Defending the Catholic Faith

[guanophore]

I am catholic, you know that…

Here is a link to a Reformed website which is referencing the Apostles Creed.

reformed.org/documents/index.html

The name of this thread is “Defending the Catholic Faith”. Do you have more to post to support your personal views?

If you want defense of the faith, 2nd, you are in the wrong part of the forum. NC religions is for the comparing and contrasting of beliefs. You need to post your challenge over in Apologetics.

Anyway, the nature of Apologetics is that our personal views do not enter the picture. When we are defending the faith we have an obligation to post support for the Apostolic Teaching, whether our personal views are consistent with them or not.

 

[benedictus2]

Please understand that I posted the link of Pope Benedicts teaching on justification by faith alone, so that you would read the entire teaching. It should be understood in the context of the entire work. I would suggest that you read and study both of my links in its their proper context before you make such a posting about me.My goal is that both Protestants and Catholics alike would read both of the links, and you will see that we are much closer to each other than most would like to admit. From my position, those who are truly in Christ in spiriitual reality, there is no Protestant nor Catholic distinctive, for those who are truly in Christ (born from above) we are one body where Christ is the head. What God has done… is done for eternity in regards to His adopted children.

There were only 10 words left of the entire sentence so I do not see why it was truncated from your quote. Would still fit in your byline I believe.

 

[ChosenAndCalled]

I find it amazing that not one Catholic has been able to state the Gospel to 2nd Adam. He asked for the Catholic understanding of the Gospel as the Apostles would have taught it to the early church - and, no one has bothered to do that simple task. The Gospel was the most important thing to the early church, they gave their lives for it. Surely, soneone has the ability to state it simple as Peter, or James or John would have done?

There has been a lot of historical information about the Catholic church, lots of creeds quoted, lots of insults to 2nd Adam - some pretty harsh words, actually. To his credit he keeps answering the demands that he state his understanding of the Gospel - which no one can answer except to tell him that he is just unable to understand the real truth.

So, what is it? I’m also dying to know.

 

[brb2]

I find it amazing that not one Catholic has been able to state the Gospel to 2nd Adam. He asked for the Catholic understanding of the Gospel as the Apostles would have taught it to the early church

.

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. …And from his fulness have we all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” John 1:14-18

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Not one Catholic, Chosen and Called? Perhaps you failed to see 2nd Adam’s responses to those who tried to answer him but were constantly told that he didn’t ‘want’ or ‘accept’ said responses. . .

I think the posters who said that Adam just wants to hear ‘back’ from us what he himself believes, in the words he himself gave or accepts, and that nothing else will satisfy, is quite correct. This is not disrespectful to Adam, it is a reasonable conclusion that can be drawn given the evidence on hand. (and of course, notice the qualifier of ‘I think’ which makes it clear that this is an opinion).

While I certainly agree that ‘harsh words’ are not becoming or called for, some of the most dedicated responders to Adam have done so with dignity, civility, and unceasing respect. . .perhaps you missed those as they were part of long, careful, thought-out responses other than the short ‘shots’ that some might have felt called upon to give.

The Catholic faith is not something that can be ‘encapsulated’ into a few paragraphs or sound bites. St. Paul did not preach that way. Neither do we.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Not one Catholic, Chosen and Called? Perhaps you failed to see 2nd Adam’s responses to those who tried to answer him but were constantly told that he didn’t ‘want’ or ‘accept’ said responses. . .

I think the posters who said that Adam just wants to hear ‘back’ from us what he himself believes, in the words he himself gave or accepts, and that nothing else will satisfy, is quite correct. This is not disrespectful to Adam, it is a reasonable conclusion that can be drawn given the evidence on hand. (and of course, notice the qualifier of ‘I think’ which makes it clear that this is an opinion).

While I certainly agree that ‘harsh words’ are not becoming or called for, some of the most dedicated responders to Adam have done so with dignity, civility, and unceasing respect. . .perhaps you missed those as they were part of long, careful, thought-out responses other than the short ‘shots’ that some might have felt called upon to give.

The Catholic faith is not something that can be ‘encapsulated’ into a few paragraphs or sound bites. St. Paul did not preach that way. Neither do we.

If you go to the book of Acts, the Apostles preached the gospel all the time.

 

[Jason_1977]

THESE ARE YOUR WORDS 2ndADAM:

Since you too are claiming that historic confessional Protestants preach a different gospel than what Paul proclaimed, please proclaim the true gospel to me so I can repent of my error. As you noticed, Catholics have a hard time proclaiming the gospel according the the Apostle Paul. Here is an easy question: what must I do to be saved?

My response to this is that THERE IS NO GOSPEL ACCORDING TO PAUL IN CANON.

Paul proclaimed the gospel. There is no gospel according to Paul

SECONDLY, when you say SAVED, what do you mean by saved? Do you mean saved as in Yes Christ is your Saviour, or do you mean saved as in you have a bus ticket to heaven? I want to undestand saved. Since you like Paul so much, I’ll impart some wisdom on you & pray that I’m not casting pearls at swine. Here goes:

PHILIPPIANS 2:12

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling

Now why would I need to work out my salvation with fear & trembling? Hmm…maybe because it’s mine to lose? Aw…so salvation isn’t a bus ticket to heaven? I hear saved so many times, but I work with a southern baptist & I’d heard him say several times, "the 2nd time I was saved, or the 1st time I got saved…I mean, is it really accepting Jesus and that’s it? Or is it accepting Jesus & then once you do that, you’re for sure going to heaven, I want to know what in the heck that’s all about. In the meantime, ponder Philippians 2:12.:coffeeread:

 

[benedictus2]

Thanks for the links. I’m familar with both the Catechism and sources from Catholic Answers. I’ve heard American Catholicism has too much Protestantism in it. Maybe that’s a good thing… it seems to be rubbing off on Pope Benedict (see link below).

Nope it is not rubbing off on Pope Benedict at all. It is because you chop up a perfectly good sentence that it only seems to be so.

Is this the only way protestants can make a case? By chopping up everything. First you truncate the Bible then you truncate Pope Benedict.

Peddling a lie is not the way to go.

 

[thirdn6]

You asked, “What makes my gospel to be a false one?”
I said, Then please answer this with a yes or a no…see if it’s true.

Do you also preach the importance of the Holy Eucharist? That the Lamb of God- Jesus, the Christ, Son of God, His body and blood, in the form of bread and wine, is what we, Catholics, receive in the holy communion? That anybody who partakes unworthily receives condemnation to himself (as St Paul stated in his letters to the Corinthians)?

Sir, I asked you to answer my question with a simple yes or** no** and your response was this…

See post 113 for a response.

I think that answered your own question, not mine!!

Peace. But Truth is more important…

 

[guanophore]

I find it amazing that not one Catholic has been able to state the Gospel to 2nd Adam. He asked for the Catholic understanding of the Gospel as the Apostles would have taught it to the early church - and, no one has bothered to do that simple task.

The reason 2nd is asking this is because he has become aware that what we have received from the Apostles differs from that which was formulated during the Reformation. Catholics do not make the Gospel into a trucated readers digest condensed message as do some of our separated brethren.

Besides, this is not the proper venue for such a request. It belongs over in Apologetics.

Some forum members erroneously fell for the ploy, and where quickly swatted down by 2nd as not meeting his preconceived standard of the meaning of “gospel”.

This reaction on his part makes it clear that only an answer that meets his standards of what he believes is acceptable. One can clearly see that it is not a discussion about how we see things differently, which is the purpose here.

The Gospel was the most important thing to the early church, they gave their lives for it. Surely, soneone has the ability to state it simple as Peter, or James or John would have done?

That is just it, Chosen. The preached message of the Apostles was never separated from the whole Teaching of Jesus. Their goal was not just to get people to pray the sinners prayer, ask Jesus into their hearts, then go on to the next city. Their goal was to teach them "all that I have commanded’ as Jesus commissioned them. The Catholic gospel is stated at the beginning of Acts, where Luke records “all that Jesus began to do, and to teach”.

This is why the first four books of the NT are called “gospel”.

 To his credit he keeps answering the demands that he state his understanding of the Gospel - which no one can answer except to tell him that he is just unable to understand the real truth.

Why would there be a need to “answer” 2nd’s conceptualization of the gospel? He has studied hard, it appears, to come to it. He seems very passionate about his faith, and takes his walk with God very seriously. I have no desire to take away any of this. I would that there were more Catholics as fervent in faith. We could change the world!
ChosenAndCalled;5812149:

So, what is it? I’m also dying to know.

Since I have been pursuaded that any offering will be swatted aside with a phrase such as “that is not the gospel”, I have decided not to play. But, if you are really that curious, I suggest that you go over to Apologetics and post a new thread there. Or, if you don’t know how, I will be happy to do it for you. I am sure there will be some folks over there that will be willing to play the “step up and get swatted” game.

 

[guanophore]

If you go to the book of Acts, the Apostles preached the gospel all the time.

Indeed they did. However, the error comes in thinking that what is written there for our instruction is the beginning and the end of the gospel.

For the Apostles, the gospel is a way of life, a manner of being in the world. This began in baptism, and was completed at the time of death.

Did you ever notice what the believers did after they were baptized on Pentecost? it is not proper to separate the activity that follows from the conversion experience.

 

[benedictus2]

Thanks for asking. The gospel in a nutshell is 2 Corinthians 5:21.

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

You really think that the whole gospel can be summarized in one verse that is not even in the Gospel?
How does Christ becoming sin make us the righteousness of God in Him?

The gospel of Christ in general is this: It is the good tidings that God has revealed concerning Christ. More largely it is this: As all mankind was lost in Adam and became the children of wrath, put under the sentence of death, God, though He left His fallen angels and has reserved them in the chains of eternal darkness, yet He has thought upon the children of men and has provided a way of atonement to reconcile them to Himself again…Namely, the second person of the Trinity takes man’s nature upon Himself, and becomes the Head of a second covenant, standing charged with sin. He answers for it by suffering what the law and divine justice required, and by

**making satisfaction by keeping the law perfectly, **
If Christ made satisfaction by keeping the law perfectly, why did He have to die? He kept the law perfectly already when He was alive so why the need for such an ignominious death?

And now this mediation of Christ is, by the appointment of the Father, preached to the children of men, of whatever nation or rank, freely offering this atonement unto sinners for atonement, requiring them to believe in Him and

**, upon BELIEVING, promising not only a discharge of all their former sins, **
Please provide Biblical support for the highlighted verse.
What does believing in Him mean? Is it mere intellectual assent as to His existence?

We must have the full message. . . ‘deliver the whole counsel of God’. . . .

What is the WHOLE of counsel of God? What consists of the full message?
2 Cor 5:21 is hardly the full message.
To deliver the full message, you need to deliver the full message of Christ.
Everything about Christ has to do with our salvation. So why is it then that you accept some of what Christ has said and willed and chose to disregard the others if you are convinced that the full message must be delivered.

 

[benedictus2]

As Christians, we are commanded to to proclaim and defend the gospel of God. Since I apparently believe and proclaim a different gospel, here is your chance to defend the Catholic Faith. Why is my gospel different than your gospel?

Here is a post I made some months back which I thnk answers your question:

The Catholic position is we are saved by grace, by faith working in love.

All that salvation by grace means is that it is free. We did not merit it. It is purely as John wrote : because God so loved the world.

But the question is how does God effect salvation? Okay so it is free, so Christ died on the cross once to save us. But have you ever asked yourself how his dying brought about salvation?

The protestant (mainly Calvinistic which I assume you to be since you quoted a Presbyterian pastor in your other post) understanding of salvation is like this:

God imputes on us Christ’s righteousness so even though deep inside we are still the same miserable, wretched creatures that we are, His righteousness covers all that muck within so when God sees us, He sees that outer covering that is Christ. In short we are a garbage pit that’s been covered with white turf so it looks pleasing to the eye.

If all that is needed is for us to be imputed with Christ’s righteousness why go to the extent of being human? Furthermore, why the need to suffer and die on the cross?

The Catholic understanding is this: The suffering death and resurrection of Christ opened up heaven so to speak so that the graces are made available to us. Justificatiion is not a mere DECLARATION by God that we are righteous but rather that we are actually MADE rigteous.

In saving us from the pit Christ requires us to put our hand in His. He could have very well yanked us out but no, He wants us to grab His hand.

This action of grace on our soul makes us righteous.

But what does it mean to actually be righteous?

It means following God’s commandments which in a nutshell boils down to love of God and love of neighbour. LOVE is WORK.

We do not truly love unless we prove it by our deeds. You can tell your wife/husband till you are blue in the face that you love him/her but that will mean zilch if you do not bring show it by an affectionate kiss, a little token of your appreciation every now and again, helping with the chiildren and the chores, listening to him/her etc, etc, etc,

That is why in one of Paul’s most moving letters he says the greatest is LOVE because to love is to participate in Divine life.

When we get to heaven, faith and hope will cease, but love will still be there and love manifestests itself in WORK so long as we are on this side eternity. That is why we have the phrase “labour of love”.

James is so right when he says “I will show you my faith by my works”.

Christ said follow me. The following of Christ involves a dying to self. A carrying of our crosses. All these involve WORK.

I was thinking about it the other day and mulled about actual grace which is defined as the transient help to act. If we are saved by grace, then this means that it involves movement from potency to action not just mere assent of belief. Once again, it involves work.

There is also a difference in the our understanding of the state of man after the fall. The Calvinistic understanding is that man became so depraved (if he were a car he would be an unrecognizable ball of wreck). The Catholic understanding is that the fall caused a depletion of gas so the car can’t move forward.

And this determines the way we see justification. You see it as imputed (which it will have to be if you see man as completely, totally depraved), we see it as infused (if you see it as merely lacking petrol).

That man after the fall is not completely and utterly depraved is attested to by the fact that natural goodness exists and this is manifested by those who are not Christian.

We preach the same Gospel. It is just that your understanding is slightly askew.

 

[benedictus2]

I find it amazing that not one Catholic has been able to state the Gospel to 2nd Adam. He asked for the Catholic understanding of the Gospel as the Apostles would have taught it to the early church - and, no one has bothered to do that simple task. The Gospel was the most important thing to the early church, they gave their lives for it. Surely, soneone has the ability to state it simple as Peter, or James or John would have done?

But the problem is 2nd Adam’s gospel is 2 Cor 5:21. Quite a condensation of the 4 Gospels don’t you think? Why bother with the 4 gospels when you can have 2 Cor 5:21?

As for me a summation of the Gospel would be :God so loved the World that He gave His only Son that we may love each other as Christ has loved us.
There is a fixation in Calvinistic theology with a legalistic understanding of the matter of salvation and justification.

There has been a lot of historical information about the Catholic church, lots of creeds quoted, lots of insults to 2nd Adam - some pretty harsh words, actually. To his credit he keeps answering the demands that he state his understanding of the Gospel - which no one can answer except to tell him that he is just unable to understand the real truth.

So, what is it? I’m also dying to know.

Well I for my part have attempted to explain the difference to him. I have not read the other posts but I am sure one or two of them would have already done that. It does not help that he did not explain at the outset what gospel he believes in so we can explain how our understanding is different to his.

 

[ChosenAndCalled]

You ask how Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was translated in righteousness for Presbyterians?

Well, I’m one - just a layman with no theology school, mind you. So, I’m a simple man who tries to study his faith from a historical and biblical perspective. I’ll give it a shot.

We have the understanding that God requires an eternal punishment for each sin that is committed. If did not inherit Adam’s nature was born dead into sin, lived a perfect life, but sinned only once (not possible, I’m taking things to extreme) I would still face an eternity in Hell as punishment for my sin. I think most orthodox Christians would agree with that.

Now, our further understanding is that Christ was the atonement for our sins on the cross. I think this is where we differ – we believe that Christ died for the Elect only and paid an eternal penalty on the cross for not only each and ever believer, but for each and every sin that believer had ever, or would ever commit. God knows His elect, knows what they will or have done and applied that wrath to Christ. So, we believe that Christ died for us in a very personal way. When I confess a sin, I confess knowing that the penalty imposed upon Christ for that sin was an eternal wrath poured out on the Cross. This is part of the reason why the sufficiency of the cross is so important to us. We’re a very real part of Christ’s torment.

We disagree on salvation, I think, because we use different words to mean the same thing and the same word to mean different things.

A word picture on justification I use for my children.

Imagine that you awake and find yourself in a deep prison, chained to the wall and other people. You’re all lying in a foul mess, the stench is unbearable. It’s dark, cold and you are afraid. Suddenly, there is a light, you feel warmth and love; the light draws you, but suddenly you realize that you’re unable to go to the light. It is pure goodness and you are a slime-filled mess. Further, you realize that you are made of the slime – it’s in you, on you, made by you and – you’ve enjoyed being that mess. You weep, wanting that light and warmth and hope and desperately wanting to see your chains removed and to be with that light. You know that God is that light and you cannot be with God because you are filth and have been the enemy of the light. You cry out, “God save me – I am unclean and unable to save myself”, and suddenly see that Christ is with you, in the slime. He is not affected by it; His radiance drives away the dark and cold. Your chains fall off and suddenly you are clean, white and pure – you know that Christ has given you His nature. Now, you can come to the light and it’s all you want to do.

This one time justification is what we cannot lose. It’s a nature changing experience; we receive a heart of flesh for a heart of stone. At that time we begin our journey of sanctification – obedience to God as we work to become more like Christ. Our inner nature is changed, but our outer nature needs to be molded throughout our life.

Now, when we are justified, no red light is illuminated on our foreheads. We show no outer signs of conversion. We can only know that we have been given a gift of grace by God and made righteousness through Christ. We can also not see anyone else’s inner nature to know who is regenerated and who is not. People lie about their faith, misunderstand or simply don’t know. This is where the tired old “Once Saved Always Saved” arguments come out.

No real Reformed Christian would tell you that a simple sinner’s prayer saved us. We did not decide to “get saved”. Nothing we could do would have allowed us to make that decision – we were dead in our sins and cannot assist God. That’s the Arminian wing – the emotional side of the Christian triangle. They need the tinglies. We see that God has moved, of His own accord, woken us from death, given us a new nature and that nature is what allowed us to suddenly desire to be with God. We see for the first time that we are sinners. A true inner conversion will not need to be repeated. Christ told us to be born again – not again and again and again….

We see the Gospel message – the message that wakes the sinner from death and shows him that he is helpless, hopeless and destined for wrath - except for the grace of God and the righteousness of Christ, as simple. So simple a child can understand it. It does not require a theology lesson, church history lesson and an understanding of complex ideas – that’s for sanctification as we walk with Christ and become more and more conformed to His nature. Those things are important, but not for the Gospel.

Part 1 - We are dead in sin, enemies of God; we, by nature hate Him and love sin. Then, He reaches out, breathes life into us, giving us a new nature. We, being made alive see our sin, recoil from it and realize that we are helpless and hopeless. We cry out to God through Christ and are made righteousness for Christ’s sake – He already paid the penalty for our sins and we belong to Him.

Part 2 - After that, yes, we must be conformed to the nature of Christ or our belief that we have a new nature is a lie. Our sanctification is a life-long process of conforming, doing the works of God that He gives us faith to do and seeking to do His will. As humans, our ability to do this will wax and wane over our lives. At some points we’ll do better and others, we’ll fail. Still, our justification is secure – God has changed our nature and nothing we can do will allow us to undo His conversion. Just as we could do nothing to become alive in the first place.

Part 1 is a Gospel message. Part 2 is a life-style indicative of a justification experience.

 

[guanophore]

You really think that the whole gospel can be summarized in one verse that is not even in the Gospel?
How does Christ becoming sin make us the righteousness of God in Him?

2Cor.5

[17] Therefore, if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come.
[18] All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation;
[19] that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
[20] So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
[21] For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

The how is a good question that we may not understand this side of the veil. However we see the use of the scapegoat in the Law that forshadowed how He would take our sins. He is the Passover Lamb, which, as you recall, had to be perfect and unblemished.

I agree with you that taking one verse out of scripture and calling it “the gospel” is a very dangerous matter. None of the parts can be separated from the whole.

The Apostles taught that we are joined with Him in His death and resurrection through baptism. In this way, we die with Him, so that the righteousness of God can live in us.

How this happens is a great mystery of our faith. We are joined with Him in His death in baptism, and raised with Him in new life. The Spirit helps us in our weakness, so it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us.

If Christ made satisfaction by keeping the law perfectly, why did He have to die? He kept the law perfectly already when He was alive so why the need for such an ignominious death?

Please provide Biblical support for the highlighted verse.

Heb.5
[1] For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.
[2] He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness.
[3] Because of this he is bound to offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people.
[4] And one does not take the honor upon himself, but he is called by God, just as Aaron was.
[5] So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “Thou art my Son,
today I have begotten thee”;
[6] as he says also in another place, “Thou art a priest for ever,
after the order of Melchiz’edek.”
[7] In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard for his godly fear.
[8] Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered;
[9] and being made perfect he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him,

Do you not believe that Jesus perfect obedience was pleasing to the Father? If I am following you, you are making the point that, if perfect obedience to the law made satisfaction, he would have no reason to die?

His perfect satisfaction through the keeping of the Law was an expression of His unblemished nature, which was given for us as the sacrificial lamb.

Everything about Christ has to do with our salvation. So why is it then that you accept some of what Christ has said and willed and chose to disregard the others if you are convinced that the full message must be delivered.

I think you hit this nail on the head. I was shocked when I read from one of our Reformed brethren on CAF that Jesus did not really have much to say that is relevant to our salvation.

 

[DOShea]

You guys write about everything except the gospel. I am convinced that Catholics are unable to proclaim the true gospel to me.

Well of course you are. Everywhere you are pointed you refuse to go, always with some excuse. When asked for what you want, you dance around and hide behind the word “gospel” as if everyone is supposed to know what YOU think it is. From this I have to conclude that no Protestant can define a gospel. That sounds fair, doesn’t it?

You apparently want someone to post a “gospel” of the entire Catholic faith with all it’s beliefs, backed up or course by Scripture. Got news for you… it won’t fit in an entire topic here. So keep asking for the impossible and using that as your basis to increase your prideful heart and grow ever further apart from God if you want to, but don’t think you are dragging anyone with you.

Jesus Christ taught the truths of Calvinism.

No He did NOT teach that.

Jesus did NOT teach once saved, always saved. That is Calvin’s made-up doctrine to cover his behind because he rejected many other Catholic teachings. Christ taught that salvation certainly CAN be lost. Parable of virgins with the lamps who forgot to bring oil? They were originally “there,” meaning they believed (oil being the symbol of faith), then they left. What happened when they came back? Were they let in or not? Try reading Rev. Ch 2 and 3 and read what God is saying to the angels of the seven churches. These are churches of people who already believe, thus according to Calvin, ARE saved.

(All quotes from the KJV)

Rev 2:17 To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna,

What’s to overcome? If all one has to do is believe, they should already merit this manna, being that they are believers.

Rev 2:19 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.

Works? Why do those matter if all I need is faith?

Rev 3:2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.

Works? Calvin says Sola Fide is it, not works. Why is God confused here, do you suppose?

Rev 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Why is God telling believers, members of a church, that IF they overcome, their name will not be blotted out of the book of life? Why would God say that when Calvin says your name CANNOT be blotted out of the book of life if you do believe? Which one gets to decide God’s justice… God, or Calvin?

Then I would like you to explain why a loving God tempts you into sin. It couldn’t possibly be Satan doing that - he’d be wasting his time if you are already saved and, according to Calvin, cannot change that no matter what you do (or for that matter, what Satan does). So it must be God doing all that tempting, right? Right? If not God, then who, and why? What is the purpose of tempting someone who cannot help but be saved?

What I get out of this entire thread is that some Protestants are too cowardly to go read the references cited and come back with some evidence if they feel those are in error. Instead, they demand something they refuse to define and puff up their ego by pretending they have “stumped” someone because they do not articulate a nebulous “something.”

Get a life! All your are accomplishing is making a thicker wall between Catholics and those of the Reformed faith. Maybe that’s really your goal, I don’t know, but it’s sad if it is.

 

[guanophore]

Here is a post I made some months back which I thnk answers your question:

The Catholic position is we are saved by grace, by faith working in love.

All that salvation by grace means is that it is free. We did not merit it. It is purely as John wrote : because God so loved the world.

But the question is how does God effect salvation? Okay so it is free, so Christ died on the cross once to save us. But have you ever asked yourself how his dying brought about salvation?

The protestant (mainly Calvinistic which I assume you to be since you quoted a Presbyterian pastor in your other post) understanding of salvation is like this:

God imputes on us Christ’s righteousness so even though deep inside we are still the same miserable, wretched creatures that we are, His righteousness covers all that muck within so when God sees us, He sees that outer covering that is Christ. In short we are a garbage pit that’s been covered with white turf so it looks pleasing to the eye.

If all that is needed is for us to be imputed with Christ’s righteousness why go to the extent of being human? Furthermore, why the need to suffer and die on the cross?

The Catholic understanding is this: The suffering death and resurrection of Christ opened up heaven so to speak so that the graces are made available to us. Justificatiion is not a mere DECLARATION by God that we are righteous but rather that we are actually MADE rigteous.

In saving us from the pit Christ requires us to put our hand in His. He could have very well yanked us out but no, He wants us to grab His hand.

This action of grace on our soul makes us righteous.

But what does it mean to actually be righteous?

It means following God’s commandments which in a nutshell boils down to love of God and love of neighbour. LOVE is WORK.

We do not truly love unless we prove it by our deeds. You can tell your wife/husband till you are blue in the face that you love him/her but that will mean zilch if you do not bring show it by an affectionate kiss, a little token of your appreciation every now and again, helping with the chiildren and the chores, listening to him/her etc, etc, etc,

That is why in one of Paul’s most moving letters he says the greatest is LOVE because to love is to participate in Divine life.

When we get to heaven, faith and hope will cease, but love will still be there and love manifestests itself in WORK so long as we are on this side eternity. That is why we have the phrase “labour of love”.

James is so right when he says “I will show you my faith by my works”.

Christ said follow me. The following of Christ involves a dying to self. A carrying of our crosses. All these involve WORK.

I was thinking about it the other day and mulled about actual grace which is defined as the transient help to act. If we are saved by grace, then this means that it involves movement from potency to action not just mere assent of belief. Once again, it involves work.

There is also a difference in the our understanding of the state of man after the fall. The Calvinistic understanding is that man became so depraved (if he were a car he would be an unrecognizable ball of wreck). The Catholic understanding is that the fall caused a depletion of gas so the car can’t move forward.

And this determines the way we see justification. You see it as imputed (which it will have to be if you see man as completely, totally depraved), we see it as infused (if you see it as merely lacking petrol).

That man after the fall is not completely and utterly depraved is attested to by the fact that natural goodness exists and this is manifested by those who are not Christian.

We preach the same Gospel. It is just that your understanding is slightly askew.

I think you are right on with this, Benedictus. I think that the skewed doctrine regarding justification finds it’s origin in the misunderstanding in the Reformed tradition about the nature of humanity. A false conclusion based upon a faulty premise.

 

[ChosenAndCalled]

What I get out of this entire thread is that some Protestants are too cowardly to go read the references cited and come back with some evidence if they feel those are in error. Instead, they demand something they refuse to define and puff up their ego by pretending they have “stumped” someone because they do not articulate a nebulous “something.”

Get a life! All your are accomplishing is making a thicker wall between Catholics and those of the Reformed faith. Maybe that’s really your goal, I don’t know, but it’s sad if it is.

Wow, you’ve done it; I’m cured. Tiber here I come. You’ve shown me, through you love and patience, the errors of my ways. I weep with joy at having my eyes opened by a stronger wiser brother who cares so much for me.

Or, the giant hammer of Irony has just pounded you upside the head so hard that you don’t even realize it.

It’s one or the other, I’ll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out.

 

[John92]

As Christians, we are commanded to to proclaim and defend the gospel of God. Since I apparently believe and proclaim a different gospel, here is your chance to defend the Catholic Faith. Why is my gospel different than your gospel?

Spread the Gospel with your deeds and prayers. You’ll convert far more people than you will with your confrontational words.