Book Review: The Catholic Verses, by Dave Armstrong

A number of former Protestant Evangelicals, like me, claim that the reason we became Catholic was that for the first time the Bible, as a whole, suddenly made sense. As Protestants we were always trying to find a logical way for the “Bible difficulties” we encountered to fit together into a cohesive whole.

“Bible difficulties” are what Protestant-Evangelical scholars call the result of comparing desperately different Bible texts that create paradoxes. For example, Romans 3:28 seems to says we are saved by faith not works, but in James 2 we are told that works are necessary for our salvation; while in Hebrews 11 we were are told not only is faith necessary, but that the ancients were justified by their works. For the Protestant, correlating these texts into a cohesive theology that makes the Bible capable of standing alone (without an interpreter) becomes difficult. It is for this reason that the full title of the book is The Catholic Verses: 95 Bible Passages That Confound Protestants (Sophia Press).

The crux of these Protestant biblical difficulties is what I call the Protestant Fallacies. Protestantism cannot exist without using linguistic fallacies to force-fit a host of biblical texts into molds that crack under the slightest pressure of scrutiny. I’d like to say that Dave Armstrong’s The Catholic Verses, dares to use a sledge-hammer on these molds, smashing them to smithereens. But Dave’s style is more like a soft but relentless tapping of a rubber mallet. Nonetheless, the result is the same. Smithereens!

Fallacies, Armstrong shows, are necessary to keep the Protestant lifeboat afloat. They are like dirty rags jammed into the holes of an old wooden dinghy suffering from dry rot. (There I go again.) Let me give you a few examples of Protestant Fallacies that Armstrong elucidates.

• Special pleading. This is used to explain 1 Timothy 3:15 “the household of God, which is the church of the living god, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” Armstrong quotes Methodist Adam Clarke about this verse: “Never was there a greater variety of opinions on any portion of sacred Scripture....” And then Armstrong summarizes Clarke’s special pleading that possibly the “pillar and bulwark of the truth” could refer to Timothy, God Himself, revealed truth, or the mystery of godliness. But never can Clarke take the literal meaning — the Church — for fear of admitting that the Catholic Church just might be the literal and direct meaning of the text (Armstrong, p. 6).

• Attacking a straw man, obfuscation, and appeal to emotion. Calvin: “The Pope hath made such [doctrine] always as seemed best to him, contrary to the word of God.” Says Armstrong, “It is an old lawyer’s tactic: when one has no (biblical) case, attempt to caricature the opponent, obfuscate, and appeal to emotions rather than to reason” (Armstrong, p. 10).

• False dichotomy, either/or argument. Protestants continue to label Catholic theology as a “salvation by works” system, claiming the correct biblical understanding is salvation by faith alone. Armstrong quotes numerous Bible passages showing that both faith and works are necessary and that they both are the result of God’s grace (Armstrong, p. 63-68).

This naming of fallacies is what I believe to be long overdue in the Catholic-Protestant dialogue. Fallacies are the language of polemics, which is the art of selecting evidence and ignoring the counter-evidence to support a foregone conclusion.

Armstrong’s technique in The Catholic Verses is unique among the Catholic apologetic books I’ve studied. Like other books, the text is divided into topical chapters: The Church, Divisions and Denominationalism, Bible and Tradition, The Papacy, Justification and Salvation, Judgment and Good works, Baptism, The Eucharist, Penance, The Communion of Saints, Relics and Sacramentals, Purgatory and Prayers for the Dead, The Blessed Virgin Mary, Clerical Celibacy, Divorce, and Contraception — sixteen chapters in all.

But rather than just explain the Catholic position, Armstrong begins each section with a collection of Bible “proof” texts that do two things at the same time. They (a) support the Catholic position on the topic, and (b) undermine the Protestant position by using Protestantism’s own technique — the “Bible alone.”

The uniqueness of Armstrong’s approach is in what comes next. He liberally quotes Protestant leaders and commentators on these same verses and puts these quotes next to each other, and in one place summarizes their conclusions in a table to prove that Protestants cannot interpret these passages with any consistency or assurance of absolute truth. A great deal of fundamental theology for Protestants is “through a glass darkly.” The juxtaposition of Protestant quotes trying to explain away the difficulties in place of the explicit and plain Catholic meaning not only reveals the desperate measures Protestant theology must resort to, but is, at times, humorous.

The implicit running joke in the book is the vision of Luther, Calvin, Clarke and a host of others arguing among themselves over what a Bible passage means, yet never arriving at a consensus. But even though they cannot agree among themselves, they do agree on one thing — the Catholic Church is wrong. The image pops into mind of two companies of soldiers marching in a parade, one behind the other. The company in front marches together, each in sync with each other and the drumbeat. But in the second company, no solider is marching in sync with any of the others; each marches to a different drummer. Nevertheless, with one voice this second company yells at the company in front, “Get in step!” Can anyone wonder at the confused look on a Catholic’s face when a Protestant, in an attempt to “save” the Catholic, tries to explain the “false teachings” of Catholicism?

Armstrong adeptly points out that the main reason Protestants can’t agree among themselves on doctrine is because they’re too preoccupied with not being Catholic. Protestant theology is based more on “not being Catholic” than “being a Bible Christian.” Armstrong gives more than one example of the “logic” and “analytical” exegesis that his Protestant witnesses bring to the stand. Armstrong points out that because Protestants reject the infallibility interpretation of the Church (decreed by Christ in the New Testament), Protestants are stuck with the Bible alone. Without an infallible interpreter, Calvin, Luther and others found using the Bible alone intellectually inadequate, and so to make their points they often lapsed into fits of outrageous, unbiblical, fallacious logic. Here’s an example from Calvin writing about clerical celibacy:

The sum of it all is that pope, devil, and his church hate the estate of matrimony...that is to say that marriage is harlotry, sin, impure, and rejected by God; and although they [Catholics] say, at the same time, that it is holy and a sacrament, that is a lie of their false hearts.... Because they do forbid [priests to marry], they must consider [marriage] unclean, and a sin, as they plainly say.... (On the Councils and the Churches, 1539; Armstrong, page 196)

An enlightening by-product of Armstrong’s analysis is the revelation of how much Protestant doctrine has reversed itself from the original Reformers to today. Anti-Catholic sentiment incorrectly claims that Catholicism has changed or reversed fundamental dogma over the centuries, leading Catholicism into corruption. While many who are ignorant of Catholic doctrine believe this, no one has ever been able to point to a single doctrine where such a reversal has occurred. But the same is not true of Protestantism, and Armstrong proves it by comparing the original Reformers’ claims with contemporary Protestant theology — well, with some contemporary Protestant theology, inasmuch as there’s little agreement.

For example, one issue debated is whether or not the Eucharist is the real flesh and blood of Christ, or is symbolic, as is held by most Evangelicals today. The debate here must focus on the Catholic Mass, not common “communion” in most Protestant and Evangelical settings where there is no debate — there, the communion elements are and can only be symbolic because there is no consecration and there is no priest to perform it. But Luther rejected the symbolic view of the Eucharist, and Armstrong says that Luther would be horrified if he could see how Protestants have reversed this doctrine. Luther writes:

[S]ince we are confronted by God’s words, “This is My body” — distinct, clear, common, definite words, which certainly are no trope, either in Scripture or in any language — we must embrace them with faith.... [N]ot as hairsplitting sophistry dictates, but as God says them for us, we must repeat these words after Him and hold to them. (Confession Concerning Christ’s Supper, 1528; Armstrong, p. 116) For Catholics, The Catholic Verses is an accessible explanation of why Protestants continue to sidestep, ignore, mumble, or just pretend certain Bible verses do not exist, while at the same time claiming to hold the Bible up as the inspired, inerrant Word of God which contains everything we need to know for salvation. For Protestants The Catholic Verses demonstrates that Catholics also believe that the Bible, read with and in the Church, contains everything we need to know for salvation. Armstrong gives ample and convincing evidence that when you look at the Bible through Catholic eyes, it all fits together and makes sense; there are no contradictions, there is absolute truth, and God and Jesus become real instead of the mystical uncertainty with which Protestantism must be satisfied. Let us pray that this book helps many of them to recognize the irrationality of their protest and join us at the Lord’s table.

Dr. Stan Williams is Executive Producer for SWC Films, an independent film and television production company. He is the producer of the television series currently in production titled Reformation Paradox: The Renaissance of Christianity, and is the author of the motion picture screenplay writing guide: The Moral Premise: The Guiding Principle of Writing and Making Great Films to be released in 2006. His website is www.stanwilliams.com and he can be reached at SWC@StanWilliams.com.

Get your copy of Dave Armstrong’s The Catholic Verses from our online store and help support Catholic Exchange.

“Bible difficulties”

Certainly God never meant His Word to be difficult.

From Wylie Transcript "Origin of the Papacy"

Christianity, though pure in itself, was committed to the keeping of imperfect beings. The age too, was imperfect, and abounded with causes tending to corrupt whatever was simple, and materialize whatever was spiritual. The symbolic worship of the Jew, heaven appointed, had taught him to associate religious truth with visible rites, and to attribute considerably more importance to the observance of the outward ceremony than to the cultivation of the inward habit.

The Jew brought with him into the Church the ideas of the synagogue, and attempted to graft the institutions of Moses upon the doctrines of Christ; The Greek, unable all at once to unlearn the lessons and cast off the yoke of the Academy, attempted to form an alliance between the simplicity of the Gospel and his own subtle and highly imaginative philosophy; While the Roman, loath to think that the heaven of his gods should be swept away as the creation of unbridled fancy, recoiled from the change, as we would from the dissolution of the material heavens, and though he embraced Christianity, he still clung to the forms and shadows of a polytheism in truth and reality of which he could no longer believe. Thus the Jew, the Greek, and the Roman, were alike in that they corrupted the simplicity of the Gospel, but they differed in that each corrupted it after his own fashion.

I feel lead to list the following scriptures for those who once may have known the Lord but may be having difficulties.

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin willfully(the "willful sin" is the transference of Faith from Christ and Him Crucified to other things) after that we have received the knowledge of the Truth(speaks of the Bible way of Salvation and Victory, which is "Jesus Christ and Him Crucified")[1 Cor 2:2], there remains no more Sacrifice for sins (if the Cross of Christ is rejected, there is no other Sacrifice or way God will accept)

Hebrews 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation (refers to God's anger because of men rejecting Jesus Christ and the Cross), which shall devour the adversaries (it is hellfire, which will ultimately come to all who reject Christ and the Cross)

Hebrews 10:28 He who despised Moses' Law died without mercy under two or three witnesses (there had to be these many witnesses to a capital crime before the death sentence could be carried out, according to the Old Testament Law of Moses)[Deut 17:2-7]

Hebrews 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be Thought worthy, who has trodden under foot the Son of God (proclaims the reason for the "sorer punishment"), and has counted the Blood of the Covenant, where which he was Sanctified, an unholy thing (refers to a person who has been saved, but is now expressing unbelief toward that which originally saved him), and has done despite unto the Spirit of Grace? (when the Cross is rejected, the Holy Spirit is insulted)

Hebrews 10:30 For we know Him Who has said, Vengeance belongs unto Me, I will recompense, says the Lord (is meant to imply that every single thing is going to be judged by the Lord, Who Alone is the righteous Judge), And again, The Lord shall Judge His people (chastise His people [Deut 32:35-36]

Hebrews 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the Living God. (this refers to those who have once known the Lord, but now express no Faith in the Cross)

1Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit (Holy Spirit) speaks expressly (pointedly), that in the latter times (the time in which we now live, the last days of the last days, which begin the fulfillment of Endtime Prophecies) some shall depart from the Faith (anytime Paul uses the term "the Faith" in short he is referring to the Cross; so, we are told here that some will depart from the Cross as the means of Salvation and Victory), giving heed to seducing spirits (evil spirits, i,e "religeous spirits" making something seem like what it isn't), and doctrines of Devils (should have been translated , "Doctrines of Demons"; the "seducing spirits" entice Believers away to believe "Doctrines inspired by Demon spirits");

1Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy (concerns the teachers of these "Doctrines of Demons" which pertain to anything that leads one away from the Cross); having their conscience seared with a hot iron (refers to the fact that these deceivers are not acting under delusion, but under deliberately and against conscience);

1Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry (is an attack against the home, even against God's Command that a husband and wife is His Plan for society [Genesis 2:23-24]) and commanding to obstain from meats (claiming the keeping of certain man-made Laws brings about Holiness), which God has created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the Truth. (The reason for the error--these have rejected Truth, i,e, "the Cross")

1Timothy 1:3 As I besought you to abide still at Ephesus (Paul desired that Timothy remain at Ephesus for a period of time because of false teachers attempting to spread false doctrine among the people), when I went into Macedonia (into Greece), that you might charge some that they teach no other doctrine (the Doctrine must be "Jesus Christ and Him Crucified"),

1Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies (Jewish fables and Jewish genealogies; so the false teachers were Judaizers who insisted that Law must be added to Grace, and who placed no stock in the Cross at all; in a sense, they were very familiar to the modern "Word of Faith" teachers), which minister questions, rather than Godly edifying which is in Faith (this speaks of the fact that Faith, not Law is the sphere or element in which our Salvation functions; such Faith always has the Cross as its object, and thereby edifies); so do. (don't leave the Cross)

1Timothy 1:5 Now the end of the Commandment(charge) is charity (love) out of a pure heart (which alone can produce love), and of a good conscience, and of Faith unfeigned (feigned faith is pretended faith, which means it doesn't have the Cross as its object)

1Timothy 1:6 From which some having swerved had turned aside (refers to missing the mark, in other words, they left the Cross) unto vain jangling (useless talk);

1Timothy 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the Law (refers to the Law of Moses, and speaks of the Judaizers); understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

1Timothy 1:8 But we know that the Law is good (the Apostle says this to show he definitely was not an enemy of the Law of Moses), if a man use it lawfully (understanding that the Law of Moses pointed strictly to Christ; when He came, He fulfilled it in totality);

1Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a Righteous man (consequently, the way Paul uses the word, it refers to any type of Law, whether the Law of Moses or Law (canon) made up by religeous men; the Believer is not to function after Law, but rather Grace, which refers to Faith placed exclusively in the Cross), but not for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for murderers of mothers, for manslayers(true Believers do not fall into these categories)'

1Timothy 1:10 For whoremongers, for them who defile themselves with mankind (homosexuality), for menstealers (slave traders), for liars, for perjured persons (those who swear falsely), and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound Doctrine (actually refers to all that is contrary to the Word of God);

1Timothy 1:11 According to the Glorious Gospel (refers to its moral Glory) of the Blessed God (pertains to His Blessed Gift of Forgiveness offered to all sinners, the totality of humanity, who accept His Gospel of Love), which was committed to my trust. (The Lord chose Paul as the recipient and bearer of the New Covenant)

1Timothy 2:5 For there is one God (manifested in three Persons- God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit), and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (He can only be an adequate Mediator Who has sympathy with and an understanding of both parties, and is understandable by and clear to both; in other words, Jesus is both God and Man, i,e, "Very God and Very Man")

1Timothy 2:6 Who gave Himself a ransom for all (refers to the fact that our Lord's Death was a spontaneous and voluntary Sacrifice on His part; the word "ransom" refers to the price He paid, owed by man to God, which was His Precious Blood [1 Peter 1:18-20], to be testified in due time. (this refers to the planning of this great Work, which took place "before the foundation of the World" [1 Peter 1:18-20], unto the "due time" of its manifestation, which refers to when Christ was Crucified)

1Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a Preacher, and an Apostle (presents the highest calling of the five-fold Ministry[Ephesians 4:11]), I speak the Truth in Christ, and lie not; (was said because it seems some were denying his Apostleship) a teacher of the Gentiles in Faith and verity (Faith and Truth)

1Timothy 2:8 I will therefore that men pray everywhere (proclaims the absolute necessity of prayer on the part of the Child of God), lifting up Holy hands (a surrendered spirit), without wrath and doubting. (speaks of an angry spirit, which is caused by doubting the Word of God)

Romans 10:9 That if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus (confess that Jesus is the Lord of Glory, and the Saviour of men, and that He died on the Cross that we might be saved), and shall believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead (pertains to the Bodily Resurrection of Christ, as is obvious), you shall be saved. (it is that simple!!!)

Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believes unto Righteousness (presents the word "believing" in a mode of "thinking" not of feeling; the "believing" has to do with believing Christ, and His Sacrifice of Himself Atoned for all sin); and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation (when Faith comes forth from its silence to announce itself and proclaim the Glory and the Grace of the Lord, its voice "is confession" to your One Mediator Christ Jesus)

Romans 10:11 For the Scripture says (combining parts of Isaiah 28:16 with 49:23), Whosoever believes on Him (proclaims the fact that Salvation is reachable by all) shall not be ashamed (in essence says "shall not be put to shame," but rather will receive what is promised)

You have God's Word

God Bless all

The origin of the Papacy is far more evangelical. Christ appointed St. Peter as chief of the disciples, leader of the band, and after his denial granted him the chief authority over the Church. This office, of its very nature, demanded a successor, and we have him in the Bishop of Rome.

"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." (Matt. 16:18-20)

What are the keys? "And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliacim the son of Helcias, And I will clothe him with thy robe, and will strengthen him with thy girdle, and will give thy power into his hand: and he shall be as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Juda. And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open." (Isaiah 22:20-22) "And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia, write: These things saith the Holy One and the true one, he that hath the key of David; he that openeth, and no man shutteth; shutteth, and no man openeth:" (Revelation 3:7). So Christ holds the keys, the chief authority as head of the Church, which he gives to St. Peter as his subordinate Vicar. The other Apostles indeed receive the power to bind and to loose, but not the keys. Why else would it be written "And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren" (Luke 22:31-32)? For Satan desired to sift the Apostles, yet Christ prays for a unfailing faith for St. Peter - surely this was fulfilled - so that he may strengthen his fellow Apostles after his denial. And this chief authority in faith and government he gives after his Resurrection, saying "Feed my sheep" (John 21:17), commissioning him with the government of the whole flock, that is, the whole Church. Thus St. Paul, although he consecended not to flesh and blood, "went to Jerusalem to see Peter" (Gal. 1:18), and St. Peter silences the disputing Council with his authority, delivering a certain judgment on the question (Acts 15:7-11).

To suppose indeed that such an authority was established by Christ without intention of continuance would be absurd. And so it is a historical and dogmatic fact that the authority of St. Peter was joined to his See of Rome. Thus the Roman Church writes to the Corinthians in the late first century, warning them as follows: "Receive our counsel, and ye shall have no occasion of regret. For as God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit, who are the faith and the hope of the elect, so surely shall he, who with lowliness of mind and instant in gentleness hath without regretfulness performed the ordinances and commandments that are given by God, be enrolled and have a name among the number of them that are saved through Jesus Christ, through whom is the glory unto Him for ever and ever. Amen. But if certain persons should be disobedient unto the words spoken by Him through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger; but we shall be guiltless of this sin" (1 Clement 58:2-59:2), and soon afterwards St. Ignatius writes to this See: "even unto her that hath the presidency in the country of the region of the Romans, ... having the presidency of love" (Epistle to the Romans, 0:0). St. Irenaeus, Bishop in Lyons near the close of the second century, confutes the heretics with the following argument: " [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere. ... Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherius does now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the inheritance of the episcopate. In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth." (Against Heresies, III, 3:2-3).

My post had nothing to do with works.

But, if you are willing to start a thread about good works and their necessity for salvation, I'd be delighted to participate.

So, do you think Jesus was speaking symbolically re His Flesh and Blood

Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say to you; Moses gave you not bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

33 For the bread of God is that which cometh down from heaven and giveth life to the world.

34 They said therefore unto him: Lord, give us always this bread.

35 And Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life. He that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.

36 But I said unto you that you also have seen me, and you believe not.

37 All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me: and him that cometh to me, I will not cast out.

38 Because I came down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him that sent me.

39 Now this is the will of the Father who sent me: that of all that he hath given me, I should lose nothing; but should raise it up again in the last day.

40 And this is the will of my Father that sent me: that every one who seeth the Son and believeth in him may have life everlasting. And I will raise him up in the last day.

41 The Jews therefore murmured at him, because he had said: I am the living bread which came down from heaven.

42 And they said: Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How then saith he: I came down from heaven?

43 Jesus therefore answered and said to them: Murmur not among yourselves.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him. And I will raise him up in the last day.

45 It is written in the prophets: And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard of the Father and hath learned cometh forth me.

46 Not that any man hath seen the Father: but he who is of God, he hath seen the Father.

47 Amen, amen, I say unto you: He that believeth in me hath everlasting life.

48 I am the bread of life.

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the desert: and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven: that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven.

52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world.

53 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you: except you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.

55 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

57 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him.

58 As the living Father hath sent me and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me.

59 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead. He that eateth this bread shall live for ever.

end of quote

*Now, you have free will to either accept Jesus at His word or not. But, one can't reasonably claim that Jesus was "speaking symbolically" after reading him REPEATEDLY teach the opposite.

Especially once one learns about what I posted in #4

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.