It is also a work. Men must submit to Baptism and men must conduct Baptisms. And before Baptism, men must convert to God and repent of their sins.
Thats all true. But God said that He will render to us according to our works. And that we must convert and repent in order to be saved:
Sincerely,
No, you have not defined “rule of works”. This is your phrase, and is not found in scripture, so I need to understand what you mean by it.
This passage is talking about repentance of a wicked man into justice. It is repentance that saves. Good works are the fruit of the repentance.
Yes, but a work of God, not of man.
If you mean that both faith and works are based in grace, then we are in agreement.
Yes. The only basis is grace. Works and faith built upon grace.
What you don’t seem to understand is that this passage is a refutation of the Calvanist notion of pre-destination, which precludes free will, and teaches that mankind cannot cooperate with pre-venient graced. It does NOT say that we can merit our justification. While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Have it your way. Such a presentation is one of the seeds of the Reformation, and if you wish to return to it and spread more disarray, I suppose it is your perogative.
At the judgement, our deeds will be rendered their just rewards. However, it is not the deeds that are the basis of salvation. A good tree bears good fruit. The works are the evidence of a faith filled life based in grace.
And the Scripture, and the Council of Trent.
You need to back up to the beginning of the section. This is written about those who are already in a state of grace. Once we are justified, then we can have the benefit of merit for ourselves and others.
This is what I mean when I say that grace is the basis. Grace is the foundation upon which faith and works rest.
We may be speaking past one another, since I am not sure, when you say “salvation” if you are speaking of justification, sanctification, or glorification, all of which are parts of salvation.
We cannot become eligible for that eternal life without being moved by grace from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light.
I think we are all in agreement on this point.
What does not make sense to me is that you have said you can merit your own justification, where in every place the documents are clear that it is “derived from the prevenient grace of God”. Grace is the basis of our justificaton.
And you imagine that we are not at that time justified?
No, Paul’s point was that Abraham was justified by faith, apart from works.
I suppose one could stretch to accomodate this. However, it is more sensible to say that it is merited on the basis of the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross. Grace is the basis, and the merit is His. We do cooperate, place our faith, and come for baptism, but none of this "merits’ justification for us, only the blood of Jesus can do this. We participate.
No, it is not. This is where I am saying that your presentation is misleading. It is not helpful to assume that one is “presupposed” to be in a state of grace.
True, but this is because a good tree bears good fruit. Such a person reflects that they are in a state of grace by their fruit.
Yes, I have noticed. It is very prevalent. Prevalence does not make it a basis, though.
And what than man is rendered is determined by who he is, whether he is a goat, or a sheep.
Exactly …
Yes … sacraments are covenants of Christ to believers. As long as we partake in full belief, we are blessed and receive healing graces.Sacraments are not what we do, sacraments are gifts that God give us. Its a two way thing. He gives and we receive.
We had no say in our first birth. But, we must speak/consent to our second birth.
No one denies that. The problem is that you have said that the initial infusion of sanctifying grace - which in Catholic teaching is justification - is merited by works. That is not Catholic teaching. The Catechism clearly states that true merit depends on first being adopted as a child of God:
But the Catholic Church does not teach that baptism is a meritorious work.
As I said to someone else, you guys are viewing works provincially. As though the only works that matter are the corporal works of mercy. As though the only works of God which matter are to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and such. The works of God are anything which we must do in obedience to God.
This is not true for me.
I agree, and I also agree that the ability to do obedience comes from grace.
Yes, salvation requires our consent and participation. We must respond to prevenient grace.
Yes! I believe this represents Catholic Teaching. It is the way you are presenting it that I think is problematic.
No. God can save whoever He wants, however He desires.
This is all true. However, when trying to communicate this to Protestants, or Catholics who are falling into error, it is useful to present these ideas in language that makes more sense to the dissenters. What about becomng all things to all people so that in some way, we can save some?
Indeed so it is, and this is very good.
Both grace and works. Not either grace or works.
Rom 4:4-5
I agree, but all such persons enter into a state of grace apart from works.
As I have said, I believe the problem is with those who say that the Church never, ever taught that salvation is by works. The Church teaches that by the grace of God, salvation is by works.
This is also problematic. God is not fickle. God has revealed whom He will save. He will save those who seek salvation. Not those who don’t.
IF we seek His salvation. Everyone is not saved.
You seem to believe that you have an absolute formula for saving Protestants? You don’t. All we do is plant the seed and water. God causes the growth.
Yeah. I have an axe to grind with Catholics who are watering down doctrine.It appears that you have some kind of axe to grind.
A lot of Protestants share your view on Church doctrines … and would see you as exhibit #1, to support their viewpoint.
More accurate of Church teachings … as I read them.
What better proof that the elect are not picked at random by an arbitrary, capricious God. All are welcome into the Kingdom, all infants can be initiated into the faith, by this enduring Sacrament.
In italics I would like to emphasize a thought that may not occur to others – the definition of “in-corporation” relates to the body of Christ – and as St. Paul comments, not ALL parts of the body are equal, so that this incorporation requires different gifts given to different members of the church.In Baptism, a child is justified. We are saved in Baptism, only as a manner of speaking. We are set aside, made holy.
Even if the babe is confirmed as an infant, he must, as he grows, begin to merit his salvation also:
[837](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/837.htm’)
"Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. **Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. **He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart.’"321
Not that they aren’t relevant, just that in your quickness of response the initial jibe aimed at you got you to state your response poorly, so that you had to clarify rather quickly a few posts later, and that reduces your credibility to some of the audience. I have noted certain posters have a knack for supplying “bait” like this, which switches in meaning depending on the response they get… (IMHO)
Sorry, my birthday is being forced on me – gotta Go for a bit.