Catholic vs. Protestant: Justification

[chestertonrules]

I know how you hate that!

- Matthew 6:14 "For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you don not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

- James 2:20 "Do you want to be shown you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren?"

- John 6:53-54 "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

- Romans 2:6-7 "For He will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give eternal life."

- Hebrews 12:14 "Strive for peace with all men and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord."

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=chestertonrules;Not accurate.
But then, what should we expect from someone who believes that God creates most people with no choice but to go to hell.

Ro 9:22 - What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:2Pe 2:12 - But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

Your man made dogma is a disgrace, and John Calvin was a mass murderer.

You flatter us.

 

[chestertonrules]

Perhaps we should burn Matthew at the stake!! How could he write this blasphemy?

Matthew 7

7"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
9"Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

 

[chestertonrules]

This one could use some interpretation, I suppose, although it is also very clear.

Matthew 7

7"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
9"Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! 12So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This passage tells us that God will not reject our pleas for grace and mercy.

This passage ends by admonishing us to do the good works that God has required of us.

 

[chestertonrules]

1 Timothy 2

Pray for All Men

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Ezekiel 33:11 God says, "As I live! I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?"

Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling."

 

[chestertonrules]

1)Yes, but it's not just what I think, it's what the bible says:

God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.



2) - James 2:20 "Do you want to be shown you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren?"

 

[SpiritDriven]

What Rome has to say means nothing....and the same applies to Protestants....nither side really has a clue about what is going on.

Individuals from each side become aware...example John Paul the second spoke about the Universal Salvation of all where ever he went.....even though Ratzinger at the time was enforcing Doctrine that was in opposition to that....

The Protestant side of things is the same.....

What is and what is to be is enforced by the Soveriegn will Of God alone in all things.....men just lack the understanding to see that because it is God who has blinded them.....and so men seek to resolve arguments that will not be resolved now by the will of God.

Gods ways are too high for men to understand....yet....

The time is not yet......

 

[CaDan]

We had some theology going for a little bit, but it got swamped out by Internet one-ups-manship.

 

[Rick Otto]

You continue to ignore the crystal clear words of scripture I posted.

I wonder why?

Because they don't prove that we aren't predestined. They only address cause & effect within the overarching context of predestination.
Predestination doesn't eliminate cause & effect, it directs it.
Calvinists don't throw any of that out, they just understand it fits into predestination.
They aren't under the misguidance that teaches predestination makes us robots, destroys the will, etc.

 

[CaDan]

Short intermission so the janitorial staff can get some work done.​

 

[CaDan]

Open for business​

 

[Rick Otto]

What just happened?
Did we need a mop in aisle 4?

 

[lionroar0]

I want to know where CaDan gets all of those neat Mod pics from.

Peace

 

[SpiritDriven]

When you think about it.....after reading the word of God....the only reason any person is Justified is because God decided that we will be Justified.

There will be no stopping this because as you know...Power and Might are in the Lords hands alone so that nobody can stand against him....just like scripture says.

It sort of makes you wonder how anybody could successfully argue against 1 Timothy 2 .4 doesnt it.

Knowing that you will not stand teaching against 1 Timothy 2.4 with the Lord...your fall will be great.

He who stiffens his neck....shall have it broken!

 

[Catholic Christian]

Justification is, without a doubt, the central issue in the Catholic-Protestant divide, even if we often get caught up in the lesser issues (papal infallibility, purgatory, Marian doctrines). Even the debate over Holy Communion cannot compare, as many on the Protestant side ally themselves with the Catholics in the real presence debate; no such exceptions exist when discussing justification.

Unfortunately, the debate is racked with oversimplifications. Far too often, it is cast as a debate of faith vs. works. This, of course, is not the case.

Rather, the debate is over: forensic justification though faith alone vs. process justification through faith and meritorious works.

The Protestant position is that justification (= making righteous) is an instantaneous event, whereby God himself proclaims the sinner legally righteous (forensic) solely on the basis of their possession of faith.

Two important notes: First, authentic, saving faith, according to historic Protestants, is not merely intellectual assent (assensus). 'Mere belief' does not save us. Authentic, saving faith also includes fiducia, meaning faithfulness and trust, that consists in love for the content of faith, which of necessity inspires good works within us. Thus good works are not absent from the Protestant doctrine of justification, but automatically flow from it.

Second, it's important to note that God's declaration of righteousness happens because, as the sins of the person are legally credited to Christ, the holiness of Christ is legally credited (imputed) to the person in question (this is called double imputation). Thus, from the moment of conversion, the person is fully and completely righteous as Christ is fully and completely righteous. The process of sanctification, mirroring the Catholic process of justification in some respects, most continue after this to bring the sinner's actions into accord with the proclamation of justification. But where justified sinners fall short in the process of sanctification, they can fall back on their imputed righteousness.

The Catholic position is that justification is an extended process, which begins when the person first has faith, and then continues as the righteousness won by Christ on the cross is transfused into them both through the continued outpouring of God's love and as the believer merits additional righteousness through good works.

A corresponding note: The process of justification begins solely because the sinner processes saving faith. Moreover, the process continues solely because God continues to pour out his blessings on the person in question. Yet, and herein lies the crucial distinction, God, in his grace, has also allowed the works of the adopted sinner to contribute to the process. They are not required in the same sense as the law requires them of the unbeliever, but the person is called upon to contribute to their justification in cooperation with God. They are only able to do so because God is willing to view the works of his children as meritorious, as something that adds to what he accomplishes within them, but it does place much of the responsibility for completing the process on the shoulders of the adopted sinner.

I'll make an argument for the Protestant view in another post. But hopefully this will help clear up the issue so that we don't have insidious strawmen floating about. I hope Catholics feel I've done justice to their view.

CCC 1996 - Our justification comes from the grace of God. Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life.
-
Source:
Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 1996
http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art2.htm

 

[Catholic Christian]

Justification can be summed up in two words: Divine Sonship.

We are adopted sons in the Father, and the Father is fathering children. If I were two years old and still loading my diapers that would be OK. However, if I were 20 years old and still loading my diapers that would be bad. We are expected to grow. Justification is not a one time juridical event, but rather it is an ongoing dynamic process. This is a key difference between the Catholic and protestant understanding of justification. But, this IS by Grace Alone.

When Paul speaks of works of the law he means works of the Torah. (As you know, the Hebrew word for "Law" is "Torah".) If you read "Torah" whenever you see "Law", things will look a whole lot different and become a much clearer. We agree, we are not saved by works of the Torah. However, we are required to do what ever works Christ commanded us to do.

Authentic Faith is, as Paul says, "Faith working through love". And we can only do this by
Grace Alone


...hey, that was pretty good

Here is the scripture referrence to my post (above):

Galatians 5:6: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love."

 

[Catholic Dude]

The New Perspective on Paul in my opinion is of people like NT Wright basically concluding over their own Bible study what the Catholic Church has always taught (but that is another topic for another thread.)

Then I suggest we begin that other thread, because I've actually read most of N.T. Wright's work and I've also skimmed through NPP's founding work, Paul and Palestinian Judaism by E.P. Sanders, and I totally disagree.

Here is where Im at, I have read a few of NTW's articles, but not any books. A month or so ago I purchased his book on what Paul really said, but Im embarrassed to admit I have not found the time to sit and read it.

That being said, in his articles he is clear he does not teach or hold to the classical Protestant teaching regarding justification. He explicitly denies imputation, for example, and has a strong notion of justification being a lifelong process, not a one time decree.

They certainly state that justification must be followed by works, and that double imputation doesn't happen (single only) or at least not according to Paul (Wright has specifically said that he's 'comfortable' with someone believing in double imputation if they can come up with a justification for on on the basis of texts other than 2 Cor 5:21), and that continuance within the covenant community, thought not in salvation, is dependent on good works, and even that salvation can be lost.

I have read clear passages by NTW that he rejects the concept of imputation, and he specifically rejects cornerstone Protestant "proof texts" like 2 Cor 5:21 as referring to imputation. GIVEN this, WHERE is he or especially any Protestant going to turn to prove imputation from Scripture?...the answer is there are no other passages to turn to.

But there's nothing about justification being a process (in fact, he's very insistent that justification is instantaneous), and nothing about our works contributing to our growth in the faith (which for him is still sanctification).

I totally disagree. To him justification has nothing to do with imputation, but rather is a decree by God that you are now in the community and through His Spirit this decree ANTICIPATES you will actually be righteous at the end of your walk on earth. From what I have read he takes the exact opposite approach than what you just described.

Moreover, except for double imputation, his soteriology is just as Lutheran as it is Catholic, and even there the double imputation he rejects is more borne of Reformed thinking (wherein it is based on the above-mentioned passage, and wherein it happens in justification) than Lutheran thinking (wherein it is based on our very Catholic theology of baptism).

You cant say "except for double imputation" because imputation is literally the cornerstone of classical Protestant theology. It would be literally like saying an Arian is just Catholic or Protestant, except for his rejecting of the Divinity of the Son. The whole scandal/controversy of the so called New Perspective on Paul is born of very real distinctions and differences people like NTW have introduced that are in conflict with classical Protestant teaching. He has re-defined justification the way Protestants understand it.


As I said above this New Perspectives topic should not derail this thread. I would be happy to continue this discussion (I can try to dig up some of the quotes I kept of NTW) either through Private Messaging or if you want to start a new thread. Either way, if you want to continue I will look for your PM directing me to your new thread.

 

[CaDan]

I want to know where CaDan gets all of those neat Mod pics from.

Peace

I have around nine gigs of cheesy sci fi/fantasy/comics scans on my server. The picture is a clip from Scott Fischer's "Orphans of Chaos."

 

[CaDan]

As I said above this New Perspectives topic should not derail this thread. I would be happy to continue this discussion (I can try to dig up some of the quotes I kept of NTW) either through Private Messaging or if you want to start a new thread. Either way, if you want to continue I will look for your PM directing me to your new thread.

New thread! New Thread!

I want more theology in General Theology!

 

[Catholic Dude]

I see salvation & justification and conversion being confused.
The OP mentioned "the moment of conversion" and I would assert that conversion is the long process of 'working out" (bring forth thru action) our salvation.

From what I understand Im pretty sure Protestants and Catholics in general use the term "conversion" almost always in reference to the time from when you went from an non-Christian to the time you became Christian. (thus a "re-conversion" would mean you came back to Christianity after falling away).

The terms "Salvation" and "Justification" are two somewhat different concepts (though they might be used interchangeably depending on the context of a discussion). Justification is usually seen as a subset or single component of Salvation, with "Salvation" encompassing every aspect such as election, sanctification, justification, glorification, etc.

As I understand it, the touch of grace imputes the legal standing of righteousness and generates spiritual life to a spiritualy dead soul (regeneration). [1]

Spiritual faith is a living thing which means it has appetite (desire) and motion (works). [2]

Those works justify our salvation before men. God needs no justification for His own acts, because no one is His judge.[3]

[1] From how I understand classical Protestant theology what you said is not correct. For Protestants "regeneration" refers to the "waking up" of a spiritually dead soul (ie non-Christian truly taking interest in Christianity), Catholics have a similar understanding but we use the term "prevenient grace" (the grace that first leads you to recognize and put faith in Christ). You combined regeneration with what Protestants call "justification" when you added your comment of the imputation of righteousness in your first sentence.

[2] I would agree with that.

[3] This is how a Protestant would interpret passages like James 2:21-24, though a Catholic would strongly disagree (especially considering passages like Gen 22:12ff).

Dude,
Eze18:24 does not include grace as part of its equation and so doesn't address its role. Grace, election, and God's predestining determinate council are not on the table for consideration in a discussion of the author's intent in that verse. That had to wait God's own sacrifice.

I dont think hardly any, IF any, OT reference used the term "grace" so you cant just say a passage has nothing to do with salvation because grace isnt mentioned. The man in Eze 18 is righteous, according to NT revelation righteousness is directly linked with salvation, especially justification.

Your wife-beater analogy falls short, because He did in fact deliver man's punishment upon His own entirely blameless Son. He took what He dishes out.

It doesnt "fall short" because what you said is exactly how I described the Protestant position in my example. I said such a notion is blasphemous and un-Biblical.

So saying Abraham was justified more than once does not equate to his being saved more than once. Justification only addresses man's perception of God's motive. Justification is evidence of conversion, a process started by the salvific act of regeneration.
Equating justification with salvation is misdirection.
Growing in righteuosness means converting behavior, not increasing righteousness. The righteousness of men & their behavior may be evidence of imputed divine righteousness, but it is never divine, never meritorious toward salvation. Only the imputed righteousness of Christ merits that.

I dont remember ever equating Abraham being justified multiple times with his being saved multiple times. I disagree that justification is merely evidence of conversion, and that is not classical Protestant theology either, rather it is an actual event which changes your status (though Catholic and Protestants disagree on HOW it does).

So when a saved person begins to sin in a way contrary to justification, he may make a shipwreck of his justification, but his salvation never depended on him in the first place, so that isn't touched. Judgement awaits him & he will suffer loss of rewards in heaven, but not his imputed righteousness which depends soley on God's mercy, and not on man's performance.

That assumes imputation is correct and Biblical, which I as a Catholic reject.

I want to conclude by saying you have the best signature I have seen in a long time.