Customer Reviews

Romanism: The Relentless Roman Catholic Assault on the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Robert Zins is a former Roman Catholic, and the director of "A Christian Witness to Roman Catholicism," an apologetics ministry geared to Catholics.

He states in the Introduction to this 1995 book that he is using Karl Keating's book Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" as "a convenient backdrop to facilitate our purpose in writing this book." (Keating is president of Catholic Answers, a prominent lay Catholic apologetics organization.)

Here are some quotations from the book:

"We assert just the opposite: without the existence of the Word, there would be no Church." (Pg. 37)
"As we have noted earlier, the only way for the Catholic religion to keep her adherents in the bondage of her theoretical religion is to heap obscurity upon obscurity when it comes to the Scriptures. The more one can be convinced that the Bible is unclear, the better a replacement system can be inaugurated." (Pg. 58)
"It is fair to say that some Protestant denominations practice infant baptism but for entirely different reasons than Rome... There is no eternal salvation begun in Protestant baptized babies. Neither is justification language a part of the Protestant paedo-baptist formula." (Pg. 85)
"We are convinced that Boettner is accurate in his assessment of Romanism." (Speaking of Loraine Boettner's very critical book, Roman Catholicism.)
"We encourage Evangelicals everywhere to repent of their own involvement with Rome. We reject the proposal ... that Rome represents nothing other than a distinctive pattern of discipleship." (Pg. 215)

On James,Zins follows the path of Norm Shepherd and Dan Fuller (The Unity of the Bible ,1992,Zondervan).

I quote from Unity (p181): "In commenting on Genesis 2:17 -do not eat from that tree-Calvin said, `These words are so far from establishing faith that they do nothing but shake it.' I argue, however, that there is much reason for regarding these words as well suited to strengthen Adam and Eve's faith...In Calvin's thinking, the promise made in Genesis 2:17 could never encourage faith, for its conditionality could encourage only meritorious works. `Faith seeks life that is not found in commandments.' Consequently, the gospel by which we are saved is an unconditional covenant of grace, made such by Christ having merited it for us by his perfect fulfillment of the covenant of works. Dan Fuller comments: "I have yet to find anywhere in Scripture a gospel promise that is unconditional."

More from Unity (p310): "If Abraham was not declared forgiven until ten years later, was he still a guilty sinner when he responded positively to God's promises in Genesis 12:2-3 and also during the following years up until 15:6?" "Calvin gave a meaning to James's use of the word justification which is not supported by the text...He argued that for James, `justify' meant the `declaration' rather than the `imputation' of righteousness."

Calvin (3:17:12): "Either James inverted faith and obedience-unlawful even to imagine-or he did not mean to call him justified, as if Abraham deserved to be reckoned righteous. What then? Surely, it is clear that he himself is speaking of the declaration, not the imputation, of righteousness."

Back to Fuller (p313): "Paul would have agreed with James that Abraham's work of preparing to sacrifice Isaac was an obedience of faith. He would have disagreed strongly with Calvin, who saw obedience and works as only accompanying genuine faith...James' s concern in 2:14-26 was to urge a faith that saves a person, not simply to tell a person how they could demonstrate their saving faith...Calvin should have taught that justification depends on a persevering faith, since he regarded Abraham as already justified before Genesis 15:6."
And then Fuller quotes Edwards: "We are really saved by perseverance...the perseverance which belongs to faith is one thing that is really a fundamental ground of the congruity that faith gives to salvation...For, though a sinner is justified in his first act of faith, yet even then, in that act of justification, God has respect to perseverance as being implied in the first act." For more from Edwards, see Schreiner's new little book (p20, 70, 92).

Rob Zins, who wrote his masters on Shepherd's view of Justification, writes: "The best we can do with James 2 is to say that Abraham was `shown to be just' by offering Isaac up on the altar. It may be stretching things too far to say that Abraham was `shown to have been justified' when he offered Isaac. One can be called righteous without being declared justified by God...Certainly there is a demonstration here, but it is a demonstration of faith rather than a demonstration of righteousness."

Zins writes on p189 about Romans 2: "It is difficult to grasp how Paul could be speaking hypothetically. Paul rather seems to be making direct statements of reality. .. The question revolves around whether God gives eternal life `because' of good works or `in accordance with good works'. " And then on p192, Zins concludes: "both James and Paul do not hesitate to apply the word `justification' when God approves a sinner on the basis of good works...Yet these justification notifications stem from a previous justification by imputation...The blood of Christ had to be applied to Abraham for his justification despite both his faith and the completion of his faith by his good works." And then Zins quotes favorably (p196) the conclusion of Jonathan Edwards about God considering from the first the future works of faith of the believers.

Robert M. Zins, Th. M., starts off his book with the statement "To deny the Gospel of the Savior is the folly of the Roman Catholic Religion." (p 10). In Chapter 1 we learn that "The Roman religion is based 100% on the notion that Jesus Christ came and left his own with an elaborate system." (p 13) and Chapter 2 states, "We disagree wholeheartedly with the Roman Catholic understanding of the Gospel." (p 16). By the last chapter, we are told that "Rome has not been infected with the Gospel of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. She remains boldly innoculated to placing herself under Biblical authority." (p 208) He concludes in his appendix that "No, the real question is whether the substance of the Catholic belief system passes the test of Biblical scrutiny when it comes to the substance of the Gospel. We say emphatically, "No!" (p 265)

Dr. Zins opening and closing remarks sum up what you will find in "Romanism" well. If you truly agree with the above remarks, this book will not change your opinion one bit - you've probably heard all of it before. If you truly love the Catholic Faith, this book will not change your mind one bit either. But if you truly want to know what the Catholic Church believes, then you would be far better off spending your money on a copy of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church"! And keep your Bible nearby, because you will be very surprised at how often you will need it to look up quotations and references.

Robert Zins quotes extensively from Karl Keatings book "Catholicism and Fundamentalism - The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians". Due to the extensive quotations from Keating, it appears the book is a rebuttal of that book. In this respect, it is useful if one wants a critique on Keating's book. As Keating levels many a barrage at Lorraine Boettner's book "Roman Catholicism" - also available at amazon.com, Zins depicts where Keating is not too fair or accurate in his evaluation of Boettner. I would ask in some places whether or not Zins is fair in some of the comments as offered by Keating. I would recommend that the reader have a copy of Keatings book for any extensive study on these subjects.

Zins is fairly accurate in his discussion of the key Roman Church doctrines - Penance, Purgatory, the Eucharist, and the Mass. In the chapter on the theology of the Mass, Zins concludes that "as in the case of other dogmas, Rome continues to be a religion in search of biblical proof" - p. 127.

In conclusion, I have seen better books on the subject of Roman Catholicism. Perhaps one that is more fair and accurate is James G. McCarthy's book "The Gospel According to Rome" or James White's book "The Roman Catholic Controversy" available also from amazon.com.