Started By
Message

re: Happy Reformation Day!

Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:14 am to
Posted by cdur86
Member since Jan 2014
1617 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:14 am to
quote:

Salvation and duty are two different things. If you believe that you are saved through works then you believe that you are in charge of your own salvation and not God.


Catholics don't believe they are saved through works though. Salvation is a process that involves both.

James 2:24 "You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone"
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
53642 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:15 am to
Thank you for starting this thread on the OT instead of on PT.
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
53642 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:17 am to
quote:

You, as a Catholic, don’t believe that, I, as a Baptist can be saved without being a member of the Catholic Church.


We should see ourselves as Salesmen for our denominations. We are not in Management. God is The Manager. His Will sends Souls to their Final Destination.

We are mere Mortals. We should act as Salesmen and stop trying to condemn one another. Leave that to Management.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
34807 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:21 am to
quote:

. I've never seen her Catholic family members say anything of the sort.


That is all fine and good. But if you're Roman Catholic and reject Roman Catholicism, then...what are you? For clarification, "anathema" means accursed and eternally damned to hell.

TRENT:
Canon 9: “If anyone says that by faith alone the impious is justified… and that nothing else is required to cooperate… let him be anathema.”



Canon 24: “If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works… let him be anathema.”


Canon 30: “If anyone says that … after the grace of Justification has been received … there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world or in the next … let him be anathema.”

“Whereas the power of granting Indulgences was granted by Christ… the sacred holy synod … condemns with anathema those who either assert that they are useless; or who deny that there is in the Church the power of granting them.”

“If anyone shall say that the Sacraments of the New Law … are more or less than seven in number … let him be anathema.”

All affirmed in Vaticans I and II.

And yet the past few popes have said things (in their "pastoral roles") that contradict these extant dogmas directly.

So is you is or is you ain't Catholic? The world may never know.

This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 9:25 am
Posted by MobileJosh
On the go
Member since May 2018
1211 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:21 am to
quote:

Show me anywhere in Catholic doctrine or catechism that backs up your opinion



Without delving too far into this, because I really don't care, the fact that you pray to Mary.
Posted by LittleJerrySeinfield
350,000 Post Karma
Member since Aug 2013
10373 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:23 am to
quote:

I always had a suspicion that yall didn’t think Protestants true Christians, thanks for coming out and showing your true colors.


I mean, that's a two-way street. Roman Catholicism isn't Christianity.
Posted by Reflex
Member since Oct 2025
273 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:23 am to
quote:

Still better than the pedophiles.


Nah, they just had a head start and controlled the narrative.

The protestants will catch up eventually in their race to the bottom
Posted by ShoeBang
Member since May 2012
21844 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:24 am to
Wtf are you blathering about? I’m Catholic. I never said I wasn’t. I just don’t inject myself into my in-laws’ bickering about who’s right or wrong.

ETA I absolutely believe that faith without works is fruitless.
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 9:27 am
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
53642 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:27 am to
Council of Trent is fine, but, the more complete articulation of Roman Catholic belief and doctrine is found in the Catechism, which is published on-line and anybody can read it for free.

You can find complete explanations of the Trent Canons you cited in the Catechism

LINK
Posted by icecreamsnowball
Member since Mar 2025
1092 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:29 am to
quote:

the fact that you pray to Mary.
Correct. As every disciple of Christ should. Prayer and worship are not interchangeable, by the way. So, don’t attempt to equate the two.
Posted by StrongOffer
Member since Sep 2020
6393 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:30 am to
quote:

Without delving too far into this, because I really don't care, the fact that you pray to Mary.
We ask her to intercede to for us. Similar to you asking a friend to pray for you. We don't believe she is the one answering our prayers. This is backed up biblically in Revelations showing Saints in heaven praying for those on earth and in Luke "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living". Other reasons which you'd dismiss, but many people have been canonized Saints because people have asked for intercession after the Saint was dead and miracles confirmed by the Church happened.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
34807 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:31 am to
to the previous reviler, i'm not blathering about anything. I literally pasted in the direct text of Canons of Trent.

And to you, I know the Catechism. The plain words above are res ispa loquitur.

My point was someone said RCs don't say non RCs are damned. But to the extent they don't believe that, they aren't actually RCs.

And here's a catechism for you on the blasphemy of necromancy

Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992)

§ 969 restates Lumen Gentium:

“This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterrupted…
Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.”

I mean, people, awake from your dogmatic slumber and see this treachery for what it really is. Abject blasphemy.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
34807 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:33 am to
quote:

We ask her to intercede to for us. Similar to you asking a friend to pray for you.


i have never. literally never. asked a dead friend to pray for me. i don't talk to dead people. because they are dead. and it is prohibited by scripture.

i also don't eat human flesh.

and a covenant cannot be a literal cup.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
34807 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:39 am to
quote:

ETA I absolutely believe that faith without works is fruitless.


that isn't what those Canons anathematize. And you know that. Trickery and sophistry will not work on me. I would bet big money i know RC doctrine and history better than 99% of RCs. Easy bet.

Here's a little more blathering aka exposition of Scripture. Just to put the absurd James arguments to bed. I've been working on this summary for a while, because this pat argument is always raised.


James 2:24 — “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

Some claim that James 2:24 seems to contradict Paul’s declarations such as Romans 3:28 and Galatians 2:16.

However, James and Paul very clearly use the same Greek word dikaioo in different senses and contexts.

The verb dikaioo means “to justify” but carries two legitimate senses in Scripture and in Greek usage:

Sense 1. Forensic (Legal) Justification — “To declare righteous before God.”
• Rooted in the law court metaphor: a judge declaring a defendant righteous.
• Passive, with God as Judge; the sinner is declared righteous through the imputed righteousness of Christ (Romans 4:5–8).
• This is the soteriological sense.

Sense 2. Demonstrative (Vindicative) Justification — “To show or prove righteous.”
• Active, human perspective: one’s righteousness is shown genuine by works.
• Example: Luke 7:35 — “Wisdom is justified by her children.”
• Thus, while Paul uses dikaioo for divine declaration, James uses it for human demonstration.

Context: James’s Argument in Chapter 2

James contrasts dead faith (mere profession) with living faith (that
produces works). He addresses not the basis of salvation but the evidence of genuine faith.

OT (as in Old Testament) EXAMPLES:
• Abraham — Already declared righteous by faith in Genesis 15:6, later vindicated in Genesis 22 by offering Isaac.
• Rahab — Her faith was shown real by hiding the spies.
James 2:22 clarifies: “Faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works.”

Harmonizing with Paul in context--
Paul and James address different errors:

• Paul’s focus: The root of justification. His opponents were legalists who sought salvation through law.
• James’s focus: The fruit of justification. His opponents were antinomians who claimed faith without obedience.

Thus, Paul speaks of justification before God; James speaks of the demonstration of faith before men.

“We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone.” (the “other” JC)


James’s Own Theological Consistency
James consistently affirms salvation by grace alone:
• James 1:18 — “Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth.”
• James 2:5 — God chose the poor to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom.
• James 4:6 — “He gives more grace.”

Therefore, James complements rather than contradicts Paul.
Posted by StrongOffer
Member since Sep 2020
6393 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:42 am to
quote:

i have never. literally never. asked a dead friend to pray for me. i don't talk to dead people. because they are dead. and it is prohibited by scripture.
"He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive"
Luke 20:38 (directly from Jesus' mouth)

quote:

i also don't eat human flesh.

“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 you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.” John 6:53–55 (Many disciples left Jesus right after He said this and He didn't correct them saying "I just meant symbolically". You would be in the group of people who left Jesus)
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 9:46 am
Posted by ShoeBang
Member since May 2012
21844 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:46 am to
We don’t say non Catholics are damned because it is not our place to say so. Those outright judgements are sinful. I am not God and thus can only pray for your conversion and salvation if God wills it so. Who am I to judge what God deems worthy or not?

The things I can say are things like this: Protestant religions are derivative of Catholic beliefs and are thus solely dependent on the supposed error of the RCC for their own legitimacy. Like it or not. We don’t carry that burden in the RCC. We do carry the burden of the fallible humans that have marred the reputation of the Church from today all the way back to St. Peter, however. We pray for God to guide our leaders to greater and greater faith and understand that they are fallible as human beings. The rank and file Catholics don’t like bad actors in the priesthood any more than those outside of the church fyi.

I actually do believe that people of other faiths can go to heaven if God wills it. Especially those who were never introduced to him or those who were not ever invited to join the RCC.

I pray to the Saints and to Mary to intercede with God for the conversion and / or salvation of all of humanity.
Posted by ShoeBang
Member since May 2012
21844 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:50 am to
quote:

Fun fact: Martin Luther would routinely flagellate himself because he thought the devil lived in his bowels.

It's thought he just had crohns disease.


That must be why my wife's Baptist grandma tells us that it's the devil inside us when we have a cold.
Posted by BigNastyTiger417
Member since Nov 2021
5157 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:53 am to
Teaching false doctrine is not good. Also, 99% of Priests are not pedophiles.
Posted by McLemore
Member since Dec 2003
34807 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 9:57 am to
Another absolutely absurd argument.

And Luther didn’t reject it. I’m not Lutheran.

Jesus is literal when you want him to be literal. And figurative when you want him to be figurative.

I’ll blast this one out of the water in a minute. I usually like to wait to see if these threads are whacked before spending my time and energy responding. But this one appears to be sticking.


And back on praying to the dead:
One question: if Mary was sinless , then why did she need to be saved? What from? By whom?

It’s fascinating to me that we have very few words that Mary actually spoke and those very words prove she wasn’t sinless.
This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 10:00 am
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
53642 posts
Posted on 10/31/25 at 10:03 am to
Catholic Answers has info on this

LINK


quote:

Mary was sinless , then why did she need to be saved? What from? By whom?


Mary's Savior is the Triune God. She says so herself when she speaks to Elizabeth at the Visitation. She needed to be Saved so that the Mother of God could serve her purpose and her God. Eve was born without Sin. It is only fitting that the Mary also be born without Sin.

This post was edited on 10/31/25 at 10:08 am
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram