Catholic Versus Protestant Church Attitudes on Repentance

[zz912]

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)

It most certainly IS a gross generalization. What you wrote may be accurate for your church’s specific flavor of Protestantism, but it is not CLOSE to encompassing all Protestantism.

I do agree on a few things. Bishops have been too lax in recent decades with reining in apostate Catholics, and administering Church discipline. It has had a pronounced and negative effect on the Church. But Church teaching never changed. While they didn’t lay down the law like they should have, the law was still correct, and should have been applied.

I also agree that priest and bishops should be speaking more during homilies about repentance, and the need for the sacrament of Confession. They have failed their flocks on this. But again, the teaching didn’t change, and the teaching of the Church is still correct, even though some in the Church haven’t behaved as they should.

Now maybe I’m misunderstanding your post, but it seems a bit overbearing if your church is investigating parishioner lives. Church discipline spoken of by St. Paul is dealing with PUBLIC, inrepentant sin. Those who were blatantly refusing to live a Christian life. Having a spiritual director to help you with perfecting your life is great, but investigating the lives of church goers is going too far in my opinion.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9892378]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?

Its the hearing of the word, through the power of the Holy Spirit that changes the heart.
You seem to be arguing that something else has to change the heart. My question is, what would that be? Or, you are arguing that man has the ability to change his own heart, and be able to seek out God, without divine aid. That strikes me as Pelagianism, which both of our communions reject. You thoughts?

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.

sure we can choose to let faith fall away, that is true, but that has nothing to do with total depravity. Total depravity speaks to our lack of ability to come to God, come to faith, without divine grace. Grace brings us to faith, not our free will.

Jon

 

[poptown]

You seem to be arguing that something else has to change the heart. My question is, what would that be? Or, you are arguing that man has the ability to change his own heart, and be able to seek out God, without divine aid. That strikes me as Pelagianism, which both of our communions reject. You thoughts?
Jon

My argument is that human has no need to change his will. Human’s will is always free will. Unbeliever can choose to accept God’s grace and gain faith, just like believer can let reject God’s grace and lose faith. In other words, God calls us, and some of us answers Him, and we have faith. In Total Depravity, God has to convert one’s will before He calls him, so that he can answer. You see that Total Depravity doesn’t fit into the Scripture that claims “faith comes through hearing” and many other things, because according to Total Depravity, man just can’t chose to hear God until his will is already changed by God, right?

Of course, God has to do the initial calling so that people can have faith, so this is not Pelagianism.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9893752]My argument is that human has no need to change his will. Human’s will is always free will. Unbeliever can choose to accept God’s grace and gain faith, just like believer can let reject God’s grace and lose faith. In other words, God calls us, and some of us answers Him, and we have faith. In Total Depravity, God has to convert one’s will before He calls him, so that he can answer. You see that Total Depravity doesn’t fit into the Scripture that claims “faith comes through hearing” and many other things, because according to Total Depravity, man just can’t chose to hear God until his will is already changed by God, right?

If man has no need to change his will, why does God need to call him? He, on his own, simply makes the decision to accept Christ. No need for hearing the word, no need for the Holy Spirit. You see, this is the argument I have with those who talk about “accepting Christ into your heart”, and why Lutherans talk about receiving Christ.

Of course, God has to do the initial calling so that people can have faith, so this is not Pelagianism.

I say amen to this, but why? Why does God have to do the initial calling in you scenario?

Jon

 

[Church_defender]

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

At my Church we had a story about people who were excommunicated in a couple different parishes. Mine’s a small Traditional Parish, and I don’t know a single person there who doesn’t live a lifestyle that completely fits the Traditional Catholic framework(Much harder than fitting the proddie framework).

 

[JonNC]

At my Church we had a story about people who were excommunicated in a couple different parishes. Mine’s a small Traditional Parish, and I don’t know a single person there who doesn’t live a lifestyle that completely fits the Traditional Catholic framework(Much harder than fitting the proddie framework).

With three extra key strokes, one can type the word “protestant”, and it sounds much more charitable than “proddie”. Just sayin.

Jon

 

[poptown]

If man has no need to change his will, why does God need to call him? He, on his own, simply makes the decision to accept Christ. No need for hearing the word, no need for the Holy Spirit. You see, this is the argument I have with those who talk about “accepting Christ into your heart”, and why Lutherans talk about receiving Christ.

I say amen to this, but why? Why does God have to do the initial calling in you scenario?
Jon

Sorry. To clarify, what I mean is God has no need to change the nature of man’s will, that is, man’s will is always free will. By free will I don’t mean good will or even innocent will like the one of Adam before the Fall; nor do I mean we don’t need God’s grace or Holy Spirit. What I mean is basically, as I said, that just like a believer can freely choose to resist the Holy Spirit let faith fall away, an unbeliever can freely choose to listen to the Holy Spirit and gain faith.

We are gravely affected by evil, and we are indeed sinners, and we are blinded from clearly seeing right from wrong. Yet, when God’s grace comes, there is nothing, even in our nature, to disable our will from saying “yes” to God. Because of sins, we often wouldn’t, but it doesn’t mean we couldn’t. On the other hand, total depravity claims that man’s will is not only affected by evil, but itself becomes evil. Man is not just tempted by Satan, but is a part of Satan. Do you think Satan can receive “faith through hearing”? Of course not. That’s why “total depravity” believer insist that unbeliever’s satanic will has to be complete destroyed and regenerated by God before any acts of conversion takes place, which simply doesn’t make sense.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9894311]Sorry. To clarify, what I mean is God has no need to change the nature of man’s will, that is, man’s will is always free will. By free will I don’t mean good will or even innocent will like the one of Adam before the Fall; nor do I mean we don’t need God’s grace or Holy Spirit. What I mean is basically, as I said, that just like a believer can freely choose to resist the Holy Spirit let faith fall away, an unbeliever can freely choose to listen to the Holy Spirit and gain faith

That’s not what total depravity speaks to. It speaks to the inability of a human to come to faith without divine grace. You seem to be saying the same thing. It takes divine grace.

We are gravely affected by evil, and we are indeed sinners, and we are blinded from clearly seeing right from wrong.

Correct.

Yet, when God’s grace comes, there is nothing, even in our nature, to disable our will from saying “yes” to God.

You can’t say yes to God without God making himself known to you.

Because of sins, we often wouldn’t, but it doesn’t mean we couldn’t. On the other hand, total depravity claims that man’s will is not only affected by evil, but itself becomes evil. Man is not just tempted by Satan, but is a part of Satan. Do you think Satan can receive “faith through hearing”? Of course not. That’s why “total depravity” believer insist that unbeliever’s satanic will has to be complete destroyed and regenerated by God before any acts of conversion takes place, which simply doesn’t make sense.

You seem to be missing the work of the Holy Spirit here. Regeneration is worked by the power of the Holy Spirit, in Baptism, in hearing the word, not simply by our saying “yes”.
If we have the power to, on our own, simply say yes, then Christ’s passion was unneeded.
People could have just said “yes” to the law.

Jon

 

[poptown]

That’s not what total depravity speaks to. It speaks to the inability of a human to come to faith without divine grace. You seem to be saying the same thing. It takes divine grace.

No. Total Depravity not just means man cannot come to God without grace; otherwise that would be the same as Catholic teaching. Instead, Total Depravity means man’s will has become evil and satanic itself and can do nothing but to refuse God and anything from Him. As the Formula of Concord says:

Likewise we believe, teach, and confess that the unregenerate will of man is not only turned away from God, but also has become an enemy of God, so that it only has an inclination and desire for that which is evil and contrary to God

That’s why it doesn’t make sense for you to say that God’s grace and Holy Spirit change a totally deprived will, which is also called “regeneration”, because, according to the definition of Total Depravity at least in Lutheranism and Calvinism, a totally deprived will always rejects God’s grace and Holy Spirit. The “regeneration” simply can’t start. If you don’t agree with Formula of Concord on the definition of Total Depravity, simply join the rest of Catholics and condemn Total Depravity as heresy!

You seem to be missing the work of the Holy Spirit here. Regeneration is worked by the power of the Holy Spirit, in Baptism, in hearing the word, not simply by our saying “yes”. If we have the power to, on our own, simply say yes, then Christ’s passion was unneeded. People could have just said “yes” to the law.

The only place where the word “regeneration” is used in the Scripture is in Titus 3:5. But the verse says “washing of regeneration”, which means Baptism. Therefore the “regeneration” here has nothing to do with changing a totally depraved will into a free will, because, as I said before, a totally depraved will can only say “no” to God. How can a man constantly say “no” while coming to God and getting baptized?

For Catholicism, Holy Spirit in Baptism washes away the original sin and and actual sins, starts its dwelling in the faithful man and keeps helping him on the way of his sanctification. It has nothing to do with changing the nature of the will, since one’s will is in nature always free.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9894554]No. Total Depravity not just means man cannot come to God without grace; otherwise that would be the same as Catholic teaching. Instead, Total Depravity means man’s will has become evil and satanic itself and can do nothing but to refuse God and anything from Him. As the Formula of Concord says:

I’m not disputing what the FoC says. but it doesn’t say we refuse anything from Him.

Against both these parties the pure teachers of the Augsburg Confession have taught and contended that by the fall of our first parents man was so corrupted that in divine things pertaining to our conversion and the salvation of our souls he is by nature blind, that, when the Word of God is preached, he neither does nor can understand it, but regards it as foolishness; also, that he does not of himself draw nigh to God, but is and remains an enemy of God, until he is converted, **becomes a believer [is endowed with faith], is regenerated and renewed, by the power of the Holy Ghost through the Word when preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own. **

This is most certainly true. If grace is a gift, and faith is a gift of grace.

That’s why it doesn’t make sense for you to say that God’s grace and Holy Spirit change a totally deprived will, which is also called “regeneration”, because, according to the definition of Total Depravity at least in Lutheranism and Calvinism, a totally deprived will always rejects God’s grace and Holy Spirit. The “regeneration” simply can’t start. If you don’t agree with Formula of Concord on the definition of Total Depravity, simply join the rest of Catholics and condemn Total Depravity as heresy!

Read above - by the power of the Holy Spirit!

The only place where the word “regeneration” is used in the Scripture is in Titus 3:5. But the verse says “washing of regeneration”, which means Baptism. Therefore the “regeneration” here has nothing to do with changing a totally depraved will into a free will, because, as I said before, a totally depraved will can only say “no” to God. How can a man constantly say “no” while coming to God and getting baptized?

See above. And also see the confessions about baptism.

from the Small catechism –
It [Baptism] works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

It delivers from death and the devil.

For Catholicism, Holy Spirit in Baptism washes away the original sin and and actual sins, starts its dwelling in the faithful man and keeps helping him on the way of his sanctification. It has nothing to do with changing the nature of the will, since one’s will is in nature always free.

Well, then we have a difference regarding free will. While we agree in the first sentence, we disagree whether one’s free will is capable of accepting grace.
It sounds to me as if you are saying that the Holy Spirit need not be involved in this, that simply hearing the word a person can choose God without divine will, but I will trust it when you tell me this is not the case.

Jon

 

[cap76]

There are antinomian strains among both the RCC and the protestants. Fundamentalists are famous for emphasizing repentance, and yet they sorely “miss the mark” so to speak. Most of them are Pharisaical in their practices. They press the people of God to do many things which are not expressly forbidden by God. This is condemned by Jesus, “teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.”
I cannot speak for the RCC on this matter, but I praise God that I can testify with a clear conscience before God and men that there are many protestants who clearly understand and teach that the heart of true repentance in its negative and positive elements consists in “turning away from idols to serve the living and true God.”

 

[poptown]

As you quote from Book of Concord:

Against both these parties the pure teachers of the Augsburg Confession have taught and contended that by the fall of our first parents man was so corrupted that in divine things pertaining to our conversion and the salvation of our souls he is by nature blind, that, when the Word of God is preached, he neither does nor can understand it, but regards it as foolishness; also, that he does not of himself draw nigh to God, but is and remains an enemy of God, until he is converted, becomes a believer [is endowed with faith], is regenerated and renewed, by the power of the Holy Ghost through the Word when preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own.

Looks like this passage basically says what I said about Lutheranism’s teaching on conversion: when the Word is preached to one, even if he rejects anything (grace, Word, Holy Spirit) from God, the Holy Spirit still goes into him and changes his totally depraved will. In other words, Lutheranism teaches that for (initial) justification, God’s grace and Holy Spirit is actually irresistible, yet after conversion somehow they become resistible. Do you think that makes sense? Also, as we already know the Scripture talks about rejecting God’s grace and the Holy Spirit for both Christian and non-Christian. What do you think?

What Lutheranism teaches is of course a question, but I think our focus is: is Lutheranism true, and whether it makes (biblical and common) sense.

 

[hn160]

It most certainly IS a gross generalization. What you wrote may be accurate for your church’s specific flavor of Protestantism, but it is not CLOSE to encompassing all Protestantism.

I do agree on a few things. Bishops have been too lax in recent decades with reining in apostate Catholics, and administering Church discipline. It has had a pronounced and negative effect on the Church. But Church teaching never changed. While they didn’t lay down the law like they should have, the law was still correct, and should have been applied.

I also agree that priest and bishops should be speaking more during homilies about repentance, and the need for the sacrament of Confession. They have failed their flocks on this. But again, the teaching didn’t change, and the teaching of the Church is still correct, even though some in the Church haven’t behaved as they should.

Now maybe I’m misunderstanding your post, but it seems a bit overbearing if your church is investigating parishioner lives. Church discipline spoken of by St. Paul is dealing with PUBLIC, inrepentant sin. Those who were blatantly refusing to live a Christian life. Having a spiritual director to help you with perfecting your life is great, but investigating the lives of church goers is going too far in my opinion.

I hate to inject politics into this discussion, but what about politicians such the Biden’s and the Polosi’s of the Catholic world. They seem to thumb their nose at the bishops and the Pope and still they probably receive communion because they are politicians.

 

[pablope]

I hate to inject politics into this discussion, but what about politicians such the Biden’s and the Polosi’s of the Catholic world. They seem to thumb their nose at the bishops and the Pope and still they probably receive communion because they are politicians./QUOTE]

Are you sure about this?

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9895160]As you quote from Book of Concord:

Looks like this passage basically says what I said about Lutheranism’s teaching on conversion: when the Word is preached to one, even if he rejects anything (grace, Word, Holy Spirit) from God, the Holy Spirit still goes into him and changes his totally depraved will. In other words, Lutheranism teaches that for (initial) justification, God’s grace and Holy Spirit is actually irresistible, yet after conversion somehow they become resistible.

Pop,
You seem to be arguing from two sides of the issue. On the one hand, you have argued that how can hearing the word and receiving the Holy Spirit change the heart and bring to faith if we are totally depraved. On the other, you say that it grace is irresistable.
Grace is not irresistable, as we have free will to reject it.

Do you think that makes sense? Also, as we already know the Scripture talks about rejecting God’s grace and the Holy Spirit for both Christian and non-Christian. What do you think?

I think that, on the part of the unbeliever, the ability to come to faith on their own without divine grace is impossible. For the believer, turning away from grace is quite possible.

What Lutheranism teaches is of course a question, but I think our focus is: is Lutheranism true, and whether it makes (biblical and common) sense.

It makes sense in both, but perhaps moreso by scripture.

Jon

 

[poptown]

You seem to be arguing from two sides of the issue. On the one hand, you have argued that how can hearing the word and receiving the Holy Spirit change the heart and bring to faith if we are totally depraved. On the other, you say that it grace is irresistable.
Grace is not irresistable, as we have free will to reject it.

Hey Jon.

What I was saying is that: if

1. grace and Holy Spirit is resistible, and
2. a totally depraved person will always reject the grace and Holy Spirit, and,
3. according to Lutheranism, the totally depraved will is “regenerated” by Holy Spirit as God’s grace

then how can logically a totally depraved will be converted? I really don’t understand. Thank you for explaining if you will.

 

[JonNC]

Hey Jon.

What I was saying is that: if

1. grace and Holy Spirit is resistible, and
2. a totally depraved person will always reject the grace and Holy Spirit, and,
3. according to Lutheranism, the totally depraved will is “regenerated” by Holy Spirit as God’s grace

then how can logically a totally depraved will be converted? I really don’t understand. Thank you for explaining if you will.

Goodness, Pop. I think I’ve already done this. Have we not discussed howthe Sacrament of Baptism brings remission of sin and the abiding of the Holy Spirit? Or, how the Spirit uses the hearing of the word?

It is by grace.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Hey Jon.

What I was saying is that: if

1. grace and Holy Spirit is resistible, and
2. a totally depraved person will always reject the grace and Holy Spirit, and,
3. according to Lutheranism, the totally depraved will is “regenerated” by Holy Spirit as God’s grace

then how can logically a totally depraved will be converted? I really don’t understand. Thank you for explaining if you will.

Pop.
Let me swing a question back to you: does man have the ability to, without grace, to come to faith? If so, what was the need for Christ? Why was the law not sufficient to convince?

Jon

 

[poptown]

Goodness, Pop. I think I’ve already done this. Have we not discussed howthe Sacrament of Baptism brings remission of sin and the abiding of the Holy Spirit? Or, how the Spirit uses the hearing of the word?

It is by grace.

Jon

Thank you. I see you mentioned the Baptism. However, I still have problem with it. I know you are Baptized as an infant, but let us consider the adult case for the sake of truth.

In general, baptism is God’s grace. Since a totally depraved will will refuse to accept any God’s saving grace, including, of course, the grace of baptism, then how can this person be baptized? Does the person unwillingly get baptized? Then isn’t God’s grace of baptism irresistible according to Lutheranism?

For adult unbelievers in particular, hearing the words usually happens before Baptism. In other words, one first learns about faith, professes his faith in Christ, and then gets Baptized, right? Then, if one’s will is totally depraved before Baptism, how can he even learn about faith through hearing, since he unexceptionally rejects all God’s Word he hears?

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9898590]Thank you. I see you mentioned the Baptism. However, I still have problem with it. I know you are Baptized as an infant, but let us consider the adult case for the sake of truth.

How about for the sake of discussion, my friend.

In general, baptism is God’s grace. Since a totally depraved will will refuse to accept any God’s saving grace, including, of course, the grace of baptism, then how can this person be baptized? Does the person unwillingly get baptized? Then isn’t God’s grace of baptism irresistible according to Lutheranism?

On his own, he will not see or accept God faith. Those who come to faith do so as a result of grace, the power of the holy Spirit. Once one receives saving faith, through hearing the word and the power of the Holy Spirit, Baptism follows.

For adult unbelievers in particular, hearing the words usually happens before Baptism. In other words, one first learns about faith, professes his faith in Christ, and then gets Baptized, right? Then, if one’s will is totally depraved before Baptism, how can he even learn about faith through hearing, since he unexceptionally rejects all God’s Word he hears?

How do you think the Holy Spirit works?

Jon