Roman Catholicism: A Biblical Analysis

Brian Schwertley

There are two types of religion in the world today: religions of the imagination (what
men and demons have made up) and the religion of revelation (what God by His grace has given
to man in the Bible). The purpose of this booklet is to examine some important Roman Catholic
doctrines in the light of the Bible and determine if these doctrines are in harmony with, or
contrary to, the clear teaching of God’s Word. Because the Roman Catholic Church believes (as
does the author) that the Bible is the inspired, infallible Word of God, all good Roman Catholics
should study the Bible for themselves and abide by its teachings. 1 As Pope Pius XII stated, “To
ignore the Scripture is to ignore Christ.”2

Authority
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the Bible and tradition as interpreted by the
Church are the final seat of authority in religion.3 Jesus condemned tradition as a rule for
religious authority and exalted the Word of God: “The Pharisees and Scribes asked him, ‘Why
do not thy disciples walk according to the tradition of the ancients...?’ But answering he said to
them, ‘...in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrine the precepts of men. For letting go the
commandment of God, you hold fast the tradition of men.... Well do you nullify the
commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.... You make void the
commandment of God by your tradition’” (Mk. 7:5-13 DB).
The Bible clearly condemns adding doctrine to what God has given in His Word: “You
must add nothing to what I command you, and take nothing from it, but keep the commandments
of Yahweh your God just as I lay them down to you” (Dt. 4:2 JB).
Using non-Christian systems of philosophy to formulate Christian doctrine (e.g., Thomas
Aquinas) is also clearly condemned by the Bible: “Beware lest any man cheat you by
philosophy, and vain deceit; according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the
world, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8 DB). The Bible teaches that we do not need extra-
biblical tradition, for the Bible is all we need; it alone can make a Christian “fully competent.”
“All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching—for reproof, correction, and training
in holiness, so that the man of God may be fully competent and equipped for every good work”

1
Bibles quoted in this booklet: DB—Douay Bible (1914). The Old Testament is the Douay version, the New
Testament is the Confraternity edition; the complete Bible is commonly called the Douay Bible or Douay Version.
Officially approved by the Roman Catholic Church. JB—Jerusalem Bible (1966). In common use among Roman
Catholics. NAB—New American Bible, New Testament (1970). Officially approved by the Roman Catholic
Church. RSV—Revised Standard Version (1952, 1971). An altered version has been approved for lay use.
2
St. Jerome as quoted in Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu (New American Bible).
3
Roman Catholic teaching on authority can be seen in the following documents. The Council of Trent (4th sess.,
1546) stated, “Seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books, and the unwritten
traditions.” Cf. The Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council (3rd sess., 1870), chap. 2, par. 3; the Creed of Pope
Pius IV.
(2 Tim. 3:16-17 NAB). History has shown that tradition is unreliable as a guide for doctrine, as
Loraine Boettner ably pointed out:

Furthermore, that the body of tradition is not of divine origin nor apostolic is proven by the fact
that some traditions contradict others. The church fathers repeatedly contradict one another.
When a Roman Catholic priest is ordained he solemnly vows to interpret the Scriptures only
according to “the unanimous consent of the fathers.” But such “unanimous consent” is purely a
myth. The fact is they scarcely agree on any doctrine. They contradict each other, and even
contradict themselves as they change their minds and affirm what they previously had denied.
Augustine, the greatest of the fathers, in his later life wrote a special book in which he set forth
his Retractions. Some of the fathers of the second century held that Christ would return shortly
and that he would personally reign in Jerusalem for a thousand years. But two of the best known
scholars of the early church, Origen (185-254) and Augustine (354-430) wrote against that
view. The early fathers condemned the use of images in worship, while later ones approve such
use. The early church almost unanimously advocated the reading and free use of the Scriptures,
while later ones restricted such reading and use. Gregory the Great, bishop of Rome and the
greatest of the early bishops, denounced the assumption of the title of Universal Bishop as anti-
Christian. But later Popes even to the present have been very insistent of using that and similar
titles which assert universal authority. Where, then, is the universal tradition and unanimous
consent of the fathers to papal doctrine?4

The Bible emphatically condemns the use of tradition as a source of authority because
whenever tradition is set up alongside of Scripture, it eventually is placed above Scripture, and is
then used to interpret Scripture. This is exactly what happened with Judaism in the days of
Christ, and unfortunately what happened in the Roman Catholic Church: tradition and ritual
became so important that it became necessary to keep the Bible away from the people. In fact,
for centuries it was a mortal sin to possess and read the Bible in one’s own native tongue. The
council of Valencia (1229), the Council of Trent (1545) and Pope Clement XI (1713) all
condemned letting people have the Bible in their own language and reading it for themselves.
Priests are quick to point out that Pope Leo XIII (1893) did urge people to read the Bible. But the
Bible he referred to was the Latin Vulgate which virtually no one but priests could understand!
Fortunately, in the twentieth century the “unchanging church” has once again changed her mind
and allowed the laity to have the Bible in their own language. But Roman Catholics are only
allowed to read church-approved Bibles which have explanations of “difficult” texts underneath
each page by an authorized theologian.
So, for a thousand years, from the early sixth century to the sixteenth century, while the
Roman Church held sway, the Bible remained a closed book. The Roman Church, instead of
being a kingdom of light, became a kingdom of darkness, promoting ignorance and superstition
and holding the people in bondage. Rome’s traditional policy of seeking to limit the circulation
of the Bible and of anathematizing or destroying all copies that are not annotated with her
distinctive doctrines shows that she is really afraid of it. She is opposed to it because it is
opposed to her. The plain fact is that she cannot hold her people when they become spiritually
enlightened and discover that her distinctive doctrines are merely man made inventions.5

4
Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962), pp. 78-79.
5
Ibid., pp. 100-101, emphasis added.
Images in Worship
Here is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, decreed by the Council of
Trent: “The images of Christ and the Virgin Mother of God, and of the other saints, are to be had
and to be kept, especially in Churches, and due honor and veneration are to be given them.”6 God
gave clear instructions for worship: bowing or kneeling to a graven image and making a graven
image for worship are forbidden: “You shall not make yourself a carved image or any likeness of
anything in heaven or on earth beneath or in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down
to them or serve them” (Ex. 20: 4-5 JB).7 Roman Catholics kneel before the pope and kiss his
ring and kneel before the statue of St. Peter in Rome and kiss his big toe, yet the Apostle Peter
forbade such conduct: “As Peter entered, Cornelius went to meet him, dropped to his knees
before him and bowed low. Peter said as he helped him to his feet, ‘Get up! I am only a man
myself’” (Ac. 10:25-26 NAB). As Peter refused Cornelius’ bowing, a mighty angel in heaven
also refused St. John’s worship: “I fell at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, ‘No, get up!
I am merely a fellow servant with you and your brother who gives witness to Jesus. Worship God
alone’” (Rev. 19:10 NAB). Thus the Bible emphatically teaches that we can bow only before
God. Roman Catholic priests, theologians and scholars insist that saints, Mary, statues and relics
are not worshipped; they substitute words such as honor, veneration, and adoration for the word
worship. Yet as Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones has pointed out, this clever semantic sleight of hand
completely breaks down in everyday church practice:

Now there is nothing that is so condemned in Scripture as idolatry. We are not to make “graven
images.” But the Roman Catholic Church is full of images. She teaches her people to worship
images: they worship statues and forms and representations. If you have been to any of these
great cathedrals you will have seen people doing so. Go to St. Peter’s in Rome and you will
notice that there is a sort of monument to the apostle Peter, and if you look at one of the toes
you will find that it is smooth and worn away. Why? Because so many poor victims of Roman
Catholic teaching have been there kissing the toe! They bow with reverence and they worship
images, statues, and relics. They claim to have relics of certain saints, a bit of bone, something
he used, and it is put in a special place and they worship it and bow down before it. This is
nothing but sheer idolatry.8

Pope Gregory III (elected 731) condemned the use of images in worship. Pope
Constantine V (elected 740), who ruled the church for nearly sixty years, condemned the use of
images of Christ as heretical because only Christ’s human nature could be depicted. A church
council which met near Chalcedon on February 10, 753 (and lasted seven months), condemned
the use of images in worship as being “idolatrous and heretical, a temptation to the faith that
originated with the devil.”9 That council had 338 bishops in attendance, making it one of the
largest councils held up to that time. So much for the idea of papal infallibility and the
unchanging church! The Bible is clear: idolatry is false worship.

6
Council of Trent, 25th sess. (1563).
7
In the Hebrew “You shall not bow down” is a negative hithpael imperfect; it carries the force of a
causative/indirect reflexive. Thus, bowing down to a statue “as an aid to worship” causes one to worship and to
serve. Attempts to separate bowing down from actual worship violate the clear teaching of the Hebrew text.
8
Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Roman Catholicism (London: Evangelical Press), p. 6.
9
Philip E. Hughes, The Church in Crisis: A History of the General Councils, 325-1870, (Garden City, N.J.: Image,
1964), p. 167.
Mary
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that Mary was born without original sin (this
doctrine is referred to as the Immaculate Conception).10 Is this biblical? The Bible teaches that
only Jesus Christ, the second Adam, was born without original sin (see Rom. 5:18, Heb. 4:15);
all others have original sin: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world and with
sin death, death thus coming to all men inasmuch as all sinned” (Rom. 5:12 NAB). “Death came
through one man...all men die in Adam” (1 Cor. 15:21-22 JB).
The Roman Catholic Church also teaches that Mary never committed actual sin.11 Is this
true? The Apostle John says that anyone who claims to be without sin is a liar: “If we say we
have no sin in us, we are deceiving ourselves and refusing to admit the truth” (1 Jn. 1:8 JB). The
Apostle Paul says emphatically that all people are sinners: “Jew and Greek are all under sin’s
dominion. As Scripture says: ‘There is not a good man left, no not one’” (Rom. 3:9-10 JB). Mary
herself admitted her need of a Savior: “And Mary said, ‘My soul proclaims the greatness of the
Lord and my spirit exults in God my savior’” (Lk. 1:46-47 JB). A person without sin does not
need to be saved from her sins!
Furthermore, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that Mary was a virgin perpetually
(that is, her entire life). Yet St. Matthew, a Jew writing to Jews, calls Jesus her firstborn son, an
expression used by Jews if other children were born after the first one; otherwise, “only son”
would have been used: “And he knew her not till she brought forth her first born son” (Mt. 1:25
DB). Matthew wrote his gospel at least 35 years after the birth of Christ and evidently knew that
Mary had children after Jesus was born. The Bible specifically says that Jesus had brothers; St.
Matthew even tells us their names: “Isn’t Mary known to be his mother, and James, Joseph,
Simon, and Judas his brothers? Aren’t his sisters our neighbors?” (Mt. 13:55-56 NAB). “All
these joined in continuous prayer, together with several women including Mary, the mother of
Jesus, and with his brothers” (Ac. 1:14 JB). Roman Catholic scholars claim that Matthew, Luke
and Paul (1 Cor. 9:5) didn’t mean brother when they said brother, but meant cousin. This view,
however, has no basis in Scripture at all. The Greek word adelphos is always translated “brother”
and never “cousin.” The Jews compared the miracle-working Jesus to His ordinary brothers in an
attempt to question the validity of His ministry; it would have been absurd to compare Jesus with
His cousins.12
In order to understand the extent that Roman Catholic teaching concerning Mary has
departed from the Scriptures, Dr. Joseph Zacchello has placed Roman Catholic teaching on Mary
in one column and the Word of God in another column. The Roman Catholic teaching is from
The Glories of Mary by Bishop Alphonse de Ligouri (Brooklyn: Redemptorist Fathers, 1931).
The Bible quotations are from the Douay Bible.

10
The doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary was set forth in a decree by Pope Pius IX on Dec. 8, 1854.
11
“The Catholic Church, an infallible interpreter of Holy Scripture, declares that she kept sinless her life long by a
special favor of God” (Bertrand L. Conway, The Question-Box Answers [New York: Paulist, 1903], p. 377; cf.
Council of Trent, 4th sess., can. 23).
12
The Bible teaches clearly that celibacy and marriage are not to be combined. For Mary to remain a virgin her
whole life, after the birth of Christ, she would have to disobey Scripture, which a godly woman like Mary would
have refused to do. “The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife her husband. For
the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own
body, but the wife does. Do not refuse each other except perhaps for a season, that you may devote yourselves to
prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self control” (1 Cor. 7:3-5 RSV).
 Mary is given the place belonging to Christ
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“And she is truly a mediatress of peace “For there is one God, and one Mediator of
between sinners and God. Sinners receive pardon God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim.
by...Mary alone” (pp. 82-83). “Mary is our life.... 2:5). “Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and
Mary in obtaining this grace for sinners by her the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the
intercession, thus restores them to life” (p. 80). Father, but by me” (Jn. 14:6). “Christ...is our
“He fails and is lost who has not recourse to life” (Col. 4:4).
Mary” (p. 94).
Mary is glorified more than Christ
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“The Holy Church commands a worship “In the Name of Jesus Christ...For there is
peculiar to Mary (p. 130). Many things...are asked no other name under Heaven given to men,
from God, and are not granted; they are asked whereby we must be saved” (Ac. 3:6, 4:12).
from Mary, and are obtained, for She...is even “His Name is above every name...not only in
Queen of Hell, and Sovereign Mistress of the this world, but also in the world which is to
Devils” (pp. 127, 141, 143). come” (Eph. 1:21).
Mary is the gate to heaven instead of Christ
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“Mary is called...the gate of heaven because no “I am the door. By me, if any man enter in,
one can enter that blessed kingdom without he shall be saved” (Jn. 10:1). “Jesus saith to
passing through her (p. 160). The way of him, ‘I am the way...no man cometh to the
salvation is open to none otherwise than through Father but by me’” (Jn. 14:6). “Neither is
Mary, and since our salvation is in the hands of there salvation in any other [than in Jesus
Mary...he who is protected by Mary will be Christ]” (Ac. 4:12).
saved, he who is not will be lost” (pp. 169-170).
Mary is given the power of Christ
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“All power is given to thee in Heaven and on “All power is given to me in Heaven and in
earth, so that at the command of Mary all obey— earth” (Mt. 28:18). “In the Name of Jesus
even God...and thus...God has placed the whole every knee should bow” (Phil. 2:9-11). “That
Church...under the dominion of Mary” (pp. 180- in all things He may hold the primacy” (Col.
181). “Mary is also the Advocate of the whole 1:18). “If any man sin, we have an Advocate
human race...for she can do what she wills with with the Father, Jesus Christ the Just: and he
God” (p. 193). is the propitiation for our sins” (1 Jn. 2:1-2).
Mary is the peacemaker instead of Jesus Christ our peace
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“Mary is the Peace-maker between sinners and “But now in Christ Jesus, you, who
God” (p. 197). “We often more quickly obtain sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the
what we ask by calling on the name of Mary than blood of Christ. For He is our peace...” (Eph.
by invoking that of Jesus. She...is our Salvation, 2:13, 14). “Hitherto you have not asked
our Life, our Hope, our Counsel, our Refuge, our anything in my name. Ask, and you shall
Help” (pp. 254, 257). receive, for whatsoever we shall ask
according to His will, He heareth us” (Jn.
16:23, 24).
Mary is given the glory that belongs to Christ alone
Roman Catholic Church: The Word of God:
“The whole Trinity, O Mary, gave thee a “God also hath highly exalted Him, and
name...above every name, that at Thy name, hath given Him a Name which is above all
every knee should bow, of things in heaven, on names, that in the Name of Jesus every knee
earth, and under the earth” (p. 260). should bow, of those that are in heaven, on
earth, and under the earth” (Phil. 2:9, 10).

Liguori, more than any other person, has been responsible for promoting Mariolatry in
the Roman Church, dethroning Christ and enthroning Mary in the hearts of the people. Yet
instead of excommunicating him for his heresies, the Roman Church has canonized him as a
saint and published his book in many editions (recently under the imprimatur of Cardinal Patrick
Joseph Hays of New York).13

Mother of God
The Roman church calls Mary the “mother of God,” a name impossible, illogical and
unscriptural. It is impossible, for God can have no mother; He is eternal and without beginning,
while Mary was born and died within a few short years. It is illogical, for God does not require a
mother for His existence. Jesus said, “Before Abram was born, I am” (Jn. 8:58). It is
unscriptural, for the Bible gives Mary no such contradictory name. Mary was the honored mother
of the human body of Jesus—no more. The divine nature of Christ existed for eternity from
eternity past, long before Mary was born. Jesus never called her “mother”; He called her
“woman.”14

Celibacy
The pope, cardinals, bishops, priests, monks and nuns are required by the Roman
Catholic Church to abstain from marriage.15 Yet Christ did not forbid the married life to Peter,
who is regarded by the Roman Catholic Church as the first pope. Jesus showed his concern for
Peter’s family when He healed his mother-in-law. “Jesus entered Peter’s house and found Peter’s
mother-in-law in bed with a fever. He took her by the hand and the fever left” (Mt. 8:14-15
NAB). The Apostle Paul clearly states that all the apostles except himself were married: “Do we
not have the right to accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brother of the Lord and
Cephas [Peter]?” (1 Cor. 9:5 RSV).16 Roman Catholic theologians admit that the Apostle Peter

13
Boettner, pp. 138-140.
14
Is Rome the True Church? p. 20. It is more theologically accurate to speak of Mary as the mother of Jesus’ human
nature; this included more than just a physical body; it includes everything there is to being a human being except
the inherited sin of Adam.
15
The celibacy of the priesthood was decreed by Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand) in A.D. 1079.
16
The Greek in this verse, adelph-n gunaika, is literally translated “a sister, a wife.” The more idiomatic translation
is “a Christian wife.” Roman Catholic Bibles translate this phrase as “a Christian woman” or “a sister, a woman”
was married but assert that he left his wife and family to follow Christ and remained celibate the
rest of his life. But this viewpoint completely contradicts Scripture. Paul, who wrote
1 Corinthians in A.D. 58, says that at that time Peter was married. Therefore, comparing this date
with the gospel of Matthew, we know that Peter was married at least 26 years. The Bible also
teaches in 1 Corinthians 7:2-5 that husbands and wives must provide a steady sexual relationship
to their marriage partner; exceptions are only made for short periods of prayer. Peter could not
have left his wife to be celibate without disobeying God.
God has given explicit instructions in His Word for the qualifications of a bishop. (The
Greek word for bishop, episkopos, is translated in different Bibles as elder, presbyter, bishop,
and in some older versions, priest; keep in mind they are all translated from the same Greek
word.) Not only is celibacy not required, but marriage and children are clearly allowed. Only
having more than one wife is forbidden: “As I instructed you, a presbyter must be irreproachable,
married only once, the father of children who are believers” (Tit. 1:5-6 NAB). “It behoveth
therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife...one that ruleth well his own house,
having his children in subjection” (1 Tim. 3:2-4 DB).
The Bible says that the doctrine of forbidding to get married is a doctrine of demons.
“The Spirit distinctly says that in later times some will turn away from the faith and will heed
deceitful spirits and things taught by demons through plausible liars—men with seared
consciences who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods which God created to be
received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim. 4:1-3 NAB).17

Was Peter the First Pope?

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the pope is the supreme head of the church on
earth, that the Apostle Peter was the first pope, and that all popes are direct successors of Peter.
Dr. Joseph Zacchello, who trained for the Roman Catholic priesthood in Italy and served as a
priest in New York, carefully pointed out what the Bible teaches concerning the Apostle Peter.
At the Council of Jerusalem Peter took part in the conversations, but the Apostle James not Peter
presided and pronounced the Council’s decision: “And after they had held their peace, James
answered, saying, ‘Men, brethren, hear me.... For which cause I judge...’” (Ac. 15:13, 19). Peter
calls himself an elder and not a pope: “Now I have something to tell your elders: I am an elder
myself” (1 Pet. 5:1 JB). The other apostles did not recognize Peter as their chief; in fact, they
sent him to preach in Samaria (not the other way around): “Now when the apostles who were in
Jerusalem had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and
John” (Ac. 8:14).
Saint Paul did not believe Peter was chief; in fact: (a) Paul mentioned Peter more than
once but he never mentioned him with any special title of honor, such as vicar or pope, or gave

because gunaika is sometimes translated “woman.” But every Greek lexicographer consulted translated gunaika
here as “wife.” The context favors “wife,” because Paul argues that he deserves financial support as the other
apostles received who were burdened with the financial responsibilities of a family.
17
In Mt. 19:12 Jesus Christ teaches that celibacy is voluntary. In 1 Cor. 7:8-9 Paul says that celibacy is a gift. If
people are having trouble controlling their sex drive, they should get married. “In one of the very few studies based
on hard data—1,500 interviews between 1960 and 1985—Maryland psychologist Richard Sipe, a former priest,
concluded that about 20 percent of the 57,000 U.S. Catholic priests are homosexual and that half of them are
sexually active. But since 1978, Sipe believes, the number of gay priests has increased significantly; other therapists
think the true figure today may be closer to 40 percent” (Kenneth L. Woodward, “Gays in the Clergy: Homosexual
Priests,” Newsweek, Feb. 23, 1987, p. 58).
any indication that he held him above any of the other apostles. (b) Paul taught that those who
attached themselves to Peter (or to any other apostle or person) as a distinct group were guilty of
schism, because Christ is the head (1 Cor. 1:12-13; 3:22). (c) Paul did not mention the papacy
when referring to the officers of the church (1 Cor. 12:28, Eph. 4:11). (d) Paul as an apostle
claimed authority over the Roman church itself (Rom. 1:5-6; 16:17). (e) Paul was “behind the
very chiefest apostle in nothing” (2 Cor. 12:11-12). (f) Paul expressly denied that Peter was the
pope and further maintained that whatever Peter was to the Jews, he, Paul, was to the Gentiles.
This certainly is incompatible with any idea of a pope in Paul’s day (Gal. 2:7,8). (g) Paul
rebuked Peter without any mention of Peter’s supremacy (Gal. 2:11).18 If Peter was chief, it was
the duty of Paul and of the apostles to recognize him as such, respect him as chief and teach in
their writings that he was the chief; but neither the gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the epistles
nor the Revelation ever mention it.19

Is the Pope Infallible?

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the pope is infallible when he speaks on matters
of doctrine.20 Ralph Woodrow has disproved such a claim by examining many papal statements
and decisions throughout history:

The fact is that, neither in practice or in doctrine, have popes been infallible. Let us
notice a few of the hundreds of contradictions to this doctrine of papal infallibility:
Pope Honorious I, after his death, was denounced as a heretic by the Sixth Council in
the year 680. Pope Leo confirmed his condemnation. Now if Popes are infallible, how could one
condemn the other?
Pope Vigilius, after condemning certain books, removed his condemnation, afterward
condemned them again and then retracted his condemnation, then condemned again! Where is
infallibility here?
Dueling was authorized by Pope Eugenius III (1145-53). But later Pope Julius II (1509)
and Pope Pius IV (1506) forbade it.
In the eleventh century there were three rival popes at the same time, all of which were
deposed by the council convened by the emperor Henry III. Later in the same century, Clement
III was opposed by Victor III and afterwards by Urban II. How could popes be infallible when
they opposed one another?
Then came the “great schism” in 1378 that lasted for fifty years. Italians elected Urban
VI and the French cardinals chose Clement VII. The popes cursed each other year after year
until a council deposed both and elected another!
Pope Sixtus V had a version of the Bible prepared which he declared to be authentic.
Two years later Pope Clement VIII declared that it was full of errors and ordered that another be
made!
Pope Gregory I repudiated the title of “universal bishop” as being “profane,
superstitious, haughty, and invented by the first apostate” (Epistola 5:20-7:33). Yet through the
centuries, other popes have claimed the title. How then can we say that popes are infallible in
defining doctrine, if they directly contradict one another?

18
Joseph Zacchello, Secrets of Romanism (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1948), pp. 43-44.
19
James D. Bales as quoted by Zacchello, p. 44.
20
“The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as
supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful...he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or
morals” (Catechism of the Catholic Church [Liguori, MO: Liguori Publications, 1994], §891).
 Pope Hadrian II (867-872) declared civil marriages to be valid, but Pope Pius VII
(1800-1823) condemned them as invalid.
Pope Eugene IV (1431-1447) condemned Joan of Arc to be burned at the stake as a
witch. Later, another pope, Benedict IV, declared her to be a “saint.” Could this be papal
infallibility?
How could all popes be infallible when a number of popes themselves denied such a
teaching? Vigilinus, Innocent III, Clement IV, Gregory XI, Hadrian IV, and Paul IV all rejected
the doctrine of papal infallibility. Could an infallible pope be infallible and not know it? Such
inconsistency!21

Vicar of Christ?
The pope, according to Roman Catholic teaching, is the vicar of Christ, Christ’s personal
representative on earth.22 A brief comparison will show the absurdity of such a claim.

The pope: Jesus Christ:

• wears a triple-decked crown • wore a crown of thorns (Jn. 19:2)
worth over $1,300,000
• claims to be head of all earthly • said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (Jn. 18:36—His
kingdoms kingdom does not originate on earth but in heaven; it extends to
all institutions, including the church)
• is waited on by servants and • came to serve and to suffer; had “no place to lay his head”
lives in extreme wealth and (Mt. 8:20)
luxury
• wears ornate, expensive • dressed as a lowly peasant
garments
• many popes, especially in the • lived a life of sinless perfection (Heb. 4:15)23
Middle Ages, lived in gross
immorality

The Confessional
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that confession of our sins is to be made to an
authorized priest for the purpose of obtaining forgiveness.24 The Bible teaches that Christians
should confess their sins to each other (not just to a priest or minister), not because Christians
can forgive sins but because Christians can pray for each other and encourage each other:
“Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray for one another, that you may be saved”
(Jas. 5:16 DB). In the early church, confession as a public act of repentance was done before the
whole church, not just the minister: “And many of them believed, came confessing and declaring

21
Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion (Riverside, CA, 1966), pp. 102-103.
22
“The Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full,
supreme, and universal power over the whole Church...” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, §882).
23
Ibid., p. 102 (slight alterations have been made by the author).
24
Baltimore Catechism, p. 231.
their deeds. And many of them who followed curious arts, brought together their books and burnt
them all” (Ac. 19:18-19 DB).
When the scribes asked, “Why does this man speak thus? He blasphemes. Who can
forgive sins but only God?” (Mk. 2:7 DB), they were right. No one but God can forgive sins—
and for a mere man to claim that he can is blasphemy. Jesus answered by saying, “The Son of
Man has power on earth to forgive sins” (v. 10); hence, He was not a mere man—He was God.
But no priest or minister can forgive sins, because he is a man. We can go directly to God
through our mediator Jesus Christ and be forgiven.25
In Acts 8:22, Peter told Simon Magus to “pray to God” for forgiveness—not to himself
who was supposed to be the first pope. Confession of sins is commanded all through the Bible,
but always it is confession to God, never to man. It is a striking fact that although Paul, Peter and
John dealt frequently with men and women in sin, both in their teaching and in their practice they
never permitted a sinner or a saint to confess to them.26
The Bible teaches that it is the privilege of every penitent sinner to confess his sins
directly to God: “If we confess our sins he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to
cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (Jn. 1:9). What did Jesus say when He told the story about
the Pharisee and the publican? The publican had no priest, and he did not go to a confessional.
All he did was cry with bowed head, “God, be thou merciful to me a sinner” (Lk. 18:13). He
went directly to God, and Jesus said that he went down to his house justified. Indeed, why would
anyone confess his sins to a priest when the Scriptures declare so plainly, “There is only one
God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5)?27
Actually, auricular confession of sin to a priest instead of to God was a late innovation instituted
by Pope Innocent III at the Lateran Council in 1215.

Indulgences
The Roman Catholic Church claims to have the power of conferring indulgences. A
partial indulgence remits a part of the temporal punishment due to sin, and thus can shorten the
suffering due to the sinner on earth and in purgatory. A plenary indulgence gives an entire
remission of temporal punishment.28 “Indulgences derive their efficacy in remitting the temporal
punishment due to sin from the superabundant merits of Christ and His saints.”29
The whole idea that God can forgive our sins and then assign to us temporal punishment
is connected to the idea that we can gain merit through good works, and that some saints
(especially Mary) have been so good that they have extra merits stored up for us less-saintly
25
Oswald J. Smith, The Roman Catholic Bible Has the Answer (Grand Rapids, MI: Faith, Prayer and Tract League,
1953), p. 6.
26
Jas. 5:16, which tells us to declare our sins to one another and to pray for each other, is a command to be done by
all Christians for mutual edification. By knowing each other’s weaknesses and bad habits we can pray and
encourage effectively. This is completely different than Roman Catholic confession. The alleged Roman Catholic
Scripture proofs (Mt. 16:19 and Jn. 20:21-23—the “keys of the kingdom of heaven”) really mean that the apostles
and all Christians are “instructed with the Gospel” (1 Th. 2:4) and therefore can open and close heaven in the sense
that if the Gospel is not preached, heaven cannot be opened; if it is preached, then heaven can be opened to the
listener who responds in faith. To interpret these passages in any other manner would make them contradict the
many passages which tell us to confess directly to God (Pr. 28:13, Da. 9:20, Mt. 3:6, Mk. 1:5, 1 Jn. 1:9, etc.);
Scripture cannot contradict itself.
27
Boettner, p. 206.
28
Catechism of the Catholic Church, §1471.
29
Zacchello, p. 161.
Christians. This teaching is totally unbiblical for two reasons: (1) The Bible teaches that even the
best saint cannot gain merit—even for himself. The Apostle John, writing to Christians, said, “If
we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 Jn. 1:8 DB). Jesus
said that even if we do obey everything we are commanded to, we do not gain merit or profit:
“Even so you also, when you have done everything that was commanded you, say, ‘We are
unprofitable servants; we have done what it was our duty to do’” (Lk. 17:10 DB). (2) Christ has
gained all the merit a Christian will ever need. He lived a sinless life, thus fulfilling the law of
God for every Christian. He died an atoning death, thus paying with His own blood the penalty
due every Christian for his sins. To suggest or teach that Christians can gain merit from their
own works or from the works of saints takes away from the perfect work of Christ. Good works
are not done to gain merit; they are done because of our love for Jesus Christ. “There is no
condemnation now for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1 NAB). “A single righteous act
brought all men acquittal and life.... Through one man’s obedience all shall become just” (Rom.
5:18-19 NAB).
What kind of doctrine of this, which gives a man (the pope) the power of dispensing the
superabundant merits of Christ and His saints to those (made available also to the souls of
purgatory) who pay for membership in a Purgatorian Society, a Rosary Society, a Scapular
Society, a Third Order Society? We Christians do not need a pope or bishop to grant us the
merits of Christ as a reward for works of penance, wearing of a scapular, etc., since we are
justified not by works but by faith (Gal. 2:16; Rom. 5:1).30

Purgatory
According to the Roman Catholic Church there exists an intermediate state called
purgatory where Christians go who are not good enough to go to heaven nor bad enough to go to
hell. Any person dying with mortal sin goes directly to hell after death. Venial sin, though, can
be eliminated through the tortures of purgatory.31
The Bible teaches that all sin will be forgiven by Jesus Christ except one: blasphemy
against the Holy Spirit: “That, I assure you, is why every sin, every blasphemy, will be forgiven
men, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Whoever says anything against the
Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever says anything against the Holy Spirit will not be
forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Mt. 12:31 NAB). Christ in His earthly
ministry often did miracles through the anointing of the Holy Spirit which He received at His
baptism by John the baptist. The Pharisees, however, called forth Christ’s rebuke by their
attributing His miracles to the devil. No Christian would ever attribute the miracles of Christ to
the devil; therefore, the penitent Christian can be assured of absolute forgiveness for all sins. All
sins are mortal in that all sins are deserving of hell, yet Christ will forgive all sins of those who
trust in Him. In the gospel of Luke, the Lord forgave a murderous thief who only moments
before was making fun of Him: “‘Indeed I promise you,’ he replied, ‘Today you will be with me
in paradise’” (Lk. 23:43 JB). The thief received complete forgiveness when he looked to the
Savior in faith. Indeed, Christ promised that all who listen and believe have eternal life now—
they do not have to merit it or to suffer in purgatory for it; they have it: “I tell you most
solemnly, whoever listens to my words, and believes in the one who sent me, has eternal life;
without being brought to judgment he has passed from death to life” (Jn. 5:24 JB).
30
Ibid., pp. 163-164.
31
Cf. Baltimore Catechism, sec. XIV, no. 181, p. 129; cf. the Council of Trent, 25th sess.
 The Apostle Paul taught that when Christians die they go immediately to be with Christ;
he mentioned nothing about purgatory: “But we are confident, and have a good will to be absent
rather from the body, and to be present with the Lord” (2 Cor. 5:8 DB). “To depart and to be
with Christ...far the better” (Phil. 1:23 DB). When a person trusts in Jesus Christ, the Savior’s
perfect life and sacrificial death actually become the possession of the believer. As far as his
standing in Christ is concerned, any idea of further purification is completely wrong; further
purification is unnecessary. Indeed, the believer will grow in practical holiness as he seeks to
love and obey Christ, yet this holiness can in no way contribute to his justification before God.
All our self-righteousness is as filthy rags in God’s sight (Isa. 64:6).
The doctrine of purgatory arose long after the death of the apostles. The early Christians
of the New Testament never believed in such a place as purgatory. The word appears nowhere in
the Bible. The idea of purgatory and prayers for the souls in purgatory was not known in the
professing church to any degree until A.D. 600 when Pope Gregory the Great made claims about
a third state—a place for the purification of souls before their entrance into heaven. It was not
accepted as a dogma of the Catholic Church, however, until 1459 at the Council of Florence.
Ninety years later, the Council of Trent confirmed this dogma by cursing those who wouldn’t
accept the doctrine.32

Transubstantiation
According to the Roman Catholic Church, when the wine and wafer are consecrated by a
priest, the substance of bread and wine is changed into the actual body and blood of Christ; this
change is called transubstantiation. Underneath what appears to be bread and wine are really the
body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ.33
The doctrine of transubstantiation is a denial of the biblical doctrine of Christ. Jesus
Christ was fully God and fully man, two distinct natures in one person; yet these two natures are
not mixed or confused in any way. This view, set forth by the church at the Council of
Chalcedon in A.D. 451, is accepted by Protestants and Roman Catholics alike. Yet
transubstantiation attributes divine attributes to Christ’s finite human nature.34 His human body,
His flesh and blood, cannot be all over the world in the eucharist at the same time without having
the divine attribute of omnipresence. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is spiritually present—
not physically present—in the bread and wine.
By studying Jesus’ teaching it becomes clear that His reference to His body and blood
was symbolic. Examples of Christ using figurative and symbolic speech are numerous: He
referred to Himself as a door (Jn. 10:14), a temple (Jn. 2:19), a vine (Jn. 15:5), a shepherd (Jn.
10:14), and bread (Jn. 6:35). He referred to the Holy Spirit as water (Jn. 4:14). When He
instituted the Lord’s supper he called the cup the new covenant (1 Cor. 11:25). Similarly, “we
know that these elements did not become the literal flesh and blood of Jesus when he ‘blessed’
them, because He (literally) was still there! He was not changed from a person into some liquid

32
Heresies of Rome, as quoted by Woodrow, p. 71.
33
Council of Trent, 13th sess., can. 1.
34
The mixing of the divine and human natures of Christ into one nature (Apollinarianism) was condemned by Pope
Damasus. A church council at Rome (377), synods at Alexandria (378) and Antioch (379), and a council at
Constantinople (381), as well as decrees issued in 383, 384 and 388, all condemned Apollinarianism as a heresy. See
J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), pp. 289-297.
and bread!”35 “Jesus Christ, after He had blessed the sacrament, still called it ‘the fruit of the
vine’—not His literal blood (see Mt. 26:29). Paul, too, says that the bread remains bread (1 Cor.
11:27-28).”36 “If the wine did became the literal blood during the mass ritual—as it is claimed—
then to drink it would be forbidden by Scripture” (see Lev. 3:17; 7:26; 17:10, 12; Acts 15:20).37
“When the Roman priest consecrates the wafer it is then called the ‘host’ and they
worship it as God. But if the doctrine of transubstantiation is false, then the ‘host’ is no more the
body of Christ than is any other piece of bread! And if the soul and divinity of Christ are not
present, then the worship of it is sheer idolatry, of the same kind as the pagan tribes who worship
fetishes.”38 According to the Roman Catholic Church, in the mass a true, proper, and
propitiatory39 sacrifice to God is offered. That sacrifice is identical with the sacrifice of the cross,
inasmuch as Christ is both priest and victim. The only difference lies in the manner of offering,
which is bloody upon the cross and bloodless on the altar.40
The Bible teaches that Christ’s sacrifice was perfect, complete, final—a one-time event
never to be repeated: “Unlike the other high priest, he has no need to offer sacrifice day after
day, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did that once for all when he
offered himself” (Heb. 7:27 NAB). “Christ...as the high priest...has entered the sanctuary once
for all, taking with him...his own blood, having won an eternal redemption of us” (Heb. 9:12 JB).
“For Christ did not enter into a sanctuary made by hands..., he entered heaven itself that he might
appear before God now on our behalf. Not that he might offer himself there again and again, as
the high priest enters year after year into the sanctuary with blood that is not his own; if that were
so he would have to suffer death over and over from the creation of the world. But now he has
appeared at the end of the age to take away sins once for all by his sacrifice” (Heb. 9:24-26
NAB). “He...has offered one singular sacrifice for sins” (Heb. 10:12 JB). “Christ...will never die
again...he dies once for all” (Rom. 6:9-10 JB)
The Roman Catholic Church does exactly the opposite of what the Bible teaches. Christ
is sacrificed thousands of times each day in the ritual of the Mass! The Roman Catholic mass, the
most central aspect of Roman Catholic faith, is sin, “for it is a denial of the efficacy of the
atoning sacrifice of Christ on Calvary.”41 The following table shows a comparison between
the communion supper instituted by Christ and that of the Roman Catholic mass today:

The Lord’s supper Roman Catholic mass

The bread was broken The bread is served whole, round
Was taken at night Taken early in the morning
Taken after a meal Partaker must be fasting
Instituted by Jesus A mixture of paganism

35
Woodrow, p. 126.
36
Boettner, p. 178.
37
Woodrow, p. 127.
38
Boettner, p. 179.
39
A propitiatory sacrifice satisfies the justice of God and removes the penalty for sin.
40
“If anyone says that in the mass a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God...let him be anathema” (Council of
Trent, 22nd sess., can. 1). “If anyone says that...Christ...did not ordain that...other priests should offer His own body
and blood, let him be anathema” (can. 2). “If anyone says that the sacrifice of the mass is not a propitiatory
[sacrifice]...let him be anathema” (can. 3). Cf. the New York Catechism and the Creed of Pope Pius IV.
41
Boettner, p. 182.
Bread and cup represent the Lord’s body and Bread and wine are said to become flesh and
blood blood
Both bread and fruit of the vine were taken Only the bread may be eaten by the
congregation
Representative of a finished work, a perfect Each mass is supposed to be a fresh sacrifice of
sacrifice Christ
A simple blessing was given over the elements Long prayers are chanted for the living and the
dead
Featured the simplicity of a common meal Elaborate ritualism, rites42

The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Justification

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation depends ultimately upon ourselves,
earned by obedience to the law of the church (for example, regular attendance at mass, rosary
prayers, fasting, the wearing of medals, crucifixes or scapulars, etc.). In this system God forgives
only those who try to atone for their sins through fruits of penance. 43 This whole system exists
because Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is regarded as not sufficient. The Roman Catholic doctrine
of justification (how a man becomes justified or perfectly righteous before God) reflects
Romanism’s complicated system of salvation by works.44

Roman Catholic view Biblical view

Justification is God’s work Justification is God’s “Being justified freely by his grace, through
of grace in man. work of grace in Jesus the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Rom.
Christ.45 3:24 DB).
As a man, by grace, God accepts men “For we account a man to be justified by
becomes more and more solely on the merits of faith, without the works of the law” (Rom.
righteous by obeying Jesus Christ. 3:20 DB).
God’s law, Church canon
law, and the use of the
sacraments, God will
accept him.
Faith and good works are Faith in Christ alone “By grace have ye been saved through faith,
the basis for justification.46 is the basis for and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of
justification. God; not of works, that no man should

42
Woodrow, p. 140.
43
Confusion was introduced by a mistranslation of the Greek word for “repent” to the Latin word for “do penance”
(cf. Council of Trent, 14th sess., ch. 1); “repent” and “do penance” are completely different.
44
“If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in
order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema.... If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else
than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies
us, let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, 6th sess., can. 9, 12).
45
See Robert D. Brinsmead, Present Truth (Fallbrooke, CA), special issue on justification by faith.
46
“Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life...”
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2027).
 glory” (Eph. 2:8-9 DB).
God’s transforming grace The righteousness of “When a man does nothing, yet believes in
infuses righteousness into Christ is imputed or him who justifies the sinful, his faith is
men who cooperate with credited to the credited as justice.... Blest is the man to
grace. Thus, justification is believer through faith. whom the Lord imputes no guilt” (Rom. 4:4-
subjective. Thus, justification is 8 NAB).
objective.
Our righteousness is Even the best of good “But we are as an unclean thing, and all our
acceptable to God. In fact, works are tainted with righteousnesses are as filthy rags” (Isa. 64:6
some saints have done sin. Our good works RSV). “I want only the perfection that comes
more than what God has contribute nothing to through faith in Christ, and is from God and
required, and have stored our salvation. based on faith” (Phil. 3:96 JB).
extra merit that we can
acquire.
Justification is a gradual Justification is an “I solemnly assure you, the man who hears
process which may not instantaneous act. It is my word and has faith in him who sent me
even be complete in this whole, eternal and possesses eternal life. He does not come
life. It usually is completed perfect, not piecemeal under condemnation but has passed from
by the tortures of or gradual. death to life” (Jn. 5:25 NAB). “Even when
purgatory. you were dead in sin...God gave you new life
in company with Christ. He pardoned all our
sins He cancelled the bond that stood against
us with all its claims, snatching it up and
nailing it to the cross” (Col 2:13-14 NAB).

The Roman Catholic Church has perverted the doctrine of justification by confounding it
with the doctrine of sanctification.47 Biblically speaking, after a man is justified before God, he
begins a lifelong process of sanctification where he grows in holiness and obedience to God’s
law. Justification is the basis, the starting point, for sanctification (Rom. 6). Justification removes
the guilt of sin and restores the sinner to God’s household as a child of God. Sanctification
removes sinful habits and makes the sinner more and more like Christ. Justification takes place
outside of the sinner in the tribunal of God. Sanctification takes place in the inner life of man.
Justification takes place once and for all. Sanctification is a continuous process which is never
complete in this life.48

Conclusion

After examining some of the key Roman Catholic doctrines, it is clear that all too often
the traditions and teachings of men have been substituted for true biblical doctrine. Many Roman

47
“Justification is a judicial act of God, in which He declares, on the basis of the righteousness of Jesus Christ, that
all the claims of the law are satisfied with respect to the sinner.... Sanctification may be defined as that gracious and
continuous operation of the Holy Spirit, by which He delivers the justified sinner from the pollution of sin, renews
his whole nature in the image of God, and enables him to perform good works” (L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), pp. 513, 532.
48
Ibid., pp. 513-514.
Catholic leaders and laymen are doing charitable deeds for which they are to be commended.
And not all Roman Catholic dogma is false; the divinity of Christ and the trinity are notable
examples. Yet the Roman Catholic Church has departed from God’s Word in so many crucial
areas that to remain under such teaching is to gamble with one’s own soul. There is no doubt that
some Bible-reading, Bible-believing Roman Catholics are saved, but they are saved in spite of
Romanism and not because of it.
You need to ask yourself seriously: Am I a Roman Catholic because I have studied the
Bible and found that its doctrine is identical with that of the church? Or am I a Roman Catholic
because I was raised in the church? Should I trust my soul to a church that practices idolatry?
Should I trust the salvation of myself and my family to a church which changes its doctrine to
cater to the surrounding culture (e.g., Vatican II), when biblical doctrine never has and never will
change? Should I trust my place in eternity to a church which explicitly denies the biblical
doctrine of salvation (e.g., Council of Trent)? Are you willing to read the Bible and obey what it
says, even when it runs contrary to what your family and friends believe? Jesus said that you
must love and serve Him more than your own family, even more than your own self (Lk. 14:26).
You can leave behind the heavy yoke of doubt, fear and bondage to ritual and man-made
regulations by trusting in the Lord Jesus Christ alone for your salvation. Believe that Jesus Christ
lived a perfect, sinless life in your place. Believe that He died a sacrificial, atoning death in order
to cover your sins with His blood, thus satisfying God’s wrath against your sin. Believe that He
rose from the dead victorious over sin and death for you. Believe that He ascended to the right
hand of God in order to intercede for you, send the Holy Spirit to regenerate you (make you born
again) and help you follow Him. Repent of your past, sinful lifestyle. True faith in Christ must
issue forth into a life of godliness and good works; otherwise you do not have true faith and are
still in darkness (Jas. 1-2). Remember, holiness and good works do not contribute in any way to
your salvation; they are evidence that salvation has already taken place.

Suggestions for further reading:

Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962).
Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Luther and His Message for Today (London: Evangelical Press, 1968).
Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Roman Catholicism (London: Evangelical Press).
Ralph Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion (Riverside, CA, 1966).
Joseph Zacchello, Secrets of Romanism (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1948).

Copyright © Brian Schwertley, Lansing, Michigan, 1996

HOME PAGE