The Difference between Roman Catholics and Evangelical Protestants
5 comments | Permalink
Biola's Robert Saucy:
(HT: STR)
They’re the same as they were at the Reformation. There are three significant ones. First is the question of final authority. Protestants hold to sola scriptura [Scripture as their final authority]. For Catholics, the final authority is Scripture as interpreted by the church, that is, the magisterium (the pope and bishops). That’s where Catholicism gets its teachings that can’t be found in Scripture, like veneration of Mary, indulgences and purgatory. Second, Catholics view the church as an extension of Christ’s incarnation. For them, the church is divine as Christ was divine. One result of this is the Catholic proclamation: “Come to the church for salvation, for faith in the church and faith in Christ are one act of faith.” That leads to the third difference: salvation. The Catholic catechism makes it very clear that you are born again and justified through baptism. That means faith plus a certain rite — which is administered by the church — is necessary for salvation. So, the church essentially grants salvation. Although this salvation is “by faith,” additional grace enables us “to work” to attain eternal life. And that’s the problem with saying we speak the same gospel. One of them is clear: Christ did it; we can’t add anything to that. The other one is: Christ did it, but to actually avail yourself of what Christ did you have to do this and this.Read the whole interview.
(HT: STR)
posted by JT at Tuesday, July 03, 2007
5 Comments:
Saucy needs to retire. What Reformational protestant who has ever drunk of Calvin at all would ever argue that salvation comes to anyone apart from the church or baptism? To be a Christian is to be part of a church and to be part of a church. There are many other problems with Rome that he could have mentioned instead of these.
Anonymous, you would be a Catholic then.
Anonymous, I know what you are getting at, and generally agree. The ordinary means of salvation is the church, and the sacraments are effectual means of salvation. Though I still see a huge difference in what Rome teaches about this and the Reformational view. Enough in fact to make it a big dividing point. Don't you? Calvin, who you invoke, criticized Rome on these very points.
Christ did it, but to actually avail yourself of what Christ did you have to do this and this.
Any Protestant should accept that too. It's just that the thing you have to do to avail yourself of it is believe and follow. The difference isn't that Catholics have you doing something to avail yourself of God's grace. Both Catholics and Protestants have that (except for universalists and antinomians). The difference is that Catholics take justification to be a judgment after the fact that God's grace has enabled you to live a holy life, whereas Protestants take justification to be a judgment before the fact that Christ's righteousness counts legally for you, and the righteousness that will be produced is merely the effect of that, not the basis of it. This is an important difference theologically, but it's a different difference from what Saucy presents.
By Saucy's description, it's not the gospel that differs, it's the praxis. Catholics and Protestants both affirm the gospel of salvation through Christ. His statement that "faith plus a certain rite — which is administered by the church — is necessary for salvation" does not represent universal Roman Catholic teaching. The Catholic Encyclopedia article on salvation makes it pretty clear that the Catholic doctrine of individual salvation is indistinguishable from that of most Protestants.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home