My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« Cindy Kiro sent to the woodshed | Main | Richard Dawkins admits possibility of Intelligent Design? »



There are a lot of very interesting things happening right now. This is just one of them. A pretty big one, though.


Hopefully, next they will affirm salvation is by faith alone and dump purgatory. Mariology should be re-visited too.



Purgatory and Mariology will never be dumped.

Salvation by faith alone is a really interesting one as there is a misunderstanding on both the part of Catholics and Protestants on what the RCC actually teaches on this. The Catholic position can be summarised as "Salvation is by Grace alone".

For more, if you are interested, read Why Catholicism Makes Protestantism Tick: Louis Bouyer on the Reformation.


Galileo, Luther, will Calvin be next?!? That would be cool.


I read a prophetic word at the begining of the year, that there would be revival
in the Catholic Church, and I laughed....
but hey I wait and hold my breath. This is a HUGE admition, quite unbelievable, what I would call a miracle really.
Now this is new, Salvation by grace, I was always taught by the Catholic church that salvation was ONLY by the Catholic church.


Like I said at the begining of the year, there is a HUGE shaking coming, I think God has already started.

Now I will just sit back and see what else He achieves.


Although Luther was excommunicated from the Church and he didn't agree (and rightly so, in some cases) with some of the practices, I don't know that he totally distanced himself from recognising the Authority that the Church has, as I think can be seen in the two quotes below (which came after the schism).

"Accordingly, we concede to the papacy that they sit in the true Church, possessing the office instituted by Christ and inherited from the apostles, to teach, baptize, administer the sacrament, absolve, ordain, etc., " Sermon for the Sunday after Christ’s Ascension; John 15:26-16:4 (2nd sermon), page 265, paragraph 28. (1522)
"We concede -- as we must -- that so much of what they [the Catholic Church] say is true: that the papacy has God's word and the office of the apostles, and that we have received Holy Scriptures, Baptism, the Sacrament, and the pulpit from them. What would we know of these if it were not for them?" Sermon on the gospel of St. John, chaps. 14 - 16 (1537), in vol. 24 of LUTHER'S WORKS, St. Louis, Mo., Concordia, 1961, 304

What would we know, if it were not for them....
We would have the scriptures, and then thousands of thousands would not have needed to be slautered in the name of the Catholic church because these godly men and women would not add or take anything away from the scriputres, nor deny
the COMPLETE work of SALVATION of Christ and Christ alone on the cross.


Salvation is indeed by the grace of God, His Son Jesus died to effect that for us. It is a free gift but faith is required to receive it. While the Holy Spirit prepares us we have to take the personal step of acceptance of the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Something is stirring in the Catholic Church; I feel that Benedict is a man who truly knows God and is known by Him. I didn't know of the prophecy Paula wrote of but I could endorse it.

John Tertullian

Now, now everyone, don't get too excited. Many years ago the central powers in the Church of Rome determined that atheistic rationalistic materialism was the real threat--and that it may well engulf Christendom. In order to counter this threat, Rome decided to build alliances with "natural" allies. The natural allies were identified to be Protestant and Orthodox churches, and the Muslim nations. It was and is held that these contituencies share a lot in common with Rome: namely, all alike are monotheistic, and, all believe in the authority of human reason. The strategy is to forge alliances with these constituencies on the grounds of a common monotheism, and combine together using the tools of reason to combat atheistic materialism--which, Rome believes, threatens the very existence of the Church.
Accordingly, decades ago, Rome opened up dialogues with Islamic clergy and scholars. Ratzinger has put this process on the "front burner" and has actively reached out to Islamic, Orthodox and now, Protestant communities. "Let's get together to fight our common enemy" is the underlying motivation.
But before we get to excited about this, let's be a bit more discerning. In this regard, everyone should read the lecture Benedict delivered at the University of Regensburg, 12 September, 2006--the one which caused such furore in the Islamic constituency (clearly indicating that that constituency had not bothered to read the speech.) The speech is an extended appeal for the use of reason not force, and an approbation of the marriage of Greek and Christian thought. Therefore Muslims, deeply influenced by Aristotle, and Rome, also deeply influenced by Aristotle and Plato, have a great deal in common.
The Reformation had good and bad elements (according to Benedict). Sola Scriptura--the Scriptures alone--the sole absolute authority coming from God's Word--that was at the heart of the Reformation was an extremist aberration, because it divorced faith from the authority of human reason.
Rome is at heart rationalistic--it always has been. It correctly sees that many Christian communions are equally rationalistic and it is seeking to reach out to them. Let me assure you: this will produce no new Reformation! The Reformation was a turning once again to the Word and authority of the Living God (which Benedict calls "primordial"--that is, primitive.) Until God's people give up on their idolatry, the admixture of God and their rationalistic ratiocinactions, there will be no Reformation. God will not tolerate idols in his presence (remember the first commandment)--and idols are always the creation and fruit of the rationalistic mind and imagination of man. Sola scriptura. Sola fide. Sola gratia. Solus Christus. Soli Deo gloria. Then we will have Reformation indeed.


Amen and amen.


Paula, sorry but, "not add or take away from the Scriptures"? That's very hypocritical of you to say when Luther took seven books away from the Scriptures (because he didn't like what they said), which the Scripture itself says not to do -

"I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book. If anyone shall add to them, GOD will add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if anyone shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, GOD will take away his portion from the tree of life, and from the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book." Rev 22:18-19

Luther added the word 'alone' to his translation of Romans 3:28 because that verse also contradicted his teaching of 'Sola Fides', "For we reckon that a man is justified by faith alone independently of the works of the law."

The entire books which he alone removed from their rightful place in Holy Scripture and placed in an appendix are, Baruch, Judith, Tobit, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1 and 2 Maccabees. Later, these books were removed entirely from Protestant bibles. He did the same with four books of the New Testament. These books had been in all Bibles for over 1100 years. Who had the authority to remove them? Did Martin Luther? Did any other single person? NO.

No one denies Christ's Salvation on the cross. Sorry Paula, but I think you have a lack of understanding of many Catholic things, and instead of trying to find out the answers you just throw it all away.

Martin Luther (1483-1546) is to be given the credit for inventing the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Bible Only or Bible Sufficiency). He had separated himself from the authority of the Papacy and the Magisterium, and thereby so doing lost all authority regarding Church matters. He then turned to the Bible, a book, as the sole source of authority. Can a book ever be a sole source of authority? Can the Constitution of the United States stand alone without an authoritive body to interpret it? What authoritive body is there to resolve disputes between opposing interpretations of the laws written within it? How long would this country have lasted if the founding fathers had not had the foresight to establish a Supreme Court, which has the final word in the interpretation of the Law of the Land? This country would have been split into factions right from the very beginning. Isn't this exactly what happened to Protestantism? Luther separated from the Catholic Church in 1521 and immediately there were squabbles between him, Zwingli, his fellow reformer from Switzerland, and Thomas Munzer. In that same year, Munzer broke away and formed the Anabaptists. John Calvin separated in 1536 and formed Calvinism. John Knox parted company and formed the Presbyterians in 1560. John Smith started the Baptists in 1609, and John and Charles Wesley started Methodism in 1739. From the moment they separated themselves from the Catholic Church, Protestantism lost the 'Supreme Court' of Bible interpretation, the Papacy and the Magisterium, and they lost all of the authority given to those two offices by GOD Himself. See the files regarding 'Authority', and 'Magisterium', elsewhere on this website (i.e. Catholic Treasure Chest website). The splits continue on to this very day, as there are now over 33,800* differing non-Catholic denominations, none of which can claim authority in the interpretation of the Law of GOD, Holy Scripture. It has become so bad that the sects are feuding amongst themselves and are further splitting internally. There are scores of splinters in the Baptists alone, and several splinters in all of the other major Protestant sects. It is every man for himself in Bible interpretation for Protestantism. If it feels good for you, it must be OK....but be prepared to suffer the consequences. There is no unity in what Martin Luther started. If anything, he made a large part of the Body of Christ impotent. It is easy to see the work of satan here, as it is HIS plan to divide and conquer. See Matt 12:25 for Satan's plan, and John 10:16 for the plan of Jesus Christ. *World Christianity Enclopedia, April 2001, a Protestant publication.

Now what do you suppose is the root cause of all of this chaos? It was the implementation of the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura, and with it, the private interpretation of Holy Scripture (forbidden in 2Pet 1:20 and 2Pet 3:16). Now, all of Protestantism can interpret the "Constitution of GOD's Law", the Holy Bible, as they see fit, bringing upon themselves splits, disunity, infighting, and chaos. Yes indeed, it would be a strange thing if GOD had given us an inerrant Book, and had failed to give us an authoritive, infallible interpreter for it. Now you and I both know that GOD would never do this.


Yes Fletch,

The INFALLIABLE interpreter of it....

You can stick to those INFALLIABLE words of your ppopes, and I will stick to the infalliable words of Jesus.
The Catholic church teach
Mary as a co-redeemer and the Word of God teaches that Christ and Christ alone is the redeemer.

I know whom I believe.
And I don't and won't as you say 'run away' from that at all....

Taken from a recent article...
Five cardinals have sent a letter inviting prelates worldwide to join them
in petitioning Benedict XVI to declare a fifth Marian dogma they said
would "proclaim the full Christian truth about Mary."

The text, released last week, includes the petition that asks the Pope to
proclaim Mary as "the Spiritual Mother of All Humanity, the co-redemptrix
with Jesus the redeemer, mediatrix of all graces with Jesus the one
mediator, and advocate with Jesus Christ on behalf of the human race."

The signatories of the letter are five of the six cardinal co-sponsors of
the 2005 International Symposium on Marian Coredemption, held in Fatima:
Cardinal Telesphore Toppo, archbishop of Ranchi, India; Cardinal Luis
Aponte Martínez, retired archbishop of San Juan, Puerto Rico; Cardinal
Varkey Vithayathil, major archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly, India;
Cardinal Riccardo Vidal, archbishop of Cebu, Philippines; and Cardinal
Ernesto Corripio y Ahumada, retired archbishop of Mexico City.

Cardinal Edouard Gagnon, who died last August, was the sixth cardinal
co-sponsor of the 2005 conference. He was the president of the Pontifical
Council of the Family from 1974 until he resigned in 1990.

The secretariat of the five cardinal co-patrons released the English
translation of the letter, which includes a translation and the original
Latin text of the "votum," or petition, that was formulated in 2005 and
presented formally to the Pope by Cardinal Telesphore in 2006.

The petition states: "We believe the time opportune for a solemn
definition of clarification regarding the constant teaching of the Church
concerning the Mother of the Redeemer and her unique cooperation in the
work of Redemption, as well as her subsequent roles in the distribution of
grace and intercession for the human family."

Pointing to ecumenical concerns, the petition continues: "It is of great
importance [...] that people of other religious traditions receive the
clarification on the highest level of authentic doctrinal certainty that
we can provide, that the Catholic Church essentially distinguishes between
the sole role of Jesus Christ, divine and human Redeemer of the world, and
the unique though secondary and dependent human participation of the
Mother of Christ in the great work of Redemption."

The text adds that the move would be "the ultimate expression of doctrinal
clarity at the service of our Christian and non-Christian brothers and
sisters who are not in communion with Rome."

In a press statement released along with the letter, the cardinal
co-sponsors reiterated the same ecumenical concern and said the
proclamation of a fifth Marian dogma would be a "service of clarification
to other religious traditions and to proclaim the full Christian truth
about Mary."

The statement added, "This initiative also intends to start an in-depth
worldwide dialogue on Mary's role in salvation for our time. [...] Should
this effort prove successful, a proclamation would constitute a historical
event for the Church as only the fifth Marian dogma defined in its
2,000-year history."

Cardinal Aponte Martínez, one of the cardinal co-patrons said: "I believe
the time is now for the papal definition of the relationship of the Mother
of Jesus to the each one of us, her earthly children, in her roles as
co-redemptrix, mediatrix of all graces and advocate.

"To solemnly proclaim Mary as the spiritual mother of all peoples is to
fully and officially recognize her titles, and consequently to activate,
to bring to new life the spiritual, intercessory functions they offer the
Church for the new evangelization, and for humanity in our serious present
world situation."

John Tertullian

Fletch, I understand the position you are advocating and I can see that you are earnest in promulgating it. But, how on earth can the claim that the Roman church is the authoritative infallible interpreter of the inerrant Scriptures be taken seriously, when, in the case of the current discussion as just one example, we learn that the Papacy and the Magisterium are apparently poised to rehabilitate Galileo and Luther? So was the Magisterium infallible and inerrant in excommunicating Galileo and Luther in the first place, or is it in error now in their pupported restoration? You cannot have it both ways. So, which ruling of the Magisterium, in your view, is wrong?
The history of the Magisterium's inconsistent rulings, alone, without any further reflection on Scripture or any other authority, tells us unerringly that Rome's claim to be the infallible and authoritative interpreter of Scripture hs to be either a meaningless or a false claim.
If the former, no-one knows what the claim means. In the end it is a wax nose to be twisted or reshaped according to the fashion of the moment. Today's errors might be declared tomorrow's truths by the Magisterium and vice versa--as has actually occurred. Either way, meaningless or false, the claims of the Magisterium are empty. I have a sneaking suspicion that Rome, at its heart, believes that this is actually the case--they are empty claims. If that's the case Rome should come out of the closet, and fess up. It would be wonderful indeed if they uttered this confession at the same time as the rehabilitation of the former-infallibly-judged heretics. They might as well go whole hog and do the job thoroughly.


The apocryhal books were never part of the canon of the early church and were specifically rejected as such. Luther rightly discerned their lack of validity as the inspired Word of God.

Marian worship is interesting. It's origins seem to have come out of the dark or middle ages, offering hope when peasants had none but were taxed by the Church to view relics or help to get their loved ones out of purgatory. It was Luther's objection to this practice which turned him, when Tetzel turned up selling indulgences.

Along with Paula I can add amen to John Tertullians's comment.


Thank you for the interesting information on possible directions for the Roman Catholic Church:

Interesting to read this recommendation:

"To solemnly proclaim Mary as the spiritual mother of all peoples is to
fully and officially recognize her titles, and consequently to activate,
to bring to new life the spiritual, intercessory functions they offer the
Church for the new evangelization, and for humanity in our serious present
world situation."

Can anyone see any merit in this? We know little about Mary. Jesus was the man.

As for rehabilitation of Galileo and Luther - I think this will do much to reverse the centuries of embarrassment suffered by Catholics. Yes, we all spot the U turn. But most modern organisations choose to the the hit short term, to provide better medium and long term prospects. It is a good marketing strategy.


'Jesus was the man.' -Peter.
You're making progress Peter.


Well done Peter, indeed, "Jesus was the man" and faith is a ship that is always on the move. Put him at the helm and anything is possible.
Kind regards
A real Peter.


Haven't got much time to reply now, but..

Kev, the Apocryphal books were part of all Bibles and were always accepted until Luther removed them which he had no right to do.

John, Rome only claims to be infallible as regards teaching on Faith and Morals, and I believe that they are through the Holy Spirit and Jesus' saying that 'whatever you bind on Earth will be considered bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on Earth shall be considered loosed in Heaven'.

Jesus gave the Church that authority. Otherwise, where are we? 33,000 different churches with different interpretations of the one book. They can't ALL be right can they? There HAS to be an authority to interpret The Law and this Authority is Peter (to whom Jesus gave the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and whom Jesus built his Church on) and those who took over his office.

Did the Church ever say from 'the Seat' (ex-Cathedra) that the Earth is flat? I don't think so.

You can see in the letters of the New Testament and in Acts that this Authoritative body is needed. Look at all the issues Peter and the first apostles had to sort out. Many of Paul's letters are written to correct.

Even Luther says -

Why are you searching heavenward in search of my keys? Do you not understand, Jesus said, 'I gave them to Peter. They are indeed the keys of heaven, but they are not found in heaven for I left them on earth. Peter's mouth is my mouth, his tongue is my key case, his keys are my keys. They are an office. They are a power, a command given by God through Christ to all of Christendom for the retaining and remitting of the sins of men. (Martin Luther 1530 - after he left the Church

John, may I ask, what is your Authority? If you don't quite understand something and the answer isn't apparent in the Bible, what do you do? You'll probably say the Holy Spirit will guide you. Well, the Early Church sure had just had a big dollop of the Holy Spirit and they still needed teaching and correcting by the Apostles (and Jesus said to Peter 'feed my sheep', 'tend my sheep').

ps, if it wasn't for Mary's "yes" there would be no 'man'. And yes, she is our Mother. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ, and God is our Father - that makes Mary our Mother.

The comments to this entry are closed.