Catholics saved by Grace alone?

[diggerdomer]

Yes. I don’t see anything in those paragraphs about infant Baptism.

Nor do you see anything in those paragraphs about the “faith of parents” required for baptism or salvation.

 

[diggerdomer]

1. No, I’m using parents as an example because 99% of the time, it is parents who bring their children to be baptized.

Well, imho, 100% matters. So what about “children” who desire baptism apart from their parents’ intention?
De Maria;7219808:

1. However, infants do not bring themselves to be baptized.

No, but in accord with Catholic teaching, “adults” are those of 7 years of age or older. So “infants” in this context refers to anyone less than 7 years of age. Right? So how would you handle the non-baptized child in first grade younger than 7 years of age who wants to be baptized? Would you require the faith of the parents as an ultimatum?

1. In case of an emergency, a person who is not of the faith may baptize according to the intention of the Church.

I’m sorry, I have no idea what you are proposing here. You seem to be saying that someone who is not Christian can baptize a Christian? What? Really? Where is this taught? Any Catholic reference for such, or is this just your own opinion? Thanks for any clarification.

This is the intention of the Church. The Church does not intend that a pagan child be baptized Christian and then raised pagan.

Yes, of course. I have no idea what you mean by this, or what your point is. Any clarification would be helpful.

 

[diggerdomer]

CHAPTER V
THE NECESSITY OF PREPARATION FOR JUSTIFICATION IN ADULTS, AND WHENCE IT PROCEEDS
It is furthermore declared that in adults the beginning of that justification must proceed from the predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ, that is, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits on their part, they are called; that they who by sin had been cut off from God, may be disposed through His quickening and helping grace to convert themselves to their own justification by freely assenting to and cooperating with that grace; so that, while God touches the heart of man through the illumination of the Holy Ghost, man himself neither does absolutely nothing while receiving that inspiration, since he can also reject it, nor yet is he able by his own free will and without the grace of God to move himself to justice in His sight.
Hence, when it is said in the sacred writings:
Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you,[19] we are reminded of our liberty; and when we reply:
Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted,[20] we confess that we need the grace of God.

CHAPTER VI
THE MANNER OF PREPARATION

Now, they [the adults] are disposed to that justice when, aroused and aided by divine grace, receiving faith by hearing,[21] they are moved freely toward God, believing to be true what has been divinely revealed and promised, especially that the sinner is justified by God by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;[22]** and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves from the fear of divine justice, by which they are salutarily aroused, to consider the mercy of God, are raised to hope, trusting that God will be propitious to them for Christ’s sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice, and on that account are moved against sin by a certain hatred and detestation, that is, by that repentance that must be performed before baptism**;[23] finally, when they resolve to receive baptism, to begin a new life and to keep the commandments of God.
Of this disposition it is written:
He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him;[24] and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee;[25] and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin;[26] and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost;[27] and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;[28] finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.[29]

May God bless you as well!

Sincerely,

De Maria

You seem to be referring to or citing something.

What?

 

[DavidFilmer]

It goes without saying that one either believes or is being brought by a believer or is being baptized by the agent of a believer.

It “goes without saying” because it has never been said (at least by the Church).

OK, I just want to present ONE SINGLE case to you. It is an absurd case, but it could happen (and, maybe it has). If Grace applies to this ONE case, it applies to EVERY case. There is not one mode of Salvation for 99.9%, and another completely different mode of salvation for 0.1%. We are all saved the same way - what saves the absurd 0.1% of us saves us all.

OK - Suppose there is a certain Hindu who really hates Muslims (these faiths have a long history of conflict - read up on India/Pakistan if you are not familiar with it). Muslims and Catholics also have a long history of conflict (read up on the Crusades if you are not familiar with it). But Catholics and Hindus have had relatively few conflicts.

So a Hindu might figure, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Hindus and Catholics have both waged open war against Muslims. So this Hindu approaches me (a Catholic) and asks me, “what can I do to really torque my Muslim enemies?” Of course, I would tell him this is a bad idea, but let’s assume he caught me on an off-day. I might tell him, “give Christian Baptism to their babies.”

He might ask me, “what is Christian Baptism?” I tell him he doesn’t need to know - all he needs to have is the intent to do what the Catholic Church does in Baptism. If he really wants to torque his Muslim enemies, he must have this intent (even if he does not understand what it is). Of course, he sincerely wants to cheese-off Muslims (he’s a very hateful guy), so he sincerely has this intent (it’s the only way he can spread his hate).

I furthermore instruct him in the proper matter and form.

All is now in place. This Hindu snatches a baby from the stroller of a Muslim couple. While the parents scream in protest, he produces clean water and Baptizes this baby using the Trinitarian form - as a hateful means of attacking this baby and this Muslim family.

Immediately afterward, a bomb goes off and kills everybody.

De Maria - I ask you - Is this baby Baptized? Is this baby saved?

There is valid minister, intent, form, matter, and subject. According to the Catholic Church, this is a valid (though illicit) Baptism.

If THIS baby is Baptized (even though the circumstances are absurd) then s/he is saved by Grace alone (because there is NO faith involved from any person present). If THIS ONE BABY is saved by Grace alone, then everybody is saved by Grace alone. We are all saved the same way.

If you claim that this baby is not saved because there was no faith, then you have invented new doctrine.

 

[sambos671]

If it were grace alone, the child would not need to be brought in for Baptism. But the “agency” which you mentioned, must have the faith to bring the child in to be Baptized. Therefore, faith must precede baptism.

No. God is acting on behalf of the child grace is given. God is therefore the Child’s agent. The parents are acting on their faith which was given them by grace. So again faith does not preceed grace

God defines faith. And faith is the first grace which one receives.

God does not define faith. Faith is. And Faith is a gift of Grace.

Works in obedience to the commands of God are an expression of faith.

And faith is the expression of Grace

God is not grace. Grace is the good which God shares with us.

Grace is far more than that Grace is God’s gift of himself to us.

It would be totally out of line with Catholic Teaching. Because the Church takes into account the exercise of our WILL.

So far nothing with this discussion of Grace negates man’s excercise of will. You confuse it with faith. Grace is freely God giving of himself to us and with it the faith to believe you can accept it or reject it. However as the catachism says the “only reasonable response is acceptance”.

The Church makes a distinction between the concept of “all is grace” and “grace alone”. Once we have engaged our will in order to cooperate with God’s grace, it is no longer called God’s grace alone. But grace through faith and works.

First. Where? Second You confuse two things. Initial Grace with sanctifying Grace. One lets you in the door so to speak and the Other continues your life of faith. Both can be accepted or rejected However Grace is the key for both.

Good, then inadvertently you have shot down the idea of Grace alone,

Faith and works are an expression of Grace. You misrepresent me on this statement. Grace still stands.

Ask any Protestant

I know many and you seem to confuse Grace with Faith.

 

[De_Maria]

No. God is acting on behalf of the child grace is given. God is therefore the Child’s agent. The parents are acting on their faith which was given them by grace. So again faith does not preceed grace

I didn’t say that faith precedes grace. I said that faith precedes baptism.

God does not define faith.

Ok, you’re losing me. What?!

Faith is. And Faith is a gift of Grace.

Yes. Faith is a grace. Faith is a gift of God which WE do.

And faith is the expression of Grace

No. Faith is the expression of our will.

Grace is far more than that Grace is God’s gift of himself to us.

Sanctifying grace is a participation in the life of God. God has given Himself to us in the Person of the Holy Spirit who is our gift during Baptism. But God is not grace. The Holy Spirit gives us grace, gives us Sanctifying Grace.

But God is not grace. Grace is what God gives us. Grace is a spiritual substance which God can pour into our hearts.

So far nothing with this discussion of Grace negates man’s excercise of will.

Yes. The idea that we are either saved or justified by grace ALONE contradicts the exercise of the will to cooperate with God’s grace.

You confuse it with faith.

I don’t know what you are talking about.

Grace is freely God giving of himself to us

As long as that doesn’t equate Grace with God. Because Grace is a substance.

and with it the faith to believe you can accept it or reject it. However as the catachism says the “only reasonable response is acceptance”.

That is true. But that does not say anything about grace ALONE.

First. Where?

Everywhere. That is why the Church does not teach GRACE ALONE. I can’t prove a negative. If you claim that the Church teaches GRACE ALONE, then it is your burden to prove.

All I can tell you is that I find no Catholic Doctrine on salvation by Grace Alone. What I do find says:
CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 1847 (313 bytes ) preview document matches
7 “God ****created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us.” To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the …
URL: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1847.htm

Therefore, we are not saved by Grace Alone.

Second You confuse two things. Initial Grace with sanctifying Grace. One lets you in the door so to speak and the Other continues your life of faith. Both can be accepted or rejected However Grace is the key for both.

The initial predisposing grace of God is an Actual Grace. This stands in contrast to the Sanctifying Grace we receive during the Sacraments. HOWEVER, we never cease to receive Actual Grace. Even after we are Baptized, we continue to receive actual graces.

Faith and works are an expression of Grace. You misrepresent me on this statement. Grace still stands.

But not Grace ALONE.

I know many and you seem to confuse Grace with Faith.

Faith is a grace:

CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 158 (779 bytes ) preview document matches
**The grace of ****faith **opens “the eyes of your hearts” to a lively understanding of the contents of Revelation: that is, of the totality of God’s plan and the mysteries of faith, of …
URL: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/158.htm

 

[De_Maria]

The point is, you don’t see anything in those paragraphs about people being saved by the faith of their parents (which you claimed).

In baptism. Adults are saved by grace through their own faith.

 

[De_Maria]

Nor do you see anything in those paragraphs about the “faith of parents” required for baptism

But I see it here in the prerequisite for the Sacraments:
**1123 **“The purpose of the sacraments is to sanctify men, to build up the Body of Christ and, finally, to give worship to God. Because they are signs they also instruct. They not only presuppose faith, but by words and objects they also nourish, strengthen, and express it. That is why they are called ‘sacraments of faith.’”

and I know, because I’ve had four children baptized, that the Church will not baptize anyone’s children if the parents or guardians will not promise to raise them in the faith. Nor will they baptize anyone’s children against the parent’s will:

Private Baptism: **
An emergency, bare-essentials baptism which can be performed anywhere, by anyone – Catholic, pagan, Jew, Protestant – who uses the proper matter and form and intends to do what the Church does when She baptizes. Because of that last condition, Baptism by heretics or apostates should always be followed by a conditional Baptism (see below). Note that Baptism must only be administered to those who request it; Baptism must never, ever be against the will of the person to be baptized, or his parents’ will if he is a child.* Also, rest assured that those who, with contrite hearts, have expressed a true desire for Baptism and have vowed to receive the Sacrament, but die before receiving it are baptized “by desire.” In any case, a person baptized in a private Baptism should participate in the Solemn Rite of Baptism if and when he is able. *
fisheaters.com/baptism2.html

or salvation.

The Church does not teach salvation by Grace Alone if that’s what you’re getting at.

 

[De_Maria]

1. No, I’m using parents as an example because 99% of the time, it is parents who bring their children to be baptized.

Well, imho, 100% matters. So what about “children” who desire baptism apart from their parents’ intention?

As far as I know, a child will not be baptized a Catholic, even if the non-Catholic parents agree. They must first convert and then the entire family will be baptized. No child will be baptized unless the parents or guardians will raise them in the faith and if they aren’t Catholic, how can they raise them in the faith? You can’t give a faith that you don’t have:
1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.52

1255 For the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents’ help is important. So too is the role of the *godfather *and godmother, who must be firm believers, able and ready to help the newly baptized - child or adult on the road of Christian life.55 Their task is a truly ecclesial function (officium).56 The whole ecclesial community bears some responsibility for the development and safeguarding of the grace given at Baptism.

No, but in accord with Catholic teaching, “adults” are those of 7 years of age or older. So “infants” in this context refers to anyone less than 7 years of age. Right?

Wrong. Age of reason is not equivalent to age of adulthood. A child of 7 will not be baptized against the will of the parents.

So how would you handle the non-baptized child in first grade younger than 7 years of age who wants to be baptized? Would you require the faith of the parents as an ultimatum?

It doesn’t matter what I want. It is the Church who recognizes the GOD given right of the parents to decide what is right for their child.

I’m sorry, I have no idea what you are proposing here. You seem to be saying that someone who is not Christian can baptize a Christian? What? Really? Where is this taught? Any Catholic reference for such, or is this just your own opinion? Thanks for any clarification.

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon.57 **In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized **person, with the required intention, can baptize58 , by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.59

Yes, of course. I have no idea what you mean by this, or what your point is. Any clarification would be helpful.

We seem to be talking past each other. When you entered the discussion, I thought you were siding with David Flimmer ( I think I spelled that right) who is making the claim that faith is not necessary for any Sacrament and that anyone can baptize any child at any time.

He is making his claim based upon the Catechism which I just posted. Yet, you seem to be unaware of this doctrine which says that in an emergency, even a non Cathollic can baptize a catechumen as long as they make the same intention as the Church? So, I have no idea what you and I are disagreeing upon.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[De_Maria]

Except in the extreme case of baptism in danger of death.

Yes or no?

No.

 

[De_Maria]

I’ll answer that question, as the OP seems to have quit the field.

Wishful thinking. I have a life away from Catholic Answers. A job, a family. But I get around to most of my threads.

There is no “extreme” case in which Baptism is valid. ANY Baptism is valid if it has the five basic components of any Sacrament. In the case of Baptism, these five components are:

• Valid recipient (in this case, any unbaptized person)
• Valid minister (in the case, any person, regardless of belief or faith. This person does not even need to be Baptized him/her self).
• Valid matter (in this case, clear water)
• Valid intent of the minister (“to do what the Catholic Church does,” even if the minister has absolutely no idea what that is).
• Valid form (in this case, the Trinitarian form - “I Baptize you in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit” while applying clear water to the head).

In the case of a person in danger of death, a First Responder or Emergency Room doctor or nurse may conditionally Baptize a patient. Such a Baptism may be illicit under Canon Law, but it is perfectly valid.

However, faith is absolutely not required.

Faith is presupposed. Therefore it is absolutely required.

A Catholic Hospital might institute a policy to conditionally Baptize every infant who was admitted with a life-threatening condition. A Muslim nurse working at a Catholic hospital (and who has an honest intent to uphold the expectations of her employer) might institute this policy upon an infant patient who was the son/daughter of Muslim parents, even against their explicit will (they might be screaming in protest as their Muslim child was Baptized against their will by a Muslim nurse fulfilling the expectations of her Christian employer). But - guess what - this is still a perfectly valid (though HIGHLY illicit) Baptism. If the child died an hour later, the child would be saved. This is doctrine.

Yes, but whose faith was the Muslim Nurse exercising when she baptized that infant, her own or her employer’s?

This is what *de Maria *does not understand. Grace alone saved this child. Grace alone saves us all.

This is what YOU don’t understand in contradiction of Catholic Teaching. The Church does not teach that it is by Grace ALONE.

1253 Baptism is the sacrament of faith.54 But faith needs the community of believers. It is only within the faith of the Church that each of the faithful can believe. The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop. The catechumen or the godparent is asked: “What do you ask of God’s Church?” The response is: “Faith!”

 

[De_Maria]

Yes

NOT according to Catholic Teaching.

**1697 ***Catechesis *has to reveal in all clarity the joy and the demands of the way of Christ. Catechesis for the “newness of life” in him should be: - a catechesis of the Holy Spirit, the interior Master of life according to Christ, a gentle guest and friend who inspires, guides, corrects, and strengthens this life;

• a catechesis of grace, for it is by grace that we are saved and again it is by grace that our works can bear fruit for eternal life;
• a catechesis of the beatitudes, for the way of Christ is summed up in the beatitudes, the only path that leads to the eternal beatitude for which the human heart longs;
• a catechesis of sin and forgiveness, for unless man acknowledges that he is a sinner he cannot know the truth about himself, which is a condition for acting justly; and without the offer of forgiveness he would not be able to bear this truth;
• a catechesis of the human virtues which causes one to grasp the beauty and attraction of right dispositions towards goodness;
• a catechesis of the Christian virtues of faith, hope, and charity, generously inspired by the example of the saints;
  -* a catechesis of the twofold commandment of charity* set forth in the Decalogue;
• an ecclesial catechesis, for it is through the manifold exchanges of “spiritual goods” in the “communion of saints” that Christian life can grow, develop, and be communicated.

Note that there is no catechesis of Grace Alone.

 

[De_Maria]

You seem to be referring to or citing something.

What?

The very same thing he was citing. The infallible teaching of the Church concerning justification in the Council of Trent:
ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

 

[sambos671]

I didn’t say that faith precedes grace. I said that faith precedes baptism.

No. You said Faith is the 1st gift of Grace.

Ok, you’re losing me. What?!

Faith exist. It just is. The fact that you can have faith in anything is proof of that. However, to have faith in God it must be 1) given to us by God. And 2) made to be understood by the recipient. Both of which God does. The third part of it is our reception of it which seems only reasonable to accept. Note I did not say a foregone conclusion. However, Grace Gifted us Faith and the ability to aprehend what faith it is.

Yes. Faith is a grace. Faith is a gift of God which WE do.

Again two fold you emphasise the latter and ignore the former. 1)Faith is a gift. Its a complete package. 2) we assent or we do not.

No. Faith is the expression of our will.

Not entirely. You couldn’t have received it unless it was first given. Our will shows its assent to the Faith already given.

Sanctifying grace is a participation in the life of God. God has given Himself to us in the Person of the Holy Spirit who is our gift during Baptism.

No disagreement here

But God is not grace

I disagree. I believe the Overshadowing of the Most High and Mary full of Grace showed that she was in reciept of God entirely for the incarnation.

The Holy Spirit gives us grace, gives us Sanctifying Grace.

Yes for continuation. but again you ignore the initial grace.

Grace is a spiritual substance which God can pour into our hearts.

I don’t agree that grace is a substance. Grace is an attribute or character of God.

Yes. The idea that we are either saved or justified by grace ALONE contradicts the exercise of the will to cooperate with God’s grace.

Not at all. That is how you see it but thats not it. Grace gives us the gift of faith. It makes it perceivable to us. And holding fast to it by assent of our will does not lessen it.I

As long as that doesn’t equate Grace with God. Because Grace is a substance.

Grace is not a substance but a characteristic of God.

That is true. But that does not say anything about grace ALONE.

Saying Grace alone is like saying God alone. I think you emphasise too much you in salvation. Are we talking about sanctification or salvation? Though salvation encorporates sanctification salvation is an act of God not man. It was Jesus who suffered and died. It was he that fulfilled God’s plan. Not us. Jesus is entirely responsible. Our assent to it verifies that he gave us Grace 1) of the Gift and 2) to understand it enought to accept.

Everywhere. That is why the Church does not teach GRACE ALONE. I can’t prove a negative. If you claim that the Church teaches GRACE ALONE, then it is your burden to prove.

The church teaches we are saved by Grace. Our assent to the faith and sanctification are all operations of Grace.

All I can tell you is that I find no Catholic Doctrine on salvation by Grace Alone

Nor will you find in scripture the term trinity. Yet it doesn’t make it less so now does it?

Therefore, we are not saved by Grace Alone.

That is not what that passage means.

The initial predisposing grace of God is an Actual Grace. This stands in contrast to the Sanctifying Grace we receive during the Sacraments.

Yes it does.

HOWEVER, we never cease to receive Actual Grace

That is true

Even after we are Baptized, we continue to receive actual graces.

yes. You see how reliant we are on grace?

But not Grace ALONE.

Then are you suggesting you can save your self of your own accord?

Faith is a grace:

Faith is an expression of Grace and is a grace. Not a concoction of your own.

CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 158 (779 bytes ) preview document matches
**The grace of ****faith **opens “the eyes of your hearts” to a lively understanding of the contents of Revelation: that is, of the totality of God’s plan and the mysteries of faith, of …
URL: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/158.htm

which agrees with what I’ve said.

 

[DavidFilmer]

diggerdomer;7221530:

As far as I know, a child will not be baptized a Catholic, even if the non-Catholic parents agree.

That is only the case for a *licit *Baptism (one done according to the rules of the Church, which are mutable).

But a Baptism (or, indeed, any Sacrament) does not have to be *licit *to be valid. The Doctrine of the Sacrament is not contingent upon human rules. And the rules change, but Doctrine remains the same.

I’ve asked you about the validity of a clearly illicit Baptism which absolutely precludes the possibility of Faith on the part of anyone involved. You have responded to many questions, but you have not responded to this one.

According to the rules (Canon Law, the GIRM, etc) this is *highly *illicit, but according to the Doctrine of the Church it is absolutely valid.

Doctrine says that Baptism (or any Sacrament) is *valid *if it has five valid components: subject, matter, form, minister, and intent. This is doctrine. This list does not include faith (because that’s not Doctrine).

Then there are the rules, which determine if the Sacrament is licit or not. But rules are not Doctrine. If a Bishop ordains a priest at night (under power of darkness), apart from an emergency, it is *illicit *because the rules say don’t do that. But the guy is still 100% a priest. Doctrine trumps rules every time - no exceptions. God does not own a copy of the Code of Canon Law, and he never checks it online. If God’s rules are followed (ie, Doctrine) then nothing can prevent his Grace from being efficacious.

So, I ask again - is the child who receives an illicit but valid baptism (where nobody has any Christian faith whatsoever) saved?

Don’t get hung up on the rules. Focus on the Doctrine.

If that child is saved, s/he is saved by Grace alone (because there is no faith present). If that child is saved by Grace alone, then we are all saved by Grace alone.

 

[excubitor]

Although we are saved by grace alone is certainly a teaching of the Catholic church, I think it is understood differently to the protestants.
The way I see it is that unless God extends grace to us we cannot be saved, but if he does extend grace to us and we respond in faith and good works then we can be saved.
But why does God extend faith to one man and not to another. In the protestant mindset there is nothing of any merit in a man that would cause him to look upon a man with favour. Every man is regarded as utterly evil and all of his works are filthy rags. That God should extend grace to one and not another is completely up to God and we can do nothing to influence God’s decision to extend Grace.

This however is not scriptural, nor does it comply with Catholic teaching. The Catholic teaching is that although man is gravely impaired by original sin and his constant inclination is to rebel against God, that nevertheless their lies within every man through the natural law to recognise and resist evil and seek after good. And that these meritorious works are pleasing to God and are likely to cause God to extend Grace to that man in his good time and at his good pleasure.

Therefore the Lord says “Seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened to you”.
Likewise we have the story of Cornelius
“Acts 10:10 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, 2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. 3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius. 4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God. 5 And now send men to Joppa, and call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter:”

So we see that God highly favours those who are kind, devout, seek God, give to the poor, and pray.

Now notice this scripture
“1 Cor 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.”

So God favours someone who humbles themselves and who does not strive after glory and who is weak and downtrodden. He loves the poor.

So we are starting to get a profile of the kind of people that God extends Grace to. Does this mean that men are saved because they did these things? No of course not because it goes to the deep mysteries of the heart and motivations that only God understands and sees. And none of these things which they have done are adequate to merit God’s grace or pardon, but they are meritorious acts nonetheless which please God and cause him to be moved with affection and love for us. But these meritorious acts are not enough to merit or deserve salvation.

Also God may extend his Grace to someone who exhibits few if any of these traits and intervene in powerful ways in their life to almost compel them to the faith, whereas others he may lead gently over decades. All of these issues are the vast impenetrabile mysteries of Grace which no man can discover. Another word I like is Serendipity I understood this from a psychologist who from a secular viewpoint could see this mysterious working of Grace in people’s lives and called it serendipity. Scott Peck of Road Less travelled.

Another way I think of this is I picture some parents walking through an orphanage to choose a child to take home to be their son or daughter. They will talk to the boys and girls and ask them some questions get to know them a bit, and choose one or the other. Why? Was it because one was better, gooder, more attractive, older, taller, friendlier than the others? Who knows. But by some astonishing mystery one child was chosen amongst all the others.

Now what would that child think if one day he grew up and his parents said “All the children in the orphanage were incorrigibly evil children, they had no good quality whatsoever, there was nothing deserving in any of them, and I rolled a dice and picked you but I could have picked any one of them” How would the child like to be told that? That is like the protestant idea of grace. But is that grace? Is that a demonstration of love? No that is almost an act of hatred.

But the Catholic teaching of grace the parents say “We went through the whole orphanage and we really liked your eyes and your happy smile and you were friendly towards us and we just had an immediate bond with you and straightaway knew that you were the one”. Now that is love, that is grace.

So what did the chosen child do throughout all of his/her life which was so much better than the other children in the orphanage? Did all the things he do mean that he deserved to be chosen and that it would have been an injustice if the parents had not chosen him? No, in fact the parents were under no obligation to adopt a child in the first place, they did so out of the goodness of their heart. Nor were they obligated in any way to choose that child and not another. It was a free choice motivated by love and goodness to share their life with a needy child.

All of which is why Paul likened adoption to the exercising of grace in this passage here in *Ephesians 1:15 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. 7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; *

 

[De_Maria]

No. You said Faith is the 1st gift of Grace.

Correcto. Because faith is the first grace which God gives us. Why? Because without faith it is impossible to please Him.

Faith exist. It just is. The fact that you can have faith in anything is proof of that.

I did not deny that faith exists, so why did you say this?

However, to have faith in God it must be 1) given to us by God.

Correct.

And 2) made to be understood by the recipient.

Not necessarily:
John 20
[26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said: Peace be to you. [27] Then he saith to Thomas: Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands; and bring hither thy hand, and put it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. [28] Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God. [29] Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed.

Both of which God does. The third part of it is our reception of it which seems only reasonable to accept. Note I did not say a foregone conclusion. However, Grace Gifted us Faith and the ability to aprehend what faith it is.

But the proof that we must make an effort of will in order to believe is the fact that God has given us every reason to believe, and yet many DON’T.

[Again two fold you emphasise the latter and ignore the former. 1)Faith is a gift. Its a complete package. 2) we assent or we do not.

Because you ignore the latter and emphasize the former to a point of contradicting Catholic Teaching. The Church does not teach salvation by grace ALONE.

Not entirely. You couldn’t have received it unless it was first given. Our will shows its assent to the Faith already given.

I didn’t say it wasn’t given to us. What I said is that we must exercise it by an act of will.

It is very much like the gift of a bike. You might say, “thank you very much.” And let it rot in the garage.

No disagreement here

Great!

I disagree. I believe the Overshadowing of the Most High and Mary full of Grace showed that she was in reciept of God entirely for the incarnation.

God is not grace:
…Is this grace of condition or state, as Peter Lombard (Sent., I, dist. xvii, 18) held, identical with the Holy Spirit, whom we may call the permanent, uncreated grace (gratia increata)? It is quite impossible. For the person of the Holy Ghost cannot be poured out into our hearts (Romans 5:5), nor does it cleave to the soul as inherent justice (Trent, sess. VI, can. xi), nor can it be increased by good works (loc. cit., can. xxiv), and all this is apart from the fact that the justifying grace in Holy Writ is expressly termed a “gift [or grace] of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38; 10:45), and as the abiding seed of God (1 John 3:9). From this it follows that the grace must be as distinct from the Holy Ghost as the gift from the giver and the seed from the sower; consequently the Holy Spirit is our holiness, not by the holiness by which He Himself is holy, but by that holiness by which He makes us holy. He is not, therefore, the causa formalis, but merely the causa efficiens, of our holiness…
newadvent.org/cathen/06701a.htm

Yes for continuation. but again you ignore the initial grace.

Nope. I have already mentioned that the initial grace is faith. And that it is an actual grace.

cont’d
[/quote]

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

I don’t agree that grace is a substance. Grace is an attribute or character of God.

It is all three. From the same paragraph referenced above:
Moreover, sanctifying grace as an active reality, and not a merely external relation, must be philosophically either substance or accident. Now, it is certainty not a substance which exists by itself, or apart from the soul, therefore it is a physical accident inhering in the soul, so that the soul becomes the subject in which grace inheres; but such an accident is in metaphysics called quality (qualitas, poiotes) therefore sanctifying grace may be philosophically termed a “permanent, supernatural quality of the soul”, or, as the Roman Catechism (P. II, cap. ii, de bap., n. 50) says “divina qualitas in anima inhaerens”.

Not at all. That is how you see it but thats not it. Grace gives us the gift of faith. It makes it perceivable to us. And holding fast to it by assent of our will does not lessen it.I

I didn’t say that it lessened it. I said that we are not saved by Grace ALONE. The Church does not teach that doctrine because it would make us mere puppets being pulled by strings, without a free will to exercise.

God gave us a free will and expects us to exert it.

Grace is not a substance but a characteristic of God.

Saying Grace alone is like saying God alone.

Yes, that is true. So I repeat the teaching of the Church:

CCC Search Result - Paragraph # 1847 (313 bytes ) preview document matches
7 “God created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us.” To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the …
URL: scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1847.htm

I think you emphasise too much you in salvation.

You emphasize too much what YOU think. It doesn’t matter what you think in this subject. It matters what the Church teaches. And the Church does not teach salvation by grace ALONE.

Are we talking about sanctification or salvation?

Either.

Though salvation encorporates sanctification salvation is an act of God not man. It was Jesus who suffered and died. It was he that fulfilled God’s plan. Not us. Jesus is entirely responsible. Our assent to it verifies that he gave us Grace 1) of the Gift and 2) to understand it enought to accept.

Our assent and our acceptance is the part of the equation which you are ignoring. It is because of our assent and our acceptance that the Church does not refer to it as sanctification nor salvation by grace ALONE.

The church teaches we are saved by Grace.

But not by Grace ALONE.

Our assent to the faith and sanctification are all operations of Grace.

Correct. All is grace.

Nor will you find in scripture the term trinity. Yet it doesn’t make it less so now does it?

But you do find it in Catholic Teaching. If you did not find it in Catholic Teaching, it certainly would be less so.

That is not what that passage means.

Yes, it is.

Yes it does. That is true yes. You see how reliant we are on grace?

I never said we weren’t. But you are forgetting that many have received the very same graces and rejected them to their own condemnation.

Then are you suggesting you can save your self of your own accord?

That is not a teaching of the Catholic Church. God calls us and gives us grace to accept His call and exercise His Gifts. Therefore it is God who saves us IF
we accept and exercise the gifts He gives us. That is why Scripture says:
Hebrews 5:9
And being consummated, he became, to all that obey him, the cause of eternal salvation.

Faith is an expression of Grace and is a grace. Not a concoction of your own.

I didn’t say it was a concoction of my own. I said that faith is a grace.

which agrees with what I’ve said.

Not with the idea of grace ALONE. Which contradicts the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[De_Maria]

De Maria;7223003:

That is only the case for a *licit *

Baptism (one done according to the rules of the Church, which are mutable).

But a Baptism (or, indeed, any Sacrament) does not have to be *licit *to be valid. That is true. But not one sacrament will be valid without faith.
**1123 **“The purpose of the sacraments is to sanctify men, to build up the Body of Christ and, finally, to give worship to God. Because they are signs they also instruct. They not only presuppose faith, but by words and objects they also nourish, strengthen, and express it. That is why they are called ‘sacraments of faith.’”

Anyone who is baptized without faith will be condemned. Anyone, any atheist or other non-baptized person, who baptizes a child without the intent of expressing the faith of the Church, is simply performing a blasphemy.

1256 The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon.57 In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize58 , by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation.59

What is that “will to do what the Church does when she baptizes”, in your opinion?

The Doctrine of the Sacrament is not contingent upon human rules. And the rules change, but Doctrine remains the same.

Very true! Now listen to the Word of God:
Hebrews 11:6
But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him.

I’ve asked you about the validity of a clearly illicit Baptism which absolutely precludes the possibility of Faith on the part of anyone involved. You have responded to many questions, but you have not responded to this one.

You understand neither because you confuse validity and licitness. First of all, the infalible doctrine of the Church says:
CHAPTER VIII
HOW THE GRATUITOUS JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER BY FAITH IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD
But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44]** these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation,** the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God[45] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.
For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.[46]

Therefore, we can’t be baptized without faith because baptism is the Sacrament where we are first justified. And the Church teaches that faith is the root of justification.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

According to the rules (Canon Law, the GIRM, etc) this is *highly *illicit, but according to the Doctrine of the Church it is absolutely valid.

But you are neglecting the faith of the believer who validly baptized the child illicitly!

What we have here is a matter of legalism on YOUR part. You seem to believe that the mere fact that faith is not mentioned explicitly means that it is not necessary. It very certainly is necessary. And if it isn’t possessed by the parents, then it is possessed by the minister who is baptizing with the “intent” of the Church. And the Church’s intent is very much rooted in FAITH.

Doctrine says that Baptism (or any Sacrament) is *valid *if it has five valid components: subject, matter, form, minister, and intent. This is doctrine. This list does not include faith (because that’s not Doctrine).

You say that because you read the list like a laundry. You place no understanding in the words listed. Of the five requirements, the one most explicitly tied to faith is “intent”. What is it that the Church intends to do?

*** Right intention is the intention to do what the Church wants, what Christ wants
*** *Even non-Catholics can validly administer Baptism. In every case, however, it is the Baptism of the Catholic Church, which does not belong to those who separate themselves from her but to the Church from which they have separated themselves (cf. Augustine, **On *Baptism 1, 12,9). This validity is possible because Christ is the true minister of the sacrament: Christ is the one who truly baptizes, whether it is Peter or Paul or Judas who baptizes (cf. Augustine, Treatise on the Gospel of John VI, 1,7; cf. CCC n. 1127). The Council of Trent, confirming this tradition, defined that Baptism administered by heretics in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, with the intention of doing what the Catholic Church does is true Baptism (cf. DH 1617).
ewtn.com/library/theology/mormbap1.htm

Can anyone do this without faith as the foundation? No. Very simply because even if the heretic or atheist who baptizes has no faith, the Church whose intent he is passing on certainly does.

Then there are the rules, which determine if the Sacrament is licit or not. But rules are not Doctrine. If a Bishop ordains a priest at night (under power of darkness), apart from an emergency, it is *illicit *because the rules say don’t do that. But the guy is still 100% a priest. Doctrine trumps rules every time - no exceptions. God does not own a copy of the Code of Canon Law, and he never checks it online. If God’s rules are followed (ie, Doctrine) then nothing can prevent his Grace from being efficacious.

And God’s rules require FAITH:
Mark 16:16
**He that believeth and is baptized, **shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.

So, I ask again - is the child who receives an illicit but valid baptism (where nobody has any Christian faith whatsoever) saved?

You’re question is based upon a false understanding of doctrine. Therefore, it would be useless to respond to it.

There is no valid baptism where Christian faith is totally lacking. All the Sacraments presuppose faith as the foundation for the administering of the Sacrament.

Don’t get hung up on the rules. Focus on the Doctrine.

Don’t get hung up on the letter of the word. Focus on the Spirit which is being conveyed.
2 Corinthians 3:6
Who also hath made us fit ministers of the new testament, not in the letter, but in the spirit. For the letter killeth, but the spirit quickeneth.

If that child is saved, s/he is saved by Grace alone (because there is no faith present). If that child is saved by Grace alone, then we are all saved by Grace alone.

Not even a child is saved by grace alone in Baptism. A child who is baptized has been administered a Sacrament of faith in God. And whomsoever commanded or was administering that sacrament was expressing the pre-existing faith of the Church. Without which, no valid Sacrament would exist.

Sincerely,

De Maria