Augustine sounds Reformed and not Catholic

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Please go back to the OP in regards to Augustine. We are discussing certain beliefs of Augustine that appear Reformed.

That’s not really relevant.

His views are consistent with Catholic teaching, including his views on grace and justification.

I bet we can find views of Barack Obama that conform to Reformed views.

And therefore?

 

[2nd_Adam]

That’s not really relevant.

His views are consistent with Catholic teaching, including his views on grace and justification.

I bet we can find views of Barack Obama that conform to Reformed views.

And therefore?

Oh, come on… this is a Christian Forum site that we can challege each other to grow as a Christian… mostly to grow our love for God. We know Reformed Christians embrace Augustine… the link goes from Paul, Augustine, Calvin, etc…

“The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox’s gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.”—C. H. Spurgeon

 

[Contarini]

“The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox’s gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.”—C. H. Spurgeon

But leaving Paul out of it, Spurgeon is wrong. (I think he’s wrong about Paul too, but that’s another debate.) The differences between Calvin and Augustine are not trivial. You can’t abstract predestination, on which they agree, from the key issues on which Calvin broke with Augustine to follow Luther and Zwingli: imputed righteousness, perseverance of the regenerate (which guts the traditional Christian doctrine of baptism of most of its meaning), and the authority of the hierarchical Church (as opposed to Calvin’s prioritizing of doctrine in his definition of the Church). On this latter point there is also a difference between Calvin and Knox. Knox broke from Augustine far more radically than Calvin inasmuch as Knox was willing to break communion with people who he thought were insufficiently Reformed (such as the “Coxian” exiles in Frankfurt). Calvin rightly rebuked him for that.

I’m not trying to start a digression here. Part of the problem with the Reformed doctrine of predestination is that given the Protestant prioritizing of doctrine in the definition of the Church, you wind up with a Christian communion whose defining identity is tied to a particularly radical version of a controversial Western doctrine which no one seems to have believed for centuries of the early Church’s existence.

Edwin

 

[2nd_Adam]

But leaving Paul out of it, Spurgeon is wrong. (I think he’s wrong about Paul too, but that’s another debate.) The differences between Calvin and Augustine are not trivial. You can’t abstract predestination, on which they agree, from the key issues on which Calvin broke with Augustine to follow Luther and Zwingli: imputed righteousness, perseverance of the regenerate (which guts the traditional Christian doctrine of baptism of most of its meaning), and the authority of the hierarchical Church (as opposed to Calvin’s prioritizing of doctrine in his definition of the Church). On this latter point there is also a difference between Calvin and Knox. Knox broke from Augustine far more radically than Calvin inasmuch as Knox was willing to break communion with people who he thought were insufficiently Reformed (such as the “Coxian” exiles in Frankfurt). Calvin rightly rebuked him for that.

I’m not trying to start a digression here. Part of the problem with the Reformed doctrine of predestination is that given the Protestant prioritizing of doctrine in the definition of the Church, you wind up with a Christian communion whose defining identity is tied to a particularly radical version of a controversial Western doctrine which no one seems to have believed for centuries of the early Church’s existence.

Edwin

I personally went from a narrow view of Christianity to a much more inclusive universal view of Christianity recently. I know that all Christians know in part, and believe things that are false. That is the nature of knowing an Infinite God as fallen creatures… knowing in part. I know God saves sinners in-spite of our doctrinal errors. That’s the perspective that I have moved toward. I think issues should be discussed within the goal to love God more and to be able to love our neighbors as ourselves with greater capacity. I’m just letting everyone know that some of the finer points of study are just an academic exercise for me, if the topic does not help me love God more. I know the more I love God, the more I am able to love my neighbor. BTW… what do you think about my summary of the work of Christ?

 

[spoiltvictorian]

I personally went from a narrow view of Christianity to a much more inclusive universal view of Christianity recently. I know that all Christians know in part, and believe things that are false. That is the nature of knowing an Infinite God as fallen creatures… knowing in part. I know God saves sinners in-spite of our doctrinal errors. That’s the perspective that I have moved toward. I think issues should be discussed within the goal to love God more and to be able to love our neighbors as ourselves with greater capacity. I’m just letting everyone know that some of the finer points of study are just an academic exercise for me, if the topic does not help me love God more. I know the more I love God, the more I am able to love my neighbor. BTW… what do you think about my summary of the work of Christ?

Respectfully I suggest that your theory is only partially correct. (You know in part, after all. ) Also, these discussions are not just academic exercises. They are inquiries into what is true, and even if you personally don’t feel more loving after discussing a point of theology, someone else might realize something true about God which would certainly benefit them.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Respectfully I suggest that your theory is only partially correct. (You know in part, after all. ) Also, these discussions are not just academic exercises. They are inquiries into what is true, and even if you personally don’t feel more loving after discussing a point of theology, someone else might realize something true about God which would certainly benefit them.

I’m all for theological debates and discussion that will help us love God in greater depth. But if we are truly honest, much of the debates on this site and other Christian sites feed our ego and pride. We loose focus on the purpose of doctrine at times. I think Paul’s prayer are my thought for myself and others…

Thanksgiving and Prayer

For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, 16 I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. - Ephesians 1

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Oh, come on… this is a Christian Forum site that we can challege each other to grow as a Christian… mostly to grow our love for God. We know Reformed Christians embrace Augustine… the link goes from Paul, Augustine, Calvin, etc…

“The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox’s gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again.”—C. H. Spurgeon

Spurgeon’s teachings don’t conform with Augustine’s.

Like Obama, I’m sure he can find some common ground with Augustine, but they believe vastly different things.

You claim to embrace Augustine, yet you reject many of his core beliefs.

For example:

“I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so.”
Against the letter of Mani, 5,6, 397 A.D.

“Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of GOD is able to forgive all sins. They are wretched indeed, because they do not recognize in Peter the rock and they refuse to believe that the keys of the kingdom of heaven, lost from their own hands, have been given to the Church.”
Christian Combat 31,33, 396 A.D.

“Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of GOD is able to forgive all sins. They are wretched indeed, because they do not recognize in Peter the rock and they refuse to believe that the keys of the kingdom of heaven, lost from their own hands, have been given to the Church.”
Christian Combat 31,33, 396 A.D.

“I believe that this practice comes from apostolic tradition, just as so many other practices not found in their writings nor in the councils of their successors, but which, because they are kept by the whole Church everywhere, are believed to have been commended and handed down by the Apostles themselves.”
Baptism 1,12,20, 400 A.D.

“Before His suffering the Lord Jesus Christ, as you know, chose His disciples, whom He called Apostles. Among these Apostles almost everywhere Peter alone merited to represent the whole Church. For the sake of his representing the whole Church, which he alone could do, he merited to hear, I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:19).”
Sermons 295,2, 391 A.D.

“What the soul is to man’s body, the Holy Spirit is to the Body of Christ, which is the Church. The Holy Spirit does in the whole Church what the soul does in all members of one body. But see what you must beware of, see what you must take note of, see what you must fear. It happens that in the human body, or rather, off the body, some member, whether hand, finger, or foot, may be cut away. And if a member be cut off, does the soul go with it? When the member was in the body, it lived; and off, its life is lost. So too, a Christian man is Catholic while he lives in the body; cut off, he is made a heretic; the Spirit does not follow an amputated member.”
Sermons, 267, 4, 391-430 A.D.

 

[2nd_Adam]

The seven churches in Revelation all had their shortcommings and faults. There is no perfect visbile church here on earth that is without error.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

I’m all for theological debates and discussion that will help us love God in greater depth. But if we are truly honest, much of the debates on this site and other Christian sites feed our ego and pride. We loose focus on the purpose of doctrine at times. I think Paul’s prayer are my thought for myself and others…

Thanksgiving and Prayer

For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, 16 I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. - Ephesians 1

Perhaps we are here for different reasons. I am in the middle of a gut-wrenching inquiry into what is the true church and how I should raise my children. My decision is going to affect perhaps thousands of people if Christ does not return soon. So it’s serious business for me. Thank you for the verse.

Edit: Yes, I’ve posted my share of humorous and occasionally inappropriate posts in this forum. The most serious and real things are also the humorous ones, as Chesterton might have said. And when I do say something I regret, I confess my sins and move on. Doesn’t mean the whole business of posting on a forum is corrupted.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Perhaps we are here for different reasons. I am in the middle of a gut-wrenching inquiry into what is the true church and how I should raise my children. My decision is going to affect perhaps thousands of people if Christ does not return soon. So it’s serious business for me. Thank you for the verse.

You are right, reconciliation of sinners to God is eternal business. God is sovereign, and all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved. From my perspective, salvation is not through a particular church, but through the person and work of Jesus Christ through faith. Being a member of the Lutheran Church or the Catholic Church is not the determining factor for a sinner to be reconciled to God. Sinners can be offiical members of the Lutheran Church or the Catholic Church and still be lost and condemned for their sins. On the other hand, a sinner can be reconciled to God through Christ without an offiicial membership of either churches. What do you believe to be the gospel of God which saves sinners? If you look at Acts 2, there are promises made to your children since they are from a household of faith. In 1 cor 7, we are told that your children are sanctified and holy.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

You are right, reconciliation of sinners to God is eternal business. God is sovereign, and all who call on the name of the Lord will be saved. From my perspective, salvation is not through a particular church, but through the person and work of Jesus Christ through faith. Being a member of the Lutheran Church or the Catholic Church is not the determining factor for a sinner to be reconciled to God. Sinners can be offiical members of the Lutheran Church or the Catholic Church and still be lost and condemned for their sins. On the other hand, a sinner can be reconciled to God through Christ without an offiicial membership of either churches. What do you believe to be the gospel of God which saves sinners? If you look at Acts 2, there are promises made to your children since they are from a household of faith. In 1 cor 7, we are told that your children are sanctified and holy.

I’m not interested in believing the bare minimum. I don’t dare decide what is the Gospel and what is extra. I especially don’t dare to keep my family away from the tools Christ gave us to keep us in the Faith while here on earth - Sacraments. Even if I thought belonging to the truest church was unnecessary for me, it might make the difference for a descendant of mine. Of course I believe that an ignorant person or even entire families can be saved in the wrong church, but for some reason God has put all this knowledge and an inclination to study these things on me, and I need to use those talents faithfully instead of burying them.

 

[2nd_Adam]

I’m not interested in believing the bare minimum. I don’t dare decide what is the Gospel and what is extra. I especially don’t dare to keep my family away from the tools Christ gave us to keep us in the Faith while here on earth - Sacraments. Even if I thought belonging to the truest church was unnecessary for me, it might make the difference for a descendant of mine. Of course I believe that an ignorant person or even entire families can be saved in the wrong church, but for some reason God has put all this knowledge and an inclination to study these things on me, and I need to use those talents faithfully instead of burying them.

Sure, there are degrees of purity in the various churches. And yes, God saves us and transforms us through His ordained means of grace. Within theological distinctives and means of grace, there are significant differences from Lutheran and Catholic as you well know. I believe in comes down to this: is Apostolic Succession true or is it a man made doctrine? If Apostolic Succession is true, then all Christians need to be Catholic. If Apostolic Sucession is false, then we should all attend a church which adheres to sola scriptura in life and doctrine. We are all called to belong to the purest church in life and doctrine within where we live. So, what is your final source of authority to discern truth?

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Sure, there are degrees of purity in the various churches. And yes, God saves us and transforms us through His ordained means of grace. Within theological distinctives and means of grace, there are significant differences from Lutheran and Catholic as you well know. I believe in comes down to this: is Apostolic Succession true or is it a man made doctrine? If Apostolic Succession is true, then all Christians need to be Catholic. If Apostolic Sucession is false, then we should all attend a church which adheres to sola scriptura in life and doctrine. We are all called to belong to the purest church in life and doctrine within where we live. So, what is your final source of authority to discern truth?

The problem is that Apostolic Succession is a phrase that appears to be meant several different ways depending on who is talking and what is being discussed. Lutherans, for example, believe in Apostolic Succession, but by that they mean the authority to preach the Word and forgive sins was delegated to all in the Holy Ministry by the apostles, and that while it’s not wrong to have a Pope as political leader of the Church, his role as a delegate of the Apostles should only be over his own parish.*

The other problem is that it’s hard to prove the doctrine of Apostolic Succession as the Catholics mean it without going by way of some other doctrines. So it’s not such a simple study.

*Edit: this is an oversimplification since Catholics and Lutherans don’t agree on the roles of the minister.

 

[2nd_Adam]

The problem is that Apostolic Succession is a phrase that appears to be meant several different ways depending on who is talking and what is being discussed. Lutherans, for example, believe in Apostolic Succession, but by that they mean the authority to preach the Word and forgive sins was delegated to all in the Holy Ministry by the apostles, and that while it’s not wrong to have a Pope as political leader of the Church, his role as a delegate of the Apostles should only be over his own parish.*

The other problem is that it’s hard to prove the doctrine of Apostolic Succession as the Catholics mean it without going by way of some other doctrines. So it’s not such a simple study.

*Edit: this is an oversimplification since Catholics and Lutherans don’t agree on the roles of the minister.

Are you familar with Scott Hahn’s testimony? If you believe in the Catholic understanding and claim of Apostolic Succession, then in good conscience you should be Catholic. If not, well… there is no biblical basis for the exclusive Catholic doctrines which seperates us from Catholics. What is your view on the doctrine of justification? I’ve read the Joint Declaration on Justification between Lutheran Churches and the Catholic Church. Which view of justification do you believe, the Lutheran view or Catholic view? The Joint Declaration appeared to have only removed the condemnation and anathemas only.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Are you familar with Scott Hahn’s testimony? If you believe in the Catholic understanding and claim of Apostolic Succession, then in good conscience you should be Catholic. If not, well… there is no biblical basis for the exclusive Catholic doctrines which seperates us from Catholics. What is your view on the doctrine of justification? I’ve read the Joint Declaration on Justification between Lutheran Churches and the Catholic Church. Which view of justification do you believe, the Lutheran view or Catholic view? The Joint Declaration appeared to have only removed the condemnation and anathemas only.

Again, it’s not that simple. The choice isn’t just between “I believe everything the Pope believes” and “I only believe what I can read in my Bible.” I am not sure if you are familiar with historic Lutheran doctrine - it’s neither Catholic nor Calvinist/Baptist. I have no idea who Scott Hahn is. Was he Lutheran?

 

[2nd_Adam]

Again, it’s not that simple. The choice isn’t just between “I believe everything the Pope believes” and “I only believe what I can read in my Bible.” I am not sure if you are familiar with historic Lutheran doctrine - it’s neither Catholic nor Calvinist/Baptist. I have no idea who Scott Hahn is. Was he Lutheran?

Okay, let’s leave Scott Hahn out of this one. I think he is kind of the Catholic hero on this site. He is an ex-Calvinist pastor turned Catholic apologist. Maybe he started or inspired the ministry of Catholic Answers?

Well, the problem with some Catholics… they become cafeteria Catholics… picking and chosing certain defined Catholic beliefs, and rejecting other official teaching. That’s not good. It’s just like a Cafeteria Christian Protestant… only picking and choosing some biblical revelation and ignoring others. I’m not that familar with historic Lutheran doctrine, but what I have read for statement of faiths, I really like. Maybe this takes us full circle from our begining discussion… there are essentials, less essentials, and non-essentials to discuss and debate. The two commandments to love God and love our neighbor as ourselves is the summary of the 10 commandments and should still drive us, don’t you think?

 

[Contarini]

If Apostolic Succession is true, then all Christians need to be Catholic. If Apostolic Sucession is false, then we should all attend a church which adheres to sola scriptura in life and doctrine.

Why? There are other churches with Apostolic Succession. The Orthodox and other Eastern Churches for sure, and possibly the Anglicans as well–perhaps even some Lutherans.

And if Apostolic Succession isn’t true, why is sola scriptura the only alternative?

We are all called to belong to the purest church in life and doctrine within where we live.

I’m not at all sure of that.

Edwin

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Okay, let’s leave Scott Hahn out of this one. I think he is kind of the Catholic hero on this site. He is an ex-Calvinist pastor turned Catholic apologist. Maybe he started or inspired the ministry of Catholic Answers?

Well, the problem with some Catholics… they become cafeteria Catholics… picking and chosing certain defined Catholic beliefs, and rejecting other official teaching. That’s not good. It’s just like a Cafeteria Christian Protestant… only picking and choosing some biblical revelation and ignoring others. I’m not that familar with historic Lutheran doctrine, but what I have read for statement of faiths, I really like. Maybe this takes us full circle from our begining discussion… there are essentials, less essentials, and non-essentials to discuss and debate. The two commandments to love God and love our neighbor as ourselves is the summary of the 10 commandments and should still drive us, don’t you think?

No, I think the Gospel of Jesus Christ should drive us. But I know that’s what you meant. What is your point with the cafeteria comments? That I should be careful not to define the true church myself and then go find it? I was trying to say that believing in the Catholic doctrine of Apostolic Succession or the Calvinist understanding of Sola Scriptura is not an all-or-nothing prospect because there are a lot of waystations between and among both of those.

Karl Keating is the founder of Catholic Answers. I think inspirations were people like Frank Sheed and John Newman. I spent some time with Karl Keating in Rome a few years ago and have a lot of respect for him.

 

[2nd_Adam]

No, I think the Gospel of Jesus Christ should drive us. But I know that’s what you meant. What is your point with the cafeteria comments? That I should be careful not to define the true church myself and then go find it? I was trying to say that believing in the Catholic doctrine of Apostolic Succession or the Calvinist understanding of Sola Scriptura is not an all-or-nothing prospect because there are a lot of waystations between and among both of those.

Karl Keating is the founder of Catholic Answers. I think inspirations were people like Frank Sheed and John Newman. I spent some time with Karl Keating in Rome a few years ago and have a lot of respect for him.

Here is a quick summary of Scott Hahn:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Hahn

Are you familar with the signers of ECT and ECT II? What is ultimately preventing you from being a member of the Catholic Church?

 

[spoiltvictorian]

Here is a quick summary of Scott Hahn:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Hahn

Are you familar with the signers of ECT and ECT II? What is ultimately preventing you from being a member of the Catholic Church?

Interesting. Scott and I both went to Grove City College and our “journeys” both started with believing contraception was wrong.

I don’t know what ECT and ECT II are. I am not ultimately sure what is preventing me from joining the Catholic Church - as with everything it’s partly doctrine and partly personal experience and what’s available around me. Where are you going with these questions?