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