Three questions from a protestant friend

[NotWorthy]

There’s nothing lacking in Christ’s atonement. The Catholic Church teaches a gospel of salvation through personal efforts and works, which I disagree with.

Then, instead of mis-quoting what the Church teaches, why don’t you address my question.

You say there is nothing lacking in Christ’s efforts.

Paul says he is making up for what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions. When Catholics site this, you simply say, “It’s your fallacious ‘work’s salvation’ teaching”.

Interesting.

 

[jmcrae]

There’s nothing lacking in Christ’s atonement. The Catholic Church teaches a gospel of salvation through personal efforts and works, which I disagree with.

We are saved through Christ alone, by grace. We stay there by means of the works of mercy and the Sacraments.

We cannot work our way into Heaven, but we can certainly work our way into Hell, simply by disobeying Christ and refusing to participate in His Church.

 

[NotWorthy]

We cannot work our way into Heaven, but we can certainly work our way into Hell, simply by disobeying Christ and refusing to participate in His Church.

Salvation - You can’t earn it, but you can sure blow it!

 

[Chris_LaRock]

I’m guessing that this is an issue Catholics and Protestants will be in disagreement about until Christ returns. I just think it’s a bit more humble to admit there’s nothing I can do to save myself.

 

[jmcrae]

I’m guessing that this is an issue Catholics and Protestants will be in disagreement about until Christ returns. I just think it’s a bit more humble to admit there’s nothing I can do to save myself.

Except trust and obey.

 

[guanophore]

I reading this thread, it appears to have been derailed by a discussion of faith -vs- works. I am not sure the OP got the answers to the questions!

I was in a discussion with a protestant friend at work and he asked me three questions that I didn’t know the answer to. I was wondering if maybe you could help me. It could be that my understanding of the Church’s teaching on these issues is misguided.

I am glad you came here, and hope you find a lot of useful info. You can also go to the library and enter search terms, and that will bring up great articles.

First Question - In the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, the Church teaches that Mary was concieved without original sin and that she did not commit a sin during her life here on earth. How can we say this and still believe what St. Paul discusses in Romans 3 in saying that “all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God?”

The doctrines about Mary were developed in response to heresies in the early church. Among these were the nature of Jesus. Was He fully God? Was he fully man? How can He be both? He drew his humanity from Mary, and therefore, it could not have been tainted.

Another poster has already pointed out the hyperbole used in Paul “all have sinned”. It does not really mean “all”. For example, Luke 1:5-6

5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechari’ah, of the division of Abi’jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

Also:

4 Now John wore a garment of camel’s hair, and a leather girdle around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan, 6 and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins." Matt 3:4-6

We know that not ALL went to be baptized by John, but it is a figure of speech.

Also, Mary recognized that she did need a saviour, as she says this: “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior” Luke 1:46-47

She accepted Christ as her savior when she was visited by the angel Gabriel.

Second Question - If the purpose of Baptism is the removal of original sin and the restoration of the soul back into a state of communion with God, why is it that Jesus had to be baptized by John?

Jesus is the fulfillment of the promised eternal king in the line of David. His baptism is a sacred annointing like the one David received. 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon David from that day forward." 1 Sam 16:12-13

Remember?
16 And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him; 17 and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” Matt 3:16-17

Third Question - If the sacrifice of Christ on the cross was the perfect sacrifice for our sins, both giving us the opportunity for forgiveness and paying the debt owed by our sin, why are there lingering effects of sin after forgiveness? What I am confused about here is the neccessity of suffering here on earth and Purgatory after death if our debt has been completely and perfectly repaid.

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions

I think there has been a grievious misunderstanding on this thread about atonement. Yes, Christ paid the debt of our sins fullly and finally. We are free of eternal death by His sacrifice. What we have left in this temporal realm is the effects of the sin. Look at it this way. If a teenager gets pregnant from fornication, she can go to confession, and be absolved of her sin. Jesus paid the price, she is forgiven, and is bound for heaven. However, the effects of her sin still remain with her. She can choose to sin again by aborting the baby, or she can choose to “offer it up” in reparation for wrongs (make amends). She can carry the baby to term, and suffer the loss of giving it up for adoption, or suffer the consequences of being a teen parent. Her sin is forgiven, but she has temporal effects of the sin that are to be embraced. She must take up her cross, and carry it. Does that make sense?

 

[Petergee]

The doctrines about Mary were developed in response to heresies in the early church. Among these were the nature of Jesus. Was He fully God? Was he fully man? How can He be both? He drew his humanity from Mary, and therefore, it could not have been tainted.

That’s not quite correct. Mary “drew her humanity” from her parents Joachim and Anne, who were sinners. We humans get our physical human bodies from our parents, but our human souls from God. I suppose God COULD have chosen to take human form within the womb of a sinner, but He didn’t.

 

[MTD]

I just think it’s a bit more humble to admit there’s nothing I can do to save myself.

Our salvation is not a passive acceptance of the merits of Christ; it is an active acceptance of and participation in the sufferings of Christ. I do not think the idea that our cooperation and work is unnecessary in order for us to be saved is very Scriptural.

Philippians 2:12-13:

Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Matthew 7:21-27:

Not every one who says to Me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and cast out demons in Your name, and do many mighty works in Your name?” And then will I declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you evildoers.”

Every one then who hears these words of Mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And every one who hears these words of Mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the fall of it.

Maria