Why We Resist The Doctrines Of The Church of Rome

Part 1 in a series of articles by A.G. Ashdown, from The Protestant Alliance
Reproduced by Manchester Orange Order under kind permission from The Protestant Alliance.

It is purposed in these articles to state briefly and clearly the reason why we dissent from the Roman Catholic Church. It was with this purpose in mind that the seventh Earl of Shaftesbury, Antony Ashley Cooper, founded the Protestant Alliance in 1845. The passing of the Catholic Relief Act in March 1829 had opened the flood gates of Roman Catholic propaganda and it was felt that it was necessary to reply to it. Over the years, the Protestant Alliance has published and sold literature with this object in view. Lectures and sermons have been preached and much work has been done to achieve this object. We now embark on a series of articles on various important doctrines of the Church of Rome that differ from the Biblical position of PROTESTANTISM.

AUTHORITY

THE RULE OF FAITH

One of the most important differences, from which in fact all the others proceed, is the way in which we define what is true in religion. For the Protestant the “Rule of Faith” is the Bible. This is stated in Isaiah 8:20 “…if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light on them.” It is only since nominal Protestants have departed from the authority of Scripture, that the Roman Church has allowed its people more freedom to read the Bible. In the present climate of thought, in which most large denominations of Proestants have adopted liberal theology, Romanism no longer fears the Bible. For them the “Rule of Faith” is the Church, see the St Peter Catechism. For the Romanist the bible is regarded as having been produced by the Church, therefore the Church is the greater authority. Further, the Church is regarded as a living thing and superior to any book or written document.

DID THE CHURCH PRODUCE THE BIBLE?

This whole idea rests, on a large extent, on how we define the Church. In the New Testament the Church is always seen as a body of believers, not a hierarchy. The Roman view is that the hierarchy is the Church, presided over by the Pope. The fable of Peter being the Bishop of Rome and the first Pope cannot be supported by Scripture or history. The idea that the Apostles formed a college of cardinals and Peter presided over it as Pope is sheer fantasy. It is true, however ,that the New Testament books have apostolic authority and were accepted by the Early Church as being the testimony of the Apostles of Christ. The claim to Apostleship was based by Paul on his having met with Christ on the Damascus road (1Corinthians 9:1). He had seen our Lord Jesus Christ. Each of the Apostles were witnesses of the resurrection of Christ, they saw Him after He was raised from the dead. In a court of law a witness never has a successor. The whole idea of Apostolic Succession is not Scriptural or reasonable. It is, however, the basis of Rome’s understanding of the Church. The Church did not produce the Bible. The larger part of the Bible, the Old Testament, was in existence before the Church. It had already been translated into Greek for Jews living in Alexandria who spoke Greek. The New Testament came into being as a result of the coming of Christ and the ministry of the Apostles. The Early Church merely added the Old Testament to this and thus produced the Bible. The Roman Church’s claim to be the Apostolic Church is spurious for the Bishops of Rome were not regarded as the Primate Bishops until well after the conversion of Constantine the Great in 312 A.D. They took precedence over other bishops because they were bishops of the Imperial City. The legends of Peter being in Rome are not substantiated in history and the whole fabric of the Roman Church authority rests on this unsound foundation. The argument that the Church is a living thing and therefore capable of change was used by Cardinal J.H. Newman to support his belief in Papal infallibility. He had maintained that the Roman Church never changes. He then had to excuse the change made in 1870 by the decree of personal infallibility of the Pope. This remains a major point of contention. In the 19^th Century the theory of evolution was gaining acceptance, it was applied to everything Newman applied to the Church. As a living thing, it could “evolve”, depending itself in a way that had not before been accepted, hence the claim of the Popes to be infallible and the right of the Church of Rome to change Church dogma.

THE BIBLICAL POSITION

It is true that the Apostles and Gospel writers were members of the Church. However, when the Apostle John wrote the book of the Revelation he sealed it in the last chapter by declaring, “If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18,19)
Therefore the Revelation is sealed and any extra unscriptural doctrine is under the ban of God. The Bible contains all that we need for our Christian Faith. All Protestant statements of faith begin by stating acceptance of the Authority of Scripture. The great argument of all the pre-reformation bodies that opposed Rome was on the ground of their acceptance of Scripture alone as the basis of Christian faith. Wycliffe, Huss, Jerome of Prague, Luther and all the Reformers appealed to the Bible as the rule of faith. The historic stand of Luther at the Diet of Worms in 1521 was on the ground of Scripture alone as the source of faith. The modern departure from the authority of Scripture into liberal theology is a denial of this principle and those who depart thus are ready to accept Church authority in place of Biblical authority. This is the basis of ecumenism. Today they have departed from the Word of God and have embraced strange doctrine.

Many reject the Biblical position on the ground of its being old fashioned. It is. God gave it to the Jews and later to the Church, it is unchangeable. There has been a habit to re-interpret the faith in the light of modern language. This is an age of discovery and invention, of the application of science to everything and a consequent rejection of all that does not fit into the present theories of science. As a result all that is miraculous is rejected. The very nature of the Gospel is divine. It is the intervention of God into human history in the coming to the world of Jesus Christ and the events in His life, testimony and sufferings, and His final triumph of the resurrection.

The Bible the Romanist has departed from and the Liberal has rejected, is today vindicated. Its history is true, archaeology has proved it; its accord with true science is remarkable. One of the most striking is the subsequent decline in morals as we have departed from the principles of Christian morality in modern society, leading to the rise of crime, of the divorce rate, of impurity and violence in modern life, of debased standards in entertainment, literature and art.
 

THE CHALLENGE OF TODAY

The Early Church opposed the heretics of its day with Scripture and Godly living. Later the Reformers opposed Romanism with the same weapons and we today must gird with the Sword of the Spirit, the Word of God, and resist the errors of Romanism, Liberalism and Ecumenism as we declare the whole counsel of God.

Click here to read Part 2