Catholic and Protestant Beliefs

[jpete79]

rbrooks:

jpete,

Good job on slowing down the discussion. Great idea! I am on track with the A&E part. I think it is just a matter of language here and that we all ultimately agree on the issue of God, man and sin.

In fact, my opinion on most matters of disagreement between catholics and non-catholics is simply language. We all believe in Christ and most catholics seek Him on a personal as well as collective lev el through the church.

I also walked the road you were on, but was lead to the Church, vice you being lead away. I know God has His plan for all of us and we are where we are according to His will for our lives. So I also will not make any attempt at conversion of anyone. Not my job, it’s Gods. I have been in the mix of close family who have left the church for their own disagreements with the authority of the church, but as I said, God has His plan for us all, we should simply be instuments for Him.

I am wondering where we are going in this thread. Since many of us here are converts and have a fairly good grasp on what non-catholics believe, would it be only fair that you purchase a catechism and study up on the major points where you may find disagreement? Durring my conversion process, at one point I was ready to remove my wife and children from the church. Although she was a cradle catholic and not very educated about her faith (a whole other topic for us catholics), she said, “what does the church say?” This was in responce to my new found anti-catholic information. It is only fair for anyone making any disagreement, based upon what they “think” about the church, to find out for themselves. Agree?? We could go on for ever, back and forth on many issues.

God bless us all and grant us grace to love one another as Christ loves the Church!

Rich

Rich:

I am trying to get a grasp on beliefs basically. I will actually read the Catechism but the reason I am on the board is to see people’s personal beliefs. What people have to say for themselves.

Basically I am trying to unjudgmentally learn about Catholicism and hopefully give you all a grasp to unjudgmentally learn about protestantism.

The first thread I was looking into specific issues…now I am looking into the central beliefs.

I know I can read the Nicene Creed, I know I can look to the Catechism but I want to hear words from people themselves and get an insight to who they are underneath (in the heart)…for no other reason than knowing them and curiousity and to better enable myself to loving them (as people and siblings).

 

[jpete79]

Della:

What you need, jpete, is a solid course in Church history in order to understanding how the differences between the Catholic Church (the origin of all Protestant churches) and other Christian bodies came about. I highly doubt you have had the Catholic side of things explained in their best light, am I right?

In very simple terms, the Catholic Church was founded by Christ during his lifetime on earth. Pentecost is considered the date from which the Church began to function as the Church and not merely as followers of Jesus.

During the Apostolic times the NT was written. It was not a cohesive whole, as we have it today, of course, but rather many writings passed around the churches (we’d say parishes) of the Christian world. In order to establish which writings were truly inspired, the Church look over ALL the writings of the first few centuries and came up with books we have today in the 4th century. Up until that time, the Church functioned fully without any set canon of the Bible because the oral teachings of the Apostles handed down to their successors, the bishops of the Church, were the basis of the Christian faith. This is called Sacred Tradition out of which we have the writings of the Early Church Fathers as well as the NT. So, the NT was the product of the Church and not the other way around.

In order to understand Catholic teaching you must first understand the history of the Church and why the Reformers of the 16th century broke from it to form their own communions. The Church was in need of reforms–serious ones, but Luther and others wouldn’t wait for them or encourage them, but rather decided to use the Bible alone for their base of what they would believe and what they wouldn’t. This was quite a new idea that hadn’t been a part of Church history for 16 hundred years. We Catholics believe they were wrong to toss out the Magisterium and the greater context of Sacred Tradition in order to use the Bible as it was never intended to be used–as a proof-text. By using the Bible that way anyone and everyone can decide what is true and what isn’t, and so it continues to this day with over 30,000 different denominations and sects of Christianity.

I admit to not being a Church historian (when I try to look up information I like to be on neither side and go to a generic encyclopedia or resource-though that seems really tough).

On this post though, I am only looking for similarities and not to argue Sola Scriptura vs. Magisterium…

I am trying to stay out of the debate area and start on the agreement area.

 

[Chris_W]

Hey jpete79. Great start to the thread I like this approach.

jpete79:

Do you agree that we now have access to an eternity with God?

Yes, through Jesus Christ (not of our own doing).

jpete79:

Do you agree that the access will also rid us of sin (in eternity not yet)?

That is a very complicated question for reasons that would be premature to discuss already in this thread. Let me re-word that into a technically more agreeable position, k?

We now have access to eternal life, and God has also given us the means of overcoming sin, both through Jesus Christ.

jpete79:

Now, how do we gain that access…the path is there but how do we get on the road? In other words, Christ gave us a path to Salvation…how do we switch the road from our old selves to our new selves?

Step 1: Baptism. It is through Baptism that we receive our adoptive son-ship, where we become co-heirs with Christ. This is part of the reversal of Original Sin.

To understand Baptism though, I think we might need to back up a bit and discuss in more detail what the consequences of Original Sin were, therby putting all of mankind in need of a Savior. I think this backgroud will head off some other potential misunderstandings down the road.

God endowed A&E with certain preternatural and supernatural gifts: freedom from death, freedom from concupiscence (the battle between the will and the flesh), and a special relationship with God (walking and talking in the Garden, whether that is literal or internal, it was a special closeness).

A&E Sinned, and these special gifts, not necessarily due mankind by their human nature, were lost. Like a rich man who loses his fortune on the throw of the dice, they became “poor” and were unable to will the fortunes to their offspring.

God had intended A&E to pass on these gifts by hereditary means. The fact they could no longer do that, was contrary to God’s plan. Since a “sin” is “that which is contrary to the will of God”, this inability to pass on these gifts is called Original Sin.

So for initial clarification, Original Sin is not an inherited guilt, per se, and it is not an indication of corruptness of our nature. It is the lack of elevating gifts which which God had endowed A&E.

Enough on that for now (unless you have questions). In answer to your question then; How do we get on the path to eternal life? The first step must be to become a child of God. That is, to have the divine life within us.

We receive our human nature from our physical parents at birth. And our divine nature from our heavenly Father at our re-birth which is the sacrament of Baptism.

Disagree with any of that so far?

Peace,
Chris W

 

[Mickey]

jpete79:

Now, how do we gain that access…the path is there but how do we get on the road? In other words, Christ gave us a path to Salvation…how do we switch the road from our old selves to our new selves?

With the free will that God has given us, we choose to accept His free gift of grace–that is how we begin.

 

[mattrue]

maybe jpete your looking for our personal testimonys if we have any. you pour alot of your history out to us. when i get a chance i will reflect to you more about myself.

 

[Chris_W]

Chris W:

In answer to your question then; How do we get on the path to eternal life? The first step must be to become a child of God. That is, to have the divine life within us.

Another clarification: For someone converting after the age of reason, Baptism obviously may be preceded by a conversion, a turning toward God. (using your analogy of a path, this would be like seeing the path, and wanting to be on the path, a decision to get on the path, but then Baptism is what actually puts us on the path so to speak).

 

[jpete79]

Chris W:

Hey jpete79. Great start to the thread I like this approach.

Yes, through Jesus Christ (not of our own doing).

That is a very complicated question for reasons that would be premature to discuss already in this thread. Let me re-word that into a technically more agreeable position, k?

We now have access to eternal life, and God has also given us the means of overcoming sin, both through Jesus Christ.

Step 1: Baptism. It is through Baptism that we receive our adoptive son-ship, where we become co-heirs with Christ. This is part of the reversal of Original Sin.

To understand Baptism though, I think we might need to back up a bit and discuss in more detail what the consequences of Original Sin were, therby putting all of mankind in need of a Savior. I think this backgroud will head off some other potential misunderstandings down the road.

God endowed A&E with certain preternatural and supernatural gifts: freedom from death, freedom from concupiscence (the battle between the will and the flesh), and a special relationship with God (walking and talking in the Garden, whether that is literal or internal, it was a special closeness).

A&E Sinned, and these special gifts, not necessarily due mankind by their human nature, were lost. Like a rich man who loses his fortune on the throw of the dice, they became “poor” and were unable to will the fortunes to their offspring.

God had intended A&E to pass on these gifts by hereditary means. The fact they could no longer do that, was contrary to God’s plan. Since a “sin” is “that which is contrary to the will of God”, this inability to pass on these gifts is called Original Sin.

So for initial clarification, Original Sin is not an inherited guilt, per se, and it is not an indication of corruptness of our nature. It is the lack of elevating gifts which which God had endowed A&E.

Enough on that for now (unless you have questions). In answer to your question then; How do we get on the path to eternal life? The first step must be to become a child of God. That is, to have the divine life within us.

We receive our human nature from our physical parents at birth. And our divine nature from our heavenly Father at our re-birth which is the sacrament of Baptism.

Disagree with any of that so far?

Peace,
Chris W

So we both agree that access to God is permitted through Jesus Christ…Good.

The second question we’ll talk about later on I guess

Now the third question
I agree Adam and Eve did have certain gifts…one was freedom of death. I don’t agree with freedom of concupiscience (in all honesty its the first time I’ve heard this word). The reason why I don’t agree with that is because they sinned…if they truly were free from the battle between will and flesh, they would not have been able to be deceived. I agree that they did have a special personal relationship with God though. Now I agree that all mankind falls short of the glory of God (they are born into that sin-which you call original sin).

Now, I agree in a sense on this next point. We need re-birth to absolve us from sin. I agree with the first step becoming a child of God.

How to get there, we will disagree on as I don’t believe in infant baptism. Let’s not debate the point, but I’ll share what I believe (if you want to share what you believe that is fine as well but I’m not going to go through an argument I will agree to disagree).

You have a belief in original sin which I agree with but what absolves us from sin…it is the blood of Jesus correct? So to be absolved from sin is to come to Christ. At that point, when a person comes straight to Christ that is when the Spirit is upon them. This is the re-birth (and the wording of when you hear someone say I was reborn that day).

I believe the way to get there is through sanctification. After the Spirit comes upon us we have to live for God. We will still sin (due to being man and constantly battling our flesh) which is why we still must confess but we should live Godly lives.

So salvation is accepting Christ and sanctification is bettering ourselves (which we can do due to the Spirit).

 

[jpete79]

mattrue:

maybe jpete your looking for our personal testimonys if we have any. you pour alot of your history out to us. when i get a chance i will reflect to you more about myself.

Thanks Matt…everyone has a testimony (all it is is a life story)…

 

[hurst]

jpete79:

OK,

So we agree that there is a barrier that stands between all man and God and that barrier is called sin.

Not quite. It is not so much a “barrier” as it is a death. God created Adam an Eve not only with a human nature, but also with the life of Grace. When they sinned, they turned away and that Grace was separated from their nature, they lost it, and they died (similar to how we naturally die when the soul separates from the body).

Neither is it the same as sin. But it is the consequence of the sin in the Garden of Eden. We are now dead and naked as far as grace is concerned. It is not a barrier as much as it is the loss of a covering and the loss of supernatural life.

jpete79:

That barrier also is what keeps us from eternal life with God.

Well, it represents our death.

jpete79:

Now would it be safe to assume that God still wants to be with us (and us with Him) forever as He did in the Garden?

Well, I think we are called to an even higher goal. The time in the Garden was a trial. Our goal is heaven, in which there is no longer any trial. In the Garden, Adam and Eve were not in the glory of heaven. Our goal is glory in Christ forever in heaven!

jpete79:

If this is the case how can we overcome the barrier to sin? God gives us a way to overcome that barrier through Jesus Christ, His own Son…

This is misleading. As I said before, we still have our good nature, and a free will, though weakened and lacking vision. We are able to do good, but without any supernatural benefit, because we are dead in the supernatural sense. God does not so much give us a way to overcome a barrier as He overcomes it by giving us the life of grace by which we may live in faith, hope, and love - making us alive as new creatures in His Son. Baptism gives this to us supernaturally. But we must actually live this out, and cooperate with God, walking with Him humbly. We walk by supernatural faith, with hope of eternal happiness, showing the love of God in us to others.

jpete79:

Are we still in agreement?

1. The barrier is not sin, though it is a loss resulting from sin.
2. God wants to be with us even more intimately than He was in the Garden of Eden, and glorify us
3. We do not overcome the “barrier” of supernatural death; we get restored. It is a gift given in Baptism, and is supernatural life itself. After that, we can die again by turning away; we must continue to choose to live in Him to stay alive.

hurst

 

[jpete79]

Chris W:

Hey jpete79. Great start to the thread I like this approach.

Yes, through Jesus Christ (not of our own doing).

That is a very complicated question for reasons that would be premature to discuss already in this thread. Let me re-word that into a technically more agreeable position, k?

We now have access to eternal life, and God has also given us the means of overcoming sin, both through Jesus Christ.

Step 1: Baptism. It is through Baptism that we receive our adoptive son-ship, where we become co-heirs with Christ. This is part of the reversal of Original Sin.

To understand Baptism though, I think we might need to back up a bit and discuss in more detail what the consequences of Original Sin were, therby putting all of mankind in need of a Savior. I think this backgroud will head off some other potential misunderstandings down the road.

God endowed A&E with certain preternatural and supernatural gifts: freedom from death, freedom from concupiscence (the battle between the will and the flesh), and a special relationship with God (walking and talking in the Garden, whether that is literal or internal, it was a special closeness).

A&E Sinned, and these special gifts, not necessarily due mankind by their human nature, were lost. Like a rich man who loses his fortune on the throw of the dice, they became “poor” and were unable to will the fortunes to their offspring.

God had intended A&E to pass on these gifts by hereditary means. The fact they could no longer do that, was contrary to God’s plan. Since a “sin” is “that which is contrary to the will of God”, this inability to pass on these gifts is called Original Sin.

So for initial clarification, Original Sin is not an inherited guilt, per se, and it is not an indication of corruptness of our nature. It is the lack of elevating gifts which which God had endowed A&E.

Enough on that for now (unless you have questions). In answer to your question then; How do we get on the path to eternal life? The first step must be to become a child of God. That is, to have the divine life within us.

We receive our human nature from our physical parents at birth. And our divine nature from our heavenly Father at our re-birth which is the sacrament of Baptism.

Disagree with any of that so far?

Peace,
Chris W

Chris:

In curiousity on the second question all I wanted to know was do you think that Jesus will one day rid the world of sin? And if we are to be there too, wouldn’t he rid us of that also?

 

[jpete79]

hurst:

Not quite. It is not so much a “barrier” as it is a death. God created Adam an Eve not only with a human nature, but also with the life of Grace. When they sinned, they turned away and that Grace was separated from their nature, they lost it, and they died (similar to how we naturally die when the soul separates from the body).

Neither is it the same as sin. But it is the consequence of the sin in the Garden of Eden. We are now dead and naked as far as grace is concerned. It is not a barrier as much as it is the loss of a covering and the loss of supernatural life.

Well, it represents our death.

Well, I think we are called to an even higher goal. The time in the Garden was a trial. Our goal is heaven, in which there is no longer any trial. In the Garden, Adam and Eve were not in the glory of heaven. Our goal is glory in Christ forever in heaven!

This is misleading. As I said before, we still have our good nature, and a free will, though weakened and lacking vision. We are able to do good, but without any supernatural benefit, because we are dead in the supernatural sense. God does not so much give us a way to overcome a barrier as He overcomes it by giving us the life of grace by which we may live in faith, hope, and love - making us alive as new creatures in His Son. Baptism gives this to us supernaturally. But we must actually live this out, and cooperate with God, walking with Him humbly. We walk by supernatural faith, with hope of eternal happiness, showing the love of God in us to others.

1. The barrier is not sin, though it is a loss resulting from sin.
2. God wants to be with us even more intimately than He was in the Garden of Eden, and glorify us
3. We do not overcome the “barrier” of supernatural death; we get restored. It is a gift given in Baptism, and is supernatural life itself. After that, we can die again by turning away; we must continue to choose to live in Him to stay alive.

hurst

What happens to someone who isn’t baptized?

 

[jpete79]

hurst:

Not quite. It is not so much a “barrier” as it is a death. God created Adam an Eve not only with a human nature, but also with the life of Grace. When they sinned, they turned away and that Grace was separated from their nature, they lost it, and they died (similar to how we naturally die when the soul separates from the body).

Neither is it the same as sin. But it is the consequence of the sin in the Garden of Eden. We are now dead and naked as far as grace is concerned. It is not a barrier as much as it is the loss of a covering and the loss of supernatural life.

Well, it represents our death.

Well, I think we are called to an even higher goal. The time in the Garden was a trial. Our goal is heaven, in which there is no longer any trial. In the Garden, Adam and Eve were not in the glory of heaven. Our goal is glory in Christ forever in heaven!

This is misleading. As I said before, we still have our good nature, and a free will, though weakened and lacking vision. We are able to do good, but without any supernatural benefit, because we are dead in the supernatural sense. God does not so much give us a way to overcome a barrier as He overcomes it by giving us the life of grace by which we may live in faith, hope, and love - making us alive as new creatures in His Son. Baptism gives this to us supernaturally. But we must actually live this out, and cooperate with God, walking with Him humbly. We walk by supernatural faith, with hope of eternal happiness, showing the love of God in us to others.

1. The barrier is not sin, though it is a loss resulting from sin.
2. God wants to be with us even more intimately than He was in the Garden of Eden, and glorify us
3. We do not overcome the “barrier” of supernatural death; we get restored. It is a gift given in Baptism, and is supernatural life itself. After that, we can die again by turning away; we must continue to choose to live in Him to stay alive.

hurst

Also, if you can die again by turning away than why be baptized in the first place? I feel this is a fair question

 

[Mickey]

jpete79:

What happens to someone who isn’t baptized?

**1261 CCC **
As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

1281 CCC
Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized

 

[Mickey]

jpete79:

why be baptized in the first place?

John 3:5
Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

“Unless a man be born again”… By these words our Saviour hath declared the necessity of baptism; and by the word “water”, it is evident that the application of it is necessary with the words. Matt. 28. 19.

 

[jpete79]

1261 CCC
As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

1281 CCC
Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized

On the first belief…we believe children who are under the age of reason (which I believe changes for people depending on their maturity level) are in the same situation as those who are unbaptized. They are in God’s Hands and under His mercy and care.

I also believe that although it is an important integral part of Faith…baptism is not essential for salvation…again I believe in baptism being after a person is old enough to decide on Christ.

 

[jpete79]

John 3:5
Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

“Unless a man be born again”… By these words our Saviour hath declared the necessity of baptism; and by the word “water”, it is evident that the application of it is necessary with the words. Matt. 28. 19.

1261 CCC
As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: “Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,” allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism.

1281 CCC
Those who die for the faith, those who are catechumens, and all those who, without knowing of the Church but acting under the inspiration of grace, seek God sincerely and strive to fulfill his will, can be saved even if they have not been baptized

See this is where I have an issue…if the Bible and the Catechism are in disagreement what do you believe? One says baptism is essential for salvation (according to your quote from john) and one says it isn’t…1281 CC.

After this I will leave this to rest as I am sure we will not agree on it

 

[Mickey]

jpete79:

On the first belief…we believe children who are under the age of reason (which I believe changes for people depending on their maturity level) are in the same situation as those who are unbaptized. They are in God’s Hands and under His mercy and care.

I also believe that although it is an important integral part of Faith…baptism is not essential for salvation…again I believe in baptism being after a person is old enough to decide on Christ.

With all due respect jpete, “the age of reason” for baptism is not Scriptural. Jesus said, “Let the children come to me.” John the Baptist leapt in the womb of Elizabeth when the virgin Mary came to visit while carrying Jesus in her womb. Infants have been baptized for 2000 years. It wasn’t until, (in large part), that the anabaptists revised the theology and it was adopted en masse by baptists, that it became a popular teaching.

 

[Mickey]

1261 CCC

See this is where I have an issue…if the Bible and the Catechism are in disagreement what do you believe? One says baptism is essential for salvation (according to your quote from john) and one says it isn’t…1281 CC.

After this I will leave this to rest as I am sure we will not agree on it

You are missing the point. We are called to be baptized. It **is **necessary. But if something should prevent us from being baptized, we trust in the infinite mercy of God. There is nothing contradictory here.

 

[jpete79]

Mickey:

With all due respect jpete, “the age of reason” for baptism is not Scriptural. Jesus said, “Let the children come to me.” John the Baptist leapt in the womb of Elizabeth when the virgin Mary came to visit while carrying Jesus in her womb. Infants have been baptized for 2000 years. It wasn’t until, (in large part), that the anabaptists revised the theology and it was adopted en masse by baptists, that it became a popular teaching.

Mickey:
How is it not Scriptural? Jesus said let the children come to me…there is never a single point in there to baptism. He said he blessed them…if the writer wanted to indicate baptism, he would have used the word.

If you say that it is not in your traditional belief, that is different. The Gospels and later were filled with “belief and baptism,” or “repent and baptism” both means someone has to have the capacity to believe and/or repent.

 

[jpete79]

jpete79:

Mickey:
How is it not Scriptural? Jesus said let the children come to me…there is never a single point in there to baptism. He said he blessed them…if the writer wanted to indicate baptism, he would have used the word.

If you say that it is not in your traditional belief, that is different. The Gospels and later were filled with “belief and baptism,” or “repent and baptism” both means someone has to have the capacity to believe and/or repent.

OK, so we disagree here…let’s leave it at that and not linger because I am looking for similarities…

now what does everyone think about the role of sanctification?