Faith Alone made the news


#1

Ahem – I Invite my RCC friends to read some news out of Rome. These were just pointed out to me.

catholic.org/international/internationa l_story.php?id=18021

thesoutherncross.co.za/features/cantala messa.htm

cantalamessa.org/en/2005Avvento3.htm

Maybe there is change in the wind.

And I have never heard the story about the Shepards before, That is a wonderful little story


#2

This is a very old story. It’s been discussed here plenty of times. The conclusions that you seem to be drawing from this are mistaken. I’m not saying that this disproves, faith alone, we can still debate that. What I mean is that the Catholic Church isn’t changing Her teaching. :stuck_out_tongue:


#3

[quote=Lazerlike42]This is a very old story. It’s been discussed here plenty of times. The conclusions that you seem to be drawing from this are mistaken. I’m not saying that this disproves, faith alone, we can still debate that. What I mean is that the Catholic Church isn’t changing Her teaching. :stuck_out_tongue:
[/quote]

:amen:


#4

What’s new? The Catholic Church has never taught that we can work our way into heaven, but only that the faith that saves is the faith that “works,” ie, obeys, follows, grows. She has always condemned the notion that all one has to do is believe (“even the demons believe and tremble”), ie, intellectual assent. “Faith” as in following, submiting, changing, working, walking (pick a verb) and as opposed to mere fiduciary trust or intellectual assent, is what saves us. We don’t think anything can be added to what Jesus did for us on the Cross (affirmed by Trent), but we believe that we have to reach out all of our lives and with all of our lives to grasp what Jesus did for us on the Cross.


#5

Ahem…

Maybe you should actually look into what the Catholic Church actually teaches instead of what you mistakenly seem to believe She teaches.

God Bless,
Maria


#6

I can no longer remember the thread that addressed this about a month ago, but please go to the following link I placed below. This is Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa’s homepage and it will include the homily you are referring to in it’s entirety. This will definetly clear this matter up for you.

In the Hearts of Jesus and Mary

cantalamessa.org/en/preaching.htm


#7

Those are some good meditations by Father Cantalamessa. They are meditations on aspects of the Catholic Faith, emphasizing here, Paul’s writings about God’s free gift of salvation. Nothing in them represents a change in our Faith. He credits Luther for “rediscovering” this aspect of the Faith:

“Nothing of this text can be understood, even to the point that it could inspire fear more than consolation (as occurred for centuries), if the term “righteousness of God” is interpreted incorrectly. It was Luther who rediscovered that “righteousness of God” does not indicate here chastisement, or worse, his revenge, toward man, but rather it indicates, on the contrary, the act through which God “makes” man “just.” (He really said “declares,” not “makes,” just, because he was thinking of an extrinsic or legal justification, in an imputation of justice, more than a real being made just.”

In the last sentence above, he points to a remaining difficulty between the Catholic and Lutheran understanding of Grace. Luther considered justification to be an external, legal act, having no internal effect, whereas the Church considers that God’s free gift of justification actually “makes” us just through an infusion of Grace.


#8

[quote=JimG]Those are some good meditations by Father Cantalamessa. They are meditations on aspects of the Catholic Faith, emphasizing here, Paul’s writings about God’s free gift of salvation. Nothing in them represents a change in our Faith. He credits Luther for “rediscovering” this aspect of the Faith:
“Nothing of this text can be understood, even to the point that it could inspire fear more than consolation (as occurred for centuries), if the term “righteousness of God” is interpreted incorrectly. It was Luther who rediscovered that “righteousness of God” does not indicate here chastisement, or worse, his revenge, toward man, but rather it indicates, on the contrary, the act through which God “makes” man “just.” (He really said “declares,” not “makes,” just, because he was thinking of an extrinsic or legal justification, in an imputation of justice, more than a real being made just.”
*** In the last sentence above, he points to a remaining difficulty between the Catholic and Lutheran understanding of Grace. Luther considered justification to be an external, legal act, having no internal effect, whereas the Church considers that God’s free gift of justification actually “makes” us just through an infusion of Grace. ***
[/quote]

Thanks for adding this insight… as it does reiterate a serious problem Luther’s theology suffered from.

Well stated (for a retired beaurocrat :whistle: )


#9

Thank you for posting the second link to the full text. As I read it, I didn’t see Fr. Cantalamessa say we are saved by “faith alone” as the first article implies. But I did find this quote from the sermon, which I think is quite beautiful:

What the Apostle was above all at pains to proclaim in Romans 3 was not that we are justified by faith, but that we are justified by faith in Christ; not so much that we are justified through grace, but rather that we are justified through the grace of Christ. Christ himself is the heart of the message, at a deeper level than faith and grace.


#10

Wasn’t it Martin Luther that added the word “alone” ?

Anyway if he did, one word in the wrong place can make a Hell of a difference.

It’s like the quote, “money is the root of all evil”, when infact the Bible doesn’t say that.

It says the Love/desire for money is the root of all evil.


#11

Wow great point JKirk…I never thought abut the point that the demons believe in Jesus, that’s very clear in the Bible.


#12

Who speaks for Rome? Meaning - As a Lutheran I can look at what the Lutheran church teaches about various subjects of doctrine by reading the Scriptures and the BOC. When someone who clams to be Lutheran says something I can look and see what he is teaching is in conformance with Scripture and the BOC. If he is not teaching what is contained in Scripture, he is in peril of his soul. If he is not teaching what is contained in the BOC then he is not a Lutheran.

Who speaks for Rome? If the catechism of the RCC is an official document like our BOC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Roman Catholic church. So who? The Councils? The Catechism? The Pope? The Magesterium? And what document or set of documents show what the RCC teaches on the various subject of Doctrine.

Reason I ask is because I will show something from one of your supposed official documents and I get "Well that is not what it teaches see this or see that that will tell you what we mean when we say that.”

Is the papal Chaplin being disciplined because he is teaching a different doctrine then the official RCC doctrine?

However, I also realize “the shoe fits” us Lutherans also. Who speaks for the Lutherans? If the our BOC is an official document like the catechism of the RCC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Lutheran confession. So who? The Councils? The Catechism? The Synods And what document or set of documents show what the Lutherans teach on the various subject of Doctrine

That question I can answer, Scripture and as a confession of Scripture, the BOC.

Isa 65:1 "I permitted Myself to be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I permitted Myself to be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ To a nation which did not call on My name.
Isa 65:2 "I have spread out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, Who walk in the way which is not good, following their own thoughts,
Isa 65:3 A people who continually provoke Me to My face, Offering sacrifices in gardens and burning incense on bricks;
Isa 65:4 Who sit among graves and spend the night in secret places; Who eat swine’s flesh, And the broth of unclean meat is in their pots.
Isa 65:5 "Who say, ‘Keep to yourself, do not come near me, For I am holier than you!’ These are smoke in My nostrils, A fire that burns all the day.
Isa 65:6 “Behold, it is written before Me, I will not keep silent, but I will repay; I will even repay into their bosom,
Isa 65:7 Both their own iniquities and the iniquities of their fathers together,” says the LORD. “Because they have burned incense on the mountains And scorned Me on the hills, Therefore I will measure their former work into their bosom.”

Jer 31:33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
Jer 31:34** “They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,”** declares the LORD, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

I look forward to that day


#13

little sheep, I refer to this web page:

scripturecatholic.com/justification.html

lots of scripture… all supporting the Catholic position :stuck_out_tongue:


#14

[quote=littlesheep]Who speaks for Rome? Meaning - As a Lutheran I can look at what the Lutheran church teaches about various subjects of doctrine by reading the Scriptures and the BOC. When someone who clams to be Lutheran says something I can look and see what he is teaching is in conformance with Scripture and the BOC. If he is not teaching what is contained in Scripture, he is in peril of his soul. If he is not teaching what is contained in the BOC then he is not a Lutheran.
[/quote]

You mean, who speaks for the Catholic Church? Simplifying the Church to Rome is not helpful. The Magisterium, “speaks for Rome,” as does the Pope, if by that you mean the entire Church Catholic. Look for official documents and declarations.

Who speaks for Rome? If the catechism of the RCC is an official document like our BOC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Roman Catholic church. So who? The Councils? The Catechism? The Pope? The M

agesterium? And what document or set of documents show what the RCC teaches on the various subject of Doctrine.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a very good place to start, as it has been approved by the Apostolic See. Local catechisms, such as the Baltimore Catechism, are promulgated by the local churches and are not thus what the Catholic Church as a whole says (necessarily).

" the catechism of the RCC is an official document like our BOC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Roman Catholic church."

Teaching otherwise than the beliefs of the Church does not necessarily incur an excommunication, even if that person is wrong.

Reason I ask is because I will show something from one of your supposed official documents and I get "Well that is not what it teaches see this or see that that will tell you what we mean when we say that.”

Because you choose to either misinterpret or interpret the documents out of context. You can only see what we actually believe, often, by comparing several documents which clarify each other. This is normal. You do it with the Bible, no doubt, in difficult passages.

Is the papal Chaplin being disciplined because he is teaching a different doctrine then the official RCC doctrine?

He is not teaching a different doctrine than official Catholic doctrine. The Church has never taught salvation by works, and never will.


#15

[quote=littlesheep]Ahem – I Invite my RCC friends to read some news out of Rome. These were just pointed out to me.

catholic.org/international/internationa l_story.php?id=18021

thesoutherncross.co.za/features/cantala messa.htm

cantalamessa.org/en/2005Avvento3.htm

Maybe there is change in the wind.

And I have never heard the story about the Shepards before, That is a wonderful little story
[/quote]

You Wish!
http://bestsmileys.com/tongs/2.gif


#16

[/font]http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=31&catname=15

I realize that these guys are outside of your communion. I also realize that these guys don’t speak for Rome since Vatican II. But their critique of the JDDJ in light of the Council of Trent is what my understanding of what the RCC teaches in regards to Justification.

And the cannons of the Council of Trent has not been repealed or set aside or however it is done. They are STILL the official teaching of Rome “as far as I know”

So which is it? Either Faith Alone as understood by the Lutherans or Trent or is there some new definition that is forming but hasn’t been canonized yet?
I’m trying to nail you down because either we really have some disagreements, or we are talking past each other and just calling each other names because its fun.

By the way where did you find the YOU WISH cartoon I have a co-work that needs that.


#17

[quote=littlesheep]Who speaks for Rome? Meaning - As a Lutheran I can look at what the Lutheran church teaches about various subjects of doctrine by reading the Scriptures and the BOC. When someone who clams to be Lutheran says something I can look and see what he is teaching is in conformance with Scripture and the BOC. If he is not teaching what is contained in Scripture, he is in peril of his soul. If he is not teaching what is contained in the BOC then he is not a Lutheran.

Who speaks for Rome? If the catechism of the RCC is an official document like our BOC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Roman Catholic church. So who? The Councils? The Catechism? The Pope? The Magesterium? And what document or set of documents show what the RCC teaches on the various subject of Doctrine.

Reason I ask is because I will show something from one of your supposed official documents and I get "Well that is not what it teaches see this or see that that will tell you what we mean when we say that.”

Is the papal Chaplin being disciplined because he is teaching a different doctrine then the official RCC doctrine?

However, I also realize “the shoe fits” us Lutherans also. Who speaks for the Lutherans? If the our BOC is an official document like the catechism of the RCC then those who teach otherwise are not of the Lutheran confession. So who? The Councils? The Catechism? The Synods And what document or set of documents show what the Lutherans teach on the various subject of Doctrine

That question I can answer, Scripture and as a confession of Scripture, the BOC.

Isa 65:1 "I permitted Myself to be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I permitted Myself to be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ To a nation which did not call on My name.
Isa 65:2 "I have spread out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, Who walk in the way which is not good, following their own thoughts,
Isa 65:3 A people who continually provoke Me to My face, Offering sacrifices in gardens and burning incense on bricks;
Isa 65:4 Who sit among graves and spend the night in secret places; Who eat swine’s flesh, And the broth of unclean meat is in their pots.
Isa 65:5 "Who say, ‘Keep to yourself, do not come near me, For I am holier than you!’ These are smoke in My nostrils, A fire that burns all the day.
Isa 65:6 “Behold, it is written before Me, I will not keep silent, but I will repay; I will even repay into their bosom,
Isa 65:7 Both their own iniquities and the iniquities of their fathers together,” says the LORD. “Because they have burned incense on the mountains And scorned Me on the hills, Therefore I will measure their former work into their bosom.”

Jer 31:33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
Jer 31:34** “They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,”** declares the LORD, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

I look forward to that day
[/quote]

AH, I see now. I was wondering what protestants did when they couldn’t understand something fully in scripture, thank you for answering that. So if someone say has a problem with the parable of the weeds and the wheat, they should ask you first since you will reject them solely on your interpretation if they differ from what you understand it to mean.

Wow, and you guys have a problem with the authority of the Pope? :confused:


#18

Read the section in the catechism on justification. That’s the official teaching. We can never get official teaching out of Protestants since none of them can agree on what the Bible says. You might think about that.


#19

Faith Alone is a totally unscriptural idea and will never become a part of the Catholic teaching as such. Luther had to weave the word “alone” into the Bible in order to get his heretical theology to fit. Catholics do not believe that we are saved by our works, but works are a necessary part of a living faith. Faith is not just belief, because the devils believed, and still tried to take on God. What Catholics believe in is a living faith, i.e. in order to be “saved” you must be sanctified, and in order to be sanctified you must have grace given to you by Christ through baptism and the Holy Spirit. Catholicism never ever taught that you could “work” your way into heaven and that thought was declared anathema at the Council of Trent. Let’s see what the Apostle James had to say about this:

14: What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15: If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16: And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17: Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18: Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19: Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20: But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21: Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22: Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23: And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
25: Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
26: For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

and the Apostle Paul:

Philippians 2:12

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

and the Lord Jesus:

Matthew 7:21

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Luke 6:46

And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

The difference between the Catholic version of faith and the protestant version is that the Catholic believes in a saving faith taught by Scripture while protestants believe in faith = belief, which is unscriptural.


#20

Hey Littlesheep!

Can you show me a verse in the Bible where the words 'faith" & “alone” are used together?

I can…http://www.emotihost.com/glass20/10.gif

Pax vobiscum,

P.S. I just used the biggest font here and the animation is from BestSmileys.com


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.