Saved, definition

[dcdurel]

Without the Popes, we can’t even know the correct definition of the word saved.

In this forum I have seen the word saved mean “to assure of going to heaven”,(Protestant) or to the beginning of the process of going to heaven.(Catholic), but still not clear what the immediate primary meaning is

Lets see what the Popes teach.
This is from
Jesus Frees Us from the Slavery of Sin John Paul II, General Audience, July 27, 1988

        *To save" means "to free from evil." Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, since he came to free the human person from that fundamental evil which has invaded man's inner being throughout the whole course of history, after the first breach of the covenant with the Creator. The evil of sin is precisely this fundamental evil which comes between humanity and the realization of the kingdom of God. Jesus of Nazareth came as Savior. From the very beginning of his mission he announced the "approach of the kingdom of God." He not only announced the kingdom of God, but he eliminated the essential obstacle to its realization, which is sin. Sin is rooted in humanity according to the law of original heredity, and which is an incentive in man to the commission of personal sins (fomes peccati). Jesus Christ is the Savior in this fundamental sense of the word. He gets to the root of the evil that is in man. That root consists in turning one's back on God, by accepting the dominion of the "father of lies" (cf. Jn 8:44) who as the "prince of darkness" (cf. Col 1:13) has become through sin (and ever continues to become so from the beginning) the "prince of this world" (Jn 12:13; 14:30; 16:11)."*

“Thus the definition, “lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world,” rooted in the Old Testament, indicates that the work of salvation, that is, liberation from sins, will be carried out at the cost of Christ’s passion and death. The Savior is at the same time the Redeemer of man. His work of salvation is at the price of the salvific sacrifice of himself.”*

To summarize, the Pope teaches, as all the previous Popes teach that to save us from our sins, means to liberate us from the incentive to sin, to liberate us from the inclination to sin. Since Jesus did this at the price of His own life, He is also the Redeemer of man.

Of course, He also atoned for our sins, so that if we die repentant we can enter heaven with Him.

But again, the primary meaning of saved and salvation is that Jesus came to free us from the inclination to sin, so that we can live for Him, so that we can be freed from the inclination to sin, thus slavery to sin, so that we can be happy, instead of being constant slaves to sin.

And the Church teaches that we receive this grace that saves us “frees us” first at baptism, then the other sacraments and through prayer. The mass “continues the work of salvation” because it continues to make available the grace that frees us from the inclination to sin. That is why when both Catholic couples go to daily mass, the divorce rate is only 2%.

Thus, when St. Paul says, by grace you have been saved through faith, he means by grace you have been set free from the inclination to sin, set free from the slavery of sin.

That is why at mass the acclamation is
“By your cross and resurrection you have set us free, you are the savior of the world”
Thus again, the word “saved” as the Church uses it, means to be “set free” from the slavery of sin.

Of course, this grace from the sacraments and the mass does not set us completely free, we still need private prayer, fasting, mortifications, etc. to receive more of this grace that takes away our inclination to sin. But the end result is the same, that freed from our inclination to sin, we can now be happy by living according to His teachings and be in union with God on this earth and eventually in heaven.
So, the saints did NOT pray always because they were good, but because they had an inclination to sin and evil, they prayed, fasted and went to mass to be freed from the inclination to sin (concupisence) so that they could be good and holy.

But since this grace does not take away our free will, we can still turn back to sin, thus rebel against God, and end up in hell if we don’t repent of our mortal sins.

 

[thistle]

///

 

[thistle]

I hope this is not another thread about how we can only believe what the Popes say because all scholars, bishops etc are in error and we cannot trust them!

 

[dcdurel]

I hope this is not another thread about how we can only believe what the Popes say because all scholars, bishops etc are in error and we cannot trust them!

Scholars are NOT infallible. Even the best theologians such as St. Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas did not trust their own teachings, but submitted it all to the judgment of the Church.
Therefore, there is NO scholar we can trust to always teach the truth. Only the Popes can be trusted, when teaching for the whole Church, to teach without error. The bishops can be trusted to teach without error, only when they are authorized by the Popes, such as in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Now, if you believe I am wrong, please name some infallible scholars.

 

[thistle]

Scholars are NOT infallible. Even the best theologians such as St. Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas did not trust their own teachings, but submitted it all to the judgment of the Church.
Therefore, there is NO scholar we can trust to always teach the truth. Only the Popes can be trusted, when teaching for the whole Church, to teach without error. The bishops can be trusted to teach without error, only when they are authorized by the Popes, such as in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Now, if you believe I am wrong, please name some infallible scholars.

Listen. You are like a broken record repeating the same things over and over again. Its really boring by now and if you go back over all your threads on this you won’t find anyone who agrees with you. Doesn’t that tell you something?

 

[dcdurel]

Listen. You are like a broken record repeating the same things over and over again. Its really boring by now and if you go back over all your threads on this you won’t find anyone who agrees with you. Doesn’t that tell you something?

I can’t find anyone who disagrees with me.
That is because most people are totally lost on the basics.
For example.
The definition of saved. I rarely hear the Pope’s definition given. Yet, his is the correct definition. Now, if Catholics don’t know what saved means, and don’t know what salvation means, then it is impossible to understand the Catholic faith. Because Salvation is the center and kernel of the whole Gospel, and the Catholic faith is the Gospel the apostles handed down.

This again, is why Vatican II failed. The Catholic scholars have NO idea what the Church means by salvation and what the Church means by the primary duty of priests and bishops, which is the “proclamation of the Gospel to all”

There is nothing more fundamental than this. But, if Catholic scholars, especially orthodox Catholic scholars cannot understand the Church on these fundamental teachings, then how can they teach the priests and bishops?

And again, the proof that they don’t understand these basic concepts is that no one can name a single Catholic Scholar who can explain what the Church means by the proclamation of the Gospel to all.
Go ahead, PROVE ME WRONG. Name that scholar, cite his work.

The solution is that every Catholic with some intelligence and love of God, especially the Catholic scholars MUST learn from Pope Paul VI, JPII and the Benedict XVI what THEY mean by the words “Salvation” and “Gospel”

I am not a theologian. I certainly cannot take the place of Catholic Scholars. But, I can see they are totally and absolutely lost on these basic teachings. Thus the bishops are lost. Proof is that they have no directives at all on what the content of the homily is supposed to be about. They have no idea that the homily is supposed to be almost all catechesis, but they cannot reconcile that with their idea of the Gospel. They have no idea that catechesis IS the primary way of proclaiming the Gospel. Because when they think “Gospel”
they think of the written Gospels, the narratives of the life of Jesus, instead of first thinking of the Gospel that Jesus and the apostles preached , the Catholic faith.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I can’t find anyone who disagrees with me.
That is because most people are totally lost on the basics.

Or, maybe it’s because most (if not all) people have NO IDEA what it is you are trying to say.

Are you capable of expressing a cogent thought? Would you like to try again, please?

 

[dcdurel]

Or, maybe it’s because most (if not all) people have NO IDEA what it is you are trying to say.

Are you capable of expressing a cogent thought? Would you like to try again, please?

It is simple. They don’t understand what the Popes teach. Thus, they have no basis for disagreeing with me or agreeing with me.

They can’t understand what the Popes teach because Catholic scholars have picked up Protestant inclinations and they think that “saved” and “salvation” has to do primarily with going to heaven. This false understanding is communicated to ordinary Catholics. Even the Baltimore Catechism gives this false understanding. It says that Jesus became man to satisfy for our sins and to open the gates of heaven.
While that is part of the reason He became man, it misses the primary meaning entirely, which is that Jesus became man to free us from everything that oppresses us, especially sin and the power of the devil.

Thus, when the Popes say it is through Jesus we have “salvation” Catholics are thinking, “Jesus atoned for our sins and thus makes it possible for us to go to heaven”,
but salvation to the Popes means, “Jesus frees us from the slavery of sin” and enlightens us, so we can live a life in union with God and our neighbor and thus have happiness, and then we can change our culture

Thus, our false definitions we learned, makes it impossible to understand these basic, simple, fundamental, beginning truths on which the whole Catholic faith is based.

Our whole Catholic faith is based and centered on the truth that Jesus became man to free us from everything that oppresses us, especially sin and the power of the devil, so that we can share in God’s life of happiness starting here and now on this earth, and later in heaven.

Study what the Popes teach. They teach almost entirely different from what the common Catholic thought is.
Their teachings make sense. The whole Catholic faith finally is connected and makes sense. The mass makes sense. Catholics would start coming back to mass, if people understood what the Popes have been teaching, that in the mass the work of salvation (freedom from the slavery of sin) is made available to us, so that we can love our spouse, parents, relatives the way we should, so that we can overcome our slavery to various sins, so that we can overcome our selfishness, greed, pride, etc. and thus live in freedom from our human desires and be free and happy.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Even the Baltimore Catechism gives this false understanding. It says that Jesus became man to satisfy for our sins and to open the gates of heaven.

I’ve re-read Lesson #7 (the Incarnation) from my 1941 edition and I can find no such passage. Would you please cite your source?

Thus, when the Popes say it is through Jesus we have “salvation” Catholics are thinking, “Jesus atoned for our sins and thus makes it possible for us to go to heaven”,
but salvation to the Popes means, “Jesus frees us from the slavery of sin”

You will find little argument in me that the modern Catholic is poorly educated in his/her faith, but I will deny that any respected theologian is to blame. Article #1 of the CCC clearly establishes Church teaching on the Sacramental Economy.

You allude to, but do not actually cite, Catholic authorities who advocate heterodox opinions. Perhaps you can cite these with more precision.

 

[cthulhubryan]

Now, if you believe I am wrong, please name some infallible scholars.

Joseph Ratzinger?

Just kidding, only the Pope has infallibility