✅ **Why do some Protestants call the Catholic Church a pagan religion?

Is it true?**

Short answer:

No, it is historically false.
The accusation comes from anti-Catholic propaganda, not from actual historical evidence.

But let’s go step by step.

🔍 1. The logic behind the accusation

Some fringe Protestant groups argue:

Catholicism mixed Christianity with pagan Roman beliefs.
Therefore, it became a “pagan religion.”
Therefore, it supposedly persecuted “true Christians”—even in the time of the Apostles.

But this logic is historically impossible, because:

Catholicism is the early Church.
The Catholic Church grew out of the Apostles themselves, not paganism.
Calling the early Church “pagan” contradicts the entire New Testament and early Christian writings.

🕊 2. Did pagan Rome kill Christians? Yes.

But pagan Rome ≠ Catholic Church.

Pagan Rome:

Worshiped gods and emperors
Hated Christians
Executed Peter and Paul
Threw Christians to lions

But that same Roman Empire persecuted Catholics too, including:

St. Ignatius of Antioch
St. Polycarp
St. Cecilia
St. Agnes
St. Lawrence
40 Martyrs of Sebaste
Many more

👉 You cannot say a group that was being killed by pagans was actually pagan.

🏛 3. Where did the accusation come from? Not from history—but from 1500–1800 polemics

1. Reformation propaganda (1500s)

Reformers needed to justify breaking away from Rome. Accusing it of paganism made it easier to separate.

2. 19th-century American anti-Catholicism

Books like The Two Babylons (Alexander Hislop, 1853) claimed:

Catholic doctrines come from Babylonian paganism.

Modern scholars—Protestant, Catholic, secular—call this book:

historically inaccurate
speculative
unscientific
discredited

Yet some groups still quote it today.

Who repeats the accusation today?

Independent Fundamentalist Baptists (IFB)
KJV-only groups
Landmark Baptists
Some Pentecostal/Oneness groups
Seventh Day Adventist extremists (not mainstream SDA)
“Trail of Blood” followers

Mainstream Protestants reject the claim.

🧠 4. What do modern scholars say? (Protestant + secular)

Scholars universally agree:

✔ The Catholic Church is the continuation of the early Christian Church

Same structure: bishops, priests, deacons (Acts 14:23, Titus 1:5)
Same sacraments
Same Eucharist-focused worship
Same creeds

✔ Catholic doctrine developed from Judaism, not paganism

Early Christian worship was based on:

Jewish liturgy
Passover structure
Psalms
Synagogue readings
Temple rituals fulfilled in Christ

❌ Catholicism did NOT adopt pagan gods

Mary ≠ Isis
Eucharist ≠ Mithras
Saints ≠ Roman gods

All these comparisons are rejected by scholars because:

The practices are theologically different
There is no historical proof
Early Christians avoided pagan practices on purpose
Pagans accused Christians of atheism (because they worshiped no idols)

🕇 **5. Did Catholicism kill any Apostles or early Christians?

No—because Catholicism was the early Christian community.**

You cannot say:

The Catholic Church killed the followers of Jesus

because:

The Catholic Church was being killed with them.
The Apostolic Fathers (students of the Apostles) were Roman Catholic leaders.
These same leaders were martyred by pagans, not by Christians.

Historical fact:

👉 The Roman Catholic Church was persecuted, not persecutor, for its first 300 years.

Not a single Apostle was killed by Christians.
Not a single early Christian martyr was killed by Christians.
All were killed by Jews, pagans, or the Roman Empire.

⭐ Conclusion: Fact or Myth?

❌ The idea that Catholicism is pagan

= Myth
= Based on 1800s propaganda
= Not accepted by modern scholars
= Not supported by historical evidence

❌ The idea that Catholicism killed Apostles

= Historically impossible

✔ The truth

The Roman Catholic Church is the same Church founded by Jesus through the Apostles, which suffered persecution alongside the Apostles and early believers.

✅ **Breakdown of The Two Babylons (Alexander Hislop)**

—and Why Modern Scholars (including Protestants) Reject It

The Two Babylons is the main source behind the accusation that the Catholic Church is a “pagan religion.”
Nearly all modern anti-Catholic pamphlets trace their arguments to this book.

However, historians—Protestant, Catholic, and secular—agree it is not a reliable work.
Here is a clear breakdown.

📘 **1. What is The Two Babylons?**

Published in 1853 by a Scottish Presbyterian named Alexander Hislop, the book claims:

The Roman Catholic Church adopted Babylonian pagan gods
Mary is based on Semiramis (Babylonian queen)
The Eucharist is based on pagan rituals
Catholic symbols come from Babylon
The papacy is the continuation of ancient pagan priesthoods

Hislop believed that every Catholic teaching has a secret pagan connection.

❌ 2. Why do scholars reject Hislop’s book?

Reason #1 — Hislop used poor research methods

He often did the following:

Took words from unrelated cultures and said they were connected
Ignored historical time gaps of thousands of years
Connected things just because they “look similar”
Used outdated 1700–1800s anthropology
Had no training in archaeology or ancient languages
Did not cite reliable primary sources

His method is called parallelomania—finding imaginary connections between unrelated things.

Reason #2 — He relied on discredited sources

Many of Hislop’s sources were:

Victorian-era speculation
Anti-Catholic pamphlets
Incorrect translations of ancient texts
Outdated archaeological theories
18th/19th-century Protestant polemics

None of his major claims are accepted by modern:

archaeologists
historians
Near Eastern scholars
patristic scholars
linguists

Reason #3 — He assumed what he wanted to prove

Hislop begins with the assumption:

“The Catholic Church is pagan.”

Then he works backwards, trying to find any resemblance—no matter how small—and treats it as proof.

This is called circular reasoning.

Reason #4 — His connections ignore historical timelines

Example:

Semiramis lived around 800–1200 B.C.
Christianity began around A.D. 30
Catholic devotions developed between A.D. 100–400

There is no timeline overlap.
Yet Hislop claims Catholic beliefs are “continuations” of her worship.

Reason #5 — Protestant scholars debunked the book

Even Protestant historians who dislike Catholicism reject Hislop’s book as:

unscientific
full of errors
historically impossible

Here are some examples:

📌 W. B. Smith (Protestant theologian):

“Hislop’s arguments are built on conjecture, not evidence.”

📌 Ralph Woodrow (Protestant pastor and former Hislop supporter):

He wrote a book exposing Hislop titled “The Babylon Connection?” (1997).

Woodrow says:

“When I checked Hislop’s claims in real historical sources, the whole theory collapsed.”

📌 Edwin Yamauchi (Evangelical historian, expert on ancient Near East):

“Hislop’s book is not valid scholarship.”

❌ 3. Why Hislop’s claims about Mary = Semiramis are false

Hislop claimed:

Semiramis = pagan goddess
Mary devotion comes from Semiramis worship

But:

Semiramis was a queen, not a goddess (Babylonian texts show this)
There is no historical link between Semiramis and Marian devotion
Early Christians rejected pagan goddess worship
Jewish Christians (who began Marian devotion) hated paganism

Even non-Catholic historians agree that Marian theology developed from:

Jewish respect for the mother of the Messiah
Biblical typology (New Eve, Ark of the Covenant)
Early Christian reflection—not paganism

❌ 4. Why Hislop’s claims about the Eucharist = pagan rituals are false

Hislop claimed the Eucharist came from:

Mithraism
pagan “sacred meals”

Modern scholars reject this because:

Christianity predates Mithraism in Rome
The Eucharist is directly from Jesus (Last Supper)
Pagan rituals were very different
Earliest Christian documents (A.D. 100–150) show Eucharist as Jewish Passover fulfillment

There is zero evidence connecting the Eucharist to paganism.

🏛 5. Why Hislop’s claims about pagan symbols are false

Hislop connected Catholic symbols to:

Baal
Babylon
Isis
Horus
Tammuz

Modern archaeology disproved these connections:

The cross is not a pagan invention
Haloes come from Roman art, not pagan worship
Statues are not idols; Jews also used them (cherubim, temple lions, etc.)
Similar artistic forms do not prove shared religion

Visual similarity ≠ historical influence.

⭐ 6. What scholars say today

Across universities and seminaries—Catholic, Protestant, secular—the consensus is:

“The Two Babylons is not historically reliable.”

“Its claims are based on guesswork and parallelomania.”

“Modern archaeology contradicts its conclusions.”

Even Protestant pastors warn their members not to use Hislop as a source.

🟢 7. Final Summary

✔ Hislop’s book is the origin of the “Catholic = pagan” accusation

❌ His claims are historically disproven

✔ Most Protestant scholars reject Hislop’s theories

✔ Catholic teachings come from Judaism and Apostolic Christianity, not paganism

❌ Hislop’s accusations cannot explain how the same early Church was being killed by pagans, not cooperating with them

IF YOU ARE A DEVOTED CATHOLIC AND HAPPY TO DEFEND YOUR FAITH, YOUR SUPPORT TO CONTINUE OUR MISSION TO DEFEND THE CATHOLIC FAITH REALLY MATTERS!

Pages

Friday, November 28, 2025