Posted on 05/23/2008 8:39:53 AM PDT by annalex
This is an open thread. I invite all opinions and encourage clear posts on the topic.
On Salvation Outside the Catholic Church
The Great Heresies [Open]
SALVATION PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE
ping for later
This should be correctly titled “Justification in ROMAN Catholic Teaching” as the Catholic Church (Eastern and other Orthodox, and various Protestant groups) as a whole does not subscribe to this.
Calling Rome alone the “universal” Church is only their opinion.
Objectively? What is "objectively" with respect to God? Does this mean the author spun a theological yarn that includes a god who is subject to a greater moral universe who isn't the final authority in and of himself?
If our moral lacking is something external to God, then God is not the ultimate creator, and cannot be considered the ultimate judge. If moral rules are above God, then that god didn't create them so there has to be a higher god who decided right from wrong. If that god is subject to moral rules, then he is also subject to judgment under them, so there must be a higher judge. Pulling out the word "objective" with respect to God is meaningless if we truly believe in an ultimate creator-God.
There is but one Catholic theology in all Catholic Churches, the Roman Church as well as the Catholic Churches of the East.
I don’t think the Eastern Orthodox theology differs from ours either, but that is not the point, is it?
Very true, and I don't think the author attempts to do so. In order to compare and contrast, he picks Protestant theologies that he thinks are typical, but I don't think he makes any presumption of uniformity regarding that. His goal is to explain the Catholic theology to those who might be more familiar with one or another Protestant theory.
Objectively with respect to God means according to His sovereign judgement.
Of course the same applies Roman Catholics...they leave Rome for other faiths all the time.
Such a price we pay for freedom of religion! Why couldn’t we have just been happy with the Inquistion!
I didn’t ask the author to speak for Protestants, I just asked him not to use “catholic” without a qualifier. He speaks for the Roman Church, no other body.
At this point in time at least, there is no human organization which is the exclusive “Catholic” church.
If there are any Christians at all outside the Roman Church (as your Magisterium has acknowledged for the last 50 years or so) than one cannot speak of the Roman Church as universal, or catholic.
What Catholic apologists must understand is that they must not address Protestant theology as if it were one monolithic body, but address each theological sticking point on its own. Catholicism it seems has one general theology, while Protestants may disagree on as much if not more with each other than with Catholic theology.
The main problem though that Catholics have with swaying Protestants, is that there is a good amount of evidence in the lack of capability that a human organization has to stay righteous. This is the core problem--not theological or liturgical differences. Being subject to a fallible human in Christianity rather than God is the core. And it's quite an uphill battle since the failings of Catholic leadership in history are so well known.
But the author called that a "legal fiction".
What he said is that Luther’s “dung heap” theory of forensic justification is legal fiction. Catholic teaching is that the soul truly and objectively becomes righteous.
In truth, there is certain unanimity among Prostestants - for example, as to the truth of the Creeds - but there is no typical Protestant theology.
In truth, there is certain unanimity among Prostestants - for example, as to the truth of the Creeds - but there is no typical Protestant theology.
I’d say, forensic justification and the idea that salvation of an indivudual is a single event in his past life, are rather typical, and false.
You are correct. If Roman Catholics are going to address Protestant theology, they must address it in “Protestant” terms. To argue with a Southern Baptist about the authority of tradition, the early church fathers, or the apostolic succession would be a waste of time. Southern Baptists do not place much faith, if any at all, in those doctrines. If Roman Catholics are going to dispute with Southern Baptists about doctrine, Catholics must confine their arguments to the Bible, as that is the only authority that Baptists recognize. One might dispute the three issues mentioned above with an Anglican, but to argue with a Baptist about these issues is futile.
The purpose of the article is to teach Catholic theology.
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.