lipitor uk patent nepalese generic viagra naproxen sodium 550 mg is used for discount lexapro online assistance with plavix cost vermox priceline coupon bijsluiter abilify 15 mg neurontin depression reviews topiramate for nsred disorder artane 5 mg posologie amoxicilline atacand 4 mg pretty how much do aciclovir tablets cost do yor require a perscripsion for viagra in canada mens place cialis tadalafil generico 20 mg clomid nhs uk can you buy amoxicillin over the counter philippines side effect of ramipril 5 mg famciclovir generico precious metals lithium ion battery manufacturer in india nicolas de cusa frases celebrex de mario sucralfate safe dogs can you get acyclovir over the counter in bali cephalexin 500mg over counter clindamycin 150 mg fass omeprazole equivalent over counter uk vonau flash generico do viagra generic flagyl medication drinking on 800 mg of ibuprofen is wellbutrin the best antidepressant azithromycin 250 mg online colace clear inactive ingredients in nexium omeprazole generico teutonic knight theophylline side effects in neonates vision where can i buy terbinafine tablets over the counter valacyclovir mylan 500 mg bijsluiter is 30 mg oxycodone a high dose methotrexate lake in celebrex commercial amoxicillin 250 mg prescribed 10 mg lexapro equivalent zoloft arjuna nritham in malayalam language translation sominex ukiah diltiazem gel brands in india diltiazem xt 300 mg prospecto atarax jarabe 150 ml glyburide pregnancy safety lasix compresse 20 mg do i need tadalafil prescriptions in malaysia terbinafine price no prescription levothyroxine generic image of a person mirtazapine neuraxpharm 15 mg packungsbeilage oder azathioprine use in vitiligo cost of ibuprofen at costco can you split nexium in half proscar uk buy cardura xl 8 mg 30 kont.salim tb lisinopril 20 mg for what metronidazole liquid differin creme zusammensetzung nizoral shampoo buy online average cost of bactrim ds can i buy wellbutrin over the counter buying viagra in shanghai estradiol 1 mg tablet benefits jolly kamagra kaufen how to buy viagra in bahrain will allegra show up in a drug test rosiglitazone in india safety diflucan infants mobicash online registration 150 generic cialis softtabs 37 5 mg effexor effective walmart imitrex cost when is the best time to conceive a boy while on clomid cheap celexa no prescription pedicetamol 60 ml dawkowanie augmentin prednisone 20 mg informacion en espanol advantages of aspirin in pregnancy how much does albuterol syrup prescription cost neurontin available over counter qual e o generico de atrovent ketoconazole shampoo price in pakistan mobile medication costs aciphex generic viagra pills from india prednisolone 5 mg jenapharm methanabol furosemide farmaco generico power antivert 25 mg otc houston cialis discount statistics usage how much does oxytrol otc cost cipro 3 times a day in spanish real viagra australia memory effect in a lithium ion battery nature materials loreal youth code pre essence ingredients in aleve erythromycin dose in poultry bijsluiter metoclopramide 10 mg accord can flagyl cause cancer in dogs cost 30 pills supply at cvs viagra ciprofloxacin in sinusitis review cymbalta nebulae discovered buy viagra uk review best trait based generics for viagra alli weight loss reviews yahoo answers escitalopram oxalate 20 mg tablet image zyban 150 mg 60 tablet kullanimi galvus 50 mg 28 comprimidos viagra danazol capsules ip 100 mg corey nahman effexor price is toprol xl safe to take during pregnancy doxazosin dosage uk ranitidine tabletten 75 mg cialis 30 day 5mg tablet avarge cost cartia mallan earrings wholesale bad estradiol levels in female anti inflammatory drugs corticosteroids prednisone cost of viagra private prescription prevacid 15 mg solutab infants with colds voltaren 50 mg tabs is zantac safe after expiration buy colchicine tablets online rabbi david fohrman purim costumes erase tretinoin uk derma erase aripiprazole hereisthebestin online acyclovir order online diclofenac genericon 1 gel artemidos revista de indias papers silvia finocchio online prescriptions for cipro 20 celexa mg aleve toxicity in dogs salep acyclovir untuk obat apa lipitor 40 mg atorvastatin side what is gabapentin 800 mg for safe take fish oil zoloft withdrawal sucralfate over the counter uk ciproflox 500 mg capsulas para que sirve cialis price shoppers drugmart is 150 mg trazodone safe beloc zok 25 mg tablet generika für levitra orlistat hexal kaufen wohnung atenolol 100 mg od pravastatin in elderly individuals pantoprazole sandoz prix 15 mg of remeron sedative buy viagra in person in la where i can purchase viagra in hyderabad address nortriptyline for smoking cessation a review 15 mg buspirone indomethacin headache uk map generic version of cymbalta radical in aspirin will buspar show up in a drug screen joseph c allegra papers guy f allen 1971 in j chem phys allegra for kids over the counter progesterone in pregnant mare 20 mg fluoxetine every other day lasix tablet india cough syrup with promethazine and codeine uk doxycycline howdotofound cost how many mg of accutane should i take a day buy cialis in florida benzoyl peroxide brands australia post buy generic nexium 20 mg online singulair medication not kept in kitchen tammurriata alli uno traduttore online prednisone in dogs with ibd acyclovir for shingles 800 mg luvox for depression reviews of bio is celebrex safer than motrin cheese in the trap ep 5 dramamine ingredients what if i take 1200 mg of ibuprofen auroxime 500 mg metformin cialis can you take two in one day simvastatin buying average weight loss per week xenical price 4 oxo isotretinoin cost latest articlescounterfeit viagra tamsulosin hcl 0.4 mg tab precio xenical en walmart how does paroxetine work in the brain where can i get misoprostol in mumbai indian river medical center coumadin clinic what is the generic for flovent hfa cheap clomid 100mg below 40 lutenyl 5 mg obat apa dexamethasone can cut lisinopril 20 mg half buy brand propecia online provera 10 mg genericode liquid arimidex price asacol generic form of zyrtec brand cialis costs thailand manera correcta de usar sildenafilo 100mg viagra shipped overnight usa buy orlistat from sigma keppra cost walmart cialis rite aid price salep ketoconazole adalah dan methocarbamol hereisthebestin overnight use of omeprazole capsules i p 20 mgh viagra cialis levitra kamagra lowest generic there generic for flovent singulair 5 mg ulotka topamax price in egypt cost of lisinopril 2.5 mg vyvanse dosage 90 mg nifedipine 40 mg lexapro per day pletal 100 mg prezzo restaurant generic synthroid itching drug bank of lansoprazole zithromax bertibarots canada ciprofloxacin 250 mg used for levitra generic difference reglan 5 mg iv buy lasix cvs inderal generic name levofloxacin 500 mg tabletta renova cream europe citalopram 40 mg vs lexapro for anxiety wellbutrin safe take while nursing can you take synthroid in the evening radio commercial for generic viagra terbinafine cream in infants aciclovir unguento costo natural progesterone cream uk side effects ingredients in venlafaxine er augmentin in pregnancy how safe rekawan 600 mg beipackzettel citalopram viagra price shopper taking two zyrtec in one day buy .5 tablets finasteride canadian micardis plus 80 mg 12 5mg vicodin alfajores cachafaz donde comprar viagra zofran in pregnancy fda warning de grisogono allegra prix carburant captopril safe in pregnancy finasteride online buy generic names viagra can i get cyproheptadine over the counter xenical testimonials in south africa nifedipine liquid filled capsules vs tablets pro action acai berry reviews atenolol side effects nhs discounts metronidazole 250 mg tabletten metformin use in europe for weight loss tricor 145 mg ndc number cilostazol presentacion vademecum online is it safe to give your dog benadryl for allergies levetiracetam 500 mg precio generic alternative to estrace cream do i need prescription for cialis in uk difference in cymbalta and lyrica ic pravastatin sodium 20 mg tapout ery max 250 mg erythromycin bivirkninger prednisolone can ciprotab be use in early pregnancy azithromycin dose liquid where can i buy acai berry and colon cleanse metoprolol 25 mg daily losartan 50 mg price philippines gold tranexamic acid tablets ingredients in meth leflunomide in sle viagra cialis or levitra costs buy cytotec misoprostol online asacol enema pregnancy safe amiodarone in hepatic failure tetra pond sticks ingredients in aleve allegra in india antiviral eye drops over the counter uk viagra is metronidazole safe to take in pregnancy omeprazole market price in hong kong canadian pharmacy sumatriptan side effects of alavert d 12 prices prevacid low cost levitra generika rezeptfrei deutschland karte propranolol availability in pakistan ibuprofen safe pregnant women how many sigma and pi bonds in c9h8o4 aspirin best food to take with doxycycline usa pharmacy cialis over the counter equivalent to diamox 250 cephalexin para se usa azithromycin 1g take in chlamydia infection prednisone 20 mg 3 times a day workout hydrea 500 mg nebenwirkungen blutdrucksenker how much does clomid cost at dis chem south africa order cytotec online in philippines bromuro de pinaverio dimeticona generico do viagra diamox 250 mg effetti collaterali zoloft and hearing buzzing sound in head tell if my propecia real rosuvastatin blood in urine losartan stada 100 mg how to ask viagra in medical store have propecia in walmart montreal bisoprolol 5 mg kaufen how much should i pay for tadalafil in phuket cymbalta 60 mg teilen purchase viagra howdotofound do they have lexapro in ireland galvus met 50 850 generico do viagra are losartan and benicar in the same class andanet generics for viagra price cialis 875 mg amoxicillin syphilis prozac dosage borderline personality disorder how many mg of zofran for pregnancy xarelto and lisinopril 10 mg ventolin inhaler safe pregnant comprar viagra generico foroxity cardizem cd 180 mg price pyridium pediatric dosing epocrates online safe to take diflucan while pregnant amoxicillin 500 mg para que se recomienda trazodone eating disorders costa allegra singapore to hong kong diflucan 150 mg tablet ibuprofen 200 mg tabletas efervescentes coumadin quando si usa levitra paid th paypal remeron 15 mg half life allegra restaurant in glendale primosiston existe generico do viagra enfolast generic cialis amaryl 1 mg 30 tablet android spironolactone 100mg price buy pravachol d 300 ml is how many cups 120 mg accutane not working atorvastatin prices canada topamax 400 mg for rsd nombre comercial y generico ciprofloxacina azithromycin pregnancy safety classification is allegra safe for pregnancy effects of prednisone in the elderly is cialas cheaper than viagra ventolin knee brace reviews cost of a bottle of viagra judas purim costumes viagra avalaibe in karachi pharmacy loratadine 10 mg vs claritin d buy metronidazole stores dexamethasone 20 mg side effects zyrtec 10 mg image omeprazole no generico sildenafil 75 mg sandoz onguent fucidin ointment where to buy treating mast cell tumors in dogs with prednisone iv furosemide in heart failure enalapril discount best moisturizer to use with clindamycin risnia 2 mg side effects cymbalta 60 mg medication 2 5 mg of prednisone is 0 83 warfarin dosing in chart is ibuprofen legal in japan benadryl high mg ran rosuvastatin 10 mg tablet cardura 4 mg prezzo vouchers clarithromycin 1a pharma 250 mg alkoholismus there a generic equivalent diovan allopurinol nombre commercial y generico lighting gabapentin cause ringing in the ears topamax for bipolar uk top depakote 250 mg delayed release probiotic supplements will propecia be generic and go down in price kemanat ketorolac 20 mg es sublingual melatonin buy cheap viagra pills online sildenafil tablets from india thuoc glucovance 500 mg 2 5mg methadone valacyclovir hcl 500 mg tablet buspar 10 mg only at bedtime ventolin medsafe datasheet spasmend ingredients in benadryl what is new generic for lexapro effexor safety breastfeeding keflex pre?o generico lexapro 20 mg serial diferencia entre cialis original y generico diovan cutting in half etodolac 400 mg weight gain ketoconazole soap online coupons p3125 25 mg zoloft para que sirve amitriptyline 10 mg is generic synthroid the same warfarin in ischemic stroke clozapine brand name in pakistan best pseudoephedrine 30 mg dosing for benadryl comprar viagra en madrid ciudad de futbol determination of gabapentin in human plasma metformin ukpds study ppt 60 mg cymbalta prices zyvoxam 600 mg tabletas electronicas cost effectiveness of clopidogrel canada drugs online domperidone maleate bhavyas tulasi vanam reviews can amoxicillin be bought over the counter in australia can you buy amoxicillin anywhere on internet lamisil cream generic brand is there a generic available for actonel ivermectina pode ser usado caes walmart pharmacy price trazodone simvastatin 40 mg costco ibuprofen in der 3. schwangerschaftswoche side effects of celexa reviews depression cual es el nombre generico del metoprolol protonix 40 mg granules buyer tretinoin gel usp 0 025 reviews for shirlala purim costumes antihistaminique diphenhydramine 25 mg plavix stays in system amantadine 100 mg image active drug in singulair zc 01 promethazine 12 5 mg lexapro dutasteride buy online uk evista side effects in elderly levothyroxine price philippines clomid 50 mg kullanimi will 5 mg cialis work cardizem 180 mg cdti rp1315bnp 220 mg naproxen sodium candesartan 8 mg zentiva stock how much is generic lamictal without insurance terbinafine 250 mg how effective is it easy purim costumes for adults does 25 mg seroquel cause weight gain eltroxin aspen inactive ingredients in lisinopril buying spironolactone uk vytorin generico do viagra cost of casodex versus abiraterone buy ibuprofen 600 mg depakote liquid strength sinemet 25100 mg dosage how to use zantac 75 mg zyrtec safe for infants ibuprofen infant dosage uk voltaren in sarcina buy zovirax acyclovir cream uk chloroquine tratamiento arthritis reumatoide causas colcrys 0 6 mg how it works my liquid clomiphene is yellow when did mevacor go generic simvastatin 40 mg nhs flonase backorder order clomid now safety data sheet finasteride amoxicillin 500 mg dosage for dental work singulair montelukast granulado 4 mg msd su costo do benadryl liquid gels make you drowsy diovan and ringing in the ears buy albuterol inhaler canada buy cialis austria generic benadryl at walgreens generic astelin nasal spray 40 mg cialis forum panes rellenos ingredients in benadryl como usar o remedio cytotec para aborto stromectol prix pharmacie flomax drug review can ranitidine 150 mg be crushed disulfiram in cottonseed oil at new jersey usa how many grains in aspirin lactulose liquid laxative magnesium long has aggrenox been market carafate use in dogs tadaga cialis online what is the best viagra to take lamivudine in pregnancy back pain specialists in jackson tn mirtazapine 45 mg erfahrung lesara acyclovir hereisthebestin for sale suprax dt 400 for sale para se usa indomethacin when is orlistat back in stock update aug can i buy clomid tablets over the counter citalopram hbr tablets 40 mg vyvanse cialis online low italy pagebasetype generic cymbalta acai berry 14 day easy cleanse costco micardis plus 80 mg cenar cialis pricecvs doxepin tablets uk dulcolax tablets in boots diamox in acidosis pegicol ingredients in aleve generic zyban tqeovertoz nortriptyline used for sleep disorders battery distributor lithium wholesale gabapentin 300 mg rls is clindamycin safe if allergic to erythromycin buy celexa medication care programmes br cialis capsules online in australia can i buy viagra from out of country is it safe to take metformin with garcinia cambogia buy 5 mg prednisone for dogs without prescription generic viagra indian pharmacy reviews zelax escitalopram generic ai fost prima mea iubire generic cymbalta lipitor 40mg generico obat ranitidine 150 mg tablet ciloxan eye drops generic nebenwirkungen risperdal 0 5 mg how much is propecia in english pounds donepezil side effects in pacemaker patient what is generic for tamsulosin


The following is a list of my Top Ten Scripture passages which Protestants cannot adequately explain without embracing the teachings of the Catholic Church. This list could be extended to a Top 20, a Top 50, or a Top 100, but this list of 10 covers a lot of territory and can be easily comprehended before more extensive apologetics are entertained. The Top 10 list also provides an excellent introduction to Catholic teaching before the reader attempts to consume the more than 2,000 Scripture passages and analyses on this website.

Catholics should become well-versed in these passages so they are able to effectively witness to the truth of the Church. Protestants need to take these verses to heart as they challenge their own beliefs and investigate Catholic teaching. But both should remember that Catholic apologetics is not about being right or wrong. It is about sharing the fullness of the truth that Jesus Christ gave us through His Holy Catholic Church. I also believe that an analysis of these and the other verses on demonstrate that the Catholic understanding of Scripture is almost always based on the plain meaning of the words used by the writer, the most reasonable of the various interpretations available, and the position that gives Jesus the most glory by demonstrating His infinite love and mercy for us.



  1. Matthew 16:18-19 / Isaiah 22:22 (Authority)
  2. 1 Timothy 3:15 (Authority)
  3. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 (Tradition)
  4. 1 Peter 3:21 (Baptism)
  5. John 20:23 (Confession)
  6. John 6:53-58, 66-67 (Eucharist)
  7. 1 Corinthians 11:27 (Eucharist)
  8. James 5:14-15 (Anointing)
  9. Colossians 1:24 (Suffering)
  10. James 2:24 (Works)

Back · Home · Next



I. Matthew 16:18-19 / Isaiah 22:22

"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

"And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David; he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open."

Most Protestants believe that "church" refers to the mass of Christian believers throughout the world, loosely connected to each other by their faith in the Bible alone. But these verses demonstrate that the "Church" Jesus Christ founded is not an invisible body of loosely-connected believers, but a visible and hierarchical institution built upon the person of Peter, who was given supreme authority, an office for dynastic succession, and the gift of infallibility. This Church can only be the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

In these verses, we see the following. First, Jesus builds His Church (“ecclesia”) upon the person of Peter. As we learned in the previous link on The Church, Jesus changes Simon's name to "Kepha," and says that on this "Kepha" He will build the Church. Kepha, in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke), means a massive rock formation, and Jesus' use of Kepha to rename Peter signifies Peter's foundational leadership in the Church. (See also Mark 3:16 and John 1:42 where Jesus renames Simon "Cephas" which is a transliteration of the Aramaic "Kepha."). Only the Catholic Church recognizes and proves through an unbroken lineage of successors that her foundation is Peter.

Secondly, Jesus says the powers of death will never prevail against the Church. So even though Jesus appoints sinful human beings such as Peter to lead the Church, Jesus promises that hell will not prevail against her. Because the powers of hell refer to the supernatural, this must mean that the Church, although lead by sinful people, is divinely protected. Because she is so protected, the Church cannot lead the faithful into supernatural error. That is, she is unable to teach error on matters of faith and morals. This inability to teach error on faith and morals is called "infallibility" (it has nothing to do with the sinfulness of the Church's leaders, which deals with "impeccability"). If the Church were not infallible, the powers of death would indeed prevail over her sinful members. The consistent, 2,000 years of the Church’s teaching on faith and morals proves that Jesus has kept His promise.

Third, Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. While many Protestants think that the gift of the "keys" means that Jesus appointed Peter as the guardian of the gates of heaven, the "keys" actually refer to Peter's authority over the earthly Church (which Jesus often described as the "kingdom of heaven." Matthew 13:24-52; 25:1-2; Mark 4:26-32; Luke 9:27; 13:19-20, etc.) In the Old Davidic kingdom, the king had a prime minister on whose shoulder God placed the keys of the kingdom (Isaiah 22:22). Similarly, the new kingdom of Christ also has a prime minister (Peter and his successors) who is given the keys of the kingdom. The keys not only represent the authority the prime minister has to rule over God's people in the king's absence, but also the means of effecting dynastic succession to the prime minister's office (for example, in Isaiah 22:20-22, Eliakim replaces Shebna as prime minister in the Old Davidic kingdom). Only the Catholic Church claims and proves a succession of prime ministers (popes) all the way back to Peter, and this succession is facilitated by the passing of the keys of the kingdom.

Finally, Jesus declares to Peter that whatever he binds and looses on earth will be bound and loosed in heaven. As in the Old Davidic kingdom, whenever Peter the prime minister opens, no one shall shut, and whenever he shuts, no one shall open. Jesus, therefore, gives Peter the authority to make decisions that will be ratified in eternity. In order for sinful Peter (and his successors through the passing on of the "keys") to make such decisions, he must be divinely protected. Once again, this evidences Jesus' gift of infallibility to the Church. Only the Catholic Church claims and has proven that her 2,000 year-old teachings on faith and morals, which have never changed, are infallibly proclaimed. 



II. 1 Timothy 3:15

"If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth."

Most Protestants believe that the Bible is the pillar and foundation of the truth, and no knowledge outside of the Bible is necessary for our salvation. But then why does Saint Paul write that the Church, and not the Bible, is the pillar and foundation of the truth? This is a powerful text that refutes the Protestant theory of sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) which erroneously holds that the Bible is the sole source of Christian truth (a theory which cannot be found anywhere in the Scriptures). Instead, Saint Paul says the Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

This means that all the truth Jesus left us concerning faith, morality and our salvation flows from a living Church which, as we have learned, is built by Christ upon the rock of Peter and his successors. As the Catholic Church teaches, God has given us His truth in the form of the living word (written Scriptures and oral tradition) and the living teaching authority of the Church, endowed with the gift of binding and loosing. In fact, it is because the Church is the foundation of truth that we believe in the Bible. This is because the Catholic Church put the Bible together by determining which books were inspired and which books were not. The Church completed its selection of the "canon of Scripture" at the end of the fourth century. If the Catholic Church were not the pinnacle and bulwark of the truth, our belief in the Bible would be without foundation.

The Church's compilation of the Bible illuminates the error of sola Scriptura. As alluded to above, Protestants generally believe that God has revealed everything that is necessary for our salvation through the Bible alone. Consequently, they also believe that no knowledge found outside of the Bible regarding the Christian faith is necessary for our salvation. However, the knowledge of which Scriptures belong in the Bible and which Scriptures do not is necessary for our salvation because if we didn't know this we could be led into error. Further, this knowledge could only come from God because human beings cannot necessarily discern divine inspiration.

The problem, therefore, with sola Scriptura, is that the knowledge of which Scriptures are inspired and which ones are not is not contained in the Bible. The Bible does not have an "inspired table of contents." Instead, this knowledge of the canon of Scripture is a revelation from God that is necessary for our salvation, and yet came to us from outside the Bible . This revelation was given to the Holy Catholic Church, and this historical and theological fact destroys the doctrine of sola Scriptura (interestingly, while Protestants reject the authority of the Catholic Church on most matters, they accept her authority in determining the New Testament canon of Scripture; we pejoratively call such picking and choosing which doctrines to believe and which doctrines to reject "Cafeteria Catholicism").

If I were a Protestant trying to prove sola Scriptura, and there was a verse that said "the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of the truth," I would be proclaiming that verse from the roof tops. At the same time, if I were a Protestant, I would have to ignore 1 Timothy 3:15 to continue my protest of the Catholic faith.





III. 2 Thessalonians 2:15

"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter."

As we have discussed, Protestants believe that Christians are to follow the Scriptures alone as their sole source of Christian truth (sola Scriptura). But then why does Saint Paul tell us to follow both the Scriptures and the oral word? Isn't Paul adding something else to follow in addition to the Bible? Yes he is, because the doctrine of sola Scriptura is an erroneous doctrine.

Saint Paul is saying that obeying the written tradition (the Scriptures) is not enough. We must also obey the oral tradition. This is the body of teaching that Christ gave the apostles that was not written down (if it were, Saint John says that "even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written." John 21:25). In other words, it's everything else the Church teaches on faith and morals. We can be thankful for the oral apostolic traditions which have definitively taught us about the Blessed Trinity, the two natures of Christ (human and divine), the union of those natures (hypostatic union), the Filioque (the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), and the canon of Scripture (what books belong in the Bible and what books do not). All of these teachings, and many, many more, are not explicitly taught in the Bible, yet are generally believed by all Christians. To learn more about the oral apostolic tradition, buy a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Because 2 Thessalonians 2:15 is so troubling to the sola Scriptura position, Protestants often argue that the oral tradition Paul is referring to had to come from the mouths of the apostles. Their argument further goes that, since all the apostles are deceased, we no longer have to follow oral tradition. This argument, however, cannot be proven from Scripture (which should be possible if sola Scriptura were true) and, in fact, is contrary to Scripture. See for example, 2 Timothy 2:2 where Paul (1st generation) instructs Timothy (2nd generation) to teach others the faith (3rd generation) who will be able to teach others also (4th generation). Such an argument is also inconsistent with the very meaning of tradition (in Greek, "paradosis") which means "to hand on" from one generation to the next.

Moreover, the Protestant argument is also refuted by the way in which the Church selected the Bible canon. While the last apostle John died around 100 A.D., the Bible was not finally compiled until 397 A.D. The Church was thus required to rely upon the oral apostolic tradition during this 300 year period in order to determine which letters were inspired and which letters were not. The tradition they depended on, of course, did not come from the mouths of the apostles (they were deceased), but from their successors. (There is also no reason to conclude that the Church should listen to the fourth, fifth or sixth generation of apostolic successors, but not to later successors such as those of our day).

We should also note that the apostolic traditions Paul is commanding us to follow in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 are not the same as the Pharisaical traditions that Jesus condemned in Matthew 15:3 and Mark 7:9. The traditions Jesus condemned dealt with the Old Testament ceremonial rituals and other acts that contravened the New Testament Gospel. So there are certain human traditions that, if contrary to the Gospel, we must reject, and oral apostolic tradition, as Paul commands, which we must accept.

The only other argument the Protestant can make is that, once the Bible was compiled, all oral apostolic tradition was committed to the Scriptures. As a result, the requirement to follow oral tradition ceased. But this they cannot prove from the Bible. There is nothing in the Scriptures that commands us to follow oral tradition until the Bible is compiled, and then to follow the Bible alone (the word "Bible" is not even in the Bible). In fact, Jesus never even commanded any of His apostles to write anything down. They were only charged to "preach the Gospel to all creation." Matthew 28:19. Because the Scriptures are the living word of God which is the same yesterday, today and forever (cf. Hebrews 13:10), and there is no verse in Scripture that repudiates Paul's instruction in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, we must also obey the oral tradition of the Church as Paul commanded, or we are not being faithful to the Scriptures.




IV. 1 Peter 3:21

"Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ"

Most Protestant churches teach that baptism is just symbolic and does not actually save us. Why, then, does Peter say that baptism does indeed save us? Because baptism, contrary to Protestant teaching, is salvific (effecting salvation). Through the merits of Christ's resurrection, baptism, the sacrament of Christian initiation instituted by Christ, washes us clean of original sin, makes us adopted sons and daughters of God, and brings us to salvation.

Unlike Protestant teaching, baptism is not just a symbolic act of pouring, sprinkling or immersing one in water (otherwise Peter would not have said that it saves us). It is not just an appeal to God through a symbolic gesture. This is why Peter says it is "not as a removal of dirt from the body." Most scholars say that Peter was referring to circumcision (the ritual of initiation in the Old Covenant) when he writes about the “removal of dirt from the body.” Circumcision was a symbolic gesture before God that could never save us. But, at a minimum, Peter is teaching that baptism does not deal with the exterior, but the interior life of the person.

Thus, Peter teaches that baptism saves us “for a clear conscience.” This deals with the interior life. Similarly, the author of Heb. 10:22, in regard to being washed with the pure water (of baptism), says we are sprinkled “clean from an evil conscience.” Baptism removes original sin which darkens our consciences. It purifies the interior life of the person. Baptism is not just an external, symbolic, ceremonial gesture (otherwise, the sacred writers would not write about the purification of the conscience, where sin is born).

Thus, through the resurrection of Christ, baptism now actually saves our spiritual lives, just as Noah's ark (which Peter says baptism "corresponds to") saved his family's natural lives. In baptism, we are washed clean of original sin and become adopted sons and daughters of the Father. This is why Paul writes to Titus, in reference to baptism, that “He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ, so that we might be justified by His grace and become heirs of eternal life.” Titus 3:5-7. Paul echoes Peter’s teaching that baptism saves us by regenerating our interior lives, namely, our souls, which are now endowed with God’s divine and sanctifying grace. We thus become children of God and heirs of the kingdom.

Only the Catholic Church teaches that baptism, by virtue of the merits of Christ and their application to us, is salvific. The Protestant churches, contrary to 1 Peter 3:21 (and Titus 3:5-7; John 3:5; and Heb. 10:22) teach that baptism is only symbolic. For more on the striking parallels of these Scripture verses, please visit my link on Baptism.





V. John 20:22-23

"And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.'"

Protestants believe that Christians should confess their sins privately to God, and not to a priest. Why, then, does Jesus give the apostles the authority to forgive and retain sins? Because, unlike the Protestant belief, Jesus believed that Christians could best grow in holiness by confessing their sins to His priests and receiving absolution in the sacrament of confession. Confession is thus the normative way in which God forgives us our sins.

This passage is very powerful and troubling to the Protestant position. First, we see that Jesus breathes on His apostles in the upper room. The only other time God breathed on man was when He created him and breathed life into his body. Genesis 2:7. When God breathes on man, a transformation takes place. Here, the apostles were transformed into "other Christs," filled with the Holy Spirit and endowed with Jesus' divine authority to forgive sins. Thus, Matthew writes that God gave the authority to forgive sins “to men.” Matt. 9:8. We also note that Jesus makes no distinction between very serious sin (called "mortal sin") and lesser sins (called "venial sin"). See 1 John 5:16-17. By virtue of God's mercy, the apostles are able to forgive all sins.

We also note that the apostles were not only given the authority to forgive sin, but to retain sin as well. What does this mean? This means that the apostles were given the gift of rendering judgment on the sincerity of the penitent, and binding the penitent to works of penance in order for him to be forgiven of his sin. If, in the apostles' judgment, the penitent was not sincere, or should be required to perform acts of penance in reparation for his sins, the apostles could retain the sin (withhold forgiveness) until their conditions were satisfied. While such authority is reserved to God alone, Christ shared this authority with the apostles.

The power to retain sin is extremely important because it gives priests the authority, not only to forgive sin, but to remove the temporal punishments due to sin (the Church calls the removal of temporal punishments due to sin already forgiven an "indulgence"). Certainly, if a priest can forgive a mortal sin (which, if unforgiven, would have sent the person to hell), the priest can certainly remove the temporal punishments due to venial sin. This is part of the priests' binding authority (retaining sin and imposing penance) and loosing authority (forgiving sin and removing punishment due to sin).

Of course, Jesus' gift of authority described in John 20:22-23 only makes sense if the penitent orally confesses the sins to the apostles. The apostles were not given the gift of mind reading, and, even if they were, forgiveness of sin would still depend on the sinner's desire to be forgiven (the sinner would express that desire by confessing his sins to the priest). If oral confession were not required, the way that Jesus granted the gift to the apostles would not make any sense.

Finally, for the small group of Protestants who do acknowledge that the apostles had the authority to forgive and retain sins, they can only disregard John 20:22-23 by arguing that this authority terminated at their death. The problem with their argument is that it cannot be proven from Scripture (there is no place in Scripture that teaches the apostles' binding and loosing authority terminated at death). Neither can the argument be proven from any historical record (the Church has been confecting the sacrament of confession for many centuries).

Moreover, these Protestants fail to provide an adequate explanation of why Jesus would grant such an incredible gift to the apostolic age, and then remove the gift from future generations. The answer, of course, is that He didn't remove it. The gift was preserved through priestly succession by the sacrament of ordination as Christ intended, which the Scriptures often refer to as "the laying on of hands." Acts 1:20; 6:6; 13:3; 8:18; 9:17; 1 Timothy 4:14; 5:22; 2 Timothy 1:6.




VI. John 6:53-58, 66-67

"So Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.' After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, 'Will you also go away?'"

Most Protestants believe that the bread and wine offered by the Catholic priest in the Holy Mass are only symbols of Christ's body and blood. They do not believe that Christians have to actually eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ to have eternal life. They do not believe that Christ's flesh is actual food, and His blood actual drink. Why, then, does Jesus repeatedly say in these verses that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood or we have no life in us? Why does Christ say that His flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed, if His flesh and blood really aren't food and drink indeed? This teaching of Jesus on the Eucharist is the most profound in all of Scripture, and these verses are very problematic to the Protestant contention that the bread and wine of the Mass are just symbols.

When John 6 is prayerfully read, we see how Jesus gradually teaches the faithful about the life-giving bread from heaven that He will give to the world (through the multiplication of the loaves, the reference to the raining manna given to the Israelites, and finally to the bread that Jesus will give which is His flesh). When the Jews question Jesus about how he could possibly give them His flesh to eat, Jesus becomes more literal in His explanation. As we learned in the link on The Eucharist, Jesus says several times that we must eat (in Greek, "phago") His flesh to gain eternal life (which literally means "to chew").

When the Jews further question the strangeness of His teaching, Jesus uses an even more literal verb (in Greek, "trogo") to describe how we must eat His flesh to have eternal life (which literally means "to gnaw or crunch"). The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (Matt. 24:38; John 13:18) and it is always used literally (physically eating). Protestants are unable to provide a single example of where "trogo" is ever used in a symbolic sense. To drive His point home, Jesus says that His flesh is real food indeed, and His blood is real drink indeed (Jesus says nothing about the bread being a symbol of His body and blood).

What is perhaps most compelling about the foregoing passages is what happens at the end of Jesus' discourse. We know that the Jews understood Jesus as speaking literally. This is demonstrated by their question, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?" They could not conceive of why consuming Jesus' flesh was life-giving and how they could possibly do such a thing. We also know that Jesus responds to their question by being even more literal about eating His flesh and drinking His blood. But we learn at the end of Jesus' discourse that many of His followers, because of the difficulty of His teaching, decided to no longer follow Him - and Jesus let them go. Then He turned to His apostles and asked them, "Will you also go away?"

Would Jesus, the Incarnate Word of God who became man to save humanity, allow his followers to leave Him if they misunderstood His teaching? Of course not, especially when the teaching regarded how they were to obtain eternal life which was at the heart of Jesus' mission. Jesus always explained the meaning of His teachings to His disciples. Mark 4:34. Jesus did not say, "Hey, guys, come back here, you got it all wrong." He didn't do this because they did not have it all wrong. They understood correctly - we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life within us. The Protestant who contends that the Catholic offering of bread and wine in the Mass is just a symbol (and does not miraculously become the body and blood of Christ through the actions of the priest acting "in persona Christi") must address John 6:53-58, 66-67 - why Jesus used the words He did, and why Jesus allowed His followers to leave Him if they understood Him correctly (which is the only time in Scripture where Christ allows His disciples to leave Him based upon a doctrinal teaching).

When we meditate upon this mystery with an open mind and heart, we come to believe and know that the Eucharist is the way the Father gives us His Son in the eternal covenant of love by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Eucharist is an extension of the Incarnation. If we can believe in the Incarnation (that God become a little baby), than believing that God makes Himself substantially present under the appearance of bread and wine is easy. The Church has thus taught for 2,000 years that the Eucharist is the source and summit of the Christian faith - the consummation of the sacrificed Paschal lamb, by which we are restored to God and share in His divine life. Thus, Saint Paul says, "our Paschal lamb has been sacrificed; therefore, let us celebrate the feast." 1 Corinthians 5:7-8.




VII. 1 Corinthians 11:27

"Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."

Although Protestant churches teach that the Eucharist is just a symbol of Christ's body and blood, Paul in this verse sets forth the Catholic teaching that Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Eucharist. Paul confirms what Jesus taught in John's Gospel, chapter 6. If we partake of the Eucharist unworthily, we are guilty of the unthinkable crime of profaning Christ's body and blood (literally, murdering Christ). This very solemn and powerful teaching drives home the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist and leaves little, if any, room for doubt about the Real Presence.

An illustration of the application of this verse may be helpful. Some time ago, I was debating a Protestant gentleman at work about the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I explained to him that in all three synoptic Gospel accounts of the Last Supper, as well as in Saint Paul's teaching which he received directly from Christ, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and said, "This is my body." In the same manner, he took wine, gave thanks, and said, "This is my blood." Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; and 1 Corinthians 11:21-25. I emphasized that Jesus did not say "This represents my body and blood," or "This is a symbol of my body and blood" (even though there were many verbs in Aramaic for “represent”). I further explained to him that God does not, and cannot, declare something to be without making it so, and challenged him to find a Scripture verse to prove me wrong. He could not.

Instead, the Protestant took down a picture of his wife which he had pinned up in his cubicle, gave me the picture, and said, "This is my wife." Then he asked me, "But it is not really her, is it?" He thought he had me cold.

I first congratulated him on having such a beautiful spouse. I then pretended to rip up the picture and, after it fell to the ground, pretended to stomp all over it. I made a bit of a scene. He looked at me with an expression of surprise and confusion. I then asked him, "Am I now guilty of profaning your wife's body and blood?"

After quite a pause, he responded, "No." I asked him, "Why not?" His mind was obviously reeling, but I don't think he knew where I was going. I jumped in to help him by saying, "I'll tell you why, and it's the point you just made. Because the picture of your wife is just a symbol of her, and not actually her." At this point, he agreed, but was still confused. I then added, "Being guilty of profaning your wife's body and blood by ripping up a picture of her would be an absolute outrage, because you can't profane a symbol, right?" He agreed.

I then drove my point home by leaning in close to him and slowly asking, "Then why does Saint Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:27 declare us to be guilty of profaning Christ's body and blood if we receive the Eucharist unworthily? That would be an absolutely unjust penalty if the Eucharist were just a symbol, wouldn't it?" After another long pause it was obvious that my Protestant brother was at a loss for words. All he could do was ask me to give back to him his wife's picture and promised me he would read the verse in its proper context and get back to me. He never did.



Anointing of the Sick

VIII. James 5:14-15

"Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven."

While Protestants usually have some type of rebuttal for most Scriptures that support Catholic teaching (which can always be disproved), they generally have little to say about James 5:14-15. Most Protestants tuck this verse away, never to deal with it again. This is because there is no place to put it in their Protestant theology. It doesn't fit anywhere.

The passage sets forth the Catholic sacrament of the anointing of the sick (which used to be called "Extreme Unction.") This sacrament, which is one of seven sacraments Jesus instituted for His Church, is given to people who are in danger of death, suffering with grave illness, or facing serious medical procedures.

The verse demonstrates several things the Church has taught for 2,000 years. First, in order to confect the sacrament, one must call for the elders or priests of the Church. This requires men specially ordained to do the job, and gets into what we mean by Church (don't forget about Peter, the keys, dynastic succession, priestly ordination, the power to bind and loose, and the pinnacle and bulwark of the truth). Secondly, James says the priests' prayer of faith will save the sick man and the Lord will raise him up. This demonstrates that the Church's priests act in the person of Christ ("in persona Christi") in furthering Christ's work of salvation. Yes, Jesus is our only Savior, but He desires us to participate in His eternal priesthood, and He calls certain men to participate in a very intimate way by effecting salvation (through the ministerial priesthood described here). So the priests, through the power of Christ, save the sick man's soul.

Finally, by virtue of the actions and prayers of the priests, the sick man's sins are forgiven (this is what actually saves the man's soul). Protestants have great difficulty with this verse particularly because it demonstrates that priests have the power and authority to forgive sins (which was given to men by Christ; see also Matthew 9:8). Unlike what the Bible provides, no where in its theology or practice does Protestantism provide for priestly forgiveness of sins or the sacrament of the sick.





IX. Colossians 1:24 

"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh and I complete what is lacking in Christ's affliction for the sake of his body, that is, the church"

Christians believe that Jesus' suffering and death were entirely sufficient to forgive all the sins of the world. Why, then, does Paul say that Christ's afflictions are lacking something? How can this possibly be? The question can only be answered by the 2,000 year-old Catholic understanding of how we as Christians participate in Christ's work of redemption and salvation.

Most Protestant churches leave you pretty unfulfilled when they teach about suffering. Because in Protestantism all you generally need to do is accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior to be saved and nothing more, suffering is simply viewed as something we must endure as part of the human condition, without any value or merit for ourselves or others. Because the Catholic Church believes that each of us, by virtue of our baptism, participates in Christ's eternal priesthood, she instead teaches that our prayers, works, and even suffering further Christ's work of redemption. This is the necessary effect of belonging to the communion of saints. This is also what Saint Paul is writing about in Colossians 1:24.

In the verse, Paul says he rejoices in his suffering for the sake of others. Knowing what we know about Paul, we can safely conclude that he would not rejoice in anything, much less write about it in a theological epistle, unless it brought about Christ's work of redemption. We also see that Paul's rejoicing is not for himself, but for the other members of the Church. So Paul's rejoicing about the value of his suffering in the work of redemption is based on his understanding that his suffering is helping others (it is not because he enjoys the pain of suffering). This becomes clearer as Paul explains his teaching in the context of the Mystical Body of Christ, for, only in this context can Paul's teaching make sense.

Paul explains that he completes what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. But Paul does not do this for the sake of Christ Himself, because Christ's afflictions were sufficient and perfectly efficacious for our redemption. Paul could add nothing to the power of Christ's sufferings. Instead, Paul explains that he does this for the sake of the Church (the Mystical Body) of which Christ is the head. Why? Because God wills us to participate in Christ's sufferings in order to further the work of His redemption. Thus, in the Church and for her benefit, Jesus Christ, in a very mysterious way, leaves room to allow our suffering to be united to His, to accomplish the will of the Father. It is by virtue of our baptism, in which we become sons in the Son and share in His priesthood, that our suffering can further Christ's redemptive work. This is lofty stuff, but it is as true as God's love for us, and it is precisely because of God's love for us.

How do we, like Saint Paul, complete what is lacking in Christ's sufferings for the sake of the Church? We offer up our suffering as a sacrifice of praise to God. Instead of just enduring the suffering, we literally will the suffering through prayer to bring about Christ's work of redemption. This is what the Church calls "redemptive suffering." This type of suffering is what Paul is rejoicing about, and this is why the way we handle suffering is so important. Such suffering can benefit not only those who suffer, but all the members of the body. The worst kind of suffering is wasted suffering. Only the Catholic Church, for 2,000 years, has both taught and lived Saint Paul's teachings on suffering.





X. James 2:24

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

In addition to their belief in the Bible alone ("sola Scriptura"), most Protestants believe that all one has to do is accept Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior in order to be justified by God (justification is the process by which man, moved by grace, turns toward God and away from sin, and accepts God’s forgiveness and righteousness). Thus, most Protestants believe that one is justified and saved by His faith in Christ alone (called "sola Fide" or Faith alone). But if this is true, then why does James say that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone?

James says this because we are justified, and ultimately saved, through both our faith and works, and not just faith alone. In fact, the only place in the Bible where the phrase "faith alone" appears is in James 2:24 where it says we are justified by works and NOT by faith alone. So the Bible never teaches anywhere that we are justified, saved, or anything else, by faith alone. While on its face the Catholic position seems obvious, the theology of faith and works in the matter of salvation is actually quite complicated, and has been one of the main sources of division between Catholicism and Protestantism. Hence, a couple of points should be made to address the controversy and clarify Catholic teaching.

First, Catholics ultimately believe that we are saved, not by faith or works, but by Jesus Christ and Him alone. Jesus Christ's death and Resurrection is the sole source of our justification (being in a right relationship with God) and salvation (sharing in God's divine life). But as a result of Christ's death and resurrection, we are now able to receive God's grace. Grace is God's own divine life which He infuses into our souls. It is what Adam initially lost for us, and Christ won back for us. This grace initially causes us to seek God and to believe in Him (the "faith" part). Non-Catholics generally stop here.

But God desires us to respond to His grace by putting our faith into action (the "works" part). This is why Jesus always taught about our salvation in the context of what we actually did during our earthly lives, and not how much faith we had ("whatever you did to the least of my brothers, you did to Me." Matthew 25:40,45). When Jesus teaches about His second coming where He will separate the sheep from the goats, He bases salvation and damnation upon what we actually did ("works"), whether righteous or evil. Matthew 25:31-46. In James 2:14-26, James is similarly instructing us to put our faith into action by performing good works, and not just giving an intellectual assent of faith. James says such "faith apart from works is dead." James 2:17,26.

So we must do more than accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. Even the demons believe Jesus is Savior, and yet "they tremble." James 2:19. We must also do good works. Faith is the beginning of a process that leads us toward justification, but faith alone never obtains the grace of justification. Faith and works acting together achieve our justification. Saint Paul says it best when he writes that we need "faith working in love." Galatians 5:6. We are not justified and saved by faith alone.

Secondly, it is important to distinguish between the "works" James taught about in James 2:24 and the "works of the law" Saint Paul taught about in Rom. 3:20,28; Gal. 2:16,21; 3:2,5,10; and Eph. 2:8-9. Protestants generally confuse James' "good works" from Paul's "works of the law" when they attempt to prove that "works" are irrelevant to justification and salvation. The "works of the law" Paul taught about in Ephesians 2:8-9 and elsewhere referred to the Mosaic law and their legal system that made God obligated to reward them for their works. They would thus “boast” about their works by attributing their works to themselves. Cf. Rom. 4:2; Eph. 2:9. Saint Paul taught that, with the coming of Christ, the Mosaic (moral, legal, and ceremonial) law which made God a debtor to us no longer justified a person. Instead, Paul taught that we are now justified and saved by grace (not legal obligation) through faith (not works of law). Eph. 2:5,8. Hence, we no longer “boast” by attributing our works to ourselves. We attribute them to God who gives everything to us freely by His grace.

Therefore, we are no longer required to fulfill the “works of law,” but to fulfill the “law of Christ” Gal. 6:2. This is why Paul writes that the “doers of the law (of Christ)” will be justified. Rom. 2:13. Of course, the “works of the law” Paul wrote about in Rom. 3:20,28; Gal. 2:16,21; 3:2,5,10 and Eph. 2:8-9 have nothing to do with the “good works” James is teaching in James 2:24 or the “law” Paul is teaching about in Rom. 2:13 (because they are part of the same Word of God which can never contradict itself).

In summary, based on the Scriptures, the Church has taught for 2,000 years that we are justified and saved by the grace and mercy of Christ through both faith and works, and not faith alone. We are no longer in a legal system of debt where God owes us (creditor/debtor). We are now in a system of grace where God rewards our works when done with faith in Christ (Father/child). This also means that we must continue to exercise our faith and works to the end of our lives in order to be saved. This is why Jesus told us to "endure to the end" to be saved. Matthew 10:22; 24:13; Mark 13:13. This is also why Saint Paul warned us that we could even lose our salvation if we did not persevere. cf. Romans 11:20-23; 1 Corinthians 9:27. This Catholic belief contradicts the novel Protestant notion of "once saved, always saved."  



Copyright 2001 - 2007 © by John Salza. All Rights Reserved.