Works plus faith

balshan

Well-known member
I am finding it interesting that RCs tell us it is not faith alone that saves. Yet when it comes to the claims made by the RCC about being founded by Jesus, the pillar and foundation of truth and morals they do not apply the works test at all. If one's salvation is dependent on works and following commandments then the institution that makes the bold claims list above needs to show the same. Why do RCs think their institution does not have to pass the same test as believers?
 

balshan

Well-known member
Would you like to reform this question, because as it is written, I find it unintelligible.
Yes that is how I feel about what your fellow RCs post on their understanding of salvation. No need to reform my question at all. Not part of the reformation. But I will agree it needs editing. Sorry about that, sometimes I get interrupted and forget to come back.

I will give an example RCs demand that all believers must obey all commandments to be saved, yet they let their institution slide, it can break as many of the commandments as it likes. Why the double standards.

The demand all believers must be holy, yet they do not demand the same of their institution.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
I am finding it interesting that RCs tell us it is not faith alone that saves.
Well, Scripture says that in James, so we are not telling you anything Scripture does not already say.
Yet when it comes to the claims made by the RCC about being founded by Jesus, the pillar and foundation of truth and morals they do not apply the works test at all.
Because the institution was founded for the purposes of teaching, preaching and handing on the Faith. The teaching authority of the Church does not depend on the moral worthiness of those who hold offices in the Church.
If one's salvation is dependent on works and following commandments then the institution that makes the bold claims list above needs to show the same. Why do RCs think their institution does not have to pass the same test as believers?
Becasue office in the Church does not depend on the moral worthiness of the one who holds the office.

Put another way: office in the Church saves no one. When Pope Francis stands before God on Judgement Day, he will not stand before God as the pope, he will stand before God as a man stripped of everything. All that will matter when the pope stands before God is what is on the pope's heart and whether that heart reflects a heart who knew and professed Faith in Jesus.

The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests, bishops, and popes. Catholics know and understand this.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
I understood what she wrote just fine. Clean off your glasses, perhaps....?
No, Mysterium is correct. I read the question myself and found it difficult to understand exact what the point was and what was being asked.

I don't know--maybe you Protestants can read each other's minds? Is that a thing with Protestants on this site?

But I think what Balshan was getting at in the question is that the institutional RCC produces rotten fruit.
 

balshan

Well-known member
Well, Scripture says that in James, so we are not telling you anything Scripture does not already say.

Because the institution was founded for the purposes of teaching, preaching and handing on the Faith. The teaching authority of the Church does not depend on the moral worthiness of those who hold offices in the Church.

Becasue office in the Church does not depend on the moral worthiness of the one who holds the office.

Put another way: office in the Church saves no one. When Pope Francis stands before God on Judgement Day, he will not stand before God as the pope, he will stand before God as a man stripped of everything. All that will matter when the pope stands before God is what is on the pope's heart and whether that heart reflects a heart who knew and professed Faith in Jesus.

The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests, bishops, and popes. Catholics know and understand this.
Not what James says at all. He never says works saves. He says if you have faith others will see it because you are changed. There is evidence of change in you. But then RCs love to twist James into saying things he didn't say. Just they take away the fact that he is Jesus half brother by blood through Mary.

Sccripture is clear they leaders must be morally worthy. Otherwise they have contaminated said office. Please show me one verse where it says in the NT to follow false teachers, to associate with those who are sexually immoral where fruit doesn't count.

I am laughing because it so sad that RCs love to misinterpret James and yet they follow those who do not meet the standards set in James.

You can say what you like Jesus did NOT establish your evil tree. It passes the evil tree tests, so it was not established by Jesus for anything. If your institution has elected a bad pope that is because it is not following Jesus, I cannot put that more clearly. Jesus never established the office of pope. The word is not in scripture.

Put it another way yep the actions of those in office contaminate said office. Your leaders fail the scriptural requirements for leaders. Maybe you need an office of integrity, our Federal Parliament has just set up an integrity Commission because they are aware that standards are important and those who fail the standard are affecting people's respect and trust in politicans. It is hogwash to say the office is separate from the people.

The road to Hell is paved with the bones of priests, bishops, and popes. Catholics know and understand this. You are correct and yet you all follow them.

By the way you have said you are a teacher, then you know example is one of the best teaching tools available.
 

balshan

Well-known member
No, Mysterium is correct. I read the question myself and found it difficult to understand exact what the point was and what was being asked.

I don't know--maybe you Protestants can read each other's minds? Is that a thing with Protestants on this site?

But I think what Balshan was getting at in the question is that the institutional RCC produces rotten fruit.
No the point is more than you don't judge your own institution by the same standards you judge others. That Rcs claim it is faith and works that save but you don't apply those to your leaders, you keep them no matter how bad their fruit is. But the rotten fruit comment is also true but that comes from you.
 

leonard03782

Well-known member
Also, Protestants are iconoclasts
look in the mirror.
and destroyed many holy images
There are no such things
and priceless works of art during their Godless revolt.
only to rc's
The Protestants needed to eradicate every remnant of the beauty of the Catholic
I would compare the rcc to rotten eggs.
world in order that they substitute their world of heretical ugliness in its place. The same basic tactics have been employed by all revolutionaries.
Look in the mirror again.
 

balshan

Well-known member
look in the mirror.

There are no such things

only to rc's

I would compare the rcc to rotten eggs.

Look in the mirror again.
Yep let us look at the whole history of the RC we see goddess worship, destruction of records of others, murder, torture, it approved the inquistions, promoted wars, encouraged RC countries to force people to convert, harmed the sheep etc.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
The Catholic church is not wise unto the truth of God, since it teaches so much that is unbiblical. Nor can they defend such beliefs from the Bible.
Yeah--and your friend James Swan would say the same thing about Lutherans. Granted--not necessarily to the same extent--but he thinks Lutherans have unbiblical teachings too.

"But, but, but waaaaaaait!" you and James Swan bleat at me in unison: "We both believe justification by Faith alone, so our differences don't matter! It is just fellow Christians having a respectful disagreement" you and James Swan bleat triumphantly as you nod your heads at me and cross your arms as if you just checkmated me.

"Nonsense" says me. "I love how you so arbitrarily dismiss your differences." says me. "God wants the Church to be one in Faith, not many." says me. "The fact that you all agree on justification by Faith alone does not justify disunity" says me.
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
Yeah--and your friend James Swan would say the same thing about Lutherans. Granted--not necessarily to the same extent--but he thinks Lutherans have unbiblical teachings too.
We are not talking about James Swan and my beliefs, but your church's beliefs. But we would BOTH agree that the following are totally unbiblical with no foundation whatsoever in Scripture:

1. popes
2. Celibate, unmarried clergy
3. The 4 Marian Dogmas (and believing them being necessary for salvation)
4. Indulgences of any kind
5. Praying to saints dead in the Lord and one would pray to God
6. Salvation by grace through faith in Jesus plus our good works.
 

romishpopishorganist

Well-known member
We are not talking about James Swan and my beliefs, but your church's beliefs. But we would BOTH agree that the following are totally unbiblical with no foundation whatsoever in Scripture:

1. popes
2. Celibate, unmarried clergy
3. The 4 Marian Dogmas (and believing them being necessary for salvation)
4. Indulgences of any kind
5. Praying to saints dead in the Lord and one would pray to God
6. Salvation by grace through faith in Jesus plus our good works.
Yeah--I already anticipated the minimization of your differences in another post to you.

But let me also add that just becasue neither of you are Catholic and BOTH agree that whatever you believe you both agree that Catholicism is bad--that also does not justify disunity.
 
Top