D
DeusVult_90
Guest
If Jesus gained for us all the merit we need, why do we need the merits of the saints?
- Status
L
LilyM
Guest
They (and we) are His body, His members through which He acts - their (and our) merits ARE His merits - and boy we need all the merit we can get!!!
D
DeusVult_90
Guest
I like that! Please explain more, and could you cite any Church documents? Thanks
N
Nita
Guest
Colossians 1:24 “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of His body, that is, the church, …”
Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph #618:
The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the “one mediator between God and men.” (1 Tim 2:5) But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men. (GS 22 paragraph 5) He calls his disiples to "take up [their] cross and follow [him], (Mt 16:24], for “Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps.” (1 Pet 2:21) In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries. (cf Mk 10:39; John 21:18-19; Col 1:24) This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering. (cf Lk 2:35)
Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph #618:
The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the “one mediator between God and men.” (1 Tim 2:5) But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men. (GS 22 paragraph 5) He calls his disiples to "take up [their] cross and follow [him], (Mt 16:24], for “Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps.” (1 Pet 2:21) In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries. (cf Mk 10:39; John 21:18-19; Col 1:24) This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering. (cf Lk 2:35)
D
DeusVult_90
Guest
So are the merits of the good works and sacrifices of the saints those gained at the cross but applied to the acts of the saints?
N
Nita
Guest
I don’t know. I never thought of it in those terms.
My thought is that the saints received graces merited by Jesus at the cross. Strengthened by that grace and cooperating with it, their good deeds have merit.
Time for bed here in Iowa. Will see if I can locate more info on it tomorrow if nobody answers before then.
Nita
N
Nita
Guest
Was hoping I could link you to sections in “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”, but the parts needed are not yet on line.
I’ll start with a quote from the Part 2, “The Work of the Redeemer” (page 177 if you have the book)
We may regard the Redemption objectively or subjectively. Objectively the Redemption is the work of the Redeemer, subjectively the Redemption is the realisation of the Redemption in individual men, or the application of the fruits of the Redemption to individual men (Justification). …
…Through the merits of Christ the supernatural riches of salvation were acquired which are to be dispensed in the subjective Redemption.
The phrasing in your opening question was
The second part of the question was
An analogy I’ve heard: a mother is baking a cake. It is necessary to stir the ingredients together in order to obtain a cake. The mother lets her child help with the stirring. It isn’t that the mother couldn’t do it, and a child was needed. Rather, it was that she desired to let her child have a part in making the cake.
If you have the book “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”, read the section on the Communion of Saints (p 314–318). Here are a couple quotes from that section:
…As Christ, the Head, in His expiatory sufferings, took the place of the members, so also one member can take the place of another. The doctrine of indulgences is based on the possibility and reality of vicarious atonement.
…
Even in the OT the idea of vicarious atonement by innocent persons for guilty is known. The innocent person takes on himself responsibility for the displeasure of God which the guilty person has merited, in order by sacrifice to win again the Divine favour for the latter. Moses offers himself to God as a sacrifice for the people who sinned (Ex 32:32). Job brings God a burnt offering, in order to expiate the sins of his children (Job 1:5). … The Apostle St. Paul teaches that also the faithful can rend expiation for one another. Col. 1:24 (I cited that earlier, so won’t repeat). 2 Cor. 12:15: “But I most gladly will spend and be spent myself for your souls.” 2 Tim 4:6: “I am even now ready to be sacrificed” (that is, to suffer a martyr’s death).
Hope this helps.
Nita
I’ll start with a quote from the Part 2, “The Work of the Redeemer” (page 177 if you have the book)
We may regard the Redemption objectively or subjectively. Objectively the Redemption is the work of the Redeemer, subjectively the Redemption is the realisation of the Redemption in individual men, or the application of the fruits of the Redemption to individual men (Justification). …
…Through the merits of Christ the supernatural riches of salvation were acquired which are to be dispensed in the subjective Redemption.
The phrasing in your opening question was
It would be better to think of it as “through his merits, Jesus gained for us all the graces we need”. Saving grace is now there and accessible, but it requires human cooperation to be received in our souls. God doesn’t force.
The second part of the question was
They aren’t “needed” in the sense that Jesus sacrifice was not sufficient to merit all the grace needed for our salvation. To the degree they are needed, it is because Jesus desired to have the members of His mystical body share in His work.
An analogy I’ve heard: a mother is baking a cake. It is necessary to stir the ingredients together in order to obtain a cake. The mother lets her child help with the stirring. It isn’t that the mother couldn’t do it, and a child was needed. Rather, it was that she desired to let her child have a part in making the cake.
If you have the book “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”, read the section on the Communion of Saints (p 314–318). Here are a couple quotes from that section:
…As Christ, the Head, in His expiatory sufferings, took the place of the members, so also one member can take the place of another. The doctrine of indulgences is based on the possibility and reality of vicarious atonement.
…
Even in the OT the idea of vicarious atonement by innocent persons for guilty is known. The innocent person takes on himself responsibility for the displeasure of God which the guilty person has merited, in order by sacrifice to win again the Divine favour for the latter. Moses offers himself to God as a sacrifice for the people who sinned (Ex 32:32). Job brings God a burnt offering, in order to expiate the sins of his children (Job 1:5). … The Apostle St. Paul teaches that also the faithful can rend expiation for one another. Col. 1:24 (I cited that earlier, so won’t repeat). 2 Cor. 12:15: “But I most gladly will spend and be spent myself for your souls.” 2 Tim 4:6: “I am even now ready to be sacrificed” (that is, to suffer a martyr’s death).
Hope this helps.
Nita
G
guanophore
Guest
Most people misunderstand what is meant by the phrase “it is finished” Jesus used on the cross. He had finished the fourth cup of the Passover. His sacrificial work is done, but ours is not. We can now become like him in his suffereings. It was His work on the cross that makes it possible for us to participate in his death adn resurrection. In becoming one with Him, we join our suffering with his, and “add” what we may to his sufferings. this has eternal value (merit).
- Status