“Christ did not merit grace for us.”
These Protestants say otherwise. Argue with them:
https://www.monergism.com/christ-rightly-and-properly-said-have-merited-grace-and-salvation-us
“He got what He deserved because He was without sin.”
Actually, He “got what He deserved because He was” obedient to the Father’s will. Hebrews 5:8-10:
“Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; and being made perfect he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.”
After all, He “being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” (Philippians 2:8)
This is why St. Peter - after explaining how Christ fulfilled all of Israel’s hopes for redemption through His obedience - said, “Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” (Acts 2:36).
If you’re going to say, “He got what He deserved because He was without sin” then the logical question to ask is: What did the Holy Spirit get since He is without sin as well? Jesus got what He got not because of His sinlessness in itself, but because of His obedience - just as scripture teaches.
“We’re getting what we don’t deserve and even if we could work for it, we still couldn’t merit it as Catholics claim people can because all our best works are as filthy rags in God’s sight. They are all tainted with sin.”
But God’s works aren’t. You should read this:
Paul tells us: “For [God] will reward every man according to his works: to those who by perseverance in working good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. There will be . . . glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:6–11; cf. Gal. 6:6–10).
In the second century, the technical Latin term for “merit” was introduced as a synonym for the Greek word for “reward.” Thus merit and reward are two sides of the same coin.
Protestants often misunderstand the Catholic teaching on merit, thinking that Catholics believe that one must do good works to come to God and be saved. This is exactly the opposite of what the Church teaches. The Council of Trent stressed: “[N]one of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification; for if it is by grace, it is not now by works; otherwise, as the Apostle [Paul] says, grace is no more grace” (Decree on Justification 8, citing Rom. 11:6).
The Catholic Church teaches only Christ is capable of meriting in the strict sense—mere man cannot (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2007). The most merit humans can have is condign—when, under the impetus of God’s grace, they perform acts which please him and which he has promised to reward (Rom. 2:6–11, Gal. 6:6–10). Thus God’s grace and his promise form the foundation for all human merit (CCC 2008).
Virtually all of this is agreed to by Protestants, who recognize that, under the impetus of God’s grace, Christians do perform acts which are pleasing to God and which God has promised to reward, meaning that they fit the definition of merit. When faced with this, Protestants are forced to admit the truth of the Catholic position—although, contrary to Paul’s command (2 Tim. 2:14), they may still dispute the terminology.
Thus the Lutheran Book of Concord admits: “We are not putting forward an empty quibble about the term ‘reward.’ . . . We grant that eternal life is a reward because it is something that is owed—not because of our merits [in the strict sense] but because of the promise [of God]. We have shown above that justification is strictly a gift of God; it is a thing promised. To this gift the promise of eternal life has been added” (p. 162). https://www.catholic.com/tract/reward-and-merit
Same difference.
You're hair splitting to make a distinction without a difference.
And it didn't prove me wrong either.