Catholics & Salvation; And the answer is: Maybe.

Stand To Reason ^ | Gregory Koukl

[Gamecock]

A caller to our weekly radio program asked a question that has come up before: Are Roman Catholics saved? Let me respond to this as best I can. But I need to offer a qualifier because I think this is going to be somewhat dissatisfying for some because I am not going to say a simple "aye" or "nay." My answer is: It kind of depends. The reason I'm saying that is because of certain ambiguities.

My point is this, I think that in the area of the doctrine of salvation, Roman Catholic theology, as I understand it, is unbiblical because salvation depends on faith and works, not just faith alone. This was the specific problem Paul addressed in the book of Galatians and was the subject of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15: Is simple faith in Jesus adequate, or must gentile followers of Christ now keep the Law as a standard of acceptance before God?

I know not all Catholics would agree that this is a fair way of putting it, but I think that most Catholics would actually say the faith/works equation is accurate. Your faith and your works are what save you. I was raised Catholic and that’s what I was taught. (For my take on the biblical relationship between faith and works, see “Faith & Works: Paul vs. James.”)

Now, I need to add this too. Many Protestants feel the same way. Many Protestants are confused on this issue, so this is not a Catholic vs. Protestant concern so much. It's just that Catholicism across the board has more of an official position that amounts this, where Protestants have a more diversity of views, some that don't even seem to be consistent with Protestantism.

But the fact that one believes Jesus is the Messiah and that He is the savior, not our own efforts, is critical. If you reject this notion, like the Jews do, then as far as I can tell from the biblical revelation, there is no hope for you. That seems to be clear. But when somebody says they believe in Jesus and He is their Savior, but somehow works are mingled in with the picture, then I can't really say to you how much faith that person is putting in Jesus and how much faith that person is putting in their own efforts to satisfy God. If a person has all their faith in their own efforts, then they are going to be judged by their own efforts. It's as simple as that. If they have their faith in Jesus, they will be judged by the merits of Jesus. Anyone judged by their own merits is going to be found wanting. Anyone who is judged by the merits of Jesus is not going to be found wanting because Jesus is not wanting.

What if you are kind of a mixture? I think most Catholics are, frankly. Many Protestants are, as well.

I reflect often on a comment that was made by a friend of mine named Dennis. He was a Roman Catholic brother in Christ that I knew when I was a brand new Christian. He asked me this: "Greg, how much faith does it take to be saved?" I said, "A mustard seed." And he said, "There you go."

And so, it seems to me, there are many Christians—Protestant and Catholic—who believe in Jesus as their savior and have a mustard seed of faith, but are confused about the role of works. I think that Jesus is still Savior in those cases.

[hosepipe]

[ The (Roman Catholic)Church doesn’t teach that the scripture is alone sufficient to learn the Christian faith, which is the so-called “sola scriptura” superstition. ]

The christian life cannot be learned..
Jesus said, "You MUST be born again".. not indoctrinated, educated, or made smarter..
You are born into a family not educated into one..
The christian life must be lived not learned..

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed.

Blessed be the Name of the Lord!

[Forest Keeper]

The arguments about the US Constitution get resolved in conservative’s favor by looking at the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. In order to do so one has to examine the Federalist Papers, their memoirs, their letters, etc. just like the Catholic Church resolves disputes about the scripture by looking at what St. Irenaeus, St. Ignatius, St. Cyprian, St. Justin Martyr and others wrote in 1-3c. You guys are innovators, not us.

No, I'm afraid that in this comparison the Catholic Church is clearly on the liberal side. :) First, let us assume that the conservative view is in strict constructionism and the liberal view is in a "living" document.

Now, how does a conservative determine the intent of a Constitutional provision? He looks to the writings of the drafters. He does not look to op-eds in the local papers near that time or to the what the current polls say 200+ years later. However, if the liberal does not like where that leads then he most certainly looks to outside sources, wherever he can find them. They include what outside writers had to say at the time, plus whatever the then modern "mood" seems to be.

So, with the Bible the conservative looks to the writings of the drafter. Well, since all scripture is God-breathed, and no other writing is God-breathed, the conservative would have to look at other scripture ONLY to determine the intent. The drafter would be comparable to God. But, the liberal, if he did not like the result, would look immediately to outside writers, who were not inspired by the drafter to get the intent. These would be the Fathers of your Church. In addition, the modern "mood" would be determined by all the Papal pronouncements ex-cathedra throughout the ages. In Catholicism, the Bible is a living document, and interpretations are made to fit the tradition of the time. We just saw recently the one about the title of "Vicar of Christ". The Marion dogmas would be another example.

The conservative sticks with the original. The liberal adds more to it than was ever there OR intended, in order to CHANGE it. God gave us His revelation in the scriptures and specifically told us NOT to add to it (Pr 30:5,6; Rev 22:18,19; Deut 4:2). Unfortunately, this has nevertheless been done by some.

[Forest Keeper]

If we Catholics are such modernizers why is it that we argue from scripture and tradition and you puzzle over philosophical questions how we made God a failure and the sacrifice of the Cross unnecessary?

With all due respect, I have not seen credible arguments from scripture, but I have seen lots of arguments that are fully in line with tradition. That is why many like me assert that Catholicism puts tradition over and ahead of scripture. That is, that Catholicism shapes scripture beyond reason to fit into the mold of tradition. We just saw this in our discussion of the Eucharist. With Jesus speaking, not only did the intended audience COMPLETELY shift in mid-thought, it completely shifted within ONE WORD. :)

I don't understand how your reference to our questioning of Catholic theology vis-a-vis God being a failure is relevant to whether you are modernizers. We simply question what we see as error, whether it is new error or error from the beginning of the Latin Church as we basically see it today.

[Quix]

Great points.

[Lord_Calvinus]

I haven’t had a Catholic argue with me over Scriptural interpretation in years. Usually, it boils down to what “the Church” teaches and I end up feeling like I should be arguing with a supervisor instead of the poor peon that can’t think for himself.

[OLD REGGIE]

If you doin’t understand my post, ask a question and I will try to help.

Oh I understood your post very well. I was simply struck by the prentiousness of the phraseology.

"The Church doesn’t teach that the scripture is alone sufficient to learn the Christian faith..."

Of course not. To do so would negate the need for the "big boys" to interpret Scripture for you.

[wmfights]

The writings of the Church Fathers do not serve the same purpose as inspired and canonical scripture.

Thanks be to God!

Days like today are what all this contentiousness is worth. You have kindly responded that oral transmission of information is not as accurate as written documents. You have acknowledged that the Scriptures are God Breathed. You have acknowledged that the writings of those theologians that came after the Scriptures were written did not write God Breathed documents. In your honest answers you have illustrated why Scripture must stand Alone .

For example, from the Fathers we see that the Church was highly hierarchical and sacramental; that salvation was understood as a process rather than one time event; that veneration of saints was encouraged by the Church.

You have given a great example of what happens when you value the opinions of those who came later rather than Scripture.

Why would the opinions of these theologians have any greater weight than the opinions of theologians who came even later? In both cases we are looking at uninspired writings and opinion. It would seem the most rational, serious, sober approach would be to measure what their opinions were against the one source we know is God Breathed, the Scriptures.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Thanks be to God! Days like today are what all this contentiousness is worth. You have kindly responded that oral transmission of information is not as accurate as written documents. You have acknowledged that the Scriptures are God Breathed. You have acknowledged that the writings of those theologians that came after the Scriptures were written did not write God Breathed documents. In your honest answers you have illustrated why Scripture must stand Alone .

LOL. AMEN!

What's that about a broken clock? 8~)

[wmfights]

What's that about a broken clock? 8~)

LOL

[Dr. Eckleburg]

For example, from the Fathers we see...that salvation was understood as a process rather than one time event

In this one sentence, we find the greatest error of Rome from which all other errors flow.

The New Testament is brimming with the declared truth that salvation has been accomplished by Christ on behalf of His flock. There is no ongoing "process" of men atoning for their own sins because Christ has atoned for those sins ONCE for all time. He has paid the price in full. The ransom has been delivered to God and God has accepted the payment of "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," and thus, the accounts of Christ's sheep have been marked "paid-in-full."

Thank you, God. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

OTOH, Rome seeks to insinuate itself between God and men as the arbiter of men's salvation, handing out bits and pieces of it according to men's own work. Any reading of Scripture refutes this deadly error that gives men the credit for their salvation which rightly belongs to God alone.

Rome obscures the difference between justification and sanctification, wrongly melding the two into a works-based salvation. Instead, the Bible tells us our justification by Christ's atonement is complete, while our sanctification by the Holy Spirit in our lives is an ongoing process of refinement as we are brought closer to God day by day.

We offer Scripture in support of this, and all Rome responds with is various and variable "church fathers."

"But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." -- Hebrews 10:12-18

Further, Rome not only confuses sanctification and justification, it likewise confuses "payment" for sins with "sorrow" for sins. Men are given by the Holy Spirit the desire and ability to repent for their sins, all the while still knowing Christ has already paid for those sins in full.

Thus our remorse. Thus our gratitude. Thus our confidence in our redemption by Christ's sacrifice alone. He has accomplished what we could not.

"But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." -- Matthew 9:13

Obviously Rome hasn't learned this yet. And this ignorance is why Trent curses all those who believe they have been justified by their God-given faith alone, and therefore have confidence in their salvation by Christ risen from the cross. Rome doesn't believe in the accomplished work of Christ. Rome denies the accomplished work of Christ and labors to augment it with the baubles and trinkets of men's vain imaginings. As if Christ's perfect, God-ordained death and resurrection needed the gaudy, gilded ornamentation and careless red paint Rome slathers onto the empty cross.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Jesus said, "You MUST be born again".. not indoctrinated, educated, or made smarter.. You are born into a family not educated into one.

AMEN! We have been adopted as His own; we didn't indenture ourselves to Him. He bought us with a price, according to His own perfect purpose.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear sister in Christ, and especially thank you for those beautiful Scriptures!

Truly, the blood of the Lamb is altogether sufficient.

I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [come] by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. - Galatians 2:21

To God be the glory!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

ANNALEX: "The Church doesn't teach that the scripture is alone sufficient to learn the Christian faith..."

OLDREGGIE: Of course not. To do so would negate the need for the "big boys" to interpret Scripture for you.

lol. From the "boys'" own, Orwellian lips through the CCC we read (keeping in mind that the word "magisterium" is from the Latin word for "master")...

"890 -- The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.

Hmmm. This certainly sounds like the magisterium has attempted to supplant the Holy Spirit. Not a smart move.

Consider this candor from Father Matthias Premm, in his book "Dogmatic Theology for the Laity" (1967)...

"...the teaching office of the Church is more important than the Bible: only an infallible Church can tell us what books belong to Scripture, and only an infallible Church can interpret the true meaning of Sacred Scripture; no one can do this for himself. Thus the Catholic can read only one Bible, the Bible which is published by the Church. In other words: the immediate and highest rule of faith is the living office of the Church."

[hosepipe]

[ AMEN! We have been adopted as His own; we didn't indenture ourselves to Him. He bought us with a price, according to His own perfect purpose. ]

True religious shamans of all types want to educate you..
God does not require you to be smart.. intelligent. or savy..
But Satan did from the beginning..

A fact so easily overlooked.. Satan puts words into Gods mouth..
Beguiling the arrogant and tricking the intelligent..

[hosepipe]

[ Rome denies the accomplished work of Christ and labors to augment it with the baubles and trinkets of men's vain imaginings. As if Christ's perfect, God-ordained death and resurrection needed the gaudy, gilded ornamentation and careless red paint Rome slathers onto the empty cross. ]

OUCH!.. that must hurt to any roman catholic(orthodox) with a modicum of honor..

[hosepipe]

[ Hmmm. This certainly sounds like the magisterium has attempted to supplant the Holy Spirit. Not a smart move. ]

Taking the Holy Spirit out of the loop has been Satans Gospel from the beginning.. by questioning "GODs words".. The ONLY UNforgivable sin(supplanting the HS).. Inserting the magisterium is subtle but effective.. Sad to say many other denominations sideline the Holy Spirit also.. in a hundred ways.. But mainly by holding meetings that the Holy Spirit is an only observer.. Even the Holy Spirit cannot/could not change the way the meetings are held in some places.. Basically the Holy Spirit is not in charge and according to me it seems not even welcome.. Many protestant synagogues are as guilty as the Orthodox except in other ways.. The Holy Spirit can be, and is, taken right of the loop..

[Alamo-Girl]

True religious shamans of all types want to educate you.. God does not require you to be smart.. intelligent. or savy.. But Satan did from the beginning..

Indeed. It was called the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. - Matthew 18:1-5

To God be the glory, not man, never man!

[Lord_Calvinus]

*** There is no ongoing “process” of men atoning for their own sins because Christ has atoned for those sins ONCE for all time. He has paid the price in full. The ransom has been delivered to God and God has accepted the payment of “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world,” and thus, the accounts of Christ’s sheep have been marked “paid-in-full.”***

Exactly. Anything else about processes for salvation is like spitting on Christ’s face while he was on the cross.

The Lord has perfected FOREVER those who are being sanctified. The only process is the unfinished santification of the saints.

***OTOH, Rome seeks to insinuate itself between God and men as the arbiter of men’s salvation, handing out bits and pieces....***

Begging for table scraps is for dogs and unfit for the saints of God.

[Forest Keeper]

Consider this candor from Father Matthias Premm, in his book "Dogmatic Theology for the Laity" (1967)...

WOW! Great find. He certainly DOES get honesty points. We've known for a long time that the Magisterium considers itself superior to scripture since they disallow the scripture to speak for itself. And he is absolutely right that no one can read the Bible for himself and arrive at Catholic theology. It's impossible. He notes that the true meaning is not found in scripture, it is a different meaning from the text. More honesty points for him.