Mathman asked me..."Do you really believe that promoting the validity of Malachy is the same as making an argument in favor of all of us converting to Catholicism?  How so?" 

 

Two reasons,

(1) Basically, you're still arguing that the Catholic Church has some sort of favored status to be given a prophecy about it's future while all other denominations lack any such prophecy.  Why was there no similar prophecy about the future of the Lutheran Church?  Does G-d favor Rome?  Is that the conclusion we come to?  Why would G-d single out the Catholic Church as the only denomination that would get such a prophecy unless they had more favor?   So where is the Malachy of the Baptist Church?

(2) Malachy spoke favorably about the validity of the Catholic Church.  So if he was speaking under the inspiration of God, then aren't we claiming G-d was using Malachy to tell us how wonderful the Church was?   Because despite the Protestant re-write to his prophecies, he never claimed the last pope would be anything but a faithful shepherd who would nourish the flock.  Is that how you see the Catholic Church?

 

I think most priests are sincere, although someone can be sincerely wrong.  The pope is not infallible, and that doctrine contradicts their reversal of indulgences and (more recently, in 1999) salvation by works .  You can't rise to the top of that organization without believing in some error, like the Mary thing.  But I can say much the same about several Protestant denominations as well that teach certain things.  But the Catholic Church is still teaching that Yeshua died for our sins, and rose again.  People can find the Gospel in the Catholic Church.  I dont' think the Cathlic Church is any more susceptible to being corrupted than any other Christian denomination, although their size means the consequences of that are more significant if such a thing happens.

 

Shalom, Joe