Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

His Open Arms Welcomed Me
Star of the Sea ^ | 1994 | Paul Thigpen

Posted on 11/03/2007 5:03:12 PM PDT by annalex

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-87 last
To: Forest Keeper; ears_to_hear; wmfights
the infallibility of the Pope (in certain circumstances) applied it retroactively to all prior Popes. Therefore, I "think", the primacy of the Pope would be something "always and everywhere believed by the Church". That doesn't match the council we're talking about in Acts.

But St. James did not contradict St. Peter in Acts 15! He presided, over the Council, yes. There is a moment in the scripture where St. Peter is contradicted (on eating separately from the Gentiles), as well as of course he outright betrayed Christ, but there is no instance where St. Peter was teaching something on faith and morals and the Church decided differently, after the Church was formed in Acts 2.

the same company as Paul, a giant in Reformed theology

Saul was not renamed ceremoniously by Christ. In fact, he is called Saul well into his covnerted discipleship. The first time Saul is identified as Paul is matter-of-factly in Acts 13:9 "Saul, otherwise Paul".

It is amusing how the Reformed appropriate St. Paul as if he taught something other than Catholic Christianity. It is especially silly given that it is from the writings of St. Paul that we derive most of your distinctive Catholic features: apostolic and hierarchical character of the Church, sacramental character of the Holy Eucharist, insufficiency of faith alone, equal importance of tradition and scripture.

The Gospel is mentioned

Where? Read the text, don't spin it. I told you what is mentioned: Church, heaven, hell, legislation on matters of salvation.

Peter should minister to his brothers. It is a message for all of us

Exactly; but only Peter is expressly charged with that at the Last Supper, while all of the the Apostles are also given a task to celebrate the Eucharist. Only in the case of Peter the charge is to strengthen or confirm his fellow apostles. This charge was not removed after the betrayal and repeated confession at the end of the book of John, as we can see in the charge to "feed Christ's lambs". This is the primary job description of the Pope, to guide the bishops, who all are primary ministers of the Holy Eucharist in the Church.

51 posted on 11/11/2007 11:20:22 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke16.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: annalex; ears_to_hear; wmfights
But St. James did not contradict St. Peter in Acts 15! He presided, over the Council, yes.

He didn't have to contradict Peter to have the authority. Peter made a case, and James agreed in James' decision. I don't at all get the impression that if James had disagreed with Peter that Peter would or could have said "I overrule you."

Saul was not renamed ceremoniously by Christ. In fact, he is called Saul well into his converted discipleship.

Are you saying that Paul renamed himself? I doubt it. As a Jew, he knew the importance of names, so I don't think he would have just made a change for no reason unless by order of God. I can't think of any other examples of self renaming by a righteous man.

It is amusing how the Reformed appropriate St. Paul as if he taught something other than Catholic Christianity.

Does Catholic Christianity teach salvation by grace alone through faith, and not by works? Besides, this notion has been projected onto us by your side! You should have seen earlier on the 10,000+ post Pope thread. We were mocked and called names such as "Paulines" because supposedly we follow Paul instead of the Gospels. That label was put on us by Apostolics, not by us. We just call ourselves Christians. :)

Exactly; but only Peter is expressly charged with that at the Last Supper, while all of the the Apostles are also given a task to celebrate the Eucharist. Only in the case of Peter the charge is to strengthen or confirm his fellow apostles.

That is a HUGE stretch. Strengthening each other, etc. is a command to ALL Christians:

Heb 10:19-25 : 19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. 25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another — and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

The writer is also asking for himself to be encouraged.

52 posted on 11/11/2007 8:08:39 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; ears_to_hear; wmfights
don't at all get the impression that Peter would or could have said "I overrule you."

No, of course not; the issue was that this episode does not contradict the Petrine primacy. On the spot, I cannot think of any instance through history when a Pope overruled a consensus of bishops. We are very much a consiliar church. May St. Athanasius did in his Contra Mundum stance against the Arians, but certainly the execrise of papal infallible authority is a very rare occurence, if it has ever happened at all.

Paul renamed himself?

That I cannot say. but the scripture does not attach to his name change any significance. It did not accompamy the conversion. It does not have the same Old Testament ring to it as Simon's renaming into Peter.

Does Catholic Christianity teach salvation by grace alone through faith, and not by works?

Of course not, but neither does St. Paul. Paul teaches that salvation does not come by works of obligation or reward, but the works of slef-denial and love are or primary importance, and we teach accordingly.

called names such as "Paulines"

I would never do that. Pauline Christianity is Catholic Christianity. The reference thatI can recognize is to our conviction that the Reformed theology takes a few verses from Paul out of context and ignores the rest. but "Paulines" you are not; we are.

Strengthening each other, etc. is a command to ALL Christians

It is generally, yes, but the passage gives specific tasks to specific people: the apostles are to give the Eucharist ("do it"), while Peter is aditionally told to "strengthen his brethren".

53 posted on 11/11/2007 9:03:31 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke16.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: annalex; ears_to_hear; wmfights
FK: "Does Catholic Christianity teach salvation by grace alone through faith, and not by works?"

Of course not, but neither does St. Paul. Paul teaches that salvation does not come by works of obligation or reward, but the works of self-denial and love are or primary importance, and we teach accordingly.

I don't see where Paul makes any such distinction. Sometimes the phrase "works of the Law" is used, but that only helps my position. :)

If for you salvation is grace plus works, then does not one get REWARDED with entry into Heaven based partially on his works? IOW, one does works of love, but clearly there is a reward waiting for him later. That is work for reward. Further:

Rom 11:6 : And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

The context of this can be none other than many thought keeping the works of the Law was how to get into Heaven. Those are works of love. No one thought doing works for pay was the way into Heaven, so the "no longer" would not apply, yet it's there. Paul was definitely teaching Sola Fide/Gratia.

But "Paulines" you are not; we are.

It was actually kind of funny because as I was reading this in the other thread in various "high-five" posts, I was thinking to myself, "what's wrong with being a Pauline if it just means following what Paul says?" :) I understand there is a difference in interpretation, but I would think there would be an equal difference in other parts of scripture as well.

54 posted on 11/12/2007 1:55:10 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; ears_to_hear; wmfights
The context of this can be none other than many thought keeping the works of the Law was how to get into Heaven.

True. This is what St. Paul corrects: purportedly salvific nature of obedience to law.

Those are works of love

No. St. Paul ends everty letter of his with exhortations to works of love; he also says

2 ... if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3 And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

...

13 And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity. (1 Cor 13)

Faith alone is not salvific and sacrifice alone is not salvific. Faith is important, but works of love are "the greatest".
55 posted on 11/12/2007 2:14:29 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
does not one get REWARDED with entry into Heaven based partially on his works

Of course not. It's not as if Paul would ever write anything like this:

But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.

56 posted on 11/12/2007 2:14:44 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: annalex; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
FK: "Those are works of love."

No. St. Paul ends every letter of his with exhortations to works of love; he also says ... (1 Cor. 13)

Of course Paul wants us to do works of love. God commands it here:

Matt 22:34-40 : 34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Jesus Himself says that doing works of love is following the Law. And Paul tells us that this is NOT how to get into Heaven. Charity, and the like, are FRUITS of salvation, not causes for it. Without fruits, one is not saved.

Faith is important, but works of love are "the greatest".

For salvation, that's exactly what many Jews thought of the Law. It's what Paul shot down.

57 posted on 11/12/2007 4:14:18 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
Charity, and the like, are FRUITS of salvation, not causes for it

Where does St. Paul teach that?

58 posted on 11/12/2007 4:16:52 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper

Of faith, love, and charity, ...charity is the greatest. (Charity as in giving with no anticipation of anyting at all in return,...not charity as in Hillary Clinton’s nonprofit organization model which seeks admiration if it gives and demands authority if it takes away to give to whom they view as worthy in their own eyes...)


59 posted on 11/12/2007 4:18:47 PM PST by Cvengr (Every believer is a grenade. Arrogance is the grenade pin. Pull the pin and fragment your life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Campion; annalex; ears_to_hear; wmfights
FK: "... does not one get REWARDED with entry into Heaven based partially on his works?"

Of course not. It's not as if Paul would ever write anything like this:

Paul recognizes the truth of POTS. He acknowledges the fact that those who do no works are not saved. He is not talking causality, or else we have to throw out the theology he otherwise lays out in his writings. In your quote, Paul is exhorting that we check ourselves to make sure we are not false believers, to make sure we are not going to be of the "Lord, Lord" crowd. If we do so honestly, and find that we are slaves to sin, then we need to come to Christ for the first time (for real). Paul appears to clearly suspect that his immediate audience is in that group.

60 posted on 11/12/2007 4:27:02 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Campion; ears_to_hear; wmfights

You know, if someone had a tree that could bear fruit, and asked me for gardeining advice, I would not be telling him what to do with the fruit. I would instead tell him to soften the soil, water the tree, chase off vermin, — things like that. I would not exhort him to constantly check if he has fruit.

If good works were a fruit of already obtained salvation it would not make sense for St.Paul to spend the second half of every letter of his on “fruits”.


61 posted on 11/12/2007 7:51:21 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Where does St. Paul teach that?

In the same passage we always quote:

Eph 2:8-10 : 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

In the same thought, Paul says we are NOT saved by works, but that we were created to do good works. Presumably, we were not created to do works for pay, but rather works of love, which are NOT a causal part of salvation. Paul is only speaking to Christians here. The "we" and "us" relate back to the earlier "you".

62 posted on 11/12/2007 7:54:21 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr; annalex; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
Of faith, love, and charity, ...charity is the greatest. (Charity as in giving with no anticipation of anything at all in return,...not charity as in Hillary Clinton’s nonprofit organization model which seeks admiration if it gives and demands authority if it takes away to give to whom they view as worthy in their own eyes...)

I disagree that this is how "charity" is used. It is used in the sense of "love" in the MACRO sense. The problem we have is in reconciling this verse so that it does not mean that love "trumps" faith. If it did, then the only result would be a works-based salvation. Instead, we can say that love here refers to all love that is good. It includes God's love for us and ours for Him. Faith and hope only refer to individuals. In this verse, love (charity) is greater because it encompasses more.

63 posted on 11/12/2007 8:23:20 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Campion; ears_to_hear; wmfights
You know, if someone had a tree that could bear fruit, and asked me for gardening advice, I would not be telling him what to do with the fruit. I would instead tell him to soften the soil, water the tree, chase off vermin, — things like that. I would not exhort him to constantly check if he has fruit.

You're assuming a conclusion, i.e., that the tree could produce fruit. The better analogy would be that the person only knew he had a tree and did not know if it was a fruit-producer or not. Paul says to check this. If it is a bad tree, then you can do anything to the soil you want, but it still won't produce fruit. The only way to turn a bad tree into a good one is faith.

If good works were a fruit of already obtained salvation it would not make sense for St.Paul to spend the second half of every letter of his on “fruits”.

It makes perfect sense. Paul knew that the worst position possible to be in is that of a false believer (honest non-believers are in a much better position). He ministers heavily to false believers because they are in the greatest need.

64 posted on 11/12/2007 9:53:43 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
Paul says we are NOT saved by works, but that we were created to do good works

"You have been saved" in Eph 2:8 is incorrect. Your own King James version says "are ye saved" and Young's literal make the progressive case very clear: "ye are having been saved". Secondly, St. Paul is not saying there that we are not saved by works in general, -- he qualifies these works twice, as works "form yourself" and intended to "boast". This is consistent with the Catholic teaching, with James 2, and St. Paul himself in Romans 2, and right here in Ephesians where he tells us that we are created to do good works. He also concludes his thought thus:

13 Wherefore I pray you not to faint at my tribulations for you, which is your glory. 14 For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 Of whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named, 16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened by his Spirit with might unto the inward man, 17 That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts; that being rooted and founded in charity, 18 You may be able to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth, and length, and height, and depth: 19 To know also the charity of Christ, which surpasseth all knowledge, that you may be filled unto all the fulness of God. 20 Now to him who is able to do all things more abundantly than we desire or understand, according to the power that worketh in us; 21 To him be glory in the church, and in Christ Jesus unto all generations, world without end. Amen.

(Eph 3)

Works and faith are not separated at all here: they are a single way of life that as a whole -- both faith and works -- has been in us as a result of Divine grace. Works strengthen faith and faith strengthens works, just like St. James teaches most conclusively.

65 posted on 11/13/2007 10:53:20 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Cvengr; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
used in the sense of "love" in the MACRO sense ...

This is an amazing spin on a very clear passage, and your only reason for it is "the only result would be a works-based salvation". This logical fallacy is called "begging the question".

66 posted on 11/13/2007 10:55:41 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Campion; ears_to_hear; wmfights

Still doesn’t make sense. If a tree cannot produce a fruit at all, there is no point in giving any gardening advice. If a tree under some conditions can produce a fruit, then again the concentration would be on these conditions and not on what the fruit is like.

The natural conclusion form this observation is what the Church teaches, that works done in the spirit of love (or charity) cooperate with grace and produce salvation. Since works is something man is at liberty to do or not do, it becomes important to Paul to urge them. Works is the gardening act, that cooperates with grace,— sun and soil. Fruit is salvation. Simple and biblical, no exegetical contortions needed.


67 posted on 11/13/2007 11:01:52 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; annalex
I disagree that this is how "charity" is used. It is used in the sense of "love" in the MACRO sense. ... Instead, we can say that love here refers to all love that is good. It includes God's love for us and ours for Him.

I'm with annalex. I have no idea where you get this exegesis from. The word translated charity here is simply agapon, the usual Greek word for selfless love.

The problem we have is in reconciling this verse so that it does not mean that love "trumps" faith. If it did, then the only result would be a works-based salvation.

Instead of starting out with a theological position and reading it back into Scripture, why don't you form your theological ideas from Scripture -- all of it -- in the first place?

That way, you don't need "reconcile" a verse by making it meaningless.

BTW, Paul's point here is simply that agape continues into heaven, and is therefore greater than faith or hope, which aren't needed in heaven. It goes without saying that he thinks all three are necessary here on earth.

68 posted on 11/13/2007 11:13:54 AM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
He acknowledges the fact that those who do no works are not saved.

All you need to do is add to that the Tridentine observation that good works strengthen grace in the justified man, and you have the Catholic position in a nutshell.

69 posted on 11/13/2007 11:16:25 AM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: annalex
"You have been saved" in Eph 2:8 is incorrect. Your own King James version says "are ye saved" and Young's literal make the progressive case very clear: "ye are having been saved".

Strong's calls it the present indicative tense. That can be taken either as a past action or as an on going process, depending on the context. The full context of Paul's writings was that he believed himself to be already saved. For example:

1 Tim 1:15-16 : 15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. KJV

However, you can simply ascribe every assertion of certainty to only being true AT THAT MOMENT. From there we would just have differing views of common sense. For example, John 3:16. Shall everyone who truly believes in Him have everlasting life? You would have to say "No".

Secondly, St. Paul is not saying there that we are not saved by works in general, -- he qualifies these works twice, as works "form yourself" and intended to "boast". This is consistent with the Catholic teaching, with James 2, and St. Paul himself in Romans 2, and right here in Ephesians where he tells us that we are created to do good works.

What? Here is the passage:

Eph 2:8-9 : 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. KJV

The "not of yourselves" clearly refers to where the grace and faith came from. It has zero to do with the works. "That" which is not of yourselves IS the gift of God. THEREFORE, works have nothing to do with it, SO THAT no one can boast. If we COULD be saved by works, to any extent, then we could boast. God doesn't want that. He wants us to know that our salvation is solely His gift. At least, that is what Paul says.

Works and faith are not separated at all here: they are a single way of life that as a whole -- both faith and works -- has been in us as a result of Divine grace. Works strengthen faith and faith strengthens works, just like St. James teaches most conclusively.

He is talking about both the time of perseverance and the act of salvation. What's the big deal? During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that. He does the same thing in Eph. 2:8-10. As I said, in the Eph. 2 passage, Paul more concretely separates the two. "Not by works" means just what it says, we are not saved by works. Salvation is not of ourselves, it is THE gift of God.

70 posted on 11/13/2007 1:05:08 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Cvengr; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
This is an amazing spin on a very clear passage, and your only reason for it is "the only result would be a works-based salvation". This logical fallacy is called "begging the question".

OK, then for you, charity is more important than faith. Just do enough charity, maybe have a little faith, and you will be saved. That's a works-BASED salvation, with a little faith thrown in. Your side emphasizes works over faith, and mine emphasizes faith only for salvation. That is what I have always thought and you are kindly confirming it for me. :)

71 posted on 11/13/2007 1:25:02 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Campion; ears_to_hear; wmfights
Still doesn’t make sense. If a tree cannot produce a fruit at all, there is no point in giving any gardening advice. If a tree under some conditions can produce a fruit, then again the concentration would be on these conditions and not on what the fruit is like.

At this point I may be getting a little lost in the analogy and what refers to what. :) I was just saying that Paul was saying to check the tree first to see if it is a fruit producer. If it is, then it will be profitable to work the soil to strengthen the tree and it will produce more and better fruit. If it is a bad tree, then everything stops until there is faith. No amount of work on a bad tree will turn it into a good tree.

Works is the gardening act, that cooperates with grace,— sun and soil. Fruit is salvation.

But not all trees are capable of producing fruit, no matter how hard you work them. Your contention appears to be that ALL trees are capable of bearing fruit if your work them hard enough. That just doesn't match what we know in nature. Some fruit trees are just bad trees and will never produce fruit. Works are only of any benefit to good trees.

72 posted on 11/13/2007 1:51:13 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Campion; annalex
FK: "I disagree that this is how "charity" is used. It is used in the sense of "love" in the MACRO sense. ... Instead, we can say that love here refers to all love that is good. It includes God's love for us and ours for Him."

I'm with annalex. I have no idea where you get this exegesis from. The word translated charity here is simply agapon, the usual Greek word for selfless love.

The important part is that under this interpretation, as I understand it, charity (or love) TRUMPS faith on earth. Works trump faith in salvation. I have often criticized Catholics for holding this view, and now it seems that it is being agreed to. :)

Instead of starting out with a theological position and reading it back into Scripture, why don't you form your theological ideas from Scripture -- all of it -- in the first place?

That's exactly what Reformers do; take our ideas from the totality of scripture. In this case a works-based faith clearly does match the totality of scripture. That totality teaches a faith-based salvation. Therefore, since this verse appears to contradict the much greater weight of evidence, it should be interpreted to match that. If, however, the greater weight of evidence was that if we all just do enough good works we will be saved, then this verse could stand alone in agreement.

That way, you don't need "reconcile" a verse by making it meaningless.

Well, there are clearly many verses in the Bible that appear to conflict on their faces. Since I refuse to declare any verses to be "wrong", I don't see any other option than to reconcile them. I have seen tons of examples of Bible verses being reconciled to match the theology the Church has developed.

I would submit that Catholicism reconciles FAR more verses than Reformers do since it is the Church's theology that must be matched. We just say that everything must match the greatest weight of other scripture. So, if the Bible is a fundamentally sound and consistent Book, then we do not need to veer away from plain meaning very often. It does happen, but less for us because we don't have to match Mariology, or praying to saints, or papal infallibility, or some sacraments, etc., etc. All of those must be back matched to the scriptures. The result is the reconciling that you are talking about that, in my opinion, renders many passages meaningless, as you say.

The standard response I get to this is that the belief was first and the writing came second. If true, then the Bible is necessarily the MOST enigmatic volume ever written in the history of literature in terms of what we need. It would necessarily mean that the Bible was NOT intended to be a direct revelation to God's people. I can't accept that, but I know the Church probably has other ideas.

BTW, Paul's point here is simply that agape continues into heaven, and is therefore greater than faith or hope, which aren't needed in heaven. It goes without saying that he thinks all three are necessary here on earth.

I would think that would match the substance of my original point; that love is called greater here because it encompasses more, i.e. God's love for us in Heaven in this case. We didn't say exactly the same thing, but I would take this as a basic agreement. :) I said love in the macro sense. That includes both love on earth and Heavenly love, just as you said. By Alex's post, I thought the Catholic view was that the love spoken of in this verse only applied to the love by people showed in their selfless acts, "charity".

73 posted on 11/13/2007 2:46:46 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Campion
FK: "He acknowledges the fact that those who do no works are not saved."

All you need to do is add to that the Tridentine observation that good works strengthen grace in the justified man, and you have the Catholic position in a nutshell.

Yes, and this may get into the very tricky "what is grace?" debate. :) Since we see salvation in this context as being an event, we couldn't say that works add to salvational grace. However, IF it is ever proper to consider "grace" to be the same as "blessing", then I could be in agreement.

74 posted on 11/13/2007 2:55:07 PM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
present indicative tense

So, "have been saved" is patently incorrect. "You are saved" as in "you are taught" or "you are fed".

The "not of yourselves" clearly refers to where the grace and faith came from. It has zero to do with the works.

Right; so if one works for boast and under his own power, that is not salvific. We agree here. Grace is source of both saving faith and saving work of love.

During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that

Ah, good, So, this is all Ephesians 2-3 is saying. No "work is fruit" theory there.

75 posted on 11/13/2007 4:16:09 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Cvengr; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
then for you, charity is more important than faith

Cuz the Bible tells me so :)

76 posted on 11/13/2007 4:19:15 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Campion; ears_to_hear; wmfights
Your contention appears to be that ALL trees are capable of bearing fruit

Yes. God wishes all to be saved;; all are capable of responding to the call, but of course, not all do so. Works of love is a necessary part of that response, and as St. Paul teaches, even the chief part.

77 posted on 11/13/2007 4:21:59 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Campion
That totality teaches a faith-based salvation

But not salvation by faith alone, as the scripture clearly tells us. It is not a matter of reconciling verses that could be read in a variety of ways: the salvation by faith alone is expressly contradicted by scripture, in a passage that is solely devoted to that question, and in language that couldn't be plainer.

78 posted on 11/13/2007 4:26:56 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: annalex
So, "have been saved" is patently incorrect. "You are saved" as in "you are taught" or "you are fed".

I am very unlearned as to tenses, but what I found was the present indicative tense as compared to other languages. It said, in essence, that "You are saved" could mean either "You were saved" OR "You are being saved now", depending on the context. I just took the context of all of Paul's writings, which demonstrate to me that he believed he was already saved, i.e. that assurance is possible.

FK: "During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that."

Ah, good, So, this is all Ephesians 2-3 is saying. No "work is fruit" theory there.

Not really. In Eph. 2-3 perseverance works are covered, but so is the separate idea that faith, executed through saving grace, is what saves alone. Lifelong perseverance is what goes with lifelong works, not the ordained and graced "moment" of salvation. Both of the passages we quoted cover both of these ideas.

79 posted on 11/14/2007 3:53:03 AM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Campion
But not salvation by faith alone, as the scripture clearly tells us. It is not a matter of reconciling verses that could be read in a variety of ways: the salvation by faith alone is expressly contradicted by scripture, in a passage that is solely devoted to that question, and in language that couldn't be plainer.

But we have been talking about Eph. 2 which PLAINLY discredits any idea that works play a significant part of salvation. Works are necessary but GUARANTEED by God for the elect. Sola Fide incorporates works BECAUSE they are guaranteed. It's all one package. No one who has true faith fails in works. EVER! That is God's promise in a passage that also "couldn't be plainer". :)

80 posted on 11/14/2007 4:10:56 AM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Cvengr; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
FK: "... then for you, charity is more important than faith."

Cuz the Bible tells me so :)

That surprises me. I thought that in Catholic thought salvation was rare outside of the Apostolic Church. If so, and knowing how many rules and regulations there are, that would appear to be a fairly substantial amount of faith required to be saved. Yet, you are telling me that works of love are more important than faith. Therefore, with all of my heretical views, if I did as many good works of love as the next good Catholic, would your guess be that I was "safe"?

81 posted on 11/14/2007 4:21:42 AM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Campion
could mean either "You were saved" OR "You are being saved now", depending on the context.

"You were saved" would be more clearly expressed with past tense. St. Paul chose the present tense.

faith, executed through saving grace, is what saves alone. [... next post] Eph. 2 which PLAINLY discredits any idea that works play a significant part of salvation

What is says clearly that grace saves alone, and that works whose source is man himself do not save. It does not say that faith saves alone or that works generally are insignificant; if it did we would have a contradiction with James 2, and the primacy of love proclaimed by Paul.

82 posted on 11/14/2007 1:31:15 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper; Cvengr; ears_to_hear; wmfights; Campion
if I did as many good works of love as the next good Catholic, would your guess be that I was "safe"?

Among theses works of love surely a ardent desire to join the Catholic Church, and once joined, vibrant life of liturgical Catholic Faith would occur, so yes.

83 posted on 11/14/2007 1:34:10 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea-Luke17.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: annalex

I rejoice with the angels at this man’s salvation. (All heaven rejoices over a person who turns to Christ, no matter what church they do it in, or even if they don’t do it in a church.)


84 posted on 11/14/2007 1:55:47 PM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex; Campion
Alex quoting FK: "faith, executed through saving grace, is what saves alone. [... next post] Eph. 2 which PLAINLY discredits any idea that works play a significant part of salvation"

What is says clearly that grace saves alone, and that works whose source is man himself do not save. It does not say that faith saves alone or that works generally are insignificant; if it did we would have a contradiction with James 2, and the primacy of love proclaimed by Paul.

Regarding the two snippets, I also said it was a package deal. Therefore, it is perfectly correct to say that faith alone saves (point of belief), AND perseverance is necessary for salvation (entry into Heaven). God's guarantee means that no one has true faith without works. They are inseparable. If one has faith then he will do works. If one does works that are good in God's eyes, then he has faith.

Paul says that grace saves alone through faith alone. Saving grace ALWAYS activates true faith. I agree with you that works born in flesh are useless. Works are not insignificant, they are just not salvific independently because they are built into faith. Works are a part of God's plan for us (Eph. 2:10) so they are very important. There is no contradiction with James 2, since James was not talking about earning our way into Heaven. James focused on the fruits of salvation, noting that if there are no fruits, there is no faith. This is true. He and Paul were coming at the same thing from different directions, but they were in total agreement with each other.

85 posted on 11/15/2007 2:02:56 AM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Among theses works of love surely an ardent desire to join the Catholic Church, and once joined, vibrant life of liturgical Catholic Faith would occur, so yes.

I see. :)

86 posted on 11/15/2007 2:10:01 AM PST by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Forest Keeper
Paul says that grace saves alone through faith alone. Saving grace ALWAYS activates true faith. I agree with you that works born in flesh are useless. Works are not insignificant, they are just not salvific independently because they are built into faith.

He doesn't say or mean "faith alone". On the rest, I agree, and that is the Catholic teaching: that good works moved by grace produce faith and likewise faith produces works, so faith and works are unseparable.

87 posted on 11/15/2007 1:19:53 PM PST by annalex (http://www.diafrica.org/kenny/CDtexts/CALuke.htm#17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-87 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson