Can Good Works Redeem Us?

[Guest Tony Atonement]

[quote name='Antigonos' date='27 November 2009 - 05:09 AM' timestamp='1259316575' post='2010199']
Perhaps we differ in our understanding of "works". I am not thinking of suffering, or even expiation. I am thinking of positive actions, either of an altruistic nature, such as giving to charity, or doing volunteer work, or being punctilious in one's religious obligations. I suppose what I'm asking[correct me if I'm wrong] that a Catholic who gives generously to various charities, assists the needy and/or ill, but never goes to church, or takes Communion, would find himself judged in Heaven more harshly than one who went to Mass every day, and regularly went on retreat, etc. but never gave a dime to charity or helped an old lady across the street? Or is it the opposite?
[/quote]


I just noticed your status as non-Christian, so I can understand you might be a little confused as to the Roman Catholic concept of expiating sins though their "carrying their own crosses", as it were. In any case, your basic defintion of good works is perfectly sound. The gruff between Protestants and Catholics will ever remain in how those good works are [u]applied[/u] in the matter of our salvation.

As for the two examples you furnished, I think what you are asking can best be answered by Jesus beginning in Matthew 23:13. He was calling the Scribes & Pharisees "hypocrites" and all sorts of other unflattering names because while they were being meticulous in donating a tenth of even the most insignificant herbs they were raising (which He did not condemn them for) He excoriated them for being utterly unscrupulous when it came to showing justice, mercy and faithfulness--which He said were the more weighter matters of the law. This was just one example of the many "woes" He raised to them.
Now because I don't believe in "Catholic communion", otherwise known as Transubstantiation, or in going to "Mass", your questions to me cannot apply, but the main point is that the Lord was saying that such pretenders to piety, in the end, would receive the greater condemnation, which is exactly in line with what you thought.

[Antigonos]

What if the "good works" are undertaken as a form of honoring God, in other words, if God shows us a way of living which pleases Him, and we live in that manner, even if the Divine requirements are inexplicable to us humans, are we not in fact engaging in an act of worship which is the equivalent of prayer?

[Aloysius]

Your quote does not contradict the idea that grace alone is what saves us. At all.

From the join declaration of the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church: "By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works."

As I said in the other thread, when someone gives you the free gift of a puppy, you have to keep that puppy alive by feeding it yourself. When God gives you the free gift of grace, you must keep that grace alive... and how would the scriptures say to keep grace alive? good works: for faith without works is dead (but Martin Luther decided that this book of scripture was an epistle of straw and not worthy to be believed so that he could twist the rest of scripture around)

Clement's quote is perfectly in line with Vatican II's quote.

"From the most ancient times in the Church, good works were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners, particularly the works which human weakness finds hard. Because the sufferings of the martyrs for the faith and for God's law were thought to be very valuable, penitents used to turn to the martyrs to be helped by their merits to obtain a more speedy reconciliation from the bishops. Indeed, the prayers and good works of holy people were regarded as of such great value that it could be asserted that the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people"

Do not good works strengthen faith? Does not faith provide the fertile soil in which grace is planted? Then if, by good works, we become more fertile soil for grace to cleanse us, why is it inaccurate to say that good works HELP TO wash, cleanse, and redeem, as the quote says? It does not say that works themselves wash, cleanse, and redeem, but that people are washed, cleansed, and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people--with the help of good works... because the good works make them more fertile soil.

we are saved by Christ... what did Christ Himself say would be the deciding factor? Because He was hungry and we gave Him to eat, He was thirsty and we gave Him to drink.

The whole of the scriptures sync up and make sense (whereas in your interpretation of Paul it directly contradicts the words of Our Lord about the Last Day when He will separate those who did good and those who did not) when you understand that works strengthen faith, and faith is the fertile soil in which the seed of grace is planted. Christ's parable of the seeds being sewn makes sense here, for it is one's works that make the soil of one's faith either fertile or barren, and one's bad works would make weeds that would choke out the seed of grace.

Good works don't cleanse, wash, and redeem; they help to cleanse, wash and redeem (reading comprehension, man, works are not the subject of those verbs; penitents are washed with the help of those who do good works )

more later. God's grace saves us, working through our faith, which is kept alive and fertile by our good works. without works faith will die and grace will not grow in the barren soil, so without works there is no salvation.

[Aloysius]

simple answer:

"Can good works redeem us?" -Tony Atonement.

"No, and if anyone says so, let them be anathema" ~Council of Trent

[quote]CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema. [/quote]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

We are saved by the working of grace in us through our faith. However, this action of grace cannot be on God's part only, we must participate in the work of grace or else it is done without and against us.

Simply put, good works by themselves (as in "without grace") do not save or redeem us. Such a belief would be Pelagianism.

However, as the Scriptures say, faith without works is dead. We must have a living faith, which is therefore a working faith, a faith-lived-out. It is not that we must have faith AND works, but that our faith is given flesh in our works. Jesus tells us that to have living faith, that is, to live out our faith, we must follow His commandments. To be branches on the Vine, to share in the life of the Vine and in salvation, we must live out the faith in charity.

The faith must be lived out to be salvific. Grace and participation in grace through charity (which itself is only possible because of grace) are not mutually exclusive any more than receiving a gift and putting that gift to use. If my wife buys me gift, that gift does not accomplish its purpose unless I use it. We must participate with grace for grace to save us (and our participation is itself God's gift) and there is no way to participate with grace aside from living out our faith in charity.

That is the Catholic belief on salvation in a nutshell: God saves us through His free gift, a gift we must put to use with His help if it is to accomplish its purpose.

Edit: thanks to Apo for reminding me of the need for greater clarity. I hadn't nuanced part of my argument adequately.

[Apotheoun]

When a Christian does good works it is not as if he does them alone, simply by his own energy; instead, they are works of Christ in, with, and through, His disciple, and as such they (i.e., the acts of virtue) - in coordination with the gift of faith - positively bring about [i]theosis[/i] (divinization) in a man.

Edited November 27, 2009 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

The monergism popular among Protestants today was condemned as heresy during the first millennium by the Church Fathers, who - in line with divine revelation - taught synergism (i.e., the doctrine that salvation is a process involving both God's energy and man's energy). That said, good works, which are really the recapitulation of Christ's virtues in the members of His body, are a necessary part of the process of divinization, for as St. Augustine said, "God made you without any cooperation on your part. For you did not lend your consent so that God could make you. How would you have consented, when you did not exist? But He who made you without your consent does not justify you without your consent. He made you without your knowledge, but He does not justify you without your willing it." [St. Augustine, Sermon 169:13]

[Starets]

There was a recent one-on-one debate on Justification on this board in [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=98502&view=&hl=justification&fromsearch=1"]this thread[/url]. You might find it interesting.

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

We Catholic Christians also beleive that the Church is the Body of Beleivers.

[Guest Tony Atonement]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='27 November 2009 - 12:58 PM' timestamp='1259344702' post='2010257']
Your quote does not contradict the idea that grace alone is what saves us. At all.


From the join declaration of the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church: "By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works."

As I said in the other thread, when someone gives you the free gift of a puppy, you have to keep that puppy alive by feeding it yourself. When God gives you the free gift of grace, you must keep that grace alive... and how would the scriptures say to keep grace alive? good works: for faith without works is dead (but Martin Luther decided that this book of scripture was an epistle of straw and not worthy to be believed so that he could twist the rest of scripture around)

Clement's quote is perfectly in line with Vatican II's quote.

"From the most ancient times in the Church, good works were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners, particularly the works which human weakness finds hard. Because the sufferings of the martyrs for the faith and for God's law were thought to be very valuable, penitents used to turn to the martyrs to be helped by their merits to obtain a more speedy reconciliation from the bishops. Indeed, the prayers and good works of holy people were regarded as of such great value that it could be asserted that the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people"

Do not good works strengthen faith? Does not faith provide the fertile soil in which grace is planted? Then if, by good works, we become more fertile soil for grace to cleanse us, why is it inaccurate to say that good works HELP TO wash, cleanse, and redeem, as the quote says? It does not say that works themselves wash, cleanse, and redeem, but that people are washed, cleansed, and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people--with the help of good works... because the good works make them more fertile soil.

we are saved by Christ... what did Christ Himself say would be the deciding factor? Because He was hungry and we gave Him to eat, He was thirsty and we gave Him to drink.

The whole of the scriptures sync up and make sense (whereas in your interpretation of Paul it directly contradicts the words of Our Lord about the Last Day when He will separate those who did good and those who did not) when you understand that works strengthen faith, and faith is the fertile soil in which the seed of grace is planted. Christ's parable of the seeds being sewn makes sense here, for it is one's works that make the soil of one's faith either fertile or barren, and one's bad works would make weeds that would choke out the seed of grace.

Good works don't cleanse, wash, and redeem; they help to cleanse, wash and redeem (reading comprehension, man, works are not the subject of those verbs; penitents are washed with the help of those who do good works [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/cyclops.gif[/img])

more later. God's grace saves us, working through our faith, which is kept alive and fertile by our good works. without works faith will die and grace will not grow in the barren soil, so without works there is no salvation.
[/quote]


___________________________________________________________________________________
My responses will be in blue:


[font="Arial"][size="2"][font="Times New Roman"][size="3"]Your quote does not contradict the idea that grace alone is what saves us. At all.

From the join declaration of the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church: "By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping us and calling us to good works."[/size][/font][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][font="Times New Roman"][size="3"][color="#0000ff"][/color][/size][/font][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][font="Times New Roman"][size="3"][color="#0000ff"]First of all, this document does not, [i]de fact[/i]o, speak for all C's & P's. I can assure you that most protestants and more than a few catholics are irate that those in their respective camps signed this document, for it muddies the issues quite badly. It even includes the admission that Catholics believe in "faith alone". In typical "cafeteria catholic" fashion, you are picking and choosing what suits your argument best, but side-step the new acceptance of "faith alone" (which I won't go into, but suffice to say that Catholicism's "new" acceptance of faith alone in the Protestant sense is of course, a lie, and is nothing less than an ecumenical trick to smooch up to eachother and it is disgraceful). Even though they now "agree" on faith alone, you can be sure there's the ever present caveat hiding in the shadows somewhere to say "this is what we [u]really[/u] meant". One further example out of many that could be mentioned, which is why I wouldn't have signed it myself even if asked, is in section 4.7 (The Good Works of the Justified). They say that, "when Catholics affirm the meritorious character of good works, they wish to say that according to the biblical evidence, a reward "IN" (emphasis mine) heaven is promised to these good works."[/color][/size][/font][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][font="Times New Roman"][size="3"][color="#0000ff"]P's & C's may indeed see rewards "in" heaven per those things God has promised and which no eye has seen and no ear has heard what He has prepared for those that love Him. But the Council of Trent makes a dire distinction, conveniently avoided by the J.D. that says eternal life is gained "BY" those good works.[/color][/size][/font][/size][/font][color="#0000ff"][/color] [color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"]"If anyone shall say that the good works of the man justified are in such a way the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him who is justified, or that the one justified by the good works, which are done by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ (whose living member he is), does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life (if he should die in grace), and also increase of glory: let him be anathema."Notice that the Council of Trent says that good works are not merely a by-product of faith, but are truly the "good merits" of the justified individual, which "truly merit...eternal life" and its "attainment." So for the sake of clarity and getting to the root of the matter, I would suggest not referring to the J.D., as it is a document with far too much ambiguity. From my own perspective, I would rather center my disagreemnt on Trent, since the J.D. breeds confusion. Therefore, Rome teaches that good works [u]merit[/u] eternal life, which most Protestants disavow, so I will argue from that viewpoint.

[/color][font="Arial"][size="2"][font="Times New Roman"][size="3"][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font]
As I said in the other thread, when someone gives you the free gift of a puppy, you have to keep that puppy alive by feeding it yourself. When God gives you the free gift of grace, you must keep that grace alive... and how would the scriptures say to keep grace alive? good works: for faith without works is dead (but Martin Luther decided that this book of scripture was an epistle of straw and not worthy to be believed so that he could twist the rest of scripture around)[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]If you don't have a problem with Pope Gregory denying the canonicity of the book of Maccabees, then you ought not criticize Luther's initial problem with James.[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"][/color][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]Now the problem with Roman Catholicism is that it presents us with an unresolved paradox. Protestants contend that grace and merit are mutually exclusive. Your church's view is that merit is rooted in grace, ending up with a [i]gracious merit [/i](the paradox). I believe the Council of Trent was trying hard to protect Rome from Pelagianism, which asserted that man can merit his salvation unaided by the grace of God, but what they came out with was that those "good works truly merit an increase of grace and eternal life." I object. To put the [u]fruit[/u] produced by the graciousness of God, as the [u]cause[/u] of that "increase of grace", robs God of His glory, reduces salvation to the cooperation of man, and diminishes Christ's mighty atonement by sharing it with the goodness of man. Protestants have long balked at "gracious merit" as it treacherously compresses together the words "merit" and "grace", and so we are left with a God who is obligated to reward the "merits of His grace" with eternal life, and this I must systematically deny. [/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font]
Clement's quote is perfectly in line with Vatican II's quote.

"From the most ancient times in the Church, good works were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners, particularly the works which human weakness finds hard. Because the sufferings of the martyrs for the faith and for God's law were thought to be very valuable, penitents used to turn to the martyrs to be helped by their merits to obtain a more speedy reconciliation from the bishops. Indeed, the prayers and good works of holy people were regarded as of such great value that it could be asserted that the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people"[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]I cannot possibly agree with you that the quote from Clement is [u]perfectly in line[/u] with Vatican II....which told us that it has "always" been the case that good works were [u]offered[/u] to God for salvation (examples in history please?) and Clement said no such thing. In fact, he clearly stated that "works done in holiness of heart" were [u]not[/u] the key to open heaven's gate.[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]It may logically be assumed that Clement would not have denied the grace of God resident in the one who was doing "Works done in holiness of heart". That being so, he would not, [i]could not[/i], agree with those later councils that said works done in holiness of heart merit heaven! [/color][/size][/font]

Do not good works strengthen faith? Does not faith provide the fertile soil in which grace is planted? Then if, by good works, we become more fertile soil for grace to cleanse us, why is it inaccurate to say that good works HELP TO wash, cleanse, and redeem, as the quote says? It does not say that works themselves wash, cleanse, and redeem, but that people are washed, cleansed, and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people--with the help of good works... because the good works make them more fertile soil.[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]Why will you not simply believe and rest your soul on the simplicity of 1 John 1:7, which tells us that it is the blood of [i]Jesus Christ that cleanses us from all sin?[/i] That way, your mind could become free from the bondage of even entertaining the thought that works done in grace have the power to cleanse us! You cannot LOSE if you put your faith entirely in the cleansing power of 1 John 1:7. On the other hand, if you are wrong on just this point, you will lose your soul. [/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"][/color][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]You ask, why is it innacurate to say that good works "help" to wash, cleanse and redeem? [/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]Because, it is (I would say, [i]robbing[/i]) the MERITS OF SOMEONE ELSE (other than Christ) and applying these merits in some mysterious way to your credit card account, as it were. This of course is fully played out in your doctrine of the "treasury of merit", wherein the merits of Mary and the saints are "dispensed" in the form of indulgences to those suffering in purgatory. This is quite simply, scandalous---since I tell you truly, there simply is no [u]need[/u] to add anything to the inexhaustible, unfailing and infinite merits of Christ![/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font]

we are saved by Christ... what did Christ Himself say would be the deciding factor? Because He was hungry and we gave Him to eat, He was thirsty and we gave Him to drink.[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]It is inexcuseable to posit that the Bible teaches that the "deciding factor" upon which our salvation hinges, is our feeding the hungry---or any other good work. Needless to say, by bringing this Judgment scene up, you completely ignore everywhere else I have noted on this thread that the Scripture saith our salvation is that we are "NOT justified by works". It is unreasonable for you to simply side-step God's word in this manner, and then zero in on Christ's commendation of those who fed the hungry. While it is true these people were then told to "enter in", you forget that the sheep and the goats were separated beforehand. Thus the sheep's salvation was not even in question. Of course we look foward to the rewards He has promised us, telling us that our labor is not in vain. But you must understand that salvation is not a [i]result[/i] of good works, but good works are a [i]result[/i] of salvation.[/color][/size][/font]

The whole of the scriptures sync up and make sense (whereas in your interpretation of Paul it directly contradicts the words of Our Lord about the Last Day when He will separate those who did good and those who did not) when you understand that works strengthen faith, and faith is the fertile soil in which the seed of grace is planted. Christ's parable of the seeds being sewn makes sense here, for it is one's works that make the soil of one's faith either fertile or barren, and one's bad works would make weeds that would choke out the seed of grace.[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]You are relentelss in turning once again to the Judgment scene, which I have explained elsewhere presents no conflict with the apostle Paul who said that salvation is NOT by works in Ephesians 2:8 and other places. You then go on to say that faith is the fertile soil in which the seed of grace is planted. It does sound all very pious, but this is what happens when the word of God is abandoned, and the traditions of men take over. The parable of the seeds says nothing about the "seed of grace". Rather, Jesus specifically says that the SEED IS THE WORD OF GOD (Luke 8:11). This seed is then planted, not in the "soil of one's faith", but by "the foolishness of preaching" to those who do not even have faith yet (1 Cor 1:21). As a result of preaching the gospel, God then takes action to either open or close the eyes of the individual according to His elect purposes (Acts 16:14), and consequently, it is [u]not[/u] "one's works" which make the soil fertile, but simply and only, the power of God: [i]"I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase" [/i](1 Cor 3:6).[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"][/color][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font]

Good works don't cleanse, wash, and redeem; they help to cleanse, wash and redeem (reading comprehension, man, works are not the subject of those verbs; penitents are washed with the help of those who do good works.[font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][color="#0000ff"]The gospel of good works "helping" to cleanse, wash and redeem" is in triplicate: [i]un[/i]historical, unbiblical and "another gospel" which Paul condemned in Second Corinthians chapter 2.[/color][/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [font="Arial"][size="2"]_____________________________________________________________________________________________[/size][/font][font="Arial"][size="2"][/size][/font] [/size][/font]Aloysius wrote:

"Can good works redeem us?" . Simple answer....

"No, and if anyone says so, let them be anathema" ~Council of Trent [color="#0000ff"]Then we all must agree that Vatican II is to be anathema.[/color][color="#0000ff"][/color] [color="#0000ff"]Look, I say that in light of the the Holy Spirit using terminology within Scripture itself, to describe the work of Christ as "washing, cleansing and redeeming"---that it is HIGHLY unlikely He would then choose to bless the words at Vatican II to confound the work of the Redeemer by using the exact same words to then explain that [u]good works[/u] are in unison with cleansing, washing and redeeming the individual. This is something that is the polar opposite of the biblical record and leads to a convoluted gospel in tattered shreds. If God had wanted to expound on the cleansing power of good works in any way resembling that of Roman Catholicism, He would have done so within the text itself. But it is completely absent therein. But as a matter of fact, the Lord [u]did[/u] go out of his way to say that there was some other cleansing power found somewhere, but it wasn't in good deeds. Instead, we are told that alongside the blood of Christ having cleansing power (1 John 1:7) there is another sense in which--- the [i]word of God[/i] itself--- has cleansing power: [i]"Now you are clean through the word which I have spoken to you" [/i](John 15:3)---and "cleanses the church by the washing of water BY THE WORD" (Eph 5:26). How much more safe it is to say within the shelter of His word and not risk venturing outside of it to foreign concepts not found therein. It is extremely hard not to get the impression that most Catholics merely consider the Bible a dead letter. But is "alive and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, which is useful for doctrine, correction and instruction in righteousness." I find it amusing that Roman Catholics consider themselves immune from correction. Nothing can ever be singled out as heretical because all they have to do is submit unhistorical claims (such as, "good deeds offered to God have been around from the beginning of the church" ploy mentioned at Vatican II) and ear-mark that claim under their always convenient "unwritten traditions", which they merely have to assert, but never prove. Just remember, you sir, will be judged individually, and should you be wrong on this, as all the evidence indicates, telling the Lord, "but the Catholic Church told me so" ----simply will not cut it.[/color]
Quote

CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema. [color="#0000ff"]I hope the object of my discontent is made more clear by you quoting Trent. We are seeing with better clarity exactly what I have been saying all along. I say it is compromising the gospel to arrive at Catholic conclusions because they are trying to validate their theology by piously asserting that, "it is all by the grace of God." Once they insert that magic phrase, they are then free to conclude that works are salvific. But this terrible deceit of[/color][color="#0000ff"] co-mingling of grace and merit is a subtle error that must be confronted. The apostle Paul suggested [i]no such Roman Catholic co-mingling[/i] schema when he said, (read it slow now)----[/color][color="#0000ff"]"And if it be by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise, grace is no more grace" (Rms 11:6). [/color][color="#0000ff"] His effort to establish the [u]singularity[/u] of God's free grace, [u]over and opposed to any sort of meritorious good deeds[/u], will be clear only to those whose eyes the Lord chooses to open.[/color]


[color="#0000ff"]I now turn to church scholar, Raphael's comments:[/color] We are saved by the working of grace in us through our faith. However, this action of grace cannot be on God's part only, we must participate in the work of grace or else it is done without and against us. [color="#0000ff"]I can only refer you back to the apostle Paul. No where do we find such a high view of works as you suppose, or even they being on the same level as grace. No where does he "polish up" works and suggest that they are now meritorious in any way whatsoever simply because they eminate from God's grace; (I insist you are presenting still yet another paradox as the person above, only this time, it rears its head in the form of [i]"the work of grace"[/i]---a complete contradiction in terms, and of course, a term no where found in the Bible). On the contrary, Paul did not rely on any fanciful philosophical contortions to try to prove, "well, after all, everything is really from grace". Instead, he was blunt and to the point, as I stated above, "And if it be by grace, then it no more of works." (Rms 11:6). The meritorious work we must rest on is that of the Messiah---period. Then, and only then, may we gladly go on our way in producing fruit. [/color]


As the Scriptures say, faith without works is dead. We must have a living faith, which is therefore a working faith, a faith-lived-out. It is not that we must have faith AND works, but that our faith is given flesh in our works. Jesus tells us that to have living faith, that is, to live out our faith, we must follow His commandments. To be branches on the Vine, to share in the life of the Vine and in salvation, we must live out the faith in charity. [color="#0000ff"]I agree with everything you said. But just remember: The Jews saw circumcision as a gift (as you do)---but they were not allowed to rename this "work" as grace and demand it for justification (Acts 15)---which you [u]are[/u] doing by promoting good deeds as meriting heaven.[/color]

The faith must be lived out to be salvific. [color="#0000ff"]I can agree with this also. But there is a deadly line of demarcation that you fail to address which is the smoking kettle that bids Protestants part company with Rome. To the point: In Matthew 7, Jesus is confronted with Christians on Judgement Day who were unpacking their good works before Him, telling Him they had done many wonderful works in His name. But the Lord shuts the door of heaven in their faces. Why is this? We are also reminded of the parable of the ten virgins, 5 of which thought that because they were in such good company, they weren't going to have any problem getting into the marriage feast (heaven). Once again, these "christians" were shut out. Why is that? Or again, the Pharisee in Luke 18. The text unmistakenly says that this man was [u]thanking God[/u] ---precisely what Catholics are doing today for the grace He gives them to be such noble laureattes. But to this man also, the door to heaven was closed. WHY? This is "catastrophic" evidence that the typical Roman Catholic's path to salvation, while lined with grace, has every indication of getting the door shut in their faces. Why? I'll tell you. Because for all their talk of trusting in Christ, in practice and reality, the One who sees the innermost workings of the heart, sees that they have divided their allegiance to Him with [i]other legalities. [/i] As someone on this thread admitted, they are trusting in their "membership" and other requirements to place their confidence in. These additions, we may safely conclude, are salvifically lethal and are a stench in the Lord's nostrils. [i]"For he that hath entered into His rest, has also ceased [to rely] on his own works" [/i](Hebrews 4:10). I have as yet to meet one Catholic in my life who has ever admitted to finding this rest in Christ. Not one. He (not our works) "is our peace and who is our life" (Rms 5:1, Eph 2:14, Col 3:4).[/color][color="#0000ff"][/color] Grace, and participation in grace [u]through charity[/u] (Tony's emphasis)-- which itself is only possible because of grace, are not mutually exclusive any more than receiving a gift and putting that gift to use. [color="#0000ff"]No. First of all, the Jews saw circumcision as a gift (as you do)---but they were not allowed to rename this "work" as grace and then "put it to use" by demanding it for justification! (Acts 15). [/color][color="#0000ff"]From a Prot perspective, God's unmerited favor in the form of grace is one thing (we are saved "by His own purpose and GRACE even before the world began, says 2 Timothy 1:9). As far as I know, I cannot remember doing any good deeds before I was born, so it would appear I was chosen, [u]without works[/u]. Our participation in it "through charity" is [u]quite[/u] another (we do good works [i]because[/i] we are saved, not to merit it). The fatal problem in the Roman Catholic scheme (i.e., "co-mingling grace and works) can be shown in the current catechism (#1987). [i]"The GRACE of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us; that is, to CLEANSE US OF OUR SINS." [/i][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"]Here we see the reason why I believe Catholics are primary candidates for the door to heaven being slammed shut. They are relying on the assistance of the Holy Spirit to do good works, not only to merit eternal life (#2008), but also claim that this "living charity" that is produced in them, has the power to wipe away sins! (#1394). Remarkably, they allege that it is the work of the blessed Holy Spirit to JUSTIFY us. On the contrary, [i]it is Jesus who died and was raised for our justification" [/i](Rms 4:25). He has also not appointed the Spirit to [u]cleanse our sins through living charity[/u] to merit eternal life either. Here we go again with still yet another mode of cleansing sin outside of the blood of Christ! As someone has wisely said circa 1860: "Subtle and plausible as it is, and difficult as it may be to disentangle the error from the partial truth which is involved in it; nothing can be more unscriptural in itself, or more pernicious to the souls of men, then the substitution of the gracious work of the Holy Spirit [u]in[/u] us, for the vicarious work of Christ [u]for[/u] us". [/color][color="#0000ff"][/color] [color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][color="#0000ff"][/color][/size][/font]

Edited November 28, 2009 by Tony Atonement

[Guest Tony Atonement]

[quote name='sacredheartandbloodofjesus' date='27 November 2009 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1259359571' post='2010359']
We Catholic Christians also beleive that the Church is the Body of Beleivers.
[/quote]

Correction. The Bible identifies the "church" (with a little c) as the body of believers, but no where does it designate the Roman Catholic "big C" Church, as you suggest, as uniquely making up that flock.

[Guest Tony Atonement]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='27 November 2009 - 02:11 PM' timestamp='1259349109' post='2010280']
The monergism popular among Protestants today was condemned as heresy during the first millennium by the Church Fathers, who - in line with divine revelation - taught synergism (i.e., the doctrine that salvation is a process involving both God's energy and man's energy). That said, good works, which are really the recapitulation of Christ's virtues in the members of His body, are a necessary part of the process of divinization, for as St. Augustine said, "God made you without any cooperation on your part. For you did not lend your consent so that God could make you. How would you have consented, when you did not exist? But He who made you without your consent does not justify you without your consent. He made you without your knowledge, but He does not justify you without your willing it." [St. Augustine, Sermon 169:13]
[/quote]


Augustine's belief that God will not justify us without our consent is simply erroneous. Paul was on his way to persecute Christians and the farthest thing from his mind, was turning over his life to Christ. Need it be said that God over-ruled his journey and had other plans for him. Much more could be said, but Jesus said that "[i]No man is [u]able[/u] to come to me unless the Father who sent me, draw him." [/i](Jn 6:44).

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Tony Atonement' date='28 November 2009 - 03:03 AM' timestamp='1259395403' post='2010605']
Augustine's belief that God will not justify us without our consent is simply erroneous. Paul was on his way to persecute Christians and the farthest thing from his mind, was turning over his life to Christ. Need it be said that God over-ruled his journey and had other plans for him. Much more could be said, but Jesus said that "[i]No man is [u]able[/u] to come to me unless the Father who sent me, draw him." [/i](Jn 6:44).
[/quote]

You don't believe in free will?

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Tony Atonement' date='28 November 2009 - 08:03 AM' timestamp='1259395403' post='2010605']
Augustine's belief that God will not justify us without our consent is simply erroneous. Paul was on his way to persecute Christians and the farthest thing from his mind, was turning over his life to Christ. Need it be said that God over-ruled his journey and had other plans for him. Much more could be said, but Jesus said that "[i]No man is [u]able[/u] to come to me unless the Father who sent me, draw him." [/i](Jn 6:44).
[/quote]
God intervened and spoke to Paul, yes. He did not, however, force Paul to follow Him then or later in his life. God draws all of us to Him, speaking to us in some way (at least in my opinion), but He never forces us to follow Him. If He did, He would, as Resurrexi points out, overrule our free will.

[kafka]

Here is my summary on the Catholic teaching of salvation and merit. It is a summary of the teaching of the Council of Trent CHAPTER XVI.
On the fruit of Justification, that is, on the merit of good works, and on the nature of that merit.

Eternal life (or salvation) is the free and gratuitous gift of immediate vision of God. It is not within the ability or power of of a finite human creature to go beyond himself and see and be with the Infinite Creator forever, therefore the gift of eternal life (or salvation) must and can only be given and won back absolutely by God. And this was absolutely merited for all men by the salvific death of Jesus Christ who is God.

Yet man is free and so he must choose to accept this gift. So there is an aspect of man in freedom accepting justifying grace and working out his salvation in life on earth with the cooperation of God. Yet it is not enough for him to merely accept this gift, he must actualize it by doing good in life since he is plunged in a historical situation. And these good acts leading up to the final definitive act of death in union with Christ are his own unique definitive 'statements' of cooperating with grace judged by God as worthy of reward since they were accomplished in His grace. And it is these definitive acts in grace, which merit a unique reward from God within eternal life, yet they do not merit the absolute gift of eternal life which only could be merited and given by God.

So eternal life is the absolute gift of God's mercy. Within the absolute gift of eternal life merited and given by God is a unique and limited reward merited by men according to their personal good acts in grace during life on earth.