Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #241  
Old Oct 7, '12, 9:32 pm
Erick_Ybarra Erick_Ybarra is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 21, 2012
Posts: 958
Religion: Protestant
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Chrysostom does not hold to a "faith alone" salvation in the sense of having "faith" and at the same time an unrighteous life.

However Chrysostom does hold to a "faith alone" salvation when faith is God's given, and which will be mixed with righteous behavior, love, and good works. But faith remains the virtue that God chooses to reckon as righteousness.
  #242  
Old Oct 7, '12, 9:45 pm
carlos19's Avatar
carlos19 carlos19 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2011
Posts: 230
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
That was a very bold statement, knowing that you have no idea what I am doing on my free time. In fact, I've read through Chrysostom and I can prove thoroughly that he did not believe in the catholic view of justification. Line after Line. I've provided enough for you to deal with. Respond to me, then, if you know they are taken out of context? It's very easy to tell everyone they are ripping quotes out of contexts....but if I keep coming with more and more quotes that are next to each other in the original, and then add more corroborative verses which show the same conclusions....maybe you should begin to wonder if you can even show that Chrysostom believes in the Catholic view of justification. If the infallible Church has claimed him a saint and doctor, could he fall under the excommunications of Trent? Do you think this is what is motivating you to deny the teaching of Chrysostom on Justification?

Consider again St. John Chrysostom's whole comment on Rom 10:4

Ver. 4. For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believes.

See the judgment of Paul. For as he had spoken of a righteousness, and a righteousness, lest they of the Jews which believed should seem to have the one but be excluded from the other, and to be accused of lawlessness (for even these there was no less cause to fear about as being still newly come in), and lest Jews should again expect to achieve it, and should say, Though we have not at present fulfilled it, yet we certainly will fulfil it, see what ground he takes. He shows that there is but one righteousness, and that has its full issue in this, and that he that has taken to himself this, the one by faith, has fulfilled that also. But he that rejects this, falls short as well of that also. For if Christ be the end of the Law, he that has not Christ, even if he seem to have that righteousness, has it not. But he that has Christ, even though he have not fulfilled the Law aright, has received the whole. For the end of the physician's art is health. As then he that can make whole, even though he has not the physician's art, has everything; but he that knows not how to heal, though he seem to be a follower of the art, comes short of everything: so is it in the case of the Law and of faith. He that has this has the end of that likewise, but he that is without this is an alien from both. For what was the object of the Law? To make man righteous. But it had not the power, for no one fulfilled it. This then was the end of the Law and to this it looked throughout, and for this all its parts were made, its feasts, and commandments, and sacrifices, and all besides, that man might be justified. But this end Christ gave a fuller accomplishment of through faith. Be not then afraid, he says, as if transgressing the Law in having come over to the faith. For then do you transgress it, when for it thou dost not believe Christ. If you believe in Him, then you have fulfilled it also, and much more than it commanded. For you have received a much greater righteousness. Next, since this was an assertion, he again brings proof of it from the Scriptures.
What you post if bold too. You misunderstand Catholic teaching. Most of what you are posting here is so unbelievably Catholic, yet you have the gall to tell us it isn't. I have read most of your posts and you have taken contradictory positions on many things.

In thread after thread you ignore what people bring up. you either say good point I am going to have to think about that and then you discard it and move right ahead without ever getting back to it. Or you refuse to answer questions and just go on cutting, pasting and quoting.
  #243  
Old Oct 7, '12, 9:50 pm
carlos19's Avatar
carlos19 carlos19 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2011
Posts: 230
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
No, they are harmonious.

For someone to say that we are justified in God's sight by faith and works is equivalent to saying that the man is justified by works (in my understanding) since I assume the working person believes in the God to whom he works for. Therefore, when someone harps that they believe not in a justification by works alone, but by faith also, I regard this as a superfluous addition for it is insanity if the one working has no belief in the object for whom he is working. Therefore the catholic assertion that we are justified by the works that we do as well as faith is teaching a justification of works.
how is that harmonious...the catholic view of justifications is one of works????

You have been here on this board long enough to know that this isn't true. There is something disingenuous about your threads. You did not come here to learn. You came here with predispositions and want to rubber stamp the Church with erroneous assumptions about what She teaches.
  #244  
Old Oct 7, '12, 10:02 pm
Erick_Ybarra Erick_Ybarra is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 21, 2012
Posts: 958
Religion: Protestant
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

What I said is true if one assumes faith is always in the worker.

I've not been able to read every response. But those I had time to answer I did.

I think it's plain in Chrysostom that faith is what made Abraham righteous, not his works.

The whole idea that one can have faith and be saved and never have works is the background to the 2nd chapter in James. In a sense, a man is also justified by works, for because those who are originally justified by faith alone are those whose faith is never alone but always accompanied with works. So in this sense, we are justified by faith and works.

Chrysostom teaches that we receive a gift of righteousness, not the habit or practice of doing the right thing, but the gracious quality of being righteous by faith without any contributing works.
  #245  
Old Oct 7, '12, 10:13 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
I do not hold that belief either.


All I am doing is showing proof that protestant interpretation if Romans and the justification passages DID NOT COME ABOUT WITH LUTHER, it was there in the early fathers, right here in Chrysostom.
Sure, faith alone is not a new concept to Catholics either, when it is in its proper context.
That context is faith, works, love, hope, charity all pour forth from the well spring of grace.

When you start referring to the protestant notion of justification by grace, through faith alone, (which is forensic and legal) and apply that paradigm to those of Eastern thought (like St. John Chrysostom) you end up doing a grave injustice to them, by taking such liberties.

They had (have) a Holistic view, which is not to be broken down into modern scholasticism. Theosis is a path not to be broken down in parts. It begins withy God's Essence-Energies which is not an Actus Purus as it is in the west, furthermore synergism is man working with God's divine grace (Essence-Energies)

St. John Chrysostom has often been accused of Semi-Pelagianism, because of his synergistic view of theoisis. Which is a false claim to make, but his view is so profoundly different from that of the Protestant "Reformers", it is naive, or disingenuous to apply modern day legal terms!


Quote:
Now protestants firmly believe that simultaneous to forensic justification that there is the powerful inward sanctifiying grace that cleanses the soul from all sin and sets them to walk in righteousness. Indeed this happens at the same time as justification.
Ok so what is the grounds of justification, imputed Righteousness?

What's the ground of regeneration?

Do they proceed justification?

Are we imputed Justification?

Are we imputed regeneration?

Are we imputed faith?

So, you have a simultaneous righteousness, regeneration, sanctifying grace, faith, and justification?

Is there any Ordo Salutis ( order of salvation so to speak) or is it simultaneous?

You must have one to be so concerned with a forensic Justification, prior to works, by imputed righteuosness!

Is it Synergistic or Monergistic?

The "Reformers" must of had an Ordo Salutis?

Was theirs Synergistic or Monergistic?

Is yours the same?

Oh wait, I'm implying that theirs wasn't at conflict with one another and yours isn't at conflict with theirs!

Quote:
But as Chrysostom ands other Protestants teach, Adams sin is imputed to us and it the original cause of our condemnation and death apart from any of our doing, so also christ in his sacrifice and resurrection is the sole original cause of our being righteous in Gods eyes. By this is not meant that we are ttansfromed into a righteous person by habit, but that we are forgiven and justified. Of course sanctifying grace comes with justification but is different in concept altogether. Just like pardon itself is different from the person being reformed but can be together.
Where does St. John Chrysostom teach that we are guilty of Adam's sin?

Where does St. John Chrysostom teach Original sin in an Augustinian view?

Last edited by onemangang; Oct 7, '12 at 10:18 pm. Reason: spelling error
  #246  
Old Oct 7, '12, 10:21 pm
Erick_Ybarra Erick_Ybarra is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 21, 2012
Posts: 958
Religion: Protestant
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

If you read Chrysostom's commentary on Romans 5:18 "For by one man's disobedience many were made sinners", he rejects the meaning that we are ontologically made sinners, and says that what this means is that we are affected legally, with the punishment of death that belongs to a sinner, even though we did not eat the forbidden fruit. Is this not the imputation of Adam's guilt to all? Also, the reverse is correct. Chrysostom does not believe to be "made righteous" (Rom 5:18) means to have our behavior change, but that we are given the "quality" of being righteous by His sacrifice on the cross (See Chrysostom's 2 Corinthians 5:21 and his differentiation between the habit of righteousness and the quality of righteousness)


With regard to your other questions.

Baptism is the place where this all takes place. Through this grace, God grants the person sanctifying grace, the remission of sins, justification (acquittal), regeneration, adoption, incorporation into the body of Christ,etc,etc...... Obviously there is a faith and repentance born in the person before they are baptized, but baptism is where the normal oridinary gifts are given.
  #247  
Old Oct 7, '12, 10:31 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
If you read Chrysostom's commentary on Romans 5:18 "For by one man's disobedience many were made sinners", he rejects the meaning that we are ontologically made sinners, and says that what this means is that we are affected legally, with the punishment of death that belongs to a sinner, even though we did not eat the forbidden fruit. Is this not the imputation of Adam's guilt to all? Also, the reverse is correct. Chrysostom does not believe to be "made righteous" (Rom 5:18) means to have our behavior change, but that we are given the "quality" of being righteous by His sacrifice on the cross (See Chrysostom's 2 Corinthians 5:21 and his differentiation between the habit of righteousness and the quality of righteousness)


With regard to your other questions.

Baptism is the place where this all takes place. Through this grace, God grants the person sanctifying grace, the remission of sins, justification (acquittal), regeneration, adoption, incorporation into the body of Christ,etc,etc...... Obviously there is a faith and repentance born in the person before they are baptized, but baptism is where the normal oridinary gifts are given.
I'll look into it but for now bed time

Is that the Ordo Salutis?

If so, justification precedes regeneration?
  #248  
Old Oct 7, '12, 11:27 pm
Richca Richca is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2012
Posts: 752
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
Hey folks,

I've been reading through the homilies on Romans in John Chrysostom, and I cannot help but notice the protestant interpretations that come line after line after line.

My first question, if someone had to prove that John Chrysosotom was Catholic, how would you go about it ? I am not aware if there is a book about this. And I am not speaking of the Eucharist. But more particularly, do we have evidence that he believed some of the other doctrines that evangelicals highly question such as infant baptism, the process of justification, the priesthood, etc,etc
"Is it not perfectly clear that anyone can, by his own free choice, choose either wickedness or virtue? For if this were not the case, and if such a faculty did not pertain to our nature, it were not right that some be punished while others receive the reward of virtue. But since everything depends, after grace from above, upon our own choice, so too are punishements prepared for sinners and recompense and reward for those who do right." ( St John Chrysostom, Homilies on Genesis)

"If salvation is by grace," someone will say, "why is it that we are not all saved?" Because you did not will it; for grace, even though it be grace, saves the willing, not those who are not willing and who turn away from it and who constantly fight against it and oppose themselves to it." ( St John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistle to the Romans).

St John Chrysostom held to a synergistic view of salvation as can be seen in the above two passages as opposed to the Lutheran monergistic view of salvation. In fact, Chrysostom is the antithesis of Luther. So was St John Chrysostom catholic? Absolutely. Indeed, Chrysostom's synergistic view of salvation fells the whole edifice and theology of Martin Luther's justification by faith alone upon which Luther stated " the church either stands or falls."
  #249  
Old Oct 8, '12, 9:13 am
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
If you read Chrysostom's commentary on Romans 5:18 "For by one man's disobedience many were made sinners", he rejects the meaning that we are ontologically made sinners, and says that what this means is that we are affected legally, with the punishment of death that belongs to a sinner, even though we did not eat the forbidden fruit. Is this not the imputation of Adam's guilt to all? Also, the reverse is correct. Chrysostom does not believe to be "made righteous" (Rom 5:18) means to have our behavior change, but that we are given the "quality" of being righteous by His sacrifice on the cross (See Chrysostom's 2 Corinthians 5:21 and his differentiation between the habit of righteousness and the quality of righteousness)
I would expect someone like St.John Chrysostom not to say we are made ontologically sinners from Adam's sin being that he believed we are not receiving an indellible mark on the soul by being imparted Adam's guilt. He did not hold to the Augustinian view of original sin, in a view of Ancestral sin, one would become ontologically made sinners by sinning, not by a mark on the soul imparted IN Adam. To call it a legal standing, once again, is imputing a foreign legal concept, that would be alien to eastern thought.........again, pun intended


With regard to your other questions.

Quote:
Baptism is the place where this all takes place. Through this grace, God grants the person sanctifying grace, the remission of sins, justification (acquittal), regeneration, adoption, incorporation into the body of Christ,etc,etc...... Obviously there is a faith and repentance born in the person before they are baptized, but baptism is where the normal oridinary gifts are given.

Ok, baptism
"First,"*It cleanses the soul from the guilt of all preceding sins, whether original or actual.
"Second,"*It frees us from the eternal punishment due to sin, all the temporal punishments, also, which the Justice of God could command for the sins one may have committed before baptism.
"Third,"*It adorns the soul with the grace of Justification, and with all those other graces and virtues which accompany it.
"Fourth,"*It makes us Christians, imprinting the sacred character of a Christian in the soul; and, as a consequence of all this.
"Fifth,"*It regenerates us by a new spiritual birth, making us children of God, members of his Church, and heirs of Heaven, and makes us capable of receiving all the other sacraments, and spiritual benefits which Christ has left in his Church, and gives us a right and title to receive them as our needs may require, as also to receive the necessary helps of actual grace to enable us to live a good Christian life, and preserve the sanctity we have received in baptism.
"Sixth,"*It gives us a right and title to the kingdom of heaven

Baptism,*Through the grace of the Holy Spirit, a person receives supernatural disposition to live and act with God’s call.
It is a pouring forth of sanctifying grace

Last edited by onemangang; Oct 8, '12 at 9:30 am.
  #250  
Old Oct 8, '12, 10:11 am
steve b steve b is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2004
Posts: 7,749
Religion: Cradle Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post

I know what Catholics believe. They believe that justification is by faith initially, and then the good works that we do continue the process of justification, whereas if one fails to provide good works and commits moral sin, he/she loses that justification, and must dive into repentance and reconciliation to obtain again the grace of being right with God.

You probably meant mortal sin there. If one dies in mortal sin, scripture says, they go to hell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EY

Most protestants misunderstand the catholic view that it simply teaches we merit justification by our own effort and good works.
I would say it differently.

God recognizes in us, good works we do, because He crowns in us the good work that He has prepared in advance for us to do.


[eph 2:8-10] 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

iow, If we don't produce good works that God has created us to do, we are like the fig tree that won't produce fruit that it was made to produce. That fig tree would be cut down and thrown in the fire. [Matt 3:10 & Lk 13:6]



grace + faith + good works = salvation. all are necessary.

What if grace is present, but no good works are present, then by definition, faith is a dead faith, and that won't save. [Jas 2:24] Paul and James are saying the same thing, they're just saying it differently.
__________________
To doubt is the greatest insult to the Divinity.[St Padre Pio]
  #251  
Old Oct 8, '12, 10:20 am
steve b steve b is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2004
Posts: 7,749
Religion: Cradle Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
let's not confused the matter. The roman catholic view and the protestant view of justification is radically opposed to each other. One is of faith and the other is of works.
It's BOTH, faith and good works, not either /or.
__________________
To doubt is the greatest insult to the Divinity.[St Padre Pio]
  #252  
Old Oct 8, '12, 10:36 am
steve b steve b is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2004
Posts: 7,749
Religion: Cradle Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
What does that quote contribute to the argument? Protestants interpret that as love being required also. Faith which justifies always has love. Luther never denied that
Therefore faith AGAIN, is not alone. The problem is, Protestants insert alone where alone doesn't belong.
__________________
To doubt is the greatest insult to the Divinity.[St Padre Pio]
  #253  
Old Oct 8, '12, 11:36 am
Erick_Ybarra Erick_Ybarra is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: August 21, 2012
Posts: 958
Religion: Protestant
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

When protestant specify alone, they do not mean that there is nothing else attached to faith such as love, but what is meant is that faith is the only virtue out of them all that God finds reason to justify because faith itself is not a work but an assurance and confidence in Gods promise. God will never save anyone whose faith does not also have works, but because he wishes to preserve the principle of grace he chooses faith out of all to be the means of being forgiven and justifiedn
  #254  
Old Oct 8, '12, 12:29 pm
onemangang's Avatar
onemangang onemangang is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: September 10, 2010
Posts: 715
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
When protestant specify alone, they do not mean that there is nothing else attached to faith such as love, but what is meant is that faith is the only virtue out of them all that God finds reason to justify because faith itself is not a work but an assurance and confidence in Gods promise. God will never save anyone whose faith does not also have works, but because he wishes to preserve the principle of grace he chooses faith out of all to be the means of being forgiven and justifiedn
Canon on justification

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

Canon 10 if anyone shall say that men are justified without the justice of Christ by which he merited for us , or that by that justice itself they are formally just: let him be anathema

Canon 12 if anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified: let him be anathema

Canon 24 if anyone shall say, that justice received is not preserved and also not increased in the sight of God through good works but that those same works are only the fruits and signs of justification received, but not a cause of its increase: let him be anathema

http://www.saintaquinas.com/Justification_by_Grace.html
  #255  
Old Oct 8, '12, 12:52 pm
carlos19's Avatar
carlos19 carlos19 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: June 27, 2011
Posts: 230
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Was John Chrysostom Catholic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick_Ybarra View Post
Hey folks,

I've been reading through the homilies on Romans in John Chrysostom, and I cannot help but notice the protestant interpretations that come line after line after line.

My first question, if someone had to prove that John Chrysosotom was Catholic, how would you go about it ? I am not aware if there is a book about this. And I am not speaking of the Eucharist. But more particularly, do we have evidence that he believed some of the other doctrines that evangelicals highly question such as infant baptism, the process of justification, the priesthood, etc,etc
I just noticed your first question which included infant baptism.... here is one of his writings that addresses that....

They are citizens of the Church who were wandering in error. They have their lot in RIGHTEOUSNESS who were in the confusion of sin. For not only are they free, but HOLY also; not only holy, but RIGHTEOUS too; not only righteous, but SONS also; not only sons, but HEIRS as well; not only heirs, but BROTHERS even of Christ; not only brothers of Christ, but also co-heirs; not only co-heirs, but His very members; not only His members, but a temple too; not a temple only, but likewise the instruments of the SPIRIT. You see how many are the benefits of BAPTISM, and some think its heavenly GRACE consists ONLY in the remission of sins; but we have enumerated TEN honors. For this reason we baptize even INFANTS, though they are not defiled by sin [or do not have sins]: so that there may be given to them HOLINESS, RIGHTEOUSNESS, ADOPTION, INHERITANCE, BROTHERHOOD with Christ, and that they may be His MEMBERS. (from Baptismal Catecheses 2:4)
Closed Thread

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics

Bookmarks

Tags
john chrysostom, protestant

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8460Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: Weejee
5147CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: 77stanthony77
4424Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: DesertSister62
4037OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: eschator83
3863SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2
3742Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: daughterstm
3322Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel
3285Poems and Reflections
Last by: tonyg
3224Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3112For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: Kellyreneeomara



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 1:29 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.