A Catholic Apologist

Recently, there was an exchange between one of our church members and a Catholic Apologist—hereafter referred to as CA. This article is an analysis of the things CA wrote; it eliminates the personal comments of the correspondence and centers on the claims that were made in the CA’s three posts.

The first post dealt with where Pope Francis is—now that he is deceased. CA claimed that many Catholics hope they will at least be sent to Purgatory. This claim highlights the main problem with Catholicism. They use terms and concepts that are not in the Bible. For years, they believed in Limbo, “a border place between heaven and hell” for unbaptized infants; however, according to Google, they have now “moved away from this concept.” Neither Limbo nor Purgatory can be found in the Scriptures. Incidentally, New Testament teaching does not change over the centuries. Otherwise, it could not be truth (John 8:31-32).

In this first post, CA says that Paul was too spiritually humble to claim to be saved. As proof, he references 1 Corinthians 9:27—without naming it. He also does not say what version he uses, but it is not a respectable translation. It has Paul saying he “hopes” he will not be disqualified (and, therefore, be lost). What he actually says is he brings his body into subjection lest he be lost. Any major translation uses lest rather than hope. Even the New Living Translation (a declared paraphrase) has lest. Apparently, CA never read or has forgotten Paul’s affirmation of his salvation in 2 Timothy 4:8 that “there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge will give me on the Day….”

CA states with pride: “I never arrogantly say that I am saved….like so many fundamentalist Protestants do.” Genuine Christians do not defend Protestantism any more then Catholicism; both have made significant departures from the New Testament. But it is not arrogance to live with confidence concerning one’s salvation. Of course, anyone can assert he is going to heaven. The proof can be discovered in whether or not one is following the New Testament.

According to Luke 16:19-31, the soul goes to the Hadean realm when it dies. Part of it is called Abraham’s bosom, and the other part is a place of torment. And there is a great gulf between them. CA blustered and fumed and accused Christians of being judgmental (whoa, there’s a surprise), but he did not say a word about the passage cited.

The Catholic Church

In his third and final post, CA claims that he was an evangelical Protestant most of his life before he “felt the Holy Spirit call” him “home to the Catholic Church in 2005.” Since then, he has been studying the Catholic faith.

Needless to say, he would have done better to study the Bible. No one knows what CA felt, but whatever it was, we know that it was not the Holy Spirit—because the Holy Spirit would not call anyone to be part of a false religion. The very concept of the pope is Exhibit A. Not only is there no mention of such an office in the New Testament, Jesus clearly said, “All authority had been given to Me in heaven and on earth” (Matt. 28:18). Notice that He did not say that any human being represented Him on earth.

Nor was Peter the first pope. To begin with, he was married (Matt. 8:14-15) and he carried about a wife with him (1 Cor. 9:5). Furthermore, he refused to be worshiped (Acts 10:25-26), and he referred to himself as “a bondservant and apostle” (2 Peter 1:1) and a fellow elder (1 Peter 5:1)—not the pope, the head of the church. In fact, the word pope does not appear in the New Testament. Paul makes clear that it is Jesus who is the head of the church (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18).

After referencing Romans 16:16 (which mentions the churches of Christ all over the world in the first century), CA affirms that “all of those churches were catholic.” Is it not astounding that they are not referred to as catholic churches anywhere in the New Testament? They are designated by five (or more) expressions (church of God, church of the firstborn, church of God in Christ, churches of Christ, the church)—but never once the Catholic Church. The Greek word katholikos does not appear in any Greek text.

In fact, CA points out that it was not until A.D. 107 that the Church Father Ignatius first used the expression, the Catholic Church. Apparently, he misses the significance of what he wrote. He has admitted that the terminology cannot be found in the Bible. Jesus did not call what He is head over the Catholic Church. Neither Peter nor the rest of the apostles so designated it. None of the churches referred to themselves in that manner. An uninspired man, writing more than 10 years after the New Testament was concluded used the phrase, and that is ten years too late!

Furthermore, Ignatius, in using this adjective, was only referring to the universal nature of the church (which included both Jew and Gentile), which was a concept Paul dealt with in Ephesians 2:14-21. In no way did Ignatius refer to modern Roman Catholicism. He never referred to a pope or the religious system that developed hundreds of years later.

Protestantism

CA thinks there are only two alternatives—Catholicism or Protestantism, which is simply not the case. He is correct in dating Protestantism to Martin Luther in 1517, but he does not ask himself, “What was Luther protesting?” The answer is apostasy.

CA is right when he claims that Protestant churches were founded by men—not Christ. But he fails to observe (which is a mystery) that the Catholic Church of the 21st century is not the church that Jesus founded (Matt. 16:18; Acts 20:28). In the New Testament there were no popes and no archbishops. All Christians were priests (1 Peter 2:5, 9); there was no separate priesthood as there had been in the Old Testament. We do not have an earthly high priest, as the Jews did; Jesus Himself is our High Priest. (Heb. 3:1).

Among other things, genuflecting cannot be found in Holy Writ; nor can “the rosary.” No New Testament writer, including the Apostle Peter, talks about going to Confession (as CA does). Nothing is mentioned resembling “the stations of the cross.” Certainly, Mary cannot be prayed to; there is one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5). Holy water cannot be found; neither can the Mass. All of these doctrines and practices were added over the centuries.

In other words, the church that Jesus established over a period of time departed from the teachings of the New Testament. They became corrupt and stood in need of correction. The Protestant Reformation sought to reform the Catholic Church, but it resulted in several manmade churches coming into existence, and they retained some errors while correcting others. The church Jesus established became the corrupt Roman Catholic Church. It too was now following the teachings of men instead of the doctrines of Christ.

Restoration

Luther and others finally realized that the Catholic Church was so corrupt that it could not be reformed; thus, Protestantism was born. But it got mankind only a little closer to the truth. We do not know how many Christians and churches there were during the Middle Ages because many of them were silenced or had to go into hiding upon threat of death. But we find traces of those attempting to simply follow the Scriptures.

And then there are those of us who have no desire to be Catholic or Protestant—but rather to follow the teachings of the New Testament. We do not practice what the Scriptures do not authorize, and we do obey what the New Testament does authorize (Col. 3:17). Jesus, for example, said not to call anyone, “Father,” or use religious titles (Matt. 23:8-10); so we do not. Neither Catholics nor Protestants follow this teaching. They seem to take delight in exalting men.

No New Testament example can be found of sprinkling infants; yet both groups do so. We do not because it is not authorized. No evidence exists for Confirmation, either. Hezekiah and Josiah tried to restore Judah to following the commands of God. They observed the Passover which had not been consistently done for centuries, although clearly commanded in the Law. They had brought in idols, a practice strictly forbidden. This is restoration—going back to what God originally commanded. We have the capability of doing so.

When someone disagrees with CA, he accuses them of having a private interpretation, which the Scriptures condemn. In discussing the Scriptures, we are examining truth, and we make an argument based on truth. We don’t accuse others of having their own interpretation. But CA misunderstands 2 Peter 1:20. Peter affirms that the writers of prophecy were not interpreting matters privately but revealing the actual Word of God.

Gibberish

CA now makes a number of unsupported statements beginning with citing 1 Timothy 3:15 and explaining that it means the Catholic Church is the pillar and ground of the (Christian) faith. Of course, the word catholic is not in that—or any other—verse. What he means by this statement is that the Bible is a Catholic book. It was written by men who believed in the Real Presence and the one that was and still is overseen by Bishops. The Bible was completed in 398AD. Long before any other Protestant Church was ever founded by a mortal man [sic CA].

Nonsense! The New Testament does not discuss the Real Presence, which is a reference to the Eucharist (which the Lord’s supper is never called). Neither does the New Testament ever refer to a sacrament. Catholicism just makes up its own vocabulary as it goes along and then pretends all the things they refer to are Biblical.

CA really ought to cite some sources once in a while. Who said the Bible was completed in 398 AD? Anyone who asks Google will be told it was completed about 90 AD. Different canons were finalized from the 4th to the 6th centuries. Most scholars think that Revelation, the last book written, was written while John was exiled on the island of Patmos in AD 95-96.

But even the canon was agreed upon before Boniface III ever claimed to be the universal bishop over all the churches in 606 AD. A little research would tell him there were five popes in different regions up until then.

Salvation

Now this is actually interesting. CA asserts that Catholics are told how to be saved. He says they must “have faith in and worship Jesus, be Baptized [sic], confess and repent of our sins and persevere to the end.” Not bad, although the order is wrong. When he was given the Scriptures which teach these doctrines, he replied in his second post that it was personal interpretation. We can’t help but wonder if it’s “personal interpretation” when he cites what those verses teach.

All people need to have faith in God the Father and Jesus our Lord, offering up sincere and true worship to them (John 4:23-24). Sin must be repented of; we must change the way we live. The confession must be that Jesus is the Son of God (Matt. 10:32-33; Rom. 10:9-10). Then we are ready to be baptized (Acts 2:38; Rom. 6:3-5). We agree that we must persevere to the end.