Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Catholic Understanding of the Saints: A Response to Jim West (Part 1)
The SacredPage.com ^ | Friday, May 20, 2011 | Michael Barber

Posted on 05/20/2011 9:25:23 PM PDT by Salvation

Friday, May 20, 2011

The Catholic Understanding of the Saints: A Response to Jim West (Part 1)

 
Earlier this month Jim challenged his Catholic friends to provide some biblical / theological support for the Catholic view of the communion of the saints. Specifically, here was his post:
1. What biblical or theological justification is there to pray for the dead?
2. What biblical or theological justification is there for believing that the dead pray for us?
3. How is ‘praying to a saint’ different from idolatry?
4. Isn’t it idolatrous to place your faith in any for salvation other than Christ?
5. Isn’t the entire notion of the invocation of the saints idolatrous and blasphemous?
I ask because with the beatification of John Paul II there is much discussion in the media about saints and their mystical magical powers to affect peoples lives and I find it all, quite frankly, more than a little disturbing and just downright pagan. It’s almost as though the Roman Church has simply replaced the Greek pantheon with saints and that the old paganism of Rome is still alive and well in the Vatican and its outlying stations.
[NB- please don't take this to mean I have problems with Catholics. My problem is with this aspect of Catholic theology / Mariolatry].
These are fair questions that deserve thoughtful answers. So. . . here goes.

Upfront though let me say: there is a lot here to address. Make no mistake about it, this is going to take some time, thoughtful interaction, and reflection. So I have put a couple other things on hold (my series of posts on Luke-Acts and my series on Petrine primacy) to write up responses to these questions.

I’ve already written up the majority of my response, but I’ve decided against "dumping" it all out at once. I want to think through this slowly. I’m eager to get responses from Jim and anyone else that will help shape the discussion.

That said, today offers the first post. Next Monday will feature another and they will keep coming at a steady pace.

Preliminary Issues

Before I give detailed answers to these questions, I think I have to make some comments at the out start.

First, let me explain that I know the Protestant objections to the Catholic view of the saints very, very well. Although I am a cradle Catholic, I spent the majority of my academic career as a student at non-Catholic institutions. I earned a B.A. in theology and philosophy at Azusa Pacific University, where I also minored in New Testament Greek. I then earned my Ph.D. at Fuller Theological Seminary.

(By the way, I would especially love to hear from any Protestants who have received theology degrees--particularly advances degrees--from Catholic universities. It would be interesting to hear your thoughts in the com-box during this series of posts.)

In both places I was blessed with the experience of studying under and with very bright men and women who sincerely loved the Lord. These individuals taught me much about what it means to live the Christian life. I am forever grateful for their example and their mentoring.

Please let me underscore how much I treasure my relationships with my non-Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ. We share a love for Christ in common and, to my mind, that is more important than any theological differences between us. We are in fact in a war and we need each other in the trenches.

The experience however of studying at non-Catholic Christian institutions as a Catholic taught me something else. I learned that very intelligent and very sincere Protestant academics often have a profoundly misinformed view of Catholic theology. Straw man arguments and misrepresentations are perpetuated—often innocently, that is, out of ignorance and not malice—but consistently.

Of course, Catholics also misrepresent Protestant theological opinions at times.

All of this has highlighted for me the fact that there is a real need for honest and open dialogue. That's what I am all about—not theological arm-wrestling. It's not simply a matter of misunderstanding—there are real differences. But I think we talk past each other far more often than we realize.

Catholic Doctrine Teaches Salvation by Works and not Grace?

For example, one line that you’ll hear over and over again is that Catholics hold to a “works-righteousness” view of justification that somehow nullifies God’s grace. The dichotomy between the Catholic and Protestant approach is cast in stark terms: Protestants preach a Gospel of grace, while Catholics believe they “earn” their way into heaven with good works.

This is incredibly frustrating for knowledgable Catholics . . . and we hear it over, and over, and over again. People who view the Catholic Church this way have either actually never read the official documents of the Catholic Church or they haven’t read them very closely.

To disabuse people of their ignorance I simply turn to them to the official compendium of all that Catholics believe, the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.
'After earth's exile, I hope to go and enjoy you in the fatherland, but I do not want to lay up merits for heaven. I want to work for your love alone. . . . In the evening of this life, I shall appear before you with empty hands, for I do not ask you, Lord, to count my works. All our justice is blemished in your eyes. I wish, then, to be clothed in your own justice and to receive from your love the eternal possession of yourself' (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2011 citing Therese of Lisieux).
I never tire of watching non-Catholics try to process this passage. Many people would never think this is Catholic teaching. It is particularly strange to see this in the Catechism to those who “studied” Catholicism at a seminary. How could such a line appear in official Catholic documents? It just doesn’t compute for them. I’d submit that’s because they didn’t really study Catholicism in school, they only learned a caricature of it.

Just a Hip, New Catholicism? 


“Well, then the Catholic Church has changed its view.” That’s the response I usually get next.

Um. . . no.

Here’s the Council of Trent: “. . . we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.” (Sess. VI, Chap. VIII).

So, to properly understand the Catholic view of the saints let me first insist: the grace of justification is not first “earned” by good works—it is purely gratuitous. It is due to God’s grace. As St. Therese of Liseieux is cited in the Catechism: The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

Notice again that I am not “recasting” Catholic teaching to somehow make it more palatable to non-Catholic Christians. I am citing from official Church documents. And I’m doing so in their own words.

Obviously, there is much more that could be said, but the heart of the matter should be clear: for Catholics, the saints are saved by God's grace—not because they have earned it due to their own ingenuity.

Hopefully, we can put that myth to bed.
 


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; saints; theology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: presently no screen name

Why am I not surprised that the definition of charitable alludes some.


21 posted on 05/21/2011 10:36:27 AM PDT by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Theology hard.


22 posted on 05/21/2011 10:37:40 AM PDT by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Yet here you are.


23 posted on 05/21/2011 10:38:47 AM PDT by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy
Just because someone commits something to print does not mean it is worth reading

I'm trying to be gracious about this. Don't click on it, if you don't want to read it. Some of the rest of us are interested.

24 posted on 05/21/2011 10:38:47 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave

How beautiful are Your tenets O Lord. May I always listen to them with a joyful heart.


25 posted on 05/21/2011 10:41:37 AM PDT by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Bless Mr. Barber for trying and bless you, my dear FRiend, for hoping that we could get somewhere. But, alas, the anti-Catholic swamp of vitriol is impenetrable here.


26 posted on 05/21/2011 2:57:46 PM PDT by Bigg Red (Palin in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sayuncledave
Thank you for the Scripture passages. Where you err is at the very start. By taking the verse from James out of context you then proceed to interpret all the other passages as reinforcement for that misunderstanding. There is a vast difference between saying:

Faith Justifies Initially, but Works Perfect and Complete Justification

and

By grace through faith we are made righteous/justified. Righteous works done through the working of the Holy Spirit within the life of a child of God perfect and complete our sanctification.

The former inculcates the efforts of man in making him justified in the sight of God. The latter sees that it is by grace and grace alone received by faith that we are made righteous. No one can logically say that a Christian, once justified and born again into the family of God, is then released to live in debauchery. If they do, they are flat out wrong and un-Scriptural to boot. God did not save us so that we have a license to sin - "God forbid!", says Paul.

The Christian is indwelled by the very Holy Spirit of God and he is a down-payment on our final inheritance with God for all eternity. We are "Sealed until the day of redemption." and we have the promise of God that we will never be lost, cast out or plucked out of his hand. He is holding us, not us holding onto him. From Hebrews 12 we are told:

God Disciplines His Children

4 In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. 5 And have you completely forgotten this word of encouragement that addresses you as a father addresses his son? It says,

“My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline, and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, 6 because the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and he chastens everyone he accepts as his son.”

7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children. For what children are not disciplined by their father? 8 If you are not disciplined—and everyone undergoes discipline—then you are not legitimate, not true sons and daughters at all. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! 10 They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, in order that we may share in his holiness. 11 No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.

12 Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. 13 “Make level paths for your feet,” so that the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed.

God will never leave us nor forsake us but will, as the ultimate good Father, discipline and teach us the way he wants us to live all for his glory.

27 posted on 05/21/2011 6:24:23 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jvette
When James speak about faith being dead apart from works, it is obvious that he means that good works are how true faith is recognized by others

Do you believe that “good works” also reveals your faith to God?

Absolutely, I believe others recognize our faith by our deeds and James 2 makes that point very clear:

14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

A dead faith is a faith that is unproductive, it is unobservable by others. The example he uses is in finding a brother cold and hungry and telling him, "Go in peace be warmed and filled.", I'll pray for you, in other words. Does that do him any good? Or is it better to take him in and give him clothes and feed him a warm meal? That is faith in action. It is made manifest by the deeds we do for others. The further example of Abraham being made righteous. We know from Scripture that Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. He was justified by his faith before God and his actions proved that his faith was genuine. It has always been that way with God. That is why without faith it is impossible to please him.

But did God need to see Abraham's actions in order to know he has faith? No. God sees the heart of man, he alone knows if faith is real. We can only see the outside and we can only observe a person's actions. We SHOULD be able to know them by their fruits, Jesus said, but I think we can agree that outward manifestations of goodness do not necessarily mean the heart is really changed. God desires we follow him in living a holy life set apart from the world, but only he knows our true motivations.

28 posted on 05/21/2011 6:46:35 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red; Salvation
Bless Mr. Barber for trying and bless you, my dear FRiend, for hoping that we could get somewhere. But, alas, the anti-Catholic swamp of vitriol is impenetrable here.

Oh, please. Can't people voice that they don't agree with something on an OPEN thread without being "anti-Catholic" or their words "vitriol"? What makes threads "impenetrable swamps" is gratuitous rhetoric.

29 posted on 05/21/2011 6:58:46 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Can such faith save them?

And, why do we need others to see our faith? Can others save us?

Matthew 6:1-4 (But) take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

Faith compels works. If one has faith, one has works and one does these things to glorify God and not himself and not as proof of faith to others.

Works are born from love of God and love of neighbor.

The two commandments Jesus cites as the greatest.

It is not that by my works I will be saved, for I am saved only because Jesus died for my sins. But, if I believe, then works are a part of that belief, that faith. One is not true without the other.

If you are doing works so that others may see your faith, you are doing them for the wrong reason.


30 posted on 05/21/2011 7:51:55 PM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jvette
Works are born from love of God and love of neighbor. The two commandments Jesus cites as the greatest. It is not that by my works I will be saved, for I am saved only because Jesus died for my sins. But, if I believe, then works are a part of that belief, that faith. One is not true without the other. If you are doing works so that others may see your faith, you are doing them for the wrong reason.

Of course we are not in disagreement on this. When James asks the proverbial, "Can faith save him?", who is the "him"? It is the one who is cold and hungry. Can just my faith, and not my actions, save him from being cold and hungry? The obvious answer is no. So then I totally agree that it is by the merciful, love and grace of God alone that can save me. I can never do enough good works to ever pay my sin debt and only the blood of Jesus Christ redeems us.

Consequently, when I live my life in obedience to Christ's commands, I do them out of love and gratitude for such an unspeakable gift that he has given me. Because if righteousness comes from works, Christ died for nothing.

Finally, I wholeheartedly agree that our motivation for our good works should NEVER be to be seen by men, however, when we DO demonstrate the sincerity of our faith by our lives, people cannot help but see and glorify God, not us. I hope you have a blessed Sunday.

31 posted on 05/21/2011 8:17:02 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Thank you, but I must respond to one small thing in your post.

The question in James is posed after he asks, suppose one has faith but not works. The question is in regards to the one whose faith is without works or whose works are without faith.

May your day be blessed as well:)


32 posted on 05/21/2011 8:26:07 PM PDT by Jvette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

>>I’m trying to be gracious about this. Don’t click on it, if you don’t want to read it. Some of the rest of us are interested.<<

I did want to read it. Problem was there was no “it” to read. It was a teaser for a whole series. That is what I was commenting on. And it reeked of “false scholarship”.

I’m not trying to be gracious. I’m trying to be blunt.


33 posted on 05/22/2011 6:30:26 PM PDT by RobRoy (The US today: Revelation 18:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Oh, please. Can’t people voice that they don’t agree with something on an OPEN thread without being “anti-Catholic” or their words “vitriol”? What makes threads “impenetrable swamps” is gratuitous rhetoric.

&&&
I apolgize if you thought those words were directed at you, as they were not. Your comments were well stated and intended for civil debate. There are some on this forum, however, who just jump in with hateful anti-Catholic comments.


34 posted on 05/23/2011 1:50:03 PM PDT by Bigg Red (Palin in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red

Apology humbly accepted. Thank you. I am really, sincerely trying to make sure that my words are “always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that I may know how to answer everyone.”. I don’t always succeed.

Have a blessed week.


35 posted on 05/23/2011 2:54:02 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson