Paul writes: Do you see the disconnect between your previous Catholicism is not about "works of the law" but, "works done in the state of grace." and your (rather touchy!) reply to my question concerning your "works done in the state of grace": [color:purple]That's a rather personal question. Whether or not I am in need of confession is not really any of your business.</font color=purple><br>You have portrayed yourself as a Roman Catholic, but now are either unwilling or unable to state that the "essence of Catholicism" is true about you, other than in a hypothetical sense? <br> <br>[color:purple]Scott replies: Paul, I am unwilling to discuss in public whether or not I am in mortal sin "at this moment." Surely you can understand that. Whether or not I am in need of confession or not "at this moment" is irrelevant to our discussions. What if I am in mortal sin and in need of confession? In the scope of our discussions - so what? I still have the means of reconcilliation provided me. Will I remain in such a state? No, I would seek reconcilliation as soon as possible, I would hope you would too.<br> <br>In JMJ,<br><br>Scott<<<<br></font color=purple>
Scott,<br><br>Since you do seem to be saying that:<br><br>A) Catholicism is about "works done in the state of grace"<br><br>and<br><br>B) It is no one else's business, not a matter of public discussion, whether you are "in the state of grace", since by your own admission, you might not be,<br><br>and<br><br>C) The Catechism clearly teaches that if you are NOT in the SOG, being in mortal sin, a <font class="big">work, apart from grace, obtains grace for you to re-enter the SOG</font> --- <br><br>1) [color:red]How can you continue to call yourself Catholic, while being unwilling or unable to state that you qualify according to your own terms,</font color=red> and<br><br>2) [color:red]How can you continue to state that in your system, grace always precedes works, when your own Catechism clearly denies that, in the case of mortal sin, which is clearly the type you most need to worry about</font color=red>, and<br><br>3) [color:red]You have acknowledged yourself a sinner. How do you know, as you so confidently state, on what or whom is your assurance based, that if in mortal sin, you [color:purple]would seek reconciliation as soon as possible</font color=purple>?</font color=red> <br>
You keep trying to convince people that your Roman Catholic system of salvation is not "based on works" by reiterating that the works "precede from grace". But you betray your true intent whenever you make statements like:
[color:purple] Jesus provided me with the means of reconciliation when I stumble.
Even though I am not worthy of His grace, He has freely given it to me
even when I fall, He is there to help me back up
because throughout this thread you have also insisted that the [color:blue]efficacy of the gift or help is conditional upon your response to it!
The self-righteousness of your synergistic devaluation of the eternally efficacious grace of God lies in your implication that "based on works" means simply "begins with a human act of my own", which you cleverly refute by having God make an initial offer of a powerless grace. But the salvation of the biblical, God-decreed, eternal, powerfully efficacious Gospel of Jesus Christ, [color:red]which alone saves sinners from the just wrath of God: [color:blue]
Begins in the love and decree and wisdom and power of God alone, for every one of the elect
Is unfailingly, efficaciously administered by God alone, to every one of the elect
Is not contingent upon, either aided or thwarted, the action, will, heart, motive, intention, disposition, habit, virtue or vice, obedience or sin--that is, [color:black]WORKS--of any created being, including each of the elect, but is unfailingly, efficaciously contingent upon the pleasure of God alone
Is unfailingly, efficaciously completed by God alone in the life of every one of the elect
Continues through eternity to the praise of God alone, from every one of the elect
This is what the Scripture means when it says: [color:blue]Not by works, so that no one can boast.
But since by your own repeated testimony, [color:purple]your salvation is efficaciously contingent on your own cooperation with (so-called) grace, you simply cannot make the claims above, and so your system is truly seen to be [color:red]BASED ON WORKS, and is therefore [color:blue]really no gospel at all.
Thanks Paul for the excellent discussion and evidence of the heresy of catholicism. It certainly proves the truth of Gal 1:6-9 (as if it needed proof):<br><br>6 ¶ I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,<br>7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.<br>8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.<br>9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.<br>
ReformedSBC said: Thanks Paul for the excellent discussion and evidence of the heresy of catholicism. It certainly proves the truth of Gal 1:6-9 (as if it needed proof):<br><br>6 ¶ I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,<br>7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.<br>8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.<br>9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.<br> <br>[color:purple]Scott responds: Interesting. Let's look at this chronologically. Prior to the 16th century, there was no such thing as "Protestantism." Catholicism clearly existed long before Protestantism. We agree that the Gospel preached in Protestantism is different than that taught in the Catholic Church. So WHO is preaching this "different gospel" that Galations is talking about?<br> <br>Excellent point ReformedSBC, excellent.<br> <br>Scott<<<<br></font color=purple> <br>
Please understand, <br>the work of man never saves. Jesus saves. The Catholic Church believes the same. Don't say that Catholics would believe that the work of man saves. Only the grace of God saves. Do not misinterpret. <br><br>In Christ,<br>Hannah
HWMinngrl<br><br>If after reading this thread you haven't understood why I said that, I am afraid I can't convinced you otherwise.<br>Have a look down the thread at Prestor John's post, I think the link he showed his daughter, shows this as well as any of the other posts.<br><br>Tom
Hannah,<br><br>Do you believe that the RCC teaches in her official doctrine that man's good works are meritorious before God with respect to salvation? In other words, does man's good works contribute to the merit they need to stand before God and be saved? Or, is the merit of Christ alone imputed to us by grace through faith sufficient to save us?<br><br>In His Grace,<br><br>Ron
You gotta just hate those guys who jump in on a discussion afer 8 pages, but hopefully I have a few things to add that haven't been said before.<br><br>For clarity's sake, I think it would do all of us, especially our Catholic friends, to read this: http://www.the-highway.com/catholic4_Armstrong.html. This is a page right on this website. This page is part of a broader work, whose table of contents can be found at http://www.the-highway.com/catholic-toc_Armstrong.html.<br><br>Read down to the quotes from the council of Trent. For example, <br><br>"Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone. . . , meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema."<br><br>"Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy. . . . which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema."<br><br>Compare this with Galatians 3:2-3:<br><br>"I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law or by BELIEVING what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain you goal by human effort?"<br><br>Or vs. 6:<br><br>"Consider Abraham: 'He BELIEVED God, and it was credited to him as righeousness.'"<br><br>Or what about the well-known Eph. 2:8:<br><br>"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith- AND THIS NOT FROM YOURSELVES, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD-" etc.<br><br>What is the "this" in "this not from yourselves"? Simple exegesis, or at least basic grammar, shows that this is plainly the aforementioned faith.<br><br>I could go on and on, citing different passages here and there, but be assured, Roman Catholicism and biblical Christianity are two very different things. Arguing over side issues like "we were here first" or whatever is useless. A careful, unbiased look at Roman Catholic doctrine will reveal that it is very different from the doctine taught in Scriptures. Period. There's no way around it. <br><br>This isn't a "Catholic interpretation vs. Reformed interpretation" issue. This is erroneous teaching standing in complete opposition to plain and simple Scripture. One is stretching the very essence of credulity to assert anything past this.<br><br>Edit: made the url's clickable
Catholics do not believe that human effort saves us. Only grace. In fact, the Catholic position can be summed up like this: "Nothing, whether faith or works, apart from the grace of God, can save us. We are saved by grace through faith which works by love." Besides, the scripture does not only offer verses regarding salvation (or justification) in the past tense , but many that speak of salvation as a present and future event. <br>Consider, "The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18) or "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt 10:22). The Bible also speaks of justification in the past, present, and future tenses, implying that it is an ongoing process of sanctification in the life of a believer. "Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 5:1). [we are] "being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ" (Rom 3:24). "But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves are found to be sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? Of course not!" (Gal 2:17).<br><br>In Christ, Hannah
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Hannah,<br><br>Do you believe that the RCC teaches in her official doctrine that man's good works are meritorious before God with respect to salvation? In other words, does man's good works contribute to the merit they need to stand before God and be saved? Or, is the merit of Christ alone imputed to us by grace through faith sufficient to save us?<br><br>In His Grace,<br><br>Ron</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Catholics do not believe that human effort saves us. Only grace.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>"If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified…let him be anathema.” Canon and Decrees of the Council of Trent: On Justification, Canon XXXII<br><br>Hannah, <br><br>"Now to him that works is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that works not, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness." Romans 4:4-5 <br><br>The Roman Catholic Church will say with you: "Nothing, whether faith or works, apart from the grace of God, can save us. We are saved by grace through faith which works by love." <br><br>No one from a Reformed perspective would argue that we are not saved by grace through faith, but we would add the word alone. We believe that we are saved by grace alone, through faith in alone, in Christ alone -- apart from works of merit. Roman Catholicism on the other hand teaches that man needs intrinsic merit to stand before God. This merit is not only intrinsic, it is something that is obtained by co-operating with grace. The merit, in other words, is not a result of pure operative grace or unconditionally bestowed by God. Accordingly, even the said merit is not received by grace alone since Roman Catholic theology teaches that each man actually causes himself to differ from another. However, the word of God rejects such a notion with statements such as: "For who makes you to differ from another... now if you did receive it, why do you glory, as if you had not received it?" 1 Corinthians 4:7<br><br>The simple truth is, the official teaching of Roman Catholicism on this matter is that man's good works are meritorious before God. Moreover, man must cause himself to differ from another. Therefore, in the final analyses, the devout Roman Catholic will not agree with the conclusion of the apostles and all the saints, which is: "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Romans 4:28 Added to this, "...and whom he justified, them he also glorified" Romans 8:30c. All this is to say, God causes one sinner to differ from another. God justifies sinners apart from their works. And finally, God will keep all of his in his grace; which is to say God grants his people everlasting life.<br><br>In Mercy and Grace,<br><br>Ron<br><br>
Forgive me if I sound antagonistic, because I really am enjoying this discussion, but you're skirting the issue. These verses would be neat to discuss, but first I'd be curious what your response is to my previous post.
I fail to understand how you can assert that the RCC does not teach a faith-works view of the gospel. You are simply in error. Now I do believe that it is possible that you are minsinformed about your own Church's official position. However, it is the official position of the RCC that both faith and works is required for justification. This is most clearly taught in the official documents of the RCC and can be found plainly taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
As a former Catholic, there are many problems inherent in Roman Catholic doctrine, and worship which must be considered. Much more important than just that “salvation is works”. The Roman system is based upon the Mass, ritualism, and sacramentalism. There are no sacraments, as such delineated in the Bible. There are two Ordinances which were instituted by Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper or Communion if you like.
Communion in the Roman Church is known as the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that the priest has the power to change the bread and the wine into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ each time he presides at the Mass. This is known as Transubstantiation. That the priest actually calls down Jesus Christ and re-sacrifices Him on the altar. I am not going to be quoting the scriptures here, but we know that Jesus 'died once and for all'. If we don't know that it is useless to go through all of that.
The Catholic Church claims to have the power through their sacrament of penance to forgive sins by auricular confession. But Scripture tells us that only God has the power to forgive sins. It also claims that baptism is necessary to forgive Original Sin. The Catholic Church offers prayer through intermediaries, the Saints, particularly the Virgin Mary, through her many alleged apparitions. They have also elevated her status to almost that of God the Father, while Jesus appears in a nearly submissive role to that of His 'mother'. Nowhere in Scripture will you find any basis for this. The Church claims that Mary was 'assumed' body and soul into heaven, without undergoing natural death and that she is the Queen of Heaven. Nowhere in the Bible do we find that Mary was accorded any special status other than that as the mother of Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church calls her the Mother of God! It is interesting to me that if Mary had been 'assumed' quite possibly John, who cared for her, or some other apostle or biblical writer would have attested to this. John certainly would have been around long after this had occurred. It would have been an event that would have rivaled even the Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord. It certainly would have been worth recording in Scripture. These are traditions (of men) that have been added through the years. They should have no standing at all.
The Roman Catholic Church claims that it is the One True Church, founded by Christ upon Peter. History tells us that it is not such. The 'Roman' Catholic originated some time after the Emperor Constantine made Christianity a state religion in Rome in 317 A.D. It certainly was not around in Acts, during Pentecost, all those were Jews.
There are many other doctrines other than these which are contrary to the Holy Bible.:
The Cult of Mary: I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols. Isaiah 42:8
Salvation is only through the Lord. The Roman Church considers Mary to be a co-redemptorist with Jesus Christ.
And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” Acts 4:12
It is also important to have a 'personal relationship with 'Jesus Christ' rather than through rituals, and sacraments.
