Salvation from the Catholic View Compared to the Eastern Orthodox View

[JohnB445]

Are there any big differences in their doctrines regarding this? Is there any risk to a believer for believing either doctrine in the perspective of either Denomination?

From what I have heard. Both denominations believe Salvation is conditional, along with belief that any man can come to the faith by their own will. And that any person can walk away from the faith by their own free will.

There isn't a belief of predestination, or OSAS (Once saved always saved), In either denomination.

If anything I have said is wrong about the beliefs or disbeliefs of either denomination please correct me. I have one question for both, and that is for those who left the faith, can they re-enter back in and be saved, or is that a permanent decision on behalf of the ex-believer?

 

[zippy2006]

Both denominations believe Salvation is conditional, along with belief that any man can come to the faith by their own will.

Catholics would basically say that we cannot save ourselves but we can damn ourselves. God is the primary worker in our salvation. Catholic and Orthodox soteriology is very similar when looking from a Protestant perspective, in my opinion.

I have one question for both, and that is for those who left the faith, can they re-enter back in and be saved, or is that a permanent decision on behalf of the ex-believer?

They can repent and return, like the Prodigal Son or the traditores of the Donatist controversy.

 

[HTacianas]

Are there any big differences in their doctrines regarding this? Is there any risk to a believer for believing either doctrine in the perspective of either Denomination?

From what I have heard. Both denominations believe Salvation is conditional, along with belief that any man can come to the faith by their own will. And that any person can walk away from the faith by their own free will.

There isn't a belief of predestination, or OSAS (Once saved always saved), In either denomination.

If anything I have said is wrong about the beliefs or disbeliefs of either denomination please correct me. I have one question for both, and that is for those who left the faith, can they re-enter back in and be saved, or is that a permanent decision on behalf of the ex-believer?

From the perspective of an outsider looking in there are no differences at all. There are some things the Roman Church adopted after the schism that can be argued either way.

According to the bible and all of Christian history salvation is conditional. The biggest word in the bible is "if". If you believe, if you obey, etc. A Christian can fall away into condemnation through sin or apostasy. According to the new testament once one falls away they can never return. But it is the tradition of the Church that even an apostate can be absolved and brought back into the Church.

 

[fhansen]

From what I have heard. Both denominations believe Salvation is conditional, along with belief that any man can come to the faith by their own will.

This is not Catholicism or Orthodoxy, but Semi-Pelagianism, strictly condemned by the Catholic church centuries ago. Faith is a gift of grace, but, as with any gift, it can be rejected. Grace is resistible, IOW. Man is lost; God must initiate everything, so man cannot possibly move himself to say "yes" to God on his own but he can still say "no" to Him at any point. Man's role is to accept and embrace and express the gift, to say yes, and continue to say yes everyday. As such he's cooperating with grace, with God in His work.

 

[ladodgers6]

This is not Catholicism or Orthodoxy, but Semi-Pelagianism, strictly condemned by the Catholic church centuries ago. Faith is a gift of grace, but, as with any gift, it can be rejected. Grace is resistible, IOW. Man is lost; God must initiate everything, so man cannot possibly move himself to say "yes" to God on his own but He can still say "no" to Him at any point. Man's role is to accept and embrace and express the gift, to say yes, and continue to say yes everyday. As such he's cooperating with grace, with God in His work.

If God's Grace is not effectual then what saves?

 

[fhansen]

If God's Grace is not effectual then what saves?

Without Gods grace man cannot be saved. But God, from Eden until now, refuses to totally override man’s will. He gave us one-He gave us freedom- so that we might use it rightly. So by His grace He informs and solicits and even moves us towards the right choice but stops at forcing a yes; He wants us to play our part no matter how small and weakly at first. That yes to Him is the basis of man’s righteousness, the opposite of Adams no which is the basis of man’s unrighteousness/injustice. God had been patiently working with humankind for centuries to ultimately bring man around to a yes, now, in the “fullness of time”. That’s why Jesus came.

You can’t be saved unless your Savior throws a life preserver. But you can still refuse to grab hold of it. Or you can grab hold but then still let go at any point.

 

[Servus]

They can repent and return, like the Prodigal Son or the traditores of the Donatist concontroversy.

I would say also there's a difference between those who stray away and those who fall away. If one comes back, then they have just strayed. Whereas one who has truly fallen away will never come back.

 

[ladodgers6]

Without Gods grace man cannot be saved. But God, from Eden until now, refuses to totally override man’s will. He gave us one-He gave us freedom- so that we might use it rightly. So by His grace He informs and solicits and even moves us towards the right choice but stops at forcing a yes; He wants us to play our part no matter how small and weakly at first.

Let me ask it another way. Why cannot man be saved without God's Grace?

That yes to Him is the basis of man’s righteousness, the opposite of Adams no which is the basis of man’s unrighteousness/injustice. God had been patiently working with humankind for centuries to ultimately bring man around to a yes, now, in the “fullness of time”. That’s why Jesus came.

You can’t be saved unless your Savior throws a life preserver. But you can still refuse to grab hold of it. Or you can grab hold but then still let go at any point.

I'll wait for your response to my question above before I retort on the matter.​

 

[fhansen]

Let me ask it another way. Why cannot man be saved without God's Grace?

Because man can’t save himself. Pelagianism taught otherwise but God is our salvation, our righteousness, our life. Righteousness is required of man (we weren’t created to be sinners, after all-and to cause all the harm that sin results in), but man has no righteousness on his own, apart from God. Being under the law does not unite us with God; it just means we’re trying to demonstrate a righteousness or holiness that we can’t even have apart from Him.

So the first order of the day is reconciliation with God. Then we become branches that can be fed by the Vine. Jesus came to effect that reconciliation and therefore that vital, life-giving union. That’s grace. We “appropriate” it, so to speak, by faith, itself a gift, which is to say yes to God, yes to His existence, to His goodness, His mercy, His love. Sin is forgiven and taken away, we are washed, cleansed, and made new creations. All grace.

Man is lost, he cannot possibly approach and find God even if he senses that something is wrong in this world, something is missing; God must come to and call him. And yet man can fail to answer, fail to appreciate any of that; we can fail to love even as He first loves us-or we can toss it all away later at any point in time. Or…we can persevere to the end, persevere in love of God and neighbor to put it best, with the ever-present aid of His grace, of the Holy Spirit who works within us. And His offer is to all humankind.

 

[ladodgers6]

Because man can’t save himself. Pelagianism taught otherwise but God is our salvation, our righteousness, our life. Righteousness is required of man (we weren’t created to be sinners, after all-and to cause all the harm that sin results in), but man has no righteousness on his own, apart from God. Being under the law does not unite us with God; it just means we’re trying to demonstrate a righteousness or holiness that we can’t even have apart from Him.

Do you not see your contradiction? Either man is saved by God's Grace alone or he's not. Your analogy of throwing a life preserver to someone suggests they are not dead in sin and trespasses, but have some signs of life left in them to reach out and save themselves, correct? This is Semi-Pelagianism, because you insist man can reach for it by having a will. Only by being regenerated by the Holy Spirit and made alive in Christ can a sinner be redeemed in Christ through Faith Alone apart from works of the Law.

Furthermore, Christ who came not to abolish the Law but to fulfill it, merits a righteousness and holiness through his finished works, is freely given through the proclamation of the Gospel that is received through Faith Alone (Empty Hands). Imputed with the Righteousness of Christ.​

Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the LORD;
my soul shall exult in my God,
for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation;
he has covered me with the robe of righteousness,
as a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress,
and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.​

So the first order of the day is reconciliation with God. Then we become branches that can be fed by the Vine. Jesus came to effect that reconciliation and therefore that vital, life-giving union. That’s grace. We “appropriate” it, so to speak, by faith, itself a gift, which is to say yes to God, yes to His existence, to His goodness, His mercy, His love. Sin is forgiven and taken away, we are washed, cleansed, and made new creations. All grace.

Agreed our separation from God due to Original Sin of Adam that is imputed to his progeny along with their personal sins as well, must be dealt with first. So, how is this dealt with? By a Mediator between Man & God. Sin cannot be brushed under the rug. If God is Holy and Righteous sin must be dealt with first. God's judgement must be rendered upon the wicked for their sins. It is Christ whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.

This is called the marvelous exchange Christ takes our place on the Cross and we take his place as righteous. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

For Christ also suffered for sins once for all , the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. He did this to condemned and kill sin in his body.

Now, to those who do not works but believe in him who justifies the ungodly, their faith is counted as righteous. A question must be asked here. How can God count the ungodly righteous? Wouldn't this make God unjust? Absolutely not, because Christ pays the penalty for the ungodly who believes and imputed to them his righteousness that God counts as righteous that is received through Faith alone.

Once this sinner is declared righteous before God, the relationship is restored. God is no longer a judge, but a Father.

​

Man is lost, he cannot possibly approach and find God even if he senses that something is wrong in this world, something is missing; God must come to and call him. And yet man can fail to answer, fail to appreciate any of that; we can fail to love even as He first loves us-or we can toss it all away later at a point in time. Or…we can persevere to the end, persevere in love of God and neighbor to put it best, with the ever-present aid of His grace of the Holy Spirit who works within us. And His offer is to allhumankind.

This is we differ, God's call will not fail, it's effectual. A calling out of the darkness into his marvelous light. His sheep will hear his voice and follow. Christ's redemptive mission was not mission possible, but mission accomplished. Finished as his final words on the Cross, "IT IS FINISHED"! God's Promise to save his people from their sins, is not a wishing and hoping that it might happen. But a fulfillment, a eschatological redemptive consummation in Christ on the Cross!​

 

[fhansen]

Do you not see your contradiction? Either man is saved by God's Grace alone or he's not. Your analogy of throwing a life preserver to someone suggests they are not dead in sin and trespasses, but have some signs of life left in them to reach out and save themselves, correct? This is Semi-Pelagianism, because you insist man can reach for it by having a will. Only by being regenerated by the Holy Spirit and made alive in Christ can a sinner be redeemed in Christ through Faith Alone apart from works of the Law.

No, God's purpose, since Eden until today, is not to violate your will but to draw it into the obedience that Adam failed at. In this world we have the history, the experience, the revelation, and the grace do so. God beckons us to the cross.

Fallen man is also characterized as sick or wounded: in need of being healed, lost: in need of being found, asleep: in need of being awakened, dead: in need of being raised or reborn. All metaphor, obviously.

Man was created good as everything in creation is, but his unrighteousness, his injustice, his death, is directly related to the distance or alienation from God that Adam initiated for all humanity, that he chose. In all of creation, only sentient, rational beings with free will can do this, can be and act outside of Gods will and control. Until we are reconciled with Him, until we know Him, until we give up our own pride that separates us from Him, we remain in a state of injustice.

But when man turns to God in faith he enters fellowship with Him and that, itself, constitutes man's justice/righteousness, that which he was made for, and that which he had strayed from. God declared Abraham righteous because his faith was the right thing to do, born out by his obedience.

Novel theologies have posited that man's righteousness is solely imputed. This is a partial truth. God's not interested in suddenly pretending that we are righteous but in actually restoring justice/righteousness lost, and moving us on to greater righteousness yet. Including forgiveness that’s the basis of our freedom from condemnation.

“Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

“Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God.” Rom 8:1-4, 12-14

Jesus Christ is both our God and our model for how a human can and should be. We just can't do it alone, apart from grace, apart from Him. We were never meant to. "Apart from Me you can do nothing."

This is we differ, God's call will not fail, it's effectual. A calling out of the darkness into his marvelous light. His sheep will hear his voice and follow. Christ's redemptive mission was not mission possible, but mission accomplished. Finished as his final words on the Cross, "IT IS FINISHED"! God's Promise to save his people from their sins, is not a wishing and hoping that it might happen. But a fulfillment, an eschatological redemptive consummation in Christ on the Cross!

No, the Bible warns and instructs and admonishes believers to be perfect, be holy, overcome the deeds of the flesh, invest their talents, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, refrain from sin, remain in Him, obey the commandments, be vigilant, persevere, do good, and more, all with eternal life at stake. It instructs us to love, to sum up the rest. The primary difference between the old and new covenants is that we’re now able to do so, by virtue of union with God. The gospel is not some sort of reprieve from man’s obligation to be righteous, but is the authentic means to accomplishing that very thing. Faith does not serve the purpose of granting us some sort of carte blanc freedom from the penalty of sin as long as we believe, but it’s actually the doorway to the God who, alone, can put His law in our minds and write it on our hearts, taking away and freeing us from sin and therefore it’s penalty: death (Rom 6).

 

[fhansen]

This is Semi-Pelagianism, because you insist man can reach for it by having a will

That’s not what I said. I said God must initiate, not man. No life preserver= no salvation. Semi-Pelagianism means that man comes to faith on his own, whereupon God responds with grace. In Christianity faith, itself, is a gift of grace. All of mans journey to God is a matter of grace. But man can still resist and refuse that grace.

 

[o_mlly]

Why cannot man be saved without God's Grace?

P1. Only God is good (Mark 10:18)
P2. Salvation is good
C1. God's grace must be the source of everyone's salvation

God's call will not fail, it's effectual.

God's call does not fail. However, man's free response can fail.

God does not overpower (imo) our freewill because doing so would make us less in His image. God wills that we become God-like. Grace is God’s gift to us that enables our transformation. Divinization, becoming like God, is a process in time. Removing our freewill would contradict God' will that we become God-like.

Karl Rahner, a Catholic theologian, wrestled with the relationship between nature and grace which he called the "supernatural existential".

Rahner’s hypothetical theology of grace stipulates that we are less free to sin than the doctrines of either Pelagius or Augustine. A sinful act, according to Rahner, is all the more culpable because since Christ's sacrifice, we are not completely free to sin, but must, in the first moment, overcome the overpowering “supernatural existential” impelling us to do good. Having rejected God's grace, we are now at Pelagius’s free-to-choose location, and then, in the second moment, we may choose to sin.

Rahner would have us struggle to sin, whereas Augustine has us struggle to be good. Pelagius said it is an even bet.

I am more inclined to the Catholic, Lutheran, Augustinian, and Pauline formulations of grace than the Rahnerian. But the self-referential bias of existentialism may offer a way to synthesize these doctrines. Perhaps Rahner’s “supernatural existential” was, at the time of his exposition on grace, actualized such that he felt grace as propelling him to do good at all times. St. Paul call himself the “chief of sinners” (1 Timothy 1:16). Augustine confessed himself as a past prolific sinner. Historians note Luther as an overly scrupulous sinner. I am still a pilgrim, a befuddled, but hopeful, sinner.

 

[ladodgers6]

That’s not what I said. I said God must initiate, not man. No life preserver= no salvation. Semi-Pelagianism means that man comes to faith on his own, whereupon God responds with grace. In Christianity faith, itself, is a gift of grace. All of mans journey to God is a matter of grace. But man can still resist and refuse that grace.

Okay, so that I do not caricature your position. Is it by Grace Alone=Monergism or by Grace and Man's ability=Synergism?

 

[ladodgers6]

P1. Only God is good (Mark 10:18)
P2. Salvation is good
C1. God's grace must be the source of everyone's salvation

Agree.

God's call does not fail. However, man's free response can fail.

I beg to differ on this point. God's effectual grace does regenerate and bring to live God's sheep. His promise will come to pass, it will be fulfilled. Man has always failed, but God will not. Just like God said like there be light​

2 Cor. 4:6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, to proclaim the virtues of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

John 10:25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

God does not overpower (imo) our freewill because doing so would make us less in His image. God wills that we become God-like. Grace is God’s gift to us that enables our transformation. Divinization, becoming like God, is a process in time. Removing our freewill would contradict God' will that we become God-like.

Yes, I understand your position, I used to hold this same belief once. Please, explain the fall for me and how it affected all of us? Thanks in advance.

Karl Rahner, a Catholic theologian, wrestled with the relationship between nature and grace which he called the "supernatural existential".

Rahner’s hypothetical theology of grace stipulates that we are less free to sin than the doctrines of either Pelagius or Augustine. A sinful act, according to Rahner, is all the more culpable because since Christ's sacrifice, we are not completely free to sin, but must, in the first moment, overcome the overpowering “supernatural existential” impelling us to do good. Having rejected God's grace, we are now at Pelagius’s free-to-choose location, and then, in the second moment, we may choose to sin.

Rahner would have us struggle to sin, whereas Augustine has us struggle to be good. Pelagius said it is an even bet.

I disagree with this assessment. Though sinners according to scripture, Calvin said, that sinners do have a free-will and choose to sin freely because it is not by compulsion but by necessity. They do by nature what they love to do, which is sin. They hate the light and love the darkness. Here let's read what Paul says on this matter.

Ephesians 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

Sinners are dead in sins and trespasses; sons of disobedience; carrying out the passions of the body and mind; by NATURE children of wrath. Calvin said man, “acts wickedly by will, not by compulsion.” So what does this mean, well, Augustine wrote, “For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity wills in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity.” Therefore, the bondage of the will to sin remains and yet such slavery is a voluntary and willful captivity. For example, consider the Devil himself. The Devil can only do evil all of the time and yet he is fully culpable for his actions and commits them voluntarily though out of necessity.​

I am more inclined to the Catholic, Lutheran, Augustinian, and Pauline formulations of grace than the Rahnerian. But the self-referential bias of existentialism may offer a way to synthesize these doctrines. Perhaps Rahner’s “supernatural existential” was, at the time of his exposition on grace, actualized such that he felt grace as propelling him to do good at all times. St. Paul call himself the “chief of sinners” (1 Timothy 1:16). Augustine confessed himself as a past prolific sinner. Historians note Luther as an overly scrupulous sinner. I am still a pilgrim, a befuddled, but hopeful, sinner.

“Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.” Luther

 

[fhansen]

Okay, so that I do not caricature your position. Is it by Grace Alone=Monergism or by Grace and Man's ability=Synergism?

It's not man's ability other than as grace enables that ability. It's man's cooperation =synergism.

By grace we're given the ability to believe in, hope in, and love God. By grace we're given the ability to do the works He's prepared for us in advance to do, by grace we're given the ability to overcome sin, by grace we work out our salvation. But we can also dismiss and bury that ability. I'd suggest reading the Parable of the Talents to gain insight light into how this works. And I think these dynamics are born out by experience as well.

 

[fhansen]

Okay, so that I do not caricature your position. Is it by Grace Alone=Monergism or by Grace and Man's ability=Synergism?

It's not man's ability other than as grace enables that ability. It's man's cooperation =synergism.

By grace we're given the ability to believe in, hope in, and love God. By grace we're given the ability to do the works He's prepared for us in advance to do, by grace we're given the ability to overcome sin, by grace we work out our salvation. But we can also dismiss and bury that ability. I'd suggest reading the Parable of the Talents to shed light on how this works. I believe this is all born out by experience as well

 

[ladodgers6]

It's not man's ability other than as grace enables that ability. It's man's cooperation =synergism.

By grace we're given the ability to believe in, hope in, and love God. By grace we're given the ability to do the works He's prepared for us in advance to do, by grace we're given the ability to overcome sin, by grace we work out our salvation. But we can also dismiss and bury that ability. I'd suggest reading the Parable of the Talents to gain insight light into how this works. And I think these dynamics are born out by experience as well.

So, you lean more towards Arminianism?

 

[ladodgers6]

It's not man's ability other than as grace enables that ability. It's man's cooperation =synergism.

By grace we're given the ability to believe in, hope in, and love God. By grace we're given the ability to do the works He's prepared for us in advance to do, by grace we're given the ability to overcome sin, by grace we work out our salvation. But we can also dismiss and bury that ability. I'd suggest reading the Parable of the Talents to gain insight light into how this works. And I think these dynamics are born out by experience as well.

"free-will is a nonentity, a thing consisting of name alone"
- Martin Luther

"The will of man without the grace of God is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil since it cannot turn itself to good."
- Martin Luther

"All the passages in the Holy Scriptures that mention assistance are they that do away with "free-will", and these are countless ... For grace is needed, and the help of grace is given, because "free-will" can do nothing."
- Martin Luther

"We are all sinners by nature, therefore we are held under the yoke of sin . But if the whole man is subject to the dominion of sin , surely the will , which is it's principal seat , must be bound with the closest of chains. And indeed if divine grace were preceded by any will of ours, Paul could not have said that,"it is God that worketh in us to will and to do ' (Phil. 2:13)
- John Calvin

"Before the fall, man had been created with a free will, so that, had he been willing, he might have kept the law; his nature was pure; the disease of sin had not yet reached him... But having desired to be as God, he died - and not he alone, but all his posterity. Since then in Adam all men are dead, no one can recall them to life, until the Spirit, which is God himself, raises them from the dead."
- Ulrich Zwingli

"Free will I have often heard of, but I have never seen it. I have always met with will, and plenty of it, but it has either been led captive by sin or held in the blessed bonds of grace."
- C. H. Spurgeon

 

[fhansen]

So, you lean more towards Arminianism?

Yes. Or Arminianism leans more towards me, and the faith historically.