Saved by What?

[jemfinch]

Mankind has knowledge of good and evil due to Eve’s eating from the tree of good and evil.

No, through Adam eating it. I don’t know what plan God had for the case where Eve ate of the fruit but Adam didn’t, but the New Testament makes it clear that it was in Adam that humanity fell, not in Eve.

Jeremy

 

[sarks]

The Sacraments are for man, not for God. God can choose to dispense His grace however He wills: we can see in the Bible an example where a man was justified and given supernatural grace and the life of the Holy Spirit apart from baptism (Cornelius, in Acts 10). But it is clear from Scripture and Tradition that baptism is the sacrament of justification, that is, the sacrament in which we become part of the Body of Christ, where our sins are washed away, and where salvation efficaciously begins.

We can recognize that God can and sometimes does work outside the bounds of His Sacraments, but we cannot preach anything but the normal means by which God has promised His grace.

Getting over the idea that the ONLY way anyone can EVER be saved is to be baptized was a major hurdle for me. I’m glad to hear this affirmed.

 

[Janet_S]

I was wondering the same thing. This sounds exactly like something I would have heard growing up. Are you explaining Catholic doctrine or Church of Christ doctrine? What have I misunderstood? COC dogma or the truth? (And no, they are NOT the same thing.)

The explanation from SoonerServant is not Catholic Church teaching.

 

[sarks]

Most Protestants can summarize their beliefs about salvation in this way:

“We are saved by grace, alone, through faith, alone, because of Christ, alone.”

Catholics can summarize their beliefs in a similar way:

“We are saved by grace and our response to that grace with our free will, through faith and a life of obedience that testifies to that faith, because of Christ and the Church He established.”

St Thomas More likened salvation to this: If you were trapped in a well and someone tossed you a rope, you would have to grab the rope in order to get yourself out of the well.

Maybe not all Protestants deny the idea of free will, but Luther did. It’s ironic that the man promoting “freedom” for Christians denies the existance of free will. But that is what he taught.

Catholics believe God wants us to come to Him and to love Him freely. That’s why the idea of free will is and always has been an important part of the Christian faith.

I dislike this analogy for several reasons. Man’s problem is not that he knows his problem and just can’t fix it himself. He doesn’t just need a rope. He needs to be healed of blindness and deafness so he can perceive that he’s in a hole, that he needs to get out, that he can’t get himself out, then he needs someone else to get him out. Even if he has to grab the rope, there’s so much he needs before he can even do so. And once he grabs the rope, he still doesn’t get out of the hole by climbing the rope, but by simply hanging on while the rope is raised.

 

[sarks]

It’s called “monergism” and I’m pretty sure it was condemned long ago (probably at Orange in 529)…

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

 

[Janet_S]

I dislike this analogy for several reasons. Man’s problem is not that he knows his problem and just can’t fix it himself. He doesn’t just need a rope. He needs to be healed of blindness and deafness so he can perceive that he’s in a hole, that he needs to get out, that he can’t get himself out, then he needs someone else to get him out. Even if he has to grab the rope, there’s so much he needs before he can even do so. And once he grabs the rope, he still doesn’t get out of the hole by climbing the rope, but by simply hanging on while the rope is raised.

I agree with what you are saying. Original sin does blind our intellects and weaken our wills. Salvation is certainly a lot more involved than this simple analogy about the well and the rope. Of course, there is more to the story.

Catholics believe salvation is a process (we were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved). We don’t believe in eternal security (once saved, always saved), and we don’t believe we are saved by faith “alone.” The Bible says we are saved by faith, by grace, by works, by Baptism, by obedience, by endurance, and by love. The Bible also speaks about salvation in the past, present, and future tenses, so it is not a one-time event.

While the well and rope analogy is certainly not a comprehensive view of Catholic teaching regarding salvation, I used it only to demonstrate in a simple way that God gives us grace (the rope) and we must respond with our free will (grab the rope). Since many Protestants deny the notion of a free will, I thought this analogy would be helpful to illustrate the Catholic position.

 

[sarks]

I agree with what you are saying. Original sin does blind our intellects and weaken our wills. Salvation is certainly a lot more involved than this simple analogy about the well and the rope. Of course, there is more to the story.

Catholics believe salvation is a process (we were saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved). We don’t believe in eternal security (once saved, always saved), and we don’t believe we are saved by faith “alone.” The Bible says we are saved by faith, by grace, by works, by Baptism, by obedience, by endurance, and by love. The Bible also speaks about salvation in the past, present, and future tenses, so it is not a one-time event.

While the well and rope analogy is certainly not a comprehensive view of Catholic teaching regarding salvation, I used it only to demonstrate in a simple way that God gives us grace (the rope) and we must respond with our free will (grab the rope). Since many Protestants deny the notion of a free will, I thought this analogy would be helpful to illustrate the Catholic position.

Thank you for the clrification. It’s very helpful.

 

[John_Henry]

And what does the Catholic church actually teach on this issue?

She teaches what the Council of Trent’s decree on justification teaches, found here:

americancatholictruthsociety.com/docs/TRENT/trent6.htm

Bear in mind that the council is only speaking of the normative way of salvation for adults.

 

[Spirithound]

I agree that in theory man could reject God’s grace. But I also believe that if a person has been freed from bondage to sin/sinfulness by that grace, then he simply won’t reject the glorious grace. Hmm… Guess that leaves me with an initial irresistable grace.

Does that even make sense? Is that part of the difference between the Catholic and Reformed positions?

The Catholic Church does affirm that if a person has been freed from bondage to sin, (by grace), then he simply won’t reject the glorious grace. The catch is, this happens upon entry to heaven. When we are still on earth, we are still subject to concupiscence, and so we can still sin.

 

[Alexius]

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

I didn’t intend for that to sound condemning. I was pointing out the name of the teaching and fact that it is considered heresy. I would prefer to allow for another persons’ comment, as I am not positive as to why it was condemned, but I think that it goes against St. Paul’s teaching that we are active participants in our salvation. Therefore, our whole journey requires our “working out of salvation,” as the apostle says. i.e. We are co-operating in our salvation - God and man working together; God could totally determine our eternal destination - He is God after all! But He doesn’t; He gives us the choice! That’s grace!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Alexius]

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

I didn’t intend for that to sound condemning. I was pointing out the name of the teaching and fact that it is considered heresy. I would prefer to allow for another persons’ comment, as I am not positive as to why it was condemned, but I think that it goes against St. Paul’s teaching that we are active participants in our salvation. Therefore, our whole journey requires our “working out of salvation,” as the apostle says. i.e. We are co-operating in our salvation - God and man working together; God could totally determine our eternal destination - He is God after all! But He doesn’t; He gives us the choice! That’s grace!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Alexius]

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

I didn’t intend for that to sound condemning. I was pointing out the name of the teaching and fact that it is considered heresy. I would prefer to allow for another persons’ comment, as I am not positive as to why it was condemned, but I think that it goes against St. Paul’s teaching that we are active participants in our salvation. Therefore, our whole journey requires our “working out of salvation,” as the apostle says. i.e. We are co-operating in our salvation - God and man working together; God could totally determine our eternal destination - He is God after all! But He doesn’t; He gives us the choice! That’s grace!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Alexius]

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

I didn’t intend for that to sound condemning. I was pointing out the name of the teaching and fact that it is considered heresy. I would prefer to allow for another persons’ comment, as I am not positive as to why it was condemned, but I think that it goes against St. Paul’s teaching that we are active participants in our salvation. Therefore, our whole journey requires our “working out of salvation,” as the apostle says. i.e. We are co-operating in our salvation - God and man working together; God could totally determine our eternal destination - He is God after all! But He doesn’t; He gives us the choice! That’s grace!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Alexius]

Please understand, the fact that someone calls it heresy doesn’t mean much. Where I am now, my childhood friends, my family, Catholics all believe I hold heretical beliefs. If I go back to the COC, I’ll be considered heretical by almost anyone in Christendom. If I become a Catholic, then most Protestants and certainly my family will think me a heretic. I’ve long since been hardened to unsubstantiated accusations of heresy.

WHY was monergism condenmed?

I didn’t intend for that to sound condemning. I was pointing out the name of the teaching and fact that it is considered heresy. I would prefer to allow for another persons’ comment, as I am not positive as to why it was condemned, but I think that it goes against St. Paul’s teaching that we are active participants in our salvation. Therefore, our whole journey requires our “working out of salvation,” as the apostle says. i.e. We are co-operating in our salvation - God and man working together; God could totally determine our eternal destination - He is God after all! But He doesn’t; He gives us the choice! That’s grace!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[MariaG]

I’ve rejected that. I can now say with complete truthfulness that anything good about me is attributable to God and all that is bad about me is mine alone. I thought that made me a Calvinist. But finding out that the Catholic church teaches something very similar has me puzzled.

Many people are puzzled when they learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches opposed to what they thought it taught.

I know I was. Everytime I would look up what someone told me Catholics believed (thereby meaning they would not be Christian ), it was not what the Church actually taught. One of Satan’s biggest deceptions is the many lies about the Catholic Church.

Catholics worship Mary according to many, yet nowhere is this taught in the Catholic Church.

Catholics believe in a works based salvation according to most, yet this is not what is actually taught in the Catholic Church.

One thing you need to be careful of in your explorations is to make sure you get the Catholic definitions of words. Justification, sanctification, faith, all these words are used by Catholic and Protestant, but they do not have the same meaning.

For example. Faith in the definition of the Catholic Church is an intellectual assent alone, along the lines of James 2:22. According to the Catholic Church, one must have faith, hope and charity all which are given to us by God.

So when Luther said we are saved by “faith alone” this was and is firmly rejected by the Catholic church since this was interpreted to mean we are saved just by agreeing on an intellectual level about God.

I have recently wondered if Luther truly meant faith alone and today’s lutherans misunderstand what he meant, or if Luther was choosing to change the definition of faith.

Either way, one can see how misunderstandings can happen.

May the Holy Spirit lead and guide you to all Truth.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[sarks]

One thing you need to be careful of in your explorations is to make sure you get the Catholic definitions of words. Justification, sanctification, faith, all these words are used by Catholic and Protestant, but they do not have the same meaning.

I’m beginning to realize how true this is. Thanks for your encouragement.

 

[SoonerServant]

Are you a member of the Church of Christ? What is your view on baptism and salvation?

God Bless,
Michael

I’m not sure what you want to know about us specifically, but I’ll just rant a little.
We believe that the gifts God offers(aka His Grace) are for his children. And, if you haven’t been baptized, you are not one of His. Baptism give you the right to his grace, but it is the grace that saves you. We don’t believe in,“Once saved, always saved.” For example, in 2 Peter 22:21 “It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to.” What is it that could have been worse than being ignorant? Being foolish! To turn your back on God, is to spit in his face.

 

[SoonerServant]

“One thing you need to be careful of in your explorations is to make sure you get the Catholic definitions of words. Justification, sanctification, faith, all these words are used by Catholic and Protestant, but they do not have the same meaning.”

I don’t agree with that. You should get the biblical meanings that were implied.

 

[Bishopite]

This is my first post here. I’m not RC, but have lots of questions. I’ll try to boil this question down and not ramble.

All my life I’ve heard the classic accusation against Catholics: “They believe they’re saved by works.” Lately I’ve run into some Catholics who say that isn’t so. Now I’m confused. I have lots of experience with a religious group who says we’re saved by both faith and works, but while they pay lip service to grace, there’s not really room for any in their theology. It ultimately always comes down to, “I’m saved because I obeyed.” So when I read Catholics saying they are saved by both faith and works, I’m skeptical. But then, I also see Catholics say that even works are by grace. So now I’m confused. As I’ve come to understand it more recently, faith is a gift (Ephesians 2:8), repentance is a gift (Acts 5:31, 2 Timothy 2:25). So how can you say that people exercise free will in order to believe or repent?

Not sure if I’ve stated my question clearly enough. If you need me to clarify, speak up and I’ll try.

I’ll try to make this short. As a former Baptist, I used to believe as you did about Catholicism, but after many years of studying Catholic and Protestant theology, I discoverd something different; that Catholicism teaches we are saved by grace alone, by faith and works [of charity] which could also be called faith and obedience or faith and love or even faith working through love. There are many ways of saying faith and works but they all mean the same thing.
From what I’ve seen and known as a Baptist, many Protestants misunderstand the Catholic use of the word “works” and many times it is a matter of semantics.
In fact, they often misunderstand or fail to recognize works as being good at all and generally when they read or hear the word “works” think only of our personal works, i.e. the Eph 2:8-9 kind of works where it is said that our personal works don’t justify us before God.

Ironically, Catholicism also agrees, and has taught this from the begining of Christian history, and dealt with this problem centuries ago in the council of Orange (529) and the council of Trent on justification (1546).

Nonetheless, the word “works” in the Bible is also used as something that pleases God e.g.,Mt 25:40,Heb 11:6. I think Gal 5:6 says it best when it says…“faith working through love.” So we need to do works to be justified as Phil 2:12 says…“work out your salvation with fear and trembling” well one should ask, how can we “work out our salvation” if it is a free gift by grace alone? Well, we can’t in and of ourselves, but with God’s grace we can do those works with faith that justify. And we cooperate with His grace 2 Cor 6:9, 1 Cor 3:9, Rom 8:28. By doing those things that are holy to God and refraining from those things that are not holy we please God. In other words, it is by faith and works [of charity/love] that we are saved because that’s what the Bible says and the Bible is God’s word.

Again works can mean…

1. Our personal works which don’t justify us before God, Rom 3:28, Eph 2:8-9
2. Those works or deeds that along with faith, justify us before God as Jesus said in Mt 25:40…“as you did these things [works of charity, love, obedience] unto the least of these you did them to Me” and it is these kind of works Catholicism means when it uses the phrase “faith and works”

 

[Bishopite]

I’m not sure what you want to know about us specifically, but I’ll just rant a little.
We believe that the gifts God offers(aka His Grace) are for his children. And, if you haven’t been baptized, you are not one of His. Baptism give you the right to his grace, but it is the grace that saves you. We don’t believe in,“Once saved, always saved.” For example, in 2 Peter 22:21 “It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to.” What is it that could have been worse than being ignorant? Being foolish! To turn your back on God, is to spit in his face.

As a Catholic, in many ways I do appreciate the Church of Christ because they don’t teach the “once saved always saved” unbiblical doctrine, and believe correctly that one can loose their salvation. And even though they don’t affirm baptismal regeration, nor padeo baptism, they do put baptism as necessary for salvation.
However, (I’m sure you knew this was coming) many Church of Christ churches don’t accept instruments in worship, (correct me if I’m wrong) nor do they accept original sin, (again, correct me if I’m wrong).