# Answering Roman catholics



## Humbled_Calvinist (Aug 21, 2004)

Can anyone here tell me where I could find information on how to answer those who are into Roman Catholicism? I'm in another board where I am trying to dialog with an Rc but I don't really know how to answer him as I would like to.
Here's an example:

Me: What is the ground our Salvation rest upon? Justification by Faith Alone in Christ Alone to the Glory of God Alone.

But what does the Church of Rome say?

The Council of Trent: "Whoever shall affirm that men are justified solely by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, or the remission of sin to the exclusion of grace and charity, which is shed abroad in their hearts, and inheres in them; or that the grace by which we are justified is only the favour of God; let him be accursed." 

The Church of Roman declares those who believe that they are saved by the vicarious atonement of Christ alone are anathema, cursed. 

That is contrary to the Word of God.

Romans 5:9
Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! 

Titus 3:7
so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. 

1 Corinthians 6:11
And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.


RC: Your post shows how to properly misqoute the Church and misunderstand her true teaching.

From the CCC

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.[46]

Also I think John Pacheco puts it wonderfully;

"Justification is by faith. But the faith that St. Paul, and the other inspired writers of the bible meant is certainly not one of "˜faith alone"(tm). It is much, much more than that. Faith alone is a presumption of God"(tm)s mercy. Justification is by believing in Jesus Christ and obeying His commandments. That means taking up our daily crosses and suffering with Him. It is not the "˜health and wealth"(tm) gospel; it is not "˜trusting in Jesus"(tm) alone; it is not being saved irrevocably. It is the hardship gospel, it is trusting in and doing what Jesus said to do; it is a conditional salvation based on our love for Him."

What am I doing wrong and how can I correct it? I would apprciate any info as I never debated a Roman catholic before and I don't want to get it wrong. Blessings.


Tom


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Aug 21, 2004)

A very simple question to ask him is this:

Is Justification analytic or Synthetic?


Imagine a train with boxcars attached to the steam engine. Now the boxcars are attached together by the clasp at each intersection and finally to the steam engine by the lead car. Those clasps lock each boxcar of the train together to be pulled behind one another, and ultimate by the steam engine. Now the boxcars are Christians. These boxcars are completely black and filled with dung. They do not have a tint of white on them. The clasps are "œfaith" by which they are joined to the steam engine. The steam engine is Christ. The steam engine is completely white with no trace of black in or on it at all. Christ, the engine, pulls the boxcars along the track. Is this a simple illustration so far? I think it is. Now the Roman Catholic will say that God looks at the boxcar and the steam engine pulling the boxcar and declares the boxcar justified in his sight. Be reminded, the boxcar did something to earn this, and God declares him just on the basis of his work, and what Christ accomplished on his behalf. This is called an analytic declaration. God analyzes the car and the engine together, and on that basis He declares the boxcar righteous and infuses it with grace which can be lost depending upon what the boxcar actually does. Now the biblical theologian rejects that altogether. He says that God forensically declares the boxcar just synthetically. This means that God only looks upon the steam engine alone. Based on the work of the steam engine alone He declares the boxcar just. For the Roman Catholic, the boxcar turns white when it is infused with righteousness and then turns black again when it looses it. Thus it is in a continual flux at attempting to be justified. It is no wonder why all strewn though their 16 chapters in the sixth session of Trent they continually press the point that men cannot know if they are truly saved since they repeatedly need to be infused with a righteousness they frequently lose. But the biblical theologian knows that on the merit of Christ alone men are declared just (actus forensis) in God"(tm)s sight "" the very thing the Council of Trent anathematizes. This is a one time act which cannot be recanted or lost. It a court-room judgment of God on the sinner for his eternal soul.

This is crux of his misunderstanding, and HIS MISREPRESENTATION of Trent.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 21, 2004)

Matt,

Doesn't the Papist affirm that the sinner is not justified, nor analysed as such until AFTER the grace of God is infused into the sinner, thus making the sinner ACTUALLY righteous and on [b:9e279d3425]that ground[/b:9e279d3425] God declares him justified?

For the Biblical theologian, the Christian is [i:9e279d3425]simul iustus et peccator[/i:9e279d3425], having been objectively and forensically declared just based on the work of Christ alone; for the Papist, he is [i:9e279d3425]solus iustus[/i:9e279d3425], having been subjectively declared just based on his own intrinsic righteousness.


----------



## SmokingFlax (Aug 21, 2004)

Quote:

"Justification is by faith. But the faith that St. Paul, and the other inspired writers of the bible meant is certainly not one of "˜faith alone"(tm). It is much, much more than that. Faith alone is a presumption of God"(tm)s mercy. Justification is by believing in Jesus Christ and obeying His commandments. That means taking up our daily crosses and suffering with Him..."

Aside from what was pointed out above, isn't this definition of Justification somewhat confused with the doctrine of Sanctification also?


----------



## govols (Aug 22, 2004)

*aomin.org*

http://www.aomin.org is a great place to be on this issue. James White does a great job and has some great books.


----------

