Theological Christians

[Inquiringperson]

I remember Michelle Arnold saying that theological Christians are believers, whereas ontological Christians are Christians due to Baptism. A person can be both a theological and an ontological Christian. This gave me a question. If ontological Christians are caused by being Baptized, then what makes someone a theological Christian?

 

[Dave_Noonan]

I remember Michelle Arnold saying that theological Christians are believers, whereas ontological Christians are Christians due to Baptism. A person can be both a theological and an ontological Christian. This gave me a question. If ontological Christians are caused by being Baptized, then what makes someone a theological Christian?

I think as you’re trying to point out, this is not a very helpful distinction. So Michelle Arnold thinks people who are unbaptized are also Christians somehow? Even though they are not “ontologically” Christians? That doesn’t even make sense.

 

[Inquiringperson]

I think as you’re trying to point out, this is not a very helpful distinction. So Michelle Arnold thinks people who are unbaptized are also Christians somehow? Even though they are not “ontologically” Christians? That doesn’t even make sense.

Clarification: Theological Christians have Christian beliefs. The qualifications for an Ontological Christian is a valid Baptism, since Baptism leaves a permanent mark on the soul. That means that if someone is Baptized Christian but leaves the Christian Faith, they are only ontological Christians. If a Baptized person doesn’t leave the Faith and believes in the Faith, not only are they ontological Christians, they are also theological Christians.

Edit: I can phrase my question better. My question would be, “what are the beliefs required that make a theological Christian?” I remember that Michelle Arnold says that Mormons are not theological nor ontological Christians, so I understand that there must be some set beliefs that would make someone theological Christians.

 

[mafh]

You said,

“I remember Michelle Arnold saying that theological Christians are believers, whereas ontological Christians are Christians due to Baptism. A person can be both a theological and an ontological Christian. This gave me a question. If ontological Christians are caused by being Baptized, then what makes someone a theological Christian?”

I think she is distinguishing between those people who are ‘Christian’ merely by the fact of having gone through the rite of baptism, and those who have gone through baptism and are also believers. So, to be a theological Christian, it is necessary, but not sufficient, to also be an ontological Christian. Of course, this pre-supposes that Baptism is necessary to be a Christian (which I think is the Catholic view?).

It’s a helpful distinction… How many arguments have been made on these forums about whether a Catholic can believe in this-or-that? It depends on whether you are taking about an ontological Catholic (by baptism/confirmation) or a theological Catholic (one who also practices and whose beliefs are in conformity with the Vatican.) Opinion polls, for instance, don’t distinguish which type of Catholic someone is, so you end up with results where a large portion of self-identified ‘Catholics’ (presumably mostly the ontological type) believe in something that is directly opposed by the Catholic church.

Anyway, I hope this helps.

 

[mafh]

Edit: I can phrase my question better. My question would be, “what are the beliefs required that make a theological Christian?” I remember that Michelle Arnold says that Mormons are not theological nor ontological Christians, so I understand that there must be some set beliefs that would make someone theological Christians.

I would say acceptance of the Nicene creed is the usual standard.

 

[Inquiringperson]

I would say acceptance of the Nicene creed is the usual standard.

But many Protestants don’t believe that Mary was a virgin, and yet they are still theological Christians.

 

[mafh]

Most non-Catholic Christians interpret the phrase ‘virgin Mary’ to mean that she was a virgin at the time of Jesus’ birth, but not necessary a virgin thereafter.

 

[bzkoss236]

Also, I’ve known many Protestants during my college years who have called themselves Christians before they were baptized.

 

[Mystophilus]

Clarification: Theological Christians have Christian beliefs. The qualifications for an Ontological Christian is a valid Baptism, since Baptism leaves a permanent mark on the soul. That means that if someone is Baptized Christian but leaves the Christian Faith, they are only ontological Christians. If a Baptized person doesn’t leave the Faith and believes in the Faith, not only are they ontological Christians, they are also theological Christians.

Edit: I can phrase my question better. My question would be, “what are the beliefs required that make a theological Christian?” I remember that Michelle Arnold says that Mormons are not theological nor ontological Christians, so I understand that there must be some set beliefs that would make someone theological Christians.

If someone has left the faith, they cannot be ontologically Christian: “ontological” means “with respect to being”, and someone outside the faith is not a Christian.

It might be more useful to say that anyone can be theologically (“with respect to ideas of god”) Christian, by virtue of having Christian beliefs, but only some of those theological Christians are baptized, making them ontologically Christian, i.e. Christian by virtue of their very being, not just by direction of belief.

If the question then is “what beliefs define Christianity”, I would agree with mafh (how dow we do usernames in bb, again?) that the Nicene Creed (with or without the Filioque) is the best answer, as it encapsulates the beliefs most central to the historical development of the faith, i.e. the Christianity to which most self-identifying Christians have subscribed.

As regards Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, one of the complications is that self-identification is the academic standard for religious position, and many of them do self-identify as Christians, but the great majority of Christians reject that identification, which is to say that the great majority of Christians self-identify with a group labelled “Christianity” which excludes such heterodox positions. On that basis, I would suggest that Mormons and JWs are “para-Christian”, but not “Christian”, because the group does not accept their membership.

 

[brianwalden]

To be ontologically Christian is to be baptized - baptism is a permanent change in being and even the damned in hell who were baptized are marked with the sign of Christ.

I would think that the bare minimum for being a theologoical Christian is to believe in the Trinity.

A person can be baptized but not believe or believe but not be baptized, but the ideal is obviously to be both.

Perhaps you could make a smaller group of Theological Christians who confess the Creed.

Finally in the loosest sense of the word I suppose those who profess faith in Christ but not in the Trinity are in some sense Christian. But not in a traditionally understood theological or ontological way.

 

[Mystophilus]

To be ontologically Christian is to be baptized - baptism is a permanent change in being and even the damned in hell who were baptized are marked with the sign of Christ.

Are you suggesting that there are Christians in Hell?

 

[Inquiringperson]

Are you suggesting that there are Christians in Hell?

Catholics believe in the possibility of Christians in Hell, since we believe that just saying that you believe isn’t enough. We Catholics believe that your faith will get you to heaven, but you have to prove you have faith by following the commands of Jesus, which is, simply, to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church and to not be in a state of mortal sin when you die. Does that help?

 

[Mystophilus]

Catholics believe in the possibility of Christians in Hell, since we believe that just saying that you believe isn’t enough. We Catholics believe that your faith will get you to heaven, but you have to prove you have faith by following the commands of Jesus, which is, simply, to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church and to not be in a state of mortal sin when you die. Does that help?

In a way, but it then makes me wonder what you consider the definition of “Christian” to be, if someone can be one and yet be so hostile to God as to be in Hell.

 

[brianwalden]

Are you suggesting that there are Christians in Hell?

Yes. Baptism causes an irreversible change in the soul, opening it to God’s supernatural grace. But, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. So if a baptized person rejects God’s grace and dies in a state of mortal sin they will go to hell - but they’ll still be baptized.

Look at it another way. Satan believes in the Trinity, he believes the Creed, he believes in Scripture. And he’s in hell.

 

[brianwalden]

In a way, but it then makes me wonder what you consider the definition of “Christian” to be, if someone can be one and yet be so hostile to God as to be in Hell.

I’m a Christian and at times I am in a state of mortal sin. Thankfully I’ve always come to my senses, repented and vowed to amend my life. Was I not a Christian during the times I was in mortal sin?

 

[Inquiringperson]

Yes. Baptism causes an irreversible change in the soul, opening it to God’s supernatural grace. But, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. So if a baptized person rejects God’s grace and dies in a state of mortal sin they will go to hell - but they’ll still be baptized.

Look at it another way. Satan believes in the Trinity, he believes the Creed, he believes in Scripture. And he’s in hell.

You did a better job explaining then I did.

 

[Mystophilus]

Yes. Baptism causes an irreversible change in the soul, opening it to God’s supernatural grace. But, as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. So if a baptized person rejects God’s grace and dies in a state of mortal sin they will go to hell - but they’ll still be baptized.

Look at it another way. Satan believes in the Trinity, he believes the Creed, he believes in Scripture. And he’s in hell.

Is Satan a Christian, then? What you are saying here is that baptized people can end up in Hell, but that only means that there can be Christians in Hell if being baptized is a sufficient condition to make one a Christian, something of which I have not yet seen any demonstration.

 

[Mystophilus]

I’m a Christian and at times I am in a state of mortal sin. Thankfully I’ve always come to my senses, repented and vowed to amend my life. Was I not a Christian during the times I was in mortal sin?

According to your catechism, being so hostile to God as to be in Hell is more than just being in a state of mortal sin. What it says is that the mortal sin must be unrepented, which is different from the situation which you describe.

“1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.”

I cannot see how someone who is “excluded from Christ’s kingdom” could be described as a Christian, particularly because it is Christ who is excluding them. It sounds rather a lot like this:
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Those people may call themselves Christians, but Christ apparently doesn’t.

 

[Michelle_Arnold]

I remember Michelle Arnold saying that theological Christians are believers, whereas ontological Christians are Christians due to Baptism. A person can be both a theological and an ontological Christian. This gave me a question. If ontological Christians are caused by being Baptized, then what makes someone a theological Christian?

Here is the answer I gave that I think you are referring to:

Ontology is a branch of metaphysics that deals with the science of being. To be an ontological Christian is a way of saying that Christian is something that a person is. Baptism imparts a permanent supernatural character upon a person’s soul that marks him as a Christian. Someone who holds the beliefs that Christians hold but is unbaptized is a theological Christian (i.e., Christianity is a religion that he believes); someone who is baptized is an ontological Christian (i.e., he is a Christian). A person who is both baptized and a believer is both ontologically and theologically Christian.

I was speaking somewhat loosely when I said that an unbaptized person who believes in Christianity is “theologically Christian.” I meant it as a way to identify those people raised in a Christian culture with Christian beliefs but who have never been baptized – which is altogether possible, especially in Protestant sects that teach that “believer’s baptism” is only for those old enough to ask for it on their own. Strictly speaking, these people are not yet Christian because they have not been baptized; but they think of themselves as Christian and generally hold to the defining Christian beliefs (the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity).

 

[Mystophilus]

Here is the answer I gave that I think you are referring to:

I was speaking somewhat loosely when I said that an unbaptized person who believes in Christianity is “theologically Christian.” I meant it as a way to identify those people raised in a Christian culture with Christian beliefs but who have never been baptized – which is altogether possible, especially in Protestant sects that teach that “believer’s baptism” is only for those old enough to ask for it on their own. Strictly speaking, these people are not yet Christian because they have not been baptized; but they think of themselves as Christian and generally hold to the defining Christian beliefs (the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity).

Could you help me with something, then? I have been discussing this with some of the people here, and, while I can appreciate that Catholic theology is firm about the enduring effect of baptism, one of the things which has been showing up in the conversation is a conflation of “baptized” with “Christian”. This led to me wondering whether Catholic theology would then say that there can be Christians in Hell, i.e. those who, after baptism, became so hostile to God as to effect their own separation.