Has Salt departed from Catholic teaching?
02.NOV.07
Editor: I am once more grateful for the opportunity to share with the reading public on the topic of the antichrist, which SALT and I have been debating these past months.
SALTâs point concerning the word âantiâ would be totally accurate, if we are dealing with English words.{{more}}
However, we are considering a Greek word – âantikristos.â In the Greek, the word âantiâ is defined thus, âa primary particle; opposite, i.e. instead or because of (rarely in addition to):â for, in the room of. Often used in composition to denote contrast, requital, substitution, correspondence, etc.â [Ref# 473 – Strongâs Greek Bible Dictionary – Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek Words taken from Strongâs Exhaustive Concordance by James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D. 1890]
Notice some of the meanings given: âinstead or because of,â âin the room of,â âsubstitution.â
Now notice SALTâs charge, âMr Rogers takes great pains to explain that the term anti means substitute. This is yet another gross inaccuracy…â
Let SALT take issue with the Greek language and the learned Dr James Strong, not me.
Incidentally, the papacy has coined the word âantipopeâ which uses âantiâ in the same context.
According to the Catholic EWTN website, âAnyone, therefore, who claims to be Pope while a duly elected Pope is living and has not resigned is, ipso facto, an Antipope…â [http://www.ewtn.com/library/homelibr/antipope.txt]
LOGICALLY then, anyone who claims to be Christ, a substitute of Christ, a vicar of Christ, anyone who claims the titles of Christ, the office of Christ, when Christ has not resigned that office, is, ipso facto, ANTICHRIST.
SALT went on to state, âthe Christian World has always understood the antichrist to be the Devil.â
SALT has conveniently departed from Catholic teaching this time around, as the Catholic Encyclopedia tells him, âthe individual person of antichrist will not be a demon, as some of the ancient writers believed; nor will he be the person of the devil incarnated in the human nature of antichrist.â [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm]
Moral sin
Nevertheless, the âchristian worldâ that SALT refers to doesnât share his view.
Martin Luther is quoted as saying, âI know that the pope is antichrist, and that his throne is that of Satan himself.â [DâAubigné, book 6, ch. 9]
We also read of reformer John Wycliffe declaring, âThe pope is the chief antichrist, for he himself falsely pretends that he is the immediate vicar of Christ, and most resembling Him in life…â [âEcclesiastical Empire,â page 619 by Alonzo Trevier Jones, published 1901]
SALT also said that the Catholic people do not regard the pope as replacing Christ. I am happy that they do not, for it is mortal sin to regard the pope as such. There are many Catholics I suppose who are unaware of the papacyâs unbiblical claims.
SALT raised the issue of âVicarius Filii Dei,â which means âVicar of the Son of God.â
SALT indicated that the letters of this Roman title add up to 666. This title appears in several Catholic publications, for example, â1879 Catholic Canon Law (Corpus Juris Canonici);â âThe Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christâ by Henry Edward Manning D.D; and âPrompta Bibliothecaâ Vol. VI, pg 43 (1890) by Lucius Ferraris.
In the November 15, 1914 and April 18th, 1915 editions of the Catholic publication âOur Sunday Visitor,â it is positively stated that âVicarius Filii Deiâ is a papal title.
The papacy now being aware that this title in its original Roman tongue adds up to 666, now strenuously denies that this was ever an âofficialâ title of the pope.
Why would the papacy boast of being vicar of Christ [Vicarius Christi], yet deny being vicar of the Son of God [Vicarius Filii Dei]? Both titles are one and the same, unless maybe the papacyâs Christ is not the Son of God.
It is obvious that the papacy is actively attempting to remove from itself an identifying mark given by scripture.
SALT helps reinforce this by alleging that the letters of the name Ellen Gould White add up to 666.
Antichrist power
Notwithstanding that her name does not have Roman origin and âWâ was not originally a Roman letter, however, let us say that this is the case. Why then didnât the Adventists seek to change Mrs. Whiteâs name, since it can be shown to add up to 666?
Obviously, it is because the scriptures do not identify Mrs. White as antichrist!
However, there are more than twenty identifying points in the scriptures which describe the antichrist power, and one can see that the papacy matches them point for point. Therefore, it becomes necessary to deny the title Vicarius Filii Dei, which is just one of those points.
SALTâs comment on Mary being âEver-Virginâ is another clear-cut example.
The scripture clearly tells us that Joseph had sexual relations with Mary after Jesus was born, thus she ceased to be a virgin. We read, âThen Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.â [Matthew 1:24-25 – KJV] Verse 25 is rendered in different translations as follows:
âHe did not have marital relations with her until she had given birth to a son; and he named him Jesus.â [International Standard Version]
âHe did not have marital relations with her before she gave birth to a son. Joseph named the child Jesus.â [Godâs Word Translation]
âBut he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.â [NIV]
If SALT cannot accept such a simple truth, and would boldly assert that Mary is âEver Virginâ, then can he/she ever accept that the papacy is antichrist?
Grace and Peace to you, SALT. May you trust in the sole mediation of our Great High Priest Jesus Christ, pray to the Father in Jesusâ name alone, and keep the Commandments of Yahweh – not the traditions of men.
Maurice Rogers