That sounds good to me, Enola. But when I explored the Presby position in the link in the OP, I discovered that good Calvinists still seem to consider the Pope to be the anti-christ. So I fear even reasonable statements from your corner won’t carry weight locally. You can imagine how it went over locally when I had 4 jewish friends stand up for me in my wedding!
I should have said I have a very Catholic understanding of the faith/works thing as well, given that’s how I was raised. Odd that so little of the requisite guilt rubbed off on me.
Anyhoo, Dr. QtM, good fellow: They got prisons in other parts of the country. I seen 'em meself. Perhaps you’ll understand it all much better from far, far away, as you look back on it a long time ago.
My experience of life suggests that people who rationalize misbehavior are the people who need to rationalize misbehavior, done by themselves or their friends. And you can’t speak that sentence to them.
Sorry I have no contribution otherwise to these specific faith-related issues.
Oh, my argument is far from the end-all on this one. I’ve personally read (on another board, and I’m sure Poly can guess who I’m talking about over there) long, LONG, dry screeds about how Predestination and Free Will could coexist, but it’s so convoluted and illogical and basically comes down to “Goddidit!” as usual that I come away from it with nothing more profound than a headache.
I can sympathize with the headache, jayjay. And speaking of Polycarp, where the heck is he? Resting, you say? All right then, if he’s resting I’ll wake him up.
Hello Poly! I’ve got a nice faith/works debate for you when you wake up, Polycarp!
'E’s pining for the Lord!
[sub]Shouting is so uncouth![/sub]
Well, yeah, you’d say that. You’re Episcopalian! 
Pining for the Lord, what kind of talk is that?
Uncouth? Sorry. Sorry. You see what I mean? I just get carried away. I’m really most awfully sorry. Sorry! Sorry, everyone.
Well, the more I read about this, the more it sounds like they think they’re having a faith/works debate, but they in fact really both land on the side of faith, but one says that since works are a result of salvation, the other side is saying that salvation comes from works. Sounds like they’re making strawmen to me.
Oh, psst, Polycarp, I think QtM was just following Psalm 98:4! 
Perhaps they’re a bunch of selfish, insular Scrooges who want their religion to justify their parsimonious approach to “loving thy neighbor”? I mean, really, I don’t want to stray too far into potential pit territory, here, but if it’s just a bunch of uncharitable jerks who are trying to weasel out of being decent human beings with donctrinaire nonsense, why bother with them? How is it that there is this community debate? Can’t you just tell them to keep it to themselves, stop bothering other folks who want to be generous citizens (of all things) and leave it at that?
lel, could you point me to the part where one side is saying “salvation comes from works”? My sense is that they’re both saying that faith alone is enough, but one side says, “since you’re saved by faith, you had best show it by works” while the other side says “since you’re saved by faith, you don’t have to show anything”.
But as I’ve said, trying to glean what each side really is saying has been difficult for me. And probably pointless too. But since it is the local controversy, I really would like to understand. Or at least be less confused.
Of course, Predeterminism has always confused me to begin with.
Frankly, that was my default assumption, Loopy.
Morbid curiosity, and the desire to not misrepresent their stances when I report on events to friends, who will shake their heads in amazement.
As for how there is this community debate, well. This sort of thing has been like meat and bread to this community for over 150 years. An old adage in this area went like this: When the first two Hollanders moved here, they right away built a church. When a third one moved here, they immediately had to build another church.
Sorry, I just phrased it incorrectly. :smack: I was just trying to say (and I hope I get it right this time!) that the one side that’s saying “show nothing” seems to be painting the other side as saying “salvation by works,” even though that side is really saying “salvation by faith, works as a result.”
Qadgop- I am so out of the loop on this that here’s where I stand-
some good “moderate-right” Calvinists whose works I’ve read & admired are pro-Auburn (James Jordan, Steve Schlissel, Peter Leithart); those who are virulently against it lean towards the “Pope is AntiChrist Batshit-crazy-right” Calvinists. SO I guess I’d sympathise with the Auburn group. PLus, they cite N.T. Wright & I think he’s cool.
You can see I’ve given lots of deep thought on this G
Thinking back to the 16th century, I can imagine an open-minded Catholic listening to Luther and, while disagreeing with him on some points, admitting that other points were on the mark. As for Calvin and his followers, on the other hand, well, I don’t want to say I agree with the persecution of the Huguenots and the excesses of the Counter-Reformation but I can imagine situations where you might want to burn someone at the stake just to shut them up. Just sayin’, is all.
And people think the disagreements between Sunni and Shi’a Muslims are violently inexplicable!