Questions and answers with Jeremiah2911 and others

Your explanation exceeded the boundaries of the actual application to our real area of contention - justification. I don't have any problem with the GENERAL explanation you give in the sense of failing to understand it. However, it is not the GENERAL application that divides us. It is the SPECIFIC application to justification. Define it here as it is specifically here where the Bible uses the term "sign" in connection with justification (Rom. 4:11).

 

The Biblicist, what exactly are you driving at with this "sign ' business ? Being that i am only a 'neophyte' could you then explain to me in the simplest laymans understanding. Also make it into a simple ,short question so as i can submit it to a Catholic apologist ,if I can get in contact with one. Back later, Thank you.

 

I have already presented this to you and you requested time to seek out a Catholic apologist in order to get an answer. I gave you the time to do that and am still waiting. So, if you want to know just go back to the thread entitled: "The Bibical Relationship of a "sign" to Justification."

 

My initial question had to do with these four questions:

Regardless of how you or Rome may justify the above statements, can you confirm or deny the following expressions are in keeping with what the above quotations explicitly say about sacraments as a sign:

1. A perceptable sign? - CCC 1084

2. The instrument by which God conveys what is signified? - CCC 1084, 1997, 1992, etc.

3. That the grace of justification and new birth are received "by" and "in" the sacrament of baptism? - CCC 1992

4. That justifying faith is inseparable from baptism which is the "sacrament of faith" and "entry into the life of faith"? - CCC 1236

If you disagree, please quote the appropriate CCC statement referenced and point out where in that quotation I have misrepresented the wording.

As you can see questions 3-4 bring it down to the application of the term "sign" to justification in connection with baptism.

My conclusion from reading the CCC and discussing with you and other's who present the Catholic view of baptism it is

1. a "sacrament."
2. a "sign" that signifies the grace of justification, eternal life, regeneration,etc.
3. What it "signifies" is actually initially transferred instrumentally through baptism by the power of God (grace of justification, eternal life, regeneration, etc.).

Is this correct according to the common understanding of a Roman Catholic if I were to ask a priest to confirm or deny?

I should have reworded question #2 to read:

2. That Sacraments are regarded as "signs" which by the power of God instrumentally convey what they signify to the candidates at the time they willingly submit to them as the Catholic Church instructs them to.

 

Well, simply explain from the Vatican's viewpoint what a "sign" means in its relationship to sacraments and justification. I am all ears!

 

A sacramental "celebration" is a meeting between God and his children that takes the form of dialogue? This dialogue is more than words but actions and these actions are "symbolic actions" which convey a language or meaning but the Word of God and the response of faith must accompany and give them life.

So, if I break down all the mubble jumble and put this in practical terms that a layman understands, it simply means that God gives life through symbols in connection with the proper response of the partakers. Correct?

The sacraments are not merely "symbols" but are "signs" through which the Holy Spirit instrumentally carries on the work of sanctification. So combining the first quotation with the second quotation God meets with his children through sacraments in conveying spiritual life and continues to meet with his children through sacraments in performing the progressive work of sanctification. Correct?

God speaks through the visible creation and thus through sacraments and thus the mass conveys the sanctifying presence of God unto the partakers wherein both God and parkers commune with each other through the mass actually conveying the life of Jesus Christ to the participants. Correct?

I read all this and still I come to the same conclusion as I did in reading the CCC concerning sacraments as signs that God uses to instrumentally convey the grace of justification, eternal life, regeneration, sanctification, etc.

If I have misunderstood and drawn the wrong conclusion then where did I miss something?

 

So, the sacraments are INSTRUMENTAL in conveying grace by faith to their person.

How can faith be both the prerequisite and consequence in regard to baptism?

1992 ....Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith."

1236 The proclamation of the Word of God enlightens the candidates and the assembly with the revealed truth and elicits the response of faith, WHICH IS INSEPARABLE FROM BAPTISM. Indeed Baptism is 'THE SACRAMENT OF FAITH' in a particular way, since it is the sarcramental ENTRY into the life of faith.

Ok! Then the signs and symbols are INSEPARABLE from faith! Or can life by grace through faith be receieve without/apart from signs and symbols?

Ok, but can it be communicated WITHOUT sacraments or WITHOUT signs and symbols by grace through faith?

 

Can you be given life without regeneration or can you have faith joined with life without justification?

How can you be given life/regeneration and faith/justification and yet have no completion of either until they are communicated and received in baptism. Does not this demand they are sectional and progressive. Sectional because you obtain PART prior to baptism but progressive because you are not communicated their completion until in, by and through baptism? Hence, both would be INCOMPLTED PROGRESSIVE actions begun BEFORE baptism but completed in baptism???? Or are they really ever completed in baptism but rather just the intial reception completed in baptism but really an ongoing progressive actions maintained through other sacraments but never really ever completed until purgatory is completed and you stand approved at the final judgement????

Hence, in reality what received before baptism is INITIAL life/justification and what is received in baptism is really INITIAL life/justification and only what is received at Judgement is completed life/justification?

Hence, regeneration/justification/sanctification are all incompleted actions and thus progressive until justification at judgement?

 

Are you then defining intial faith as mere intellectual assent but then submission to baptism as the completion of that faith in good works?

 

Indeed, Paul actually called circumcision a "sign" and "seal" of Abraham's justification by faith - Rom. 4:11 and here is where the definition of "life by grace through faith" completed in "baptism" stands or falls in regard to what the Bible teaches versus what the Vatican teaches in regard to "sacraments" and "signs."

 

I understand your explanations. I thank you for your time in making sure that I understood it properly. Your explanations did aide in a more consistent fuller comprehension from a Roman Catholic perspective.

I have gone step by step with you and you have answered step by step. I fail to see where I made any major mistake in understanding the bottom line Roman Catholic relationship between a "sign"and "sacrament" in regard to justification? I may have not used the precise terminology that you believe was required to provide the right basis for defense of your position but as far as I can see, in a laymen's explanation I hit it right on the target (although maybe not right on the bullseye).

Now, here are the original questions and I believe that by your detailed explanation and defense that you have to answer "yes" to each one if I just tweaked the wording in very minor ways. The Roman Catholic perception of a "sacrament" is that it is:


1. A perceptable sign? - CCC 1084

2. The instrument by which God conveys what is signified? - CCC 1084, 1997, 1992, etc.

3. That the grace of justification and new birth are received [in some sense]"by" and "in" the sacrament of baptism? - CCC 1992

4. That justifying faith is inseparable from baptism [because it finds more fullness and thus] which is the "sacrament of faith" and "entry into the life of faith"? - CCC 1236

However, I believe that such an explanation is completely incompatible with the Biblical teaching and that can be precisely demonstrated at the point of the Biblical use of the same term "sign" in connection with justification by faith - Romans 4:11 - and in regard to the idea that a "sign" is instrumental in conveying what is signified - Lk. 5:12-15.

Are you now ready to approach this dispute in regard to how Christ and Paul perceives a "sign" in connection with justification by faith from a Baptist perspective since I have listened to your Catholic perception?