Does Catholic theology contradict the Bible regarding sin?

[fineca]

Please help with this problem. How are we to understand passages like 1. John 3:9,

“No one born of God commits sin; for God’s nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God.”

Both Catholic teaching and reality seem to teach the opposite, don’t you think? Even if we try to explain the above as a reference to mortal sin and pertinacy in it and not everyday sins, we still fail, because there are many Catholics who live in such sin and couldn’t care less, and yet we believe they have been born of God in baptism.

Another hard passage is Romans 14:23:
“whatever does not proceed from faith is sin”

I think the Church has officially condemned the Jansenist proposition that whatever doesn’t proceed from Christian faith and charity is sinful. The same against Luther and Calvin I think. Anyway it seems the Church has thus anathemized the Bible!

Then there is the question of concupiscence. Luther taught it was sin, the Church said it wasn’t. Luther taught we are still sinners even after justification, and are saved because we are in Christ, covered by him. The Catholic view holds that sin is washed away and the man truly changed and the inclination to sin that remains isn’t sinful. But see what St.Paul says - he clearly calls the concupiscence sin in Romans 7:17,20:
“So then it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.”
“Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.”

He goes on to say:
“I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members…Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” (7:23-8:1)

Isn’t this a clear indication of a person committing sins in the flesh but not dealing with it saying “oh, it’s good I can go to confession and be cleansed” but with a “praise God because there is no condemnation at all”. Somehow sounds a lot more Protestant than Catholic doesn’t it? “For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate…I can will what is right, but I cannot do it” (Rom. 7:15,18) Again seems to be opposite to the CC’s teaching - surely we can do what is right, right?

Thank you very much for your help! If you can recommend an article about the Catholic understanding of sin from a biblical point of view that’d be great. Is there a Catholic Bible commentary available online?

Thanks!
E

 

[jmcrae]

Please help with this problem. How are we to understand passages like 1. John 3:9,

“No one born of God commits sin; for God’s nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God.”

The footnote in my DRV indicates that what this means is that we lose our Baptismal grace when we sin, and need to be reconverted again. We do this by going to Confession.

We will not be truly “born again” until we actually reach Heaven - until then, it will always be possible for us to lose our Baptismal grace, and have to go to Confession. I suppose this is why, at funerals, we hear that it is by dying in the state of grace that we finally complete the work of our Baptism.

Another hard passage is Romans 14:23:
“whatever does not proceed from faith is sin”

This is referring back to verse 15 of the same passage, with regard to setting a stumbling block for the weaker brother. If what we do builds up the faith of our weak brother, it is good, but that which does not build up his faith is sin, because it causes him to stumble - even if the action itself isn’t sinful - due to the fact that the weaker brother isn’t seeing the good example that we need to be setting for him.

I highly recommend the Douay-Rheims Bible with the original footnotes - it clarifies a lot of difficult Bible passages. (Unlike the NAB, where the footnotes often leave me even more confused than before - I like the translation itself, though, for being easy to read.)

 

[Pax]

1 John 3:9 and the passages surrounding it refer to habitual sin. The Greek is properly understood to mean “continuing in sin.” Even protestant commentaries recognize this. For example:

Gray’s Home Bible Commentary says this about the passage in question.

“Others interpret the word “commit” in the sense of practice (compare Galatians 5:21), (Revised Version). It is one thing to fall temporarily into sin as a consequence of sudden temptation, and another thing to practice it, i. e., to live in continual transgression. This no regenerated man does. The teaching of this verse should be balanced with that of 1:8, where the apostle is speaking to the same persons as in the present instance.”

The cited verse [1:8] for balance says:

“If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”

Verse 9 goes on to say, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

All of this is in keeping with Catholic teaching.

 

[fineca]

I already addressed that in the first post - it doesn’t solve the problem, because there are many many regenerated (baptized) Catholics who live in continual sin! The Protestant commentary says no regenerated man does this, and it’s in keeping with protestantism, since whoever lives like that is ipso facto not regenerated according to them, but it’s problematic for Catholics because we believe all baptized to be regenerated! So how can there be regenerated Catholics living in continual sin even though the passage says it’s not possible??
John is obviously not talking about heaven here.

 

[Bishopite]

[fineca;1900549]I already addressed that in the first post - it doesn’t solve the problem, because there are many many regenerated (baptized) Catholics who live in continual sin!

Baptized Catholics live in sin by their free will and deny the sanctifying grace given to them at their baptism.

The Protestant commentary says no regenerated man does this, and it’s in keeping with protestantism, since whoever lives like that is ipso facto not regenerated according to them, but it’s problematic for Catholics because we believe all baptized to be regenerated! So how can there be regenerated Catholics living in continual sin even though the passage says it’s not possible??
John is obviously not talking about heaven here.

Baptismal regeration doesn’t mean that we can’t fall into grave sin, it’s not fool proof safety net.
What you are assuming is that all regenerated people can’t again fall from grace. A regenerated Catholic can live in continual sin by free choice and by denying the sanctifying grace within them, thus choosing grave sin or death above love or God.

It is only the Calvinistic Protestants who hold the false premise that one can’t loose ones salvation, therefore they have to follow logic to its conclusion and conclude that a person who was regenerated (or so appeared to be in their view) wasn’t actually regenerated because if they were regenerated or “justified” which is to them punctiliar only
(meaning one-time only at one point in time only) then that person would persevere in grace. From a Protestant Calvinistic perspective one wouldn’t be in sin if one is justified but not all Protestants teach this. Calvinists teach this view of justification and start off with a false premise (that we can’t fall away from God’s grace, which Gal 5:4, 1 Cor 9:27 and other verses contradict)
Gal 5:25 “if we live in the Spirit, let us also follow the Spirit” …but the “if” is a conditional term for it assumes a condition at that moment in time not whether one was in the Spirit or not prior. And if we live in the Spirit we will follow the Spirit. And with a false premise Calvinists also assert a false conclusion; that they were never justified or saved in the first place, but Scripture and life experience tell us otherwise.

If we take 1 John 3 in an over literal sense we get big problems. Verse 6 “No one who remains in him sins; no one who sins has seen him or known him.” Does that mean everyone who is in Christ doesn’t sin any longer? No.

Verses 9-10 "No one who is begotten by God commits sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot sin because he is begotten by God.
So…everyone who is of God doesn’t sin?
10 "In this way, the children of God and the children of the devil are made plain; no one who fails to act in righteousness belongs to God, nor anyone who does not love his brother."
Notice in verse 10 it is those who “act in righteousness” that belong to God vs anyone “who does not love [act in righteousness] his brother.”

In verse 11-12 "For this is the message you have heard from the beginning: we should love one another,
12 unlike Cain who belonged to the evil one and slaughtered his brother. Why did he slaughter him? Because his own works were evil, and those of his brother righteous. Cain as Able had the free choice of obedience vs grave sin (found in 1 John chapter 5). But notice Cain chose evil by his works and Able chose righteousness by his works. We also even after we have been given sanctifying grace, can chose by our works [actions or obedience] evil or love for baptism is our initial justification and salvation is a process.

"Salvation has many components:

1. saved by grace – Rom. 3:23,24; Titus 2:11; Eph 2:5,8
2. saved by faith – Acts 16:31; Eph. 2:8; I Peter 1:9
3. saved by confession – Rom. 10:10; I John 1:9; James 5:16
4. saved by repentance – Luke 13:3; II Cor. 7:10; II Peter 3:9
5. saved by baptism – Mark 16:16; John 3:5; I Peter 3:21
6. saved by the Holy Ghost – John 3:5; Rom. 8:9; Eph. 1:13,14
7. saved by endurance – II Tim. 2:10; James 1:12; Heb. 3:6

Salvation is a process:
1. we have been saved, “According to his mercy he saved us” (Titus 3:5), and “{God} has saved us and called us to a holy life” (2 Tim 1:9),
2. we are being saved, “For by grace are ye saved” (Eph 2:8), and “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phi 2:12),
3. we shall be saved, “much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” (Rom 5:10) and “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” (I Tim 4:16).
God only gives this final salvation if we continue in him (Rom 11:22; Col 1:23; I John 2:24,25)."
apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/process.htm

 

[fineca]

Hmm…let’s make it simple:
Take a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend in a sinful state and not wanting to repent. Is he born of God? If you say yes, you contradict the Catholic teaching on baptism, if you say no, you contradict 1. John 3:9. That’s the problem.

Nobody has addressed the St.Paul issue Romans 7…

 

[jmcrae]

Hmm…let’s make it simple:
Take a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend in a sinful state and not wanting to repent. Is he born of God? If you say yes, you contradict the Catholic teaching on baptism, if you say no, you contradict 1. John 3:9. That’s the problem.

That’s because you’re asking the wrong question.

A more pertinent question would be, “Is he in the state of grace?” and the answer to that is “No.” If he dies in that state, he will almost certainly go to Hell, although he will have the characterem of Baptism on his forehead, which will be a source of eternal shame to him.

 

[fineca]

But you see the problem is that the passage doesn’t talk about the state of grace but about being born of God which is a different thing.

 

[Pax]

Hold on. I used the Protestant commentary for the sole purpose of showing that even non-Catholics recognize that the meaning of the verses from John are in reference to continuing sin. This is not the full explanation and the end all of teaching and doctrine in this matter.

Your comments about the individual living in sin with his girl friend does not refute the Catholic understanding. This person may be in a habitual state of sin but that does not mean that the person will never repent. This person could be baptized and be regenerated and suffer a fall from grace. Even Paul mentions that some have fallen from grace[see Gal 5:4].

The best way to understand this is by way of family membership in the household. We are adopted sons and daughters and as such we live in Christ and do not live in a state of sin. It is, nevertheless, possible to fall from grace and leave the household.

The story of the prodigal son pretty much says it all. The son left the household on his own accord. Upon coming to his senses he returns to his father’ household and confesses that he has sinned. Scripture then gives us the clear message about what has taken place. In Luke 15:22-24 it says:

“the father said to his servants, ‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet and bring the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and make merry; for this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to make merry.”

Jesus is telling this parable about salvation. The son was a member of the household but “squandered his inheritance.” The son was “dead.” Upon returning in repentance to the household, the son is “alive again.”

This truth of wandering off in sin and then being restored is spoken of elsewhere in scripture as well. For instance in James 5:19-20 it says,

“My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.”

I hope this helps.

 

[Bishopite]

Hmm…let’s make it simple:
Take a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend in a sinful state and not wanting to repent. Is he born of God? If you say yes, you contradict the Catholic teaching on baptism, if you say no, you contradict 1. John 3:9. That’s the problem.

Nobody has addressed the St.Paul issue Romans 7…

No we don’t contradict Catholic teaching on baptism. You are the one who doesn’t understand what Catholicism teaches. Is a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend born of God? NO, because he’s been cut off from grace by his free choice.

What about Romans 7?

 

[Bishopite]

But you see the problem is that the passage doesn’t talk about the state of grace but about being born of God which is a different thing.

You are proof texting 1 John 3:9, taking one text to attempt to make the context of 1 John 3 and then applying it incorrectly to Catholicism.

The passage does talk about the state of grace and being born of God is the same thing as being in a state of grace. Baptism is the initial justication in Catholicism and the bible; it’s a process!

Verse 10 says very clearly… "In this way, the children of God and the children of the devil are made plain; no one who fails to act in righteousness belongs to God, nor anyone who does not love his brother."

This is describing actions that either keep you out “no one who fails to act in righteousness belongs to God”
This is the Catholic who lives with his girlfriend and is in mortal sin. Read two chapters later in 1 John 5.

Verse 11…“unlike Cain who belonged to the evil one and slaughtered his brother. Why did he slaughter him? Because his own works were evil, and those of his brother righteous.”
Cains works were evil so is fornicating an evil work.

 

[Bishopite]

But you see the problem is that the passage doesn’t talk about the state of grace but about being born of God which is a different thing.

Expalin to me what the difference between the two?

 

[Bishopite]

Please help with this problem. How are we to understand passages like 1. John 3:9,

“No one born of God commits sin; for God’s nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God.”

Both Catholic teaching and reality seem to teach the opposite, don’t you think? Even if we try to explain the above as a reference to mortal sin and pertinacy in it and not everyday sins, we still fail, because there are many Catholics who live in such sin and couldn’t care less, and yet we believe they have been born of God in baptism.

Another hard passage is Romans 14:23:
“whatever does not proceed from faith is sin”

Here when he gives into the sin of the flesh, he sins. Those who are born of God or in a state of grace or in Christ Jesus (all saying the same thing) are NOT condemned but are in Christ Jesus and righteous.

Isn’t this a clear indication of a person committing sins in the flesh but not dealing with it saying “oh, it’s good I can go to confession and be cleansed”

I don’t see your point. If we fail to deal with our sins we only hurt ourselves. Confession presumes one is sorry for their sins or why would they go?

but with a “praise God because there is no condemnation at all”. Somehow sounds a lot more Protestant than Catholic doesn’t it? “For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate…I can will what is right, but I cannot do it” (Rom. 7:15,18) Again seems to be opposite to the CC’s teaching - surely we can do what is right, right?

Of course we can do what is right. God gives us the grace to do good thing. What about Phillpians 4:13…“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me?” We can be free from sin, look at the Saints lives, but that we all struggle is part of this life. God knows our stuggles and can help us through them.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Bishopite]

No we don’t contradict Catholic teaching on baptism. You are the one who doesn’t understand what Catholicism teaches. Is a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend born of God? NO, because he’s been cut off from grace by his free choice.

What about Romans 7?

Refecting on what I said here made me think I should apologize to you for my bad choice of words. Again, sorry for sounding harsh or rude.

 

[Bishopite]

Originally Posted by fineca
Hmm…let’s make it simple:
Take a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend in a sinful state and not wanting to repent. Is he born of God? If you say yes, you contradict the Catholic teaching on baptism, if you say no, you contradict 1. John 3:9. That’s the problem.

Nobody has addressed the St.Paul issue Romans 7…

No we don’t contradict Catholic teaching on baptism. You are the one who doesn’t understand what Catholicism teaches. Is a Catholic who’s living with his girlfriend born of God? NO, because he’s been cut off from grace by his free choice.

What about Romans 7?

I want to apologize for my harsh words. After reading this again I realized what I wrote here was a bit harsh and I didn’t intend to be rude.

 

[Bishopite]

Thank you very much for your help! If you can recommend an article about the Catholic understanding of sin from a biblical point of view that’d be great. Is there a Catholic Bible commentary available online?

Thanks!
E

Here is one that is easy to understand…
cin.org/users/james/files/justcath.htm

 

[fineca]

The rude words: it’s ok don’t worry.
I do understand Catholic teaching- I am very much a Catholic, I’m just playing the devil’s advocate and pushing you to get a satisfactory response which I’m not sure I’ve received yet.
The difference between being born of God (if this is equal to being regenerated) is that it happens once, at baptism, whereas the state of grace is what follows baptism and it can be lost and regained etc, but you’re not “born again again”.
So according to C teaching if born of God means regenerated the C living with the gf is indeed born of God.

As to St.Paul, I don’t see how your comments really answered my questions…

Again I ask: is there a Catholic Bible commentary online?

Since we mentioned imputed righteousness, let me ask another question about penal substitution which is very much related. I think the RCC considers it a heresy but doesn’t Is.53 clearly teach it?

4 Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. 8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? 9 And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand; 11 he shall see the fruit of the travail of his soul and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities.

Is. 53:4-11

 

[mlchance]

But you see the problem is that the passage doesn’t talk about the state of grace but about being born of God which is a different thing.

No, it isn’t. They are the same thing.

1 John 3:9 cannot be yanked out of the larger context of 1 John 2:24 through 1 John 3:10. The Apostle isn’t saying Christians are incapable of sin. He is saying that we avoid sin by remaining “in the Son and in the Father.”

Moreover note that in 1 John 5:13-17, the Apostle specifically speaks of “his brother” (a codeword for fellow Christian) sinning, and also notes there is a distinction between venial and mortal sins.

IOW, the perceived contradiction exists only in your mind.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[fineca]

No they aren’t the same thing, if born of God means regenerated. One is regenerated in baptism and never again (baptism can never be repeated), but one can fall from and re-enter the state of grace many times.

I know it can’t be taken out of the context and 1J2 says he wrote it so that we wouldn’t sin but IF we sin Jesus intercedes for us…but that doesn’t make the problem go away

As to mortal and venial sins, does he really make that distinction? He says if someone has committed a venial sin we can give him life by praying for him. Now that is contrary to Catholic teaching since a venial sin doesn’t take away supernatural life. So John’s venial sin seems to be Catholic mortal sin. And John’s mortal sin seems to be something for which there is absolutely no remedy - he doesn’t say “let him go to confession” or “pray he goes to confession” but simply that there’s no point in praying for him. Reminds me of Hebrews 6, it’s impossible for them to return…

Now answer me that one

 

[mlchance]

No they aren’t the same thing, if born of God means regenerated.

And since that isn’t what “born of God” necessarily means…

Now answer me that one

Your questions have been answered by the Church, whose answers in such matters are always correct.

Again, any perceived contradiction exists only in your mind.

– Mark L. Chance.