Posted on 07/17/2017 8:08:32 AM PDT by ebb tide
“Francis is more interested in leftwing politics than in Catholic theology”, George Neumayr, contributing editor of The American Spectator, states talking to Tom Woods on July 14th on tomwoods.com. Woods describes Francis as a result of John Paul II who - as he puts it - appointed "absolutely terrible people" as bishops: "Catholics have suffered under Bergoglios for decades now”.
Neumayr agrees that a lot of the liberal bishops were appointed by John Paul II and Benedict XVI. He sees Francis as the “culmination of a century” of liberalism and modernism in the Church.
For him it is "highly unlikely" that Francis, who in his theology is “more a Protestant than a Catholic” will convert to Catholicism. Instead, the realistic scenario is that Francis will produce division and chaos, "Catholics will have to decide whether they guard the faith over papolatry.”
And: “The Cardinals have to declare that Francis is a bad pope who must be resisted.”
ealgeone:
Again, the OT prefigures the NT, so no, we are not under the OT, however, the NT is the fullfillment of the OT.
Praying for the dead would not be inconsistent with NT. We are bound by time, not God. Can God in ways only known to Himself make effective the prayers of the Church for the dead? In Catholic Theology, the answer is Yes. As To How, that is a Holy Mystery.
And effectiveness of those Prayers for the dead in the Church can only be effective because of Christ Death and Resurrection, apart from that, it is nothing.
Without getting into a long discussion on this, there are numerous examples from the ECF that mention the Church in Her Liturgy praying for the dead. I know you would not totally accept those ECF writings since you come from a sola scriptura perspective, however, it does indicate what was a common practice in the Church well before the NT canon was finally settled in the late 4th century.
You can pray for them all you want....but their eternal destination is determined when they die.
If believers in Christ...Heaven. If not...hell.
If the RCC position were valid all we have to do is pray all the dead into Heaven without benefit of knowing Christ.
That's not a NT position.
Or we could say we have faith in Christ.
Not once. Not ever.
Heaven, and then raised into eternal life.
Hell, and raised into eternal death.
[/pedantic nitpick]
Sorry, just something I’m passionate about. ^^;
Not for those sealed by the Spirit. Eph 1:13-14
Don't be silly. Can you not see that Paul is using "works" with two different meanings? He must be since in one passage he says that God will repay everyone according to his works and in another he says that we are not saved by works. In Romans 2 he defines works as either doing evil or doing good. Latter he uses works to denote circumcision and the Mosaic Law. This latter meaning is especially clear in Ephesians. There is no contradiction if you look beyond the mere word and look at it context.
If you think that the Romanist works were so necessary for salvation, wouldn’t Paul have mentioned them?
He did, in Romans 2. In Ephesians 5 he also clearly states that immorality will loose us our salvation.
In the same book Paul writes we are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. Ephesians 1:13-14. How can he give the assurance in one place and take it away in another. He’d be contradicting himself.
Did you read the entire post? Most of your current post has already been answered.
Nor does talking about immorality affect how we are justified. It can not contradict any of Paul’s other statements, and contorting Paul’s plain words to fit a doctrine that says the exact opposite of what his plain words say is, in my opinion, foolish.
Good works and faith go together. If good works don’t exist, faith doesn’t exist. But it’s still faith and not works that justifies.
I am so sick of how some Catholics just continually assume that we don’t preach good works, even if salvation comes through faith. Why is that?
Happily! However, eyes have to be willing to be opened for the truth to sink in. Here is a link that shows Luther was NOT the only, nor the first, to translate Romans 3:28 using the phrase "faith alone":
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/02/luther-added-word-alone-to-romans-328.html
Previous translations of the word “alone” in Romans 3:28 Luther offers another line of reasoning in his “Open Letter on Translating” that many of the current Cyber-Roman Catholics ignore (and most Protestants are not aware of):
The Roman Catholic writer Joseph A. Fitzmyer points out that Luther was not the only one to translate Romans 3:28 with the word “alone.”
At 3:28 Luther introduced the adv. “only” into his translation of Romans (1522), “alleyn durch den Glauben” (WAusg 7.38); cf. Aus der Bibel 1546, “alleine durch den Glauben” (WAusg, DB 7.39); also 7.3-27 (Pref. to the Epistle). See further his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, of 8 Sept. 1530 (WAusg 30.2 [1909], 627-49; “On Translating: An Open Letter” [LuthW 35.175-202]). Although “alleyn/alleine” finds no corresponding adverb in the Greek text, two of the points that Luther made in his defense of the added adverb were that it was demanded by the context and that sola was used in the theological tradition before him. Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):
Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).
Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).
Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).
Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).
John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).
Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).
Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.
Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988).
To these eight Lyonnet added two others (Quaestiones, 114-18):
Theodoret, Affectionum curatio 7 (PG 93.100; ed. J. Raeder [Teubner], 189.20-24).
Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1, lect. 3 (Parma ed., 13.588): “Non est ergo in eis [moralibus et caeremonialibus legis] spes iustificationis, sed in sola fide, Rom. 3:28: Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis” (Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom 3:28: We consider a human being to be justified by faith, without the works of the law). Cf. In ep. ad Romanos 4.1 (Parma ed., 13.42a): “reputabitur fides eius, scilicet sola sine operibus exterioribus, ad iustitiam”; In ep. ad Galatas 2.4 (Parma ed., 13.397b): “solum ex fide Christi” [Opera 20.437, b41]).
See further:
Theodore of Mopsuestia, In ep. ad Galatas (ed. H. B. Swete), 1.31.15.
Marius Victorinus (ep. Pauli ad Galatas (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15-16: “Ipsa enim fides sola iustificationem dat-et sanctificationem” (For faith itself alone gives justification and sanctification); In ep. Pauli Ephesios (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15: “Sed sola fides in Christum nobis salus est” (But only faith in Christ is salvation for us).
Augustine, De fide et operibus, 22.40 (CSEL 41.84-85): “licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intellegatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur” (Although it can be said that God’s commandments pertain to faith alone, if it is not dead [faith], but rather understood as that live faith, which works through love”). Migne Latin Text: Venire quippe debet etiam illud in mentem, quod scriptum est, In hoc cognoscimus eum, si mandata ejus servemus. Qui dicit, Quia cognovi eum, et mandata ejus non servat, mendax est, et in hoc veritas non est (I Joan. II, 3, 4). Et ne quisquam existimet mandata ejus ad solam fidem pertinere: quanquam dicere hoc nullus est ausus, praesertim quia mandata dixit, quae ne multitudine cogitationem spargerent [Note: [Col. 0223] Sic Mss. Editi vero, cogitationes parerent.], In illis duobus tota Lex pendet et Prophetae (Matth. XXII, 40): licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere Dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intelligatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur; tamen postea Joannes ipse aperuit quid diceret, cum ait: Hoc est mandatum ejus, ut credamus nomini Filii ejus Jesu Christi, et diligamns invicem (I Joan. III, 23) See De fide et operibus, Cap. XXII, §40, PL 40:223.
Source: Joseph A. Fitzmyer Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993) 360-361.
Even some Catholic versions of the New Testament also translated Romans 3:28 as did Luther. The Nuremberg Bible (1483), “allein durch den glauben” and the Italian Bibles of Geneva (1476) and of Venice (1538) say “per sola fede.”
Why is it some people cannot understand that saying "immorality" can lose us our salvation is no different than saying "morality" gains us salvation???
Thank you. That’s very enlightening information which hopefully will be read by all concerned. Looks like Luther was repeating what he’d heard. This reinforces the idea that the RCC, and not Luther, had indeed departed from the faith.
Immorality can only lose salvation if you lose faith because of it.
But as per usual, it is faith in Christ, or lack thereof, not works that do it.
Please explain how Paul could say Abraham - who lived 430 years BEFORE the Law of Moses - was justified by faith but we, who are here thousands of years AFTER the Law was given, are justified by our works?
Though Catholicism claims that works of the law are different than the good works that justify us, Paul clearly stated that "if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come from the Law." (Gal. 3:21) The Law of Moses was the perfect law, but rather than impart eternal life to those that obey it completely (though no one ever could) it was given to point us to Christ, it is our schoolmaster. In fact, those who insist obedience to the law merits our salvation, have set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing! (Gal. 2:21).
We don't earn grace. If we did, it would not BE grace. So whether you say it is the works of the Law or the works of charity that we merit or deserve salvation - it's the same thing - you are setting aside God's grace and going about to establish your own righteousness. You WILL fail.
“Why is it some people cannot understand that saying “immorality” can lose us our salvation is no different than saying “morality” gains us salvation???”
............
+1
“In Ephesians 5 he also clearly states that immorality will loose us our salvation.”
No, Paul does not say this. You say it.
Yeah.
Intentional sin can LEAD to salvation loss, but it’s not because of the sin, it’s because of the loss of faith. Man cannot serve two masters and all that.
But that truth is, as seems to be so common, twisted into supporting something horrible.
“Intentional sin can LEAD to salvation loss, “
Not once. Not ever.
Salvation depends entirely on Christ’s sacrifice and righteousness that is imputed to the believer at the moment of salvation.
All the believer’s sins - past, present, future - were placed on Him and paid for.
The believer himself was place positionally in Him on the Cross and died.
This is the only basis of salvation and depends 100% on Him and His faithfulness and not on the believer.
This is the basis upon which Scripture proclaims in I John 5
11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12 Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.
13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.
If you insist.
I’ve seen too many of my closest friends ditch the faith because they loved their sin too much.
I hope you’re correct.
Jesus Christ is the Author and Finisher of our faith.
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.