[quote=CatholicChef]I’m ashamed that I can’t defend my faith better, but some of the stuff I read on CARM confused me. Would it take a Scott Hahn to know what to say? If you care to, take a look at an article that was on their home page under the title Roman Catholicism:
What would you say to this? I really need to study and understand, because most of my family have left the Church.
Parts of it are accurate, if a bit unfamiliar in “Protestantese” - but parts are seriously off-beam, or are worded in such a way that they seem to rest on misunderstandings. And that is before I read a quarter of it.
What it needs is a lengthy examination - not a few words in a post; there’s not the space for that.
The mistakes are not that surprising, given that Catholic accounts of transubstantiation have sometimes been worded for those without knowledge of theology or metaphysics: such as children, for whom such detail would not be a help - but that has meant a considerable degree of over-simplification. Metaphysics cannot - if one is going to speak of transubstantiation in any detail - be avoided; not because it is founded upon metaphysics rather than revelation; but because metaphysical language is the least unhelpful we have, if we are to discuss transubstantiation in detail.
The article is also ahistorical in outlook - it is not an objection that the disciples did not adore the Eucharist: it would be an objection only if development in doctrines about things believed in, & and in understanding of them, were impossible.
One must also take into account that a Calvinist author is writing with a Calvinist outlook on these matters - not a Catholic one. So one must try to see what the Calvinist understanding, & way of thinking theologically, is based on. It is based on more than the Bible. This may help:
Sections 4 & 20-22 may be a surprise to some - the whole thing is quite long, but it deserves a close reading.
For this topic is a theology degree is a very helpful thing ##