Salvation by the merit of Christ

[Christian_Unity]

Salvation by the merit of Christ:

How do Catholics and Protestants understand salvation through the merit of Christ the same way, and what are our differences?

 

[Della]

Salvation has to be understood as the result of Christ’s redemptive life, death and resurrection. With that as the definition, there should be no difference, for “there is no other name under heaven by which we are saved.”

How we come to be saved, though, entails more than claiming salvation as a one time gift. We are saved by cooperating with God’s grace, the grace Christ merited for us. It’s not a passive action on our part, but a life long battle against sin for we are to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling” not assume we have it merely because we give mental assent to the redemptive work of Christ or pray a one time prayer of repentence. We must “take up our cross daily” and follow Christ.

 

[Christian_Unity]

Salvation has to be understood as the result of Christ’s redemptive life, death and resurrection. With that as the definition, there should be no difference, for “there is no other name under heaven by which we are saved.”

How we come to be saved, though, entails more than claiming salvation as a one time gift. We are saved by cooperating with God’s grace, the grace Christ merited for us. It’s not a passive action on our part, but a life long battle against sin for we are to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling” not assume we have it merely because we give mental assent to the redemptive work of Christ or pray a one time prayer of repentence. We must “take up our cross daily” and follow Christ.

Thanks for your answer. In historic Protestantism, I think it is incorrect to say that Protestants believe we are saved by mental assent. I’ve heard other Catholics make that same comment about mental assent regeneration. I don’t even believe we are saved by faith + works, or by faith alone. I believe faith is simply an instrument in which the grace of God merited by Christ flows to us. Therefore, it is by the merit of Christ that we are saved. Please explain to me what you mean by we must “take up our cross daily” and follow Christ. In what degree must you take up your cross daily and follow Christ because nobody is able to do it perfectly. Does your daily effort to take up your cross and follow Christ merit salvation for you in any degree at all?

 

[Ubenedictus]

Salvation has to be understood as the result of Christ’s redemptive life, death and resurrection. With that as the definition, there should be no difference, for “there is no other name under heaven by which we are saved.”

How we come to be saved, though, entails more than claiming salvation as a one time gift. We are saved by cooperating with God’s grace, the grace Christ merited for us. It’s not a passive action on our part, but a life long battle against sin for we are to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling” not assume we have it merely because we give mental assent to the redemptive work of Christ or pray a one time prayer of repentence. We must “take up our cross daily” and follow Christ.

amen

 

[Della]

Thanks for your answer. In historic Protestantism, I think it is incorrect to say that Protestants believe we are saved by mental assent. I’ve heard other Catholics make that same comment about mental assent regeneration. I don’t even believe we are saved by faith + works, or by faith alone. I believe faith is simply an instrument in which the grace of God merited by Christ flows to us. Therefore, it is by the merit of Christ that we are saved. Please explain to me what you mean by we must “take up our cross daily” and follow Christ. In what degree must you take up your cross daily and follow Christ because nobody is able to do it perfectly. Does your daily effort to take up your cross and follow Christ merit salvation for you in any degree at all?

I agree that liturgical Christians do not believe in OSAS, but there are many Protestants who do, especially in the USA, so it had to be addressed.

Yes, if we refuse to “take up our cross daily” we deny following Christ for that was his command. Does that mean we do it perfectly? No. Only by the grace of God can we do it at all. But to refuse to do it leads to rebellion, a “why me” attitude that can certainly endanger a person’s salvation by blaming God instead of calling on God in life’s troubles. It can lead to hardening of the heart. This doesn’t mean that we don’t have our moments in which we ask “why me?”, but if we take on that attitude as a life style, it won’t lead to heaven, that’s for sure.

 

[Christian_Unity]

amen

Does your daily effort to take up your cross and follow Christ merit salvation for you in any degree at all? Or do you believe your successful effort to take up your cross daily (in the degree that you are able to do it) is simply because of what Christ accomplished on your behalf through His life and death on your behalf? Therefore, is it by the merit of Christ they you are able to obey?

 

[R_C]

Salvation by the merit of Christ:

How do Catholics and Protestants understand salvation through the merit of Christ the same way, and what are our differences?

I recently wrote two posts about justification (salvation) as understood by the Church vs. the protestant reformers:

Part 1

Part 2

 

[Christian_Unity]

I agree that liturgical Christians do not believe in OSAS, but there are many Protestants who do, especially in the USA, so it had to be addressed.

Yes, if we refuse to “take up our cross daily” we deny following Christ for that was his command. Does that mean we do it perfectly? No. Only by the grace of God can we do it at all. But to refuse to do it leads to rebellion, a “why me” attitude that can certainly endanger a person’s salvation by blaming God instead of calling on God in life’s troubles. It can lead to hardening of the heart. This doesn’t mean that we don’t have our moments in which we ask “why me?”, but if we take on that attitude as a life style, it won’t lead to heaven, that’s for sure.

For those who are united to Christ, it is God who works in us… enabling us to work out our salvation in fear and trembling. We do strain ahead and press on toward the goal with much effort, but are we doing this by the power of God working in us? Again, even in our journey and Christian walk, it appears we are able to this (imperfectly) based on the merit of Christ alone flowing to us through the instrument of faith. Do you seem to agree or disagree?

Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. – Phil 2

But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained. - Phil 3

 

[Christian_Unity]

I recently wrote two posts about justification (salvation) as understood by the Church vs. the protestant reformers:

Part 1

Part 2

Thanks for the links. When time permits I will try to read them. I don’t think the historic debate on justification is about easy believism or OSAS because God does change those who are united to Christ over time; therefore, salvation is a journey and a process which a sinner is becoming more like Christ. Do you believe Catholic and Protestant theology agrees that salvation is ultimately by the merit of Christ alone?

Again, I don’t believe salvation is by faith alone, or faith (+) works done in Christ. When the circle is made to trace the source that we are able to do anything that pleases God, it seems to all come back to the life and death of Christ which merited everything for us, enabling us to do what pleases God imperfectly.

 

[pablope]

Does your daily effort to take up your cross and follow Christ merit salvation for you in any degree at all? Or do you believe your successful effort to take up your cross daily (in the degree that you are able to do it) is simply because of what Christ accomplished on your behalf through His life and death on your behalf? Therefore, is it by the merit of Christ they you are able to obey?

CU…can you define what you mean by “merit” to better understand your question…thanks.

 

[JonNC]

I recently wrote two posts about justification (salvation) as understood by the Church vs. the protestant reformers:

Part 1

Part 2

From your first post

Luther for many times applauded good works, but recognized them only as necessary concomitants, not as efficient dispositions, for justification. Luther was surprised to find himself by his unprecedented doctrine in direct contradiction to the Bible, therefore he rejected the Epistle of St. James as “of straw” and into the text of St. Paul to the Romans (3:28) he boldly inserted the word “alone”. This was not in the spirit of the Apostle’s teaching, for nowhere does St. Paul teach that faith alone (without charity) will bring justification, even though we should accept as also Pauline the text given in a different context, that supernatural faith alone justifies but the fruitless works of the Jewish Law do not. In this statement St. Paul emphasizes the fact that grace is purely gratuitous; that no merely natural good works can merit grace; but he does not state that no other acts in their nature and purport predisposing are necessary for justification over and above the requisite faith.

Source, please, other than from the likes of Denifle, that Luther found himself surprised.
It would also be helpful to provide the full text of the “of straw” comment, and the comparative nature of it. Luther’s complaint with James, after the primary one of authorship, is that James spoke little of Christ or the Gospel, but instead of the law, and in this way he makes the comparison to the others.
“In a word St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it"

Further, to claim that Luther rejected James is a bold overstatement:
“Though this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, I praise it and consider it a good book, because it sets up no doctrines of men but vigorously promulgates the law of God. However, to state my own opinion about it, though without prejudice to anyone, I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle;"

Finally, Luther on works:
*Faith must of course be sincere. It must be a faith that performs good works through love. If faith lacks love it is not true faith. Thus the Apostle bars the way of hypocrites to the kingdom of Christ on all sides. He declares on the one hand, “In Christ Jesus circumcision availeth nothing,” i.e., works avail nothing, but faith alone, and that without any merit whatever, avails before God. On the other hand, the Apostle declares that without fruits faith serves no purpose. To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. In this terse manner Paul presents the whole life of a Christian. Inwardly it consists in faith towards God, outwardly in love towards our fellow-men. *

Jon

 

[Della]

CU…can you define what you mean by “merit” to better understand your question…thanks.

Yes, I’d like that too because I’d like to know the direction/intent of this thread–just for the sake of clarification.

 

[pablope]

Salvation by the merit of Christ:

How do Catholics and Protestants understand salvation through the merit of Christ the same way, and what are our differences?

Somebody shared this a while ago…from Mcgrath:

Starting with Augustine, the Roman Catholic tradition has understood justification as the entire process by which God forgives and then transforms Christians. Based on their reading of the use of “justification” in Paul’s letters, the Reformers took justification to refer specifically to God’s forgiveness and acceptance. The term “sanctification” was used to refer to the lifelong process of transformation. Thus the Roman Catholic term “justification” effectively includes both what Protestants refer to as “justification” and “sanctification.” This difference in definitions can result in confusion, effectively exaggerating the disagreement. However the difference in definitions reflects a difference in substance. In the Protestant concept, justification is a status before God that is entirely the result of God’s activity and that continues even when humans sin. Thus using different words for justification and sanctification reflects a distinction between aspects of salvation that are entirely the result of God’s activity, and those that involve human cooperation. The Roman Catholic tradition uses a single term, in part, because it does not recognize a distinction of this type. For the Roman Catholic tradition, while everything originates with God, the entire process of justification requires human cooperation, and serious sin compromises it.[1]

The Catholic tradition, following Augustine, has identified justifying works as those works performed by the regenerate, i.e., the baptized, i.e., the justified. Works do not bring bring about the state of justification–God does this gratuitously in the sacrament of baptism–but they do contribute to our growth in justification. Please note that in the traditional Latin usage, “justification” comprehends initial justification, growth in justification (sanctification), and final justification. Hence it is meaningful for Catholics to speak of works as justifying–not in the sense that they earn God’s favor, not in the sense that they effect the transition from a state of sin to a state of righteousness, but in the sense that they contribute to our growth in holiness and sanctity and thus deepen our communion with the Holy Trinity

 

[pablope]

Salvation by the merit of Christ:

How do Catholics and Protestants understand salvation through the merit of Christ the same way, and what are our differences?

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/salvation.pdf

Justification By Faith
By Dr. William Marshner

The Protestant Reformers, however, impatient with metaphysics, preferred not to cope with such an entity and denied its existence.4 To them it seemed simpler to say that grace is something wholly in God, namely, His favor towards us. But then, if grace is not something real in man, our “justification” can no longer be conceived as a real change in us; it will have to become a sheer declaration on God’s part, e.g. a declaration that, thanks to the work of Christ, He will henceforth consider us as just, even though we remain inwardly the sinners we always were. Hence, the Protestant doctrine of “forensic” or “extrinsic” justification. Now watch what happens to our own act of faith: it ceases to be the foundational act of an interior renewal and becomes a mere requirement, devoid of any salvific power in its own right, which God arbitrarily sets as the condition on which He will declare us just. Whereupon, watch what happens to our good works: they cease to be the vital acts wherein an ontologically real “new life” consists and manifests itself; they become mere human responses to divine mercy—nice, but totally irrelevant to our justification—or else they become zombie-like motions produced in us by irresistible divine impulses, whereby God exhibits His glory in His elect.

 

[Christian_Unity]

Yes, I’d like that too because I’d like to know the direction/intent of this thread–just for the sake of clarification.

Thanks for asking. I am an administrator on a Christian Fellowship Facebook group consisting of both Catholics and Protestants. As you can imagine, we fight like cats and dogs at times because we see things differently. Yet, I think we have common ground since everything seems to flow from the person and work of Christ… which is the source of merit in which God grants us. Aren’t the seven sacraments simply the instrument in which the grace of God flows? Can we say that grace was merited by Christ on our behalf in which Protestants receive by faith and Catholics received by faith through the sacraments?

 

[Christian_Unity]

CU…can you define what you mean by “merit” to better understand your question…thanks.

The perfect life of Jesus obeying the will of God perfectly, and the sacrifical death of Jesus merted God’s forgivness and eternal favor for all those who are united to Christ. Therefore, Christ’s worked merited grace on our behalf.

 

[po18guy]

The perfect life of Jesus obeying the will of God perfectly, and the sacrifical death of Jesus merted God’s forgivness and eternal favor for all those who are united to Christ. Therefore, Christ’s worked merited grace on our behalf.

Semantics: Is not Jesus also God? He obeyed the will of His Father, correct?

If we, being baptized into the Body of Christ, and being members of His Body (as Paul wrote), cannot also work - to some limited degree - to merit salvation, even of others, are we truly members of His Body?

I ask this because of the beliefs of neo-Calvinism.

 

[po18guy]

Thanks for asking. I am an administrator on a Christian Fellowship Facebook group consisting of both Catholics and Protestants. As you can imagine, we fight like cats and dogs at times because we see things differently. Yet, I think we have common ground since everything seems to flow from the person and work of Christ… which is the source of merit in which God grants us. Aren’t the seven sacraments simply the instrument in which the grace of God flows? Can we say that grace was merited by Christ on our behalf in which Protestants receive by faith and Catholics received by faith through the sacraments?

Since Sacraments are established scripturally and historically, why then, would one consciously reject them? That would seem to negate Christ’s founding of His Church in the first place. I dare make no such judgment on the acts of God.

 

[Christian_Unity]

Semantics: Is not Jesus also God? He obeyed the will of His Father, correct?

If we, being baptized into the Body of Christ, and being members of His Body (as Paul wrote), cannot also work - to some limited degree - to merit salvation, even of others, are we truly members of His Body?

I ask this because of the beliefs of neo-Calvinism.

I kind of confused what you are sharing brother. Are you saying you can merit your salvation in some limited degree? What’s neo-Calvinism?

 

[Christian_Unity]

Since Sacraments are established scripturally and historically, why then, would one consciously reject them? That would seem to negate Christ’s founding of His Church in the first place. I dare make no such judgment on the acts of God.

Sorry brother, I’m not Catholic. Us Protestants only have two sacraments. I’m not trying to limit you to only two sacraments. If you are Catholic, then you defintely have seven sacraments… that’s cool by me.