Catholics are not saved by Works

[mikeledes]

You need a little help with definitions.

Salvation is not in time, it is in eternity.

Justified and regenerated are the same things to the Roman Catholic. It is the new life that comes with sanctifying grace.

peace

I understand that justification and regeneration are connected in Catholic theology. However, Calvinists argue - like Nick - that regeneration occurs prior to repentance or faith. Moreover, there is a point in time when we experience God’s salvation, at least the first stage of it, namely, being in a state of grace. There is a point in time when we go from a ungodly to justified.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mgrfin]

Here is a quote from a Catholic source:

**This is the difficulty that St. Paul expresses when he writes: “What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? God forbid. For He saith to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. And I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy.” St. Paul thus answers the difficulty by affirming the principle of predilection, or of the gratuity of grace to which we can have no claim. Further on he states: “O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God! How incomprehensible are His judgments, and how unsearchable His ways!” St. Augustine expresses the mystery in these words: “Why He draweth one and not another, seek not to judge if thou dost not wish to err.”

St. Thomas called special attention to these two great difficulties in the mystery of predestination; one difficulty is general in scope, the other of particular interest. He says: “The reason for the predestination of some, and the reprobation of others, must be sought for in the goodness of God. . . . God wills to manifest His goodness in men; in respect to those whom He predestines, by means of His mercy, in sparing them; and in respect of others, whom He reprobates, by means of His justice in punishing them. . . . Yet why He chooses some for glory and reprobates others, has no reason except the divine will. . . . Neither on this account can there be said to be injustice in God, if He prepares unequal lots for not unequal things. . . . In things which are given gratuitously a person can give more or less, just as he pleases (provided he deprives nobody of his due), without any infringement of justice.”

The answers given by St. Paul, St. Augustine and St. Thomas show there is no contradiction. But underlying these two aspects there is an inscrutable mystery because it is essentially supernatural and also because the divine intervention is supremely free. This mystery is supernatural not only modally like a miracle that can be known by natural means, but it is supernatural because by its very nature it belongs to that class of mysteries which concerns the intimate life of God, such as the Trinity, and it thus transcends the natural powers of every intellect whether human or angelic, of every created and creatable intellect. Moreover, in this mystery there is the intervention of God’s supremely free good pleasure, the divinum beneplacitum which St. Paul speaks of. This good pleasure, which is not at all a caprice - for it is the very essence of wisdom and holiness - is for us, as everything is which concerns God’s sovereign liberty, a profound mystery. By this good pleasure God mercifully grants His grace to one of the two thieves crucified with the Savior, whereas in justice He permits the other to resist to the very end, and so lets him remain in sin.**

This is from…

thesumma.info/predestination/predestination6.php

God Bless,
Michael

You have set off in murky waters, Michael. There is an opposing view to Thomists among Roman Catholic theologians. You have the Thomists, supported by the Jesuits, (St. Robert Bellarmine and Suarez). Against this theory of Predestination antecedent to the prevision of merit has an opposing school, (Molinists) who hold that Predestination is ‘post praevisa merita’. Do you really want to go here?

Ultimately, the two schools have been left by the Church to teach their own theories until such time as the Holy See might issue a definite ruling in favor of one or the other.

All Catholic theologians must agree on two points: that God has a real will for the salvation of mankind (in opposition to Calvin), and that our salvation is the result of God’s grace (in opposition to Pelagianism)

After that, go for it!

peace

 

[mgrfin]

I understand that justification and regeneration are connected in Catholic theology. However, Calvinists argue - like Nick - that regeneration occurs prior to repentance or faith. Moreover, there is a point in time when we experience God’s salvation, at least the first stage of it, namely, being in a state of grace. There is a point in time when we go from a ungodly to justified.

God Bless,
Michael

You have to be careful with your terms.

Faith for the Roman Catholic is not the same thing as it is for the Protestant.

Faith is a virtue by which we firmly believe all the truths God has revealed, on the word of God revealing them, who can neither deceive or be deceived.

God’s salvation? You mean in eternity, when we get to heaven?

When we make a perfect act of contrition for our sins, we are sorry because we have offended the all-good God, who is deserving of all our love. Then, sanctifying grace flows into the soul of this newly justified person.

Our we make an act of contrition that may be imperfect - we are sorry for our sins because we are afraid of going to hell, and have a firm purpose of amendment. With absolution, in the sacrament of penance, we then receive sanctifying grace.

peace

 

[mikeledes]

You have set off in murky waters, Michael. There is an opposing view to Thomists among Roman Catholic theologians. You have the Thomists, supported by the Jesuits, (St. Robert Bellarmine and Suarez). Against this theory of Predestination antecedent to the prevision of merit has an opposing school, (Molinists) who hold that Predestination is ‘post praevisa merita’. Do you really want to go here?

Ultimately, the two schools have been left by the Church to teach their own theories until such time as the Holy See might issue a definite ruling in favor of one or the other.

All Catholic theologians must agree on two points: that God has a real will for the salvation of mankind (in opposition to Calvin), and that our salvation is the result of God’s grace (in opposition to Pelagianism)

After that, go for it!

peace

Both schools however agree on the following points:

1) Predestination to the first grace is not because God foresaw our naturally good works, nor is the beginning of salutary acts due to natural causes; (2) predestination to glory is not because God foresaw we would continue in the performance of supernaturally meritorious acts apart from the special gift of final perseverance; (3) complete predestination, in so far as it comprises the whole series of graces from the first up to glorification, is gratuitous or previous to foreseen merits.

In addition, the Molinists believe the following:

According to them, God by His scientia media, sees beforehand how men would freely react to various orders of grace. In the light of this knowledge He chooses, according to His free pleasure a fixed and definite order of grace.

thecatholicfaith.com/Teachings/predestination.htm

Which means that in the order of grace he has presently chosen, there are those who will persevere to the end (i.e. the elect) and there are those who will not or will refuse to believe (i.e. the reprobate). But the basis of why he chose the order of grace in which John A. is saved and John B. is not saved is not because John A. deserved it more than John B. Nor is it based on their respective merits. Otherwise, complete predestination would not be gratuitous. Regarding Molinist teaching, the Catholic encyclopedia says the following:

**On His good pleasure alone it depends to whom He will give the supreme grace of final perseverance, to whom He will refuse it; whom He will receive into Heaven, whom He will exclude from His sight for ever. This doctrine is in perfect harmony with the dogmas of the gratuity of grace, the unequal distribution of efficacious grace, the wise and inscrutable operations of Divine Providence, the absolute impossibility to merit final perseverance, and lastly the immutable predestination to glory or rejection; nay more, it brings these very dogmas into harmony, not only with the infallible foreknowledge of God, but also with the freedom of the created will. **

This is from…

newadvent.org/cathen/10437a.htm

This is also reaffirmed by the following:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism

Molinism is not another form of Arminianism.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

All this time, the arguments going back and forth are between a Calvinist and a non-Roman Catholic. Swell!

peace

And who’s the non-Roman Catholic?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mgrfin]

Both schools however agree on the following points:

1) Predestination to the first grace is not because God foresaw our naturally good works, nor is the beginning of salutary acts due to natural causes; (2) predestination to glory is not because God foresaw we would continue in the performance of supernaturally meritorious acts apart from the special gift of final perseverance; (3) complete predestination, in so far as it comprises the whole series of graces from the first up to glorification, is gratuitous or previous to foreseen merits.

In addition, the Molinists believe the following:

According to them, God by His scientia media, sees beforehand how men would freely react to various orders of grace. In the light of this knowledge He chooses, according to His free pleasure a fixed and definite order of grace.

thecatholicfaith.com/Teachings/predestination.htm

Which means that in the order of grace he has presently chosen, there are those who will persevere to the end (i.e. the elect) and there are those who will not or will refuse to believe (i.e. the reprobate). But the basis of why he chose the order of grace in which John A. is saved and John B. is not saved is not because John A. deserved it more than John B. Nor is it based on their respective merits. Otherwise, complete predestination would not be gratuitous. Regarding Molinist teaching, the Catholic encyclopedia says the following:

**On His good pleasure alone **it depends to whom He will give the supreme grace of final perseverance, to whom He will refuse it; whom He will receive into Heaven, whom He will exclude from His sight for ever. This doctrine is in perfect harmony with the dogmas of the gratuity of grace, the unequal distribution of efficacious grace, the wise and inscrutable operations of Divine Providence, the absolute impossibility to merit final perseverance, and lastly the immutable predestination to glory or rejection; nay more, it brings these very dogmas into harmony, not only with the infallible foreknowledge of God, but also with the freedom of the created will.

This is from…

newadvent.org/cathen/10437a.htm

This is also reaffirmed by the following:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism

Molinism is not another form of Arminianism.

God Bless,
Michael

And I am sure Jones accepts every word of what you say.

peace

 

[mgrfin]

And who’s the non-Roman Catholic?

God Bless,
Michael

Who said that? I misunderstood. Sorry.

 

[mikeledes]

And I am sure Jones accepts every word of what you say.

peace

Hey, what I quoted is from reliable Catholic sources. If he did agree, then he would be Catholic. The differences between Jones’s beliefs and Catholicism is that:

1) While prevenient grace is needed to bring a person to faith, that is not the equivalent of regeneration.

2) This prevenient grace is offered not only to the elect, but to the reprobate as well.

3) This prevenient grace will be immediately efficacious in many of the non-elect, though it will not end in glorification. Not all of justified are predestined to glory. Even Martin Luther accpeted this. There are those of the justified who will freely fall away and God will allow them to go their own way.

God bless,
Michael

 

[RobNY]

No doubt it’s a very complete book…but not at all easy or even moderately difficult reading. There’s a lot of dependance on the original languages (necessarily), which I found to be slow and cumbersome. I do a lot of theologial reading, and found myself giving up on the book; repeat, it is not an easy or light read.

That being said, if you want a heavy theological explanation, it may be the thing for you. Personally, although I am interested in the subject, I didn’t like the book.

I think I just liked the completeness. As I mentioned, I haven’t finished. Nor do I plan on finishing it any time soon. I may use it as a reference if I ever get into a faith alone debate with someone, though.

The thing is, that after the first 3 chapters, you’ve already got the idea, and you wonder why he keeps on writing.

I can definitely see why you disliked it.

-Rob

 

[peary]

** For Catholic Christians -

We are saved by GRACE ALONE.

We are JUSTIFIED THROUGH OUR GOOD WORKS.**

 

[mgrfin]

For Catholic Christians -

We are saved by GRACE ALONE.

We are JUSTIFIED THROUGH OUR GOOD WORKS.

We are saved by cooperating with Actual Grace, moving us to faith, to forgiveness, and to contrition.

We baptise infants who receive sanctifying grace, ex opere operato.

We are not saved by our Good Works. This is primarily condemned by the Council of Trent, yet you continue to pronounce this heresy.

peace

 

[ryanoneil]

I don’t think he is saying that man does not have free will, only that it is incapable of choosing God. I think this notion is based on the false presumption of total depravity. I can see where he is lost, though, as

Col 2:13
And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh,

He also seems confused about regeneration, thinking that it is caused before baptism, and before saving faith.

I think he has been taught that

Rom 8:6-8
7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, indeed it cannot; 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

means that the will is unable to turn to God without regeneration.

Doesn’t the logic still stand? In Col 12:13 Paul was teaching about our condition prior to baptism. If man is incapable of choosing God before baptisms (total depravity), then why would God ask them to choose Him?

Ezek. 18:30-31 Therefore I will judge you, house of Israel, each one according to his ways, says the Lord GOD. Turn and be converted from all your crimes, that they may be no cause of guilt for you. Cast away from you all the crimes you have committed, and make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. Why should you die, O house of Israel?

Ezek. 33:11 Answer them: As I live, says the Lord GOD, I swear I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked man, but rather in the wicked man’s conversion, that he may live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! Why should you die, O house of Israel?

What am I missing here? If they can’t turn to God, these people were already predestined to hell. Wouldn’t that make God’s pleading meaningless?

Peace,

Ryan

 

[Nick_Jones]

Catholics do believe in predestnation. However, God involves free will in accomplishing His plan of salvation.

God Bless,
Michael

Without God’s work of regeneration, the “free” will of depraved sinners can only accomplish damnation for themselves. Jesus said, “you must be born again.” Salvation is accomplished by the good works of God, not the saved individual.

 

[Nick_Jones]

But it’s not apparent how we can say that God “wants everyone to be saved” if He isn’t giving them the grace to be saved. It seems to have no meaning to say, “God wants everyone to be saved” if we don’t also say that he gives everyone the means to be saved. What do you think, “God wants everyone to be saved” means? In my book, the only way to interpret that is that God does His part to save us.

Your interpretation ultimately makes salvation a matter of human merit rather than free grace. If God “does His part” to save John Doe, but John Doe fails to do his part, then what?

 

[Odell]

Your interpretation ultimately makes salvation a matter of human merit rather than free grace. If God “does His part” to save John Doe, but John Doe fails to do his part, then what?

John Doe goes to hell.

God did His part 2000 years ago for everyone He died for everyone 2000 years ago You did yoiur part with Gods grace of course by accepting him as your Lord if you did not you would be another John doe

 

[Nick_Jones]

John Doe goes to hell.

God did His part 2000 years ago for everyone He died for everyone 2000 years ago You did yoiur part with Gods grace of course by accepting him as your Lord if you did not you would be another John doe

And if you use your free will to do good or to choose what is good, while John Doe uses his free will to reject God’s grace, you are saved ultimately by your own goodness, and John Doe is damned by his lack of goodness. How is this any different from moral elitism?

 

[guanophore]

Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

If salvation is ultimately a matter of God’s mercy, then it isn’t a matter of your own goodness in using your free will BETTER than other people. Read the passage above again, and then show me where it attributes God’s mercy to our own good free will choice.

It is true that salvation is a matter of God’s mercy. It is not a matter of our own goodness or using our free will BETTER than ohters. No one here is claiming that Catholic teaching puts any stock in one’s own goodness or betterness. These are your constructions that you are bringing here, and asking us to defend them! Strawmen. You don’t understand Catholicism, and you are asking us to defend what you THINK it means. We can’t do that, because we don’t believe what you think we do.

You keep bringing that passage about God’s mercy, as if it should “trump” all the other passages in the Bible about salvation. It does not. In order to understand the Divine message, we have to take all of it as a whole, and not give one portion more weight or significance than the others. That passage does not negate what Jesus said about following the commandments so that we can be saved.

God’s mercy is not dependent upon our own free will, and choice. However, we will not benefit from His mercy against our wills.

 

[mgrfin]

Without God’s work of regeneration, the “free” will of depraved sinners can only accomplish damnation for themselves. Jesus said, “you must be born again.” Salvation is accomplished by the good works of God, not the saved individual.

You are spewing that nonesense still. Catholics don’t believe that salvation is accomplished by the individual good works.

How many times does this have to be repeated before you stop saying what is heretical for a Roman Catholic.

Justification is not brought about by good works!!!

peace

 

[Jerry-Jet]

God does provide sufficient grace for all and some reject it.

It is the ideal will of God that all men will be saved.

It is the circumstantial will that some will choose to reject Him.

the ones who accept Him cooperate by DOING NOTHING and He does all the saving.

It really is true–the way around the either/or dilemma is to recognize that man doesn’t not have a positive or negative choice when it comes to God

Only a neutral or negative choice.

People that die in the negative state go to Hell.

People who die in the neutral state go to Heaven–all the good that comes from them comes from God–not them!

Doing nothing against the will of God is a neutral response to God–that is how man cooperates with God–he surrenders his will.

that is not a positive act for God–that is man quitting resisting God so God can do all the saving.

The neutral/negative choice scenario is the only way where God can do all the saving–man can cooperate with God–and man’s cooperation is still at the same time not doing anything thus giving God all the glory!

Some may ask this mysterious question about how God acts that we may never know:

Why did God create creation knowing that His sufficient grace for all would be rejected by some and that they would go to Hell?

I mean if God is really sovereign why wouldn’t He just make it so everyone would go to heaven?

Because the cooperation of the finite creature man by that man doing nothing brings greater glory to God then by making it so that only His action without cooperation would bring salvation.

And also it could have been that the best possible universe and creation out of all the possibilities that God could have exercised would be one where some would go to Hell–

In other words that plan of salvation brought the greatest glory to God and the most happiness for man.

But since God is pure act and is outside of history the possible responses of man did not dictate what He chose to do because God can SIMULTANEOUSLY Foreknow and PREDESTINE!

God is bigger than either/or!

God is bigger than “Faith alone” or 'justification by works"!

My prayer is that everyone will worship God that truely is that big!

The Catholic understanding is true.

I maintain that we are gracefully saved by faith when faith continues through God willed works!

Man does all the saving–man cooperates by not raising impediments to God’s grace which is a neutral zero act and the resulting God willed works complete the grace of faith–the complete journey of grace through faith and through God-willed works saves us not because of any part of that process but because grace is not interrupted at any point!

In other words we’re saved when we let God save us!

That is entirely Catholic. “Faith Alone” is an abomination because it DIVIDES the work of God’s grace and says that only ONE PART–initital faith is the ONLY thing that saves.

That is not true and saying it is not true does no mean that Catholics are saying they are saved by works.

Catholics are smart enough to let God work the complete grace of faith and not DIVIDE it.

When oner dies in the state where it isn’t being interrupted or DIVIDED one goes to Heaven!

Jesus Saves!

 

[mgrfin]

God does provide sufficient grace for all and some reject it.

It is the ideal will of God that all men will be saved.

It is the circumstantial will that some will choose to reject Him.

the ones who accept Him cooperate by DOING NOTHING and He does all the saving.

It really is true–the way around the either/or dilemma is to recognize that man doesn’t not have a positive or negative choice when it comes to God

Only a neutral or negative choice.

People that die in the negative state go to Hell.

People who die in the neutral state go to Heaven–all the good that comes from them comes from God–not them!

Doing nothing against the will of God is a neutral response to God–that is how man cooperates with God–he surrenders his will.

that is not a positive act for God–that is man quitting resisting God so God can do all the saving.

The neutral/negative choice scenario is the only way where God can do all the saving–man can cooperate with God–and man’s cooperation is still at the same time not doing anything thus giving God all the glory!

Some may ask this mysterious question about how God acts that we may never know:

Why did God create creation knowing that His sufficient grace for all would be rejected by some and that they would go to Hell?

I mean if God is really sovereign why wouldn’t He just make it so everyone would go to heaven?

Because the cooperation of the finite creature man by that man doing nothing brings greater glory to God then by making it so that only His action without cooperation would bring salvation.

And also it could have been that the best possible universe and creation out of all the possibilities that God could have exercised would be one where some would go to Hell–

In other words that plan of salvation brought the greatest glory to God and the most happiness for man.

But since God is pure act and is outside of history the possible responses of man did not dictate what He chose to do because God can SIMULTANEOUSLY Foreknow and PREDESTINE!

God is bigger than either/or!

God is bigger than “Faith alone” or 'justification by works"!

My prayer is that everyone will worship God that truely is that big!

The Catholic understanding is true.

I maintain that we are gracefully saved by faith when faith continues through God willed works!

Man does all the saving–man cooperates by not raising impediments to God’s grace which is a neutral zero act and the resulting God willed works complete the grace of faith–the complete journey of grace through faith and through God-willed works saves us not because of any part of that process but because grace is not interrupted at any point!

In other words we’re saved when we let God save us!

That is entirely Catholic. “Faith Alone” is an abomination because it DIVIDES the work of God’s grace and says that only ONE PART–initital faith is the ONLY thing that saves.

That is not true and saying it is not true does no mean that Catholics are saying they are saved by works.

Catholics are smart enough to let God work the complete grace of faith and not DIVIDE it.

When oner dies in the state where it isn’t being interrupted or DIVIDED one goes to Heaven!

Jesus Saves!

Look, cooperating with God’s grace, the use of free will is SOMETHING. What do you mean? You believe in total Predestination. No, God expects us to cooperate with the Actual Grace He sends us.

If some men are lost this is due to their own rejection of grace, and not to God. Man has sufficient grace, he rejected it, and therefore God condemns. If he COOPERATES, he moves forward to salvation.

peace