The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Roman Catholicism and salvation

Since you have not seen or seen fit to reply to my response, I thought I might try once again.

There is no doubt that much of the Catholic teaching is couched in language and stated in such a way that the average person is easily confused and can make wrong conclusions about what is actually being taught. So, I thought it would help if I listed a few of the clearest statements concerning "Justification", since, by your own admission, Rome sometimes uses "justification" and "sanctification" interchangeably. The following is a quote from an article written by Michael Horton wherein he simply quotes directly from the Council of Trent as to Rome's official teaching concerning the doctrine of "Justification".

---

Justification is defined as "not only a remission of sins but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man through the voluntary reception of the grace and gifts whereby an unjust man becomes just."

The Protestants never denied the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, but this was identified in Scripture as sanctification, not as justification. Rome simply combined the two concepts into one: God justifies us through the process of our moving, by the power of God's Spirit at work in our lives, from being unjust to becoming just. This, however, rejects Paul's whole point in Romans 4:1-5, that justification comes only to those who (a) are wicked and (b) stop working for it. God justifies the wicked as wicked, the sinner as sinner. That is the good news of the gospel, and the scandal of the Cross!

The most relevant canons are the following:

Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone (supra, chapters 7-8), meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema.

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost (Rom. 5:5), and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy (supra, chapter 9), which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.

Canon 24. If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works (ibid., chapter 10), but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema.

Canon 30. If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema.

Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life, and in case he dies in grace the attainment of eternal life itself and also an increase of glory, let him be anathema.

In other words, men and women are accepted before God on the basis of their cooperation with God's grace over the course of their lives, rather than on the basis of Christ's finished work alone, received through faith alone, to the glory of God alone. There are indeed two fundamentally different answers to that recurring biblical question, "How can I be saved?" and, therefore, two fundamentally different gospels.

---

One last comment which I believe is most salient to the discussion. You keep insisting that Rome doesn't teach any form of "works" salvation, or should I say "justification"? And, that Paul is always speaking of "works of the law" and not what Rome deems to be "works of grace". May I strongly suggest that this dichotomy is fallacious and has no semblance to truth whatsoever. The first 3 chapters of Galatians are perspicuous enough for most to apprehend what Paul is dealing with. The Judaisers brought "another gospel"; a "gospel" that was an admixture of faith + works:

While Paul is adamant that no man is justified by works of the law, it INCLUDES "works" at any time; as you might phrase it, "before or after grace".