We Catholics Are Dead Sure The Church Is The One Church Of Christ And That All Others Are Mistaken

[JonNC]

Lutherans believe in the real presence, but not in transubstantiation, see the tenth article in the Confessio Augustana.

However the Lutherans do not believe in the Real Presence as Catholics and Orthodox do. They reject Communion under one species and they reject that the bread and wine disappear leaving only the accidents. While it is not consubstantiation, it is called the sacramental union, that they receive not just the accidents, but the bread and wine also. Catholics reject this affirming dogma of Transubstantiation, which states that [it] the bread and wine are no more, only the accidents remain, but the Eucharist is the true Body and Blood of Jesus . The Orthodox have the same belief, but do not term it, calling it a mystery.

Laus Deo

I’m sure that motstraumen knows Luteran teaching. Article X of The Augsburg Confession states : “1] Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed 2] to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.”
Transubstantiation was not mentioned, neither pro nor con.

We have gone over this before, and it seems an overstatement to claim that the Orthodox share “the same” belief when it comes to Transubstantiation.

Orthodox profess a real change (metabole) of the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ by the Words of Institution and the act of the Holy Spirit in the eucharistic anaphora. **This does not mean a “transsubstantiation” of the substance of the bread and the wine into the substance of the deified humanity of Christ, but a union with it: “The bread of communion isn’t an ordinary bread, but united with divinity” (John of Damascus). **This union amounts to a communication of the deifying properties of the humanity of Christ and of the deifying grace of his divinity to the eucharistic gifts: The bread and the wine are no longer understood with respect to their natural properties but with respect to Christ’s deified human body in which they have been assumed through the action of the Holy Spirit. As in Christology the two natures are united hypostatically, so in the Eucharist Christ’s exalted human body and the “antitypes” (St. Basil, Anaphora) of bread and wine are united sacramentally through the act of the Holy Spirit.

c. Orthodox and Lutherans agree, whether they use the language of “metabole” or of “real presence”, that the bread and wine do not lose their essence (physis) when becoming sacramentally Christ’s body and blood. The medieval doctrine of transsubstantiation is rejected by both Orthodox and Lutherans.

helsinki.fi/~risaarin/lutortjointtext.html#euch

I admit ignorance of the Orthodox position on concomitance, but I am not aware that they give the Eucharist in one part only. Someone who is Orthodox could help.

Jon

 

[motstraumen]

And please stop saying “again OTCA”…it is truly annoying. I know in what I speak about.

Your generalizations are annoying. You can say we don’t have the real presence or believe in it or whatever, but that doesn’t make it so. I don’t care what you and the rest of your lot say. You are no authority. I too know in what I speak, and you are no help to the cause of Christian understanding. Hope I didn’t annoy you.

 

[Selene]

True, protestants believe in Christ, however, they and other non-Catholics do not believe in the Eucharist as the Real presence. They also do not believe in a lot of other Scriptural references of Christ that Catholics believe and in which we were the first to believe in this, considering we were the first Christians.
I cannot understand how you say that Muslims and Jews are “bonded” with the Catholic church since they only recognize Jesus as a man and not a Messiah.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church #839-843:

839 “Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in varioius ways.”

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People, “the first to hear the Word of God.” The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews “belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriachs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ,” (Romans 9:4-5) “for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.” (Romans 11:29).

840 And when one considers the future, God’s People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock with God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city…

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these relgions as “a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.”

 

[rinnie]

I generaly agree with what you say here, rinnie. To me, in large measure, it is a matter of semantics. For example, anywhere you write “we accept”, a Lutheran is inclined to write “we receive”, a more passive expression of how faith comes to us. And it is at this point that we have free will to act on the faith that comes to us by Grace.
Again semantics: “*because faith not combined with *works is useless.” Where you write “combined with”, a Lutheran would write “followed by”. It is not the importance of good works that we seem to differ on, it is the placement of good works in the progression of justification and sanctification.
Were I to secretly take your statement, and make the changes in semantics I outlined here, my Lutheran brethren would probably say, “that is a Lutheran’s work”. (at least I hope so )

The question is, do these semantic differences reveal a truly deep difference in our understanding of salvation, and is it necessarily church-dividing?

Jon

If they do Jon, I sure could never see it. I mean to me I like to keep thing’s simple. How our Church could not come together on such issues is beyond me. Its like we both see it the same way. Bottom line, Jesus saved us from Original sin on the cross, now we can get into heaven if we just obey his commandments. IF we sin, we go to confession, do penance and stop doing the sin. If we see a brother in trouble we help. If by no other reason, what goes around comes around. Do to others, do to you. Sorry trying to make things short.

But to me everyone knows right from wrong. And anyone can turn a right into a wrong. But Gods knows the difference and so does the person. Thats grace, not turning a right into a wrong, and doing the right thing. Simply because you know that you have to. Not because Gods watching (well that too) but because you have the grace (the God in you) to know the difference. And if you are of God you will act like it. If you are not of God you will not act like God. My Dad always said if in doubt in knowing what is the right thing to do, pick the hardest. Thats probally it.

 

[rinnie]

Rinnie,

Somehow, I get the feeling we’re running around in circles.

Are you saying that works neither precede nor follow grace? Perhaps the problem is that I have been speaking of faith while you speak of grace.

No argument here.

No argument here.

Here’s where I sense a problem. The phrase that I put in bold print seems to say that it is what we do – or simply want to do – that saves us. This, to me, contradicts the idea that salvation comes from God, through Christ, alone.

I don’t have any argument with you in this.

What my Point was just because God saved us by the cross does not mean we do not have to do our part in salvation also. Jesus did all he could do. He wiped out sin, and no matter how we sin we can be re-united with him. But just because we can be re-united with him does not mean that we will choose to be. To make it as simple as I can I will put it this way. Jesus picked us, now will we pick Jesus. If we want salvation it is possible, but we can also refuse it. We cannot say that because Jesus died on the cross to save us we are saved. Just because that is true, does not mean that we do not have our role in salvation also. Its not Jesus saved us and we are all getting in. ITs Jesus saved us, and gave us the means to keep that salvation. Now its up to us. If we choose sin then we screwed ourself. Sorry I don’t know any easier way to say it.

 

[rinnie]

Hey Jon, How about you get your Bishop, I get the Pope we all meet on Friday, and we could get this whole thing cleared up by Monday!

 

[JonNC]

Hey Jon, How about you get your Bishop, I get the Pope we all meet on Friday, and we could get this whole thing cleared up by Monday!

I’ll bring the beer.

EDIT: Oh, and since its Friday, we’ll fry some fish!!!

Jon

 

[gcnuss]

I’ll bring the beer.

Oh!! Can I come, too??:extrahappy:

 

[rinnie]

I’ll bring the beer.

EDIT: Oh, and since its Friday, we’ll fry some fish!!!

Jon

Don’t forget the chips. We gotta have chips too!

 

[JonNC]

Oh!! Can I come, too??:extrahappy:

Well… ok.

Pastor, One of the issues on this subject that rarely gets talked about is infused vs. imputed.
Can you help me understand the differences, and how it effects unity?
Jon

 

[eric51]

If they do Jon, I sure could never see it. I mean to me I like to keep thing’s simple. How our Church could not come together on such issues is beyond me. Its like we both see it the same way. .

I hate to be the churl at the party, but I think believing good works naturally follow faith, is more than a semantic difference with Catholics/Orthodox. It goes to how one views the role of humans in God’s Plan of Salvation.

Luther was rather crude and succinct about his perception. Humans are manure; God’s grace is the snow covering the manure, giving us an appearance a deceptive appearance] of being righteous. Human agency, Human Will, is of absolutely no avail in the Justification process, according to Luther. We can do absolutely nothing to cooperate with God’s grace. God does it all. God, if He ultimately judges us saved, does so inspite of the fact absolutely nothing that we did pleases Him, except our utterance, even a one-time utterance, of faith.

Catholics, based on our reading of the experiences of the hebrews in the OT, and based on Jesus’ teaching and Apostolic teaching, reaffirm that human Will matters, because God deems that it matters. No matter that our efforts to do good pale in comparison to God’s perfection, that we try to be obedient, that we try to be loving to our neighbors, that we try to do good, MATTERS TO GOD. And it is based on our trying to do the right thing that God, we hope, may judge us meritorious in His eyes, to be saved.

Yes, all the efforts we make to do good, come from God’s grace. But, when you analyze that concept, you see the word,“effort” in it. We must make an effort to cooperate with God’s grace. Saying I believe can, can be a start on the road to justification. But it also can, can be a single step leading nowhere if it stops with simple, abstract, belief. Without the EFFORT, Faith Alone leads NOWHERE.

Believing in Faith Alone, believing that Faith Alone produces good works is endorsing the heretical belief that God has created us as completely helpless automatons with no Will that can make a difference. That all our efforts are meaningless, because anything “good” we may do, naturally, inevitably, comes from the simple act of belief, the simple act of faith.

Catholics don’t believe that. Nor do we see it as a semantic matter. It matters very much.

In Christ

 

[greggy53]

Very well put eric51, you make the distinction bewteen us very clear. St Paul was very clear about it as well.

1 Corinthians 13 2 “And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.”

 

[JonNC]

I hate to be the churl at the party, but I think believing good works naturally follow faith, is more than a semantic difference with Catholics/Orthodox. It goes to how one views the role of humans in God’s Plan of Salvation.

Luther was rather crude and succinct about his perception. Humans are manure; God’s grace is the snow covering the manure, giving us an appearance a deceptive appearance] of being righteous. Human agency, Human Will, is of absolutely no avail in the Justification process, according to Luther. We can do absolutely nothing to cooperate with God’s grace. God does it all. God, if He ultimately judges us saved, does so inspite of the fact absolutely nothing that we did pleases Him, except our utterance, even a one-time utterance, of faith.

Catholics, based on our reading of the experiences of the hebrews in the OT, and based on Jesus’ teaching and Apostolic teaching, reaffirm that human Will matters, because God deems that it matters. No matter that our efforts to do good pale in comparison to God’s perfection, that we try to be obedient, that we try to be loving to our neighbors, that we try to do good, MATTERS TO GOD. And it is based on our trying to do the right thing that God, we hope, may judge us meritorious in His eyes, to be saved.

Yes, all the efforts we make to do good, come from God’s grace. But, when you analyze that concept, you see the word,“effort” in it. We must make an effort to cooperate with God’s grace. Saying I believe can, can be a start on the road to justification. But it also can, can be a single step leading nowhere if it stops with simple, abstract, belief. Without the EFFORT, Faith Alone leads NOWHERE.

Believing in Faith Alone, believing that Faith Alone produces good works is endorsing the heretical belief that God has created us as completely helpless automatons with no Will that can make a difference. That all our efforts are meaningless, because anything “good” we may do, naturally, inevitably, comes from the simple act of belief, the simple act of faith.

Catholics don’t believe that. Nor do we see it as a semantic matter. It matters very much.

In Christ

I think the testamony of Lutherans on this thread, and the Lutheran Confessions, differ with your assessment of the Lutheran view of the importance of human will with regards to salvation. In fact, article 18 of the Augsburg Confession was approved in the Confutation.
When we say that works flow necessarily from faith, we are saying that no works we do are of themselves capable of meriting justification. In fact, even the best works that the unregenerate do are in the eyes of God filled with sin.
Our sanctification, however, requires our participation. Because the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to the salvation offered by Christ, we now have the free will to reject or receive His gifts of Grace. Our efforts to share His grace through our actions with others are anything but meaningless, as they share His grace with others to their benefit, and glorify God who is in Heaven. Do my good works in any way merit me for salvation? No. Are my good works evidence of a active, saving faith? Yes. Are they necessary? Absolutely.

Your characterization that Lutherans believe that our good works mean nothing just doesn’t square with anything I’ve read in the Book of Concord (Lutheran Confessions).
Jon

 

[eric51]

I think the testamony of Lutherans on this thread, and the Lutheran Confessions, differ with your assessment of the Lutheran view of the importance of human will with regards to salvation. In fact, article 18 of the Augsburg Confession was approved in the Confutation.
When we say that works flow necessarily from faith, we are saying that no works we do are of themselves capable of meriting justification. In fact, even the best works that the unregenerate do are in the eyes of God filled with sin.
Our sanctification, however, requires our participation. Because the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to the salvation offered by Christ, we now have the free will to reject or receive His gifts of Grace. Our efforts to share His grace through our actions with others are anything but meaningless, as they share His grace with others to their benefit, and glorify God who is in Heaven. Do my good works in any way merit me for salvation? No. Are my good works evidence of a active, saving faith? Yes. Are they necessary? Absolutely.

Your characterization that Lutherans believe that our good works mean nothing just doesn’t square with anything I’ve read in the Book of Concord (Lutheran Confessions).
Jon

Good works, works of charity, that come from God’s grace, are judged by God’s grace, not LAW, therefore, pointing out that compared to God’s perfection, they are filled with sin, doesn’t fly. That dog won’t hunt. Being judged by grace means that GOD makes allowances for our plethora of imperfections, yet, He judges us aware of those imperfections and makes allowances for them. Otherwise, we would in effect be judged by LAW not Grace.

Sanctification, as a theological concept, seems to have been invented by Protestants to cover up the fact that in essence they have relegated good works to insignificance within God’s Plan of Salvation. Sanctification, as a theological concept, really means no more than Justification. It is appropriately used after one is deemed to have achieved initial justification, and subsequently on his life journey of faith and salvation, achieves justification again and again.

Cooperating with God’s grace, through our Human Will, is not “meaningless”. Jesus Christ, God, doesn’t seem to think so. And, I would hope, His opinion counts–afterall, He gave His life as an expiation to the Father, on our behalf, so that Grace, not Law, would be the basis on which we, our Will, good works and all, are judged.

Faith Alone makes a mockery of that Sacrifice, and of the opportunity we have, in God’s Eyes, to merit eternal life, through our Faith AND Actions.

In Christ

 

[greggy53]

I think some of this has to do with the Catholics having a different view of the fall of man, and our nature as a result. I wonder if Lutherans accept the premiss of Natural Law, or reject it out right like the Calvanist / Presbyterian??

 

[sambos671]

Good works, works of charity, that come from God’s grace, are judged by God’s grace, not LAW, therefore, pointing out that compared to God’s perfection, they are filled with sin, doesn’t fly. That dog won’t hunt. Being judged by grace means that GOD makes allowances for our plethora of imperfections, yet, He judges us aware of those imperfections and makes allowances for them. Otherwise, we would in effect be judged by LAW not Grace.

Sanctification, as a theological concept, seems to have been invented by Protestants to cover up the fact that in essence they have relegated good works to insignificance within God’s Plan of Salvation. Sanctification, as a theological concept, really means no more than Justification. It is appropriately used after one is deemed to have achieved initial justification, and subsequently on his life journey of faith and salvation, achieves justification again and again.

Cooperating with God’s grace, through our Human Will, is not “meaningless”. Jesus Christ, God, doesn’t seem to think so. And, I would hope, His opinion counts–afterall, He gave His life as an expiation to the Father, on our behalf, so that Grace, not Law, would be the basis on which we, our Will, good works and all, are judged.

Faith Alone makes a mockery of that Sacrifice, and of the opportunity we have, in God’s Eyes, to merit eternal life, through our Faith AND Actions.

In Christ

That was an excellent post. However, I would like to hear more about your second and third Paragraphs. After all Paul in Galatians and Romans seems to imply an initial Justification making sancitfication possible. How do you reconcile these consepts. Also explain and contrast Cooperating with God’s grace with Faith alone.

 

[rinnie]

I think the thing here is Jon and I are on the same page. We see thing’s in the same way. And from the post Jon has wrote I see his views pretty much in line with the RCC.

ITs like to me in school. One day the teacher started us out with an A. We did not have to earn it, it was given freely. Well let me tell you this I worked harder to keep that A then I ever did to earn any A in my life.

My point God starts us all out with an A. Now we have to keep it, BUt he gives us all we need to keep it, we have Grace. In school terms we have the Teacher (for us the CHurch) We have books (scripture) Now all we have to do is the work. And KEEPING salvation is work. Hard work. Just like keeping the A. ITs not impossible its a struggle. But God knows what we can handle. Just like the teacher gives every student free will to keep the A or lose it. So does God. We have free will! To either follow God or not.

 

[motstraumen]

That was an excellent post. However, I would like to hear more about your second and third Paragraphs. After all Paul in Galatians and Romans seems to imply an initial Justification making sancitfication possible. How do you reconcile these consepts. Also explain and contrast Cooperating with God’s grace with Faith alone.

Good question.

 

[distracted]

louie,
I,m sorry to hear that you are more obedient to bishops than you are to the word of God.
Did you actually read the passages about judging others? What do you think the Lord is telling you in his word? Are you being obedient to your Savior or a mere man?

Praying for you,
jean

no one should blindly follow a bishop if the bishop is obviously in the wrong… but Poster did NOT indicate this to be the case…

Jesus said of his apostles/priest (etc): If they [the world, those you are preaching to] hear you, they hear Me…

 

[JonNC]

=eric51;5369297]Good works, works of charity, that come from God’s grace, are judged by God’s grace, not LAW, therefore, pointing out that compared to God’s perfection, they are filled with sin, doesn’t fly. That dog won’t hunt. Being judged by grace means that GOD makes allowances for our plethora of imperfections, yet, He judges us aware of those imperfections and makes allowances for them. Otherwise, we would in effect be judged by LAW not Grace.

For the regenerate, you are correct.

Sanctification, as a theological concept, seems to have been invented by Protestants to cover up the fact that in essence they have relegated good works to insignificance within God’s Plan of Salvation.

I would suggest that saying this over and over does not make it so. I guess I need for you to show me where we say this, if you want to ascribe it to us as one of our beliefs.

Sanctification, as a theological concept, really means no more than Justification. It is appropriately used after one is deemed to have achieved initial justification, and subsequently on his life journey of faith and salvation, achieves justification again and again.

Yes, we certainly would disagree on this, in the sense that one can achieve justification, either initially or again and again. For me at least, achieve implies merit. I see justification as part of grace - a gift. But I am willing to listen to what you mean by it, as opposed to what I am inferring here.

Cooperating with God’s grace, through our Human Will, is not “meaningless”.

Agreed.

Jesus Christ, God, doesn’t seem to think so. And, I would hope, His opinion counts–afterall, He gave His life as an expiation to the Father, on our behalf, so that Grace, not Law, would be the basis on which we, our Will, good works and all, are judged.

On its face, I have no argument.

Faith Alone makes a mockery of that Sacrifice, and of the opportunity we have, in God’s Eyes, to merit eternal life, through our Faith AND Actions.

If I viewed faith alone as you do, I would agree.
OTOH, when you say “opportunity we have, in God’s Eyes, to merit eternal life”, the language appears contrary to what Lutherans believe scripture says about whether or not we can merit eternal life.
It also seems to be contrary to what I’ve heard other Catholics say, and contrary to the JDDJ, but far be it from me to claim to know more about Catholicism than a Catholic.
And again, I’m open to listening to further explanation.

Jon