General Comments

A couple of things to begin with:

1) I cannot thank all of you enough for the wonderful generosity with which you responded to our semi-annual appeal!!!  We raised enough to pay off the Bible Christian Society's outstanding credit card balance (a few thousand dollars), someone donated the money for a brand new CD duplicator, I can pay the rent for the next few months, and I was even able to put some away for a rainy day.  You guys are awesome! 

2) On occasion, I try to let you guys know about good Catholic resources that I come across, well, I want to let you know about a little newspaper called Oremus Press.  It's published by folks who are part of a Latin Mass community, but not to worry Novus Ordo folks, it is not some far to the right radical publication - well, it is radical, but in a very Catholic radical way.  It has excellent articles and news from around the Church world.  And I'm not saying all of this just because they have an apologetics column written by yours truly.  It really is a wonderful little publication.  It comes out monthly, so they don't pile up in your office or home...you have plenty of time to read one before the next one comes.  And, it is only $35/year mailed to your house.  I highly recommend you looking into it.  You can contact them at: oremus.press@yahoo.com.  Tell 'em I sent you...

Introduction

Okay, last week I posted the first half of an article that I found on the website of Matt Slick, an anti-Catholic apologist and asked you to think about how you would respond.  I received a number of emails from you guys with your responses.  Got some very good responses, some pretty good responses, some okay responses, and some not so good responses.  But, for the okay and not so good responses, there is some good news - the problem was not so much content, as it was presentation.  I wanted you to think about how you would respond via email, or in person, directly to someone who presented this stuff to you - but I may not have been adequately clear on that.  The content of the "okay" and "not so good" responses was generally pretty good but it was not presented in a way that would not get you very far in a dialogue.  A lot of you answered the questions or responded to the accusations in Slick's material, and that was it.  You did not ask questions of your own and, in my experience, that is where you can really make some headway with folks - by asking them questions instead of always answering the questions.  Answer the questions with questions.  I would say you guys seem to generally know your stuff - which puts you ahead of about 99% of the Catholics out there - you just in some cases need to sharpen your technique.  So, overall, nice job people!

So, this week I am going to first present Mr. Slick's material again, then go piece by piece to respond to it. 

Challenge/Response/Strategy

by Matt Slick

This paper is written in two parts.  The first explains and documents the Roman Catholic Church's position on justification.  The second part presents the true gospel in contrast to the Catholic Church's position.  If you want to go straight to the gospel presentation for Catholics, simply scroll down the page.

Because of the great emphasis on Sacred Tradition within the Catholic Church and because so many Roman Catholics appeal to the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, the Word of God is often placed after the Catholic Church itself in relation to authority.  Because of this, many Catholics appeal to their works, in combination with the sacrifice of Christ as a means of being justified before God.  The Council of Trent expresses this plainly:

"If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema." (Canon 14).

Justification is the legal declaration by God upon the sinner where God declares the sinner righteous in His sight.  This justification is based completely and solely on the work of Christ on the cross.  We cannot earn justification or merit justification in any way.  If we could, then Christ died needlessly.  "I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly," (Gal. 2:21).  Because righteousness cannot come through the Law (through our efforts of merit), the Bible declares that we are justified before God by faith:

• "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law," (Rom. 3:28).
• "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness," (Rom. 4:3).
• "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness," (Rom. 4:5).
• "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," (Rom. 5:1).
• "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God," (Eph. 2:8).

However, in Roman Catholicism, justification by faith is denied.

"If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified ... let him be accursed," (Canon 12, Council of Trent).

Which are we to believe?  The Roman Catholic Church or God's word?  Furthermore, the RCC states that justification is received not by faith, but by baptism.   The Catechism of the Catholic Church says in paragraph, 1992, that "...justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith."   This means that faith is not the instrument of obtaining justification; instead, it is an ordinance performed by a priest in the Roman Catholic Church.

Furthermore, baptism is only the initial grace along the road of justification.  The Roman Catholic is to then maintain his position before God by his efforts.

"No one can MERIT the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can MERIT for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods," (Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), par. 2027).

The problem here is that the RCC is teaching us to "merit for ourselves and for others all the graces need to attain eternal life."  You cannot merit grace.  Grace is unmerited favor.  Merit is, according to the CCC, par. 2006, "...the recompense owed by a community or a society for the action of one of its members, experienced either as beneficial or harmful, deserving reward or punishment..." CCC 2006.  This means that merit is something owed.  By contrast, grace is something not owed.  Therefore, the RCC is teaching contrary to God's word regarding grace and justification.

The sad result is that in Roman Catholicism, justification before God is a process that is maintained by the effort and works of the Roman Catholic.  This is a very unfortunate teaching since it puts the unbearable burden of works righteousness upon the shoulders of the sinner.  By contrast, the Bible teaches that justification/salvation is by faith.

• "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness," (Rom. 4:5).
• "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," (Rom. 5:1).
• "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God," (Eph. 2:8).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Matt Slick

This paper is written in two parts.  The first explains and documents the Roman Catholic Church's position on justification.  The second part presents the true gospel in contrast to the Catholic Church's position.  If you want to go straight to the gospel presentation for Catholics, simply scroll down the page.

My Response:

Matt, is it possible...just possible...that your perception and understanding of Catholic teaching could be influenced by prejudice, ignorance, and/or pre-existing beliefs about the Catholic Church on your part?

Strategy/Thoughts:

I want him to at least admit to the "possibility" that his understanding of Catholic teaching could be flawed, and I want everyone of his like-minded readers to think about that possibility.  Let us be clear that he "explains" the Roman Catholic Church's position on justification according to Matt Slick's very fallible, and very skewed, interpretation and understanding of the Roman Catholic Church's position on justification, and that he "documents" the Church's position on justification in a pretty selective manner.  It seems Mr. Slick is more than willing to quote, out of context, from one part of a Catholic source that seems to fit the warped version of the Catholic Church that he is trying to make people believe, but he somehow neglects, on a pretty consistent basis, to quote from the parts of those same Catholic sources that don't fit his warped version of the Catholic Church.  Hmmm....

Mr. Slick:

Because of the great emphasis on Sacred Tradition within the Catholic Church and because so many Roman Catholics appeal to the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, the Word of God is often placed after the Catholic Church itself in relation to authority. 

My Response:

Matt, you are right on both counts - there is a great emphasis on Sacred Tradition within the Catholic Church, and Catholics do indeed have a tendency to appeal to the authority of the Catholic Church, but your conclusion that the Word of God is thus placed after the Catholic Church in terms of authority, simply doesn't hold.  First of all, I would like to say that we place no more emphasis on Sacred Tradition than did the Apostle Paul: "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you," (1 Cor 11:2); "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter," (2 Thes 2:15); "And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God," (1 Thes 2:13).  Does not Paul place equal emphasis on the Word of God which folks received from him either in writing or by word of mouth?  Yes or no? 

Secondly, you didn't really mention why Catholics appeal to the authority of the Church, did you?  So, I will ask you: For what reason exactly do Catholics appeal to the authority of the Catholic Church?  Aren't they appealing to the authority of the Catholic Church in its role as the authentic interpreter of Scripture?  Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), paragraph #85, "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone.  Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."  In other words, Mr. Slick, when Catholics appeal to the authority of the Church, it is not that they are appealing to the authority of the Church in opposition to Scripture, it is that they are appealing to the authority of the Church for an authentic interpretation of Scripture.  Appealing to the authority of the Church to authentically interpret God's Word in opposition to Matt Slick's authority (or lack thereof) to interpret God's Word.  So, it isn't that the Catholic Church puts itself ahead of Scripture, it's that the Catholic Church puts itself ahead of Matt Slick.  So, isn't the problem you really have with Catholics is that they are appealing to the authentic interpreter of the Word of God, the Church, which received its authority from Jesus Christ, rather than appealing to an inauthentic interpreter of the Word of God - Matt Slick - who received his authority from...Matt Slick?  Isn't that the real problem here?  Catholics, when there is a dispute as to the truth found in the Word of God, take it to the Church.  Mr. Slick, when there is a dispute as to the truth of the Word of God, takes it to...Mr. Slick.  Who should I believe for an authentic interpretation of the Bible, Matt...the Church founded by Jesus Christ; or...Mr. Slick?

One other comment on this point...you seem to recognize that the Catechism is indeed the official teaching of the Catholic Church, as you repeatedly quote from it to make your points about Church teaching, yet you tend to ignore those parts of the Catechism that do not fit with Matt Slick's version of Catholic teaching.  Is that because you haven't read the whole document and so are simply ignorant of those parts, or is it because you knowingly choose to ignore parts that don't fit your version of Catholic teaching?  For example, in response to your claim that, "...the Word of God is often placed after the Catholic Church itself in relation to authority," the Catechism says, "Yet this Magisterium [the teaching office of the Church] is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant," (CCC #86).  You recognize the Catechism at the official teaching of the Catholic Church, and the Catechism states that the Church is the servant of the Word of God, so how is it you claim the Church puts itself before the Word of God?  Is that the result of ignorance of Catholic teaching, or are you deliberately trying to mislead your readers?  You wouldn't do that, would you?

Strategy/Comments:

There are any number of sentences in my response that could have just been statements of fact, but I worded them in such a way as to turn them into questions.  Why?  Because he can simply ignore a statement of fact, but a question demands an answer.  For example: the last sentence in my 1st paragraph above could have read: "Paul placed equal emphasis on the Word of God which folks received from him either in writing or by word of mouth."  Well, he can ignore that statement and not comment on it. It doesn't demand a response.  But I turned it into a question.  If he ignores my question in his response, then I can come back to him and say, "Hey, you didn't answer my question...please answer it before we move on."  And, if he does answer the question, he gives me a whole bunch of new material to tear into because I can guarantee that his answer will not be from the Bible, it will simply be the words and fallible musings of Matt Slick, which I can then point out to him and to anyone else reading (were this a direct dialogue between the two of us).  Ask questions, folks!

Matt Slick:

Because of this, many Catholics appeal to their works, in combination with the sacrifice of Christ as a means of being justified before God.  The Council of Trent expresses this plainly:

"If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema." (Canon 14).

Justification is the legal declaration by God upon the sinner where God declares the sinner righteous in His sight.  This justification is based completely and solely on the work of Christ on the cross.  We cannot earn justification or merit justification in any way.  If we could, then Christ died needlessly.  "I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly," (Gal. 2:21).  Because righteousness cannot come through the Law (through our efforts of merit),

My Response:

"Justification is the legal declaration by God upon the sinner where God declares the sinner righteous in His sight."  Uhmm...Mr. Slick...could you please give me the passage of Scripture from which your definition of justification was pulled?  You see, as I read my Bible, it tells me that God doesn't just "declare" the sinner righteous, He actually makes him righteous.  "He saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of His own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior," (Titus 3:5-6).  The Word of God says that we have received a washing of regeneration and renewal, not merely a legal declaration, as you claim.  How do you reconcile that with your interpretation?  "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God," (John 3:5).  The Word of God says we received a new birth in the Spirit, not merely a legal declaration, as you claim.  How do you reconcile that with your interpretation?  "For by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous," (Rom 5:19).  The Word of God says that we in fact received righteousness through Christ, not merely a legal declaration, as you claim.  How do you reconcile that with your interpretation?  "And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into His likeness from one degree of glory to another, for this comes from the Lord Who is the Spirit," (2 Cor 3:18).  The Word of God says that we have received glory from the Lord, not merely a legal declaration, as you claim.  How do you reconcile that with your interpretation?

I will touch on the concept of merit in response to something else you say a little further on in all of this, but I would really like to know if you have some sort of Bible dictionary or something that you are using to come up with your definitions, or are they based solely on your personal interpretations of the Bible?  I ask that because you just defined "justification" in a way that I don't see in the Bible, and now you have defined "the Law" as being our "efforts of merit."  And, again, I don't see that in the Bible.  Where did you get that from?  Could you please give me book, chapter, and verse?  Are you not aware that Scripture tells us that "the Law" Paul is speaking of in Galatians 2:21 is the Old Testament law?  It is not, as you seem to think, our good works, or our "efforts of merit."  Isn't that made very clear in Galatians, chapter 3: "This is what I mean, the law, which came four hundred and thirty years afterward [after Abraham]," (Gal 3:17)?  The law which came 430 years after Abraham - isn't that the Mosaic Law, Matt?  So, when Paul speaks about righteousness not coming through the Law in Galatians 2:21, he is not talking about good works in general, or our "efforts of merit," he is talking about the Mosaic Law, right?  You know, it is good practice that if one is to quote from one part of a book in the Bible, he might want to take into account the rest of what is in that particular book as well.  Just sayin'...

Strategy:

Do not let the other guy define the terms however he needs to in order to fit his storyline, as Mr. Slick is doing here.  In one very short paragraph, he defines two key terms however he sees fit to best define them.  Justification means this... The Law means this...  Yeah, says who?!  By what authority?!  If you can't find something they say directly in the Bible as they say it, then challenge them every step of the way.  The point of doing that is to make them realize that they are not actually going by the Bible, but by their own personal, fallible interpretation of the Bible.  And every time they quote the Bible correctly, you can then say that you agree with that verse or passage of the Bible, but you don't necessarily agree with their fallible interpretation of that verse - which will be all the words that follow that quote. 

 

Okay, I wanted to finish it all this week, but I've run out of time.  So, I'm sending out this part of it and I'll finish up with it after Memorial Day. 

 

Conclusion

I hope you've enjoyed this little excursion into Matt Slick territory.  I look forward to you joining us on another such trip in the very near future. 

I hope all of you have a safe and enjoyable Memorial Day weekend with your loved ones, and please do remember to keep the souls of all of our deceased military personnel in your prayers especially on this holiday weekend in remembrance of them. 

And, one more big thank you for your generosity and support of this ministry - both your prayer support and your financial support!  We can't do this without you guys...

How To Be Added To or Removed From this List

If this newsletter was forwarded to you by a friend, and you would like to be added to our distribution list, all you have to do is go to www.biblechristiansociety.com and click on the “Newsletter” page to sign up. It will take you about 10 seconds.

$RemovalHTML$

Share this newsletter on: