Intended Catholic Dictatorship

Independent Individualist ^ | 8/27/10 | Reginald Firehammer

[bkaycee]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe in the Calvinist view the good news is you were born with a free ticket to heaven, sin all the away, no matter what.

The elect are not born regenerated and Will believe when the Gospel is presented. Paul addresses antinomianism in Rom 6 and various other places. Those who "sin all the way", prove they are not Christians.

[D-fendr]

Maybe that's why we seem to be talking past each other. I am not Calvinist, either!

Praise the Lord !

;)

We can work on the OSAS part...

Thanks very much for your replies.

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply:

The elect are not born regenerated and Will believe when the Gospel is presented.

And there will be no cases where that doesn't happen, correct? IOW, from the womb they have a ticket to heaven, everyone else a ticket to hell.

Those who "sin all the way", prove they are not Christians.

So if they don't stop sinning, ipso factso, they're not elect? I would guess it's more a matter of degree. Is there some general guideline on this? Or is it so long as they are contrite; IOW is everyone who is regrets their sin, elect?

Is everyone who thinks they're elect, elect, or could they be wrong?

[daniel1212]

Perfunctory professions are part of both Catholicism and Protestantism, but what is being dealt with is what characterizes the latter now. Certainly historically it did not take sin or prayer for forgiveness lightly, as a reading of the most popular classic commentaries will show. But that atonement is made and God is ready to forgive and promises to do when the conditions are met is also clear.

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (2Chr. 7:14)

... but to this [man] will I look, [even] to [him that is] poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word. (Isa 66:2b)

We can see in Acts how that conviction of sin, and of righteousness and of judgment (Jn. 16:8) regarding Christ preceded conversion, thus

Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do? (Acts 2:37)

[bkaycee]

So if they don't stop sinning, ipso factso, they're not elect? I would guess it's more a matter of degree.

Those who claim to have recieved the new birth but produce little or no fruit are certainly suspect. If the New birth is not life changing, it is reasonable to suspect it has not taken place. Offcourse only God knows the heart.

Is there some general guideline on this? Or is it so long as they are contrite; IOW is everyone who is regrets their sin, elect?

Only those who repent and place they Faith/Trust in Christ's finished work on the cross as their only salvation.

Is everyone who thinks they're elect, elect, or could they be wrong?

Yes, we are told to exanmine ourselves to see that we are in the Faith. If the fruits of a new life are not present or we are found to be trying to score points with God for salvation, then most likely the new birth has not taken place.

[D-fendr]

Yes, we are told to exanmine ourselves to see that we are in the Faith.

Fox guarding the hen house?

Could you be wrong in your examination on whether you "pass" and are really already saved?

I'm being a bit facetious, but when looked at properly, as I think you are doing, in practice, personal experience of double predestination is a bit tenuous.

[caww]

Yes, I believe this was so and still is today prior to conversion. But once we have walked with Him and are acquainted with what He desires of us...when we fail it just has not been so gut-wretching as when one first comes to Him.

I agree some Historical authors, “Kemp” comes to mind, oftentimes struggled and mightily so before God. We do as well at times. But on a ‘daily’ I don't think this is what Christ expects of us as those being set free to love Him and serve Him with Joy. To imagine oneself “Begging” as if there is any possibility He would not forgive unless I beg hard enough or strong enough does not compute with the Christ I have know. Rather more as a loving Father would hear His child.

[Kolokotronis]

“The ACTUAL Dogma(MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS) uses many references about Mary dying before being Assumed into heaven and DOES NOT say she was alive before being Assumed into heaven.”

Shows what I know! :)In fact, it is quite clear that she had indeed died before the Assumption.

[kosta50]

"The Encyclopedia bears the imprimatur of the Most Reverend Archbishop under whose jurisdiction it is published."

The bottom of the New Advent page reads "Copyright © by Kevin Knight, Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary." I odn't see any imprimatur statement in it.

The organ ETWN likewise says, “The Tridentine list or decree was the first infallible and effectually promulgated declaration on the Canon of the Holy Scriptures.”

EWTN is a popular Roman Catholic television channel which says popular things that are not always right and this is one of them. Specifically, what is wrong is the word "first," which reflects popular but mistaken opinion of many a Roman Catholic, clergy and lay person alike.

The infallibility of the Church does not depend on, or originate from, ecumenical councils or papal ex-cathedra proclamations both of which are rare and far in between, and are considered  "extraordinary" manifestation of infallible teaching of the Church or "Sacred Magisterium". The more common or usual or "ordinary" manifestation of ecclesial infallibility is made through the "Ordinary Magisterium." They are distinguished respectively as de fide credenda (revealed) and de fide tendenda (based on tradition and circumstance).

However, not all ecumenical council or ex-cathedra proclamations are necessarily of the credenda type. nevertheless, both Magisteria are manifestations of ecclesial infallibility because the Church is believed to be infallible, even if her individual members are not.

[kosta50]

Those who "sin all the way", prove they are not Christians

Oooh, so you mean to tell me that "real" Christians at some point become sinless in this lifetime?

Sure sounds like a subtle way of preaching a works-based salvation.

[kosta50]

The actual wording of the dogma of the Assumption of Theotokos neither affirms nor denies her death:

"By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory" [+Pius XII, 1950]

[aruanan]

"By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory" [+Pius XII, 1950]

And notice that it doesn't say "testimony" because there was none given on this matter by either Jesus, Peter, or Paul. So the "authority" is invoked simply as a way of saying, "This is so because we say it's so. We're asserting we have the same authority as Jesus, Peter, and Paul and since you can't win in going up against them, you can't win in going up against us. Since they're unimpeachable and since we assert that we are of the same class as they, we, therefore, are unimpeachable in whatever we say, and this is what we're saying about Mary's assumption. Besides, it's divinely revealed and the proof of that is that because on our authority we say it's divinely revealed. So if you deny what we're asserting on our authority, you're going up against God, Jesus, Peter, and Paul. Why? Because they've ever said anything about us or vouched for us? No, because we invoke their authority as our authority and if you question it and don't repent of it, we'll cast you into outer darkness."

[stfassisi]

The actual wording of the dogma of the Assumption of Theotokos neither affirms nor denies her death:

True, but without the foundation of the Church Fathers clearly saying she did die used as foundation of the Assumption document there would be no dogma at all without that foundation.

So, I think that speaks for itself ,thus we can and should agree on this,Dear friend.

I know that some people have taken more than they should from this and thought it to mean we can believe either way ,but I don't think they should have

[OLD REGGIE]

But I am going tom have to leave you, OR, because I am tired of reading your posts about me. Maybe that will give you an opportunity to find another obsession, or perhaps, there is always hope, maybe you will decide to write about the topics instead, and add a little substance to them for a change. :)

I fully understand your desire to break off this exchange. Narcissistic personalities do not take well to criticism, disagreement, or correction. Obama comes to mind.

I admit to being somewhat surprised that not one of the "learned" Catholics on this forum have taken exception to any of your erroneous claims concerning Catholic teaching. Perhaps they are too pleased with your anti-Protestantism to notice.

[bkaycee]

Oooh, so you mean to tell me that "real" Christians at some point become sinless in this lifetime?

Certainly, not. No one is perfected this side of Heaven. However, ones life must be different for the better if there is a new birth. A tree and its fruit.

[OLD REGGIE]

Here's a generous listing of writings of Early Church Fathers you can choose from for your list of unanimous patristic support for Unitarian Universalism.

Ya still got nuthin'?

Their letters are hidden deep in the Vatican Archives and will not be made available to you.

[Kolokotronis]

“I admit to being somewhat surprised that not one of the “learned” Catholics on this forum have taken exception to any of your erroneous claims concerning Catholic teaching.”

Not being a learned “Catholic”, at least not of the Latin persuasion, I wouldn’t know an erroneous “Catholic” teaching if I saw one, as was amply demonstrated by my erroneous claim that the Latins believe, and are compelled to believe, that Panagia never died (which was promptly corrected by one of the learned Latins here), so I, at least, wouldn’t be taking exception with what Kosta might say about Latin beliefs.

As for Kosta being anti-Protestant, he looks thoroughly Orthodox to me, his protestations of agnosticism to the contrary notwithstanding. Vigorous presentation of the praxis and Holy Tradition of The Church is a hallmark of Orthodoxy, not an example of anti-Protestantism or anti-Latin Catholicism. We Orthodox worship in the same way and believe the same things as our ancestors did 1700 years ago. To us, 500 year old Protestantism is the ultimate in “New Age” philosophy.

[bkaycee]

Yes, we are told to exanmine ourselves to see that we are in the Faith.

Fox guarding the hen house?

No I think its a fairly reasonable excersise considering it is scripture.

2 Cor 13:5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!

Could you be wrong in your examination on whether you "pass" and are really already saved?

While no one is infallible, we can be reasonably assured that if we are sincerely trusting Christ's work on the Cross and not our own work for salvation, that we pass the test.

1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life. 14 And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us.

Scripture is the pure Word from God. Since we believe what the scriptures teach, we can be confident, trusting in His Word.

[OLD REGGIE]

“”However, I can find no evidence of a unanimous, or even majority, belief in the RCC concerning the “Assumption of Mary” in the early Church up to, and including, relatively modern times””

There are many writings and even feast days through the ages we can point to on the Assumption or Dormition (Orthodox) of the Blessed Virgin Mary.There is even very old Icons as well that Kolo has posted on occasion.

Thanks for your reply. However, IMO (humble) your evidence is sparse. I did say "...no evidence of a unanimous, or even majority, belief in the RCC concerning the “Assumption of Mary” in the early Church up to, and including, relatively modern times."

Please note I qualified my claim to the RCC. The Orthodox may have somewhat earlier, though not numerous, beliefs in the assumption but even then it was not until the 4th century that it saw the light of day.

Scripture is silent on the life, death, and assumption of Mary after the ressurection.

The Early Church Fathers were silent on the life, death, and assumption of Mary after the ressurection.

The case cannot be made for "Apostolic Tradition".

[Kolokotronis]

“The Orthodox may have somewhat earlier, though not numerous, beliefs in the assumption but even then it was not until the 4th century that it saw the light of day.”

But since the 300s, we have, virtually all of us, believed firmly that the Most Holy Theotokos was assumed bodily into heaven. As I said, however, this is NOT dogma in The Church in the East and thus all of us are free not to believe it.

Here is a late (14th century) sermon on the Dormition by one of the greatest Fathers of The Church, +Gregory Palamas. I post it to you because it is best sermon on the doctrine I am aware of and it is particularly scriptural.

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/reading/dormition.html