Protostants and Catholics

[MoNiCa4316]

Sister, this poster started a thread in OBOB to discuss the same topic. Please argue your points there. Thanks and blessings.

Oki, no prob

 

[rozerz]

I see thankyou. if i could get back to the question of why do you think it is so hard to unite Protestants and Catholics? If someone offered any of you the chance to be at peace with the other, would you say no?

 

[Hentenza]

I see thankyou. if i could get back to the question of why do you think it is so hard to unite Protestants and Catholics? If someone offered any of you the chance to be at peace with the other, would you say no?

Brother, we are not at war. Have not been for centuries. The RC is a denomination just like any other. They have their beliefs and we have ours. God uses their church to save some and He uses our church to save some.

Do I agree with their theology? We have things in common and things where we disagree. From my perspective one of the largest point of contention is the bible. The RC consider it coauthoritative with "T"radition while we believe that the bible is the sole authority for matters of the faith. This point will keep us as separate denominations probably until Christ returns.

 

[rozerz]

sorry i didn't mean mean at war, i aknowledge the moral conflict between the two.

would you that we are both on the "rightious" path then?

 

[Hentenza]

sorry i didn't mean mean at war, i aknowledge the moral conflict between the two.

would you that we are both on the "rightious" path then?

I don't see it from that perspective since God is the one that judges the heart. It is God's purview to declare righteousness. There are wheats and tares in every church. Overall, I consider the RC to have fallen in error quite a while back and the reason why I left. What I will not do is condemn them since that is God's job.

ETA- The Baptist church and the RC are not in a moral conflict either. At least among the conservative churches.

 

[DeaconDean]

Let me give you an example where Catholics and Baptists differ on doctrine.

The Ground of our Justification

The ground on which we as Christians stand justified in the sight of God is Jesus Christ. On this, nearly all would agree. However, there is confusion on other matters relating to this doctrine. And we will attempt to examine some of these. How can a man be just with God? Paul stated:

“Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,” –Rom. 4:6 (KJV)

If our moral excellences are not the ground on which God pronounces us just, what is that ground? Depending on which denomination you belong to, the answer varies.

Roman Catholic Doctrine


Before anything is said on this subject, the writer wishes to point out that many doctrines Christianity as a whole hold dear to come to us through the Catholic Church. They have retained the supernatural element of Christianity throughout. Indeed, we owe a gratitude of thankfulness to God that underneath numerous errors, great Gospel truths are preserved. The doctrine of the Trinity, the true Divinity of Christ, the true doctrine regarding His person as God and man in two distinct natures and one person forever, salvation through His blood, regeneration and sanctification through the almighty power of the Holy Spirit, the resurrection of the body, and eternal life are all the doctrines in which the people of God in communion live.

However, on the matter of justification, the Catholic Church has marred the truth as they have almost all other doctrines pertaining to the merits of Christ are made available to our salvation. Catholics share the same view of mankind before salvation as do Protestants. Up to the point of regeneration we can agree, it is from the moment in regeneration (as the Catholic Church teaches, i.e.: baptism) we begin to separate. According to the Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 7, we read:

“…the final cause is the glory of God and of Christ…the efficient cause is the merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise,..the efficient cause is the merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance, the meritorious cause is His most beloved only begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited for us justification by His most holy passion on the wood of the cross and made satisfaction for us to God the Father, the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which no man was ever justified finally, the single formal cause is the justice of God, not that by which He Himself is just, but that by which He makes us just, that, namely, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and not only are we reputed but we are truly called and are just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to everyone as He wills, and according to each one's disposition and cooperation. For though no one can be just except he to whom the merits of the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ”

So according to the Catholic scheme, we can sum it up as:

1. God is the efficient cause of our justification, as it is by his power or supernatural grace that the soul is made just.
2. Christ is the meritorious cause, as it is for his sake God grants this saving grace, or influence of the Spirit to the children of men.
3. Inherent righteousness is the formal cause, since thereby the soul is made really just or holy.
4. Faith is the occasional and predisposing cause, as it leads the sinner to seek justification (regeneration) and disposes God to grant the blessing. In this respect it has the merit of congruity only, not that of congruity.
5. Baptism is the essential instrumental cause, as it is only through or by baptism that inherent righteousness is infused or justification, which makes the sinner holy.
6. Good works, all the fruits and exercises of the new life, have real merit and constitute the ground of the Christians title to eternal life.

Remonstrant (Arminian) Doctrine

The Remonstrant or Arminian position on justification is hard to pin down. Early on John Wesley denied it, but when his position was attacked by James Harvey, Wesley seems to have reaffirmed it. Though some suspect he fell back into his earlier position. [1] Wesley’s response to James Harvey’s “Theron and Aspasio” argues that Harvey’s doctrine of imputation of Christ’s righteousness will produce antinomianism.

Many people remember Adam Clark for his commentaries. However, many may not recall that Adam Clark was a Methodist who brought controversy in teaching, rather, maintaining his position against the eternal sonship of Jesus. He in fact, did not biblically believe it enough to affirm this doctrine, instead, he maintained that prior to the incarnation Jesus was “unoriginated.” Otherwise, according to Clark, he would be subordinate to God and therefore not fully divine. He further states:
“To say that Christ’s personal righteousness is imputed to every believer is not scriptural: To say that he has fulfilled all righteousness for us, in our stead, if by this is meant his fulfillment of all moral duties, is neither scriptural nor true. In no part of the book of God is Christ’s righteousness ever said to be imputed to us for our justification.”[2]

As Calvinism has its five pints, so does Arminianism. At first, Arminians held to similar views as Reformed churches. They did not hesitate to say that Christ made full satisfaction for the sins of men; that he was a ransom, a sacrifice, a propitiation; that He expiation for sin; that His righteousness or obedience is the ground of our acceptance with God; that the faith which saves us is not mere assent to truth, or pious confidence in God, but specifically faith in Christ as the Savior of men; and that justification is an act of God pronouncing the sinner just, or in which He pardons sin and accepts the sinner as righteous. Now, all this sounds great, and is pleasing to the ear. However, upon closer scrutiny of two key words; “justification” and “righteousness,” we see that they meant something very different than what most Reformed churches meant.

There are, however, several points one can see that are very different than most Reformed positions. Samuel Wakefield agreed with Clarke in denying “imputation.” The key points on which they disagree with the Reformed view is on “imputation” and “satisfaction.” Regarding satisfaction, noted Arminian theologians Episcopius Curcelloeus and Limareh readily adhere to the scriptures mode of regarding Him as a ransom and a sacrifice. However,, theirs is more in form than reality. They admit Christ redeems us by giving Himself as a ransom for many. But a ransom, as Curcelloeus says, is not the equivalent; it is anything the holder of the captive sees fit to accept. It is admitted, also, that Christ gave Himself as a sacrifice for our salvation; but a sacrifice is said not to be a satisfaction to justice, but simply the condition on which pardon is granted.

The second point now is a strict denial of imputation:

“…there can be no such thing as a transfer, or imputation, either of guilt or of righteousness.”[3]

And another:

“There is no imputation of our sins to Christ, nor his righteousness to us.”[4]

Adam Clarke explains why there is no imputation of Christ’s righteousness:

“The truth is, the moral law was broken, and did not now require obedience; it required this before it was broken; but after it was broken, it required death.”[5]

Christ’s obedience pertained only to Himself (as a private person):

“His active obedience has nothing to do in the work of redemption than his supreme Divinity. Both were essential to His character as the world’s Redeemer; but neither of them can in truth be imparted to us.”[6]

And:

His capacity as Redeemer only came into play at His death. Christ’s righteousness, therefore, is not our righteousness. Even Adam’s sin is not imparted to us because imputation has been precluded.”[7]

The doctrine which Arminians hold to in regards to justification is not a simple matter. It seems most likely that Arminians hold to the doctrine of pardon. As mentioned previously, there is some talk of “imputation.” But for them, it hinges on faith, faith is imputed for righteousness. J. Miley states:

“…faith itself, and not its object, that is thus imputed. Hence any attempt at a metonymical interpretation of faith, so that shall mean, not itself but its object, that is Christ, and hence mean the imputation of his personal righteousness is utterly vain.”[8]

Their doctrine regarding justification is more than clouded, it’s downright confusing. They don’t want to completely sever some sort of righteousness imputed to us. But rather, the nature of that righteousness is vague and undefined.

Continued...

 

[DeaconDean]

Calvin’s Position

John Calvin taught:

“…a man will be justified by faith when, excluded from the righteousness of works, he by faith lays hold of the righteousness of Christ, and clothed in it appears in the sight of God not as a sinner, but as righteous. Thus we simply interpret justification, as the acceptance with which God receives us into his favor as if we were righteous; and we say that this justification consists in the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ”[9]

That is pretty clear cut. Not much can be added.

[1] See the article by T. Nettles, “John Wesley’s Contention with Calvinism: Interactions Then and Now,” in the Grace of God and the Bondage of the Will, II, 297 ff. Similarly, Robert Oliver, “The Arminian Controversy of Eighteenth Century Methodism” Divisions and Dissensions: Papers Read at the 1987 Westminster Conference (England: The Westminster Conference, 1987) 78-93.

[2] Adam Clark, Christian Theology, London, Thomas and Son Publishers, 1835, p. 156; 158

[3] A.M. Mills, Fundamental Christian Theology: A Systematic Theology, Schmul Publishing Company, Salem, OH., 1980, II, p. 184

[4] William Pope, A Higher Catechism of Theology, p. 228

[5] Adam Clarke, Christian Theology, p. 155

[6] Samuel Wakefield, Christian Theology, p. 414

[7] "The personal guilt of Adam's transgression was never imputed to his descendents, nor that of the elect to Christ; though Adam's descendents do suffer certain consequences of his sin, and Christ's sufferings were in consequence of sin not his own" (W. F. Tillett, Personal Salvation: Studies in Christian Doctrine pertaining to the Spiritual Life [Nashville, TN: Publishing House of the M. E. Church, 1902] p. 219).

[8] J. Miley, Systematic Theology, II:319.

[9] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Of Justification by Faith, Chapter 11, Section 2. Article on-line, accessed 5/27/09, found on the World Wide Web at: Institutes of the Christian Religion | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

From a paper I wrote entitled "The Doctrine of Justification, Restated and Reviewed"

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Colin]

I see thankyou. if i could get back to the question of why do you think it is so hard to unite Protestants and Catholics? If someone offered any of you the chance to be at peace with the other, would you say no?

I would say YES .

I , an R.C. , have Protestant friends .

Thank God for the giant strides that have been made in my life-time in the growth of unity between the Catholic church and Protestant churches and communions .

In a month's time the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope will be praying Evening Prayer together in Westminster Abbey . Such an event would have been unthinkable when I was born .

Let's rejoice at the unity that has been achieved . We are on the road to closer unity . There will be ups and downs . Full unity will never be reached this side of Heaven , but if we are submissive to the Holy Spirit , we will increasingly work and pray together .

 

[rozerz]

I would say YES .

I , an R.C. , have Protestant friends .

Thank God for the giant strides that have been made in my life-time in the growth of unity between the Catholic church and Protestant churches and communions .

Let's rejoice at the unity that has been achieved . We are on the road to closer unity . There will be ups and downs . Full unity will never be reached this side of Heaven , but if we are submissive to the Holy Spirit , we will increasingly work and pray together .

well said! im not sure if asked this but do you think both sides are saved under the name of Christianity?

 

[Colin]

well said! im not sure if asked this but do you think both sides are saved under the name of Christianity?

Both Catholic and Protestant are part of what you call Christianity .
We are all saved in the name of Jesus , unless we reject the salvation he offers .

 

[rozerz]

thankyou very much, iv longed to hear that for ages! my mind can be put to rest.

 

[DeaconDean]

Didn't I say that here:

Up to the point of salvation we stand united with our Catholic brethren.

And here:

Before anything is said on this subject, the writer wishes to point out that many doctrines Christianity as a whole hold dear to come to us through the Catholic Church. They have retained the supernatural element of Christianity throughout. Indeed, we owe a gratitude of thankfulness to God that underneath numerous errors, great Gospel truths are preserved. The doctrine of the Trinity, the true Divinity of Christ, the true doctrine regarding His person as God and man in two distinct natures and one person forever, salvation through His blood, regeneration and sanctification through the almighty power of the Holy Spirit, the resurrection of the body, and eternal life are all the doctrines in which the people of God in communion live.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[rozerz]

you did sorry, i got disracted by looking into the differences.

 

[Colin]

you did sorry, i got disracted by looking into the differences.

That's a problem we all have . We focus on the differences , but in this age when Christians are drawing closer together , we are called first to look at what we have in common . What unites is greater than what divides .

In 1953 at the Queen's coronation in Westminster Abbey there was a booth placed outside the entrance to the Abbey . It was for the Apostolic Delegate , the Pope's representative to the UK . He was not able to enter the Abbey to participate in an Anglican ceremony . That was according to R.C. rules , not Anglican .

When the Queen celebrated her golden jubilee as monarch there was a service of thanksgiving in St. Paul's Cathedral . Cardinal Cormac , the Archbishop of Westminster was present . He wasn't outside in a booth , but in the sanctuary leading some of the prayers .
That's the normal practice now when such a national event takes place .

During his visit to the UK , Pope John Paul 2 went on pilgrimage to Canterbury Cathedral . In a service led by the Archbishop of Canterbury , and joined by leaders from other Protestant churches , the Pope and all present renewed their baptismal promises and prayed together .
In Liverpool the Pope travelled along the providentially named street called Hope St . At either end of the street stand the Anglican and Catholic cathedrals .
Aware of the serious divisions that once existed between Protestants and Catholics in Liverpool , the Pope had expressed his wish not to simply pass by the Anglican cathedral on his way to the Catholic one . He entered the Anglican cathedral , receiving a tremendous welcome from all present , to join them all in prayer led by the Anglican bishop of Liverpool .

At a grassroots level such joyous gatherings are repeated . In my home town in Lancashire there is a hill overlooking the town . On Palm Sunday Christians , Catholic and Protestant , process in witness to the top of the hill where a cross has been erected for Holy Week and Easter . Together they sing hymns , listen to the Scriptures , and pray . On Good Friday there is a service of the stations of the Cross on the pathway up the hill . Again it is for Christians , Catholic and Protestant , an opportunity to pray to their one Lord and Saviour .
In 2008 my parish priest died suddenly . At his Funeral Mass the priest from the neighbouring Anglican parish read one of the Scripture readings .

In all we do we should be helping to bring to reality the prayer of Jesus at the Last Supper that all his followers be one .

 

[rozerz]

In all we do we should be helping to bring to reality the prayer of Jesus at the Last Supper that all his followers be one .

your message speaks to me, but this bit stands out. are you saying either Catholics or Protestants need to give up their ways and join the other?

 

[Colin]

your message speaks to me, but this bit stands out. are you saying either Catholics or Protestants need to give up their ways and join the other?

If there is to be total unity both will have to give up some of their ways , and take on beliefs they do not hold at present .

I do not see that as a problem since I do not believe there will be total unity this side of Heaven .

But we can still continue to grow together in our faith and practices .
We can pray together , study together , socialize together , work together etc.

I do not try to convert my Anglican , Methodist and Pentecostal friends to Roman Catholicism . If they ask me anything about my beliefs I just give them what I believe is the truth . My wish is for them to be good Anglicans , Methodists , and Pentecostals .

Total unity would entail the Protestants having to accept all R.C. dogmas . That's not on the cards . So let's be Christians together , agreeing to disagree on certain matters , all the time growing closer to each other .

 

[rozerz]

If there is to be total unity both will have to give up some of their ways , and take on beliefs they do not hold at present .

I do not see that as a problem since I do not believe there will be total unity this side of Heaven .

But we can still continue to grow together in our faith and practices .
We can pray together , study together , socialize together , work together etc.

I do not try to convert my Anglican , Methodist and Pentecostal friends to Roman Catholicism . If they ask me anything about my beliefs I just give them what I believe is the truth . My wish is for them to be good Anglicans , Methodists , and Pentecostals .

Total unity would entail the Protestants having to accept all R.C. dogmas . That's not on the cards . So let's be Christians together , agreeing to disagree on certain matters , all the time growing closer to each other .

i couldn't agree more. if only we could get this out to all Christians

 

[Colin]

i couldn't agree more. if only we could get this out to all Christians

As you will see from reading threads on CF , there are plenty of Christians who sadly are not interested in the movement towards Christian unity .

We can keep praying for them , and putting our beliefs forward .

The main thing is to keep hoping and not get discouraged .

 

[Hentenza]

As you will see from reading threads on CF , there are plenty of Christians who sadly are not interested in the movement towards Christian unity .

I disagree and frankly, the main issue comes from your side. The RC is divisive in nature not ecumenical. From the RC's point, and yours from your previous post, the protestants would have to accept the teachings of the RC in order to be unification. That is arrogant considering that the RC is just a denomination just like any other except that it was formed shortly after the edict of Milan while others are newer. Let me remind you that the first recorded major schism was between the RC and EO with each one of you throwing dirt on the other.

I do agree with you in that we can do many things together. We do interdenominational projects in my church for the benefit of the community but we do keep theology discussions out of it. lol

 

[Communion]

Protestant-Catholic, Calvinist-Arminian, Conservative-Liberal, in the end we all decide what is right for us (or are "led" to the truth if you prefer). It seems faith is best demonstrated in our actions by how we treat those we disagree with...I'll get rack & kindling