Responding To Your Feedback: Part 6 (The Catholic Edition)
Every so often I receive comments on my blog posts and emails from readers who want to share their input on what I have written. Although many are supportive and friendly, plenty of others are critical, mean-spirited, inaccurate, or some combination of those attributes. On occasion, I do not respond to emails or approve comments because I don’t see how the exchange could be edifying. All that said, I would like to acknowledge some of these comments and emails when it seems appropriate. “Responding to your feedback” posts will be written directly to the author, but I will keep the individual anonymous by assigning him/her a nickname. Welcome to the Catholic edition!
The Comment For Today
I typically address one comment I have received and respond to it for this series, but I’m going to do things a little differently this time around. Each and every single week, my post, Catholicism Is Not Biblical Christianity, is my most read piece of content. I’m shocked so many people have seen it, but I suspect it became more visible to readers when some pretender on Twitter (now X) literally copied and pasted it to her account as if she had written it. Well, she had to deal with a lot of haters while I had an uptick in views. Eventually, though, folks figured out where to place the blame for what had been written about the Catholic Church. Me!
I have received many comments and emails defending the Catholic faith and telling me just how wrong I am. Some have been short, rude, and to the point. Others have been more along the lines of academic dissertations from former pastors and pseudo-intellectuals. None of them, however, have proven Catholicism aligns with God’s Holy Word, and I think it’s time to publicly address some of these arguments.
The Comments
Rather than share one comment with you all, I’m going to combine the comments I have received and address the common questions and rebuttals people have offered me. The quotes will be paraphrased instead of direct quotes from readers so that I can address the issues more broadly for a wider audience.
My responses will be written as if to one person for simplicity’s sake. Let’s call my fictional commenter “John Paul.” Today, I’ll address just five of the common responses I have received concerning Catholicism. In all likelihood, I’ll respond to others in a future post.
Responding To Your Feedback
Dear John Paul,
Thank you for your thorough and thoughtful response to my post claiming that Catholicism is not, in fact, biblical Christianity. I would like to begin by apologizing if anything I said hurt you. My goal is not to harm individuals when I point out the errors of the Catholic faith. I want to warn people who are entrenched in a religion that teaches unbiblical doctrine that they are trusting in a man-made system which offers no salvation. You may not agree with me, but I pray that you understand my heart on the issue. I’m pained to see so many wonderful and sincere men and women pulled into lies when the Truth is so easy to access.
At the time I am writing this, you have raised fourteen objections or concerns about what I said regarding Catholicism. Please, forgive me for limiting my response to only five for today. Let’s dive in.
Responding To Your (Catholic) Feedback – Comment 1:
“Please, understand Catholic history involves many martyrs who died so that you would know Christ. Think of all the hospitals and schools started by the Catholic Church. Do you think a person as amazing as Mother Teresa could have possibly been a part of a church that was not established by Christ?”
To begin, I’d like to remind you that the stance you are disagreeing with is that Catholicism is not biblical Christianity. Nothing you have said here even addresses that subject. This argument and others like it are, at best, a distraction from the actual conversation. Are you doing this because you don’t know how to defend your Catholic faith? Do you genuinely believe that who has been a Catholic affects the biblical validity of the religion? Nonetheless, I’ll engage with your comment with the understanding that this piece of feedback is neither here nor there concerning the original subject. (But it’s the most popular type of response I receive.)
Martyrs
Let’s talk about martyrs. Let me just say that I am always sad about martyrs for any cause. Persecution and death for one’s faith is a unfortunate affair, but I also understand that it can be a part of the Christian walk. In fact, persecution for Jesus’ sake is a blessing.
“Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 5:10
Does dying for one’s faith make that faith correct, though? Some folks claim that only Christians have been martyred, but that is absolutely false. For one, many people who fall under the overly broad umbrella term Christian are not actually Christians. For instance, the LDS Church is heretical yet they claim to be a Christian denomination. Therefore, if a Mormon is martyred, then she would be a non-Christian martyr. Do you follow that?
Secondly, other religions around the world face persecution. Jews, for example, are decidedly not following after Jesus, yet they have a long history of persecution and death due to their religious beliefs. I’m positive there have been martyrs from nearly every religion at some point in history. So, does this make all faiths with martyrdom true? Answer: No.
Let’s not forget those who purpose to die for their faith such as Muslim suicide bombers. Is their willingness to die for their faith an argument for the legitimacy of Islam? Answer: Also no.
Catholic martyrs may stir up compassion in my heart, they do not prove your religion is biblical.
Hospitals And Schools
Doing “good” things doesn’t prove a religion as true. How many adulterers, thieves, liars, blasphemers, etc. give large sums of money to charitable causes like hospitals and schools? Should we look at those people as admirable in character and trustworthy because they helped open hospitals and schools? Of course not. So, why does a Catholic hospital or school somehow tell us anything in particular about Catholicism? For example, how does a new maternity ward support the doctrine of transubstantiation?
Essentially, I’m saying there is no connection between the Catholic faith and an institution putting up a community building with its name plastered on the front. Sure, these might be welcomed additions to the community, but they are completely void of biblical significance.
Mother Teresa
I know Mother Teresa is highly regarded by Catholics and the world at large. She was a humanitarian who, as far as I can tell, loved people and cared for others’ needs. But where you see a saint, I see a pitiable woman who was deeply indoctrinated in a false religion and working endlessly to earn Heaven. I’m not downplaying her work among the needy, but I do question what she believed. Full transparency: I have no idea what spiritual condition she was in when she died. So, I am not saying she was or was not saved. However, I think the answer to that question is less clear than Catholics say.
Time Magazine reported on Mother Teresa after her death. In letters that were read after her passing, she expressed severe loneliness and darkness. She admitted that her smile was a “cloak that covers everything.” A longer quote from Time Magazine reveals Mother Teresa felt no presence of God in her life for nearly fifty years.
“That absence seems to have started at almost precisely the time she began tending the poor and dying in Calcutta, and—except for a five-week break in 1959—never abated. Although perpetually cheery in public, the Teresa of the letters lived in a state of deep and abiding spiritual pain. In more than 40 communications, many of which have never before been published, she bemoans the “dryness,” “darkness,” “loneliness” and “torture” she is undergoing. She compares the experience to hell and at one point says it has driven her to doubt the existence of heaven and even of God.”
Time Magazine, 2007
Mother Teresa, though she did many things we might define as “good” or “admirable,” described her spiritual life as torturous. Really, if you think about it, she didn’t appear to have a spiritual life. She simply completed works and deeds.
Universalist or Catholic?
John Paul, the woman you are pointing to in order to validate the Catholic faith appears to not have been a theologically consistent Catholic. The biography Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work quotes her as saying, “If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are. … What God is in your mind you must accept.” This quote is in complete opposition to Catholic teachings.
Works Don’t Save
Mother Teresa is one of those impossible to replicate standards Christians and the world likes to point to for how to be a “good person” and “get to Heaven.” Well, if works get a person to Heaven, then Mother Teresa is the top of the list, isn’t she? I have bad news for anyone depending on earning salvation, though. You can’t. Actually, not just you. None of us can. We are saved through faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior, and that work was finished for you with Jesus’ death on the cross and His empty tomb. You can’t save yourself, but we’ll get deeper into that topic later.
“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
John 3:3
“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”
Acts 4:12
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
Ephesians 2:8-9
Although there are many figures in Catholicism who are commendable and who display positive character traits, they are not evidence for Catholicism being biblical. They are just people who need to be born again just like anyone else. Our faith ought not be in the people of this world but rather in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Responding To Your (Catholic) Feedback – Comment 2:
“The idea of “Bible alone” is a relatively new idea that occurred around the time of Luther and the Reformation.“
It appears that you also don’t quite understand what people mean when they say “Bible alone.” That’s all right, though. I want to clarify these things so that I make more sense to you.
Martin Luther And The Reformation
The term sola scriptura (i.e., Bible alone) was, in fact, adopted and popularized during the Reformation. Martin Luther wanted to see confirmation in the Bible for any church teachings he would adopt, and he ultimately rejected a great deal of what he saw in the Catholic Church such as the unholy grifting scheme we know as “indulgences.”
Sola scriptura was a call for Christians to stop taking church leaders at their word, and to seek out the Truth in God’s Word. John Paul, you are claiming that this is the first time we see this belief in Christian history. But you’re wrong. And kind of right. “Bible alone” is not written in the Bible. Of course, “Trinity” is not there either. Is that a false doctrinal belief someone made up? Nope. The Trinity is evident throughout Scripture, and Christians gave the concept a name. Sometimes, we need to look at the whole of God’s Word to understand an idea. (OK…we should always do that, actually.)
Scripture Supports Sola Scriptura
Well, sola scriptura is supported in the Bible. Here are a few examples.
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”
2 Timothy 3:16-17
This sure makes it sound like God intends the Bible to be enough to practice our faith and be sanctified, doesn’t it?
“And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
Acts 17:10-11
How many times have you heard someone say this? “Be a Berean Christian and examine the Scriptures for yourselves?” The Early Church did not just take what the Apostles said with no critical thinking or discernment. Believers compared it to what they had of God’s Word at the time to ensure that what they were told aligned with what God had already told them. They weighed the teachings from the Apostles against the Word, not the other way around.
“I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.” (emphasis mine)
1 Corinthians 4:6 (ESV)
So, this sounds a lot like Paul saying his version of sola scriptura. Don’t go beyond what is written… How else can you take that but to mean the final word on our faith is the Holy Bible?
“He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.” (emphasis mine)
Mark 7:6-9
This is Jesus Himself speaking, and it should make Catholics tremble because that sounds 100% like Catholicism. It is filled with man-made traditions, repetitive prayers said in vain to people other than God, and deep love and connection for the traditions of the religion over the love of God’s Word.
Reformers may have given us a concise way to express this biblical truth, but sola scriptura has always been God’s standard, friend.
Responding To Your (Catholic) Feedback – Comment 3:
“The Apostle Paul makes it clear in 1 Timothy 3:15 that even though our Holy Bible is sacred, it is the Church that is the pillar and foundation of truth.”
Thank you, John Paul, for using the Bible to make your point. I feel like we can have a real conversation about biblical Christianity when we include the Bible in our discussion. I hope others are taking notes from you. Despite that praise, I do have to wholeheartedly disagree with you. Why don’t we read your reference?
“I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.”
1 Timothy 3:14-15 (ESV)
These verses are commonly used by Catholics to “prove” that the Catholic Church is the ultimate authority of spiritual knowledge, but these can’t be understood cherry-picked out of context like that.
First, let’s take note that this comes at the end of a chapter focused on qualifications for church leaders. Two such qualifications are to be the husband of one wife (1 Timothy 3:2) and to manage his home and children well (1 Timothy 3:4). I’d say those are odd qualifications for church leadership if God intended the Catholic Church to be His Church…seeing as priests aren’t allowed to marry…
Second, we won’t find instances in the Bible where man and his teachings are elevated to a place of irrefutable truth. We are encouraged to seek confirmation of teachings in the Word (Acts 17:10-11), reject false doctrine (Mark 1:3-7) , mark and avoid false teachers (Romans 16:17-18), and be more concerned with what is being taught than who is teaching it (Galatians 1:6-8).
What Is The Foundation?
The Bible doesn’t contradict itself, and there is another place in Scripture that clearly states who the foundation is in the Christian faith. It’s not the Pope, priests, or congregants. The foundation is Jesus Christ.
“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
1 Corinthians 3:11
As for the foundation and pillars in 1 Timothy 3:15, “the church” Paul references here is the Body of Christ. The believers. The Church (i.e., Christians) holds up the truth to the world. We are sharing the gospel and demonstrating the Christian life. This statement comes at the end of a long list of expectations for church leadership, and this makes complete sense because proper conduct is essential from leaders if the Church is going to present the truth to the world around us well and without hypocrisy.
As is often the case, Catholic apologists will use proof texts to make claims about the Catholicism’s authority and God-ordained status in the world. However, just add context and more Scripture to interpret the text, and the argument becomes nonexistent.
Responding To Your (Catholic) Feedback – Comment 4:
“The problem is that you are using your lens to try and understand our worldview. Protestants have no concept for things like the veneration of Mary or intercession of the saints, so you borrow from your worldview. Thus, you accuse Catholics of worshiping Mary or using saints as mediators between us and Jesus. Both are absurd and tired clichés.“
Pot, have you met Kettle? Your criticism of my worldview can also be turned around to you, can it not? You claim to understand my views and have assumed my ability to understand your faith, yet I am the one with the lens problem. OK…
Everyone is working from her own worldview. That can’t be avoided. But let’s not pretend that approaching the world with a particular set of beliefs and values somehow makes an individual incapable of learning new things or approaching information with an open mind. Why even engage with people in debate or bother to educate anyone if they can’t possibly learn and understand?
I can only ask you to believe me that I do not approach Catholicism with a closed mind. I don’t approach these conversations with an unwillingness to learn. In fact, I am desperate to understand where Catholics are coming from in order to have better discussions, and I have spent copious amounts of time reading Catholic materials and studying out both sides of Catholic claims. I’ve landed where I have concerning the Catholic Church because the Bible doesn’t supported it. End of story.
Careful With Protestantism
Catholics appear to divide Christianity into Catholic and Protestant, and that makes sense in some ways. On the other hand, you’re throwing a lot of denominations into one pot because they aren’t you. I’d call it a classic case of Us vs. Them. Protestantism usually includes Anabaptists, Anglican, Baptists, Congregational, Lutheran, Methodist, Pentecostal, Quaker, and Reformed. A quick glance at these groups and you will likely notice that they range from slightly different from one another to how-are-these-both-allegedly-Christian? Personally, I could not, in good conscience, worship with the majority of the Protestant denominations on that list.
With that in mind, I suggest you spend some time learning about differing denominational beliefs before you come at a non-Catholic Christian with your assumptions about our worldview. My worldview and Christian walk, for instance, is in no way similar to a Quaker woman or many Pentecostal believers. Yet, you place us together as if we view life, Catholicism, or even the Bible the same way. That, my friend, is absurd and cliché of you.
My “Absurd” Claims About Catholics
According to nearly all dictionaries, to worship is to show reverence and adoration and/or to honor with religious rites. With that definition, Mary fits the bill. You may change the words around to make it sound like I’m wrong, but you’re doing exactly what I have accused you of doing. For example, Catholic weddings include a time for the bride to pray to Mary (at the foot of her statue in the instances I witnessed) in hopes that Mary will assist the bride in helping her be a good wife. Then, of course, we have the oft-repeated prayer whether it be for penance after confession or during the rosary – “The Hail Mary.”
John Paul, you used the word veneration. That term means to regard with respect or reverence. The Bible is clear from beginning to end on who is to receive our honor and praise. God is the sole recipient of reverence. And you can say Catholics don’t worship Mary, but my previously mentioned examples are clear-cut acts of worship.
“Who will not fear, O Lord, and glorify your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship you,for your righteous acts have been revealed.”
Revelation 15:4 (ESV)
Intercessors
It’s just prayers, though, right? No! Prayer is an act of worship. Some Catholics are praying directly to Mary. I know this because they say so. My own father has told me about praying to Pope John Paul II in a time of need, and he even attributed the answered prayer to the deceased pope.
For those of you who split hairs by claiming Mary and the saints are just intercessors, where do you find any basis for this in the Bible? Don’t tell me “historically some guy was doing it well before people were calling themselves Baptists, so…” In which verses have you seen believers praying to the those who have passed?
Other comments I’ve received have informed me that the saints in Heaven are perfected now and have more access to God. Therefore, they are good choices for intercessors. Again, where do see a precedent for such behavior. I will admit that this line of thinking makes sense for Catholicism because the Catholic Church has placed priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes between you and God. Why not throw some saints in the group, too? If you have direct access to Jesus through prayer, why not just pray to Him?
Speaking To The Dead
The Word never gives us a positive picture of speaking to the dead. Rather, the Bible addresses speaking to the dead in a negative light and commands against it (1 Samuel 28:7-19; Deuteronomy 18:10-13). Shouldn’t there be some sort of caveat for praying to Mary if there is such negativity surrounding the idea?
“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.”
Leviticus 20:27 (ESV)
Mary Doesn’t Possess God’s Abilities
Finally, what makes you think Mary (and other saints) can hear our prayers? God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. That’s a powerful combo that makes God able to, well, be God. Meanwhile, Mary couldn’t possibly hear/know the prayers of the billions of people on Earth. Even glorified with the Lord, she has limitations.
I mean this with love, John Paul. You don’t need to and should not pray to Mary. She is a human woman who God chose for an extraordinary purpose. She was a wonderful role model for faithfulness, obedience, and love, but she is no more than that. Repent of this idol worship, and give all your worship energy to the One True God.
Responding To Your (Catholic) Feedback – Comment 5:
“Catholics don’t believe in a works-based salvation.”
I am always stunned to hear a Catholic tell me that she doesn’t believe in works for salvation. The Bible tells us that salvation is a gift from God, and that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9). I can’t earn salvation or ever be good enough to get myself into Heaven. Meanwhile, as a believer, I do good works because I’m compelled to as I grow in Christlikeness. The book of James discusses works as a necessary part of the Christian life, and he describes them as evidence of our salvation (James 2:14-26). So, works are a part of the Christian life, but they don’t save. You say you believe that, but here are a few examples of why I don’t think you do.
1. Infant Baptism
I have never met a Catholic who, in a one-on-one conversation, did not attribute baptism, at least in part, to salvation. I often hear arguments in public venues from Catholics that I’m wrong about this, but I’m not the only one who believes the Catholic Church teaches this concept.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, baptism is “necessary for salvation” (CCC 1257). So, it looks like the Catholic Church agrees with me on this one.
If I have to complete a task to be saved, we call that works-based salvation.
2. Confirmation
This is the sacrament “in which the Holy Ghost is given to those already baptized.” In this case, a teenager takes classes for a year to be confirmed in the Catholic Church. Then, the church holds a special service in which the priest anoints those being confirmed with oil. This sacrament is sometimes called perfecting or completing.
That looks like a work to me because people are the ones doing the work. Also, that’s not how one is indwelled with the Holy Spirit. We are either believers and have the Holy Spirit, or we aren’t Christians and the Spirit is not in us. Christians don’t proceed through steps of salvation such as baptized as an infant, receive Eucharist beginning in second grade, and then being confirmed in eighth grade. We are born again and sealed with the Holy Spirit at that time.
“But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.”
Romans 8:9
“In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.”
Ephesians 1:13-14
3. Losing Salvation
The very idea that a believer can lose her salvation suggests she can earn it, too. Think about it. What happens when she loses that salvation? How does she get it back? And how did she lose it to begin with? Or better yet, what was she doing to keep it? The responsibility of salvation falls onto the individual when one can lose it and get it back. This just becomes a works salvation. And if you can lose your salvation, you will. No Catholic can have any assurance that she will one day be with the Lord while holding this belief. It’s more of a fingers-crossed faith.
The biggest concern, though, is that this belief is completely unbiblical.
“And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (emphasis mine)
John 10:28
“And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.” (emphasis mine)
1 John 5:11-13
“And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” (emphasis mine)
Philippians 1:6 (ESV)
Final Thought
John Paul, some of what I said probably feels harsh or unkind, but I know the most loving and caring thing I can do is warn you that the Catholic Church is not teaching an accurate gospel. You don’t have to add the extra traditions, saints, sacraments, and whatnot. In fact, to do so is sin.
I know there is a comfort and spiritual feeling in Catholic churches because of the beautiful setting and liturgical style, but none of that saves, friend. It’s all a show in which people can put on religion, but it isn’t biblical. Go back to the basics, and read the gospels. Then slowly work your way through Acts. It won’t take long to see the Catholic Church has stepped way out of God’s Word and into its own thing. But it’s not too late to find a Bible preaching church. Please, consider examining what you’ve been taught through the lens of the Bible. You won’t regret it.
All right, everyone. How would you respond to John Paul?
One Comment
Pingback: