originally from a
pro-Catholic site:
(now shut down; but this has been on the internet at various other sites for years)
Arguments Catholics Shouldn't Use
If CARM posting Catholics would follow these tips : the quality of their apologetics would improve dramatically.
1) No problem since I do not allege there are 33,000 Protestant sects. I accept the number James White has suggested--at a few hundred. It does not matter. Protestantism cannot agree on what the Bible teaches. Thus, hundreds of sects are hundreds too many.
2) When Protestants intentionally lie about Catholicism with accusations of saint worship, Mary worship, bread worship, statue worship, what is that if NOT anti-Catholicism?
3) Lack of charity and Saint Jerome? I never heard of this.
4) This is nothing but a caricature of the Catholic argument against Sola Scriptura.The author cannot be blamed as "Catholic Answers" tends to be where most armchair Catholic apologists get their apologetics information. Catholics do not maintain that Scripture is unintelligible without the Church. Catholics maintain that God founded a Church, in part, to be the divinely authorized teacher of the Word of God. Sola Scriptura is not adequate becasue Scripture is not the sole locus where God's authority on earth is manifested. THAT----perhaps in short and oversimplified is the Catholic argument against Sola Scriptura.
5) Again, another caricature. If one is going to claim to go by the Bible alone, it follows that one needs to know what constitutes the Bible; that is to say, one needs to know what is Theopneustos. It is not readily apparent what is and is not Theopneustos. Thus, in accepting the 27 book New Testament Canon, Protestants unwillingly have to appeal to Tradition as their basis for doing so-and thus violate Sola Scriptura. You cannot have your cake and eat it.
6) Catholics do not claim that Tradition is Theopneustos, they claim it is infallible. Catholics agree that only Scripture is Theopneustos. If this is all Sola Scriptura asserted, Catholics could agree with it.
7) I am not sure what the point of this argument is.
8) So becasue 2 Peter 1: 20-21 cannot be used as a proof-text against Private Judgement, this entails Christians are free to interpret the Bible however they want--apart from the teaching, guidance and authority of the Church?
9) The author misses the point. How do you accurately reconstruct the manuscripts without appealing to Tradition in order to do so? All reconstructions of the manuscripts and all appeals to their accuracy are ultimately appeals to the authority of Tradition, since you cannot know their accuracy apart from Tradition. Sort of ironic for a Sola Scriptura Christian, don't you think?
10) The doctrine of inspiration--and inerrancy--which naturally follows from inspiration is a Faith based claim, not a scientific claim. Thus, alleged errors in the DeuteroCanonicals are simply not relevant since they are only apparent, not real--exactly like in any other book of the Bible the same logic applies.
11) Catholics don't just appeal to James as justification for their beliefs about justification.
12) Catholics believe that the whole Scriptures are the Word of God. The Gospels are not "more" the Word of God than the other Scriptures are. We give priority to the Gospels only becasue the rest of Scripture finds its perfect fulfillment and completion in Jesus, the Word of God incarnate.
13) Good point--but the author seems to assume that the Catholic is debating a reformed Protestant. Most "Bible Christians" are not Five Point Calvinists.
14) Another good point, but for the reasons above irrelevant. Most "Bible Christians" are not Five Point Calvinists.
15) If we agree that works are an outgrowth of Faith, how can they be anything other than justifying? When God sees our Faith, He sees Christ, correct? If Faith produces works, one and the same Christ is producing those works--which means--they are also justfying. How could they be anything but--if it is one and the same Christ doing them?
16) Agreed. The truth of the Catholic Faith does not hinge on whether one is justified in adding the word "alone" in Romans 3:28. A Catholic could add the word alone in that passage and still have it be consistent with the Catholic Faith about justification.
17) But love of God is exactly what motivates Catholics to do good works too. It is not and never has been Catholic teaching that there is an inherent equality between our good works and the rewards God gives them. Our good works are NOTHING. I as a Catholic do not do good works becasue I think I can place God in my debt, but because I love God and want to please Him. God rewards those works becasue God in his graciousness as deigned to associate his Grace with those works.
18) Agreed. I am sure the author of this article is well-intentioned.