Is it a sin to attend a Catholic Latin Mass?

[Jerusalem Blade]

Hello Khater,

There is a power inherent in Roman Catholicism, just as there is in pagan religions, and in the spiritual paths of the East and their gurus—it is the power of the devil, to seduce, to bedazzle, to draw.

I was amazed once, when listening to a video message the current pope had recorded on an iPhone to send to Kenneth Copeland and his congregation (a former attender and friend of Copeland who became a close friend of the pope before he "ascended the throne of Peter" recorded it)—he (pope) tried speaking in English, then said he had to revert to Italian (I think it was) but he would speak "the language of the heart" and it could easily be translated: he was so winsome and so deep-hearted and "spiritual" it frightened me! I say it frightened me because I strongly oppose Catholicism yet was drawn to this man, to his charisma. He appeared lamb-like, but it was the seducing voice of a dragon. It shook me, as I am no novice.

Unless you were skilled in apologetic rebuttal of RC doctrines, I would avoid the priest. And there is power in the show they put on—it is not just a religion, but a demonic pageant geared to fish for souls. It is probably a good idea to thank the teacher for the invite, and tell him as you're a convinced Protestant you would not want to go, though you would share with him the beauty of the simple Biblical faith in Christ you hold if he were interested.

It would be good to join a sound local church and get baptized when you are able (though I think I recall reading your circumstances don't allow that at present).

 

[MichaelNZ]

As a former traditionalist Roman Catholic, I second Jerusalem Blade's point about the show. I still find myself drawn to the beauty and pageantry of the Latin Mass (the new Mass is but a mere shadow of the traditional Mass). However, the Mass is a blasphemy against the cross of Christ, as it seeks to 're-present' or 'make present' Christ's bloody sacrifice upon the altar in an unbloody manner. It is believed by Romanists to be a sacrifice of Christ (which is much more evident in the Latin Mass than the modern Mass) and therefore violates the Epistle to the Hebrews.

If you're having trouble deciding, think about it this way: if you were being asked if you'd like to see a puja at a Hindu temple, would you go or not? Romanism will lead you to hell just as fast as Hinduism will (in fact I'd say Romanism is more dangerous as it seems so close to Biblical Christianity). My recommendation is not to go. The danger far outweighs any benefits.

As to debating the priest, remember, he's been through years of seminary and has probably had to defend the Catholic faith multiple times. It would be like a 13-year old kid taking on a boxing champ like Mike Tyson. My recommendation again is not to do it. If you want to watch someone who knows his stuff take on papists, then watch Dr James White's debates with Roman Catholic apologists.

 

[Dachaser]

good advice, as Roman Catholic theology seems to those "outside their camp" to be changing and adapting to more "reformed views" regarding salvation, but the truth still is that Rome still upholds First Council of trent, so really teaching another and false Gospel!

 

[MichaelNZ]

good advice, as Roman Catholic theology seems to those "outside their camp" to be changing and adapting to more "reformed views" regarding salvation, but the truth still is that Rome still upholds First Council of trent, so really teaching another and false Gospel!

As far as I know, Rome has not moved towards a "Reformed view" of salvation, that is, salvation by faith alone. Catholic Answers, one of Rome's main apologetics sites, has numerous articles critiquing the Protestant view of sola fide. However, since Vatican II, Rome has embraced the ecumenical movement and now refers to Protestants as "separated brethren". Pope Francis at least seems to think that Orthodox (and maybe even Lutherans) do not need to convert to Catholicism in order to be saved. He may very well be a universalist.

What is obvious is that the modern Catholic hierarchy's views are at odds with the "infallible" Council of Florence, which stated "[The Roman Catholic church] firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the catholic church before the end of their lives" (Session 11—4 February 1442)

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

good advice, as Roman Catholic theology seems to those "outside their camp" to be changing and adapting to more "reformed views" regarding salvation, but the truth still is that Rome still upholds First Council of trent, so really teaching another and false Gospel!

Name one or two "reformed views" being adopted by Rome.

 

[Dachaser]

I was saying that to those who do not really know Catholic theology, it might appear moving towards that, as that infamous signing where some said that Rome now agreed with salvation by/through grace alone...

That was my point, that it was NOT changing at all, but might appear that way to someone not knowing what they really believe!

 

[Anglicanorthodoxy]

Just for the record, I did NOT end up attending the Latin Mass.