The Westminster Confession of Faith and Baptismal Regeneration

[PRmerger]

This has been beaten to death on a thousand threads, so let’s whack at it, shall we?

The Catholic Church maintains that a baptism of desire is good enough if someone has not been, ah, wetted. And you already agreed that if God does nothing then nothing happens. So if God does everything else, what is there that is necessary for man to do? Since He can ‘cover’ for someone who is ‘dry’, what is the necessity?

Short answer: the intention (that is, the…er…desire) of the human person is what is necessary.

IOW: We can’t be saved without Him, but He won’t save us without US.

 

[Tomyris]

Short answer: the intention (that is, the…er…desire) of the human person is what is necessary.

IOW: We can’t be saved without Him, but He won’t save us without US.

Okay…Since you the Catholic are agreeing water baptism is not necessary for salvation I’ll meet you and I the Reformed will say that God wants our willing obedience and a free return of love from us, as we have free will.

Now everyone is confused.

 

[PRmerger]

Okay…Since you the Catholic are agreeing water baptism is not necessary for salvation

Indeed.

And did you know that the Catholic Church is so committed to agreeing that water baptism is not absolutely necessary for salvation that we have a feast day dedicated to thousands of souls who are declared to be in heaven but were never baptized.

Do you know what that day is?

Hint: it’s in December.

I’ll meet you and I the Reformed will say that God wants our willing obedience and a free return of love from us, as we have free will.

Now everyone is confused.

I certainly now am! I always thought that you believed that you were unable to resist the calling of God if you were a member of the elect??

 

[Per_Crucem]

Indeed.

And did you know that the Catholic Church is so committed to agreeing that water baptism is not absolutely necessary for salvation that we have a feast day dedicated to thousands of souls who are declared to be in heaven but were never baptized.

Do you know what that day is?

Hint: it’s in December.

The Feast of St. Damasus!!!

I certainly now am! I always thought that you believed that you were unable to resist the calling of God if you were a member of the elect??

Kinda like Megatron.

 

[PRmerger]

The Feast of St. Damasus!!!

Kinda like Megatron.

 

[Tomyris]

Okay…Since you the Catholic are agreeing water baptism is not necessary for salvation I’ll meet you and I the Reformed will say that God wants our willing obedience and a free return of love from us, as we have free will. .

I always thought that you believed that you were unable to resist the calling of God if you were a member of the elect??

Both are true. What is the problem?

I believe in God’s totally unlimited, free, total and complete sovereignty, that nothing exists or can exist or can continue to exist without His present and continual sustenance and support.

He also created man with free will, sadly now broken in the natural. Man cannot and will not choose God on his own, either initially or continually. We must now be trained, healed and sanctified in order to choose freely.

And we certainly resist God’s will! The elect will however make it to heaven, every last one of them, predestined before the foundation of the world, by the grace of God and a free decision to follow Him.

It’s called paradox.

 

[PRmerger]

Both are true. What is the problem?

I believe in God’s totally unlimited, free, total and complete sovereignty, that nothing exists or can exist or can continue to exist without His present and continual sustenance and support.

He also created man with free will, sadly now broken in the natural. Man cannot and will not choose God on his own, either initially or continually. We must now be trained, healed and sanctified in order to choose freely.

And we certainly resist God’s will! The elect will however make it to heaven, every last one of them, predestined before the foundation of the world, by the grace of God and a free decision to follow Him.

It’s called paradox.

“Paradox” and “tension” are 2 favorites words among the Reformed I am finding.

NB: I don’t have a problem with that. In fact, there are (a few) ideas in Catholicism which also call for the word “tension”.

However, I feel that the Catholic Church best resolves the paradox and tension. More light is shed through the lens of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition than with Scripture alone.

 

[Tomyris]

“Paradox” and “tension” are 2 favorites words among the Reformed I am finding.

NB: I don’t have a problem with that. In fact, there are (a few) ideas in Catholicism which also call for the word “tension”.

They are fun words.

However, I feel that the Catholic Church best resolves the paradox and tension. More light is shed through the lens of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition than with Scripture alone.

Really? I hadn’t noticed you thought that way.

 

[Tomyris]

“Paradox” and “tension” are 2 favorites words among the Reformed I am finding.

NB: I don’t have a problem with that. In fact, there are (a few) ideas in Catholicism which also call for the word “tension”.

However, I feel that the Catholic Church best resolves the paradox and tension. More light is shed through the lens of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition than with Scripture alone.

Also, explain how “Sacred Tradition” would improve my post: how what I wrote is deficient in light of ST. Bear in mind

• I will concede there is much excellent intellectual work that the Church and individual theologians have done
• There is much knowledge of apostolic times that is not in Scripture
• Not all of it is right, or authoritative, even if it worth looking at and considering

 

[PRmerger]

Also, explain how “Sacred Tradition” would improve my post: how what I wrote is deficient in light of ST. Bear in mind

• I will concede there is much excellent intellectual work that the Church and individual theologians have done
• There is much knowledge of apostolic times that is not in Scripture
• Not all of it is right, or authoritative, even if it worth looking at and considering

Well, the primary way that ST informs the Catholic view of soteriology is in that it denies the Calvinistic view of salvation. Calvin’s view was an innovation that was never taught by the Church.

It appeared after 1500 years of ST proclaiming that God wills all to go to heaven and that He saves all of us, but He will not save us without US and our cooperation. And we are always free to refuse to cooperate. Always. (That is, until death.)

 

[Tomyris]

Well, the primary way that ST informs the Catholic view of soteriology is in that it denies the Calvinistic view of salvation. Calvin’s view was an innovation that was never taught by the Church.

It appeared after 1500 years of ST proclaiming that God wills all to go to heaven and that He saves all of us, but He will not save us without US and our cooperation. And we are always free to refuse to cooperate. Always. (That is, until death.)

Why do you keep bringing up Calvin? Also, it is very simplistic to say that he had a ‘view’: he had nuanced positions on a variety of issues, And what did I say that made you think that what I wrote was on ‘his’ side of the line rather than ‘yours’?

There is free will, and predestination. Both are found in Catholicism. Do you reject predestination?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

*]Not all of it is right, or authoritative, even if it worth looking at and considering

Correct. But you are missing another important part that tells us what is authoritative and what isn’t:

Teaching Office (Magisterium). [Not a single dissenting individual and those in allegiance with him]

In light of Matthew 28 - Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition are taught by the Magisterium.

In regards to your other post regarding predestination - Yes, there are basically 2 views within Catholicism: Molinism and Thomism.

What you will find absent and anathematized is double predestination in regards to damnation.

 

[PRmerger]

Why do you keep bringing up Calvin?

Because it is impossible to discuss the Reformed position without him. I did a search (albeit cursory) of the Reformed churches and every single website mentioned Calvin.

crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/reformed-accent/what-reform
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Reformed_churches
gospelofgracechurch.com/recommendedreading.html
reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/BelgicConfession.html

Also, it is very simplistic to say that he had a ‘view’: he had nuanced positions on a variety of issues, And what did I say that made you think that what I wrote was on ‘his’ side of the line rather than ‘yours’?

I wouldn’t have a problem with saying that what you wrote was the Reformed position (as opposed to the Calvinist position), and not the Catholic position.

There is free will, and predestination. Both are found in Catholicism. Do you reject predestination?

I reject predestination the way that you, Calvin and the Reformed churches describe predestination.

I accept and proclaim that which the Scriptures, as viewed through the lens of the faith which gave us these Scriptures proclaims regarding predestination. Namely:

Originally posted by the Council of Trent: “The Synod furthermore declares, that in adults, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of God, through Jesus Christ, that is to say, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace: in such sort that, while God touches the heart of man by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, neither is man himself utterly without doing anything while he receives that inspiration, forasmuch as he is also able to reject it; yet is he not able, by his own free will, without the grace of God, to move himself unto justice in His sight. Whence, when it is said in the sacred writings: ‘Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you,’ we are admonished of our liberty; and when we answer; ‘Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted,’ we confess that we are prevented by the grace of God.”

 

[Tomyris]

Because it is impossible to discuss the Reformed position without him.

Not true. I’ve seen it done many a time. I can’t recall the last time I heard it mentioned at church.

I did a search (albeit cursory) of the Reformed churches and every single website mentioned Calvin.

crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/reformed-accent/what-reform
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Reformed_churches
gospelofgracechurch.com/recommendedreading.html
reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/BelgicConfession.html

proves nothing.

I wouldn’t have a problem with saying that what you wrote was the Reformed position (as opposed to the Calvinist position), and not the Catholic position.
Please identify exactly where what I wrote differs from the Catholic position.

I reject predestination the way that you, Calvin and the Reformed churches describe predestination.

Since you haven’t said where that is, I don’t know what you mean here.

I accept and proclaim that which the Scriptures, as viewed through the lens of the faith which gave us these Scriptures proclaims regarding predestination. Namely:

Where does that differ from what I have said?

 

[TRH1292]

Not true. I’ve seen it done many a time. I can’t recall the last time I heard it mentioned at church. proves nothing.

Please identify exactly where what I wrote differs from the Catholic position.Since you haven’t said where that is, I don’t know what you mean here.

He probably means the views expressed in The Westminster Confession of Faith, and Calvin Institutes, which I have previously quoted to you on this forum.

 

[Tomyris]

Correct. But you are missing another important part that tells us what is authoritative and what isn’t:

Teaching Office (Magisterium). [Not a single dissenting individual and those in allegiance with him]

In light of Matthew 28 - Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition are taught by the Magisterium.

In regards to your other post regarding predestination - Yes, there are basically 2 views within Catholicism: Molinism and Thomism.

What you will find absent and anathematized is double predestination in regards to damnation.

Most discussions on CAF boil down to one on the authority of the Magisterium.

Do Catholics not believe in reprobration? Aquinas said yes to reprobation (Summa I,23,3), which is not the same thing as negative predestination. I don’t accept double predestination but I do accept the idea of reprobation.

 

[TRH1292]

Why do you keep bringing up Calvin? Also, it is very simplistic to say that he had a ‘view’: he had nuanced positions on a variety of issues, And what did I say that made you think that what I wrote was on ‘his’ side of the line rather than ‘yours’?

There is free will, and predestination. Both are found in Catholicism. Do you reject predestination?

Yes, both are definitely found in Catholicism. But predestination akin to what is present in the Reformed Tradition does not exist in the Catholic Church, and “Free Will” as expressed in the classical reformed confessions is not the same thing as Free Will from a Catholic perspective.

 

[TRH1292]

Most discussions on CAF boil down to one on the authority of the Magisterium.

Do Catholics not believe in reprobration? Aquinas said yes to reprobation (Summa I,23,3), which is not the same thing as negative predestination. I don’t accept double predestination but I do accept the idea of reprobation.

It depends on what you mean by reprobation. If you mean reprobation akin to something taught by Calvin, then no. If you mean the idea that God may pass over those who stubbornly refuse his graces, then yes. But it has to be careful constructed to avoid contradicting other teachings of the Church.

 

[Tomyris]

Yes, both are definitely found in Catholicism. But predestination akin to what is present in the Reformed Tradition does not exist in the Catholic Church, and “Free Will” as expressed in the classical reformed confessions is not the same thing as Free Will from a Catholic perspective.

It depends on what you mean by reprobation. If you mean reprobation akin to something taught by Calvin, then no. If you mean the idea that God may pass over those who stubbornly refuse his graces, then yes. But it has to be careful constructed to avoid contradicting other teachings of the Church.

This sounds like “yes, well, we believe in it, just not the way Calvin did.”

So it sounds to me like you are allowing Calvin to define your beliefs here.

 

[Tomyris]

It depends on what you mean by reprobation. If you mean reprobation akin to something taught by Calvin, then no. If you mean the idea that God may pass over those who stubbornly refuse his graces, then yes. But it has to be careful constructed to avoid contradicting other teachings of the Church.

If you observe, I referenced Aquinas’ definition of reprobation. It sounds exactly like what I have been taught on the subject. So if Calvin taught it, you don’t buy it?