Statement of faith

[jcrichton]

It’s pretty standard Evangelical stuff. In all likelihood whoever wants it signed got it from someone else, and would be startled to discover anyone would take issue with it.

Jesus is your personal Lord and Savior in the sense that He is Lord of your life and you are accountable to Him, and He is the one saving you (as opposed to, say, the Flying Sphaghetti Monster). That is not the same meaning as your personal butler, shoes or car. He owns you, you personally, as opposed to you being in a group where He does not know you or hold you to account. If you deny this statement to them then they would think you are denying Christ.

Hi!

The objection is that it presents a theology of “sola:” the Bible as the only Authority, a relationship with Christ alone, that it takes “trust” and not Faith in Jesus for one to gain Salvation…

This may seem sound to non-Catholics but Catholics cannot accept these tenets since they fall short of Apostolic Teaching.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Roseeurekacross]

It would not be considered an oath. They want to be sure the people in the organization are Christians and not theological liberals. If someone said they didn’t believe the Bible was God’s Word, or that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, this would exclude them.

It’s not meant to be an exhaustive treatise of doctrine.

Addendum: they may have had theological liberals in mind when they wrote this and didn’t realize it excludes Catholics. Or of course, the reverse. Or they wanted to exclude both.

What is a theological liberal?

 

[po18guy]

I would like to know if a Catholic could, in good conscience, sign the following statement of faith:

“I have received Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior and believe the Bible to be the only inspired infallible Word of God. I believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin and He died on the cross as the only atonement for our sins; that He rose from the dead; that He ascended to the Father’s right hand in Heaven, and will one day come back for those who trust in Him.”

If not, what would be the reason?

Thank you.

No! 1000X no. The bible as sole rule of faith is a man-made doctrine. It opposes the bible itself! Our Lord, Paul and the scriptures themselves testify to the Church which Christ founded. Rather, here is the Apostle’s Creed: What is wrong with it and why can you not sign it?

**

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son Our Lord,
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into Hell; the third day He rose again from the dead;
He ascended into Heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.
Amen.

**

 

[Tomyris]

I accept both the apostles’ and the Nicene Creeds. We generally confess one or another on Communion Sundays, and I have asked the pastor that we use the Nicene creed rather than the apostles’ creed. I have no problem with either. Perhaps that was not clear?

What I am saying is that endorsing the “statement of faith” PLUS either one of the two creeds above does not make the total package of statements Catholic. There is no statement in either of the above creeds that denies “and believe the Bible to be the only inspired infallible Word of God.”. You can point to belief in the Church, but it is also “according to the Scriptures”(Sola Scriptura Christians generally have no problem accepting either creed). So the phrase “and believe the Bible to be the only inspired infallible Word of God.” would clarify that the professing Christian rejects Sacred Tradition as the Word of God, or as part of the Word of God, however that goes. Pardon my Protestant ignorance. Hmmm. Now I am thinking that this creed may have a problem for those who produced it: is Jesus then NOT the infallible Word of God? (In the beginning was the Word…"). Is He not infallible or not the Word of God? What are they saying about Him with this exclusion? I would see a Catholic as being unable to accept the statement of faith plus any creed you add, unless it specifically overrides, modifies or somehow nullifies this phrase. Personally at this point I would point out this problem with it, and if they accept that as a problem, volunteer cheerfully to help rewrite it. That would be a game changer.

I have visited a number of churches that have cheerfully written their own statements of faith for everyone to sign, often written by people who really didn’t know what they were doing. Most of these have holes you could drive a truck through.

 

[Tomyris]

Speculation does not really help us but mentalmagicman should be able to offer clarification on their reasons and if not he may need to ask them before going forward.

At the very least MM needs to discuss it with them. That might give a very good idea of what things would be like after they get a signature on the dotted line.

 

[Todd977]

I would like to know if a Catholic could, in good conscience, sign the following statement of faith:

“I have received Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior and believe the Bible to be the only inspired infallible Word of God. I believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin and He died on the cross as the only atonement for our sins; that He rose from the dead; that He ascended to the Father’s right hand in Heaven, and will one day come back for those who trust in Him.”

If not, what would be the reason?

Thank you.

Which Bible? A 73-book Catholic Bible or a 66-book Protestant Bible?

I think signing such a statement of faith would be problematic for a Catholic because it identifies the Bible as “the only inspired infallible Word of God.” Catholics hold Sacred Tradition, those traditions taught by the Apostles “by word of mouth,” to be equally inspired. Catholics also hold that the Magisterium of the Church, i.e., Peter’s successor, the bishop of Rome, and the other bishops with him or the bishop of Rome alone can, if they choose to do so, teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals.

I think it would also be problematic for a Catholic to sign because it identifies Christ’s death on the cross as the only atonement for our sins. Christ’s death on the cross is indeed the only atonement for Original Sin and the eternal consequences of our mortal sins but there are various ways we can atone for the temporal consequences of our own sins, including prayer, fasting, almsgiving, indulgences, etc. This is true not only for the temporal consequences of our own sins but by those same ways we can also atone for the temporal consequences of the sins of the righteous dead in Purgatory, as they undergo their final sanctification before entering heaven, easing the suffering they are experiencing and hastening their sanctification process.

 

[jcrichton]

Which Bible? A 73-book Catholic Bible or a 66-book Protestant Bible?

I think signing such a statement of faith would be problematic for a Catholic because it identifies the Bible as “the only inspired infallible Word of God.” Catholics hold Sacred Tradition, those traditions taught by the Apostles “by word of mouth,” to be equally inspired. Catholics also hold that the Magisterium of the Church, i.e., Peter’s successor, the bishop of Rome, and the other bishops with him or the bishop of Rome alone can, if they choose to do so, teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals.

I think it would also be problematic for a Catholic to sign because it identifies Christ’s death on the cross as the only atonement for our sins. Christ’s death on the cross is indeed the only atonement for Original Sin and the eternal consequences of our mortal sins but there are various ways we can atone for the temporal consequences of our own sins, including prayer, fasting, almsgiving, indulgences, etc. This is true not only for the temporal consequences of our own sins but by those same ways we can also atone for the temporal consequences of the sins of the righteous dead in Purgatory, as they undergo their final sanctification before entering heaven, easing the suffering they are experiencing and hastening their sanctification process.

Hi, Todd!



…good explanation on atonement!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[mentalmagicman]

Thank you for all your responses. I’ll post replies to questions tomorrow.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Thank you for your responses. Although I stated that I didn’t want to discuss the question, I may want to discuss some of this further after I (hopefully) receive more responses.

I don’t see why people say that they don’t want to discuss the question yet they post it to begin with. Anyway no that is not something you should be saying or agreeing to.

 

[mentalmagicman]

I don’t see why people say that they don’t want to discuss the question yet they post it to begin with. Anyway no that is not something you should be saying or agreeing to.

Because discussion wasn’t/isn’t my purpose. I simply wanted to hear from members of this forum regarding my question.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

It is not required for a Catholic to sign any document to attemd a Church or Mass in Australia, is this different overseas?

 

[po18guy]

It is not required for a Catholic to sign any document to attemd a Church or Mass in Australia, is this different overseas?

The OP is testing to see if Catholics can hold to “bible alone” which, of course, requires us to embrace ignorance of the totality of reveled truth. I note with some amusement that Christian communities that just cannot adhere to a “creed” have substituted a malleable “Statement of belief” - which is a creed, but of their own formula.

 

[po18guy]

Because discussion wasn’t/isn’t my purpose. I simply wanted to hear from members of this forum regarding my question.

If you are seeking evidence that Catholics are not Protestant, we will most certainly give you that.

Rhetorical point for you to ponder: Since bible as sole or supreme rule of faith did not appear on the face of this earth either by the teaching of Christ, or by that of the Apostles, and was not seen for the first 1,500 years of the faith, I would first question the roots and validity of “bible alone.” Look at its fruits: rampant division - a guarantee that the Holy Spirit is not driving this doctrine.

 

[Tomyris]

The OP is testing to see if Catholics can hold to “bible alone” which, of course, requires us to embrace ignorance of the totality of reveled truth. I note with some amusement that Christian communities that just cannot adhere to a “creed” have substituted a malleable “Statement of belief” - which is a creed, but of their own formula.

I think he was asking an honest question. Why infer this motive?

 

[Bonnie]

To the OP -

My husband was asked to sign a similar statement when he was going to teach at a Protestant school. He refused & wrote his own statement. They accepted it, but the headmaster was surprisingly pro-Catholic. He & his family came to our parish for ashes every Ash Wednesday.

 

[po18guy]

I think he was asking an honest question. Why infer this motive?

Take a look and note the huge, qualifying “IF” as my first word. These are discussion forums and OP does not want to discuss. Don’t you find that just a bit odd? It is the 500th anniversary of the reformation. Combine that with the apparently intentional request if Catholics could/would agree to violate a core belief. What should I think? My spidey sense was tingling. Would you sign a statement that, in essence, repudiated Jean Calvin?

 

[mentalmagicman]

Take a look and note the huge, qualifying “IF” as my first word. These are discussion forums and OP does not want to discuss. Don’t you find that just a bit odd? It is the 500th anniversary of the reformation. Combine that with the apparently intentional request if Catholics could/would agree to violate a core belief. What should I think? My spidey sense was tingling. Would you sign a statement that, in essence, repudiated Jean Calvin?

I’m disappointed that my motives would be questioned. I asked my question in good faith.

Moving on. Wikipedia reports the following regarding St. John Bosco:

“While Bosco had been popularly known as the patron saint of illusionists, on 30 January 2002, Silvio Mantelli petitioned Pope John Paul II to formally declare St. John Bosco the Patron of Stage Magicians.[33] Catholic stage magicians who practice Gospel Magic venerate Bosco by offering free magic shows to underprivileged children on his feast day.[citation needed].”

The Fellowship of Christian Magicians is the organization that asks for potential members to agree with the Statement of Faith that I posted. There has been discussion in regard to whether a Catholic can agree or not. I was simply looking for responses. I didn’t originally come here to discuss. I would also like to hear from an ordained priest on this. Do any ever frequent this forum!

Thank you for your responses.

 

[hu324b]

I would remove the sola scripture part and replace it with:

My hope is in Jesus Christ
but with fear and trembling I am working out my salvation.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

. I would also like to hear from an ordained priest on this. Do any ever frequent this forum!

Thank you for your responses.

forums.catholic-questions.org/member.php?u=487805

 

[jcrichton]

It is not required for a Catholic to sign any document to attemd a Church or Mass in Australia, is this different overseas?

Hi, Rose!

…never heard of it!

…the only times I’ve heard of signing some “statement of faith” has always revolved around some Protestant organization or worship group… or during/after some “conversion” period (prayer, initiation, membership).

Our signature is of the heart… we practice it during each Mass: “I Believe in One God…” It is also proclaimed during our Baptism as we are joined to the Body of Christ, and when we welcome others in their Baptisms into the Body.

So we Believe in our hearts and Confess with our mouths that Jesus is Lord–no paperwork’s necessary!

Maran atha!

Angel