Commandments should not be followed ...

[Pax]

This is a follow up to my comments on Abraham.

The same kind of thing is evident in reading Hebrews chapter 11. Each of the holy figures cited had faith and their faith was associated with something they did.

Hebrews tells us that:

1. By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous,
2. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was attested as having pleased God.
3. And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.
4. By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.

8-10. By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. For he looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

11-12. By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.

1. These all died in faith

It is eminently clear that the faith of these individuals would be meaningless if they defied God and failed to live out their faith in the actions described above. None of them would have received divine approval.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

None, thank you! It’s all about belief and justification. Even about Him who was delivered up because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification. And the one who does not work but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, “his faith is reckoned as righteousness.”

“For this reason it is by faith, that it be in accordance with grace…” (4:16) - not law! Faith and grace kiss each other.

The explanation about circumcision is quite easy…and it takes nothing away from our command to obey the Commandments of God…being the 10 Commandments given to Isreal through Moses.

The people who were being circumcised in those times were the Isrealites. The male babies…and it was done at about the same age as we now Baptise all of our new born children. Baptism took over for circumcision, if I am not mistaken. Anyway, to my point, all male babies, under Mosaic Law, needed to be circumcised. That identified them through out their history as Isrealites.

When Jesus came into the world, though, He didn’t just come for the Isrealites. He came for all mankind…that all might be saved. And under the New Covenant with Jesus, there were to be no distinctions between the Isrealites and the Christians…because all were wanted and accepted by Christ in His redemption.

There was no more meaning to the law for circumcision. That part of the law was no longer needed. It wasn’t a behavioral law…teaching us how we must act throughout our lives. It was a sort of, for lack of better words, a rite of passage.
But, as for the 10 Commandments, those are MORAL and BEHAVIORAL Laws, and they are still needed. They never changed.
Circumcision was replaced by Baptism. When a male child was born of an Isrealite family, circumcision was the way he was brought into the Faith of the Isrealites. As Christians, we are called to Baptism, which does so much more than circumcision ever did for the Isrealites. In affect, it didn’t even abolish it [law]…it merely fullfilled it [law], and added along to it ALL of mankind…and added to it our commitment to God. That is, in actuality, what Baptism is…it is our commitment to God…not just His commitment to us. Baptism brings us into His friendship. And, as such, we are called to be His children, His friends. And He tells us that we will be His friends if we do what He commands us…and that is to NOT sin. How do we know if we are sinning or not? The 10 Commandments, plus the one that Jesus gave us…the Golden Rule…Love your neighbor as yourself…which brings the 10 Commandments to fruition. For, who among us would chose to have someone bear false witness against us, or sleep with our spouse, or steal from us, or murder us, etc? So, they are every bit commanded today as they were in the day that God gave them to the Isrealites.

Yes, I know that Baptism also removes the stain of original sin…in case anyone thinks I am unaware of it.

Once more, I am not sure I have said everything using the best terms. Those who can explain better what I am trying to say, have at it.
God bless,
cherie

 

[Pax]

moondweller,

I am reasonably sure that you are familiar with the non-Catholic hymn Amazing Grace. You have probably sung this hymn many times. Protestants have no theological problems with this hymn and they fully embrace its content.

The hymn contains the following words:

*"Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me…
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now, I see.

T’was Grace that taught…
my heart to fear.
And Grace, my fears relieved.
How precious did that Grace appear…
the hour I first believed.

Through many dangers, toils and snares…
we have already come.
T’was Grace that brought us safe thus far…
and Grace will lead us home.

The Lord has promised good to me…
His word my hope secures.
He will my shield and portion be…
as long as life endures.

When we’ve been here ten thousand years…
bright shining as the sun.
We’ve no less days to sing God’s praise…
then when we’ve first begun.

“Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me…
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind, but now, I see.”*

I emphasized the words “the hour I first believed.” This obviously refers to the moment that we first come to faith. I see no reason why you want to argue with this. Christians believe it and celebrate it in one their most popular hymns.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Quote from Guano" No, Christ does not “lose” souls. The saved become lost when they wander from him, and refuse to return, or reject the grace by which they are saved, and refuse the benefits of it.
/QUOTE]

That hits the nail right on the head. I honestly do not understand how anyone can argue that point, given all of the rest that even Paul states.

Just thought I would put my 2 cents in.

Thanks, Cherie

 

[guanophore]

You have really summed things (salvation-wise) quite nicely.:yup: It was mentioned during one of the sermons at my (Baptist) church that you have to be careful when reading certain sections of the Bible (Hebrews was specified), because without a good (Protestant) commentary, you might get confused about the security of your salvation.:ehh:

This is a very good point, ellammcg. It is true that one must really work hard to see all the passages through the proper “lens”. Catholics see the scripture throught the “lens” of the Apostolic Teaching that has been handed down to us. Reformers, such as sandusky, to whose message you are replying here, see through the Reformation lens. These man made traditions supplanted the Apostolic lenses about 500 years ago, and continue to undergo changes.

Hebrews 11 is an excellent passage to use to discuss the relationship between faith and works. It is clear that faith is never “along” but is always accompanied by works

" By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous,"

It was through his act - his offering that he received righteousness.

" By faith Enoch …"

Enoch “walked with God” - a work

“…was taken up”

Heb 11:4-38God rewarrds those who seek him. "

Seeking God is a ‘work’.

Heb 11:4-387 By faith Noah, took heed and constructed an ark for the saving of his household; by this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness which comes by faith.

It was by accepting God’s warning, and buiding the ark that Noah became an heir. his faith was completed by works

" 8 By faith Abraham obeyed … and he went out, not knowing where he was to go.

His faith was active along with his works.

"By faith **he sojourned **in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise.

A “work”

" 17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac…

An act of faith. Works completing his faith.

" 20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. "

faith, completed by works

“21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, **bowing in worship **over the head of his staff.”

Blessing and worshipping, works.

" 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, **made mention **of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial. "

An act of faith.

" By faith Moses left Egypt…

and act/work

" 28 By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the first-born might not touch them. "

An act that justifies/saves.

“29 By faith the people **crossed the Red Sea **as if on dry land;”

Talk about WORK!

’ 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days."

After what?

" 31 By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given friendly welcome to the spies."

Another work? By a PAGAN!?

"32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets - 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life. 36 Others suffered mocking and scourging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, ill-treated - 38 of whom the world was not worthy - wandering over deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. "

How is it so impossible to believe that Christians can keep the commandments of God through faith?

How can anyone who reads this not recognize that faith cannot be separated from the works that are produced by grace? Oh, yeah, right! One can do that if one has “a good Protestant commentary”.

 

[moondweller]

I agree that one who is in a state of grace does not need justification.

Well, Pax argues that Abraham was justified THREE times. So are you saying Abraham twice fell from his justified estate? Based on your agreement above, that must be your conclusion.

We are in agreement that Abraham was justified by faith. His faith was completed by works, and by every work of faith, he demonstrated that he was justified.

Yes, he was justified only ONCE, and that was back in Gen. 15:6. when he believed in the Lord and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. No other time is it stated. James, however, is not saying that works completed that which was lacking in Abraham’s justification. The idea there is that his faith (belief) in the Lord grew and matured, demonstrated by his willingness to offer up Isaac. Having complete faith in God’s covenant promise to him, Abraham believed he would receive Isaac back by resurrection (Heb. 11:17-19).

Using Abraham as his example, James argues for the practical side of faith. He is not, however, stating a conditional salvation based on works.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Quote from Moondweller "And Paul clearly separates salvation from works when he says: “…not as a result of works.” end quote.

Md, I totally agree with that statement from Paul, but you are forgetting all of the other things that Paul and Jesus say.

They clearly explain that just by doing good works, you cannot be saved. You must know and love Christ. You must believe in Him. You cannot get to the Father through anything or anyone other than Jesus. So, no matter how much of a peace giver or bringer, no matter how great a philanthropist…if you reject Jesus as the Son of God, Redeemer of the world, you are lost.

Now, Jesus and Paul also state that you cannot be saved(knowing and loving and accepting Jesus as your savior) or be His friend if you do not show your love and faith in Him by the work that you do. How can anyone who denies that Jesus is God, whether they were once “saved” or not, expect to be saved? It goes totally against what Christ and Paul both taught us.

God bless,
Cherie

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I’ve been following this thread. Your post summs it all up…even to the point of stating that those of old (1600s) in the Church were fighting the exact same heresies. They even had a name for them. In todays world, where there are thousands of small groups of them, they don’t all have a name.
All of the questions and arguments were answered in your post. Anyone who would argue with that is “acting” like a scoffer, according to what St. Peter calls those who would argue against the Truth.

May the Truth of Jesus, granted to us through the Power of the Holy Spirit in the Roman Catholic Church be with all of you.

Cherie

Calling all Catholics, please edit my post. I believe I may have erred in some way. I got confused in re reading it just now, and am in need of someone to point me to the truth.
I shall endeavor to be much more careful in the future.
God bless, Cherie

 

[moondweller]

You could not be more wrong, and Abraham is the perfect example to prove our point.

Instance #1
In Genesis 15:6 Abraham believed God concerning his descendants being as numerous as the stars, and his belief was reckoned to him as righteousness.

And this is the ONLY place it is stated.

Instance #2
Hebrews 11:8 makes reference to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-4, and says, “By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.” We know this is a reference to saving faith because in Hebrews 11:1-2 it says, “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old received divine approval.” Divine approval is given for a person’s faith only when it is a saving faith.

Nowhere before Gen. 15:6 does it state anything about Abraham being justified by God. Don’t read into Scripture something that is not there.

Instance #3
James 2:21-23 makes reference to Abraham having faith when he was to sacrifice his son Isaac upon the altar and James says that the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as rightousness; and he was called the friend of God.”

Yes, and that is a DIRECT QUOTE from Gen. 15:6. As I said, not even James can cite another instance.

Your attempted refutation of instance #3 is ludicrous. James mentions that Abraham was justified when offered Isaac upon the altar.

But he does not say BY offering up Isaac. The only reference James makes regarding Abraham’s justification is Gen. 15:6 - and that’s exactly what he quotes. He can cite no other occurrence, neither before nor after it.

So concrete is this FACT that Paul forms his N.T. doctrine of justification by faith alone in Romans four (referring to the man who does not work but believes…) - citing that same Gen. 15:6 passage. James’ discussion is polemical, not doctrinal. You must interpret him within the whole context.

In respect to Abraham’s justification both James and Paul can go no further than Gen. 15:6. That’s where it all happened, not before, not after. It’s simply a Biblical FACT. Men refute it only because they have an agenda.

 

[moondweller]

I notice that you did not respond to the passages from the Catechism on Justification. Why is that?

What is it exactly you want me to respond to?

It’s like Teflon quoting massive bodies of Scripture and asking for a response.

 

[moondweller]

I emphasized the words “the hour I first believed.” This obviously refers to the moment that we first come to faith. I see no reason why you want to argue with this. Christians believe it and celebrate it in one their most popular hymns.

You miss the whole point of the song, Pax. It’s grace alone that saved the hour we first believed. And it’s grace that brings us Home. There’s no “falling from (that) grace.”

The Catholic doctrine of “initial” salvation and justification in rooted in its belief in a conditional salvation and justification. The condition being subsequent works.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus N Cherie
Calling all Catholics, please edit my post. I believe I may have erred in some way. I got confused in re reading it just now, and am in need of someone to point me to the truth.
I shall endeavor to be much more careful in the future.
God bless, Cherie

Sorry if I sound desperate, but I honestly cannot find the wrong things in this post. Yet, from reading other posts by sandusky, I am wondering if I have missed something…no specific offense to sandusky.

This is the post I was originally commenting on. Please…Pax…help.

Originally Posted by sandusky
by Thomas Watson, from his work, “A Body of Practical Divinity”, 1692

‘Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.’ Exod 20: 3.

Before I come to the commandments, I shall answer questions, and lay down rules respecting the moral law.

What is the difference between the moral laud and the gospel?

(1) The law requires that we worship God as our Creator; the gospel, that we worship him in and through Christ. God in Christ is propitious; out of him we may see God’s power, justice, and holiness: in him we see his mercy displayed.

(2) The moral law requires obedience, but gives no strength (as Pharaoh required brick, but gave no straw), but the gospel gives strength; it bestows faith on the elect; it sweetens the law; it makes us serve God with delight.

Of what use is the moral law to us?

It is a glass to show us our sins, that, seeing our pollution and misery, we may be forced to flee to Christ to satisfy for former guilt, and to save from future wrath. 'The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ. Gal 3: 24.

But is the moral law still in force to believers; is it not abolished to them?

In some sense it is abolished to believers.

(1) In respect of justification. They are not justified by their obedience to the moral law. Believers are to make great use of the moral law, but they must trust only to Christ’s righteousness for justification; as Noah’s dove made use of her wings to fly, but trusted to the ark for safety. If the moral law could justify, what need was there of Christ’s dying?

(2) The moral law is abolished to believers, in respect of its curse. They are freed from its curse and condemnatory power. ‘Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.’ Gal 3: Is.

How was Christ made a curse for us?

Considered as the Son of God, he was not made a curse, but as our pledge and surety, he was made a curse for us. Heb 7: 22. This curse was not upon his Godhead, but upon his manhood. It was the wrath of God lying upon him; and thus he took away from believers the curse of the law, by being made a curse for them. But though the moral law be thus far abolished, it remains as a perpetual rule to believers. Though it be not their Saviour, it is their guide. Though it be not foedus, a covenant of life; yet it is norma, a rule of life. Every Christian is bound to conform to it; and to write, as exactly as he can, after this copy. ‘Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid.’ Rom 3: 31. Though a Christian is not under the condemning power of the law, yet he is under its commanding power. To love God, to reverence and obey him, is a law which always binds and will bind in heaven. This I urge against the Antinomians, who say the moral law is abrogated to believers; which, as it contradicts Scripture, so it is a key to open the door to all licentiousness. They who will not have the law to rule them, shall never have the gospel to save them.

And this is what I commented:
Originally Posted by Jesus N Cherie
I’ve been following this thread. Your post summs it all up…even to the point of stating that those of old (1600s) in the Church were fighting the exact same heresies. They even had a name for them. In todays world, where there are thousands of small groups of them, they don’t all have a name.
All of the questions and arguments were answered in your post. Anyone who would argue with that is “acting” like a scoffer, according to what St. Peter calls those who would argue against the Truth.

May the Truth of Jesus, granted to us through the Power of the Holy Spirit in the Roman Catholic Church be with all of you.

Cherie

 

[moondweller]

Sorry if I sound desperate, but I honestly cannot find the wrong things in this post. Yet, from reading other posts by sandusky, I am wondering if I have missed something…no specific offense to sandusky.

The problem is, Cherie, that you as a Catholic do not believe this following statement about the so-called “Moral Law,” the “10 Commandments.”

(2) The moral law is abolished to believers, in respect of its curse. They are freed from its curse and condemnatory power. ‘Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.’ Gal 3: Is.

You do not believe you are completely freed from its curse because as a Catholic you believe by transgressing any of the 10 you have committed a “mortal sin.” Consequently, fallen from your initial state of grace received at the time of water baptism. It’s how Catholicism interprets the phrase, “fallen from grace.”

Hence, you are not truly freed from the curse and condemnatory power of the Law. As a Catholic you believe it still has power over you.

In other words, in the Catholic mind, Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil, but Moses still has power to destroy the work of Christ.

I hope this helps.

 

[pneuma07]

I can show you numerous verses that say we are saved BY FAITH. Nothing added.

Dear moondweller,

                        do you  believe  we necessarily  have a biological father and a biological mother ?

        I am afraid that is unbiblical.  :tsktsk:

Matthew 1

*2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren;

…

4 and Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon; and Nahshon begat Salmon; *

And, besides these ones, and although mothers are mentioned too sometimes:

I can show you numerous verses that say that people are generated BY a FATHER. Nothing added.

 

[moondweller]

Dear moondweller,

                        do you  believe  we necessarily  have a biological father and a biological mother ?

        I am afraid that is unbiblical.  :tsktsk:

Matthew 1

*2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren;

3 and Judah begat Perez and Zerah of Tamar; and Perez begat Hezron; and Hezron begat Ram;

4 and Ram begat Amminadab; and Amminadab begat Nahshon; and Nahshon begat Salmon; *

And, besides these ones:

I can show you numerous verses that say that people are generated BY a FATHER. Nothing added.

Cute, Pneuma. Indication of one knowing he’s lost the debate is when he begins to present the absurd.

 

[pneuma07]

Cute, Pneuma. Indication of one knowing he’s lost the debate is when he begins to present the absurd.

Dear moondweller,

           that's so.

I presented the absurd, because it is evident to any reader of the thread that we catholics have “lost the debate”.

Moon,

on a more serious note, are all of us “winning and losing debates” here, or are we learning from each other ?
I have learnt something in this thread both from fellow catholics and yourself.
Let’s keep learning my friend.

God bless you.

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

The Catholic doctrine of “initial” salvation and justification in rooted in its belief in a conditional salvation and justification. The condition being subsequent works.

Hello,

Salvation is 3-dimensional, something you apparently overlooked.

St. Paul told us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling”Philippians 2:12]. Does simply having faith in Jesus Christ fit this description of how our salvation is achieved? The race of life, an analogy that St. Paul makes in 1 Cor. 9:24, is compared to salvation. He instructs us to “run so as to win”. Remember that we are judged by what we do on this earth, good or evil 2 Corinthians 5:10]. Being “good or evil” does not entail only having faith or not. If the idea of an “absolute assurance of salvation” were the truth, then St. Paul, a great minister of Christ, surely was not informed of this-“I myself may be disqualified”[from the race]1 Cor. 9:27].

If you are not conditionally saved (ie: living a life of grace) then what you are saying is you can NEVER lose the race once you started. I’m afraid that is your only conclusion from this point if you stick with what you preach.

 

[moondweller]

St. Paul told us to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling. Does simply having faith in Jesus Christ fit this description of how our salvation is achieved?

In that passage Paul is not saying to work FOR your salvation but to work outward unto maturity one’s salvation within. Your interpretation does not fit Pauline soteriology which is “by grace through faith…a gift of God, not as a result of works.”

The race of life, an analogy that St. Paul makes in 1 Cor. 9:24 is compared to salvation. He instructs us to “run so as to win”. Remember that we are judged by what we do on this earth, good or evil 2 Corinthians 5:10. Being “good or evil” does not entail only having faith or not. If the idea of an “absolute assurance of salvation” were the truth, then St. Paul, a great minister of Christ, surely was not informed of this-“I myself may be disqualified”[from the race]1 Cor. 9:27

.What makes you think Paul was referring to being disqualified from salvation? When Paul directly teaches on salvation he never refers to it as a race on our part. But instead, “by grace, through faith, gifted, not as a result of works” (Eph. 2:8-9)

If you are not conditionally saved (ie: living a life of grace) then what you are saying is you can NEVER lose the race once you started. I’m afraid that is your only conclusion from this point if you stick with what you preach.

I’ll stick to it, but not the “race” part. Salvation is gifted upon faith in Christ, and the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29).

 

[Teflon93]

What is it exactly you want me to respond to?

It’s like Teflon quoting massive bodies of Scripture and asking for a response.

It is no difference because the Catechism clearly demonstrates that your repeated claims that Catholics believe in a “works salvation” to be untrue, just as the “massive bodies” (i.e., single chapters, an interesting perspective for a Bible reader to have as to one chapter being “massive”) of Scripture I have posted demonstrate your manmade and uninspired interpretations of single verses to be untrue.

The proper response would be, “Whoops, I retract my claim.”

We won’t be seeing that response, will we, Moondweller?

 

[Teflon93]

The problem is, Cherie, that you as a Catholic do not believe this following statement about the so-called “Moral Law,” the "10 Commandments."You do not believe you are completely freed from its curse because as a Catholic you believe by transgressing any of the 10 you have committed a “mortal sin.” Consequently, fallen from your initial state of grace received at the time of water baptism. It’s how Catholicism interprets the phrase, “fallen from grace.”

Hence, you are not truly freed from the curse and condemnatory power of the Law. As a Catholic you believe it still has power over you.

In other words, in the Catholic mind, Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil, but Moses still has power to destroy the work of Christ.

I hope this helps.

Well, Moondweller has made progress of a sort—from fabricating Catholic teaching to merely perverting it.

The Church has quite a bit more to say on the topic than the, ahem, “sloppy” Moondweller would have us believe:

THE MORAL LAW

1950 **The moral law is the work of divine Wisdom. Its biblical meaning can be defined as fatherly instruction, God’s pedagogy. It prescribes for man the ways, the rules of conduct that lead to the promised beatitude; it proscribes the ways of evil which turn him away from God and his love. It is at once firm in its precepts and, in its promises, worthy of love. **

1951 Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. **The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. **All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. "Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law."2

Alone among all animate beings, man can boast of having been counted worthy to receive a law from God: as an animal endowed with reason, capable of understanding and discernment, he is to govern his conduct by using his freedom and reason, in obedience to the One who has entrusted everything to him.3

1952 There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: **eternal law **- the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.

1953 **The moral law finds its fullness and its unity in Christ. Jesus Christ is in person the way of perfection. He is the end of the law, for only he teaches and bestows the justice of God: “For Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified.”**4

I. THE NATURAL MORAL LAW

1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good. The natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie:

The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, because it is human reason ordaining him to do good and forbidding him to sin . . . But this command of human reason would not have the force of law if it were not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be submitted.5

1955 The “divine and natural” law6 shows man the way to follow so as to practice the good and attain his end. The natural law states the first and essential precepts which govern the moral life. It hinges upon the desire for God and submission to him, who is the source and judge of all that is good, as well as upon the sense that the other is one’s equal. Its principal precepts are expressed in the Decalogue. This law is called “natural,” not in reference to the nature of irrational beings, but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature:

Where then are these rules written, if not in the book of that light we call the truth? In it is written every just law; from it the law passes into the heart of the man who does justice, not that it migrates into it, but that it places its imprint on it, like a seal on a ring that passes onto wax, without leaving the ring.7 The natural law is nothing other than the light of understanding placed in us by God; through it we know what we must do and what we must avoid. God has given this light or law at the creation.8

1956 The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties:

For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense . . . . To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.9

1957 Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.

1958 The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:

Theft is surely punished by your law, O Lord, and by the law that is written in the human heart, the law that iniquity itself does not efface.11

1959 The natural law, the Creator’s very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.

1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known "by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error."12 The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit.