When I Got the Attention of Catholic Answers Over Their Tradition

The comments I’ve been making on social media about Roman Catholicism have attracted the attention of some higher profile Roman Catholics, including former White House speech writer Joshua Charles, pro-life advocate Abby Johnson, and Catholic Answers, “the world’s largest database of answers about the beliefs and practices of the Catholic faith.”

Last week, on May 28, I posted the following:

The apostle: “Stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or our letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

Roman Catholics: “Guys, you hear that? We can make stuff up and call it ‘tradition’ and shame all who won’t go along with it! Let’s worship Mary!“

Catholic Answers responded to my caricature and we had a brief exchange. I’m not sure who it was at Catholic Answers I interacted with, but they did not score the point they may have thought they did. I’m not even sure what they were attempting to refute, or why they commented in the first place.

First, a Little Explainer

In case you’re unaware, Roman Catholicism claims their tradition is just as authoritative as God’s word, and 2 Thessalonians 2:15 is one of those verses they use to justify it. In fact, they will place their tradition above God’s word, because only the Roman Catholic church has the true understanding of Scripture since they gave us the Bible. This is all according to Roman Catholics.

So praying to Mary and other dead saints is perfectly acceptable, even though God never permitted this, nor is there one example of it in Scripture. The only instance in the Bible that someone appeared to have succeeded in communicating with the spirit of a deceased saint, he died the next day as a result (1 Samuel 28).

God has said that “one who inquires of the dead… is an abomination to the Lord” (Deuteronomy 18:11-12). Isaiah 8:19-20 says, “When they say to you, ‘Inquire of the mediums and the necromancers who chirp and mutter,’ should not a people inquire of their God? Should they inquire of the dead on behalf of the living? To the teaching and to the testimony! If they will not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.”

But because Scripture is insufficient to the Roman Catholic, they invalidate the command of God praying to departed saints, including Mary, the mother of Jesus; the apostles of Jesus; Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul II, various Roman Catholic figures over the centuries, and pretty much anyone they want to. The canonization process, whereby the Roman Catholic church declares a departed Catholic to be a saint, requires that one pray to that saint for a miracle. It takes two miracles verified by the Roman Catholic church for one to be declared a saint.

Take the case of a deceased Italian boy named Carlo Acutis, who died at the age of 15 on October 12, 2006 of Leukemia. At least two healing miracles have already been attributed to Acutis, including the healing of a boy named Matheus in Brazil, and a girl named Valeria in Florence, Italy who had fallen off her bicycle. Valeria’s mother Liliana said she went to Carlo Acutis’s tomb and prayed to him for her healing, and the Roman Catholic church has verified that Acutis granted her request. (It’s possible that Acutis could be the first millennial to be canonized as a saint as early as next year.)

What is the difference between this and a Medium conducting a seance? This is abject paganism. A Christian has a direct connection to the God who created the universe! But they would settle for praying to the dead instead? Then they do not have the light of God—exactly the word of Isaiah 8:20. Departed saints are not listening to these prayers. As 1 Timothy 2:5 says, “There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

In Mark 7:9, Jesus rebuked the Pharisees, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!” And that is Roman Catholic dogma in a nut shell—deliberately ignoring God’s commands in favor of their man-made traditions. For the cult of Mary and the saints, God’s word is only good for twisting to justify their traditions. Thus my post mocking Roman Catholic traditionalism..

Catholic Answers Answered… Sort Of

Catholic Answers responded to me and said, “[From] actual Roman Catholics who aren’t made of straw:” and then they posted an image from an article on their website about Scripture and Tradition. The article begins:

“Protestants claim the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrong.”

For the most part I agree, with a minor correction. Now, I cannot speak for all Protestants, as Protestantism is not a monolith. But Reformed Baptists believe, as our statement of faith says, “The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.”

This is in submission to 2 Timothy 3:16-17, which says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Scripture is clear. God has made it understandable for anyone, by the illumination of His Holy Spirit (see also 1 Corinthians 2:6-16, 2 Peter 1:16-21, and 1 John 5:6-12).

The Roman Catholic “magisterium (teaching authority),” as they so arrogantly call themselves, says no. According to the Council of Trent, Session 4, “No one, relying on his own skill, shall—in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine—wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church—whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures.”

So in other words, I am not allowed to read Deuteronomy 18 as meaning that we cannot pray to the dead, because the Roman Catholic church has determined that’s not the meaning. I cannot say that 1 Timothy 2:5 means that there is one mediator between God and man, and Mary ain’t her, because the Roman Catholic church has determined that’s not its meaning.

This is quite the scam they have going on—no one can understand the Bible without the Mary cult. Roman Catholicism has a long history of wanting to keep the Bible out of the hands of just anyone. They were murdering Christians who translated the Bible into languages that people could read, including William Tyndale and Thomas Cranmer.

Now when Catholic Answers says that Protestants don’t need apostolic tradition to understand the Bible, that’s wrong. In fact, I rely heavily on apostolic tradition, and to the pastors I have trained in expository preaching, I have told them they need the apostolic tradition to understand Scripture. The apostolic tradition is in the Bible. We use Scripture to interpret Scripture.

Of course, that’s not what Catholic Answers means when they say “apostolic tradition.” They’re talking about themselves. They believe Roman Catholicism is the apostolic tradition, and that only they have the true understanding of the Bible. The Pharisees taught the same thing. “Weightier are the words of the elders than the words of the prophets,” they taught (from John Gill’s commentary on Matthew 15).

The main point of the article that Catholic Answers wanted me to see was this line, from the Second Vatican Council’s document on divine revelation, Dei Verbum (Latin for “The Word of God”):

“It is not from Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same devotion and reverence.”

Now, that might be what they say, but that’s not what they mean. As I quoted earlier from the Council of Trent, and Vatican II would affirm, what the Scripture says is held in reverence according to how their tradition interprets it. So though they might say Roman Catholicism regards tradition as equal with Scripture, tradition is over the Scripture—or to say it as Jesus would, “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8).

I responded to Catholic Answers with this: “But you believe Roman Catholic tradition has authority over the Scripture, correct?” Then I shared a clip of priest Martin Diaz, rector of the Cathedral of the Madeleine in Salt Lake City, UT. And according to Roman Catholic’s so-called “magesterium,” he holds more authority than Catholic Answers. What asked, “What is the Roman Catholic view of Scripture?” Diaz said the following:

“So I think one of the things for Roman Catholics is that we are not a church of the book. So for us, the church is first, the book is second.”

Catholic Answers responded simply by pointing to the line from Vatican II. “Read the screenshot again,” they said, “especially the last sentence: ‘Therefore both sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same devotion and reverence.'”

I asked how that fits with what Martin Diaz said. “And if tradition and Scripture are to be ‘venerated with the same devotion and reverence,'” I added, “how does that negate my post?” To this, Catholic Answers never responded.

And again, I’m not sure why they commented in the first place. They never showed that what I said was wrong. In fact, it seems they agree with it—they just did not like the way I framed it. Again, my caricature of their doctrine was this: “Guys, you hear that? We can make stuff up and call it ‘tradition’ and shame all who won’t go along with it! Let’s worship Mary!”

Were they not attempting to shame me for not going along with it? Many of the comments from other Roman Catholics certainly were.

Follow-Up Comments from Other Roman Catholics

Said an anonymous Romanist named Regina, “He’s exactly correct: the Church came before the Bible; the Bible came from the Church, not the other way around. Anyone with even a smidgen of knowledge of church and biblical history knows this. Your engagement farming and ignorance of Christianity is embarrassing.”

No, I believe I heard the priest and Regina didn’t. The very first part of his answer was: “We are not a church of the book.” The church has authority over the book, and of course Roman Catholics believe this because they believe they gave us the Bible.

A guy by the name of Jacko said, “Sacred tradition isn’t ‘just made up.’ Stop acting like a two year old. If you seriously don’t know the history of Sacred Tradition within Christianity, you should resign immediately. I know you have no formal theological training, but you’re just making yourself look foolish.”

If it’s not made up, then show me where in the Bible God permits Christians to pray to Mary or any other departed saint? Where does God permit making statues of them and bowing to them? Where does it say Mary was without sin or that she was bodily assumed into heaven? Where is the doctrine of papal infallibility? Where is any doctrine of the pope, for that matter? Where is purgatory in the Bible? Where is the treasury of merit? These doctrines are all man-made traditions. They are not biblical. But Jacko can’t give a reasoned response, so he name-calls. That’s all he has.

Jared called me a “false witness.” Stephen said, “What unrepented sin is keeping you from the One True Church, Gabriel?” Matthew said, “Not how it works there, Mr. Heretic.” Scott said, “Gabe is starting pride month early.” Darrien from Canada said, “Gabe, why are you court-ordered to have no contact with persons under the age of 16?” This is the slander they resort to. Again, it’s all they have.

I also had various threats that my criticisms were going to result in my judgment. Said Nanora, “My only consolation is that if you fail to repent for that [post], you will, on judgment day, have to answer for it.” Ronald from Pittsburgh said, “Welcome to another addition of ‘Pastor Gabe’s a False Witness.’ Today’s episode is brought to you by the small of sulfur.”

Another anonymous Romanist said, “Tradition informs Scripture because Scripture doesn’t interpret itself.” See? He gets it! He’s wrong, but at least he interprets his own church’s doctrine correctly. Another anonymous Romanist said, “Gabe, if I were you, I wouldn’t read 1 Timothy 3:15.”

Yes, I just taught on that passage earlier this year. As 1 Timothy 3:14-15 says, “I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.” The church is the instrument God has chosen to proclaim the truth to the world (pillar) and defend it from those who wish to malign it (buttress).

But what is 1 Timothy 3:15? Scripture. And what’s Timothy to do? Follow it. That verse actually says the church is subject to the writings of the apostles, not the other way around. The verse this anonymous Romanist used to shame me actually puts his doctrine to shame.

John from California said, “Hold on. Where is the Canon of Scripture explicit in the Bible? It’s also a tradition, isn’t it? So whose tradition are you also relying on if the Bible preceded the Reformation by over a thousand years and hundreds of books were purported to be Scripture.”

Well first of all, hundreds of books were not purported to be Scripture, that’s a lie. The list of 66 books that we call the Bible is not listed in Scripture, that’s true. It is tradition—a tradition which precedes Roman Catholicism, incidentally. The 39 books of the Old Testament were already compiled as the word of God even before Jesus was born. The 27 books that make up the New Testament were already upheld and taught in the church before the Council of Hippo in 393 agreed that these books were the New Testament.

Canon is a tradition that is subject to Scripture, not over it. If “all Scripture is breathed out by God,” then how can it be that the church gave us Scripture? Isn’t it God who gave us Scripture? The church doesn’t define what Scripture is—Scripture defines what the church is. And so the church did not decide canon—the church discovered canon. Scripture, being the authoritative word of God, is self-authenticating.

As said in 2 Peter 1:19-21, “We have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

As Psalm 138:2 says, “I bow down toward your holy temple and give thanks to your name, for your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word.” And Jesus said, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:27).

In Conclusion

When Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, “Stand firm and hold to the traditions you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or our letter,” this was not a license to grab whatever tradition you want no matter how historic it may be and attribute it as apostolic. How do we know what the apostles said? Because it’s also what they wrote, which we have in the Bible. But Catholic Answers will twist this Scripture and others to justify their unbiblical man-made traditions, and the gospel of Jesus Christ gets hidden beneath false doctrines of Roman Catholicism.

Jesus died on the cross for our sins and rose again from the dead for our justification (Romans 4:25). By faith in Him, we are forgiven our sins and have everlasting life with God. That’s not a message you will hear very often from the Mary cult, who place their man-made traditions and works-based righteousness over Scripture.

Tradition is not a bad thing. I have my traditions as I’m sure you have yours. The very fact that I’m a baptist is a tradition. But all of our religious traditions must be subject to Scripture—not equal to Scripture, and certainly not over Scripture, for it is the very word of God.

As the apostle wrote, “Learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another” (1 Corinthians 4:6). That’s one rebuke the “Magesterium teaching authority” of the self-proclaimed “one true church” cannot stand.