Posted on 11/20/2020 6:19:59 AM PST by Teleios Research
Is this another "Upset the Catholics" thread??
The issue isn't what God wants. The issue is man is evil and he doesn't want anything to do with God.
God is concerned and disappointed when many reject His love.
OK...and I suppose He wants everyone to have a bright new Cadillac as well.
Amen! How else could anyone KNOW they HAVE eternal life?
No, it is a complete modification of Orange, and Pelagius would feel vindicated by Trent.
As for free will, it depends exactly on what you mean by free will.
It's a term used often in Scripture: https://biblehub.net/search.php?q=free+gift
John 3:3-8 Jesus answered him,“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
John 3:14-18 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
Paul likewise, did not promote baptism for salvation.
1 Corinthians 1:11-17 For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
As usual do not actually interact with what challenges you but simply parrot what you believe, which will not make it right. Here you do not receive justification through Baptism and becoming friends of God, since besides the fact that you cannot become friends of God unless you are justified, and not vice versa, but it is the heart-purifying regenerating faith that is expressed in baptism that justifying one, being counted for righteous.
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (Acts 10:43-47)
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:7-9)
And since to be baptized signifies faith, then the promise of regeneration is given if one will be baptized, but it is not the act itself of baptism that appropriates this, but faith.
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)
I question if there are faithful protestants (you are entitled to believe what you want) as I believe that protestants are not following Christ’s teachings but the opinions of man.
At least you gave an answer but this indicates you are of those Catholics who dissent from Vatican Two and other RC teaching which broadly affirm properly baptized Scripture-centric Prots as lovingly believing in God, some even as martyrs, and born of the Spirit brethren, albeit separated.
Vatican Two: Lumen Gentium 15: "The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*)
For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (Cf. Jn. 16:13) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical [Protestant] communities...
"They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood.
Dominus Iesus: " …those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.” “All who have been justified by Faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ: they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church.”
CCC Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord's Eucharist."324
You could argue that the obligatory statement of Lumen Gentium 14 (being the work a a committee trying to appease two factions) excludes most Prots from salvation (whosoever "knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved") excludes Prots in general, but that would be contrary to the affirming spirit of the broad ecumenism for Scripture-centric faithful Prots that follows, and the meaning of "knowing" is debated among Catholics (I know of her claims, but certainly do not know she was and is made necessary by Christ for my salvation).
The words of Jesus is clearly stated in John 6 and the readings about the Last Supper. Jesus shared the Eucharist at Emmaus (Luke 24:30).
Which statements (that Catholics themselves do not take plainly literally, thus there laborious metaphysical contrivances to explain a body that appears as bread and wine, yet which do not exist, and does not conform to what Christ materially manifested Himself to have, which is set in opposition to the other) are to be understood in the light of the only wholly inspired-of-God and substantive record of what the NT church believed, which is Acts thru Revelation, which best shows how they understood the OT and the gospels. And which do not teach the Catholic contrivance.
However, most Catholics must ignore what corrects them and simply parrot their perversions instead. And which you resort to in the rest of your post.
Your false statement: “As usual do not actually interact with what challenges you but simply parrot what you believe, which will not make it right. Here you do not receive justification through Baptism and becoming friends of God, since besides the fact that you cannot become friends of God unless you are justified, and not vice versa, but it is the heart-purifying regenerating faith that is expressed in baptism that justifying one, being counted for righteous.
You are entitled to believe man-made beliefs, but you should not change God’s Truth.
Baptism forgives all sins at time of Baptism (original and actual) and thus initiated in the Church, the Body of Christ. Those that have been baptized have been saved by their faith in Christ and the grace of Baptism. Subsequent sin can prevent the fruits of salvation. I am sure that you can find multiple references in the Bible where Jesus told us we need Baptism for our salvation along with the Eucharist.
Your comment:”At least you gave an answer but this indicates you are of those Catholics who dissent from Vatican Two and other RC teaching which broadly affirm properly baptized Scripture-centric Prots as lovingly believing in God, some even as martyrs, and born of the Spirit brethren, albeit separated.”
While I do not fully know how Jesus will judge each individual and everyone has the opportunity to fully repent before death, I believe that non Catholics reject at least part of God’s revealed Truth and reject His Catholic Church that was established to preach God’s Truth, Baptize all nations for our salvation. Jesus established one true catholic and apostolic church and not multiple versions that accept some of God’s Truth and substitute man’s opinion that reject the Word of Jesus.
Christ forewarned us that there would be many false prophets and false teachers. So I see that protestant religions provide some of God’s Truths that are beneficial, they also provide false truths lead many away from God’s Truth and to perdition. The Blessed Mother of God has warned us that Catholic Cardinals, Bishops and Priests are also leading many to perdition.
I do believe that Catholics that reject Christ’s Catholic Church will probably not receive eternal life with God. John 12:48
No one who knowingly and deliberately rejects God’s truth will be saved.
“Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it” (CCC here quotes The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, “Lumen Gentium,” 14, from the documents of Vatican II).
Metmom’s comment: “Jesus never told us baptism was necessary, but only believing.”
That is a false statement that rejects God’s Truth. Mark 16:16 and there are multiple other sources.
In tho original Greek it’s not there.
That is just your personal opinion.
Council of Orange II
“[G]race is preceded by no merits. A reward is due to good works, if they are performed, but grace, which is not due, precedes [good works], that they may be done” (Canons on grace 19 [A.D. 529]).
The Catholic Church teaches only Christ is capable of meriting in the strict sense—mere man cannot (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2007). The most merit humans can have is condign—when, under the impetus of God’s grace, they perform acts which please him and which he has promised to reward (Rom. 2:6–11, Gal. 6:6–10). Thus God’s grace and his promise form the foundation for all human merit (CCC 2008).
So then, grace precedes works and works are a result and not a condition of grace, yes?
then there assumes there are gifts you have to pay for.
this side of heaven.
Folks, this issue here is ASSURANCE of Salvation, not Salvation it self.
Stated another way, “Once saved, always saved.” Now the discussion changes.
To further stir the pot, there is REAL assurance of salvation and FALSE assurance of salvation. Jesus speaks to the false assurance, “Many will come to me and say Lord, Lord.................go away, I never knew you.”
A good question for reflection is, “Did God choose you or did you choose God.”
I will let the reader reflect......................
Did God choose you or did you choose God.”
Pray tell then what gifts do we have to pay for?
Pray tell then what gifts do we have to pay for?
If you want to do business with usa, make a donation to the clinton foundation.
Seriously, most worldly gifting has strings attached, you know that.
There are exceptions as always.
Rather,that is a manifestly TRUE statement, and which you proceed to illustrate.
You are entitled to believe man-made beliefs, but you should not change God’s Truth. Baptism forgives all sins at time of Baptism (original and actual) and thus initiated in the Church, the Body of Christ. Those that have been baptized have been saved by their faith in Christ and the grace of Baptism. Subsequent sin can prevent the fruits of salvation. I am sure that you can find multiple references in the Bible where Jesus told us we need Baptism for our salvation along with the Eucharist.
Meaning that rather than actually interacting with Scriptures provided for you which clearly state that forgiveness is by the faith which is expressed in baptism, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9) and that John 6:53,54 nowhere is taught as meaning spiritual life is obtained by taking part in the Lord's supper, then true to form, you again resort to reciting man-made beliefs that you can only wish were what Scripture teaches.
I believe that non Catholics reject at least part of God’s revealed Truth and reject His Catholic Church that was established to preach God’s Truth,
You are free to believe whatever delusions you wish, but it shows that you are wrong while also revealing yourself to belong to just one of the many sects in Catholicism.
Jesus established one true catholic and apostolic church and not multiple versions that accept some of God’s Truth and substitute man’s opinion that reject the Word of Jesus.
You are in just one of the subdivisions that that add to and reject the Word of Jesus make substitute man’s opinion to be so, for distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
And Christ did indeed established one true catholic and apostolic church, which means it must be without unbelievers, and thus the one true church which the Lord promised to overcome the gates of Hell was and is the body of Christ that the Spirit baptizes every believer into, (1Co. 12:13) and to which He is married, (Eph. 5:25) for it uniquely only and always consists 100% of true believers, while organic fellowships in which they express their faith inevitably become admixtures of wheat and tares, with Catholicism and liberal Protestantism being mostly the latter.
Christ forewarned us that there would be many false prophets and false teachers...The Blessed Mother of God has warned us The Blessed Mother of God has warned us
The hyper-exaltation of Mary far far above that which is written (cf. 1 Co. 4:6) and prayer to here and other created beings in Heaven are just two of the false teachings that you are guilty of defending.
I do believe that Catholics that reject Christ’s Catholic Church will probably not receive eternal life with God. John 12:48
Again, what you profess no more makes it true than what Mormons confess, and it is clear that the NT church was not that of Catholicism, regardless what here blind defenders choose to believe and parrot.
Metmom’s comment: “Jesus never told us baptism was necessary, but only believing.” That is a false statement that rejects God’s Truth. Mark 16:16 and there are multiple other sources.
Baptism is obedience, and salvation does require effectual faith which is expressed in baptism, and thus those "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16; cf. Acts 2:38) since to be baptized means that one believes, just as the the meek shall inherit the earth, (Matthew 5:5) - not because they earned it by being meek, but because meekness is a characteristic of a believer.
Thus belief and baptism go together as cause and effect, like as forgiveness and healing/walking went together in the story of the palsied man in Mark 2:1-2, so that they can be used synonymous, as in "Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?' (Mark 2:9) However, the effect (healing) is not the cause (forgiveness). And as evidence, the healing also justified/vindicated the one who did so as being forgiven. And thus (in the context of dead versus living effectual faith) James can state that "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (James 2:24) A man is justified before God by faith, and a man is justified as being a believer by the "obedience of faith." Therefore is the faith which will be and is expressed in obedience that appropriates justification, as is plainly stated as regards Abraham:
What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. (Romans 4:1-7)
And which is not restricted to just works of the Law, but to any system of justification by actual merit, becoming actually good enough, for which the Law represents as the epitome of it, "for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." (Galatians 3:21)
And writing to Gentiles the apostle does not refer to the law in excluding salvation by works, but plainly states:
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; (Titus 3:5)
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)
The issue here is what actually appropriates the justification which renders one "accepted in the Beloved," (Eph. 1:6) that of effectual heart-purifying regenerating faith being imputed for righteousness, or actually becoming good enough to enter Heaven by an act and character development making expiation for sins. The Bible teaches that is it effectual heart-purifying regenerating faith, as shown you before:
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (Acts 10:43-44) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (Acts 10:47)
And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:7-9)
And thus they were baptized. In contrast, Roman Catholicism teaches that the act itself of faith justifies one by infusing Divine love in their soul, even those who cannot fulfill the requirement for baptism, that of repentant whole-hearted faith. (Acts 2:38; 8:36,37) And having begun with actually becoming good enough to be with God - even if that is said to be by grace - then such must either attain to and die in perfect holiness and atone for all their post-baptismal sins, or endure purfing punishments in RC Purgatory until they attain to the level needed to be with God.
And thus by the close of the fourth century was taught "a place of purgation..from which when purified they "were admitted unto the Holy Mount of the Lord". For " they were "not so good as to be entitled to eternal happiness ".
One "cannot approach God till the purging fire shall have cleansed the stains with which his soul was infested." (Catholic Encyclopedia>Purgatory)
All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. (CCC 1030)
"The purpose of purgatory is to bring you up the level of spiritual excellence needed to experience the full-force presence of God." (Jimmy Akin, How to Explain Purgatory to Protestants).
"Every trace of attachment to evil must be eliminated, every imperfection of the soul corrected." Purification must be complete..." "This is exactly what takes place in Purgatory." — John Paul II, Audiences, 1999; http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/1999/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_04081999.html
Catholic professor Peter Kreeft states,
"...we will go to Purgatory first, and then to Heaven after we are purged of all selfishness and bad habits and character faults." Peter Kreeft, Because God Is Real: Sixteen Questions, One Answer, p. 224
The theological virtues are the foundation of Christian moral activity; they animate it and give it its special character. They inform and give life to all the moral virtues. They are infused by God into the souls of the faithful to make them capable of acting as his children and of meriting eternal life. (CCC 1813 )
In contrast, wherever Scripture clearly speak of the next conscious reality for believers then it is with the Lord, (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)
And rather than Purgatory conforming souls to Christ to inherit the kingdom of God, the next transformative experience that is manifestly taught is that of being made like Christ in the resurrection. (1Jn. 3:2; Rm. 8:23; 1Co 15:53,54; 2Co. 2-4) At which time is the judgment seat of Christ And which is the only suffering after this life, which does not begin at death, but awaits the Lord's return, (1 Corinthians 4:5; 2 Timothy. 4:1,8; Revelation 11:18; Matthew 25:31-46; 1 Peter 1:7; 5:4) and is the suffering of the loss of rewards (and the Lord's displeasure!) due to the manner of material one built the church with. But which one is saved despite the loss of such, not because of. (1 Corinthians 3:8ff)
More: Basically, what is the Roman Catholic teaching on salvation?
The translation of the "original" Greek in modern English does allow for that modifier to be used with the word "gift". Not every Bible version does so but it is incorrect to conclude it shouldn't be used. There are various Greek words that are translated as "gift" in our Bible. For example in the English Standard Version:
That word "gift" in English appears 5 times in that passage but in the Greek, three different words are used for "gift": charisma from charizomai, dōrea from didómi and dōrēma from dóreomai. (see https://biblehub.com/lexicon/romans/5-15.htm; https://biblehub.com/lexicon/romans/5-16.htm).
Without getting in the weeds about transliterations vs. translation, it often happens that English is too limited to convey the full meaning of some Greek words. When we see the word "gift" we assume it of course means it's FREE. But the Greek sometimes uses adjectives to modify and emphasize nouns that we wouldn't necessarily know unless we look at a lexicon or concordance or speak/read fluent Greek. Suffice it to say "free" gift isn't superfluous or redundant. God FREELY gifts us with His grace. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Went through the concordance of my KJV an it says “... it’s the gift of God” not the “free gift of God” .... but back to my original thought: who pays for a gift. A gift naturally assumes it’s free so it’s redundant to say “free gift”.
Why is post 50 not clear? Do you believe that the Catholic church teaches differently? Or are you relying on the fiction that some non Catholics proclaim about Catholic teaching?
Everything that we have has been given to us by God including our talents and weaknesses. A recent Sunday Gospel reading (Matthew 24:14-30) teaches us in the Parable of the Talents. We should recognize God’s gifts filled with His love and return his trust in us with our love toward God and neighbor by our good works.
Grace (gratia, [Gr.] charis), in general, is a supernatural gift of God to intellectual creatures (men, angels) for their eternal salvation, whether the latter be furthered and attained through salutary acts or a state of holiness.
Among the three fundamental ideas—sin, redemption, and grace—grace plays the part of the means, indispensable and Divinely ordained, to effect the redemption from sin through Christ and to lead men to their eternal destiny in heaven.
Actual grace derives its name, actual, from the Latin actualis (ad actum), for it is granted by God for the performance of salutary acts and is present and disappears with the action itself.
Graces regarding Free Will.—If we take the attitude of free will as the dividing principle of actual grace, we must first have a grace which precedes the free determination of the will and another which follows this determination and cooperates with the will. This is the first pair of graces, preventing and cooperating grace (gratia proeveniens et cooperans). Preventing grace must, according to its physical nature, consist in unfree, indeliberate vital acts of the soul cooperating grace, on the contrary, solely in free, deliberate actions of the will. The latter assume the character of actual graces, not only because they are immediately suggested by God, but also because they may become, after the achievement of success, the principle of new salutary acts. In this manner an intense act of perfect love of God may simultaneously effect and, as it were, assure by itself the observance of the Divine commandments.
The real nature of sanctifying grace is, by reason of its direct invisibility, veiled in mystery, so that we can learn its nature better by a study of its formal operations in the soul than by a study of the grace itself. Indissolubly linked to the nature of this grace and to its formal operations are other manifestations of grace which are referable not to any intrinsic necessity but to the goodness of God; accordingly three questions present themselves for consideration:
(a) The inner nature of sanctifying grace.
(b) Its formal operations.
(c) Its supernatural retinue.
(a) The Inner Nature
(a) As we have seen that sanctifying grace designates a grace producing a permanent condition, it follows that it must not be confounded with a particular actual grace nor with a series of actual graces.
(3) The Characteristics of Sanctifying Grace
The Protestant conception of justification boasts of three characteristics: absolute certainty (certitudo), complete uniformity in all the justified (oequalitas), unforfeitableness (inamissibilitas). According to the teaching of the Church, sanctifying grace has the opposite characteristics: uncertainty (incertitudo), inequality (inoequalitas), and amissibility (amissibilitas).
(a) Uncertainty
The heretical doctrine of the Reformers, that man by a fiduciary faith knows with absolute certainty that he is justified, received the attention of the Council of Trent (Sess. VI, cap. ix), in one entire chapter (De inani fiduciae hoereticorum), three canons (loc. cit., can. xiii-xv) condemning the necessity, the alleged power, and the function of fiduciary faith. The object of the Church in defining the dogma was not to shatter the trust in God (certitudo spei) in the matter of personal salvation, but to repel the misleading assumptions of an unwarranted certainty of salvation (certitudo fidei). In doing this the Church is altogether obedient to the instruction of Holy Writ, for, since Scripture declares that we must work out our salvation “with fear and trembling” (Phil., ii, 12), it is impossible to regard our individual salvation as something fixed and certain.
(b) Inequality
If man, as the Protestant theory of justification teaches, is justified by faith alone, by the external justice of Christ, or God, the conclusion which Martin Luther (Sermo de Nat. Maria) drew must follow, namely that “we are all equal to Mary the Mother of God and just as holy as she”. But if on the other hand, according to the teaching of the Church, we are justified by the justice and merits of Christ in such fashion that this becomes formally our own justice and holiness, then there must result an inequality of grace in individuals, and for two reasons first, because according to the generosity of God or the receptive condition of the soul an unequal amount of grace is infused; then, also, because the grace originally received can be increased by the performance of good works
(c) Amissibility
In consonance with his doctrine of justification by faith alone, Luther made the loss or forfeiture of justification depend solely upon infidelity, while Calvin maintained that the predestined could not possibly lose their justification; as to those not predestined, he said, God merely aroused in them a deceitful show of faith and justification. On account of the grave moral dangers which lurked in the assertion that outside of unbelief there can be no serious sin destructive of Divine grace in the soul, the Council of Trent was obliged to condemn (Sess. VI, can. xxiii, xxvii) both these views. The lax principles of “evangelical liberty”, the favorite catchword of the budding Reformation, were simply repudiated (Trent, Sess. VI, can. xix-xxi). But the synod (Sess. VI, cap. xi) added that not venial but only mortal sin involved the loss of grace. In this declaration there was a perfect accord with Scripture and Tradition. Even in the Old Testament the prophet Ezechiel (Ezech., xviii, 24) says of the godless: “All his justices which he hath done, shall not be remembered: in the prevarication, by which he hath prevaricated, and in his sin, which he hath committed, in them he shall die.” Not in vain does St. Paul (I Cor., x, 12) warn the just: “Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall”; and state uncompromisingly: “The unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God….neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers…nor covetous, nor drunkards….shall possess the kingdom of God” (I Cor., vi, 9 sq.). Hence it is not by infidelity alone that the Kingdom of Heaven will be lost. Tradition shows that the discipline of confessors in the early Church proclaims the belief that grace and justification are lost by mortal sin. The principle of justification by faith alone is unknown to the Fathers. The fact that mortal sin takes the soul out of the state of grace is due to the very nature of mortal sin. Mortal sin is an absolute turning away from God, the supernatural end of the soul, and is an absolute turning to creatures; therefore, habitual mortal sin cannot exist with habitual grace any more than fire and water can coexist in the same subject. But as venial sin does not constitute such an open rupture with God, and does not destroy the friendship of God, therefore venial sin does not expel sanctifying grace from the soul.
The rest of the article on Grace.https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/grace
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.