Roman Catholics & Evangelicals: Where We Disagree - Part 1
Now we turn our focus to important areas of disagreement between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals. The goal here is not to be divisive or to put down anyone. Rather it is to take an honest look at the key differences and why each denomination holds to their views. On that note, let the fun begin.
Apocrypha - A serious divide between Catholics and Protestants is over the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha is an additional eleven pieces of text that the Roman Catholic Church add to the Protestant canon of Scripture. It was adopted and made infallible at th Council of Trent in1546. Any who reject these are anathema. Issues are both doctrinal and canonical. Doctrinally the Apocrypha supports prayers for the dead resulting in a belief in purgatory. Canonically the Apocrypha does not test the true test of canonicity.
Catholics support the Apocrypha for eleven reasons: 1) There is reference to events mentioned and mirrors some general thoughts found in it. 2) The New Testament quotes the Septuagint, which contained the Apocrypha. 3) Some early church fathers quoted the Apocrypha. 4) Some early church fathers accepted it as canon. 5) Early Christian catacombs depicted scenes from the Apocrypha. 6) Early Greek manuscripts interject it with the Old Testament books. 7) Some early church councils accepted it. 8) The Apocrypha is accepted by the Eastern Orthodox Church. 9) It became canonical at the Council of Trent. 10) The Apocrypha was included into Protestant Bibles until the 19th century. 11) Some of its books are found in the Dead Sea community.
There is strong evidence supporting the Protestant Old Testament canon excluding the Apocrypha. The evidence is both canonical and doctrinal. Canonicity is tested by propheticity. Only books written by a prophet are inspired by God. It was up to God's people to discover these prophetic books. None of the apocryphal books were written by a prophet. None are prophetic predicatively. There is no messianic truth. In addition, testimony from antiquity rejects the apocryphal books from canon. Philo, Josephus, Jewish teachers, Jesus, New Testament writers, Jerome, Martin Luther, John Calvin and more rejected its canonicity.
Scripture - Protestants and Catholics differ over the boundaries of infallible authority. The reformation emphasised sola Scriptura, the Bible alone, and sola fide, faith alone. For Protestants sola Scritpura means Scripture is the final and objective authority on all doctrine and practice of faith and morals. Sola Scriptura encompasses many things. First, it holds the Bible is God's word and revelation. It transmits God's words. Second, Scripture is sufficient and final. Third, The Bible is perspicuous, in that the essential teachings are clear. Last, Scripture must interpret Scripture.
Catholics view Scripture as materially sufficient, but reject its formal sufficiency. Catholics defend teaching magisterium to decide what is and is not apostolic tradition. Catholics contend apostolic tradition is both infallible and authoritative. The guidance from the church is infallible. Catholics defend their position of the Bible plus tradition in several ways: Nowhere does the bible teach sola Scriptura. The Bible encourages traditions. The Bible endorses oral tradition. Tradition is needed to understand the Bible. The Bible and tradition cannot be separated. Rejecting tradition is self-contradictory, violates the principle of causality, leads to denominationalism, and is unhistorical.
Despite Catholic's position, Protestants argue the Bible does teach sola Scriptura,
Catholics admit the New Testament contains the only infallible accounts for apostolic tradition. Once the apostles died, there would be no new apostolic traditions. The Bible does not endorse oral tradition. Perspicuity exists apart from traditions. Tradition is not the problem, it is believing tradition is infallible that is the problem. Oral traditions are unreliable. Some traditions contradict each other. Last, Catholics' use of tradition is inconsistent.
Infallibility - A major distinction between non-Catholics and Catholics is the infallibility of the Pope, as declared by Vatican I. By infallible Catholcis mean, he is immune from error - that is passive or active. The Catholic church holds the pope, the Infallible Magisterium, when he speaks ex cathedra. By ex cathedra the church refers to his teaching on doctrine or morals to be held by the Universal Church. The Catholic Church has set up regulations for his declarations to be ex cathedra. Once a pope as spoken ex cathedra his teaching is irrevocable. Catholics defend infallibility from Scripture and tradition.
Protestants find many problems with Catholics defense of infallibility from Scripture. The use of Peter as the only rock of the church is incorrect. Peter was not infallible. Today only the teaching of the apostles exist, not current apostolic authority. Historically, there is theological problems with the infallibility of the pope. First there have been heretical popes. Catholics believe an infallible interpreter is needed for God's infallible revelation. There has been indeciveness amongst the teaching magisterium. In addition there are philosophical and historical problems with the infallibility of the pope.
Justification - The common bond of Salvation between Catholics and Protestants is grace. However there is disagreement over justification. Protestants hold onto grace is exclusive, while Catholics believe it is necessary and the core. The Council of Trent declared "By his good works the justified man really acquires a claim to supernatural reward from God."
For Luther justification was forensic; it was instant and final. The Catholic response was at the Council of Trent. The council determined justification was the process of becoming righteous. Works were needed for final justification. Man's freewill was weakened by sin. The sacraments are part of initial and progressive justification. Last, Trent deemed the certainty of assurance of salvation false. Catholics defend their dogma from Scripture and tradition.
Protestants reject the position of meritorious justification for many reasons. It makes eternal life conditional on works. It mixes up working from salvation and working for salvation. It blurs salvation and service. It shows salvation and be gained and lost and then again. Catholics hold the sacraments deliver salvation; and it is through the Roman Catholic Church this is possible. Protestants defend justification by faith alone (sola fide) because it is found explicitly in the Old and New Testament. The Old declares it in Exodus 23:7 and Deuteronomy 25:1. The New declares it in Romans 3 and 4, as well as 2 Corinthians 5:19.
As you can see there are very important differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants. Next time we will keep examining areas of disagreement.
Click the links to read areas of agreement part 1 or part 2.
Apocrypha - A serious divide between Catholics and Protestants is over the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha is an additional eleven pieces of text that the Roman Catholic Church add to the Protestant canon of Scripture. It was adopted and made infallible at th Council of Trent in1546. Any who reject these are anathema. Issues are both doctrinal and canonical. Doctrinally the Apocrypha supports prayers for the dead resulting in a belief in purgatory. Canonically the Apocrypha does not test the true test of canonicity.
Catholics support the Apocrypha for eleven reasons: 1) There is reference to events mentioned and mirrors some general thoughts found in it. 2) The New Testament quotes the Septuagint, which contained the Apocrypha. 3) Some early church fathers quoted the Apocrypha. 4) Some early church fathers accepted it as canon. 5) Early Christian catacombs depicted scenes from the Apocrypha. 6) Early Greek manuscripts interject it with the Old Testament books. 7) Some early church councils accepted it. 8) The Apocrypha is accepted by the Eastern Orthodox Church. 9) It became canonical at the Council of Trent. 10) The Apocrypha was included into Protestant Bibles until the 19th century. 11) Some of its books are found in the Dead Sea community.
There is strong evidence supporting the Protestant Old Testament canon excluding the Apocrypha. The evidence is both canonical and doctrinal. Canonicity is tested by propheticity. Only books written by a prophet are inspired by God. It was up to God's people to discover these prophetic books. None of the apocryphal books were written by a prophet. None are prophetic predicatively. There is no messianic truth. In addition, testimony from antiquity rejects the apocryphal books from canon. Philo, Josephus, Jewish teachers, Jesus, New Testament writers, Jerome, Martin Luther, John Calvin and more rejected its canonicity.
Scripture - Protestants and Catholics differ over the boundaries of infallible authority. The reformation emphasised sola Scriptura, the Bible alone, and sola fide, faith alone. For Protestants sola Scritpura means Scripture is the final and objective authority on all doctrine and practice of faith and morals. Sola Scriptura encompasses many things. First, it holds the Bible is God's word and revelation. It transmits God's words. Second, Scripture is sufficient and final. Third, The Bible is perspicuous, in that the essential teachings are clear. Last, Scripture must interpret Scripture.
Catholics view Scripture as materially sufficient, but reject its formal sufficiency. Catholics defend teaching magisterium to decide what is and is not apostolic tradition. Catholics contend apostolic tradition is both infallible and authoritative. The guidance from the church is infallible. Catholics defend their position of the Bible plus tradition in several ways: Nowhere does the bible teach sola Scriptura. The Bible encourages traditions. The Bible endorses oral tradition. Tradition is needed to understand the Bible. The Bible and tradition cannot be separated. Rejecting tradition is self-contradictory, violates the principle of causality, leads to denominationalism, and is unhistorical.
Despite Catholic's position, Protestants argue the Bible does teach sola Scriptura,
Catholics admit the New Testament contains the only infallible accounts for apostolic tradition. Once the apostles died, there would be no new apostolic traditions. The Bible does not endorse oral tradition. Perspicuity exists apart from traditions. Tradition is not the problem, it is believing tradition is infallible that is the problem. Oral traditions are unreliable. Some traditions contradict each other. Last, Catholics' use of tradition is inconsistent.
Infallibility - A major distinction between non-Catholics and Catholics is the infallibility of the Pope, as declared by Vatican I. By infallible Catholcis mean, he is immune from error - that is passive or active. The Catholic church holds the pope, the Infallible Magisterium, when he speaks ex cathedra. By ex cathedra the church refers to his teaching on doctrine or morals to be held by the Universal Church. The Catholic Church has set up regulations for his declarations to be ex cathedra. Once a pope as spoken ex cathedra his teaching is irrevocable. Catholics defend infallibility from Scripture and tradition.
Protestants find many problems with Catholics defense of infallibility from Scripture. The use of Peter as the only rock of the church is incorrect. Peter was not infallible. Today only the teaching of the apostles exist, not current apostolic authority. Historically, there is theological problems with the infallibility of the pope. First there have been heretical popes. Catholics believe an infallible interpreter is needed for God's infallible revelation. There has been indeciveness amongst the teaching magisterium. In addition there are philosophical and historical problems with the infallibility of the pope.
Justification - The common bond of Salvation between Catholics and Protestants is grace. However there is disagreement over justification. Protestants hold onto grace is exclusive, while Catholics believe it is necessary and the core. The Council of Trent declared "By his good works the justified man really acquires a claim to supernatural reward from God."
For Luther justification was forensic; it was instant and final. The Catholic response was at the Council of Trent. The council determined justification was the process of becoming righteous. Works were needed for final justification. Man's freewill was weakened by sin. The sacraments are part of initial and progressive justification. Last, Trent deemed the certainty of assurance of salvation false. Catholics defend their dogma from Scripture and tradition.
Protestants reject the position of meritorious justification for many reasons. It makes eternal life conditional on works. It mixes up working from salvation and working for salvation. It blurs salvation and service. It shows salvation and be gained and lost and then again. Catholics hold the sacraments deliver salvation; and it is through the Roman Catholic Church this is possible. Protestants defend justification by faith alone (sola fide) because it is found explicitly in the Old and New Testament. The Old declares it in Exodus 23:7 and Deuteronomy 25:1. The New declares it in Romans 3 and 4, as well as 2 Corinthians 5:19.
As you can see there are very important differences between Roman Catholics and Protestants. Next time we will keep examining areas of disagreement.
Click the links to read areas of agreement part 1 or part 2.
Comments
Post a Comment