This post is the result of having just read two volumes that offer convincing arguments against the quasi-ecclesiastical organization (this nomenclature is mine and should not be attributed to the authors) called the Roman Catholic Church: A Primer On Roman Catholicism by John Gerstner; and, Evangelical Answers: A Critique of Current Roman Catholic Apologists by Eric Svendsen. For anyone who is concerned about the influence of Roman Catholicism, either within the microcosm of their family, where indeed its impact is most strongly felt; or within the greater context of the culture at large, where the impact has more of a rippling effect, I would recommend both of them. The Gerstner volume is small, thus offering a quicker read, while at the same time presenting a sound and effective refutation of practicing Roman Catholicism. Svendsen’s book, on the other hand, is quite a bit longer at 247 pages, during which, as the title infers, he examines the arguments of RC spokesmen and digs deep into both the Bible and early ecclesiastical history to prove the fallacy of each major doctrinal claim they make.

Although this post is not a book review per se, I do want to list the 10 issues that Svendsen considered most important to address: 1) Infallibility of the Catholic Church; 2) The Nature of the Church; 3) Apostolic Succession; 4) The Canon; 5) The Sufficiency of the Scriptures; 6) Old Testament Israel – A Story of the Catholic Church; 7) The Myth of Catholic Unity; 8) Beliefs about Mary; 9) The Catholic Priesthood; 10) The Eucharist and the Mass. I would also like to quote from his conclusion: “…The arguments presented look impressive at first glance, and the weight of the evidence appears massive – but only until we discover that the Catholic apologists’ arguments are a house of cards. The instant we pull out one card that does not belong, the entire structure comes tumbling down.” I would insert that Svendsen makes abundantly clear that the apologists’ contentions are based on inaccurate translations and forced interpretation of Scripture (when a papal decree or tradition is unavailable to claim as a higher authority!). Much of their reasoning stems from what can be termed as incestuous intellectualism, drawing only on internal resources rather than testing their doctrines and beliefs in the greater arena of accepted Christian statements of faith.

It is a shame that Evangelical theologians continue to find it necessary to devote so much time and energy to call the bluff of the world’s greatest ecclesiastical threat to true Christianity in the name of being the “one holy church.” The discerning person already is aware that the claims of Roman Catholicism have no substance behind them, and that they are nothing more than ritualistic sophism, not a panacea, for the spiritually faithless, fearful, gullible, and obtuse – as the writer to the Hebrews says, “…for you have become dull of hearing (Heb.5:11).” Despite what may sound like a harsh indictment, please grasp that this is being written in love.

Here I must express frustration and disappointment with Svendsen who, as do the overwhelming majority of Christians, uses the word ‘church’ to apply to individual congregations, denominations, the collective ‘Church,” as well as the Roman Catholic Church, thereby at times muddling the nomenclature such that it is difficult to decipher to which entity he is actually referring. Svendsen actually felt it necessary to clarify that “Christ did not establish an ‘institutional church’ in Matt[hew] 16:18. Rather, ‘church’ is a term which represents the collective whole of God’s elect.” Acknowledging that I hold a minority position, which it will continue be since I sense a lack of will, commitment, and conviction to remedy this conundrum, but we Evangelicals must drop the word ‘church’ when identifying ourselves as believers in Jesus Christ. In fact, our overarching identity should be as members of the Body of Christ, both individually and corporately, as we worship with a particular congregation of believers. And, as we rally beneath the Body of the Once-for-all-time Crucified Christ, we must dispense with secondary and tertiary points of doctrinal confession that only serve to divide the Evangelical Community and bring about aspersions from the outside.

The 16th-century reformers William Tyndale and Martin Luther refused to translate the Greek word ‘ekklesia’ as ‘church.’ Tyndale preferred to use the gloss ‘congregation,’ while Luther translated the Greek into German as ‘Gemeinde,’ a community or fellowship. Whether the two Biblical scholars/translators were cognizant of the derivation of the word ‘church’ is not clear, but they both obviously were of the conviction that it did not carry the connotation of ‘a group called out to accomplish a defined task’ as is the case with ‘ekklesia.’ Above all, their decision was based on the rampant corruption within the Roman Catholic Church, from which I can only conjecture they wished to separate themselves. By acquiescing to King James’ dictat that ‘ekklesia’ must be translated as ‘church’ in the Bible bearing his eponym, Tyndale’s martyrdom has proven to be for naught and that once again, the powers of darkness had overcome the light.

We should be of the same mindset today. The Evangelical Ekklesia must sever its ties with Roman Catholicism, given that the theological standards of the one differ so radically from the other. A case in point: how can Rome claim that Christ, Who is the Word incarnate, is its Head as we Evangelicals do, when tradition or papal edict can supersede that Word? Of course, nor can the liberal, progressive congregations/denominations within Protestantism be considered a part of the true Body of Christ, the members of which stand on the inerrancy of the Word, the only guide for faith and practice.

The derivation of the word ‘church’ may surprise you. It certainly did me as I was researching it. In fact, only Roman Catholicism truly owns the right to call itself a ‘church,’ but for all the wrong reasons. I invite you to read my post https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/125354824/posts/4069473697 which discusses my research and the sinister conclusion that was the result.