Justification - Catholics and Protestants

[2nd_Adam]

Let’s go back. You posted a thread stating that the Pope agrees with Luther. (posting his “entire link” to prove it, which did not do so). You spent the whole thread claiming over and over again that he agrees with Luther and Catholics don’t know it. In this thread, you just said this:

What do you have to refute if you believe that we are not divided by the doctrine of justification?

guanophore posted that what I believe in regards to justification is heresy on another thread. If you want to discuss the thread topic, I will respond to you. Otherwise, I will no longer respond to unrelated issues that you bring up. Ecumenicism is not easy between Catholics and Protestants; however, even Pope Bendedict is willing to try with his statement of faith alone.

 

[bookgirl32]

guanophore posted that what I believe in regards to justification is heresy on another thread. If you want to discuss the thread topic, I will respond to you. Otherwise, I will no longer respond to unrelated issues that your bring up.

Um . . . . the thread topic is “Justification - Catholics and Protestants”. I asked you if you believed if we were, or were not, divided on the doctrine of justification. How is that off topic?

 

[2nd_Adam]

I wasn’t questioning if you believe it to be a lie, I was just wondering exactly what out of this quote

is misrepresenting your position?

Originally Posted by guanophore
He believes there are a “remnant” within Catholicism that are among the elect. These actually reject Catholic doctrine (like Tweetymom) but continue to call themselves “Catholic”. these people can be saved, as long as they don’t embrace what the Catholic Church teaches about justification, or so I gather from the link.

Do you really think that I posted anything like this? Or, do you think that I believe this? Heck, most Protestants and Catholics have no idea what justification means. guanophore not only continues to attack me by untrue statments about me, he continues to attack his Catholic sister. That just amazes me how undermines Tweetymom who is Catholic.

 

[bookgirl32]

Do you really think that I posted anything like this? Or, do you think that I believe this? Heck, most Protestants and Catholics have no idea what justification means. guanophore
not only continues to attack me, he continues to attack his Catholic sister.

I wasn’t talking about that quote. I was talking about this one:

He believes, as he has said, that the “theological distinctives” are not important. He believes that Catholicism really has nothing to do with people getting saved, that God has a “remnant” in all congregations. He is here to "connect’ to the remnant and “stir the flame” of faith in those who are Elect. He does not believe that all people are supposed to be saved, and that God is going to save those He plans to save, no matter what.

You said the above quote was a lie. I’m just trying to understand your position. What in the above quote is untrue?

 

[2nd_Adam]

I wasn’t talking about that quote. I was talking about this one:

You said the above quote was a lie. I’m just trying to understand your position. What in the above quote is untrue?

Please give me the orignial post number in which you are refering to. I need to see the string of postings before I can answer you.

 

[bookgirl32]

Please give me the orignial post number in which you are refering to. I need to see the string of postings before I can answer you.

Okay, it’s number #155. But I copied and pasted the quote. I’m not trying to get into anything between you and guanaphore. I’m just confused b/c he made this statement:

He believes, as he has said, that the “theological distinctives” are not important. He believes that Catholicism really has nothing to do with people getting saved, that God has a “remnant” in all congregations. He is here to "connect’ to the remnant and “stir the flame” of faith in those who are Elect. He does not believe that all people are supposed to be saved, and that God is going to save those He plans to save, no matter what.

and this particular statement didn’t sound too offbase from what you’ve been saying you believe, so I wondered what part of it was a lie. Because if there’s something in that statement that you don’t believe than I could be misunderstanding you, and I wanted to make sure I didn’t.

 

[bookgirl32]

bookgirl32 said

Um . . . . the thread topic is “Justification - Catholics and Protestants”. I asked you if you believed if we were, or were not, divided on the doctrine of justification. How is that off topic?

and this too, if you wouldn’t mind.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Okay, it’s number #155. But I copied and pasted the quote. I’m not trying to get into anything between you and guanaphore. I’m just confused b/c he made this statement:

and this particular statement didn’t sound too offbase from what you’ve been saying you believe, so I wondered what part of it was a lie. Because if there’s something in that statement that you don’t believe than I could be misunderstanding you, and I wanted to make sure I didn’t.

Things look quite different with the proper context, doesn’t it? I think you should go to the TULIP thread to get my answer to your question

This is very important, too. 2nd has made it clear from the beginning that he is not here to learn, but to evangelize. He believes, as he has said, that the “theological distinctives” are not important. He believes that Catholicism really has nothing to do with people getting saved, that God has a “remnant” in all congregations. He is here to "connect’ to the remnant and “stir the flame” of faith in those who are Elect. He does not believe that all people are supposed to be saved, and that God is going to save those He plans to save, no matter what.

In spite of all that, I do think he has learned a lot since he came here. He asks a lot of good questions (most of them off topic) and if he is not too anxious, really does read the answers. What is most important in a case like this are the lurkers. Others have his same questions, and will benefit from reading, even if he does not. All we can do is plant seeds.

 

[2nd_Adam]

and this too, if you wouldn’t mind.

Sure, historic Protestantism believes in a forensic justification. We are credited with the perfect righteousness of Christ through the instrument of faith as our means of justification at our conversion. The righteousness of Christ alone is eternally sufficient for us for our justification. We are made righteous through the Spirit which Protestants call sanctification. I’m not going to represent the Catholic view of justification, but we see things quite differently since Catholic don’t separate justification from sanctification like Protestants do. However, if you read the Pope’s teaching on justification, many Evangelicals can receive it. I rejoice over it, and see it to be excellent teaching regardless of being Catholic or Protestant. And, that’s a good thing.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Do you really think that I posted anything like this? Or, do you think that I believe this?

As I showed in post #188, yes:

				Originally Posted by **2nd Adam** 					[forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5900852#post5900852) 				
			*For those whom the Spirit united to Christ, are eternal brothers and sisters in Christ, **regardless of our personal religious communities and denominations. There is a remnant chosen** by grace according to Scripture.*
		 		 	 	  	Quote:
 	 		 			 				 					Originally Posted by **guanophore** 					[forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5902543#post5902543) 				
			***He believes there are a "remnant" within Catholicism that are among the elect.** These actually reject Catholic doctrine (like Tweetymom) but continue to call themselves "Catholic". these people can be saved, as long as they don't embrace what the Catholic Church teaches about justification, or so I gather from the link.*
		 		 	 	 
Quote:
 	 		 			 				 					Originally Posted by **2nd Adam** 					[forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=5902558#post5902558) 				
			*There you go again, putting words in my mouth. Why do you do that? You sure like to speak for me, but you are incorrect when you do. **I've never posted anything remotely in what you stated above.** It would do you good to study ECT 1, ECT II, and the Joint Declaration between Lutherans and Catholics.*

…he continues to attack his Catholic sister. That just amazes me how undermines Tweetymom who is Catholic.

Guanophore was not attacking Tweetymom as a person, but the fact that she is a dissenting Catholic and teaches RCIA. In fact, a series of questions was asked of Tweetymom after she stated that she was a teacher of the Catholic Fatih, and here are her answers in RED:

Do you believe that Jesus founded the Church upon Peter? No
Do you believe that the Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Christ? No
Do you believe that Jesus gave authority to the apostles to forgive sins? No
Do you believe in apostolic succession? No
Do you believe that the apostles handed down sacred tradition directly from Jesus? No
Do you believe that Mary is the mother of God? Yes
Do you believe that Mary is ever virgin? ???
Do you believe that Mary was without sin (immaculate conception)? Yes
Do you believe that the Catholic Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth and NOT scripture? No
Do you believe in Purgatory? ???
Do you believe that Catholic priests can forgive sins in persona Christi? No
Do you believe that Baptism is required for salvation (including the baptism of desire and of blood)? Yes
Do you believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist? Yes
Do you believe in the intersession of the saints? ???
Do you believe that the Catholic Church is responsible for the canon of scripture? No.
Do you believe that those outside of the Catholic Church posses only part of the fullness of the faith? No.
Do you believe in papal infallibility in matters of faith and morals? No.
Do you believe in the assumption of Mary? ???
Do you believe in the sacraments? Yes
Do you use sacramentals? Yes
Do you believe that life begins at conception? (I.e. that abortion is murder) Yes
Do you believe in redemptive suffering? Yes
Do you believe in the particular and general judgment? Yes

---

As you can clearly see by Tweetymom’s answers she does not believe the Catholic Faith at all. So while she is a Catholic by baptism, she professes another faith entirely.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Sure, historic Protestantism believes in a forensic justification. We are credited with the perfect righteousness of Christ through the instrument of faith as our means of justification at our conversion. The righteousness of Christ alone is eternally sufficient for us for our justification. We are made righteous through the Spirit which Protestants call sanctification. I’m not going to represent the Catholic view of justification, but we see things quite differently since Catholic don’t separate justification from sanctification like Protestants do. However, if you read the Pope’s teaching on justification, many Evangelicals can receive it. I rejoice over it, and see it to be excellent teaching regardless of being Catholic or Protestant. And, that’s a good thing.

The Pope’s teaching on justification is the Catholic teaching on justification, yet you imply that it isn’t.

 

[bookgirl32]

Things look quite different with the proper context, doesn’t it? I think you should go to the TULIP thread to get my answer to your question

What context did I take it out of? He listed what he thought you believed. How hard is it to state that you do or don’t?

You want me to go to the thread on TULIP? You just stated, on the thread on Tulip, that you didn’t think it was a good place for the discussion on TULIP and you hoped the moderators would move it back here.

 

[bookgirl32]

Sure, historic Protestantism believes in a forensic justification. We are credited with the perfect righteousness of Christ through the instrument of faith as our means of justification at our conversion. The righteousness of Christ alone is eternally sufficient for us for our justification. We are made righteous through the Spirit which Protestants call sanctification. I’m not going to represent the Catholic view of justification, but we see things quite differently since Catholic don’t separate justification from sanctification like Protestants do. However, if you read the Pope’s teaching on justification, many Evangelicals can receive it. I rejoice over it, and see it to be excellent teaching regardless of being Catholic or Protestant. And, that’s a good thing.

So . . . you understand what the Catholic teaching is, you understand what the Pope said, and you think that the Pope and the Church have two different views on justification?

 

[E.E.N.S]

So . . . YOU THINK you understand what the Catholic teaching is, YOU THINK you understand what the Pope said, and you think that the Pope and the Church have two different views on justification?

Fixed.

 

[2nd_Adam]

So . . . you understand what the Catholic teaching is, you understand what the Pope said, and you think that the Pope and the Church have two different views on justification?

I’m not sure how much you understand the history of the Protestant Reformation and the doctrine of justification. IMO… it appears the Catholic Church has moved toward a more Protestant friendly position of justification, even though they are still very different. However, most Protestants and Catholics are not too concerned with our different positions on justification.

 

[2nd_Adam]

The Pope’s teaching on justification is the Catholic teaching on justification, yet you imply that it isn’t.

Just like TULIP, this is some pretty tough stuff. This is not fast food theology. Here’s a document that you should consider reading. Let me know what you think about it.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church
Preamble

1.The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. It was held to be the “first and chief article”[1] and at the same time the “ruler and judge over all other Christian doctrines.”[2] The doctrine of justification was particularly asserted and defended in its Reformation shape and special valuation over against the Roman Catholic Church and theology of that time, which in turn asserted and defended a doctrine of justification of a different character. From the Reformation perspective, justification was the crux of all the disputes. Doctrinal condemnations were put forward both in the Lutheran Confessions[3] and by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent. These condemnations are still valid today and thus have a church-dividing effect.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Just like TULIP, this is some pretty tough stuff. This is not fast food theology. Here’s a document that you should consider reading. Let me know what you think about it.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church
Preamble

1.The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. It was held to be the “first and chief article”[1] and at the same time the “ruler and judge over all other Christian doctrines.”[2] The doctrine of justification was particularly asserted and defended in its Reformation shape and special valuation over against the Roman Catholic Church and theology of that time, which in turn asserted and defended a doctrine of justification of a different character. From the Reformation perspective, justification was the crux of all the disputes. Doctrinal condemnations were put forward both in the Lutheran Confessions[3] and by the Roman Catholic Church’s Council of Trent. These condemnations are still valid today and thus have a church-dividing effect.

I have read it before, more than once I might add. You are still trying to imply (it would seem) that the Pope somehow teaches a different view than the Catholic Church, and I am telling you that you are mistaken.

 

[bookgirl32]

I’m not sure how much you understand the history of the Protestant Reformation and the doctrine of justification.

I’m sure you could teach me a thing or two about it. It would be nice, though, if you would acknowledge that I could teach you a thing or two about Catholicism.

IMO… it appears the Catholic Church has moved toward a more Protestant friendly position of justification, even though they are still very different.

The Church is trying to be ecumenical, yes. But the funny thing is that the address you quoted to illustrate this was actually, poliltely, getting a jab in at sola fide altogether, in any way that the myriad of denominations define it. The Church isn’t going to move anywhere, it will encourage Protestantism to come home by helping them to understand it’s errors.

However, most Protestants and Catholics are not too concerned with our different positions on justification.

Do you say this because you don’t often come upon a Catholic and a Protestant in public having a debate on justification? Or do you say this because you find a hard time finding Protestants or Catholics that will make a personal statement about another’s justification? I just don’t know where you’re getting this idea, much less what you really mean by it.

 

[bookgirl32]

Just like TULIP, this is some pretty tough stuff. This is not fast food theology. .

Do you realize how condescending this sounds? I’m honestly asking you this, not trying to put you down. You are implying that EENS knows less than you about his own faith, and that he might not be able to handle it. You may not mean that, but you are implying it.

 

[E.E.N.S]

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church

Just some quick tidbits in the declaration you mentioned:
Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification:

12.The justified live by faith that comes from the Word of Christ (Rom 10:17) and is active through love (Gal 5:6), the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22f). But since the justified are assailed from within and without by powers and desires (Rom 8:35-39; * Gal* 5:16-21) and fall into sin (1 * Jn* 1:8,10), they must constantly hear God’s promises anew, confess their sins (1 * Jn* 1:9), participate in Christ’s body and blood, and be exhorted to live righteously in accord with the will of God. That is why the Apostle says to the justified: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Phil 2:12f). But the good news remains: “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:1), and in whom Christ lives (Gal 2:20). Christ’s “act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all” (Rom 5:18).

Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification:

30.Catholics hold that the grace of Jesus Christ imparted in baptism takes away all that is sin “in the proper sense” and that is “worthy of damnation” (Rom 8:1).[16] There does, however, remain in the person an inclination (concupiscence) which comes from sin and presses toward sin. Since, according to Catholic conviction, human sins always involve a personal element and since this element is lacking in this inclination, Catholics do not see this inclination as sin in an authentic sense. They do not thereby deny that this inclination does not correspond to God’s original design for humanity and that it is objectively in contradiction to God and remains one’s enemy in lifelong struggle. Grateful for deliverance by Christ, they underscore that this inclination in contradiction to God does not merit the punishment of eternal death[17] and does not separate the justified person from God. But when individuals voluntarily separate themselves from God, it is not enough to return to observing the commandments, for they must receive pardon and peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation through the word of forgiveness imparted to them in virtue of God’s reconciling work in Christ. [See Sources for section 4.4].

Also note:

5. The Significance and Scope of the Consensus Reached
40.The understanding of the doctrine of justification set forth in this Declaration shows that a consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification exists between Lutherans and Catholics. In light of this consensus the remaining differences of language, theological elaboration, and emphasis in the understanding of justification described in paras. 18 to 39 are acceptable. Therefore the Lutheran and the Catholic explications of justification are in their difference open to one another and do not destroy the consensus regarding the basic truths.

41.Thus the doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century, in so far as they relate to the doctrine of justification, appear in a new light: The teaching of the Lutheran churches presented in this Declaration does not fall under the condemnations from the Council of Trent. The condemnations in the Lutheran Confessions do not apply to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church presented in this Declaration.

42.Nothing is thereby taken away from the seriousness of the condemnations related to the doctrine of justification. Some were not simply pointless. They remain for us “salutary warnings” to which we must attend in our teaching and practice.[21]