"So the Pharisees and scribes questioned him, “Why do your disciples not follow the tradition of the elders but instead eat a meal with unclean hands?” He responded, “Well did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines human precepts.’ You disregard God’s commandment but cling to human tradition.” He went on to say, “How well you have set aside the commandment of God in order to uphold your tradition!" - Mark 7:5-9, NABRE
In the above Scripture, we see a snippet of an exchange between the Pharisees and Jesus. The Pharisees were a devoutly religious sect of Jews, yet, in spite of being so devoutly religious, they were also devoted to their own traditions. In their teachings, tradition was equal to Scripture, and in practice, greater than. Thus, when we read on, we see that they would disregard even the 10 commandments, using their tradition to justify it. When Scriptures says honor thy father and mother, that is an order directly from God. The Pharisees, however, would disregard it, saying that the money their parents would receive as support in their old age is devoted to God.
This earned them a stern rebuke from Jesus, who had no regard for Pharisaical traditions, nor did He teach His disciples to do so. Thus, although it is certainly no sin to wash your hands before you eat, Jesus and His disciples apparently did not, earning Pharisaical ire. To Jesus, your priorities are clear: Scripture first, for this is the word of God, and tradition second, for this is the word of man. Where they two collide, Scripture always wins.
Much like the Pharisaical order, the Roman Catholic Church places a heavy emphasis on tradition. According to their official teachings, "...both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence." (Emphasis added). (1). This, of course, leads to the practical demotion of Scripture whenever, as frequently happens, Catholic tradition conflicts with Scripture. In the eyes of the Catholic Church, whenever Scripture and Catholic tradition are in disagreement, the Catholic Church has the authority to reinterpret the Scriptures in order to reconcile the two.
An obvious example is the Roman Catholic practice of communicating with the saints. Roman Catholicism is absolutely saturated with idolatry. Whereas Scripture makes it clear that we are not to communicate with the dead, and especially not for intercession, for we should seek God instead, as the law and testimony affirms (Isaiah 8:19-20), Roman Catholics reason that, since the dead in Christ are actually alive in Heaven, they are not included in this command. Therefore, we can, and indeed must, seek the intercession of the Saints, especially Mary.
The logic seems strong, and indeed, were I to convert to Roman Catholicism, this would be the logic I would use to justify this form of necromancy. Of course, the logic still does not work. To begin with, Scripture confirms that those who are alive in Heaven are, nevertheless, dead on the Earth. Indeed, the only example in the Bible of anyone making a genuine communication with a dead person is when Saul made contact with Samuel, a Saint and prophet who, at that time, was alive in Heaven. And this is just for those who are confirmed to be in Heaven by Scripture. Yet, the Roman Catholic Church is radically inconsistent with regard to who gets to Heaven, how they get there, and whether or not you get to talk to them. The Pope even told a young boy that his atheist father made it, and he can therefore pray to him!
Thus, by explicit command, explicit example, and even basic logic, we see that, according to Scripture, it is a grave sin to speak to the dead, even if we make some distinction between the dead in Christ (1 Thessalonians 4:16), and the dead apart from Him. Furthermore, Scripture gives us no permission to make this distinction. We are never told that we can make an exception to the command if the dead with whom we are communicating are actually alive in Heaven. Rather, this is an ad hoc justification invented by the Necromancers in an attempt to justify such brazen disobedience to the word of God. As Christ Himself says, the "...disregard God’s commandment but cling to human tradition."
Recently, it occurred to me that this is shockingly easy to do. I look at the world today, and I see how aggressively it increases in its rebellious ways. This is not unique to the atheists. There are openly gay priests even within the Catholic Church, while the Pope himself will happily "laicize" pro-life priests for being too openly pro-life. Now, I don't believe the Catholic Church will suddenly become "Woke" tomorrow, but I do believe it has all the tools it needs to do so.
To begin with, homosexuality is obviously not a Catholic value. It's one of the common points between Catholicism and Christianity: When Scripture calls homosexuality an abomination, the Roman Catholic Church, for now, agrees. However, the Bible simply takes this for granted. It doesn't clarify that gay "marriage" is sin because it doesn't need to. However, marriage does legitimise sex. It is fornicators that God judges (Hebrews 13:4), but if you're married, you can have all the sex you want, you aren't fornicating. Therefore, since the Bible does not clarify that gay "marriage" is sin, maybe all the commands against homosexuality apply only outside of marriage, whereas gay "marriage" legitimises gay sex.
While this would certainly please openly gay Catholic priests, such as James Martin, it is an obviously problematic interpretation that Conservative Catholics, at the very least, would recognise as awful. Yet, the difference between this and the logic used to justify Catholic necromancy is negligible.
To make matters worse, consider that, in Roman Catholic theology, the 10 commandments are essential to salvation. Catechism of the Catholic Church 2068 tells us "The Council of Trent teaches that the Ten Commandments are obligatory for Christians and that the
justified man is still bound to keep them; The Second Vatican Council confirms: "The bishops, successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord . . . the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments.""
In Christianity, the 10 commandments take on a different role. With the exception of the 4th, regarding the Sabbath, the 10 commandments fall under the category of Moral Law, and thus, are still binding even on Christians who are no longer under the law. However, salvation is received by grace alone, through faith alone, and not of works. Therefore, we do not attain salvation through faith and baptism and the observance of the Commandments. That is just not Biblical. However, as the 10 commandments are so vital to the Catholic faith, it is worth showing that, using the same logic, all 10 of the commandments can be nullified.
1. No other gods.
The first commandment is "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall not have other gods beside me." (Exodus 20:2-3).
To begin with, I have to acknowledge the somewhat anomalous, yet fantastic rendering of the NABRE in this one instance. 9 times out of 10, an English Bible translation will render it "no other gods before me", which is a more accurate rendering, yet is more open to confusion. "Before" can mean "in the presence of". "I bring this other god before you". No, get rid of it. However, the primary meaning of "before" is in front of, or ahead. By contrast, no other gods beside me is more in the spirit of the commandment. Therefore, although the Hebrew term is more accurately rendered "before", the NABRE sacrifices precise accuracy in order to preserve the true meaning.
But knowing that "before" is the more accurate rendering, we can easily interpret the 10th commandment as meaning we can have other gods, we just have to make sure God Himself is greater. This is further justified by the fact the Bible does give the title of "god" (lower case G) to lesser beings. Psalm 82:6, for example, says "I declare: “Gods though you be, offspring of the Most High all of you," (well, there goes my high praise for the NABRE...).
So, maybe we can have gods beside God. Maybe we can divide worship into categories. Perhaps we can reserve "Latria" for God alone, yet lesser beings may be given "Dulia". Those familiar with the Catholic Church may have noticed that I am actually using Catholic theology here. According to their teachings, there genuinely is a distinction between the honor they give to God and the honor they give to their idols. Latria, they give to God alone, whereas Dulia is reserved for angels and the saints. Mary holds a special place, and is thus given Hyperdulia. In this particular article, I will not go into such depths, though I have done so before. Suffice to say for now, though they (usually) dress it up in nicer words, only rarely admitting they worship Mary, the specious distinction between "Latria" and "Dulia" is, in practice, no greater than the Pharisaical "qorban".
We see, then, how although the logic is abysmal, the first commandment can be nullified using Catholic logic.
2. No graven images.
The second commandment is "You shall not make for yourself an idol or a likeness of anything in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or serve them. For I, the Lord, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their ancestors’ wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but showing love down to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:4-6).
This is actually another time when I do not need to speak hypothetically, as the Catholic Church is so guilty here, they actively teach a different version of the 10 commandments to accommodate their idolatry. Instead of the traditional, Judeo-Christian order, the Catholic Church merges the first and second commandments together, splitting the 10th commandment in two to compensate. This fact alone has caused many Catholics to abandon the Church, and I hope pointing it out in this article may have the same effect on any well-meaning Catholic who reads it.
As stated, the Catholic Church is saturated with idols, and there is no shortage of Catholics who will actively bow before them. With this in mind, it is instantly apparent that Catholics are idolators. Devout Jews do not bow to statues, and when they did, God punished them Himself. Similarly, Christians do not bow to statues. With the second commandment in mind, as it is written in Scripture, it is obvious why.
But Catholics do. And rather than try to hide it, they attempt to justify it. This justification can be seen in Catechism of the Catholic Church 2132: "Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. the movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is."
It's worth noting that every pagan who has ever existed would likely use the same reasoning. Do you imagine anyone who has ever made and worshiped an idol has believed the idol they made with their own two hands is the "god" who made them with its own two hands? This would be no more logical than calling your daughter your mother! Not that idol worship is any more logical, of course, but it just seems like a stretch for pagans to believe their idols were actually their gods. At any rate, they could use the same excuse. "I'm not worshiping this bronze statue, I'm worshiping the god it represents". Putting a Christian spin on it, showing "dulia" to people who have no business receiving such worship, does not nullify the crime. But using Catholic logic, it does!
3. No taking the Lord's name in vain.
The third commandment is "You shall not invoke the name of the Lord, your God, in vain. For the Lord will not leave unpunished anyone who invokes his name in vain." (Exodus 20:7).
The temptation, to which I will actually cave, is to go on a tangent here and point out that actually, the Roman Catholic Church has the audacity to go the other way here. Rather than nullifying it, they actually add to it, saying "The second commandment forbids the abuse of God's name, i.e., every improper use of the names of God, Jesus Christ, but also of the Virgin Mary and all the saints." (CCC 2146). Now, when the Bible tells us to honor the Lord, and only the Lord, in a certain way, and you start trying to give that honor to human beings like Mary and the Saints, that is a major issue. That is, without excuse or qualification, idolatry.
Thus, ironically, Catholics do not nullify the 3rd commandment, but rather, they depend on it as a part of their own idolatry. This does not mean, however, that it is impossible for others to nullify using Catholic logic. See, the commandment itself only commands us not to misuse the name of God, yet, ironically, "God" itself is not His name. Rather, it is a title. Similarly, "Christ" is a title. Can we therefore run around shouting "oh my G**", or "for C***** sake!"? I will admit, this does fall somewhat short of the Catholic logic here. The difference is reverance. Whereas the other instances thus far add to the appearance of religiosity, and of course fit with some kind of tradition in a pre-existing religion, abusing even the titles of God gives off the impression of irreverence, and the only religious traditions that would typically permit such blasphemies are atheistic. However, it still involves the twisting of Scripture in an effort to support an idea that is not present. Thus, it is still the same logic being used to nullify yet another command.
4. Honor the Sabbath.
The 4th commandment is "Remember the sabbath day—keep it holy. Six days you may labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God. You shall not do any work, either you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your work animal, or the resident alien within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the Lord has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." (Exodus 20:8-11).
This is actually an anomalous command, as it is actually, in a sense, "nullified" by the New Testament itself. Romans 14 is a particularly prominent example, as this chapter includes Sabbath days as being a "doubtful disputation". That is, rather than having specific days we may, or may not, observe as a Sabbath, each Christian must be fully convinced in his or her own mind that the way we observe a given day, even if that means we observe all days alike (verse 5). Not even Sunday (which, technically, is not even the Sabbath day) is so Holy that a Christian may be compelled to honor it in a special way.
As Scripture itself "nullifies" the 4th commandment, it seems strange to seek to do the same, even for sake of argument. And of course, even an example I could give, Christ Himself gives. When criticised by the Pharisees for "working" on the Sabbath, Christ, as Lord of the Sabbath, points out that there is work that must be done on the Sabbath. We respond to emergencies on the Sabbath (Luke 14:5), priests worked on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:5), and God Himself works on the Sabbath (John 5:17). Thus, as far as the actual command to honor the Sabbath, I have no case to make here.
But what of the reasoning? As it happens, there is a religion today that stands aggressively against the Sabbath: Evolution. Evolution is a religion that posits that, rather than being the end result of a week-long, creative process by God, we are the end product of nature. Beginning with a magical explosion, a series of spectacular coincidences occurred, eventually resulting in the creation of our solar system, our planet, and the first living cell. This living cell, somehow, was able to reproduce, but that reproduction was imperfect. Mutations in its genome resulted in changes in each generation, some of which provided an advantage to survival and reproduction. Eventually, this lead to the creation of human beings.
And the Catholic Church is totally cool with that!
This should not be surprising, given that the Big Bang "theory" was, itself, a product of the Roman Catholic Church, specifically being made up by Georges Lemaître, a Roman Catholic priest. Sadly, regardless of their denomination, many Christians compromise with Evolution in various ways. This, they argue, is entirely justifiable, because not everything in Scripture is intended to be taken literally. Yes, it says the heavens and the Earth were created in 6 days, but do those have to be 6, literal days?
Well, unless you want to nullify the Sabbath, yes, absolutely. See, while Christians are no longer bound by the 4th commandment, as Christ is our Sabbath rest, this was not the case before Christ. Prior to the Incarnation, the Jews genuinely did work for 6 days, then rest on the Sabbath, "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the Lord has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." The creation week is the justification for the existence, and the framework, of the 4th commandment. Therefore, if you nullify the creation week, you nullify the Sabbath! And the Roman Catholic Church has a nasty recent history of nullifying the creation week...
5. Honor your parents.
The 5th commandment is "Honor your father and your mother, that you may have a long life in the land the Lord your God is giving you." (Exodus 20:12).
As we have already covered the way the Pharisees did this, I feel no compulsion to come up with a different example, but I could point out the extra layer of indulgences. According to CCC 1471, ""An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints."
This concept is actually one of the corruptions that lead to the Reformation. We no longer hear priests running around saying "every time a coin in the coffer rings, a soul from Purgatory springs", however indulgences are still a thing. So, what if a Catholic decided, rather than being "qorban", the money they would use to support their aging parents is instead to be used to purchase indulgences? Maybe they could even do it specifically for their parents, to speed up their time in Purgatory! We see, then, how easy it would be for a Roman Catholic to nullify the 5th commandment in a worse way than the Pharisees themselves did.
6. No murder.
The 6th commandment is "You shall not kill." (Exodus 20:13). This one is actually easier to justify than Necromancy. Nowhere does the Bible offer a single exception to the command against communicating with the dead. It doesn't say it's ok if they're in Heaven, it doesn't say it's ok if they died as an atheist but baptised their kids anyway, it never says it's ok to speak to the dead. But it is littered with examples of legitimate killing. Can a hunter kill a deer? Can a farmer kill a chicken? Can an inquisitor kill a heretic?
The answer to that last question is no, and we can be grateful that, thanks to the political power it lost as a result of the Reformation, not even the modern Catholic Church is proud of its bloodthirsty history. However, because of the large number of legitimate kills recorded in the Bible, it would be oh so easy to justify killing just about anyone. Hey, why'd you kill that guy? It's ok, it's no murder, he was a Muslim who followed a false prophet, so I just treated him like Elijah treated the prophets of Baal. Boom, 6th commandment nullified, and it was easier than justifying praying to Mary.
7. No adultery.
The 7th commandment is "You shall not commit adultery." (Exodus 20:14). This is, perhaps, the tightest commandment in the entire Bible. It is discussed so heavily, there is no realistic way for anyone to justify it. However, there is one sneaky way: Polygamy.
Biblically speaking, polygamy is a no-no. It even bars a man from taking up a leadership role within the Church (1 Timothy 3:2, 12). Yet, did David not do it? And did God not even say to him "I gave you your lord’s house and your lord’s wives for your own. I gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were not enough, I could count up for you still more" (2 Samuel 12:8)? The only real snag here is that polygamy seems to be a universally male practice, but nothing says it has to be.
So what if we just nullify the command against adultery by taking more than one husband or wife? Scripture militates against the idea, but it doesn't explicitly state as much.
8. No theft.
The 8th commandment is "You shall not steal." (Exodus 20:15). Three words: Socialism, and Communism. By stating, or at the very least implying, that someone who does not have wealth is more entitled to it than the one who does, it becomes very easy to identify stealing as simply "redistributing". You could even imply that the true owner is the thief. It is so easy to nullify the 8th commandment that we are seeing it happen right now.
9. No deceit.
The 9th commandment is "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor." (Exodus 20:16). But are there not "righteous lies" in Scripture? Didn't Shiphrah and Puah do well by lying to the Pharaoh (Exodus 1:15-22)? Didn't Rahab please God by concealing the spies (Joshua 2:1-7)? So, clearly, not all deceit is wrong, even if it is against your neighbor. Thus, just as Catholics can claim speaking to dead saints is breaking a Godly command for a Godly purpose, in step with their tradition, surely they can also lie for a Godly purpose? The 9th commandment is nullified.
10. No coveting.
The 10th commandment is "You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, his male or female slave, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor." (Exodus 20:17). This can be nullified in a similar way to stealing. You simply suggest that you have a greater right to wealth than the one who holds it.
Conclusion
As you can see, all 10 of the commandments can be nullified in similar ways to how Catholics justify their communication with dead people in Heaven. The issue here is eisegesis: The practice of beginning with a conclusion (such as a tradtion), and using that tradition to justify disobedience to a very clear teaching of Scripture. Thus, Jesus says "You nullify the word of God in favor of your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many such things.”" (Mark 7:13).
Biblically speaking, there is no way to justify this kind of behavior. According to Scripture itself, "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work." This means we simply do not have the right to reinterpret it whenever it conflicts with our traditions. We certainly don't get to actively change it because a tradition we are notorious for is so obviously contrary to it that anyone looking in from the outside will know our crimes. Thus, whenever Catholics seek to justify their idolatry, it doesn't matter if their reason for doing so is another Scripture cited out of context, all this does is pile one sin on top of another sin. Roman Catholics are in dire need of repentance, lest their hope is erroneously placed in Mary, when "...there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human," (1 Timothy 2:5), and "There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved.”" (Acts 4:12).
References
1. Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, Promulgated by Pope Paul VI, November 18 1965 (link)