It is in fact quite possible to apply the more general definition of cult to Roman Catholicism. Roman Catholicism, as well as any Protestant denomination, including any held by Bob Jones would fulfill the criteria of being, for example, "a system of religious beliefs and ritual", etc. Thus if one really wanted to argue that Catholicism is a cult, one could.

But the issue obviously revolves around the application of the third definition, "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious" to the Catholic Church.

As regards orthodoxy the Roman Catholic Church espouses and upholds all of the historic creeds which for two millennia have been the sole foundation for any definition of Christian "orthodoxy" accepted by Protestant denominations. The claim that Protestants are othodox whereas Catholics are not can only be made upon a distorted meaning of "orthodox" since there have been no post-Reformation creeds whereby a Protestant "orthodoxy" might be distinguished from pre-Reformation orthodoxy.

It must also be noted that although Luther was initially condemned by the Roman Church, he is now a figure who is frequently lauded by most Catholic Theologians. Luther's call for reformation was not only heeded by many Catholics in the Counter-Reformation but obviously strikes chords with contemporary Catholic sensibilities. No doubt all sides regret the fact that the Pope excommunicated the reformer Luther. (And that Luther then excommunicated the Pope!)

As regards spurious, it is undoubtedly the Catholic doctrines of Papal authority (infallibility), the role of Mary in one's salvation, and perhaps Transubstantiation which are the obstacles to theological agreement.

On these important theological disagreements, however, we sincerely doubt that any are able to preclude one's faith in Jesus Christ, thereby fulfilling the sole criteria for membership into the Universal Church.

One's position on the Eucharist (Lord's Supper), whether that of Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation or Memorial, cannot and should not be elevated to such a status that one can claim that to err on this issue implies that one's soul is in danger of damnation. For (if for no better reason) if this were true, Luther, Calvin and Zwingli, who themselves stand separated on this issue, could not all enter salvation.

Papal authority does not preclude salvation, lest the individual truly replaces faith in Christ with faith in the Pope. This is perhaps as unlikely as finding Protestants who mistakenly replace faith in Christ with faith in Scripture. Protestant language about the Authority of Scripture and Catholic language about the Authority of the Pope do not speak to issues about faith in Christ to the degree that either authority should be mistakenly thought to claim preeminence over Christ. To view Catholic allegiance to the Pope as a proposed replacement for faith in Christ is no less a mistake than to view Protestant allegiance to Scripture as a proposed replacement for faith in Christ. No doubt, Papal authority is an important theological disagreement between Protestants and Catholics, but one's position in this debate in no way prohibits faith in the redeeming Person of Christ.

Mariolatry, the belief that prayer to Mary can be salvific, poses a potentially significant danger if Mary's role is deemed either preeminent over Christ's role or in any way necessary. If one holds to either of these two positions (preeminent or necessary) the theological implications cannot be overlooked. Christ's role cannot be subordinated or necessarily complemented in any way if historical Christian orthodoxy is to be maintained.

If this view, namely that Mary is instrumental in Salvation, is claimed, one must say from the perspective of historic orthodox Christianity that a spurious and erroneous doctrine is being espoused.

However, possible adherents of this position within Catholicism must be distinguished from two other groups within Catholicism: [1] those who believe that prayer to Mary is not salvific but may be beneficial due to her maternal relationship to Christ, and [2] those who do not pray to Mary. There is no doubt that those belonging to these last two groups comprise the great majority of Catholics. (No one here has actually encountered a Catholic espousing salvation through Mary.) Those in group [2] need not even be brought into this discussion, unless one is willing to argue that affiliation with an organization or denomination with possibly erroneous theology is tantamount to believing erroneous theology oneself, a position we do not hold. (For one may hold many affiliations for many, potentially noble reasons.)

The issue then involving those of group [1] is whether one can pray for aid or comfort (and not salvation) to anyone outside of the Trinity and still be a Christian. Our position is that although we view such prayer as fruitless and perhaps demonstrably so, one's practice of such prayer cannot be said to preclude one's salvation. In this instance, erroneous practice may be said to exist within the Body of Christ (as it does in many other instances within the Church).

conclusion

We believe there is nothing to be gained from excluding Catholics from Protestant definitions of "Christian". We believe that Bob Jones' excommunication of the Catholic Church assumes authority he in no way possesses, authority, we might add, a previous Pope also assumed in attempting to excommunicate Luther. We also believe Bob Jones is aware of the arguments outlined above and has intentionally chosen to juxtapose Papal authority and faith in Christ and to equate adherence to Mariolatry with membership in the Catholic Church. As we have expressed above, we feel there is ample evidence and reason to reject both assumptions.

Opting to pursue either of these assumptions in light of obvious alternates demonstrates an unwillingness to provide even a small measure of the optimism or openness necessary for any type of dialogue, theological or otherwise. It also trivializes the very sincere faith in Christ that many Catholics hold, which, they would claim, is not in spite of, but through their Catholic heritage. Though Bob Jones is undoubtedly accustomed to preaching to the choir, we feel he runs a grave risk by deeming himself able to declare such indivduals heretical. If Bob Jones intended to distinguish between the doctrines of the "Catholic Church" and the (possibility of sincere faith held by the) members therein, the fallout of his ambiguous and obviously misleading statement is indeed unfortunate.

Scott David Foutz, webmaster

(Scott holds a BA in Biblical Theology from Moody Bible Institute, a Masters of Divinity (MDiv) in Systematic Theology from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, a Sacred Theology Masters (STM) in Medieval Theology from Yale University Divinity School, and is completing a PhD in Systematic Theology from Trinity International University. You can contact Scott at scott@foutz.net. - AND he could excommunicate you if he really tried hard...)

Chicago-North Shore Therapy.com