Round Two - Martignoni
Round 2
Well, I would never want to be so impertinent as to tell a man he doesn’t believe what he says he believes. So, if my question to Dr. Mizzi about the criteria for salvation is based on a misunderstanding of what Dr. Mizzi believes in regards to the doctrine of Sola Fide…salvation by faith alone…then I apologize. I give him his belief as he defines it. I challenge him to do the same towards Catholics.
The problem is, though, that while Dr. Mizzi claims his interpretation of “salvation by faith alone” is THE accurate understanding of the doctrine, I deal with many Protestants who would disagree 100% with his assertion regarding the definition of “salvation by faith alone.” These people say that works have no role in salvation whatsoever. And, all of these folks point to the Bible as the sole source of their beliefs and claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit.
So, I hope Dr. Mizzi will understand the nature of my confusion regarding his belief on the doctrine of Sola Fide. Now, he will undoubtedly claim that all Protestants (or anyone else for that matter) who disagree with him are, of course, wrong. Just as these other Protestants would tell me he is wrong. So, my question is, who do I, as a Catholic, turn to for a definitive ruling on the Protestant doctrine of Sola Fide, when different Protestants tell me different things, and they all point to the Bible as the source for their beliefs?
Dr. Mizzi will not only use the Bible, though, he will also use history – which is a legitimate and logical thing to do. I believe Dr. Mizzi will claim that his understanding of this doctrine of Sola Fide represents the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification.” But, exactly where does one go to find out the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification?” And, who exactly is it that decided the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification?” There aren’t any Protestant councils one can point to for authentic Protestant teaching. No Protestant catechism.
Could we say that the beliefs of Martin Luther and John Calvin represent the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification?” That would make sense, wouldn’t it? The beliefs on Justification of the two main founders of Protestantism would indeed represent the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification,” right?
But, that would present a problem to Dr. Mizzi. If the beliefs of Martin Luther and John Calvin can be said to represent the “historical Protestant doctrine on Justification,” then why does he believe in some historical Protestant doctrines, but not others? For example, both Martin Luther and John Calvin believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary, yet Dr. Mizzi does not.
So, if the beliefs of Martin Luther and John Calvin can be said to represent historical Protestant doctrine, then Dr. Mizzi is, in a sense, talking out of both sides of his mouth. He believes historical Protestant doctrine in one area (because it fits with his beliefs), but he doesn’t believe historical Protestant doctrine in another area (because it doesn’t fit with his beliefs).
So, Dr. Mizzi, please tell us how you know what historical Protestant doctrine is? Is it the teaching of Luther and Calvin? If it is, then why don’t you believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, like they did? If it’s not, then what is it?
Now, to close, at the end of Dr. Mizzi’s comments he stated: “I do not perform works to merit justification – for justification is God’s gratuitous gift…” As I pointed out in my first round comments, the Council of Trent states that very thing. Dr. Mizzi is perilously close to Catholic teaching.