Catholic Apologetics Essay, Research Paper

The Apocrypha: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees

The Protestant argument is that the Catholic Church added the 7 books known as the Apocrypha to the Canon Bible at the Council of Trent in the mid-16th century (after the reformation) to back up things the Church taught

Reformation: 1517 Martin Luther

Council of Trent: 1545-48, 51-52, 62-63

The truth is that these books were part of the original Canon. They were there in 1442 at the Council of Florence. These books had beed a part of the Christian Canon dating back to the first Canon developed at the Synod of Hippo in 393.

The Reformers adopted the “Jewish Canon” and rejected the “Christian Canon”…the problem now is that the spiritual decendants of the Reformers think that the “Jewish Canon” IS the “Christian Canon.”

Celibacy for Priests:

Many Protestants feel it is wrong, and inherently evil, to forbid anyone from marrying and having sex. A refrence is made to 1 Timothy 4:1-3 saying that forbidding marriage is “a thing taught by demons.”

1 Cor 7:32-38–”An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs–how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world–how he can please his wife–and his interests are divided. I would like you be free from concern. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord. If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and feels he ought to marry, let him do as he wishes. He is commiting no sin; let them get married. THe one who stands firm in his resolve, however, who is not under compulsion but has power over his own will, and has made up his mind to keep his virgin, will be doing well. So then, the one who marries does well; the one who does not marry will do better ”

Matt 19:12 the words of Christ himself -there were some who “have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven.” And, significantly, He added, “The one who can accept this should accept it”

It appears that here the Bible has contradicted itself. This, however, is not the case. The passage from 1 Timothy is refering to the Gnostic heresy which regarded matter as intrinsically evil. Gnostic’s believe that marriage is evil because matter is evil, therefore sex is evil. So really Paul is denouncing heresies, not the idea of remaining celebate.

Call no Man Father:

Protestants make refrence to Matt 23:9 which clearly states “And do not call anyone on earth “father,” for you have one Father, and he is in heaven”

The very next verse Matt 23:10 says “Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one Teacher, the Christ”

Countless times the Apostles refer to themselves as spiritual fathers and the faithful as spiritual children…Abraham is refered to as the father of all who believe (Rom 4:11)…

Paul writes “for in Jesus Christ I became your father through the gospel (1 Cor 4:15)

The point Jesus was making is that no man is to take the place of God in our lives.

The Protestant International Standard Bible Encyclopedia acknowledges that this is the true meaning of the text: “Christ’s condemnation is clearly of the praise-seeking or obsequious spirit, rather than of a particular custom.”

Catholics are not being disobeditent to Jesus, rather following the apostolic example established be Paul and John.

Bible in Vernacular

The common misconception is that the Protestants were the ones who started to translate the Bible and before that the Catholic Church would not allow it to be written in any lanuage other than Latin.

First, the Bible was written in Latin for so long because Latin was the lanuage of Eurpoe. If a person in Europe could read at all they could read Latin.

Second, the Catholic Church promoted the translation of the Bible into many lanuages well before the Reformation including High and Low German, Italian, French, Bohemian, Belgian, Russian, Danish, Norwegian, Polish, Hungarian, and many versions of Spanish.

The preface to the 1611 King James Version of the Bible (written by Protestants) states (reluctantly) that translating the Bible into the common lanuage dated back to centuries before the Reformation.

The Catholic Church does not respect the Bible as divinely inspired

“Job . . . is merely the argument of a fable.”

“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish naughtiness.”

“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.”

“There are many things objectionable in this book [Revelation]. To my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character.”

All of the above judgments were made by Martin Luther

The Catholic Church’s opinion on Scripture:

“Therefore since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into the sacred writings for the sake of our salvation.”

Protestant Writer on Luther’s view:

Luther . . . freely charges the sacred writers with inaccurate statements, unsound reasonings, the use of imperfect materials and even urges the authority of Christ against that of Holy Writ. In a word, as is admitted by a recent Protestant writer: “Luther has no fixed theory of inspiration: if all his works suppose the inspiration of the Sacred Writings, all his conduct shows that he makes himself the supreme judge of it”

When Scripture Scholars showed Luther he improperly added the word alone to his translation of Romans 3:28 he replied “You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word ‘alone’ is not in the text of Paul. If your Papist makes such an unnecessary row about the word ‘alone,’ say right out to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’ and say: ‘Papists and asses are one and the same thing.’ I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough.”