Skip to content

The Anti-Catholic Rhetoric of ‘Way of the Master’

July 28, 2011

(For the latest news about Kirk Cameron and his anti-Catholic blog post against Pope Francis’ remarks on atheists read this blog entry.)

Let me first say that I am not interested in a blow-by-blow refute of Way of the Master.  There are plenty of very adequate blogs and other resources out there that dispute with the material within it from the polished presentation of its street evangelism to its reasoning of faith.  While I do appreciate the legions of individuals who choose to address the errors, because they need to be pointed out for those who have the smallest doubt, that is not the point I’m willing to address here.

What I haven’t seen a lot of is staunch statements of the irrefutable fact that the team of Comfort and Cameron are absolutely anti-Catholic.  Catholics I’ve read online seem to think there’s nothing anti-Catholic about the duo.  This even from those who claim to have watched the show for a while.  It took me one episode.

Perhaps I’m just fortunate to have caught it at the right moment because the illustration of it was blatant. Basically, they work off of heavy illustration to make a point and the illustration they were using was the airplane emergency crash.  The visual they were showing was a mock-up of the emergency procedures manual you have on all airplanes visually showing you what to do in an emergency except it was interspersed with religious imagery they were using to make a point about the Ten Commandments (their modus operandi).  They begin talking about the Second Commandment,

You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. (Exodus 20:4,5)

Cameron repeats this Commandment as they again cut away to the emergency procedures manual again.

Catholics can easily guess what’s coming next.

It’s clearly displaying our veneration and honor of the Blessed Mother of Our Lord Jesus as equal to the worship of a Hindu god.  As they display it, the Buddhists worship Buddha and his statue just like Hindu’s worship their gods and statues, and, apparently, like Catholics worship Mary and her statue.  A clear violation of the second commandment.  This is erroneous in every instance.  Buddhists worship neither a Buddha or a statue.  Hindu’s also do not prescribe worship of statues either.  The latter goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway for clarification:

We don’t worship Mary! and we certainly don’t worship statues!

Statues are often explained as being the equivalent of a picture of a loved one to serve as a reminder of the life of that individual.  (Much like the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC).  When Catholics kneel before a statue we’re not praying to a statue.  The statue is a rendition of an individual, made of earthly materials, and isn’t any more than an earthly material.  Statues have no power in and of themselves and we certainly don’t think the statues can hear us.  We honor what the statue represents.  As far as leaving flowers or Rosary’s on or near a statue, think of the Vietnam Memorial Wall in Washington DC as well.  Why leave trinkets and tokens, flowers and the like there?  It serves as a visual reminder that the person you’ve chosen to honor with an object was worth the honor and recognition for the life they lived.  That is all.
(Click here to see the entire episode)

Ray Comfort wrote an article in November ’06 which claims that the reason it’s so hard for Jews to be converted to Christianity is that the Nazi’s, in conjunction with the ideas of the Catholic Church, caused their genocide.  For some reason in the article Comfort starts by talking about Roman Catholics, but the majority of the article deals with Lutherans.  It seems, from the article, that the two are interchangeable.

“I’m always encouraged when I ask someone if they are a Christian and they answer “No. I’m Roman Catholic.”  (CATHOLICS – PLEASE STOP DOING THIS! CATHOLICS ARE CHRISTIANS!  We are the FIRST Christians. Christianity came to world through the Catholic Church.)  It confirms something that most Catholics know but it seems that the world doesn’t know. There is a difference between biblical Christianity and Roman Catholicism. Although the Roman church holds to some of the main tenants of the Christian faith, at its core it has its own entity. It has many high-held traditions that are not found in the Bible. They are Roman Catholic traditions.  Consequently, it shouldn’t surprise us that Jews are very difficult to reach with the gospel. This is because many of them equate Christianity with Roman Catholicism.”

He goes on in the article to talk about how Hitler subverted and corrupted the tradition filled, liberal philosophy and theology of the Protestant Lutheran church (his description, not mine) and eventually other institutions to his own twisted version of Christianity “thus [emptying the] church pews so [that] they began to meekly cloak their political agenda in biblical phraseology. Over time this left many of the more simple folk unable to distinguish the true pastor from the false.”  Apparently, simple folk were so uneducated in biblical truth because of the “institution” of all the theological “corruption” of the Lutheran church that they couldn’t distinguish between genuine Christian faith and genocidal mania.

He then reverts back to something that is distinctly aimed back at Catholics.

“.. in the eyes of many Jews, the evil of Nazism came directly through the Christian church.  As a result, when you and I approach a Jew with a New Testament in our hand, or a cross around our neck and sweetly say, ‘I would like to talk to you about Jesus,’ to them we may be saying, ‘Hi, I represent an institution that is filled with pedophiles, bows down to idols, worships false gods, and was responsible for the murder of six million Jews.’  No wonder they are reluctant to talk to us.”

Go read the article for yourselves linked above.  I think it’s of the highest priority to inform my fellow Catholics that not only are these two using their ministry blatantly spread misinformation about Catholics, they don’t consider us Christians to begin with, and they’re accusing us of being “filled with pedophiles, bowing down to idols, worshiping false gods and being responsible for the murder of six million Jews.”  It’s due to this reason, our high profile in the world, and our “high-held un-biblical traditions” that Comfort and can’t reach the Jews to convert them to Christianity.

Something I once heard a priest say and I’ll never, ever forget it.
“Those easily gained are not gained for long.”

I think it is a terrible misrepresentation of Catholics and the Church and I think it deserves to be pointed out to people who are Catholics.  Ray and Kirk do not think you are Christians and I certainly wouldn’t feel inclined to give any of my money to them for their products because of their active ministry against Catholicism.


This post, about halfway down, has a further exposition on Comfort’s anti-Catholic bias.  It makes for interesting reading.
This video clearly shows from Ray Comfort’s own mouth that he does not believe Catholics to be Christians.

20 Comments leave one →
  1. westhoff0407 permalink
    September 27, 2011 1:03 am

    I often wonder what I would say if ever confronted by Ray and his cameras (or any other “Master” of his training). I pray I would have the calm determination to answer him with the words of St. Pacian: “If you want to know who I am, Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname.” I am sure he would have a response, but nonetheless. I recently watched his video “180” about abortion. He lays out a fairly convincing argument against the atrocity and he usually gets his interviewees to change their opinion. I am just saddened that he will not unite this fervor for the life of unborn children with the greatest force for good in the world: Christ’s Church.
    While I am saddened by Comfort’s rhetoric against the Church, I also see that he simply embodies the words of our beloved Archbishop Fulton Sheen who said, “Not 100 in the United States hate the Roman Catholic Church, but millions hate what they mistakenly think the Roman Catholic Church is.” You are in my prayers, Mr. Comfort.
    (I really enjoy your blog, by the way! Especially the collage at the top.)
    Pax et Bonum.

    • Christine permalink*
      September 27, 2011 11:51 am

      I have often thought myself about what I would say when asked the formulaic questions that Comfort/Cameron put to the people they see on the street. I hadn’t known about the quote from St. Pacian before but I really enjoy it. (Perhaps I should make him the patron saint of my blog here since its web address is “catholic is christian”.) It has been a shame that the Church’s people have been so slow in taking up the fervor of the Evangelical set in spreading the message of the Catholic Church. Then again, Catholic’s don’t approach their faith the same way. It’s so much more internal and personal, so much more action than words, therefore, I think our fervor, being expressed differently, comes off as evangelizing apathy. The blessed Archbishop Sheen’s quote is one of my favorite and even those who don’t persecute the Church have some erroneous beliefs about her teachings.
      Thank you for your kind words about my blog! Since I feel that I tend to be “slow of speech and tongue” when it comes to speaking apologetically about our faith, I took to my writing it instead and I’m very passionate about it. The collage at the top of the page I actually photo shopped myself. I was pleased with the way it came out if I do say so myself. 🙂 Thanks again for your support and your comments.
      Peace be with you.

  2. November 17, 2011 10:43 pm

    I just came across your blog & saw this post regarding Messrs Comfort and Cameron; I had just read one of Mr. Comfort’s articles and had been looking for a place to comment on his site but could not find one.
    Great points regarding the admixture of evangelicalism and anti-Catholicism; Catholics need to be wary of who they support.
    Keep up the good work.
    In Him,
    Tim Ouellette

    • Christine permalink*
      November 18, 2011 6:38 pm

      Tim, thank you so much for your kind words. I find it strange that so many Catholics do actually support them and have done so despite information pointing out that they’re anti-Catholic. To me, it’s like supporting a person who runs you down all the time and still calling them a friend. Are people so hard up that they’re willing to compromise on their faith being disrespected for other areas of common ground? I know I’m not.

      Peace be with you, Tim.

      • November 18, 2011 7:05 pm

        The devil here is certainly in the details…there’s a section in one of Comforts posts, I believe it’s in a supposedly generic “how to” of evangelism that, while not mentioning the word ‘Catholic’, touches upon distinctly Catholic teachings…Comfort appears to discuss the futility of appealing to the prospective converts’ intellect; instead, he recommends appealing to his. “guilty conscience” with fallacious arguments intended to cause psycological/emotional conflict within the listener.

        Heaven forbid Comfort should lead with a rational, authentically intellectual argument; it would be a very Thomistic step toward

  3. February 22, 2013 4:12 am

    At our parish we get bible tracts on our windshield after mass sometimes from a calvinist group near us. They are always trying to save us similar to Living Waters. The Priest is always nice and says to pray for them which I do.

    John Mcarthur has alot of anti Catholic videos on You Tube but Living Waters is out there now front and center too. To me they are the modern day Pharisees running around guilting everyone about their sins never examining their own interior life.

    I have all I can do to deal with my own sins let alone guilting someone about theirs.

    What is interesting is a couple of their street ministers at Living Waters are X- Catholics who were poorly instructed in the faith.

    • February 22, 2013 7:22 pm

      I really think that is really tactless that other Christians are putting tracts on the cars of the people at Mass. Targeting Catholics while we’re worshiping God by putting tracts on our cars to tell us we’re no good sinners. I’ve heard of a similar incident before and I think it’s shameless. I also think it’s tragic that so many poorly catechised Catholics are now actively working AGAINST the faith they were raised in precisely because they were poorly catechised.
      I think too many Christians should be called out for the way they behave in their evangelizing efforts. Especially when they’re targeting other Christians. Being the bigger person and praying for their sins and their actions on top of our own is too tough to battle with sometimes. Hopefully, by our prayers we can show ourselves to be a little more Christ like than some of our separated brethren.
      It’s just shameful and sad with so many other grand evils happening right here in our own country that those who wish to evangelize to the (I would assume their ideology does not permit Catholics to share the title of Christian) other Christians would do better to turn their efforts toward combating moral evils which destroy all believers.

    • December 8, 2014 2:08 pm

      Sorry. I know you posted this a long time ago, but I feel inclined to reply. I totally agree with you about not attacking people for their sins. Was it not Jesus who told us to take care of the log in our own eyes before worrying about the splinter in the eye of another? He preaches that he follows Jesus, but he just does not seem to understand Jesus’ compassion. It saddens me, and–though I hate to admit it–frightens me. He seems to think the only way to heaven is turning away from sin due to a fear of eternal fire. However, us Catholics believe differently. We believe that true love and good works only begin when we feel inclined to do good in our hearts. I mean, if you tell someone you love them only because you fear their anger or mistrust in you if you don’t is not true love. God knows it’s not true love. It is a lie. This is the same as turning from sin due to a feeling of obligation, rather than a deep desire to sin no more. Likewise, we should all turn to Jesus with an open heart, ready to accept Him–not out of fear. Jesus is our protector, not a tyrant to be feared. He loves us and would never leave us. Though Comfort denies it, we are beautiful and good in God’s eyes. Comfort seems to think our names, to God, are our sins. That is not true. God knows who we truly are and called us by name even before we were born. I once heard that what we are is God’s gift to us, while who we become is our gift to God. Using Comfort’s logic, this would not work. To Comfort, we are garbage in God’s eyes and cannot be redeemed through our love for Jesus and the works we do in following what Christ taught. Comfort’s message is poison, and cannot–if followed–lead to a happy life on Earth. His teachings are teachings of despair. According to him, we will never be anything no matter how hard we try–so why even bother? To God, we are always something, and He always loves us–no matter how much we sin. If He didn’t believe there was something worth saving within us, He would have never sent His son, Jesus, to die for us. Comfort may be right in one way: we are not worthy of heaven. However, even despite this, we are beautiful handiwork in God’s sight. And He does love the good we do, along with the love and compassion we show for one another. That’s why He gave us one another–to support. We are not islands. Comfort is trying to make us islands.

      • December 23, 2014 10:28 am

        I appreciate your comments. I don’t know what all WotM says to people on the street but what comes across in the broadcast is an ironclad black or white theology that doesn’t incorporate or ignores far too many theological rules. Especially infallible ignorance.
        I cannot say for certainty but my strong supposition is that Comfort believes only in an imparted righteousness whereby it is only Christ’s righteousness that allows us to stand before God and our souls themselves are really still unclean. This is opposed to our understanding of infused righteousness whereby through Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross and our acceptance of it and through the Sacraments of the Church we ourselves actually become righteous. We can gain merit in holiness and stand before God ourselves. We don’t hide behind Christ but He is our mediator to God. My entry explaining more about imputed and infused can be found under the title Imputed, Infused, Confused?

      • Kyle permalink
        December 26, 2014 4:06 pm

        Katherine, I could not agree with you more. What a fantastic reply! I am in awe by your comment. I grew up in a non demontional/fear based environment (speaking of Church only) and your description is spot on. Well done!

  4. Mary permalink
    August 7, 2013 8:24 am

    Your response to those sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, is quite, well uh, un-Christ-like! It not biblical either……. It would be interesting for you to put your money where your mouth is and back up your belief with all relative scripture…. Kirk and Ray are bringing many into Christ’s fold as you would say….. and maybe a self re-evaluation as to why they have a problem with Catholicism, just like Luther and Calvin, might bring the almighty Catholic Church to a Christ-like humble position rather than spewing in an infantile manner how it was the FIRST Christians….. Does first really matter? or does the salvation of ALL really matter? It shows a complete lack of what the church’s true goal should be, as well as a defensive position not necessary if the church were practicing true, unchanging and infallible biblical principles!! Pretty sickening, if you ask me!
    The comments themselves show where the Church has gone wrong… the people sound like a bunch of holier than thou zealots! We must ALL remember, that NONE OF US DESERVE HEAVEN! Not one! Christ gave us what we DON’T deserve…… Catechism does NOT save you… CHRIST does. He Paid the price….. I am sad for all of you…….. that you would be so pharisaical that you would not even investigate fully, centuries of people questioning your very practices…. and they have questioned them with solid biblical foundation….. I will be praying that your veil of deception is lifted…. God have mercy…….

    • August 8, 2013 5:34 pm

      I will say that your charge of my response to those sharing the Gospel of Christ to be un-Christ like has merit and as a result I have made the effort to change that and remove items throughout this entire blog which essentially degrade my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. Those statements which do not lend themselves to the subject or which denigrate other Christians unnecessarily are being removed. I believe this entire blog and the subjects divisive to Protestants and Catholics like the Eucharist, Mary, the Saints, Confession, IS putting my money where my mouth is by expounding on the Biblical principles that we derive our faith from and by citing Bible verses within those blog posts. I believe that the reason Kirk and Ray have a problem with Catholicism and similar Protestant denominations is because they have not studied official Catholic teaching and doctrine. They misrepresent Catholic teaching and beliefs and rather expound on falsehoods common to anti-Catholic arguments.
      While Salvation is the most important thing for any believer to obtain, the reason I “spew in an infantile” manner why we were the first Christians and why I think that matters is because Ray is clearly making a distinction between who he believes to be Christians and who he doesn’t believe to be Christians when he asks Catholics, “Are you Christian?” and they answer, “No I’m Catholic.” This is an erroneous statement to make since Catholics ARE, in fact, Christians, and to further validate that point I state, “Catholics were the first Christians”. Therefore, every Protestant denomination that has followed from early Christianity came from the Catholic Church. It matters because we are why Protestants can even say Christianity exists in the first place.
      You are right when you say that no one deserves Heaven. This is never more true to a Catholic when he responds during the Mass by saying, “Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the words and my soul shall be healed.” (cf Matthew 8) The teachings of the Church, encompassed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church include the price Jesus paid for us all and gave us what we don’t deserve. It includes centuries of unchanged teachings handed down from the Apostles down to the current day. I have done mountians of study of Christian history, in full, in its completed, unabridged texts as I know many of my readers have done as well. I have absolutely no fear of reading Christian history because there isn’t one extant document in Christian history before the Protestant Reformation that lends any support of Protestantism at all. From the ancient Church to the modern day Catholic Church, the teachings are the same.
      While I can appreciate others having different theological beliefs than I do, I don’t appreciate them misrepresenting my Church or presenting incomplete information regarding her teachings and this is precisely what Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron are doing. However, as far as truly trying to plant the seeds of the Gospel into people’s hearts, yes, I do give them the benefit of trying to reach the world for Christ even though I highly disagree with their methods of evangelizing with what looks like a ‘shame and blame’ and ‘hellfire awaits’ sort of approach, which I don’t personally think makes a life-long impression. I do hope those they do reach will eventually come to understand the faith in its fullness. However, to call me “infantile”, my readers “holier than thou zealots”, and all of us “pharisiacal” while living “under a veil of deception” seems rather like the pot calling the kettle black as far as un-Christian like words go. Especially since you ARE on a CATHOLIC blog space to begin with and the theological ideas here are likely to be far removed from your own.
      I hope you will continue to seek out the Lord and the Holy Spirit as we all are and the Truth, which is Christ Himself and His teachings, regardless of where that Truth may lead you and not be afraid of it.

  5. Mary permalink
    August 10, 2013 7:53 am

    Christine, Thank you for your response. It is never comfortable to be called out, as Christian brothers and sisters, when we stray from God’s path or the Truth. Therefore, I offer my sincerest apology for my prideful analogies and verbiage that was not Christ-like. Kirk and Ray have studied Catholic teaching and doctrine, so their problem with Catholicism is not unfounded. I do not understand why you disagree with “shame and blame” and “hellfire awaits’, for is it not our shame and are we not to blame and doesn’t hellfire await? How can any heart be convicted of wrongdoing, and its consequences, if it is unaware of both? Who are you or I to denigrate the Biblical Truth of any believer sharing the true gospel of jesus Christ? The avenue is not important, but the destination is. False information can lead to a u-turn, or stopping before the destination is reached, which you have expressed as a concern in their witness. Yet, it is not Kirk, Ray or the Catholic which saves a man from hell. It is Christ and Christ alone. Christ imparts upon our hearts to turn from sin and believe, so no man boasts. We are just the avenue by which Christ works. I say “just” because, we are nothing in comparison to Christ. You have stated that Christianity, both protestant and Catholic would not exist if it were not for the Catholic Church. So, ultimately, is what you are saying that the Catholic Church is responsible for Christianity rather than Christ? We can’t thwart God’s plan. Christ, and His earth are the sole reason why Christianity exists today. To state that any one or any church or lack thereof can change that, or is the sole reason of existence, is not only inaccurate, it is boastful. Do you truly think that Christianity would NOT exist without the Catholic Church? God has no limits, for He is all powerful. It removes God’s almighty hand from the equation. Longevity does not impart purity from infallibility. Why on earth would any Christian-Born again-Catholic answer “no, I am Catholic.”? Could it be because the church has failed him? Could it be that the eucharist does not impart enough upon a non-believer that He has committed a crime against God, and has a fine to pay? Could it be that he was never really told that his fine, can’t be erased, but was fully paid for by Christ, once and for all? Salvation does not, and never did lie in our hands. We must all remember that any church has both true believers and non believers sitting in their pews, each and every service. So when a flyer is left, that might move any one of the non-believers to the Truth of Jesus Christ, albeit Protestant or Catholic, there should be no issue. However, if either(protestant & Catholic) is giving false witness, then it is any Christian’s duty to call them out, not for their own sake, but for Christ’s. Here are some scripture references that may help you understand why Kirk, Ray and protestants, like myself, have concerns with Catholicism… Sola Scriptura: 2Timothy 3:16 shows that Sola is Biblical. John 14:6 is the Sola for Christ alone. Ephesians 2: 8 & 9 is Grace alone. Romans 3:28 and all of Romans 4 is Faith alone. Sola Deo Gloria is Romans 11:36, the Glory goes to God alone. Eucharist: Hebrew’s 9: 24-28 & Hebrews 10 states that Christ died, (past tense….He does not die continually), only one time for all the sin of the believer. The eucharist clearly denies the humanity of Christ. Christ’s blood is clearly in his body, not in any cups of wine or juice. Even at the last supper, Christ used wine as a symbol. He did not bleed into a cup. It was a representation, not literal. He said, “It is finished.” and He is seated at the right hand of the Father, so we know the work of the sacrifice is done. Also, in Mary’s song, Mary states, rejoice in Christ MY savior. If Mary was without sin, she would not need a savior. These are just a few reasons for concern. Does this mean that a born again-Catholic is not truly saved? absolutely not……. but it does mean that everything must be held up against the grit of all scripture, in order for it to be true. When a Vicar, or a church, or a Christian brother/sister states things that are inconsistent with scripture, their error is not of God, for God never changes. God is immutable, and He never contradicts Himself. There is nothing inconsistent with Scripture in Kirk and Ray’s testimony. However, there is inconsistency with Catholic doctrine. I would hope that you would search it out fully, and discuss your concerns about doctrine, to see if it really is true, not through history, but Biblically…. rather than discredit those who have investigated and found error. May Christ’s love shine upon you, today and always.

    • August 22, 2013 9:01 am

      Mary, thank you for writing back. I wanted to reply to you quickly to let you know that I did see your response and that I do want to answer you and dialogue about this, but unfortunately I’ve been so busy of late that I cannot devote the proper time to giving your reply the attention it deserves. I genuinely want to reply and I want to take the time to reply with a full answer so I ask your patience of me a little longer and I hope to be able to get to it soon. Since it’s such a lengthy reply I will probably reply via email so that we can correspond that way. Pax tecum.

    • Tim permalink
      September 22, 2013 7:01 pm

      Hello, I somehow came across this blog after I viewed Kirk Cameron’s and Ray Comfort’s video on Mormonism… This video caught my attention because I have 2 brothers that are devout Mormons and I have been studying their beliefs. I love my brothers and I am saddened that they and their families have been deceived by this fictitious faith.
      Anyway, I am a Roman Catholic, and could not help but chime in to the conversation between Christine and Mary. I wanted to offer Mary some thoughts and information regarding her concerns with Catholicism.
      I would also like to say that I am often reminded by my Church Pastor and Deacon that we Catholics do consider our Protestant friends as our “Brothers and Sisters” in Christ.
      Please forgive my intrusion if it is unwelcomed.
      Mary, here is what I would like to offer you for consideration to a few of your concerns.
      You Say: Sola Scriptura: 2Timothy 3:16 shows that Sola is Biblical.
      2Timothy 3:16 reads as follows: All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
      So I must ask, Where does it say scripture alone? I don’t see the term or words scripture only or scripture alone. The Catholic Church agrees and teaches that scripture is inspired by God. The church teaches that Scripture AND Tradition (Tradition being the un written teachings handed over from Jesus Christ to the Apostles and continued on to their successors) are the ways in which we learn of the Word.
      How do you think the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ were taught and learned in the first centuries of Christianity, before scripture was distributed in print? It was by Tradition (oral teaching under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit).

      The following 5 paragraphs are not my own thoughts, but I wanted to pass along as information you may want to consider regarding your position of Sola Scriptura.

      The Bible actually contradicts the notion that Sola Scriptura that is sufficient as the complete rule of faith. Paul says that much Christian teaching is to be found in the tradition which is handed down by word of mouth (2 Tim. 2:2). He instructs us to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).

      This oral teaching was accepted by Christians, just as they accepted the written teaching that came to them later. Jesus told his disciples: “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me” (Luke 10:16). The Church, in the persons of the apostles, was given the authority to teach by Christ; the Church would be his representative. He commissioned them, saying, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matt. 28:19).

      And how was this to be done? By preaching, by oral instruction: “So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). The Church would always be the living teacher. It is a mistake to limit “Christ’s word” to the written word only or to suggest that all his teachings were reduced to writing. The Bible nowhere supports either notion.

      Further, it is clear that the oral teaching of Christ would last until the end of time. “’But the word of the Lord abides forever.’ That word is the good news which was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:25). Note that the word has been “preached”—that is, communicated orally.
      This would endure. It would not be
      supplanted by a written record like the Bible (supplemented, yes, but not supplanted), and would continue to have its own authority.

      This is made clear when the apostle Paul tells Timothy: “[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). Here we see the first few links in the chain of apostolic tradition that has been passed down intact from the apostles to our own day. Paul instructed Timothy to pass on the oral teachings (traditions) that he had received from the apostle. He was to give these to men who would be able to teach others, thus perpetuating the chain. Paul gave this instruction not long before his death (2 Tim. 4:6–8), as a reminder to Timothy of how he should conduct his ministry.

      IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
      permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
      +Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004

      There is absolutely no scripture support for Sola Scriptura!!

      You Say: Ephesians 2: 8 & 9 is Grace alone. Romans 3:28 and all of Romans 4 is Faith alone.

      The Bible nowhere uses the expressions “justification by faith alone” or “salvation by faith alone.
      Catholics believe in salvation by grace alone, however grace through faith and works… (not faith alone and not works alone). James 2:14-17 states that Faith without Works is dead.

      You Say: Also, in Mary’s song, Mary states, rejoice in Christ MY savior. If Mary was without sin, she would not need a savior. These are just a few reasons for concern.

      Yes, Mary was without sin, but she was still a human being and a descendant of Adam and Eve. Unlike you and I, who inherited original sin due to the fall of Adam and Eve, through the Grace and will of God, she was born without original sin and remained without sin. God saved Mary BEFORE she was stained with the sin that you and I inherited from Adam and Eve. Since Christ is God, why wouldn’t Mary rejoice and proclaim Christ My Savior?

      Regarding your concern with The Eucharist:
      This issue deserves a very detailed and comprehensive review of both the Passover in the Old Testament as well as the true meaning of the new covenant and how and why Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist, after all, we both know that this is one of the major issues that divides your faith with Catholicism. If you have a sincere interest in learning more of the true meaning of this sacrament, I invite you to look up works by Dr. Scott Hahn and other scholar converts from Protestant faiths or go to
      However, as a start, you may want to refer to John 6: 32-68, specifically verses 53-57,

      • September 23, 2013 7:47 pm

        What’s interesting, Tim is that when I emailed Mary my reply to her statement I think I answered her almost verbatim to what you’ve mentioned here, including the Catholic Answers website info. It’s wonderful to see that Catholics are able to correspond adequately about our faith. I hope that the information we wrote will provide an opportunity to deliberate on the answers and hopefully plant the seeds of knowledge. Sorry if the blog was giving you trouble earlier, I haven’t had the opportunity to approve your comment before just now so I promise I didn’t remove before.
        God Bless.

  6. September 16, 2013 7:19 am

    All those who protested against the Church never know what is waiting for them.This was kept until the end of days.

  7. Lila permalink
    December 14, 2015 5:31 pm

    Thank you for this post. I do try to use Comfort’s techniques when I evangelize (I am Protestant). I am coming to see a lot of the truth the Catholic Church has to offer. However, in this post, I am not as concerned with the arguments about the Virgin Mary, or of Comfort’s misunderstanding of the RC church (I have read them). I am concerned with what you, as a Catholic, feel about his presentation of the law, and how it relates to salvation through faith and grace. Do you, as a Catholic, feel that Comfort’s approach to the law and grace is Biblical and sound? Is it heretical to use his technique?

    The thing is, when I evangelize, I don’t attack Catholics for being Catholic. I don’t “get people” on Mary or stuff like that. I try to simply present the fact that we are sinners and that it’s Christ’s atoning sacrifice that purchased our salvation. In response to this, we walk in good works. That’s where the heart of evangelism is. I just want people to know Jesus.

    I understand your concerns about him being so formulaic and even black-and-white. But the thing is, people need to recognize their sin. And the simple seed of the Gospel message needs to get out there! It really does help to have it broken down. I think that Catholics can learn from that, especially with the New Evangelization. No, people don’t like to face their sins or talk about Hell. We are deeply sinful creatures. But you present the truth with love.

    • September 23, 2016 7:25 pm

      Thanks for writing a comment and I apologize for the delay. I will admit that I am not as familiar with Comfort’s approach to the law and grace so I cannot draw a reference to the technique he uses. I am familiar with many evangelical theological beliefs regarding “law”, “Grace” and its effect or hindrance to Salvation. Perhaps it would be helpful for you if I outline the role of Grace and faith in obtaining Salvation from a Catholic perspective. Take a look at my entry, How a Catholic Gets to HeavenAre you Saved?and Salvation by Works. The very short answer is that through an initial Grace we are given the opportunity to respond the the call of God on our hearts (not anything we did or worked for, but only that Grace which was given by God), that by our assent we cooperate with God to accomplish the “works He created beforehand that we should walk in them” (Eph 2:10) and we strive to walk in those works – which we do not believe are a natural inclination simply flowing from our acceptance to follow God, but rather a conscience consent we can freely ignore or deliberately act against.
      I think the basis for belief between Christian entities is not so far off as we imagine in some cases, but the presentation of it can be detrimental to others faith and a stumbling block. Although I would say the faith cannot simply be reduced to a single formula or concept and lived, nor would I say that faith is relative to the believer and their private interpretation. I think that presenting the truth of the Gospel in its fullness, in charity, and with the understanding that “while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” is a perfectly acceptable thing to say. I just don’t think hitting people with “you’re a sinner and you’re going to Hell” right off the bat is necessarily the best opening line. For me, it is just as truthful a statement to start off with, “You know Jesus loves you right?” I think most people are painfully aware of their sin because it lodges in the soul like a glass shard. I prefer to leave off addressing one’s sins and focusing on giving them a pathway out of it. Unless they’re hardened unrepentant stubborn people who are proudly persisting in their sin, then I might work around to the consequence of that sin. I don’t think the topic of Hell or Sin has to be avoided or that people need not talk about it, but I think a lot has to do with the WAY we talk about it and approach it particularly because we as a culture have, in the past, been abused by it.
      I guess the bottom line for me is if people are treated with respect, shown that Jesus loves them no matter what, and that they can turn to Him for anything, that’s the most important thing and it doesn’t have to be a complicated message, even Catholics can deliver that message in the context of the fullness of our faith without compromising it and still be very easy to understand. Mother Angelica was very much that way. Discussing faith with another Christian – I believe – should always be in the context of mutual respect. That can be very difficult to find in Christian circles where many feel theologically and doctrinally superior to Catholics with the motive of getting them out of the Church.


  1. The Pope Declares Man Can Save Himself Read more at

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: