Sola Fide is driving me crazy!!

[mark_a]

SojournerOf78:

I constantly hear from them how Faith alone is what “saves” yet they will at the same time say that if a person isnt acting as a Christian they cant be “saved” because that proves they dont have true Faith.

So when you boil it all down the Protestant view that I am always hearing is that in order to be “saved” you need to have works, because being without works shows you dont have faith, so they, without understanding it, claim that true faith has works, which is the Catholic point of view. But when i say this they say no no no…you Catholics believe in a “Works based righteousness”…

I know that we believe we are saved by Grace through Faith, not because of our works. But that we must work out our salvation by bringing forth fruits worthy of repentance.

To me it seems like this old arguement is six of one or a half a dozen of the other. The Catholic message of “faith and works” easily makes sense to anyone and can stated so that even a simpleton like myself can understand, whereas the “faith alone” arguement requires much discussion and contemplation.

“Faith alone” is about as useful as “works alone”.

 

[brianberean]

MariaG:

I would see this in the same light as the tract Reward and Merit available from our host. I hope you will read it. It explains it all very well there. The Bible tells us we will be rewarded for our works.
“For [God] will reward every man according to his works: to those who by perseverance in working good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. There will be . . . glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:6–11; cf. Gal. 6:6–10).

catholic.com/library/Reward_and_Merit.asp

God Bless
Maria

Canon 33 speaks of earning increased justification and eternal life. Please address this or explain to me using the context of canon 33 that I am wrong.

Brian

 

[brianberean]

RBushlow:

Sorry Brian, but Will Webster completly misinterprets the Catholic positon. The Church never held that the Duterocanonical books were Canonical.

The Duterocanonical books are exactly that. Lacking Canonical status. That’s what “dutero” means (please see definition below).That’s why they are deuterocanonical instead of Canonical.

Websters: Main Entry: **deutero- **Etymology: alteration of Middle English *deutro-, *modification of Late Latin *deutero-, *from Greek *deuter-, deutero-, *from *deuteros; *probably akin to Greek *dein *to lack, Sanskrit *dosa *fault, lack
: second : secondary

Why do I have to keep repeating the same explanations over and over again?

Jerome and others, including the bible editions, not only call them less than canonical but say they are not canonical Scripture and were therefore not used by the Church for confirming the authority of any fundamental points of doctrine, though the Church allowed them to be read for purposes of edification.

Brian

 

[Trelow]

Like I said before, quite insane.

Wouldn’t this energy be better directed towards ending the mass infanticide of our day?

Ever seen or read “Who’s on first?” check it out.

 

[headman13]

shannin:

Sola Fide?

Satan has faith and he knows without a doubt that Jesus is the Son of God and yet he chooses to be totally evil. Is faith alone enough for him??? Certainly NOT.


Shannin

Pardon me, for disagreeing with you, Shannin, but the Devil most assuredly does NOT have faith, the Devil has KNOWLEDGE. Knowing is not having faith. James 2:19 tells us that “the Demons know there is a God and they tremble.” We are told in 1 Peter 3:18 that Christ descended to Hell and showed Himself to the spirits in prison. Satan knows God personally, he was God’s brightest angel at one time; Satan has SEEN the Victorious Lord of Life when Jesus descended into Hell. Satan trembles. Satan has certain knowledge but he does not have faith. Hebrews 11: 1 tells us *“Now Faith is being sure of what we hope for and **certain of what we do not see.” ***Satan has no excuse, he can have no faith.

 

[headman13]

Corpus Cristi:

headman13, for the last time, CHARITY TOWARDS OTHERS IS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THIS ARGUMENT BETWEEN YOU AND ME. It is, however on what IS Catholic teaching, and what ISN’T Catholic teaching. I can’t help it if you’re in the wrong coming in here talking about how Catholics believe such-and-such when they don’t and talking **** that isn’t true about us. You wouldn’t like it if someone went telling lies about you to other people, much less them coming around and saying things that aren’t true about you to your face when you’re around others, BUT YOU SEEM TO NOT LIKE IT EVEN WHEN PEOPLE COME AND TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT YOU EITHER.

Charity is always an issue. “Faith, hope, charity endure, these three, but the greatest of these is charity.” I have no objection to you speaking your mind, I do however object to the offensive tone you use. There is NO reason to be discourteous to ANYone, ever.

 

[RBushlow]

brianberean:

RBushlow:

Originally Posted by RBushlow

*Sorry Brian, but Will Webster completly misinterprets the Catholic positon. The Church never held that the Duterocanonical books were Canonical.

The Dutero*canonical books are exactly that. Lacking Canonical status. That’s what “dutero” means (please see definition below).That’s why they are deuterocanonical instead of Canonical.

Websters: Main Entry: **deutero- **Etymology: alteration of Middle English *deutro-, *modification of Late Latin *deutero-, *from Greek *deuter-, deutero-, *from *deuteros; *probably akin to Greek *dein *to lack, Sanskrit *dosa *fault, lack
: second : secondary

Why do I have to keep repeating the same explanations over and over again?
Jerome and others, including the bible editions, not only call them less than canonical but say they are not canonical Scripture.
Brian

Yes, correct. I believe you have accurately restated what I said (see above quote). I’m afraid I don’t understand what your argument is.

 

[Corpus_Cristi]

headman13:

Charity is always an issue. “Faith, hope, charity endure, these three, but the greatest of these is charity.” I have no objection to you speaking your mind, I do however object to the offensive tone you use. There is NO reason to be discourteous to ANYone, ever.

Okay, I’ll be kind, I’ll be curtious, I’ll be charitable. The only thing I would really like for you to do, is learn Catholic teaching, and then, if you’re not satisfied, go knock it, but please, don’t talk bad about something you don’t know about.

 

[brianberean]

RBushlow:

Yes, correct. I believe you have accurately restated what I said (see above quote). I’m afraid I don’t understand what your argument is.

Maybe you claim not to “understand” what my argument is because you don’t want to respond to my entire argument…

Here’s the rest of my response that you cut out. Mind addressing it?

…and were therefore not used by the Church for confirming the authority of any fundamental points of doctrine, though the Church allowed them to be read for purposes of edification.

Is this what Trent “infallibly” declares?

When the Council of Trent “infallibly” established the OT canon does it state that the deuterocanonicals are not canonical Scripture? Does Trent seperate the deuterocanicals in any way as less canonical than the rest of the OT canon? Does Trent “infallible” declare that the deuterocanicals should not be used by the Church for confirming the authority of any fundamental points of doctrine?

Brian

 

[Brad]

Shibboleth:

You can choose to die, but you cannot choose to live becuase we do not give ourselves life.

I completely agree.

 

[RBushlow]

brianberean:

Does Trent seperate the deuterocanicals in any way as less canonical than the rest of the OT canon?

Yes Brian, once again:

The Duterocanonical books are exactly that. Lacking Canonical status. That’s what “dutero” means (please see definition below).That’s why they are deuterocanonical instead of Canonical.

Websters: Main Entry: **deutero- **Etymology: alteration of Middle English *deutro-, *modification of Late Latin *deutero-, *from Greek *deuter-, deutero-, *from *deuteros; *probably akin to Greek *dein *to lack, Sanskrit *dosa *fault, lack
: second : secondary

That’s why the Church which declare them to be Duterocanonical?

 

[Shibboleth]

RBushlow:

Yes Brian, once again:

That’s why the Church which declare them to be Duterocanonical?

This is interesting considering that Luther stated that the books in question were very important and should be read but were not equivalent to the rest of Scripture.

 

[Shibboleth]

Whatever is being said here really needs to be explained because I am reading different things.

The first paragraph in the Catholic Answers Web Site on the OT Cannon states this…

During the Reformation, primarily for doctrinal reasons, Protestants removed seven books from the Old Testament: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, and parts of two others, Daniel and Esther. They did so even though these books had been regarded as canonical since the beginning of Church history.

Are the cannon or are they not?

 

[brianberean]

RBushlow:

Yes Brian, once again:

That’s why the Church which declare them to be Duterocanonical?

Forgive my seeming hard-headedness but…

I was hoping you’d provide evidence with your answer. Maybe by quoting the Council of Trent or any other “infallible” declaration by the RCC concerning the OT canon…

Brian

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

brianberean:

That’s fine if you beleive that. However, this canon from the Council of Trent seems to show that RCs must believe that their own good works at least help to merit eternal life.

Council of Trent:
CANON XXXII.-If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, **by the good works which he performs **through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema.

This “infallible” statement from Trent clearly shows the difference between the teaching of the RCC and Sole Fide which means trusting solely in the merits of Jesus Christ for justification.

Is it that hard to see?

Brian

The wording here isn’t the clearest, but it certainly seems to say that the good works that the justified perform are through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ.

This statement doesn’t seem to be saying what you think it’s saying.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

headman13:

Charity is always an issue. “Faith, hope, charity endure, these three, but the greatest of these is charity.”
ever.

I thought the greatest of these was faith…alone.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[brianberean]

Catholic4aReasn:

The wording here isn’t the clearest, but it certainly seems to say that the good works that the justified perform are through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ.

This statement doesn’t seem to be saying what you think it’s saying.

In Christ,
Nancy

I don’t see how you can’t see it. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Brian

 

[headman13]

Corpus Cristi:

Okay, I’ll be kind, I’ll be curtious, I’ll be charitable. The only thing I would really like for you to do, is learn Catholic teaching, and then, if you’re not satisfied, go knock it, but please, don’t talk bad about something you don’t know about.

If you will refer to my original posting, friend, I was not knocking ANYthing and to the contrary to what you say did not say anything bad about the Catholic church or anything else. You were the one who took exception to my posting. I suggested that the young gentleman consult the recent Catholic-Lutheran agreement on Justification, a document signed by a busload of Catholic bishops and Lutheran worthies. I was rejoicing that we had learned to discuss things with each other and were looking for things we could agree on, rather than things which divide us. In the extremely anti- Christian world in which we live, I think that is important. I regret that that seems to be a foreign concept to you. This has been my point all along, a lesson I trust you will learn as you mature, that persons can disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[MariaG]

Brian,

While I respect the fact that you want to “agree to disagree” I will still try one more time.
As Nancy said, the good works that the justified perform are through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ. And because the works are through Christ, they will bring us reward in heaven. As well as it is alluding to the fact that when we respond to the grace that God gives us, it makes us more receptive to receiving even more grace. Let me highlight the same words differently: You seem to be stuck on the word of merit and good works. Focus on where these things come from.

the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs** through** the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ

And because the works are done through Christ to say that a person:

does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema.

will not be rewarded for the work of Christ, work that is only possible through God and because of what Christ did for us, that person is an anathema.

And have you read the tract I posted? You have asked absolutely no questions about it. Since it is 100% completely about this topic, and explains this so much better than I ever could, it makes me wonder why you haven’t at least brought any quotes from that article to discuss. Have you even read it? It is not long. And if you have read it, but you think it doesn’t relate then I truly will have to say we will have to “agree to disagree”.
God Bless,
Maria

 

[headman13]

Catholic4aReasn:

I thought the greatest of these was faith…alone.

In Christ,
Nancy

Nancy, pardon me for correcting you, but no, 1 Corinthians 13 is quite clear, “the greatest of these is charity” St. Paul says " Now I will show you a more excellent way, If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal…though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains and have not charity, I am nothing…though I give my body to be burned and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing…charity never fails…" That’s the Authorized Version of 1611, you realize of course that “charity” and “love” are the same word in Greek. After 30 years as a pastor I can tell you, Charity/Love towards one another is the greatest gift the Savior can give us. It’s a shame not to see more of it all around.