Disclaimer: Sorry but this is gonna be a long one.
This is unsubstantiated on two counts: First of all, it is based on what has been read INTO the biblical text. And second, it cannot be validated as true.
This is not the case. The whore of Babylon and her cup are well pictured the way Brothertom shared in one of his previous posts. Babylon is pictured as an image of spiritual adultery, and that is what her cup of mixture is. The Catholic church itself doesn't get the full rights to this title though. This whore's (in Greek the word used for harlot is the same when used for spiritual adulteries) umbrella is large enough to cover all of the worlds false and mixed religions, including many of today's apostate protestant ones. Even the title written on her head "Mystery" is a reference to the mystery religions of Babylon (as the Greek shows as well), and in Greek many of the titles given to her in Revelation 17 are direct references to idolatry.
If we have never met one Catholic who knows the Lord Jesus and has put their trust in God, the real issue is more likely the limitations of our experience, our knowledge of church history, and our expectations of what God is doing and can do in the world - yes even today, as in the evangelical movement in some Catholic congregations. It is counterproductive to isolate out the Catholic Church, call them Babylon, while disregarding the fluidity between these two "sides" – including the hostilities of the past.
That sounds really nice and all, but it's a straw man argument. We do not base any truth upon subjective experience, church history, our expectations etc. etc. Our truth is defined quite simply on what the Word says about it. Not even how people receive or respond to the truth, but simply what the truth is. The Word condemns the practices of the Roman Catholic church as false and idolatrous. I'm not one to argue with it, as I didn't write it.
The Lord detests a mixture in worship of Him. This is quite clearly pictured when He was giving the law from Sinai. He was also very specific on HOW He was to be worshiped. Read through Deuteronomy 12 and you'll see how He explicitly forbids the Hebrews to worship in the way that the pagan countries around Him worship Him. He demands to be worshiped by the standard that He sets: The Truth.
Let's take a look at some Roman Catholic "truths";
Mary, Mother of God (a phrase not even found in the Bible) also born without sin (even though in Luke's Gospel she says that she needs a savior), perpetually a virgin (even though Jesus had siblings) equal with Jesus, co-Redemptrix, and Mediatrix.
Lie.
In communion the bread becomes (by faith now, though before they believed it was literal until science debunked it) the LITERAL body of Christ and the wine becomes His LITERAL blood, prayed to and then consumed (cannibalism and vampirism), even though the apostles specifically condemned the consumption of blood (For the record I don't think that Roman Catholics are actually cannibals or vampires, but apparently they think that they are).
Lie.
The blood of Christ does not cover all of your sins but instead you have to pay in purgatory for your own.
Lie.
Prayers to the dead (the sin of necromancy) and bowing down in front of statues (the sin of idolatry) are acceptable acts of worship.
Lie.
The forbidding of marriage for the priesthood and the nuns, even though Paul referred to such practices as the doctrine of demons.
Lie.
Isaiah 2:6
For You have abandoned Your people, the house of Jacob, Because they are FILLED WITH INFLUENCES FROM THE EAST, And they are soothsayers like the Philistines, And they strike bargains with the children of foreigners.
Influences from the east? The RCC has that one in spades.
I could go on and on...
These are not simply "minor doctrinal differences". The Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormon's probably have more in common with our beliefs than the RCC, but we're quite quick to distinguish them both as a cults (and rightly so), yet accept that born again believers can take part in Roman Catholic worship and fellowship. We have a pretty vicious double standard I'd say.
And like I said above, the Catholics do not have the exclusive rights to the title of Babylon. They have Methodists, Anglicans, Lutherans, and many other largely apostate groups clamoring for rights to that title these days. I'm not saying this is true of every member of every one of those groups, but soon there will be a line drawn in the sand, as we're seeing more of these denominations fall into apostasy with ordinations of homosexuals, ecumenism, denial of basic Christian doctrines, etc. etc. They're becoming quite willing to share in her immoralities, which is why the Lord calls them out, lest he throws them onto a bed of sickness, though He has given time for repentance.
In one town I lived in it wasn’t long ago that Protestant and catholic school children hated (ie feared) each other so much that they would walk on opposite sides of the street from each other – and even beat each other up. Where did they learn to do this?
That bears no essence on the issue at hand, again, truth is not defined by how people act (no matter what title they give themselves), but simply upon what the Bible defines as truth. If these children had the truth, they would share it with the Catholic children, out of concern for them, not avoid them like the plague.
Strong anti-Catholic rhetoric is fear driven – much like we see in Jesus day where the Jews hated the Samaritans. They stayed away from them thinking that would keep them pure. Why the need?
I'm glad that you've brought this point up. In the account we have in John 4 of Jesus with the Samaritan woman He deals with this exact issue. The Samaritan woman wanted the living water, but before He would give it, He addressed her sin. Then to divert the issue, she tries to play the same game that's being played these days saying, "Our fathers worshiped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship."
The Samaritan's of antiquity and of modern times, treated the Torah in a similar fashion to the way the RCC handles the New Testament. They disregard it's specific commands on how the Lord was/is to be worshiped, and instead substitute it for their own invention. Same God (so they claim), but just a little bit different way of doing it.
How does Jesus respond to this though? Does John say that He commended her for giving it her all, and talk about the limitations of her experience, knowledge about Jewish history, and expectations of what God can do in the world?
Nope.
"You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for SALVATION IS FROM THE JEWS. But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit AND truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him MUST worship in spirit AND truth."
Sorry Mormons. Sorry Jehovah's witnesses. Sorry Roman Catholics. Your forms of worship didn't make the cut, even though you use the same names when talking about God and Jesus.
To say something to the contrary or to claim that God is somehow pleased with worship mixed with pagan idolatry and lies is simply to argue with the Words of Christ. Nothing less.
This is not "fear driven anti-Catholic rhetoric" that puts them on the other side of the fence, and keeps us away from them. This is the truth. The truth that sets free. If we didn't love Catholic people we wouldn't tell them the truth. We would just say, "Go ahead and continue in your abominations, we both serve Jesus, right?"
One cannot be a true doctor and not hate sickness and disease. One cannot be a true officer of the law and not hate lawlessness. One cannot be a follower of Christ and not hate the things that separate others from Him (like false religions).
My closest friend in Japan is a former Catholic. He'll be the first to tell you that the reason he converted is because someone loved him enough to tell him that he was following a lie. And he struggled through it. He rejected it at first, but the Truth set him free, and he came out from amongst Babylon because God calls His own out from her. The former Roman Catholics I know would be offended at the idea that one would stay within such idolatry, and they'd be the first to say so.
This is truth. Speaking the truth does not make one popular. Jesus said He came and was born into the world to testify to the truth. So they crucified Him for it. If one loves the Truth and proclaims it like He did, then they shouldn't expect anything less. He told us to expect it.
So all in all, I'm sorry to put it bluntly, but in all humility I have not read anything into the text that wasn't there. You've done the opposite though, and taken something away from Christ's words that were.
-Grant