Justification Differences between Catholics and Protestants

[McCree79]

Yeshua1, Rom. 4:3-4 - Paul refers to works apart from God's grace. We do not obligate God to give us grace like an employee obligates his employer to pay wages. Faith in Christ must be behind our good works in order for it to be considered a work of grace; otherwise, it is a work of law or obligation.


Eph. 2:8-9 - we have been saved by grace through faith, not because of "works," lest anyone boast. This much-quoted verse by Protestants refers to the "works" of the Mosaic law or any works performed in a legalistic sense, where we view God as a debtor to us, and not as our heavenly Father. Paul is teaching us that, with the coming of Christ, we are now saved by grace through faith, not by Mosaic or legal works.
This is why Paul refers to “works of ourselves” and so we can’t “boast.” Paul says the same thing about “works” Rom. 4:2,4 – if Abraham was justified by “works,” he would have something to “boast” about. Here, the wages are not counted as grace, but debt. “Boasting” does not attribute works to God, but to oneself. But good works done in faith are necessary for justification (James 2:24, etc.) because we receive rewards by grace, not by legal obligation, and we attribute these works to God, not ourselves.
Eph. 2:10 - in quoting Ephesians 2:8-9, Protestants invariably ignore the very next verse. Right after Paul's teaching on "works" referring to Mosaic law, Paul says we are created in Christ for "good works" - a clear distinction between "works of law" (Mosaic law/legal payment) and "good works" (law of Christ/reward of grace).

What faith the does the infant have when baptized and infused with justification?

 

[lakeside]

McCree, here is what the Church teaches about infant Baptism and Baptism for adults..In the Catholic Church today, baptism is most commonly administered to infants. While some other Christians strenuously object to infant baptism, believing that baptism requires assent on the part of the person being baptized, the Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, and other mainline Protestants also practice infant baptism, and there is evidence that it was practiced from the earliest days of the Church.
.Since baptism removes both the guilt and the punishment due to Original Sin, delaying baptism until a child can understand the sacrament may put the child's salvation in danger, should he die unbaptized.
.Adult converts to Catholicism also receive the sacrament, unless they have already received a Christian baptism. (If there is any doubt about whether an adult has already been baptized, the priest will perform a conditional baptism.) A person can only be baptized once as a Christian—if, say, he was baptized as a Lutheran, he cannot be rebaptized when he converts to Catholicism.
.While an adult can be baptized after proper instruction in the Faith, adult baptism normally occurs today as part of the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) and is immediately followed by Confirmation and Communion.
.The Effects of the Sacrament of Baptism
.Baptism has six primary effects, which are all supernatural graces:
.1. The removal of the guilt of both Original Sin (the sin imparted to all mankind by the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden) and personal sin (the sins that we have committed ourselves).
2. The remission of all punishment that we owe because of sin, both temporal (in this world and in Purgatory) and eternal (the punishment that we would suffer in hell).
3. The infusion of grace in the form of sanctifying grace (the life of God within us); the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit; and the three theological virtues.
4. Becoming a part of Christ.
5. Becoming a part of the Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ on earth.
6. Enabling participation in the sacraments, the priesthood of all believers, and the growth in grace.

 

[Yeshua1]

McCree, here is what the Church teaches about infant Baptism and Baptism for adults..In the Catholic Church today, baptism is most commonly administered to infants. While some other Christians strenuously object to infant baptism, believing that baptism requires assent on the part of the person being baptized, the Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, and other mainline Protestants also practice infant baptism, and there is evidence that it was practiced from the earliest days of the Church.
.Since baptism removes both the guilt and the punishment due to Original Sin, delaying baptism until a child can understand the sacrament may put the child's salvation in danger, should he die unbaptized.
.Adult converts to Catholicism also receive the sacrament, unless they have already received a Christian baptism. (If there is any doubt about whether an adult has already been baptized, the priest will perform a conditional baptism.) A person can only be baptized once as a Christian—if, say, he was baptized as a Lutheran, he cannot be rebaptized when he converts to Catholicism.
.While an adult can be baptized after proper instruction in the Faith, adult baptism normally occurs today as part of the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) and is immediately followed by Confirmation and Communion.
.The Effects of the Sacrament of Baptism
.Baptism has six primary effects, which are all supernatural graces:
.1. The removal of the guilt of both Original Sin (the sin imparted to all mankind by the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden) and personal sin (the sins that we have committed ourselves).
2. The remission of all punishment that we owe because of sin, both temporal (in this world and in Purgatory) and eternal (the punishment that we would suffer in hell).
3. The infusion of grace in the form of sanctifying grace (the life of God within us); the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit; and the three theological virtues.
4. Becoming a part of Christ.
5. Becoming a part of the Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ on earth.
6. Enabling participation in the sacraments, the priesthood of all believers, and the growth in grace.

And none of those points can be found in the bible!

 

[McCree79]

And none of those points can be found in the bible!

This is were RCC tradition, trumps scripture. I disagree with all infant baptism, but I don't really consider the Presbyterian view "dangerous". This view of infant baptism saving a child....even adult for that matter is dangerous. False path to salvation. The blood of Christ took away or sins.....not water.

 

[BobRyan]

What faith the does the infant have when baptized and infused with justification?

none.

Infant Baptism is a direct contradiction of Peter's statement in 1Peter 3 (Pope Peter for some).

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

McCree, here is what the Church teaches about infant Baptism and Baptism for adults..In the Catholic Church today, baptism is most commonly administered to infants. While some other Christians strenuously object to infant baptism, believing that baptism requires assent on the part of the person being baptized, the Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, and other mainline Protestants also practice infant baptism, and there is evidence that it was practiced from the earliest days of the Church.
.Since baptism removes both the guilt and the punishment due to Original Sin, delaying baptism until a child can understand the sacrament may put the child's salvation in danger, should he die unbaptized.
.Adult converts to Catholicism also receive the sacrament, unless they have already received a Christian baptism. (If there is any doubt about whether an adult has already been baptized, the priest will perform a conditional baptism.) A person can only be baptized once as a Christian—if, say, he was baptized as a Lutheran, he cannot be rebaptized when he converts to Catholicism.
.While an adult can be baptized after proper instruction in the Faith, adult baptism normally occurs today as part of the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults (RCIA) and is immediately followed by Confirmation and Communion.
.The Effects of the Sacrament of Baptism
.Baptism has six primary effects, which are all supernatural graces:
.1. The removal of the guilt of both Original Sin (the sin imparted to all mankind by the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden) and personal sin (the sins that we have committed ourselves).
2. The remission of all punishment that we owe because of sin, both temporal (in this world and in Purgatory) and eternal (the punishment that we would suffer in hell).
3. The infusion of grace in the form of sanctifying grace (the life of God within us); the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit; and the three theological virtues.
4. Becoming a part of Christ.
5. Becoming a part of the Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ on earth.
6. Enabling participation in the sacraments, the priesthood of all believers, and the growth in grace.

That is man-made tradition that is in contradiction to the Word of God.

how did Christ solve that problem in His day?

Answer given by example -


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[lakeside]

BobRyan, in the Holy Bible it states "whole families " were Baptised, I am 100% positive that whole families contain infant family members now as back then, don't ya think so?

 

[McCree79]

BobRyan, in the Holy Bible it states "whole families " were Baptised, I am 100% positive that whole families contain infant family members now as back then, don't ya think so?

"While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days."

Who did the Holy Spirit fall on? "All who heard the word"

Who was baptized? "These people, who received the Holy Spirit"

The ones who were baptized, where the ones who heard the word. It doesn't say those who heard and received, were baptized, along with their infants. Only those who received the Holy Spirit were baptized. That is who Peter commanded to be baptized. Believers.....those who heard.....no one else. The only indication of those Baptized is those believers. Anything else is to add to scripture.

 

[lakeside]

McGree, of course the emphasis is to baptize the adults, because their the one who are aged closer to death, it was the first time in human history that anybody will be baptized, so of course those adults would be called to be baptized.

 

[McCree79]

Infant mortality rate, for Rome(1st Century), was 28%. 40% did not live until the 5th birthday. Seems like infant had a strong chance of not surviving. Once you passed the age of 5, your life expectancy improved. So, if anything, I would think the emphasis would have been on the infants. Since they, on average, were more likely to die within 1-5 years.

 

[lakeside]

McCree, do you think that uneducated{ secular ignorance that is }, apostles cared or had access to information of that nature ? The apostles operated on an extreme zealous evangelizing campaign, including baptizing family parents first and going down baptizing infants last as found within an average " whole families" family.

 

[Walter]

Infant mortality rate, for Rome(1st Century), was 28%. 40% did not live until the 5th birthday. Seems like infant had a strong chance of not surviving. Once you passed the age of 5, your life expectancy improved. So, if anything, I would think the emphasis would have been on the infants. Since they, on average, were more likely to die within 1-5 years.

What constituted a 'household' at that time? It wasn't just the family of the home owner but their relatives and their children and even included all the servants and the children of all the servants. Do a little study on the size and shape of a typical Jewish 'HOUSEHOLD' and you will see it is highly unlikely that infants would not be part of one.

 

[McCree79]

McCree, do you think that uneducated{ secular ignorance that is }, apostles cared or had access to information of that nature ? The apostles operated on an extreme zealous evangelizing campaign, including baptizing family parents first and going down baptizing infants last as found within an average " whole families" family.

I think everyone who lived in the first century knew that infants were at high risk of death. That would be common knowledge.

 

[Walter]

You Baptists totally ignore the writings of/historical record of the Early Church when it clearly supports the fact that the Christian Church has been baptizing infants from the start of the Church. None of the Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it? Hmmm? None, zippo, nada!

 

[McCree79]

What constituted a 'household' at that time? It wasn't just the family of the home owner but their relatives and their children and even included all the servants and the children of all the servants. Do a little study on the size and shape of a typical Jewish 'HOUSEHOLD' and you will see it is highly unlikely that infants would not be part of one.

Not one example in the Bible of a "Household" Baptism of those who did not hear the word. Lydia's household was with her at the riverside. Cornelius had his family and friends over. Who all heard before baptized. The Bible only supports Baptism of those who heard and believed.

 

[Walter]

Deleted by me

 

[Walter]

You Baptists totally ignore the writings of/historical record of the Early Church when it clearly supports the fact that the Christian Church has been baptizing infants from the start of the Church. None of the Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it? Hmmm? None, zippo, nada!

Or, are you going to claim that the 'evil Catholics' destroyed all the historical evidence of opposition to infant baptism? In that case, why we're not all the other writings such as Arians, Gnostics, etc destroyed?

 

[McCree79]

You Baptists totally ignore the writings of/historical record of the Early Church when it clearly supports the fact that the Christian Church has been baptizing infants from the start of the Church. None of the Fathers or councils of the Church was claiming that the practice was contrary to Scripture or tradition. They agreed that the practice of baptizing infants was the customary and appropriate practice since the days of the early Church; the only uncertainty seemed to be when—exactly—an infant should be baptized. Further evidence that infant baptism was the accepted practice in the early Church is the fact that if infant baptism had been opposed to the religious practices of the first believers, why do we have no record of early Christian writers condemning it? Hmmm? None, zippo, nada!

Early Church writings indicate infant baptism really started in 3rd century. That is when it was taught as valid practice. Before that. Peter and Paul taught believers baptism. The is plenty of early Christian writings supporting believers baptism. Its in the Bible.

 

[lakeside]

McCree,the historic Christian Church has always held that Christ’s law applies to infants as well as adults, for Jesus said that no one can enter heaven unless he has been born again of water and the Holy Spirit (John 3:5). His words can be taken to apply to anyone capable of belonging to his kingdom. He asserted such even for children: "Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19:14).

More detail is given in Luke’s account of this event, which reads: "Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, ‘Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God’" (Luke 18:15–16).

 

[BobRyan]

What constituted a 'household' at that time? It wasn't just the family of the home owner but their relatives and their children and even included all the servants and the children of all the servants. Do a little study on the size and shape of a typical Jewish 'HOUSEHOLD' and you will see it is highly unlikely that infants would not be part of one.

that is a red herring.