Setting things Straight

Over the past few weeks I have received many questions emailed to me. I love getting email from readers/listeners. Much of the email is about the Catholic faith. While I can't possibly answer all the email, I have seen some common misconceptions. Let me try to clear up some of those misconceptions:

Here are some of these things people have told me Catholics believe. All of these are NOT TRUE:

Catholics reject the tradition of "sola fide" ("faith alone"), they think they can work their way into Heaven and believe they are saved by works.

Catholics think the pope does not sin .

Catholics re-crucify Christ at their Masses (or at least think they do).

Catholics think Mary is part of the Godhead and is to be worshipped

Catholics worship statues

Catholics think they can't pray to God directly but have to go through saints

Catholics conjure the dead

Catholics believe people can be saved after they die

The Catholic Church teaches that one who isn't formally a Catholic is damned to Hell

The Crusades are an example of Catholic aggression

The Inquisition(s) killed hundreds of thousands of people and targeted Jews

Pope Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope" and didn't do a thing to help Jews during WWII

The Catholic Church wasn't around until the time of Constantine, a pagan who controlled the Church. The Catholic Church did more than baptize pagan calendar days for the good of Christ, it is pagan in its very roots.

If you believe any of the above myths, I implore you to do more research. None of this is true, yet people constantly ask me why I believe these things. I don't mind others disagreeing with what I believe, but I do ask they know what I believe prior to disagreeing.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Catholics reject the tradition of "sola fide" ("faith alone"), they think they can work their way into Heaven and believe they are saved by works.

Not true, you say?

Sola fide asserts that, although all people have disobeyed God's commands, God declares those people obedient who place their confidence, their faith, in what God has done through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. They account Christ's obedience as their own, and the only meritorious, obedience. Their assurance is that God's work in Christ is their commendation for acceptance by God. Conversely, the doctrine says that those who trust God in this way do not trust what they themselves have done (which has no worth, because of sin). The doctrine holds that it is not through personal goodness that sinners are reconciled to God. Reconciliation is only through the mercy of God himself, made effectual for forgiveness through the sacrifice of his son; thus it is only through the obedience of Christ given in substitute for the disobedience of believers, who for their sake was raised from the dead, that they have confidence that they are in fact heirs of eternal life.

The doctrine of sola fide, as formulated by Martin Luther, is accepted by all Protestants, including Lutherans, Reformed and Baptists; and as ordinarily articulated by Protestants, it is rejected by Catholics, who say that good works must be added to faith in order to justify as righteous in God's sight.

Remember the document - The Gift of Salvation? This document states Sola Fide in agreement with non-Catholics on the subject; yet the document's veracity was vehemently discounted by someone on your (PBall's) forum.

You say it's not true ... other Catholics say it is.

Seems like the very thing we non-Catholics are accused of is demonstrated on this very topic - there is no doctrinal unity.

Thomas Dodds said...

Powerball - didn't you tell me not too long ago that we have no assurance of salvation - that is one cannot know whether or not, for sure, that s/he will be saved?

The teaching of sola fide states, "...that they have confidence that they are in fact heirs of eternal life."

The Unseen One said...

The Catholic Church teaches that one who isn't formally a Catholic is damned to Hell

Pre-Vatican II, this was a commonly held notion, and still is among the traditionalist sects. But doesn't the Catholic Church teach that the only way a non-Catholic Christian can be saved is by "invincible ignorance?"

Anonymous said...

Actually I believe both Catholics and Protestants agree that we are saved by grace alone.

We differ as to what God expects from us as a response to that grace.

For Catholics the response needs to be faith and works, and for Protestants it is faith alone.

-Anony

The Unseen One said...

For Catholics the response needs to be faith and works, and for Protestants it is faith alone.


We believe we are to respond with works also, in gratitude for our salvation. We believe the works has no bearing on whether or not we are saved, though.

Thomas Dodds said...

I think there needs to be a clarification here ...

We differ as to what God expects from us as a response to that grace.

For Catholics the response needs to be faith and works, and for Protestants it is faith alone.


This owuld very much depend on what do you mean by 'response'?

My salvation isn't a response, nor is my faith a response to God's grace. My faith and God's grace are both the gift of God.

My understanding (and I'm open for correction) is that for one to be saved in the Catholic (C) view that they must add to their faith works - taken from the passage in Peter's epistle (if I remember right). This adding to faith is explained on the part of many Catholics in such a way that it is taken by others to be a works-based salvation. If you say it ain't so - then GREAT! But I would admonish you to learn to explain this in other terms that are understandable.

If the works are the 'showance' of salvation and the stipulation is that one cannot claim faith with out any 'proof of it' outwardly, then this is in agreement with the book of James; faith without works is truly dead (separated from Christ) - or no faith at all.

All/any true faith (a small as a mustard seed IN Christ) ALWAYS produces fruit to God's glory - it can't not produce some fruit.

We all, C and non-C, need to be clear on this and be clear to each other on it.

So ... have I understood how you Cs see it?

...

We believe we are to respond with works also, in gratitude for our salvation. We believe the works has no bearing on whether or not we are saved, though.

By 'no bearing' do you mean that good works do not originate nor maintain our salvation?

Good works are nothing but the outward evidence of the inward reality. We are saved by grace, which is the gift of God, not on the principle of working, lest any one should boast in himself, but we are God's creation (new) fitted for good works that God has pre-planned that we should do (Eph 2).

Why would He pre-plan good works for His own? - to give glory to Him and to be a witness to those still yet outside Christ.

The Unseen One said...

By 'no bearing' do you mean that good works do not originate nor maintain our salvation?


Yup!

Shaun Pierce said...

There is much to respond to here. Let's start at the top.

Sola Fide:
Works are a result of faith and not added to faith to equal salvation. The Catholic Church does not teach that we earn our salvation by our own efforts, although it does teach that we have to work on our salvation.

There is a clear teaching on this. That does not mean that all Catholics know or understanding it.

I think you are misstating much of the protestant "unity" on the issue. Lutherans understand the formula of sola fide in a way that does not exclude baptism as a means of justification, as do some Anglicans, some Presbyterians in relation to elect infants, and members of the "Church of Christ" movement. For many Protestants, however, the idea of baptism as a means of salvation is seen as a direct violation of sola fide.

That goes back to the early days of the Protestant Reformation, as illustrated by Luther’s Large Catechism, in which he excoriates Anabaptists for the new, non-baptismal interpretation they were giving his "faith alone" formula.

Lutherans also understand sola fide in a way that allows salvation to be lost, as do most Methodists, Wesleyans, Pentecostals, Charismatics, and many Anglicans. However, Calvinists, Baptists, and many non-denominational Evangelicals hold that, if it is possible to lose salvation, then justification is accomplished in part by one’s "works" which is a violation of sola fide.

Romans 3:28 is a key verse in the differences between traditional Protestants and Catholics. You will notice that Paul says a man is justified by faith (pistei in Greek). When Martin Luther translated the letter to the Romans into German in the sixteenth century, he added the word "alone" —but alone is not in the original Greek text. The phrase "faith alone" does occur in the New Testament: one time, in James 2:24. There the apostle denies that justification is from faith alone. "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

Ok, that ran longer then I wanted it to!

Assurance of Salvation:
As for assurance of salvation, it has been put this way. "I am saved. I am being saved and I hope to be saved". I have confidence of my salvation, but I also know what Jesus said "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13)

Non-Catholics Damned to hell:
Catholics believe we are members of the one true church started ny Jesus himself. If you know this truth and reject it then yes, you are in trouble. Yet if you do not fully understand the teaching "invincible ignorance" then as a Christian you still may be saved.

There is so much to cover here. I hope this is at least a start.

The Unseen One said...

Catholics believe we are members of the one true church started ny Jesus himself. If you know this "truth" and reject it then yes, you are in trouble.

By know, do you mean believe and accept? Or do you mean "heard but reject"? If it is the latter, I have heard Catholics claim to be the "one true church", but I reject that notion. Which category do you believe that would put me in?

Thomas Dodds said...

Works are a result of faith and not added to faith to equal salvation. The Catholic Church does not teach that we earn our salvation by our own efforts, although it does teach that we have to work on our salvation.

What does "work on our salvation" mean? Does it need improvement? This statement implies something that I must do - which is contrary to Scripture and of great insult to Christ.

Non-Catholics Damned to hell:
Catholics believe we are members of the one true church started ny Jesus himself. If you know this truth and reject it then yes, you are in trouble. Yet if you do not fully understand the teaching "invincible ignorance" then as a Christian you still may be saved.


You've just introduced more vagueness... are you speaking of the truth of the One Body of Christ as shown in the Scriptures or are you referring to the Catholic church?

Plus, Christ said ALL that come to Him will not be cast out. The real question is have we come to Him as he has instructed or have we concocted our own means?

Romans 3:28 is a key verse in the differences between traditional Protestants and Catholics. You will notice that Paul says a man is justified by faith (pistei in Greek). When Martin Luther translated the letter to the Romans into German in the sixteenth century, he added the word "alone" —but alone is not in the original Greek text. The phrase "faith alone" does occur in the New Testament: one time, in James 2:24. There the apostle denies that justification is from faith alone. "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

Concerning Luther - true. Concerning James many read - "A man is justified by works and not by faith alone." What James says is "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." James is concerned with results - visible results! Paul's emphasis wasn't what Jame's was - both have to be read together. Scripture in its entirety shows that there is no salvation apart form faith in Christ alone. Our justification is granted by the Father upon our salvation - what we do subsequent to that is the proof of it being done.

Thomas Dodds said...

Assurance of Salvation:
As for assurance of salvation, it has been put this way. "I am saved. I am being saved and I hope to be saved".


This certainly doesn't look like ...

Let's be honest. We will not really know if we are saved until after we die (or if Jesus comes back first). You can say you are saved but it's not for you to determine.

It's also not for us to judge others when it comes to salvation.


Presumably written by the same PowerBall ...

I have confidence of my salvation, but I also know what Jesus said "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13)

You have confidence, BUT? But what? ... with confidence in Christ there's no ifs ands or buts about it.

For Matt. 24 to be about salvation in the day of God's grace, then it is to be held in contention with John's epistles - where he clearly states that we have knowledge of our salvation.

Shaun Pierce said...

If you know it to be true and reject it you would be damned. It's not just hearing. I also am not the one who will judge you or out you in any category.

I stand by every word I wrote. Past and present.

We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. I know Jesus paid the price. I also know that I am not worthy of that cost. Yet I still must try to live in obedience to God. There is something all Christians MUST do. We must live our life in obedience. That not an insult, it's Biblical.

There are if's, and's and buts Thomas. Salvation is a gift IF we choose to accept it. AND by accepting it, we must change our life internally and externally to the teaching of Christ. BUT to assume you are granted slavation is arrogance. We all must stand in judgement before God.

We do have knowledge of our salvation. For without it, we could not choose.

Thomas Dodds said...

We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.

Yes. This is in complete agreement with James - work out into visible results. You state it in such away you hinge your salvation on the working - that is not Biblical.

I know Jesus paid the price.

This might seem a dumb question - what price?

I also know that I am not worthy of that cost.

And what cost?

Yet I still must try to live in obedience to God.

I don't disagree - but what is the motivatin for obedience? What is the result of obedience? What is the purpose of obedience?

There are if's, and's and buts Thomas. Salvation is a gift IF we choose to accept it. AND by accepting it, we must change our life internally and externally to the teaching of Christ.

This is precisely whaere you run amuck ... Salvation is a gift free for our receiving, and by accepting it, we ARE changed internally and externally to the teaching of Christ.

To assume you are granted slavation is arrogance.

I assume NOTHING. Christ has died FOR me - the debt is paid. There remains nothing for me to do but accept and live the life He has given in obedience to Him until He either calls me Home or He returns (which ever comes first).

We all must stand in judgement before God.

I don't disagree nor do I deny this.

We do have knowledge of our salvation. For without it, we could not choose.

I don't follow you here? Are you talking about availability while I'm talking about accomplished reality?

The Unseen One said...

The Inquisition(s) killed hundreds of thousands of people and targeted Jews

I must have flew right by this one.

Now what is wrong about that statement? The number of people and who the four inquisitions were directed towards? Hundreds of thousand killed does seem a bit high. Thousands, perhaps, with thousands upon thousands more imprisoned for life, tortured, and/or having all of their worldly goods siezed. And they were mostly directed towards non-Catholic Christians. That was my understanding of them.


And isn't it interesting how Hollywood has "Hollywood-ized" the Crusades? From what I've read, they were started because of Muslim aggression. Turks were attacking pilgrams on their way to Jerusalem. Unfortunately, many of the people killed were Byzantine Christians.

Shaun Pierce said...

Thomas:
I do not hinge my salvation on my works. Works are the result and we must do them in obedience to God. Not to earn salvation.

Jesus died for my sins. Without him I would have no chance at salvation. His death covers my sins. That what I mean by "paid the price"

The motivation for obedience is to honor and love God. I try to live in obedience not because I have to or it gives me a claim on heaven but out of respect on to honor the Lord.

After all this... WE AGREE

"I assume NOTHING. Christ has died FOR me - the debt is paid. There remains nothing for me to do but accept and live the life He has given in obedience to Him until He either calls me Home or He returns (which ever comes first)."

Could not have said better myself.

As for knowledge of salvation. If a once professed Christian dies rejecting Christ some say he was never truly saved. Others would say he lost his salvation. Yet we don't really know because only God knows a persons heart.

It comes down to when you believe the gift of salavtion is given.

Thomas Dodds said...

See you on the other side brother!

If a once professed Christian dies rejecting Christ some say he was never truly saved. Others would say he lost his salvation. Yet we don't really know because only God knows a persons heart.

I cannot grasp how one could lose his salvation - I see how one never came in the fashion prescribed by the Lord though and 'went through the motions'.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Thomas Dodds said...

It comes down to when you believe the gift of salavtion is given.

I have been mulling this over all day ...

You said we agreed regarding salvation ... not working for it.

But if the gift is given AFTER death, then for me to be elligible I must have had to work for it from the time I believed to the time I died - or at least died in the good graces of Christ.

Is the above not true from your perspective? If so, you do believe that your salvation must be 'earned' in part.

Isn't it up to you, from your perspective, to ensure you are in the good graces at the time of death?

I ask becaseu I want the difference to be clear - it was noted we agreed ... but then additional pieces were added making it so we don't agree. I don't want anyone misled - and you have a legitimate complaint that many don't understand your position - I'm trying to 'get a hold of it'.