The Sufficiency of Christ

images (1)

On June, 20, 2016, Pope Francis tweeted:

The Christian journey is based on what I will call the “coordinates of truth.” In John 14:6, Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” Then in John 17:17, He prayed to the Father, saying, “Your word is truth.

First John 5:6 also says: “It is the Spirit who bears witness [to Jesus Christ] because the Spirit is truth.

In essence, Jesus is the truth, God’s Word – the Bible – is the truth and the Spirit is truth. Any doctrine, no matter how dogmatic, that is not true to Jesus, the Bible and the witness of the Holy Spirit, is a deception.

In a certain Catholic article titled “The Protty Jesus,” the writer stated that the Catholic and Protestant Jesus “are not really related, beyond the most basic things.” Consequently, we non-Catholics “do not worship the same Jesus as Catholics do.”

He’s right.

One of the key areas where we differ greatly is on the sufficiency of Christ – solo Christos. And the best way to demonstrate this is by comparing what the Bible teaches with what Roman Catholicism teaches.

I know the visceral response of the Catholic will be, “We teach and read the Bible too!” Yes, that’s true, but there is a big difference between reading the Bible to learn what God has said in it and reading some contrived ideas into it.

It’s self-deception for one to think he is saved or looking forward to heaven if one believes untruths about Jesus who is the only Way to Heaven.

The stakes are too high and eternity is too real to allow sentiments or rigidity cloud this issue. Here are some examples:

Salvation by Christ or a Church?

The Second Vatican Council decree on ecumenism explains: For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone which is the universal help towards salvation that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained” (Catechism #816, p 215)

Looking at God’s Word on the subject of salvation, you will not find a single verse requiring one to go through a church to be saved.

What did Jesus Himself say?
“For what my Father wants is that all who see the Son and believe in him should have eternal life” (Jn. 6:40).

He says “those who hear my words and believe in him who sent me have eternal life … [they] have already passed from death to life” (Jn. 5:24). He says again “he who believes has eternal life” (Jn. 6:47).

Salvation from eternal condemnation is received by believing in Christ “but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (Jn. 3:18).

If the Catholic church was necessary for salvation, then Jesus was lying.

Apostle Paul wrote: “For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9-10)

Nothing is said about being saved by a church here.

Paul defines the Gospel as how Christ died for our sins and His resurrection and says “you are saved by the gospel if you hold firmly to it.” (1 Cor. 15:2).

He says the Gospel “is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes.” (Rom. 1:16).

If salvation is obtained by joining the Catholic church, then Paul was lying and the Holy Spirit inspiring him was also lying.

Apostle John wrote: “Some, however, did receive him and believed in him, so he gave them the rights to become God’s children” (Jn. 1:12).

That’s the only condition to be saved and become a child of God. Therefore, if the Catholic church is the only visible and universal sacrament of salvation, then apostle John was lying, so was the Holy Spirit.

But Jesus is truth, the Bible is truth and the Holy Spirit is truth. The key to salvation is believing in Jesus, not joining a church – whether Catholic or Protestant.

When the Philippian jailer asked Paul “what must I do to be saved?” did Paul say “you must come to the Catholic Church?” No. He said “believe in the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 16:31).

The moment one believes the Gospel – which is about the death and resurrection of Christ offering us forgiveness and eternal life – he is saved.

No church can offer salvation because the church is simply a community of the saved. The church is not the Saviour. Not a single person in the New Testament looked up to a church for salvation and why would they, when it’s clear that Jesus alone is the Saviour.

If the Catholic church is right about this, then the Bible was wrong and Jesus was mistaken.

The Sufficiency of Christ’s Mediation

For, taken up to heaven, she [Mary] did not lay aside this saving role, but by her manifold acts of intercession continues to win for us gifts of eternal salvation” (The Documents of Vatican II, p. 91).

Not a single verse of the Bible assigns a saving or interceding role to Mary.

Jesus said about His sheep: “I give them eternal life and they shall never perish” (Jn. 10:28).

He “is able, now and always, to save those who come to God through him because he lives forever to plead with God for them” (Heb. 7:25).

He has the power to “keep [us] from stumbling and to present [us] before his glorious presence without fault.” (Jude 1:24)

Why would the Bible emphatically declare that “there is no salvation through anyone else” and no “other name under heaven given to the human race” if Mary also dispenses salvation as Rome says? (Acts 4:12)

Both the Bible and Catholicism do not agree.

Jesus’ intercession is based on His Mediatorship. If Mary is also interceding for mankind, it means Jesus’ mediation is grossly insufficient. But God came down as Man to graciously establish His covenant with us.

Jesus, as the “mediator of the new covenant” (Heb. 9:15) intervenes between God and man. He represents God before mankind and represents mankind before God.

As the God-Man, He has “given us a ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18). This ultimately disqualifies Mary or anyone else.

Jesus came to earth to save sinners. He kept inviting them “Come to Me” – not to Mary or a church for salvation (Mt. 11:28). At no point do we find a sinner being afraid to go to Jesus asking Mary to approach Him on his/her behalf.

We find examples of Nicodemus, Zaccheus, the woman at Bethany, the penitent thief on the cross and many others who came to Christ. They all approached Him directly without going through Mary.

He showed them love and care more than Mary ever did, so, to suggest that He has lost that superior and divine love and mercy for sinners, that we are now to go to Him through Mary is utterly blasphemous. It denies a central truth: “there is one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5).

The sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice

“Each time the Mass is offered, the Sacrifice of Christ is repeated. A new sacrifice is not offered, but by divine power, one and the same sacrifice is repeated … In the Mass, Christ continues to offer Himself to the Father as He did on the Cross.” (The New Saint Joseph Catechism, #2, 171)

But the Bible clearly teaches that Christ’s sacrifice must not (and cannot) be repeated.

He “does not need to offer sacrifices every day” (Heb. 7:27) because He “was offered in sacrifice once to take away the sins of many.” (Heb. 9:28)

The offering of His body was “made once and for all” (10:10) and “By the virtue of that one single offering he has achieved the eternal perfection of all who are sanctified” (10:14).

Why would God persistently tell us Jesus’ one sacrifice is sufficient if it needs to be repeated?

After presenting these facts to a Catholic guy years ago, he paused briefly, then said “The original Greek couldn’t have said these. The English Bibles have been distorted!” When I asked him to prove this, he couldn’t. That was a lame excuse.

Jesus said “It is finished” (Jn. 19:30). The Greek word there is tetelestai which literally means “completely complete.” Jesus has offered a perfect and complete sacrifice to God by His infinite power.

To deny this is a blasphemous reduction of Jesus into a perpetual sacrificial victim in the hands of men.

The Sufficiency of His blood

From the most ancient times in the Church good works were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners … [by] the prayers and good works of holy people … the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed…” (Vatican II, Vol. 1, 65)

On the contrary, redemption (or salvation) was accomplished by Christ in His sacrifice upon the cross and is received by faith: “Christ entered once and for all into the Most Holy Place … [with] his own blood and obtained eternal salvation for us” (Heb. 9:12).

None of man’s efforts can add to it.

“For by the blood of Christ we are set free, that is, our sins are forgiven” (Eph. 1:7). There is no way our own good works can cleanse our sins or redeem us.

The penalty of sin is infinite and only God could pay it. To reject this one-way redemption provided by the blood of Christ is to remain in sin and eternal condemnation.

Romans 5:9 says “By his blood we are now put right with God…” The present tense used means that once a person repents and believes the Gospel, he is justified and receives eternal life that moment. He doesn’t have to merit it with good works, sacraments or rites.

“The gift of God is eternal life through Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). We don’t work for this gift of salvation, we only receive it by faith in Christ.

Salvation is received here and now and Jesus saves completely, He doesn’t save by half or instalmentally (see Jn. 3:16, 1Cor. 1:21, 2Tim. 1:9, Tit. 3:5).

It matters not how much lip service Catholicism pays to solo Christo, its doctrines explicitly deny it, and a truth-seeking Catholic has a choice to make: to take sides against Jesus, the Bible and the Holy Spirit in order to follow a religion or  humble himself/herself and agree with God’s truth and consequently reject the lies of men.

But one thing is clear: every false religion tries to take the glory away from Christ and diminish His work and place it on a human figure, false god or religious organization.

“Mysteries” of the Mass

To a novice, the Catholic Mass is the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. That is not exactly true. Pope Paul VI sums up the Catholic belief:

“We believe that as the bread and wine consecrated by the Lord at the Last Supper were changed into His Body and His Blood which were to be offered for us at the cross, so the bread and wine consecrated by the priest are changed into the Body and Blood of Christ enthroned gloriously in heaven, and We believe that the mysterious presence of the Lord, under the appearance of these elements which seem to our senses the same after as before the Consecration, is a true, real and substantial presence… This mysterious change is…called by the Church transubstantiation” (Official Church Teachings – Christ Our Lord, 1978, 411).

I. The belief that Jesus turned bread and wine into His body and blood at the Last Supper is supported with 3 Bible passages:

a) Matthew 26: 26-29

When Jesus “consecrated” the bread and wine, He was still literally there with the disciples. He didn’t vanish to appear as bread and wine. His statement “this is My body” there is symbolic. The Greek verb “is” (estin) used there also means “signify” and some versions render it that way.

He said: “I shall not drink of this fruit of the vine again, until I drink it with you, new wine, in the kingdom of my Father” (v. 29). Now, if the wine had changed to blood because He called it “My blood” as it’s argued, that means it also changed back into wine when He called it “fruit of the vine.”

The Lord simply blessed the bread and wine, He didn’t perform a miracle there. He “took the cup and gave thanks [Greek: Eucharistesas]” (Matt. 26:27) just as Godly people blessed and gave thanks for their meals (Deut. 8:10, Matt. 6:11; Rom. 14:6).

b) John 6:53-57

The statement latched onto is: “Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” Catholics refuse to consider the context of this passage. Of course, some Jews were troubled at those words and walked away because they couldn’t understand what Jesus meant. It’s unwise to deduce from their action that Jesus was teaching transubstantiation.

It’s argued that the word “to chew” (Gr: trogo) in vs 54 proves we are to literally eat Christ’s flesh, but Jesus had not instituted the Lord’s Supper here. Bear in mind also that Jesus didn’t establish a mysterious rite of eating flesh or drinking blood for that would be a violation of the Law of Moses which He came to fulfill (Lev. 7:26-27; 17:10-12).

In John 6:25, He says “I am the bread of life“. If we take this literally as Catholics have taken verse 53, then Jesus is a loaf of bread. He said in John 10:9 “I am the door...” Does this also make Him a piece of wood? No.

Psalm 91:4 says: “He [God] shall cover you with His feathers, and under his wings shall you trust.” If we take this expression literally also, then God is a big bird. Here is the point: in Biblical interpretation, a word is taken as literal when it’s used literally and figurative when used figuratively or when its literal use violates Scripture or Logic.

Jesus spoke in parables to the multitudes (Matt. 13:34) and this were His audience in John 6, so He used a figurative, spiritual rather than a literal or physical language. He consistently called men to believe in Him using different analogies – seed, sheep, water, new birth, bread – to illustrate it.

He told Nicodemus that those who believed in Him would receive a new birth. He wasn’t speaking of a physical birth but a spiritual birth (John 3:16).

He promised the woman at the well “living water” and “a well of water” springing up within her. He didn’t mean physical water but spiritual cleansing (John 4:10-14). When He said “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness…” (Jn. 8:12), He wasn’t speaking of physical light, but spiritual light to all who receive Him.

The “hunger and thirst” Jesus referred to in John 6:35 was spiritual since the bread was not physical. Catholics claim they are physically eating Christ, but if that is the case, they shouldn’t hunger or thirst physically either – but they do.

If the “hungering and thirsting” are spiritual terms, so are the eating and drinking. The different metaphors Jesus used – eating, drinking, coming, believing – all stand for the same: receiving Him by faith (vv. 35, 36, 47, 48, 51).

c) 1 Cor. 11:25-29

That Jesus said “this cup is the new covenant in my blood” doesn’t change the cup into the new covenant, in the same vein, the elements do not change into flesh and blood because of the words “this is my body” in Latin.

Catholics are reading a dogma officially defined in the 13th century back into this Bible passage. That is an abuse of Scripture. Paul here speaks of the Lord’s Supper, a simple meal in which Christians proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes, not an ornate sacrament which “re-presents” the sufficient sacrifice of Calvary.

II. The Eucharistic liturgy gives priests a high footing:

“Thus the priest may, in a certain manner be called the creator of his Creator, since by saying the word of consecration, he creates as it were, Jesus in the sacrament” (Alphonsus Liguori, Duties and Dignities of the Priest, 27).

How blasphemous to believe priests have the power to pull Christ down to appear as bread to be handled and swallowed! How blasphemous to think some men can create Christ!

Now, if the bread was really being changed into the flesh of Christ, why does it breed mould after a period of time? That proves it’s not changed to Christ’s body because God wouldn’t let His body experience decay. “You will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, nor will you let your faithful one see decay” (Ps. 16:10).

III. The Mass is defined as: “A sacrifice in which the Sacrifice of the Cross is perpetuated;  – A memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, who said ‘do this in memory of me.’ Luke 22:19” (Eucharistum Mysterium, May 25, 1967).

This is where a clear contrast between Roman Catholicism and the Bible is striking. Jesus declared at the cross: “It is finished!” (Jn. 19:30). He offered the perfect sacrifice to God paid the full penalty for the sins of mankind.

His sacrifice took place once for all on the cross and is never to be repeated (and doesn’t have to) like the OT sacrifices that couldn’t take away sins (Heb 7:27, 9:25-10:2; 10:12-18). The fact that the Catholic Mass has to be repeated proves its ineffectiveness because if once is not enough, even a billion would not.

Also, it’s an impossibility to “perpetuate” or “re-present” the sacrifice of Christ at the cross because it’s a specific event that has not only occurred, but has also achieved its full purpose. One can only remember or honour an historic event.

Christ is now at the right hand of God in an immortal, resurrected and glorious body which can never die again. “I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! ” (Rev. 1:18). He’s not dying or shedding His blood in heaven because He already did that once at the cross. The “dying-rising” Jesus of Catholicism is not the Jesus of the Bible.

IV. Transubstantiation is said to be a “mystery” or “miracle.” If that is the case, where is the proof that any change occurs? The bread still looks and tastes as bread and the wine still tastes as wine after consecration.

If Cyanide is added to the wine before “consecration” what priest would be willing to drink it afterwards? A miracle functions within the bounds of reality and is verifiable, otherwise it’s not a miracle.

When Catholics are asked to present an evidence for this “mystery,” they bleat “we believe it changes…we accept in faith…that they change into flesh and blood under the appearance of bread and wine.” We are not interested in beliefs without proofs.

Examine all the miracles in the Bible. When Jesus turned water into wine, everyone saw and tasted that it had changed. The water didn’t change into wine “under the appearance” of water. When God parted the Red Sea, both the Israelites and the Egyptians saw it and walked on dry land. The sea didn’t part “under the appearance” of remaining closed.

Did Jesus raise the dead “under the appearance” of remaining dead or heal the blind “under the appearance” of being unable to see? Such a fantasy is not in the Bible yet Catholics are forced to believe it.

V. The wafer (“bread”) used in the Mass is called the host (from the Latin word for “victim” or “sacrifice”). Since it’s believed to have changed into the flesh of God, it is placed in a tabernacle and worshipped by Catholics as they enter the church. It is also borne in a monstrance on procession during the Feast of Corpus Christi.

Whatever Rome may assert, this is plain idolatry and it’s strictly forbidden by Scripture. This is the false Christ “of the inner chambers” that Jesus warned us against (Matt. 24:26)

Bread gods always come with problems. During the Middle Ages discussions erupted about what should be done if a person were to vomit after receiving the host or if a mouse were to by chance eat God’s body. At the Council of Constance, it was argued whether a man who spilled some of the blood of Christ should have his beard burned (This is why till date, in most cases, only the priests drink the wine).

The Jews in Deggendorf, Bavaria, were once slaughtered by Catholics in revenge for allegedly stealing and “torturing” a consecrated host. When you believe in absurdities, you will commit atrocities.

I once saw a funny video footage of a priest trying to serve the host to a bride, it mistakenly dropped onto her chest and slid into her gown. The priest quickly dipped his two fingers into her breasts to rescue his wafer god from in there. The lady had to involuntarily hold his fingers.

I have had some Catholics tell me that Satanists break into their churches to steal their wafer Jesus so as to “torture” him in their covens! Such narratives are humourous and of course, sad. The Lord Jesus Christ is in heaven, in power and glory. He’s not being “stolen” or “tortured” as a wafer in some foul coven. Any god that has to be carried about by men cannot save in the day of trouble.

VI. Christ said: “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). He is spiritually present with believers, He doesn’t have to become a bread to do so. It defies the bound of rational (and Biblical) thought to claim Jesus is physically present in the midst of millions of different groups of believers around the world.

He said: “You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me [physically]” (Jn. 12:8). To suggest that millions of wafers on Catholic altars is the physical body, “whole and entire” of Christ is a hallowed lie.

VII. The complicated ritualism associated with the Catholic Mass tells a lot. An author observed that it is “a spectacle of gorgeous magnificence – lights, colors, vestments, music, incense… [with] spectators, not participants, spectators like those who were present at a performance of the ancient mystery cults” (Scott Anderson, Romanism and the Gospel, 1937, 93).

During the Mass, as a work notes, the priest makes the sign of the cross 16 times, turns towards the congregation 6 times, kisses the altar 8 times, bows his head 21 times, genuflects 8 times, strikes his breasts 10 times, blesses the altar with the sign of the cross 30 times and lifts his eyes towards heaven 11 times.

Compare this to the simple meal Christ instituted and tell me if there isn’t a wide contrast.

VIII. At the memorial supper, Jesus simply took bread and broke it. The unleavened bread symbolized His sinless body and the wine His shed blood. He and the apostles didn’t use the round wafer Rome uses. After all bread doesn’t break into round pieces.

The round, disk-shaped symbolism has links with ancient pagan rites in which initiates received a small round cake or wafer of unleavened bread – symbolizing the solar disk. In the ancient Egyptian cult, different shapes of cakes were used to symbolize their deities and the most commonly used was the round wafer symbolizing the sun god.

The “god-eating” rite was a crucial part of several ancient pagan religions. The Catholic Encyclopedia (10:404) notes: “Mithraism had a Eucharist, but the idea of a sacred banquet is as old as the human race and existed at all ages and amongst all peoples.” These same rites were also known among the the pre-colonial Central and South Americans.

The concept of transubstantiation came from paganism. It was only mixed with some New Testament principles to disguise it. As a result, many Catholics, instead of receiving Christ into their hearts by faith have been deceived to believe they receive Christ by physically eating him at Mass.

What is Wrong with Roman Catholicism?


Many people wonder why Bible believing Christians attack many teachings and practices of the Roman Catholic Church.

After all, respected Evangelical leaders like Billy Graham, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Rick Warren, Hank Hanegraaff, and even entire denominations like the Anglican, Methodist, Salvation Army and the Assemblies of God have embraced the Catholic Church as a true Christian church with maybe just a “tiny little bad history.”

This ecumenical tide has made it become “politically incorrect” to attack an institutional church endorsed by such great evangelists.

Furthermore, most people speaking against Roman Catholicism nowadays are dismissed as rank Jehovah’s Witnesses or wild-eyed anti-Catholic fundamentalists who have had too much caffeine.

Therefore, it must be emphasized that the evangelical disagreements with Roman Catholicism areare  based on irrational or uninformed hostility but an adherence to the infallible authority of Scripture.

Unfortunately, most cult experts today have omitted the inclusion of Catholicism from their assessments.

In the book, The Agony of Deceit (edited by Michael S. Horton) written by different evangelical leaders to address false teachings in the church), we read:

The Catholic church resisted the mounting heresies with regard to the Person of Christ, and … Protestants would continue to affirm Catholic Christology” (p. 111)

From my study of Romanism so far, this statement is untrue. One of the key doctrines of the Christian faith is what the Bible teaches about Christ (Christology). At a casual glance at Roman Catholic doctrines, it seems we both agree on this aspect, but looks can be deceiving.

Let’s examine the Christology of Roman Catholicism in contrast with God’s Word:

1. The Eucharistic Sacrifice of Christ

According to Catholic doctrine, the communion wafer (host) becomes the body, soul and spirit of Jesus Christ when the priest ‘blesses’ it during Mass.

In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist ‘the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained” (Catechism, 346 #1374).

The summary of what happens at the Catholic mass was summed up by Catholic priest, John O’ Brien:

When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from his throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man” (The Faith of Millions, p. 255).

When Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper with the disciples, He took bread and said “Take eat; this is My body.”

The fact that He was still literally there with them and didn’t appear as bread and wine clearly shows His words here were figurative.

And after He blessed the cup, He still called it “the fruit of the vine” – not literal blood (Matt. 26:25-29).

Paul the apostle emphasizes what Jesus said: “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of me … This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me” (1Cor. 11:23-25).

Since the communion was to be done “in remembrance” of the Lord, “to show the Lord’s death until he comes” (v. 26), certainly, He is not literally present in the bread and wine, body, soul or spirit.

It’s a memorial and symbolic observance. Moreover, God’s Law also forbids cannibalism and vampirism (Lev. 11, Deut. 12:16, Acts 15:20), thus it would be abominable for Christ to physically take His own flesh and blood.

Jesus is in heaven in a glorified body that can never die. He doesn’t need to offer Himself in daily sacrifice like the Old Testament priests “for this He did ONCE when He offered up himself” on the cross (Heb. 7:27).

Jesus Christ is spiritually present “where two or three are gathered in His name.” He doesn’t become pieces of wafer on Catholic altars (Mt. 18:20).

2. Replacing Jesus with Mary

Roman Catholicism subtly relegates Christ and exalts Mary in His stead. This is where Catholicism deviates from Bible Christianity, because true Christianity is based on Christ, while Romanism is based on Mary.

(a) The titles of Christ have been transferred to the Catholic Mary. Just as Jesus is the King, Mary is called “the Queen.”

Jesus is our Lord, Mary is called “our Lady.” As He is the Second Adam, Mary is also called “the Second Eve.”

The Genesis 3:15 in the Catholic Douay-Rheims bible was rendered to say: “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: She shall crush thy head, and thou shall lie in wait for Her feet.”

This is blasphemy

(b) The attributes of Christ have benyn transferred to the Catholic Mary. Christ is sinless, Rome too teaches that Mary was sinless.

Just as Jesus ascended to heaven, Mary too was declared to have assumed into heaven.

Just as Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, they teach that Mary also sits at the right hand of Jesus.

(c) Denying the exclusive Mediator-ship of Christ by teaching that Mary is a co-mediatrix with Christ. AA docto of the Catholic church, Alphonsos de Liguori, wrote:

There is no doubt’ the saint adds, ‘that Jesus Christ is the only mediator of justice between men and God … but because men acknowledge and fear the Divine Majesty… it was necessary to assign us another advocate, to whom we might recourse with less fear and more confidence, and this advocate is Mary, than whom we cannot find one more powerful…” (The Glories of Mary, p. 195)

This statement is false. Jesus’s role as our mediator is essentially and necessarily different.

He has a ground to stand on as a mediator because He was “made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest…and that he might make an atonement for the sins of the people.”

No one, including Mary, possesses these attributes (Heb. 2:17).

Roman Catholicism misrepresents Christ as mean and inaccessible in order to justify looking up to ‘another advocate’, the “virgin Mary”, who is supposedly more merciful.

But the Word of God says that Jesus is our great High priest and we are all to come boldly to His throne of grace to obtain mercy and find grace in the time of need (Heb. 4:16). Why look to anyone else?

(d) Making Mary a Co-Redemptrix

The Bible says we are redeemed through the blood of Jesus (Col. 1:14), but Rome exalts its Mary on the same footing with Christ by teaching that Mary also redeemed us with her blood and the agonies of her heart:

That Woman [Mary] is the mother alike of the Redeemer and of the redeemed. It was first from her veins that the blood was drawn which now lies scattered cheaply about, but which has ransomed the world” (The Legion of Mary, 1975, p. 144)

3. Denial of Salvation by Christ alone.

Pope Pius IX said:

Our salvation is based upon the holy Virgin…so that if there is any hope and spiritual healing for us, we receive it solely and uniquely from her” (The Encyclical of February 2, 1849).

One of the many prayers in the booklet Devotions in Honor of Our Mother of Perpetual Help says “In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee do I entrust my soul” (p. 46).

But God’s Word says “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

God Himself says: “Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth” (Isaiah 45:22). Only God has the power to save. By attributing salvation to Mary, Rome elevates her to the status of a goddess.

4. Denial of the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice.

This is seen in the belief underlying the Mass and by the teaching that Christians have always “carried their crosses to make expiation for their own sins and the sins of others…[to] help their brothers obtain salvation from God…” (Vatican II Council: The Counciliar and Post Counciliar Documents, Vol 1, 65)

Now, if “by one offering he [Jesus] hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified” and “by his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us,” how can any man add to that perfect sacrifice let alone save another? (Heb. 10:14, 9:12)

5. Replacing Christ with Men.

Catholic priests are said to be “Sacerdotus alter Christus” (the priest is another Christ) and Popes are called “Vicarius Christus” which means ‘another Christ’.

A Catholic Dictionary says that the pope sits as Christ in the Vatican. Catholic priests are seen as representatives of Christ having the power to forgive sins and to re-sacrifice Jesus.

These are all false teachings that hinder Catholics from having a saving relationship with the real Jesus Christ. He has warned us against following false Christs (Matthew 24:5, 23-24).

6. Replacing the Living Christ with a dead one.

For example Catholic crucifixes having a “dead” Jesus on it, which Catholics pray to. Such objects are accursed (see Deut. 21:23).

The resurrection of Christ is one of the cornerstones of the Christian Faith, otherwise our belief is in vain (1 Cor. 15:13). If Jesus were to remain on the cross as Rome portrays, we would all be doomed. Other examples of false Christs in Catholicism are images of Christ and various “visions” of the “dying and agonizing face of Christ.”

Indeed, there are true Christians within Roman Catholicism who have been saved by believing the Gospel of the Bible “which is the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16), but still remain in that religious inatiinstit for one reason or the other.

However, due to Rome’s false teachings, they are in a distinct minority. Logically, it’s impossible to believe two contradictory beliefs at the same time.

For example, how can one believe Christ’s sacrifice on the cross for us is an accomplished fact of history and He is in heaven in a resurrected, glorified body and at the same time believe He is being literally “immolated in the sacrifice of the Mass?”

Or how can one believe Christ’s redemptive work on the cross is “Finished!” as He Himself said (John 19:30), and at the same time believe the Mass repeats Christ’s sacrifice?

Or how can one believe that by simple faith in Christ, one receives eternal life and assurance of heaven as a free gift of God’s grace and at the same time believe that God’s grace and merits of Christ, Mary and the saints are contained in the treasury of the Catholic church and is dispensed in bits and pieces for attending Mass, penance or saying the rosary?

It’s simply impossible. This is why true Christians who trust in Christ alone must renounce Roman Catholicism and its false gospel.