How do Protestants and Catholics differ regarding works?

[Bob_Crowley]

Bob Crowley. You said:

QUOTE:
For the life of me, when it comes down to actual practical experience, I think there isn’t an iota of difference. . . . . As far as I’m concerned the whole “Faith Vs. Works” issue between Protestants and Catholics is just one big idiotic dog-fight.

How about when a Salvation Army Protestant says Baptism is an unnecessary “work” and refuses to be Baptized . . . ever!

Now you have a guy that is not born again or “born of water and the Spirit”.

Surely you don’t think THIS situation isn’t “one iota of difference” do you?

---

When I carry out Eucharistic Adoration I may be doing a work of reparation for myself and other sinners.

Yet some Protestants refer to me as an “idolater” for worshiping Jesus.

This wouldn’t count as “one iota of difference” in your mind would it?

---

If as a Catholic, I am taught if I am in a valid marriage . . . than what God has brought together, let no man put apart.

Yet I recall reading an article years ago in a national US newspaper (USA Today if I recall correctly) a popular Christian singer who was NOT Catholic talking about ditching his wife and kids and “marrying” his new girlfriend.

He said he has been challenged on this by his fellow Christians.

His reply?

He said, works don’t figure into his justification so it was no biggie (it is a small inconsequential matter).

That’s how he rationalized dumping his wife and children!

Would you say this isn’t “one iota of difference”?

He thinks he’s out doing God’s “work”.

Jesus warns us if we cut ourselves off from the Vine, we cannot bear fruit that will last.

Do YOU think this guy is still “in the Vine” as he thinks?

If not, do YOU think this guy can bear fruit that will last anyway? Or do you think “apart from Me (Jesus), you can do nothing”?

---

Beliefs have consequences.

The kind of “works” I was referring to was not fundamental theological differences between Catholics and Protestants, or Protestants and other Protestants, or Catholics and other Catholics, but works of charity - when someone helps a poor person, or stands up for the persecuted, or gives of their time to serve some worthy cause.

For the life of me, I cannot see one iota of difference between a Salvo, a Baptist, or a Catholic serving other people - they all think they’re doing it for Christ, through Christ and in Christ. Hence any argument about the difference between “Faith” and "Works’ is a lot of hot air in my opinion.

Baptism isn’t a “work”. It’s a sacrament, a visible sign of an invisible grace. There’s no work on our part, whether the baptised person is Catholic or Baptised.

Likewise if some people simply want to ignore theological and moral principals, so they can do what they want, regardless of the consequences to others, that’s their lookout. But they’re not “works”.

So insofar as “works” refers to “charity”, my comment still stands. Much of what passes for debate on works and faith is so much hair-splitting (as someone else put it), or dog-fighting as I put it.

 

[Cathoholic]

Baptism isn’t a “work”. It’s a sacrament, a visible sign of an invisible grace. There’s no work on our part, whether the baptised person is Catholic or Baptised.

The problem with this Bob is THEY wouldn’t agree with you.

I agree with you, but because THEY don’t, it changes their lives (by self-deprivation).

They have a serious void because of their defective theology.

This in turn ultimately has effects on society.

So insofar as “works” refers to “charity”, my comment still stands.

But Bob. You cannot even HAVE Supernatural Charity without the life of Christ in you. (There CAN be natural virtue but there cannot be Supernatural Charity)

You receive that Charity at Baptism.

 

[Cathoholic]

susanlo. You said:

QUOTE:
It sounds like the Catholic teaching says a believer must do good works and Protestantism says a believer will do good works and display fruit of the spirit.

One of the examples I gave is a guy (a popular Christian singer) who thought he was a Christian, everybody else thought he was a Christian, he says he “believed”, and he clearly did SOME good works.

But later he ditched his wife and kids and “married” a new gal. (Now we even see guys dumping their wife and kids for men too.)

You said:

QUOTE:
Protestantism says a believer will do good works and display fruit of the spirit.

Certainly you don’t think this guy displayed fruit of the spirit (and I don’t either).

Considering this, do you think this guy who thought he was a believer (also recall so many others thought of him as a believer too), was never a “believer” in the first place?

Or do you think this adulterer WAS a believer, but his sin of adultery is irreconcilable with salvation (as long as he remains unrepentant)?

And if the good works DON’T NECESSARILY flow from your faith (as with this guy), are you still justified anyway?

And do “bad” works” matter concerning justification?

Do “works” figure into the paradigm of salvation at all?

Are ANY unrepentant “bad works” a “deal breaker” for believers?

Excerpt from 1st Corinthians 6:9-10

Do not be deceived . . . Neither adulterers nor men who have sex with men . . . will inherit the kingdom of God.

1st CORINTHIANS 6:9-10 (NIV) 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

---

You also said:

QUOTE:
When Luther said, “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” he didn’t mean that there doesn’t NEED to be fruit of the spirit or works.

That’s fine. IF that’s what he meant, and THAT is what my Protestant friends and family members think, I am OK with that.

But I DO take issue with at least two things from SOME Protestants.

I take issue that we as Catholics allegedly think we “earn” our own way to Heaven (we don’t think that) . . . and I take issue with Protestants that say works are NOT NECESSARY in the equation of justification (for those who CAN work).

Let me repeat and expound on that.

What I am NOT accepting from our Protestant friends then, is the CRITICISM of the Catholic concept of Christ WORKING in us and through us and how this NEEDS to be done.

What I am NOT OK with is the charges that we as Catholics “earn” our way to Heaven.

What I have an issue with, is that we as Catholics allegedly assert, “works righteousness” when in fact we do not.

My other issue is with Protestants that think ALL they need is an intellectual assent-moment of faith and they are; and infallibly will be . . . . saved. (Presumption)

They reduce grace down to their own mere emotions of when they “accepted Jesus into their heart as personal Lord and Savior”.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard this PARTIAL TRUTH false assertion . . . .

“He look. I’m saved! I’ve accepted Jesus into my heart as personal Lord and Savior! Works don’t matter. You SHOULD do works but you don’t HAVE to. (Or works come automatically as an aside but don’t figure into my justification). My works don’t justify!”

---

**IF “faith alone” is such wise as to mean . . . . **

If when Luther said, “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” he MEANT that this NEEDS to be a working faith and WORKING IN the Holy Spirit (not natural works) I’m OK with that.

But if Luther or anyone else says “faith ALONE” means nothing else is REQUIRED for salvation (for those who can work), I will take issue with that.

COUNCIL OF TRENT (SIXTH SESSION, CANON IX.) If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

(If by “faith alone” you mean a mere intellectual assent, I must take issue with that too.)

---

 

[Cathoholic]

We can have a natural faith before baptism. This is a non-supernatural faith. A NATURAL faith is not a saving faith. A natural faith does NOT justify.

When we are “born again” in Baptism, we receive a supernaturalized faith (and supernatural hope and charity too) as a gift from the work of Jesus Christ.

These SUPERNATURAL virtues we receive at Baptism ARE justifying.

COUNCIL OF TRENT SESSION VI CHAPTER VII. . . . . Of this Justification . . . our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified;

This saving faith is a gratuitous gift or undeserved donation from God earned by Jesus.

This supernatural faith (and hope and charity) are GIFTS from God at Baptism.

Preceding Baptism, we had NO supernatural faith, hope, or charity. We may have had a natural virtues of faith, hope, and charity (assuming we were Baptized as adults), but we had no SUPERNATURAL faith, hope, or charity before Baptism.

This supernatural faith is the beginning of salvation (but faith isn’t the ONLY gift when we were justified).

COUNCIL OF TRENT SESSION VI CHAPTER VIII.
In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.
. . . . we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

This is part of the reason WHY “works” are not all “the same” even though they may APPEAR the same (recall GRACE is supersensible. Grace is ABOVE nature.).

The Council of Trent, THE canons of Session 6 are very specific as to works:

Canon 1.
If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema.

Canon 3.
If anyone says that without the predisposing inspiration of the Holy Ghost and without His help, man can believe, hope, love or be repentant as he ought, so that the grace of justification may be bestowed upon him, let him be anathema.