Catholic Versus Protestant Church Attitudes on Repentance

[poptown]

How about for the sake of discussion, my friend.
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.

The bold part is very important. Therefore, because coming to the faith is done with the help of God’s grace, yet one, being totally depraved before Baptism, always resists God’s saving grace. How can God’s saving grace work? Do you agree that one will not come to the Baptism if he rejects God’s saving grace?

How do you think the Holy Spirit works?

In order for God’s grace to work, one must be able to choose to accept God’s grace, therefore one cannot be totally depraved. Because of that, an adult can have faith, true faith, before baptism, of course given God’s grace. In fact, an adult must have true faith in order to be baptized. Neither Catholic Church nor the majority of Protestant churches baptize adults who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Why we need Holy Spirit? Because of original sins, unforgiven actual sins, weakness of humanity, etc … Holy Spirit is our Helper and Counselor.

 

[zz912]

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.

Yep, bishops have definitely been lax in keeping discipline regarding these public apostates. It has greatly harmed the Faith.

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

But you understand, discipline has not been in the Catholic Church for YEARS. To find a Parish where they are keeping the members accountable to the call in Christ Jesus for good works (Heb 10:25) is almost impossible, it is very sad.

 

[Porknpie]

But you understand, discipline has not been in the Catholic Church for YEARS. To find a Parish where they are keeping the members accountable to the call in Christ Jesus for good works (Heb 10:25) is almost impossible, it is very sad.

Erick -

Would we agree that God is the judge on the unrepentant, both for their public sins and private sins? Is Hebrews not speaking of public sins? Ultimately God’s justice will prevail and I will trust his Word on this point. Let the one without sin throw the stone at another church member to kick them out of the church. If you want to belong to a church that investigates the lives of their members (as you say) then that is your choice but I’ll pass. You can be judge and jury on what sins to investigate, the sincerity of their repentance, whether their penance absolves them or not, and how & whether to declare them guilty or innocent. Now practically speaking, if I take the “other side” for a moment, this is nearly impossible to do in a Catholic church with 500, 1000, 1500 or more families. The Priests that I know are busy enough with daily mass, reconciliation, visiting the homebound, visiting hospital patients and at our parish attending to the needs of a school. Plus, overseeing the other spiritual needs of the parish (programs like RCIA, Youth groups etc).

Happiness & Trust - Christ says to forgive 70x7…forgive always the repentant sinner. Like I said earlier - and very positively - the lines for reconciliation are long in my parish. I see Catholics every day turning back to God, repenting and getting their souls cleansed. No sadness here. Just happiness and trust in a forgiving Lord.

Pork.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9899278]The bold part is very important. Therefore,** because coming to the faith is done with the help of God’s grace**, yet one, being totally depraved before Baptism, always resists God’s saving grace. How can God’s saving grace work? Do you agree that one will not come to the Baptism if he rejects God’s saving grace?

Until. Until God’s grace, one is not capable of seeking faith. That grace can come via Baptism, and via hearing the word.

In order for God’s grace to work, one must be able to choose to accept God’s grace, therefore one cannot be totally depraved. Because of that, an adult can have faith, true faith, before baptism, of course given God’s grace. In fact, an adult must have true faith in order to be baptized. Neither Catholic Church nor the majority of Protestant churches baptize adults who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Why we need Holy Spirit? Because of original sins, unforgiven actual sins, weakness of humanity, etc … Holy Spirit is our Helper and Counselor.

And, since you insist on the word “choose” (we prefer the word “receive”) it is grace that makes this possible. You say so yourself in the bolded.

Perhaps, Pop, my explanation is lacking in clarity, not in trying to convince of our view, for that is not my intention, but instead for you to undertand our view for what it is, not for what others say it is. I’m thinking that the linked statement from the Norwegian Lutherans in the late 1800’s might describe it more succinctly.

angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.anaccounting.html

Just a few selected quotes (bolding is mine):

Being dead in sin, the natural man cannot himself change this condition of his heart nor cooperate, either little or much, in effecting this change; for “the man who is not regenerated resists God altogether and is wholly and entirely a slave of sin,” and “he is and remains an enemy of God,** until **he by the power of the Holy Spirit is converted, made a believer, regenerated and renewed, through the Word that is preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own.” (Formula of Concord, Thor. Decl., 11,44 and 11,2.) John 3,6; Rom. 8,7-9; Eph. 2,4-6; Phil. 2,13; Jer. 31,18; Hos. 13,9; Matth. 11,27; Deut. 29,4; I Cor. 12,3; Col. 2,12,13; Matth. 7,17-18.

1. The preparation of the heart of man for conversion by preparatory grace is a work of the Holy Ghost, like conversion itself, and is described in Holy Writ by many names, such as Calling, Awakening, Inviting, Drawing, Knocking, etc. Matth. 20,16; II Tim. 1,9; Eph. 5,14; Luke 14,16; John 6,44; Jer. 31,3; John 12,32; Rev. 3,20.

1. There may be several steps and degrees in this preparation for conversion, through which men are led, sometimes in a shorter, sometimes in a longer, time; for God deals, in his wisdom and love, very differently with the different men. Is. 48,4; Acts 24,25; I Tim. 1,13; Acts 26,28-29; Heb. 4,12; Luke 13,17; Mark 12,34; Luke 24,25; Acts 16,14; 13/18; Matth. 21,28-29-Luke 11,27-28.

1. God’s work is not done on man by force, but by changing the will. Therefore, as certain as it is that God alone works conversion, so certain is it also that man repents and that the man who repents wants to repent. For the man who repents does not do it by compulsion, but willingly, although it is God alone who effects this that a man both wants to do this and does it. For it is not God, but man who repents of his sin; it is man who ceases his resistance; it is man who believes and makes good resolutions and thus decides for God, although all these things are the operations of grace, which God alone, without any cooperation of man, has produced in him by the power of the Word by which He in His grace bends and determines the will. (See Pontoppidan, Sandh. til Gudfr., Q. 585, 586 [Q. 692, 487, 488].) Jer. 24,7; John 1,12; Jer. 20,7; Ezek. 18,31-32; 36,26; Ps. 51,14; Is. 55,6-7; Phil. 2,13.

And one more:

1. Since the unregenerated man is at enmity with God and resists God altogether, **it belongs to the gracious work of the Holy Ghost to “remove the resistance of the will.” This removal does not take place by compulsion, but by the drawing of God; **for “the Lord God draws the man whom he wishes to convert, and draws him in such a way that his darkened understanding is turned into an enlightened one and his perverse will into an obedient one. And this is what the Scriptures call creating a new heart” (Ps. 51,12). (Formula of Concord, Thor. Decl., II, 30. cf. Pontoppidan, Sandh. til Gudfr., Q. 485; Epitome, Q. 369.) Rom. 8,7; Acts 7,51; Is. 63,17; II Tim. 2,25; Acts 9,1 ff.; Ezek. 36,26; John 6,44; Matth. 11,27.

Hope that helps.

Jon

 

[poptown]

Haha Joh. Thank you for replying. Your quotes (especially the bold part) really helps. So basically you are saying that the Holy Spirit can change one’s will even if the will is rejecting the Holy Spirit, so the “regeneration” work of Holy Spirit is irresistible, right?

To clarify, In Catholicism, one is capable of choosing and accepting God’s grace even if the grace is not there. He cannot choose because he is blinded from knowing what is true, not because his nature is incapable. For example, we are arguing whether X is true. You claim X is true while I claim X is false. Then you raised an argument against a fallacy of my claim, which I never thought about, and I am finally convinced by you. Am I by nature incapable of knowing what is true? Has my will been regenerated by your argument? Of course the answer to both questions is no.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9903475]Haha Joh. Thank you for replying. Your quotes (especially the bold part) really helps. So basically you are saying that the Holy Spirit can change one’s will even if the will is rejecting the Holy Spirit, so the “regeneration” work of Holy Spirit is irresistible, right?

Not necessarily. And irresistable grace means that one can never resist it. Hence, perseverance of saints, which we uncategorically reject.

To clarify, In Catholicism, one is capable of choosing and accepting God’s grace even if the grace is not there.

So, even if God’s grace is not conferred to the unbeliever, the unbeliever can choose to accept it? Interesting. Or, based on what you say next, did you mean incapable?

He cannot choose because he is blinded from knowing what is true, not because his nature is incapable. For example, we are arguing whether X is true. You claim X is true while I claim X is false. Then you raised an argument against a fallacy of my claim, which I never thought about, and I am finally convinced by you. Am I by nature incapable of knowing what is true? Has my will been regenerated by your argument? Of course the answer to both questions is no.

Certainly not by yours (meaning another man), but by the Holy Spirit moving you to realize that X is true.

Jon

 

[poptown]

Not necessarily. And irresistable grace means that one can never resist it. Hence, perseverance of saints, which we uncategorically reject.

So I guess you are basically saying the initial conversion is forced by God’s grace and Holy Spirit and is therefore irresistible at the time of that initial conversion, though one can resist after being converted to free will. Am I right?

So, even if God’s grace is not conferred to the unbeliever, the unbeliever can choose to accept it? Certainly not by yours (meaning another man), but by the Holy Spirit moving you to realize that X is true.

You see, when we are talking about Holy Spirit, we mean quite differently. In Catholicism, Holy Spirit is the necessary Helper of our salvation. Man needs to accept the Holy Spirit first and then let Holy Spirit work in him, rather than the reverse, which is the belief of Total Depravity. This implies that man, by nature, is capable of as well as responsible for choosing and cooperating with the Holy Spirit.

Of course, Holy Spirit must be present so that we can choose Him, but it doesn’t mean that we are by nature unable to choose, or that doing so requires our nature of the will be changed. An example would be that the fact that one doesn’t know some knowledge X or even has a blinded misunderstanding about X doesn’t mean one’s spirituality is unable to know X. One can learn X, for instance, from a book; the book helps him to learn, without changing the nature of his spirituality.

All in all, Holy Spirit doesn’t force us to move; rather, He draws us and we respond freely to His drawing. I hope this is a clear representation of Catholic doctrine.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9906871]So I guess you are basically saying the initial conversion is forced by God’s grace and Holy Spirit and is therefore irresistible at the time of that initial conversion, though one can resist after being converted to free will. Am I right?

From the document:

God’s work is not done on man by force, but by changing the will. Therefore, as certain as it is that God alone works conversion, so certain is it also that man repents and that the man who repents wants to repent. For the man who repents does not do it by compulsion, but willingly, although it is God alone who effects this that a man both wants to do this and does it. For it is not God, but man who repents of his sin; it is man who ceases his resistance; it is man who believes and makes good resolutions and thus decides for God, although all these things are the operations of grace, which God alone, without any cooperation of man, has produced in him by the power of the Word by which He in His grace bends and determines the will. (See Pontoppidan, Sandh. til Gudfr., Q. 585, 586 [Q. 692, 487, 488].) Jer. 24,7; John 1,12; Jer. 20,7; Ezek. 18,31-32; 36,26; Ps. 51,14; Is. 55,6-7; Phil. 2,13.

You see, when we are talking about Holy Spirit, we mean quite differently. In Catholicism, Holy Spirit is the necessary Helper of our salvation. Man needs to accept the Holy Spirit first and then let Holy Spirit work in him, rather than the reverse, which is the belief of Total Depravity. This implies that man, by nature, is capable of as well as responsible for choosing and cooperating with the Holy Spirit.

Of course, Holy Spirit must be present so that we can choose Him, but it doesn’t mean that we are by nature unable to choose, or that doing so requires our nature of the will be changed. An example would be that the fact that one doesn’t know some knowledge X or even has a blinded misunderstanding about X doesn’t mean one’s spirituality is unable to know X. One can learn X, for instance, from a book; the book helps him to learn, without changing the nature of his spirituality.

Is this intended to answer my question above?
So, even if God’s grace is not conferred to the unbeliever, the unbeliever can choose to accept it? Interesting. Or, based on what you say next, did you mean incapable?

All in all, Holy Spirit doesn’t force us to move; rather, He draws us and we respond freely to His drawing. I hope this is a clear representation of Catholic doctrine.

We agree that the Spirit does not force us, that is true.
Again, from the document I provided:

The preparation of the heart of man for conversion by preparatory grace is a work of the Holy Ghost, like conversion itself, and is described in Holy Writ by many names, such as Calling, Awakening, Inviting, Drawing, Knocking, etc. Matth. 20,16; II Tim. 1,9; Eph. 5,14; Luke 14,16; John 6,44; Jer. 31,3; John 12,32; Rev. 3,20.

Not coercing or forcing.

I have no opposing information, and believe what you say. My concern, in all honesty, is that you don’t seem quite as willing to accept what I say, as you keep repeating the same things, even when I’ve provided documentation.

Jon

 

[poptown]

Hey Jon.

I do want to accept what you say. Sorry, but I just want to understand what does it mean to say “God’s work is not done on man by force, but by changing the will”. This is a great summary, except that the phrase “changing the will” you gave is too ambiguous to form a doctrine. Does it mean changing the nature of the will, which, as Lutheranism teaches, the total depravity? Or does it mean, as Catholicism teaches, a change from a will freely choosing evil to a will freely choosing good?

If it’s the former one, then we can conclude that, since a totally depraved will always reject God, the act that God changes his will itself is certainly against his will. Do you accept this?

 

[teeboy]

There is a chapter on sacrament of penance in the U.S. Catechism.

Quite odd that he would post such a statement.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9907089]Hey Jon.

I do want to accept what you say. Sorry, but I just want to understand what does it mean to say “God’s work is not done on man by force, but by changing the will”. This is a great summary, except that the phrase “changing the will” you gave is too ambiguous to form a doctrine. Does it mean changing the nature of the will, which, as Lutheranism teaches, the total depravity? Or does it mean, as Catholicism teaches, a change from a will freely choosing evil to a will freely choosing good?

The conversion (of the fallen) is “that a man who has fallen away from the grace of God and is dead in sin is again by the power of God raised up to a new spiritual life, reconciled with God by faith and thus entirely converted and changed.” (Cf. Pontoppidan, Sandhed til Gudfrygtighed, Q. 677; Epitome, Q. 532.) II Tim. 2,25,26; Jer. 3,1,6,7; Eph. 2,4-6; Acts 26,18.

If it’s the former one, then we can conclude that, since a totally depraved will always reject God, the act that God changes his will itself is certainly against his will. Do you accept this?

Until, until, until. And, as I quoted before, it is not against one’s will.
More:

1. Since the unregenerated man is at enmity with God and resists God altogether, it belongs to the gracious work of the Holy Ghost to “remove the resistance of the will.” This removal does not take place by compulsion, but by the drawing of God; for “the Lord God draws the man whom he wishes to convert, and draws him in such a way that his darkened understanding is turned into an enlightened one and his perverse will into an obedient one. And this is what the Scriptures call creating a new heart” (Ps. 51,12). (Formula of Concord, Thor. Decl., II, 30. cf. Pontoppidan, Sandh. til Gudfr., Q. 485; Epitome, Q. 369.) Rom. 8,7; Acts 7,51; Is. 63,17; II Tim. 2,25; Acts 9,1 ff.; Ezek. 36,26; John 6,44; Matth. 11,27.

1. It is God’s gracious will to remove all resistance in every man to whom His call in the Word comes. Where a man in spite of this persists in his resistance, this has its cause not in any lack or insufficiency in the operation of the Holy Ghost, but in man’s own wickedness. But we do not have the right, according to Scripture, to deduce from this that those men whose resistance is removed have themselves cooperated in any way toward this result which must be ascribed to the grace of God alone. We reject the doctrine that the outward hearing of the Word of God by the unregenerated man constitutes a cessation of the rebellious opposition of the human heart and thus a change in his real conduct toward God. We likewise reject the doctrine that this inner, rebellious opposition, where it is removed, is removed not by God but by man himself, either by his own natural powers or by powers which the unregenerated man is supposed to have received from God. I Tim. 2,4; Ezek. 11,19; Acts 7,51; Jer. 7,25-27; Luke 7,30; Matth. 23,37; Hos. 13,9; cf. Thesis 3.

The bolded lays to rest the notion of irresistable grace.

Jon

 

[poptown]

… gracious work of the Holy Ghost to “remove the resistance of the will.” This removal does not take place by compulsion …

Thanks for replying, Jon. The quotes are very helpful. So you claim that the removal of the resistance of the will done by Holy Spirit is not compulsion. But since the man, whose will is totally depraved, rejects every saving work of God, wouldn’t he also reject the “removal of the resistance of the will” as well? If the man truly rejects it, what does it mean by “not compulsion”?

Also, it still seems that this has to happen before the baptism. If so, then what does God do to turn an adult from refusing to be baptized to willing to be baptized, even before the baptism and regeneration work takes place?

Thank you!

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9910532]Thanks for replying, Jon. The quotes are very helpful. So you claim that the removal of the resistance of the will done by Holy Spirit is not compulsion. But since the man, whose will is totally depraved, rejects every saving work of God, wouldn’t he also reject the “removal of the resistance of the will” as well? If the man truly rejects it, what does it mean by “not compulsion”?

When a man does not repent, he cannot rightly excuse himself with this that he was incapable of doing so. For it is God’s gracious will to remove this hindrance, as well as everything which hinders a man’s conversion. The cause is only this that the man himself would not. Matth. 21,32; 22,4; Ps. 95,8; Is. 55,6-7; Acts 7,51; Is. 65,2. 19. Since it is God’s gracious purpose to remove every hindrance to conversion by the means of grace, and it still is possible for a man at every point to continue in his opposition to God, a man is never without responsibility over towards the grace of God, although he may mock and say that, since God is the one who does everything for our salvation, then a man has no responsibility himself, as we see in Rom. 9,19. Cf. Theses 17 and 18.

If he rejects it, it is his doing.

Also, it still seems that this has to happen before the baptism. If so, then what does God do to turn an adult from refusing to be baptized to willing to be baptized, even before the baptism and regeneration work takes place?

1. The preparation of the heart of man for conversion by preparatory grace is a work of the Holy Ghost, like conversion itself, and is described in Holy Writ by many names, such as Calling, Awakening, Inviting, Drawing, Knocking, etc. Matth. 20,16; II Tim. 1,9; Eph. 5,14; Luke 14,16; John 6,44; Jer. 31,3; John 12,32; Rev. 3,20.

1. There may be several steps and degrees in this preparation for conversion, through which men are led, sometimes in a shorter, sometimes in a longer, time; for God deals, in his wisdom and love, very differently with the different men. Is. 48,4; Acts 24,25; I Tim. 1,13; Acts 26,28-29; Heb. 4,12; Luke 13,17; Mark 12,34; Luke 24,25; Acts 16,14; 13/18; Matth. 21,28-29-Luke 11,27-28.

As for willingness to be baptized as an adult, similarly to repentence:

Therefore, as certain as it is that God alone works conversion, so certain is it also that man repents and that the man who repents wants to repent. For the man who repents does not do it by compulsion, but willingly, although it is God alone who effects this that a man both wants to do this and does it. For it is not God, but man who repents of his sin; it is man who ceases his resistance; it is man who believes and makes good resolutions and thus decides for God, although all these things are the operations of grace, which God alone, without any cooperation of man, has produced in him by the power of the Word by which He in His grace bends and determines the will. (See Pontoppidan, Sandh. til Gudfr., Q. 585, 586 [Q. 692, 487, 488].) Jer. 24,7; John 1,12; Jer. 20,7; Ezek. 18,31-32; 36,26; Ps. 51,14; Is. 55,6-7; Phil. 2,13.

Jon

 

[poptown]

If he rejects it, it is his doing.

Hey that sounds like one needs to cooperate with God’s working (at least not reject it) in order to gain faith, right?

Though you may say it is God who makes him willing, you shall see this leads to a circular process, which couldn’t be true, as there must be a start, right?

To illustrate my point, here is a sentence you just quoted:

“For the man who repents does not do it by compulsion, but willingly, although it is God alone who effects this that a man both wants to do this and does it.”

So in the context of initial conversion, it means that it is God’s work alone that turns one from unwilling to willing, but:

1. if the person is willing to let God work on him before God’s work takes place, then he is not totally depraved.
2. if the person is unwilling to let God work on him, how can God start his work without doing it against his will (i.e. compulsion)?

Therefore, I am sorry to say that your quote simply replay the problem I am wondering about. I hope you can explain your understanding to me, if you would like to.

Well, if you can’t, then my point is that Lutheranism teaching on this one (I am not saying others) is a great logical fallacy. I hope you have already sensed it.

Thank you.

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9911307]
Well, if you can’t, then my point is that Lutheranism teaching on this one (I am not saying others) is a great logical fallacy. I hope you have already sensed it.

Well, of course not. Because it is not, except in the sense that from your point of view, expressed in your very first post I responded to, you see it indistinguishable from Calvinism. It is not.

Hey that sounds like one needs to cooperate with God’s working (at least not reject it) in order to gain faith, right?

Though you may say it is God who makes him willing, you shall see this leads to a circular process, which couldn’t be true, as there must be a start, right?

To illustrate my point, here is a sentence you just quoted:

So in the context of initial conversion, it means that it is God’s work alone that turns one from unwilling to willing, but:

1. if the person is willing to let God work on him before God’s work takes place, then he is not totally depraved.
2. if the person is unwilling to let God work on him, how can God start his work without doing it against his will (i.e. compulsion)?

If you wish to say that there is a cooperation by the regenerate man because he chooses to repent, I would say that comes from a Catholic perception of the state of the fallen man. Some will say yours is semi-pelagian, but I don’t wish to use such terms, since I am not here trying to desparage the Catholic POV.

From a Lutheran POV, we see, for the regenerate man, the three uses of the law here.
Curb, mirror, and guide.

God’s Law serves us as a curb, a mirror, and a guide.

God’s law works as a curb because the threat of punishment keeps evil in check. Imagine a world with no law at all! When we slow down so that we don’t get caught breaking the speed limit, that is God’s Law working as a curb.

When use God’s Law to evaluate our lives, we find that they simply do not measure up to God’s expectations. The more we compare our lives to God’s Law, the more we see ourselves as sinners from top to bottom. When you hear God’s Word and feel the guilt of sin, you have learned that from God’s mirror.

A forgiven sinner desires to show his gratitude by doing what is pleasing to God. God’s Law serves as a guide to show you how you can thank your Savior. When you are met with a decision and first ask yourself, “What is God’s will in this matter?” you are using God’s Law as a guide.

I borrowed this from the below site because it is rather easily worded, catechetically.
immanuelmankato.org/wordoftruth/word_truth/106/2

As the spirit works on our hearts toward conversion, the mirror of the law shows us our sins and the need for our savior. In the regenerate man, we are driven to repentance as we become aware of our sinful nature and actions. This ability to see what we truly are is, of course, by grace.

The repentent, regenerate man then uses the law as a guide to live a more godly life, in grateful thanksgiving for what Christ has done for us.
Of course, we maintain the freedom to at any time reject grace.

Therefore, I am sorry to say that your quote simply replay the problem I am wondering about. I hope you can explain your understanding to me, if you would like to.

Well, if you can’t, then my point is that Lutheranism teaching on this one (I am not saying others) is a great logical fallacy. I hope you have already sensed it.

As you see, I can.

Jon

 

[poptown]

If you wish to say that there is a cooperation by the regenerate man because he chooses to repent, I would say that comes from a Catholic perception of the state of the fallen man. Some will say yours is semi-pelagian, but I don’t wish to use such terms, since I am not here trying to desparage the Catholic POV.

Thank you. People who say Catholic Church teaches Semi-Pelagianism are ignorant. They can just go to Wikipedia and they will know that Semi-Pelagianism holds that man can (unaided by grace) make the first move toward God; in other words, God won’t give us grace until we first ask for grace.

Of course this is what Catholic Church rebukes all the time. Catholic Church teaches the initiation is done by God’s grace. But man’s will is not totally depraved; man’s will has the ability to be willing to accept God’s grace; such ability exists even before God’s grace comes, though needs the actual God’s grace to initialize in order to bear the fruit of faith. In other words, God’s grace comes, then man says “yes” to God’s grace, and then conversion starts. As said in Catechism 1993:

Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion …

But those ignorant people would rather remain ignorant in order to satisfy their hatred toward the Catholic Church.

Still, I don’t fully understand Lutheranism’s position based on your quotes. I was even more baffled because based on what you said I can’t tell the difference between Catholic teaching and Lutheran teaching. Could you tell me what you think the difference is? Could you present Lutheran teaching on this issue in a way that highlights the difference with Catholic teaching? Thank you!

 

[JonNC]

=poptown;9914576]Thank you. People who say Catholic Church teaches Semi-Pelagianism are ignorant. They can just go to Wikipedia and they will know that Semi-Pelagianism holds that man can (unaided by grace) make the first move toward God; in other words, God won’t give us grace until we first ask for grace.

Of course this is what Catholic Church rebukes all the time. Catholic Church teaches the initiation is done by God’s grace. But man’s will is not totally depraved; man’s will has the ability to be willing to accept God’s grace; such ability exists even before God’s grace comes, though needs the actual God’s grace to initialize in order to bear the fruit of faith. In other words, God’s grace comes, then man says “yes” to God’s grace, and then conversion starts. As said in Catechism 1993:

But those ignorant people would rather remain ignorant in order to satisfy their hatred toward the Catholic Church.

Still, I don’t fully understand Lutheranism’s position based on your quotes. I was even more baffled because based on what you said I can’t tell the difference between Catholic teaching and Lutheran teaching. Could you tell me what you think the difference is? Could you present Lutheran teaching on this issue in a way that highlights the difference with Catholic teaching? Thank you!

Pop,
I’m probably not knowledgeable enough of Catholic teaching to answer this. IOW, I depend on Catholics, such as yourself, to explain and describe to me Catholic teaching.
No other Catholic has intervened in our open discussion to say that you are right or wrong in the way you describe Catholic teaching, so I assume you are correct in this regard.

Assuming this is true, it seems like our difference is mostly related to the coming to justification, what the ability of the unregenerate man is in order to cooperate with grace.
It seems to me the Lutheran position is far more passive - a receiving of grace which changes the heart, followed by a desire to repent. IOW, monergistic.

Jon

 

[poptown]

It seems to me the Lutheran position is far more passive - a receiving of grace which changes the heart, followed by a desire to repent. IOW, monergistic.

Thank you Jon. Catholicism also teaches the grace is a free gift to receive. Yet upon receiving the gift, the recipient needs to voluntarily accept it and then grace starts to work in him. On the other hand, it still seems to me that in Lutheranism the God’s grace alone starts to work in him, turning a totally depraved will into a free will, even when he is in a state of always rejecting God and His grace.

So I think the problem here is that in Catholicism, the very first change of will is done by man (not alone), and, in Lutheranism, by God’s grace (alone). Do you agree on this?

 

[JonNC]

Thank you Jon. Catholicism also teaches the grace is a free gift to receive. Yet upon receiving the gift, the recipient needs to voluntarily accept it and then grace starts to work in him. On the other hand, it still seems to me that in Lutheranism the God’s grace alone starts to work in him, turning a totally depraved will into a free will, even when he is in a state of always rejecting God and His grace.

So I think the problem here is that in Catholicism, the** very first change **of will is done by man (not alone), and, in Lutheranism, by God’s grace (alone). Do you agree on this?

That’s right from the Lutheran view. On the Catholic side, I defer to your understanding, so I would agree.
two questions for you:

1. Have I in any way helped you see the difference between Lutheran teaching and that of Calvinism?
2. Do you think that, in the long run, the differences between our views (yours and mine) need be Church-dividing?

Jon