tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post6013458547914753230..comments2024-03-27T20:28:38.015-04:00Comments on Reasonable Christian: The Roman Catholic Doctrine of Merits After BaptismCharlie J. Rayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-63335102926332352422009-01-28T18:00:00.000-05:002009-01-28T18:00:00.000-05:00I might add that the problem is not just with the ...I might add that the problem is not just with the Anglican Communion. Evangelicalism in general here in the U.S. is apostate from all appearances. Only those who are willing to preach the doctrines of grace without compromise can be given a clear endorsement of being "Christian."Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-81469286511793962342009-01-28T17:58:00.000-05:002009-01-28T17:58:00.000-05:00William, your other posts were not well cited. An...William, your other posts were not well cited. And furthermore, you totally ignored the other things which Latimer said which were anti-<BR/>Roman Catholic. It's obvious that you have not read Cranmer's writings on Holy Communion and the presence of Christ in the sacrament of communion. Cranmer over and over attacks the Roman Catholic position as "papist" and calls his own position, the Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-16652951044547118302009-01-28T08:58:00.000-05:002009-01-28T08:58:00.000-05:00Hello Charlie Ray,I hope you will at least post wh...Hello Charlie Ray,<BR/><BR/>I hope you will at least post what I have written on this and the other thread--the posts were well cited and substantive in their information (and certainly contained no ad hominem). Although you likely didn't intend this--by only posting my minor "post-script" post on a "Calvinist" Anglo-Catholic minister and blocking my primary post on this and the other thread a Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03632454122621599528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-76036608831161462782009-01-26T21:37:00.000-05:002009-01-26T21:37:00.000-05:00A SERMONOF THE SALVATION OF MANKINDBY ONLY CHRIST ...A SERMON<BR/>OF THE SALVATION OF MANKIND<BR/>BY ONLY CHRIST OUR SAVIOUR FROM SIN<BR/>AND DEATH EVERLASTING.<BR/>BECAUSE all men be sinners and offenders against God, and breakers of his law and commandments,<BR/>therefore can no man by his own acts, works, and deeds, seem they never so good, be justified and made<BR/>righteous before God; but every man of necessity is constrained to seek for Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-50614524163866647332009-01-26T21:30:00.000-05:002009-01-26T21:30:00.000-05:00Billy, Peter Kreeft is a ROMAN CATHOLIC. HELLO???...Billy, Peter Kreeft is a ROMAN CATHOLIC. HELLO??? Let me state it for your once more for emphasis. SANCTIFICATION AND JUSTIFICATION ARE TWO DISTINCT GRACES. Justification is NOT our union with Christ. Justification is absolutely outside of us. It is a forensic/legal declaration made outside of us and its basis and foundation is the perfect life and obedience of Christ imputed to us AND it Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-68817509405296669642009-01-26T21:21:00.001-05:002009-01-26T21:21:00.001-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-75950395121192650462009-01-26T21:21:00.000-05:002009-01-26T21:21:00.000-05:00Billy, with every word you utter you condemn yours...Billy, with every word you utter you condemn yourself further as a papist. You do not believe Articles IX-XVIII. The Articles clearly state that ONLY the merits of Christ merit ANYTHING AT ALL FOR US.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-21620631103686561682009-01-26T20:14:00.000-05:002009-01-26T20:14:00.000-05:00I have never attacked you ad hominem, as you say. ...I have never attacked you ad hominem, as you say. You however, have called me a liar and by the name Billy Bob...I don't know where you learned discourse but you should have been taught that name calling isn't acceptable. You have said I am unconverted, which is a lie. You have said I trust in my own righteousness which is not true. <BR/><BR/>I don't know how many times I will have to tell Billyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00718837086000788837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-6875697157314112242009-01-26T17:29:00.000-05:002009-01-26T17:29:00.000-05:00William, you obviously have an agenda and you have...William, you obviously have an agenda and you have made empty assertions with virtually no support. If you wish to spew this sort of nonsense on your on blog, be my guest. However, I moderate this blog. <BR/><BR/>First off, the final authority in ALL matters of faith is HOLY SCRIPTURE. If you could prove Latimer were an Anglo-Catholic, I would still reject the view. Holy Scripture Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-79953987522550096252009-01-26T12:43:00.000-05:002009-01-26T12:43:00.000-05:00Sorry, for the misspelling of Michael Horton's nam...Sorry, for the misspelling of Michael Horton's name in my last post.<BR/><BR/>Blessings in Christ,<BR/>William ScottWilliamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03632454122621599528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-26990718427068996282009-01-26T10:00:00.000-05:002009-01-26T10:00:00.000-05:00Finally, I should note that this is not necessaril...Finally, I should note that this is not necessarily an "Anglo-catholic" issue. I know an Anglo-Catholic minister who is WCF Calvinist in his soteriology (and a big fan of Michael Hortan, Westminister Seminary (East/West), etc). <BR/><BR/>Blessings in Christ,<BR/>William Scott<BR/><BR/>p.s. Because of schedule I likely won't be able to respond to any posts immediately.Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03632454122621599528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-23520999878282861282009-01-26T00:26:00.000-05:002009-01-26T00:26:00.000-05:00William, your quotes from Latmer are from 1549, pr...William, your quotes from Latmer are from 1549, prior to the full development of the English Reformation. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to conclude that Latimer is still citing the Roman Catholic view of venial and mortal sins. The Irish Articles of 1615 state this: <B>44. Not every heinous sin willingly committed after baptism is sin against the holy Ghost and unpardonable. And therefore Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-31344928886053658032009-01-26T00:11:00.000-05:002009-01-26T00:11:00.000-05:00William Scott, your comments about Billy are total...William Scott, your comments about Billy are totally OFF the mark. First off, I do not deny that good works are a necessary evidence to the church of those who have been truly converted. However, it does not follow that the elect may fall from grace. Non sequitur.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, the Homily on Justification clearly and over and over says that justification is APART FROM WORKS. Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-31484714942751225552009-01-25T23:54:00.000-05:002009-01-25T23:54:00.000-05:00Hello Charlie Ray,I just commented on the thread o...Hello Charlie Ray,<BR/><BR/>I just commented on the thread of<BR/><I>A Critique of Today's Sermon Preached by Rev. George Conger </I> <BR/>http://reasonablechristian.blogspot.com/2009/01/critique-of-todays-sermon-preached-by.html<BR/><BR/>While I'm not an Anglo-catholic and I have serious issues with the Roman Catholic teachings (Catechism, Council of Trent, etc)--Billy is totally correct when Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03632454122621599528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-72216726005482386142009-01-24T08:21:00.000-05:002009-01-24T08:21:00.000-05:00Billy, until you come to the end of your own works...Billy, until you come to the end of your own works, your own merits and your own efforts you cannot be saved. Trusting in your own righteousness instead of Christ's righteousness will merit only eternal hell for you. Only the righteousness of Christ is acceptable as a means of meriting your salvation. Until you acknowledge this and confess your self-righteousness to God, you are a lost sinner.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-67417487237359807362009-01-24T08:18:00.000-05:002009-01-24T08:18:00.000-05:00Billy, you still do not get it. In your view you ...Billy, you still do not get it. In your view you basically save yourself. Grace is ineffectual and can fail. However, in the Augustinian view, grace NEVER fails to save even ONE of the elect. Each and every single one who is elected WILL be saved and will live a life that is set apart to good works. HOWEVER, those good works NEVER merit ANYTHING AT ALL!!!<BR/><BR/>To say otherwise is to Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-44377384633830919172009-01-24T08:09:00.000-05:002009-01-24T08:09:00.000-05:00Billy, I'm not a "Romophobe." You're a papist. T...Billy, I'm not a "Romophobe." You're a papist. The fact is this paragraph shows that the Roman Catholic Church is "semi-pelagian." If you don't know the technical meaning of that word, let me know and I will explain it to you. However, semi-pelagianism says that God first provides grace to all men and then men are enabled to "collaborate with God" freely on their own. In short, Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15388492.post-23176556186071584982009-01-23T21:53:00.000-05:002009-01-23T21:53:00.000-05:00Since you seem generally unwilling to admit you mi...Since you seem generally unwilling to admit you might be wrong or that there are things which need to be discussed further, I was going to leave this alone. <BR/><BR/>But it's been gnawing at me all week, so I'm going to go ahead and write a critique of your critique. <BR/><BR/>Nice try on explaining Paragraph 2010, but your critique of it is off the mark. The part you laughably refused to Billyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00718837086000788837noreply@blogger.com