who understand what Papal Infallibility is though I think your start date is off but you get an A for the right definition. Anyway every non CAtholic I know never understands it only applies to Dogma and Morals. “I Came Out” I love the splash a Catholic thought (just as long as its not me!). πŸ˜€

    1. The Church first promulgated the dogma of infallibility in 1870.
      Of course, then and now, it said that it has always been true, but it wasn’t an official point of dogma until 1870.

      1. Formal definitions, as you rightly observe, are simply the official recognition and confirmation of doctrines the Church has always believed.

        “No doctrine is defined till it is violated.” — J.H. Newman. Nicaea I and Chalcedon are excellent illustrations of this maxim.

        1. “Formal definitions … are simply the official recognition and confirmation of doctrines the Church has always believed.”

          That’s the party line, but it isn’t always so. For example, celibacy for priests was optional for roughly the first millenium of Christianity, then it had “always” been universally required. Then the Church made some exceptions for married Anglican clergy who wanted to come into the Catholic Church. There was no Catholic prohibiton on abortion until the 19th century, then it had “always” been a mortal sin. There’s a good deal of evidence that there were female priests, and maybe even female bishops, during the first couple of centuries of the Christian era, but the current Vatican leadership says that women’s ordination would be an unspeakable crime against the church (literally unspeakable: John Paul II forbade Catholics to even talk about it), and, of course, that it has always been that way.

        2. There is a priest in the Northeast who is married and has several children. Had to get a special “blessing” from the Vatican to be allowed to be a Catholic priest.

      2. The Written doctrine may have came then but like the understanding of the Holy Spirit and the Trinity is was there long before it was written down and made official to fight off heresies. Usually a good heresy would necessitate the dogma being written down ala Papal Infallibility. Only on Doctrine and Morals.

        1. Almost everyone who claims divine inspiration for a doctrine claims that it has always been that way. Scientologists believe that their doctrine has always been true, both before and after L. Ron Hubbard discovered it or had a revelation or whatever he did. Even Bob Jones University is now claiming that it never preached racial segregation (which is just a bold-faced lie).

          But you have to look at the historical record to see if whoever it is has really always said what they say now. In the case of the Church, sometimes yes, sometimes no, but you can pick and choose data points from history to make it seem either way.

  7. Big Gary its good to see there are people who understand what Papal Infallibility is though I think your start date is off but you get an A for the right definition.

    Amen, preach it, sister!

  8. Haven’t posted in a while, but this one strikes close to home because after being raised IFB, I attended – HORRORS – a Catholic university. It’s funny because I went to the University of Dallas, which could charitably be described as the Catholic Bob Jones (only Ave Maria is reputed to be more conservative doctrinally and more restrictive with respect to student conduct). However, I was castigated by my IFB friends and family much more for going to a college that did not ban drinking and smoking among its students than I was for going to a Catholic school. In fact, the rumor mill at my parents’ church specifically alleged that the reason why I chose a Catholic school was because I didn’t want to go to an IFB “college” with rules against drinking alcohol. (Of course, as we all know, the Gospel According to Jack Chick includes the doctrine of oinos-hamartiology (the doctrine of the sin of drinking wine)).

    Real reason I went to Catholic U: I had to get out of the farce that was Patrick Henry College so I thought a politically conservative liberal arts school that was close to my hometown would be a decent choice to finish my undergraduate work. But, as Jack Chick has taught us, there is always the REAL, conspiracy-driven reason for why we do things because we should never take a fellow believer’s explanation at face value unless said believer is a MOG.

    Anyway, quite naturally my experience at UD gave me a great appreciation for the contributions of Catholics to the body of Christ. I had been a fan for a long time of C.S. Lewis’ explanation of denominational Christianity as being an exponent of the inability of us mortals to capture in one belief system the full range of who God is. Living and learning for two years with many dedicated Catholic believers was a very positive experience for me. While some things struck me as a bit odd (e.g., the professor who once stated, probably contrary to his own church’s teaching, that “I trust in the priesthood for my salvation” or the girl who worked in the campus ministry office who once stated “I’ve never read the Bible”), my overall impression of my Catholic friends was a community of sincere, dedicated believers, who understood that there was more to Christianity than the narrow IFB view with which I had been raised. My journey out of the IFB cult and into the broader Christian community involved many more influences both before and after UD, but the Catholic influence over my current beliefs and understanding of Christianity was quite profound.

    May God grant Pope Benedict a peaceful retirement.

    1. “The Catholic Bob Jones University” is a very apt description of the University of Dallas. It’s way out there on the right wing of U.S. Catholicism. It has a large and powerful chapter of Opus Dei, which is sort of the Catholic KKK– Opus Dei had close ties to Franco and other Fascists, which it has never repudiated.

      That said, I know a good many sane people who graduated from UD and feel that they got a good education there.

      When I tell people I attended the University of Texas at Dallas, many of them think I mean UD instead of UTD (they almost couldn’t be more different).

      1. It’s funny because when you tell people you went to UD, they tend to think you went to UTD!! And then there was the lawyer who didn’t hire me to work at his firm and I later found out it was because he thought UD was “a fake college like the University of Phoenix.” Never mind the fact that I was Order of the Coif, Editor-in-Chief of the law review, etc., in law school.

        I think perhaps your claims of Opus Dei’s presence at UD are a smidge overblown, though. The only high-profile university official that I knew of that had explicit ties to OD was history professor Susan Hanssen, the daughter of the spy Robert Hanssen. He used his spy money to send all his kids to highly-ranked Catholic schools; hence her professorship at UD.

        But, by and large, UD was populated by the kids of upper middle class Southern Catholics who took their religion about as seriously as upper middle class southern Baptists take theirs (i.e., not much).

        1. When Robert Hanssen was caught, I remember reading that his children were students at UD.
          But I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the college was in any way implicated in Hanssen, Sr.’s, treason.

    1. I’m one of those former-fundy Catholics. I am thankful for my IFB education in reading Holy Scripture. The NT has passages that I’ve always found favorable to what little I knew about Catholicism. You could say the Bible was very instrumental in me becoming Catholic.

      1. But to tell you the truth, I think this all makes a lot of sense as there are many similarities between fundamentalism and Catholicism. Almost like two sides to the same coin.

        Anyway, I am searching now for a happy medium.

        Maybe I will dabble in the emerging church for a few years just so that I can get in all aspects of craziness before settling on some kind of a happy medium.

  9. I fail to see the humor in any of this. Praying the Lord opens many eyes and draws many to true freedom and Truth through salvation in Him today.

    Galatians 5:1 It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

    I cannot grasp why one would go from the proverbial frying pan of RCC into the proverbial fire of the IFBC or any other denomination.

    SAM

    1. If you don’t find it funny, fine, but here’s why the Chick Tract versions of other religious traditions are worth commenting on:
      It’s one thing to make a reasoned criticism of a doctrine or a philosophy or even an institution. It’s another thing (both more objectionable and, sometimes, more humorous) to make up a bunch of crazy bat guano about a religion or a group, and then insist that everyone should answer your absurd arguments and waste time disproving your wild accusations.

        1. My husband often references, “Taste and see that the Lord is good” at Communion, reminding us not only that the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin but also that He is lovely and good and desirable.

  10. If Darrell is interested, I have a bunch of those Alberto Rivera/Chick comic books and would be willing to lend them to him for further “material”. The Alberto Rivera series used to give me the creeps. I used to believe that stuff until eventually I was like “The Vatican…really? those bunch of old guys? they’re running the world? Riiiight.”

    1. Hi Greg, when you ask someone to pray for you you are asking them to mediate for you. To stand before God and plead for you. Now if you want me to mediate for your salvation I can mediate or pray but only Christ can Mediate because of what He did and who He is . A lawyer mediatews for you, intercessory prayer is mediation. Sa io have one Mediator, Jesus Christ but many mediators who pray for me.

        1. and “Queen of Heaven,” “Morning Star,” “Co-Redemptrix,” and “Temple of the Most Holy Trinity” to name a few

        2. “Co-Redemptrix” – that one absolutely freaks me out. I have one Redeemer, Jesus Christ, and to me calling anyone else a Co-Redeemer seems disrespectful to Him.

          It also bothers me hearing a name applied in Scripture to Christ, the Bright and Morning Star, to Mary.

      1. When I ask someone to pray for me, I’m asking them to pray for me, that’s all. They don’t mediate for me, because there is only one mediator between God and man and that is Jesus Christ.

        1. There is one mediator, Jesus Christ.

          My prayers asking intercession go through Him. My prayers asking Mary to pray for us sinners go through Him. My prayers for my mother go through Him. My prayers asking my patron for direction go through Him.

          And from Him, go through the Father.

        2. Surprised that you would ask such a question, but 1 Timothy 2:1-2 was the first verse that came to mind: “I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone – for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness”…….James 5:16, Ephesians 6:18, Colossians 1:9, 1 Thes 5:25, Phillipians 1:9-11, Romans 15:30, Matthew 18:19 Colossians 4:3, Matthew 17:15, Acts 12:5

        3. Everyone makes it up as they go along including you. With Christianity in particular its been evolving for two millennias hence we see what we do today a la denominations / sects.

        4. Teddy-That does apply to most. But you definitely don’t know me. And it does NOT apply! I pick up the precious word of God, read it and believe it. I don’t care what men/denominations have to say about it!

        5. I’ve got more than enough to apologize to God for without that kind of arrogance. The apostles/authors themselves had far more humility and if you believe in inspiration they were being moved by God inspiration to pen the New Testament, and were much more humble than to claim they were this inerrant.

        6. Teddy – You may have misunderstood me, I’m not saying I’m right all the time! But what I AM saying is that I don’t follow man-made denominations around like a dog on leash or a robot!

  11. Nothing devastated me more (as a new believer)than those Chick comics (Alberto, etc.) which “exposed” Roman Catholicism as sinister, malevolent, demonic, etc.

    Being from a family of devout Catholics, (and finally, at age 21, sincerely trying to please the Lord) I alienated most of my siblings and my dear father and grandmother due to the screwed up indoctrination of that yellow dog ‘journalism’.

    After a long, strange trip through fundyland, I arrive (at age 53) wishing I could have avoided all that sad ‘enlightened’ superiority and wrongheadedness about the Catholic Church which led me away from familial blessings.

    I detest my own gullibility in allowing any of Chick’s demonization of Catholics to influence my approach to Christian teaching. It is just this kind of isolationism from mainline Christianity which led me to believe that the IFB was the ‘way’ to purity in doctrine and practice.

    Instead, (and I’m grateful for the friends and many of the blessings which my family and I received as active members of our former IFB church) I am repairing goodwill with my siblings, and seeing them with new ‘non-judgemental’ eyes. I can break bread in peace with Catholicism.

    1. Nothing devastated me more (as a new believer)than those Chick comics (Alberto, etc.) which β€œexposed” Roman Catholicism as sinister, malevolent, demonic, etc.

      With me it was “This Was Your Life” and “The Beast”, taken during the heyday of Hal Lindsay. The damage is still there.

  12. I’ve never seen so much Catholic-bashing as I have in the past few days. It’s like it’s open season on them, and it’s coming from all directions, from IFB, from GRAs, from feminists, from you-name-it. I’m disgusted, frankly. There’s a lot about Catholicism with which I disagree, but that doesn’t give me a right to trash Catholics in general.

    1. Thank you for that, PP. You are right, it is everywhere. It is all over news sites, forums, and filling up my FB feed. This announcement was like declaring open season on Catholics. I find it disgusting and hurtful.

    2. I’m not a fan of the current (for a little while longer) Pope. I believe he has done many hurtful things during his time as Pope, and before that in his tenure as a Cardinal and a Bishop. But I have no ill will toward him personally, and I sincerely hope and pray that the Roman Catholic Church’s next Pope will be a good one, nay, a great one.

      1. I guess what I mean is that criticizing the Pope, or any individual Catholic, or a particular Church policy, does not have to be Catholic-bashing.

        Of course, those people who see all religion as a form of insanity or chicanery, or the Catholic Church itself as demonic (a la Chick), have other reasons for their remarks on this occasion.

        1. Big Gary,
          Or false information. Thanks for saying that. So many lies have been propagated for so many years. Thanks for your statement. I was ready to sign off this board. I felt like I was reading exactly what we say we dislike in Fundism and then saw your post.
          You are very correct.

    3. Persnickety Thank you! I was waiting for a non Catholic to step in and say that. I was getting ready to get off these boards. As a former fundie growing up then a “Non-Denominational” evangelical for most my adult life and now a convert to Catholicism I was really aghast at how rude and disrespectful some of the people here are. No one has to agree but there is such a thing as disagreeing respectfully and frankly I am disappointed in a few of the people who are posting here. They are respectful of most Protetstants but boy anything Catholic and the arrogance and self-righteous tone is alarming. I think Darrell needs to end this thread to stop this and everyone should always check their facts first. Some of the old fables about Catholicism that are still popping up show me alot of the posters are still relying on Fundie sources for what they know about what we believe. It took me 16 years of research and discernment to debunk what had been ingrained in me by my years leading up to my conversion. I went to the”Horses Mouth” so to speak and checked out what the Catholic church doctrine actually said about their dogma. Anyway no matter what you believe about us Catholics you owe us the same respect as you give to any other religion. 😐
      Thanks again Persnickty

      1. The man is eighty-five years old. No one can say he hasn’t earned his retirement.
        It’s highly unusual for Popes to retire while still alive, but it makes sense to do so instead of keeping the office while incapacitated by bad health and age.

        1. The day his Pontificate began he said the if he was ever not able to carry out his duties he would leave. That took a lot of humility to step down from the office when its so rare. He knows his limits. He is a great theologian and wants to write more. I wish him the best.

  13. Has anyone mentioned the “fact” that the Vatican was responsible for creating ISLAM, as well as Communism, Nazism, and every other “ism” you can think of. Also, according to the Infallible Chick, the Vatican also orchestrated the American Civil War and both World Wars. What makes tracts like these dangerous is that people will believe – WANT to believe – stuff like this unless it is disproved and it is hard, if not impossible, to disprove the Vatican’s involvement in something….

      1. I have read where the Catholic church is also responsible for the sinking of the Titanic!!
        I am so thankful for my conversion to the catholic church. Years I spent as an evangelical believer, Yes even reading those diabolical Chick tracts!! After doing my own research for over five years and a lot of soul searching I crossed over. Now my prayer life has improved, my intention of following Jesus has been strengthened. And I love His Church and my Savior more than ever. Praise God!

        1. Big Dave, I totally agree I just wish it had taken me 5 years of research instead of 16! I finally get those Scriptures like Col 1:24. No one ever knew the answers. THere are so many verses we always skimmed over. John 20:22 and tons more. I was a Christian but couldn’t get passed a certain stage. Now I know that I’m where I belong and I’m closer to Jesus than ever. Praise God! Satan sustains the lies about the Church to keep us from our seperated brethren that also love God. We can only pray that He will light that divine flame in all hearts along with the desire for holiness and intimacy with His son and break through Satans fog of lie!

  14. Gotta admit, when I see a Chick tract I haven’t read, I feel compelled to pick it up and read it.

    And what do Catholics believe concerning salvation? Must one keep the sacraments to be “saved”? Just asking. I live in an area where all the Catholics tend to stay in the clos…uh, sorry.

  15. PS. People like Chick would say “I don’t hate Catholics, just the Roman Catholic Church”
    Isn’t that a bit like saying “I don’t hate you, just your family” ??

    1. I don’t think the “I don’t hate you, just your family” allusion is quite correct. I would say that the current sentiment of “supporting our troops while opposing the war” is more apropos. While that appears to be a self-contained dichotomy, I understand it…the troops are just following orders, similar to the Catholic follower. I have a similar view of Romanism. I love the parishoners, but abhor the heretical teachings of Rome. I had this very discussion with Cardinal Chelli in the Vatican in 1999. He was a very affiable person, even after I told him that I thought the papacy was the antichrist. We proceeded to share some vino and some laughs after that (it was a wedding/reception), but we both understood where the other was coming from. My thoughts are completely in line with Spurgeon’s “Constant War with the Papacy”.

      Here’s something to think about – as a Protestant Historicist (similar to Luther, Calvin, Whitfield, Wesley, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc), I see the Catholic church as the Whore of Revelation, and, therefore, I think the Bible actually has a direct message to believers within Catholicism: Revelation 18:4 -“Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues”.

      1. Great, lucid comment!

        I know of no other church with so much innocent blood on their hands and that Rev 17:6 would apply so appropriately:

        “I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus”

        1. No other church has ever been as large and powerful worldwide.

          The greater the power, the greater the potential for abuse of power.

        2. Power corrupts. Absolute power is even more fun.
          I agree that Rome has a lot of blood on its hands, but that can happen when any religious sysyem becomes dominamt, even Protestant State Churches…. Personally, I think the one of the more subtle reasons for these tracts is to keep the Faithful toeing the Fundy Line. Their reasoning is as follows: – “Don’t get involved with any non-fundamentalist, because they are all heading Rome-ward. If you have anything to do with them you will be sucked in by Rome, you will have to Worship Mary, and parents will be forced to give over your sons and daughters to pedophile priests. Do you want that? then do what we say!”

        3. Paul –

          Even though I consider myself a “Reformation Protestant”, I have to agree with your point about some of the Protestant States. It is a fact that both Zwingli and Calvin were responsible for some religious persecution…and I do not absolve or make apologoes for them just because they were Protestant.

          I also agree that Fundies use Romanism as a boogeyman in order to subjugate their flocks. I also believe that the typical fundy MOG has little to no knowledge of Catholic dogma and uses generalities to scare the sheeple.

          All that being said, the basic fact still remains – the heretical teachings of Rome have damned millions upon millions of followers and the bloody hand of popery knows no equal in the civilized world.

        4. Oh please, Greg. Riiiiight. Millions killed during the Inquisition! (No, not exactly. More like several thousand max.) Millions butchered during the Reformation! (Again, not exactly.) And did you know that the Protestants did quite a bit of butchering themselves? Google what Elizabeth I and Lord Cecil liked to do to Jesuit priests who were trying to bring the Sacraments to England’s recusant Catholics. There’s plenty of blood-spilling to go around, my friend.

          You are sadly misinformed, brother. Here’s a hint: Foxe’s Book of Martyrs is not exactly gospel truth. So…don’t believe everything you read — especially when it’s lurid anti-Catholic propaganda.

        5. Catholic Gate Crasher-

          Assuming that you are responding to my post, I urge you to read it again. I fully acknowledged that some Protestants engaged in religious persecution…and for that, there is no defense (nor did I try to make one). I also condem cuius regio, eius regio (which was used by both Catholics and Protestants to censure/persecute each other)…everyone should have the opportunity to worship how they fit. You, however, try to minimize the bloodshed sanctioned by the papacy. I fear that you are either severely misinformed or purposefully ignorant of the facts. I’m certain that your Catholic teachers told you not believe that things were as bad as reported…and you bought it hook, line and sinker.

          I am quite certain that you also believe that Pope Sixtus V had NOTHING to do with sending (and financing) the Spanish Armada to invade England…

        6. LOL, Bro. Bluto. No, I was responding to Greg. But I suppose I should have been responding to you as well. πŸ˜‰

          Actually, I spent only three years in Catholic school. I majored in history at my very secular college, and I got my info from secular historians, not from Catholic polemicists.

          Nice try, though. πŸ˜‰

      2. Dear Bro Bluto:

        I prefer the ideal interpretation myself.

        As I see it, Mr. Beast depicts political/military power. The whore is ill-gotten wealth and the false prophet is derailed religion.

        John sets the whore on the back of a scarlet beast, suggesting a system of economic extortion enforced by political/military power. Religion that endorses that arrangement thereby constitutes itself as the false prophet.

        As I see it, Re 18 depicts that ideology/authority/power/coercion/extortion/oppression/blasphemy/idolatry/propaganda system called β€˜the world.’ Re 18:3-4 is the gospel call to participate in the New Exodus to leave that skanky system for the Empire of God.

        The beast/whore/false_prophet is anyone who does their works at any time or place, under any name or system.

        Christian Socialist

        1. CS – I would love to get together sometime and talk about the relative merits of the historicist vs ideal interpretations. Perhaps one of us would be swayed?…

    1. Me too. There are a few here who often say “back when I was a fundamentalist”, but still hold to exclusivist dogmatic positions from which they will not bend and who agree with Chick that the Catholics are inherently evil. Another irony is that while most Catholics that I know are moderate and reasonable, there are many parallels between Benedict and evangelical fundamentalists. Just look at the wagon-circling reaction to doctrinal challenges, or to sex scandals.

    2. I guess we have a different perception. I don’t see any thing anti-Catholic FILLING UP the thread. People are posting their perspectives; that’s what happens with discussions. Disagreement doesn’t automatically mean dislike.

  16. Must be my Quaker Presbyterian upbringing because I grew up in a house, and educated in a school, where we respected folks that went to different churches. In our row house neighborhood in Philadelphia, we lived among Jews, Catholics and others. Next to us, across the street and across the driveway, street after street. So this entire discussion is so foreign to me. I know that when I have visited Catholic churches, I have experienced reverence, mystery and a worshipful experience. Most of my friends in Philadelphia are Catholics and their school system is so much better than the public one in years past.

    1. We should never judge “religion” by our “experience” (pentecostals have that one wrapped up) But we should always judge “religion” ……..ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES…..1 Corinthians 15: 3-4

      1. Greg, you’re starting to use ranty punctuation. If you don’t want to seem like a semiliterate yahoo getting upset because the whole world doesn’t think exactly the way you do, try writing like this:

        We should never judge religion by our experience–Pentecostals have that one wrapped up–but we should always judge religion according to the Scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15: 3-4.

        Since slapping a verse number on an argument and expecting people to be too cowed to read the actual verse is a classic tactic of bully-Christians and therefore to be avoided by people who really want to have a discussion, here are the verses cited (KJV): For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures[.] This comes from the beginning of Paul’s summary of the Gospel.

        Are you arguing that some of the “folks that went to different churches” mentioned by Presbyterian Quaker in Fundyland did not hear the Resurrection preached? If so, which ones? Or did you mean the Jews PQF talked about? In that case . . . um, you do know that Jews are not supposed to believe in Christian doctrine, right?

        1. Ranty punctuation! Wow, I’ve been accused of alot of things but, ranty punctuation! My, my!……. My purpose in posting comments is simply to communicate a message or thought.

          My point to “presby” was simply not to be overly-swayed by the “experience” I thouht I conveyed that thought clearly.

  17. My uncle is an Archbishop and I’m tempted to get his opinion on this whole post and the comments, purely out of curiosity. I know next to nothing about Catholicism. He was raise Baptist so he’s probably seen the the tracts before. I definitely remember the garbage we were taught about Catholics growing up.

  18. I grew up as a Methodist in Northern Ireland, where anti-Catholic feelings are practicaaly part of the Protestant DNA. If a church teaches something, or have a form of praise, or hymns or whatever, that Protestants aren’t sure about, many don’t go to the Scriptures to check the validity of what is taught or happening – they check if it is accepted my the Catholic Church. If the Catholics accept it, then it is NOT of God. End of Argument. SOMETIMES they do go to the Scriptures, but usually to find backing for why it is can’t be of God if the Catholics accept it.

    There do seem to be an immense number of parallels between the IFB and Northern Ireland’s Evangelical Protestantism in general. That is why I find the forum to fascinating. So much of what is covered here resonates with me.

  19. I’m intrigued that the Magen David is up there with the hammer and sickle and swastika as, I suppose, things the Church controls…and yet on the last page, Jewish SCOTUS justices Breyer, Kagan and Ginsburg are apparently NOT under the Vatican’s influence. They also look a lot more normal than Jack Chick’s usual Jews. What gives, or am I asking for too much consistency from Chick?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.