Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
Okay, this is just so unexpected...sorry FRiends, but I have to HOWL laughing!!!!
QUIX, of all people, inspiring someone to apologize to ME of all people!
Honestly, I wish we were all in the same room. I’d get out an adult beverage for anyone who wanted one, and make a toast to the unlikeliest event, one I could NEVER have imagined!
ROFL!!!!
Forgive me, it’s just so....so...amazing!
Just go back to each persons posts. Yes, it’s a lot to do, but it is quite eye opening!!!
How about Article 5:
We are children of the King to rest upon His work-not our.
Now if you believe I'm reading too much into this text I would suggest the following:
It is the same way with our belief. In every case that you've pointed out our Lord tells them their "faith has made them well" just like He told the disciples bring in "the fish YOU caught". God must grant to us what He commands.
As far as your scriptures go, I don't have a problem with any of them. What you have steadfastly refused to answer is who gives you your belief? Where does your faith come from? Answer that, and you'll understand why Arminius was wrong.
wmf-I'm not sure that's a fair assessment.
I would agree with you wmfights but I know where Dr. E is coming from. I think the basic problem is in the OSAS doctrine. It is inconsistent at best. Those who believe you have free will must take the next logical step and say you can lose your faith. Many just do not take that step. Nor will they take the step towards election. They exist in between two doctrines.
654 The Paschal mystery has two aspects: by his death, Christ liberates us from sin; by his Resurrection, he opens for us the way to a new life. This new life is above all justification that reinstates us in God's grace, "so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."526 Justification consists in both victory over the death caused by sin and a new participation in grace.527 It brings about filial adoption so that men become Christ's brethren, as Jesus himself called his disciples after his Resurrection: "Go and tell my brethren."528 We are brethren not by nature, but by the gift of grace, because that adoptive filiation gains us a real share in the life of the only Son, which was fully revealed in his Resurrection.
What your Catachism does state is that "by His death He liberates us". Christ is raised so that we too might be raised. Wrong. God only recognizes the finish work of Christ-not ours. But this aligns with the Eastern Orthodox position.
It should be pointed out this is "new" teaching. The early church fathers never believed this. I'll stand by what I've stated, the Catholic Church does not believe in the atonement for sin any more. Your Catachism proves it.
So I accept your apology for saying I'm "slandering" the Catholic faith. I would suggest Catholics become more accutely aware of their Catachism before they make such accusations.
Thank you.
I think the basic problem is in the OSAS doctrine. It is inconsistent at best. Those who believe you have free will must take the next logical step and say you can lose your faith.
It's a good point.
Many just do not take that step. Nor will they take the step towards election.
As a Baptist I've always held to "once saved always saved" and equated it in terms Reformed would call "preservation of the saints". I hadn't thought about the free will argument because the indwelling Holy Spirit is with us forever. We can't change our minds and drag the Holy Spirit to Hell with us.
OK, but I'm still trying to get the approach. For the sake of discussion, let's put everything in the Catechism that is extra-Biblical to the side for a moment. Would you then say that everything in the rest of the Catechism is right because it matches the higher authority of scripture, OR, would you say that everything in the rest of the Catechism is correct because the authors of the Catechism were inspired just like the authors of the Bible were?
There is nothing in paragraphs 653 or 654 on that topic.
What your Catachism [sic] does state is that "by His death He liberates us".
What paragraphs 653 and/or 654 does state...
But, beyond the two paragraphs you quote, there is this (just as an example):
Liberation and salvation. By his glorious Cross Christ has won salvation for all men. He redeemed them from the sin that held them in bondage. "For freedom Christ has set us free."34 In him we have communion with the "truth that makes us free."35 The Holy Spirit has been given to us and, as the Apostle teaches, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom."36 Already we glory in the "liberty of the children of God."37Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1741
So I accept your apology for saying I'm "slandering" the Catholic faith.
I made no such apology. None will be forthcoming.
I would suggest Catholics become more accutely aware of their Catachism before they make such accusations.
I would suggest you start at CCC paragraph 1 and continue to paragraph 2865 before you lecture Catholics on our Catechism.
a) Mary to be co-equal with the SonYou have attempted to excuse one of these, though you failed.
b) that she imparts grace
c) that the atonement is nothing more than Christ showing us how to live
d) that the inspired works in scripture is no more than any other writings
e) or that they actually do worship (yes, not venerate) relics and Mary
This is a very pretty thing and a wonderful witness to the love of God IMHO.
How do you know Natural Law doesn't understand "Blessed Assurance?"
614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other sacrifices. First, it is a gift from God the Father himself, for the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself. At the same time it is the offering of the Son of God made man, who in freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience.I'll stand by what I've stated, the Catholic Church does not believe in the atonement for sin any more. Your Catachism proves it.615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous." By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities". Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father.
616 It is love "to the end" that confers on Christ's sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as ,atonement and satisfaction. He knew and loved us all when he offered his life. Now "the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died." No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all. The existence in Christ of the divine person of the Son, who at once surpasses and embraces all human persons, and constitutes himself as the Head of all mankind, makes possible his redemptive sacrifice for all.
1505 On the cross Christtook upon himself the whole weight of evil ....
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.
Whom should I believe, you or my lying eyes?
Nobody can say everything at once. One cannot conclude that because the catechism doesn't say something in one place it doesn't say it in any place.
This is where shades come in (and also my ignorance) but I think our language about the magisterium is "protected from error," as distinct from "inspired." FWIW
You show me anywhere in the Catachism that states God wrath rested upon our Lord Jesus for the sins of the world. The catachism specifically states it was a "liberation" for the salvation of men-not a payment of punishment for all men.
I would suggest you start at CCC paragraph 1 and continue to paragraph 2865 before you lecture Catholics on our Catechism.
If Catholics can't understand their Catechism then, yes, they do need lecturing on them. I've been called "stupid" by some of the Catholics out here. Well sorry, but I find that Catholics can't even read their Catachisms nor can they understand them-even when I post them in plain sight.
I don't need to read the entire catechism to reconize heretical-bordering on blasphemous-doctrine. If a person does not understand that the wrath of God rest on them and accepts that our Lord Jesus paid their price, they are simply not saved. This is the gospel handed down by the fathers. If the Church is not teaching this, and it's not, then it is not teaching the gospel.
BLESSED BE THE NAME OF THE LORD!
PRAISE GOD FOR HIS FAITHFULNESS.
I’m sure Judith Anne or Petronski or some such might have a dissenting perspective. LOL.
It touches me deeply that you see that.
Many folks take fierce disagreement and outrage at some heresies and blasphemies as personal hatred. Thankfully, they are exceedingly wrong. It blesses me tons that you and many others see the reality that’s quite different from that perspective.
Besides, I want to be forgiven instantly 24/7. Scripture teaches me I must practice and sow such forgiveness if I want such.
Mercifully, God has, through many long painful dark nights of the soul, also taught me to love even those who would seek my pain and even my death.
And, isn’t being a Christian about Loving God and being conformed by Him to the image of His Son? Nothing else is worth anything, really.
If a lot of the folks who are so hostile towards me could see my heart toward them, it would jangle them quite a bit. Sadly, they can’t see past their reactions to my word antics against various beliefs and practices.
Thankfully, God can.
And, evidently, you.
What a gift. And it’s past Christmas! Praise God.
THANKS TONS.
And who deserves the lecture if you cannot understand them?
Read.
I don't need to read the entire catechism to reconize heretical-bordering on blasphemous-doctrine.
Of course not.
My suggestion is that you read the entire Catechism of the Catholic Church to recognize that it is NOT heretical--bordering on blasphemous--doctrine.
Or do you mean blasphemy against YOPIOS?
One of my first thoughts was something like . . .
Judith must have had an interesting response to this! LOL.
Lots of things are amazing Judith. Lots.
I’ve appreciated your civil, charitable posts to me. Warms my heart and raises my understanding and respect for your Christianity enormously.
PRAISE GOD.
I’m guessing that we’re having our legs pulled here. The CCC is so full of the very stuff HarleyD says it so completely lacks that this has to be a joke.
“But how can you be born into something different before you are born into something different? We are children of wrath until God changes our hearts.”
Yes, we are children of wrath until we believe. Then, “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God”. There are hundreds of verses about our need to believe and have faith. Hundreds.
You suggest this “can be explained by the fact that their belief came from God.” OK, show it. Arminius and I agree that God must reveal himself first - that we do not seek God out. But if God reveals himself to us, where does it say he then provides us with belief? There are passages where men are rebuked for having too little faith, or no belief, but where does it say that God does not give us the opportunity to believe, but gives us belief itself?
“Do you believe that you can resist God? If God calls you, do you really believe that you can simply say no to God? God turns the hearts of men where He wills.”
Well, what does scripture say?
Eph 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
Heb 3:7-8 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness,
Heb 6:4-6 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance
Of course, you agree that man can resist God’s ‘public call’, and you agree that we can resist God’s will in our lives - unless, of course, you believe we sin IAW God’s will. Sorry, HD, but scripture explicitly states that we can resist the will of God.
When they say Christians “have thereby full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory;”, what do they do other than repeat scripture? It doesn’t say we obey perfectly, but that by the power of God we can resist Satan and sin (as we are commanded to do). We can deny the flesh, as we are commanded to do, and walk in the Spirit. It says we have power to STRIVE: “1. to exert oneself vigorously; try hard: He strove to make himself understood. 2. to make strenuous efforts toward any goal: to strive for success. 3. to contend in opposition, battle, or any conflict; compete.”
Do you deny it?
HD “We are children of the King to rest upon His work-not our.”
Someone forgot to tell Jesus & Paul.
“Mat 16:24 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.
Luk 9:23 And he said to all, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
Luk 14:27 “Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.
Gal 5 “25If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.”
1 Cor 9 “ 24Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. 25Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. 27But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.”
We are not saved passively, nor are we called to be passive.
HD “And yet, Romans tells us that NO one does what is right. Now if no one does what is right, then how can the Article 4 of the Remonstrant be correct? It can’t.”
Article 4 states “That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following and cooperative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements, that can be conceived, must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ.”
How does that conflict with Romans 3?
You worry about “Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.”
That agrees with Arminius. We can not reach to heaven to draw God down, he must reach to us. The word for draw is used one other time for God’s interaction with men: “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” John 12:32
The word for draw implies force, supporting your side...but consider this (and this just occurred to me, so it isn’t a well thought out argument - not that you would expect that from an Arminian anyways):
In the parable of the wedding feast, the King sends out his servants to pull people in from the streets. He compels them to come, so that sounds a lot like drawing. (8Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find.’ 10And those servants went out into the roads and gathered all whom they found, both bad and good. So the wedding hall was filled with guests.) - Matt 22
But what happens next?
11”But when the king came in to look at the guests, he saw there a man who had no wedding garment. 12And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot and cast him into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ 14For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Not all the guest brought in accept the wedding clothes from the King. At least one remained in his rags, and he is cast into the outer darkness. “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
So I would say John 6:44 means what it says: “No one can come to me” “unless the Father who sent me draws him.”
First the Father draws. And if God does not intervene, none of us have the choice of coming. But God HAS drawn us, and those who respond by coming (”whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.- v 35) “will [be raised] up on the last day.”.
HD “Now why would the Holy Spirit forbid speaking in certain places? Why would God harden the hearts of Jews? Why would God not do the miracles in Tyre to cause them to repent?”
1 - Now why would the Holy Spirit forbid speaking in certain places?
Don’t know. Because it wouldn’t be productive? Haven’t you ever talked to someone, and then felt a strong compulsion to stop? Arminius didn’t teach man comes to God, but that God reaches to man, and that God’s grace or revealing himself is given in different measure. And we don’t know why, but we trust God is just.
2 - Why would God harden the hearts of Jews?
See Romans 9-11, where Paul explains, not how men come to be saved, but why the Jews are STILL God’s chosen people, inheritors of the promise.
3 - Why would God not do the miracles in Tyre to cause them to repent? See #1.
HD “The only obvious answer is because it is His will that they DON’T repent.”
No. It is explicitly stated that it is God’s will for all to repent. However, it is also explicitly stated that he gives up men who have rejected his revelation to greater degradation.
“In the above example one could argue that the disciples caught the fish. However, we know that they really would not have caught anything if it was not for the Lord telling them to drop their net. In fact, they had been trying to catch fish all night.
It is the same way with our belief. In every case that you’ve pointed out our Lord tells them their “faith has made them well” just like He told the disciples bring in “the fish YOU caught”. God must grant to us what He commands.”
You miss what happens. God doesn’t compel them to toss their nets anywhere. He directs them to, and they...respond obediently. NO one is claiming we save ourselves. But God doesn’t climb in our boats and toss the nets for us, either!
You also miss what happens when Jesus was healing, so I’ll repeat it:
Mat 8:13 And to the centurion Jesus said, “Go; let it be done for you as you have believed.” And the servant was healed at that very moment.
Mat 9:28 When he entered the house, the blind men came to him, and Jesus said to them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?” They said to him, “Yes, Lord.”
Luk 8:50 But Jesus on hearing this answered him, “Do not fear; only believe, and she will be well.”
Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith.
Mat 9:2 And behold, some people brought to him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.”
Mat 9:22 Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well.
Mat 9:29 Then he touched their eyes, saying, “According to your faith be it done to you.”
Mat 15:28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly.
Mar 2:5 And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “My son, your sins are forgiven.”
Mar 5:34 And he said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease.”
Mar 10:52 And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.
Luk 17:19 And he said to him, “Rise and go your way; your faith has made you well.”
Luk 18:42 And Jesus said to him, “Recover your sight; your faith has made you well.”
Act 14:9 He listened to Paul speaking. And Paul, looking intently at him and seeing that he had faith to be made well,
Faith first, then healing takes place.
“Just to be clear, the early Protestants believe Arminius to be a heretic.”
Just to be clear, the Synod of Dort was a state religion meeting with only Calvinists present. Not surprisingly, the Calvinists decided Arminians were heretics, and 4 days later their chief supporter was executed.
However, the first English Baptists were Arminians, in 1610. The earliest Baptist Confession of Faith was done by an Arminian. The Particular Baptists hit England over 20 years later.
The SBC says there is ample room for both in the Convention, so the official SBC position is that we are not heretics. And of course, we all know that Catholics considered Calvinists to be heretics, and Calvinists considered Catholic to be heretics, and both despised the AnaBaptists, and the English Baptist (both General and Particular) were not loved by Anglicans or Catholics.
The early Protestants continued the idea of a state church (not justified by Sola Scriptura, although the latter is followed only when convenient), and likewise continued baptizing for infants.
HD “What you have steadfastly refused to answer is who gives you your belief? Where does your faith come from?”
What I do know is that the Calvinist idea that they are gifts given by God to the Elect is nowhere taught in scripture. Both belief and faith are repeatedly - in literally hundreds of verses - described as something men do, not receive.
"Jesus atoned for our faults" - No, Christ did not atone for our "faults" which means a weakness of character. He atoned for our sins which means our transgressions or rebellion.
No man, not even the holiest, was ever able to take on himself the sins of all men and offer himself as a sacrifice for all.
Doesn't this statement makes you even the tisy-wesy nervous? If our Lord Jesus was not the most holiest man (besides being the Son of God) then what was He. Didn't He die in His humanity? If there is any statement that fully support what I'm saying it is this remark. Doesn't the author consider Jesus fully man? Wow, there went some church violations or something.
Christ took upon himself the whole weight of evil ....
No, Christ did not take the whole weight of "evil". He took on the whole weight of sin. There is a significant difference.
...and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men.
And here we come round about as to what the meaning of atonement is. The "blood has become the instrument of atonement". Wrong. We are atoned of our sin through our Lord Jesus. The shedding of the blood is the price for that atonement-the remissions of our sins.
I'd suggest Catholics are trying to read into this that grace is imparted through the Eucharist. Sorry but that is not what the scriptures teaches.
Don't believe me. I'd suggest you believe the scriptures instead of some goofy catechism.
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.