Salvation questions from some Protestant brothers

[Sirach2]

@Steve-B

Since quotes 3 and 4 came from Tim Staples AND the Holy Office, you will need to take your argument there, not to me. I’m out, remember?

(Do you always shout when you type responses?)

 

[annad347]

if that is true, then why are there so many different ‘churches’? is God tricking some people? How does this line up with Jesus’s desire that we all be one?

No, I don’t think so… I believe Jesus Christ is the One True Church.

So, do you think all the denominations that split off of the Catholic Church did so under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? Do you believe that the Holy Spirit preserved the Church founded by Christ?

Yes.

Do we? Do the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons worship the same God as you do? Do they all believe who Jesus is as you do? Is he just a man but the son of God or is he both man and God?

I don’t know what they believe to be honest… but if I was interested in joining their churches I’d find out. If they do believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, and was baptized in the name of the Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit… then Holy Spirit should guiding them… if they are contrite in their confessions to cleanse them of their sins.

No need to explain or to defend.

Explaining but Not Defending:

I was just going through the motions. Never felt God’s love, mercy or grace in that church… so I left. No one noticed… and if you don’t think that can happen in a Catholic church… look around, it can. I went to that church way before the internet, things might be a little different now.

You totally misunderstood the poster who said that.

maybe but it does sound like if you’re not Catholic you can’t be in heaven.

as for the rest my point I just meant to point they weren’t Catholic… but since I missed understood @MiserereMeiDei my comment might have been rude so I’m very sorry for that… and I was getting a little upset, I’m sorry for that too.

This thread would be much easier to read if it were easier to distinguish when someone meant catholic as in “all encompassing” or Catholic as in the denomination. I know for some there is no distinction, but many people mean it in one sense or the other.

This was mentioned several times… what is the difference?

Oh and reading you guys debate the meaning of invincible ignorance is interesting and yet confusing

 

[annad347]

(Do you always shout when you type responses?)

responses are getting loud… WOW.

 

[Sirach2]

responses are getting loud… WOW.

I was not directing that to you, Anna. Here is an example of shouting. It presumes we are not able to understand unless it is highly emphasized.

ignorant of the truth of the Catholic Faith, “through no fault of [his] own,”

AND​

Can be saved ≠ will be saved​

 

[annad347]

I was not directing that to you, Anna. Here is an example of shouting. It presumes we are not able to understand unless it is highly emphasized.

I didn’t think you were… I was agreeing with you.

 

[TNMan]

Don’t teach consubstantiation. Poor catechised Lutherans use that term. We call it Sacramental Union.

It’s confession at the beginning of the divine service.

 

[Inquiry]

The word ‘catholic’ means whole or all encompassing. In some ways it means The Church as seen from Heaven. The Catholic Church is a denomination. For many Catholics there is no distinction. However, Orthodox and Anglicans both consider themselves part of the all encompassing church (and hence catholic), but they do not consider themselves to be part of the Catholic denomination.

 

[annad347]

The word ‘catholic’ means whole or all encompassing. In some ways it means The Church as seen from Heaven.

I may sound like stupid but I’ve never heard that before, Catholic was just Catholic… I’m old, go figure.

so when you say a person can not be saved outside of the church, you mean outside the universal meaning when you catholic church, not the denomination Catholic church?

 

[whichwaytogo47]

OSAS is a grave error, since they do not know/understand the need for continued reconciliation - could die in a state of mortal sin believing that their one profession of faith was enough. … My concern is more for the souls of those who have left the Church & became anti-Catholic.

I’ve attended both Catholic and a non-denominational church for 6 years where the pastors are trained by Dallas Theological Seminary. Many at the church are repentant (whether they always had been Protestant or were former Catholics) despite buying into the easier concept of OSAS rather than the necessity for confession and persistence to the end to be saved. Many are former Catholics, but I’ve only noticed a few that are anti-Catholic, including a prior roommate of mine.

Most Protestants are repentant despite OSAS and have a desire to avoid mortal sin and also to repent of sin - some as soon as they commit it, though like practicing Catholics, this differs from person to person. And at least some are perfectly capable of making a perfect contrition. The issue with OSAS is that you could theoretically believe that there is no need to repent of sins once saved (because there’s nothing you can do to lose your salvation). One of the benefits of saying the sinners prayer is that the Holy Spirit can come into your heart. But as Catholics, we should ask the Holy Spirit to come into our heart for different reasons: because of the good works, the Holy Spirit can help us achieve in advancing the Kingdom of God and bringing other souls to heaven.

The biggest thing Catholics can do is make people feel welcome and remind people that Jesus wants to invite everyone into his House (Luke 15:7 - ESV) Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. (Luke 15:7 Douray Rheims) I say to you, that even so there shall be joy in heaven upon one sinner that doth penance, more than upon ninety-nine just who need not penance.

The biggest misconception of some protestants is the understanding of works. They believe you are saved by faith alone and that your works are a reflection of that faith. They believe you’re saved by grace. Catholics also believe your saved by grace. Catholics believe that your works are not good enough, but the works of the Holy Spirit are, and that it’s your faith and works that save you.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

as for the rest my point I just meant to point they weren’t Catholic… but since I missed understood @MiserereMeiDei my comment might have been rude so I’m very sorry for that… and I was getting a little upset, I’m sorry for that too.

Don’t worry, I have no idea if you were rude…or if I was (or if you’re apologizing to me). I try not to be but I know I can be at times. I apologize if I was.

The no non-Catholics in heaven means that anyone who is in heaven converted before they died. It could be when they were seven or just before they close their eyes for the last time before the resurrection; you can’t convert after death. Any protestant, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist etc. who made it to heaven accepts the Trinity, the deity of Jesus, the infallibility of the pope, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the assumption of Mary, etc. When they died they believed anything they knew that the Church teaches and were willing to believe anything they didn’t know that she teaches. IOW, they converted. Conversion doesn’t have to be on record in the rectory, but it does have to happen.

Protestants have the sacrament of baptism (assuming they used the proper form, matter and intent). That removes original sin, all sins prior to baptism and puts sanctifying grace into the soul. However, it does nothing to remove any sins, venial or mortal, after baptism. The odds that someone sins after baptism are…well, whatever they are, I think they’re rather high.

To remove the stain of sin after baptism requires the sacrament of penance or a special gift of grace from God to have perfect contrition, which most people don’t get and certainly cannot be counted upon. If a person is baptized and only ever commits venial sin, they will not lose the sanctifying grace they received at baptism ans will go to heaven, perhaps immediately, perhaps after a period in purgatory. If a person commits a mortal sin, they lose that sanctifying grace and need to confess to a priest in order to receive absolution. If they die before they do so and without perfect contrition they will go to hell.

Since protestants don’t have anyone with holy orders to hear their confessions and absolve them, if they commit a mortal sin and don’t receive the special grace from God of perfect contrition, they will go to hell. That’s one very important reason why protestants should come back to the Catholic church.

 

[Inquiry]

It’s actually even broader than that. Someone who has never even heard of Christ can still be saved through him, and everyone who is saved through Christ is part of The Church. The schisms in the Church are purely earthly, they do not exist in heaven.

 

[vsedriver]

The Catholic Church is a denomination

this is not correct. The Catholic Church is not a denomination. In order for the Catholic Church to be a denomination it would have to have split off from the Church founded by Christ. Since that never happened it is not a denomination.

The orthodox are still part of the Catholic Church but they are not in union with the chair of St. Peter because they do not acknowledge the authority of the Pope only his pre-eminence. (although pre-eminence without authority doesn’t strike me as having any pre-eminence). But they are still the Catholic Church by apostolic succession.

The Anglicans are a denomination since they were originally part of the Catholic Church under the Latin Rite and as such were under the Bishop of Rome. Their orders have been invalidated by the Pope who has the right to do that since their apostolic succession was through Rome to begin with. The same applies to the Lutherans and all other forms of Christianity.

 

[Inquiry]

That is an artificial constraint on the term ‘denomination.’ Denomination does not relate to validity one way or the other. So calling Catholic Church as an earthly entity a denomination neither questions nor upholds its claim of being the closest to Christ’s teachings.

 

[vsedriver]

I believe Jesus Christ is the One True Church.

so you only accept a spiritual church and not a physical church?

If the church was only spiritual how do you recognize it? Why would you need a church council to settle issues? Once someone believed in Jesus what more would you need? Do you just pick the group who thinks like you and who make you feel welcome?

How do you know that what you believe is true without an authoritative teacher?

If I sit and read sacred scripture and pray for enlightenment or guidance from the Holy Spirit and I conclude that Baptism isn’t necessary for salvation does that make it true?

What if the guy across the street is doing exactly what I am doing and concludes that Baptism is necessary for salvation. Does he also have the truth about salvation?

So what is necessary for salvation? This is a hugely important question.

 

[steve-b]

@Steve-B

Since quotes 3 and 4 came from Tim Staples AND the Holy Office, you will need to take your argument there, not to me. I’m out, remember?

(Do you always shout when you type responses?)

They are ALSO points I’m referencing , in the article you posted.

AND,

Emphasizing words or text to me ≠ shouting

 

[annad347]

so you only accept a spiritual church and not a physical church?

you asked me How does this line up with Jesus’s desire that we all be one? Jesus said when 2 or 3 gather in my name I will be there. I know He didn’t mean poof now you’re a church… but that He was there.

If you gather in Jesus name and He is there how does that not mean you are gathered as one as Jesus wishes you to be? One meaning you are gathered in One Name, in Jesus’s name doing the will of His Father.

… who make you feel welcome?

that’s kinda cold…

How do you know that what you believe is true without an authoritative teacher?

If I sit and read sacred scripture and pray for enlightenment or guidance from the Holy Spirit and I conclude that Baptism isn’t necessary for salvation does that make it true?

If you read sacred scripture and was guided to them by The Holy Spirit, why would you doubt what you read was the truth?

Wouldn’t you have faith in the guidance of the Holy Spirit, especially after Spirit of God lead you to where you are… gave you the ability to read sacred scripture? Didn’t Jesus rewrite sacred scripture that many were following for years… and The Holy Spirit lead the to believe it as the truth?

What if the guy across the street is doing exactly what I am doing and concludes that Baptism is necessary for salvation. Does he also have the truth about salvation?

I don’t know, does he?

So what is necessary for salvation? This is a hugely important question.

Accepting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. Then allow Him to take over my path to Salvation… including picking my church.

Maybe say a little prayer: Jesus Christ son of God, my Savior. I am a sinner. I humble myself before you… have mercy on me. Help me to allow The Holy Spirit to guide me on the right path to my salvation.

 

[vsedriver]

If you read sacred scripture and was guided to them by The Holy Spirit, why would you doubt what you read was the truth?

You mean the Holy Spirit told you which text were sacred scripture and which weren’t?

I think we are talking about two different things here:

1. what is and what isn’t sacred scripture
2. what is authentic interpretation of scripture

I can see that you have one interpretation of what Jesus meant when he prayed that we all be ‘one’. And I have a different interpretation of that piece of scripture. I’m trying to determine if your interpretation is the correct understanding and my interpretation is not true.

 

[annad347]

You mean the Holy Spirit told you which text were sacred scripture and which weren’t?

I was just answering you’re question.

You asked if I was given sacred scripture to read, lead to me by my Holy Spirit if I would believe it… and I basically said why wouldn’t I, it was given to me by THE HOLY SPIRIT… why wouldn’t I believe it as true?

Besides I was lead to the bible…and lead to read it… and I think that’s pretty sacred scripture.

I can see that you have one interpretation of what Jesus meant when he prayed that we all be ‘one’. And I have a different interpretation of that piece of scripture. I’m trying to determine if your interpretation is the correct understanding and my interpretation is not true.

Why? Maybe God wants us to understand Him how He wants us to understand Him. Why does one of us being right means the other has to be wrong in our understanding of Jesus words, ‘When we gather, He is with us’?

 

[vsedriver]

Why does one of us being right means the other has to be wrong in our understanding of Jesus words, ‘When we gather, He is with us’?

But that wasn’t the text I was referring to. The text I was quoting was this:

John 17: 21 That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

I interpret this to mean we should all be one faith, one church, all of the same mind and understanding. Total unity.

 

[annad347]

John 17: 21 That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

I kind of understand the passage to mean that my body is the temple of the Lord. You know, treat your body as a temple for that is where the Spirit of the Lord lives within you.

My body, my heart, my mind is Jesus Temple. I am one with Jesus. I am one with The Holy Spirit. Soon I will be one with God. One body, one with the Holy Trinity. I am in Him, He is in Me. My body is His church… my body is where The Holy Spirit guides me.

wasn’t even thinking about a physical church with that passage… more like a blending of souls, one with Jesus.

anyway that’s how I understood the passage.