I'm tired of constantly fighting about this issue so I'm just going to post what I *THINK* are the differences between our 2 traditions.
REFORMED:
God predestines from eternity past the elect and the reprobate. All men are trapped in total depravity unable to commit any good act without the irresistible grace of God. By this irresistible grace the elect have faith alone in Christ alone and Christ's perfect active obedience and righteousness is imputed to their souls. The faithful then know they are God's elect and are eternally secure (unless they fall away and the show that they weren't eternally secure - this is what I don't understand) This is justification. THEN Sanctification is the process where their actual lives/souls become righteous and holy, they turn from sin and towards God. BUT this process is not what God considers when evaluating their holiness so that in the eyes of God the thief on the Cross and St. Paul are equally righteous. Nevertheless the believer does become holy and this intrinsic personal holiness will be perfected instantly at death when all sin is killed with the body and in the instant process of glorification when the soul reaches heaven. But again, this intrinsic holiness is not what matters in terms of salvation, only Christ's extrinsic righteousness.
CATHOLIC:
God predestines the elect to receive the grace sufficient for salvation. They are (ordinarily) baptized and washed of their original sin and receive the supernatural virtues of faith, hope, and charity which works with the grace of baptism to make them holy. The elect are given grace which they cooperate with and become more just and holy. On the basis of their faith they are declared just by God and made just intrinsically by being in a state of grace and by receiving the sacraments they receive more grace. If and when they fall into wilful grave sin (mortal sin) or apostasy the grace at work in their souls making them both holy and just is killed, they are no longer in a state of grace. But this grace can sacramentally be regained through Confession/Reconcilliation. To die in a state of grace means that God will put the soul (if necessary) through purgatory where they will be perfected in holiness. This is justification and/or sanctification. On judgment day they will be judged righteous based on the intrinsic righteousness God has wrought within their souls.
REGARDING 1 CORINTHIANS 6:11
"...But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God"
REFORMED Exegesis:
In the moment of new birth and justification there is in some sense a real sanctification that occurs in the believer.
CATHOLIC Exegesis:
Paul is here showing that being made holy and being made just are not two separated processes but the same indivisible process. So the verse is a useful prooftext to show not only the interchangabiity of the terms sanctification and justification, but also the way in which Catholic theology speaks of multiple justifications, or an increase of justification, or a regaining of justification.
REFORMED claim:
There is a "distinction" between justification and sanctification but not a division.
CATHOLIC response:
This is a division not a distinction because you believe sanctification is a superfluous process. The thief on the cross was justified and barely - if at all- sanctified, and St. Paul was justified and extremely sanctified, and the Reformed Tradition would have us believe that God views them identically in terms of righteousness and holiness.
____________________________________________________
Now. If I screwed this up significantly on the Reformed or Catholic side, please let me know.
Showing posts with label Sanctification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sanctification. Show all posts
Friday, August 21, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
Malachi's Lenten Message
"For I hate divorce, says the Lord, the God of Israel, and covering one’s garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless.
You have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet you say, ‘How have we wearied him?’ By saying, ‘All who do evil are good in the sight of the Lord, and he delights in them.’ Or by asking, ‘Where is the God of justice?’
See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears?
For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the Lord in righteousness. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord as in the days of old and as in former years.
Then I will draw near to you for judgement; I will be swift to bear witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired workers in their wages, the widow, and the orphan, against those who thrust aside the alien, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts.
For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, have not perished. Ever since the days of your ancestors you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the Lord of hosts. But you say, ‘How shall we return?’" - Malachi 2.16-3.8
A few things stick out to me here. God is talking about St. John the Baptist obviously with the messenger who purifies, and the offering of Judah as Christ's crucifixion - that's the offering - Or the Eucharistic Sacrifice (because it says it is of Old, and in Mal 1, it has the verse about a perfect sacrifice).... In any case, the Sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the mass are the same sacrifice, so it's still being presented which makes sense of the verse, or perhaps it is just that it stretched through all time past and future. But again as John judged the hypocritics of his day as Christ did, so the final judgment is foreseen here where some are purified (purgatory for Catholics, whatever the hell the Orthodox believe in -they probably all disagree-, or sanctification for Protestants).
I like that verse about the Lord not changing and therefore the true covenant people will not change. So the Church being the new israel in the covenant will be purified - but they will be saved - and they will be cleansed of sin and Christ's pure sacrifice will be theirs which will please God.
At least that's what I got from it. I'm probably going to get destroyed by the covenant theologians wanting the great wall of China between OT and NT covenants, and the Catholics who try to make everything a proof-text for later developed doctrine.
Whatever..... what it practically means is God is kicking my ass right now with bad stuff that's happened this week and i need some explanation so i go back to the scary part of the Old Testament which makes more sense than this week's readings of "In him (Christ) every one of God's promises is a yes" -which sounds nice, but isn't really true, as I'm still praying for what I've been praying for for the last 3 years, etc.
Hence why the Old Testament and Lent makes sense. God obviously still has discipline and wrath to dish out, even to his kids. But eventually we'll be able to say that this cosmic child abuse 'made us the men we are today'. Blah blah C.S. Lewis problem of pain....blah blah Ken Gire Sanctification... blah blah life sucks at times.
yep. good thing everyone stopped reading this blog. heh.
I'll close on a good quote from Rabbi Abraham Heschel (who the emergents all love): God remains unreal to those who view him as anything less than a consuming fire. (or something like that.)
Now off to class.
You have wearied the Lord with your words. Yet you say, ‘How have we wearied him?’ By saying, ‘All who do evil are good in the sight of the Lord, and he delights in them.’ Or by asking, ‘Where is the God of justice?’
See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears?
For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the Lord in righteousness. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord as in the days of old and as in former years.
Then I will draw near to you for judgement; I will be swift to bear witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired workers in their wages, the widow, and the orphan, against those who thrust aside the alien, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts.
For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, have not perished. Ever since the days of your ancestors you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the Lord of hosts. But you say, ‘How shall we return?’" - Malachi 2.16-3.8
A few things stick out to me here. God is talking about St. John the Baptist obviously with the messenger who purifies, and the offering of Judah as Christ's crucifixion - that's the offering - Or the Eucharistic Sacrifice (because it says it is of Old, and in Mal 1, it has the verse about a perfect sacrifice).... In any case, the Sacrifice of the cross and the sacrifice of the mass are the same sacrifice, so it's still being presented which makes sense of the verse, or perhaps it is just that it stretched through all time past and future. But again as John judged the hypocritics of his day as Christ did, so the final judgment is foreseen here where some are purified (purgatory for Catholics, whatever the hell the Orthodox believe in -they probably all disagree-, or sanctification for Protestants).
I like that verse about the Lord not changing and therefore the true covenant people will not change. So the Church being the new israel in the covenant will be purified - but they will be saved - and they will be cleansed of sin and Christ's pure sacrifice will be theirs which will please God.
At least that's what I got from it. I'm probably going to get destroyed by the covenant theologians wanting the great wall of China between OT and NT covenants, and the Catholics who try to make everything a proof-text for later developed doctrine.
Whatever..... what it practically means is God is kicking my ass right now with bad stuff that's happened this week and i need some explanation so i go back to the scary part of the Old Testament which makes more sense than this week's readings of "In him (Christ) every one of God's promises is a yes" -which sounds nice, but isn't really true, as I'm still praying for what I've been praying for for the last 3 years, etc.
Hence why the Old Testament and Lent makes sense. God obviously still has discipline and wrath to dish out, even to his kids. But eventually we'll be able to say that this cosmic child abuse 'made us the men we are today'. Blah blah C.S. Lewis problem of pain....blah blah Ken Gire Sanctification... blah blah life sucks at times.
yep. good thing everyone stopped reading this blog. heh.
I'll close on a good quote from Rabbi Abraham Heschel (who the emergents all love): God remains unreal to those who view him as anything less than a consuming fire. (or something like that.)
Now off to class.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
"Romans" Catholic Justification
I've been studying Romans for the past 2 weeks and at first ironically after reading chapters 3-4 I felt the Protestants were absolutely correct on Justification by Faith Alone, now after reading chapters 5-8 I am almost certain the Catholics are correct in their explanation.
The way I understand it, the Faith alone issue is almost a misunderstanding. We have such close ideas on justification it's amazing how different people think they are. Justification for the Protestant is by faith alone, but they don't REALLY mean faith alone, if you asked a Protestant does someone have to repent of their sins? yes they would answer. Do they have to love God? yes they would answer. Do they have to love their neighbour? yes to a point (we know that we have passed from death to life because we love one another -1 Jn 3:14). So the Protestant really believes that we are justified by the attitude of our heart, by faith in God and by repentance, which is exactly what the Catholic believes.
The difference is imputed vs. infused righteousness. St. Paul argues in the beginning of Romans that by having faith we are justified by the 'free gift of God' and that 'Christ died for us' (5:8) HOWEVER in my NRSV commentary the writer says 'the verse should NOT be interpretted 'Christ died in our place' (protestant doctrine of Penal Substitution), but it is better interpretted 'for our benefit' (Catholic doctrine of Christus Victor). How could Christ's vicarious death on the cross mean the final salvation of some when St. Paul writes "just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all" (5:18) - Now unless you're a Quaker and believe in Universal salvation, then you have to accept the Catholic view that Christ died for all, and did so 'the many WILL be made righteous' (5:19). This is showing justification as a process, it is ongoing, and it is Christ's faithfullness which will be infused into us. St. Paul's whole point is that Christ died to make it possible for us to be like him, as St. Irenaeus says 'he became what we are that we might be what he is'. The next theme of Romans is life in the Spirit. St. Paul says "just as Christ was raised from the dead... so we might walk in the newness of life" (6:4). He continually warns us 'do not let sin exercise sin in your mortal bodies' (6:12), and why would he if we are justified by imputed righteousness. Next he writes "become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted" (6:17). He sums it up at the end of his argument in chapter 6 with "you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you get is sanctification. The end is eternal life." - The end of sanctification - being made holy - is 'eternal life'. The next verse of course we all had to memorize for sunday school, but the verse before is really the key to the argument.
For Paul the cross means the Possibility of Salvation, it is salvation from 'the law' he writes "you have died to the law through the body of Christ...in order that we may bear fruit for God" (7:4). The big point is 'we are slaves not under the old written code (ie. the law) but in the new life of the Spirit" (7:6). The other big conclusion, the message of Romans as I learned today was that Christ died "so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (8:4)
This is the message of Jesus as well, that we are to love God, and love our neighbour. Finally I have a view of Romans and St. Paul that fit with the rest of scripture. The role of the Holy Spirit is justifying us/sanctifying us. The division of sanctification and justification did not exist till John Calvin in the 16th century, it is foreign to scripture as well. If God just wanted us to believe, why did Christ tell the rich young ruler 'you know the law' when he asked how he was to be saved. The purpose is that through Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit, we can be made righteous. That makes sense of all the verses that say no impure people will enter heaven etc, and also proves purgatory. This has been quite a breakthrough in the Catholic - Protestant search, and it makes alot of sense. So we are justified by a 'heart-faith' alone (Peter Kreeft's term) but we are sanctified by the Holy Spirit who leads us in love and good works, and we are then judged on our love. as Matthew 25 says, did we care for the poor, the lonely, the needy.
The way I understand it, the Faith alone issue is almost a misunderstanding. We have such close ideas on justification it's amazing how different people think they are. Justification for the Protestant is by faith alone, but they don't REALLY mean faith alone, if you asked a Protestant does someone have to repent of their sins? yes they would answer. Do they have to love God? yes they would answer. Do they have to love their neighbour? yes to a point (we know that we have passed from death to life because we love one another -1 Jn 3:14). So the Protestant really believes that we are justified by the attitude of our heart, by faith in God and by repentance, which is exactly what the Catholic believes.
The difference is imputed vs. infused righteousness. St. Paul argues in the beginning of Romans that by having faith we are justified by the 'free gift of God' and that 'Christ died for us' (5:8) HOWEVER in my NRSV commentary the writer says 'the verse should NOT be interpretted 'Christ died in our place' (protestant doctrine of Penal Substitution), but it is better interpretted 'for our benefit' (Catholic doctrine of Christus Victor). How could Christ's vicarious death on the cross mean the final salvation of some when St. Paul writes "just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all" (5:18) - Now unless you're a Quaker and believe in Universal salvation, then you have to accept the Catholic view that Christ died for all, and did so 'the many WILL be made righteous' (5:19). This is showing justification as a process, it is ongoing, and it is Christ's faithfullness which will be infused into us. St. Paul's whole point is that Christ died to make it possible for us to be like him, as St. Irenaeus says 'he became what we are that we might be what he is'. The next theme of Romans is life in the Spirit. St. Paul says "just as Christ was raised from the dead... so we might walk in the newness of life" (6:4). He continually warns us 'do not let sin exercise sin in your mortal bodies' (6:12), and why would he if we are justified by imputed righteousness. Next he writes "become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted" (6:17). He sums it up at the end of his argument in chapter 6 with "you have been freed from sin and enslaved to God, the advantage you get is sanctification. The end is eternal life." - The end of sanctification - being made holy - is 'eternal life'. The next verse of course we all had to memorize for sunday school, but the verse before is really the key to the argument.
For Paul the cross means the Possibility of Salvation, it is salvation from 'the law' he writes "you have died to the law through the body of Christ...in order that we may bear fruit for God" (7:4). The big point is 'we are slaves not under the old written code (ie. the law) but in the new life of the Spirit" (7:6). The other big conclusion, the message of Romans as I learned today was that Christ died "so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (8:4)
This is the message of Jesus as well, that we are to love God, and love our neighbour. Finally I have a view of Romans and St. Paul that fit with the rest of scripture. The role of the Holy Spirit is justifying us/sanctifying us. The division of sanctification and justification did not exist till John Calvin in the 16th century, it is foreign to scripture as well. If God just wanted us to believe, why did Christ tell the rich young ruler 'you know the law' when he asked how he was to be saved. The purpose is that through Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit, we can be made righteous. That makes sense of all the verses that say no impure people will enter heaven etc, and also proves purgatory. This has been quite a breakthrough in the Catholic - Protestant search, and it makes alot of sense. So we are justified by a 'heart-faith' alone (Peter Kreeft's term) but we are sanctified by the Holy Spirit who leads us in love and good works, and we are then judged on our love. as Matthew 25 says, did we care for the poor, the lonely, the needy.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
C.S. Lewis - Awesome Quote
"This is the whole of Christianity. There is nothing else. It is easy to get muddled about that. It is easy to think that the Church has alot of different objects - education, building, missions, holding services...The Church exists for nothing else but to draw men into Christ, to make them little Christs. If they are not doing that, all the cathedrals, clergy, missions, sermons, even the Bible itself, are simply a waste of time. God became man for no other purpose." - C.S. Lewis in "Mere Christianity"
I am glad that there are men like C.S. Lewis and St. Augustine, who in my opinion can teach things to Christians of every branch and denomination. I think Lewis hits the nail on the head with this quote I read this morning. I love that he says 'even the Bible'. It's so easy to forget the simple faith, as the Church Fathers said "God become man in all ways but sin, so that man might become like God in all ways but essence".
I am glad that there are men like C.S. Lewis and St. Augustine, who in my opinion can teach things to Christians of every branch and denomination. I think Lewis hits the nail on the head with this quote I read this morning. I love that he says 'even the Bible'. It's so easy to forget the simple faith, as the Church Fathers said "God become man in all ways but sin, so that man might become like God in all ways but essence".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)