7 Catholic teachings that make Evangelicals cringe
Response to Allen Parr (Part 2)

We appreciate Allen's strong prolife stance and his proclamation of the gospel. Unfortunately, he's been heavily influenced by several evangelists with shrill anti-catholic positions. In Part 1 we posted our response to Allen Parr's first video where he questioned whether Catholics are Christian. He now acknowledges we're Christian but then posted a video called "7 DANGEROUS false teachings of the Catholic Church" where he brings up the issues that cause Evangelicals not to fellowship with Catholics. Allen acknowledges the Catholic Church is the original founded by Christ (2000 years ago) and that all Evangelical churches stem from the Reformation in the 1500's.

First century Christians practiced all of these 7 teachings in some form, even though the actual theological language was articulated and refined at later councils. This is evident in Churches that left Catholicism before the Reformation like the Coptics (451 A.D) and Orthodox (1054 A.D.).

(1) Prayers to the "dead"

Allen's video uses the creepy word "dead" 32 times with a photo of a dead person in a coffin, and a shawdowy vampire figure with fire behind his head, as if Catholics are into ghosts and zombies.

Neither Catholics nor Evangelicals think Heaven is a "dead" place

You don't often hear the word "dead" at an Evangelical funeral. At the K-Love music awards, Evangelical singer Anne Wilson talked to her "dead" brother:

"Thank you Jacob in heaven my big brother I would not be singing without you and your inspiration every day".

There was no backlash in the Evangelical media afterwards because this is normal talk regarding loved ones in heaven among evangelicals. The Bible says:

They will be like the angels in heaven. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. (Mark 12:26-27)

The 2nd century Catacomb of St. Sabastian shows numerous graffiti that ask for prayers of martyred apostles, Peter and Paul.:

• For 2000 years, Christians have asked intercessions from the saints.
• In 1521, after the diet of worms, Martin Luther wrote intercessions
  

Does every righteous person's prayers have the same value?

Allen Parr aserts that every righteous person's prayers have the same value according to James 5:16:

prayers of a righteous person has great power in its effects

Two verses earlier we find the context of the passage:

... call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them (James 5:14)

Elders are presbyters, from which Catholics get the English word "priest". This passage is saying go to your pastor and it doesn't rule out that a more righteous person's prayers have more power. A righteous person is someone who is close to Jesus and we can always be closer. Peter's prayers raised the dead (Acts 9:40). Try that!

Some people have a gift for praying for specific things

Most Evangelicals would agree that we may want a certain person to pray for us because they overcame a particular problem, such as cancer. This is true for saints in Heaven also. Each one has a particular life experience or gift that makes them unique, and different from the others.

Can saints hear us? The Bible compares saints in Heaven to angels

Heaven probably doesn't have the same laws of physics as earth so naturally when we say a saint "hears" our prayers we mean that God has allowed the saint to receive the request similar to how angels know the interior disposition of the repentant sinner. (Lk 15:10).

Angels communicate with those on earth (e.g., Gen 21:17, Rev. 1:1-2; 10:9, 11 etc. ) and John talked to an Angel (Rev. 1:9, 10:9). Jesus says we will be “equal to” angels after death (Lk 20:36) and “like angels” (Mat 22:30; Mk 12:25). It is reasonable to assume humans in heaven will have similar qualities.

Even Samuel, who was dead, heard Saul's supplication (1 Sam 28: 8-25). See below for what was wrong and disobedient about Saul's action. So it is reasonable to assume Christrians in Heaven can hear the supplications of those on earth, as God allows.

What about Saul's visit to the medium?

The Bible has many examples of talking to the dead:

So the problems with Saul's actions in 1 Sam 28:10-11 are more specific than forbidding any kind of communication with people in heaven:

1. Saul went to a medium
2. Inquired of the dead for the purpose of necromancy.
3. Two verses earlier, Saul went to God but got no answer (1 Sam 28:6), so he defiantly went looking for an answer

Necromancy is forbidden in Deut. 18:10-11. It is communication with the dead in order to obtain hidden or secret knowledge beyond our ordinary human powers, whether about the future or current events, which is usually done through a medium via a seance or other dark ceremony. We cover this topic further in our article on saints.

Cloud of Witnesses: Hebrews 12:1 stadium vs a museum

Allen claims that the "cloud of witnesses" in Hebrews 12:1 are like artifacts in a museum, rather than saints cheering us on like in a stadium. Evangelical theologians William Barkley and Ben Witherington both assert the [Catholic] stadium interpretation is correct.

The Oxford dictionary says a witness is a living person who can see an event. Art works in a museum are not alive and cannot be "witnesses". We hope Allen doesn't espouse the notion of "soul sleep" (7th Day Adventist, Jahovah Witness) which is unbiblical, (as per Scripture verses above), and is rejected by most Evangelicals.

Although they are not interceding to God in Heb 12:1, these heroes of the Bible are in heaven witnessing and that supports the Catholic doctrine on saints.

The elders in Revelation are interceding

The elders (saints) are delivering the prayers of God's people (us) to God. This is intercession (Rev. 5:8; 8:3-4) Why did God allow this instead of direct prayers to God?

Jesus is the ONE MEDIATOR

When we pray for one another we are participating in this one mediation, we are not the mediator. When a saint enters into the joy of their Master, they are "put in charge of many things" (Mat 25:21).

Mary says "My soul Magnifies the Lord" (Lk 1:46). A magnifying glass doesn't replace the object it is magnifying. It makes the object (Jesus) appear bigger.

If you want to understand Catholic's reverence for Mary, consider the Jewish people's reverence for the Ark of the Covenant. Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant (Rev 11:19). The Old Testament Ark carried the Word of God made "stone" (Heb 9:4), Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, carried the Word of God made "flesh" (Jn. 1:14)

We have separate articles on the Saints and Mary.

(2) Prayers for the dead (3) Purgatory

Praying for somebody is never "dangerous"

Evangelicals can agree that we can safely pray for anybody, anywhere. Its a one way communication directly to God about someone. Whether its a waste of time is a completely separate issue which we'll cover below, but its certainly not "dangerous" as the title of Allen Parr's video suggests.

Purgatory

Allen Parr's entire argument is based on a false notion that people in Purgatory can end up in heaven OR hell and that our prayers can affect that outcome. But Catholics aren't saying we can change someone's destiny after death

Allen says

One of the ways that you can get promoted from Purgatory to Heaven is through the prayers of the living saints.

Our prayers only make their journey towards heaven easier, and lessens their suffering. This doesn't change their ultimate destiny. They are all headed for Heaven.

A simple way to explain Purgatory is that its the "mudroom" for Heaven. When kids come in the house after playing in the mud, they take of their shoes and change their cloths in the mudroom.

For nothing unclean can enter the presence of God in heaven (Rev. 21:27)
See also (Mat 22:12)

If an Evangelical wants to argue that this cleanup is unnecessary because of what Jesus did on the cross, we can talk about that.

Those headed for hell have no such way to get cleaned up, they are forever lost to the abyss of hell

To his credit, Allen refers to the Book of Maccabees which demonstrates prayers for the dead, and sin offerings. The Deuterocanonical books (which Evangelicals call the Apocrypha) have always been part of the Canon of Scripture. However, instead of diving into this Scripture, Allen sidesteps the entire passage after reading it and says:

"yes, but..." (pivots to New Testament)

Effectively, he is conceding that the Catholic interpretation of Maccabees is valid.

He points to New Testament passages that confirm we cannot change a person's destiny after death.

Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment (Heb 9:27) 

Catholics totally agree with this passage. Purgatory is an result of this judgment. People in Purgatory died in friendship with Jesus and are headed for Heaven, but Jesus is purifying them.

Allan believes there are consequences after death for non-serious sin, that the imperfect believer will not get as much reward in Heaven. This is very similar to the punishment of Purgatory, except that Purgatory is temporary, while his concept of the consequences is permanent.

C.S. Lewis, the great Protestant writer of the Narnia series says:

Of course I pray for the dead. At our age the majority of those we love best are dead. What sort of intercourse with God could I have if what I love best were unmentionable to Him? I believe in purgatory. Our souls demand purgatory, don't they? My favourite image on this matter comes from the dentist's chair. I hope that when the tooth of life is drawn, a voice will say, 'Rinse your mouth out with this.' This will be purgatory.

- C.S. Lewis, Letters to Malcolm: Chiefly on prayer, p. 107-109

Finally, no Catholic is mandated to pray for people in purgatory if they don't want. We just find it sad that your loved ones in purgatory don't have more people praying for them. We have separate articles on Purgatory in the Bible and Purgatory in the Church Fathers.

(4) Transubstantiation

What did Jesus serve at the last supper if the Eucharist is his body?

Allan Parr points to the last supper to "prove" the Eucharist is not Jesus' body, since he didn't

... take a part of his body, or piercing his skin to get blood, or his finger, or a piece of his stomach ... (Allen gestures as if to pull out a piece of his stomach out with cringing face).

The 2nd century Romans accused Christians of cannibalism when they heard about the Eucharist, so Allen Parr is in good company. But Jesus' finger or stomach couldn't have been the Eucharist, which is the inseparable combination of the accidents of bread and the substance of his body. Allen says Jesus was there at the last supper so it couldn't be his body to which we respond:

• Jesus was the 'rock' in the desert? (Ex 17:6, 1 Cor 10:4)
• Jesus was the "Word" in the beginning of time? (Jn 1:2-3)
• Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I AM"? (Jn 8:58)
• If Jesus could feed 5,000 (Mat 14:13), he can also perform this miracle (Jn 6:56)

Jesus is not subject to time. Denying that would be a heresy for both Protestants and Catholics. Jesus easily brought together the accidence of bread and the substance of his body at the last supper.

Is Allen Parr correct to say communion is only a remembrance?

Allan Parr claims communion is just to "remember" Jesus. He cites:

Do this in remembrance of me (Luke 22:19)

The Protestant theologian, Joachim Jeramias said:

The Greek word for Remembrance anamnēsis refers to more than just a spiritual recollection.

In the next chapter, Paul recalls Jesus’ words of remembrance, saying,

This cup is the new covenant in my blood (1 Cor. 11:23-26; Luke 22:20)

This is unmistakably sacrificial language, which recalls the words and actions of Moses in sealing the Old Covenant (Exod. 24:6-8).

When we read "do this in remembrance of me", we have to ask "do what"? "Eat my body and drink my blood, and remember me." This doesn't say the body is a remembrance, he's saying the act is done "in remembrance of me".

Was Transubstantiation invented in 1200's?

The Church is very slow to declare a dogma, which is permanent and unchangeable. For instance, the word "Trinity", is not in the Bible either. It took 400 years to become dogma even though it was believed universally in the early Church.

The word "transubstantiation" and its finer theological details were made dogma in the 1200's but belief in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is all over the Bible (i.e. Jn 6:56) and was universally held by all Christians from the time of Christ, including the Church Fathers.

The Coptic Church left in 451 A.D, which was 800 years before the dogma of Transubstantiation, and they believe Jesus is really present in the Eucharist. The Orthodox left the in 1054 A.D, which was 200 years before the dogma, yet they believe in the "real presence".

We have a separate article on the Eucharist

(5) Venial vs Mortal sin

Allen Parr says:

Protestants ... interpret the phrase "a sin that leads to death" (1 Jn: 16) as somebody who is completely totally and finally rejecting Jesus Christ because that is the sin that would ultimately lead to spiritual death.

Allen Parr lists mortal sins (from a "Catholic" website), and snickers at the sin of masturbation as if God's fine with it. We suggest that anyone who is masturbating should stop immediately.

A list of gravely wrong actions is not a list of mortal sins because two of the criteria for "mortal sin" are about the internal disposition of the sinner.

It is ironic that Allen has another video called "Many 'Christians' Will Go To Hell Because Of This! ", where he lists 6 things from scripture that Christians must not do:

We agree these 6 principles are excellent indicators of people not living in His Grace. But its weird that Allen says Catholicism is "DANGEROUS" for saying we must avoid mortal sin, while he says "Christians" who do the things above are going to hell. He says:

This video is a ... WARNING. You don't read your Bible, you don't pray, you don't go to Church but you believe you're a Christian on your way to heaven. You're not a Christian.

Allen Parr: Many "Christians" Will Go To Hell Because Of This!

He basically agrees with the Catholic position when saying:

You are no longer a genuine believer if you:

• No longer experience remorse for sin
• Making excuses and justifying sin
• Are making plans to sin
• Presuming on the Grace of God
• Encouraging others to do it

Allen Parr: 5 SUBTLE SIGNS YOU'RE LIVING IN SIN AND NOT JUST STRUGGLING WITH SIN

However, we would say they have separated themselves from the Body of Christ through mortal sin. This list is an indication of 2 of the 3 criteria for Mortal Sin

• full consent that its a gravely wrong action
• full knowledge that its a gravely wrong action

Allen is presenting the Catholic doctrine of mortal sin piece meal. In one video he has a list of gravely wrong actions that Evangelicals should not do, and in another video he lists the internal disposition for mortal sin.

Its a semantic difference between Allen's position and the Catholic position. After he correctly says that Catholics believe that those who die in a state of mortal sin will go to hell, he says with pity:

If you are Catholic, God has something greater for you called Grace, you don't need to live the rest of your life in fear that if you ... die in the act of committing a sin that all of your works, and all of your righteousness are thrown out the window and God doesn't look at that anymore...

Hmmm ... it seems like he's saying God is evaluating the "works" of this Catholic to save them if they died in mortal sin.

Why tell Catholics "don't worry about mortal sin" and then tell Evangelicals, "if you are doing these things (listed above), you are headed for hell." Seems like a double standard.

Allen argues in another video:

If we have unconfessed and unrepentant sin in our lives it leads to a disconnect in terms of our fellowship and intimacy with God

Allen Parr: How is SECRET Sin Dangerous and Can I Still Be Saved if I'm Struggling with it?

Here he is saying that its dangerous not to confess sin, and in the video about Catholicism, he says it is "Dangerous" to require confession.

(6) Grace through works

To his credit Allen acknowledges that Catholics don't require works to be saved. We provide a discussion of the role of faith and works in our response to Allan Parr's first video . We also have a separate article on Faith and works.

Allen suggests there are requirements beyond faith, once a believer is born again.

The only thing that He requires from us to restore our intimacy with him is for us to confess our sins ... [which] cleanse me of my sins and unrighteousness

"Allen Parr: 5 Bible Verses to Remember When You've Sinned Against God!"

So what happens if this person doesn't go to confession? Sounds pretty Catholic. In the same video Allen talks about "serious sin... ", which sounds a lot like Catholic distinction between mortal and venial sin. We have a full article on Faith vs. Works

(7) Confession

The Catechism says:

Only God forgives sins ... Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name. (Catechism §1441)

Allen Parr says Catholics depend on Jn 20:23 to justify the doctrine of Confession, and points out that the passage doesn't mention apostolic succession, or confession of sins. It only says Jesus gave authority to the apostles that "if you forgive anyone his sins they are forgiven ..."

John 20:23 is only one of many Scriptures that support the Catholic position on confession and the priesthood.

Allen Parr recognizes the need for confession, he just thinks we can do so on our own.

The only thing that He requires from us to restore our intimacy with him is for us to confess our sins ... [which] cleanse me of my sins and unrighteousness (1 John 1:9-10)

"Allen Parr: 5 Bible Verses to Remember When You've Sinned Against God!"

The New testament never said to confess our sins only to God. The context of 1 John is confession to other people.

The New Testament uses of the Greek word "Öuolovéw" for "confess" 26 times, and all but one of those refers to confession to a human being, not God. In John's writings, its always referring to another human.

Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation.
( 2 Cor 5:18)

A leading Protestant Greek scholar says

... not only acknowledge them [sins], but acknowledge them openly in the face of men. Brooke Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, 23

Many other leading Protestant commentaries support the understanding of face to face confession.

Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. (James 5:16)

James is referring to the Elders or Presbytery referenced earlier in the passage, from which we get the English word "priest".

Catholics agree God can extraordinarily forgive sins directly in situations of need, like deathbed confessions, or "invincible ignorance" about the necessity of confession to a priest, but the normal way is through a priest. This is what the early Christians did.

We have a separate article on the priesthood including biblical evidence for succession.

Conclusion

Although many of his videos are amazing, Allen Parr's videos about Catholicism are full of misconceptions and straw men. Thankfully, the comment sections on these videos are filled with refutations, and Catholic apologist Trent Horn's YouTube response has garnered over 200,000 views, while Allen's attack got 100,000 views.

We offer this article as an attempt to help Allen Parr understand that Catholics are his brothers and sisters in Christ.

Related Articles

1. Repsonse to Allen Parr, Part 1
2. Faith and works
3. Catholic Priesthood
4. Flowchart of Catholic Doctrine