Catholics and Protestants: This is UNBELIEVABLE, would you please answer me these questions?

Question

I am one “unnaturally born” into Christianity – and although I do attend a specific church, at heart I am neither a Catholic nor a Protestant. I am a Christian who burns for the glory of the Lord, driven by the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Gospel of the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ in love, and search out truth to teach others so that they, too, may be saved and grow in their knowledge and understanding of the LORD, so as to worship and honor and serve and obey Him as we ought, all to the end of His glory.

Justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone.

This was the “battle cry” that led to the reformation and resultant fragmentation of the Christian church.

BUT NOW, I behold the “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” as another answerer posted a link to this for me to be enlightened:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

-

I must say, I am FLOORED by what I read!

It states that Catholics and Lutherans BOTH believe that Justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone! (See points #15 and #19!!!)
No only this, but see point #20!

It is as if BOTH are preaching and teaching and saying they agree with the main teachings of John Calvin!
This is as of 1999!

My questions:
1) Does the OFFICIAL Roman Catholic Church, led by the Pope AGREE with this “Joint Declaration” or only some fractions of Catholicism that no longer follow the Pope?

2) In this document, it makes abundantly clear that Catholicism refuses to admit any past “error”, but rather speaks of “new insights” and “developments” that have taken place (points #7 and #8!!!). And so now, Catholics are saying “new insights” and “developments” in the history of the Church through “Bible Study” (see points #7 and #8) have led them to AGREE with Luther’s main original claims regarding the doctrine of justification!?

3) If you say that the OFFICIAL RCC agrees with this “Joint Declaration” AND the RCC now agrees with Luther’s main contentions, then why doesn’t the RCC simply admit they were incorrect about Luther, just as they were incorrect about Galileo? Is not the CHIEF point of the Gospel that ALL are imperfect and holy as God – excepting Jesus – and all are in desperate need of salvation through His righteousness? Is this a matter of pride for the Catholic Church?

Answer 1

It is as if BOTH are preaching and teaching and saying they agree with the main teachings of John Calvin!
This is as of 1999!

Rest assured, the major teachings of nearly all western Christian sects are identical, and always have been.

1) The short answer: this is an official Vatican document, and the RCC congregation has no choice but to follow the pope on issues of *canon law* and *morality* only. In other words, the congregation is not required to agree with this statement, but as an official Vatican statement, it has the approval of the pope.

On the other hand, I was taught that justification is only by grace, through faith, in the early 70's - before this document was even a thought, apparently. This predates the current RCC catechism. I believe the catechism we were using was from the early 1900s, or possibly even the 1800s.

At the time of Luther, the pope actually had a *sales force*, selling indulgences. This was Luther's primary disagreement with the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), and led to his insistence on restructuring the RCC without the pope, and instead relying on scripture ("sola scriptura"). A mere 50 years later, the new pope outlawed the selling of indulgences, and that edict has remained in effect since. Thus, the mechanism for achieving salvation was only a temporary issue, altered by one greedy pope and restored by another shortly (historically) thereafter.

So, although I cannot say for certain that the RCC doctrine of justification by faith existed in the RCC in Luther's time, I can say with a fair degree of certainty that it has existed at least since the early 1900s.

I looked in the current RCC catechism, and they reference Augustine's writings (section 2001) ("De gratia et libero arbitrio" and "De natura et gratia")) as a source for "grace alone" salvation. Considered *the* great apologeticist of the RCC, he died in 430 C.E. *Presumably*, *permitting* salvation by means other than grace existed as a RCC doctrine for only 50 years!

2) Actually, that is not what this says. Read it again more closely. What it says is that *both* churches have changed from their previous incompatible positions (without assigning blame to either). It also states that neither disavow their past doctrines - in other words, they both agree that they were both wrong about *something(s)*. They *also* both agree that the condemnations made by each against the other (in the past) were taken seriously, rather than dismissed. What those prior doctrine(s) were is not detailed (only the new, concurring beliefs).

3) Perhaps you never read about the counter-reformation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_reformation
Of course, in many respects, the RCC does *not* believe that they were incorrect about Luther. The RCC does *not* accept the doctrine of "sola scriptura". The RCC does *not* accept the removal of the so-called "Apocrypha" from the canon of inspired scripture. The RCC does *not* accept that the office of the pope is evil by its very existence. etc. etc. etc. You are reading far more into this than is actually present. This official document only declares that the RCC and the Lutherans are now on the same page with respect to justification *only*, and have agreed on this issue only after *both* have altered their previous doctrine (which is admitted in this document). It also appears that the doctrines of both sects were altered *independently*. In other words, that they did not change their doctrine in this matter in order to produce this document, but rather that both of their doctrines have changed in years past to arrive at an identical teaching *in this specific matter only*. There is no indication that there is agreement on *any* other point of contention (of which there are many)!

Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/

Answer 2

Your question seems to assume the Catholic Church is wrong. . . And, despite the fact you've declared neutrality as far as denominations go, you seem to be favoring Lutherans over Catholics. . .

Two things you need to understand:

1) The Catholic Church doesn't change - it develops. The fact of the matter is, the Holy Spirit is guiding the Magesterium of the Church. Therefore, it is not beyond the realm of possibility for them to claim new revelations, insights, etc. That's what they are supposed to do. As these things happen, the Church develops - not "change" mind you, it develops.

The Fundamental Dogma the Church believed back in Apostolic times is still enforced today, and will be enforced until the end of time. Inspired Revelation and Insight helps the Church implement these same old Dogma's in different ways.

As far as mistakes made by the Church, people love to use this one as evidence the Catholic Church is not the True Church founded by Christ Himself. Nowhere did Jesus ever promise members of His Church would enjoy sinlessness on earth. This means the members of the Church, laity and clergy alike, will have to contend with their tendancy to sin.

This does, from Day One, lead to controversies within the Church. Even the Letters of Paul speak of controversies that started over the proper way to celebrate Mass and to revere the Holy Eucharist and such. The important thing to know is that, the fact the Church on earth is populated entirely by sinners, does not mean the Church's teachings on Faith and Morals can't be infallible. There is Scripture to back this up:

Matt. 13:24-30 - scandals have always existed in the Church, just as they have existed outside of the Church. This should not cause us to lose hope in the Church. God's mysterious plan requires the wheat and the weeds to be side by side in the Church until the end of time.

Matt. 13:47-50 - God's plan is that the Church (the kingdom of heaven) is a net which catches fish of every kind, good and bad. God revealed this to us so that we will not get discouraged by the sinfulness of the Church’s members.

Matt. 16:18 - no matter how sinful its members conduct themselves, Jesus promised that the gates of death will never prevail against the Church.

Matt. 23:2-3 - the Jewish people would have always understood the difference between a person's sinfulness and his teaching authority. We see that the sinfulness of the Pharisees does not minimize their teaching authority. They occupy the "cathedra" of Moses.

Matt. 26:70-72; Mark 14:68-70; Luke 22:57; John 18:25-27 - Peter denied Christ three times, yet he was chosen to be the leader of the Church, and taught and wrote infallibly.

Mark 14:45 - Judas was unfaithful by betraying Jesus. But his apostolic office was preserved and this did not weaken the Church.

Mark 14:50 - all of Jesus' apostles were unfaithful by abandoning Him in the garden of Gethsemane, yet they are the foundation of the Church.

John 20:24-25 - Thomas the apostle was unfaithful by refusing to believe in Jesus' resurrection, yet he taught infallibly in India.

Rom. 3:3-4 - unfaithful members do not nullify the faithfulness of God and the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church.

Eph. 5:25-27 - just as Jesus Christ has both a human and a divine nature, the Church, His Bride, is also both human and divine. It is the holy and spotless bride of Christ, with sinful human members.

1 Tim. 5:19 - Paul acknowledges Church elders might be unfaithful. The Church, not rebellion and schism, deals with these matters.

2 Tim. 2:13 - if we remain faithless, God remains faithful for He cannot deny Himself.

2 Tim. 2:20 - a great house has not only gold and silver, but also wood and earthenware, some for noble use, some for ignoble use.

Jer. 24:1-10 - God's plan includes both good and bad figs. The good figs will be rewarded, and the bad figs will be discarded.

1 Kings 6,7,8 - the Lord commands us to build elaborate places of worship. Some non-Catholics think that this is controversial and the money should be given to the poor, even though no organization does more for the poor of the world that the Catholic Church. We create our churches with beauty because Christ our King lives in the churches in the blessed Eucharist.

Matt. 26:8-9; Mark 14:4-5; John 12:5 - negative comments concerning the beauty of the Church are like the disciples complaining about the woman anointing Jesus' head with costly oil. Jesus desires that we honor Him with our best gifts, not for Him, but for us, so that we realize He is God and we are His creatures.

Matt. 26:10-11 - Jesus says we have both a duty to honor God and give to the poor - a balanced life of reverence and charity.

Answer 3

So one of the things you should realize from the responses that you've received is that Catholics and Protestants disagree on several points, not the least of which is *what we actually disagree on*. I've seen several answers from Protestants, for example, where their perception of what the Catholic Church does or teaches is not actually what the Church does or teaches. I'm sure if I gave you a laundry list of our differences, my Catholic bias would show, even if I try to stay impartial. My recommendation is that you make appointments to talk to clergy of various Catholic and Protestant churches. You will find many differences among churches that identify as Protestant, less (but still present) among those that identify as Catholic. For example, you might pick a couple of large Protestant sects (baptist, presbyterian, methodist) and compare them to unaffiliated churches or churches affiliated with smaller denominations. On the Catholic side, you could talk to a Roman Catholic priest and also to clergy from the Eastern Orthodox tradition and possibly also to someone from the Anglican community (like Father K on Answers). Ask them about the following, and be sure you ask about their Church's "official" position. And take note of what they have to say about "official." 1. The Trinity - what does their denomination believe about it and why? 2. Mary - what sort of person was she and what is her role in the church and in the history of Christianity? 3. The Eucharist/Communion - what is it, what does it mean, why is it celebrated and how often is it celebrated? 4. Scriptural interpretation - are laypeople encouraged to interpret the Bible on their own (without guidance); why or why not? 5. Sacred Tradition - do the Traditions handed down to us from the early church have a role in modern spirituality; why or why not? 6. Is the Bible the ONLY source of spiritual guidance for Christians? Why or why not, and how do you justify your response? 7. Respect for the Saints and the allowability of religious art - what does your denomination have to say about these issues and why? 8. Intercessory prayer - is it allowed or not? Those, I think, are the really big points where we have significant theological differences. I'm not going to tell you the difference between the Protestant and Catholic views, because the only one I can give with any degree of authority is the Catholic view. Your first respondant gave an excellent answer detailing the Protestant perception of the differences between Catholics and Protestants. I can tell you that much of what she said about Catholics is not accurate. That's why I'm not going to detail the particulars. You will have a much better and much less biased research paper if you gather the information from venues that are not so contentious as this one.

Answer 4

SOME Lutheran Churches and the Vatican are in agreement of what Justification is -- the transformation of the sinner into a righteous child of God. However, there are still big differences wIth regard to the definitions of Grace and Faith, and what their respective roles are in Justification.

You are reading way too much into this. This is an academic, esoteric issue. The Catholic Church has not changed its position, nor is it in entire agreement with what Luther, much less Calvin, taught.

In the spirit of our beloved late Holy Father, His Holiness Pope John Paul II, I thank the Lord for this achievement in Ecumenism and Christian Unity.

Answer 5

Well. My goodness.

One thing you can always count on when it comes to Vatican documents: They are like a lavish 12-course meal, and as such require some time to digest. But based on my first read-through, I'll take a stab at your questions.

1. The easiest to answer: Yes, this is official. It's published by Holy See (actually came out in 1999, I think), which is "Catholic Central", headed by the Pope. Nothing shows up on the Holy See's web site that he hasn't approved.

2. "New insights/developments" are explained in #13 as essentially the ongoing body of work since the 16th century in biblical studies and "modern investigations of the history of theology and dogma" -- in other words, what theologians have learned in the interim with source materials not available to 16th century scholars. I don't read it as a couched term shaded to mean "we've decided the council of Trent was wrong and we're quietly reversing it". The condemnations of both Trent and the Lutheran Confessions are determined to no longer apply -- but only to the teachings of the two bodies as presented in this document. It's a very significant step, heck yes, but a much smaller one than would be a declaration that Luther was right after all. Simply put, that's not what it says.

3. Look closely, and you'll find that while the document takes pains to define justification, it does not do the same for faith or grace; rather, where there is agreement on what faith or grace DOES, it appears in the "we jointly confess" paragraphs. It would be a bit of a stretch to infer from this document that the Church is ready to retract its view of Luther entirely at this point.

But consider this, from #19:
"We confess together that all persons depend completely on the saving grace of God for their salvation."
"...as sinners they stand under God's judgment and are incapable of turning by themselves to God to seek deliverance, of meriting their justification before God, or of attaining salvation by their own abilities. Justification takes place solely by God's grace."

Is that not exactly what you're saying -- "all are in desperate need of salvation through His righteousness"? And here you have the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation (which includes the largest US Lutheran body, the ELCA) saying WE confess this; WE agree. And further, "In light of this consensus the remaining differences of language, theological elaboration, and emphasis in the understanding of justification ... are acceptable". (#40) Acceptable differences, where once there was blanket condemnation! It's definitely a step in the right direction.

One final point: Apparently not all Lutherans are pleased with the JDDJ and in fact the Missouri Synod is adamantly opposed to it, although in perusing the LCMS position I wonder if they even read the same document I did. But that's just me. With sincere respect to confessional Lutherans who are fine folks, that matter of pride you raised seems now to be the ball in their court. Or at least the Missouri Synod's.

Answer 6

Here are my thoughts, please keep in mind I am not a priest or theologian:

1) Yes, this is official Catholic teaching and belief. The Vatican does not publish the propositions of some factions which do not follow the Pope.

2) I did not exactly see a question in there. Contrary to what you may have heard, this is not new thinking. Catholics do not, and never have, thought we could "earn" our way into heaven.

3) I would like to call your attention to point #21. Catholics and Lutherans do not agree on everything. Catholics do not agree with Calvin's ideas of predestination. Seems to me that this document is pointing out where we agree and also where we do not agree.

We have been telling you since you got here that Catholicism does not teach that one can "earn" his or her way into heaven. I am glad you are beginning to believe us. That said, apparently your pre-conceived notions are hard to change. You still think that this is a new idea in Catholicism, you still want to criticize the church for changing our beliefs and not admitting to the change.

Answer 7

Dude, this is incredible stuff. I hope that this has really taken root in the heart of the 'average' Catholic! I, too, claim no denomination, though many aspects of the RCC make me uncomfortable. However, if the RCC is willing to go by what the Bible says--- the we are saved and justified by FAITH ALONE this is a huge step forward! I'm sorry that no one else is responding to your news with joy, I am!

If they're really calvinists --- well, heh. That's pretty awesome. (Btw, do you have his commentaries? They are so much more readable than I would have imagined! If only the Kings and Chronicles and Samuels were in there!)

What is exciting about this is that Jesus has said He'd come back for His SPOTLESS BRIDE. If we are still fractured, are we spotless? While I would never 'bow the knee' to lots of RCC beliefs, this is a step in the right direction! Praise God for this, brother, and for you and your zeal for Him and His Word! :)

Answer 8

well They are always changing.
I find that there is a wide variety of beliefs in the RCC . Here in Latin America many Catholics from the US would not even recognize this as the RCC that they know...
I also have a Spanish Catholic authorized bible that states that they believe in evolution and US Catholics would refute that, but I have it here at home..
The Saints they worship in Mexico are very different from the standard Saints they have in the US..

Answer 9

I'm probably not your target audience for the question.

But i can only affirm the veracity of Question 1 via my Catholic friends. Yes, the Joint Declaration is accepted by their leaders - no weird breakaway faction.

Answer 10

Following is copied and pasted from the document:

"Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works (point 15)"

"We confess together that all persons depend completely on the saving grace of God for their salvation."

The document does not say that we are saved BY FAITH ALONE. We are saved by GRACE.

A person needs to cooperate with God's grace to produce the fruits of faith, hope and love. It is important to understand that love is not an emotion, but a work. Love is shown by means of works of charity.

Faith, hope, and love are acts of the human will. We can decide to have faith hope and love or we can decide NOT to have these things in our life. If we cooperate with God's grace and allow faith, hope and love to grow in our life, we will be saved. If we do not, we will die.

Faith without works is dead and works without faith is meaningless.