Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Posted on 10/17/2011 7:29:39 PM PDT by fishtank
... We must remember that it is not we who anathematized Rome, but Rome that anathematized the gospel and thereby anathematized itself. The issue is not even really the condemnation of Protestants (those wounds are easy to heal) but the anathema against the gospel. The evangelicals who remain authentic witnesses to the gospel of grace alone through faith alone, therefore, are carrying on the Catholic faith. Just prior to the Council of Trent, there were many—including cardinals—who accepted the material principle (that is, the gospel) as the Reformation restated it. In fact, there was still much hope on both sides that a unity could be achieved. But when the Council of Trent repeatedly declared that those who believed that their only hope for salvation was faith in Christ now fell under the church's ban, Rome became a schismatic body. ...
This is an excerpt.
Entire article at the link.
(Excerpt) Read more at the-highway.com ...
A longer quote ...
Even as the curia began sitting in Rome to draft a conciliar response to the Reformation, there was hope of reconciliation. A number of cardinals who had gathered at the Council of Trent were convinced of one or more of the Reformers’ objections to the popular teaching of the day, and the popular rejection of the gospel by the pope and the monks had not yet been solidified. Since at this stage popes were not regarded as infallible (that was not declared until Vatican I, 1869-70) the door was open to the full reformation of Western Christendom until the Council of Trent (1545-63) finally closed it with its devastating canons against the gospel. Things that had been left to debate in the universities were now closed to discussion as the Council issued what it considered infallible pronouncements on the doctrine of justification and related truths. Now, issues upon which men and women of goodwill could differ were given a single answer: tradition is equal to Scripture in authority; the interpretation of Scripture and the elements of Holy Communion are to be denied to the laity; the Mass is a repetition of Christ’s sacrifice and each Mass atones for the people; transubstantiation was officially affirmed, as was the belief in purgatory.
However, the most important decree was also the longest, Concerning Justification. The decree begins by affirming, against any Pelagianism, the traditional Augustinian insistence on original sin and the need for grace. Human beings cannot even believe until grace first enables them. In fact, “It is furthermore declared that in adults the beginning of that justification must proceed from the predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ, that is, from his vocation, whereby, without any merits on their part, they are called”—then the good news ends and the Roman error begins—”that they who by sin had been cut off from God may be disposed through his quickening and helping grace to convert themselves to their own justification by freely assenting to and cooperating with that grace.” So, while a person is not “able by his own free will and without the grace of God to move himself to justice in his sight,” he can and must cooperate with grace. Justification is defined as “not only a remission of sins but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts whereby an unjust man becomes just.”
The Protestants never denied the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, but this was identified in Scripture as sanctification, not as justification. Rome simply combined the two concepts into one: God justifies us through the process of our moving, by the power of God’s Spirit at work in our lives, from being unjust to becoming just. This, however, rejects Paul’s whole point in Romans 4:1-5, that justification comes only to those who (a) are wicked and (b) stop working for it. God justifies the wicked as wicked, the sinner as sinner. That is the good news of the gospel, and the scandal of the Cross!
The most relevant canons are the following:
Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone (supra, chapters 7-8), meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema.
Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost (Rom. 5:5), and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.
Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy (supra, chapter 9), which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.
Canon 24. If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works (ibid., chapter 10), but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.
Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.
Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life, and in case he dies in grace the attainment of eternal life itself and also an increase of glory, let him be anathema.
In other words, men and women are accepted before God on the basis of their cooperation with God’s grace over the course of their lives, rather than on the basis of Christ’s finished work alone, received through faith alone, to the glory of God alone. There are indeed two fundamentally different answers to that recurring biblical question, “How can I be saved?” and, therefore, two fundamentally different gospels.
2. The doctrine of the church as expounded by the Roman church, which requires sound, orthodox Roman Catholics to regard the gospel, as understood by evangelicals, as heresy.
We must remember that it is not we who anathematized Rome, but Rome that anathematized the gospel and thereby anathematized itself. The issue is not even really the condemnation of Protestants (those wounds are easy to heal) but the anathema against the gospel. The evangelicals who remain authentic witnesses to the gospel of grace alone through faith alone, therefore, are carrying on the Catholic faith. Just prior to the Council of Trent, there were many—including cardinals—who accepted the material principle (that is, the gospel) as the Reformation restated it. In fact, there was still much hope on both sides that a unity could be achieved. But when the Council of Trent repeatedly declared that those who believed that their only hope for salvation was faith in Christ now fell under the church’s ban, Rome became a schismatic body.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Bookmark..
Reformation Day is coming PING!
Just prior to the Council of Trent
PING!
I read an article not to long ago, from a feschrift for John Gerstner. John Warwick Montgomery on the history of the Council of Trent.
Far from being the general council Luther wanted, it was a very stacked deck.
If you are going to misrepresent the teaching of the Church, it is better you leave to your reader free to interpret the text. Your interpretation is certainly different from what 2005 of the Catholic Catechism says:
Since it belongs to the supernatural order, grace escapes our experience and cannot be known except by faith.We cannot therefore rely on our feelings or our works to conclude that we are justified and saved. (cf. Council of Trent, DS 1533-34). However, according to the Lord, "Thus you will know them by their fruits," reflection on God's blessings in our lives and in the lives of the saints offers us a guarantee that grace is at work in us and spurs us on to an ever greater faith and an attitude of trustful poverty. [quoting St.Joan of Arc's testimony] Asked if she knew she was in God's grace, she replied," If I am not, may it please God to put me in it; if I am, may it please God to keep me there. "
Co-operation is a poor term. Rather we must open our hearts to the graces that pour on us as unrelentingly as the sun's rays fall on the earth, though we be on the far side and do not see the light nor feel its warmth. To close our hearts is to remain forever in the dark and shiver in the cold.
Working with the Holy Spirit always gives you a stacked deck.
I heard/read Horton was so embarrassed by ho badly he lost this debate that he cut out the Catholic comments and responses when he aired the debate on his radio program.
https://store.patrickmadrid.com/what-still-divides-us-debate-mp3/
I listened to that debate in 1995 or so. Even the Protestant church which ran the debate admitted the Protestant side stunk.
Among other things, this biblical interpretation disregards the St. Paul's teaching on purgatory and St. James' direct anathema against he principle of salvation by faith alone.
2. The doctrine of the church as expounded by the Roman church, which requires sound, orthodox Roman Catholics to regard the gospel, as understood by evangelicals, as heresy.
Notice the hesitancy and weakness of this claim. The author dares not say that Protestantism (or Evangelicalism) represents the One, True, Orthodox Christian teaching. Such a claim is made by the Catholic Church alone (and by Easterners who share the Catholic position). That is because there were no Protestant Church Councils or non-Western manifestations of Protestantism in prior to Luther.
The authenticity of Catholic biblical interpretation is proven by the record of history. Protestantism disputes the interpretations of all previous Fathers and Doctors of the Church.
and for his next article, it must be:
“What Still Keeps Us Apart” by Michael Horton (or why Michael Horton and the Calvinists Anathematized themselves from the Lutherans)
From a Calvinist website — I don’t think I’ll believe their slant on things.
It is the Decision of the Holy Spirit and Us….On the Council of Jerusalem...(Catholic Caucus)
A Timeline of Catholic Church history, 1-500 A.D. (includes Councils, Canon of the Bible)
MAJOR COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH - 1st Council of Nicaea - 325 A.D. (1st in a series)
MAJOR COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH - 1st Council of Constantinople - 381 A.D. (2nd in a series)
MAJOR CHURCH COUNCILS - The Council Of Chalcedon - 451 A.D.
Lutheran leaders were initially invited...but, when it was clear they were to be completely stonewalled and ignored (not to mention being at serious risk of being arrested, tried and burned by the Inquisition...) they soon left.
I’d like to see the historical texts you cite when referring to “being at serious risk of being arrested, tried and burned by the Inquisition...”
Can you do that for me?
Correct, not only were 80% of those at Trent from Italy, not one of them knew NT Greek or OT Hebrew.
Sorry, but no. Lame article. There are, simply put, too many holes, half-truths, and misty assertions, for one to take apart while waiting to start the work day. Suffice it to say that those who call themselves evangelicals will doubtless enjoy the article, while those who love history, and the Catholic Church, will not.
But when the Council of Trent repeatedly declared that those who believed that their only hope for salvation was faith in Christ now fell under the church's ban
Trent made no such declaration, much less did so repeatedly.
But Trent did anathematize those who believed that "saving faith" is merely believing that Christ saved you, which is what Luther said. That amounts to believing your own salvation into existence, an error that is the direct progenitor of the "prosperity Gospel" error. After all, if you can believe your own salvation into existence, why can't you believe your own wealth into existence?
The Protestant leaders were offered safe-conduct passes. And they didn’t “soon leave”; they never showed up at all.
(not to mention being at serious risk of being arrested, tried and burned by the Inquisition...)
Given the fate of Hus, in the not too distant past, not an unreasonable concern.
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.