Evidence for God from Science

cubeus19 wrote:Hi all, I was wondering about a few things regarding Catholics and salvation.

From what I currently know Catholics either believe or at the very least, many Protestants think that Catholics believe that salvation is not fully based on grace through faith but on a ambigous combination of faith and works.

Now my first question to anyone here who is either Catholic or knows alot about Catholics is, is that true? Do Catholics really believe that salvation is earned or merited by faith plus works?

My second question regards assurance of salvation in the Catholic church. Do Catholics or can Catholics even have assurance of salvation like what most Protestants claim to have?

If so, then how does a Catholic know if he or she is doing enough good works or has the right ratio of faith and works to assure themselves that they are indeed saved?

I'm mostly just curious about these things, please let me know if you can help me out. Thanks.

Excelent question, cubeus19. And since I'm Catholic, I'm going to try to answer as best I can.

Statements like "I'm saved by faith" or "I'm saved by works" all miss the point, since neither works nor faith in and of themselves can save us. To the contrary, we are saved by the redeeming actions of Christ on the cross. Our salvation, won for us on the cross, is an unmerited gift, which no amount of faith or works could rightly earn.

Christ has accepted us completely, becoming one of us, and dying for us. Christ wants to enter into a relationship with each one of us personally. However, he also created us with free will, and he does not force anyone to enter a relationship with him against their will. Thus to obtain salvation, we must believe in Christ (faith), and obey his commandments (works). Salvation is no onetime event, as throughout our lives we must continually choose to accept or reject God. As Paul stated, "Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified." (1 Cor 9:26-27) Notice the phrase "so that...I myself may not be disqualified." Paul clearly recognizes that salvation is no one time event, but that he must continue with faith and works until Christ would call him home. Also note how this totally debunks the once saved always saved proposition, since a great apostle such as Paul would certainly have locked up his salvation by the time he wrote this letter.

I think there is a misconception as to what Catholics mean by works. We do not mean works to mean only feeding the poor, housing the homeless etc. We mean works to simply mean actions that are in line with God's will. In our sense of the word, showing up at your job on time and putting in an honest effort would be a good work, unless God had a serious reason for you to be somewhere else. Going to church and feeding the hungry are good works too, but so is anything else done in line with God's will, no matter how mundane.

Since Catholics are saved by grace from the Cross, and respond to that unmerited gift with faith and works, we are not trying to work our way into heaven. That work has already been done for us on the Cross. Everything else is merely a response to Christ's outpouring of love. So there is no magic number of works Catholics need to do in a day to "keep up", we just need to follow when called.

As welcoming as an assurance of salvation would be, there is no such assurance that I am aware of in Catholic theology. Since we have free will and could reject God's love at any point, we never have any true assurance until we have actually won the race. What we have instead is hope, the sure belief that if we live life in accordance with God's will, and maintain a firm belief in all that Christ has revealed, we will be welcomed into eternal life. And hope does not disappoint.

dellsOfBittersweet wrote:

cubeus19 wrote:Hi all, I was wondering about a few things regarding Catholics and salvation.

From what I currently know Catholics either believe or at the very least, many Protestants think that Catholics believe that salvation is not fully based on grace through faith but on a ambigous combination of faith and works.

Now my first question to anyone here who is either Catholic or knows alot about Catholics is, is that true? Do Catholics really believe that salvation is earned or merited by faith plus works?

My second question regards assurance of salvation in the Catholic church. Do Catholics or can Catholics even have assurance of salvation like what most Protestants claim to have?

If so, then how does a Catholic know if he or she is doing enough good works or has the right ratio of faith and works to assure themselves that they are indeed saved?

I'm mostly just curious about these things, please let me know if you can help me out. Thanks.

Excelent question, cubeus19. And since I'm Catholic, I'm going to try to answer as best I can.

Statements like "I'm saved by faith" or "I'm saved by works" all miss the point, since neither works nor faith in and of themselves can save us. To the contrary, we are saved by the redeeming actions of Christ on the cross. Our salvation, won for us on the cross, is an unmerited gift, which no amount of faith or works could rightly earn.

Christ has accepted us completely, becoming one of us, and dying for us. Christ wants to enter into a relationship with each one of us personally. However, he also created us with free will, and he does not force anyone to enter a relationship with him against their will. Thus to obtain salvation, we must believe in Christ (faith), and obey his commandments (works). Salvation is no onetime event, as throughout our lives we must continually choose to accept or reject God. As Paul stated, "Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified." (1 Cor 9:26-27) Notice the phrase "so that...I myself may not be disqualified." Paul clearly recognizes that salvation is no one time event, but that he must continue with faith and works until Christ would call him home. Also note how this totally debunks the once saved always saved proposition, since a great apostle such as Paul would certainly have locked up his salvation by the time he wrote this letter.

I think there is a misconception as to what Catholics mean by works. We do not mean works to mean only feeding the poor, housing the homeless etc. We mean works to simply mean actions that are in line with God's will. In our sense of the word, showing up at your job on time and putting in an honest effort would be a good work, unless God had a serious reason for you to be somewhere else. Going to church and feeding the hungry are good works too, but so is anything else done in line with God's will, no matter how mundane.

Since Catholics are saved by grace from the Cross, and respond to that unmerited gift with faith and works, we are not trying to work our way into heaven. That work has already been done for us on the Cross. Everything else is merely a response to Christ's outpouring of love. So there is no magic number of works Catholics need to do in a day to "keep up", we just need to follow when called.

As welcoming as an assurance of salvation would be, there is no such assurance that I am aware of in Catholic theology. Since we have free will and could reject God's love at any point, we never have any true assurance until we have actually won the race. What we have instead is hope, the sure belief that if we live life in accordance with God's will, and maintain a firm belief in all that Christ has revealed, we will be welcomed into eternal life. And hope does not disappoint.

Nice post, I am not Catholic but what you have said accurately represents what I believe. I guess we are not that much different, after all we are brothers in Christ.

Dan

Just out of my own curiosity, I am wondering at what point Catholics believe regeneration happens. I have the feeling that its another thing I have in common with you guys.

John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 , do you guys concur?

Glen wrote:

Byblos wrote:I was away for a while and just got back yesterday. I doubt I will have time this week to address this and other issues as I will be swamped at work trying to catch up. I will say this as a quick summary, there might be varying beliefs among Catholics but the official Catholic Church's position is what matters so one cannot say they are Catholic then disagree with the official position of the church.

1. We are saved by God's grace alone, nothing we do to earn it
2. Salvation is an active, life-long process and not a one time event
3. Faith without works is dead
4. We have a moral assurance of salvation, not an absolute one (and as I've argued many times before, most non-catholics do as well, they just don't know or don't want to admit it).

That, in it a nutshell, is the official Catholic position on salvation and assurance.

We are saved by God's grace "alone", nothing we do to earn it, seems like you have a contradiction with that in 2 through 4.

Like I said in my preface, it really depends on how one defines works. If one defines it by doing anything, anything at all then you might be right that there is a contradiction. But then you're left with defending whether or not giving a mental assent to a proposition is in and of itself a work. If not, why not.

The reason we do not see a contradiction is that those supposed works are sacraments, commandments if you wish, that are not only instituted by Christ himself, but are also done at God's prompting and not ours so there is nothing of ourselves to boast about. God does the baptizing, we cooperate with it (give mental assent to it if you wish), God does the miracle of transubstantiation, we merely accept and receive it, God does the forgiving of sins, we merely confess our sins, etc. etc. In Catholic theology and understanding these are not works. I understand the majority disagree and that is fine. I only aim to clarify, not to convince.

Glen wrote:Just the works to reach a state of being worthy to be water baptized is a long process is it not? The sinner Just can't hear the gospel and be saved in the Catholic religion. I guess Luther is being de-fanged by this new improved version of grace alone theory.

I honestly don't know what that means. There's nothing new or improved about Catholic theology, it has always been what it is.

domokunrox wrote:Just out of my own curiosity, I am wondering at what point Catholics believe regeneration happens. I have the feeling that its another thing I have in common with you guys.

John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 , do you guys concur?

You would be correct in assuming it is baptism (without getting bogged down with the whole debate of whether or not water baptism is necessary).

Byblos wrote:

domokunrox wrote:Just out of my own curiosity, I am wondering at what point Catholics believe regeneration happens. I have the feeling that its another thing I have in common with you guys.

John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 , do you guys concur?

You would be correct in assuming it is baptism (without getting bogged down with the whole debate of whether or not water baptism is necessary).

Byblos, I think you need to be perfectly clear in what you mean here. Are you saying that the Catholic church teaches that regeneration occurs, by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, at the moment that one believes on Christ? And, water baptism is a symbol of that true baptism, and therefore, water baptism has no saving power? Or, are you saying that the Catholic Church teaches that one is regenerated at the moment of water baptism?
This is an important distinction, and can't be passed over. At the risk of starting another all-out war over water baptism.

Also note how this totally debunks the once saved always saved proposition

DellsofBittersweet, we already have enough threads discussing assurance of salvation. Let's just keep this on topic, and about what the Catholic Church teaches.

RickD wrote:

Byblos wrote:

domokunrox wrote:Just out of my own curiosity, I am wondering at what point Catholics believe regeneration happens. I have the feeling that its another thing I have in common with you guys.

John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 , do you guys concur?

You would be correct in assuming it is baptism (without getting bogged down with the whole debate of whether or not water baptism is necessary).

Byblos, I think you need to be perfectly clear in what you mean here. Are you saying that the Catholic church teaches that regeneration occurs, by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, at the moment that one believes on Christ? And, water baptism is a symbol of that true baptism, and therefore, water baptism has no saving power? Or, are you saying that the Catholic Church teaches that one is regenerated at the moment of water baptism?
This is an important distinction, and can't be passed over. At the risk of starting another all-out war over water baptism.

Lol Rick, I hope this does not degenerate into another all out war thread. I think I've answered this question numerous times and I will again here but before I do that let me ask you a few questions. Is it enough to state one's intent to confess their sins or must they actually confess them before they are forgiven? Is it enough to state one is a follower of Christ or must they abide by his words? etc, etc.

I (as a Catholic) see baptism in the same light. Under ordinary circumstances, one must not only express the desire to be baptized but to actually GET baptized. The act itself is part and parcel of the confession of the faith. The reason I underlined ordinary circumstances is that the Church also recognizes extraordinary circumstances under which one may be considered baptized. Those are called baptism of desire or of the heart (e.g. the thief on the cross) and baptism of blood (martyrdom for the faith). So are there circumstances where water baptism is not absolutely necessary? Yes there is but under ordinary ones water baptism is the correct formula.

And by the way, the Church also recognizes as a valid baptism anyone who was already water baptized using the correct formula as prescribed in the great commission. So one does not have to be Catholic for their baptism to be valid (including infant baptism) and one does not need a priest to get baptized (like I said, the one who is actually doing the baptizing is God). Even an atheist can baptize another, all that is needed is the intent (of the baptizee or the consent of their parents) and the correct formula (in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit).

Next you're going to ask me if you, Rick, are considered regenerated if you were never water baptized and to that I can honestly say I do not know your circumstances (or anyone else's for that matter). What I am showing here is the Catholic Church's understanding vis-a-vis water baptism. I am well aware of your disagreement with such. On a personal basis, I have no doubt in my mind that you are a brother in Christ, period.

So ideally by Baptism but in some cases there's an express lane?

Next you're going to ask me if you, Rick, are considered regenerated if you were never water baptized and to that I can honestly say I do not know your circumstances (or anyone else's for that matter). What I am showing here is the Catholic Church's understanding vis-a-vis water baptism.

Byblos, I'm not going to ask anything else. We went over this in other threads. I've read the Catholic Church's stance on this, and I've heard it from you before. My intent wasn't to argue my pov. I just wanted you to clarify what the Catholic Church teaches, and what you were saying. Some people say that baptism is necessary for salvation. I just wanted you to be clear on what kind of baptism you were talking about. You did a good job, as usual, explaining exactly what I asked you to explain. Thanks.

On a personal basis, I have no doubt in my mind that you are a brother in Christ, period.

That's kind of you to say, and thanks for being honest. I believe I'm saved, because I found a loophole in the system.

RickD wrote:

Next you're going to ask me if you, Rick, are considered regenerated if you were never water baptized and to that I can honestly say I do not know your circumstances (or anyone else's for that matter). What I am showing here is the Catholic Church's understanding vis-a-vis water baptism.

Byblos, I'm not going to ask anything else. We went over this in other threads. I've read the Catholic Church's stance on this, and I've heard it from you before. My intent wasn't to argue my pov. I just wanted you to clarify what the Catholic Church teaches, and what you were saying. Some people say that baptism is necessary for salvation. I just wanted you to be clear on what kind of baptism you were talking about. You did a good job, as usual, explaining exactly what I asked you to explain. Thanks.

On a personal basis, I have no doubt in my mind that you are a brother in Christ, period.

That's kind of you to say, and thanks for being honest. I believe I'm saved, because I found a loophole in the system.

So are you saying it's all in your efforts?

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote:

Next you're going to ask me if you, Rick, are considered regenerated if you were never water baptized and to that I can honestly say I do not know your circumstances (or anyone else's for that matter). What I am showing here is the Catholic Church's understanding vis-a-vis water baptism.

Byblos, I'm not going to ask anything else. We went over this in other threads. I've read the Catholic Church's stance on this, and I've heard it from you before. My intent wasn't to argue my pov. I just wanted you to clarify what the Catholic Church teaches, and what you were saying. Some people say that baptism is necessary for salvation. I just wanted you to be clear on what kind of baptism you were talking about. You did a good job, as usual, explaining exactly what I asked you to explain. Thanks.

On a personal basis, I have no doubt in my mind that you are a brother in Christ, period.

That's kind of you to say, and thanks for being honest. I believe I'm saved, because I found a loophole in the system.

So are you saying it's all in your efforts?

I (as a Catholic) see baptism in the same light. Under ordinary circumstances, one must not only express the desire to be baptized but to actually GET baptized. The act itself is part and parcel of the confession of the faith. The reason I underlined ordinary circumstances is that the Church also recognizes extraordinary circumstances under which one may be considered baptized. Those are called baptism of desire or of the heart (e.g. the thief on the cross) and baptism of blood (martyrdom for the faith). So are there circumstances where water baptism is not absolutely necessary? Yes there is but under ordinary ones water baptism is the correct formula.

let me put it another way then, Byblos. According to the Catholic Church, I must be saved under extraordinary circumstances.

It's either that, or you're believing something other than Catholic dogma, if you call me a "brother in Christ".

RickD wrote: let me put it another way then, Byblos. According to the Catholic Church, I must be saved under extraordinary circumstances.

That's why I said I don't know yours or anyone else's circumstances.

RickD wrote:It's either that, or you're believing something other than Catholic dogma, if you call me a "brother in Christ".

Then let the chips fall where they may.

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote: let me put it another way then, Byblos. According to the Catholic Church, I must be saved under extraordinary circumstances.

That's why I said I don't know yours or anyone else's circumstances.

RickD wrote:It's either that, or you're believing something other than Catholic dogma, if you call me a "brother in Christ".

Then let the chips fall where they may.

OOOOOOH! I'm gonna tell the pope on you!!!!

Byblos wrote:.

Glen wrote:Just the works to reach a state of being worthy to be water baptized is a long process is it not? The sinner Just can't hear the gospel and be saved in the Catholic religion. I guess Luther is being de-fanged by this new improved version of grace alone theory.

I honestly don't know what that means. There's nothing new or improved about Catholic theology, it has always been what it is.

Certainly you know about the formal steps to become catholic for the unbaptized! There's quite a program in place for those (cathechumens) wanting to become catholic that could take up to almost a year.
The goal is to become worthy through that initiation process for baptism if one is judged ready by the church, certainly sounds like a works program to me.

Grace, Glen.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:Nice post, I am not Catholic but what you have said accurately represents what I believe. I guess we are not that much different, after all we are brothers in Christ.

Dan

Amen brother.