Roman's chapter 1-6 from a Catholic perspective; please!

  • Thread starter Thread starter MGV12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MGV12

Guest
Please help; I have found myself attending a non-catholic bible study on the book of Romans. While I myself have only just started to pick up reading scripture, I don’t like the idea of this bible-study,:tsktsk: i wouldn’t attend except that my fellow catholic roomate is attending and i feel it my duty not to let her stand alone as the only catholic there among various protestants etc and be corrupted, though i don’t know how much help i can be.

This monday we went through chapters 1-3 supposedly (only got through ch.1) and already I feel so sick to my stomach over their study guide. (chapters 1-3 supposedly according to them point to the abosolute destruction of “works” because “faith” alone saves. Ch. 4-5 is themed “Justification by Faith Alone,” ch. 6-8 is the “Power of the Spirit,” and according to them we have yet to get to the serious parts (though I think this is where their denominations bicker because these latter chapters point to soverign election etc.). That’s why i definately need to be pointed out to a chapter-chapter catholic based reference so that i can definately tell them were we stand. The Lord must have known I’d be in this mess because not 2 weeks prior I picked up Robert A. Sungenis’ Not By Faith Alone : The Biblical Evience for the Catholic Doctrine of Justification (which is very deep, oh and by the way they don’t seem to know or agree on what Justification is). In anycase I don’t think they know I’m Catholic, they may know my roomate is though, next monday I MUST tell them were I stand. As a good Catholic, I can’t stand idly by and not say where we stand, and let them poor over me their protestant interpretation as absolute truth.(hum…how do i tell them, though?) Thank God, I have sustanance (my faith and love of our holy church, my rosary, and so many other catholic reading I’ve undertaken in the last couple of months.)

This is what happend at the bible study.
The girl in charge voiced out the themes as understood by their youth pastor (like I explained above - ch. 1-3 “faith” alone saves) and then were divided into two groups and were told to look for such passages that contained faith and jot them down. We briefly discussed our finding, by then I had read enough to think this can’t possibly mean what we understood to be justificable salvation, but that’s how they read it (Rm 1:5,12, 17 probably verse 31, etc) are some examples of how Faith saves.

what I’ve noticed is that they themselves don’t think that faith alone saves, because questions concerning the means of “obiedience”, “justification” came up, and what it means to oberve faith came into play. I tried to say my piece that Jesus upheld the two greatest commandments, To love God and to love one another. We can’t exist 24/7 loving and adoring God from a fixed position, loving our neighbor entails action(works)how can be come to heaven( and be justified) if we do not do as He said & did. In anycase I’m really not that very good at paraphrasing catholic doctrine or scripture, so understanding a text I’ve never read before is going to be problematic.

I hope you guys can help me even if it’s just a little.:blessyou:
 
Here is an excerpt from the Haydock Bible Commentary’s introduction to Romans
We shall learn there that faith is essentially necessary to please God; that this faith is but one, as God is but one; and that faith which shews itself not by good works, is dead. Hence, when St. Paul speaks of works that are incapable of justifying us, he speaks not of the works of moral righteousness, but of the ceremonial works of the Mosaic law, on which the Jews laid such great stress as necessary to salvation. — St. Peter (in his 2nd Epistle, chap. iii.) assures us that there were some in his time, as there are found some now in our days, who misconstrue St. Paul’s epistles, as if he required no good works any more after baptism than before baptism, and maintaining that faith alone would justify and save a man. Hence the other apostles wrote their epistles, as St. Augustine remarks in these words; “therefore because this opinion, that faith only was necessary to salvation, was started, the other apostolical epistles do most pointedly refute it, forcibly contending that faith without works profiteth nothing.” Indeed St. Paul himself, in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, (Chap. xiii. 2.) positively asserts: if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. —

Through this in Romans we can conclude that faith is necessary, not faith alone. We look at the 3 theological virtues in all cases (Faith Hope and Charity). The Epistle of James 2:20, 22, 24, 26 all deal with reiterating that with out works, faith is dead and faith is dead without works. We must have the 3 theological virtues and put charity above all, because without one of them the others cease to exist.
 
I have some Catholic commentaries on Romans here, just scroll down to the book of Romans. litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Bible+Commentaries-Fathers+and+Doctors

My suggestion is to either use this week to really dig deeeeep and learn it, or to back out of this study if you think there is a chance you may leave a bad impression or even get manipulated away from Catholicism. Many evangelicals thrive on “evangelizing” uninformed Catholics, I used too. They are prepared many times to debate the topic, and it takes being very informed to not get overwhelmed by their spill that they will give.

But if you continue the study then use this site to kick around the topics that you know you will be covering next time so that you can get familiar with it and I am sure many on here will discuss it, I know I will, which will help you when you square off with them. You can also use my site and correspond with me one on one if you like, I have a deep background as Southern Baptist.
 
Bob Sungenis has written some things that I have been very impressed with, though I don’t know too much about him, but I believe he is very orthodox, which is great in my book.

I recommend reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church on this section, scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm#1987

First and foremost you will need to know what our Church teaches about it which is in the Catechism and on the link I just gave. I would study that link until I had it down, in my opinion that would be the most effective thing right now.

Protestants love illustrations and forumulas and outlines of doctrines, they will usually memorize them and use them to “evanglize” people. I think Catholics should do the same because it does make it easier to understand doctrines when they are layed out in a simple form. A good formula that I heard from a Catholic apologist was this

We come to salvation first by
  1. Repentance
  2. Faith
    3)Baptism
Then afterwards we live a life of
  1. Repentance
  2. Faith
  3. Confession
 
COPLAND_3 said:
A good formula that I heard from a Catholic apologist was this

We come to salvation first by
  1. Repentance
  2. Faith
    3)Baptism
Then afterwards we live a life of
  1. Repentance
  2. Faith
  3. Confession
Click to expand...
Thank you, Copland for the bible commentaries (I’ll be scouring that very soon), and I had the CCC, in fact I was just reading on justification, I go to john salza’s website Scripturecatholic.com for more on justification, reading Sugenis, and for the past few weeks I had been scouring catholic answers on the difference between Catholics & more mainlined protestants with an eye toward understanding sola scriptura etc. Very good results, I hope to pen out an outline by Friday.

If I have questions I know where to find recourse to, thanks so much, I’ll keep you all tuned in.

p.s. copland what are baptists? One of my roommate’s suppose to be one, but since there’s no official baptist church here she church hops, going where it feels good. the only thing i know is that she believe she’s saved, when i told her I don’t know if I’m saved (ex: if i died that minute would i go to heaven ) b/c it’s really up to God and what good works i do, she looked at me in shock.
 
Also, Jesus asked his disciples to “Do this in memory of me.” We drink his blood and eat his body because that’s what he asked his diciples to do.

Don’t forget not to take anything with you when you go to the bible study. Just pray and the Holy Spirit will be with you. Be calm and lovingand trust in God, and your example may alone may convince many. It is yoour true testimony.
 
p.s. copland what are baptists? One of my roommate’s suppose to be one, but since there’s no official baptist church here she church hops, going where it feels good. the only thing i know is that she believe she’s saved, when i told her I don’t know if I’m saved (ex: if i died that minute would i go to heaven ) b/c it’s really up to God and what good works i do, she looked at me in shock.
Click to expand...
Baptists are not a denomination but is made up of many different denominations with many different beliefs, some are as different as night and day, such as Southern Baptist and Free Will Baptist, or United Baptist and Independent Baptists.

I would be careful about how I present “being saved” to Protestants because we actually have so much in common with them, but we only use a different vocabulary most of time but may mean similar things. As a Catholic you can say that you are saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ and by God’s grace you will be going to Heaven. We have assurance that we will go to Heaven if we die in the state of grace. The only difference is that we don’t believe that we will go to Heaven no matter what we do as some Protestants believe. Some believe that they can not lose their salvation even if they tried. But we as Catholics can be assured that God’s promises are true and that we have that great hope and assurance that we are going to Heaven only by His grace, and with our Free Will we can chose to follow Him and obey Him. Basically we chose to go to Heaven or not by the way we respond to God and live our lives.
 
Catholic_Dude said:
There is also a treasure trove of online material like what Copland suggested.

Here is an old and respectable online Catholic commentary:
haydock1859.tripod.com/
Click to expand...
Awesome!!! It’s commentaries like this from the above website, that I’m in particular need of.

Oh yes, and I’m working off of the Ignatius Study Bible (very lovely outline by the way - now I see why everyone has recourse to it, I’ve only ever used Little Rock Arkansas Study bible.)

Thanks ya all, I hope to keep you guys posted.
 
… look for such passages that contained faith and jot them down.
Click to expand...
Back when I first became a Christian, and long before I became a Catholic, I was exposed to something called the “Romans Road.” It’s a *selection *of verses from Romans, designed to lead a person to a particular point of view.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses do something similar in their Bible studies, jumping from verse to verse to “prove” their view.

This is called “proof-texting,” and you can do this to promote almost any kind of belief. The Oneness Pentecostals do it to prove there is no Trinity, only Jesus. JWs do it to prove that Jesus is only an archangel. Other sects do it to prove many different views: that musical instruments are banned from worship; that baptism is necessary, or not, for salvation; that women must never cut their hair; that the Second Coming will be at a certain date. I could go on.

I used to be on a now-defunct private Bible Study forum where I learned all those things. Some of the discussions got pretty acrimonious!

My point is that each kind of proof-texting forces you to skip over verses that “prove” something contradictory.

I chose not to proof-text. I decided to add it all up. That means that faith is necessary for salvation. So is baptism. So is works, because without them, faith is dead. So is perseverance. So is carrying our cross. So is loving our neighbors.

And, whaddaya know, so does the Catholic Church! Boy, were the guys on the forum surprised when I told them that!

So, challenge them on proof-texting. Figure out what view they’re promoting, and look for verses that contradict tht view.

Books: Get the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible booklet on Romans. Get one for your friend, too. It has the whole text along with copius notes. It’s about $10.

Oh, and… when it comes to Abraham and his justification by faith (Ch. 4), you might point out that Abraham did not sit around waiting for God to keep His promise. Isaac came into the world in the usual way, through the “work” of Abraham and Sarah performing the marital act. Without that - no father of nations. We can’t sit around waiting for salvation; we have to put one foot in front of the other, and “walk the walk,” to get there.

God bless you in your endeavors,

Ruthie

Vote pro-life!
 
MGV12 said:
Please help; I have found myself attending a non-catholic bible study on the book of Romans.
I hope you guys can help me even if it’s just a little.:blessyou:
Click to expand...
May God bless you for your diligence and faithfulness. You will find the library here a great resource on all these things. Some basics:

Nothing in the Bible contradicts what the Catholic Church teaches. It was written by, for, and about Catholics. Only when it is separated from the Sacred Tradition that produced it does it;s meaning become skewed.

We don’t develop doctrine from one book, one author, or even a selection of verses. Doctrine is developed by the church, through those that Jesus put in authority to teach. Scripture represents and supports this doctrine because it was produced by those who were authorized by Jesus to teach. Romans, though very important to understand salvation, cannot be separated from the rest of the NT.

Don’t be afraid to say “hmmm. I never thought of it that way. I will ponder that and get back to you”. Then rush run over here and we will help you. 👍
 
I would recommend reading the Navarre bible intro to the book of Romans. It contains a section on the theology of Paul which makes it make sense from a Catholic viewpoint.
Also Scott Hahn has a audio series “Romanism in Romans” Which is a very good overview of the book of Romans. This audio was taken from one of his classes he teaches.
The link I provided is in MP3 format for $42.00 - It has 13 sessions.
A little steep, but well worth it if you want to dig deeper, and it is cheaper that ordering the CD version for $59.
 
I think a mistake Protestants do is to read the bible backwards. That is, when I’ve talked with them, they go first to the books of Romans, Galatians, etc. They rely primarily upon the writings of Paul, sometimes called “the canon within the canon,” to justify their ideas.

But in my opinion, since we are Christians, followers of Christ, and are not “Paulists,” we should start with the teachings of Jesus. We should start at the beginning of the Christian scriptures, the Gospels. First we need to thoroughly understand the Gospels, what Jesus taught, and then, and only then, will we have the background to properly understand the writings of Paul.

Peter himself makes this clear in 2Peter 3:15-16 when he says, “There are certain things in the letters of our beloved brother Paul that are hard to understand, that the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the scriptures.”

Peter then makes it clear that for proper understanding of Paul we must be previously taught, to be not ignorant. Ignorant of what? He can only mean to be ignorant of the Gospel, the teaching and good news of Jesus. That is why it is so important to first know Jesus and the Gospels before attempting to interpret Paul.

But that is exactly what Protestants do, they are ignorant, and attempt to interpret Paul without benefit of first having the benefit of the teachings that Jesus gives us in the Gospels (and the teachings in Tradition, I might add).

So, we must be careful not to let the ignorant and unstable twist the writings of Paul to our destruction.
 
Who are the unstable that Peter refers to in 2Peter 3:16?

They are those who may have heard the Gospel, but are also easily pushed out of position, easily swayed. They may have “itchy ears,” or be “eager for new winds of doctrine.” The original Protestansts would fit in this category.
 
Much of this has to do with the assurance of faith. Jesus does not expect us to serve Him in some open ended Covenant where we never know where we stand, we never can finally rest or be at peace, etc… St. John said he wrote these things “that you may know that you have eternal life.”

Some catechists explain Catholic salvation this way:
I have been saved (Baptism);
I am being saved (perseverence);
I shall be saved (final deliverance).

It is not helpful to stress an emphasis on works. Works have to do with rewards and not salvation. In salvation, Jesus gives, we receive. Faith alone does save in that sense, but that is the rhetoric, not the reality. Faith unites us to Christ through grace and in the mystery of adoption. Jesus imparts His own divine nature to us and we are sanctified by our union with Him. He makes us objectively good, and the state of being absolved of our sins and made positively good is called justification. Justification is the state of being just or righteous. It is a gift.

Seeing then that we are righteous in Christ, the works we do merit a reward (not of debt, but of benevolence). The works do not save, but “give legs” to faith. Faith without works is dead (St. James) because it is not living faith at all. In rhetoric, St. Paul could separate works and faith, and he had to because of the Jews’ propensity to equate keeping the Law with salvation. If that were the case, the Pharisees who condemned Jesus were really righteous - and they were condemned by our Lord. Paul also shows that by works he was blameless (Phillipians 2) and that he was still lost, because his righteousness was his own, and not that which procedes from grace.

You must understand Paul’s preaching and teaching. The early Jewish converts were teaching that the gentile converts had to be circumcised in order to be saved. That is the context of Paul’s teaching. Paul argues that if you are doing that to keep the Law, then you are under the whole Law and its attendant curse. This would have been a death blow to the infant Church had Paul not separated faith and works. It also true today that our sinful nature is more apt to gaze upon our own perceived desserts and not on the gratuity of God in Christ - and thereby fall into the same error as the Pharisees who rejected Jesus’ invitation to salvation by grace through faith.

We teach as St. Paul did that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners. That means our Gospel is universal and freely given. The works that we do are the evidence of our faith, but not the cause of it.

A lost person is without hope (I have been that man!). It is a grave evil to require works of a lost soul in order to be saved. We must hold out the promise of forgiveness, justification and new life to the sinner. We must pray for them, teach them, comfort them into relying on Jesus’ love and propitiary (substiutionary) good works, and not on their own works or merits, which will cause them to despair when they fall. Once in faith, like a newborn baby St. Peter says, we feed them the milk of the Word of God to nurture their infant faith. The milk is the basics that establish our hearts in childlike trust. Remember, it takes babies months before they can walk, and even then they fall often and require assistance. This is how it is with the converts that St. Paul and Peter are writing to.

Sorry I went on and on!
 
:extrahappy:You all are too good to me.

Well I was only able to get through 2-3 bible study sessions, the commute was a clincher for my roomie. I did end up purchasing St. Ignatius’s Roman’s Bible study booklet.

My understanding of our faith has greatly increased, I see the great panorama of everyone of your comments in the context of our deep and rich faith. I read Roman’s, now with so much love and conviction (I THANKFULLY don’t cringe in memory of all the apologetics I found to be monumental at that time). I still have so much to grow in, I find so many of your comments to be so helpful even now. My younger sister left the faith while she was attending a bible study with a friend and is now an apostate, your insights on “Proof-texting” send an ache through my heart as she began to do this to “prove” that the Catholic Church has lied to us and butchered the 10 Commandments. I have so much to learn, so many prayers, but I am so thankful for all of your help on the Roman’s Bible Study Question I had presented. Please continue to be an invaluable resource for people like me.
 
Protestants get this text all wrong. It talks about salvation through faith. What St. Paul implies througout the whole text of Romans, is that if you follow the law blindly, without divine inspiration, then your works are no good and God won’t take them in account. Whereas if you have faith your works, led by faith, will automatically be good.

It’s a bit more complicated, but as a logical reply for those that say: ‘Only through faith shall thy be saved. Thus the sacraments, works and deeds have no importance’ - I say, the works, deeds, or sacrements you do are necessary to fulfil the law of God, but you have to do all through your faith in Jesus else they won’t count. For example, if you marry just because you are told to do so, then that is no holy commitment.

Also, Jesus walked around, teaching for at least three years on how to understand the law and how to behave. Did he not say “I am the path”. Well, I guess it would be silly to say: Yes I believe, but that does not imply that I have to do anything that you taught us.’ So in my point of view, protestants are actually saying: “We don’t believe in Jesus. He told us to love our enemies, but we say that deed is of no importance. He told us to treat others like we want to be treated, but we say we are already saved regardless of the way we treat people. He told us not to judge others, because we shall be judges in the same way, but we say that is ******** because God preordained everything and thus also the way we think and thus we have no saying in whether we will judge someone or not…” So, don’t believe protestants, they’ll lead you away from Christ.

One more example. The law said, stone all prostituts. What did Jesus do? He said:" We have all sinned." Clear example of what Paul is talking about in Romans. Yes, follow the law, but first comes your faith and love and then you can intepret the law. That makes the difference between good works and bad works…
 
For a good understanding of Paul I think you will find these audiences of Pope Benedict XVI interesting…

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061025_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061108_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061115_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061122_en.html

Series from the Year of St. Paul

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080702_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080827_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080903_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080910_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080924_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081001_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081008_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081015_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081022_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081029_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081105_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081112_en.html

Faith and works in these two:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081119_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081126_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081203_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081210_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20090107_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20090114_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20090128_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20090204_en.html

books that contain them:

ignatius.com/Products/SPAUL-H/saint-paul.aspx

ignatius.com/Products/JAEC-H/jesus-the-apostles-and-the-early-church.aspx
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top