Certain people maintain that the Catholic Church was not founded by Jesus Christ, being instead a pagan cult with ties binding it to ancient Babylon. This idea gained wide circulation through a book, “The Two Babylons,” published in Great Britain by Alexander Hislop in 1858, which purported to establish a connection between the teachings and practices of Catholicism and the mystery religion practiced in the aforementioned Babylon. However, the methodology employed by the book’s author, a Protestant minister without any serious academic training, has been discarded and denounced as false from a rational and historical point of view.
Apocalypse 17:1-7 — And there came one of the seven angels, who had the seven vials, and spoke with me, saying: “Come, I will shew thee the condemnation of the great harlot, who sitteth upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication; and they who inhabit the earth, have been made drunk with the wine of her whoredom.” And he took me away in spirit into the desert. And I saw a woman sitting upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was clothed round about with purple and scarlet, and gilt with gold, and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand, full of the abomination and filthiness of her fornication. And on her forehead a name was written: a mystery: “Babylon the great, the mother of the fornications, and the abominations of the earth.” And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And I wondered, when I had seen her, with great admiration. And the angel said to me: “Why dost thou wonder? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast which carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.”
This biblical passage is frequently used to “prove” that the Catholic Church is the “harlot of Babylon” whom St. John describes in his vision. Such an interpretation is not merely erroneous; it is impossible to reconcile with history. It is obvious to anyone who studies the Scriptures seriously that St. John is referring to Rome as “Babylon the great,” since Rome and Babylon were the only two powers of this world that God permitted to lay waste to Jerusalem and carry His people off into captive exile. Jewish and Christian writings alike have compared Rome to ancient Babylon, since both subjugated Israel, destroyed the Great Temple, and laid waste to Jerusalem.
A well-known promoter of Hislop’s interpretations, Ralph Woodrow, following the same path, went so far as to write another book entitled “Babylon Mystery Religion.” Years later Woodrow was compelled to repudiate the method he had learned from Hislop, when scholars from his own Protestant circle pointed out to him its grave deficiencies and its lack of scholarship. In 1997 Woodrow published a retraction, “The Babylon Connection?,” in which he exposed the essentially flawed premises of the Scottish fundamentalist minister’s original theories. To illustrate the kind of faulty logic at work, Woodrow uses Hislop’s very own methods to “demonstrate” a preposterous theory: that a certain fast-food restaurant chain has its origins in Babylon. We quote:
“The golden arches” are known throughout the world as the identifying symbol of McDonald’s. We should note, however, that the arch was commonly used by the ancient Babylonians in their gates and palaces. Indeed, in paintings made by the Babylonians, we see their kings depicted within arch-shaped frames! We also know that Nabuchodonosor, the Babylonian king, ordered his subjects to worship a golden image (Daniel 3:5-10). And Babylon was known in the ancient world as “the golden city.” Finally, note that the first letter of McDonald’s, the M, is the thirteenth letter of the (English) alphabet, a number reputed to possess mystical power and to bring bad luck. Can that be mere coincidence? What is more, to what does the M point besides McDonald’s? Clearly to Moloch, the pagan god of fire worshipped in Babylon. And what is used to heat the food in a modern McDonald’s? Electricity, which many would associate with a controlled form of fire! Who, then, can doubt that the McDonald’s restaurant chain, known for its golden arches, is in reality a mystery cult connected with the fire god worshipped by the ancient Babylonian royalty?
However ridiculous this absurd way of reasoning may seem—we know perfectly well that the McDonald’s chain was not created by a king of Babylon, but by an American businessman named Ray Kroc in the 1950s—this is exactly the same technique of reasoning that Hislop uses to slander the Church. In his essay “Anti-Catholicism,” the Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong explains Hislop’s errors: “[Hislop’s] method commits two well-known logical fallacies: the ‘genetic’ fallacy, in which the source of an idea is attacked rather than the idea itself, and the ‘non sequitur’ fallacy, in which a mere resemblance ‘proves’ that one practice derives from another, earlier practice…” By way of clarification, let us say that a logical fallacy is a proposition presented as true in an assertion, but which is true only in appearance. Logical fallacies are commonly employed to justify arguments or positions that cannot be justified by reason. They tend to mask deceptions, falsehoods, or frauds. Knowing how to recognize logical fallacies is a great help in avoiding being deceived. The Latin term “non sequitur” literally means “it does not follow.” In the case we are examining, the similarity of a Catholic practice to an ancient Babylonian practice does not imply that the former derives from the latter.
Woodrow also points out that, if Hislop’s own arguments were applied, one could “prove” that the Bible itself is pagan. He lists many elements present in the Bible that can be linked to pre-existing pagan religions, such as prostrating oneself on the ground, praying with uplifted hands, a mountain with a deity present upon it, laws engraved in stone, and Elias’s chariot with its horses of fire. All this biblical phenomenology, and much more, can likewise be found in paganism.
Therefore, if we use Hislop’s fallacious logic, we would be forced to conclude that the faith taught in Scripture is in reality a pagan religion. Since we know that this is absurd, we must necessarily conclude that Hislop’s technique is fundamentally flawed.
1 Corinthians 9:20-22 — And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were without the law, as if I were without the law, (whereas I was not without the law of God, but was in the law of Christ,) that I might gain them that were without the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak. I became all things to all men, that I might save all.
Rather than condemning every practice of the Gentiles as pagan, the Catholic Church has always sought to inculturate herself. That is to say, she has respected whatever good there might be in other religions and cultures, in order to relate it to the complete truth in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Acts 10:9-16 — That which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common.
Jesus came to bring salvation to all mankind, including those who were regarded by the Jews as unclean—and not only to a chosen few. In other words, God’s love is not only for those who already practice the Christian faith. He loves all men, whom He created in His image and likeness.
Acts 17:16-34 — Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. For passing by, and seeing your idols, I found an altar also, on which was written: “To the unknown God.” What therefore you worship, without knowing it, that I preach to you.
St. Paul did not preach fierce condemnation to the Greeks for their pagan worship. Rather, he used their beliefs as a tool through which to reveal to them the complete truth that is found in Christianity. The Catholic Church has always acted in this way. Note also that in verse 28 there is a reference by St. Paul to two pagan poets, Epimenides (“For in him we live, and move, and are”) and Aratus (“For we are also his offspring”). Does this mean that St. Paul was preaching a pagan religion? Using Hislop’s system of proving things, we would arrive at that ridiculous conclusion. It is clear from the context, however, that St. Paul is using a sound debating technique: empathy. He is simply couching his message in terms that make sense to his audience.
Acts 22:25 — And when they had bound him with thongs, Paul saith to the centurion that stood by him: “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and uncommitted?”
In Acts 22:25-28 we see St. Paul repeatedly asserting his Roman citizenship—that is, his citizenship in a pagan empire—in his disputes with the temple authorities. Obviously he did not regard such a thing as a defilement.
At times, certain fundamentalists seem more concerned with preserving the pristine nature of an idealized Christianity, keeping it in a kind of theological amber, than with following the example of St. Paul in using all one’s own cunning, art, and brains in the effort to save the souls whom God loves. Paul was less occupied with maintaining the purity of his traditional religious practices—such as circumcision or the Jewish dietary laws—than with the task of handing on the faith, to which he devoted himself with courage; and when he found it necessary, he used unconventional means. There is therefore no reason to fear when our faith is debated—or even attacked—in the arena of the world of ideas. The essential truth of the Gospel is its protection.
Article: Greg Oatis
Source: prodigos.org
