Right.
Sorry about that - them little typos get out of the box and spoil everythingand viscera?
I might make an argument for both obedience and discipline. But, one usually denotes the other. So, I could agree.
Only because you are equating 'love" with feelings of love. They are not the same although loving feelings accompany love.
Here’s my second reply.
I say that we stop at the highlighted text. Justification by grace full stop. The grace may come in the form of faith or in the form of works or both. Grace is certainly poured out in the sacraments but coming to the sacraments necessitates faith.
Ok, but its impolite to answer a question with a question. Please address the questions I posed:
And to you!
Agreed.
Ok.
The only problem with this explanation, although I like it, is that it makes God out to be some sort of “force” rather than a personal being (God in three persons).
On the contrary, the vine is the umbilical cord. It is through the vine that the branches get their sustenance.
Faith is what keeps the baby attached to the umbilical cord.
They are completely out of God’s SANCTIFYING grace. But they are sustained by God’s actual grace. God sustains all. In God we live, breathe and are.
Wasn’t it you that asked me if I was Calvinist? Grace alone is not a Catholic doctrine.
Faith is a peculiar type of grace which requires our participation in order for it to be effective. It requires the engagement of OUR WILL. That is why “faith” is a work. It is the work which God wills we perform. The Liturgy, the work of man, is adoration of God and faith in action.
Because at that point we SUBORDINATE and unite our will to God’s.
And loving another one loves God.
God’s unfailing love is usually invoked by those who want to discard doctrine. But doctrine is important. Wouldn’t you agree?
But only God can do that for us. We can’t, by our faith or by our works, make ourselves in God’s image. Only God can do that for us. And in order to do that, Scripture says that God requires us to believe that He can do that for us.
God loving every one has nothing to do with whether He is just or not.
Not necessarily. I can think of a similar thing when it comes to unrequited love. Some people can’t stand being loved by someone who they do not love. I know a guy who can’t stand his caring mother and find the love displayed by the mother irritating.
I gave an explanation of why God IS love in my previous post about the Trinity.
Well yes He does. What did Jesus say? That the Good Shepherd leaves the 99 good sheep for the one who is lost.
The bad find the love painful because the bad is turned in on himself. We are called to abandon our selves to God who is Love.
Well, not quite. That would be coercion. God gave us free will. And giving us free will is His will.
Nope. You tend to understand this in terms of human love.
Well not quite. Have a look at a vine. Jesus said I am the vine, you are the branches.
But I don’t think that is quite what you said. I think you said faith is the umbilical cord.
I don’t think that is correct. They are not in a state of sanctifying grace but they are not necessarily outside of it for God can give sanctifying grace to whom He wills by the actual graces that He bestows. Whatever sanctifiying grace we have all started with the actual or prevenient graces.
Actually it is. Properly phrased it is : Justified by Grace through faith working in love. You can cut it at justified by grace because grace is a broad term that covers all possible gifts of God. That is why we say, everything is grace.
I agree. That is why we can simply say justified by grace because then it covers both faith and works. Everything that comes from God is grace.
Yes, and that is very important.
Yes, because love is what we are made for. Faith is not something we can control. A missionary may not pass by our way to enlighten our minds as regards faith. But love, love is universal because we are all created in love and we are destined for love.
Absolutely! None of the fuzzy wuzzy liberal theology.
Yes, and that is why I come back to that all important word = grace. Everything is grace. Faith is grace. Works is grace.
And yet it has not stopped so many people from trying. Which is really sad.
It does not fit into my head that they are thereby loved the same, no.
But God is a personal God. He is a reasonable Being. He is not an impersonal “FORCE”.
So is Truth. So is Justice. So is Wisdom. God has no attributes but WE must give Him attributes in order that we may understand Him the better. Our finite minds can’t conceive of the true essence of God.
That is another analogy. It is not a perfect description.
Consider this. Say that you place your child in a ballet class and they are having their recital. You love all the children but you love your child the most. Which child will hold you fixated in that recital? Certainly for me, it was my own.
He finds the love irritating or the mother irritating? Which is the root of the irritation?
But Loved, Lover and Beloved is another analogy.
That in itself shows a difference. If God has abandoned the 99 good sheep and gone in search of the bad that shows a difference.
No it wouldn’t. That is exactly true.
Now you’re getting somewhere.
Correct.
Which is a facsimile of God’s love. That is why God uses the Marriage analogy for our relationship with Him.
But we are REPENTANT sinners. Whereas, unrepentant sinners are not saved.
Without meaning any disrespect to Jon at all, I would heartily agree!
See #3; Protestants call this double-speak. You say it is not of works, which is what man contributes, then you proceed to show us your meritorious works by Sacraments. you can’t have it both ways; we’ll you can and do before yourselves, but that is it. No one else sees it. Go to the catechism under “Merits” and look at 2010 or 2009, can’t recall which one, but you will see the works salvation. Christians are taught that God justifies a man when He true believes, a gift of God. God declares a man righteous in a forensic sense and also that Christs righteousness is supernaturally imputed into the believers account. So just as the Father saw the sins of man on Jesus and therefore poured out His wrath due to man onto Him; when the Father sees the Christian he sees the righteousness of Christ. Then the conforming to the image of Jesus begins immediately, which the Christian calls sanctification process that lasts a life time until we receive our full redemption in Christ Jesus. All of the entire process is a gift or granted by God, which is why people hate the doctrine of election because it basically says that before time began God selected who would be in heaven and by default, who would not.
So therefore Christ is not the source but only the channel? After all Christ said He is the vine.
If the vine is the source then it cannot be the conduit unless you are saying that source and conduit is the same.benedictus2:
Correct.
Well then your analogy does not apply. You started off with the umbilical cord analogy (which is clearly distinct from the mother) and applied that to the vine and the branches analogy which is not the same because the vine has no such thing.
But you said faith is the conduit. This is the statement that I was having an issue with.
Not impossible. Nothing is impossible to God. The grace of God which grafts us to Him is not limited to faith.
No I am not saying that God bestows sanctifying grace willy nilly. God does not do anything willy nilly.
Let me give you an example. A child who is being baptized is given sanctifying grace.
The reformed leap is not Grace Alone. The reformed leap is Faith Alone.
A spring is also a conduit. The source may be underground or in the heavens, the rain which falls, gathers and begins to flow.
The analogy is fine, you just don’t acknowledge it.
On the contrary, the analogy is perfectly clear. Its not even my analogy. I stepped in to say that I understand it perfectly.
I personally don’t remember the comment. I searched back to the place where I initially entered the discussion in defense of this analogy. forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7102708&postcount=114
Revelation and Church teaching say that Sanctifying Grace is given through the Sacraments. And through a Spiritual Baptism in the after life to those who wanted but could not receive Baptism in this life. That’s all.
God is not limited by His Sacraments. But the Church does not teach that there are any other fountains of Sanctifying Grace besides the Sacraments. Therefore, for us to assume that God gives Sanctifying Grace to nonbelievers is a simple, “novum”, I believe that’s the term you used.
But those are two COMPLETELY and RADICALLY different forms of grace. One is in the form of material beings. The other is a participation in the very LIFE OF GOD.
I never denied it. Nor is it even part of the discussion we are having.
Find it for me and quote it.
All is grace is not the same as Grace alone. The Reformed doctrine of Grace alone says that God’s will is that man cannot by any action of his own, acting under the influence of grace, cooperate with grace to “merit” greater graces for himself…