Salvation question

[mh22]

Hello,

Does anyone have an explanation on the Catholic view of the man that was crucified next to Jesus promised heaven by just believing. I was asked this by some people that felt that this was strong proof that all you need is faith. Has anyone ever thought about this situation?

 

[az_4_faith]

Saint Dismas, the Good Thief, was saved by his faith. His faith came to him on his deathbed, so to speak.

It took alot of courage for Dismas to speak to Jesus, considering the shame of crucifixion and the state of sin that Dismas was in. What would have happened to him if he hadn’t seized that moment?

Like many converts, his faith came late in life. Upon his death, his sins were then purged in the same way that we all hope ours will be, and heaven became his eternity.

 

[heisenburg]

Initial Justification is by grace alone (eph2:8). The man came to Christ (literally), and asked for his forgivness, and was baptized by blood. Since he was cleansed at this point, his soul was ok… He ran the race till the end from that point, just happened that the end of the race was mere hours away…

I can assure you, if later, the same theif denounced christ before he died, he would not have been in heaven.

In Christ

 

[Fidelis]

I think it is safe to say that the Good Thief was a special case and not presented to us a norm for salvation. First of all, we know nothing about him-- for all we know, he may have been a back-slidden follower of Jesus and even baptised before this point (how else would he know enough about Jesus and his “kingdom” to even place his faith in him?).

Secondly, unlike most of us, the man on the Cross was hardly in a position to be baptized to perform any acts of obedience. In addition to being able to read the man’s heart, Jesus worked with what he had: the Good Thief’s defense of Jesus from the taunts of the other thief, and his asking Jesus to remember him.

Most of us have an opportunity to do much more, and so to whom much is given much more is expected.

 

[mrs_abbott]

Initial Justification is by grace alone (eph2:8). The man came to Christ (literally), and asked for his forgivness, and was baptized by blood. Since he was cleansed at this point, his soul was ok… He ran the race till the end from that point, just happened that the end of the race was mere hours away…

I can assure you, if later, the same theif denounced christ before he died, he would not have been in heaven.

In Christ

But it kinda supports the Protestants’ view on sola fide and that we are initially saved by faith alone.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,
IMHO I feel this was put in the bible to specifically show us that faith saves. I believe we were given an example. It is true we do not know anything about the thief other then he accepted Christ on his death bed(cross) I would think that in and of itself is enough to prove faith alone saves. Of course Im looking at this from a purely spiritual point of view.

 

[E.E.N.S]

But it kinda supports the Protestants’ view on sola fide and that we are initially saved by faith alone.

I disagree. Even besides the special circumstances this thief still “picked up his cross” and followed Christ willingly and humbly. He accepted his suffering as penance for his past life, is this not what we do daily and in the sacrament of penance?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Hello,

Does anyone have an explanation on the Catholic view of the man that was crucified next to Jesus promised heaven by just believing. I was asked this by some people that felt that this was strong proof that all you need is faith. Has anyone ever thought about this situation?

Hmmmm…he had faith…but didn’t he also admonish the sinner next to Jesus? That’s a work of mercy, right? A meritorious work (Gk axios ergon), right? “They should repent and turn to God and perform deeds worthy (Gk ergon axios) of their repentance” (Act 26:20)

 

[az_4_faith]

Saint Dismas didn’t have much of an opportunity to renounce his faith, or time to committ acts contrary to his faith, but others who were baptized in the Church did, as Saint Paul says, “fall asleep”. What happened to them is anyone’s guess.

Most of us will come to our faith with a lifetime ahead to live it. What we do in our lifetime reflects our faith. If we live according to the Gospels, our actions will naturally support our profession of faith. If we don’t, our actions may lead us to somewhere away from heaven upon death.

Faith alone is not complete.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Hi,
IMHO I feel this was put in the bible to specifically show us that faith saves. I believe we were given an example. It is true we do not know anything about the thief other then he accepted Christ on his death bed(cross) I would think that in and of itself is enough to prove faith alone saves. Of course Im looking at this from a purely spiritual point of view.

On the contrary, it is evident that one must display at least faith. But even St. Dismas had time to enact a spiritual work of mercy–admonishing sinners.

For further evidence, let us compare two parables, the Laborers in the Vineyard, and the Two Talents. In brief, the parable of the Laborers symbolizes all those who have been called by Christ, some early in life, some late. All work for the landowner, and all receive the same reward despite the length of time each has worked. The parable of the two talents entails a landowner who has entrusted talents with each of three servants. The two who faithfully employed their talents were rewarded, while the last who did nothing, is punished severely. From these tales we can learn that it is both a privilege and a chore to be called early in life to God’s service. We are expected to use the gifts He gives in service for His kingdom, and should we fail to do so, we will suffer just punishments. Those who are called later are yet expected to do what they can, such as St. Dismas, who at the least admonished the sinful criminal on the other side of Jesus, but not as much is expected due to the short time remaining. Bearing this in mind, we can see that yes, “good works” are necessary.

But also in another way are good works necessary. St. Paul teaches that we must replace the ‘old man’ with the ‘new man’. A very effective way of doing so is keeping in mind the works of mercy and committing ourselves to enacting them as we are given opportunity everyday. Is this earning our salvation? No. Perhaps a better way of thinking is that it is “earning our sanctification”. One doesn’t become holy by waiting on the Lord to infuse it. One becomes holy by living as the holy live, by doing what Christ did…by enacting the works of mercy.

The final accusation protestants levy at Catholics is that salvation should be simple and Catholics have made it complex. This is not my experience. It is much simpler to follow a plan, knowing that you will end up with the desired result, instead of creating a plan as you go in hopes that the desired result will be acheived. This seems to me the difference between the protestant path and the Catholic. The protestant must form his conscience by trial and error, especially in things that follow from Biblical principles, but are not explicitly commanded. The Catholic has a history of 2000 years from which to draw from other’s experiences as well as the voice of the Spirit speaking through the Church. The plan is clear, and is relatively simple to follow. By any means, when the protestant exclaims, “By Faith alone”, it is never that simple.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Hello,

Does anyone have an explanation on the Catholic view of the man that was crucified next to Jesus promised heaven by just believing. I was asked this by some people that felt that this was strong proof that all you need is faith. Has anyone ever thought about this situation?

Was that the same man who (1)turned on his friends to defend Jesus(verbally), (2)confessed his sins, and (3)asked Jesus to remember him, or do you refer to another man who had silent faith? Another way to look at this is how did David remain in God’s grace despite his sins? My understanding of the Catholic teaching is God decides and thus no one can be assured any outcome. The Church and Apostles which have the ability to *bind and loose *teach faith alone is insufficient. Similarly Protestants teach faith causes the true believer to follow Jesus teaching which means he performs Jesus works! So actually Protestants do teach faith and works they just teach it as a step 1, step 2 method.

 

[heisenburg]

But it kinda supports the Protestants’ view on sola fide and that we are initially saved by faith alone.

Hi Mrs…

Just wanted to make a comment on this statement…
Catholic teaching is that the initial justification is by Grace Alone. This is differant than Faith alone, though they appear to be the same. We do not, nor will ever be able to do anything to obtain that initial justification. This is why Baptism is so important. It cleanses us of original sin, and prepares our soul for christ. We still have to follow His words, do what he asks, etc. this is were our works come in.

Also, if you look at Eph 2:8… Protestants like to say this verse says we are saved by faith alone, but it doesnt, it says Grace alone, which is a-ok (and true) For we are saved by grace (there you have it) through faith, apart from works.

the core sentance is that we are saved by grace…
it goes on to say faith is simply a required component, but that without those two, no work will give us our initial justification.

Anyway, hope that helps

In Christ

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Luke 23:39-41 - One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.”

This is a work of mercy…admonish the sinner and instruct the ignorant. He was indeed given faith and metanoia or “repentence”, but he also performed deeds worthy of his repentence.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

It is strange that a Protestant will see in the same narrative of Scripture, supposed evidence his “faith alone” doctrine, when it seems clear to Christians, to include the commentaries of ancient Christianity on this passage, that this thief was manifesting his sin (confession) before our high priest, showing sorrow (contrition) and suffering satisfaction (penance), being forgiven by the priest (absolution), complete with meritorious deeds worthy of his repentence (works of mercy: adomishing the sinner, instructing the ignorant). This is indeed an example of the means of salvation, but it is a very Catholic example.

St. Cummian (7th cent.) “…the thief gained Paradise in the last hour of his confession” (C. xiv, 2).

 

[BlestOne]

It is strange that a Protestant will see in the same narrative of Scripture, supposed evidence his “faith alone” doctrine, when it seems clear to Christians, to include the commentaries of ancient Christianity on this passage, that this thief was manifesting his sin (confession) before our high priest, showing sorrow (contrition) and suffering satisfaction (penance), being forgiven by the priest (absolution), complete with meritorious deeds worthy of his repentence (works of mercy: adomishing the sinner, instructing the ignorant). This is indeed an example of the means of salvation, but it is a very Catholic example.

St. Cummian (7th cent.) “…the thief gained Paradise in the last hour of his confession” (C. xiv, 2).

What Dave Said…

How could Sola Fide folks not see this?

 

[Mommyof02green]

It is strange that a Protestant will see in the same narrative of Scripture, supposed evidence his “faith alone” doctrine, when it seems clear to Christians, to include the commentaries of ancient Christianity on this passage, that this thief was manifesting his sin (confession) before our high priest, showing sorrow (contrition) and suffering satisfaction (penance), being forgiven by the priest (absolution), complete with meritorious deeds worthy of his repentence (works of mercy: adomishing the sinner, instructing the ignorant). This is indeed an example of the means of salvation, but it is a very Catholic example.

St. Cummian (7th cent.) “…the thief gained Paradise in the last hour of his confession” (C. xiv, 2).

That is what I was thinking. I just didn’t know how to say it.

Other then I see it as the theif doing confession.

I’m glad that you posted before me.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Christianity on this passage, that this thief was manifesting his sin (confession) before our high priest, showing sorrow (contrition) and suffering satisfaction (penance),

Hi, Im with you up until this point.

being forgiven by the priest (absolution), complete with meritorious deeds worthy of his repentence (works of mercy: adomishing the sinner, instructing the ignorant).

The robber is being forgiven by Christ himself–so how does that go along with a Priest? Are you saying the Robber was showing mercy or Christ–sorry a little confused by this statement.
Thanks

 

[E.E.N.S]

Hi, Im with you up until this point. The robber is being forgiven by Christ himself–so how does that go along with a Priest? Are you saying the Robber was showing mercy or Christ–sorry a little confused by this statement.
Thanks

Christ is the High Priest.

Both Christ and the thief showed mercy. The thief was performing works of mercy (as explained in the posts above), and Christ in return showed mercy on the thief.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Christ is the High Priest.

Both Christ and the thief showed mercy. The thief was performing works of mercy (as explained in the posts above), and Christ in return showed mercy on the thief.

Thank you.

I guess I dont know what act of mercy the robber showed.
Yes Jesus is the high priest but it is a stretch IMHO to go from confessing our sins to God himself to a mere man.

 

[E.E.N.S]

Thank you.

I guess I dont know what act of mercy the robber showed.
Yes Jesus is the high priest but it is a stretch IMHO to go from confessing our sins to God himself to a mere man.

The works of mercy performed were listed in several of the posts in this thread already (like post #14 for example).

As for confessing sins to a priest, did not Christ tell the Apostles to “go…who’s sins you forgive are forgiven them…”? How could a priest forgive my sins if I did not first confess them to him?