In All Things - Charity
Sep 30th 2007adam murrellGeneral
| I have a friend who, when asked about his religion, claims to be a Catholic. He is married to a Catholic. He was confirmed in the Catholic Church. In all respects, he is Catholic, except one – he espouses Protestant dogma. How can this be? How can someone take a Protestant stand, but yet, claim to be Catholic? This is a question that I find troubling. He justifies his position with the mantra, “Show me one church without fault and I will change.” Now this is troubling on several grounds. First, this is a red herring, a distraction from the original object. The legitimacy of the Catholic Church is not incumbent upon the veracity of other churches. That is a separate issue that does not validate nor invalidate the Catholic Church. Each church is to be judged independently of other churches. The Catholic Church is not correct simply because it is closer to the truth than the Mormon Church. Nor is the Mormon Church correct because it is closer to the truth than Islam. We should not place Churches side by side and chose the lesser of two evils. Rather, we chose a church because we believe it is most compatible with Scripture and the New Testament Church. Second, there are Churches that should be faulted, especially if they officially denounce the New Testament message. St. Augustine remarked, “IN ESSENTIALS UNITY, IN NON-ESSENTIALS LIBERTY, IN ALL THINGS CHARITY.” A Church must preserve the essentials if it is to be acceptable. If it cannot do that, then it has nothing laudable. The chief element that separates the Christian religion from every other religion in the world is the doctrine of grace. All other religions teach that man saves himself, while the Christian religion teaches that man cannot save himself because of his desperate plight, and therefore, needs a Savior. When this fundamental tenet is denied, then that Church no longer has the right to claim to be the true Church. Consider several doctrinal statements from my friend’s Church: CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sixth Session) CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sixth Session) CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sixth Session) CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema. (Council of Trent, Sixth Session) The most recent council (Vatican II) reaffirmed the positions taken at Trent. Alas, these are not harmless statements, nor are they the non-essentials of which St. Augustine was referring. These statements are in direct opposition to the gospel message of free grace. If for nothing else, my friend, who affirms salvation by grace through faith alone, should take a step back and re-evaluate why he thinks he should belong to an organization that denies the fundamentals of the Christian faith. |