The Two Brothers; or, Why are you a Protestant? Part 3

Last month I posted the second of four parts to this engaging story (if you're into being engaged with this kind of story, that is : ). Here is the third. If you haven't already read the first or second, would like to read them all at once, or at least before I continue 'time-releasing' them, you can find them linked in the right hand side-bar of the blog under the heading 'Check This Out'.

The Celibacy and Fatherhood of Paul

• The Apostle Paul was celibate and yet he called himself a "father".
• Did Christ really prohibit calling all men "father"? If so, why did Paul call himself a spiritual "father"?
• Learn how the Catholic discipline of celibacy and spiritual fatherhood are related in Saint Paul and in the Catholic Church.

Click here to listen to a 21 minute podcast addressing these points listed above.

A Blessed Advent to all!

Update:

Recently, it has been difficult finding time to contribute to the blog with our own posts. It is partly for this reason that I have been posting contributions from "outside authors" that I have found, at least, interesting and thought provoking. My hope is that we will be able, in the near future, to continue adding our own posts that will be worthy of your time and will provide further insight into the why's of being Catholic and the why not's of being Protestant or Bible-only.

Until then, we hope the links and "visiting posts" provided on the blog will find a welcome readership. A blessed Advent to all!

The Catholic Argument from History

There are a lot of ways of establishing that the Catholic Church is correct. One way is to show that the New Testament Scriptures describe a single, visible, authoritative Church capable of settling disputes. When we find that governance in the Church was headed by the Apostles, with one Apostle (Peter) guiding the other Eleven, that's good evidence that the Catholic Church was the Church Christ founded (Mt. 16:17-19) and intends us to be part of (John 17:20-23).

For some people, that'll do the trick. They'll read John 6 on the Eucharist, or notice Apostolic Succession in Acts 1, or Petrine primacy in Matthew 16 and Acts 2 and Luke 22 and so on, and they'll have a Eureka! moment - asking themselves, 'how have I read these Scriptures so many times, and never noticed that?' It's an "Emmaus" moment, when you suddenly discover a Truth you'd never seen before in Scriptures you may well have memorized. But there are other Christians who look at passages of Scripture which I think spell out core Catholic doctrines, and they just don't read them that way. For those folks, let's look at a different way of establishing the Catholic Church.

For the rest of this article by Joe Heschmeyer, click here

The Two Brothers; or, Why are you a Protestant? Part 2

Last month I posted the first of four parts to this engaging story (if you're into being engaged with this kind of story, that is : ).  Here is the second.  If you haven't already read the first, would like to read them all at once, or at least before I 'time-release' them, you can find them linked in the right hand side-bar of the blog under the heading 'Check This Out'.

How Quickly Catholic Heresy Took Over the Church (Immediately)

Pentecost

Brantly Millegan at ‘Young Evangelical and Catholic’ has recently posted this thought provoking article below. I have provided it in it's entirety here on our blog. If you'd like to check it out at it's source, you can find it here.


UPDATED: After having interacted with a few people over the original post, I have added "A.D. 110 - the necessity of bishops to the Church, and the necessity of submitting to bishops" to the list of dates and the supporting quotes from St Ignatius of Antioch, as well as 3 more paragraphs of comments, and adjusted the order of my comments. The original post is still up.

UPDATED: How Quickly Catholic Heresy Took Over the Church (Immediately)

Tertullian, Against Praxeas, ch 2 (~A.D. 200):

“That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics, much more before Praxeas, a pretender of yesterday, will be apparent both from the lateness of date which marks all heresies, and also from the absolutely novel character of our new-fangled Praxeas. In this principle also we must henceforth find a presumption of equal force against all heresies whatsoever—that whatever is first is true, whereas that is spurious which is later in date.”

Below is a list of the year of the earliest (of which I am aware) extant extra-biblical witness of various Christian doctrines.

Ecclesial Deism

In my humble opinion, this thesis put forward by author, Bryan Cross, ought to be worked through by every non-Catholic holding to a bible-only position, and to the concept of a merely invisible church: which denies the reality and necessity of the visible nature of the Church.

The article which is referred to in the podcast linked above, written by Bryan, can be found here.

Hermeneutics and the Authority of Scripture

Here is another podcast I found worthy of consideration from www.calledtocommunion.com.

The Canon Question

I have the type of job which, at times, allows me the opportunity of listening to something on my iPhone while working . It is an option for which I am very thankful because outside of my work schedule, I would not have the time for much of what I am able to gain access to in this way. Recently, I have been listening to a number of podcasts from www.calledtocommunion.com. I have posted links to a couple of these podcasts already, and have just listened to a couple more. I will post links to them here and in subsequent posts.

The question of the canon of Scripture, or which books belong to Scripture and how we know this, has been a critical question in my journey of faith. In this podcast, the beginnings of this subject are discussed in an accessible and, I think, thought-provoking way.

If any of you who do not subscribe to the Catholic view of the canon have sources or arguments against the Catholic viewpoint which you believe satisfactorily answer the Catholic perspective, please let us know.

Peace to all!

A Presuppositional Apologist Becomes Catholic

Greg Bahnsen, left.

Here is another story of a Protestant whose journey overlaps with mine in numerous aspects: particularly in his Calvinism, Presbyterianism, appreciation for Dr. Greg Bahnsen, theonomic way of approaching ethics, presuppositional method of apologetics, and line of questioning which led us both to the Catholic Church. From the title and description of this podcast, it may be tempting to think it is highly nuanced and going to focus on this, perhaps, little known method for defending the Christian faith called Presuppositionalism (and for this reason, bore the listener to death, or at least be a good reason NOT to listen : -). On the contrary, while this topic is discussed and finds it's way back into the story from time to time, many other critical subjects are touched on in Marc's well-told story. Adding to the interest, he does it all with a Southern draw : -) You can find access to the podcast here.

Independent Baptist becomes Catholic

For a story about a recent convert to Catholicism after being raised Independent Baptist and evangelical, click here. Numerous facets of his story cross paths with ours, and indeed, with some of our other family members who remain non-Catholic. The story is in interview form recorded on podcast. You can either listen directly from the page linked or save as mp3.

Did the Protestant Bible Exist Before the Reformation?

For a worthy article on this question, see here.

The Three "Reformation Day" Ironies

I wouldn't necessarily choose this name for my blog (please don't be unnecessarily turned off by the name), but the article here is worth considering.

Reformation Sunday 2011: How Would Protestants Know When to Return?

Imagine that the Occupy Wall Street protest continued for years, during which time the community of protesters divided into different factions, each with different beliefs, different demands, and different leaders. But the protests continued for so long that the protesters eventually built makeshift shanties and lived in them, and had children. These children grew up in the protesting communities, and then they too had children, who also grew up in the same communities of protesters, still encamped in the Wall Street district. Over the course of these generations, however, these communities of protesters forgot what it was that they were protesting. They even forgot that they were protesting. Life in the shanties in Wall Street was what these subsequent generations had always known. They did not even know that they had inherited a protesting way of life, separated from the rest of society. When asked by a reporter what Wall Street would have to change in order to get them to return home, they looked at him confusedly, and responded, “We are home; this is home.” They no longer had any intention to ‘return to society’ upon achieving some political or economic reform. For them, camping out on Wall Street was life as normal, and those with whom they had grown up camping simply were their society.

For more, click here.

What Therefore God Has Joined Together: Divorce and the Sacrament of Marriage

There are some ancient Christian doctrines that only the Catholic Church has retained. One such doctrine is her teaching on contraception, which was the unanimous teaching of the Church Fathers, and which all Christians shared for nineteen centuries until the Lambeth Conference of 1930. At that conference the Anglican Church decided to permit the use of contraceptives, and were soon followed by all other Protestant denominations. Another such doctrine is the Catholic Church’s teaching concerning the indissolubility of marriage, and thus the impossibility of remarriage while the spouse lives.

To read more, click here.

Evolution: Fact or Belief?

Is the Theory of Evolution a scientific fact or a mere belief? This is the only question this documentary seeks to answer. Five world top scientific minds give their answer on Evolution. A ground breaking video sold all around the world, award winning international documentary, now available for all to see (WARNING: "now available for all to see" does not mean this was a recent production, as you will see if you watch it). To view, click here.

The Two Brothers; or, Why are you a Protestant? Part 1

The following is the first of a four part story written by Orestes Brownson about two Protestant brothers. Both brothers were set to follow in the steps of their father who was a Protestant minister. In fact, they both began with great determination to pursue this end by enrolling in seminary to prepare for their happy lives in pastoral ministry. After the untimely death of their mother, however, and due largely to the last words she spoke to her eldest son on her deathbed, he begins a search for truth that changes his relationship with both his brother and father, and the path his life would take from that point on. Click here to access the first of four parts to this interesting story.

Some Quotes from St Francis of Assisi

On the day when the gift of St Francis' life is remembered by the Church, I thought I would take a break from our ongoing post themes and offer a few quotes from this man of simple, yet profound holiness and faith.


"All the darkness in the world cannot extinguish the light of a single candle."

"Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words."

"It is no use walking anywhere to preach unless our walking is our preaching."

"Start by doing what is necessary, then what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible."

"Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.

Where there is hatred, let me sow love,

Where there is injury, pardon;

Where there is doubt, faith;

Where there is despair, hope;

where there is darkness, light;

And where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek

to be consoled as to console,

to be understood as to understand,

to be loved, as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive,

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,

and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life."

"The deeds you do may be the only sermon some persons will hear today."

"A real friend is someone who walks in when the rest of the world walks out."

"He who works with his hands is a laborer.

He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman.

He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist."

"Where there is charity and wisdom, there is neither fear nor ignorance. Where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor vexation. Where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice. Where there is peace and meditation, there is neither anxiety nor doubt."

The Great Commission

"And Jesus came and said to them, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.'" (Matthew 28)


“What is the Church?” and “What is faith?”: Two key questions with which, it seems, any thoughtful Christian must reckon. Such questions are at the heart of the Christian revelation, and, also, sadly, at the heart of much division between those who desire to follow Christ. In answer to the first question, I will base myself upon the "Great Commission" in the Gospel of Matthew, and try to begin to describe the nature of the Church by seeking to show that the Church, in some recognizable way, is infallible. In a later post I will then seek to show that faith, by its very nature, presupposes the Church’s infallibility, and the denial of the Church's supernatural commission, authority and, thus, infallibility results in the denial of possibility for true faith.

Some Theses against Sola Scriptura

A Definition of Sola Scriptura (Bible alone): “The Word of God as contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments is the only infallible rule of faith and practice” (C. Hodge, Systematic Theology vol. 1)


Based on this borrowed definition from the respected 19^th century Presbyterian theologian, I will offer some theses on why the doctrine of Sola Scripture (Bible-only) cannot be true. I hope my statements will elicit reflection, discussion and debate.

In the hope of preempting any reader of this post from getting the notion that my statements against Sola Scriptura are directed towards the Bible, as such, I offer a summary of my positions with respect to Scripture. I am not intending to lessen the importance or dignity of Scripture. My intention is to help clarify the true role of Scripture, as God intended it. God, being reason and truth itself, would not establish an unreasonable economy of salvation. Thus any doctrine that claims to be from God must be reasonable and practicable.  If a doctrine fails on either or both these accounts the doctrine cannot be from God. I leave it to my readers' intelligence to infer the other possible sources of unreasonable doctrines.

The Catholic Church teaches, and I believe, that Scripture is God's written Word. This means Scripture is inspired and inerrant as a whole and in all its parts. Thus the 73 books of the Bible make up the canon of Scripture and contain only what God intended. Whatever is asserted by Scripture is true in virtue of its divine inspiration and thus must be believed and/or obeyed as the Word of God.

Some Theses against Sola Scriptura:

Thesis I: The principle of Sola Scriptura (SS) is nowhere clearly taught in Scripture.

Thesis II: SS is in contradiction to the model of the early Church as begun with Jesus and His disciples. Moreover, Scripture nowhere indicates a transition from a living authority to a written.

Thesis III: SS cannot be the only rule because it cannot resolve doctrinal and pastoral disputes.

Thesis IV: SS cannot explain either the canon or inspiration (and thus) the divine authority of the Bible.

Thesis V: SS cannot consistently function as a rule for orthodoxy--e.g., the debate over essential versus non-essential matters. Another example: logically, one who reasons according to SS cannot exclude Roman Catholicism from orthodox Christianity. If one tries to exclude Roman Catholicism, he must, logically also exclude all other individuals and groups with whom he disagrees over matters that pertain to what God commands or reveals in Scripture.

If any or all of the above theses are true, SS is called into question, if not rendered untenable. The fact that each of the above theses are debatable by reasonable people, who are basing themselves on, generally speaking,  "Christian" teachings and sources, also casts doubt on SS. If SS is a (possibly the) foundational principle upon which Christianity rests--as we come to know and understand it today--wouldn't God have made it a little clearer?

A Few Q's and A's on The Church and the Bible

From Radio Replies Vol 1, by Frs. Rumble & Carty, pg 119-120
(The questions in the 3 volume set, Radio Replies, were mailed in by listeners then answered over the airwaves by these "radio priests" before being published in written form.) 

548 Why is the Catholic Church antagonistic to the Bible? She is not. She protects and defends it. But she does teach that the private reading of the Bible with reliance solely upon one's own powers of comprehension is no sure way to arrive at the truth taught by Christ. And experience bears out her teaching.

549 Was not the Bible unknown to the people before the Reformation? No. Beautifully illuminated copies of the Scriptures, wrought by the monks, were in the charge of the Clergy and the Churches, and from these the Word of God was carefully preached to the people. Before the invention of the printing press, a wider diffusion was impossible.

550 Did not the Catholic Church burn all Bibles, and punish those who had copies? No. The Catholic church would have been very foolish to have copies multiplied only to destroy them. When the printing press was invented by the German Catholic Gutenberg in 1445, the first book printed was a Bible, before Protestantism had come into existence. 

Did the Catholic Church Suppress the Bible: A Reply.

Hi M.M.,

Thank you for your comments on Kyle's post.  This is turning into an interesting discussion. Serious charges have been leveled. I offer some responses composed mainly of quotations and/or citations from works of scholarship. I hope these responses will help clear up some misconceptions about the Catholic Church's attitude towards Scripture. I finish with some questions.

The Faith of Our Fathers

James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, wrote a very useful little work in the late 1800's titled, "The Faith of Our Fathers." The inquiring reader will find much to chew on in this "Plain Exposition and Vindication of the Church Founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ." You can access it here. I will also add it to the "Check this out" section of our blog in the right hand column.

In light of the subject which is in recent view on the blog, I recommend the chapter on "The Church and the Bible," found on page 97.

The Right To Private Interpretation?

In principle, what could those who adhere to the protestant belief of the right to the private interpretation of Scripture have against a person coming to understand Scripture in the way the Catholic Church understands it? In other words, why would the Catholic interpretation be excluded from the valid exercise of this principle any more than another protestant view?

For that matter, why would any interpretation be excluded from the exercise of this principle? If this belief is true, how would it be determined (and who would do the determining) that any given interpretation (Baptist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, even JW, etc.) was in error? Wouldn't it just be every man's interpretation for himself?

Were the Common People of the "Dark Ages" Kept Ignorant of the Scriptures?

It is fairly common for people opposed to the Catholic Church to make the assumption that the Catholic Church intentionally kept the Scriptures from the people (at least) during the Middle Ages (I personally remember having this view). Partly for this reason, this period in history has been coined by some as the "Dark Ages". Various motives have been assigned to the Church for why she would do such a thing. One of these motives is to keep the people "in the dark" so they won't know they are really being duped into believing falsehoods that are dressed up as truth. In this way, it is said, the people end up just following in blind faith, and this is what the Church hierarchy really wants so they can maintain control. If the people could read the Bible for themselves, and understand it on their own terms, they would come to see just how tyrannical and false the Catholic Church is. Furthermore, it is claimed, the Church hierarchy knows this, fears it, and on this basis keeps the people "in the dark".

We must ask, however, is this all true?

Is Christianity Subject to Private Opinion?

Christianity is not a matter of private individual's opinion. It pre-existed every person and group of persons who cling to or deny its claims. We are all therefore in a position of having to receive the testimony of those to whom its message was entrusted (apostles) or those to whom it has been handed all the way down to us in the 21^st century. This is what tradition is all about and hopefully with a measure of thought, its significance can readily be seen.

We cannot decide what Christianity is: we simply are not in a position to do so. Its rightful guardians and messengers put before us the positive claims of what it is and we are then in a position to either accept or reject their witness and its content. So, along with the authenticity of the message is the authority of the messenger that is proposed to us for belief. This is the message of the Catholic Church.

Its identity is that of the rightful guardian and messenger of the life and teachings of Jesus.  The truth of its (Christianity's) claims is not dependent upon whether or not they make sense to the individual. Just as the first century listener could not reject the message of the apostles and still rightfully claim to be Christian, so also the 21^st century audience cannot reject the teaching of the apostle’s successors and still rightfully claim to know the fullness of Christianity.

When is one's scriptural interpretation more than just private opinion?

Protestants and Bible-only Christians who hold to the principle of "sola scriptura" want to claim by virtue of this principle that the Bible is the final authority for what they view to be orthodox doctrine. When they affirm and assert a particular theological viewpoint as true, they believe they have the support of the Bible to back up their claims. They may cite a passage or more from the Bible that they believe gives them warrant to believe and propose their views as true. To them, the Bible seems to clearly support their views on any number of given doctrines. For someone to suggest otherwise, to them, seems as if that person is directly contradicting the teaching of God's Word, the Bible.

But is this necessarily so?

If I were looking for the Church Jesus established...

 “If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because he called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly, it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. … “

Archbishop Fulton Sheen

What is meant by "Word of God"?

Question: "I have a basic question to start off with for your blog: What is the definition of the Word of God? Could you also define any terms you use in the definition." --Mike McDowell


Word of God is distinguished between (a) the Eternal Word, (b) the Incarnate Word and (c) the Revealed Word.

The Bible Alone?

A fundamental principle which protestants hold to is that of the "Bible alone" or in Latin, "Sola Scriptura". It makes the claim that the Bible is the final authority or rule for everything that is to be believed as a Christian, whether in matters of faith or morals.

In my own spiritual journey which led me to embrace the truth of the Catholic Faith, this notion of Sola Scriptura became a point of agonizing debate.

What do we mean by the term "Protestant"?

The need to clarify our use of the term Protestant has come to our attention in correspondence with one our blog viewers. When we say in our blog title description that our intent is "to interact with Protestant ideas opposed to the Catholic Faith", we do not mean to exclude those non-Catholics who may want, for one reason or another, to distance themselves from being identified with this term (Protestant).

On the contrary, for our purposes here, Protestant includes Baptist as well as other denominations which protest against (or are at least opposed to) the teaching of the Catholic Church, whether or not individual adherents to these denominations believe themselves to have historical roots in (what has come to be known by many as) the Protestant reformation. While much more could be said on this subject, suffice it to say at this point that we are using the term in the way it has ordinarily been used in recent history by scholars and common folk alike. This common sense of the term includes Baptist as well as all the non-Catholic faith traditions which are represented among our family members and friends to whom the invitation to participate in this blog has been offered.

Perhaps at another time (if we judge it to be within our scope) we'll take this subject up further in a separate post.

A Case of Mistaken Identities: Would the Real Catholicism Please Stand Up?

"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is of course, quite a different thing....As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do." --Archbishop Fulton Sheen