Catholic vs Calvinist (if you had to choose)

Is Catholicism more Scripturally Accurate than Calvinism?

  • Calvinism

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
I believe you see similarities in that...

1) Catholics believe good works gain salvation.
2) IFBs believe good works gain God's favor.
 
My experience with Catholics is they teach the same. How do they not preach the gospel? They aren’t teaching from the Koran.
They teach the same regarding the person of Jesus Christ. They do not teach the same regarding the work of Jesus Christ. Catholic theology does not teach that the work of Jesus accomplished everything regarding our salvation.
 
Not only does the Roman Catholic Church not preach the gospel, but they officially condemn those who do - see Council of Trent, Canon 12:

“If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified…let him be accursed.”

 
Not only does the Roman Catholic Church not preach the gospel, but they officially condemn those who do - see Council of Trent, Canon 12:

“If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified…let him be accursed.”

That article you posted is misleading. The one I posted earlier touched on this very subject of “anathema” and what was meant by the Council. https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvation
 
They teach the same regarding the person of Jesus Christ. They do not teach the same regarding the work of Jesus Christ. Catholic theology does not teach that the work of Jesus accomplished everything regarding our salvation.
I agree based on my understanding, but I’ll explore further.
 
That article you posted is misleading. The one I posted earlier touched on this very subject of “anathema” and what was meant by the Council. https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvation
I think the article is playing fast & loose with the definition. I was raised as a Roman Catholic in a very faithful Catholic family. I went to Catholic grade school & high school. I was taught if you were outside of the Catholic church, you were damned to Hell. Excommunication puts one outside the church. Unless there are contemporary (to the council of Trent) writings that elaborate that the Council of Trent's meaning differs from the meaning of the same word in scripture, the article is wrong.
 
I think the article is playing fast & loose with the definition.
Maybe, but I’m using a very well-known and reputable website that has roots going back fifty years for most of my responses. The ministry actually started as a result of Christian fundamentalists leaving attack flyers on the windshields of cars in the parking lot of a Catholic Church, and of course it was full of misinformation. Here’s more on their background: https://www.catholic.com/about
I was raised as a Roman Catholic in a very faithful Catholic family. I went to Catholic grade school & high school. I was taught if you were outside of the Catholic church, you were damned to Hell. Excommunication puts one outside the church.
I was not raised Catholic, but I attended Catholic school after elementary. It was considered by my parents to be the lesser of two evils versus the public school. Back in those days, charter schools didn’t exist, and we didn’t have a Protestant affiliated school near our house, so it was either Catholic or public. Of course nowadays there are a plethora of school options, including virtual.
I was taught if you were outside of the Catholic church, you were damned to Hell. Excommunication puts one outside the church. Unless there are contemporary (to the council of Trent) writings that elaborate that the Council of Trent's meaning differs from the meaning of the same word in scripture, the article is wrong.
Like you, I was also taught misinformation, but from the pulpit of IFB and SBC churches. I think most of us on here can point to misinformation we were taught back in the 70s or 80s or whatever. Isn’t that part of the lifeblood of this forum, people jaded by experiences in the IFB world?

My agenda isn’t to convert anyone to Catholicism. I’m not Catholic myself, but the misinformation about Catholicism is astounding. We can’t just make statements like “I heard this…” and consider it official Catholic doctrine when it’s not.

So what do Catholics actually consider us? They officially consider Protestants “separated brethren.” That’s certainly not “condemned to hell” rhetoric. https://www.catholic.com/video/what-does-the-church-teach-about-salvation-for-protestants
 
Last edited:
I’m not Catholic myself, but the misinformation about Catholicism is astounding. We can’t just make statements like “I head this…” and call it official doctrine when it’s not.
Of course. But the number of Catholics teaching doctrine that doesn't line up with official Catholic doctrine is astounding. They are not as united and catholic as they claim to be. When Catholics give me stuff to read, if it doesn't have the stamp of the imprimatur, I've stopped wasting my time. I've grown weary of debating their human reasoning and emotions when those don't line up with official doctrine. Even the stuff with the imprimatur is loaded with human reasoning and conjecture and passages taken out of context. The Catholic church has strayed so far from the church of God. It left orthodoxy centuries ago.
 
Even the stuff with the imprimatur is loaded with human reasoning and conjecture and passages taken out of context.
True, but that was my world growing up in the Bob Jones IFB church. Half of what they used to espouse is now no longer preached, and of course it was all human and cultural conjecture and spinning. The same could be said of the Methodists splitting with the gay marriage issue. Ironically, I actually found the Catholic school a respite from my IFB church, but maybe if I’d grown up in a Catholic family I’d have a different POV.
 
Good article, but I would take umbrage with the grace + works tone of it. I agree that "good works" follows salvation and they astutely cite Philippians 2:13, but the tone of the article puts almost a legalistic emphasis on works.
Yeah, that’s one of the main reasons I never became a Catholic—that and the sacrament of reconciliation.
 
They teach the same regarding the person of Jesus Christ. They do not teach the same regarding the work of Jesus Christ. Catholic theology does not teach that the work of Jesus accomplished everything regarding our salvation.

Theoretically, the work of Christ is superfluous, since the Roman church claims the authority to open the "treasury of merit" and dispense the righteousness of Christ and the saints as indulgences:

An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1478).​

If one requires the authority of the Church to grant righteousness to remit temporal punishments, then Christ's own merits are insufficient. Depending on how much extra merit that the sinless Mary and the saints have stored up, then maybe Christ isn't even necessary to save someone.

Of course, that's just a falsehood. No mere human being has superfluous merit. Everyone, Christ himself excepted, was a sinner. The saints didn't have enough righteousness of their own to save themselves, let alone give it to someone else.
 
That article you posted is misleading. The one I posted earlier touched on this very subject of “anathema” and what was meant by the Council.

In Roman theology, may one's bad works--let's limit those to mortal sins for the sake of simplicity--result in the loss of justifying grace? (i.e. do bad Catholics forfeit heaven?)
 
Back
Top