Gentlemen, can we move along here? This site was not established to argue over the philosophical stle of arguments. It was established to discuss aspects of Catholicism. The true topicis: "Are we saved by faith alone?" The Catholic interpretation is, "No, faith without works is dead." This draws into the point made, that man cannot "save" himself, therefore, all his works are impotent. However, the Catholic view is that man can lose salvation if he doesn't cooperate with the fact that Jesus has died for our sins, and therefore, made it "possible" to enter the kingdom of Heaven.

On Sun, Jul 3, Keith H. Bray <kbrayhlc@...> wrote:

I will introduce myself as someone that seeks common-ground with Roman Catholics ("Catholicism"), contrary to Mormons or JW's, intending no incivility with the comparisons as they are theological and sociological cults.  Frank Beckwith (or Dr. Francis Beckwith) is a personal friend, and Robert George, Patrick Lee, and Fr. Robert Spizter, just a few of my Catholic heroes.  Evangelicals are notoriously weak or not well-thought out bioethical matters, and probably have not heard of the above mentioned names (again, intending no incivility).  I am also a Thomistic substance dualist, a Molinist (that nasty Jesuit) and this introduction can be expanded to die the death of a thousand qualifications so I will cease for the moment as I do not know yet know how this forum works.  

I am in disagreement with certain Catholic doctrines, especially in the area of theology proper (or Doctrine of God)--and this is contingent upon whether or not some of God's incommunicable attributes are required or logically entailed by Catholicism.  These issues will be unpacked in due time (e.g., omnitemporality v. timelessness [and Stump and Kretzmann, Leftow, et seq. will be of no assistance]).   I do believe that the Catholic churches views on God's attributes are wrong, and this alone would be sufficient to rebut and undercut the truth claims of Catholicism (or start a wedge to borrow Phil Johnson's metaphor).  That is to say, regarding issues of sola scriptura and Mario-logy, all of which are somewhat over rehearsed at the moment, the truth is that one of our respective positions are right and the other wrong which is why I thought it would be interesting to take a different tact.

QUESTION: Starting matters off a bit simpler (my lack of quoting scripture is self-evident as I am utilizing a meta-apologetic of common ground), my query relates to the nature of soteriology and "works" as they relate to sin (i.e., I am presuming you are already a Christian).  By works, I mean are a person's (exterior) actions or deeds. 

The argument is a philosophical thought experiment: if a Catholic were driving in a vehicle and stopped at 10 traffic lights perfectly, what would happen?  Would the District Attorney send you a letter stating that you have credit in your "legal account" allowing you to run the next stop light?  The answer is no.  Why not?  Because the law presumes that you will fulfill it requirements perfectly.  That is, just because you practice good works by stopping at every sign means nothing?  There is no credit in this so-called legal account, and you do not expect to receive a letter by the District Attorney.

Now pretend that you stop at the first 9 stop lights, but you run the 10th stop light?  You are pulled over and you inform the police officer that you obeyed the law regarding the first 9 lights perfectly.   Doesn't that count for something?  The officer informs you that the law presumes you are supposed to stop perfectly, that there is no credit in your "legal account" and you have no letter from the District Attorney.  You are a lawbreaker and you are guilty?  What good are works if you have already been forgiven, aside from evidence of course?   This should be an easy thought experiment 

Thank you,

(I apologize for the format—this is my first dive into this forum).  Re: Catholic Questions Pardon My Query, But I was Literally Writing in the Dark, which Sets up a Good Pun in Retort

I would suggest, Keith, that your moral theology is too legalistic. In the Christian conception (Catholics are Christian), we are created for a variety of possibilities. God expects something of us that we may never know while we are alive. If we have the gift of faith and embrace the salvation that is offered, we don't enter a legal contract. Rather, we embrace the possibility of starting to live in recognition of God's rule, or kingdom.

Good works, to the Christian, are not actions to "earn" salvation, which can't be done, but a response of gratitude for the gifts of faith and salvation. Even though there was a (largely semantic) misunderstanding between an Augustinian friar and the pope 500 years ago, the Catholic understanding and the Lutheran are not far apart at all. (See http://goo.gl/y5yQN for an official document on the subject.)

In sum, to refer to your example, God does not presume you will stop perfectly at all 10 stops (being omniscient God knows you won't). For that reason, God has placed at your disposal the (sacramental) means for apologizing and making amends when you fail.