Why all the Fuss over the Reformation 2

[spina1953]

If that were the case, then man would not have been held responsible for the action.

Adam and Eve were held responsible for their actions in disobeying God which was death to the body because they were tricked into disobeying God and did not of their own accord decide on their own to on purpose disobey God, God was willing to forgive them but they did have to pay the price which was death to the body but not the soul as was done to the angels who decided on their own having known who God was and is choose to purposely reject God which was not the case with Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were ticked by satan because of their ignorance but not because willfully choose to disobey. Man is always responsible for his actions and one can either accept God or reject God that is our choice given to us meaning we have free will, when we sin and ask God to forgive us God is willing to forgive because God loves but that does not mean that there is no punishment for the actions that we take, just as God rewards us for the good we do, when we allow God to do His work through us.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Adam and Eve were held responsible for their actions in disobeying God which was death to the body because they were tricked into disobeying God and did not of their own accord decide on their own to on purpose disobey God

Satan is held responsible for tricking them as well. However, Adam and Eve knew God’s word and chose to disobey of their own free will. If they did not, then it would have been unjust for God to punish them.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Adam and Eve were held responsible for their actions in disobeying God which was death to the body because they were tricked into disobeying God and did not of their own accord decide on their own to on purpose disobey God, God was willing to forgive them but they did have to pay the price which was death to the body but not the soul as was done to the angels who decided on their own having known who God was and is choose to purposely reject God which was not the case with Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were ticked by satan because of their ignorance but not because willfully choose to disobey. Man is always responsible for his actions and one can either accept God or reject God that is our choice given to us meaning we have free will, when we sin and ask God to forgive us God is willing to forgive because God loves but that does not mean that there is no punishment for the actions that we take, just as God rewards us for the good we do, when we allow God to do His work through us.

Not only disobedience. They wanted to be like God instead of recognizing the Creator’s uniqueness and Holiness.

See my forum name?

 

[Tomyris]

I will say no more about this particular issue, save to point out that there are some Reformed folks here, and even some Catholics here who must consider this: either God is pleased with an atheist giving his life for a stranger, or God is not.

And by “atheist” I mean: someone who, using his full intellect and reason, willingly and forcefully rejects God.

When this atheist gives the ultimate sacrifice of his life…in this action…is God pleased?

I cannot accept that any rational Christian would answer anything except: YES.

Hello.

I answer no. I think it is likely this has been debated before. STA might have something to say about it…

The picture that springs to mind immediately is that of a bank robber who is shooting his way out of the bank. In the middle of escaping he sees a child with the sniffles and stops and gives the kid his handkerchief. Nice of him.

Either we are saved by grace or we are in a state of sin. If the first, then we are forced to discuss the absurd situation of the saved robber and the discussion goes to justification and eternal security and all sorts of things, too many to cram into one post, even for me. . Let’s look at the second. The sinner cannot do anything pleasing to God, because he is under indictment, under judgement, in big trouble. “For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all” (Rom 11:32). NOTHING he does can please God, even if the sniffling kid is happy for the moment. God sees each event, but He also sees the whole picture.

Let’s talk about my lethal lemonade again: 99.99999% the best lemonade you ever had, the rest a hideous poison. It is still lethal. Sin stains all of us, leaving no part of us untouched, which means it touches every action, thought, intent, emotion, body part, moment we are alive. NOTHING you do, even to the extent of laying your life down, is without a wee touch of sin. Good is credited to us always as an act of grace otherwise whatever it is is sin. There is no middle ground.

So the atheist lays his life down, but it is not to please God. Therefore, since something else was more important to him than God, he was committing idolatry, a sin, in addition to whatever else he had going on. Tough for him.

 

[spina1953]

Not only disobedience. They wanted to be like God instead of recognizing the Creator’s uniqueness and Holiness.

See my forum name?

Hi Isaiah 45: You are correct but Adam and Eve were not as knowledgeable as satan was.

 

[Tomyris]

That’s right, there was no trick.

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Somewhere Paul says Eve was deceived but the man knew what he was doing.

 

[guanophore]

sigh.

I will say no more about this particular issue, save to point out that there are some Reformed folks here, and even some Catholics here who must consider this: either God is pleased with an atheist giving his life for a stranger, or God is not.

And by “atheist” I mean: someone who, using his full intellect and reason, willingly and forcefully rejects God.

When this atheist gives the ultimate sacrifice of his life…in this action…is God pleased?

I cannot accept that any rational Christian would answer anything except: YES.

I thought a lot about this today, and I think one reason that Catholics see this differently is because we have the flexible concept of a person bein gin a state of grace. I know that Calvanists don’t have this concept, and I am beginning to wonder about Lutherans.

I think what you are saying is that a person can do a good deed when they are not in a state of grace?

 

[PRmerger]

I think what you are saying is that a person can do a good deed when they are not in a state of grace?

Essentially, yes. Every human person has the light of God written in her heart, in her will, intellect and ability to reason.

IOW: every human person has actual grace accessible, but not sanctifying grace.

From New Advent: “grace signifies good will, benevolence; then, objectively, it designates every favour which proceeds from this benevolence and, consequently, every gratuitous gift (donum gratuitum, beneficium).”

And all grace is necessarily a derivative of the atoning death of Christ.

Again: It’s all God. All the time.

 

[spina1953]

Essentially, yes. Every human person has the light of God written in her heart, in her will, intellect and ability to reason.

IOW: every human person has actual grace accessible, but not sanctifying grace.

From New Advent: “grace signifies good will, benevolence; then, objectively, it designates every favour which proceeds from this benevolence and, consequently, every gratuitous gift (donum gratuitum, beneficium).”

And all grace is necessarily a derivative of the atoning death of Christ.

Again: It’s all God. All the time.

Hi PM Merger: I agree since there are those who live in the Amazon who have never even seen a jet or TV or any thing or of People outside of where they live so deep in the Amazonian jungle who are peaceful and nor violent and do, do good things but have never heard about Christ, I would think since God is a loving God these people though Christ they never heard are saved in some way.

 

[Per_Crucem]

I thought a lot about this today, and I think one reason that Catholics see this differently is because we have the flexible concept of a person bein gin a state of grace. I know that Calvanists don’t have this concept, and I am beginning to wonder about Lutherans.

We do. Because we stress monergism in justification does not mean we are monergistic about apostasy/mortal sin. We keep both in tension.

 

[guanophore]

We do. Because we stress monergism in justification does not mean we are monergistic about apostasy/mortal sin. We keep both in tension.

Oh then I can see why so many Lutherans have rejected the JDDJ.

This will be an issue in reunification, since those Churches founded by Apsotles find this a contradiciton of scripture and the sacred teaching which has been handed down to us.

 

[Tomyris]

Here is Whether man can wish or do any good without grace? by a Thomist. I thought it of interest.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Oh then I can see why so many Lutherans have rejected the JDDJ.

This will be an issue in reunification, since those Churches founded by Apsotles find this a contradiciton of scripture and the sacred teaching which has been handed down to us.

Which Scripture does it contradict?

 

[guanophore]

we stress monergism in justification

Which Scripture does it contradict?

There are a great many, which may be beyond the scope of this thread. Anyway they are clearly summed up in the JDDJ.

 

[Tomyris]

There are a great many, which may be beyond the scope of this thread. Anyway they are clearly summed up in the JDDJ.

Well, back to this…

On other threads we have seen no one gives a rip about Luther anymore. He was just too dad-gummed polite and good natured, I guess.

Ahem.

Is Catholic initial justification monergistic?

 

[guanophore]

Well, back to this…

On other threads we have seen no one gives a rip about Luther anymore. He was just too dad-gummed polite and good natured, I guess.

Ahem.

Is Catholic initial justification monergistic?

Not entirely. Catholics call the monergistic part “pre-venient grace” or drawing grace, to which everyone has an opportunity to respond. Those who do so “co-operate with grace”.

We don’t believe we can respond to grace without grace, but once we have received grace, it is necessary to respond.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Well, back to this…

On other threads we have seen no one gives a rip about Luther anymore. He was just too dad-gummed polite and good natured, I guess.

Ahem.

Is Catholic initial justification monergistic?

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

I. JUSTIFICATION

1987 The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us “the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ” and through Baptism:34

But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. For we know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. The death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.35
1988 Through the power of the Holy Spirit we take part in Christ’s Passion by dying to sin, and in his Resurrection by being born to a new life; we are members of his Body which is the Church, branches grafted onto the vine which is himself:36

[God] gave himself to us through his Spirit. By the participation of the Spirit, we become communicants in the divine nature. . . . For this reason, those in whom the Spirit dwells are divinized.37
1989 The first work of the grace of the Holy Spirit is conversion, effecting justification in accordance with Jesus’ proclamation at the beginning of the Gospel: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."38 Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, thus accepting forgiveness and righteousness from on high. "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man.39

1990 Justification detaches man from sin which contradicts the love of God, and purifies his heart of sin. Justification follows upon God’s merciful initiative of offering forgiveness. It reconciles man with God. It frees from the enslavement to sin, and it heals.

1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or “justice”) here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:40

But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.41
1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.42
1994 Justification is the most excellent work of God’s love made manifest in Christ Jesus and granted by the Holy Spirit. It is the opinion of St. Augustine that “the justification of the wicked is a greater work than the creation of heaven and earth,” because "heaven and earth will pass away but the salvation and justification of the elect . . . will not pass away."43 He holds also that the justification of sinners surpasses the creation of the angels in justice, in that it bears witness to a greater mercy.

1995 The Holy Spirit is the master of the interior life. By giving birth to the "inner man,"44 justification entails the sanctification of his whole being:

Just as you once yielded your members to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now yield your members to righteousness for sanctification. . . . But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.45

And the Council of Trent Decrees on Justification

I don’t know if we can find common middle ground in a Calvinistic view of monergism which would involve Irresistible grace.

Are you referring to monergism as the “one work” by the Holy Spirit? and Are you including the inability of man to resist Grace?

 

[Tomyris]

I don’t know if we can find common middle ground in a Calvinistic view of monergism which would involve Irresistible grace.

Oooh. A challenge. I will have to read these links carefully.

 

[spina1953]

I think that the fuss over the reformation is due mostly to Catholic’s wanting to understand the reasons why it happened and how it shaped Western Christianity it effects and causes. Over time there has been a great many doctrinal differences and understanding them in ways that seem strange to Catholic’s in general. What Catholic’s see I think is that more and more church spring up each saying that they have the truth and the correct interpretation of Scripture; that they are bible based, IOWS they go by what the bible says.

Then there is the question of who has the authority to interpret Scripture? The Church or the individual. This seems to be outside the mainline protestant denominations like the Lutheran's, or the Church of England who really do not go by bible only or Sola Scriptura by the individual in determining authority or right to interpret Scripture in accordance with one's own understanding outside against what the Church teaches or practices. It seems more those denominational churches that seemingly continue to separate from each other over doctrinal differences. I also think that when a Catholic talks with another Protestant about what each believes, there is a wide gulf in how one understands the doctrinal teachings and the understanding of it. Each has its own understanding and so are not going to change their way of thinking just because one side or the other asserts that they have the correct interpretation of Scripture. However, one can certainly cause confusion if one side or the other is not all that well versed in reading Scripture or what the Church teaches or the understanding of it, and so sow the seeds of doubt and they end up leaving and seeking another church to go to that they think hold the truth.

One when one studies the time of the Reformation, it was not all Luther but others like Calvin and Zwingli who had their own ideas of what they felt needed reforming, and each not agreeing with the other, which only led to others starting their own church. This too is confusing to Catholic’s in the sense that it has continued to day in churches continuing to split and splinter into more and more denominational churches each teaching what they feel is the truth, and those who decide from their own interpretation of Scripture whether or not that church meets their needs. Of course I could be wrong about all of it but that’s my take on it so far.