When Martin Luther started the Reformation in 1517, there was no doubt the Catholic Church was in need of reform. Yet reform should have come from within, as it always had. In light of Mt 13:24-30, it's obvious the Church Jesus founded would always have Judases, but it would always nevertheless still be the Church Christ founded (Mt 16:18-19) and promised to stand by (Mt 28:20), to lead us into all truth (Jn 14:26, Jn16:13, Lk 10:16, 1Tim 3:15).

1. The doctrine of justification by faith alone (from which flows "once saved, always saved") originated with Martin Luther in 1517. No one believed it before he proposed it. Why is it that the Holy Spirit led no one to the doctrine of justification by faith alone for nearly 1,500 years? Protestants interpret Jn 16:13 to mean Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide us individually, to all truth (Catholics believe Jesus made that promise to His apostles so they could lead His Church in truth). If that's true, why did He let billions of people over 15 centuries be deceived? Either Jesus lied, didn't know what He was talking about, or the 475-year-old doctrine of faith alone is false.

 

2. All Christians, including Martin Luther and John Calvin, condemned artificial contraception and withdrawal as grave, serious sin, until the Lambeth Council of the Anglican Church in 1930. If contraception is okay, how is it that the Holy Spirit led no Christian denomination to the truth about it for 1,900 years? And if the Holy Spirit did lead all Christians to see that contraception was gravely sinful for some 1,900 years, isn't it still sinful? After all, the Holy Spirit is truth, and truth is eternal and never contradicts itself. The Catholic Church is the only Christian denomination that still teaches contraception is sinful. Every Protestant denomination has done a flip-flop as a result of the Lambeth Council just 65 years ago, and now, no Protestant denomination teaches there's anything wrong with contraception. Individual Protestants here and there hold that it's grave, serious sin, but no denomination officially teaches it.

 

3. Where does the Bible teach that it alone is the sole authority (the doctrine of sola scriptura)? If the Bible doesn't teach that it alone is the sole authority, you have to rely on another authority to come to that conclusion, and the Bible is not your sole authority.

 

4. Protestants and Catholics alike affirm the material sufficiency of Scripture, meaning that it contains or implies all that is needed for salvation. Sola scriptura, however, holds that Scripture is also formally sufficient, meaning Scripture contains all that is needed for salvation and it is so clear that it does not require anything else (like history, tradition or an authoritative interpreter) to interpret it. If Scripture is formally sufficient, why has the principle of sola scriptura resulted in more than 25,000 Protestant denominations (and counting) in just 475 years, none of which fully agree with each other? All claim to be guided into all truth by sufficiently clear Scriptures and the Holy Spirit, yet they disagree on such important doctrines as baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, faith alone vs. faith working in love (Jas 2:24, Gal 5:6, 1Cor 13:2), whether or not you can lose your salvation (Rom 2:6-8, 11:17-22, Mt 5:13, 7:21-23, Phil 2:12), the role of Mary and the saints, ordination of women, abortion, homosexuality and countless others. How do they know who has the fullness of the Holy Spirit? All claim it. Yet, once again. the Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself, so which of those 25,000 denominations has the fullness of truth? How can we do all that Christ commanded (Mt 28:20) if we can't even be sure what He commanded?

 

5. How do you know the Bible is infallible? You may point to 2 Tim 3:16 here, but how do you know that that verse was originally part of Paul's letter to Timothy? You have to accept the binding testimony of the Catholic Church. That's oral tradition, and contradicts the doctrine of sola scriptura.

 

6. How do you know which books constitute the New Testament? How do you know 2 Timothy even belongs in the New Testament, while the Gospel of Thomas or the Acts of Peter does not? Nowhere in Scripture is there an infallible New Testament list or table of contents, and even if there were, you'd have to somehow prove from Scripture alone that that list or table of contents was itself infallible. You once again have to rely on binding oral tradition (the testimony of the Catholic Church), to know that God worked through fallible men to infallibly establish the collection of infallible books. If the Catholic Church was fallible, how would anyone know whether or not their list of 27 books listed the correct books only, with no extra books, and none missing'?

  

7. What good is an infallible book if no one can infallibly interpret it? Think about that. Then consider this: If God could use fallible men (Catholic bishops) to infallibly determine the collection of infallible books, why couldn't He use the same group of men (Catholic bishops) to infallibly interpret them? In fact, why wouldn't He?

Why does Jesus want you to join the Church He instructed and instituted in the year 33 A.D., instead of one that Martin Luther began some 1,500 years later? So we can have access to all the graces He offers us through His Church. So we may be one, as Jesus and the Father are one, that we may be brought to perfection as one. (Jn 17:20-23). And so we can do all that He commanded (Mt 28:20), which includes eating His flesh and drinking His blood (Jn 6:51). (Is your first reaction like the reactions in Jn 6:52 and 6:60? Jesus didn't clarify by saying. "I don't mean it literally," because He did mean it literally. He emphasizes it in 53-58. They all understood Him literally. That's why they left in verse 6:66.)

Jesus wants you to belong to the 2,000-year-old Church that He began for you. Study the Catholic position from Catholic authors and speakers. Pray hard. Come home to Rome.