St. Paul's Epistles Support Catholic Doctrines?
The God Fearin Fiddler is on a roll! His latest installment on St. Paul was a very interesting discussion on howSt. Paul's writings on justification are totally compatible with Catholic doctrine. As he points out in his latest treatise, it was the Catholic Church that decided that St. Paul's writings had the "Evangelium" on them. Therefore, why wouldn't they be compatible? Moot point, I suppose, that goes without saying, but we have become so accustomed to having St. Paul's letters used to attack the doctrines of Catholicism that we forget that it was a bunch of Catholic guys (bishops) who included Paul's letters in the canon in the first place!
Let's make the assumption that St. Paul's writings to the Romans were in direct contradiction to Catholic teaching on faith and works. Why then did the Church Fathers in the fourth century include them? Why didn't they declare in their discussions that St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans was contradictory to their dogma and label it as a epistle of straw, worthy only to be thrown into the stove for burning? They at least should have relegated his writings to the back of the Bible, so the reader would be given the unspoken impression that it was just an addendum to Holy Scripture and not meant to be a part of the original canon.
Going one step further with this entirely illogical construct, one could wonder why the Counter-Reformation Council of Trent didn't take Romans right the heck out of the Canon, infallibly stating "it was a mistake to have included it earlier and shouldn't be in there."
Enough of the silliness, my point is to echo what the Fiddler states in his blog, St. Paul's writings are God's word to us and help us to understand Catholic teaching when "rightly divided."
"And so Paul, Christ and the Catholic Church all teach in unison, obedience is necessary. You will be held responsible for every sin you commit. Only by Christ can you be freed from these sins. That is the doctrine of the Church. This is what Paul preached and that is what the Church shall continue to preach until Christ returns. Amen" God Fearin' Forum
Let's make the assumption that St. Paul's writings to the Romans were in direct contradiction to Catholic teaching on faith and works. Why then did the Church Fathers in the fourth century include them? Why didn't they declare in their discussions that St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans was contradictory to their dogma and label it as a epistle of straw, worthy only to be thrown into the stove for burning? They at least should have relegated his writings to the back of the Bible, so the reader would be given the unspoken impression that it was just an addendum to Holy Scripture and not meant to be a part of the original canon.
Going one step further with this entirely illogical construct, one could wonder why the Counter-Reformation Council of Trent didn't take Romans right the heck out of the Canon, infallibly stating "it was a mistake to have included it earlier and shouldn't be in there."
Enough of the silliness, my point is to echo what the Fiddler states in his blog, St. Paul's writings are God's word to us and help us to understand Catholic teaching when "rightly divided."
"And so Paul, Christ and the Catholic Church all teach in unison, obedience is necessary. You will be held responsible for every sin you commit. Only by Christ can you be freed from these sins. That is the doctrine of the Church. This is what Paul preached and that is what the Church shall continue to preach until Christ returns. Amen" God Fearin' Forum
posted by Russ Rentler, M.D. | 12:57 PM
3 Comments:
I've commented before on this issue in that Reformed Protestants believe that faith without works is dead. That is, a faith which is merely "belief" or assent is incompatible with what the Bible teaches. Although we don't see works as meriting favour before God, we do see them as a necessary evidence that we are saved. They are intertwined in this way. The Reformed concept of faith and works is rarely presented fairly and completely, in my view.
Tiber, thanks for the link! I am humbled.
It's a battle we share as well, PA.
Much of the doctrines of Catholicism that are the most maligned are the ones that are least understood or accurately presented. (indulgences for example)
Sadly sometimes it is us Catholics that are to blame for this misrepresentation!
Post a Comment
Home