Site Contents © 2013 Monsterwax
© 2013 Monsterwax
The Catholic Corner
We get so many letters from 'em, we're giving them a wing!
Your web site reports no particular slander or deformation, however it promotes the some time elicit activity of others, namely under age youth.
I don't know what you're talking about. Do not confuse this site with everything it is linked to. (We also link to various Catholic sites as well.)
To read more of Pat's detailed letter, go here.
Hello. I'm a Catholic. You guys are wrong!
(To read the rest of Cyberpunk's long letter/list of arguments disputing Chick's beliefs, go here.)
I found your site about Jack Chick very interesting but wondered if you were aware of the following:
1. Alberto Rivera was exposed as a fraud by a Protestant Magazine, "Christianity Today", April 1981. At the time Chick claimed that Rivera was imprisoned with the Jesuits, he was in reality, living on the Canary Islands with a mistress, having fled the USA on alleged charges of car theft and credit card fraud! The Sunday Visitor, trying to check out Rivera's claims was unable to even phone interview Rivera.
2. The Sunday Visitor, a Catholic newspaper, offered a $10,000 reward to someone who could just validate ONE of Chick's claims. This was a full page ad, reprinted over a period of several years. No one claimed the reward.
3. Jack Chick was not only thrown out of the Christian Booksellers Assn, but also in the early 1990's was one of the only people on record to be thrown out of the Southern Baptist Convention (his home church).
4. Even those folks who do not like the Catholic church, feel that stooping to lies has some major ethical problems.
The following website refutes many of Chick's claims:
I guess my point is that there are always 2 sides to every story. As many Christians might not be in favor of the genre of films you appear to specialize in, you may feel they are an oppressive bunch but in Chick's case, using lies to blacken a church's reputation (or attempt to) and making the only big bucks he ever made off that, has some serious ethical issues, regardless of what folks may feel about the Catholic church. I would hope you might consider having the website above linked for the other side of the story.
My website also gives the real story about Catholic dogma. If Jack Chick is such a crusader, why does he have to base his ministry on lies. The fact that his main income has been from these lies, suggests a conflict of interest, don't you think? Also, one of his defenders who links your site is a porn video maker. "Using" him to prove a point when Christians feel porn is against the Bible has some serious problems, do you think?
Thanks for your attention,
Thanks for your mail. You are indeed correct to say there are always two sides to every story (sometimes more). I am familure with your claims, but have additional information that you may find interesting. It shows how this story is more complicated than you may have first thought.
1. Christianity Today (CT) did publish articles that claimed to expose Rivera as a fraud. That doesn't prove he was a fraud, however, anymore than Chick's comics prove the Vatican is Satanic. Most CT's articles were written by Gary Metz, a man Chick says tried to get a job at Chick Publications but was refused. Chick also believes ecumenical Billy Graham, founder of CT, is in the Vatican's pocket.
2. It's also accurate that The Sunday Visitor offered $10,000 to anyone who could prove Alberto's claims were true. But were you aware Alberto offered $1 million to anyone who could prove his claims were false? Neither group acknowledged nor paid anyone who tried to collect the money (big suprise).
3. Chick was never thrown out of the Christian Book Sellers convention, but he did resign when they tried to pressure him to discontinue the Alberto comic series. He was never thrown out of the Southern Baptist Convention either, because he was never a minister there. He wasn't even a member. (He is an Independent Baptist.) The Southern Baptist Sunday School Board did respond to Catholic pressure by removing his books from their bookstores.
Chick's main source of income is not from selling Anti-Vatican materials. In fact, it lost him 1/3rd of his distributors. Most of his business is from mainstream gospel tracts used by missionaries for witnessing.
Let's hope everyone agrees that lying is wrong. Unfortunately, what we have here is a disagreement about what the basic facts really are. Both sides appear to misrepresent (or at very least, exaggerate) the other side to some degree, and I suspect neither side realizes they are doing it.
You'll be happy to know we already linked to the anti-Chick site a long time ago. And yes, we also linked to the Walkertown site as well. We link to all sorts of sites about Chick tracts, be they pro, con, sinner, saint, or what have you. Now your site is linked to. Fell free to return the favor.
I do question your motive, and pray God heals your minds as well as your troubled souls.
You really ought to look into the early Church, study what they taught, and look at how it aoolys to the Catholic Church, and your own beliefs.
I think you will find that upon further study, the earliest Christians WERE CATHOLIC! As well you might discover that there is nothing the Catholic Church teaches that is in any way contradictory to the Scriptures.
You obviously have not investigated the teachings of the first Christians, the way the Cannon was thought out, nor have you looked into the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I realy want to call you stupid, but that would be wrong I suppose, and it would lower myself to your level.
Again, I do question your motives, and do not see God in your work, just misinformation, lack of truith, and poor judgment.
I do pray for you. In Jesus love and grace. -Tim
What do you mean by "You people"? Are we different from you because we are people? (Just kidding.)
This is not Chick Publications, but fans who enjoy collecting his comics... including Catholics. (Many of whom have a sense of humor and can take criticism in stride.)
For the sake of discussion, however, I will attempt to clarify some of Chick's beliefs. Keep in mind that these are Chick's beliefs, and not necessarily mine or other fans.
No one is debating that the early Christian church eventually evolved into the Catholic Church, but they weren't Catholics by today's standards, nor did they call themselves Catholic. It would be like an evolutionist claiming that ancient monkeys were human. There are big differences between the two.
Besides, there are two Catholic Churches. (The Roman and the Eastern Orthodox.) Each claims to have original roots. Obviously, they can't both be the One True Church.
Chick believes the Roman Catholic Church was gradually seduced by Satan away from its early Christian goals. He reasons that a true Christian church would never hold Inquisitions and murder fellow Christians. Chick also condemns controversial Catholic dogma, especially indulgences, confession, purgatory, etc. So your claim that "there is nothing the Catholic Church teaches that is a contradictory to the Scriptures" is certainly subject to dispute.
To many, this is what makes Chick tracts so interesting. They are entertaining and reactionary, yet they also provide food for serious thought.
[For Tim's Response, go here.]
Jack Chick claims in numerous anti-Catholic tracts that the Vatican is the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17. Most of the reasons why this is not true are shown at www.catholic.com. Apart from everything else, the Vatican cannot be Babylon because this interpretation does not account for the seven kings mentioned in the passage.
Revelation 17:9-10: "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is yet to come; when he cometh, he must continue a short space".
The seven kings are Roman Emperors: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Titus, and Domitian. Titus ruled only two years, hence:"...he must continue only a short space."
Verse eleven says: "And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven and goeth into perdition".
The red beast on which the woman is sitting, with its seven heads, is the emperor Domitian, who was mistaken by people at the time for Nero resurrected, hence:" ...and is of the seven." The Beast of Revelation is Nero and Domitian together. These both persecuted Chiristians. Nero apparently liked to set them on fire at garden parties, and Nero's name adds up to the number 666 if the Hebrew alphabet is used for the words: "Kaiser Neron" (Emperor Nero).
These seven kings cannot be future kings:"...and one is...."
This is probably the only possible interpretation: Baylon is Rome, but in Roman times, not now. Fundamentalist author Dave Hunt wrote a book called: A Woman Rides the Beast, in which he wrote a long list of reasons why the Vatican must be Babylon. He finished with the laughable suggestion that although the Vatican was not built on seven hills anyway, the names "Rome," and "Vatican" were interchangeable-- a load of rubbish.
This claim against Catholicism is in breach of the Ten Commandments, which prohibit the telling of lies. I don't know if Chick and Hunt perhaps did not notice the little detail of the seven kings whilst they were busy squeezing the seven hill thing dry, or forgot that the Vatican is not ruled by a king, or that the Pope cannot be the Beast because the Beast must have existed nearly 2000 years ago, but whether it is a deliberate lie or a mistake, it is not very good that they have been spreading around.
I can't blame anyone for being a fan of Chick Tracts. I go online all the time to read them--I hate 'em that much! I would not buy any because that would be giving money to that organisation. O.K, he reinforces his tracts with scripture, but aren't we forgetting that the Bible implies that it's all right to burn homosexuals? I personally think anyone who listens to Chick is just not thinking.
You're letter gives a good summery of another popular interpretation of Revelation. That is, that John's vision wasn't a prophecy of the distant future, but an analogy of events unfolding 2,000 years ago. As you point out, many of the symbols fit better. Others do not, including cataclysmic events that clearly haven't occurred yet. So both theories have debatable points which leave plenty of room for interpretation. I wouldn't call different interpretations a "lie", but a difference of opinion. And people are entitled to their own opinions (including you).
Comparing the Pope to a king is not outlandish. He certainly rules the Catholic Church. And many Catholics refer to events in the Vatican as news from Rome. So Chick and Hunt's comparisons are not as misleading as you suggest. Of course, that doesn't prove they are right about The Beast part.
Since you bring up the Ten Commandments though, perhaps you can answer a question for me. Why does the Catholic Catechism leave out the 2nd Commandment (the part about idols) and split the 10th commandment it two? Not only is it manipulating scripture, it gives Protestants the impression that the Vatican is okay with idols (holy statues) and is covering up the change by doubling another commandment. What's the official Vatican "spin" on this?
[See Cameron's response]
A Catholic response about the 10 commandments.
Dear Chick publishing:
I admire your extensive knowledge of the Bible. The only reason that your company could possibly be successful in trying to destroy the faith that JESUS CHRIST himself founded, is by preying upon the members of this church that do not have a knowledge of the Bible. I know that you have probably read many a time the passage from the Gospel of John, in which many of Christ's Disciples left him because his teaching was so difficult to believe. If Christ had drawn a line, what line would you be, Mr. Chick? Take a closer look: John 6:22-60. You may find that you are on the side that, even after Christ saying three times over, that to get to the Kingdom of Heaven, must EAT and Drink the blood of the Lord. You may find this to be pretty sick, this is frankly because of ignorance. You simply cannot understand the beauty of the Eucharist. I would certainly not damn you to Hell, My name is not YAWEH!! You seem to think that that is your name, however. It is not your, nor anybody's job to damn anyone!!! I believe in the one true Lord Christ. What more is there to be considered a Christian? I also believe in the Church- the Catholic one! I think that you certainly have a feeling of the love of the Lord. I believe that everyone can see that light through the great mystery of Creation. However, I believe that I can see deeper into the light because of the insights of many people through the thousands of years.
Thank you for your time, and I would be pleased to hear from Mr. Chick or one of his representations.
I will certainly pray for your souls!
We're not Chick publishing. Ours is a fan site for collectors of his comics-- many of which are, in fact, Catholics. (But only ones with a better sense of humor.)
I happen to be Episcopal, which allows members to believe communion is symbolic OR literal (talk about compromising!) I admit that I personally side with Chick on this particular point. I'll spare you the usual Biblical references which contradict literal views of the Eucharist, because they're mentioned many places in this site if you care to look them up. (Chick also includes them in numerous tracts.) For me, determining the answer was much easier than pondering complicated theological arguments: I know what blood tastes like, and I know what wine tastes like, and communion wine tastes like wine-- not blood. So unless you taste something different or you believe it transforms into blood within the stomach, your fooling yourself. But like I said, it's no skin off my nose whichever version you chose to believe. However, you might try reading this site-- and Chick's tracts-- a bit closer before you close your mind on the subject.
[Return to Chick Memories 5.]
No where in my email did I say Jesus loved "all religions"....scan down an reread my email. I said he loved "all His children". I also did NOT say he "urges people to hate". He is much more clever than that. He bashes the faiths that HE doesn't feel are true or right!!! Is he God?? Does he have the ability to read peoples hearts? Does he have a direct line to God? What sort of expert is he that he makes these decisions?
<<You stated "Anything written with such hate and criticism of other faiths is quite simply.......NOT Christian." That certainly sounds like you're saying good Christians don't criticize other faiths. Yet Jesus said HE was the only way to heaven, and urged Christians to witness to others. You can't convert others if you're unwilling to confront their false beliefs.>>
LEARN THIS.....WHAT CHICK WRITES IS WHAT CHICK BELIEVES AND WHAT CHICK WANTS EVERYONE ELSE TO BELIEVE!!!! You don't think he spreads hate and criticism?.....check out on their web site the "brochure" entitled "Are Roman Catholics Christians"?? Read it....and then KNOW that almost EVERY SINGLE THING YOU HAVE READ IS FALSE!!!
<<Once again, you are confusing hate and criticism. Chick uses criticism all the time, but to call it "hate" is to use the same exaggerations you're so angry for Chick using.>>
I read that today and could NOT believe it!!!!! Almost EVERY SINGLE thing he said about Catholic belief is TOTALLY FALSE!! I emailed them with the Bible quotes that prove them wrong but, of course, they will not respond to me....because they simply HAVE no response!! They can't respond to the truth!!
Yes, I AM a Catholic.
<< I guessed that from the tone of your first letter.>>
I had NO faith or religion for over 30 years. God decided one day in 1999 to perform an incredible miracle of conversion on me!!! It was a true miracle for which I am forever grateful to God!!! It BLEW ME AWAY!!!! I was NOT looking for God or even thinking I ever really NEEDED God in my life!!! He IMMEDIATELY....and I mean IMMEDIATELY, within a 20 minute period, brought me from NO RELIGION AT ALL to the Catholic church!! A church I really didn't like and a church I CERTAINLY had no desire to join.
BUT...........when God comes down and enters your very being.............YOU CERTAINLY LISTEN!!!! And there was NO DOUBT that He wanted me in the Catholic church. I walked into our catholic church in my little midwestern town and to say that God has totally opened my eyes in the last 2 years is to say the least!!!!!! He has continued to perform MIRACLES in my life...one after the other after the other!!!!! I wish God would enter everyone the way He did me and let everyone see how true the Catholic church is and how TOTALLY devoted to God and Jesus EVERYTHING about it is!!!!!
Chick would have you believe we're a bunch of total idiots who don't know world history or church history or our Bibles and we worship idols!!! What total nonsense!!!!!
<< As I said before, many Chick readers do not agree with all or Chick's views. But he does have a Biblical basis for his criticism of many Catholic beliefs. Worshiping before statues of saints looks a lot like idol worship. You say he's lying, but Catholic churches and shrines both have these statues where people kneel and pray. That's not lies, but different interpretations about the same events. That's criticism!>>
BELIEVE me........every Catholic point he made in this brochure............I can show you the exact scripture in the Bible where it was begun and implemented.....a fact Chick keeps well hidden. Does Chick truly believe that God could not possibly enter and inspire "His Vicar on earth..the Pope"??? Don't you think God could direct His church and teach His church in this day and age? Or are you one who believes once the Bible was inspired and written.....God disappeared? Almost the ENTIRE Bible was Divine Inspiration.So why couldn't God still be inspiring His church through the Pope? Simply.....HE COULD!!!! Chick would have you believe the Pope is some goofy moron who makes stuff up!!! How ridiculous!!! Jesus Himself said of His church....."I will always be with you".
<< Chick is pointing out that sometimes Popes act more inspired by evil than good. The Inquisitions are a classic example. Certainly Jesus did not inspire the Vatican to allow mass murder and torture of "heretics". You talk about hate, it's hard to demonstrate more hate than to kill someone. And to do it in the name of Jesus. Now that's ridiculous!>>
Trace the Popes back in time........they began with Jesus and then Peter!! Why don't protestants GET THIS?? EVERY protestant denomination originated with Martin Luther. Before the Reformation, EVEN MARTIN LUTHER was Catholic and had great belief in the True Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Martin Luther had tremendous devotion to the Blessed Mother....and on and on and on. He just got mad at some of the church leaders, and instead of fighting for what he believed in........................he simply..........left. He threw away the baby with the bath water!!!
THEN..............he changed all the rules that had been in the church since Jesus. He even went so far as to change passages in the Bible to suit his agendas!!!! (This is an historical fact.) THEN....all the other denominations sprung up! Thousands of them! I could go on and on here but................
<< There was a lot more to the Reformation than Martin Luther being angry at certain Church leaders. Selling pardons, massive corruption within the Church, read his 95 theses for details. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and Catholic church of 1500s was a supreme example of this. The church you admire today would be far more self serving if it had not been for Luther. And by self serving, I mean tending to the needs of the shepherds instead of the flock.>>
ENOUGH.....sorry...........I get pretty passionate about things. I just KNOW Mr. Chick is misrepresenting the Catholic church. Instead of believing his errors..........why don't you get a Catholic Catechism and read for yourself. He didn't refer to the Catechism AT ALL in his little tract. Why not? He couldn't. It contains the truth about Catholocism!!
<< I admire your passion, as I admire Chick's. (Although I may not agree with what you are passionate about.) I should point out that Chick references the Catholic Catechism in other tracts.>>
Just keep your eyes open and if something in his tracts is mean-spirited or seems "funny"...........DON"t promote it as truth....PLEASE. Don't be so easily fooled!!! There ARE wicked men out there who Satan can control to slide into peoples lives through blind trust. Don't be one of them!! I guess what I'm saying is that if Chick will misrepresent and lie and spread falsehoods about the Catholic church.............he'll do it about anything.
<< Questioning the accuracy of claims is good advice for anyone reading about anything. There are two sides to every story. Thanks for presenting your side.>>
I have a large collection of Chick tracts. Some are rare and out of print. As a Catholic priest, and former Protestant minister, I find them amusing. They are also quite bigoted. What disturbs me about your site is that you seem to agree with Chick. If you met someone who said the Jews were out to take over the world and mentioned the Protocols of the Elders of Zion you would immediately peg them as a bigot. Anti-semitism is unacceptable. So is anti-Catholicism.
Was the early Church Catholic? St. Ignatius in 107 AD said that "where Jesus Christ is there is the Catholic Church". So they seemed to think they were Catholic. Does the Church go against scripture? Well since the Church canonized scripture that doesn't make much sense. Did they believe in Purgatory? In the catecombs there are 1st century inscriptions asking prayers for the dead Christians buried there. I could go on. The point is that after 2000 years if our position was so weak you would think we would have folded by now. As for proving Alberto false. It appears that no proof is acceptable to you. I find it strange that you are so willing to accept such a fraud. It is a bit like arguing the holocaust didn't exist and can't be proven. Some do that, but no one with brains takes their arguments seriously.
By all means enjoy Chicks tracts. Trade them with your friends. Chuckle over their lunacy. But don't take them seriously. The Vatican isn't trying to take over the world. If it is they they aren't doing very well at it. In fact much of the dark side of Church history is over stated. And it often leaves out the fact that Protestants have much to feel guilt over. You have heard of the English martyrs for example? And the Jesuits? Most are rather ancient. The rest are so busy undermining their own Church they don't have time to worry about Protestants. Soon Chick will demonize Opus Deias the up and coming villian. So please, refrain from the anti-Catholic polemic. We are not coming to get you. We don't have Swiss Guards hiding in anyones bushes. I think maybe you have been reading to much of Jack's tracts, lol.
Or maybe instead of lol it should be HAW HAW.
Sincerely, Fr. Jim (Oct. 2004)
Dear Fr. Jim,
Thanks for your note. We do not endorse nor condemn the beliefs promoted in Chick tracts. We do enjoy the tracts, however. As far as comparing Catholic bashing to Jew bashing, there is one important difference. The Jews were victims of the Holocaust, the Catholics were the instigators of the Inquistions. No one is going to call the Jews bigots for criticizing the Germans, they paid for that right in blood. Likewise, the protestants have paid a heavy blood toll to the Catholic church, and all the criticism in the world can't reach the level of pain and suffering the Catholics inflicted on protestants. So even if Chick goes "over the top" on various claims, his suspicions and fear of the Catholic church are understandable in a historical context. Like the old scholor said, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
For my part, two of my sisters are Catholic, as are many of my friends. I suggest you do as they do, and keep a good sense of humor about it. Clearly, there is no growing anti-Catholic movement in this country. On the contrary, we are now deciding if to elect a Catholic president. These days, I'd be more worried about protecting first ammendment rights.
(Read Father Jim's responses.)
Content copyright 2013