Posted on 06/03/2011 7:29:16 PM PDT by Winstons Julia
I was raised Lutheran and have attended many churches. I was born-again in 2005. I was shocked to have a Catholic tell me that *we* aren't saved by grace alone ... but that we need to recharge our salvation with works.
Now ... it's not that I'm not charitable and kind. We all know the studies about Christians and charitable giving.
But *I'M* NOT saved by Grace? Are you kidding?
I was responding to what Cicero said.
I was responding to Cicero.
"OK...Lutheran," maybe it was a Kennedy Catholic. Fer cryin' out loud.
I am enjoying reading all the responses, so please forgive me for not getting right back to the thread without doing some of the other reading that people have recommended.
I understand that some Catholics, right now, may be feeling a bit raw due to recent bad publicity.
I assure you, I did NOT post the question in order to attack Catholics. On other forums, I never attack fellow Christians. I don’t feel that the average Catholic has any responsibility for some of the recent controversies in the church.
The question was posted because of exactly what I described when I posted the question.
I’ve never had any issues with Catholics before. But I have had Catholics here on Free Republic tell me that someday I must join “the one true church” and I’ve seen Catholics post defamatory info about Luther.
So... if you want to jump me for one comment ... maybe you ought to be jumping some of your OWN Catholic posters for being dismissive of protestants.
It seems there are some other Catholics on this thread saying the same thing.
“OK...Lutheran” - not really. I attended a Missouri Synod Lutheran church as a kid. I dropped out of confirmation because I refused to say that anyone not a Lutheran was going to Hell. I was agnostic/verging on atheist until I was 33.
I am 41 now. Sometimes, I attend a meek little Presbyterian Church.
“Yet Protestants apparently believe that Jesus lied, and withdrew his love and guidance, from his ONE church...for over 1400 years!”
I kind of think it had much to do with the sale of indulgences and other things.
Maybe it’s a case of “I didn’t leave the Democratic party ... the Democratic Party left me...”
And I’m sure that will make you mad and you’ll think I’m trying to foment discord.... but ....
"OK Presbyterian." You seem pretty "outraged."
Do you have a point? It would be good if you would get around to it.
I’ve been to Fatima and even attended mass there.
I had no clue what they were saying and it was blazingly hot.
That’s really NOT the place the Portuguese government should take multi-faith visiting dignitaries... but I digress.
It kind of seemed like they were worshiping Mary.
>>You believe that Lutheranism is the one true religion.”
No, I don’t. I believe Christianity is the one true religion.<<
Then why not be Catholic?
Why not be Presbyterian?
Why not Methodist?
Why not Evangelical?
There are many denominations, you picked the best for you so it’s your one true religion. Or maybe you picked it cause it’s the closest church. Whatever floats your goat.
I believe that The Catholic Church is the best, but others are right for others.
When I attend church I attend a Presbyterian church.
My goat doesn’t float.
So, when you grew up and had children, did you tell yourself you knew all you needed to know about Catholic thought because you could quote from the Baltimore Catechism? Did you conclude that your Catholic education was over?
***No, but that’s how we were taught. Up until 8th grade, the BC was used. I always wondered throughout those years why the nuns never brought out the Bibles. One of the nuns actually taught my mother and my grandmother when they attended. And why so angry? No, I didn’t conclude that my education was finished. Sheesh.
That’s a problem with “catechisms” in my view. They are the beginning, not the end. To use them properly, I think, means looking further, beyond their texts and formulaic answers. If one ‘can quote from the Baltimore Chatechism’ yet knows ‘nothing from the Bible except for the main “stories,”’ I don’t see that as the Catholic Church’s fault. I see that as negligence on the part of a lay person.
***Oh really? I was a child being educated by the Catholic Church. How was a kid supposed to know better? When the Bishop came for our Confirmation, he asked all of us questions to which our answers needed to come from the Baltimore Catechism. Again...anger.
WHY didn’t you read the Bible? Did you read Aquinas on Grace — or Augustine or some introductory works? Did you LOOK for Catholic Bible Studies in your area?
***You know — again, I was a child. Back in the 70s no one questioned the Church. Certainly not generations who were already brainwashed into following the Church.
I’ve been through THIS movie before as a Protestant pastor. We put announcements in the bulletin, in the newsletter, on the bulletin board, in mailings, and we have Bible study and five people show up, while the others complain there was never any interesting offering.
***This isn’t a movie - it is a part of my life.
Catholics come to Mass late and leave during the closing hymn and complain that “nothing ever happens at that church — no I didn’t stay for the announcements or read the bulletin. They must think I have nothing to do but waste my time ....”
***Sorry, we weren’t those people, either.
Your presentation of “working off” the penalty of sin suggests an immature theology, something suitable MAYBE for Junior High. No offense, but the way you presented it is just flat insufficient for a mature and intelligent crowd.
***Wow. Your anger is immature and frankly, very weird. Way to lead people, pastor. Have a nice day.
Where did I jump you? I don’t even think I posted to you.
Good grief folks, have at each other. This is clearly my mistake for stopping in here.
I’m sorry. I responded to you and all.
You didn’t jump me. I apologize.
Others have jumped me for one comment. Again. I apologize to you.
I was reading and also distracted and looking at other sources at the same time.
Apology accepted. :)
Personal remark AND mind-reading. Both are prohibited by forum rules. It is clear that you do not know that I was angry because I wasn't. You misread my post and misread me.
AND I am no longer a pastor. I renounced my orders in 1994 to become a Catholic.
It simply IS immature to think of the temporal penalty for sin as "working off sin." On another thread I made the distinction between thinking of acceleration as distance/time squared, which is fine for 6th grade, and as the second derivative of distance over time which is what I'd expect of a high school student concentrating on physics
A high school theology student with initiative and enough interest to decide RESPONSIBLY that the Church is wrong has, I think, a duty to try to understand what the church teaches.
I don't know what the concern is about anger. I'm making a case here. Do I have to stop and smile or may I focus on the task?
If someone decides to leave the Church on the basis of the Baltimore Catechism alone, then it would seem that he thinks the Baltimore Catechism gives him all he needs to know about the teaching of the Church, that he thinks his education was over -- that it ended in 8th grade.
If he DIDN't think it was over he would find a thoughtful Catholic and ask for conversation and maybe a readding list.
Now a lot here TELL others what they thing (and how they feel, evidently.) I made a conjecture but thought I'd check. So I asked. YOU tell me I'm weird and a bad leader. I ask a question. And I'm the angry guy?
How was a kid supposed to know better?
As long as he was a kid, a kid's level of knowledge seems reasonable. But if, when he's in his twenties he is still thinking in terms of the BC which he learned in 8th grade, I think there's an issue.
You say you made your decision between your first and second child. I'm assuming that you did not stick with your 8th grade notions of the opposite sex or of the reproductive process or of how to be a good parent.
But to find out what the Catholic Church teaches about works and grace you go to the text you used in the 8th grade.
I'm not angry. I AM noticing a kind of inconsistency. In how many matters does one make important decisions based on what one thought in 8th grade or on one's 8th grade textbooks?
I was a child being educated by the Catholic Church. How was a kid supposed to know better?
You were a child when you had your second child? Clearly not. I am not criticizing a child for not reading more than what is assigned. I am questioning the reason of relying on 8th grade information when one is an adult.
From my POV, and what I observe in my admittedly unusual parish, is lots of adult Catholics coming to talks, running Bible study groups, giving and taking little classes. A lot of Catholics come to RCIA (Inquirers class) for a refresher on their religion, and this includes folks in their 60's and 70's.
I never took an official Catholic theology class in my life. I DID do a little work on Aquinas when I was a Protestant, in college and in seminary. But mostly I am an autodidact on this stuff. And I have never even SEEN a Baltimore Catechism. I've heard so much about it that I bet it's at once pretty cool and, as I said, a STARTING point for study.
I still don't know where all the attribution of anger comes from. As I said, I was building a case for a particular point of view.
Have a good evening, in any case.
I think what’s called for is serious study. Seriously. At this point there are so many myths about “the Inquisition”, the Crusades”, and the sale of indulgences that it’s no easy thing to get a good and fair view of the whole thing.
Sorry. My ‘assertion’ about sola was more like the arguments put forth. As far as I know, sola scriptura translates to scripture alone. But noticing that there are five so-called ‘solas’, they therefore do NOT stand alone. Hence the weird semantic arguments like “sola does not mean solo”, it means something else. Whatever, sorry about the mystification.
Quite right. Sorry about that.
2 Kings 2:11
“And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.”
“Heaven” has several usages in the bible, one of them being the sky above. “Example; the birds of heaven”. Elijah was simply moved by God and taken to a better place on earth. Note that Elijah eventually died later like all the prophets. “Heb.11:32”
“Hebrews 11:5
“Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him.”
If you read verse 13 of the same chapter, it says “these all [including Enoch] died.
Here, God at the time protected Enoch from death “Enoch was targeted for death by the wicked” by moving him from one place to another on the earth, similar to what he did with Elijah. Again, Enoch later died naturally.
Genesis 5:24
And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; For God took him.
Again, taken to a better place by God for protection to spare him of death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.