Are Catholics saved or even christians?

[ReformedBaptist]

Hi JohnDeereFan: Lori4dogs is telling you what Catholicism does and does not teach based upon official Catholic documents.

Let me ask you two questions:
1) do you even care what Catholicism really teaches and does not teach, and
2) do you really care what the individual Catholic believes?

This might help clarify for Lori and all of us whether it is worth Lori making the effort.

I will answer, although it is not addressed to me.

It seems very clear that John cares and knows official Roman doctrine. And that he cares about individual Roman catholics or he would not spend his time on these boards with.

Your questions are absurd, pointless, and contentious. But if you don't have an argument or defense of your beliefs, then the natural thing to do is attack someone's person.

That said, I have personally have contended that while the papacy is rife with heresy, the main issue is on the doctrine of justification.

Canon 9. If anyone shall say that by faith alone the sinner is justified, so as to understand that nothing else is required to cooperate in the attainment of the grace of justification, and that it is in no way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will: let him be anathema.

Canon 11. If anyone shall say 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 Spirit and remains in them, or even that the grace by which we are justified is only the favor of God: let him be anathema.

I read a comment one time that said that if a person gets justification wrong, they get the Gospel wrong. I could not agree more.

What we have today is too many smooth-talking salesmen. There is an attitude that runs the line of thinking as "Look, our differences aren't that great. We can be friends and brothers/sisters in Christ!" This is also known as ecumenism.

For a Roman catholic to say that the papacy believes we are saved by faith alone, in christ alone, et. is disengenious unless they misunderstand their own church's official doctrine.

Because of slick talkers, terms need to be defined. If you say you believe we are justified by faith alone, then define what you mean by that. Does faith alone mean faith without works, or does it mean faith and the works that follow faith? Or do you mean faith and the works that improve it?

However you would define it, do so. Or we can simply use the above canons as our basis if you are an individual roman catholic who disagrees with the above statements.

 

[lori4dogs]

Sola Gratia, Solo Christo: The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Justification
What does Sola Gratia, Solo Christo mean??

 

[Johnv]

How come everyone here claims to know what Catholic doctrine is, but when a Catholic claims to know what their own doctrine is, that person gets rebuffed?

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Sola Gratia, Solo Christo: The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Justification
What does Sola Gratia, Solo Christo mean??

I know what Christians believe sola gratia means. We believe it means salvation by grace alone, without any works or any merit of the individual.

Are you claiming that Catholics believe this? If this is true, then how do you reconcile this with ex ecclesia nulla salas and Purgatory, when sinners must go, according to Catholicism, to expiate their own sins?

 

[JohnDeereFan]

How come everyone here claims to know what Catholic doctrine is, but when a Catholic claims to know what their own doctrine is, that person gets rebuffed?

John, if a Catholic claims that Catholicism doesn't teach that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, and a Christian comes along and shows from the Catholic Church's own sources that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, who is right?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Sola Gratia, Solo Christo: The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Justification
What does Sola Gratia, Solo Christo mean??

If you read my above post, I asked Roman Catholics to define what they mean. Why are you asking what it means?

 

[Darron Steele]

...
Your questions are absurd, pointless, and contentious. But if you don't have an argument or defense of your beliefs, then the natural thing to do is attack someone's person.

It was a couple of questions, ReformedBaptist -- and they were not to you.

Since when is asking someone a couple of questions an attempt to "attack someone's person"? No one was attacked.

I was curious. I thought his answer might be helpful to Lori4dogs too.

JohnDeereFan was the person to whom those questions were asked. They were questions in the strictest sense of the word: a request for information. You are the person who is trying to escalate this into some sort of personal conflict.

JohnDeereFan, who was the recipient of those questions, has the right to answer those questions or to choose not to. I have no intention of trying to argue with either of you.

 

[Johnv]

John, if a Catholic claims that Catholicism doesn't teach that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, and a Christian comes along and shows from the Catholic Church's own sources that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, who is right?

Aside from the fact it's obvious that you presume Catholics as a whole aren't Christians, I would accept a Catholic's response, since it is the Catholic who is living the faith with which one is taking issue with.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

It was a couple of questions, ReformedBaptist -- and they were not to you.

Since when is asking someone a couple of questions an attempt to "attack someone's person"? No one was attacked.

I was curious. I thought his answer might be helpful to Lori4dogs too.

JohnDeereFan was the person to whom those questions were asked. They were questions in the strictest sense of the word: a request for information. You are the person who is trying to escalate this into some sort of personal conflict.

JohnDeereFan, who was the recipient of those questions, has the right to answer those questions or to choose not to. I have no intention of trying to argue with either of you.

First, welcome to a PUBLIC discussion. When you post a question to a particular person expect to get answers and comments from others. That is what a public discussion is.

DUH.

Second, you didn't deal with the arguments and points he made. YOu questioned his motives implying they were less than honorable and I called you out for your ad hom.

Next.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Aside from the fact it's obvious that you presume Catholics as a whole aren't Christians, I would accept a Catholic's response, since it is the Catholic who is living the faith with which one is taking issue with.

Then I would conclude that there is as many "truths" within catholocism as there are those claiming to be roman catholic and its worse than I thought.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Aside from the fact it's obvious that you presume Catholics as a whole aren't Christians, I would accept a Catholic's response, since it is the Catholic who is living the faith with which one is taking issue with.

So a rank and file Catholic is better suited to define Catholic doctrine than the Catholic Church, itself?

That makes no sense. What if two Catholics disagree? Isn't there a need for the Catholic Church to have an objective and authoritative statement of belief?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

And notice how very few are actually discussing the weighty issue: Justification.

Why?

In my thread on this you will see that it quickly turned from actually discussing justification to authority.

 

[Johnv]

So a rank and file Catholic is better suited to define Catholic doctrine than the Catholic Church, itself?

No, a rank and file Catholic is better suited to explaining doctrine of the Catholic Church than a rank and file Baptist.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Sola Gratia, Solo Christo: The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Justification
What does Sola Gratia, Solo Christo mean??

By Grace alone, by Christ alone. Do I get something?

 

[lori4dogs]

John, if a Catholic claims that Catholicism doesn't teach that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, and a Christian comes along and shows from the Catholic Church's own sources that the purpose of Purgatory is for sinners to expiate their own sins, who is right?

If you keep studying you find it is God that does the expiating. It is by the hand of God that a person enters into the state known as purgatory.

First let’s make something really clear. Anyone who is saved, is saved because of Christ’s redeeming work on the cross. Period. Without that act of love, it wouldn’t matter what we did; we could not be saved. That is Catholic teaching pure and simple.

Now what about purgatory? Anyone who is in purgatory is already saved. Everyone should be grateful for purgatory because while some of us may try to do God’s will perfectly, we often fail, and unless we are perfect, we cannot be there. Heaven is all about love, love of God, and love of neighbor. That is his will for us. To love one another as Christ loved us. We must be perfected in love to get to heaven. Until we are perfected in love, we cannot be in God’s presence (Mt 5:48; Heb 12:14;Rev. 21:27).

True love is demonstrated by giving of ourselves. So when we do good works out of love, in a mysterious way they are joined to Christ’s work on the cross…the ultimate act of love. If they are simply self-serving works, they have no merit (Gal. 5:4-6).

The Church did not make this up. The Church teaches it, but it is Christ who said it first (Mt 25:31-46).

So God, in his perfect wisdom, arranged it so that if we do acts of love for others (which includes praying) it helps us grow in love while helping the other do so as well.

At this point you might want to read Mark 2:4-5:

 

[JohnDeereFan]

No, a rank and file Catholic is better suited to explaining doctrine of the Catholic Church than a rank and file Baptist.

So, Baptists wrote the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Baptists are behind Trent?

Have you ever taken a church history class?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

If you keep studying you find it is God that does the expiating. It is by the hand of God that a person enters into the state known as purgatory.

irst let’s make something really clear. Anyone who is saved, is saved because of Christ’s redeeming work on the cross. Period. Without that act of love, it wouldn’t matter what we did; we could not be saved. That is Catholic teaching pure and simple.

Now what about purgatory? Anyone who is in purgatory is already saved. Everyone should be grateful for purgatory because while some of us may try to do God’s will perfectly, we often fail, and unless we are perfect, we cannot be there. Heaven is all about love, love of God, and love of neighbor. That is his will for us. To love one another as Christ loved us. We must be perfected in love to get to heaven. Until we are perfected in love, we cannot be in God’s presence (Mt 5:48; Heb 12:14;Rev. 21:27).

True love is demonstrated by giving of ourselves. So when we do good works out of love, in a mysterious way they are joined to Christ’s work on the cross…the ultimate act of love. If they are simply self-serving works, they have no merit (Gal. 5:4-6).

The Church did not make this up. The Church teaches it, but it is Christ who said it first (Mt 25:31-46).

So God, in his perfect wisdom, arranged it so that if we do acts of love for others (which includes praying) it helps us grow in love while helping the other do so as well.

At this point you might want to read Mark 2:4-5:

This is a diversion from the OP.

Let's get to the doctrine of justification shall we?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

So, Baptists wrote the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Baptists are behind Trent?

Have you ever taken a church history class?

Non sequitur.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

No, a rank and file Catholic is better suited to explaining doctrine of the Catholic Church than a rank and file Baptist.

Trust...but verify.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Non sequitur.

Don't be silly. It actually does follow, but calling out this fallacy is stupid. He was obviously being tounge-in-cheek sarcastic, in a funny way.