Edited Title: Refuting anti-Catholic site

[GeorgeSword]

Is anyone familiar with this website? carm.org/religious-movements/roman-catholicism/reparation-sacred-heart-jesus-and-pope-pius-xi

I’ve been trying to refute it for a friend who it’s really bothering, and I’ve gotten down to the “Reparation of the Sacred Heart”. It’s full of misconceptions, I was just wondering if anyone else had refuted it before and might have some advice.

 

[Church_Militant]

Analysis
For anyone familiar with the biblical doctrine of -]justification by faith/-] (see verses above), the teachings of Pope Pius XI should be very disturbing.

:yawn: What Matt Slick, or whoever penned this shipwreck should have said is justification by faith alone, but they don’t. Here’s some material that should help.

1. 
   *]LUTHER’S OBITUARY FOR LUTHERANISM (This Rock: August 1991)
   *]By faith alone? (This Rock: April 1993)
   *]JUSTIFICATION (This Rock: November-December 1999)
   *]Faith and Works (This Rock: September 1999)
   *]The Disasters of 'By Faith Alone’ (This Rock: February 2002)
   

   There is no way that we are ever able to please God through our works.

   Really? Is that what the New Testament actually says?
   Acts 10:1] At Caesare’a there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort,
   2] a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms liberally to the people, and prayed constantly to God.
   3] About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius.”
   4] And he stared at him in terror, and said, “What is it, Lord?” And he said to him, **“Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. **
   5] And now send men to Joppa, and bring one Simon who is called Peter;
   6] he is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the seaside.”
   Looks like they are wrong according to the Word of God.
   

   This is why Jesus, who is God in flesh, became one of us so that he might bear our sins on the cross.

   Just like a stopped clock, these guys tend to be right at least twice a day.
   

   Because He did it, we don’t need to expiate, repair damage done, or appease God in any way. To infer that we need to is to deny the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Jesus said on the cross “It is finished,” (John 19:30). That statement was commonly used during that time in legal documents to signify a debt that had been paid in full. Since it is paid in full, there is nothing we can do to please God so as to make things right with God. To imply that there is, is sinful.

   Or it would be if the Catholic Church actually taught that we are saved by the merits of our good works alone, which it does not and never has and never will. The Church does teach (just as the New Testament does) that our works play a part in our salvation at our judgment.
   Matthew 25:31-46 is very clear about that as is James chapter 2.
   14] **What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? **
   15] If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food,
   16] and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?
   17] So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
   18] But some one will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.
   19] You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe – and shudder.
   20] Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren?
   21] Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
   22] You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works,
   23] and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God.
   24] You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
   25] And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
   26] For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.
   

   Jesus bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24). It was Jesus who became sin on our behalf (2 Cor. 5:21) and did it all. It was necessary that Jesus do what we could not.

   No argument there…
   

   Pope Pius XI contradicts the biblical teaching of salvation by grace through faith. If it was necessary for us to make amends, or reparations, or expiations in order for some sort of cleansing of our sins, then why did Jesus have to come and die on the cross? Gal. 2:21 says, “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.”
   Also, in paragraph 9 as quoted above, Pope Pius XI takes Heb. 5:1 out of context.

   Rest assured that if you look up the entire document that they have cited, you’ll soon see that the actual out of context trick is not by Pope Pius XI. A-Cs do that all the time to try to confuse Catholics and make their case appear to have substance where there really isn’t any. Hey…if Slick and company didn’t make it look like they had a good case, all those people wouldn’t be donating to pay his bills, now would they?
   (Cont’d)

 

[Church_Militant]

It is not we who offer up the gifts and sacrifices for sins as his quote implies. Instead, the passage speaks about the high priest doing this: “For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins,” (Heb. 5:1). He has misapplied the very word of God. He should know better.

Notice here that they have very conveniently ignored a very relevant passage of the New Testament, penned by St. Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Colossians 1:24] Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is** lacking **in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,

The truth is that what is taught here is consistent with other teachings of the Roman Catholic Church that oppose the biblical doctrine that we are made right with God completely and totally through the cross of Christ and that we can do nothing to gain or maintain that rightness with God. Pope Pius XI contradicts Scripture as does much of Roman Catholic teaching.

This is the very kind of statement that leads so many people to rationalize that once they are “saved” that they can then raise all the hell they want andnot worry about finding themselves in Hell. It’s not what these guys mean, but you can see the errant was they express it.

Moreover, as the passages from James and Matthew 25 both show above this is not even a correct scriptural teaching.

As for that crack about Catholic teaching contradicting scripture…that’s the “party line” for that site and so many more a-Cs and it’s wishful thinking on their part (at best) and an outright and deliberate misrepresentation (at worst) of Catholic teaching. You’ll encounter a lot more of this as you progress on your journey into the Church my friend.

Conclusion

Pope Pius XI did not offer anything new. But he did reiterate the incorrect teaching in the Roman Catholic Church that our righteousness before God can be helped through our works. This is a false doctrine and is one of the main reasons at the Protestant Reformation happened. The excesses and false teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, particularly in the area of salvation, means the Roman Catholic Church is not Christian.

And here you have Slick’s a-C propaganda at it’s most clear.

1. 
   *]The so-called “Reformation” was never intended to depart from the Catholic Church. This is just typical hogwash. Read Luther’s theses and you’ll see.
   *]The truth is that it’s not the Catholic Church that is in error on salvation, and we have been pointing that out to people like this since the “Reformation”. I have an article that may help you here. Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?

 

[GeorgeSword]

If you want to have a look at it, they’ve got a whole page dedicated to other things about Catholicism: