Clarification On Christian Fundamentals

[jesussaves]

Your argument: Person A lived a life more in conformity to Christ, so he is more justified than person B who did not as much. Both people are justified, but person A is more justified.

My problem: Jesus' death covered all the sins of the world. If you sin, it is covered. If it is covered, how can it become more covered? To say that someone is "more justified" means there are shades of guilt on someone who is "less justified", doesn't it?

Then again, not necessarily, as you point out, again there's the point that person A did in fact lead a life more in conformity, so he is more justified, again even though BOTH ARE JUSTIFIED.

I'm not sure which analogy fits. Obviously because an analogy is used doesn't means it follows, like the wedding one. It seems like a fundamental judgement call that I would have no idea how to make.

Edited October 25, 2006 by jesussaves

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1100877' date='Oct 25 2006, 02:27 PM']
Your argument: Person A lived a life more in conformity to Christ, so he is more justified than person B who did not as much. Both people are justified, but person A is more justified.

My problem: Jesus' death covered all the sins of the world. If you sin, it is covered. If it is covered, how can it become more covered? To say that someone is "more justified" means there are shades of guilt on someone who is "less justified", doesn't it?

Then again, not necessarily, as you point out, again there's the point that person A did in fact lead a life more in conformity, so he is more justified, again even though BOTH ARE JUSTIFIED.

I'm not sure which analogy fits. Obviously because an analogy is used doesn't means it follows, like the wedding one. It seems like a fundamental judgement call that I would have no idea how to make.
[/quote]
Your problem reflects a difficulty posed by the distinction between objective redemption and subjective redemption. Objective redemption is that which Christ merited on the cross. Subjective redemption is that which is applied to individual souls. I addressed it above (look for my analogy with the "grace bank"). When we talk of one being more justified, it is on the subjective level, not the objective. It does not affect Christ's sacrifice, but rather affects the level to which Christ's sacrifice may be applied to individuals.

[jesussaves]

I think a fundamental question I need to ask is, according to the Catholic Church, is the person who has faith while they are alive justified?

I asked a friend what I asked you:
[quote]Myfriend said this: Person A lived a life more in conformity to Christ, so he is more justified than person B who did not as much. Both people are justified, but person A is more justified.


My problem with that is what your problem is: Jesus' death covered all the sins of the world. If you sin, it is covered. If it is covered, how can it become more covered? To say that someone is "more justified" means there are shades of guilt on someone who is "less justified", doesn't it?

Then again, not necessarily, as my friend pointed out, again there's the point that person A did in fact lead a life more in conformity, so he is more justified, again even though BOTH ARE JUSTIFIED.[/quote]

Here is what he said:

[quote]
Yes, one is forgiven more than the other. But the end result, the state of being forgiven, is exactly the same for both of them. Neither one of them had to pay a single cent. Someone who is forgiven is forgiven!

Let's do some math.
Person A has $100 debt.
Person B has $ 1000000 debt.
Person A is forgiven $100.
Person B is forgiven $ 1000000.
Who was forgiven more? Person B.
Who has more debt now, Person A or Person B?
Neither one; now they do not have ANY debt.
You are a sinner; I am a greater sinner.
Jesus forgave you your sins; he forgave mine also.
Who has more legal debt now?
Neither one, we are both completely forgiven, free, justified!
One more thing notice how your Catholic friend is basing our state of justification on how we live, our conformity with Christ. If that is so, than we are not yet justified -- for like me, you admit that we continue to sin. In that case it is not a question of being more justified or less justified, but of being more guilty and less guilty!
But the Bible says that we are justified right now. And that this state of justification is on account of the blood of Jesus.
I'm sending you some past editions of my newsletter which deal with the topic of justification. I hope you find them informative.
[/quote]

It seems you could insert "justified" for "forgiven" at least in the first paragraph of response. But the point he is making is whether the person at their conversion is justified or not. Are you forgiven and justified after you convert?
Would you respond that the person can be said to be objectively justifeid, but subjectively increasing in justifiecation? Doing what they can do not mitigate what needs to be done by Christ, so to speak?

Your thoughts?

Edited October 27, 2006 by jesussaves

[jesussaves]

Also in addition to the last post, what about the idea of what Christ's blood accomplished. Did it accomplish the possibility that we would eventually become justified by our own works, ableit graced, on earth or ultimately purgatory? Or did it accomplish more than just hte possibility, but the actual justification?

[jesussaves]

Also in addition to the last post, what about the idea of what Christ's blood accomplished. Did it accomplish the possibility that we would eventually become justified by our own works, ableit graced, on earth or ultimately purgatory? Or did it accomplish more than just hte possibility, but the actual justification?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1102380' date='Oct 27 2006, 12:22 PM']
I think a fundamental question I need to ask is, according to the Catholic Church, is the person who has faith while they are alive justified?

It seems you could insert "justified" for "forgiven" at least in the first paragraph of response. But the point he is making is whether the person at their conversion is justified or not. Are you forgiven and justified after you convert?
Would you respond that the person can be said to be objectively justifeid, but subjectively increasing in justifiecation? Doing what they can do not mitigate what needs to be done by Christ, so to speak?

Your thoughts?
[/quote]
While the analogy with the money is interesting and certainly makes a point, I don't think it really addresses the issue I'm raising.

It is true that both persons end up with no debt, just as it is true that, in the case of getting to class late, a person with only one excuse and a person with ten excuses would both end up excused.

The problem is that it's not a matter of all the sins being covered. All sin is forgiven in Baptism (and sins committed after Baptism are forgiven in Confession, which I will gladly address in a different thread if you choose to start it) so that the sins are removed. One "mild" sinner and one "severe" sinner after Baptism would both be completely "paid up," as it were. However, the problem arises again that the Protestant mindset on salvation sees it as a contract...once the terms are met and everything is paid off, it's all set to go. It's a tempting position, but there is a principle in Catholic theology that God not only wants to save us enough to get into heaven, but to make us better and better, even better than we would have been had we never sinned. Although we may be paid up, so to speak, it is clear that a person still retains concupiscience, a certain desire to commit sin, a weakness to evil. Although they have grace in their souls and are forgiven their mortal sins, they still retain these weaknesses. These weaknesses keep them from fully reflecting Christ and from being in full conformity to Him (because, of course, He has no weaknesses). Therefore, since we accept it as a principle that the more you are conformed to Christ, the more justified you are, it naturally follows that someone who has made a faith-response to grace in such a way as to remove some of these weaknesses is more conformed to Christ than one who is "merely" in the state of grace without having removed these weaknesses (I put merely in quotes because grace in the soul is no insignificant thing, nor do I mean to give that impression). It's a matter of growing in that grace. Take, for instance, the ten men who were healed by Christ. All were healed, but who was more justified? The man who returned and thanked Christ was the one who made a response to that gift, that grace, and as such, while that healing was a gift, the thanks he gave to Christ certainly not only earned him further blessings but by thanking Christ, the man really opened himself up to the full healing. Although God may heal us and justify us, when we respond in faith to that grace, we are accepting it (thanking is a form of accepting) and allowing it to penetrate more deeply. That man not only had his sight restored, but also grew in grace by thanking God. Thus, he was more conformed to Christ than the others because he, like Christ, had both sight and thankfulness, while the others had only sight. Now, certainly this shows that one becomes more conformed to Christ, but does it show that he was more justified because he was more conformed? Let me ask you this, if you have two friends and you give them both the same gift and one uses it constantly to the point that he would wear it out if it could be worn out and the other uses it only a little, who is more deserving of that gift? Remember, they didn't earn it; it was truly a gift to you, and yet the one who really uses it deserves it more. In fact, you could even say that he owns his gift more than the other owns his because he really takes ownership of it and puts it to good use. So when God looks at two people are in the state of grace, the one who puts that grace to better use and is, consequently, more conformed to His Son, is more justified...more deserving...but that justification still depends primarily on God's gift. It is God's generosity that distributes, it is our willingness to accept God's grace that determines how it is portioned out, and it is our response to God's grace that determines how much effect it has on us, not only in getting us to heaven, but in recreating us and renewing us in the image of His Son.

Anyway, I hope that helps. I wanted to sort of shift the question a bit because I thought that this approach would cut to the heart of the matter better. The short answer is that yes, you are justified in this life if you have grace in your soul because you have the sort of "minimum" conformity with Christ, but are you as justified as you will ever be? No. We believe that we continue to grow and grow in justification. You only need a certain amount to get into heaven, but you want to grow past that. This begs the question, why do we want to do more than the minimum if the minimum gets us to heaven? Well, think of it like this: in heaven, God will pour Himself out to you in love (I assume we agree here, although it's really only an analogy). You are a vessel made to hold God's grace. As long as you hold His grace, you are justified. However, you can hold more grace, and the more room you make in yourself by uprooting evil, the more grace you can hold. Well, when you get to heaven, you will be filled with grace, undoubtedly, but during this life you can be stretched to hold more. Thus, while in any case you will be completely blessed in heaven, your capacity for blessing can increase. That and it's just a good thing to be conformed more and more to Christ (what true Christian wouldn't want to be?).

I would like to address one thing directly:

[quote]One more thing notice how your Catholic friend is basing our state of justification on how we live, our conformity with Christ.[/quote]

First, you must speak well of me for me to be called a friend. I appreciate that.

I'm not basing the state of justification on how we live (although to some extent how we live is responsible, since Baptism is part of us living and since, if we live very sinful lives, we will also lose justification), but rather I am stating the degree of justification on how we live. If one is in the state of grace, one is in the state of justification. If one has more grace, one is in a higher degree of justification. One is in the state of justification independent of degree.

[quote]Also in addition to the last post, what about the idea of what Christ's blood accomplished. Did it accomplish the possibility that we would eventually become justified by our own works, ableit graced, on earth or ultimately purgatory? Or did it accomplish more than just hte possibility, but the actual justification?[/quote]

Certainly the grace flowing from the Blood of the Lamb which was shed upon the Cross does more than just allow us to be justified by our own works. The Scriptures tell us that when we who are in a state of grace do good, it is God doing good through us. St. Paul says, indeed, that Christ lives through him. The fact is that our consent is needed for salvation (no theology can throw out that fact). The work of grace which God works in us is something we participate in by our very consent, but of course we see from the Scriptures that consent is not just a willful thought or assent, but a willful act (the son who consented to doing his father's will did not do it, but the son who did it was the truly consenting one who did his father's will). This is why we say that we cooperate with God in our salvation. God saved us. Without Him, we would be damned. Salvation is therefore a free gift, but like any gift, if it is not used, it is useless and does not accomplish its purpose. However, we cooperate with it so that we may "own" our salvation by truly making it ours, that is, by living by it. The purpose of grace is to make us worthy of heaven (God doesn't through pearls before swine; He wants to transform us to be worthy of heaven, not just give it to us who are unworthy). We are worthy of nothing if we do not take that gift and try to live it out. In order to be made worthy, we must live in grace and live out that grace in order to "exercise" our souls and make them strong, yet it is still God doing it in us, but we are cooperating. Again, I come back to that word. Cooperate comes from Latin for "to work with." We work with God in our salvation because if we don't, then we aren't really taking part in Christ's sacrifice (this is why we see foreshadowings in the Old Testament covenants, when the Hebrews not only had to say that they were Hebrews, nor accept God's mercy with words, but had to do acts of faith, to go inside, to paint blood over their doors, and to eat the passover lamb...God wants us to cooperate with Him because it allows us to "own" our salvation, that is, to make salvation our own, "our" salvation, yet not to attribute the glory to ourselves, [b]our[/b] salvation is [b]God's[/b] gift). Cooperation is very necessary.

So, in short, God accomplishes the actual justification, what we would call the subjective justification, but with our assistance because He not only respects our free will to reject it, but actively wills our participation. In other words, God the Father wants the whole family involved in its salvation. God's a "family man."

[jesussaves]

I'm not getting the clear Catholic answer. You say we are justified at the conversion and at any point thereafter before death. Then you say there are degrees of justification, where some are less justified. I realize your story of being late to class would leave on to think you are more justified than the other. Are you saying the one that is less justified isn't justified completely? How are you saying they are both justified, but one is less justified, considering the Protestant notion that both are justified completely. Are both justified completely in Catholic thought? How so if there are degrees? The only way I could see you saying it is from the objective v. subjective issue which I don't think you stated very well. I also understand that in Catholic thought you must be perfect body and soul before entering heaven, which is not in line with Protestant thought that you only need legal justification. In Catholic thought, all that seems necessary is a savior to give you the potential to earn your justification.

Also please note that the good Protestant arguments are that you must increase in sanctification, to increase your vessel as you put it, and you want to. The relation to justification is that justification is completed, but santicfication must still occur. must being stressed again.

Also, I don't understand how you say God's justification is subjective in the last paragraph of the last response.

Edited October 30, 2006 by jesussaves

[jswranch]

I am not sure the two of you hold the same deffinition of:

salvation
justification
forgiveness
merit (all three types)
sanctification

If this was worked out, the two could communicate better.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1105025' date='Oct 30 2006, 02:36 PM']
I'm not getting the clear Catholic answer. You say we are justified at the conversion and at any point thereafter before death. Then you say there are degrees of justification, where some are less justified. I realize your story of being late to class would leave on to think you are more justified than the other. Are you saying the one that is less justified isn't justified completely? How are you saying they are both justified, but one is less justified, considering the Protestant notion that both are justified completely. Are both justified completely in Catholic thought? How so if there are degrees? The only way I could see you saying it is from the objective v. subjective issue which I don't think you stated very well. I also understand that in Catholic thought you must be perfect body and soul before entering heaven, which is not in line with Protestant thought that you only need legal justification. In Catholic thought, all that seems necessary is a savior to give you the potential to earn your justification.

Also please note that the good Protestant arguments are that you must increase in sanctification, to increase your vessel as you put it, and you want to. The relation to justification is that justification is completed, but santicfication must still occur. must being stressed again.

Also, I don't understand how you say God's justification is subjective in the last paragraph of the last response.
[/quote]

Let me see what I can do in light of JSWRanch's post.

These definitions are out of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and are therefore authoritative:

[b]Salvation - [/b]The forgiveness of sins and restoration of friendship with God, which can be done by God alone (cf. CCC 169).

[b]Justification - [/b]The gracious action of God which frees us from sin and communicates "the righteousness of God" (Romans 3:22). Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man (cf. CCC 1987-1989).

[b]Merit - [/b]The reward which God promises and gives to those who love him and by his grace perform good works. One cannot "merit" justification or eternal life, which are the free gift of God; the source of any merit we have before God is due to the grace of Christ in us (cf. CCC 2006).

For the others, strict definitions are not provided in the Catechism. What I'm going to do is list a sequence of things which must be understood in a progressive order. I do this only because I know that all of it is quite confusing to me when organizing it. Make sure you grasp one step before going to the next. I'll number them for easy reference.

1. Justification for us is a process which begins at Baptism when grace enters the soul.

2. This process is first initiated by God, who inspires a person toward conversion.

3. All grace was earned by Christ through His Cross.

4. This grace was "deposited" in order to be drawn out and given to mankind, which had fallen and needed grace to be restored.

5. Jesus constantly offers us His grace.

6. We are moved by God to accept this grace.

7. This is done by the grace of God working in our lives but not yet living in our souls.

8. We accept it, but we must accept it with an act of faith; the will to be saved is not enough by itself because it is vain if it is not lived out.

9. We live the faith and, by the prompting and assistance of God, we open ourselves by those faith-acts to grace in the soul.

10. The first faith-act is to receive Baptism, which places grace in the soul.

11. At this point, one is justified, that is, he has received [i]gracious action of God which frees us from sin and communicates "the righteousness of God."[/i]

12. Because [i]justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man[/i], it is a process by which a whole person is made into a better version of themselves.

13. Since all people are in the image of God, the better version of any one person is more perfectly in conformity with Christ.

14. Grace brings about justification.

15. Therefore, grace is that which conforms a person to Christ, attaching the person to Christ so that he may be saved.

16. This is necessary because it was Christ who suffered and died and rose again and it is we who, being baptized into His death, rise with Him.

17. However, it is not only by doing as He did, that is, dying and rising, that we are saved. That would mean that we merely needed to follow His example to be saved. We would be saving ourselves on our own, just following His example.

18. Therefore, we must be bound to Christ. Only by being branches grafted onto the vine will we be saved.

19. When we are grafted onto Christ, the vine, His sap (what some authors call the Holy Spirit in this analogy) runs through us, providing us with the nutrients (grace) to bear fruit (ultimately, our salvation).

20. Thus, our fruit (and ultimately, our salvation) is all ultimately Christ's and not our own.

21. Therefore, salvation is Christ's and we are allowed to share in it by being joined to Him (making us co-heirs).

22. However, the fruit is also ours, inasmuch as we freely cooperate with grace in helping it grow by applying the nutrients, all with the instructions provided by the signals from the vine (the inspirations of the Holy Spirit, spiritual direction from the Church, etc), in order to grow and bear good fruit.

23. Inasmuch as the fruit is ours and we cooperated with God in its production, we rightly say that we shared in the merit, but this is only because Christ merited it for us and, as a gift, allowed us to share, and therefore it is a gift.

24. We do not merit it in the strict sense of being deserving of the gift in the first place or of earning it, but we do "deserve" it in much the same way a person deserves a gift when they use it as well as they can, that is, they didn't purchase the gift, but they are worthy of it. We don't purchase salvation, Christ does, but by His grace and work in our lives, which we cooperate with freely, He makes us worthy to receive salvation.

25. Since we, as branches on the vine, grow, we are growing in justification. As long as we are on the vine and truly will to bear good fruit and cooperate with grace, we will bear good fruit. If we do not will to bear good fruit and do not cooperate with grace, we will bear bad fruit and will fall away or be cut away from the vine. All branches bearing good fruit, no matter what the size of the fruit or how good, are saved--they have the Holy Spirit and grace and are part of the vine--they are justified. However, those which are more perfectly joined to the vine, that is, which bear greater and more glorious fruit as a result of their willingness and cooperation with grace, are more perfectly justified and the Lord is more pleased with them, but not in a way that He is displeased with the others which bear good fruit.

Anyway, does that make any sense? I assure you, if you step into this way of thinking of salvation, many of Jesus' parables will make a great deal more sense.

[jesussaves]

I don't think the above really adds anything. I haven't gone through it completely, but it seems that way.

I think the justificaiton in the catholic thought could be said as legitimate in this way. When someone does good, they retract what needs to be justified by Jesus. Their subjective justification makes up for the objective justification of Jesus. My issue with this is that it might not be true necessarily by Catholic standards. If we have to be pure on the inside of our soul by our own means, albeit by grace, eventually via earth or purgatory, then Jesus didn't really justify us directly, he only "justified" us in the sense that he allowed us the possibilty of being justified. I wonder if that is really justification at all. It could be contrued that way, but I'm not sure that's what is true.

[jesussaves]

I don't think the above really adds anything. I haven't gone through it completely, but it seems that way.

I think the justificaiton in the catholic thought could be said as legitimate in this way. When someone does good, they retract what needs to be justified by Jesus. Their subjective justification makes up for the objective justification of Jesus. My issue with this is that it might not be true necessarily by Catholic standards. If we have to be pure on the inside of our soul by our own means, albeit by grace, eventually via earth or purgatory, then Jesus didn't really justify us directly, he only "justified" us in the sense that he allowed us the possibilty of being justified. I wonder if that is really justification at all. It could be contrued that way, but I'm not sure that's what is true.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1108748' date='Nov 2 2006, 02:56 PM']
I don't think the above really adds anything. I haven't gone through it completely, but it seems that way.

I think the justificaiton in the catholic thought could be said as legitimate in this way. When someone does good, they retract what needs to be justified by Jesus. Their subjective justification makes up for the objective justification of Jesus.
[/quote]
This is not at all the Catholic Church's teaching.

[quote]My issue with this is that it might not be true necessarily by Catholic standards. If we have to be pure on the inside of our soul by our own means, albeit by grace, eventually via earth or purgatory, then Jesus didn't really justify us directly, he only "justified" us in the sense that he allowed us the possibilty of being justified. I wonder if that is really justification at all. It could be contrued that way, but I'm not sure that's what is true.[/quote]

It's not the Catholic Church's teaching. It is not the case that He merely allowed us the possibility of being justified. He justified all mankind, but individuals must accept that on an individual basis and must live a life of grace, cooperating with God's action in their lives so that they will be remade by grace in Christ's image, thus being co-heirs with Him and obtaining His inheritance of salvation. All merit comes from the Cross of Christ. The question is a matter of who will acknowledge and accept that merit into their lives so that it may have its effect. It is God working through all of it, but we must cooperate (otherwise, we are being saved unwillingly).

[Briguy]

1. . Justification for us is a process which begins at Baptism when grace enters the soul.

The above sounds all good and all but it just does not hold water (no pun intended ) Justification by definiton means "to be proved righteous" or "to be proved worthy" Grace was given to man as a gift, though man did not deserve it. We can't earn Grace. Grace entering the soul after the earthly act of baptism, would put a modifier on grace and remove the free status. Grace entered the world when Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. That is one issue. That justificaion can happen, unaware to the justified person, is another obvious problem since there is a "proof required with justification". Ah, but there is two different justifications to consider. Justification before God and Justification before man. Our actions "prove" us "worthy" before men. It is our faith that "proves us worthy" before God. I assumed that the statement above was referring to being justified before God. If Baptism was the time that a person was justified before God then faith would need to be evident. This can't happen in an infant. The flip side is that millions of people have been water baptized and it has NO effect on their lives what-so-ever. Not just a few, millions right in the Catholic Church get baptized and then think little to nothing about God for their entire lives. They eat, drink, sleep around etc... showing no worthinees of the Grace and justification that you are saying is thrust upon them. If at baptism a person was justified it would have a lasting effect.

Just some quick thoughts,
Brian

[jesussaves]

What exactly does the justification from Jesus achieve if you have to justify yourself completely inwardly? Is it the initial justification? The potential?

[Briguy]

In my post above I wrote "They eat, ...... It sounded really dumb when I just re-read it and I could not edit it. Like eating is a sin - LOL I think I was going to say eat, drink, and be merry as a figure of speech, but I didn't and so it really sounded silly. Just wanted to point out that I messed up; but only in that one point. The rest of the post was incredible if I do say so myself, and I do

In Christ,
Brian

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Briguy' post='1108955' date='Nov 2 2006, 06:23 PM']
1. . Justification for us is a process which begins at Baptism when grace enters the soul.

The above sounds all good and all but it just does not hold water (no pun intended ) Justification by definiton means "to be proved righteous" or "to be proved worthy" Grace was given to man as a gift, though man did not deserve it. We can't earn Grace. Grace entering the soul after the earthly act of baptism, would put a modifier on grace and remove the free status. Grace entered the world when Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead. That is one issue. That justificaion can happen, unaware to the justified person, is another obvious problem since there is a "proof required with justification". Ah, but there is two different justifications to consider. Justification before God and Justification before man. Our actions "prove" us "worthy" before men. It is our faith that "proves us worthy" before God. I assumed that the statement above was referring to being justified before God. If Baptism was the time that a person was justified before God then faith would need to be evident. This can't happen in an infant. The flip side is that millions of people have been water baptized and it has NO effect on their lives what-so-ever. Not just a few, millions right in the Catholic Church get baptized and then think little to nothing about God for their entire lives. They eat, drink, sleep around etc... showing no worthinees of the Grace and justification that you are saying is thrust upon them. If at baptism a person was justified it would have a lasting effect.

Just some quick thoughts,
Brian
[/quote]

Yes, grace entered the world when Christ died on the cross. However, it would be silly to say that's when grace entered each individual soul (especially considering most souls ever to exist didn't at that point).

I am talking about justification before God. It is God who makes us worthy before God, but we must cooperate in that. Infants can be baptized because parents have spiritual jurisdiction (just as they have every other kind of jurisdiction) over their children and can will for their children to be baptized and their children can be baptized on account of the faith of the parents. The Church sees that the material world is always an image of the spiritual world. If adults have authority over children in the material world, then they do in the spiritual world, too.

As for those who are baptized and go and enter into iniquity, assuming culpability, grave sin makes them lose that grace, so the point is irrelevant.

Justification is not once for all. It does not stop until you're dead. The problem here is at the very fundamental base of the argument. I have been trying to show how justification works and if your argument is essentially "it doesn't work that way," then you are basically overlooking my proof and just reasserting your own argument without discrediting mine.

Look over my argument. Think about it. I assure you, it makes sense. If you want to go against it, go point by point with the points you find inaccurate and give me in concise form what you would say instead. I ask for this as a concession. Please do me this kindness, because I'm very busy with papers and can't examine in great depth at the moment...point by point arguments would be a great help.

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1108982' date='Nov 2 2006, 06:37 PM']
What exactly does the justification from Jesus achieve if you have to justify yourself completely inwardly? Is it the initial justification? The potential?
[/quote]
Justification from Jesus achieves salvation. We do not justify ourselves alone, we cooperate with His justification of us by working with grace to apply justification to ourselves. It's like this...all justification flows from the Cross of Christ...it is the living water...God grants salvation to those who have the living water welling up inside of themselves. Therefore, we want to take that flow from the Cross and make it well up inside ourselves. God initiates this and we respond by doing as He commanded us: "believe and be baptized." When we are baptized, we die and rise with Christ...the Cross itself is placed in our very hearts and we have a spring of living water welling up in our hearts. Then God says, "look, I have planted the seeds and have let the water flow, but there are parts of your heart still closed off...the dirt is tightly packed...take this hoe and loosen it...I will give you the strength...I will reside in you and with your cooperation, I myself shall loosen it and uproot the weeds...and you shall be made perfect." It is not enough that we should dwell in heaven; God wants heaven to dwell in us. Then we will truly be complete.

[jesussaves]

I could agree maybe in theory that the Catholic idea that heaven inside you is what God requires. But I can't get past the notion that the Catholic Church doesn't teach faith AND works. Faith *through* works seems like a vaque way to smoke and mirror the fact that it's faith and works.
To be clear, maybe I can agree in some weird way you teach we are saved by faith through works, but at least as far as justification, we are justified by faith AND works, at least according to the Catholic Church, albeit noting those works are by the grace of God.

Edited November 21, 2006 by jesussaves

[Katholikos]

To put the Catholic - Protestant disagreement on faith and works in historical perspective:

"His [Martin Luther's] thunderbolt idea that faith alone was sufficient for salvation came, in his own words, as 'knowledge the Holy Spirit gave me on the privy in the tower. ' "

Source: William Manchester, [i]A World Lit Only by Fire: The Medieval Mind and the Renaissance[/i] (Little, Brown & Company, 1993, p. 140); quoted in [i]TRIUMPH: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church -- A 2,000-Year History[/i], H.W. Crocker III, Forum, 2001, p. 237.

The Catholic Faith comes to us from the Apostles.

James 2:24: "See how a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

===========================
Blessed Father Damien, pray for us!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesussaves' post='1125197' date='Nov 21 2006, 02:52 PM']
I could agree maybe in theory that the Catholic idea that heaven inside you is what God requires. But I can't get past the notion that the Catholic Church doesn't teach faith AND works. Faith *through* works seems like a vaque way to smoke and mirror the fact that it's faith and works.
To be clear, maybe I can agree in some weird way you teach we are saved by faith through works, but at least as far as justification, we are justified by faith AND works, at least according to the Catholic Church, albeit noting those works are by the grace of God.
[/quote]
Let me put it this way: it is not Catholic teaching that we are saved by faith and works as if they were two separate conditions necessary for salvation which both must be met by the faithful to get to heaven.

Sometimes seeing what one does not believe helps clarify what one does believe.

[jesussaves]

[quote]I wanted to sort of shift the question a bit because I thought that this approach would cut to the heart of the matter better. The short answer is that yes, you are justified in this life if you have grace in your soul because you have the sort of "minimum" conformity with Christ, but are you as justified as you will ever be? No. We believe that we continue to grow and grow in justification. You only need a certain amount to get into heaven, but you want to grow past that. This begs the question, why do we want to do more than the minimum if the minimum gets us to heaven? Well, think of it like this: in heaven, God will pour Himself out to you in love (I assume we agree here, although it's really only an analogy). You are a vessel made to hold God's grace. As long as you hold His grace, you are justified. However, you can hold more grace, and the more room you make in yourself by uprooting evil, the more grace you can hold. Well, when you get to heaven, you will be filled with grace, undoubtedly, but during this life you can be stretched to hold more. Thus, while in any case you will be completely blessed in heaven, your capacity for blessing can increase. That and it's just a good thing to be conformed more and more to Christ (what true Christian wouldn't want to be?).[/quote]

I wanted to reply again, because I see a point I made that was possibly good, obscured by a point I made that was not so good above, in response to this paragraph. Here is how I replied, minus the obscured part, plus a comment from way earlier.

way earlier.
[quote]You say we are justified at the conversion and at any point thereafter before death. Then you say there are degrees of justification, where some are less justified. I realize your story of being late to class would leave on to think you are more justified than the other. Are you saying the one that is less justified isn't justified completely? How are you saying they are both justified, but one is less justified.[/quote] Add: It's almost contradictory, at least at this level of understanding.

reply to your quote, and my thought on what the catholic thought must be to be legitimate.
[quote]I think the justificaiton in the catholic thought could be said as legitimate in this way. When someone does good, they retract what needs to be justified by Jesus. Their subjective justification makes up for the objective justification of Jesus. [/quote]
While of course acknowleding the whole time grace is the copperating impetus the whole time in Catholic thought.

Or another way of making sense of the Catholic thought, to me, is to say that the one who is less justified is indeed less justified, while living, but when they die, they both have a minimal justification to achieve salvation, even though one has less while living.

I think I'm beginning to understand, but I want to be clear. Actually what you said in the quote is probably enough to explain, but I want you to point out any errors I'm making restating it and giving impications to it.


I think I can accept the above, but then you add the idea of purgatory and how we have to achieve full perfection, to be justified. That still requires our own abilities, albeit graced. Maybe I"m just a doubting Thom so to speak, but I don't see us achieving that, even in purgatory. Maybe when we die we'll have much more incentive etc to increase where we need and it's more beyond my understanding now. Plus maybe I should just have faith that it can happen.

Finally, I thought I'd add, if the above is true, that I think you're doing yourself a diservice most of the time as I've seen you respond to others, saying that they are desribing Pelgians (sp?) when they accurse you of faith and works because we must cooperate with the grace. That simply to a prot would be a fancy foot work to get around the fact you have to cooperate and thus earn it, albeit graced. Even in protestant circles you have to cooperate, or atleast the better prots, but you aren't earning it. I think the best response is what you said above, noting that we are justified at each moment. Or at least justified enough to make puragory and then receive full justification after that.

Edited December 18, 2006 by jesussaves