Faith Alone

[zippy2006]

Catholics are synergistic in their soteriology - one must cooperate with God's grace in order to be saved. It is insufficient to merely have faith. One must obey a long list of Catholic commandments in order to hope for salvation,

Most Protestants follow Augustine's monergisim in their soteriology. Salvation is a gift of God to those whom He chooses to give it. It is the work of God from beginning to end. God produces good works in his children as evidence of their faith. He is the vinedresser and Christians are His vine.

"God created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us." -St. Augustine, Catholic bishop

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Catholics are synergistic in their soteriology - one must cooperate with God's grace in order to be saved. It is insufficient to merely have faith. One must obey a long list of Catholic commandments in order to hope for salvation,

Most Protestants follow Augustine's monergisim in their soteriology. Salvation is a gift of God to those whom He chooses to give it. It is the work of God from beginning to end. God produces good works in his children as evidence of their faith. He is the vinedresser and Christians are His vine.

If you refuse to cooperate with God's Spirit, your faith is dead.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

That is quite true. Some denominations seem to thrive on syncretism in an effort to claim converts. There is much more to being a Christian than merely repeating a prayer or doing some religious one-time action.

That's correct, but I would say prayer is extremely important to growth in God and becoming receptive to His Spirit. Especially contrite prayer.

 

[zippy2006]

Catholics kind of compromised their position when they said you could literally buy the "supererogation" of saints to compensate for your lack of works, and even going to far as to sell certificates for it as a way to get out fasting during Lent. Commodification of works for the sake of salvation, is indeed at fundamental odds with the Gospel and Christ's conception of works.

The Catholics have their history of sold indulgences and the Orthodox have their history of aerial toll houses. If we all focused only on the worst things that divide us, we would all be Orthodox.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

The Catholics have their history of sold indulgences and the Orthodox have their history of aerial toll houses. If we all focused only on the worst things that divide us, we would all be Orthodox.

There is not really anything objectionable about saying satan and his minions render particular judgement (Christ renders Final Judgement, including against satan), which is all Ariel Toll-Houses stipulate.

And you are lynching Negroes - Wikipedia

 

[zippy2006]

There is not really anything objectionable about saying satan and his minions render particular judgement (Christ renders Final Judgement, including against satan), which is all Ariel Toll-Houses stipulate.

No, that's not all that they stipulate. And that's not why several Orthodox theologians have called them heretical.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

No, that's not all that they stipulate.

As teaching supported by the Church, that is all they have ever stipulated. If you're going to cite variants of personal theologies, that's hardly comparable to indulgences, since such variants were never supported by the Church.

 

[zippy2006]

As teaching supported by the Church, that is all they have ever stipulated. If you're going to cite variants of personal theologies, that's hardly comparable to indulgences, since such variants were never supported by the Church.

The faith of a period, passed down through tradition, is hardly a personal theology.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

The faith of a period, passed down through tradition, is hardly a personal theology.

I'm not sure what you mean by, "faith of a period". Do you mean folks beliefs, or what? The Church doesn't consider any doctrinal tradition not espoused by the Liturgy, to be Holy Tradition.

 

[zippy2006]

I'm not sure what you mean by, "faith of a period". Do you mean folks beliefs, or what? The Church doesn't consider any doctrinal tradition not espoused by the Liturgy, to be Holy Tradition.

If you want to pretend that toll houses were personal theologies distinct from Orthodox tradition, go right ahead. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm tired of the petty discussions with you.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

If you want to pretend that toll houses were personal theologies distinct from Orthodox tradition, go right ahead. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm tired of the petty discussions with you.

No, Toll Houses are espoused by the Liturgy, but in that form there is nothing objectionable about them. There are plenty of "traditional theologies" that are not, and never were, endorsed by the Church, such as Mary as Mat Zemlya. Trying to use these as a way to cover for institutional Catholic selling of the works of saints, in a thread concerned specifically with the place of works in salvation, is the real pettiness.

 

[zippy2006]

No, Toll Houses are espoused by the Liturgy, but in that form there is nothing objectionable about them. There are plenty of "traditional theologies" that are not, and never were, endorsed by the Church, such as Mary as Mat Zemlya. Trying to use these as a way to cover for institutional Catholic selling of the works of saints, in a thread concerned specifically with the place of works in salvation, is the real pettiness.

Who is covering? The Church no longer allows the selling of indulgences. Who do you even think yourself to be arguing with? Instead of addressing a live difference between traditional Christians and Protestants, you opted to re-ignite a dead issue of Catholic bashing that is old news. That's petty. My point with toll houses was that we all make mistakes. The relevant difference is that some of us admit it and some of us try to rewrite history.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The Centurion was indicated to be a religious monotheist, so his circumstance is a bit different from most pagans. I'd also argue the jailer's circumstance was exceptional, because he immediately saw the sole truth of Christianity and was ready to accept everything told to him. Also all that was in Israel, and the Romans there would have a much better idea of the Jewish religion.

In conventional pagan cases, people could easily fall to incorporating Christ into a pantheon or some other form of syncretism. It's clear from Paul's epistles that slipping back into pagan morality was also a major issue.

You are certainly allowed your opinion on the matter, I go only with the scriptural basis which is all people are ready for baptism upon confession and should be baptized immediately. Really though, if we can agree that baptism is important and in fact necessary as an obedient step in our walk with the Lord then we can agree.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Who is covering? The Church no longer allows the selling of indulgences. Who do you even think yourself to be arguing with? Instead of addressing a live difference between traditional Christians and Protestants, you opted to re-ignite a dead issue of Catholic bashing that is old news. That's petty.

You don't do it anymore, but that's not really the point. The point is what your understanding of works is, which has a bearing on this discussion. Works, in Orthodoxy, for instance, means simply operating according to God's will and plan for you; in Catholicism, you can go "beyond", which means you have a fundamentally different conception of works than we do, for you obviously can't go "beyond" God's will, can you?

My point with toll houses was that we all make mistakes. The relevant difference is that some of us admit it and some of us try to rewrite history.

No, the Church is God (Ephesians 1:22-23), God doesn't make mistakes.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

You are certainly allowed your opinion on the matter, I go only with the scriptural basis which is all people are ready for baptism upon confession and should be baptized immediately. Really though, if we can agree that baptism is important and in fact necessary as an obedient step in our walk with the Lord then we can agree.

Baptism is actual participation in Christ's death and Resurrection, so I'd say it's pretty important, yeah.

When someone is ready for baptism I think varies on a case-by-case basis. Generally, though, if someone isn't actively being raised in the faith, they should have a very solid understanding of the faith and morality expected of them, before baptism.

 

[zippy2006]

You don't do it anymore, but that's not really the point. The point is what your understanding of works is, which has a bearing on this discussion. Works, in Orthodoxy, for instance, means simply operating according to God's will and plan for you; in Catholicism, you can go "beyond", which means you have a fundamentally different conception of works than we do, for you obviously can't go "beyond" God's will, can you?

1. Is celibate monastic life required of Christians?
2. Do monks go beyond what is required of Christians?

Supererogation is common sense. As soon as you have something that is required and something that is better but not required you have supererogation (e.g. 1 Corinthians 7:38).

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

1. Is celibate monastic life required of Christians?
2. Do monks go beyond what is required of Christians?

Supererogation is common sense. As soon as you have something that is required and something that is better but not required you have supererogation (e.g. 1 Corinthians 7:38).

Monks don't go beyond what is required of them. God gives celibacy to certain people, and not to others. For those he gives it to, it is a sin not to embrace it. For those he does not give it to, he gives marriage.

 

[friend of]

This version, perversely, equates all moral injunctions of the New Testament, with those of the Mosaic Covenant: as unnecessary with Christ. I see proponents of this say, for instance, that fornication is no longer a big deal, so long as you have faith. And whether or not your faith engenders works is irrelevant

I believe a handy term here is antinomianism which states that we can sin all we like upon salvation through faith. I fully agree this is evil and nemesistically disrespectful to the Lord.

Romans 6:1-2

1 John 2:3-4

Hebrews 12

 

[Monk Brendan]

Yeh, you're probably correct about the main point. But as with Orthodoxy, there are individuals within the church whose views are shockingly at odds with what their own church teaches. We do not, as a result, characterize the church or all members as being in that camp. And we do not say that there are two different and opposed views that are representative of that church.

Name a few. Please be specific.

 

[Monk Brendan]

You're going to have to do some high level "proving" in order to sustain that argument. There are plenty of Protestant churches that are Sola Fide bodies and still emphasize charitable action...and do a lot of it themselves.

In my opinion, most Protestant churches have a very narrow definition of "charity." I have been around the block, and seen a lot of them, from evangelical to Baptist to PCUSA, and others. Most of them seem to want your money so they can help some poor unfortunate in Africa, without helping the homeless in their own church.