The protestants are actually members of the Catholic Church !?

[SteveVH]

Thankfully, we don’t believe that either! I know that God intends all of his children to come to full communion with him. How this happens is a mystery to me!

The Lutheran concept of free will when if comes to salvation is quite the rabbit hole of paradoxes and mysteries all trying to be wrapped up in a human language that seemingly always fails.

The running joke I have with my pastor is that “the only time Lutherans have free will is when we’re talking about free will.” We all chuckle, but it’s a nervous type of chuckle because we’re all wondering if we had enough free to laugh freely.

The Catholic belief is that God never interferes in our free will. Sin could not exist without free will, nor could love. I am unfamiliar with the Lutheran take on free will other than a vague knowledge that you believe our free will was somehow diminished after the fall. We would agree that our intellect was darkened and our will was diminished insofar as having control over the flesh. As to the choices we make according to our free will, however, we are still culpable.

 

[benjohnson]

I am unfamiliar with the Lutheran take on free will other than a vague knowledge that you believe our free will was somehow diminished after the fall.

The big hang up with Lutherans is that we should never be anything other than entirely grateful that we find ourselves in Grace though Faith.

That we should never think that “we brought ourselves to the Lord.” Instead we should say that for some unmerited reason, God has given us the faith that we find ourselves having and thankfully he has given us grace in kind.

Generally, if I can distill it, Lutherans should be loathe to say “I found God”, but instead should say “God found me.”

Again, I’m probably wrong in all this, so any other Lutheran should feel free to correct me. And in practice, this concept doesn’t come up much at all as it usually doesn’t have much application to a life lived in faith.

EDIT: We would also agree that God gives us free will, but only add the caveat that our free will is for things that are beneath us. We just reserve for God the things that are above us, and we would say that a true saving faith in God is above us, and hence also a gift from God.

 

[SteveVH]

The big hang up with Lutherans is that we should never be anything other than entirely grateful that we find ourselves in Grace though Faith.

That we should never think that “we brought ourselves to the Lord.” Instead we should say that for some unmerited reason, God has given us the faith that we find ourselves having and thankfully he has given us grace in kind.

Generally, if I can distill it, Lutherans should be loathe to say “I found God”, but instead should say “God found me.”

Again, I’m probably wrong in all this, so any other Lutheran should feel free to correct me. And in practice, this concept doesn’t come up much at all as it usually doesn’t have much application to a life lived in faith.

EDIT: We would also agree that God gives us free will, but only add the caveat that our free will is for things that are beneath us. We just reserve for God the things that are above us, and we would say that a true saving faith in God is above us, and hence also a gift from God.

All faith is a gift from God and we believe that God draws all people to himself. As for our free will being only for things beneath us, do you not consider that it is through our free will that we choose to love God and neighbor, or not? Love is certainly not beneath us, but rather the very essence of God himself. If we are not free to “choose” then we cannot be culpable where sin is concerned.

 

[manualman]

Ben, there are certainly worse mistakes to make than to place excessive focus on the sovereignty of God! The problem in our culture today is usually rather the opposite: people seem to think God exists to serve them…

 

[benjohnson]

All faith is a gift from God and we believe that God draws all people to himself.

Amen!

As for our free will being only for things beneath us, do you not consider that it is through our free will that we choose to love God and neighbor, or not?

Remember… we’re going into really fine detail here, so it’s not that I’m saying that anything your are saying is wrong, only that we silly Lutherans just have a different approach. There should be no practical difference, in that if you find a Lutheran not quite behaving up to Catholic standards, then the problem is in the Lutheran.

We would say that your faithful love for your neighbor is a response to the Grace that God gave you, and that while you can chose to sin and are responsible for it, you don’t get any credit for presenting yourself to the Lord; In that his love is infinite, and while our faith may be strong, his love and grace is always infinitely bigger.

Remember when you first understood the concept of infinity?

That even the largest number you could think of way always going to be infinitesimally smaller than infinity? That sort of how we view our free will when it comes to choosing to have faith.

Love is certainly not beneath us, but rather the very essence of God himself. If we are not free to “choose” then we cannot be culpable where sin is concerned.

I think we’re sort of at the dividing line here - in that Lutherans are not quite sure where the boundary is between God’s love and our own responding love. We choose to love as best we can, but we say that any love we give is in response to God’s love.

 

[hn160]

The Catholic belief is that God never interferes in our free will. Sin could not exist without free will, nor could love. I am unfamiliar with the Lutheran take on free will other than a vague knowledge that you believe our free will was somehow diminished after the fall. We would agree that our intellect was darkened and our will was diminished insofar as having control over the flesh. As to the choices we make according to our free will, however, we are still culpable.

Luther’s Bondage of the Will is a good read.

 

[SteveVH]

Amen!

Remember… we’re going into really fine detail here, so it’s not that I’m saying that anything your are saying is wrong, only that we silly Lutherans just have a different approach. There should be no practical difference, in that if you find a Lutheran not quite behaving up to Catholic standards, then the problem is in the Lutheran.

We would say that your faithful love for your neighbor is a response to the Grace that God gave you, and that while you can chose to sin and are responsible for it, you don’t get any credit for presenting yourself to the Lord; In that his love is infinite, and while our faith may be strong, his love and grace is always infinitely bigger.

Remember when you first understood the concept of infinity?

That even the largest number you could think of way always going to be infinitesimally smaller than infinity? That sort of how we view our free will when it comes to choosing to have faith.

I think we’re sort of at the dividing line here - in that Lutherans are not quite sure where the boundary is between God’s love and our own responding love. We choose to love as best we can, but we say that any love we give is in response to God’s love.

Ben, I don’t think there is anything with which I disagree in what you said. We believe that even when we pray that it is a prompting of the Holy Spirit and not of ourselves. And I would also agree that we have nothing of ourselves to offer to God that is not already His. All that we are has come from Him and we truly have nothing of which to boast.

Bless you my brother.

 

[nitesnake]

Most protestants believe sincerely, that many of the teaching of the Catholic Church is against the bible, hence it’s impossible for them to know that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ.
Is my argument valid? Please enlighten me if I am wrong. Thanks!

You are correct. Protestants will be saved. From #1260 of the CCC:

“…Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved…”

 

[TEPO]

You are correct. Protestants will be saved. From #1260 of the CCC:

“…Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved…”

What is the catholic definition of “ignorant”…?

…also, the CCC uses the word “can”, while you used the word “will”.

 

[SteveVH]

What is the catholic definition of “ignorant”…?

Not knowing.

 

[TEPO]

Not knowing.

What about ‘ignoring’. Some people might see it that way and come to a different conclusion.

 

[nitesnake]

What about ‘ignoring’. Some people might see it that way and come to a different conclusion.

But you seem to be ignoring the CCC. The Catholic church is not some arrogant little club that doles out salvation. Everyone gets a shot at it. You should be happy about that.

 

[fbl9]

What about ‘ignoring’. Some people might see it that way and come to a different conclusion.

Some have been raised in this manner, taught to ingore what the Catholic Church teaches.
“i don’t want to hear it.” the teaching of the catholic church from the lip of a catholic. They just won’t accept what is told to them.
i feel that , to what extent did one resit God’s promtings to the Church, would be the wilfull iignoring.

 

[crazydays08]

Alright, so I am a Protestant. I found these forums a couple days ago. I had recently read the book Falling Upward by Richard Rohr, a Catholic. Great book. His perspective definitely piqued my interest on the Catholic faith, so I have been looking through these forums for more knowledge. I was always told that Catholics worship Mary, which I found is not true from these forums. I was also told that Catholics are forgiven by a priest, when in fact the priest is merely acknowledging God’s forgiveness (hope I got that right). What I have found so far is that I really like the Catholic take on things, just about everything has aligned with my beliefs. There are a few areas that I still want to look into further, including the current topic. From what I am reading, it sounds like Catholics believe that in order to go to heaven, you have to be in communion with the Catholic Church.

They don’t believe in real presence so they don’t have mass; they don’t believe in the authority of the Pope; they are anti the BVM, etc… nevertheless, they actually are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church

Isn’t this the same kind of argument Peter and Paul got into. I thought Jesus said that whoever believes in Him shall have everlasting life. NOT whoever believes in Him AND attends mass, AND believes in the authority of the Pope, AND is anti BVM (whatever that means). I definitely believe that Mass and the Pope are great things, but are they contingent upon eternity? The thief on the cross next to Jesus didn’t do any of these things, yet Jesus said he would be with him in heaven. The thief simply believed. Now obviously there’s more than just believing, but I am just clarifying that there was no Catholic Church, no Pope, no Mass. I am curious if Catholics believe that you have to be a “Member” of the Catholic Church to go to heaven.

There are a lot of rumors about the Catholic beliefs out there. I am still intrigued by the community feel, the deeper relationship, and the accountability found in the Catholic Church and want to learn more.

Great Forums by the way.

 

[TEPO]

I am curious if Catholics believe that you have to be a “Member” of the Catholic Church to go to heaven.

No, the Catholic Church doesn’t teach that, so that’s not what we believe. I see Catholic membership as nothing more than a tool for achieving my goals… Goals that other, more pious people have achieved outside the Church.

 

[TEPO]

But you seem to be ignoring the CCC. The Catholic church is not some arrogant little club that doles out salvation. Everyone gets a shot at it. You should be happy about that.

Well, I’m not at all happy if someone chooses to ‘ignore’ the Church and it’s teachings because they do not believe that this or that are actually sins.

I’d be more happy if they ignored the Church because they were told by somebody that Catholics worship Mary… That would be more in line with the Catholic definition of ‘ignorant’… Just saying.

 

[manualman]

…
Isn’t this the same kind of argument Peter and Paul got into. I thought Jesus said that whoever believes in Him shall have everlasting life. NOT whoever believes in Him AND attends mass, AND believes in the authority of the Pope, AND is anti BVM (whatever that means). I definitely believe that Mass and the Pope are great things, but are they contingent upon eternity? The thief on the cross next to Jesus didn’t do any of these things, yet Jesus said he would be with him in heaven. The thief simply believed. Now obviously there’s more than just believing, but I am just clarifying that there was no Catholic Church, no Pope, no Mass. I am curious if Catholics believe that you have to be a “Member” of the Catholic Church to go to heaven.

Welcome to the foum! Like “Mary worship” and other common distortions of catholicism, you’ll understand this issue if you keep at it. Not necessarily agree, mind you, but understand. I get the sense you aren’t quite there yet.

Catholics recognize that God does EVERYTHING for valid reasons. When you read the Old Testament, what do you see? You see that God ordains prophets and leaders to be a reliable source of teaching and leadership. The ancient Israelites don’t all just get the covenant and then go their own way and figure it out for themselves. God KNOWS that one facet of fallen human nature is our capacity for rationalization and self-delusion. Christ chose 12 apostles specifically to establish a visible church, one that teaches with authority, one that resolves disputes. It was a GIFT He gave us so that we need not wonder which voice claiming to proclaim the “full” gospel actually is. The structure of the church is not a human invention. If it were, it would have collapsed into ruin centuries ago. The Church doesn’t exist to shackle God, but as a gift to humanity. The thief was saved by Grace in an extraordinary manner. It CAN happen. But God designed the church to address the failings of human nature and make it EASIER, not harder for fallen man to be saved than just by figuring it out on his own.

 

[benjohnson]

All that we are has come from Him and we truly have nothing of which to boast.

Bless you my brother.

That’s true wisdom right there!

Bless you too!

 

[JaKael02]

The Church on earth is the Church militant because we are in a spiritual battle. The Church in purgatory is the Church suffering. The Church in heaven is the Church triumphant and the destiny of all Christians.

The mystical body of Christ is the Church in all of its forms. Christ is the head. We are the Body. We are, then, intrinsically united (being one body) with the saints in heaven, thus the doctrine of the “Communion of Saints” which is why we can ask for their intercession on our behalf. The uniting factor in all of this is the Eucharist which makes us truly one.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:

•The members of the Church are bound together by a supernatural life communicated to them by Christ through the sacraments (John 15:5). Christ is the centre and source of life to Whom all are united, and Who endows each one with gifts fitting him for his position in the body (John 15:7-12). These graces, through which each is equipped for his work, form it into an organized whole, whose parts are knit together as though by a system of ligaments and joints (John 15:16; Colossians 2:19).
•Through them, too, the Church has its growth and increase, growing in extension as it spreads through the world, and intensively as the individual Christian develops in himself the likeness of Christ (John 15:13-15).
•In virtue of this union the Church is the fulness or complement (pleroma) of Christ (Ephesians 1:23). It forms one whole with Him; and the Apostle even speaks of the Church as “Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:12).
•This union between head and members is conserved and nourished by the Holy Eucharist. Through this sacrament our incorporation into the Body of Christ is alike outwardly symbolized and inwardly actualized; “We being many are one bread, one body; for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Corinthians 10:17).

This is helpful. Thank you. My next question by extension would be: If a significant amount of the members of the Church militant are only part of the catholic Church “imperfectly”, then how does the imperfect members relate to the Mystical Body of Christ?

I mean imperfect by protestants & cafeteria Catholics?

Kindly - James

 

[SteveVH]

This is helpful. Thank you. My next question by extension would be: If a significant amount of the members of the Church militant are only part of the catholic Church “imperfectly”, then how does the imperfect members relate to the Mystical Body of Christ?

I mean imperfect by protestants & cafeteria Catholics?

Kindly - James

If one has been baptized they are part of the mystical body of Christ. We are all imperfect members because we all sin, some to a greater degree than others. The degree of imperfection varies with each individual, therefore I cannot say that I am saved simply because I am a Catholic. I must live out the Christian life, to the end, according to the teachings of the Church, putting flesh on the words of the Gospel.

Subsequent to Baptism we are all free to squander the grace given to us. This is the importance of the sacraments of the Eucharist and Reconciliation; to fill our jar once again with God’s grace. When we sin, we harm the entire body of Christ just as diseased physical body parts affect the entire body. Those who are in imperfect communion with the Catholic Church are akin to a body part which for some reason is not functioning in the manner for which it was intended. Division in the Church wounds the body of Christ, but so does a Catholic who is not living out his or her faith. But a part of the body that is not functioning properly is still a part of the body.

Wow. I hope all of that makes sense and comes even close to answering your question.