Real Answer to 100 Mil

8/13/2019 Real Answer to 100 Mil

1/25

A $100,000 Answer to Eric Svendsen

This is an answer to a challenge from a former Catholic turned Evangelical

Protestant apologist, Eric Svendsen who asks what he thinks are seeminglydifficult questions and promises to pay any Roman Catholic $!!,!!! for theanswers to his challenge" #e doesnt specify %correct% answers &ut 'll assumethats what he wants" Eric is author of the self(pu&lished &ookEvangelical

Answers: A Critique of Current Roman Catholic Apologetics )*TR+,-." The present form of his challenge can &e found on his New TestamentRestoration Ministrieswe& site" Since ' am a %Roman Catholic% ' will accepthis challenge" ' am responding to the original challenge although ' recogni/e acouple changes were made )for e0ample, the deadline is now 1cto&er 2,

(( and he added one question at the end. &ut 'll answer them all since 'could use the money" ' downloaded the original challenge on 343 at 566P+ which contained )-. questions, and no deadline was set" #ere is what itlooked like5 Eric Svendsen's words are ES>

ES7 Take the Roman Catholic ChallengeToday89e will pay $!!,!!!"!!((thats right, $!!,!!!"!!((to anyRoman Catholic who can answer the following points" 9e will post the most "

" " mmmm " " " lets say, creative answers" :ood luck to you )or, good ;ivineProvidence< whichever your theology allows 5 .

Thank you, Eric"

' would like the money distri&uted in small, unmarked &ills of $!, $=!, and$!! in two rugged suitcases, each with a com&ination lock that ' wont openuntil we are safely past the dreaded +idnight hour of >=? (( @anuary , =!!!"This way ' will know whether to keep the money safely as cash, or depositinto my &ank accounts once the computers at my credit union are functioning

properly after the possi&le >=? disaster" The com&ination to the locks can &esent to me in encrypted Email" 9hen the non(mass(hysteria of >=? is over,then ' will deposit the money and figure out which Catholic charities andapologetics organi/ations will receive some of your money"

'n answering this challenge, ' will try to &e as thorough as necessary referringto the official documents of the Catholic Church or standard reference works"'f the doctrine or issue in question has not&een officially defined, then ' willstate such" Eric cant force me into defining something which the Church hasnot yet seen fit (( yes, in the providence of :od (( to officially define" This is

the case with a couple of his questions" That should not disqualify me fromwinning the $!!,!!!"
http://www.ntrmin.org/http://www.ntrmin.org/http://www.ntrmin.org/http://www.ntrmin.org/


2/25

(1)Tell us how you came to decide that Rome was the %true% church withoutengaging in the very private Audgment that Rome condemns as illegitimate"

The answer to the first one is easy" ' did not have to %decide% this since the

decision was made for me" ' was &apti/ed and raised a Catholic" +y family isCatholic and we have always known the Catholic Church )Rome. is the trueChurch" So your question and o&Aection is seemingly directed at converts tothe Catholic faith, not myself" B convert to the Catholic faith can answer yourquestion a&out %private Audgment% and whether they see that as a pro&lem" 'do not" 'f you could define %private Audgment% more e0plicitly, and show mewhere %Rome% condemns such that would help"

There are indeed cradle Catholic apologists who are not converts" ' know theyare few right now for the simple reason that many post(atican '' Catholics

dont know their faith or are indifferent toward it, and dont know how todefend their faith against the likes of a @ames 9hite or Eric Svendsen" +yselfand the thousand or more current 'nternet Catholic apologists are going toremedy that in the ne0t 2! years" 'f ' knew you when you were young, Eric,may&e ' could have kept you from leaving the faith of your youth"

(2);emonstrate that those ecclesial systems that follow %Scripture plus an'nfalli&le 'nterpreter% are more unified in their &eliefs than those ecclesialsystems that follow Sola Scriptura"

#ere you ask a more %empirical question% that requires some %scientific study%and evidence concerning the &eliefs of %ecclesial systems% )what 'll simplycall churches." ' shall assume the question requires the demonstration that theCatholic Church is more unified than those Protestant churches that claim tofollow Sola Scriptura )Scripture alone." 9hile not taking a rigorous scientificapproach, 'll tackle the question in a general way" The main differences

&etween the Catholic Church and the many Protestant churches consist of four&road areas5 the nature of the Church and authority, the meaning of salvation,the Diturgy or how we worship, and moral theology or how we are to live"

Catholics officiallycan &e shown to &e unified in all fourof these areas" Thenature of the Church is hierarchical )with ishops, priests, and deacons. andsacramental )we along with the 1rthodo0 have seven sacraments., and thePope &eing the ishop of Rome is the visi&le head of the Church, and has thefinal say on matters of doctrine and &elief" The meaning of salvation is we aresaved &y Christ through #is Church, which includes faith in #im,

participation in #is sacraments )mainly aptism, Eucharist, Confession., andsalvation and Austification is seen as a process that must &e lived out &y gracein o&edience to Christ and love of neigh&or" The worship or Diturgy ofCatholics is specified in the order of the +ass, and the o&ligations and


3/25

disciplines required for Catholics are clear )holy days of o&ligation,confession at least yearly, though recommended often, fasts during Dent, etc."The moral teachings of the Church are defined quite clearly )see theCatechismon the Dife of Christ and the Ten Commandments." The specificdoctrines and &eliefs involved in these four main areas are spelled out in greatdetail in such sources as the Ecumenical Councils, papal encyclicals, a &ooklike Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma&y Dudwig 1tt, or the Catechism ofthe Catholic Church"

Protestants officiallycan &e shown to &e disunified in all fourof these areas"1n the nature of the Church, there is no agreement" 's the Church hierarchicalor not )ishops or no ishops, a pastor or plurality of %elders%., sacramentalor not )Bnglicans, Dutherans, some +ethodists, and some Reformed acceptsacraments as %means of grace% while many others do not." 1n the meaning of

salvation, while there is general agreement among Protestant churches thatAustification is %sola fide% )&y faith alone., what Protestants mean &y this is notclear" Can salvation &e lost &y committing grevious sinF Can a person of hisown free will turn away from Christ and finally &e lostF 9hat a&out therelationship of faith to good worksF 9hat a&out the connection &etweensalvation and the sacramentsF Should &a&ies &e &apti/edF Bnd how manysacraments are thereF Some Bnglicans or Bnglo(Catholics would go as far asthe Council of Trent on the sacraments, while others are as far away fromCatholic teaching as aptists are from the 1rthodo0" 1n worship and moralteaching, there is much disagreement among Protestants" There is no set

%order of worship% among Protestant churches, and there are contradictorypositions on the &asic moral issues of the day )a&ortion, contraception,homose0uality, divorce and re(marriage, and many other issues."

So from this &rief assessment, the Catholic Church can &e shown to &e moreunified officially)' stress the official positionsince that is what counts whenwe are comparing %ecclesial systems%. in these four areas )Church andauthority, salvation, worship, and morality. than the many Protestant churches(( some sources claim there are over =!,!!! individual Protestant

denominations and sects )two such sources are the United Nationsnformation Center !tatisticsand the "orld Christian Encyclopedia."

(3);emonstrate that you picked the %true% church from among all the other%true% churches that say you can rightly understand the i&le and churchhistory without their help, such as the Eastern 1rthodo0 church, the9atchtower Society, +ormonism, and every other cult that e0ists )remem&er,you cant use private Audgment for this since you are falli&le."

The answer to this one is similar to my answer to num&er )." ' was &orn and

raised a Catholic, &een one my whole life" So ' did not have to pick andchoose among the different religions who offer similar claims" Bnd ' have


4/25

never really dou&ted the truth of the Catholic faith" Dater ' did learn how todefend my faith )with the help of Catholic Bnswers and others., and learnedthe differences among the many Protestant churches, the Eastern 1rthodo0,and the pseudo(Christian groups, &ut ' have never had to %pick% among thechurches and religions that claim to offer Christian truth since ' was &orn andraised Catholic"

Bgain, a convert to the Catholic faith might &e in a &etter position to answerthis one"

>es, ' am indeed falli&le &ut my knowledge and recognition that the CatholicChurch is infalli&le is as certain as my knowledge and recognition that :odand Christ is infalli&le" 'f you are saying ' have to &e infalli&le to know theCatholic Church is infalli&le, then likewise you would have to &e infalli&le to

know that :od is infalli&le" That the Catholic Church is the true Church, the1ne, #oly, Catholic and Bpostolic Church founded &y @esus Christ is ascertain and clear on historical grounds as the &odily Resurrection of Christ"9hen you convert to Eastern 1rthodo0y, then we can discuss the minordifferences &etween the 1rthodo0 and Catholics"

()Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on the 'nerrancy of thei&le((does it contain errors or notF

;epends on what you mean &y %errors"% ' assume you do not mean errors inthe translation or transmission of the te0t of the i&le, since it is clear therehave &een &ad translations or printing errors in the past )whether Catholic orProtestant i&les. and copyist errors that have crept into the present te0t)although scholars can reconstruct the original &i&lical te0t to a high degree."'f Eric means the official Catholic position on the scope or e0tent of &i&licalinerrancy, he was actually answered on this question over three years ago)@une G. in a series of posts ' made to @ames 9hites old Sola ScripturaEmail list" #ere is how ' responded then5

!"!#"A# "NERRAN%(( Eric Svendsen 63==3G

ES7 Dets start with one issue((the e0tent of inerrancy of Scripture" 'f theCatholics can satisfactorily defend unity on this issue, then perhaps we cane0plore more areas"

ES7 +ost of the more popular Catholic apologists understand this statementHfrom atican '' ;ei er&um I to include all of Scripture, and that all ofScripture is without error for the sake of our salvation"""""

ES7 's this a monolithic &elief of CatholicismF #ardly" Raymond rown)perhaps the top Catholic scholar of our time. &elieves )as do all in the


5/25

moderate camp of Catholicism. that the phrase for the sake of our salvationlimits the scope of inerrancy to 1*D> those writings that deal directly withissues of salvation((all the rest of Scripture is prone to error" 9ho is rightFCatholic Bnswers )and followers. or Raymond rown )and his ilk.F

This shows an appalling lack of understanding of what the Catholic Churchofficially teaches" There is no %moderate camp% on this issue (( there is onlythe %true camp"% #ow do we know what the true camp isF

1n &i&lical inerrancy, Raymond rown might &e a good theologian and i&lescholar, &ut he does not speak for the Catholic Church #FFCA$$%" ThePopes and Councils )+agisterium. do" ' will &e challenging Eric Svendsen oranyone later to produce evidence that there is #FFCA$disagreement onthis issue from Catholic +agisterial sources"

'f someone wants to find out what the Catholic Church &elieves#FFCA$$%on inerrancy, we dont go to Raymond rown or CatholicBnswers (( although the latter is certainly a &ig help, see the article in &his

Roc'%The Truth of Scripture% )@an 4. &y C" Dattey, S@ (( we go to the+agisterial documents that spell it out" Several popes have written encyclicalsthat speak to the issue, Deo J''' in(rovidentissimus Deus, enedict J in

!piritus (araclitus, Pius J'' inDivino Afflante !piritu)all three of these arereferenced in atican ''Dei )er*um. and there is a section on Scripture andinerrancy in the Catechism of the Catholic Churchwhich reads as follows ((

10&The inspired &ooks &EAC+ &+E &RU&+" %Since thereforeA$$that the inspiredauthors or sacred writersAFFR,should &e regarded as affirmed &y the #oly Spirit,we must acknowledge that the &ooks of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and "&+#U&

ERR#Rteach that truth which :od, for the sake of our salvation, wished to seeconfided to the Sacred Scriptures"% atican "" * 11+

13:od is the author of Sacred Scripture &ecause he inspired its human authors< heacts in them and &y means of them" #e thus gives assurance that their writings teach"&+#U& ERR#Rhis saving truth c- * 11+"

't is that simple" The Catechismdoes not limit this to %faith and morals% only"The phrase %for the sake of our salvation% cannot &e understood that way" 'fyou want to get more specific, go to the a&ove papal encyclicals" Pope DeoJ''' wrote over !! years ago ((

%The Catholic interpreter, although he should show that those facts of natural sciencewhich investigators affirm to &e now quite certain are not contrary to the Scripturerightly e0plained, must nevertheless always &ear in mind, that much which has &eenheld as proved certain Hin natural scienceI has afterwards &een called in question andreAected" Bnd if writers on physics travel outside the &oundaries of their own &ranch,

and carry their erroneous teaching into the domain of philosophy, let them &e handedover to philosophers for refutation"


6/25

"NS."RAT"/N "N/M.AT"!#E "T ERR/R

%The principles here laid down will apply to cognate!CENCE!- and especially to+!R%" 't is a lamenta&le fact that there are many who with great la&our carry outand pu&lish investigations, on the monuments of antiquity, the manners and institutions

of nations and other illustrative su&Aects, and whose chief purpose in all this is too oftento find,!&A.E!in the sacred writings and so to shake and weaken their authority"Some of these writers display not only e0treme hostility &ut the greatest unfairness< intheir eyes a profane &ook or ancient document is accepted without hesitation, whilst theScripture, if they only find in it a suspicion ofERR#R, is set down with the slightest

possi&le discussion as quite untrustworthy"

%'t is true, no dou&t, that copyists have made mistakes in the te0t of the i&le< thisquestion, when it arises should &e carefully considered on its merits, and the fact not tooeasily admitted, &ut only in those passages where the proof is clear" 't may also happenthat the sense of a passage remains am&iguous, and in this case good hermeneutical

methods will greatly assist in clearing up the o&scurity"

%/U& & ! A/!#$U&E$% "R#N0 AND F#R/DDEN- E&+ER NARR#"N!(RAN CER&AN (AR&! #N$% #F +#$% !CR(&URE- #R

AD,& &+A& &+E !ACRED "R&ER +A! ERRED" Kor the system of those who,in order to rid themselves of these difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that divineinspiration regards the things of FA&+ AND ,#RA$!- AND N#&+N0 /E%#ND,

&ecause )as they "R#N0$%think. in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage,we should consider not so much what :od has said as the reason and purpose which #ehad in mind in saying it (( &+! !%!&E, CANN#& /E $ERA&ED"

%Kor all the &ooks which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are writtenwholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the #oly :host< and so far isit from &eing(#!!/$E &+A& AN% ERR#R CAN C#1E2!& "&+

N!(RAN- &+A& N!(RAN N#& #N$% ! E!!EN&A$$%

NC#,(A&/$E "&+ ERR#R- /U& E2C$UDE! AND RE3EC&! & A!

A/!#$U&E$% AND NECE!!AR$% A! & ! ,(#!!/$E &+A& 0#D

+,!E$F, the supreme Truth, can utter that which isN#& &RUE"

%This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in theCouncils of Klorence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more e0pressly formulated

&y the Council of the atican ie atican " wic #eo """ ten cites+"%

%#ence, &ecause the #oly :host employed men as #is instruments, we CANN#&therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have FA$$EN

N ERR#R, and not the primary Buthor" Kor, &y supernatural power, #e so movedand impelled them to write (( #e was so present to them (( that the things which #eordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to writedown, and finally e0pressed in apt words and withNFA$$/$E &RU&+" 1therwise,it couldN#&&e said that #e was the Buthor of theEN&REScripture" Such hasalways &een the persuasion of the Kathers St A454stine and .o6e St 7re5or8 te7reat are ten cited+"


7/25

%'t follows that those who maintain that anERR#R ! (#!!/$E N AN%0ENUNE (A!!A0Eof the sacred writings, either(ER)ER&the Catholic notion ofinspiration, or make :od theAU&+#R of such error" Bnd so emphatically were all theKathers and ;octors agreed that the divine writings, as left &y the hagiographers, areFREE FR#, A$$ ERR#R, that they la&oured earnestly, with no less skill than

reverence, to reconcile with each other those numerous passages which seem at variance(( the very passages which in great measure have &een taken up &y the %highercriticism%< for they were UNAN,#U! in laying it down- that those writings- in their

EN&RE&% and in A$$ &+ER (AR&! were equally from the afflatus of Almighty

0od- and that 0od- spea'ing *y the sacred writers- could not set down anything /U&

"+A& "A! &RUE" St A454stine (E6 92:1) to St ;erome is cited+"%

./.E #E/ """ from(rovidentissimus Deus)*ov L, L2. addressed %Toour enera&le &rethren, all Patriarchs, Primates, Brch&ishops, and ishops ofthe Catholic 9orld, in :race and Communion with the Bpostolic See% )cited

in intro to theNew American Catholic Edition.

TheNew Catholic Encyclopediagives the official Catholic position ((

%Christian antiquity, in its prayer, preaching and theological writing, universallyrecogni/ed that the writings of the 1T and *T were the work of the #oly Spirit andwere all equally the word of :od" 't was the UNAN,#U! teaching of the Fathersthat the !acred !criptures were FREE FR#, A$$ ERR#R AND FR#, A$$

C#N&RADCN"%

%&he inerrancy of !cripture has *een the C#N!&AN& teaching of the Fathers-

theologians- and recent (opes in their encyclicals on /i*lical studies"% #eo """,!enedict , .i4s "", are 5iven+

)NCEHG-I, olume = under %i&le ''%, pages 2L=, 2L4.

Evangelicals accept this has always &een the #FFCA$Catholic position"

'nA 0eneral ntroduction to the /i*le)+oody, LG., *orm :eisler and9illiam *i0 quote another maAor Evangelical scholar, Carl K" #" #enry,regarding the Catholic teaching on &i&lical inerrancy ((

%Throughout its long medieval influence, the Roman church therefore promoted thedoctrine of Scriptural inerrancy and #((#!ED notions of a limited inerrancyrestricted to faith and morals"% )page =L.

'nRoman Catholics and Evangelicals)aker, 6., :eisler and Ralph+acken/ie speak to this very issue in an appendi0" The phrase %for the sake ofour salvation% is relocated in the Klannery edition of atican '' ); . and isthe preferred translation among traditional Catholics" Some li&erals havemisunderstood the B&&ot translation to teach a restriction &ut that is their

fault" :eisler3+acken/ie state ((


8/25

%9e have e0amined this pro&lem at length to prove a point that some evangelicalsoverlook in their /eal to refute Roman Catholics" &he official position of traditional

Roman Catholicism concerning the authority of +oly "rit is that everything

!cripture asserts is asserted *y 0od- and since 0od cannot assert falsehood-

everything !cripture asserts is automatically inerrant)see chap ." @ust as we would

take offense if someone confused the theological position of #enry Emerson Kosdickwith that of " " 9arfield, so we should reali/e that #ans ?ung is informed &y adifferent theological impulse than, say, Cardinal Rat/inger"% )page 4G.

HB footnote reads5 %9e are inde&ted to @ames Bkin, staff mem&er of CatholicBnswers, for insights concerning this issue% so may&e +r" Bkin would like toela&orate on the a&ove"I

:eisler3+acken/ie also cite St" Bugustine, St" Thomas Bquinas, and Pope DeoJ''' to show this %limited inerrancy% view has never &een the official Catholic

position" That false idea %is contrary to the whole of the Catholic tradition upto modern times% )page =(2!."

So ' am challenging Eric Svendsen or anyone to show me where this %limitedinerrancy restricted to faith and morals only% idea is the #FFCA$Catholic

position" 'f this cannot &e done, then it must &e admitted that Catholics#FFCA$$%agree on %the e0tent of inerrancy"% 'f you wont admit this,then please produce the evidence to the contrary from the #FFCA$sources(( papal encyclicals, Councils, Catechisms"

EN* /< RES./NSE)dated @une G, G.

Kinally, helpful articles in theNCEare on the Pontifical i&lical Commission)vol , page 66ff.,(rovidentissimus Deusof Pope Deo J''' )vol , page==f.,!piritus (araclitusof Pope enedict J )vol 2, page Gf.,Divino

Afflante !pirituof Pope Pius J'' )vol 4, page =6f., and i&le '' )vol =,page 62ff on papal teaching and inerrancy."

The full te0t of these papal encyclicals can &e found here5

Deo J''' )*ov L, L2. .rovidentissim4s *e4s)The +ost Provident :od.

enedict J )Sept 6, =!. S6irit4s .arac=it4s)The Paraclete Spirit.

Pius J'' )Sept 2!, 42. *ivino A--=ante S6irit4)Mnder the 'nspiration ofthe ;ivine Spirit.

()Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on Predestination((is it theposition of BugustineF ScotusF +olinaF BquinasF
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/L13PROVI.HTMhttp://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/B15SPIRI.HTMhttp://www.newadvent.org/docs/pi12da.htmhttp://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/L13PROVI.HTMhttp://www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/B15SPIRI.HTMhttp://www.newadvent.org/docs/pi12da.htm


9/25

This is a more comple0 issue and indeed some of the minute detailshave not&een defined simply &ecause Predestination itself will always remain amystery" 9e cannot know the mind of :od completely on this Aust as wecannot comprehend the doctrine of the #oly Trinity" 9hile we can %e0plain%the issue to some e0tent, and the Church can and has e0cluded hereticalnotions and errors on these &eliefs, we cannot fathom the depths of such

&eliefs since these are only known fully &y :od #imself )Rom 522f."

:iven that distinction however, there have &een %limits% on whatPredestination is and is not as defined &y the Catholic Church, and these arefound in such works as Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma&y Dudwig 1tt)which refers to the relevant theologians, Councils and Popes, and the heresiesthat were opposed. as well as some helpful articles in theNCE(( ' wouldrecommend the ones on Predestination in Catholic theology )vol , page

-4ff., Predestination in non(Catholic theology )vol , page -ff., Kree9ill and :race )vol G, page 2f., Kree 9ill and Providence )vol G, page 4f.,Duis de +olina )vol , page !!f., +olinism )vol , page !ff., and ane/and ane/ianism )vol =, page 4Lff."

The main %controversy% over the minute detailsof Predestination &etweenCatholics occurred in the later si0teenth century with the +olinists )after theSpanish @esuit theologian Duis de +olina. and the ane/ians )after theSpanish ;ominican theologian ;omingo ane/. who emphasi/ed differentaspects of the issue" +uch farther apart in their &eliefs, the de&ate in non(

Catholic or Protestant theology is &etween the Calvinists )after the ProtestantReformer @ohn Calvin, whose theology affected later Reformed andPres&yterians, some aptists. and the later Brminians )after @aco&us Brminiuswhose theology affected the +ethodists, Pentecostals, some aptists, andothers."

Rather than give a whole history of the doctrine of Predestination ' will statewhat the Catholic Church has officially defined on grace, free will andPredestination )see Dudwig 1tt, page =(=4.5

There is a supernatural intervention of :od in the faculties of the soul, which precedesthe free act of the will" (*e -ide)

There is a supernatural influence of :od in the faculties of the soul which coincides intime with mans free act of will" (*e -ide)

Kor every salutary act internal supernatural grace of :od )gratia elevans. is a&solutelynecessary" (*e -ide)

'nternal supernatural grace is a&solutely necessary for the &eginning of faith and of

salvation" (*e -ide)


10/25

9ithout the special help of :od the Austified cannot persevere to the end in Austification"(*e -ide)

:race cannot &e merited &y natural works either de condigno or de congruo" (*e -ide)

:od, &y #is Eternal Resolve of 9ill, has predetermined certain men to eternal&lessedness" (*e -ide)

:od, &y #is Eternal Resolve of 9ill, predestines certain men, on account of theirforeseen sins, to eternal reAection" (*e -ide)

The human will remains free under the influence of efficacious grace, which is notirresisti&le" (*e -ide)

There is a grace which is truly sufficient and yet remains inefficacious )gratia vere etmere sufficiens." (*e -ide)

This defines the %&asic% position of the Catholic Church on grace andPredestination" TheNCEin the article on Predestination defines the teachingof the Church giving references toDen4inger)which is a standard source forCatholic dogma. as the following5

:od predestines no one to evil" (*en? 1&)

#e wills, on the contrary, the salvation of all men" (*en? 23)

Christ did not die solely for the predestined or the faithful" (*en? 200, 230, 230)

There is a grace that is truly sufficient and that is a true gift of :od" (*en? 230)

The grace of conversion is offered to sinners" (*en? 12)

They only are deprived of it who, failing in their duty, refuse it< this is something which:od permits &ut of which #e is &y no means the cause" (*en? 1, 1&, 29)

Bgainst the various forms of predestinationism offered &y Protestants in the

si0teenth century, the Church teaches )taken from theNCE.5

(1):od sincerely wills the salvation of all men and thus makes the fulfillmentof #is precepts possi&le for all< (2)There is neither predestination to evil as afinal end nor predestination to any evil deed in particular< (3)Christ died forall men without e0ception< ()*evertheless, :od has decreed from all eternityto inflict eternal punishment for the sin of final impenitence, which #e hasforeseen for all eternity (( #e is &y no means the cause of the impenitence, &utmerely permits it"

See also the article on my site .redestination: a=vinism vs ato=icism
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num21.htmhttp://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num21.htm


11/25

#owever, as Dudwig 1tt points out these definitions do not answer the morespecific questions on the minute detailssuch as5 #ow does efficacious gracesecure salvation with infalli&le certainty for the person who receives itF ;oesthis efficacy lie in the grace itself or in the free assent of the human willforeseen &y :odF 's the grace efficacious &y its intrinsic power )per se sive a&intrinseco. or is it efficacious &y the free assent of the will )per accidens sivea& e0trinseco. F 's efficacious grace intrinsically different from sufficientgrace or only e0trinsically different &y reason of the free assent of the willFThese and other questions were answered in various ways &y St" Bugustine,St" Thomas Bquinas, and the later theologians Duis de +olina )and the+olinists., ;omingo ane/ )and the ane/ians., Krancis Suare/ )whodeveloped %Congruism%., and the later theologians of the Sor&onne )whodeveloped what is called %syncretism% which is a middle path &etween thesystems."

The later discussion and de&ate on the minute detailsof the issue does notcontradict the definitions and limitations on Predestination as ' have outlinedthem a&ove on which the various Catholic theologians were agreed" EricSvendsen seems to &e confusing the Protestant %magisterium% )which is

&asically individual theologians and scholars (( Catholics dont look to them tofind defined dogma on a topic., with the official teaching of the Churchdefined &y the +agisterium )the Councils and ishops in union with thePope." This is a common mistake ' see among Evangelical apologists in theiranalysis of Catholic teaching"

()Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on interpreting the :enesisaccount((was there a literal Bdam and Eve, or did evolution take placeF

9hy the dichotomyF There is no necessary pro&lem with the theory ofevolution and the e0istence of a real Bdam and Eve as the first man andwoman" The issue whether evolution %happened% is a matter for science todiscover, not the Church )although there are theologians who are scientists."Bnd since Pope @ohn Paul '' approved the theory of evolution )of course not

the %materialist% version that removes :od altogether. in his Messa5e to.onti-ica= Academ8 o- Sciences)dated 1cto&er ==, G. and he doesnt seethis as a pro&lem with the :enesis account, neither do '" Catholics do not haveto accept the Kundamentalist approach to the first chapters of :enesis that is

put forward &y such groups as the 'nstitute for Creation Research )'CR." Thevast maAority of scientists would oppose such &ad %creationist science"%

Bgain, we should defer science to the scientists, and theology and doctrine tothe Church" ' dont see science and the Catholic faith as &eing in conflict since:od is ultimately the +aster and Creator of &oth" *ow as to whether there

was a literal Bdam and Eve )which is a separate question from whetherevolution happened., there is a consensus and this has &een the defined
http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.htmlhttp://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.htmlhttp://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.htmlhttp://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.html


12/25

teaching of the Church from the &eginning" The Catechism of the CatholicChurchstates5

32The human person, created in the image of :od, is a &eing at once corporeal andspiritual H&ody and soulI" The &i&lical account e0presses this reality in sym&olic

language when it affirms that %then the Dord :od formed man of dust from the ground,and &reathed into his nostrils the &reath of life< and man &ecame a living &eing% H:en=5-I" +an, whole and entire, is therefore willed&y :od"

3&The Church, interpreting the sym&olism of &i&lical language in an authentic way,in the light of the *ew Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents- Adamand Eve, were constituted in an original %state of holiness and Austice% o4nci= o-Trent, *en? 111+" This grace of original holiness was %to share in"""divine life%atican "" #7 2+"

3@0The account of the fall in :enesis 2 uses figurative language, &ut affirms aprimeval event, a deed that took place at the &eginning of the history of man atican"" 7S 13:1+" Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human historyis marked &y the original fault freely committed *y our first parentso4nci= o- Trent,*en? 113 .o6e .i4s "" *en? 39@& .o6e .a4= " AAS 9 (1@), +"

3@@Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first diso&edience"Adam andEveimmediately lose the grace of original holiness HRom 25=2I" They &ecome afraid ofthe :od of whom they have conceived a distorted image (( that of a :od Aealous of his

prerogatives H:en 256(!I"

0#ow did the sin of Adam&ecome the sin of all his descendantsF The whole humanrace is in Adam%as one &ody of one man% St Tomas AB4inas, *e Ma=o :1+" ythis %unity of the human race% all men are implicated in Adam5s sin, as all areimplicated in Christs Austice" Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that wecannot fully understand" ut we do know &y Revelation thatAdam had receivedoriginal holiness and 6ustice not for himself alone- *ut for all human nature7 /y

yielding to the tempter- Adam and Eve committed a personal sin- *ut this sin affected

the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen stateo4nci= o- Trent,*en? 111C112+" 't is a sin which will &e transmitted &y propagation to all mankind,that is, &y the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and Austice"Bnd that is why original sin is called %sin% only in an analogical sense5 it is a sin

%contracted% and not %committed% (( a state and not an act"

Those are some of the relevant passages from the Catechismon the literale0istence of Bdam and Eve as %our first parents% which the Kathers, ;octors,and Popes have always affirmed in the Catholic Church" Pope Pius J'' whowrote on human origins and science in his 6! encyclical+umani 0eneriscan &e summari/ed on the su&Aect as follows5

(1)The question of the origin of mans *odyfrom pre(e0isting and livingmatter is a legitimate matter of inquiry for natural science" Catholics are free

to form their own opinions, &ut they should do so cautiously< they should not


13/25

confuse fact with conAecture, and they should respect the Churchs right todefine matters touching on Revelation"

(2)Catholics must &elieve, however, that the human soulwas createdimmediately &y :od" Since the soul is a spiritual su&stance it is not &roughtinto &eing through transformation of matter, &ut directly &y :od, whence thespecial uniqueness of each person"

(3)Bll men have descended from an individual, Bdam, who has transmittedoriginal sin to all mankind" Catholics may not, therefore, &elieve in%polygenism,% the scientific hypothesis that mankind descended from agroupof original humans Hthat there were many Bdams and EvesI"

Kurther, the Catechism of the Catholic Churchstates on origins and science5

293 The question a&out the origins of the world and of man has &een the o&Aect ofmany scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age anddimensions of the cosmos, the development of life(forms and the appearance of man"These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator,

prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdomhe gives to scholars and researchers""""

29The great interest accorded to these studies is strongly stimulated &y a question ofanother order, which goes &eyond the proper domain of the natural sciences" 't is notonly a question of knowing when and how the universe arose physically, or when man

appeared, &ut rather of discovering the meaning of such an origin""""

So the Catechismrecogni/es there are domains and questions that science cananswer, and the domain of religion which deals with such questions asmeaning, theology, and Catholic doctrine" There is no necessary conflict

&etween the two since :od indeed is the Creator and Ruler of &oth"

1@Faith and science:%"""methodical research in all &ranches of knowledge, providedit is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can neverconflict with the faith, &ecause the things of the world and the things of faith derive

from the same :od" The hum&le and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is&eing led, as it were, &y the hand of :od in spite of himself, for it is :od, the conserverof all things, who made them what they are"% atican "" 7S 3:1+

See Pope @ohn Paul '' G Messa5e to .onti-ica= Academ8 o- Sciences

See also the full te0t of Pope Pius J'' 6! encyclical 4mani 7eneris

(&)Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on whether or not @onah wasreally swallowed &y a %great fish"%
http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.htmlhttp://www.newadvent.org/docs/pi12hg.htmhttp://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.htmlhttp://www.newadvent.org/docs/pi12hg.htm


14/25

#ere there is no %official% position, and ' dont see this as a pro&lem" Thequestion is a matter for &i&lical scholars and e0egetes to de&ate, and it doesnot impinge on any doctrine or dogma of the Catholic faith" ' see what Eric isdriving at since some of the more recent Catholic i&le translations are more%skeptical% a&out 1T history and say this a&out the ook of @onah5

%This late date Hafter the E0ileI is warning enough against any interpretation of the &ookas historical" This is e0cluded &y other arguments as well" There is no trace in Bssyrianor &i&lical documents of a conversion of the king of *ineveh with all his people to the:od of 'srael" Bnd, though :od is indeed master of nature, the successive prodigieshere narrated read like a succession of practical Aokes played &y :od on his prophet5 thesudden storm, the choice of @onah &y lot, the great fish, the plant growing in a night andwithering in a hour< while the whole story is told with undisguised irony quite alien tothe writing of history"% (New 3erusalem /i*le*o4D=eda8, 1@9+, "ntrod4ction to;ona, 6a5e 1199C@)

1ther translations would also %late date% the &ook )for e0ample, theNewAmerican /i*letranslations edited &y ;onald Senior and @ean +arie#ies&erger, and pu&lished &y 10ford Mniversity Press, ! and 6., alsotheNew 3erome /i*lical Commentaryedited &y Kr" Raymond rown takes amore %skeptical% approach toward the &ook" ut this is true of most Protestantcommentaries also, although there are more %Evangelical% commentaries thatwould dissent from that view" 1n the %great fish% swallowing @onah, and @esususing this as an illustration of #is &urial and Resurrection in the :ospels, the

New 3erusalem /i*lesays5

%'n +t =54 and Dk 5=(2= @esus was to cite the conversion of the *inevites as ane0ample of repentance, and +t =54! sees @onah inside the great fish as a prefiguring ofChrist in the tom&" This use of the story of @onah should not &e invoked as a proof of itshistoricity" @esus employs the 1ld Testament story as Christian preachers use the *ewTestament para&les< the intention is the same5 to teach &y means of well(knownillustrations, without implying any opinion as to the historical reality of the facts"% (6a5e119@)

Some of the older and more traditional Catholic &i&lical commentaries

)mostly out of print. would &e less %skeptical% in their approach to themiracles and history of the 1ld Testament" ' am certainly no e0pert myselfand it seems most &i&lical scholars today )whether Catholic or Protestant. takethe more %skeptical% or %li&eral% approach to interpreting the 1T" So whilethere is no %official% position on the ook of @onah, this is not important sinceit does not affect official Catholic doctrine )as found in the Catechism. in theleast"

(9)Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on E0tra Ecclesiam *ullaSalus )%no salvation outside the church%." 's it the view of atican '', or theview of every Roman document &efore atican ''F Should Protestants and the


15/25

Eastern 1rthodo0 &e em&raced as %&rothers% )as atican '' teaches., or shouldthey &e eternally condemned as heretics )as all pre(atican '' documentsteach.F

' wont answer this question in too much depth since the suggestion is thatthere are %contradictions% &etween atican Council '' and the previousteaching of the Church" 1ther Catholic apologists would &e more competentthan myself to answer this" Deaving aside the missing evidence for such%contradictions% which Eric Svendsen failed to produce, ' will simply assertthat there is no real conflict &etween atican '' and previous teaching, andstate the position of the Church as found in the Catechism of the CatholicChurchwhich cites the documents of atican ''5

%1utside the Church there is no salvation%

9#ow are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated &y the Church KathersFSt 86rian, E6 &3:21 .# 3:11@ *e nit .# :0@C3+" Re(formulated

positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the #ead through the Churchwhich is his ody5

%asing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrimnow on earth, is necessary for salvation5 the one Christ is the mediator and the way ofsalvation< he is present to us in his &ody which is the Church" #e himself e0plicitlyasserted the necessity of faith and aptism, and there&y affirmed at the same time thenecessity of the Church which men enter through aptism as through a door"+ence

they could not *e saved who- 'nowing that the Catholic Church was founded asnecessary *y 0od through Christ- would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it"%atican "" #7 1 MF 1:1 ;n 3:+

9&This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do notknow Christ and his Church5

%Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the :ospel of Christ or hisChurch, &ut who nevertheless seek :od with a sincere heart, and, moved &y grace, try intheir actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience ((those too may achieve eternal salvation"% atican "" #7 1 *en? 39C39&2+

The key here is to notice the distinction made of those who %'nowing% of thenecessity of the Catholic Church for salvation and yet refuse, those are theones who cannot &e saved< and those who %through no fault of their own% donot know Christs :ospel or #is Church %may% have salvation, &ut even thatsalvation is mediated &y Christ in #is Church" Protestants and Eastern1rthodo0 are indeed em&raced as %&rothers% in atican '' );ecree onEcumenism 2., &ut they are %separated &rethren,% Christian &rothers who arenot in communion with the #oly Kather and are therefore separated from the

one and only Church of Christ necessary for salvation" That position has notchanged" 9hether or not someone is ultimately saved or is %eternally


16/25

condemned% is left up to :od, who is the final Audge of individual souls"Catholics do not put a limit on :ods Austice, mercy or grace in salvation, &utthey do point the way to salvation5 through Christ in #is Church"

Kor more on this issue see the e0cellent articles at Matt's ato=icA6o=o5etics

(@)Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on atican ''" 9as it aninfalli&le ecumenical councilF ;oes it contradict earlier teachings of Rome )asthe Traditionalists claim.F

Bgain, ' do not &elieve there are any real contradictions &etween thedocuments of atican '' or the Catechism&ased on atican '', and previous

teachings )yes, some Traditionalists claim there are, &ut ' havent seen any thatcant &e reconciled." ' myself am not a Traditionalist, and am no e0pert onthem, &ut ' am willing to study the issues they wish to &ring up" 9hat is theofficial Catholic position on atican ''F The official position is that atican ''is the twenty(first Ecumenical Council, ratified and confirmed &y Popes @ohnJJ''', Paul ', and now @ohn Paul ''" 9as it an %infalli&le% CouncilF 't wasas %infalli&le% as the previous =! Ecumenical Councils, &ut granted there arenot %definitions% as such in the documents of atican '', and no %anathemas%that followed canons or propositions as found in previous Councils" Somesuggest atican '' was merely a %pastoral% Council, &ut there is plenty of

doctrine taught in the Council documents, &ut indeed much was alreadypreviously defined"

The documents of atican '' have the most comprehensive and &eautifuldescription of the nature and authority of the Catholic Church, which was notdefined in such depth &efore" 9hile every statement in the documents is not%infalli&le% as such, the Second atican Council is Ecumenical and therefore

&inding and authoritative for all Catholics" #ow the Council is to &e appliedand &elieved &y individual Catholics is e0plained in great depth and &eauty inthe L!!(page and over =L!! paragraphs of the Catechism of the CatholicChurchwhich Pope @ohn Paul '' declares %a sure norm for teaching the

faith% )on the pu&lication of the Catechismgiven 1cto&er , = which wasthe 2!th anniversary for the opening of the Second atican Council."

B de&ate on %infalli&ility% and atican '' can &e found at +ario ;erksens

ato=ic "nsi5t

(10)Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on ;ivine Revelation" 's itall found in Scripture, or is it partly in Scripture and partly in TraditionF
http://pweb.netcom.com/~matt1618/TRADIT.htmlhttp://pweb.netcom.com/~matt1618/TRADIT.htmlhttp://www.cathinsight.com/apologetics/debates/sippo/index.htmhttp://pweb.netcom.com/~matt1618/TRADIT.htmlhttp://pweb.netcom.com/~matt1618/TRADIT.htmlhttp://www.cathinsight.com/apologetics/debates/sippo/index.htm


17/25

This can &e answered &y saying %neither% (( Revelation is found allinScripture and allin Tradition" The formula %partly"""partly% was specificallyreAected )although de&ated. at the Council of Trent which adopted the phrasethat %these truths and rules are contained in the written &ooksANDin theunwritten traditions% from %

the sourceHnot two sourcesI at once of all saving

truth and rules of conduct% &eing our Dord @esus Christ and #is Bpostles)Kourth Session." Dater theologians and especially atican Council ''ela&orated on this and taught that divine Revelation comes from %one commonsource% while there are %two distinct modes of transmission% )Scripture andTradition. 5

90%Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are *ound closely together andcommunicate one with the other7 For *oth of them- flowing out from the same divine

well1spring- come together in some fashion to form one thingand move towards thesame goal"% atican "" * @+""""

91%Sacred Scripture is the speech of :od as it is put down in writing under the &reathof the #oly Spirit"% * @+"""%Bnd H#olyI Tradition transmits in its entirety the 9ord of:od which has &een entrusted to the apostles &y Christ the Dord and the #oly Spirit" 'ttransmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened &y the Spirit of truth,they may faithfully preserve, e0pound, and spread it a&road &y their preaching"% * @+

92Bs a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation isentrusted, %does not derive her certainty a&out all revealed truths from the holyScriptures alone" oth Scripture and Tradition must &e accepted and honored with equal

sentiments of devotion and reverence"% * @+

@&%Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture ma'e up a single sacred deposit of the"ord of 0od% * 10+, in which, as in a mirror, the pilgrim Church contemplates :od,the source of all her riches"

(11)Tell us what theRoman Catholic position is on the decisions of thesynods of #ippo and Carthage )which lists the &ooks of the canon." 9erethese infalli&le %councils%F 9here they right in their list of 1T &ooks, or wasTrent right in its list insteadF

The synods or councils of #ippo and Carthage, &eing provincial or localcouncils, were not %infalli&le% councils as such (( &ut the 1ld and *ewTestament &i&lical canons listed &y these councils were accepted and ratified

&y the Ecumenical Council of Trent" 'f there are discrepancies on the canon&etween them, ' am not aware of any" Even if there were, it does not mattersince the Council of Trent has the final say on the canon for Catholics" 'n afootnote for the fourth session )on the Canonical Scriptures. in &he Canonsand Decrees of the Council of &renttranslated &y #"@" Schroeder )Tanooks, -L., we find the following for earlier canon lists5

Synod of Daodicea )end of fourth century. (( although this one is disputed


18/25

Synod of Rome )2L=. under Pope ;amasus *en? 9+

Real Answer to 100 Mil

Documents

Transcript of Real Answer to 100 Mil