Let the Verbal Mud Slinging Begin!! LOL!!
Catholic ping!
Let the Verbal Mud Slinging Begin!! LOL!!
We know that we are saved by Christ.. His sacrifice was SUFFICIENT , no work needs to be added to His.. He is the author AND THE FINISHER of our faith...there is nothing we can add to that
We are the righteousness of God in Christ.. not because we deserve it..but because He has given it to us
Most evangelicals know to a date certain on what day and at what moment they committed and gave their life to God.
My impression is that its a bit different with Catholics, they will see their walk of faith as more of a continuum. Although, in actual fact, there will definitely have been a moment in the life of any committed Catholic believer in which he did, in fact, accept God’s dominion over his life. (Like, every day, no doubt).
I see my walk as a continuum too, but I remember when it started.
I don’t know that Catholics typically say anything directly equivalent to the “sinner’s prayer” that is popular in evangelical churches but a committed, believing Catholic would have no problem saying those words and has no doubt said them many times.
If you love God and have made him lord of your life, if you believe that Jesus is the Christ, then we’re brothers. You may or may not see me in the same light, but I see you as my brother or sister. If God is alive in your life you will already have seen all the confirmation you need.
I’m not catholic but I’ve met many genuinely Christian catholics and I do not doubt their salvation. And if God claims you, I do too. We aren’t going to agree with each other on everything this side of heaven, and I don’t know that its necessary that we do. We aren’t called to agree with each other on everything, we’re only called to love one another. And I think we mostly do.
God is the choreographer. I’ll do whats in front of me, while you do what he puts in front of you. I’ll feel free to tell you you aren’t doing it right from time to time, and you will no doubt tell me the same. Its part of being human.
Being Houston born and raised, and now living in California, I sure miss street preachers.
I miss getting out of the car to go into a 7/11, and having someone speak to me about Christ and salvation.
First of all, even Catholics (and Orthodox, and every other ancient liturgical church) address and describe J*sus as "our [or my] savior." Simple logic dictates that in order to have a savior, one must be saved. If one is not saved, one has no savior; one has only a potential savior. Yet Catholic prayers do not refer to J*sus as a "potential savior" but as a "savior," implying a fait accompli. Why get mad at Protestants for simply taking this universal chrstian convention logically?
Second, there is simply a logical problem with Catholicism's partial antinomianism (antinomianism with respect to the Torah of Moses, nomianism with respect to the Catholic ceremonial). This was something I never could make sense of, no matter how hard I tried. Every antinomian statement in Paul's epistles is arbitrarily applied to Jewish law and ceremonial (which is actually in the Bible), while a post-Biblical system whose calendar and rituals are derived from paganism are exempted from this critique. Does no Catholic anywhere see the problem with this? Catholics think that such things as Passover seders, laying tefillin, calculating the time of the new moon, and celebrating Purim were "done away with," whereas rosary beads, celebrating the 25th of December, and observing church obligations not the apostle's target. And technically this is right, for not even the most fanatical liturgical will claim that the current church ceremonial sprang forth on the first "pentecost." That ceremonial is indeed ancient and much more "authentic" than Protestants want to admit, but it was not part of the "chrstianity of the first hour."
Now let's summarize this last point: the first part of the Bible establishes an elaborate ceremonial; the "second part" (the apostles of Paul) allegedly abolish this ceremonial. Protestants get that. What they don't get is claiming that a post-Biblical ceremonial is less onerous to the claims of "salvation by grace" than the original Biblical one would have been. Am I making any sense? Does anyone understand what I'm saying?
While Protestants don't ascribe any salvific merit to the Jewish ceremonial, neither do they think observing it is inherently evil; hence the rabid Hebrew sentimentalism of so many Fundamentalist Protestants. Observing the commandments does not good, but it does no harm. This is contrasted with the Catholic/Orthodox position that observance of the Jewish law is not only superfluous but forbidden, but that the developing post-Biblical church ceremonial is the absolutely necessary "means" by which J*sus' salvation is channeled to chrstians.
Let me make a further illustration: Catholics/Orthodox insist that the Jewish calendar was replaced by the chrstian one. Think about this for just a moment. The Jewish calendar (unless one is a liberal higher critic) was created by G-d and not adopted from any prior culture. It and all its rules and regulations were given orally to Moses at the beginning of Exodus 12. This included esoteric information about the length of the lunar month, the molad ("birth" of the new moon), and a set of elaborate calculations--all from the Mouth of G-d Himself. This is what Catholicism/Orthodoxy insists was "done away with." Now almost all chrstians believe the same, including the most anti-Catholic Protestants. But Catholicism/Orthodoxy doesn't stop here. It actually insists that the Roman calendar adopted by Julius Caesar (and whose very months are named for pagan deities) has replaced this calendar by the will of G-d. All those complicated, elaborate calculations given directly by G-d allegedly evaporated to be replaced with a calendar whose calculation the church inherited from pagan Rome. Can no Catholic see why some might find this position problematic?
Before leaving this topic I simply must address the reflexive Catholic reaction of invoking the epistle of James. Despite Catholic dogma, James presided over a Jewish church that still observed the Law of Moses--a "system of works" to which Catholicism is allergic. James' church eventually became the "heretical" Ebionites and were lost to history. The notion that James presided over an orthodox Catholic church is every bit as naive as the notion that he presided over an ancient congregation of Jewish Southern Baptists.
Thirdly, with regard to the issue of purgatory vs. "going straight to Heaven": the Protestant (at least Fundamentalist Protestant) notion of "Heaven" is different from that of Catholics/Orthodox. Adam was not destined to "go to Heaven." He was already in paradise, and he had done absolutely nothing to deserve living there. It was simply G-d's Will that man be placed there. It was his "natural home," so to speak. I know that Catholics/Orthodox regard the earthly paradise as temporary and that Adam would have eventually been translated, but most Fundamentalist Protestants have never even heard of this. To them there never was a higher "beatific" state which Adam or any other human being was meant to "deserve" after a probationary period. There was just the paradise in which he was initially placed. Thus it is only natural that for them, once J*sus has been vicariously damned in the place of every human being (granted, a position alien to Catholicism/Orthodoxy) there is no further purgation or preparation necessary. Heaven in the only alternative to Hell. Once a Protestant "gets saved" he reverts to status quo ante. He can't go to Hell because he's already there (in the person of J*sus' vicarious damnation). So all that's left is the natural state in which Adam was created, ie, "Heaven" (the Heaven of disembodied spirits is considered a contingency that came into being only as a result of the "fall"). To speak of the unworthiness of the individual chrstian to experience Heaven immediately upon death makes no more sense than to speak of Adam not deserving to live in Paradise without first becoming "worthy."
I know that I have been very unpleasant many times, but in this post I have tried to avoid all that and simply explain the Protestant position and why the Catholic position, which Catholics think is so reasonable, is simply nonsensical to Protestants. I have explained as best as I can and have not engaged in any of my usual name-calling or unpleasantness. I hope Catholics and Orthodox who read this will try to understand and stop acting as if the Protestant position were completely ridiculous.
Catholics and Orthodox are justly proud of a two thousand year history of spirituality and intellect. There is no need to engage in name-calling and insults. The Catholic/Orthodox position is based on a completely different set of assumptions than the Protestant one. Please just try to explain this position to them as I have tried to explain theirs to you. Please.
Thank you.
Not me.
Jesus hates me.
He even gave me this button to wear.
