Posted on 07/29/2008 4:39:52 PM PDT by annalex
Evangelicals have been going through a major change of heart in their view of Catholicism over the past 15 years or so. In the 80’s when I was in college I lived in the Biblebelt and had plenty of experience with Evangelicals–much of it bad experience. The 80’s was the height of the “Are you saved?” question. In Virginia, the question often popped up in the first 10 minutes of getting to know someone. As I look back, Isurmise that this was coached from the pulpit or Sunday school as it was so well coordinated and almost universally applied. It was a good tactic for putting Catholics on the defensive even before it was known that they were Catholic—”ummmm, uhhh, well no, I’m not sure, I’m Catholic.” Then a conversation about works righteousness or saint statues would ensue. Yeah, nice to meet you, too.
Thankfully, those days are pretty much over. We now have formerly rabid anti-Catholics apologizing and even praising the pope. Catholics and Evangelicals have both learned that we have much in common and need each other to face the secular culture with a solid front. But, where did this detente come from? I think there is a real history to be told here and a book should be written. Let me give my perceptions of 7 major developments since 1993, which I regard as the the watershed year for the renewal of the Catholic Church in the United States.
1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1993. When this document came out, it was uncertain that even Catholics would read it. We should have known that something was up when the French version hit the top of the bestsellers charts in France and stayed there for months. The English version did the same in the US. Catholics were reading the Catechism, forming study groups and challenging errant professors in the classroom.
2. World Youth Day, Denver 1993. Catholic youth and youth ministers woke up. Suddenly, Catholic youth ministers realized that the youth loved the pope. And they loved him all the more because he did not talk down to them or water down the faith. He challenged them. Gone now were the pizza and a video parish youth nights. Furthermore, youth and young adults took up the challenge to evangelize. One of those youth heard the message and started a website, New Advent. Catholic youth were now becoming zealous for the Catholic faith in its fullness and were not going to be swayed by an awkward conversation that began with “Are you saved?”
3. Scott Hahn. While the Catechism is great for expounding the Catholic faith, it is not a work of apologetics itself. It is not written to expose the flaws of Evangelical theology. It is not written to defend the Church against the attacks of Evangelicals per se. It just would not let them get away with misrepresenting the Catholic faith. But Scott Hahn hit the scene at about the same time with Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 1993). I first heard his testimony on cassette tape in 1996. It blew my mind. Suddenly, Catholic apologetics, which is as old as the Catholic Church itself, got a leg up and there was an explosion of books, magazines and websites that effectively undercut the arguments of the 5 Solas. For the first time, there was a cadre of Catholics well enough informed to defend their faith.
4. The Internet. The Net started exploding from 1993 to 1996. I had my first account in ‘94. Compuserve was horribly basic, but by ‘96 I had AOL and the religion debates raged instantly. Catholics who had just been given the most powerful weapon in the arsenal in the war against misinterpretation of their teaching were learning to type on a forum while balancing their catechisms on their laps. Of course, online versions came out, as well. But, no Evangelical bent on getting Catholics out of the arms of the Whore of Babylon could expect to do so without himself have a copy of the Catechism, knowing it inside out and pouring over it for the errors and horrors he would surely find. Evangelical apologists were confronted with a coherent and beautiful presentation of the Catholic faith that they were ill equipped to argue against. They learned that Catholics, too, loved Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Catechism had arrived providentially just before the internet and had turned the tables in just a few short years. With the apologetic movement hitting at the same time, Evangelicals were also confronted with Catholics who could argue from the Bible defending their faith and demonstrating the weaknesses of Evangelical interpretations of scripture.
5. Early Church Fathers. One fruit of the Apologetics movement has been a flowering anew of Catholic interest in Patristics. This is happening at every level from armchair apologists to doctoral studies. It is suddenly all about Patristics, whereas in the 70’s-90’s the academic focus had been on Karl Rahner and Liberation Theology.
6. Evangelical Third World Experience. Evangelicals have had a field day in Latin America among the poor who are not part of the internet conversation and are distant from the study of apologetics. But, Evangelicals have learned from their experiences abroad an essential aspect of the Gospel they were missing: the Works of Mercy. Once haughty with their criticism of “works righteousness,” they have learned one cannot attend to the spiritual needs of the poor without attending to their bodily needs. Catholic have always understood this. Now, the Evangelicals are coming around. I haven’t heard an Evangelical Televangelist speak on works righteousness in many years.
7. Secularism. With the collapse of the Mainline churches as the backbone of American religion over the past thirty years (since about 1975), Catholics and Evangelicals are the only ones left standing in this country to present the Gospel. Secularism is on the rise and is ruthless. Evangelicals are now learning that only Catholicism has the intellectual resources to combat the present secular age. And, with the pope, we have a pretty effective means for communicating the faith and representing it to the world. There is nothing an Evangelical can do that will match the power of one World Youth Day.
With such an array of Providential developments, Evangelicals as well as Catholics have come to appreciate the depth and the breadth of the Catholic faith. It is far more difficult for them to honestly dismiss Catholicism as the work of Satan as once they did without qualm. There have been apologies and there have been calls for a new partnership. Let us hope these developments will bring about a new moment of understanding for the Glory of the Lord.
The Soviet Union was promised nothing in the Scripture; the Church was promised that the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
Monks are witnesses of consecrated living. The laity is sustained by their prayers and educated on the priorities in life. In this example, we have a Coptic community of faith that preceded the Muslims and will outlast them in Egypt; we can read the book and learn how we, too, can have a life of meaning and endurance.
Forced conversion is contrary tot he teachings of the Chruch and always has been. Do you have a specific example that we can examine?
they were doing so as agents of the Roman pope
There was no agency relationship between the feudal sovereigns and the pope ever.
What was their offense, other than "heresy?"
The Albigensian crusade was a crusade, and not an inquisition. Like the Muslim in the Holy Land, they usurped territorial control in Southern France. Whatever your objections to the crusades are, what do they have to do with the inquisitorial methods?
I think you should take up Campion's advice.
And yet we are told by the same person you quoted, Paul, that all those who aspire to be "overseers" [episkopos, read "bishop" in some translations; "elders" in others] in the church should be the "husband of one wife" {lit., a "one woman man"], and should rule their own household well, else how can they manage the household of God. 1 Timothy 3:1-6
Is there a contradiction here? Paul didn't mandate the celibate life, he merely said to those who were so at that time to remain so in order to engage in the Lord's work.
If the monastic life is a model for the secular person, what do you do with the mandate given to Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth?
Basically, I believe your model doesn't hold water, and doesn't line up with the Scriptures.
I said "the scripture advises us all to consider". I did not offer any such interpetation.
You are asking me to engage in an extrascriptural speculation in the pattern of the lying fathers of the Reformation. I decline, since we have clear scripture on the divine love for all, quoted in 842, from which we can, God willing, all profit.
What's extra-scriptural is the claim that God loves all equally FOR THE PURPOSES of salvation. You well know that there are different kinds of love in the Bible, as in our own lives. God could not love all equally for salvation or else all or none would be saved. I do not see how your 842 addresses the issue of God's love for all men in the specific area of salvation.
The difference you speak of is likewise explained in the scripture: [Matt. 25:31-46]
I'm not sure how this is on point. If I was a newcomer and asked you how God's love for all men worked and you quoted me this passage, then I would assume that Catholics believe that God doesn't love men at all and the salvation is works-ONLY. :) Obviously, the faith component is not detailed in this particular passage. We say that the people who do the works God approves of are the only ones who had true faith. Other scriptures explain how that works. The works proceed from true faith and are not independent of it. As Paul cites from Ps. 53:
Rom 3:10-12 : 10 As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one."
So, I was asking that if God graces everyone equally for salvation what is it that then causes some to seek God and most not to. Catholicism has no answer for this question. THAT would be a reason for your declination. :)
In the scripture I quoted the reference is to salvation:
[God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4)
Further, Apoc. 3:19 explicitly links love to repentance and chastisement.
I'm not sure how this [Mt 25] is on point
The relevance of Matthew 25 is that it explains the free will component of salvation: while God loves us all, some choose to do the works that He teaches us to do; others don't.
if God graces everyone equally for salvation what is it that then causes some to seek God and most not to.
Because some don't love Him back, as Mt 25 makes clear: "as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me".
And you are better, smarter and holier than them.
BTW who made you better, smarter and holier than them?
BTW who made you better, smarter and holier than them?
What on earth are you talking about?
I don’t know if I am, but if I am, Jesus did. The love and understanding of the Holy Scripture is of a supernatural origin, and is an evidence of our supernatural end.
Very true. It's just that this universal church of Christ on earth is not in Rome, but in a variety of churches throughout the world, some more and some less faithful to the word of God. Nor is the church headed by a pope, but by Christ alone.
I do confess my sins as a recognition that they are an affront and an offense to God's holiness. I don't know where you ever got the idea that I don't believe in confession of sins.
I go directly to the mercy seat in heaven; the throne of grace, as commanded in the word of God (Hebrews 4:15). I meet with the High Priest there. His name is Jesus Christ, Who payed my sin debt in its entirety. I meet there with Him as per 1 John 1:7-9 in context, and maintain my fellowship with the Father.
Every child of God (that does not mean every human being - to be a child of God requires a NEW CREATION by God) has direct and open right of access and entrance into the presence of God because of the Blood of Christ. The book of Hebrews spells all of this out quite clearly. I joyfully take advantage of it, and find it to be true in the Christian “experiment.”
Whatever you think the Church is that Christ founded in Matthew 16, it, NOR any earthly visible church can control the access and entrance of sinner or saint directly to the God's throne THROUGH Jesus Christ.
The Church of which Jesus Christ is the Head is HIS FULNESS, the union with Him of every regenerated soul, every soul from the Cross to the Second Coming of Christ who has relied on Christ (by deliberate, positive faith) as their Sin-Bearer, Sin-Debt-Payer, Righteousness, living Lord, and Eternal Life. All who genuinely belong to Christ in this age ARE HIS CHURCH — HIS BODY.
In the scripture I quoted the reference is to salvation: [God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4)
But is that REALLY what God will have? No, or else God is a failure. He is making an outward call as opposed to a decree. Outward calls are not backed up with action by God designed to accomplish the thing asserted. Decrees are. It is simply not true, and no one can claim, that God loves all men SUCH THAT all men will be saved. It absolutely IS true that God loves all of His elect SUCH THAT they will be saved:
Rom 8:29-30 : 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those he predestined , he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
Eph 1:4-5 : 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—
Eph 1:11-12 : 11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.
All of these describe decrees, God will act, He will choose according to His will, He will justify, He will glorify, etc. These match what we actually see, that some are saved and some not. And here, we also see that God gets everything He actually wants without being a failure.
Further, Apoc. 3:19 explicitly links love to repentance and chastisement.
Well sure, but that obviously does not apply to all men, but those who are already Christians, the ones He loves. Paul explains:
Heb 12:8 : If you are not disciplined (and everyone undergoes discipline ), then you are illegitimate children and not true sons.
Since obviously not everyone is a child of God (scripture available upon request), then this means that ONLY children of God are disciplined by God. Therefore, the passage in Revelation is talking about believers who fall away temporarily.
The relevance of Matthew 25 is that it explains the free will component of salvation: while God loves us all, some choose to do the works that He teaches us to do; others don't.
I can understand how your side would use that to show THAT free will is a component, but it doesn't explain WHY it is that some choose the good over the evil. What the Catholic cannot say is that God is sovereign and decides, as opposed to, men are sovereign and decide.
In 1231, Pope Gregory IX published a decree which called for life imprisonment with salutary penance for the heretic who had confessed and repented and capital punishment for those who persisted. The secular authorities were to carry out the execution. Pope Gregory relieved the bishops and archbishops of this obligation, and made it the duty of the Dominican Order, though many inquisitors were members of other orders or of the secular clergy.
The Albigensian crusade was a crusade, and not an inquisition.
A later pope, Pope Gregory IX established the Inquisition, in 1233, to combat the heresy of the Abilgenses, a religious sect in France.
The express purpose of this original medieval Inquisition was to discover and eliminate vestiges of Cathar belief left after the Cathar Crusades. ... In 1233 the next pope, Gregory IX, charged the Dominican Inquisition with the final solution: the absolute extirpation of the Cathars.
There have actually been several different inquisitions. The first was established in 1184 in southern France as a response to the Catharist heresy. This was known as the Medieval Inquisition, and it was phased out as Catharism disappeared.
The promise is given the Church founded on the person of Apostle Peter, not to any variety, especially the less faithful kind that only knows to protest against the Gospel.
Wonderful. I did not know you go to Mass.
Whatever you think the Church is that Christ founded in Matthew 16, it, NOR any earthly visible church can control the access and entrance of sinner or saint directly to the God's throne THROUGH Jesus Christ.
Actually, the Church founded on the person and faith of St. Peter can, in the name of Christ, control access to the Heavenly Kingdom, the scripture says. Remember the keys part?
I still did not see an answer from you to why did Christ commission the Apostles to forgive sins, and where exactly did He tell us to go directly to Him, and not through them, for forgiveness of sin.
Again, being Catholic I read what is written in the scripture and believe it; you speculate and come out with God being according to you, either a failure or a liar.
The quotes about predestination do not disprove divine love for the reprobate. That God knows our will before we ourselves do, and even before we are born does not limit His love to the elect only.
ONLY children of God are disciplined by God.
Hebrews 12:8 says the exact opposite: "chastisement whereof all are made partakers". The reprobates do not respond to chastisement, but they surely receive it. "See that you refuse him not that speaketh" (v. 25) makes it very clear that it is the reprobate who refuses grace, not God who does not give it.
WHY it is that some choose the good over the evil.
Because some respond to the snares of the Devil, of course. "The woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat" (Gen 3:6). Did God not love her? Funny god you have.
Gregory IX was very severe towards heretics, who in those times were universally looked upon as traitors and punished accordingly. Upon the request of King Louis IX of France, he sent Cardinal Romanus as legate to assist the king in his crusade against the Albigenses. At the synod which the papal legate convened at Toulouse in November, 1229, it was decreed that all heretics and their abettors should be delivered to the nobles and magistrates for their due punishment, which, in case of obstinacy, was usually death. When in 1224 Frederick II ordered that heretics in Lombardy should be burnt at the stake, Gregory IX, who was then papal legate for Lombardy, approved and published the imperial law. During his enforced absence from Rome (1228-1231) the heretics remained unmolested and became very numerous in the city. In February, 1231, therefore, the pope enacted a law for Rome that heretics condemned by an ecclesiastical court should be delivered to the secular power to receive their "due punishment". This "due punishment" was death by fire for the obstinate and imprisonment for life for the penitent. In pursuance of this law a number of Patarini were arrested in Rome in 1231, the obstinate were burned at the stake, the others were imprisoned in the Benedictine monasteries of Monte Cassino and Cava (Ryccardus de S. Germano, ad annum 1231, in Mon. Germ. SS., XIX, 363). It must not be thought, however, that Gregory IX dealt more severely with heretics than other rulers did. Death by fire was the common punishment for heretics and traitors in those times. Up to the time of Gregory IX, the duty of searching out heretics belonged to the bishops in their respective dioceses. The so-called Monastic Inquisition was established by Gregory IX, who in his Bulls of 13, 20, and 22 April, 1233, appointed the Dominicans as the official inquisitors for all dioceses of France (Ripoil and Bremond, "Bullarium Ordinia Fratrum Praedicatorum", Rome, 1729, I, 47).
Then you should be able to explain those scriptures which absolutely make God out to be a failure or a liar under Catholic beliefs. He is neither under our beliefs according to scripture, and I have explained how.
The quotes about predestination do not disprove divine love for the reprobate.
They DO disprove God's love for them concerning salvation. It is plain. Sure, He loves them by giving rain and sunshine, etc., but that is not the same.
That God knows our will before we ourselves do, and even before we are born does not limit His love to the elect only.
For salvation it sure DOES because He creates them anyway, knowing they will spend eternity in hell. He creates His elect knowing they will spend eternity with Him in Heaven. If that doesn't signify a difference in love on that subject, given that God is all powerful, then God necessarily loves no one.
Hebrews 12:8 says the exact opposite: "chastisement whereof all are made partakers". The reprobates do not respond to chastisement, but they surely receive it. "See that you refuse him not that speaketh" (v. 25) makes it very clear that it is the reprobate who refuses grace, not God who does not give it.
So am I to understand that the Great Commission was written ONLY for the Apostles, and of course their imaginary successors, but that Heb. 12:8 is written to all people, everywhere, who have ever lived since? The Bible is clear that some are sons and some are not (John 1:12). Verse 8 says that those who are not disciplined are not true sons. Therefore, the reprobate are not disciplined in the Christian sense. They are punished, but not with the expectation of recovery that the author of Hebrews is talking about. God wiping out whole cities in the OT is not the discipline that is being discussed in this passage. There is no reasonable interpretation that the corporate "you" in this passage has anything to do with the reprobate.
FK: WHY it is that some choose the good over the evil.
Because some respond to the snares of the Devil, of course. "The woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat" (Gen 3:6). Did God not love her? Funny god you have.
God loves Eve if she is in Heaven today, but your response doesn't answer the "why" of it. Are these people less smart, less loving, etc. and what or Who made them that way? Some were not brought up in loving homes, and such, so do you think environment plays a big role on one's eternal destiny? That would go toward the "why". Remember I am not the first to ask this:
1 Cor 4:7 : For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?
I am asking how Catholicism reconciles this. Doesn't this suggest to you that God gave something to the elect that He did not give to the reprobate?
You presume the absence of free will, then with that presumption firmly in mind ask me to explain Catholicism to you. Get rid of that silly and unscriptural idea, and every scripture will become crystal clear.
Here’s the explanation: men can accept or resist grace according to their free will. To accept grace is to love God. To resist grace is not to love Him. God’s love is unconditional and extends to the reprobates (those who don’t love God back). The reasons they are reprobates is the original sin which left them with inflated pride, weak will and darkened intellect; hence they fall prey to Satan.
God knows His elect and His reprobates. He cannot “fix” the reprobates because love by definition has to come from the free will. For God to save a reprobate against the reprobate’s will is as impossible as it is impossible for Him to lie, or fail, or not love.
What God can do is give opportunities for the free will to turn the right way. Those are in the form of the Sacraments of His Church that transmit the saving grace, the revelation of God in Christ, and the chastisement of suffering that everyone receives, but not everyone can use to grow closer to Christ.
It is very simple.
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.