An Open Letter to CRI (Christian Research Institute) or is it really Catholic Roman Institute?
CRI (Hendrik Hanegraff)
P.O. Box 500
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693-0500
Hendrik Hanegraaff:
A friend of mine who listens to your program starts asking me why do I say Roman
Catholicism is a cult. I explain and now he sees it ever so plainly. He told me what he
gets from CRI: "It's not a cult, it has its problems but it's Christian." We talked about the
"virgin" Mary, the pope, the eucharist, the sacraments, etc. He couldn't hardly believe
what he was hearing. I answered all of his questions using official Roman Catholic
literature. Now he knows that it is a cult. His next question is, "Why does CRI defend
it and talk like it isn't?" My only answer: "It has to be one of these three reasons- 1. They
are being paid by the Vatican to say what they say. 2. They are Roman Catholics in
disguise. 3. They are blinded by Satan and they believe that they are putting forth truth
but they're not." I lean towards the second answer. If Satan wanted to protect his biggest
false religion, how would he go about it. One of the best ways is to raise up some of his
people, disguise them as Protest-ants, have them expose the cults- that is, all the cults but
the biggest one. Have them expose people like Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin for
their false teachings yet let the same false teachings taught by the pope, bishops, priests
slide by unnoticed.
I was reading some of your magazines that my friend gets and if I didn't know that it
was supposedly a serious magazine, I wouldn't be able to keep myself from laughing. I
am just going to be talking about two of them in this short letter. The Spring and Fall
magazines of 1993. The first edition that I will be discussing has Kenneth Copeland on
front. I skimmed the article on Copeland. Your logic is poorly done. You condemn
Copeland's false teachings regarding Christians being Gods yet you never say anything
about the pope claiming to be God and/or Christ. Nor do you mention that the Roman
Catholic priests are 'alter christus, another christ.' My Bible tells me that any other christ
is an anti-christ.
Then the article after Copeland's was, "What Think Ye of Rome?" On page 34 of your
article you say, "For example, though very critical of Catholicism at numerous points,
evangelical theologian John Jefferson Davis of Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary
stated that "'conservative evangelicals could affirm about 85 percent of what Catholics
believe." I was wondering what in the world is he talking about 85 percent (?). I get to
page 38 where you have a chart,"A Doctrinal Comparison of Catholicism and the (other)
Cults". And once again, what I read I could not believe and everybody else I let read it
were in total agreement with me. I want to deal with your compromises. Listed at the
bottom of the page is the definition of compromise- (compro.) an unacceptable
blending, settlement, or concession. I said to myself, 'That is a pretty decent definition.'
Now let's see what CRI said the Roman Catholic church compromised on. Even though
most of their compromises are in reality- 'deny'.
1. Justification by faith- My mind goes to Martin Luther. Believing that you are fully,
completely justified through faith in Jesus' completed work for you on the cross. Yea, you
can compromise on that.
2. Sufficiency of Christ's atonement- Was Christ dying for us on the cross enough?
Maybe not? Yea, you can compromise on that.
3. Authority of the Bible- Is it really important to believe in the authority of the Bible?
I mean I heard the plan of salvation through the Bible. I heard about what Jesus did for
me through the Bible. The Bible says that God's Word would not pass away, etc. Yea,
you can compromise on that.
4. Salvation outside their ranks- Does it matter if a religious organization says that
salvation is only through their church, that only they have Christ- body, soul, and divinity.
No, that isn't a big deal.
5. Total depravity- Does it matter if you teach that others are born sinless besides Jesus?
Take for instance, Mary. Surely that doesn't matter. I mean if the authority of the Bible
is compromised yet it being infallible, inerrant isn't(?) then we could get by with about
anything.
6. Eternal life in heaven- The chart says 'affirm'. Where in the world are you coming
from. Tell the whole truth and let the people know that they don't believe that until they
spend quality time in a place that they call purgatory to get purified from their sins that
Jesus' blood couldn't or didn't cover. This also goes with the 'Eternal conscious
punishment' which is for the Roman Catholics who died in 'Mortal' sin not venial sin. The
'venial' sin Roman Catholics probably spend a few thousand years or so in purgatory.
Now if CRI working with this so-called church can get 'Christians' to believe that
justification by faith isn't enough to justify you, the sufficiency of Christ's atonement is
insufficient, you don't really need to trust the authority of the Bible even though its
inerrancy and infallibility is affirmed, some people aren't really depraved especially if
they happen to be the mother of Jesus. That our sins need further purifying in a temporary
hell called purgatory. If we can just get Christians to believe that these listed aren't/are
necessary as with many other things then we can deceive a whole body of believers into
believing a lie. And that is what the Roman Catholic church is doing through
organizations like CRI.
In His Majesty's Service,
Danny D. Bunn
Ekklesia Communications
Back to the Ekklesia Communicator Main Page