Catholic Versus Protestant Church Attitudes on Repentance

[JonNC]

poptown;9884228]Hey John,

Thank you for replying, but I am afraid you didn’t understand what I said. So I will try to make my explanation short this time.

Pop,
It isn’t what you say about the Catholic Church that concerns, but instead what you’ve said about Lutheranism. If what you say about the CC is faulty, I will let a Catholic respond, as I have no place to do so.

First, you misunderstood my word when you claim that I said that Catholics believe men are saved without grace. But take a look at what I wrote: I said Catholics believe that we have freedom and are “able to choose God when God put his grace in front of us and let us choose”. My quotes from Catechism also says man has free response to God’s grace. So you misunderstood what I said.

And Lutherans would say we have the free will to reject grace, once received.

Second, Catholics believe that, though we need God’s grace to initiate the process, faith is not received by grace alone, since it involves human’s free response: acceptance or denial.

Again, I’ll let Catholics agree or dispute this. Lutherans believe grace and faith are a free gift.

Third, as you should see, for Catholics, even Baptism is done by our free will. In other words, God presents his saving grace as he gives us an invitation to His Holy Baptism, and some of us freely choose to obey God and get Baptized.

Again, Catholics can respond. To be honest,and thanks be to God that my parents had faith, I was presented for Baptism a month and a day after my birth. It is at this time that I received the Holy Spirit. If you wish to say that this was against my free will, that’s fine. Free will gives us the freedom to reject grace.

But since Luther believes in Total Depravity, Luther claims that man, whose will is already fundamentally evil and corrupted,** cannot say anything but “no” to God even if God put his grace in front of him**;

this isn’t what the confessions say in the bolded, at least not the way you phrase it. I’ve never thought of grace as being "placed before us to reject or accept. In fact, even the term accept is questionable in my view. We are capable of receiving grace through faith, and capable of rejecting it once received.
When I gave my granddaughter a gift some months back, when she was 6 months, she was incapable of accepting it, but she did receive it. As she grows, she can choose to reject it.

instead, God has to completely change his will in order to let him say “yes” to God’s grace, and then comes faith and Baptism and everything.

Well again, you seem to have a problem with the order here. The practice of infant baptism is doctrinal in Lutheranism. as I said, I was Baptized a month and a day after my birth. This reception of the Holy Spirit, a gift of grace, is the beginning of faith, and regeneration and forgiveness of sins.

Do you see what I am saying? I hope so. If not, feel free to reply back to me.

I see, but I think you are confusing what we believe with other protestant communnions.

Some selections from Formula of Concord that proves Luther’s belief in Total Depravity:
“For this reason the human being who is not reborn resists God completely and is totally the slave of sin.”
“we believe, teach, and confess that original sin is not a slight corruption of human nature, but rather a corruption so deep that there is nothing sound or uncorrupted left in the human body or soul, in its internal or external powers.”

You don’t have to convince me that we believe in “total depravity”. We do. So, we recognize that justification is, as the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification says, the work of the Triune God. We are, indeed slaves to sin, death and the devil. But thanks be to God for His grace that regenerates us in Baptism, and by hearing His word.

Jon

 

[poptown]

Thank you for reply. Ok. Since you think that I don’t get Lutheranism right … I will reformulate again so that you can see my thoughts clearer. I hope I can do best this time. And I would like you to have two question answered, if you like to:

Lutheranism teaches Total Depravity. Man by nature reject God without any exception, so for the sake of salvation, God has to change their heart by force, i.e. against their will (whether or not is free) which always rejects God.

Take baptism for example. You believe that through Baptism one receives the Holy Spirit, which leads to faith and regeneration of will (i.e. from totally depraved will to free will). But if God wants an unbeliever to get baptized, how can this unbeliever possibly obey God and get baptized since he must reject God as he is yet without the Holy Spirit and is totally depraved? This is my first question.

Your infant baptism example doesn’t resolve this problem for adults. Still, on the other hand, infant-baptized life is just like adult-baptized life if the pre-baptism part is ignored. So if we only consider after-baptism life, Lutheranism seems to be quite similar with Catholicism: both of them teach that true faith can fall away, and, as a result of free will, human’s continuing responsibility of salvation through required works. So it seems to me that regarding life after receiving faith, Luther teaches Synergism just like Catholicism. Do you agree with me on this? If not, what do you think Lutheranism actually teaches? This is my second question.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9885891]Thank you for reply. Ok. Since you think that I don’t get Lutheranism right … I will reformulate again so that you can see my thoughts clearer. I hope I can do best this time. And I would like you to have two question answered, if you like to:

I will try.

Lutheranism teaches Total Depravity. Man by nature reject God without any exception, so for the sake of salvation, God has to change their heart by force, i.e. against their will (whether or not is free) which always rejects God.

Not without exception, but instead without Grace. It is the Holy Spirit that moves the heart.

Take baptism for example. You believe that through Baptism one receives the Holy Spirit, which leads to faith and regeneration of will (i.e. from totally depraved will to free will). But if God wants an unbeliever to get baptized, how can this unbeliever possibly obey God and get baptized since he must reject God as he is yet without the Holy Spirit and is totally depraved? This is my first question.

Scripture tells us: faith comes by hearing. the Spirit uses the word to move the unbeliever.

Your infant baptism example doesn’t resolve this problem for adults. Still, on the other hand, infant-baptized life is just like adult-baptized life if the pre-baptism part is ignored. So if we only consider after-baptism life, Lutheranism seems to be quite similar with Catholicism: both of them teach that true faith can fall away, and, as a result of free will, human’s continuing responsibility of salvation through required works. So it seems to me that regarding life after receiving faith, Luther teaches Synergism just like Catholicism. Do you agree with me on this? If not, what do you think Lutheranism actually teaches? This is my second question.

I don’t think its innapropriate to say that, from the lutheran view, that sanctification has a synergistic componant. Since works are the fruit of faith, we recognize that the Spirit moves us to good works. Of course, we are speaking about the regenerate here. This is how we view James when he speaks of faith without works being dead. Faith, of course, comes first.

Jon

 

[poptown]

Scripture tells us: faith comes by hearing. the Spirit uses the word to move the unbeliever.

Then my question is: if one is totally depraved, how can one even hear and accept God’s word? In other words, shouldn’t the heart of man be changed even before he receive the word so that he will not reject what he hears? What do you think?

I don’t think its innapropriate to say that, from the lutheran view, that sanctification has a synergistic componant. Since works are the fruit of faith, we recognize that the Spirit moves us to good works. Of course, we are speaking about the regenerate here. This is how we view James when he speaks of faith without works being dead. Faith, of course, comes first.

Amen! Sanctification is truly a synergistic process. Therefore, since Lutheranism teaches sanctification is a part of salvation (i.e. without obeying Christ’s Commandment one cannot be saved), would you say salvation is a synergistic process?

Thank you.

 

[JonNC]

Then my question is: if one is totally depraved, how can one even hear and accept God’s word? In other words, shouldn’t the heart of man be changed even before he receive the word so that he will not reject what he hears? What do you think?

Amen! Sanctification is truly a synergistic process. Therefore, since Lutheranism teaches sanctification is a part of salvation (i.e. without obeying Christ’s Commandment one cannot be saved), would you say salvation is a synergistic process?

Thank you.

Not exactly. Salvation is the word of the Triune God. It is Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, His suffering and death, and His resurrection that brings salvation. Our works cannot add to that. It truly is by grace alone.
But it is true that, in response to this gift of salvation, we the regenerate endeaver, with the guidance and by the power of the Holy Spirit, to become more Christ-like. Theosis if you will, or to grow in his grace. Our growth in grace is also the result of grace.

You did phrase it, however, in the proper way, when you said “without obeying Christ…”. that implies a rejection of the grace that saves. While we are commanded to do good works, we do them out of obedience. As the Augsburg Confession says:

Also they teach that this faith is bound to bring forth good fruits, and that it is necessary to do good works commanded by God, because of God’s will, but that we should not rely on those works to merit justification 2] before God. For remission of sins and justification is apprehended by faith, as also the voice of Christ attests: When ye shall have done all these things, say: We are unprofitable servants. Luke 17:10. The same is also taught by 3] the Fathers. For Ambrose says: It is ordained of God that he who believes in Christ is saved, freely receiving remission of sins, without works, by faith alone.

Jon

 

[brianwalden]

There’s really no need for Catholics and Lutherans to be arguing about justification:

Catholic and Lutheran Joint Declaration on Justification

 

[poptown]

Not exactly. Salvation is the word of the Triune God. It is Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, His suffering and death, and His resurrection that brings salvation. Our works cannot add to that. It truly is by grace alone.

I see what you are saying. It really looks as if Catholicism is very similar with Lutheranism. For example: grace + cooperation = strengthen of faith; grace - cooperation = falling away of faith. initial justification + required sanctification (justification being continued through works of cooperation or obedience) = salvation (justification being completed).

If that’s the case, then I would say, those phrases like “faith alone” or “Christ alone” or “grace alone” can only be used to describe initial justification, since things after initial justification definitely involve human’s free will that, being truly free, is neither controlled by God’s will or is merely a result of God’s grace. What do you think?

Also, may you answer the first question please if you like?

Thank you.

 

[poptown]

There’s really no need for Catholics and Lutherans to be arguing about justification:

Catholic and Lutheran Joint Declaration on Justification

Thank you. It is truly a good document … the only pity is that this document focuses on common points rather than clearly listing the differences … which we really want to know … Still it’s a good read … Thanks again.

 

[Bible_Light]

A “Protestant Evangelical” from another thread posted the comments below, comparing their view of Catholic church versus Protestant church attitudes on repentance. This was a bit off topic of the thread so I am starting a new one. What are your thoughts, in this regards? Do you agree or disagree and why?

“…protestant churches demand more repentance and a change of life than do Catholics, and they practice excommunications where there is a practice of sin and unrighteousness.”

“Tell me, how do Catholics avoid antinomianism when they do not even stress the necessity of repentance in their homilies”

“or investigate the lives of people, to excommunicate when necessary??”

For one thing repentence is an absolute. There are not degrees of repentence. Either you repent or you don’t.

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

I am the one who wrote that quote. And I do not believe it is a gross generalization. Yes I know the RC church teaches repentance. But how often is it preached? Here’s the next question. When was the last time you saw the clergy assemble together and excommunicate publicly an unrepentant person? Ya know Jesus and Paul commanded this (Matthew 18; 1 Corinthians 5-6). In my experience of a reformed baptist church, I’ve seen many excommunications and I have seen one restoration. I myself was excommunicated for not living a holy life.

In the catholic church, I Grew up in it all my life and was living in sin and no one ever questioned me! Held me under authority, held me accountable.

A church that is filled with the holy spirit practices church discipline which requires inspecting peoples lives (rev 1-3)

 

[poptown]

Also, I feel that some of my previous posts did not represent the true Lutheranism’s teachings. I am sorry about that. It seems to me that Luther believed in total depravity even after receiving faith, quasi-unconditional predestination and nonexistence of free will. However what I didn’t know is that Lutheranism’s teaching is not all the same as what Luther himself believed…

To illustrate my misunderstanding, here are a few things Luther said:

“This is the acme of faith, to believe that He is merciful who saves so few and who condemns so many; that He is just who at His own pleasure has made us necessarily doomed to damnation; so that, as Erasmus says, He seems to delight in the tortures of the wretched, and to be more deserving of hatred than of love. If by any effort of reason I could conceive how God could be merciful and just who shows so much anger and iniquity, there would be no need for faith.”

“God is the only independent agent that there is. And if we believe it to be true, that God fore-knows and fore-ordains all things; that He can be neither deceived nor hindered in His Prescience and Predestination; and that nothing can take place but according to His Will; then, even according to the testimony of reason herself, there can be no “Free-will”-in man,–in angel,–or any creature!”

No free will? Everything is done according to God’s Will? So even human’s sins are according to God’s will? God even finds delight in predestining people to damnation? That’s very very Calvinistic! I have to say that’s Luther’s first impression to me. Now, thanks to Jon’s explanation, it seems to me that Lutheranism is quite different from Luther’s original teachings but rather is very in accord with Catholicism except the Total Depravity. So, my apology again about having confused Luther and Lutheranism …

 

[JonNC]

There’s really no need for Catholics and Lutherans to be arguing about justification:

Catholic and Lutheran Joint Declaration on Justification

While there are still things to resolve, I think this is more true than not. I also think Lutheran and Catholic theologians are well ahead of the laity in this regard.

Jon

EDIT: I also think my own synod is behind the curve on this.

 

[JonNC]

Also, I feel that some of my previous posts did not represent the true Lutheranism’s teachings. I am sorry about that. It seems to me that Luther believed in total depravity even after receiving faith, quasi-unconditional predestination and nonexistence of free will. However what I didn’t know is that Lutheranism’s teaching is not all the same as what Luther himself believed…

To illustrate my misunderstanding, here are a few things Luther said:

No free will? Everything is done according to God’s Will? So even human’s sins are according to God’s will? God even finds delight in predestining people to damnation? That’s very very Calvinistic! I have to say that’s Luther’s first impression to me. Now, thanks to Jon’s explanation, it seems to me that Lutheranism is quite different from Luther’s original teachings but rather is very in accord with Catholicism except the Total Depravity. So, my apology again about having confused Luther and Lutheranism …

No apology necessary. The thing to remember is that Luther, just like any other teacher, is held accountable to scripture, and one must look to the Confessions to understand what Lutheranism teaches.

Jon

 

[poptown]

No apology necessary. The thing to remember is that Luther, just like any other teacher, is held accountable to scripture, and one must look to the Confessions to understand what Lutheranism teaches.

Jon

Thank you. Could you answer some of my questions I post previously, which I reproduce here again (and have some grammar corrected) Thank you:

1. You said “faith comes by hearing; the Spirit uses the word to move the unbeliever” even before the Baptism. Then my question is: if one is totally depraved, how can one even hear and accept God’s word? In other words, shouldn’t the heart of man be changed even before hearing the word so that he will not reject what he hears? What do you think? Did I misunderstand anything?
2. I see what you are saying. It really looks as if Catholicism is very similar with Lutheranism. For example: grace + cooperation = strengthen of faith; grace - cooperation = falling away of faith. initial justification + required sanctification (justification being continued through works of cooperation or obedience) = salvation (justification being completed). If that’s the case, then I would say, those phrases like “faith alone” or “Christ alone” or “grace alone” can only be used to describe the initial justification, since things after initial justification involve human’s free will that, being truly free, is neither controlled by God’s will nor merely a result of God’s grace. What do you think?

Thank you.

 

[TimeEntrance]

It’s been said - from what I have read in a book - of the Catholic Church that it is “Easy on sinners and hard on heretics.”

I think there is much truth in that.

However, today there are so many branches of Protestant Churches and many more lax on “sinners” than the Catholic Church. Some have no problem with abortion, heterosexual promiscuity, or having lesbian priestess.

But I think all Protestants share a theological and cultural view of placing the bible first and preaching faith alone.

Whatever their criticism of the Holy See and Catholic holy orders… some of them still don the Roman collar and mimic the liturgical garments of the Catholic priesthood and Church. Drawing upon it’s symbols of authority.

But I do agree there are some Protestant Churches that do preach a very socially conservative life and focus a great deal of their preaching on sin and repentance.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9890574]Thank you. Could you answer some of my questions I post previously, which I reproduce here again (and have some grammar corrected) Thank you:

I’ll try.

1. You said “faith comes by hearing; the Spirit uses the word to move the unbeliever” even before the Baptism.

Actually, scripture says that.

Then my question is: if one is totally depraved, how can one even hear and accept God’s word? In other words, shouldn’t the heart of man be changed even before hearing the word so that he will not reject what he hears? What do you think? Did I misunderstand anything?

What would change the heart before hearing the word, and/or receiving the Holy SPirit in Baptism? Clearly, this is the way God does it. At least that is what scripture says.

1. I see what you are saying. It really looks as if Catholicism is very similar with Lutheranism. For example: grace + cooperation = strengthen of faith; grace - cooperation = falling away of faith. initial justification + required sanctification (justification being continued through works of cooperation or obedience) = salvation (justification being completed). If that’s the case, then I would say, those phrases like “faith alone” or “Christ alone” or “grace alone” can only be used to describe the initial justification, since things after initial justification involve human’s free will that, being truly free, is neither controlled by God’s will nor merely a result of God’s grace. What do you think?

I think that’s probably the way a Catholic would describe it, were a Catholic to use the three sola’s.
What do you mean by controlled? I regularly sense and feel the influence of the Spirit in my life, in my choices, etc. however, I think “controlled” is a term I probably would not use. Influence, encourage, etc., yes.

Jon

 

[poptown]

What would change the heart before hearing the word, and/or receiving the Holy SPirit in Baptism? Clearly, this is the way God does it. At least that is what scripture says.

But if nothing changes the heart before man hearing the word, then man has to reject the word he hears, since man is totally depraved. Therefore, how can the conversion possibly be done? So I would say total depravity is wrong, because if human can receive faith through hearing, then human has to be able to accept the word God gave him before regeneration takes place.That’s my argument. What do you think?

What do you mean by controlled? I regularly sense and feel the influence of the Spirit in my life, in my choices, etc. however, I think “controlled” is a term I probably would not use. Influence, encourage, etc., yes.

Control means no free will, i.e., what you will is exactly determined by what God wills, at least for important matters like faith. Since we have free will, we can do really big things that God does not want us to do, i.e., let faith fall away.

Thank you.

 

[SaintPatrick333]

I’d say that both statements are gross over-generalizations. What in the world is the basis for saying that the Catholic church doesn’t emphasize repentance?

I can think of some fundamentalist congregations that are more totalizing and thus demand more conformity in congregational behavior. And they also tend to be smaller, and so behavior is easier to regulate. Such congregations also tend to have a plethora of rules (no smoking, drinking, gambling, etc.) which Catholics would not have–so perhaps your dialog partner is reading that as a lack of repentance on the Catholic side, but I’m not sure.

easier for their pastor to control everyone that way. This sounds like the baptist church my friend’s ma belongs to. Ever since she joined her entire personality changed. The “community” all lives a certain way and believes the same things. She brought him to church a few times (even though he has enough sense to never become baptist) but they treated him like he was satan himself lol.

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

The fact that they believe the same thing is wrong? Is that not better than going to a catholic church where the priest thinks Islamic people are going to heaven, the average parishioner thinks that it is unloviing to share the gospel which includes the notion of judgement, where almost everyone leaves church right after service and no one knows each other?

And you arenot realizing that Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5-6 teaches that. Paul said in1 & 2 thessalonians that if anyone is disobedient that we are to avoid them

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

The fact that they believe the same thing is wrong? Is that not better than going to a catholic church where the priest thinks Islamic people are going to heaven, the average parishioner thinks that it is unloviing to share the gospel which includes the notion of judgement, where almost everyone leaves church right after service and no one knows each other?

And you arenot realizing that Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5-6 teaches that. Paul said in1 & 2 thessalonians that if anyone is disobedient that we are to avoid them