The Roman Catholic Controversy

As you read the reviews, please do not be dissuaded from reading this book. I'm afraid that a great deal of mutual understanding is lost in unnecessary, inflammatory rhetoric, from both sides. It accomplishes nothing other than cloud the real issues. Instead, my hope is that you will give this book an objective read.Having many family, friends, and coworkers that are Catholic, I've attempted to approach these issues with sincerity and charity. As I've evaluated Catholic belief in light of Scripture, I do believe that the differences from evangelical beliefs are more than just "surface deep." I'm concerned that many of my evangelical brethren have tended to view these differences as merely stylistic (versus substantial). Modern evangelical have shifted in their view of Catholicism because of their de-emphasis on scriptural truth. I echo the words of Dr White that evangelicals must return to walking in the "Apostle's footsteps with a reference to the glory of God and the truth of the gospel." (page14). We need a "...renewal of confidence in the Word of God as supreme authority in all matters of Christian faith and practice..." (John Armstrong, Preface).Out of the box, I was impressed by the book's structure. Dr White does an excellent job sticking to the most important and foundational issue - the Gospel itself. There are many peripheral issues that could take center stage. White purposefully begins arguing that Scripture is the infallible authority versus the alternative - acceptance of a church as an infallible authority. The book builds on this foundational understanding of the Bible and centers on a proper understanding of the Gospel.The following are a selection of Dr White's insights (these are just a sampling of my notes. Don't use this as a substitute for reading the book)1.) Regarding Scripture:- 2 Timothy 3:14-17. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." -- All scripture is theopneustos, or God-breathed, and thus carries His authority. -- Scripture makes the man of God adequate (complete, qualified) for every good work....ie scripture is SUFFICIENT for the task to fully equip. Scripture is sufficient.- Matthew 22:31-32. Jesus Christ held his hearers accountable to what scripture said.... "have you not read what was spoken TO YOU by God" (emphasis mine). What was said in the past was continuing to be said in the present.- Matthew 15:1-9. Jesus Christ subjugated alleged divine tradition to the supreme authority of the scriptures. Scripture is to be the divine standard.2.) Regarding Tradition:- "... not only is Rome claiming the exclusive right of interpretation of the Scriptures but the exclusive right of both definition of tradition as well. When we ask to see the contents of tradition, we have to depend upon the veracity of the same Church that bases her doctrines (including her claim to interpretive authority) on those very traditions!" (page 75)- "Because the Catholic Church claims no one else can properly interpret those Scriptures, and she herself claims to be the sole guardian of `Sacred Tradition,' no external checks and balances exist that could correct her should she err". (page 75)- "Anyone who has read the treatises of Athanasius or Augustine concerning the Trinity and the deity of Christ knows that these men used the Scripture as their sole source." (versus claims to external sources of authority) (page 83-84)- In arguing that we are not dependent on Rome for the canon. "The canon is a function of Scripture, or, to be more specific, it is the result of inspiration itself." (page 93)- With claiming an infallible authority to interpret, "...we need to observe that Rome has hardly solved the problem of fallible people. Once Rome speaks, the fallible person must still interpret the supposed infallible interpretation...and the longing for infallible fuzzies...remain as unfulfilled as ever." (page 91)- in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, this "tradition" or oral teaching is not future but has already been delivered to the entire Church, not just to the bishops, but to everyone at that church. As shown in 1 Thessalonians 1, this oral teaching was the Gospel ("...when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is the word of God...")2.) Regarding the Papacy:- Lacks Scriptural support for such a concept. Nowhere does Peter speak of himself as a Pope in 1 or 2 Peter. When Paul wrote to the Church at Rome, he never mentioned Peter as some kind of Pope. In 1 Corinthians 12:28, when Paul lists the biblical order of "first apostles, second prophets, third teachers..." we don't see the Pope listed as first and foremost.- In Matthew 16 which most Catholics point to for proof, the central theme is the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. Note the change of Greek words from petros to petra as a play on words. Furthermore, in Matthew 18:18, we see the authority of binding and loosing passed on to all of the Apostle, not to Peter alone. (page 117-118)-- Interesting to note that Vatican I says that the Catholic Church as always understood passages like Matthew 16 to refer to Peter as the Pope. Yet, many of the early church fathers (which the Catholic Church will claim as unbroken connection to Peter) disagree to the meaning of "the rock" and many held to a different understanding than the Catholic Church teaches today. (page 120) Are they considered accursed?3.) Regarding the Gospel of justification:- Based on numerous quotations from Trent and others, in Catholic theology "the process of justification is based on God's grace - but not COMPLETELY on God's grace, and it CANNOT be said that God's grace alone is sufficient WITHOUT human works to bring about full and complete justification" (page 133)- "Rome confesses the NECESSITY of grace, but refuses the acknowledge the SUFFICENCY of grace" (page 136)- In contrast, Romans 5:1 "Having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." It speaks of justification as past for followers who have presently have peace in Jesus Christ. Righteousness is imputed to a believer by faith (Romans 4:1-8). For those in Christ Jesus, He has become to us wisdom from God and righteousness and sanctification and redemption." The Catholic Church has placed those that believe such things as under the anathemas of Canons 24 and 32 of Trent (page 137)- Imputation is different than "infusion" or "Impartation" in Roman Catholic theology...In imputation, righteousness is CREDITED by the words of another, Jesus Christ.- We are justified by grace through the blood of Jesus Christ (Titus 3:5-7, Romans 3:24, 5:9) (page 145).Because of the importance of the Mass in Roman Catholic theology, White addresses a whole chapter to it. He also discusses the concepts or purgatory, veneration of the saints, and Mary. For the sake of brevity, I will not elaborate, but suffice to say, I think White makes a compelling case.NOTE: For those who have mentioned it in other reviews, White deals with James 2 briefly on Page 254. He gives a much fuller exposition of the text in his book, The God who Justifies. The context of James 2 (and Romans 2 for that matter) is very important.In conclusion, I would highly recommend this book. Dr White does an excellent job quoting from primary sources. Be prepared to flip back and forth to the end notes as they contain a lot of insight that should not be missed.

I found this book to be very fair to the opposition and highly instructive for protestants.

Dr White makes the most complete, systematic, and biblical repudiation of the false Roman church and its false Gospel. I believe in this book he blows the smoke of the incense away from the arrogant and cumbersome Roman doctrine, especially the Roman encyclopedic works system of justification compared to Acts 16 :31 "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved."A Catholic friend once said to me when i look at the Mormon church, I think it was modeled after the Catholic church. I told him he was a prophet. Phony, crazy, extra biblical revelation from a so called infallible tradition, and reducing Christ to something less than he is. I told him there is a name for this kind of system"cult".When you read the Catholic Catechism, you ask yourself the question,what Magesterial piety it takes to make a system so bogged down in works minutia and condition: then you think of Jesus saying in Mark: "unless you receive the kingdom like a child, you shall not enter it". Thank you Dr White that you should carry Holy scripture above the words of men and defend it to the death.We are told to meditate on it day and night and not let it depart from our lips. Oh that these Pius Roman School Men would have done the same. On the long war on the truth The Roman Catholic church has been the greatest enemy.Reformers and the true church have always known this. That a mere sinful man could be the vicar of God, and the Bishop of Rome could be God's representative on Earth, how foolish. These Popes die.The church lives and Christ is the head of his church.He did not come to earth and shed his blood to let some mere sinful man steal his Glory.There can be no peace with Rome. Spurgeon said war, to the knife with her. When we think of all the evil that has been committed under the guise of a false priesthood and the corruption in the history of a popery, as Spurgeon said i would rather be called a devil than a Catholic priest. God Bless you Dr White. Know you have friends in the cause of the truth.

I really liked this book. Unlike other things I've read on this subject, White didn't just give a list of random Catholic beliefs and debunk them in isolation to each other. Instead, he focused on the heart of the matter--the centrality of the gospel. More particularly, his main focus was on the difference between the Catholic and reformed view of justification.Before going into justification, he addressed the subject of authority, which makes good logical sense because it is from authority that the doctrines of justification derive.Once he addressed justification, then he wrote a few short chapters on Catholic doctrines that have a bearing on justification, such as the Mass, indulgences, and the Marian doctrines. But they were all relevant to justification.I have two complaints about this book. First, White write quite a lot in his footnotes, and it seems to me that he should've woven most of that information into the body of his text. Footnotes should be used for citing sources and giving peripheral information, but White wrote a lot of important stuff in his footnotes, and some of them were pretty long.Second, White ignored a few key texts that Catholics use to justify their view or refute protestant views. For example, whenever the subject of sole fide comes up, Catholics will say, "The only place in the Bible that uses the phrase, 'faith alone,' is a passage in James that says we are NOT justified by faith alone." White should've addressed that verse because it's so obvious it just jumps out at you. He did talk a little about James 2, but he ignored that particular part.And there were a few other passages he should've talked about but didn't.Still, I thought it was an excellent book, well organized (other than the footnotes), clear, easy to understand, and compelling. I would recommend it.

Always prompt and products are as described

Dr White delivers again. Shows, through acceptable research, the true modern divide between R.C Church and the Reformed by getting to the heart of the Gospel message. I too was guilty of assuming a little too much when it came to this debate. Thank you Dr White for setting me straight. However you need a new publisher because the book quality was terrible, the spine of the book did not allow for proper fanning of the pages and caused the left side of the pages to be only 80% visible. The print was faded at the top 3 lines of each left page making it seem as if the pages were photocopied making for a very uncomfortable read..cheaply made minus 2 stars for quality, very disappointing.

Good book, although not life changing for me. I've had a lot of issues in my life at that time and was looking for help in various Christian literature; however, I have found little help if any at all.

Very well written and informative. Kept me interested, especially towards the end. So glad I read this book!