Semi-pelagianism unveiled

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='http://www.flyfreeministries.org/Tradition-histBiblical.htm#POST-REFORMATION%20TIMES']So the non-Catholic Christian's faith is founded upon the Bible Alone. He ignores the way the Bible has been understood since the Apostles walked the earth and reads it for doctrine "de novo" -- as if it were brand new. He ignores the history of the making of the Bible and has no concept of its origin. His sense of history begins in the 16th, rather than the first century. In his (partial, 66-book) Bible he finds the other two doctrines -- Faith Alone and [b]grace alone[/b] , as Luther did. The (well-formed) Catholic [b]finds none of these three doctrines in the Bible.[/b][/quote]

So, here we have it folks. Conclusive evidence that scholars within the Church of Rome are content to offer us a doctrine of devils - a doctrine where God's grace is not the only thing that saves us, but that we must try hard, and work to stay in that grace. Gone is the New Testament assurance that God sustains those whom He claims as His own - instead, it is replaced by the constant fearful threat of condemnation if one should make the slightest little slip up.

[Guest Aluigi]

the terms "faith alone" and "grace alone" as any Catholic would understand it connotates an idea that one without any good works can get into heaven. the Catholic Church says it is grace alone that saves, but because it works through faith which is kept alive by works it cannot be ALONE in the entire salvation process.

[spathariossa]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 10:28 PM']
So, here we have it folks. Conclusive evidence that scholars within the Church of Rome are content to offer us a doctrine of devils - a doctrine where God's grace is not the only thing that saves us, but that we must try hard, and work to stay in that grace. Gone is the New Testament assurance that God sustains those whom He claims as His own - instead, it is replaced by the constant fearful threat of condemnation if one should make the slightest little slip up. [/quote]
That's absolute nonsense. As an Orthodox christian I can tell you that works are crucial to the church. First and foremost is the doctrine of sin. If you are saved merely by faith and need do nothing to work towards your salvation then that pretty much eliminates sin altogether. How could you do anything that separates you from God if you have faith in him and he saves you by that faith? Once saved always saved anyone? So you're saying that what you do in this life aside from accepting Christ has no bearing on your salvation whatsoever?

Edited December 9, 2004 by spathariossa

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 11:28 PM']
So, here we have it folks. Conclusive evidence that scholars within the Church of Rome are content to offer us a doctrine of devils - a doctrine where God's grace is not the only thing that saves us, but that we must try hard, and work to stay in that grace. Gone is the New Testament assurance that God sustains those whom He claims as His own - instead, it is replaced by the constant fearful threat of condemnation if one should make the slightest little slip up. [/quote]


I'm sorry ICTHUS that's just a riot. You come writing from a laymen, twist it, post that it says what it does not say and claim that the Catholic faith is damnable.



ICTHUS, my dear boy, semi-pelaganism was DEFINED by the Catholic Church and fought against by the Catholic Church. I hardly believe she would embrace it, as was that Bible you hold in your hand a product of the hard working souls of the Catholic Church, protected and preserved for your use.

Edited December 9, 2004 by littleflower+JMJ

[Theoketos]

Charity in correction every one.

Thank you Icthus for pointing out something we need to Clarify.

[Brother Adam]

I have "reported" myself for that post. I would edit it now if I could.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 9 2004, 01:12 AM'] I have "reported" myself for that post. I would edit it now if I could. [/quote]
Whoa...

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 9 2004, 02:12 AM'] I have "reported" myself for that post. I would edit it now if I could. [/quote]
Gotta love integrity...

[thessalonian]

Grace alone is definitely not contrary to the Catholic faith. Look it up in the CCC. Unlike many protestants who say we come to faith and then God get's going, the Catholic Church even recognizes that God's grace is acting on the individual BEFORE he attains faith. He cannot come to it on his own. All works involve God's grace. We cannot do them on our own out of love if God does not give us the true love. Our motives will be selfish.

In context faith alone can be correct. That is an active and abiding faith that works in charity. But the faith alone by which one says "I believe" and it's all over but the dying and risin is a false faith alone. The faith alone that says works just automatically happen afterwards is an incorrect faith alone. WE WORK in faith, by grace.

Ephesians 3:19-21
and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.
Now to Him who is able to DO FAR MORE ABUNDATLY beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that WORKS WITHIN US,
to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.

Mark 4:20
"And those are the ones on whom seed was sown on the good soil; and they hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold."



Protestants call God doing this work in us filthy rags. They say God's work in us and through us can have no value in salvation. Paul disagrees with them of course:

Romans 2:6-8
who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

And so does Jesus is you read about the sheep and the goats being separated at judgement day. Matt 25, i'll let you look it up. It ain't pretty for the goats who have not taken care of the less fortunate.

Bible alone?

Well 1 Tim 3:16 is true for us as well. But without the oral teachings and the living, abiding prescence of the Church, carrying on the oral traditions that go along with the written (2 Thes 2:15) it is simply a dead letter to a past lover that we are trying to apply to our lives withou having a true understanding of it's content. This creates division like a cancerous sore on mankind's hearts. Man's pride in his own thinkig on the scriptures overcomes him and he has to start a new Church. Jesus said "I pray that you may all be one. We as Catholics hold the Bible as sacred but if one does not have it's true meaning he is lead down blind alleys and false thinking that do not for his salvation, of which the words of scripture contain only if understood correctly. A false interprutation is simply a lie that has no salvific value.


God bless

Edited December 9, 2004 by thessalonian

[Quietfire]

[quote]QUOTE (http://www.flyfreeministries.org/Tradition-histBiblical.htm#POST-REFORMATION%20TIMES)
So the non-Catholic Christian's faith is founded upon the Bible Alone. He ignores the way the Bible has been understood since the Apostles walked the earth and reads it for doctrine "de novo" -- as if it were brand new. He ignores the history of the making of the Bible and has no concept of its origin. His sense of history begins in the 16th, rather than the first century. In his (partial, 66-book) Bible he finds the other two doctrines -- Faith Alone and grace alone , as Luther did. The (well-formed) Catholic finds none of these three doctrines in the Bible.
[quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 10:28 PM']
So, here we have it folks. Conclusive evidence that scholars within the Church of Rome are content to offer us a doctrine of devils - a doctrine where God's grace is not the only thing that saves us, but that we must try hard, and work to stay in that grace. Gone is the New Testament assurance that God sustains those whom He claims as His own - instead, it is replaced by the constant fearful threat of condemnation if one should make the slightest little slip up.[/quote][/quote]

Icthus,
Why is it that this started at Flyfree but you chose to bring it here?
Afraid to finish it at Flyfree?

[Brother Adam]

It's not in the forum it is part of the actual website, as he linked to. he has come here to.... umm... "argue" it.

[thessalonian]

Unless he is the one who is going to take up the battle cry of semi-pelgianism it seems to me he is going to be in an awfully lonely debate. It's just not Catholic teaching.

God bless

[God Conquers]

It just doesn't make sense.

How could the body that defined and condemned the practice be practicing it?

[thessalonian]

One thing I find funny. These people keep running around looking for what the Catholic Church teaches through some comment some website posts that is out of context or some imprecise or incomplete statement of doctrine, or even from someone who misunderstands the faith. They even make things up themselves as to what the Church teaches. More than any other religion on earth one can find what the Catholic Church officially teaches. It is called the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If someone disagrees with that and they won't submit to it they are seriously in error. It is not the Catholic Church that is wrong about that persons errant understanding.

Of course when they do pick up the CCC it is usually to look for a quote they can pull out of context of the rest of the CCC and so off they go again running around as if they are chicken little, warning those pagan Catholics.
They all parade around as if they have a phd in Catholicism.

Edited December 9, 2004 by thessalonian

[Quietfire]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 9 2004, 02:38 PM'] It's not in the forum it is part of the actual website, as he linked to. he has come here to.... umm... "argue" it. [/quote]
Yeah, I know.
But why didnt he post there to 'argue' it?
Why here?

Or is he just afraid of you Bro.? Thinking you wouldnt see it here.
Oh mighty Bro. sees all!!

[Don John of Austria]

[quote]If someone disagrees with that and they won't submit to it they are seriously in error[/quote]


THe CCC is not infallable, much of it is not even doctrine, one free to dissent with some of it and still be a faithful Catholic.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 9 2004, 05:00 PM']

THe CCC is not infallable, much of it is not even doctrine, one free to dissent with some of it and still be a faithful Catholic. [/quote]

Are you saying that much of the CCC is optional. You would be in error.

I think you are making the mistake of thinking that what is not infallibly declared is therefore fallible. This is a fallacy. A faithful Catholic has the obligation to do there best assent to Church teachings on all maters of doctrine and must assent to all dogma. The CCC is primarily made up of dogmatic statements of the Catholic Church from Councils and Popes and scripture and writings of the Church fathers that support that dogma. Those statements (of the ECF that suppport a dogma)may not be infallible but that does not mean they are fallible and therefore optional. There isn't much of it that is really debatable. Further, I do not know of any doctrines of the Church that rather than be dogmatized later, were declared false. So I highly recommend and assent to it all myself in as much as I fully understand. The CCC is a sure norm of the faith.

As for much of it not being doctrine, the vast majority is. Some of it falls under practice and still requires submission to the magesterium, such as celebacy and the priesthood (though it has doctrinal and dogmatic aspects). Matt 16:19 says "WHATEVER you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven". Not just faith and morals. i.e. once again rules for lent are not OPTIONAL as your post would have us believe. Vatican one anethemitizes anyone who says the Pope only has authority with regard to faith and morals. So your out of luck with regard to the non-doctrinal/dogmatic parts. Sorry.

Thanks for the comment.

Edited December 9, 2004 by thessalonian

[Don John of Austria]

I never said anything was optional I said you were free to dissent not disobey, and I don't recall saying anything about Lent, however parts of the CCC are in DIRECT conflict with Infallable statements declared by Popes and in ecumenical Councils. The CCC is not itself an infallable document much of what is in it is infact infallable but not by virtue of being in the CCC.

[thessalonian]

"the CCC are in DIRECT conflict with Infallable statements declared by Popes "

Name one. I know where you will head and your wrong but humor me. After all that is what this board is about.

Withe regard to lent, easy boy. I do believe I used lent as an example of something that includes practice. I never said you said anything about it.

Blessings

Edited December 9, 2004 by thessalonian

[ICTHUS]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Dec 9 2004, 03:30 PM'] One thing I find funny.  These people keep running around looking for what the Catholic Church teaches through some comment some website posts that is out of context or some imprecise or incomplete statement of doctrine, or even from someone who misunderstands the faith.  They even make things up themselves as to what the Church teaches.  More than any other religion on earth one can find what the Catholic Church officially teaches.  It is called the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  If someone disagrees with that and they won't submit to it they are seriously in error.  It is not the Catholic Church that is wrong about that persons errant understanding. [/quote]
This is a fair statement - however firstly, notice I said "[i]scholars within the Church of Rome[/i]", not "[i]the Church of Rome[/i]" (though I could certainly make the case that the Church of Rome herself teaches semi-Pelagianism and condemns the Pauline/Augustinian teaching it once embraced, if I so wished), if someone who is perhaps less knowlegeable in the Faith endeavours to know about Catholicism and happens to run across flyfree ministries, and sees "Grace alone is wrong" - they conclude that we are saved by God's grace plus a little bit of effort on our part.

Sure, it's not official Catholic Church teaching, but if it's not, shouldn't it be corrected?

Edited December 10, 2004 by ICTHUS