INTRODUCTION

    A. Today, it is my responsibility to deal with Catholic doctrine. 

        1. According to the letter I got from the elders here, I am to deal with the 
            sources of authority of the Catholic church and its doctrines (teachings) 
            concerning man, sin, God, Christ, judgment, salvation, the church, etc.

        2. That is quite a difficult task as it depends on in which century one lives
            as to what the Catholic church held one accountable on these doctrines.

        3. Where does one begin in speaking of the doctrine of a nearly 2000 year
            old church whose primary  authority is the men who lead it?

        4. In 1952 there was a debate in which the proposition was “The New
            Testament Is The Supreme Authority in the Christian Religion” ... and a 
            Catholic priest opposed that proposition.  He said, 

             What is the supreme authority, the last court of appeal, 
              in the Church founded by Jesus Christ?  Mr.  Stevens replies,
              ‘The New Testament and that alone.’  I say, ‘No!  The living
              voice of the living church founded by Jesus Christ and teaching 
              in His name and with his authority all peoples in all ages until
              He shall come again.
              The first and primitive Christians did what I do.  They didn’t 
              listen to a book; they listened to the living voice of the living 
              Church.
              I believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God.  I don’t
              believe it is to be used in the way that my opponent says. 
              I say that is the reason for all the trouble we’re having today
              in religion.  They are using something that Jesus Christ never
              intended them to use.
              The Church did not come from the scriptures.  The scriptures 
              came from the church. 
              ...it is the inspired word of God.  What I’m denying is that it
              is the ultimate court of appeal when we’re to find out what 
              Jesus Christ taught. 
 

    B. When discussing authority with a potential convert, my first goal is to
         establish our authority in matters of faith as being the word of God ... the 
         Bible.

        1. No church that exists today should be able to step outside of the Bible
            either to learn or teach their doctrine. 

        2. As we continue, I hope to show you why that is the case.

    C. It is the plea of the churches of Christ that men will return to the Bible to
         determine what is of faith.

        1. The Protestant churches developed in the Reformation years cried out
            to reform the Catholic Church

        2. As we have already discussed, the Apostles prophesied a departure
            from the faith once delivered. 

        3. The Roman Catholic Church, after a period of religious evolution, is at
            least in part the fulfillment of that prophecy.

        4. The reformation years produced men who, rather than attempt to bring
             the church back to the Bible, attempted to reform the church to 
             resemble its original apostate form.

    D. It is because of the Catholic church’s reliance on the private interpretations
         of men and their additions to the word of God that, in its nearly 2000 
         years of existence, it has developed new and strange doctrines that have 
         taken it further and further away from the Bible.

        1. In this lesson, I want to deal with three doctrines that I feel have been
            most influential in aiding and abetting the Roman departure.

        2. I don’t think that these doctrines are any worse than their other
            departures, as one sin is no worse than any other.

        3. I do believe, however, that the departures we will be discussing have led
            to the majority, if not all, of the other departures.

    E. Before getting to that point  I’d like to share with you a list  of departures
        from the teachings of the Bible and the approximate time in which those 
        departures came about.

        1. As I did not research all of these dates, I do not claim that the dates are
            accurate.

        2. However, as these doctrines/practices are taught and/or observed by
            the Catholic church even today, I would not have you doubt them as 
            true departures.

        3. Please notice that none of these doctrines or practices is found in the
            Bible (See the chart at the end of the lesson). 

    F. In my opinion, the greater sin is not so much that they believe some of
        these things, but that they teach they are essential to having a right 
        relationship with God.

        1. If a man, for example, wants to kiss another man’s toe - he is more than
            welcome to do that - but to insist that such is an ordinance of God is to 
            go beyond the teachings of the Bible and therefore sinful.

        2. If a man thinks that touching his forehead, bellybutton, and two
            shoulders with his fingertips will help him hit a baseball better, have at it 
            - but to think that such an action will invoke the aid of God in his effort 
            is to think outside the sphere of Biblical authority.

        3. If a man wants to be celibate and be a preacher at the same time, there
            is nothing wrong with that - but for the church to make that a 
            requirement upon him is to take upon itself more authority than God has 
            given.

    G. Before going further, I think it only fair to note that not everything the
         Catholic church teaches is wrong.

        1. From what I can determine, they believe in God as the Creator and that
            He created the earth in six literal days.

        2. They believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the virgin born Christ of God and,
            in fact, have for centuries opposed what we know as the doctrine of the 
            Jehovah’s Witnesses about Jesus’ not being fully deity.

        3. They believe that man is a living soul made in the image of God and that,
            therefore, abortion, the killing of a human fetus, is a sin.

        4. There are other such doctrines held by the Roman Catholic Church on
            which we do not disagree - but it would be outside our purposes today 
            to discuss them.

    H. Now, let’s deal with some teachings of the Catholic church.  Had they not
         fallen away on these points, they would not have fallen away on these 
         others.

DISCUSSION

  I. THE DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

    A. By apostolic succession the Catholic church means that they can trace the
         ordination of each successive pope back to the apostles, specifically 
         Peter.

    B. I don’t want you to take my word that this is a fundamental doctrine of the
        Catholic Church.  Hear their own sources.

        1. The Knights of Columbus is a Catholic organization. 

            a. It was created by a Catholic priest in the 1800's to give Catholic
                men a civic/fraternal organization on par with and in competition with 
                other such civic/fraternal organizations forbidden to Catholics. 

            b. They are responsible for much good work and many charitable
                deeds. 

            c. They, being made up of Catholic men, strongly defend the Catholic
                church, its popes, bishops, priests, and doctrines.

            d. One way by which they do this is in their publication of
                “advertisements” in national magazines and newspapers.  Some of
                their titles are:

    2. In one such publication, The Papacy: Expression of God’s Love, we find
        the following significant quote. 

            ... The name of Peter, which means the foundation, has 
           become inseparable from his person.  He carries and takes
           about with him his position as a Rock.  And as that position
           is one of those which can never again be absent from the 
           church, any more than the foundation of a building can be 
           taken away, all the indications are that the successors of Peter 
           must inherit his title, his mission, his authority.  The whole doctrine
           of the Catholic Church rests upon this basis. 

            a. Such is the confidence the defenders of the Catholic faith have in the
                doctrine of apostolic succession.

            b. One would think that, if it can be proven that there is no such thing as 
                apostolic succession, they would be the first to tear down the 
                Catholic Church which rests upon that foundation. 

            c. While it can be proven both Biblically and historically that apostolic
                succession is both a false doctrine and a fraud,  don’t get your hopes 
                up that they will crank up their demolition crew.

    C. It is my contention that the idea of a “hierarchy” in the church is far
         removed from what the Bible teaches as concerns the leadership of the 
         Lord’s church. 

        1. The Lord’s church is not an institution over which man has or can have
            dominion.  It is the Lord’s church!

            a. Yes, the Eldership is the divinely ordained form of church leadership.

                 1) The elders are to feed the sheep of God.  Such is the work of a
                      servant, not a master.

                 2) The elders are in a position, not so much of authority, but of 
                      submission - they are servants to the church, not lords over the 
                      church.

                 3) The people of God need food - spiritual food.  The elders of the
                      church have the authority and obligation to supply that food to
                      the church from the word of God.

            b. Do the elders have any authority in the church?

                1) Of course, they do.  If, when the Lord comes, they are going to be
                     held 

                2) They have the authority to make sure no wolves enter into the
                     flock to devour the sheep.

                3) They have the authority to reveal those who are wolves in sheep’s
                     clothing.

                4) They have the authority to bring wandering sheep back into the
                     fold by means given them in the New Testament.

            c. The elders/bishops do not, however, have the authority to 

                1) Change the word of God.

                2) Tell a congregation outside of the one which they have oversight
                    what they must do.

                3) Make one elder more important than another.

        2. According to Hans Kung the term “hierarchy” was not introduced into
            the church until some 500 years after Christ, and then by “an unknown 
            theologian who hid behind the mask of Paul’s disciple, Dionysius.” 

            a. He further states that the term “priest” was never used in New
                Testament times “for those who serve in the Christian communities. 
                Here, rather, the word ‘presbyter,’ or ‘elder,’ is used.” 

            b. He goes on to state that each Christian community (church) had its
                own set of elders and “we cannot establish historically whether there 
                was a distinctive constitution of elders in Jerusalem which claimed to 
                have jurisdiction over the local church and then the church as a 
                whole.” 

            c. While it can be determined that there was an eldership in Jerusalem
                (Acts 15:4, 6, 22), Kung’s point was to prove that James was the 
                church leader and not Peter ... so, Kung asks, how/when did Peter 
                take charge?

            d. He further states that the term “priest” was never used in New
                Testament times “for those who serve in the Christian communities. 
                Here, rather, the word ‘presbyter,’ or ‘elder,’ is used.” 

            e. He goes on to state that each Christian community (church) had its
                own set of elders and “we cannot establish historically whether there 
                was a distinctive constitution of elders in Jerusalem which claimed to 
                have jurisdiction over the local church and then the church as a 
                whole.” 

            f. While it can be determined that there was an eldership in Jerusalem
               (Acts 15:4, 6, 22), Kung’s point was to prove that James was the 
               church leader and not Peter ... so, Kung asks, how/when did Peter 
               take charge?

            g. One of Kung’s conclusions was this: 

            Peter was undoubtedly the leader of the earliest Jerusalem 
            community - not, however (and this is decisive) alone, but 
            only together with the group of Twelve ... In the earliest church 
            Peter doubtless had a special authority; however, he did not 
            possess it alone, but always collegially with others. 

        3. Concerning Peter’s position in the church at Rome, Kung says “Catholic
            theologians concede that there is no reliable evidence that Peter was 
            ever in charge of the church of Rome as supreme head or bishop.” 

        4. Then there is this powerful quote from Kung: 

           Bishops of the Catholic church ... are fond of calling themselves
           ‘successors of the apostles.’  The presbyteral-episcopal constitution
           of the church is said to have been instituted by Jesus Christ, even 
           to be a divine institution and therefore unchangeable divine law.
           However, it is not a simple as that.  A careful investigation of the
           New Testament sources in the last hundred years has shown that
           this church constitution, centered on the bishop, is by no means 
           directly willed by God or given by Christ, but is the result of long
           and problematical historical development.  It is human work and 
           therefore in principle can be changed ...  Any reader of the Bible
           can see ... that there is not a word ... about a legal institution of the 
           church. 

            a. His remarks are true as concerns the placing of a bishop as the legal
                head of the church or group of churches.  There is no Biblical 
                authority of the concept of “a bishop.”

            b. His remarks are true about it being a human work.  The humanity of
                it is seen in the battles that have taken place for the position of leader
                of the church.

            c. If their ordination is of divine or apostolic authority, then why have
                some, over the years, fought over the position to the point of blood 
                and death?

            d. If their ordination is of divine or apostolic authority, then how could it
                possibly be that men full of sins such as polygamy, fornication, 
                murder, etc.  could be appointed to that position?

            e. In 1377 there were two popes.  In 1409 there were three popes ... it
                was never determined which, if any was the true successor to Peter!

        5. Believe it or not, the Catholic church has an answer ... and it’s a real
            good one (not!).

            a. Kung states that some historians give the title of pope to Leo I “the
                Great” (440-461). 

            b. Leo argued for the Biblical, historical and legal elements of the
                Roman idea of primacy. 

                1) His Biblical argument actually contains no Bible reference.

                2) His historical argument, says Kung, was based on a forged letter
                    from “Pope” Clement to James the brother of the Lord concerning 
                    Peter’s last words.

                3) His legal argument is stated as such:

            The successor might not inherit the personal characteristics 
            and merits of Peter, but he did inherit the official authority 
            and function handed on by Christ, so that even an unworthy
            pope was a completely legitimate successor and held the office 
            as such ... (this still holds today).   [Emphasis mine, mru]

        6. The Bible cannot be used to support this claim of the Catholic church
            and their own history shows it to be fraudulent.

  II. THE LACK OF RESPECT FOR THE AUTHORITY OF THE
       SCRIPTURES.

    A. According to the Catholic Church, in lieu of the doctrine of apostolic
         succession, the pope, bishop, and priest are the ultimate authority. 

        1. If, therefore, there is contradiction between the Bible and Catholic
            authorities, we must defer to the Catholic authorities. 

        2. In that light, let me enlighten you as to the “wisdom” of some of those
            authorities.

        3. From the Manual of Moral Theology this quote is taken: 

            If I (a priest) know that someone has made up his mind to 
            commit sin and there is no other way of preventing him, I
            may lawfully induce him to be satisfied with some less offence 
            of God than he was bent on committing.  And so, if a man
            was determined to commit adultery, I do nothing morally 
            wrong, but rather to the contrary, by persuading him to
            commit fornication instead. 

        4. Here’s a quote from the Fourth Lateran Council concerning those
            crusaders who took up arms to fight for the Catholic Church: 

            We therefore, by the mercy of the omnipotent God, trusting 
            in the authority of the Blessed Apostle Peter and Paul in virtue 
            of that power of binding and loosing which God has conferred 
            on us.  Though unworthily, grant to all who aid in this work 
            (Crusades) personally and at their own expense, a full remission
            of their sins.  (sic) 

            a. A reading of the events of the Crusades reveals not only killing in the
                name of the Roman Church (Christ) but looting, rape, pillaging and 
                claiming as your own the properties that you captured. 

            b. According to that reasoning, if you are a big man - a mighty man of
                valor - with no moral scruples, and you know that neither law of man 
                nor God forbids you from doing what ever you want or need to do 
                win the battle and to the victor go the spoils - what would you do?

    B. I’ve already noted Mr. Beevers’ opposition to the proposition that the
        New Testament is the sole authority for the church.

        1. This priest in the Catholic church claims: 

            There is no religion on this earth, past or present, that has split, 
            and split, and split, and split like Christianity.... What caused 
            the split?  Making the written word the supreme rule. 

        2. Now, I ask you, how can one argue with such wisdom?

    C. The argument of the Catholic church is that, via the pope, they have (are)
         the living word of the living church.

        1. By that they mean that the church throughout the ages is forever 
            growing into a mature man.

        2. What a baby needs is not what a man needs.  Thus, as you would not
            give steak and potatoes to a baby, you would not give baby formula or
            breast milk to a man.

        3. We need a living word, they say, thus indicating that the Bible is not
            “living and active” (Hebrews 4:12) as it claims for itself.

        4. Hear their priest’s own words on this matter:

            When you go home, I want you to take out that baby photo 
            of you when you were two or three weeks old, and look in 
            the mirror!  It’s you, isn’t it?  It’s you!  But you don’t look 
            like that picture.  Why?  Because life is growth.  You can no
            more go back to first century Christianity in the sense of acting 
            the way they did than I can go back to being that little baby. 
            Life!  Growth!  Whenever a thing stops growing, it is dying! 
            We are not first Century Christians; we are not primitive 
            Christians; we are twentieth century Christians.... I do believe 
            it [the Bible, mru] is the inspired word of God, but I do not 
            [emphasis his] believe that Jesus Christ ever intended it to be
            the supreme court [emphasis his].  The living voice of the living 
            Church!  ‘My Church!’  He didn’t say, ‘my written word’ or 
            “my book’, he said, ‘my Church.’...the living voice of the living
            Church is the supreme authority ... 
 

    D. Time will not allow here for a complete refutation of such.  I will deal with
        this more thoroughly in my next lesson.  But for now consider the 
        following.

        1. To the apostles Jesus said, 

            ... the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in
            My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your
            remembrance all things I said to you (John 14:26).

            a. “All things,” not some things, not things just for the first century
                infancy of the church, but “all things.”

            b. What “all things” are we talking about?  Jesus explains: 

            When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into 
            all truth; ... He will tell you things to come” (John 16:13)
            [emphasis mine, mru]

        2. Paul declared to the elders in Ephesus, “I have kept back nothing ...
            declaring to you the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:20-27). 
            [emphasis mine, mru]  Now I ask you, what part of the counsel of God 
            is not considered in  “the whole counsel of God”?

            a. Now, I ask you, what part of the counsel of God in not considered in
                “the whole counsel of God”?

        3. Poor Peter didn’t know about the living word of the living church when
            he proclaimed that “His divine power has given to us all things that 
            pertain to life and godliness” (2 Peter  1:3). [emphasis mine, mru]

        4. And what about Paul teaching Timothy that “All scripture is inspired of
            God ... that the man of God may be perfect [complete]” (2Timothy 
            3:16-17).  Didn’t Paul know that it is the living word of the living 
            church, not the scriptures, that make the man of God or the church to 
            mature?
 

  II. THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN.

    A. Another doctrine that has had a major effect on the apostasy of the
         Catholic church is that of Original Sin.

    B. This departure is due to the former two that we’ve discussed.

        1. Had the error of apostolic succession and supremacy of the pope and
            his word over the New Testament not been made, this heresy would 
            not have come to its fruition.

        2. This heresy came about early in church history and had the elders of the
            early congregations fulfilled their responsibility, the mouth of the false 
            teacher(s) would have been stopped in the church.

    C. The implications of this doctrine are far reaching in that it affects the
         teaching of the Bible as to how salvation is achieved.

        1. Further, it impugns the justice of God taught throughout the scriptures.

        2. The doctrine apparently originated from Aurelius Augustine (354-430;
            there is some indication that Tertullian of the second century had such
            leanings).

        3. Kung says that Augustine ...

            attempted to explain the sin of every human being from the 
            biblical story of the fall of Adam, ‘in whom [instead of after 
            whose example] all human beings sin.’  That is a downright 
            mistranslation of Romans 5.12.  In this way Augustine historicized, 
            psychologized, indeed sexualized Adam’s primal sin.
            For him, in complete contrast to Paul, it became original sin,
            which was determined sexually.  For according to Augustine 
            this original sin was transmitted to every new human being 
            through the sexual act and the fleshly, that is, self-centered
            desire (consupiscence) connected with it.  Therefore, according 
            to this theology every infant has already fallen victim to eternal 
            death - unless it has been baptized. 

        4. As the High Priest said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? 
            You have heard the blasphemy!  What do you think? (Mark 14:63-64).

        5. This foolish doctrine brought about the doctrines of:

            a. The immaculate conception.

            b. The baptism of babies.

            c. Godparents being able to take the sins of the baby upon themselves
                and be forgiven by the priest.

            d. And others.

    D. Simply put:

        1. Sin is the transgression of God’s law (1John 3:4).  Transgression is a
            willful act of which a baby is not capable.

            a. John teaches that “he who sins is of the devil” (1John 3:8).

            b. If God can hold as accountable a baby who has no ability to either
                repent of sin (assuming the baby could even commit sin) or confess 
                faith (trust) in Christ, then there is no justice in God!

            c. If there is no justice in God, then the One we worship as God is not
                God for the Bible declares that justice is a part of His very nature.

        2. It was God who said through the prophet Ezekiel 

            Behold, all souls are Mine; The soul of the father as well as 
            the soul of the son is Mine; the soul who sins shall die (Ezekiel 18:4).

        3. In Ezekiel chapters 3 and 33 God further explains that it is deeds of
            wickedness, iniquity and unrighteousness for which He will punish man. 

        4. He states that it is the wicked man who refuses to turn from wickedness
            whom He will hold accountable.

        5. I ask you, what deed of wickedness, iniquity and unrighteousness can a
            baby willfully commit?
 

CONCLUSION

    A. If one can read the Bible and hold to any of these doctrines, he has
         rejected the doctrine of Christ.

    B. If a person or a church rejects the doctrine of Christ, I cannot, yea will
         not, have any fellowship with him, nor will I or can I receive him (accept
         him) into my house (2John 9-11).

    C. The decision is yours - but it is not without eternal consequence.
 
 

  1  Very Reverend Eric Beevers, Ph.D., Stevens-Beevers Debate on The New Testament and Roman Catholicism, pp 32-38.
  2  John Shannon,Why I Left The Roman Catholic Church, 1992 Shenandoah Lectures - Denominationalism Verses The Bible, edited by Terry M.  Hightower (Austine McGary and Company)  p. 134.
   3 The Papacy: Expression of God’s Love, Catholic Information Service, (New Haven, CT: Knights of Columbus, n.d.), pp. 22-23.
   4 Hans Kung, The Catholic Church A Short History, Translated by John Bowden (A Modern Library chronicles book), p.  9.
   5 Ibid.
   6 Ibid.
   7 Ibid.
   8 Ibid.
   9 Ibid, p.  10.
 10 Ibid, p.  11-12.
 11Ibid, p.  19-20.
 12 Ibid.  pp. 57-58.
 13  O.  C.  Lambert, Roman Catholicism Against Itself Vol.  2, p.  253.
 14 Ibid.  p.  247.
 15 Ibid.  Beevers, p.  61.
 16 Ibid.  Beevers, pp 58-61
 17 Ibid.  Kung, p.  48-49.