What Is This All About?!

[Dusty Fro]

[i]Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema. (excommunicated)

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the righteousness of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12.If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.

Canon 24. If anyone says that the righteousness received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good wrks, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.

Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.[/i]

That makes salvation pretty cheap. More like a bank than a merciful God.

Edited August 1, 2004 by Dusty Fro

[MorphRC]

Whats wrong? Its rebuking prot thinking

[Dusty Fro]

Sounds to be like they're degrading the value of God's grace. I think it's purely reactionary, and definitely not commissioned by God.

[StColette]

They aren't degrading the value of God's grace, they are speaking truths, which have been handed down through the Church from the Apostles.

Edited August 1, 2004 by StColette

[MorphRC]

[quote]Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema. (excommunicated)[/quote]

Dusty seems your not understanding it, or Im not understanding you. By this the Church is saying, faith alone is not good, as James 2:17 clearly states, and anathema means go to hell, i think.

So i dont get why youve got an attitude with it

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 01:52 AM'] Sounds to be like they're degrading the value of God's grace. I think it's purely reactionary, and definitely not commissioned by God. [/quote]
You should always read a document in its entirety, because to isolate out portions of a text is to twist its meaning. My suggestion is that you read the entire Tridentine Decree on Justification and all the canons appended to it, because at present what you have done is simply isolate out those canons that condemn the Protestant heresies on the doctrine of Justifcation, while you have ignored the positive teaching of the decree which is found in the body of the text, and not in the canons that you have selected.

The Catholic Church has always taught that salvation is by grace alone, but she will not subscribe to the [i]sola fide[/i] heresy of the Protestant Reformers.

God bless,
Todd

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM'][i]Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema. (excommunicated)[/i][/quote]
This canon condemns the Protestant heresy of [i]sola fide[/i]. The Catholic Church teaches that the infused virtue of faith is necessary for a man to be justified, but that the infused virtues of charity and hope are also necessary. [cf. Gal. 5:6, cf. 1 Cor. 13:1-13] Thus, faith is a necessary, but is not a sufficient condition for man's justification. [cf. James 2:18-26]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM'][i]Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the righteousness of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema[/i].[/quote]
This canon condemns the error of the Reformers, who held that man does not really and ontologically become just, but that Christ's righteousness is merely imputed to man as something foreign and extrinsic to him. This idea makes God a liar, for He calls man just, when in reality man is still sinful and unjust. Additionally, the Catholic Church teaches that grace does more than simply remit a man's sins, it actually brings him into communion with God, and bestows a filial adoption upon him, making him a son of God in the only begotten Son of God. [cf. Rom. 8:14-17, cf. John 1:12-13, cf. Gal. 3:26] The Holy Spirit really dwells in the justified man and this involves a remission of sin and an elevation of man into the life and energy of the Trinity. Finally, this canon condemns the Protestant error that reduced God's grace to a simple concept of [i]divine favor[/i], because grace is in fact a real participation in the divine nature. [cf. 2 Peter 1:4]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM'][i]Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema[/i].[/quote]
This canon condemns the error of the Reformers, who held that faith was a simple trust in having been forgiven by God, rather than a dogmatic acceptance of all that God has revealed in Christ. The Catholic Church holds that faith is a gift of grace whereby a man assents to all that God has revealed; in other words, man, under the impulse of grace, makes an act of faith in Christ Himself, and not in the subjective apprehension of the remission of his own sins. [cf. Col 1:4, cf. 1 Tim. 3:13] The former is an objective reality, the latter is of a subjective nature, and as a result, a man can be mistaken about the state of his own soul. This Protestant error is also related to the sin of presumption, i.e., of presuming upon the divine mercy, as if the man in question knows the divine mind. Man must always pray for the gift of final perseverance and never presume on God's mercy.

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM'][i]Canon 24. If anyone says that the righteousness received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema[/i].[/quote]
This canon once again condemns the false doctrine of [i]sola fide[/i], because both faith and works are gifts of God's grace [cf. Eph. 2:10, cf. Phil. 2:12-13, cf. John 15:1-10], and the justified man grows in justice and holiness before God by the gift of divine grace and the constant infusion of the divine life. Grace is a dynamic participation in the life of the Triune God, and thus it is not a static reality. [cf. 2 Cor. 3:17-18] In addition, this canon is emphasizing the power of grace in bringing about good works in the life of the Christian, for as St. Paul says, "It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me," [Gal. 2:20] and from this we can say, that it is no longer I who work, but Christ works in me, it is not longer I who pray, but Christ prays in me, etc., and so all the works of a Christian are gifts of God, which Christ performs in, with, and through the justified man. [cf. Phil. 2:12-13]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM'][i]Canon 30.  If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema[/i].[/quote]
This canon condemns the Protestant error denying the purgation of the temporal punishment due to sins committed after baptism. The Reformers doctrine held that man, after the legal fiction of his justification, remains sinful but that God simply overlooks his sins and lets man enter into heaven even though he is in reality unjust and evil in his very nature. Of course, the idea that nature is in itself evil is another Protestant error, but that is another topic. The Catholic Church teaches that nothing unholy can enter into the beatific vision, and so those venial attachments which offend God must be purged prior to a man's entering into the Vision of God. [cf. Rev. 21:27] The process of purgation is man's [i]final theosis[/i], for after it has been completed man is fully divinized by God's grace, and only then can he enter into the presence of the divine majesty.

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:34 AM']That makes salvation pretty cheap.  More like a bank than a merciful God.[/quote]
Clearly, you have failed to see the great transformative power of God's grace, for all that we do and all that we believe, is done and believed by the power of God, who alone saves man and makes him a son of God in the only begotten Son of God. This is the true nature of grace, for grace is the gift of God's own life given to man.

As I said in a previous post, you should read the entire Decree on Justification and not simply isolate out a small number of the canons.

God bless,
Todd

Edited August 1, 2004 by Apotheoun

[MorphRC]

Todd. Your a theologian arent you!???



DONT HIDE IT BOY

[Brother Adam]

lol. Once Todd posts on a thread I feel [i]almost[/i] like Rome has spoken and nothing is left to say on the issue.

[StColette]

lol Bro Adam, I feel the same way when I read Todd's posts.


lol I was too tired at 4:00 am to handle this one lol

Edited August 1, 2004 by StColette

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 03:52 AM'] Sounds to be like they're degrading the value of God's grace. I think it's purely reactionary, and definitely not commissioned by God. [/quote]
My sentiments exactly. This is exactly why the [url="http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/indexf.html"]Westminster Confession of Faith[/url] was formulated, to combat Rome's perversion of the Holy Gospel.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:17 PM']My sentiments exactly. This is exactly why the [i]Westminster Confession of Faith[/i] was formulated, to combat Rome's perversion of the Holy Gospel.[/quote]
I used to be a Protestant and I praise God every day that I now have the fullness of the faith, which is found only in Christ's Catholic Church. No one prior to the Reformation held the views of the Reformers on the nature of justification, and no one held that Christ's righteousness was merely imputed to man, or that man's sins were not really removed by the grace of God. The teachings of the Reformers are a form of theological nominalism.

Edited August 1, 2004 by Apotheoun

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Aug 1 2004, 02:25 PM'] The teachings of the Reformers are a form of theological nominalism. [/quote]
Apotheoun, I've heard the term 'theological nominalism' bounced around quite a bit.

Could you explain what you mean by it, please?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 1 2004, 12:35 PM'] Apotheoun, I've heard the term 'theological nominalism' bounced around quite a bit.

Could you explain what you mean by it, please? [/quote]
It is the reduction of the mysteries of faith to rational propositions, which are held to convey in an absolute sense the revealed truth in question. It also involves rejecting the multivalent nature of the mysteries of the faith, and reducing salvation to legal categories of thought alone; as an example, the Reformation doctrine that God declares the sinner righteous, but does not actually make him righteous. Now, this is true to a point, but the Reformers error was in rejecting the fact that what God declares to be so, is of necessity ontologically true. Thus, when God declares a man just, not only is the righteousness of Christ imputed to him, but the man really and ontologically becomes just before God. The justified man's righteousness is not his own doing, because it is a gift of God's grace, but the righteousness given is not foreign or extrinsic to the justified man, and so it becomes, by God's grace, his own possession, or better, the justified man truly and ontologically becomes God's possession. The justified man is really sanctified. Thus, when a man is justified by God's grace, he truly and not in mere appearance, enters into communion with God and becomes a son of God in the only begotten Son of God. The Reformers denied that man truly becomes just, and held instead that God simply "calls" a man just, even though in reality he remains completely sinful, or as Luther liked to say, the justified man is "simul justus et peccator."

Edited August 1, 2004 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[b]THE COUNCIL OF TRENT[/b]
SIXTH SESSION,
Celebrated on the thirteenth day of the month of January, 1547.


[b]DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION [/b]

[i]Proem.[/i]
Whereas there is, at this time, not without the shipwreck of many souls, and grievous detriment to the unity of the Church, a certain erroneous doctrine disseminated touching Justification; the sacred and holy, oecumenical and general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost,--the most reverend lords, Giammaria del Monte, bishop of Palaestrina, and Marcellus of the title of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem, priest, cardinals of the holy Roman Church, and legates apostolic a latere, presiding therein, in the name of our most holy father and lord in Christ, Paul III, by the providence of God, Pope,-purposes, unto the praise and glory of Almighty God, the tranquillising of the Church, and the salvation of souls, to expound to all the faithful of Christ the true and sound doctrine touching the said Justification; which (doctrine) the sun of justice, Christ Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, taught, which the apostles transmitted, and which the Catholic Church, the Holy Ghost reminding her thereof, has always retained; most strictly forbidding that any henceforth presume to believe, preach, or teach, otherwise than as by this present decree is defined and declared.


CHAPTER I.
[i]On the Inability of Nature and of the Law to justify man.[/i]
The holy Synod declares first, that, for the correct and sound understanding of the doctrine of Justification, it is necessary that each one recognise and confess, that, whereas all men had lost their innocence in the prevarication of Adam-having become unclean, and, as the apostle says, by nature children of wrath, as (this Synod) has set forth in the decree on original sin,-they were so far the servants of sin, and under the power of the devil and of death, that not the Gentiles only by the force of nature, but not even the Jews by the very letter itself of the law of Moses, were able to be liberated, or to arise, therefrom; although free will, attenuated as it was in its powers, and bent down, was by no means extinguished in them.


CHAPTER II.
[i]On the dispensation and mystery of Christ's advent.[/i]
Whence it came to pass, that the heavenly Father, the father of mercies and the God of all comfort, when that blessed fulness of the time was come, sent unto men, Jesus Christ, His own Son-who had been, both before the Law, and during the time of the Law, to many of the holy fathers announced and promised-that He might both redeem the Jews who were under the Law, and that the Gentiles, who followed not after justice, might attain to justice, and that all men might receive the adoption of sons. Him God hath proposed as a propitiator, through faith in his blood, for our sins, and not for our sins only, but also for those of the whole world.


CHAPTER III.
[i]Who are justified through Christ.[/i]
But, though He died for all, yet do not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only unto whom the merit of His passion is communicated. For as in truth men, if they were not born propagated of the seed of Adam, would not be born unjust,-seeing that, by that propagation, they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own,-so, if they were not born again in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just. For this benefit the apostle exhorts us, evermore to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption, and remission of sins.


CHAPTER IV.
[i]A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof under the law of grace.[/i]
By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.


CHAPTER V.
[i]On the necessity, in adults, of preparation for Justification, and whence it proceeds.[/i]
The Synod furthermore declares, that in adults, the beginning of the said Justification is to be derived from the prevenient grace of God, through Jesus Christ, that is to say, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace: in such sort that, while God touches the heart of man by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, neither is man himself utterly without doing anything while he receives that inspiration, forasmuch as he is also able to reject it; yet is he not able, by his own free will, without the grace of God, to move himself unto justice in His sight. Whence, when it is said in the sacred writings: Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you, we are admonished of our liberty; and when we answer; Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted, we confess that we are prevented by the grace of God.


CHAPTER VI.
[i]The manner of Preparation.[/i]
Now they (adults) are disposed unto the said justice, when, excited and assisted by divine grace, conceiving faith by hearing, they are freely moved towards God, believing those things to be true which God has revealed and promised,-and this especially, that God justifies the impious by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus; and when, understanding themselves to be sinners, they, by turning themselves, from the fear of divine justice whereby they are profitably agitated, to consider the mercy of God, are raised unto hope, confiding that God will be propitious to them for Christ's sake; and they begin to love Him as the fountain of all justice; and are therefore moved against sins by a certain hatred and detestation, to wit, by that penitence which must be performed before baptism: lastly, when they purpose to receive baptism, to begin a new life, and to keep the commandments of God. Concerning this disposition it is written; He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him; and, Be of good faith, son, thy sins are forgiven thee; and, The fear of the Lord driveth out sin; and, Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; and, Going, therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; finally, Prepare your hearts unto the Lord.


CHAPTER VII.
[i]What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof.[/i]
This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself, which is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just, and of an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.

Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but 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 Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified; lastly, the alone formal cause is the justice of God, not that whereby He Himself is just, but that whereby He maketh us just, that, to wit, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and we are not only reputed, but are truly called, and are, just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to every one as He wills, and according to each one's proper disposition and co-operation. For, although no one can be just, but he to whom the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet is this done in the said justification of the impious, when by the merit of that same most holy Passion, the charity of God is poured forth, by the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of those that are justified, and is inherent therein: whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added thereto, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circumcision, availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, Catechumen's beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: whence also do they immediately hear that word of Christ; If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Wherefore, when receiving true and Christian justice, they are bidden, immediately on being born again, to preserve it pure and spotless, as the first robe given them through Jesus Christ in lieu of that which Adam, by his disobedience, lost for himself and for us, that so they may bear it before the judgment-seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, and may have life everlasting.


CHAPTER VIII.
[i]In what manner it is to be understood, that the impious is justified by faith, and gratuitously.[/i]
And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith and freely, those words are to be understood in that sense which the perpetual consent of the Catholic Church hath held and expressed; to wit, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.


CHAPTER IX.
[i]Against the vain confidence of Heretics.[/i]
But, although it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted, nor ever were remitted save gratuitously by the mercy of God for Christ's sake; yet is it not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins, and rests on that alone; seeing that it may exist, yea does in our day exist, amongst heretics and schismatics; and with great vehemence is this vain confidence, and one alien from all godliness, preached up in opposition to the Catholic Church. But neither is this to be asserted,-that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubting whatever, settle within themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified, but he that believes for certain that he is absolved and justified; and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone: as though whoso has not this belief, doubts of the promises of God, and of the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ. For even as no pious person ought to doubt of the mercy of God, of the merit of Christ, and of the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, even so each one, when he regards himself, and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension touching his own grace; seeing that no one can know with a certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God.


CHAPTER X.
[i]On the increase of Justification received.[/i]
Having, therefore, been thus justified, and made the friends and domestics of God, advancing from virtue to virtue, they are renewed, as the Apostle says, day by day; that is, by mortifying the members of their own flesh, and by presenting them as instruments of justice unto sanctification, they, through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, faith co-operating with good works, increase in that justice which they have received through the grace of Christ, and are still further justified, as it is written; He that is just, let him be justified still; and again, Be not afraid to be justified even to death; and also, Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. And this increase of justification holy Church begs, when she prays, "Give unto us, O Lord, increase of faith, hope, and charity."


CHAPTER XI.
[i]On keeping the Commandments, and on the necessity and possibility thereof.[/i]
But no one, how much soever justified, ought to think himself exempt from the observance of the commandments; no one ought to make use of that rash saying, one prohibited by the Fathers under an anathema,-that the observance of the commandments of God is impossible for one that is justified. For God commands not impossibilities, but, by commanding, both admonishes thee to do what thou are able, and to pray for what thou art not able (to do), and aids thee that thou mayest be able; whose commandments are not heavy; whose yoke is sweet and whose burthen light. For, whoso are the sons of God, love Christ; but they who love him, keep his commandments, as Himself testifies; which, assuredly, with the divine help, they can do. For, although, during this mortal life, men, how holy and just soever, at times fall into at least light and daily sins, which are also called venial, not therefore do they cease to be just. For that cry of the just, Forgive us our trespasses, is both humble and true. And for this cause, the just themselves ought to feel themselves the more obligated to walk in the way of justice, in that, being already freed from sins, but made servants of God, they are able, living soberly, justly, and godly, to proceed onwards through Jesus Christ, by whom they have had access unto this grace. For God forsakes not those who have been once justified by His grace, unless he be first forsaken by them. Wherefore, no one ought to flatter himself up with faith alone, fancying that by faith alone he is made an heir, and will obtain the inheritance, even though he suffer not with Christ, that so he may be also glorified with him. For even Christ Himself, as the Apostle saith, Whereas he was the son of God, learned obedience by the things which he suffered, and being consummated, he became, to all who obey him, the cause of eternal salvation. For which cause the same Apostle admonishes the justified, saying; Know you not that they that run in the race, all run indeed, but one receiveth the prize? So run that you may obtain. I therefore so run, not as at an uncertainty: I so fight, not as one beating the air, but I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection; lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a cast-away. So also the prince of the apostles, Peter; Labour the more that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing those things, you shall not sin at any time. From which it is plain, that those are opposed to the orthodox doctrine of religion, who assert that the just man sins, venially at least, in every good work; or, which is yet more insupportable, that he merits eternal punishments; as also those who state, that the just sin in all their works, if, in those works, they, together with this aim principally that God may be gloried, have in view also the eternal reward, in order to excite their sloth, and to encourage themselves to run in the course: whereas it is written, I have inclined my heart to do all thy justifications for the reward: and, concerning Moses, the Apostle saith, that he looked unto the reward.


CHAPTER XII.
[i]That a rash presumptuousness in the matter of Predestination is to be avoided.[/i]
No one, moreover, so long as he is in this mortal life, ought so far to presume as regards the secret mystery of divine predestination, as to determine for certain that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; as if it were true, that he that is justified, either cannot sin any more, or, if he do sin, that he ought to promise himself an assured repentance; for except by special revelation, it cannot be known whom God hath chosen unto Himself.


CHAPTER XIII.
[i]On the gift of Perseverance.[/i]
So also as regards the gift of perseverance, of which it is written, He that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved:-which gift cannot be derived from any other but Him, who is able to establish him who standeth that he stand perseveringly, and to restore him who falleth:-let no one herein promise himself any thing as certain with an absolute certainty; though all ought to place and repose a most firm hope in God's help. For God, unless men be themselves wanting to His grace, as he has begun the good work, so will he perfect it, working (in them) to will and to accomplish. Nevertheless, let those who think themselves to stand, take heed lest they fall, and, with fear and trembling work out their salvation, in labours, in watchings, in almsdeeds, in prayers and oblations, in fastings and chastity: for, knowing that they are born again unto a hope of glory, but not as yet unto glory, they ought to fear for the combat which yet remains with the flesh, with the world, with the devil, wherein they cannot be victorious, unless they be with God's grace, obedient to the Apostle, who says; We are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh; for if you live according to the flesh, you shall die; but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live.


CHAPTER XIV.
[i]On the fallen, and their restoration.[/i]
As regards those who, by sin, have fallen from the received grace of Justification, they may be again justified, when, God exciting them, through the sacrament of Penance they shall have attained to the recovery, by the merit of Christ, of the grace lost: for this manner of Justification is of the fallen the reparation: which the holy Fathers have aptly called a second plank after the shipwreck of grace lost. For, on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of Penance, when He said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian, after his fall, is very different from that at (his) baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins, and a detestation thereof, or, a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of the said sins,-at least in desire, and to be made in its season,-and sacerdotal absolution; and likewise satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment,-which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament,-but for the temporal punishment, which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, to those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Spirit, and have not feared to violate the temple of God. Concerning which penitence it is written; Be mindful whence thou art fallen; do penance, and do the first works. And again; The sorrow that is according to God worketh penance steadfast unto salvation. And again; Do penance, and bring forth fruits worthy of penance.


CHAPTER XV.
[i]That, by every mortal sin, grace is lost, but not faith.[/i]
In opposition also to the subtle wits of certain men, who, by pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent, it is to be maintained, that the received grace of Justification is lost, not only by infidelity whereby even faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin whatever, though faith be not lost; thus defending the doctrine of the divine law, which excludes from the kingdom of God not only the unbelieving, but the faithful also (who are) fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, liers with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, railers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins; from which, with the help of divine grace, they can refrain, and on account of which they are separated from the grace of Christ.


CHAPTER XVI.
[i]On the fruit of Justification, that is, on the merit of good works, and on the nature of that merit.[/i]
Before men, therefore, who have been justified in this manner,-whether they have preserved uninterruptedly the grace received, or whether they have recovered it when lost,-are to be set the words of the Apostle: Abound in every good work, knowing that your labour is not in vain in the Lord; for God is not unjust, that he should forget your work, and the love which you have shown in his name; and, do not lose your confidence, which hath a great reward. And, for this cause, life eternal is to be proposed to those working well unto the end, and hoping in God, both as a grace mercifully promised to the sons of God through Jesus Christ, and as a reward which is according to the promise of God Himself, to be faithfully rendered to their good works and merits. For this is that crown of justice which the Apostle declared was, after his fight and course, laid up for him, to be rendered to him by the just judge, and not only to him, but also to all that love his coming. For, whereas Jesus Christ Himself continually infuses his virtue into the said justified,-as the head into the members, and the vine into the branches,-and this virtue always precedes and accompanies and follows their good works, which without it could not in any wise be pleasing and meritorious before God,-we must believe that nothing further is wanting to the justified, to prevent their being accounted to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life, and to have truly merited eternal life, to be obtained also in its (due) time, if so be, however, that they depart in grace: seeing that Christ, our Saviour, saith: If any one shall drink of the water that I will give him, he shall not thirst for ever; but it shall become in him a fountain of water springing up unto life everlasting. Thus, neither is our own justice established as our own as from ourselves; nor is the justice of God ignored or repudiated: for that justice which is called ours, because that we are justified from its being inherent in us, that same is (the justice) of God, because that it is infused into us of God, through the merit of Christ. Neither is this to be omitted,-that although, in the sacred writings, so much is attributed to good works, that Christ promises, that even he that shall give a drink of cold water to one of his least ones, shall not lose his reward; and the Apostle testifies that, That which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation, worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory; nevertheless God forbid that a Christian should either trust or glory in himself, and not in the Lord, whose bounty towards all men is so great, that He will have the things which are His own gifts be their merits. And forasmuch as in many things we all offend, each one ought to have before his eyes, as well the severity and judgment, as the mercy and goodness (of God); neither ought any one to judge himself, even though he be not conscious to himself of anything; because the whole life of man is to be examined and judged, not by the judgment of man, but of God, who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts, and then shall every man have praise from God, who, as it is written, will render to every man according to his works. After this Catholic doctrine on Justification, which whoso receiveth not faithfully and firmly cannot be justified, it hath seemed good to the holy Synod to subjoin these canons, that all may know not only what they ought to hold and follow, but also what to avoid and shun.

[b]CANONS ON JUSTIFICATION[/b]

CANON 1 - If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

CANON 2 - If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.

CANON 3 - If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.

CANON 4 - If any one saith, that man's free will moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, nowise co-operates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of Justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema.

CANON 5 - If any one saith, that, since Adam's sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing with only a name, yea a name without a reality, a figment, in fine, introduced into the Church by Satan; let him be anathema.

CANON 6 - If any one saith, that it is not in man's power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.

CANON 7 - If any one saith, that all works done before Justification, in whatsoever way they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; or that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins: let him be anathema.

CANON 8 - If any one saith, that the fear of hell,-whereby, by grieving for our sins, we flee unto the mercy of God, or refrain from sinning,-is a sin, or makes sinners worse; let him be anathema.

CANON 9 - If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

CANON 10 - If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema.

CANON 11 - If any one saith, 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 Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.

CANON 12 - If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.

CANON 13 - If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.

CANON 14 - If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.

CANON 15 - If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.

CANON 16 - If any one saith, that he will for certain, of an absolute and infallible certainty, have that great gift of perseverance unto the end,-unless he have learned this by special revelation; let him be anathema.

CANON 17 - If any one saith, that the grace of Justification is only attained to by those who are predestined unto life; but that all others who are called, are called indeed, but receive not grace, as being, by the divine power, predestined unto evil; let him be anathema.

CANON 18 - If any one saith, that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.

CANON 19 - If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.

CANON 20 - If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.

CANON 21 - If any one saith, that Christ Jesus was given of God to men, as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey; let him be anathema.

CANON 22 - If any one saith, that the justified, either is able to persevere, without the special help of God, in the justice received; or that, with that help, he is not able; let him be anathema.

CANON 23 - lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,-except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema.

CANON 24 - If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.

CANON 25 - If any one saith, that, in every good work, the just sins venially at least, or-which is more intolerable still-mortally, and consequently deserves eternal punishments; and that for this cause only he is not damned, that God does not impute those works unto damnation; let him be anathema.

CANON 26 - If any one saith, that the just ought not, for their good works done in God, to expect and hope for an eternal recompense from God, through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if so be that they persevere to the end in well doing and in keeping the divine commandments; let him be anathema.

CANON 27 - If any one saith, that there is no mortal sin but that of infidelity; or, that grace once received is not lost by any other sin, however grievous and enormous, save by that of infidelity ; let him be anathema.

CANON 28 - If any one saith, that, grace being lost through sin, faith also is always lost with it; or, that the faith which remains, though it be not a lively faith, is not a true faith; or, that he, who has faith without charity, is not a Chris taught; let him be anathema.

CANON 29 - If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and universal Church-instructed by Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be anathema.

CANON 30 - If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema.

CANON 31 - If any one saith, that the justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal recompense; let him be anathema.

CANON 32 - If any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life,-if so be, however, that he depart in grace,-and also an increase of glory; let him be anathema.

CANON 33 - If any one saith,that,by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.

Edited August 1, 2004 by Apotheoun

[qfnol31]

I think that's the longest post I've ever seen.

[Aloysius]

Apotheon Locuta Est.
Causa Finita Est.

(forgive my crappy latin)

lol

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 1 2004, 01:21 PM'] I think that's the longest post I've ever seen. [/quote]
Well it is the Tridentine Decree on Justification in its entirety.

[Dusty Fro]

[quote]The Catholic Church has always taught that salvation is by grace alone, but she will not subscribe to the sola fide heresy of the Protestant Reformers.
[/quote]

But that's exactly what it speaks against in that passage, that anyone who says that salvation is by grace alone will be excommunicated. The idea of salvation by grace is Biblical. Paul himself says: "Galations 2:21 I am not one of those who treats the grace of God as meaningless. For if we could be saved by keeping the law, then there was no need for Christ to die."

Anathema means excommunication, I looked it up. Now you tell me what your hoity toity latin means.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 01:31 PM'][quote]The Catholic Church has always taught that salvation is by grace alone, but she will not subscribe to the sola fide heresy of the Protestant Reformers.[/quote]
But that's exactly what it speaks against in that passage, that anyone who says that salvation is by grace alone will be excommunicated.  The idea of salvation by grace is Biblical.  Paul himself says: "Galations 2:21 I am not one of those who treats the grace of God as meaningless. For if we could be saved by keeping the law, then there was no need for Christ to die."

Anathema means excommunication, I looked it up.  Now you tell me what your hoity toity latin means. [/quote]
Please read the entire Decree on Justification, the Church teaches that grace alone saves a man. Grace is the infusion of the divine life into man, which redeems him from sin and elevates him into the very life and glory of the Triune God. Until you read the entire document, and stop focusing on one canon taken out of context, you will not grasp the teaching of the Church.

None of the canons condemn the proposition that we are saved by grace, for it is grace that produces both faith and works in a man.

As far as the word "anathema" is concerned, it is means that the proposition condemned in the canon is in error, and if one holds that position, he is excommunicated from the Church.

Edited August 1, 2004 by Apotheoun

[PedroX]

Dusty,

Al's latin roughly says "Apotheoun has spoken, case is finished"

I also recommend that you read the decree in its fullness and then re-read the canons that seem to be giving you trouble. No where does the church deny that salvation is by the grace of God. In fact, this is what the Reformers were saying. By saying that salvation exists through faith alone (sola fides) they were teaching that salvation started with us. For, the emphasis shifts from God's grace to our faith. If Luther, et al could have stayed with Sola Gratia we might have avoided this whole mess.

Icthus,

I understand you are not Catholic, but that doesn't give you the right to be rude. Please avoid using words like "perversion" to describe the church's teaching. Martin Luther said "one cannot have God as their father without haveing the Church as their mother." I for one don't like anyone calling my mother a pervert.

peace...

[MichaelFilo]

Todd has a certain authority about him, and the super classy avatar that can be found on the Vatican's website makes him seem very professional.

God bless,

Mikey

[cappie]

The Vatican Website has a number of articles about the joint declaration with the Lutheran Federation about Justification
[url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/sub-index/index_lutheran-fed.htm"]The Holy See[/url]

[Dusty Fro]

A classy icon does not a genius make.

[Aloysius]

no, but beautifully written intelligent posts DO a genius make.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 1 2004, 05:52 AM'] Sounds to be like they're degrading the value of God's grace. I think it's purely reactionary, and definitely not commissioned by God. [/quote]
You are taking things out of context.

Here is a link, there is a lot to the Council of Trent... Read it all if you really want to understand it.


[url="http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/trent.asp"]http://www.catholic-pages.com/dir/trent.asp[/url]


It does not degrade the value of God's grace.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[ironmonk]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 1 2004, 04:17 PM'] My sentiments exactly. This is exactly why the [url="http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/indexf.html"]Westminster Confession of Faith[/url] was formulated, to combat Rome's perversion of the Holy Gospel. [/quote]
How is something from the group established by Christ a perversion when Christ said it would NEVER be overcome. The perversion then would be Westminster. They left the group. They are Acts 20:29-30

"Perversion" is deviating from what is considered right and correct. The Church has always been right and correct as Christ promised. The group established by Christ will never be perverted in it's teaching. I believe Christ, I wish others did as well.


You would have different sentiments if you actually studied it.

Edited August 2, 2004 by ironmonk

[ironmonk]

[quote]Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema. (excommunicated)

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the righteousness of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12.If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.[/quote]

[b]St. Matt 16:27[/b] [color=red]For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father's glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct. [/color]

[b]2 Corin 11:15 [/b]
So it is not strange that his ministers also masquerade as ministers of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.

[b]St. Matt 10:22[/b]
[color=red]You will be hated by all because of my name, but whoever endures to the end will be saved.[/color]

[b]St. Matt 24:13 [/b]
[color=red]But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved. [/color]

[b]James 2:20 [/b]Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?





[quote]Canon 24. If anyone says that the righteousness received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.[/quote]

[b]1 Corin 3:12[/b]
If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw,
[b]13 [/b]the work of each will come to light, for the Day will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire (itself) will test the quality of each one's work.
[b]14 [/b]If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage.
[b]15 [/b]But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved, 8 but only as through fire.


[b]St. Matt 6:19[/b]
"[color=red]Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and decay destroy, and thieves break in and steal. [/color]
[b]20 [/b][color=red]But store up treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor decay destroys, nor thieves break in and steal.[/color]

If we can store up treasures in heaven, then this Canon is correct.

[b]St. Luke 6:23[/b]
[color=red]Rejoice and leap for joy on that day! Behold, your reward will be great in heaven. For their ancestors treated the prophets in the same way.[/color]

Rewards in heaven will vary. Some will have more, some will have less. This canon holds true, as all of them do.


[quote]Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.[/quote]


[b]1 John 5:16 [/b]
If anyone sees his brother sinning, [b]if the sin is not deadly[/b], he should pray to God and he will give him life. This is only for those whose sin is not deadly. There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray.

[b]Rev 21:27 [/b]
but nothing unclean will enter it, nor any (one) who does abominable things or tells lies. Only those will enter whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.


Nothing Unclean can enter Heaven, but not all sin is deadly (1 John 5:16) therefore we must have our sin purged (Isaiah 6:6-7) before we enter Heaven if we are guilty of lesser sins.


Again, this canon holds true.


A few other canons [url="http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent/ct06jc.htm"]http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent/ct06jc.htm[/url] :

CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.

CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.

CANON XXI.-If any one saith, that Christ Jesus was given of God to men, as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey; let him be anathema.

[b]St. John 14:15 [/b]
"[color=red]If you love me, you will keep my commandments.[/color]


CANON XXIII.-lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,-except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema.


[b]St. Matt 13:19 [/b]
[color=red]The seed sown on the path is the one who hears the word of the kingdom without understanding it, and the evil one comes and steals away what was sown in his heart.[/color]
[b]20 [/b][color=red]The seed sown on rocky ground is the one who hears the word and receives it at once with joy. [/color]
[b]21 [/b][color=red]But he has no root and lasts only for a time. When some tribulation or persecution comes because of the word, he immediately falls away. [/color]
[b]22 [/b][color=red]The seed sown among thorns is the one who hears the word, but then worldly anxiety and the lure of riches choke the word and it bears no fruit.[/color]
[b]23 [/b][color=red]But the seed sown on rich soil is the one who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and yields a hundred or sixty or thirtyfold[/color]."


[b]Romans 11:22[/b] "See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off"

[b]Hebrews 10:26[/b]
If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.
[b]28 [/b]Anyone who rejects the law of Moses is put to death without pity on the testimony of two or three witnesses.
[b]29 [/b]Do you not think that a much worse punishment is due the one who has contempt for the Son of God, considers unclean the covenant-blood by which he was consecrated, and insults the spirit of grace?

[b]2 Peter 2:20[/b]
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of (our) Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
[b]21 [/b]For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them.
[b]22 [/b]What is expressed in the true proverb has happened to them, "The dog returns to its own vomit," and "A bathed sow returns to wallowing in the mire."




God Bless,
ironmonk

[Broccolifish]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 1 2004, 02:35 PM'] Apotheoun, I've heard the term 'theological nominalism' bounced around quite a bit.

Could you explain what you mean by it, please? [/quote]
It's supposed to be a "dirty word," ICTHUS. Nominalism was a prevailing metaphysic in the Middle Ages that reduced all universals simply to naming conventions; that is, there were no true universals but only particulars which are categorized by people who name them. This was an attempt to solve the problem of universals, but it really only translated it from the realm of matter to the realm of thought. Instead of assigning [i]things[/i] to categories, we now must ask how we account for categorizing [i]thoughts[/i] according to universals in thought. After all, the nominalist may claim that there are no universals, but he relies on them in every act, presuming "types" of events and "types" of things. A "man" is considered different than a "woman" because of a universal [i]idea[/i], even if there is no realm of forms like Plato envisioned, where "manness" resides. I believe that William of Ockham (famous for his phrasing of the principle of Parsimony, popularly called "Ockham's Razor") was an important philosopher of this school.

To accuse the Reformers of Theological Nominalism is to misunderstand both what they taught and what nominalism claimed. Martin Luther was, to be sure, a nominalist in at least some way. Apotheoun is not making any new claim. In fact, by rejecting the Platonic and Aristotelian answers to the problem of Universals, it would be difficult to classify Luther as anything [i]but[/i] a nominalist. However, how Apotheoun [i]defines[/i] "theological nominalism" shows linguistic revision. He has also misunderstood the Reformation phrase [i]simul iustus et peccator[/i], which does not intend to say that we are completely sinful and completely justified at the same time; rather, it means that we are simultaneously justified and [i]still sinners[/i]. To quote the Heidelberg Disputation, 1518:

[i]The Law says, 'Do this,' and it is never done; the Gospel says, 'Believe this,' and everything is already done.[/i]

The work of salvation, justification and sanctification both, is accomplished. It is worked in Christ. Those who are being saved [i]will[/i] be saved, and His Will will not be frustrated. Christ's death works in two ways for the believer: First, he is [i]declared righteous in spite of his sin[/i]. Second, [i]he is made righteous[/i] by the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification. The Reformed doctrines of grace do not allow for Apotheoun's accusation of Nominalism, however, because the sinner, when regenerated, [b]is[/b] a [i]new[/i] creation; the Holy Spirit within him, he is not the sinner he was, sin though he still may. He is now a saint, righteous by Christ's work. It should be seen that what Apotheoun accuses the Reformers of is really nothing more than G.K. Chesterton calling Calvinism "The New Manichaeism." That is, it's hogwash.

[PedroX]

Brocolli,

If you are indeed positing a real perspective of the reformers and their teachings, how do you square your definition of the nature of man with the doctrine of total depravity? (especially as deliniated by J. Calvin)

peace...

[Guest JeffCR07]

[quote]A classy icon does not a genius make.[/quote]

Dusty, your premise is inherently flawed. Einstein was a genius. Einstein would make a classy icon. The only logical conclusion is that "a classy icon [i]does[/i] a genius make."


...





...




lol

[MorphRC]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Aug 1 2004, 11:32 PM'] lol. Once Todd posts on a thread I feel [i]almost[/i] like Rome has spoken and nothing is left to say on the issue. [/quote]
Lol.

Hes a good apologetist....guy....brother...

[Broccolifish]

[quote name='PedroX' date='Aug 3 2004, 10:37 PM'] Brocolli,

If you are indeed positing a real perspective of the reformers and their teachings, how do you square your definition of the nature of man with the doctrine of total depravity? (especially as deliniated by J. Calvin)

peace... [/quote]
I believe in the doctrines of grace as espoused by John Calvin and St. Augustine, as incompletely espoused by Martin Luther and the rest of the Reformers.

Total Depravity is a biblical truth, and in no way conflicts with what I have said about the nature of man. I don't understand how you would get that impression.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 4 2004, 08:30 AM'] I believe in the doctrines of grace as espoused by John Calvin and St. Augustine, as incompletely espoused by Martin Luther and the rest of the Reformers.

Total Depravity is a biblical truth, and in no way conflicts with what I have said about the nature of man. I don't understand how you would get that impression. [/quote]
I believe the doctrines of grace espoused by Scripture and Tradition, which includes all the Fathers of the Church, and not simply St. Augustine.

Nowhere in Scripture does the term "total depravity" appear to describe man's condition after the fall from grace in the Garden of Eden.

[God Conquers]

[quote]Martin Luther said "one cannot have God as their father without haveing the Church as their mother." I for one don't like anyone calling my mother a pervert.[/quote]

Pedro, St. Cyprian said the above quote... although it is possible Martin Luther quoted or stole from St. Cyprian.

[PedroX]

Brocolli,

You described the nature of man as simultaneously justified and sinful. This doesn't appear to square with the supposed doctrine of total depravity. Can you show me how you make this fit?

G. Conquers,

M. Luther must have stolen it then. I have the source at home, but alas am stuck at the office now. Good work on tracking down the original.

peace...

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Aug 4 2004, 08:18 AM']
Dusty, your premise is inherently flawed. Einstein was a genius. Einstein would make a classy icon. The only logical conclusion is that "a classy icon [i]does[/i] a genius make."


...





...




lol  [/quote]
He obviously wasn't TOO smart, if he couldn't even see the pre-figurement of Christ [color=red]edited[/color]

Edited August 4, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[Paladin D]

IQ does not determine one's acceptance and faith in Christ. If that were so, many of us would not be followers today.

[Broccolifish]

[quote]I believe the doctrines of grace espoused by Scripture and Tradition, which includes all the Fathers of the Church, and not simply St. Augustine.[/quote]
The Fathers contradict one another, themselves, and the Scriptures at various points. Augustine, Calvin, and Luther provide a more Scriptural testimony to the plan for salvation than the Roman Catholic faith, which is really not the Christian Gospel at all.

[quote]Nowhere in Scripture does the term "total depravity" appear to describe man's condition after the fall from grace in the Garden of Eden.[/quote]
Irrelevant. The word "Trinity" does not appear in the Scriptures either. Total Depravity is a convenient shorthand for the Biblical declaration of man's condition.

[color=blue]Jeremiah 13:23
23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good who are accustomed to doing evil.

Job 14:4
4 Who can make the clean out of the unclean? No one!

Job 15:14-16
14 "What is man, that he should be pure, or he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?
15 "Behold, He puts no trust in His holy ones, and the heavens are not pure in His sight;
16 How much less one who is detestable and corrupt, Man, who drinks iniquity like water!

Ecclesiastes 9:3
3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that there is one fate for all men. Furthermore, the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil and insanity is in their hearts throughout their lives. Afterwards they go to the dead.

Psalms 51:5
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.

Isaiah 64:6
6 For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; and all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Matthew 12:33
33 Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit.

John 3:19-21
19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.

John 6:44
44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.”

John 6:53
53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.”

John 6:65
65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

John 8:47
47 "He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God."

John 10:26
26 "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.

Acts 13:41
41 “Behold, you scoffers, and marvel, and perish; for I am accomplishing a work in your days, a work which you will never believe, though someone should describe it to you.”

Acts 28:27
27 “’For the heart of this people has become dull, and with their ears they scarcely hear, and they have closed their eyes; otherwise they might see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understanding with their heart and return, and I would heal them.'”

Romans 3:10-12
10 as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one;
11 there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God;
12 all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.”

Romans 5:12
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned

Romans 8:7-9
7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.

1 Corinthians 2:14
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

2 Corinthians 4:4
4 In whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Ephesians 2:1-5
1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)

Ephesians 2:12
12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

Colossians 2:13
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,

Titus 1:15
15 To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.

Titus 3:3
3 For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.[/color]

[Guest JeffCR07]

Not a single one of these quotes disprove the Catholic understanding of Original Sin and Concupiscience, nor the nature of Man as taught by the Holy Magisterium.

However, the notion of Total Depravity, that man is incapable of being good, has a much harder time dealing with passages such as these in which God finds men to be good.

[quote]The LORD then said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation (Genesis: 7:1)[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 4 2004, 06:02 PM'] The Fathers contradict one another, themselves, and the Scriptures at various points. Augustine, Calvin, and Luther provide a more Scriptural testimony to the plan for salvation than the Roman Catholic faith, which is really not the Christian Gospel at all.


Irrelevant. The word "Trinity" does not appear in the Scriptures either. Total Depravity is a convenient shorthand for the Biblical declaration of man's condition.

[color=blue]Jeremiah 13:23
23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good who are accustomed to doing evil.

Job 14:4
4 Who can make the clean out of the unclean? No one!

Job 15:14-16
14 "What is man, that he should be pure, or he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?
15 "Behold, He puts no trust in His holy ones, and the heavens are not pure in His sight;
16 How much less one who is detestable and corrupt, Man, who drinks iniquity like water!

Ecclesiastes 9:3
3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that there is one fate for all men. Furthermore, the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil and insanity is in their hearts throughout their lives. Afterwards they go to the dead.

Psalms 51:5
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.

Isaiah 64:6
6 For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; and all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Matthew 12:33
33 Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit.

John 3:19-21
19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.

John 6:44
44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.”

John 6:53
53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.”

John 6:65
65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

John 8:47
47 "He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God."

John 10:26
26 "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.

Acts 13:41
41 “Behold, you scoffers, and marvel, and perish; for I am accomplishing a work in your days, a work which you will never believe, though someone should describe it to you.”

Acts 28:27
27 “’For the heart of this people has become dull, and with their ears they scarcely hear, and they have closed their eyes; otherwise they might see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understanding with their heart and return, and I would heal them.'”

Romans 3:10-12
10 as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one;
11 there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God;
12 all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.”

Romans 5:12
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned

Romans 8:7-9
7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.

1 Corinthians 2:14
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

2 Corinthians 4:4
4 In whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

Ephesians 2:1-5
1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)

Ephesians 2:12
12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

Colossians 2:13
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,

Titus 1:15
15 To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.

Titus 3:3
3 For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.[/color] [/quote]
The Church Fathers do not contradict themselves on settled dogma, and St Augustine is a Docter of the Church.

[Apotheoun]

Broccolifish,

I apologize in advance for the length and complexity of this post.

Let me begin by saying that your comments show that you lack any familiarity with the Scholastic philosophy of the early and high middle ages. To call the early Scholastics, and St. Thomas Aquinas in particular, nominalists is to betray a complete lack of knowledge of the philosophical thought of the men of that time. The early Scholastics, and St. Thomas in particular, were [i]realists[/i] as it concerns the [i]universals[/i]. St. Thomas held that the [i]universal form[/i] of a [i]particular[/i] thing is concretely real through a natural mode of being within the [i]particular[/i] itself, but in addition he held that it is also real in the human mind through a mode of intention. Thus the [i]particular[/i] is real, but so is the [i]universal[/i], because the [i]universal[/i] is not a mere [i]concept[/i] or [i]name[/i], but is a real essence existing in both a natural mode in the [i]particular[/i] thing in question, and in a mode of intentionality in the human mind. Moreover, the [i]universal[/i] is not real because of man's thought; instead, it exists the in [i]particular[/i] itself prior to any human apprehension of it through abstraction by the [i]agent intellect[/i]. This philosophical viewpoint was only later denied, culminating in the metaphysical nominalism of Ockham. In concluding my introductory remarks, I would like to point out that I have no real interest in debating points of doctrine with Protestants, because I left Protestantism behind over 15 years ago, and to be blunt, Protestantism bores me; but that being said, I will now move on and give a critique of your post.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date=' Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']It's supposed to be a "dirty word," ICTHUS.  Nominalism was a prevailing metaphysic in the Middle Ages that reduced all universals simply to naming conventions; that is, there were no true universals but only particulars which are categorized by people who name them.[/quote]
This appraisal of the philosophy of the middle ages is a massive generalization and is clearly in error. To call St. Thomas Aquinas, who was a philosophical realist, a nomimalist shows a great lack of knowledge on this topic. Please back up your assertions with quotations from St. Thomas Aquinas showing that this great intellectual of the middle ages was a nominalist.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']This was an attempt to solve the problem of universals, but it really only translated it from the realm of matter to the realm of thought.[/quote]
This statement shows confusion on the nature of the debate about the reality of the [i]universals[/i] and the [i]particulars[/i]. The [i]universal[/i] is the immaterial essence of the [i]particular[/i] thing. The [i]forms[/i] are not material, but immaterial, but that does not mean that they are not real, because they are most certainly real. Reality is not confined to material existence, as any good philosopher or theologian knows. Unless you wish to assert that God, from all eternity, is a material being. The [i]universal[/i] exists in the mind of God and through a mode of intention in the mind of man, and thus the [i]universals[/i] are very real indeed, although they are not material. This type of existence cannot be described as [i]nominal[/i], and to say that it is, is to betray a total lack of understanding of the distinctions made in early medieval Scholasticism. William of Ockham is the full flowering of nominalism in metaphysics and he died in the middle of the 14th century. It is only the later Scholastics, and not all of them by any means, who held to a type of metaphysical nominalism.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']Instead of assigning [i]things[/i] to categories, we now must ask how we account for categorizing [i]thoughts[/i] according to universals in thought.[/quote]
This comment needs further clarification, because as it presently stands, it is so imprecise that it is hard to even see what you mean. Clearly, by abstracting from the [i]particular[/i] through the action of the [i]agent intellect[/i] man does apprehend the [i]form[/i] of the [i]particular[/i] object in question, i.e., he apprehends its [i]universal essence[/i]. But your statement as it is presently worded is so convoluted, as to be unintelligible. The first part of the statement sounds like a form of Kantian idealism, while the second part appears to reduce the [i]universals[/i] to [i]thought[/i] which is not consonant with the metaphysics of early and middle Scholasticism. The [i]universals[/i] exists through a mode of intention in the mind, but it is not the mind that gives them existence, because the [i]universals[/i] exists in each [i]particular[/i] thing in a natural mode prior to any act of human intellection.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']After all, the nominalist may claim that there are no universals, but he relies on them in every act, presuming "types" of events and "types" of things.[/quote]
This statement shows a lack of understanding of the nomimalist position itself, because the nominalists didn't claim that there were [i]no universals[/i] but that the [i]universals[/i] were mere [i]names[/i] or [i]concepts[/i], and so, these two positions, i.e., the misrepresentation of nominalism by Broccolifish, and the actual position of the nominalists, are not identical. But I agree wholeheartedly that the nominalists were in error, I just don't agree with your misrepresentation of their position.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']A "man" is considered different than a "woman" because of a universal [i]idea[/i], even if there is no realm of forms like Plato envisioned, where "manness" resides.[/quote]
This statement doesn't conform to anything I've read in the Scholastics in general or St.Thomas in particular. Men and women share the same universal [i]form[/i] or [i]essence[/i], i.e., human nature, and thus they are one species; and in addition, because they share a common essence, they have the same rights and duties. Certainly, there are biological differences between men and women, and thus they are not identical at the [i]particular[/i] level, but they are equal because they share a common human nature. To assert anything else would involve major philosophical and theological problems. On the theological level it would make the salvation of women impossible, since Christ assumed human nature as a [i]particular[/i] male individual. If men and women at the level of their common humanity are different in the way you imply, it follows that Christ did not save women by becoming man, which is a ludicrous proposition to assert. You need to clarify further what you mean by this bizarre statement. If I were to posit a guess as to your meaning, I think you are trying to distinguish between maleness and femaleness, which are [i]particular instances[/i] of the one [i]universal[/i] human nature, but I don't know why you thought that this idea was vital to your argument. Also, in using the word [i]Idea[/i] you need to be careful, because for Plato the [i]Ideas[/i] are self-subsisting realities not dependent upon thought for their existence; and Aristotle, who accepted in a modified form Plato's views on this topic, also refused to limit their existence to thought. It is not man's apprehension of the [i]universal[/i] that gives it existence; instead, man apprehends the already existing reality of the [i]universal[/i] which then exists in his mind through a mode of intention. You seem to be confusing Kant and Plato.


[quote name='Broccolifish @ Aug 3 2004' date=' 06:38 PM']I believe that William of Ockham (famous for his phrasing of the principle of Parsimony, popularly called "Ockham's Razor") was an important philosopher of this school.[/quote]
Ockham is the full flowering of philosophical nominalism, but he lived at the end of the Scholastic period. This is the only one of your comments so far that is historically accurate.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']To accuse the Reformers of Theological Nominalism is to misunderstand both what they taught and what nominalism claimed.[/quote]
This is the point at issue, and so asserting that what I have said isn't true isn't sufficient, you must prove that it isn't true. You haven't even addressed my points in your post. The Reformers reduction of salvation to an intellectual faith alone, which is not formed by charity, is a [i]theological novum[/i], and no one prior to the 16th century would have accepted such an idea. As. St. Augustine said about faith and works, "Let us now consider the question of faith. In the first place, we feel that we should advise the faithful that they would endanger the salvation of their souls if they acted on the false assurance that faith alone is sufficient for salvation or that they need not perform good works in order to be saved. When St. Paul says, therefore, that man is justified by faith and not by the observance of the law, he does not mean that good works are not necessary or that it is enough to receive and to profess the faith and no more. What he means rather and what he wants us to understand is that man can be justified by faith, even though he has not previously performed any works of the law. For the works of the law are meritorious not before but after justification." [St. Augustine, "On Faith and Works," [u]Ancient Christian Writers[/u], volume 48, pages 28-29] The Catholic Church holds that we are justified by grace alone, through faith, but that faith must be formed by charity ([i]agape[/i]), or it is dead and cannot justify a man. As St. Paul said, "If I have all faith, as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing," and as he went on to say, "[i]Love[/i] bears all things, [i]believes all things[/i], hopes all things, endures all things." [1 Cor. 13:2 and 13:7] Faith must be infused with divine love or it is dead and cannot justify anyone. Moreover, the Reformers reduction of the doctrine of justification to legal categories of thought is nominalist as well, for this conception of justification does not exhaust the nature of what it is to be justified by grace alone through faith. There is an excellent article on this topic by an Eastern Orthodox author, and here is a link to that article: [url="http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/frag_salv.aspx"]Salvation by Christ[/url]


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']Martin Luther was, to be sure, a nominalist in at least some way.  Apotheoun is not making any new claim.  In fact, by rejecting the Platonic and Aristotelian answers to the problem of Universals, it would be difficult to classify Luther as anything but a nominalist.[/quote]
On this we agree, because Luther was a nominalist; and I would add, that he was a theological nominalist.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']However, how Apotheoun [i]defines[/i] "theological nominalism" shows linguistic revision.[/quote]
This is an interesting assertion, but it is not backed up with any evidence. Thus I stand by my original statement. Clearly, the Reformers reduced the various mysteries of the faith to simple categories of thought, as an example the reduction of justification to a legalistic framework is clearly a form of nominalism applied to theology. It empties justification of any ontological content, for as I stated in my previous post, what God declares to be so, is so, not only through some form of a "legal fiction" as the Protestant Reformers erroneously held, but also through a true regeneration of man at the ontological level.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']He has also misunderstood the Reformation phrase [i]simul iustus et peccator[/i], which does not intend to say that we are completely sinful and completely justified at the same time; rather, it means that we are simultaneously justified and [i]still sinners[/i].  To quote the Heidelberg Disputation, 1518: [i]The Law says, 'Do this,' and it is never done; the Gospel says, 'Believe this,' and everything is already done[/i].[/quote]
I have not misunderstood it at all, but you have evaded the point at issue with a quotation from Luther that really doesn't address our conflicting views. Let me point out first that although Luther's aphorism is untraditional, a Catholic can make use of it, if it is properly defined, and the reason that this is possible is because Catholics distinguish between [i]mortal[/i] sin and [i]venial[/i] sin, and it is only [i]mortal[/i] sin that expels charity from the soul. In other words, [i]venial[/i] sins do not remove a person for a state of grace, and so a person with various [i]venial[/i] sins can be called just and yet [i]venially[/i] sinful at the same time, but not [i]mortally[/i] sinful. Now let us move on to the crux of the dispute between the Catholic Church and Luther as it concerns the use of the phrase, [i]simul justus et peccator[/i], and how it is to be understood. When Luther used the phrase [i]simul justus et peccator[/i], he was not using it in order to differentiate between [i]mortal[/i] and [i]venial[/i] sins, but he used it in order to assert that [i]concupiscence[/i], which is the inclination to sin caused by the fall, is itself sin; but the Catholic Church doesn't accept that to be the case. So, even though concupiscence remains in the justified man after his translation to a state of grace, it does not follow that he is still sinful. The fact that you didn't know this shows that you are unfamiliar with this element of the dispute between the Lutheran Churches and the Catholic Church. Prescinding from the various historical disputes about this phrase, had you even looked at all the documents issued in connection with the recently signed [u]Joint Declaration on Justification[/u] between the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church, you would have had a better grasp of this important topic. What I am saying about Luther's understanding of the phrase can be easily confirmed by looking at the [u]Joint Declaration[/u] itself, in which sadly the Lutherans in their explanatory paragraph (n. 29) continue to assert this bizarre theory, and by looking at the socalled [i]Roman Response[/i] to the [u]Joint Declaration[/u], which was issued by the [i]Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith[/i], clarifying the Catholic position on this issue. Now, since this is an important issue, I will quote in full the section of the [i]Roman Response[/i] that touches on use of the [i]simul justus et peccator[/i] phrase, and here is what the CDF said: "The major difficulties preventing an affirmation of total consensus between the parties on the theme of Justification arise in paragraph 4.4 [i]The Justified as Sinner[/i] (nn. 28-1,0). Even taking into account the differences, legitimate in themselves, that come from different theological approaches to the content of faith, from a Catholic point of view the title is already a cause of perplexity. According, indeed, to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in baptism everything that is really sin is taken away, and so, in those who are born anew there is nothing that is hateful to God. [cf. Council of Trent, [u]Decree on original sin[/u] (DS 1515)] It follows that the concupiscence that remains in the baptised is not, properly speaking, sin. For Catholics, therefore, the formula [i]at the same time righteous and sinner[/i], as it is explained at the beginning of n. 29 ('Believers are totally righteous, in that God forgives their sins through Word and Sacrament ...Looking at themselves ... however, they recognize that they remain also totally sinners. Sin still lives in them...'), is not acceptable. This statement does not, in fact, seem compatible with the renewal and sanctification of the interior man of which the Council of Trent speaks. [cf. Council of Trent, [u]Decree on justification[/u], cap. 8: ". . . iustificatio . . . quae non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et sanctificatio et renovatio interioris hominis" (DS 1528); cf. also can.11 (DS 15619)] The expression 'Opposition to God' (Gottwidrigkeit) that is used in nn. 28-30 is understood differently by Lutherans and by Catholics, and so becomes, in fact, equivocal. In this same sense, there can be ambiguity for a Catholic in the sentence of n. 22, '. . . God no longer imputes to them their sin and through the Holy Spirit effects in them an active love,' because man's interior transformation is not clearly seen. So, for all these reasons, it remains difficult to see how, in the current state of the presentation, given in the Joint Declaration, we can say that this doctrine on [i]simul iustus et peccator[/i] is not touched by the anathemas of the Tridentine decree on original sin and justification." [[u]Response of the Catholic Church to the Joint Declaration[/u], no. 1] When you look at section 4.4 of the [u]Joint Declaration[/u] itself, you can see exactly what the Lutherans understand by the phrase, [i]simul justus et peccator[/i], and it has nothing to do with the quotation that you (Broccolifish) gave from Luther's Heidelberg Disputation; instead, it is the assertion that man is totally just and totally sinful at the same time, and that concupiscence is sin, when in fact it is not. This conception of justification is irrational and impossible, in that it is contrary to the principle of non-contradiction. Certainly, the phrase can be given a Catholic meaning by distinguishing between [i]mortal[/i] and [i]venial[/i] sins, but the Lutherans do not do that; instead, they assert, as Luther himself asserted, that man is totally just and totally sinful [i.e., mortally sinful] at the same time, and this attempt to combine mutually exclusive terms is based on Luther's view of justification as a mere [i]legal fiction[/i], i.e., upon his belief that grace really doesn't change man in any kind of an ontological sense.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']Grace fulfills the law, and St. Augustine held, once one is in a state of grace, he can, by grace, keep the moral law.[/quote]
On this we basically agree, and confirmation of this can be seen by looking at my quotation from St. Augustine's treatise "On Faith and Works" above. It's important to note that the ritual and judicial precepts of the law were of a temporary nature, and that by our assimilation to Christ we have undergone these things in a spiritual way in Him, because He is our Head; but the moral law, which is written by God into the very nature of the human person, is eternal; and so, all men, under the power of God's grace, must do good and avoid evil.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']The work of salvation, justification and sanctification both, is accomplished.  It is worked in Christ.[/quote]
This is what Catholics believe as well, but unlike the Reformers, our soteriology and ecclesiology are not [i]nominalist[/i] in nature, because Catholics understand that the application of the merits of Christ's redemptive activity continues throughout time in the Church; just as His passion continues in, with, and through, His Body, the Church. For the Church is the perpetual extension of the incarnation throughout time. In reference to the continuation of Christ's passion in the Church, St. Augustine said, "What does the scripture mean when it tells us of the body of one man so extended in space that all can kill him? We must understand these words of ourselves, of our Church, of the Body of Christ. For Jesus Christ is one man, having a Head and a Body. . . . And so the passion of Christ is not in Christ alone; and yet the passion of Christ is in Christ alone. For if in Christ you consider both the Head and the Body, then Christ's passion is in Christ alone, [i]but if by Christ you mean only the Head, then Christ's passion is not in Christ alone. For if the sufferings of Christ are in Christ alone, that is in the Head alone; why does a certain member of Him, Paul the Apostle, say, 'In my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions?' Hence if you are in the members of Christ, . . . whatever you suffer at the hands of those who are not members of Christ, was lacking to the sufferings of Christ. It is added precisely because it was lacking. You fill up the measure, you do not cause it to overflow. You will suffer just so much as must be added of your sufferings to the complete passion of Christ, who suffered as our Head and who continues still to suffer in His members, that is, in us[/i]." [Emile Mersch, [u]The Whole Christ[/u], pages 424-425; taken from St. Augustine's, [u]Enarrationes in Psalmos[/u], Commentary on Psalm 62] Clearly, for St. Augustine, Christ and the Church are one mystical Man, and so anything that happens to His Body, to each individual member of it, happens to Christ. This truth is beautifully illustrated in the account of St. Paul's conversion in the book of Acts, for when Christ appears to Saul on the road to Damascus, He says, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" [Acts 9:4] You will notice that Jesus didn't say, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting My followers," no, He didn't say that; instead, Christ said, ". . . why are you persecuting [b][i]Me[/i][/b]?" Why did the Lord say this? Because He associates all those who have been incorporated into His Body with Himself, for all who have been made members of Christ are living His life and energy in this world, as they move toward their definitive home in Heaven with their mystical Head. [cf. John 15:1-11] Moreover, in reference to suffering St. Paul tells us in Romans 8:14-17, that ". . . all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of sonship. When we cry, 'Abba! Father!' It is the Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, and fellow heirs with Christ, [i]provided we suffer with Him in order that we may be glorified with Him[/i]." Jesus is the Messianic Suffering Servant, and the Church is the perpetual extension of this reality throughout time; and so, if we are to be glorified with Him, we must participate in His passion. This participation in Christ's passion on the part of His Body the Church, is a wonderful gift of God's grace, for it is Christ who suffers in each one of us.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']Those who are being saved will be saved, and His Will will not be frustrated.  Christ's death works in two ways for the believer:  First, he is [i]declared righteous in spite of his sin[/i].[/quote]
Here again is the crux of our disagreement, because Catholics hold that what God declares to be true, is ontologically true. The Reformers held that God declares, as a [i]legal fiction[/i], that man is just, when in fact he remains unjust, and as a Catholic I cannot subscribe to that viewpoint. This theological idea, that God declares something to be so, when it in reality is not, makes God a liar; and this reduction of justification to legal categories of thought is a form of [i]theological nominalism[/i].


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']Second, he is made righteous by the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification.[/quote]
Catholics hold that justification and sanctification occur simultaneously, and this Catholic belief is the ancient understanding of the effect of justifying grace as the Protestant scholar Alister McGrath quite readily admits in his historical survey of the doctrine of justification, for as he said, "The essential feature of the Reformation doctrine of justification is that a deliberate and systematic distinction is made between justification and regeneration. Although it must be emphasized that the distinction is purely notional, in that it is impossible to separate the two within the context of the [i]ordo salutis[/i], [b]the essential point is that a notional distinction is made where none had been acknowledged before in the history of Christian doctrine. A fundamental discontinuity was introduced into the western theological tradition where none had ever existed, or ever been contemplated, before[/b]. The Reformation understanding of the nature of justification as opposed to its mode must therefore be regarded as a genuine [b]theological novum[/b]." [Alister McGrath, [u]Iustitia Dei[/u], volume 1, page 186]


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']The Reformed doctrines of grace do not allow for Apotheoun's accusation of Nominalism, however, because the sinner, when regenerated, is a new creation; the Holy Spirit within him, he is not the sinner he was, sin though he still may.[/quote]
Again, this is where we disagree, because I hold, in line with the 2,000 tradition of the Church, that when a man is justified, all that is truly sinful is removed from him, concupiscence alone, which is not in reality sin, remains; and you hold, in line with the [i]theological novelties[/i] of the 16th century Protestant [i]nominalism[/i], that man, even after being justified, is and remains totally sinful, because grace does not establish an ontological connection between man and God, it does not truly begin the process of man's [i]theosis[/i], but instead only establishes a [i]legal fiction[/i], whereby God calls the totally sinful man just, even though he in reality he remains unjust.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']He is now a saint, righteous by Christ's work.[/quote]
I agree, because the righteousness of the justified man is a gift of God's grace, but this [i]grace given righteousness[/i] is not foreign or extrinsic to the justified man, and so it becomes his actual possession, because grace has ontologically changed him, making him truly just and not merely [i]nominally[/i] just.


[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 3 2004, 06:38 PM']It should be seen that what Apotheoun accuses the Reformers of is really nothing more than G.K. Chesterton calling Calvinism "The New Manichaeism."  That is, it's hogwash.[/quote]
There is great truth in what Chesterton said in comparing Calvinism and Manichaeism, even though you don't recognize this fact; but anyone familiar with St. Augustine's Anti-Manichaean writings would understand what Chesterton meant. To say that nature is in itself sinful and depraved is to say that sin and evil are essential and thus created realities, when in fact they are not. The assertion that nature is evil is a form of dualism. In reality, evil is a privation of the good, it is a relative absence of the good in the will of the creature, and so evil and sin have their origin in man's will, not in God. God is all good, all holy, all perfect, and so He is not the cause of sin, but He permits man to sin, because He created man in freedom. Clearly, it was man's abuse of his own created freedom that brought sin into the world, and thus God is not the author or cause of sin. God's foreknowledge of our sins does not mean that He is the author of sin. Whatever He causes, He foreknows, but it does not follow that whatever He foreknows, He causes. [cf. St. Augustine, [u]De Libero Arbitrio[/u], Book 3, 2:4-3:8, 4:11; [u]City of God[/u], Book 5, 10:1-2] Moreover it should be remembered, that every nature is from God as is every good thing. Sin is not something positive; it is a defect rather than a created nature. This defect or absence of the good is not the work of God. It is a voluntary defect and it is in the power of man's will to cause it. [St. Augustine, [u]De Libero Arbitrio[/u], Book 2, 20:54] Calvinism makes sin natural to man, and in doing this it postulates a form of dualism akin to Manichaeism, and so Chesterton's comment is apropos.

As I said at the very beginning of this post, I have no interest in an extended debate on these issues: first, because my time is limited as I'm preparing to go back to school; and second, to be honest, the [i]theological novelties[/i] of the Protestant Reformers hold no intellectual interest for me. I do recommend reading an excellent book which compares the Catholic and Protestant theological systems, and it's called, [u]Symbolism: Exposition of the Doctrinal Differences between Catholics and Protestants as Evidenced by their Symbolical Writings[/u], by Johann Adam Moehler. Moehler's book is a detailed study of the theological and anthropological issues that separate Protestants and Catholics, and unlike some people's comparisons of Catholic and Protestant soteriology, it uses the documents of both sides in order to fairly present their positions. I highly recommend the book.

God bless,
Todd

Edited August 5, 2004 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Aug 4 2004, 02:02 PM'] Irrelevant.  The word "Trinity" does not appear in the Scriptures either.  Total Depravity is a convenient shorthand for the Biblical declaration of man's condition. [/quote]
Oh it's quite relevant, because the doctrine of the [i]Trinity[/i] is present in scripture, but the doctrine of [i]total depravity[/i] is not. Nor do any of the quotations you've given prove that man's nature is totally depraved. Man's nature is not depraved after the fall, because Adam lost nothing natural to his existence as man; instead, he lost the supernatural gift of sanctifying grace (divine intimacy and communion), and the preternatural gifts of integrity, immortality, impassibility, and infused knowledge. Moreover, if nature is sinful, then it follows that God, as the sole Creator of nature, is the cause and origin of sin, but every Catholic Christian knows that that idea is false, because moral evil and sin are not natural, nor are they essential and created realities; instead, moral evil is unnatural, it is a relative absence of the good in the will of the creature, and to say otherwise is to fall into Manichaean dualism. Clearly, unregenerate man cannot save himself, for he requires the gift of God's grace in order to have the likeness to God ([i]theoeideis[/i]) lost by sin restored, but that is not the same as saying that man's nature is totally depraved.

God bless,
Todd

Edited August 5, 2004 by Apotheoun

[MorphRC]

Apotheoun!!!!!

Someone Give Him Church Scholar!!!!!!!

[qfnol31]

[MorphRC]

Blink someone else bub.

[Donna]

Excuse me for interrupting, but I'd like to get back to Dusty Fro.

DF, I am at a loss as to why you think the Catholic Church teaches that grace is NOT necessary for justification (if I'm getting your thought right - correct me if I haven't). I really want to know what you see in those canons of Trent that convinces you of this.

And will you try to stop being rude? It's distracting, for one.

[phatcatholic]

is it humanly possible to refute what Apotheoun has just written?

that's what i want to know......

[StColette]

umm I say No lol

[MorphRC]

I couldnt be bothered..lol So who knows.

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='MorphRC' date='Aug 5 2004, 12:13 AM'] I couldnt be bothered..lol So who knows. [/quote]
hehe, well, ur missin out, that's for sure!

[God Conquers]

Apotheoun....

That was the single most glorious post I have ever seen.

God be Praised in His Angels, in His Saints, in His Church and in His Scholars, now and Forever!


Dude..... awesome.

God Bless,
Matt

[MichaelFilo]

Apotheon hangs out with the pope doesn't he?? ADMIT IT!!

Rock on Mr.Scholar.

God bless,

Mikey

[phatcatholic]

Apotheoun, Henry Cardinal Newman, Ronald Knox, Hillaire Beloc, and G.K. Chesteron all hang out together, eat tacos, so very tasty and good for you,, and talk with each other about how ridiculous Protestant theology is.

i think i'm in there too, shining one of their shoes

Edited August 5, 2004 by phatcatholic

[qfnol31]

Actually, Apotheoun should be Church Scholar, he's proven himself and has a Philosophy degree.

[VeraMaria]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 5 2004, 04:35 PM'] Apotheoun, Henry Cardinal Newman, Ronald Knox, Hillaire Beloc, and G.K. Chesteron all hang out together, eat tacos, so very tasty and good for you,, and talk with each other about how ridiculous Protestant theology is.

i think i'm in there too, shining one of their shoes [/quote]


That cracked me up.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall of that room...maybe I'd even learn something!

[MorphRC]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 6 2004, 03:53 AM'] hehe, well, ur missin out, that's for sure! [/quote]
Give Me 7 Years

[MorphRC]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 6 2004, 06:05 AM'] Apotheoun, Henry Cardinal Newman, Ronald Knox, Hillaire Beloc, and G.K. Chesteron all hang out together, eat tacos, so very tasty and good for you,, and talk with each other about how ridiculous Protestant theology is.

i think i'm in there too, shining one of their shoes [/quote]

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Aug 5 2004, 05:27 PM'] Actually, Apotheoun should be Church Scholar, he's proven himself and has a Philosophy degree. [/quote]
I think only those that have formal theology training get the Scholar title....

[qfnol31]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Aug 6 2004, 11:28 AM'] I think only those that have formal theology training get the Scholar title.... [/quote]
I bet he will in a few years then.

[MichaelFilo]

Todd has answered questions that some Church scholars cannot say like he can. By mere merit he deserves it. However, rules are rules.

God bless,

Mikey

[MorphRC]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Aug 7 2004, 02:58 AM'] I think only those that have formal theology training get the Scholar title.... [/quote]
Why dont we just make it a masters while were at it.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Doesn't a Church Scholar have the authority to nominate someone as a Church Scholar?

...(pm-ing dUSt)...

[Laudate_Dominum]

Oh.. Also God has led me back to Steubenville, this time not as a scholar but as a lowly carpenter. The point is: since you (Apotheoun) live in Steubz, we could meet and have excessively long conversations about Philosophy and Theology!
I would love that.

I know a couple other guys who are crazy about such things, maybe we could form a small discussion group.

peace

[Mary's Knight, La]

if you start that i'm moving up there (wishful thinking but still a nice idea) it'd be great to sit at the feet of masters *grabs his shoe shine kit and bumps phatcatholic outta the way*

Edited August 7, 2004 by Mary's Knight, La

[MorphRC]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Aug 7 2004, 05:34 PM'] Doesn't a Church Scholar have the authority to nominate someone as a Church Scholar?

...(pm-ing dUSt)... [/quote]
hmm

[Dusty Fro]

Well now that this post has turned into a bunch of hero worship or whatever...

I never said that those passages didn't indicate that grace was neccessary for salvation, but that they said that grace was not sufficient for salvation. The way I read them is that anyone who believes that faith and the grace of God is sufficient for salvation, let him be condemned to hell.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 9 2004, 03:04 AM'] Well now that this post has turned into a bunch of hero worship or whatever...
[/quote]
Something about the situation makes me laugh, although I sympathize with you.

grace, faith, works. yep

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Dusty Fro' date='Aug 9 2004, 01:04 AM'] I never said that those passages didn't indicate that grace was neccessary for salvation, but that they said that grace was not sufficient for salvation.  The way I read them is that anyone who believes that faith and the grace of God is sufficient for salvation, let him be condemned to hell. [/quote]
No, the Fathers of Trent are not saying that. What they are saying is that if a man has faith alone, which is not formed by charity, he is not saved. Nowhere, in either the [u][url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=16965&view=findpost&p=290044"]Decree on Justification[/url][/u], nor in the canons appended to the Decree, does it deny that man is saved by grace alone, because that is precisely the teaching of Trent. The Tridentine Fathers teach that man is saved by grace alone, but not by an unformed faith alone.

As St. Prosper said, "That some men are saved is the gift (i.e., grace) of Him (i.e., God), who saves; that some men are lost, is the fault of those who are lost." Salvation is by grace alone, but grace perfects, restores, and elevates nature, and so it empowers man to act in the supernatural order. The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by grace alone, through faith, hope, and charity. [cf. Council of Trent, [u]Decree on Justification[/u], chap. x]

God bless,
Todd

Edited August 9, 2004 by Apotheoun

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Aug 7 2004, 02:38 AM'] Oh.. Also God has led me back to Steubenville, this time not as a scholar but as a lowly carpenter. [/quote]
St. Joseph and Jesus seem to have exalted your "lowly" profession

consider yourself doing the work of the Holy Family!

[Guest JeffCR07]

Laudate, Apotheoun, how old are you guys and where did you study? I'm only 18 (a sophomore), but I'm looking to get a Doctorate in theology when I finish undergrad, and I'm having a really hard time finding places that a.) give doctorates, b.) are orthodox, and c.) arn't in another country. I don't know what level of crazy scholarship you two are at, but I figure you might know of someplace reliable.

Also, in light of the "hero" comments before: you two are my heroes,

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Aug 10 2004, 01:45 AM'] St. Joseph and Jesus seem to have exalted your "lowly" profession

consider yourself doing the work of the Holy Family! [/quote]
you rock brutha! I really need to meditate on that more, it was my original inspiration, but the daily grind can wear on a man.

God bless you

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Aug 10 2004, 11:46 AM'] Laudate, Apotheoun, how old are you guys and where did you study? I'm only 18 (a sophomore), but I'm looking to get a Doctorate in theology when I finish undergrad, and I'm having a really hard time finding places that a.) give doctorates, b.) are orthodox, and c.) arn't in another country. I don't know what level of crazy scholarship you two are at, but I figure you might know of someplace reliable.

Also, in light of the "hero" comments before: you two are my heroes, 

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff [/quote]
Jeff,

I just turned 26 (I feel so old, you have no idea , and I'm mostly self-taught with the exception of my years at Franny (Franciscan University of Steubenville).
I can recommend this school for sure, although there are others. I have always wanted to study in Europe, for example at the Gregorian or the Angelicum.

As far as schools that are orthodox, give doctorates and aren't in other countries I actually can't think of any (perhaps some seminaries). I know of schools that match these criteria that are relatively orthodox. Perhaps someone else would be better at answering this, I actually don't pay enough attention to this sort of thing. I'm too busy reading volumes of jargon so I can sound smart on the internet. hehe, j/k

peace.

p.s. Pray that you get good roommates in college. I had three roommates in a row who were geniuses (I'd bet money on that) who taught me many things. There is nothing like nightly four hour conversations on problems in philosophy (with geniuses!) to exercise your mind.

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Aug 4 2004, 09:49 PM'] Oh it's quite relevant, because the doctrine of the [i]Trinity[/i] is present in scripture, but the doctrine of [i]total depravity[/i] is not. [/quote]
Ephesians 2:1-10

As for you, [b]you were dead in your transgressions and sins[/b], 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. [b]3All of us[/b] also lived among them at one time, [b]gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[1] and following its desires and thoughts. [/b]Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were [b]dead in transgressions[/b]--it is by grace you have been saved. 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

This is total depravity. Total depravity is not the belief that man is as sinful as he will ever be, but rather, that he is, without God's quickening grace, able to bring himself back to life from the dead. This is why, Lorraine Boettner, in his work "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination", prefers to call the doctrine "Total Inability" rather than "Total Depravity", because the word "Depraved" carries a connotation in todays language which is not entirely faithful to the Reformers teaching on the matter.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Aug 12 2004, 08:11 PM'] Ephesians 2:1-10

As for you, [b]you were dead in your transgressions and sins[/b], 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. [b]3All of us[/b] also lived among them at one time, [b]gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[1] and following its desires and thoughts. [/b]Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were [b]dead in transgressions[/b]--it is by grace you have been saved. 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

This is total depravity. Total depravity is not the belief that man is as sinful as he will ever be, but rather, that he is, without God's quickening grace, able to bring himself back to life from the dead. This is why, Lorraine Boettner, in his work "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination", prefers to call the doctrine "Total Inability" rather than "Total Depravity", because the word "Depraved" carries a connotation in todays language which is not entirely faithful to the Reformers teaching on the matter. [/quote]
ICTHUS,

The problem is this, you read scripture in the light of the 450 year old tradition of John Calvin, and I read scripture in the light of the 2,000 year old Apostolic Tradition of the Catholic Church. Scripture does not teach that man's nature is totally depraved, and thus I will not agree with you on this topic. I, unlike the followers of Calvin, am not a Manichaean dualist. I hold that nature is created by God, and that it is good, because He has made it. Nature cannot be depraved, nor is man intrinsically evil, for to believe that is to be a Manichaean, and not a Christian. Now, I do believe that because of the fall, man's nature, wounded by the loss of the preternatural gifts intended to perfect it, cannot achieve, under its own power, eternal life. Moreover, for man to be saved, he must be raised above his nature, and above his natural existence, into the supernatural life of the Triune God, and this can only be accomplished through the gift of God's grace.

God bless,
Todd

P.S. - One other thing, I don't use the NIV Bible, and the reason I don't is that it was translated by Evangelical scholars in order to support various Protestant doctrinal theories, including the idea that nature is sinful. Thus in the quotation you've given above, the following translation is given: ". . . also lived among them at one time, [b]gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. [/b]" What the NIV translators have translated as "sinful nature" is the Greek word, "sarx," which is accurately translated as the English word "flesh." Thus, nowhere does scripture call nature in itself "sinful." In fact, sin is by definition "unnatural."

P.P.S. - A Catholic can accept the technical term "total inability" in relation to man's natural status before God, but can never accept the concept of "total depravity." The reason that a Catholic can accept the first term is because salvation is purely by God's grace, which is a supernatural gift imparted to man in order to restore, perfect, and elevate him above his own natural existence. Thus, by the power of grace given to man in Christ Jesus, the divine likeness disfigured by sin is restored, and man is elevated into the very life and energy of the Trinity, i.e., he is divinized. But the second term, i.e., "total depravity," is not acceptable, because nature is not depraved.

Edited August 13, 2004 by Apotheoun