Justification Confusion as declared

[pritchard85]

In Catholicism we are initially justified by having our sins forgiven/removed formally at Baptism and then we must continue on-to “go, and sin no more”.

I don’t know of a single person that has the ability to do this.

The problem for most of us is that while we may be washed clean at that point, our attraction to sin (concupiscence) is still around. Whatever needed to be resolved in Adam & Eve’s own spirits isn’t necessarily resolved yet in our own. Their rebellion, their tendency towards sin and away from God, is something we may still struggle with.

Yep. Our entire lives.

And sinners simply do not enter heaven according to scripture. Why should they, sin is what separated man from God to begin with and this makes more sense when we consider Pope Benedict’s assertion that God is

heaven according to his book, Jesus of Nazareth. So man must be just, and justification is no more or less that being truly just, not merely imputedly so. And the New Covenant is the agreement whereby God promises to make man just, by writing His Laws on our hearts and in our minds as per Jer 31.

The problem with this is that it doesn’t take into account what Scripture says about being declared righteous by the blood of the lamb. I believe that the pope is wrong.

And what does man’s justice consist of? What* is*

mans’ holiness? It’s simply to love God with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and his neighbor as himself. Here universal order and man’s integrity are restored, God’s will is done, the Law is fulfilled. Sin is excluded because God/Heaven/Love, and sin, are mutually exclusive.

Christ is the key here to this and everything.
[/QUOTE]

 

[CopticChristian]

No that’s not what I agree with. Justification is when we accept and believe in Christ. Sanctification is growing more like Christ.

Think of it as falling off the side of a cliff as we all are without Christ. Justification is the very moment that a rope is thrown down to us and we grab it to stop our fall. Sanctification is the long pull up across the sharp rocks back to the top.

I understand your imagery. I imagine that I am a creature created to know, love and serve God but cannot absent the grace provided by His Son. My justification transforms me from a creature to a child of God and with grace and ongoing justification I grow up and endure the Journey so that I can be confromed to the image of His Son offered all the day like sheep to be slaughtered for no suffering can separate me from the love of God as his grace is sufficient. I work out my salvation with fear and trembling.

I like my imagery better.:harp::heaven:

 

[pritchard85]

I understand your imagery. I imagine that I am a creature created to know, love and serve God but cannot absent the grace provided by His Son. My justification transforms me from a creature to a child of God and with grace and ongoing justification I grow up and endure the Journey so that I can be confromed to the image of his son offered all the day like sheep to be slaughtered for no suffering can separate me from the love of God as his grace is sufficient.

I like my imagery better.:harp::heaven:

You keep going back to Justification as being a process. It is not a process. Sanctification is a process. There seems to be a confusion with this. If you are not justified, then why would God waste his time sanctifying you?? There would be no point.

 

[pritchard85]

Alot of the problem I found when I was Catholic is that there was a profound emphasis put on the idea of not getting something unless you gave something to get it. I found this to be very damaging to building faith. When we are absent of that faith which brings us to Justification, we then begin to mix it together with Sanctification to try and obtain Salvation by our own doing. Without saving faith in Jesus we are doomed…

 

[PJM]

=CopticChristian;8249270]The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church defines Justification as sonship and is outlined in the Council of Trent. Many Protestants see Justification as an external act. Working through this I am confused. Here is what I came up with. Does this sound correct?

To have Faith that Justifies you must be born again and regenerated by the Holy Spirit.

Justification has nothing to do with inner moral transformation. It is only a external, forensic, legal, juridical, extrinsic act of God in His actions as a Judge, imputing Christ’s righteousness to my heavenly account.

There appears to be an inconsistency.

To be justified you have to have Faith. To have Justifying Faith you need to be reborn through the Holy Spirit, because it is the Holy Spirit that gives you Faith.

I am justified legally by Faith alone apart from any moral transformation although that moral transformation occurred prior to the justification and the Faith that justifies is the result of the inner transformation of the soul brought about by the Holy Spirit.

Regeneration is required to have Faith that justifies and then declare Justification to be a legal act.

It also appears that regeneration occurs on account of something that is done, a work. It appears that there is an inner transformation and yet justification is considered only external.

***Justification begains with God’s Internal Grace which manifest itself properly externally in multiple ways.

Justification is the end result of a multi-step process that begins with Christian baptism, moves on to a mature understanding of what we believen and WHY, then Lives this faith and shares it. It begains with Faith [steming from God’s Grace], and evolves when we cooperate with the Holy Spirit.

“Living our faith” includes keeping the comandments and ALL of the teachingsd of our Chruch as required. The process includes GRACE, Charity, humility, prayer and sacrifice.

"being “Justified” is Knowing [through Grace and Faith] and then DOING God’s Will, without complaint.

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.

1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or “justice”) here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.

1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

2018 Like conversion, justification has two aspects. Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, and so accepts forgiveness and righteousness from on high.

2001 The preparation of man for the reception of grace is already a work of grace. This latter is needed to arouse and sustain our collaboration in justification through faith, and in sanctification through charity. God brings to completion in us what he has begun, “since he who completes his work by cooperating with our will began by working so that we might will it:”***

 

[CopticChristian]

You keep going back to Justification as being a process. It is not a process. Sanctification is a process. There seems to be a confusion with this. If you are not justified, then why would God waste his time sanctifying you?? There would be no point.

Es gibt kein Durcheinander. Wir sprechen unterschiedliche Sprachen. Wir haben unterschiedliche Paradigmen. Das ist alles

Now if the above does not make sense, then you will agree that what I say is true. This is german and translated this is what it says.

There is no confusion. We speak different languages. We have different paradigms. That is all.

We speak different languages. A table is a table. To call it something else does not change the table. To call the process by whatever name we choose does not change the process. You put the words justification followed by sanctification on the same process that I put Justification, ongoing justification, growing justification to holiness. It is all the same process. We just call it something different.

What God does, God does. Our naming it and describing it cannot and never will change what God does. We experience God and try to explain what it is we experience and believe however that in no way changes the actions of God.

 

[CopticChristian]

Alot of the problem I found when I was Catholic is that there was a profound emphasis put on the idea of not getting something unless you gave something to get it. I found this to be very damaging to building faith. When we are absent of that faith which brings us to Justification, we then begin to mix it together with Sanctification to try and obtain Salvation by our own doing. Without saving faith in Jesus we are doomed…

Help me understand what it is you believe you gave to get?

 

[fhansen]

The problem with this is that it doesn’t take into account what Scripture says about being declared righteous by the blood of the lamb.

You mean verses like these?:
**“You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone” James 2:24

God “will give to each person according to what he has done.” To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. Rom 2:6

For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. Rom 2:13**

I believe that the pope is wrong.

The Popes’ contribution here was simply the statement that ‘God is heaven’-IOW God is what makes heaven what it is, He’s the source of inexhaustible happiness for us. Many Protestants wouldn’t have a problem with this-it’s just that the Catholic Church has always maintained at least this concept of heaven: that there we’ll possess the Beatific Vision, the immediate knowledge of God, where we’ll “see” Him “face to face”. IOW God* is* our beatitude.

Christ is the key here to this and everything.

Amen

 

[CopticChristian]

You mean verses like these?:
**“You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone” James 2:24

God “will give to each person according to what he has done.” To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. Rom 2:6

For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. Rom 2:13**

The Popes’ contribution here was simply the statement that ‘God is heaven’-IOW God is what makes heaven what it is, He’s the source of inexhaustible happiness for us. Many Protestants wouldn’t have a problem with this-it’s just that the Catholic Church has always maintained at least this concept of heaven: that there we’ll possess the Beatific Vision, the immediate knowledge of God, where we’ll “see” Him “face to face”. IOW God* is* our beatitude.
Amen

I am with you on this. I am not sure if you are aware that as I understand it is that what you are quoting is Romans 2, many doings are noted. As I understand it the Protestant sees it this way. Commencing with Romans 3:10 and following the conclusion is that no one can accomplish what is outlined in Romans 2. You and I know that these are references to Old Testament passages including Psalm 14. They then drop down to Romans 3:21 and following doing is an impossiblity. Romans 3:28 you recall is where Luther added “Faith alone”. It is not there now but it is like being in a court of law where the Judge tells the jury to ignore what was said. They heard it. They know it was done and how do you stop thinking of an elephant when you are told not to think of an elephant?

My understanding is that the Protestant says that Romans 2 is a hypothetical. Romans 3 and following explain Plan B, no one does the law, Christ does it for us and by believing in Christ and trusting Christ the righteousness of Christ is legally imputed to you extrinsically without any internal change.

Romans 2 Plan A, an impossiblity therefore the Protestant invokes Plan B.

The Catholic says Romans 2 is true, however in order to perform Romans 2 we need the righteousness of Christ intrinsically imputed to us so that by grace we can then do Romans 2 in a way pleasing to God, as explained in Romans 3 and following.

What is IOW?

 

[fhansen]

What is IOW?

In Other Words

Yes, and they also say that Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, didn’t really mean that we must fulfill every jot and tittle of the Law, nor that our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, nor that we must be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. Our perfection/righteousness is merely imputed, according to them.

Makes God out to be pretty silly, I think. I mean, He never intended man to sin; He always meant for us to be how we were created to be, IOW , without sin. It’d be kind of capricious if God created man, gave him laws he couldn’t possibly fulfill, then blamed him for not fulfilling them anyway, then decided on a whim to reverse Himself and save man later- no rhyme or reason to the whole drama.

In Catholicism, man can fulfill the Law; he simply can’t fulfill it *without God. * That’s the lesson for man to learn, the truth Adam & Eve rejected, simply that ‘man needs God or else he remains without hope’, to paraphrase Pope Benedict. Grace doesn’t save us in spite of our lawbreaking, grace saves us by making us law-keepers, saving us “while we are yet sinners”, by God the Potter molding us, writing His laws on our hearts and in our minds.

 

[CopticChristian]

In Other Words

Yes, and they also say that Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, didn’t really mean that we must fulfill every jot and tittle of the Law, nor that our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, nor that we must be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect. Our perfection/righteousness is merely imputed, according to them.

Makes God out to be pretty silly, I think. I mean, He never intended man to sin; He always meant for us to be how we were created to be, IOW , without sin. It’d be kind of capricious if God created man, gave him laws he couldn’t possibly fulfill, then blamed him for not fulfilling them anyway, then decided on a whim to reverse Himself and save man later- no rhyme or reason to the whole drama.

In Catholicism, man can fulfill the Law; he simply can’t fulfill it *without God. * That’s the lesson for man to learn, the truth Adam & Eve rejected, simply that ‘man needs God or else he remains without hope’, to paraphrase Pope Benedict. Grace doesn’t save us in spite of our lawbreaking, grace saves us by making us law-keepers, saving us “while we are yet sinners”, by God the Potter molding us, writing His laws on our hearts and in our minds.

I feel an anointing, can you feel it? Do I hear an Amen? Louder now, do I hear an Amen. Cmon you can do better than that, let all the heavens hear the voices of an Amen!

 

[guanophore]

As I said previously the understanding that causes confusion is not necessarily Lutheran.

This being the case, your exploration would be much better served by avoiding the term “Protestants”. The problem with which you are grappling is a specific emanation from the heresies of Calvin, which most Protestants do not espouse.

 

[guanophore]

Sanctification is biblical for some but not all Protestants.

Sanctification is Catholic, because it is the NT writings, which were written by, for and about Catholics. In the East, it is called “theosis”. We are being changed daily into the image of Christ.

 

[guanophore]

This is the dilema. If we, as some Protestants say are extrinsically declared righteous, we are not truly righteous. Then by your admission you are not among those that believe we are declared righteous, we are made righteous.

.

Why can’t both be true? Both are in Scripture. Both are in the Teaching of the Church.

As far as Justification/Sanctification. The Catholic Position is We are justified, we are being justified, we will be justified unto holiness. Call it what you like, you have agreed with the Catholic Position.

Paul uses forensic language to explain the legalities of our objective position before God. This does not preclude an inner transformation.

 

[guanophore]

The problem with this is that it doesn’t take into account what Scripture says about being declared righteous by the blood of the lamb. I believe that the pope is wrong.

Christ is the key here to this and everything.

What is the pope wrong about?

Do you think the Pope does not believe Christ is the key to everything?

 

[guanophore]

You keep going back to Justification as being a process. It is not a process. Sanctification is a process. There seems to be a confusion with this. If you are not justified, then why would God waste his time sanctifying you?? There would be no point.

You are quite right. It is a semantics problem. Coptic is undertsanding the Scripture differently than you do. Same verses, different perceptions.

Alot of the problem I found when I was Catholic is that there was a profound emphasis put on the idea of not getting something unless you gave something to get it. I found this to be very damaging to building faith. When we are absent of that faith which brings us to Justification, we then begin to mix it together with Sanctification to try and obtain Salvation by our own doing. Without saving faith in Jesus we are doomed…

It is a sad fact that there was an entire generation of abysmal catechesis after Vat. 2.

There is nothing unbiblical about the idea that we have to give something to get. I am sure we will both agree that salvation is the free gift of God, and cannot be earned. That being said, we are expected to bear fruit that befits repentance, and to do the work of God. Catholics do not believe in cheap grace. Either it is worth giving everything we have (selling all to buy the field) or we are not taking it serious.

I can understand how you got confused into thinkng that salvation comes by our own doing. I had a misunderstanding myself about this for a long time. But salvation does depend upon mixing our faith with His grace. The two meet, and produce fruits. The fact that our own wills are able to be a part of this process does not equate to it being “our own doing”. It is God at work in us to will and to do His good pleasure.

 

[JustaServant]

Alot of the problem I found when I was Catholic is that there was a profound emphasis put on the idea of not getting something unless you gave something to get it. I found this to be very damaging to building faith. When we are absent of that faith which brings us to Justification, we then begin to mix it together with Sanctification to try and obtain Salvation by our own doing. Without saving faith in Jesus we are doomed…

I never met a Catholic in their right mind trying to ‘work their way to Heaven’ without faith. Obviously you were not taught correctly, or you distorted what you were taught.

 

[fhansen]

You keep going back to Justification as being a process. It is not a process. Sanctification is a process. There seems to be a confusion with this. If you are not justified, then why would God waste his time sanctifying you?? There would be no point.

This could be turned around to ask, ‘how can sanctification be separated from justification?’ How can one be *just *without being sanctified?. God doesn’t declare us righteous when we’re not-rather He forgives us our unrighteousness and then, depending on our how our particular life proceeds and the time we’re given, expects us to continue on in that righteousness. “Your sins are forgiven, go, and sin no more.” But He also promises to help His sheep in this endeavor-to help keep them from straying-or to bring them back to the fold if they do.

This is all a process for us-a struggle against sin and towards righteousness that we’re expected to persevere in until our righteousness is complete-until we’re ready for heaven, until we’re capable of seeing God. If sin can be defined as rebellion against God’s order, against God, then why/how could we enter heaven in that state? Our hearts aren’t yet fully turned to Him. We’re still looking over the fence at some other attraction.The Law, the greatest commandments, are yet unfulfilled in us.

So we must cooperate in our justification because man’s will is the problem to begin with-it’s the very faculty that was employed in man’s original separation from God and it’s what He expects to have aligned with His own will in the end. We can’t be saved without Him but He won’t save us without us, to paraphrase Augustine and other thinkers.

Our faith is a first step in our justification. Faith was lost at the fall-that’s the simple reason why we’re born without it now. But even the gift of faith is a grace that can be rejected, so our wills are involved even there. Otherwise salvation would be universal-there’d be absolutely no part for us to play. But God elects to have it otherwise. Our justification-our being just, depends in part-it consists in part- on our choosing it, on our accepting it, on our cooperating with it. Salvation is accomplished when man fully loves God- with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength- and his neighbor as himself.

 

[pritchard85]

This being the case, your exploration would be much better served by avoiding the term “Protestants”. The problem with which you are grappling is a specific emanation from the heresies of Calvin, which most Protestants do not espouse.

Not the heresies of Calvin exactly, but the heresies of what has evolved into five point Calvinism of today long long after John Calvin.

 

[JonNC]

Not the heresies of Calvin exactly, but the heresies of what has evolved into five point Calvinism of today long long after John Calvin.