Q. How does a Catholic get to Heaven?
A. By Faith and the Grace of God. Catholics get to Heaven by the power and grace of God. The good works that we do are in obedience to Christ and in order to purify ourselves so that we can become holy as He is holy. But it is all of Grace. We cannot do anything worth while on our own.But specifically GOD communicates His Grace to save and strengthen us to journey towards Heaven, in the following primary ways:
By being born again in baptism:
- John 3:5 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
- 1 Peter 3:20-21 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you…
By receiving communion in the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ
- John 6:50 “This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.
- John 6:51 I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.
- John 6:53-58-So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
- He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will (CH)raise him up on the last day.
- “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.
- “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
- “As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me.
- “This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”
By living life so that at death you are friends with God. This means that you die without mortal sin on your soul and live life so as to avoid mortal sin. But if we sin we must confess mortal sin to a priest in the sacrament of confession with true repentence and avoid it in the future.
MORTAL SIN
- I John 5:16 If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.
SACRAMENT CONFESSION
- John20:22-23And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”
Filed under: Baptism, Confession, Eucharist, Salvation
You cannot not get to Heaven by good works. You must confess to God..not a priest..that you believe and you must have faith whole heartedly. Romans 10:9 – That if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.
Correct.
Breanne,
Agreed. No one can get to Heaven by good works alone. But of course as James says, “Faith without works is dead.”
We must, of course, have faith. We confess to a priest our mortal sins in order to receive absolution and grace to strengthen us to stay on course to Heaven. We obey Christ in this matter since He conferred upon His apostles, the first priests and Bishops, the authority to hear confession and bind or loose the sins of the penitent. John 21.
The Romans 10:9 passage is certainly true as long as one does not fall away from Christ and commit mortal (as in DEADLY) sin as explained in I John 5:16-17
If you believe in the Bible, it says that there is no other way to Heaven but through him. You cannot work your way there. God is a perfect and holy being and we are pitiful and sinful by nature. Therefore there is no way for us to get to heaven. That’s why Jesus died on the cross, to forgive our sins, so we can go to Heaven. But, on the matter of going through a priest and Mary to communicate with God, that directly against the Bible. Mary was a simple human being was chosen by God to be the mother of Jesus. That does not mean that Mary is in anyway higher than God. I urge you to read through the BIble, and everything I have said will be proved.
Correct! Plain and simple!! I was a catholic and now I am a Christian.
Catholics are Christians.
Alex:Not necessarily…one big difference between the two is that Catholics baptize babies which is totally wrong… and also they belive the only way to get to heaven is by good works. That is also wrong.
BFHU:Why is it “totally wrong” to baptize babies? Where does scripture prohibit the baptism of babies? You have been grossly misinformed. Catholics do not “believe that the only way to get to heaven is by good works.” We believe that good works are evidence of our faith and also help to purify us from sin and selfishness. But we are completely UNABLE to work our way to heaven. Jesus Christ is the only door to Heaven.
Roman Catholics ARE indeed Christians, and by the way,…they are not the only ones who baptize infants. I am a Lutheran, and we baptize infants as well…so do Episcopalians. Your definition of a Christian is dangerously narrow, and perhaps unfounded.
Not if you believe in Mary and the Pope being the vicar to Christ. Maybe i should remind you that Adolph Hitler was catholic.Hitler killed 90% of the Jews in Poland; that would be a good testimony for Christ. The Catholic church has a long history in persecuting the Jews, and the bible tells us that the Jews were the apple of Gods eye.
Randy,
We believe the Pope is the Vicar of Christ. Not Mary. We believe she is our Blessed Mother as it says in Rev 12. You are guilty of the sin of detraction in the way that you mention Hitler being a Catholic. Yes, he was raised Catholic. And you should know very well that he was not in any way a faithful Catholic. And you should know also that the Catholic Church did not endorse Hitler. In fact, several Popes spoke out against Hitler and his policies. Pope Pius the XII hid Jews all over Italy in Churches and convents. And, Hitler tried to have the pope assassinated. Shortly after the war he was acclaimed as a friend of the Jewish nation. In fact, the Chief Rabbi of Rome converted to the Catholic Faith after the war and took the Pope’s baptismal name as his own baptismal name…Eugenio.
You can read this story here–>Salvation is From the Jews
I think you all Catholics an apology for implying that the Catholic Church approved of or was aligned in some way with Hitler.
A-MEN, brother ,you are sooooooooooooooo right . pray for the Catholics to be saved before Chirst comes back, God loves them inspite of the false teaching. Judy ga.
Daniel: If you believe in the Bible, it says that there is no other way to Heaven but through him. You cannot work your way there.
Daniel: God is a perfect and holy being and we are pitiful and sinful by nature. Therefore there is no way for us to get to heaven.
Daniel: That’s why Jesus died on the cross, to
forgive our sins, so we can go to Heaven.
Daniel: But, on the matter of going through a priest and Mary to communicate with God, that directly against the Bible.
Daniel: Mary was a simple human being was chosen by God to be the mother of Jesus.
Daniel: That does not mean that Mary is in anyway higher than God.
BFHU: That is very true.
Can you please tell me where in the bible it states that Mary was given the gift of unfallen human nature?
Mary wasn’t perfect, just obedient by accepting God’s call on her life to bear Jesus. Mary was no different than anyone else, she was born into a fallen world just as you and I. If I answer God’s call on my life and choose to serve Him by going on the mission field, becoming a pastor, priest, or nun, that doesn’t make me anything special, but just as every one else of a sinful nature in need of Jesus to die for my sins. Jesus died for Mary just as much as he died for the rest of the world to atone for our sins.
Dear Donna,
I will tell you the answer to your question if you can tell me where in the Bible it says that all religious truth is to be found in Scripture alone?
What scripture tells us that any religious belief that is not spelled out clearly in scripture is a lie?
Isn’t your reliance on Scripture Alone, the dogma of Sola Scriptura, itself unscriptural?
And, yes, Mary certainly did need a Savior. And her savior is Jesus Christ. But He saved her before she sinned and by His power and her cooperation with His grace she was able to to keep from sinning. Just like Adam and Eve could have done, but did not.
gb57, the truth is this, if one stays in the catholic church, believes in its teachings, and ways, then you will go to hell.believe it or not. read the , bible, mary, praying to dead saints, lighting candles, and confession, all lies. bless you all.
What you wrote is true. Thanks to our Lord and Savior, I am no longer a catholic. Now I can call myself a Christian!!!! Which is a sinner saved by Grace!
Catholics are Christians. We are sinners saved by grace.
Oh, I did not realize that there was a faith where the followers are indeed Godlike and they get to determine who does and does not go to hell. Very interesting…
Dear George,
Could you explain, using scripture, why Catholics who believe the teachings of our Church are going to Hell?
I have read the Bible many times. I can find NOTHING about Mary, praying to Saints, (alive in Heaven, only their bodies are dead) lighting candles or confession, that the Bible condemns or contends is a lie. Please may we see your verse?
To be clear, I contend that there is NOTHING in Sacred Scripture that contradicts anything we believe. As you search the scriptures ponder about this:
Is it possible that ONLY PROTESTANT INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE CONTRADICTS CATHOLIC THEOLOGY?
Based on your explanations for Catholic traditions that are not based in Scripture, one may say that everything that is not spoken in Scripture is OK to do. I believe it is safer follow what Scripture explicitly says to do, and not to do. Ambiguity is where the devil sneaks in – so if the Bible is silent on stuff, why do something that may be sinful (or may lead someone to sin)? We can only know if we’re living according to God’s will when we can hear God speaking about it in His Word.
I’ve been reading throughout this website, and see that many of questions asked are not answered; the answer seems to be: since the Scripture does not prohibit it explicitly (although some practices come very closely to idolatry – and seem that way to many), then it must be OK to practice them.
From a logical point of view, it seems kind of unorthodox – since we know that God’s Word is true, we use it as the plum line for our lives in faith. It seems logical not to practice things that Bible does not speak of.
Traditon, spoken of in the Bible, speaks of REVELATION OF CHRIST spoken and written about by Apostles. Everything that Christ taught the apostles is considered apostolic tradition.
Human tradition – rituals, rules, regulations are generally criticized, even condemned by Jesus Himself (the Pharisees, who by wanting to observe the law perfectly, made up many unnecessary rules, that made them miss God and His intentions).
Finally, I just wonder why you would speak so harshly about Protestants, who read the Bible and see that it does not speak about Mary being taken into heaven, and nowhere it says that she was without sin. Why is it wrong to take Jesus at His Word, when He says that He Himself intercedes for us before the Father?
Why is it so wrong (based on what you say) to rely solely on Scripture? Isn’t Christ and only Christ enough for our salvation? Isn’t only God who can forgive, justify, sanctify and glorify? No protestant will tell you we do not need the Church, but only Christ is the foundation of the Church. No man, but Jesus. Peter – yes the first church member, the church planter ordained by God, but still a mere man. Only Christ will remain after the judgment. All else – all human tradition – Protestant or Catholic will burn in the fire. What is truly of God will remain – and that is the Word of God given to the Church.
Just as you say that some Catholic rituals are OK because they aren’t spoken of in Scripture, why would you say that Protestant belief of ‘sola scriptura’ is against Scripture? Is it because Protestants do not follow human traditions, which are ambiguous? Is that why you think they are wrong?
According to God, we are sinners. We are born with selfish and fallen nature, with hearts of stone – hearts that deceive us, minds that trick us and wills that make us prone to elevate and glorify ourselves. Why is it wrong to stray from traditions and doctrines that do not have strong Biblical foundation? Food for thought – if you find a verse in the Bible that condemns following the Bible and only the Bible, please let me know – it’s a matter of life and death.
One more thing – how can we ever know if a human is right or wrong? How can we know if someone is telling the truth? I would love to hear your thoughts.
BFHU: You have misunderstood. One must listen to Scripture and the Doctrine taught by the Catholic Church. Why do Protestant practice contraception when God killed Onan when he did it?
JIML:I believe it is safer follow what Scripture explicitly says to do, and not to do. Ambiguity is where the devil sneaks in – so if the Bible is silent on stuff, why do something that may be sinful (or may lead someone to sin)? We can only know if we’re living according to God’s will when we can hear God speaking about it in His Word.
BFHU: There is nothing in the Catholic Faith that contradicts the Scripture. Nothing that is taught by the Catholic Church that is a sin. But of course, Catholics sin. But not in obedience to our Faith but by disobedience.
JIML:I’ve been reading throughout this website, and see that many of questions asked are not answered; the answer seems to be: since the Scripture does not prohibit it explicitly (although some practices come very closely to idolatry – and seem that way to many), then it must be OK to practice them.
BFHU: That is because if I can’t give Protestants chapter and verse in Scripture to answer the questions they do not consider it answered. Until a Protestant can PROVE Sola Scriptura from Scripture I am not under any Scriptural obligation to obey it. I only provide the best scripture I can to answer questions. But even when Scripture CLEARLY SUPPORTS Catholic Theology Protestants still wiggle out of it by INTERPRETING IT DIFFERENTLY. Such as,
Savation is NOT BY FAITH ALONE>
JIML:From a logical point of view, it seems kind of unorthodox – since we know that God’s Word is true, we use it as the plum line for our lives in faith.
BFHU: Catholics do also.
JIML:It seems logical not to practice things that Bible does not speak of.
BFHU: Why? If Sola Scriptura was Scriptural then it would be logical. But since the Christian Faith of 2000 years had believed and practiced what the Catholic Church teaches, then it seems a lot MORE logical to practice the Faith of the Church founded by Jesus and His Apostles than a denomination founded by men.
JIML:Traditon, spoken of in the Bible, speaks of REVELATION OF CHRIST spoken and written about by Apostles. Everything that Christ taught the apostles is considered apostolic tradition.
BFHU: I agree.
JIML: Human tradition – rituals, rules, regulations are generally criticized, even condemned by Jesus Himself (the Pharisees, who by wanting to observe the law perfectly, made up many unnecessary rules, that made them miss God and His intentions).
BFHU: Only the traditions that nullified the word of God and examples are given. But St. Paul exhorts us to cling to the traditions he taught by word (Oral Tradition) or writing (Scripture)
JIML:Finally, I just wonder why you would speak so harshly about Protestants, who read the Bible and see that it does not speak about Mary being taken into heaven, and nowhere it says that she was without sin.
BFHU: I don’t speak harshly about Protestants. I used to be a zealous Protestant. You can read my conversion story above on a tab. But Scripture does not say Mary Sinned so why are Protestants so sure she did? It doesn’t say in Scripture that Mary died and was buried. So How can Protestants know this is what happened. Protestants forget about Sola Scriptura when it is not helpful to make their case.
JIML:Why is it wrong to take Jesus at His Word, when He says that He Himself intercedes for us before the Father?
BFHU: It is not wrong. We do this. Show me one place where the Catholic Church does not take Jesus at his word.
JIML:Why is it so wrong (based on what you say) to rely solely on Scripture?
BFHU: Because Protestants criticize the Catholic Church for beliefs not found in Scripture and yet Protestants also hold beliefs not found in scripture. And because Protestants have a limited Faith since it rejects the Fullness of the Faith found in the Church founded by Jesus and ALL of His teachings.
JIML:Isn’t Christ and only Christ enough for our salvation? Isn’t only God who can forgive, justify, sanctify and glorify? No protestant will tell you we do not need the Church, but only Christ is the foundation of the Church. No man, but Jesus. Peter – yes the first church member, the church planter ordained by God, but still a mere man. Only Christ will remain after the judgment. All else – all human tradition – Protestant or Catholic will burn in the fire. What is truly of God will remain – and that is the Word of God given to the Church.
BFHU: I agree but that Word is NOT only what got written down. Jesus is the WORD. and there were other teachings that were passed down orally.
JIML:
Just as you say that some Catholic rituals are OK because they aren’t spoken of in Scripture, why would you say that Protestant belief of ‘sola scriptura’ is against Scripture?
BFHU: We do not say that Sola Scriptura is against Scripture. What I say over and over is that Protestants object to Catholic beliefs by saying, “Where is that in Scripture?” Protestants do this b/c they believe the doctrine of Sola Scriptura conceived of by Martin Luther 500 years ago.( But the Catholic Faith and beliefs have been around for 2000 years as evidenced by reading the Early Church Fathers.
But the problem with the Doctrine of Sola Scriptura is that it cannot be found in Scripture! So Protestants criticize Catholics for beliefs that cannot be found in Scripture and yet the very foundation of why they criticize Catholics, Sola Scriptura, is not in Scripture any more than the assumption or immaculate Conception of Mary!!!
JIML: Is it because Protestants do not follow human traditions, which are ambiguous? Is that why you think they are wrong?
BFHU: But that is the point. Protestants DO FOLLOW CATHOLIC TRADITION! The New Testament Canon is a Catholic TRADITION. The NT table of contents is not contained in scripture.
The Doctrine of the Trinity is Catholic Teaching that is not found explicitly in the NT. That is why Jehovahs Witnesses exist.
The word Trinity and Incarnation are NOT found in Scripture just like Purgatory is not found in Scripture.These are all Catholic Traditions.
JIML: Why is it wrong to stray from traditions and doctrines that do not have strong Biblical foundation?
BFHU: Because Jesus founded a Church 2000 years ago. Christianity evangelized the known world 1500 years until Protestantism was born, claiming to know better than the Church founded by Christ. Protestantism dropped by the wayside things that Christians had always and every where believed. Everything Jesus did and taught did not get written in the books of the NT. They are precious but there also existed along side the NT Oral teachings and explanations of Scripture that Protestantism lost touch with.
JIML:One more thing – how can we ever know if a human is right or wrong? How can we know if someone is telling the truth? I would love to hear your thoughts.
BFHU: Regarding what exactly? In general everyday stuff….beats me. Regarding Christianity….If what a teacher or Christian says aligns with the Cathechism I would accept it. But if it contradicts any teaching of the Church, and I mean CHURCH, not some whacko priest or catholic layman, then I reject it.
they are IDOLS!
Thank you so much for providing this material. I am in a Bible Study and this is a huge point of contention with me. I was raised a Catholic and am now a Methodist but I find it very frustrating to hear the slams against Catholics in our study. My mother and several of my friends are Catholic and they are some of the most devout Christians I know. And it’s also interesting to me that when you see this argument it is mostly Protestants saying that Catholics are going to hell with usually something less than a loving Christian attitude.
I agree that it is a harsh statement to say that catholics are going to hell. Actually, that isn’t true. It doesn’t matter what you “call” yourself. If you are a sinner saved by grace, you are a Christian. Therefore, you will go to Heaven. But, of course, works without being saved are like “filthy rags”, as the Bible puts it.
So, if you are a sinner saved by grace, but still going to the catholic church, it’s ok. I just wonder why you would still want to go there. I learn more from a non-denominational church.
Don,
We are saved by Grace not our learning. We Catholics are all sinners saved by the grace of God through the death and resurrection of Jesus. Our good works do not save us. They begin the purifying process or sanctification process.
We still want to go to the Catholic Church because it is the ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH founded by Jesus Christ. Why would anyone want to go to any church founded by mere men.
And we also receive grace through the sacraments, especially the body and blood of Jesus in the Eucharist and Confession.
Catholic = universal = all people saved by grace of Christ alone.
Roman Catholic is not same as Catholic. Roman Catholic is a denomination, just as all the others.
The Catholic Church is called the Roman Catholic Church but we do not call ourselves that. This was an epithet apended to Catholic by the Anglicans to denigrate the Catholic Church. It is used in ph books and elsewhere. But the Catholic Church is the Universal Church. We have Churches in every country. I don’t think there is a Protestant denomination that does. We are the original Church. Eastern Orthodox and all Protestant broke off from us and each other.
Peace Be With You, Pam Forrester bfhu.wordpress.com
Christ founded only “one” church upon Peter (Matt 16:18). The “marks” of this church are “one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic” as professed by all Christians since Nicea. The Catholic Church is simply an abbreviated term for the true church of God founded by Christ. In about AD 110, we had the first extant recorded use of the name “catholic church” (katholike ekklesia) for the true Church as universally known (Letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans).
The idea of “denominations” was simply a late American Protestantism invention. The first Protestants (that is, in Europe) were simply grouped in “state churches” as they are still … thus Church of England, Church of Scotland, Church of Denmark, Church of Sweden, etc. When Protestants came to America, the reality of being churched under political and nationalistic lines was no longer practical … thus “(Protestant) denominations” were born. Thus, the Catholic Church is not “just” another denomination. it is the one church founded by Christ and is the Mother Church. All Protestant churches were sub-groups founded by man (Lutheran – Martin Luther; Anglicanism/Episcopalianism – King Henry the Eighth; Baptist – John Smyth; Presbyterianism – John Knox; Methodism – John Wesley, etc. etc.
Yes, Roman Catholics follow the Pope in Rome. There are many, many catholics who do not follow the Pope.
True, Lori, too many protest-ants who call themselves Catholic in the Catholic Church.
It is really sad in these days that with everything that is going on Christians can’t unite and lift each other up. I am very sad to say that I hear much more negative spoken about Catholics from Protestants than I do Catholics speaking negatively about Protestants. That is just in my expierience. I don’t know how anyone can claim to be filled with the spirit of the Lord and make those kind of comments.
Tom’s comments make me sad. My mother is a retired Methodist pastor. I am so sorry for the pain that brings to you,Tom. I pray for those hearts to be softened.
Ah – but Roman Catholics ‘say’ this through belief and action – until all are welcome at the communion table, the RC message is that only RC’s are ‘saved’. The liturgy may be beautiful, and the homily loving, but then the table is closed. That’s a huge message. Maybe this is the reason many people are turing to the many independent catholic churches, such as the Catholic Apostolic Church of Antioch. Such churches are Independent of the dogma of Rome, yet Catholic (a word, btw, that means universal, not ‘Roman.’)
Ah – but the term “RC” is just another Protestant (of wannabe Anglo-Catholic) invention – because the one holy catholic and apostolic church (called “Catholic”) is one in communion with the successor of Peter, the bishop of Rome, the Pope, under one fold and one shepherd. Don’t be a “bad” Protestant by going about shopping for one church after another to fit one’s personal agenda and cafeteria-variety Christianity. The real “huge” message is how Protestantism is so far removed from authentic Christianity as to put one’s soul in jeopardy by not “discerning the body” (1 Cor 11:28-29). Like the unfaithful disciples in John 6, Protestants find “eating (Christ’s) flesh” to be a “hard saying” and instead, have opted for a pseudo Eucharist. The Catholic Church does not have open communion because she does not want Christians without proper disposition to “eat and drink judgment against themselves … for this reason many of (you) are weak and ill, and some have died” (1 Cor 11:29-30).
Merry Christmas,
Tom,
Try to understand that there are essentially two ways to look at God’s organization of the Church:
1.) Catholics teach that God set order in the church by placing Apostles and their successors in charge.
OR
2.)Protestants teach that Jesus is the head of the Church
but while he’s in Heaven, he never intended anyone on earth to have the authority to lead.
Now ask yourself, where in your entire life experience have you ever found it to be a good idea to tell people that no one is in charge and that they are unregulated?
Recall that the VERY FIRST lie Satan ever told was that they(Adam and Eve) could be in charge. As the saying goes; old tricks are the best tricks.
Also I should probably point out I am Daniel H., not the other Daniel on this thread. *lol*
Hello, Well you’ve answered my question with a question. What is the basis of your belief then? It’s simply an assumption. I understand why you would think Mary was saved prior to her birth, but it simply doesn’t line up with what Jesus said. He died once for all of us. The perfect sacrifice without spot nor blemish. It had to be a blood sacrifice! He didn’t die once for Mary and then again at Calvary for the rest of us. It simply doesn’t make any sense at all. Ref: Romans 6:10
10The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
Jesus’ death saved everyone Before Christ (including Mary’s immaculate conception) and AD =Anno Domine. We do not think Jesus had to die twice.
Then how could Mary be born without sin, if Jesus died after her. Makes no sense at all.
I believe , as Mary has said, “I am the immaculate conception” which means” she” was born “without sin” as I read it the same as Adam and Eve were born without sin. Therefore, Mary would be on the same plain, so to say, as Jesus who was without sin and therefore we can pray for Grace through Mary to the Father directly.
Adam and Eve were not born. They were created by God without “human birth”. makes a world of difference. Everyone after Adam and Eve – born, and born with sin.
TRUE! Everyone else was born with a fallen nature, EXCEPT Jesus and Mary. I think he just mis-spoke.
Peace Be With You, Pam Forrester bfhu.wordpress.com
Dear Donna,
Just as all of the OT saints were saved in anticipation of the atonement of Christ, so Mary was saved from sin before she ever sinned by Christ her savior, her son. Her sinlessness was a great gift of grace from God. She was fully human, free of the stain of original sin she was created in innocence and purity just like Adam and Eve. Just like we all might have been born (free from sin), if not for the fault of our first parents.
With God all things are possible. He is not bound by TIME. He is outside of it and able to save Mary from the stain of original sin by the merits of Christ Jesus. Don’t you agree that He could do this if He wanted to? I am sure you don’t think that this is too hard for the Almighty.
Mary is exactly the same as Adam and Eve were before the Fall. The difference is she kept herself pure,with the grace and power of God to assist her. Jesus is the new Adam and Mary is the new Eve.
Mary didn’t have parents? She was not born? She was created, not born? She was without original sin? I always thought that Jesus was withut original sin, that His conception, His birth was a miracle of God. I wonder why God didn’t tell us in the Bible that it is true of Mary too. I always thought that the only un-created One is without sin.
Mary had normal parents who were born with the sin nature. Mary was conceived in the normal way. She is not uncreated. She is a creature saved from sin by her son BEFORE she was born at her conception. And by the grace of God she did not fall as did Adam and Eve.
Adam and Eve created without sin but fell. Jesus (the second Adam) and Mary created without sin and did not sin. Both Jesus and Mary were born through a miracle. Jesus’ birth is the miraculous birth taking flesh from Mary but fathered by the Holy Spirit. Mary’s the Immaculate Conception.
Peace Be With You, Pam Forrester bfhu.wordpress.com
Yes Jesus died for the saints of old~the priest’s were no longer required to burn offerings for the remission of sin, because Jesus was the final sacrifice~the lamb without spot nor blemish, but This is no way infers that Mary was born without original sin. It’s a romantic idea, but nothing in scripture old or new testament points to this idea. Her immaculate conception didn’t make her holy. She was simply faithful and obedient to the call God had on her life. No different than anyone else who’s obedient to the call of God.
No different than anyone else who received a miracle from Jesus.
Jesus said, All have sinned and All fall short of the Glory of God. No where does it infer All, but Mary.
Mary had other children. (She was not ever virgin) I believe the Catholic church still teaches that and it clearly states in the word that Jesus had Half Brother’s and Sisters as well.
If Joseph kept her a virgin throughout their entire marriage then he should get the kudos x a million!
Poor Joseph~not much is stated about him in the word, nor is much honor given him, but he was an obedient servant of the Lord by keeping Mary a virgin till Jesus was Born. Under Jewish Law he could have had her stoned.
In response to a previous point regarding sola scriptura , read John’s warning
Revelation 22:18-19.
18. I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
God takes His Word very seriously. He’s a God of order and that’s what I love about Him and His Word. It follows very logical patterns of thought. He doesn’t mince words.
You still have no basis for your belief that Mary was born without original sin and lived a sinless life. And yes Jesus was sinless~He’s God! As a believer in Jesus Christ I will infer that He was sinless! My only proof I need is my belief that He’s God!
And of course I take the whole counsel of God and read it in context. The Old Testament was a foreshadowing of the New. It doesn’t make the New illegitimate.
I was raised Catholic and never encouraged to read the bible. I started reading it when i was in my late 20′s. By the power of the Holy Spirit God showed and continues to show me who He is and the meaning of His word. My belief hangs on the Word of God and not on the doctrine of any denomination.
Do you believe what you believe because Catholic doctrine says it’s truth or have you searched out the word and sought out the truth from God Himself? I can’t put my trust in man, now that I have Jesus.
My parents think I’ve left the true church and I believe I haven’t left anything~I’ve just met my Saviour in a very personal way and the Holy Spirit leads me to all truth. Besides Jesus said, The True church is without spot nor blemish and I don’t believe any church will lay claim to that.
When I first started reading the Word, I just found some encouragement and comfort there~especially from the Psalms, but without the holy spirit, it was just that.~words When I accepted Jesus as Lord and Saviour, repented of my past, then the Word became life to me.
Donna, It is unfortunate that you are equating knowing the Holy Spirit and Jesus and reading the bible with not being Catholic.
I am a protestant headed toward Converting and I don’t find your statements to be accurate in what I have seen and experienced in the Catholic Church.
“~I’ve just met my Saviour in a very personal way and the Holy Spirit leads me to all truth. “(Donna)
You make it sound like that is impossible in the Catholic Church. I find very much the opposite. I have enjoyed the emphasis put in Scripture, the impact of the Holy Spirit in our lives and the relationship that we have with Jesus all strongly supported in the Catholic Church.
Blessings.
Well Catholics do not have the same Bible as Christians do
I’m speaking from personal experience when I said that I was not encouraged to read the bible as a Catholic. If you’re converting to the Catholic church from the protestant faith, then perhaps it would be a reasonable conclusion to assume you’ve read the bible and had some understanding of the holy spirit and have some type of relationship with Jesus. I never had any teaching about the holy spirit nor did I ever have any classes on the bible. I grew up in the 60′s and was taught by nuns. Never owned a bible until my 20′s in the 80′s. I’m speaking from personal experience & from talking with my family & friends who are Catholic. When I asked my Dad if he thought I had to be Catholic to be saved, he said he didn’t know what you had to believe to be saved. I find that terribly sad. When I first started talking about the bible he seriously got angry with me. Anytime I mention the bible both he and my Mom act as though I’m speaking a foreign language. It’s possible that the Catholic church is changing and I have heard that some are offering bible classes. Glad to hear that.
I’m a born-again believer, so I don’t know how that compares to what you’ve been taught as a protestant. I don’t know that I was ever taught to pray to Jesus. I do remember being taught to pray to Mary and various saints. I remember that on my own I chose to pray to God. Before I read the Bible, I didn’t know about Jesus being our advocate to the Father. Now I pray only to God in Jesus name. Until I was saved, born again, there’s no way I could understand the bible or God. I had to be born~again of the spirit. I had to realize I was a sinner in need of a savior. My Catholic baby baptism didn’t save me. I had to repent of my sin as an adult~ I was 30~and put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ. He had to become my Lord, my everything! A question was put to me, “If you died today, would you go to heaven?” My snap response was yes, but after I thought about it, I really didn’t know the answer to that. I thought I was a pretty good person, so why wouldn’t I go to heaven. Fact was, I was a rank sinner, desperately in need of Jesus. I’ve broken every commandment! Jesus said if you hate your brother, you’ve got murder in your heart~if you lust after anyone, you’ve committed adultery in your heart and on goes the list.
I don’t know where you’re at with the Lord. I was going to ask if you were a Priest or Deacon. Maybe you’re a seeker still trying to figure it out. All I know is Jesus saved me and I’m forever grateful. I love the Lord and put my hope & trust in Him, not in the doctrines of man.
I hope you search the scriptures for yourself, before taking the word of anyone else. I believe there are Catholics who’re saved, but it’s not because they were Catholic, it’s because they are born of the spirit and put their hope and trust in Jesus their Lord and Savior.
Hope that clarifies what I said.
Donna,
I agree with what you have said and yes, as a protestant, that is all what I was raised in. I have a relationship with Jesus and know the holy spirit and know where my salvation lies.. … I just don’t personally know ANY Catholics who believe they are saved because they are baptized. Your upbringing is unfortunate, but perhaps not the norm? I love the Church and the sanctity and the emphasis on worship while in the presence of the Lord. I was raised in a non denominational Christian Church and then have spent the past 20 plus in the Methodist Church. I get tired of every church I have been to the elders bustling around to fit church to the people. The whole set up changes and beliefs are altered as time goes on and adjusted to what the people want to hear. God doesn’t Change!??! Also, it is not like being in a worship situation. People waltz in wearing WHATEVER(including pajama bottoms and bare feet!) Drinking cokes and coffee… eating, visiting and even when service begins none of this stops. No reverence at all.
I love the Church I go to know. When you walk in, BE QUIET! People are praying. It is such a sweet attitude of worship, adoration, prayer and repentance. I have yet to meet a Catholic who has been taught to pray to Mary and not Jesus. And certainly no one who believes that anyone, but our Lord answers those prayers.
“I confess to almighty God,
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have sinned through my own fault,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done,
and in what I have failed to do;
and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin,
all the angels and saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord, our God.”
I have said this before, but when you look at the prayer we pray at Mass. This is obvious who it is directed to. I am asking Mary, angels, saints and YOU to pray for me to the Lord. That is pretty obvious that we are asking for prayer. Also, don’t be deceived that Catholics are the only ones who pray to Saints. Other protestant groups do to.
Blessings in your journey.
And just to briefly add to what happy said, technically, Protestants who believe in and confess their faith through the Apostles’ Creed should have no problem with praying to the Saints, either. The Apostles’ Creed clearly confesses, as translated by every mainline Protestant denomination (believe me, I checked), a belief in the “communion of saints.” This can be defined as a union of all Christians, both living and dead. Check the book of Revelation, especially the second half, where images of the Catholic Mass are clearly present – ex. the Great Amen and the Holy, Holy, Holy sung during the Eucharistic prayer. Not only can we pray to the saints, but we can worship with them each Sunday. And one final note on the topic – Catholics have multiple types of prayer, including intercessory, whereas Protestants seem to have only one type. When we pray to the Saints, we are asking them to intercede on our behalves; we’re not praying in a worshipful manor to them. The way I look at it, you can never have too many people praying for you – especially if they’re people of that caliber.
Amen!!
I’m sorry, but you have it backwards. We say these things at Mass, because they are in Scripture, not the other way around.
Please go to this web site and it clears up allot of misunderstandings…
http://www.protestanterrors.com/#20
(WWW.protestanterrors.com)
To claim that the Protestant reformers were given direct mission by God to reform the church requires undeniable proof, otherwise people all over the world could easily claim direct mission from God on all sorts of beliefs, then where would we be? Then each time we thought we were following the truth we would be forever interrupted by men claiming an extraordinary vocation. Is that how Jesus intended His Church to be?
Consider the miracles sent by God through Moses so that others would believe his mission. Also consider the miracles performed by Jesus and the Apostles so that the people would believe their word. Yet the Protestant reformers, despite making the most drastic changes to the Catholic Church since its founding, have never shown a miracle or any other sign to prove their mission, as would have occurred elsewhere in Scripture with such a drastic change to the faith. Jesus did not hesitate to show signs when reforming the Church, so what audacity do the Protestant reformers have to propose changes as drastic as Jesus made without showing any signs? “Believe you not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake. Amen, amen I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do; and greater than these shall he do.” John 14:11,12
Why should we take the Protestant reformers mere word without a sign? He who boasts an extraordinary mission from God without immediately producing undeniable signs cannot be believed.
If there was a true immediate mission from God to reform the church, then we ask which one had the true mission; Luther, Calvin, or another reformer? Each of these men had opposing beliefs from the start which resulted in different denominations so it is quite obvious these men did not have an immediate mission from God.
For those who would like to claim the Protestant reformers were true prophets, why did they act contrary to all other prophets before them by not showing any undeniable signs to prove their words, and by opposing the one true Church which no other true prophet has ever done?
It is as simple as this.
There is but one way to get to heaven, and that is to confess to the Lord that you have sinned, believe that Jesus Christ came to Earth and died on the cross for every man’s sins. Then ask God to come into your heart and save you. When I say that Jesus died on the cross for every man’s sins, this does not mean that every man is saved. No not at all. It means that God sent his son to die on the cross for our sins, and that if we ask him to save us then we will be saved. We do not have to do works to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. However I do believe that once saved, Christians should witness for Christ.
And by the way, Mary was a sinner just like every other human that has been on this planet, is on this planet, and will ever be on this planet, except for Jesus.
What I find most dissapointing is that Christians/Catholics/Christ followers who should be focussing on the areas of their faith that unite the body of Christ would rather spend time aruguing over details that are divisive.
Christ died for the His bride the Church…that isn’t one specific denomination but the body of believers…those that believe in their heart that He is God and confess with their mouth that God raised Him from the dead.
Ultimately that will determine the destination of your soul.
If one believes and confesses and doesn’t do another thing…one’s salvation is still assured.
It is one’s sad fate to rob themselves of hearing Christ say “Well done, good and faithful servant.” I am certain that there are soooo many things that will only be made clear once we are in heaven… I am content to wait until then.
In the meantime …i’ll seek to live a life of salt and light for my saviour.
Anna,
If what you say is true, basically, once saved always saved, then what about…
I Peter 3:20…..baptism that now saves you
John 6:53 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Hebrews 6: 4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace….
26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?
I John 2:3 We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. 4The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him . 5But if anyone obeys his word, God’s love[b] is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did….9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness. …15 If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him... 29 If you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who does what is right has been born of him.
Explain why you use IJohn 2:3. It is very clear to a Protestant and Catholic, that once you are saved – you died to sin and sin is no longer your master. You live to God – meaning following His commandments. You cannot, however follow God without the Holy Spirit. If you are born of the Spirit (saved), you bear fruit of the Spirit marked by God’s peace and contentment. We all agree on that.
(Romans 5 & 6)
Not exactly. The Once Save Always Saved Calvinist theology says that how one lives after salvation CANNOT cause one to lose their salvation.
Anna:
In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. James 2:17
Its funny BFHU uses 1 peter 3:20. I will use the following verse to explain the water that Noah and his family was saved as it relates to the new testament. 1 Peter 3:21 states, ” and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge [fn] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,”
Notice that it specifys the baptism that saves is not the removal of dirt from the body but the PLEDGE (confession of faith in good conscience) that saves you. This explains what baptism is. It’s the public profession of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and the water has no saving power in itself. It is confessing Jesus as Lord. The true baptism is in the regeneration process by the Holy Spirit. Ephesians 1:13
John 6:53: BFHU takes this completely out of context. Jesus describes himself as the bread of life and we know from the Lord ‘s Supper scriptures Jesus said the Lord’s supper was to be done in rememberance of Him and what He did. Rememberance of Him implies a memorial (something done in memory of). When Jesus is saying those who eat of my flesh and drink of my blood remain in me, he is referring to those who have made a commitment to Christ and have taken and ingested the bread of life. When we look at what scripture says says us the bible says faith alone in Jesus alone. So when we put our faith alone in Jesus alone we ingest the bread of life. Christ dwells within us. We are regenerated.
Both Hebrews 6:4 and 26 talks about once we have been enlightened and received knowledge. Notice this is referring to knowledge of the truth and not accepting Christ as Lord and Savior. It is one thing to say we know the truth and reject it then we gave our life to Jesus and then turned away. This person clearly is not reading what the scripture says. Of course someone can turn away after receiving knowledge of the truth and reaching enlightenment (which means understanding). Its what you do with that understanding. If you accept that understanding and confess Christ as Lord than you are saved. If you reject than you deny him.
1 John 2:3 is talking about obeying Jesus and living as Jesus did as knowing we are saved. Notice the verse never refers to those things as saving them. Faith produces good works, but faith alone saves. So the Catholic Argument here fails miserably.
Find out why Protestant pastors and theologians become Catholic-
http://jerome2007.tripod.com/remarkable_conversions.htm
In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. James 2:17
http://jerome2007.tripod.com/remarkable_conversions.htm
Most folks don’t realize that Catholics and Evangelicals are coming much closer to agreement on the issue of salvation. A few years ago Catholic and Lutheran theologians produced a document that explains that most of our differences are semantic. You can read it here: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html. The document goes on to say that differences that developed after the initial debate about the roles of grace, faith and works remain a significant stumbling block to unity, but we all more or less agree on how we are saved.
Moreover, as an ex-Evangelical, I can say that one of the things that gets Evangelicals all hot and bothered is the inference that when the Catholic Church says that you have to do this and this and this to get saved, then non-Catholics must all be damned. This is an oversimplification and misunderstanding of Catholic teaching.
In paragraphs 4 and 5 of “An Assessment of the Second Vatican Council,” for instance, it is written:
“The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God’s word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize.
The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church.”
Catholics embrace Evangelicals as their brothers and sisters in Christ, and look forward to sharing eternity with them. In the meanwhile, we are bound to proclaim the truth as we understand it and continue working for that unity that Our Lord prayed for on the night that He was betrayed.
I always find it interesting (in a sad way) that protestants will say that the only thing, that you must do or say to be saved, is to confess that Jesus is your personal lord and savior, Romans 10:9 ,
which all catholic (that I know) do profess, and so they must be saved by the protestant definition. but then they believe that Catholics are doomed to hell, because Catholics also believe in other biblical passages, that support works,
James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Matthew 12:37
For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”
Galatians 6:7
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows.
Rico – James is dealing with people who profess to be Christians, and yet they don’t evidence the reality of their faith by their works [deeds]. Over, and over again… people will say they have faith and they don’t have works, and James is saying that real faith always produces works as a result… The question is, ‘A man may say that he has faith, but will that faith justify him?’ If it is just a ‘said’ faith”—no, it won’t!
Romans 3:20—”Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in [God's] sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.”
Romans 3:28—”Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”
Titus 3:5—”He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.”
Your arguments are put together well but completely and utterly flawed.
To correct one of the catholic responses: According to the Council of Trent, Protestants are not going to heaven, but hell. We were condemned in our practices. So under Catholic theology, if everyone truly understood it, that person, Matthew, would not be able to say,”Catholics embrace Evangelicals as their brothers and sisters in Christ, and look forward to sharing eternity with them. In the meanwhile, we are bound to proclaim the truth as we understand it and continue working for that unity that Our Lord prayed for on the night that He was betrayed.”
In addition, what Catholics call faith in Jesus Christ is not true faith. Their definition of faith is completely different than Protestants. The bottom line is: What are they counting on to get to heaven? Catholics believe the 7 sacraments are how they receive grace. They call this their faith. Notice how their faith is defined. They define faith by receiving sacraments. Protestants define faith as trusting in what Jesus did alone to save us by accepting him and making him our Lord and Savior. Protestants receive grace through repentance and trust in Jesus. Catholics receive faith by sacraments. You can call a grapefruit an orange, but that does not change the fact that the grapefruit is a grapefruit.
What saves us? Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” We are saved by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and it is not anything we can do. Therefore works have nothing to do with salvation. To imply works would have anything to do with salvation is to take away what Jesus did on the cross for us. As Paul states in Ephesians 2:9, “not of works, lest anyone should boast.” He is saying that salvation is not by anything we do or don’t do and the reason is so we will have nothing to boast about. We are sinners before a Holy and Just God. Isaiah 64:6 states, “But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have taken us away.” This verse displays how nothing we do can measure up to God’s glorious standards. Therefore faith alone in Christ Jesus alone is what makes us right with God.
Therefore, if works has nothing to do with salvation than what role does works play in the Christian life? James 2:26 states, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” James in this passage and in the entire chapter is showing that works is the end result of faith. True faith in the Lord Jesus Christ produces works for the glory of God. Without works to prove faith, than true faith may not exists. The works don’t save the person, but shows the person has been saved by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone.
How does faith produce works? When we are saved and we have experienced God’s amazing forgiveness through His grace, we have the Holy Spirit that indwells us and we are becoming more like Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:18 states, “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.”The more we become like Christ the more we care about the things He cares about. 2 Peter 3:18 states, “but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.” As we grow in Christ we will live for His glory alone and good deeds will flow, because it truly is the Lord Jesus Christ working through us.
To conclude, works has nothing to do with salvation. Salvation is through the grace of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. Works are the result of True Faith, because true faith results in regenerated heart that beats to serve the Lord Jesus Christ.
Justin,
I agree that we are saved by faith in Jesus Christ
Sections 161-162 the Catechism says:
(161) “Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation …therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification…(162) Faith is an entirely free gift that God makes to man…
I agree that good works are the result of True Faith and I would add that works complete our faith.
Even Paul who no one can deny had True faith had to work at it.
For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do … For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. (Rom 7:15-20)
our good works are part of our purification process.
Not everyone who says to me “Lord, Lord” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. (Mat 7:20)
What you said contradicts the Roman Catholic view that all are saved by Faith AND Works set forth in the Council of Trent. It is clearly stated Faith AND Works, which makes it a combination that saves. So you saying that you agree that faith in Jesus Christ saves is not the same thing as what the bible says concerning faith. By stating that you agree that faith saves you are calling an orange a grapefruit when it really is an orange. No matter what you call something the definition of it and what it truly is defines it. Catholic faith = Works plus faith. Biblical faith = faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone. Biblical faith works comes after faith because we are “born again” and new creatures in Christ. See the scripture references from my last post. Our new nature creates works because it truly is Christ in us that is producing the fruit and not ourselves.
As far as the Catholic view of purification and purgatory (where you go to get purified for heaven) This is a stark contrast to what the bible teaches. Purgatory is made up and the idea that you can buy your way out of purgatory through indulgences is a myth that is supported only by Catholic tradition. Interestingly enough indulgences were sold to raise money for the Catholic’s church building of St. Peter’s Basilica.
I’m glad you mentioned Matthew 7:20. Lets look and examine the verse in its context.
Matthew 7:19-23 states, “19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. 21″Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’”
Notice in verse 22 Jesus explains what he means when He says those who do the will of my Father in heaven. In verse 22 Jesus talks about many who will on judgment day say they did this or that in Jesus name (notice it is all WORKS) and he will say depart from me I never KNEW YOU. Therefore this defines what the will of the Father in heaven is. The will of the Father in heaven in the verse you used is for us to know Jesus personally as Lord and Savior. We are purified through his blood and inherit his righteousness.
Everyone loves to refer to the Council of Trent without actually quoting their sources. Let’s see what the Council actually says about justification. The first canon of the Council’s Sixth Session (on Justification) says: “CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.”
You can’t get much more straightforward than that. The Catholic Church anathematizes anyone who teaches that we are saved by works, and always has. So let’s finally bury this old dead horse y’all been trying to ride and get a new one.
As for indulgences, the Catholic Church today agrees that Luther was in the right to preach against the abuses that had grown up around them in his day. In fact, so did (drum roll please) the Council of Trent! In their twenty-fifth session they had this to say: “It ordains generally by this decree, that all evil gains for the obtaining [of indulgences],–whence a most prolific cause of abuses amongst the Christian people has been derived,–be wholly abolished.”
Please allow me one last word in regard to Purgatory. Protestants do not use the word, but every one of them that I know, (including my former self), believes in the concept. Surely we can all agree that we will no longer be our current sinful selves in heaven. No sinful thing can come into God’s holy Presence. That process that takes us from what we are now to what we will be then is Purgatory, (which is just a fancified form of “purging”). Catholics have dedicated substantial portions of theology and imagination to this, far more than Protestants, too be sure, and our musings have produced beliefs and practices that are indeed “strange” to the run-of-the-mill Evangelical, but the root doctrine of Purgatory is no fairy-tale, but an affirmation in the power of the Cross to change us from what we are to what He wants us to be. That process is going on now, in some mysterious way will finally be accomplished after our death, and will end directly before we come into the loving embrace of our Father.
Yes!!!
If People would state what the Catholic Church actually believes with accuracy and not what their interpretation of the Catholic Church is there would be little to discuss. It is so sad that people spend sooooooo much time picking at people for their beliefs and when it comes down to it, they don’t really know what their beliefs are. I don’t find anything in that edifying or lead by the holy spirit.
I think it is because many, many, many catholics have no idea what they themselves believe – I come from almost fanatic Catholicism. The council may say that it is not by works. But somewhere else it says faith AND works. Does it say it is by faith alone? I mean, does it say what the Bible says we are saved by?
The Bible says in James 2 that it is NOT by Faith alone
. and Peter says that baptism now saves us.
and then favorite of Protestants and Catholics but interpreted differently by each:
Peace Be With You, Pam Forrester bfhu.wordpress.com
Justification by faith ALONE is a major heresy. It is not taught in the bible and is not believed by any Christians before Martin Luther. Martin Luther knew this and so he inserted ALONE in Rom 3:28:
“So halten wir nun dafur, da_ der Mensch gerecht wird ohne des Gesetzes Werke, allein durch den Glauben” [3.28]). Luther added the word “allein” (alone) to justify his new doctrine of Sola Fide. So much from someone who complained that the Catholic Church had violated the Word of God by adding to it.
I’m saying that Catholics have faith, and your good works will confirm your faith, you must do good works for the glory of god, and not for your glory, so that no man shall boast.
The catholic church has no problem if you say that only faith will get you to heaven as long as you also do good works,
regardless if your good work proceed from your faith, or you do good works to complete your faith.
but I think the differences are semantic. faith has to be there, and good works have to be there., or else your faith is dead.
James 2:21-22
Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?
You see, his faith and his actions worked together. His actions made his faith complete.
I am quoting the bible as a catholic, so it’s not Catholic versus bible, You might say catholic versus (insert_your_denomination_here). since not all protestants agree with what your saying.
We reading Matthew 7:19-23 differently,
“that a tree that does not bear good fruit, will be thrown in to the fire” that to me is a indication that you must do some kind of work. (faith, love, honesty)
“Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.” this is more that works, not one or two, but to continue to do good works, even if you have been wronged. (turn other check, love your enimies, do onto others…)
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven” >> it is not just faith, cause you have to have faith to say “Lord, Lord”
“but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” it not just works with selfish motives, but works that are selfless, because there are righteous.
“Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles” since Jesus has been talking about works being good, he is not suddenly saying that works are bad, but he saying even if you perform prophecy and miracles don’t think your special, because these gifts were not for your benift, but the benift of others and for the glory of God, not for your glory,
“Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers” my conclusion is that you have faith by the grace of God to do good works for the glory of god, and be humble about it.
Rev 20:12
And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books
St. Cyprian said “No one is safe by his own strength, but he is safe by the Grace and mercy of God.”
Thank includes faith, and works, since there both graces given to you by god.
Working on my response……will publish soon.
Why are we all arguing who is going to be saved?
The Bible was compiled to help Christians get to know God, to help them Love God and to help them be with God eternally in heaven, not as a book to be analysed and memorized for the sake of knowledge and argument.
Isn’t it said in the Bible:Judge not others?
If we truly believe in God and Jesus as our saviour we must trust him. Jesus said: I am the son of the living God, I am the way the truth and life, Love one another as I have loved you, Abide in me and I will abide in you, I am the wine and you are the branches…… In all these he wants us to believe him, trust him and follow in his way and be connected to him.
However we are now accusing each other and trynig to prove who is following the correct faith as Christians. What we must do is have faith in God and faith will lead us to be good and charitable . How can we say we are faithful to God and then do uncharitable acts? do you think we will be taken to heaven just because we say “I believe”? Its easy to confess our faith by mouth and not truly believe. When we truly believe we will achieve the fullness of life and be utilized for God’s purpose for which we were created. We will be selfeless and completely at his disposal, definetely not trying to put ourselves higher than others.
So lets stop these arguments and try to live as true Christians in Faith and doing good works since they go hand in hand. Becasue at judgement we will be asked : when I was naked did you clothe me, when I was hungry did you feed me……and so on. We can take bible phrases to prove both logics.
I am a Catholic and I do listen to other Christian preaches and this helps me to grow in faith.
Priase the Lord my soul, and praise his holy name!
Angela,
You sound like a girl who has a sweet relationship with our Lord
Amen, sister!
What a beautiful response!
Merry Christmas!
All,
I want to thank you all for the engaging conversations. I apologize for my delay in responding but I have been taking finals this week in seminary and have been unable to respond due to time constraints.
With regards to the comments on purgatory and that Protestants believe in purgatory, I’m not going to even answer that argument because it has no basis and I have never met a Bible believing evangelical that believes in purgatory as it is no where in the Bible.
To respond to the following comment Matthew made concerning the Council of Trent, “The first canon of the Council’s Sixth Session (on Justification) says: “CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.”
You can’t get much more straightforward than that. The Catholic Church anathematizes anyone who teaches that we are saved by works, and always has. So let’s finally bury this old dead horse you all have been trying to ride and get a new one.
I understand that the Council of Trent has been a very butchered topic and after having studied it thoroughly, more thoroughly than I would have liked, I will show you what it clearly says. Below is the first several canons of the council of Trent. I went through it line by line. Please see my remarks after each one and please keep in mind that the Bible does clearly teach salvation is through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. Paul states in Ephesians 2:8-9: For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” Please refer to my earlier posts to see how works and faith are truly related according to the Bible. Its important to see what the Bible states in order to see teachings that clearly contradict the Bible.
So below is the council of Trent Canons:
CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema. –
Comments: Matthew, if the council of Trent just stopped here I would agree with you. Unfortunately it did not.
CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.
CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.
Comments: Again this sounds right if not for the rest.
CANON IV. If any one shall affirm, that man’s freewill, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed”!
CANON V.- If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed”!
Comments: Put here to try and refute reformer theology concerning predestination.
CANON VI.-If any one saith, that it is not in man’s power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema
Comments: Put here to try and refute reformer theology concerning predestination.
CANON VII.-If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.
Comments: Put here to try and refute reformer theology concerning predestination.
CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that the fear of hell,-whereby, by grieving for our sins, we flee unto the mercy of God, or refrain from sinning,-is a sin, or makes sinners worse; let him be anathema.
Comments: Put here to try and refute reformer theology concerning predestination.
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.
Comments: Notice this is saying that faith alone in Jesus Christ alone does not save. This is saying that if anyone says they have nothing to do with their salvation let them be anathema. NOTICE ANTHEMA MEANS TO BE ACCURSED AND ASSIGNED TO DAMNATION. So basically the Roman Catholic Church says if we believe that faith alone in Jesus Christ alone saves us we are damned.
CANON X.-If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema.
CANON XI.-If any one saith, 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, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
Comments: Notice this is saying that faith alone in and trusting in nothing else but Jesus Christ alone does not save. Again the word anathema is used to describe the reformers who clearly believe faith alone in Jesus alone fait to be damned. ANTHEMA MEANS TO BE ACCURSED AND ASSIGNED TO DAMNATION. So basically the Roman Catholic Church says if we believe that faith alone in Jesus Christ alone saves us we are damned.
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.
CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.
Comments: You starting to see a pattern? I will just paste my previous comment: Notice this is saying that faith alone in and trusting in nothing else but Jesus Christ alone does not save. Again the word anathema is used to describe the reformers who clearly believe faith alone in Jesus alone fait to be damned. ANTHEMA MEANS TO BE ACCURSED AND ASSIGNED TO DAMNATION. So basically the Roman Catholic Church says if we believe that faith alone in Jesus Christ alone saves us we are damned.
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.
Comments: So this states if we believe someone is born again. Which Jesus states as a qualification for entrance into heaven and if we believe in predestination, also in the bible, we are damned. So this is damning clear teachings of God’s Word. John 3:3 states, “3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”
Romans 8:29 states, “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.”
This clearly shows an anti biblical stance.
CANON XVI.-If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema.
Comments: This is attacking the perseverance of God’s elect (people who have accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior). John 10:27-29: “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. “And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.”
So since I believe in the Holy Spirit that indwells me as a believer and that it is not how tightly I hold onto God, but how tightly God holds onto me, I’m damned? That’s unbiblical.
CANON XVII.-If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.
Comment: More of the same against Protestants beliefs.
CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.
Comment: This is saying that if we say we cant keep the commands of God and if we say that it is impossible to basically be perfect after we have received grace than we are damned. However, Paul states, “Romans 3:23-28 (New King James Version)
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.” Notice that we are all sinners and are justified by faith APART from keeping the law.
Galatians 5:16-18, states, “But I say, walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would. But if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the law.”
Notice even after we are saved we struggle, but we are NO LONGER under the law. We have been set free because we cant keep it. Now we obey God and do good works out of gratefulness of a new heart that desires to obey God. Those works clearly though have nothing to do with salvation.
CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.
Same comment as above.
Conclusion:
Catholics clearly condemn (anathema) protestants for their belief (and what the Bible teaches) as faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. Unfortunately the Council of Trent clearly states that salvation for the Catholic Church is Faith and Works and those who don’t believe it are anathema. The council of Trent is basically stating if you don’t believe in Catholic doctrine you are anathema. So essentially the Council of Trent is saying Protestants are condemned.
What is Salvation:
What saves us? Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” We are saved by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and it is not anything we can do. Therefore works have nothing to do with salvation. To imply works would have anything to do with salvation is to take away what Jesus did on the cross for us. As Paul states in Ephesians 2:9, “not of works, lest anyone should boast.” He is saying that salvation is not by anything we do or don’t do and the reason is so we will have nothing to boast about. We are sinners before a Holy and Just God. Isaiah 64:6 states, “But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have taken us away.” This verse displays how nothing we do can measure up to God’s glorious standards. Therefore faith alone in Christ Jesus alone is what makes us right with God.
Therefore, if works has nothing to do with salvation than what role does works play in the Christian life? James 2:26 states, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” James in this passage and in the entire chapter is showing that works is the end result of faith. True faith in the Lord Jesus Christ produces works for the glory of God. Without works to prove faith, than true faith may not exists. The works don’t save the person, but shows the person has been saved by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone.
How does faith produce works? When we are saved and we have experienced God’s amazing forgiveness through His grace, we have the Holy Spirit that indwells us and we are becoming more like Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:18 states, “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.”The more we become like Christ the more we care about the things He cares about. 2 Peter 3:18 states, “but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.” As we grow in Christ we will live for His glory alone and good deeds will flow, because it truly is the Lord Jesus Christ working through us.
To conclude, works has nothing to do with salvation. Salvation is through the grace of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. Works are the result of True Faith, because true faith results in regenerated heart that beats to serve the Lord Jesus Christ.
I pray brothers that you all know our precious Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This will be my last post. May God guide you in your blogging.
Angela, I am sorry to continue the “argument.” But I do not feel that all of it is being done uncharitably. For us to achieve true unity in the Body of Christ, it is necessary for us to engage one another, “give the reason for our hope,” and defend the faith. If we want real peace with one another, the kind of peace that brings us to bless one another and work together for the furtherance of God’s Kingdom, we are going to have to be open with each other, speak our mind, and allow others to speak theirs. I am continuing this dialogue because there are real misconceptions about what Catholics believe, and a good deal of establishing peace between Catholics and Protestants just comes down to getting rid of these misconceptions. (As a convert to the Catholic Church, I know what I am talking about). So, Angela, I appreciate your ecumenical spirit, and bless you in the name of Our Lord, but cordially disagree with you about the best way to achieve the ends you seek.
God bless you Justin, and grant you success in your finals. As a fellow academic, I empathize with your stress and distraction over the last few weeks. I am certain that Our Lord is crafting you into a worthy handler of His Word, as your willingness to continue this dialogue evinces.
I realize that you have said that you are done with this blog, and thus will not respond to these comments, but I feel compelled to continue the conversation from my end nonetheless. If you want to jump back in, I will be very happy to hear from you again. Otherwise, you (and everyone else) can just listen silently as I continue my theological monologue, the ravings of a Kansas-farm boy stranded in the Negev.
First things first. I believe that it is important to acknowledge the fact that your comments here are motivated by your love for each and everyone of us who have wandered here. You love us with the love of the Father, who does not desire that any should be lost, but share eternity in bliss with Him. You have a genuine desire to rescue us from opinions that you hold to be damnable. (So it seems to me). I applaud your efforts. God is crafting you into a soul-winner.
Now, if I may, I want to correct a few of your statements, emphatically state our position in regards to others, and, in the process, attempt to convince you that we are on the same team you are, and that we could be working together to bring in lost sheep who truly are lost. I don’t actually believe that I am going to change your mind about anything, nor do I really want to convert you to Catholicism. All the same, ignorance is not bliss, and if I can help you hone your arguments better, all for the good. (And if all this should provoke you to take a second look at Catholicism, all the better!).
Hold up on the ridicule about purgatory. Let’s step back and use a different word for it, with different imagery. Let’s leave Dante on the shelf. I fully realize that Evangelicals do not use the word purgatory to describe any of their beliefs about the afterlife. Very well. My point was, Evangelicals, nonetheless, believe in the concept. They have to.
Let me explain. Justin, do you believe that when you get to heaven you will be a) made perfect and holy, without spot or stain or b) retain your sinful and rebellious nature? I hope you chose a). And if you did, guess what. You believe in purgatory.
Let’s put it another way. Do you accept the following text of Scripture as God-breathed and infallible? Ephesians 5:5: “For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God” (NKJV). If Evangelicals really do not believe in purgatory (i.e., the purification of unclean souls), then they must believe that heaven is going to be empty, for the Bible clearly says that no unclean person has an inheritance there, and every one of us is unclean. Just ask Luther and Calvin. Of course, that’s just silly, so I have to conclude that even though my Evangelical brothers and sisters refuse to use the same word for it as I do, even so, they really, truly believe in purgatory.
To help you out a bit, when I say purgatory, I do not necessarily have in mind Dante’s vivid depiction of gruesome tortures endured for hundreds of solar years for the crimes of unrepentant Christians. That mythic picture provides us with food for thought, but in the end, it’s just a myth, and is not an exact reflection of Catholic doctrine on the subject. Purgatory, although certainly an important part of Catholic theology, in large part remains a mystery, just as the true natures of heaven and hell do to a great extent. We are forced to use worldly metaphors to describe unworldly processes and experiences. This means that it is not entirely accurate to speak of purgatory as a place. I prefer to think of it as a process. It’s whatever happens to prepare us for the beatific vision, the experience of entering into the presence of our holy Creator. That process, as I stated in an earlier response, begins now. It involves pain and suffering, because it involves weaning us from self-love and self-worship, so that we can truly give ourselves in love to the Father. Moreover, “beyond the veil” of death, all of our shortcomings and mistakes and failures, as well as every one of our missed opportunities, will appear before us in crystal clarity. That regret must be excruciating to a soul preparing to gaze upon the Father. Finally, at that moment the soul is finally fully prepared to run into the Father’s embrace, and yet, the remaining uncleanness that is impeding that moment must be a great aggravation. Even if all of this takes place in the blink of an eye, in eternity, (you see how difficult it is to actually use human language to describe all of this), the suffering of the soul, we believe, is quite real, and this is why we pray for the souls of the dead.
I do not expect you to sign on to all of that. But I hope that you can at least appreciate my efforts to bring us to some common ground on the subject. Obviously, our contrary theologies are going to take us down some very different paths on this subject, but I still maintain that our starting point is the same: We both believe that no unclean thing will enter heaven. That means you believe in purgatory, brother. (Don’t worry. I’m not telling your professors).
You maintain that purgatory “is no where in the Bible.” You should not be surprised to learn that Catholics would disagree with you. Here is an entire web-page full of scriptural proofs for the doctrine: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html. I am certain that you will interpret these passages differently than we do, but you should at least give it a look before declaring out of hand that “purgatory is not in the Bible.” Let’s look at just a few of these scriptural proofs.
2 Corinthians 5:10 says, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad” (NIV). Saint Paul is describing a situation where even the righteous headed for heaven experience judgment for their sins, and “receive what is due” them. Hmm. Sounds like purgatory to me. You say “sinner.” I say “peccato.” You say “judgment seat of Christ.” I say “purgatorio.”
1 Corinthians 3:13-15 is another text that Catholics smell some purgation going on in. “Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire” (KJV). Here we are told that our works shall be tried when our life is over. Some works shall abide. Others will be shown for the transitory things that they are. In other words, we will see all of those moments wasted on pleasure and self-promotion go up in smoke, and become painfully aware of missed opportunities to have laid up more treasures in heaven. Even though we will ultimately be saved, if much of our life’s works are burned up, it will be like someone plucked from the flames of a burning house. The picture is one of pain and regret experienced before proceeding on to glory. Charles Stanley includes a whole chapter in his book on eternal security in which he exegetes this text in much the same manner as any Catholic would, except he is careful not to use the p-word. That’s okay. We know what he’s talking about anyway.
Praying for the dead suffering purification from their sins is not just a Catholic belief. We inherited it from the Jews. There are veiled references to it in the same canonical Scriptures that you would recognize with us. For instance, Gen. 50:10 describes the mourning of Joseph and his brothers for their father Jacob: “And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, which is beyond Jordan, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation: and he made a mourning for his father seven days” (KJV). Why not just a simple funeral with periodic mourning following, whenever they especially missed him? This kind of ritualistic period of mourning is observed by the Jews to this day. They drop everything they are doing and sit in their house for seven days, mourning, but especially praying for the souls of their loved ones.
There are explicit references to prayers for the dead in the Deuterocanon (what you would call Apocrypha). 2 Maccabees 12:39-46 describes how Judas Maccabeus offered up prayers for the souls of his fellow soldiers who had fallen in battle:
On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his men went to gather up the bodies of the slain and bury them with their kinsmen in their ancestral tombs. But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had been slain. They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden. Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection of the dead in view; for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death. But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin (NAB).
I realize that you would not consider this text to be inspired Scripture in the same way we do, but it at least provides proof that praying for the dead is an ancient Jewish practice. The Catholic Church didn’t cook it up in the Middle Ages as I was taught they had done in Sunday School. Notice that the author includes a polemical jab at the nascent Saduceeanism of his day by appealing to the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead as the basis of this practice. Jesus would make a similar argument against the Saducees when He appealed to God’s designation as the “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” to explain that God is the God of the living, not of the dead. The same holds true here. Judas and his companions recognized that though the bodies of their brothers in arms were slain, their souls were yet very much alive and standing before the judgment of God, and would some day be reunited with their resurrected bodies. Notice too the reference to sacrifice in atonement for their sins. Although they were sons of the covenant, they had died having made a compromise with the sin of idolatry. The text implies that this brought about their physical death. However, Judas remained hopeful that they had not sinned to such an extent as to have brought damnation upon their souls, i.e., he hoped that they had not committed what Catholics call a mortal sin. He took recourse to offering sacrifices on their behalf “that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out.” These sacrifices looked forward towards Jesus’ atoning sacrifice on the cross, just as the sacrifice of the Mass looks back to it, and, indeed, is identical to that same sacrifice in substance. This is why we offer up masses for the dead. We are pleading Christ’s mercies, poured out in His blood, upon the souls of our loved ones who are aching to behold the Father and being purified in preparation for that moment. It is Jesus’ sacrifice that obtains that grace, of course. We merely participate in it. (Really, that’s what all prayer is, isn’t it? Participating in God’s bestowal of grace. He doesn’t need our prayers to get His work done, but invites us to make our requests and petitions because it strengthens our relationship both with Him and the rest of the body).
Enough of purgatory. On to the Council of Trent.
Justin, I am so happy that you actually bothered to look this text up. So many of your co-religionists go straight for the parts that are disagreeable to them and create the impression that the Council of Trent says that we are saved by works apart from faith. Now you know that that is not true, and I hope that you will help other non-Catholics better articulate their arguments against Catholic soteriology.
That said, I am a bit surprised that you are still trying to do mouth to mouth resuscitation on this dead horse, and hoping to keep riding it in your polemic against Catholicism. It seems to me that after acknowledging that what I said was true, you cut off the rest of the canons from the first and attempt to read them as independent and contradictory statements. You also seem a bit shocked that (horror!) the Council of Trent doesn’t agree with Calvinistic Protestantism in a great many things. That was not what I was trying to say by quoting the Council’s first canon on Justification at all. Of course we disagree on a handful of core issues. I just wanted to point out that it is not fair to say that Catholics believe in salvation by works (which you still seem to want to argue). We believe in salvation by grace. We do not believe in salvation by faith alone, either. We believe in salvation by grace. Our response to grace involves both faith and works, and that is precisely where many Protestants grow uncomfortable, but please try to be charitable and attempt to comprehend that we believe that we are saved by grace just as much as you do.
You ask us to “keep in mind that the Bible does clearly teach salvation is through faith alone” and support that with Ephesians 2:8-9, which, I grant you, would be a pretty convincing proof-text if those two verses made up the whole of our New Testament. However, I disagree that the whole Bible clearly does teach a sola fide soteriology. I understand that you are trying to argue that works just kind of naturally flow out of a life of faith. That’s the same thing I used to believe and teach. The problem is, you don’t ever find that kind of statement anywhere in the Bible. Instead, you have lots of places in the New Testament where there is a clear connection between salvation and works, texts like Matthew 7:24-27, where the wise man whose house is built upon the rock is the picture of “everyone who hears these words and does them” and the foolish man doomed to destruction is the picture of “everyone who hears these words and does not do them.” What do you do with James 2:24 that says that we are “justified by works and not by faith alone” (RSV)? That verse says the exact opposite of what you are arguing the Bible teaches so clearly. When you take the whole counsel of Scripture together, I think you are hard pressed to argue that sola fide soteriology is so clearly taught in the Bible. Paul’s words need to be taken in the greater context of Scripture, and then it begins to become apparent that he was primarily addressing the problem of what to do with Jewish ritual. Paul is saying that since we are saved by grace through faith, the external practices of the Jewish Law are no longer necessary to enter into and remain in God’s covenant, and if someone attempts to say otherwise, they are getting the cart in front of the horse by making works more significant than the grace that God is bestowing so freely on mankind through Jesus. He is not saying that works are absolutely unnecessary. He can’t be. After all, he is the same person who wrote, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12, NKJV). The next verse puts this work in its proper context. It is God who works in us. We are saved by grace, even in our works. But some responsibility for accomplishing the work is still incumbent upon us, nonetheless, or we wouldn’t have the command to begin with.
If works just kind of naturally flowed out of our faith, I don’t think there would be so much emphasis on performing works. Why did the authors of Scripture encourage righteous living so often? It seems obvious to me that they were concerned that we just might not be as righteous as we ought; as though they did not believe that our righteous behavior would just sort of naturally flow out of a life of faith without a bit of encouragement.
Of course it would be ridiculous for a Catholic (or anybody else) to think they could get saved by being good enough to get into heaven. That’s why the Council of Trent declared anyone teaching such an idea to be anathema. Of course it would be ridiculous to respond to God’s grace with works without faith. It’s not just ridiculous. It’s inconceivable. Just a bit more inconceivable than responding to God’s grace with faith without works.
Here is my question for my Protestant brothers and sisters: If all we have to do is believe to be saved, then why are you all so uptight about us Catholics who do believe but are convinced that our works are important too? It’s not like any of us don’t have any faith at all, but are running around working our tails off to get into a godless heaven. Do you understand my point? What makes my faith in Jesus and His salvific work invalid and yours valid? Why should my faith send me to hell and yours to heaven? Think about it and chill.
Justin, you say that if the Council of Trent had stopped with the first canon on justification, you would agree with me. I am not sure what you mean by that. You would agree that Catholics believe we are saved by grace? You would agree with Catholicism?
I am curious which translation of the Council documents you are using. I have been using Waterworth’s venerable translation, available here: http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html. Some of the translation that you are using seems to have been worded for the purpose of Protestant polemics.
You rightly comment that canons four through eight of the sixth session of Trent deal with controversies with certain reformers over predestination. You might be surprised to know that the Thomistic school of Catholicism essentially agrees with Calvinism on this subject, and has never been condemned by the Catholic Church. This was because they allowed room for man’s free-will as well, as do most Calvinists. These canons were not intended to cast a blanket condemnation on the doctrine of predestination, but only to check certain excesses that had crept in among more radical reformers. The Molinists oppose the Thomists, and are roughly analogous to Protestant Arminians. The Catholic Church has chosen to allow both schools of thought to continue, declining to make a final ruling on the matter due to insufficient revelation. You can read a rather technical article on the matter here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14698b.htm. Perhaps it will interest you to know that before I was Catholic, I was a thorough-going Arminianist, and that today I consider myself a Thomist, and thus a close cousin to Calvinists.
Justin, you misunderstand the particular meaning of anathema in the sense used by the Council fathers. Anathema can indeed mean “to curse” and “to damn,” but that is not the meaning here. Going back to the meaning of the Greek words will help us to understand what the fathers mean when they say “anathema sit.” Ana means “up.” Thema comes from the verb tithemi, meaning “to place.” Thus, together, the words mean “something placed up, i.e., apart.” The ancient Greeks used the word to describe all kinds of set apart things, including something that was holy, such as a sacrificial victim. Thus, we see that anathema has a broader meaning than “cursed, damned.” Anathema sit is technical language used in relation to the specific action of ecclesiastical excommunication. You can check this out in Wikipedia’s article on “anathema.” Notice that all of the canons you have listed here say, “If any one saith ….” The situation described is that of Catholic clergy who are sympathetic to Reformation theology. The point is, if you are a Catholic priest or bishop, if you preach any of these things, you are out of the boundaries of the Catholic Church and no longer have communion with her. The canons are not directed at you, Justin. They do not condemn you for holding beliefs contrary to Catholic teaching. Neither do they curse you. I surmise that you grew up in a faith tradition at odds with Catholicism. Very well. We bless you in the name of the Lord. If someone was a practicing Catholic and left the Catholic Church to embrace a belief system that held to the opinions condemned by the Council, even they would not be condemned to hell and cursed by the canons. The canons are aimed with pinpoint accuracy towards priests who were preaching Protestant theology but refusing to leave the Catholic Church. This was the method with which the Church resorted to sweeping them out. I don’t think that it is fair to say that the canons even curse them. In this context, anathema sit should be translated, “Let him be excommunicated.”
The Catholic Church would never say that anyone is damned simply for holding Protestant beliefs. We are strictly forbidden by the Church to cast judgment on anybody in such a manner.
For the next item, Justin, I think I will need to quote you:
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.
Comments: So this states if we believe someone is born again. Which Jesus states as a qualification for entrance into heaven and if we believe in predestination, also in the bible, we are damned. So this is damning clear teachings of God’s Word. John 3:3 states, “3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”
Romans 8:29 states, “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.”
This clearly shows an anti biblical stance.
You have simply misunderstood the words of this canon. I will paraphrase it, in hopes that the intent will be more clear. “If any one says that a born again and justified individual is bound of faith to believe in his eternal security; let him be excommunicated.” The Council fathers by no means condemn John 3:3. This is clear from a reading of the entire document. In fact, I will quote the whole of chapter XIII from the sixth session, and highlight the especially relevant portions. I am including the whole quote, because it also addresses much of the rest of your accusations:
CHAPTER XIII.
On the gift of Perseverance.
So also as regards the gift of perseverance, of which it is written, He that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved:-which gift cannot be derived from any other but Him, who is able to establish him who standeth that he stand perseveringly, and to restore him who falleth:-let no one herein promise himself any thing as certain with an absolute certainty; though all ought to place and repose a most firm hope in God’s help. For God, unless men be themselves wanting to His grace, as he has begun the good work, so will he perfect it, working (in them) to will and to accomplish. Nevertheless, let those who think themselves to stand, take heed lest they fall, and, with fear and trembling work out their salvation, in labours, in watchings, in almsdeeds, in prayers and oblations, in fastings and chastity: for, knowing that they are born again unto a hope of glory, but not as yet unto glory, they ought to fear for the combat which yet remains with the flesh, with the world, with the devil, wherein they cannot be victorious, unless they be with God’s grace, obedient to the Apostle, who says; We are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh; for if you live according to the flesh, you shall die; but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live.
Please notice how much Scripture permeates that paragraph that I have just cited. What of that “anti biblical stance” that you spoke of?
Neither do the Council fathers intend to condemn belief in predestination, which, I agree, is a Scriptural doctrine. What canon XV is targeting is the belief in the eternal security of the believer. Chapter XII of the sixth session of the council addresses this issue, and if you should read it you will see that the Council fathers affirm God’s election, yet maintain that “except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God hath chosen unto Himself.”
Granted, you very likely cannot stomach the Catholic stance on perseverance and election, nor do you, I suppose, accept with us the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. All the same, I hope you can understand that the Catholic Church does not simply sweep verses that do not suit her under the rug. We revere Scripture. The first half of every Sunday Mass is occupied with a liturgical reading from the prophets, then a psalm, then from an epistle, and finally from the Gospels. Daily Mass has less Scripture. One of the readings is left out. We are doing our best to live according to the teachings of the Bible, as interpreted by the Catholic Church. Please don’t accuse us of being “anti biblical” simply because you cannot accept our interpretations.
We do not reject outright the doctrine of the perseverance of God’s elect, as should be evident from the paragraph quoted above. Basically, we agree with your interpretation of John 10, that God holds us securely in His grace. However, as you know, we reject the doctrine of eternal security. Though we have the reassuring words of Jesus that no one can snatch us out of the Father’s hand, yet we also have texts like this one: “The love of money is the root of all evils; it is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs” (1 Timothy 6:10, RSV). Verses like this cause us to believe that although our Father will never let us go and that no external force can rip us from His grip, yet, we by our own will can make a conscious decision to wander away from the faith.
We can go back and forth accusing the other of holding unbiblical views and not get anywhere. Why can’t we just drop the whole “unbiblical” 2X4 we have been whacking each other with and concede that we just interpret the Bible differently and trust God to overlook whatever flaws in our theology there are, (because there must be a whole bunch of them!)?
Let me quote you again, Justin:
CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.
Comment: This is saying that if we say we cant keep the commands of God and if we say that it is impossible to basically be perfect after we have received grace than we are damned.
Here, yet again you have misunderstood the intent of the Council fathers. You have taken a little, specific statement and inflated it to say much more. The fathers are combatting yet another excess that had grown out of the Reformation, anti-nomianism. Certain people were preaching that since it is impossible to be perfect, why should we even try? No one, not even a justified believer, can keep the commandments of God. The Council fathers are addressing this teaching. Believe me, no Catholic is deluded enough to believe that he or she is without sin, or that he or she is going to be able to live a perfect life for the remainder of their time on earth. As Saint John said in his first epistle, if any one should say that he has no sin, then he is a liar. Yet, we also believe that having been born again and infused with God’s grace has given us a share in Christ’s nature, and whereas before we were so spiritually impoverished by our sin nature that we were not able to attain a righteous life, now that we are “justified and constituted in grace” we can actually perform the commandments of God in a way that was impossible before. We realize that we are still growing in grace and the virtues of the Holy Spirit, so we will yet fall far short of our purpose, and so we have the Sacrament of Confession to restore us. But it would not give the Holy Spirit credit for the major work that He is doing if we were to say that we cannot, with His help, even attempt to live out the commandments that He has given.
You cite Romans 3:23-28 to support your argument. I think you misuse it. When Paul says that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” he is speaking about those who have not yet been justified by God’s grace. I agree that even after we are justified we continue all too often to sin and fall short of God’s glory, but that is not the heart of Paul’s message in Romans. He is trying to show how necessary God’s grace poured out through Christ’s sacrifices is for salvation. Without it, we cannot possibly hope to live the kind of life God desires. Not even the Jewish Law could enable someone to really be righteous apart from the infusion of God’s grace in their life. Faith is the hitch-pin that connects us to God’s grace and brings justification, or, (the Greek word is used with both meanings), “righteousness.” Whereas before we were not righteous, now that we have received God’s grace through faith, we have been given Christ’s righteous nature as our own. That means we can actually live according to His commandments now. That’s good news, Justin!
When Paul uses the word law, he almost certainly means Torah. This is the conclusion of James Dunn, an Evangelical who is one of the foremost authorities in Pauline studies today. See The New Perspective on Paul, revised edition (Eerdmans, 2007) for his material. If this is so, when Paul says that “if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the law” in Galatians 5:18, he means to say that for a Spirit-filled Christian to put himself under the yoke of the Jewish Law is an absurdity. This is the whole purpose of Galatians, to combat the Judaizers who were compelling Gentile believers to receive circumcision. However, it is hard to imagine that Paul has in mind commandments such as “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Surely the Spirit enables us to really love in ways that we were incapable of before He had made His dwelling in us.
You say that “the Council of Trent clearly states that salvation for the Catholic Church is Faith and Works.” That’s not precise. Salvation is a free gift of grace. The Council clearly teaches, in the very canons that you have quoted, that we are saved by grace. No one can earn their salvation by works. No one can believe their way into heaven. God has to give the grace both to believe and to perform His will. Most of our participation in the work of salvation is just a matter of receiving more and more of His grace.
Justin, you say that “to imply works would have anything to do with salvation is to take away what Jesus did on the cross for us.” I disagree. If we said that we could earn our salvation with our own works apart from God’s grace, what you say would be true. It would indeed do dishonor to Jesus’ amazing victory. But a transformed life that evinces the work of the Holy Spirit and the power of Jesus’ transfused life into the believer would bring glory to Jesus, would it not? Jesus tells us to let our light shine before men in Matthew 5:16. How would a life without good works lived by a spiritual slouch “trusting” in God to save him bring glory to Jesus?
You do something that strikes me as odd. You go to James 2 for proof that “works is the end result of faith.” According to you, James is saying that works merely show “the person has been saved by faith alone.” You cite verse 26 to substantiate this, where it says that “faith without works is dead.” But the rest of the chapter ought to present some problems for you. For instance, verse 14 says, “What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?” (NKJV). Verse 21 says that “Abraham was justified by works”! To cap it all off, James says that “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (verse 24, NKJV). This is the only verse in the Bible in which the Greek text uses the phrase “faith alone.” I have no further comment. This chapter is indeed one text where the Protestants’ pet doctrine of perspicuity of Scripture seems to hold true!
But, Justin, all in all, I don’t entirely disagree with your understanding of how works are produced by faith. I find this paragraph of yours to be quite insightful:
How does faith produce works? When we are saved and we have experienced God’s amazing forgiveness through His grace, we have the Holy Spirit that indwells us and we are becoming more like Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:18 states, “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.”The more we become like Christ the more we care about the things He cares about. 2 Peter 3:18 states, “but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.” As we grow in Christ we will live for His glory alone and good deeds will flow, because it truly is the Lord Jesus Christ working through us.
To that I say, “Amen.” They are not our works, but the Lord’s. We merely submit to His will and enjoy the ride. I can’t agree with you that these Spirit-operated works have nothing to do with salvation, but at least we can agree that on our own, working in the flesh, we can accomplish nothing. We can agree that we are saved by grace alone through faith (but I have to leave the alone off at this point).
God bless you, brother, and have a great Christmas season.
Angela, I am sorry to continue the “argument.” But I do not feel that all of it is being done uncharitably. For us to achieve true unity in the Body of Christ, it is necessary for us to engage one another, “give the reason for our hope,” and defend the faith. If we want real peace with one another, the kind of peace that brings us to bless one another and work together for the furtherance of God’s Kingdom, we are going to have to be open with each other, speak our mind, and allow others to speak theirs. I am continuing this dialogue because there are real misconceptions about what Catholics believe, and a good deal of establishing peace between Catholics and Protestants just comes down to getting rid of these misconceptions. (As a convert to the Catholic Church, I know what I am talking about). So, Angela, I appreciate your ecumenical spirit, and bless you in the name of Our Lord, but cordially disagree with you about the best way to achieve the ends you seek.
God bless you Justin, and grant you success in your finals. As a fellow academic, I empathize with your stress and distraction over the last few weeks. I am certain that Our Lord is crafting you into a worthy handler of His Word, as your willingness to continue this dialogue evinces.
I realize that you have said that you are done with this blog, and thus will not respond to these comments, but I feel compelled to continue the conversation from my end nonetheless. If you want to jump back in, I will be very happy to hear from you again. Otherwise, you (and everyone else) can just listen silently as I continue my theological monologue, the ravings of a Kansas-farm boy stranded in the Negev.
First things first. I believe that it is important to acknowledge the fact that your comments here are motivated by your love for each and everyone of us who have wandered here. You love us with the love of the Father, who does not desire that any should be lost, but share eternity in bliss with Him. You have a genuine desire to rescue us from opinions that you hold to be damnable. (So it seems to me). I applaud your efforts. God is crafting you into a soul-winner.
Now, if I may, I want to correct a few of your statements, emphatically state our position in regards to others, and, in the process, attempt to convince you that we are on the same team you are, and that we could be working together to bring in lost sheep who truly are lost. I don’t actually believe that I am going to change your mind about anything, nor do I really want to convert you to Catholicism. All the same, ignorance is not bliss, and if I can help you hone your arguments better, all for the good. (And if all this should provoke you to take a second look at Catholicism, all the better!).
Hold up on the ridicule about purgatory. Let’s step back and use a different word for it, with different imagery. Let’s leave Dante on the shelf. I fully realize that Evangelicals do not use the word purgatory to describe any of their beliefs about the afterlife. Very well. My point was, Evangelicals, nonetheless, believe in the concept. They have to.
Let me explain. Justin, do you believe that when you get to heaven you will be a) made perfect and holy, without spot or stain or b) retain your sinful and rebellious nature? I hope you chose a). And if you did, guess what. You believe in purgatory.
Let’s put it another way. Do you accept the following text of Scripture as God-breathed and infallible? Ephesians 5:5: “For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God” (NKJV). If Evangelicals really do not believe in purgatory (i.e., the purification of unclean souls), then they must believe that heaven is going to be empty, for the Bible clearly says that no unclean person has an inheritance there, and every one of us is unclean. Just ask Luther and Calvin. Of course, that’s just silly, so I have to conclude that even though my Evangelical brothers and sisters refuse to use the same word for it as I do, even so, they really, truly believe in purgatory.
To help you out a bit, when I say purgatory, I do not necessarily have in mind Dante’s vivid depiction of gruesome tortures endured for hundreds of solar years for the crimes of unrepentant Christians. That mythic picture provides us with food for thought, but in the end, it’s just a myth, and is not an exact reflection of Catholic doctrine on the subject. Purgatory, although certainly an important part of Catholic theology, in large part remains a mystery, just as the true natures of heaven and hell do to a great extent. We are forced to use worldly metaphors to describe unworldly processes and experiences. This means that it is not entirely accurate to speak of purgatory as a place. I prefer to think of it as a process. It’s whatever happens to prepare us for the beatific vision, the experience of entering into the presence of our holy Creator. That process, as I stated in an earlier response, begins now. It involves pain and suffering, because it involves weaning us from self-love and self-worship, so that we can truly give ourselves in love to the Father. Moreover, “beyond the veil” of death, all of our shortcomings and mistakes and failures, as well as every one of our missed opportunities, will appear before us in crystal clarity. That regret must be excruciating to a soul preparing to gaze upon the Father. Finally, at that moment the soul is finally fully prepared to run into the Father’s embrace, and yet, the remaining uncleanness that is impeding that moment must be a great aggravation. Even if all of this takes place in the blink of an eye, in eternity, (you see how difficult it is to actually use human language to describe all of this), the suffering of the soul, we believe, is quite real, and this is why we pray for the souls of the dead.
I do not expect you to sign on to all of that. But I hope that you can at least appreciate my efforts to bring us to some common ground on the subject. Obviously, our contrary theologies are going to take us down some very different paths on this subject, but I still maintain that our starting point is the same: We both believe that no unclean thing will enter heaven. That means you believe in purgatory, brother. (Don’t worry. I’m not telling your professors).
You maintain that purgatory “is no where in the Bible.” You should not be surprised to learn that Catholics would disagree with you. Here is an entire web-page full of scriptural proofs for the doctrine: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html. I am certain that you will interpret these passages differently than we do, but you should at least give it a look before declaring out of hand that “purgatory is not in the Bible.” Let’s look at just a few of these scriptural proofs.
2 Corinthians 5:10 says, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad” (NIV). Saint Paul is describing a situation where even the righteous headed for heaven experience judgment for their sins, and “receive what is due” them. Hmm. Sounds like purgatory to me. You say “sinner.” I say “peccato.” You say “judgment seat of Christ.” I say “purgatorio.”
1 Corinthians 3:13-15 is another text that Catholics smell some purgation going on in. “Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire” (KJV). Here we are told that our works shall be tried when our life is over. Some works shall abide. Others will be shown for the transitory things that they are. In other words, we will see all of those moments wasted on pleasure and self-promotion go up in smoke, and become painfully aware of missed opportunities to have laid up more treasures in heaven. Even though we will ultimately be saved, if much of our life’s works are burned up, it will be like someone plucked from the flames of a burning house. The picture is one of pain and regret experienced before proceeding on to glory. Charles Stanley includes a whole chapter in his book on eternal security in which he exegetes this text in much the same manner as any Catholic would, except he is careful not to use the p-word. That’s okay. We know what he’s talking about anyway.
Praying for the dead suffering purification from their sins is not just a Catholic belief. We inherited it from the Jews. There are veiled references to it in the same canonical Scriptures that you would recognize with us. For instance, Gen. 50:10 describes the mourning of Joseph and his brothers for their father Jacob: “And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, which is beyond Jordan, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation: and he made a mourning for his father seven days” (KJV). Why not just a simple funeral with periodic mourning following, whenever they especially missed him? This kind of ritualistic period of mourning is observed by the Jews to this day. They drop everything they are doing and sit in their house for seven days, mourning, but especially praying for the souls of their loved ones.
There are explicit references to prayers for the dead in the Deuterocanon (what you would call Apocrypha). 2 Maccabees 12:39-46 describes how Judas Maccabeus offered up prayers for the souls of his fellow soldiers who had fallen in battle:
On the following day, since the task had now become urgent, Judas and his men went to gather up the bodies of the slain and bury them with their kinsmen in their ancestral tombs. But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had been slain. They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden. Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection of the dead in view; for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death. But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin (NAB).
I realize that you would not consider this text to be inspired Scripture in the same way we do, but it at least provides proof that praying for the dead is an ancient Jewish practice. The Catholic Church didn’t cook it up in the Middle Ages as I was taught they had done in Sunday School. Notice that the author includes a polemical jab at the nascent Saduceeanism of his day by appealing to the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead as the basis of this practice. Jesus would make a similar argument against the Saducees when He appealed to God’s designation as the “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” to explain that God is the God of the living, not of the dead. The same holds true here. Judas and his companions recognized that though the bodies of their brothers in arms were slain, their souls were yet very much alive and standing before the judgment of God, and would some day be reunited with their resurrected bodies. Notice too the reference to sacrifice in atonement for their sins. Although they were sons of the covenant, they had died having made a compromise with the sin of idolatry. The text implies that this brought about their physical death. However, Judas remained hopeful that they had not sinned to such an extent as to have brought damnation upon their souls, i.e., he hoped that they had not committed what Catholics call a mortal sin. He took recourse to offering sacrifices on their behalf “that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out.” These sacrifices looked forward towards Jesus’ atoning sacrifice on the cross, just as the sacrifice of the Mass looks back to it, and, indeed, is identical to that same sacrifice in substance. This is why we offer up masses for the dead. We are pleading Christ’s mercies, poured out in His blood, upon the souls of our loved ones who are aching to behold the Father and being purified in preparation for that moment. It is Jesus’ sacrifice that obtains that grace, of course. We merely participate in it. (Really, that’s what all prayer is, isn’t it? Participating in God’s bestowal of grace. He doesn’t need our prayers to get His work done, but invites us to make our requests and petitions because it strengthens our relationship both with Him and the rest of the body).
On to the Council of Trent.
Justin, I am so happy that you actually bothered to look this text up. So many of your co-religionists go straight for the parts that are disagreeable to them and create the impression that the Council of Trent says that we are saved by works apart from faith. Now you know that that is not true, and I hope that you will help other non-Catholics better articulate their arguments against Catholic soteriology.
That said, I am a bit surprised that you are still trying to do mouth to mouth resuscitation on this dead horse, and hoping to keep riding it in your polemic against Catholicism. It seems to me that after acknowledging that what I said was true, you cut off the rest of the canons from the first and attempt to read them as independent and contradictory statements. You also seem a bit shocked that (horror!) the Council of Trent doesn’t agree with Calvinistic Protestantism in a great many things. That was not what I was trying to say by quoting the Council’s first canon on Justification at all. Of course we disagree on a handful of core issues. I just wanted to point out that it is not fair to say that Catholics believe in salvation by works (which you still seem to want to argue). We believe in salvation by grace. We do not believe in salvation by faith alone, either. We believe in salvation by grace. Our response to grace involves both faith and works, and that is precisely where many Protestants grow uncomfortable, but please try to be charitable and attempt to comprehend that we believe that we are saved by grace just as much as you do.
You ask us to “keep in mind that the Bible does clearly teach salvation is through faith alone” and support that with Ephesians 2:8-9, which, I grant you, would be a pretty convincing proof-text if those two verses made up the whole of our New Testament. However, I disagree that the whole Bible clearly does teach a sola fide soteriology. I understand that you are trying to argue that works just kind of naturally flow out of a life of faith. That’s the same thing I used to believe and teach. The problem is, you don’t ever find that kind of statement anywhere in the Bible. Instead, you have lots of places in the New Testament where there is a clear connection between salvation and works, texts like Matthew 7:24-27, where the wise man whose house is built upon the rock is the picture of “everyone who hears these words and does them” and the foolish man doomed to destruction is the picture of “everyone who hears these words and does not do them.” What do you do with James 2:24 that says that we are “justified by works and not by faith alone” (RSV)? That verse says the exact opposite of what you are arguing the Bible teaches so clearly. When you take the whole counsel of Scripture together, I think you are hard pressed to argue that sola fide soteriology is so clearly taught in the Bible. Paul’s words need to be taken in the greater context of Scripture, and then it begins to become apparent that he was primarily addressing the problem of what to do with Jewish ritual. Paul is saying that since we are saved by grace through faith, the external practices of the Jewish Law are no longer necessary to enter into and remain in God’s covenant, and if someone attempts to say otherwise, they are getting the cart in front of the horse by making works more significant than the grace that God is bestowing so freely on mankind through Jesus. He is not saying that works are absolutely unnecessary. He can’t be. After all, he is the same person who wrote, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12, NKJV). The next verse puts this work in its proper context. It is God who works in us. We are saved by grace, even in our works. But some responsibility for accomplishing the work is still incumbent upon us, nonetheless, or we wouldn’t have the command to begin with.
If works just kind of naturally flowed out of our faith, I don’t think there would be so much emphasis on performing works. Why did the authors of Scripture encourage righteous living so often? It seems obvious to me that they were concerned that we just might not be as righteous as we ought; as though they did not believe that our righteous behavior would just sort of naturally flow out of a life of faith without a bit of encouragement.
Of course it would be ridiculous for a Catholic (or anybody else) to think they could get saved by being good enough to get into heaven. That’s why the Council of Trent declared anyone teaching such an idea to be anathema. Of course it would be ridiculous to respond to God’s grace with works without faith. It’s not just ridiculous. It’s inconceivable. Just a bit more inconceivable than responding to God’s grace with faith without works.
Here is my question for my Protestant brothers and sisters: If all we have to do is believe to be saved, then why are you all so uptight about us Catholics who do believe but are convinced that our works are important too? It’s not like any of us don’t have any faith at all, but are running around working our tails off to get into a godless heaven. Do you understand my point? What makes my faith in Jesus and His salvific work invalid and yours valid? Why should my faith send me to hell and yours to heaven? Think about it and chill.
Justin, you say that if the Council of Trent had stopped with the first canon on justification, you would agree with me. I am not sure what you mean by that. You would agree that Catholics believe we are saved by grace? You would agree with Catholicism?
I am curious which translation of the Council documents you are using. I have been using Waterworth’s venerable translation, available here: http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html. Some of the translation that you are using seems to have been worded for the purpose of Protestant polemics.
You rightly comment that canons four through eight of the sixth session of Trent deal with controversies with certain reformers over predestination. You might be surprised to know that the Thomistic school of Catholicism essentially agrees with Calvinism on this subject, and has never been condemned by the Catholic Church. This was because they allowed room for man’s free-will as well, as do most Calvinists. These canons were not intended to cast a blanket condemnation on the doctrine of predestination, but only to check certain excesses that had crept in among more radical reformers. The Molinists oppose the Thomists, and are roughly analogous to Protestant Arminians. The Catholic Church has chosen to allow both schools of thought to continue, declining to make a final ruling on the matter due to insufficient revelation. You can read a rather technical article on the matter here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14698b.htm. Perhaps it will interest you to know that before I was Catholic, I was a thorough-going Arminianist, and that today I consider myself a Thomist, and thus a close cousin to Calvinists.
Justin, you misunderstand the particular meaning of anathema in the sense used by the Council fathers. Anathema can indeed mean “to curse” and “to damn,” but that is not the meaning here. Going back to the meaning of the Greek words will help us to understand what the fathers mean when they say “anathema sit.” Ana means “up.” Thema comes from the verb tithemi, meaning “to place.” Thus, together, the words mean “something placed up, i.e., apart.” The ancient Greeks used the word to describe all kinds of set apart things, including something that was holy, such as a sacrificial victim. Thus, we see that anathema has a broader meaning than “cursed, damned.” Anathema sit is technical language used in relation to the specific action of ecclesiastical excommunication. You can check this out in Wikipedia’s article on “anathema.” Notice that all of the canons you have listed here say, “If any one saith ….” The situation described is that of Catholic clergy who are sympathetic to Reformation theology. The point is, if you are a Catholic priest or bishop, if you preach any of these things, you are out of the boundaries of the Catholic Church and no longer have communion with her. The canons are not directed at you, Justin. They do not condemn you for holding beliefs contrary to Catholic teaching. Neither do they curse you. I surmise that you grew up in a faith tradition at odds with Catholicism. Very well. We bless you in the name of the Lord. If someone was a practicing Catholic and left the Catholic Church to embrace a belief system that held to the opinions condemned by the Council, even they would not be condemned to hell and cursed by the canons. The canons are aimed with pinpoint accuracy towards priests who were preaching Protestant theology but refusing to leave the Catholic Church. This was the method with which the Church resorted to sweeping them out. I don’t think that it is fair to say that the canons even curse them. In this context, anathema sit should be translated, “Let him be excommunicated.”
The Catholic Church would never say that anyone is damned simply for holding Protestant beliefs. We are strictly forbidden by the Church to cast judgment on anybody in such a manner.
For the next item, Justin, I think I will need to quote you:
“CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.
Comments: So this states if we believe someone is born again. Which Jesus states as a qualification for entrance into heaven and if we believe in predestination, also in the bible, we are damned. So this is damning clear teachings of God’s Word. John 3:3 states, “3In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”
Romans 8:29 states, “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.”
This clearly shows an anti biblical stance.”
You have simply misunderstood the words of this canon. I will paraphrase it, in hopes that the intent will be more clear. “If any one says that a born again and justified individual is bound of faith to believe in his eternal security; let him be excommunicated.” The Council fathers by no means condemn John 3:3. This is clear from a reading of the entire document. In fact, I will quote the whole of chapter XIII from the sixth session:
CHAPTER XIII.
On the gift of Perseverance.
So also as regards the gift of perseverance, of which it is written, He that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved:-which gift cannot be derived from any other but Him, who is able to establish him who standeth that he stand perseveringly, and to restore him who falleth:-let no one herein promise himself any thing as certain with an absolute certainty; though all ought to place and repose a most firm hope in God’s help. For God, unless men be themselves wanting to His grace, as he has begun the good work, so will he perfect it, working (in them) to will and to accomplish. Nevertheless, let those who think themselves to stand, take heed lest they fall, and, with fear and trembling work out their salvation, in labours, in watchings, in almsdeeds, in prayers and oblations, in fastings and chastity: for, knowing that they are born again unto a hope of glory, but not as yet unto glory, they ought to fear for the combat which yet remains with the flesh, with the world, with the devil, wherein they cannot be victorious, unless they be with God’s grace, obedient to the Apostle, who says; We are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh; for if you live according to the flesh, you shall die; but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live.
Please notice how much Scripture permeates that paragraph that I have just cited. What of that “anti biblical stance” that you spoke of?
Neither do the Council fathers intend to condemn belief in predestination, which, I agree, is a Scriptural doctrine. What canon XV is targeting is the belief in the eternal security of the believer. Chapter XII of the sixth session of the council addresses this issue, and if you should read it you will see that the Council fathers affirm God’s election, yet maintain that “except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God hath chosen unto Himself.”
Granted, you very likely cannot stomach the Catholic stance on perseverance and election, nor do you, I suppose, accept with us the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. All the same, I hope you can understand that the Catholic Church does not simply sweep verses that do not suit her under the rug. We revere Scripture. The first half of every Sunday Mass is occupied with a liturgical reading from the prophets, then a psalm, then from an epistle, and finally from the Gospels. Daily Mass has less Scripture. One of the readings is left out. We are doing our best to live according to the teachings of the Bible, as interpreted by the Catholic Church. Please don’t accuse us of being “anti biblical” simply because you cannot accept our interpretations.
We do not reject outright the doctrine of the perseverance of God’s elect, as should be evident from the paragraph quoted above. Basically, we agree with your interpretation of John 10, that God holds us securely in His grace. However, as you know, we reject the doctrine of eternal security. Though we have the reassuring words of Jesus that no one can snatch us out of the Father’s hand, yet we also have texts like this one: “The love of money is the root of all evils; it is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs” (1 Timothy 6:10, RSV). Verses like this cause us to believe that although our Father will never let us go and that no external force can rip us from His grip, yet, we by our own will can make a conscious decision to wander away from the faith.
We can go back and forth accusing the other of holding unbiblical views and not get anywhere. Why can’t we just drop the whole “unbiblical” 2X4 we have been whacking each other with and concede that we just interpret the Bible differently and trust God to overlook whatever flaws in our theology there are, (because there must be a whole bunch of them!)?
Let me quote you again, Justin:
“CANON XVIII.-If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.
Comment: This is saying that if we say we cant keep the commands of God and if we say that it is impossible to basically be perfect after we have received grace than we are damned.”
Here, yet again you have misunderstood the intent of the Council fathers. You have taken a little, specific statement and inflated it to say much more. The fathers are combatting yet another excess that had grown out of the Reformation, anti-nomianism. Certain people were preaching that since it is impossible to be perfect, why should we even try? No one, not even a justified believer, can keep the commandments of God. The Council fathers are addressing this teaching. Believe me, no Catholic is deluded enough to believe that he or she is without sin, or that he or she is going to be able to live a perfect life for the remainder of their time on earth. As Saint John said in his first epistle, if any one should say that he has no sin, then he is a liar. Yet, we also believe that having been born again and infused with God’s grace has given us a share in Christ’s nature, and whereas before we were so spiritually impoverished by our sin nature that we were not able to attain a righteous life, now that we are “justified and constituted in grace” we can actually perform the commandments of God in a way that was impossible before. We realize that we are still growing in grace and the virtues of the Holy Spirit, so we will yet fall far short of our purpose, and so we have the Sacrament of Confession to restore us. But it would not give the Holy Spirit credit for the major work that He is doing if we were to say that we cannot, with His help, even attempt to live out the commandments that He has given.
You cite Romans 3:23-28 to support your argument. I think you misuse it. When Paul says that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” he is speaking about those who have not yet been justified by God’s grace. I agree that even after we are justified we continue all too often to sin and fall short of God’s glory, but that is not the heart of Paul’s message in Romans. He is trying to show how necessary God’s grace poured out through Christ’s sacrifices is for salvation. Without it, we cannot possibly hope to live the kind of life God desires. Not even the Jewish Law could enable someone to really be righteous apart from the infusion of God’s grace in their life. Faith is the hitch-pin that connects us to God’s grace and brings justification, or, (the Greek word is used with both meanings), “righteousness.” Whereas before we were not righteous, now that we have received God’s grace through faith, we have been given Christ’s righteous nature as our own. That means we can actually live according to His commandments now. That’s good news, Justin!
When Paul uses the word law, he almost certainly means Torah. This is the conclusion of James Dunn, an Evangelical who is one of the foremost authorities in Pauline studies today. See The New Perspective on Paul, revised edition (Eerdmans, 2007) for his material. If this is so, when Paul says that “if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the law” in Galatians 5:18, he means to say that for a Spirit-filled Christian to put himself under the yoke of the Jewish Law is an absurdity. This is the whole purpose of Galatians, to combat the Judaizers who were compelling Gentile believers to receive circumcision. However, it is hard to imagine that Paul has in mind commandments such as “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Surely the Spirit enables us to really love in ways that we were incapable of before He had made His dwelling in us.
You say that “the Council of Trent clearly states that salvation for the Catholic Church is Faith and Works.” That’s not precise. Salvation is a free gift of grace. The Council clearly teaches, in the very canons that you have quoted, that we are saved by grace. No one can earn their salvation by works. No one can believe their way into heaven. God has to give the grace both to believe and to perform His will. Most of our participation in the work of salvation is just a matter of receiving more and more of His grace.
Justin, you say that “to imply works would have anything to do with salvation is to take away what Jesus did on the cross for us.” I disagree. If we said that we could earn our salvation with our own works apart from God’s grace, what you say would be true. It would indeed do dishonor to Jesus’ amazing victory. But a transformed life that evinces the work of the Holy Spirit and the power of Jesus’ transfused life into the believer would bring glory to Jesus, would it not? Jesus tells us to let our light shine before men in Matthew 5:16. How would a life without good works lived by a spiritual slouch “trusting” in God to save him bring glory to Jesus?
You do something that strikes me as odd. You go to James 2 for proof that “works is the end result of faith.” According to you, James is saying that works merely show “the person has been saved by faith alone.” You cite verse 26 to substantiate this, where it says that “faith without works is dead.” But the rest of the chapter ought to present some problems for you. For instance, verse 14 says, “What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?” (NKJV). Verse 21 says that “Abraham was justified by works”! To cap it all off, James says that “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (verse 24, NKJV). This is the only verse in the Bible in which the Greek text uses the phrase “faith alone.” I have no further comment. This chapter is indeed one text where the Protestants’ pet doctrine of perspicuity of Scripture seems to hold true!
But, Justin, all in all, I don’t entirely disagree with your understanding of how works are produced by faith. I find this paragraph of yours to be quite insightful:
”How does faith produce works? When we are saved and we have experienced God’s amazing forgiveness through His grace, we have the Holy Spirit that indwells us and we are becoming more like Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:18 states, “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.”The more we become like Christ the more we care about the things He cares about. 2 Peter 3:18 states, “but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen.” As we grow in Christ we will live for His glory alone and good deeds will flow, because it truly is the Lord Jesus Christ working through us.”
To that I say, “Amen.” They are not our works, but the Lord’s. We merely submit to His will and enjoy the ride. I can’t agree with you that these Spirit-operated works have nothing to do with salvation, but at least we can agree that on our own, working in the flesh, we can accomplish nothing. We can agree that we are saved by grace alone through faith, but I can’t agree with you that we are saved by faith alone.
These are some informative ideas. You mentioned some important points that I hadn’t considered before. I will subscribe to see if you post any more updates.
thanks Mathew, you have given me a lot of insight and am really happy to read all your research. I have a few questions though. since it may not relate to the topic on discussion here, is there any other Catholic forum where I can place my questions? Praise the Lord and May God bless you.
There is a massive forum at http://forums.catholic.com/. I just got a forum up and running on my own website if you have any specific topics that you were wanting to take up with me in particular: http://www.epicfoodfight.com/talking-with-our-mouths-full-a-forum.html.
God bless you and guide you in your quest for truth.
I don’t understand how faith alone can save a person, a person must act with their faith in order to receive salvation. It reminds me of “Do as I say, not as I do”, but instead it’s “Judge me as I believe, not as I act.” Just because someone believes truly in God does not justify their actions, and if their actions are against God, they shall not be saved, because by going against God they are denying him. Now this is assuming extremes of course.
come on guys! no one has said anything about acts! the apostles who walked and talked with Jesus! Get wise!
Sorry. I don’t understand your point. What are you wanting us to say about Acts?
Wow….I am amazed by all the comments. So many great points.
I was born and raised by a Catholic Family. All great and loving people. Some more knowledgeable than others regarding God’s word. I decided a few years ago (in my late 20′s) to start reading the Bible. Shortly after I began to attend a new Church. (An Assembly of God) I attended for about a year before The Lord started speaking to me. I began to feel totally out of place, overwhelmed with confusion, and a calling to find a new Church. I decided to attend a Born Again Church but had the same results and repeated moving around a few more times. Finally, I made the decision to take the time to pray and read the word on my own, so I could learn and listen for direction. In the end, I am back at the Catholic Church. Due to the fact I had developed friendships at the Churches I attended earlier, (or so I thought) I ended up with so many critics and judges in my life. It made me so sad to have to be judged and criticized by people just because I wasn’t a part of the same Church they were. I asked “are we all not Christians?”
I think it is safe for me to say that no one is perfect, nor is a any place (Church) perfect. We could all say this or that about Churches that are not our own, but I must ask this question…Are you attending your Church because you like what they do or say or do you attend because this is the Church the Lord has brought you to? I tried at several Churches, but the Lord brought me back to the Catholic Church. I believe through my own experience that all Churches may say something here or something there that is different or not believed by another. As long as you are attending because you are called there, have accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior, reading the Bible and working with your personal relationship with God, love, help, forgive, lead others to the God, and remain faithful in all the teaching then we are ALL on our way to Heaven.
I know how hurt I was when others came down on me when I was already down/lost (trying to find my place) so I refuse to do that to new/returning Christians.
The truth is written, so no matter what man says if you want the truth just read. One should not depend on what is said at Church alone.
You guys are totally misunderstanding the passage…the only way to heaven is by believing that u are a sinner and believe that Jesus died on the cross for ur sins-John 3:16-”for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life”
We Catholics believe all of that. But we also believe one can lose his salvation by serious sin (mortal sin).
No one can lose his/her salvation no matter what they do… and ur mortal sint or whatever is no worse or better than steeling a penny… all sin is bad…God has a totally different perspective that man has…
Thank you Alex!!!! This is something I keep saying, but so many battle me on that point. We are all sinners and when you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior you are saved but may stumble in your walk. However, our God is a loving forgiving God.
I am still very new at following the Lord and I just wish my fellow Christians would stick to the facts and stop adding their own opinions.
Since Protestants are so fond of boasting that they are the only true Christians and believing that all Catholics will go to hell, let me also be direct and say that most Protestants are in REAL danger of going to hell. Why? Because Protestants are worshiping a book (idolatry #1), following heretics with itching ears and are largely unbelievers. If you truly belong to Christ, you will follow all his commandments about church and discipline. The favorite Protestant pastime is church hopping and a self-prescribed faith based on cafeteria variety. Frankly, most of your so-called bible knowledge is foolishness. They are just so removed from facts, history and reality. Yes, better believe in purgatory cos most of you “will never get out till you paid the last copper.” Learn some humility and repent your sins and the sin of pride of your ancestors.
I totally agree with Kathy… I’m 13 and I just got saved 2 years ago and before that I kept adding my own options to my spiritual life…and I found out that… Well that’s beside the point… how can u belive in purgatory and getting to heaven by good works.. I believe in the Bible by faith and faith alone… Francis, could u please shoe me in the Bible where it says anything about purgatory or getting to heaven by works? it’s my job as a Christian to make sure everyone knows that God sent his son Jesus into the world to pay off the sins of the world so that we can live in heaven forever with him if u just believe… come on guys whose with me?!?!?!
I hope you are not one of those who profess “bible-alone” ‘cos that doctrine is not even found in the bible itself. Not everything is found in the bible since like John said, “There are many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written” (Jn 21:25). About purgatory, you find biblical inferences like in 1 Corinthians 3:14–15: “If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” If you think Catholics get to heaven by doing works, then you are very sadly mistaken or misinformed. Catholics believe in faith saves but that “a man is justified … not by faith alone … for faith apart from works is dead … but faith working through love” (Rom 3:28, Jas 2:24, 26, Gal 5:6). Well, there is also more than just believing that “God sent his son Jesus into the world to pay off the sins so we can live in heaven forever.” Read what Jesus said about the price of discipleship in the gospels. Grow in faith and love of God!
Dear Alex,
I know that you have been taught that we are saved by faith alone. However, this Protestant doctrine contradicts Sacred Scripture as Francis mentioned above because James 2 clearly says that Faith without works is dead. (Martin Luther removed James from his New Testament for exactly this reason.)
Regarding Purgatory:
In addition to Francis’ reply the Jews long before Christ believed in the necessity for a purification after death and before entering “Heaven”.
You can see my post –>Where Did the Catholic Church Get the Idea of Purgatory
Also you can read one of many of my posts on Purgatory–>
Where is Purgatory in Scripture?
When u talk about Abraham doing good works…Abraham was in the old testament…Jesus had not come into this world yet, so people in old testament times were looking toward the comming of Jesus as where we are looking to his second comming… And btw there is no need for a priest to be an intercessor…Jesus is the intersessor… After all…a priest is just a human, he is no better or worse than us… he’s just got a big name
Dear Alex,
You seem to be ignoring
Kyrie Eleison,
BFHU
Alex sweetie, I hope this doesn’t send you in to shock. I am a Catholic (Which makes me Christian). I read and I know the truth. I read the same Bible as you because my dear there is only 1 Bible. I think it is amazing how you and I, who are new at all of this, have such a great positive love for Jesus and can see eye to eye. Is that not what God wants for his people. No one person is sinless, so we must keep our minds on the truth and repent when we stumble. I know I am not perfect, but I do the very best I can. I love all people (strong and weak). God has blessed me with this great ability to love and see the best and beauty in all. Through my actions, I hope to show those who may question my faith how God works through me. As the best model I can be, I hope to lead people closer to the Lord.
Accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior….Accept that you are a sinner….Repent for your sins (and pray that God give you the strength to overcome your weaknesses)….Keep your heart and eye on the truth in God’s word and try with all your might to live according to it. Remain humble, don’t judge others harshly unless that is how you want to be judged on Judgement Day, Love and Respect all people. This is how you make it in to Heaven.
Alex: Catholics aren’t Christians
BFHU: Dear Alex,
Catholics are certainly Christian. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ himself. All the Protestant denominations were founded by men either rebelling against the Catholic Church –Protest-ants–or other denominations.
Here is one of my posts:
Q. Are Catholics Christians?
A. Yes. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ.
Q. Why is it called the Catholic Church?
A. “Catholic” comes from the Greek word kataholos meaning universal. The Christian Church has been called “The Catholic Church” at least since 110 AD! We know this from a letter written by St. Ignatius of Antioch:
Q. Are Catholic Christians born again?
A. Certainly. In the Catholic faith tradition we believe that we are born again through the waters of baptism.
I’m being raised in a Christian family and I’ve heard my catholic friends tell me that they don’t have the same Bible as me
Dear Alex,
The New Testament for Protestants and Catholics is exactly the same. But our Old Testaments do differ. Martin Luther removed seven Old Testament books and four New Testament books from his translation of the Bible into German. He was later persuaded to replace the New Testament books. So Protestants are still missing seven books from the Old Testament used by Christians for 1500 years. You can read the whole story by clicking here–>Why did the Catholic Church add books to the Bible?
Wow, so sorry you feel that way. But that would be your own personal belief. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus himself and was the first Church of Christianity. There are many denominations of Christianity. (Baptist, Lutheran, Catholic, Assemblies of God, Born Again, etc) I respect your opinion/belief but I know who I am, and that my God loves me. I don’t feel a need to battle with anyone.
Your friends told you false information. Maybe they don’t even read the bible. My Baptist and Born Again Christian friends all read the same Bible as I do and we all have the same foundation in our faith. I do agree that there are differences in the methods of worship inside of the actual Churches, but we all believe in 1 God, the sacrafice that Jesus endured for us, and we stand strong in those truths.
I have had my fair share of descrimination pressed upon me because I am Catholic, but I have done my research and my true Christian friends embrace me because the know that we are all one…God’s people.
I am happy that you are saved and involved in these discussions. You must be a very mature intelligent 13 year old. Keep up your growth in your faith, I know God must be very proud of you.
Somehow my posts end up all over the place instead of on the bottom. So where ever this one may land
Although born and raised Catholic and still remaining Catholic, I am going to consider myself a new believer because I only started reading and researching in my late 20′s. Ok please correct me if I’m wrong. Baptism is first, then Communion, then Confirmation. These are the Sacraments. They are the necessary steps in the Catholic Church. I have done all. Since I strayed away I don’t remember much of the teaching that came along with them. However, I attend Church every Sunday and reading faithfully now and I am learning little by little.
My question is this: What does each step represent? I mean the deep meaning behind them because I know the brief version of it.
The reason I ask this question beside wanting to know for myself, is because there is soooo much being said against the Catholic Church for what is considered routine/ritual, but while attending many other Churches trying to find my place there were routines/rituals there that the Bible can’t explain. Ex: the presentation of a baby and the Pastor puts his hand on the baby and says his words. (I am not saying this to knock anyone because I refuse to argue) All I am saying is I believe we all have more in common than we do have differences. I COULD BE WRONG, BUT I AM BASING THIS ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCES. I am a very peaceful individual and I find that the fellow Catholics on here appear to be as well. I just want to know why we CATHOLICS are so hated? You may say you don’t hate us but if you reread your posts and put yourself on the other side of the fence, can you not feel the rage? I refuse to hate you or bash you because I choose to love you. So why must you do it to us? We are more alike than different and whatever makes us different is personal and between God and each and everyone of us. Not man on man.
Dear Kathy,
Baptism:
Holy Baptism holds the first place among the sacraments, because it is the door of the spiritual life; for by it we are made members of Christ and incorporated with the Church. And since through the first man death entered into all, unless we be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, we can not enter into the kingdom of Heaven, as Truth Himself has told us. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water; and it is indifferent whether it be cold or hot. The form is: I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. (for more information see
Baptism in the Catholic Encyclopedia and scroll down to EFFECTS OF BAPTISM..it is a long article. or see Baptism in the Catechism of the Catholic Church .
Eucharist click here–>Catholic Encyclopedia or Catechism
Confirmation click here–>Catholic Encyclopedia or Catechism
Thank you for taking the time to send me this information. I am going to take my time reading through each one. If someone would of asked me 10 years ago to go to Church or if I found it important to learn about my God, I would of brushed off the topic. I think it is amazing how God reached out and grabbed hold of me. Now I can’t get enough information.
Welcome back to Mother Church, Kathy. The work of the Holy Spirit in your life is inspiring. I would love to hear your story of conversion.
It wrong to baptize babies before they are saved!!!! they don’t even understand what is going on…and baptizing them doesnt help them in any way except confuse them when they get older and if they begin to explore religions…
Dear Alex,
I appreciate and am very happy that you love Our Lord and have the zeal to go out and make disciples. But, I must ask you or ask you to ask those who taught you, what scripture says “it is wrong to baptize babies before they are saved.”
We Catholics believe, in agreement with St. Peter, that baptism saves babies, in case they die before reaching the age of reason and until a person is old enough to receive the gift of Faith.
We do not believe a person who is baptized and never comes to faith in Christ will automatically be saved.
Please take a look at my posts
Infant Baptism,
Do you Have to Be Baptised?,
Baptism of Blood or Desire, and
Baptism Does Not Save You.
On April 1st I gave a short explanation of how I returned. It’s definitely not as detailed and beautiful as your story, but it is all the truth.
I’m glad I found this site. I am trying to understand the Catholic religion and be open minded, but even with the links above – I still do not see it. None of the versus you quote when it comes to Baptism stated anything about children. Also it states over and over that you need to believe and be forgiven, etc… An infant can not do this.
God bless you for your openness and charity towards your Catholic brothers and sisters.
You bring up a good point. None of the verses in the Bible say anything about children and baptism. That’s just it. Nothing is said either for or against the practice. Even Anabaptists have to resort to tradition to substantiate their practice of refusing baptism to infants. They may use Scripture to validate their tradition, but make no mistake, it’s still an extra-biblical tradition.
The verses in Scripture that do describe conversion experiences are all in the context of adults who have encounters with Jesus. Nowhere do you have the example of a child who grows up in a Christian home and meets Jesus that way. But it sure would be absurd to suppose that such a thing was “unbiblical,” wouldn’t it?
I will throw out one more Scriptural reference, Matthew 19:14: Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” I can make a pretty strong argument that refusing baptism to little children is a hindrance between them and Jesus. Why would we refuse baptism to the very ones that Jesus tells us depict most clearly what sorts of subjects belong to the Kingdom of Heaven?
Infant baptism is an ancient practice, as is attested by Irenaeus who taught that infants could be born again in the second century:
“He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age” (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).
This was written by a disciple of Polycarp, who was himself a disciple of the Apostle John. Three removed from Jesus is pretty close. I think I’ll stick with Irenaeus on this one.
Dear Linda,
You are coming to the research into the Catholic Faith with a Protestant handicap. That handicap is the mind set that if you can’t clearly see something in scripture it must be wrong.
Are you aware that the Protestant Dogma of Sola Scriptura cannot be found anywhere in scripture? Christianity was around for 400 years before the New Testament was canonized. Therefore, the Christian Faith was based on the teaching of the apostles and their sucessors. It never was a teaching of the Christian Faith that Scripture alone is true and nothing else. How could it have been when no one knew for sure which books were infallible?
Also, the Doctrine of Sola Scriptura requires that the believer owns a Bible, and can read well. This was an outright impossibility for everyone in the ancient world except the very wealthy, who, perhaps could not read well either.
It is still an impossibility for 20% of the world population today, who cannot read.
Please see my post: –>Sola Scriptura and –> Catholic Beliefs oppose Scripture?
My questions for you are:
How could the reading of scripture be the only way to know your faith and grow for all those centuries when most people could not read and a Bible cost thousands of dolllars before the invention of the printing press?
So Sola Scriptura is a new Protestant tradition invented by Martin Luther 500 years ago.
Many of you people who leave the Catholic Church to join the Christian Church simply don’t understand.
Mary is “indeed” the mother of Jesus Christ (the mother of God). Catholics do not think of Mary as better than Jesus Christ/God, and we do not pray “TO” Mary. We only ask Mary to pray “for us.”
Do you see the difference? Christians and other religions don’t believe that angels and saints, and the mother of God, can pray for us. Well they are wrong.
Think about it this way (metaphor). If your neighbor asked you to mow his lawn. Would you do it? If you are nice, then yes. But what if your own father asked you to mow his lawn? Then it would be different right? You wouldn’t hesitate to say no. In the Ten Commandments, we are supposed to honor our mother and father.
This is the same with God. When Jesus was on earth, men from a party asked Jesus to turn their water into wine. Jesus refused. Then Mary spoke with them and said that her son would turn their water into wine. She knows her place and that she should not command her own God to do anything. So she didn’t, she simply stood there and looked at him. And Jesus instantly got up and did it. Not because the man asked him to do it, but because his mother Mary did.
So that is the difference. Why have just you praying for something when you can ask Mary, His mother to pray for you as well. Or the saints.
The Catholic Church is perfect, the people who are a part of the Catholic Church, are not. We cannot judge a religion on its people. Simply believe in Jesus Christ, that he is your Lord & Savior. And you will have eternal life in the kingdom of heaven. Just know that catholics in no way shape or form, pray “to” anyone other than God. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are “ONE GOD.”
Jesus: “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father except through Me.”
I love you all <3
That’s a pretty awesome defense of Marian intercession, UniQuE. But please don’t categorize Catholics as non-Christians. That’s what a lot of the debate here has been about. Also, technically, Catholics DO pray to the saints, although there is an important distinction between prayer to God and prayer to someone else. Augustine distinguished between “latreia,” worship that is due to God alone, and “douleia,” reverence that we pay to our fellow creatures. Douleia is what we are exhibiting when we call a judge “your honor,” for instance. There are instances of this in Scripture, as well. For example, in Genesis 42:6 it says that, “Joseph was the governor of the land, the one who sold grain to all its people. So when Joseph’s brothers arrived, they bowed down to him with their faces to the ground.” Joseph’s brothers were not worshiping Joseph as a god, but they were paying him respect in the proper cultural mode of their day. The word “bow” in Hebrew is “hishtachaveh,” and it is the normal word for “worship.” This is the kind of “worship” that is offered to the saints, douleia. It is not of the same degree or even kind as the latreia that is due to the Creator God alone. As Augustine also teaches in “De Doctrina Christiana,” only God can properly be our heart’s desire. Our fellow creatures are loved for His sake, not for their own. So it is with the saints. We love them and reverence them for the sake of Father God who has manifested such great works in them and made us, with Him, sons and daughters in His celestial family.
You say sola scripture cannot be found in scripture, take a look at scripture.
Psa 119:105
Your word [is] a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.
Jhn 8:31
Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
Act 17:11
These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily [to find out] whether these things were so.
l 1:23
if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.
Rev 22:18
For [fn] I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add [fn] to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away [fn] his part from the Book [fn] of Life, from the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Hbr 10:7
Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come– In the volume of the book it is written of Me– To do Your will, O God.’
Psa 138:2
I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
I hope this will open your eyes. God bless.
It seems to me that this sort of thing has all been responded to, but for the sake of thoroughness …
There are five problems with culling those verses as you do:
1. None of them actually says that Scripture is the ONLY place to go for direction. With you, Catholics affirm the inspiration of Scripture, and that is what is established with those texts. But your interpreters have imposed the doctrine of Sola Scriptura upon texts such as these. This is called eisegesis, and it’s not a very helpful way to read the Bible.
2. You are quoting Rev 22:18 out of context. That’s pretty tricky. If you read the passage as a part of the rest of the book of Revelation, it becomes pretty clear that what the Lord is referring to is NOT adding something to the Bible book (no one carried around a whole Bible back then), but adding to the specific book of Revelation. Deuteronomy 4:2 is a very similar text, and if it meant what you say Revelation 22 means, then we wouldn’t have anything more than the Pentateuch in our Bibles. Thank God that He wasn’t done speaking to us at Deuteronomy!
3. Quoting Rev 22:18 with the implication that the Catholic Church “adds to God’s Word” is also an invalid argument, because when Revelation was completed, a few years before the death of John the Apostle, the deposit of apostolic faith was more or less sealed. There was no more revelation for God to impart to the Church. The Catholic Church does not claim to have received new truths since the passing of the Apostles. All that we do now is “unpack” them and apply them to our specific geographic and historic locales. Most of the doctrines that the Catholic Church proclaims are well-established in Scripture, a few are less so, but all of them are an inheritance that we have received from the Apostles, and no one, not even the Pope, has the right to make substantive alterations to that inheritance.
4. For Catholics, “God’s Word” is more than the Bible. We would regard Sacred Tradition and it’s elucidation on the part of the Magisterium to equally be “God’s Word.” In fact, one helpful way to look at it is that the Bible is the core of Sacred Tradition.
5. You have to fall back on Sacred Tradition to establish the Canon of Scripture that you want restrict your faith to. This undercuts your entire argument. How do you know which books belong and which one’s do not? Why didn’t the Apostle Paul give us a list in one of his epistles? Evidently the Holy Spirit thought having an inspired Church would take care of that problem.
“Stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by WORD OF MOUTH or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15).
“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the CHURCH of the living God, the PILLAR AND GROUND OF THE TRUTH” (1 Tim 3:15, KJV).
The only problem I have with tradition is when it goes against scripture.
“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” Romans 16:17-18
“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Proverbs 30:5-6
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” 2 Timothy 3:16
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men…” Mark 7:7-8
“Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” Matthew 15:3
“Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Colossians 2:8
“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” Matthew 24:35
“… the word of our God shall stand for ever.” Isaiah 40:8
“But the word of the Lord endureth for ever…” 1 Peter 1:25
“For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.” Psalm 119:89
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Galatians 1:8
“The only problem I have with tradition is when it goes against scripture.”
Then you should have no problems with the traditions of the Catholic Church!
John,
Matthew is correct. There is nothing in Catholic Teaching that goes against or contradicts Scripture. What Protestants are oblivious of is that they too believe things that are not explicitly in scripture. Such as Sola Scriptura or Scripture alone. This is a tradition begun 500 years ago by Martin Luther.
Protestants have also been taught to interpret certain scriptures in such a way that Catholic doctrine seems to contradict scripture but it does not. The Catholic Faith simply does NOT align with Protestant Interpretation and/or Protestant tradition because the whole reason of
being for Protestantism is to PROTEST the Catholic Faith.
Patrick Madrid made this analogy. The Catholic Church is like a home with a large family living in it. The Protest-ant churches are like some of the children of the family who get mad and take their blankets, a tent, pillows, a lantern, food,and a book out in the back yard and camp out refusing to be a part of the family. But all that they possess they took with them from the family home.
If you are a Christian you are a follower of Christ…. not Peter, or the pope or any other name.
As for not allowing people to take communion ‘for their own good’ so they don’t call down comdemnation…. this being why some are ill or die…. here again is a different interpretation. We are sick and some die because they do not understand the power of the cross and Jesus sacrifice for us. By His stripes we are healed… if we fully understood what Jesus purchased at Calvary we would know His healing and so would not be sick or even dying.
Brothers and sisters in Christ may we all continue to know Him better.
“If you are a Christian you are a follower of Christ…. not Peter, or the pope or any other name.”
I think it’s being a follower of Christ and then some more … like are we obeying His commandments, and do we love God and love our neighbors, and are we doing the will of the Father? We cannot be complacent but always be mindful of Matt 7:21 -23.
“if we fully understood what Jesus purchased at Calvary we would know His healing and so would not be sick or even dying”
I seriously doubt this is all there is. We need to study John 6 on the discourse of the Bread of life and then honestly ask ourselves if we are identified with the UNFAITHFUL followers who disbelieved (because it is a hard saying”) and left our Lord.
And until we can unite with Peter who responded “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” … any disrespectful reception of the the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ in the Holy Eucharist is a most serious transgression against the holiness of God.
I came to this website looking for answers from a Catholic perspective. I am Catholic and while I was listening to Christian radio, I learned that everyone who does not believe in Jesus is going to hell, and wanted to find out if this is true.
What I got was words of wisdom from the original post, which I appreciate for what it is. What I saw from many of the comments was plainly numerous hateful posts. According to some, I am going to hell. I don’t appreciate that. I have a strong relationship with God AND JESUS, and I am sure that he is not happy with these people telling me I am DEFINITELY GOING TO HELL. Thanks for judging me and every Catholic you know. I am sure Jesus is very happy with all of you who judge, even though he is the only one who is suppise to do that.
I think many hateful and bigoted fundamentalists will be very surprised when they get to the Pearly Gate to see who’s guarding it (St. Peter). In the afterlife, I’m also quite certain that many of them will continue to dispute with our Lord (the Living Word himself) by comparing bible verses from a KJV.
John Piper – If you had 2 minutes with the Pope, what would you say? desiringGod