T
timz
Guest
I apologize that I haven’t got a chance to reply recently (work has been a mess). I will definitely get back to this soon and give everyone the replies they deserve.
Thanks,
Tim
Thanks,
Tim
- Status
A
AquinasXVI
Guest
You hit a great point Tim.
You see Catholic Theology is all encompassing…thus all things are organically related like a human body. All of the teachings are cohesive to each other…so for us to simplify we run the risk of heresy (mistaking one aspect of truth as the whole of truth). You will see this when you read the Catechism…the paragraphs are numbered because they interweave with each other. In the end it is simple as simple as John 6. But the complexity is a fitting response to the complexity of the broken human nature… so to speak; we have many medicines for the many illnesses.
What I’ve noticed when talking religion with my non catholic friends is that the syntax that we use are different. Like Apple and PC computers. Different language. But (not as a slight) my personal observation is that the lack of theological rigor lead them to believe many shallow things in scripture…whereas we have 2000 years of tried and tested theology that hold up under true philosophical testing. And it’s still developing. Like when JPII came up with the Theology of the Body…it can be absorbed in catholic theology and not upset orthodoxy but rather actually enrichen it. I do not see this continuous deepening of theology in protestant thought.
Well, stick around and hope we can help you with questions of our faith.
God bless.
in XT.
M
MariaG
Guest
You made some very good points:thumbsup: , but I would disagree with this last one. Altough they are not *deepening *from a Catholic point of view they are rediscovering and deepening thier Protestants faith, or example, through the recovery and “discovery” of Mary and Lent and other Traditional “Catholic” practices.
God Bless,
Maria
A
AquinasXVI
Guest
Thanks. What I meant by that is that their dogmas doesn’t develop maturely from their founders’. As for rediscovering orthodox christianity…as GKC progress is only progress when the object is moving from a fixed point to another fixed point…if you see them coming closer to orthoxy then by all means, come on over!
in XT.
A
AquinasXVI
Guest
Tim:
As for the simplicity that you speak of, another point of it is that should the sincere Christian really try to understand and apply what Christ said, then it cannot be simplified as you speak or as Protestant formulations of Sola Fide would prescribe.
Christ did and said many complicated things, the beatitudes, the commandments, the picking up of the cross, the eating of his flesh, the parables, handing of the keys, the commission, baptism etc.etc. To Catholics, all these things simply add up to the reality of Jesus Christ…but the reality of Jesus Christ is very complex.
Thanks again.
in XT.
As for the simplicity that you speak of, another point of it is that should the sincere Christian really try to understand and apply what Christ said, then it cannot be simplified as you speak or as Protestant formulations of Sola Fide would prescribe.
Christ did and said many complicated things, the beatitudes, the commandments, the picking up of the cross, the eating of his flesh, the parables, handing of the keys, the commission, baptism etc.etc. To Catholics, all these things simply add up to the reality of Jesus Christ…but the reality of Jesus Christ is very complex.
Thanks again.
in XT.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Faith alone; read of the paralytic in mark 2:5, or of the criminal on the cross with Jesus. No sacrements, no good works… faith alone.
E
Elzee
Guest
If I remember right, the criminal on the cross didn’t just have faith alone - he acted on that faith by his words and defense of Jesus - that’s a ‘good work’.
And, if I remember right also, the woman who was healed by touching Jesus’ garment had faith yes, great faith, but you’ll notice it was her acting upon that faith - reaching for the garment (a ‘work’) - that initiated the healing and got Jesus’ attention. Same goes for the centurion who asked for his servant to be healed…he didn’t “just” have faith - he acted upon that faith and lived it out by asking Jesus.
As for the paralytic in Mark 2:5 - it was their acting upon their faith that once again, initiated the healing. It wasn’t “just faith”.
And finally, Paul tells us ‘if we have faith that can move mountains but have not love, we are nothing’ (excuse my paraphrasing - I don’t have my bible with me right now). But, the point is, he doesn’t say ‘if we have faith that can move mountains but not love, that’s okay - you’re still saved’.
I won’t quote James for you, even though you can figure out that’s where I’d go next!!
When I read these passages, it is hard for me to understand how anyone can say ‘faith alone’. Living our faith is the dominant message throughout the entire bible - both OT and NT.
When you think about these passages above, can you explain what makes you still say ‘faith alone’?
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Works brings on faith, faith brings on salvation. I read the book of James as a guide for the people who try to be slugs essentially thinking that just because Christ saved me I dont need to do good works. When in reality Christ knows if we know we are saved we will desire to do good works in his name. What of the issue of baptism for the thief or the paralytic they were saved by Christ himself and at that point were not baptized, this as I see it is why baptist such as I, see baptism not as a sacriment rather a proclamation of faith. Yet Catholics and many protestants see it as necessary for salvation as I understand. This is a great thread to learn denominational diffrences.
J
John_Henry
Guest
Simple. To get to heaven, a Catholic must repent of his sins, turn to Jesus Christ in faith, be baptized for the remission of sins, and live a life of obedience to Jesus Christ. As Catholics can be expected to fail at times in living a life of obedience, Jesus Christ has given us some sacraments to help us. Namely, the Eucharist, which conveys the grace to carry out our daily duties, and Penance, which is the sure means of remission of post-baptismal sin. The merits of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are applied to us in these (and other) sacraments.
The varying answers you have so far received are either incomplete, or different ways of saying the same thing.
I
Ignatius
Guest
That’s not what Scripture says. The only place where “faith alone” is use in the Sacred Scripture is where it says. “by works a man is justified, and not by faith alone.”
And Jesus Christ Himself said, “If you love me you will keep my commandments.” and “Not everyone who cries ‘Lord, Lord’ will be saved, but he who does the will of my Father.”
And paul tells us that “God will give to each according to what he has done. To those who by persistance in dooing seek glory, honor and immortality, He will give eternal life.”
Pax vobiscum.
Your brother in Christ.
J
joshua_b
Guest
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Here in lies our diffrences, timz asked how we would share Christ and salvation with one who was unfamiliar and as a baptist I explained my viewpoint, I’m not a theologian or an apologetic, just
a brother in Christ both wanting to learn and share, but I am curious how the thief on the cross was saved without baptism from a Roman Catholic standpoint.
Peace!
a brother in Christ both wanting to learn and share, but I am curious how the thief on the cross was saved without baptism from a Roman Catholic standpoint.
Peace!
N
Nicene
Guest
Baptism of Desire.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
J
John_Henry
Guest
The Church teaches that baptism is normatively necessary to enter into a state of grace. However, those who desire to be united to Christ in the ways he had prescribed, yet die before that opportunity arises, are said to have been baptized by desire. Such would apply to the thief on the cross, or to catechumens who died prior to the Easter Vigil, which is when they are baptized.
J
joshua_b
Guest
You are right indeed that herein lies our differences. We believe that the Catholic Church is the church that Christ established here on earth to make available to humanity the full and normative means to attain salvation. That does not mean that God can not and does not save anyone who is not in visible communion with the Catholic Church during their lifetime. I will not debate Catholic Doctrine, discipline or theology here, as that is not the topic of discussion. I do feel this is a question that holds a valid underlying sentiment though so I will respond in kind…
J
joshua_b
Guest
Given the fact that as a Catholic, I believe that Christ gave the full and normative means to Salvation to humanity in the form of the Catholic Church,whose Doctrine has remained unchanged since the time of the Apostles, my answer as a Catholic, to the OP, would naturally be to join the Church. Now, my challenge to you, if you choose to accept it…
The Catholic Church claims to have the “fullness of Truth” and to be the Church founded by Jesus. That is a pretty substantial claim without a doubt. But, we are to seek Truth, and my challenge to you is to research this claim…and to put it under as much scrutiny as you wish. The two stipulations are (1) that you are to seek out all answers to your own questions and (2) you are to go to the original source for all answers. For example, if you don’t believe that infant baptism was the faith of the Apostles, research the Catholic rebuttal from Catholic sources…as many as possible and as far back into history as you can find. I am a “revert” to Catholocism, and as for me, the more intense my scrutiny of the Catholic Church, and the deeper I dug for answers to my own questions, the more the claims of the Church were substantiated. Think of it this way…if I am wrong, then you have deepened your faith that much more, and gotten that much closer to the truth. If I am right, then you will see the fullness of Truth in a way you never knew before. Either way, you are closer to the Truth…its a win/win proposition.
The Catholic Church claims to have the “fullness of Truth” and to be the Church founded by Jesus. That is a pretty substantial claim without a doubt. But, we are to seek Truth, and my challenge to you is to research this claim…and to put it under as much scrutiny as you wish. The two stipulations are (1) that you are to seek out all answers to your own questions and (2) you are to go to the original source for all answers. For example, if you don’t believe that infant baptism was the faith of the Apostles, research the Catholic rebuttal from Catholic sources…as many as possible and as far back into history as you can find. I am a “revert” to Catholocism, and as for me, the more intense my scrutiny of the Catholic Church, and the deeper I dug for answers to my own questions, the more the claims of the Church were substantiated. Think of it this way…if I am wrong, then you have deepened your faith that much more, and gotten that much closer to the truth. If I am right, then you will see the fullness of Truth in a way you never knew before. Either way, you are closer to the Truth…its a win/win proposition.
F
Flopfoot
Guest
Timz actually asked “As a Catholic you reply?” so I don’t think he was interested in Baptists’ view on salvation, that might be better discussed in a separate thread.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Joshua; being at the Catholic answers web page a couple hours everyday I am learning, seeking direction to answers and so forth.
Flopfoot; after rereading you are right it asks Catholics; I digress.
Martin
Flopfoot; after rereading you are right it asks Catholics; I digress.
Martin
J
joshua_b
Guest
I am happy to hear that. I pray for you and God bless you and guide you in your journey of seeking Truth.
V
VociMike
Guest
Yeah. One could just as easily say to him “…if you’re lucky enough not to backslide”.
- Status