I don't like the sound of it, but the way catholic.com helps to explain it makes some sense.[there is so much to study!!!!] These do seem to be (applied) for temporal results of sin Only--they are for the temporal results of sins which have already been forgiven .
Here is a good quote from catholic.com on remittance of temporal penalties of sins and the relationship to the merits of the saints:
"How many of one's temporal penalties can be remitted?
"Potentially, all of them. The Church recognizes that Christ and the saints are interested in helping penitents deal with the aftermath of their sins, as indicated by the fact they always pray for us (Heb. 7:25, Rev. 5:8). Fulfilling its role in the administration of temporal penalties, the Church draws upon the rich supply of rewards God chose to bestow on the saints, who pleased him, and on his Son, who pleased him most of all. [These rewards are referred to metaphorically as "the treasury of merits." A merit is anything that pleases God and moves him to issue a reward, not things that earn "payment" from God. Humans can't earn anything from God, though by his grace they can please him in a way he chooses to reward. Picturing the saints' acts under a single, collective metaphor (such as a treasury) is biblical: "It was granted her [the Bride] to be clothed with fine linen, bright and pure" (Rev. 19:8). John tells us, "[F]or the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints." Here the righteous deeds of the saints are pictured under the collective metaphor of clothing on the Bride of Christ, the Church. Jewish theology also recognizes a treasury of merits. Jewish theologians speak of "the merits of the fathers"--the idea being that the patriarchs pleased God and inherited certain promises as a reward. God fulfills these promises and ends up treating later Jews more gently than they would have been treated. The idea of "the merits of the fathers" is essentially the same as the Catholic concept of the "treasury of merits." Both postulate a class of individuals, the Old Testament patriarchs on the one hand and Christ and the saints on the other, who have pleased God and whom God chooses to reward in a way involving lesser temporal punishments on others].
"The rewards on which the Church draws are infinite because Christ is God, so the rewards he accrued are infinite and never can be exhausted. His rewards alone, apart from the saints', could remove all temporal penalties from everyone, everywhere. The rewards of the saints are added to Christ's--not because anything is lacking in his, but because it is fitting that they be united with his rewards as the saints are united with him. Although immense, their rewards are finite, but his are infinite.
"If the Church has the resources to wipe out everyone's temporal penalties, why doesn't it do so?"
"Because God does not wish this to be done. God himself instituted the pattern of temporal penalties being left behind. They fulfill valid functions, one of them disciplinary. If a child were never disciplined he would never learn obedience. God disciplines us as his children--"the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives" (Heb. 12:6)--so some temporal penalties must remain.
"The Church cannot wipe out, with a stroke of the pen, so to speak, everyone's temporal punishments because their remission depends on the dispositions of the persons who suffer those temporal punishments. Just as repentance and faith are needed for the remission of eternal penalties, so they are needed for the remission of temporal penalties. Pope Paul VI stated, "Indulgences cannot be gained without a sincere conversion of outlook and unity with God." [Indulgentarium Doctrina 11]. We might say that the degree of remission depends on how well the penitent has learned his lesson.
"But what about the merits of the saints--by the doctrine of indulgences aren't the saints made co-saviors with Christ?"
"Not at all. At best they would only be saving us from temporal calamities, which any human may do (and should do!) for another without b.aspheming Christ. [For example, it does not offend Christ for a fireman to pull a child out of a burning building. The idea of one human saving another from temporal misfortune does not besmirch Christ]. Besides, the saints have the ability to please God because the love of God has been put in their hearts (Rom. 5:5). It is God's grace that enables them to please to him. His grace produces all their good actions, and his grace is given to them because of what Christ did. The good actions of the saints therefore are produced by Christ working through them, which means Christ is the ultimate cause of even this temporal "salvation."
"Should we be talking along these lines? Isn't it better to put all of the emphasis on what Christ alone?"
"No. If we ignore the fact of indulgences, we neglect what Christ does through us, and we fail to recognize the value of what he has done in us. Paul used this very sort of language: "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church" (Col. 1:24).
"Even though Christ's sufferings were superabundant (far more than needed to pay for anything), Paul spoke of completing what was "lacking" in Christ's sufferings. (As put by Augustine, "The God who created you without your cooperation will not save you without your cooperation.") If this mode of speech was permissible for Paul, it is permissible for us, even though the Catholic language about indulgences is far less shocking than was Paul's language about his own role in salvation"
.Furthermore we can look at it in a broader way. I will give some quotes and some scripture on this topic of merits in general etc:
The catechism says< in number 2008 "The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit."
[I am wondering if this could be applied in the area of sanctification. As we walk in the Spirit we gain strength for further walking in the Spirit. When we sin we grieve the Spirit---a direct result of an action we take. We then, become weaker and spiritually it takes effort on our part with the Spirit's aid to regain spiritual ground. God does reward (all from grace) when we obey, when we seek Him, when we walk in the Spirit, when we confess sin etc.]
The catechism keeps stressing that all merit is the result of God's grace....but then it says in a section of 2010, "Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the grace needed for our sanctification for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions."
I am not sure what to think of that above statement. It would seem that our prayers are related to all of this and also God's wisdom. It seems to stem from the whole family relationship we are in with God. But the catechism goes on to explain in 2011 "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."
The saints "merits" only came through God's grace working in them. These perhaps are joined to Christ's accomplishments because they are done by and through Him and we are one body with Him. Therefore we receive of his fullness which perhaps includes the saints stuff only because of the one body of Christ---we are one body. So because we are all one body the treasury of the saints affects us.
Col 1:24 says,
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,
Perhaps that whole idea could be placed in this verse.
This whole thing is related to indulgences. There is an article on it here:http://www.catholic.com/
You might want to read the whole thing. Here are some partial quotes , but you should read the whole article when you get time:
"Before looking at those principles more closely, we should define indulgences. In his apostolic constitution on indulgences, Pope Paul VI said: "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Church's help when, as a minister of Redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints." [Indulgentarium Doctrina 1].
"When God blesses one person as a reward to someone else, sometimes the specific blessing he gives is a reduction of the temporal penalties to which the first person is subject. For example, Solomon's heart was led astray from the Lord toward the end of his life, and God promised to rip the kingdom away from him as a result. "[T]he Lord said to Solomon: `Since this is what you want, and you have not kept my covenant and my statues which I enjoined on you, I will deprive you of the kingdom and give it to your servant. I will not do this during your lifetime, however, for the sake of your father David; it is your son whom I will deprive. Nor will I take away the whole kingdom. I will leave your son one tribe for the sake of my servant David and of Jerusalem, which I have chosen" (1 Kgs. 11:11-13). God lessened the temporal punishment in two ways: by deferring the removal of the kingdom until the days of Solomon's son and by leaving one tribe (Benjamin) under Judah.
"God was clear about why he did this: It is not for Solomon's sake, but "for the sake of your father David." If David had not pleased God, and if God had not promised him certain things regarding his kingdom, God would have removed the entire kingdom from Solomon and done so during Solomon's lifetime. This is an example of God lessening a punishment for the sake of one of his saints.
"Other examples are easy to think of. God promised Abraham that, if he could find a certain number of righteous men in Sodom, he was willing to defer the city's temporal (and eternal) destruction for the sake of the righteous (Gen. 18:16-33).
"Paul noted, "As regards the gospel they [the Jews] are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable" (Rom. 11:28-29). Paul indicated that his Jewish contemporaries were treated more gently than they otherwise would have been treated (God's gift and call were not removed from them) because their forefathers were beloved by God, who gave them irrevocable gifts (which are listed in Rom. 9:4-5).
"Scripture tells us God gave the authority to forgive sins "to men" (Matt. 9:8) and to Christ's ministers in particular. Jesus told them, "As the Father has sent me, even so I send you. . . . Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained" (John 20:21-23).
"If Christ gave his ministers the ability to forgive the eternal penalty of sin, how much more would they be able to remit the temporal penalties of sin! [This kind of argument, with the form "If X is the case then how much more likely is Y the case," is called an a fortiori argument. A fortiori arguments were favorites of Jesus and Paul; see Matthew 7:11, 10:25, 12:12, Luke 11:13, 12:24, 28, Romans 11:12, 24, 1 Corinthians 6:3, and Hebrews 9:14]. Christ also promised his Church the power to bind and loose on earth, saying, "Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 18:18). As the context makes clear, binding and loosing cover Church discipline, and Church discipline involves administering and removing temporal penalties (such as barring from and readmitting to the sacraments). Therefore, the power of binding and loosing includes the administration of temporal penalties.
more quotes :
"There is a difference between the way indulgences are obtained by us in this life and the way in which they are applied to the dead. The official documents of the Church, such as Pope Paul VI's apostolic constitution on indulgences, the Code of Canon Law, and The Catechism of the Catholic Church, all note that indulgences are applied to the dead by way of prayer.
"This is because Christians in the hereafter are no longer under the earthly Church's jurisdiction. They no longer can receive sacraments, including penance, and the Church does not have authority to release their temporal penalties. All it can do is look to God and pray that he will lessen them. This is a valid form of prayer, as 2 Maccabees indicates. We may have confidence that God will apply indulgences to the dead in some way, but the precise manner and degree of application are unknown.[This is one reason the Church cannot simply "empty purgatory," as Martin Luther suggested it should. Because it lacks jurisdiction, the Church can only pray for purgatory to be emptied, and it does].
"There are four parties: The first pleased God and moved him to issue a reward, providing the basis for the indulgence; the second requests the indulgence and obtains it by performing the act prescribed for it; the third issues the indulgence (this is God working through the Church); and the fourth receives the benefit of the indulgence by having his temporal penalties lessened. [Some parties may be one and the same person. The person who provides the basis for an indulgence may request one and apply it to another; the person who requests an indulgence may ask it for himself or someone else. The only limit is that under current canon law one may not obtain an indulgence for another living person (although it is possible to do so in principle, as the case of the early penitents shows)
the catechism writes:
1474 The Christian who seeks to purify himself of his sin and to become holy with the help of God's grace is not alone. "The life of each of God's children is joined in Christ and through Christ in a wonderful way to the life of all the other Christian brethren in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ, as in a single mystical person."85
1475 In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things."86 In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin.
1476 We also call these spiritual goods of the communion of saints the Church's treasury, which is "not the sum total of the material goods which have accumulated during the course of the centuries. On the contrary the 'treasury of the Church' is the infinite value, which can never be exhausted, which Christ's merits have before God. They were offered so that the whole of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. In Christ, the Redeemer himself, the satisfactions and merits of his Redemption exist and find their effficacy."87
1477 "This treasury includes as well the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary. They are truly immense, unfathomable, and even pristine in their value before God. In the treasury, too, are the prayers and good works of all the saints, all those who have followed in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by his grace have made their lives holy and carried out the mission the Father entrusted to them. In this way they attained their own salvation and at the same time cooperated in saving their brothers in the unity of the Mystical Body."88
Obtaining indulgence from God through the Church
1478 An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity.89
1479 Since the faithful departed now being purified are also members of the same communion of saints, one way we can help them is to obtain indulgences for them, so that the temporal punishments due for their sins may be remitted.
someone also wrote this--but I don't feel it quite explains it, but it partially touches on it:
"Now, it is important to realize that what we do as a member of this body affects everyone. As St Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 6:15-16, if we sleep with a prostitute, we are joining the whole Body of Christ to that prostitute. Our sins not only impact us, but the entire Body of Christ! This is something to ponder when we consider a particular sin a “victimless crime.” The good news is, our attempts to grow in holiness positively impact the Body of Christ, just as we are positively influenced by those around us who are growing in holiness. As St. Paul writes in Colossians 1:24, “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church.”
"In other words, as we grow in holiness, we also help those around us to grow in holiness. Many people have probably known some holy priest or layperson at some point in their lives, someone who evidenced so much of the love of God that it inspired people around them. Anglican C. S. Lewis probably said it best in his essay The Weight of Glory:
Quote:
"It may be too much for each to think too much of his own potential glory hereafter; it is hardly possible to think too often or too deeply about that of his neighbor. The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbor’s glory should be laid on my back, a load so heavy only humility can carry it, and the backs of the proud shall be broken. It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting you can talk to may one day be a creature, which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of those destinations.
"What then, does the “merits of the saints” mean? A saint is someone who led a life extraordinarily surrendered to God, and allowed Him to work through him in a mighty way. And if we want to, since we are One Body, I can allow the holiness of that saint to influence my life.
One more answer from a priest summarized:
we are all a part of the communion of the saints. We are all members of the body of Christ. In a sense, if one of us is joined with a prostitute, we all are affected. And likewise, if one of us is holy, we all are affected. In a body, when the mouth consumes good food, the entire body is nourished. When it consumes poison, the entire body is injured. He used the blood-stream as his example, stating that the merits of the saints flow to us today, and that it is more than just us being inspired or elevated by the goodness of those around us. There is a real, spiritual transfer of health going on. The body supporting and sustaining itself through the unity and working of the Holy Spirit.
more on merit: http://www.mark-shea.com/merit.html
more on merit: http://www.catholic.com/library/Reward_and_Merit.asp
more on merit: http://www.mark-shea.com/merit.html
more on merit: http://www.catholic.com/library/Reward_and_Merit.asp
very interesting one on merit! http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1995/9510fea3.asp
ANOTHER ONE I NEED TO READ: http://crossed-the-tiber.blogspot.com/2011/09/catholics-work-their-way-into-heaven.html
There are not two righteousnesses of Christ, one alien and one infused. There is His righteousness. Infused in us, it saves us from the eternal penalty of sin. It does not save us from temporal penalties of sin, which is what the treasury of the saints (of works wrought from infused righteousness) and Purgatory are for.
from comment 97 on same thread:
Rather, I wanted to point out that, in Catholic theology, sanctifying grace with infused charity is sufficient for salvation from Hell, even if the person who has inherent grace and charity also has venial sins, and so is temporarily prevented from entering Heaven.
...........Your question in comment #22 might be problematic for the thesis that “infused agape fulfills the law (venial sins notwithstanding) and so renders extra nos imputation redundant” if the benefit of fulfilling the law had only a positive aspect (going to Heaven) and not also a negative one (being saved from Hell). But if we agree that being saved from Hell is a benefit of fulfilling the law, then it is no telling criticism of the aforementioned thesis to point out that, for Catholic theology, merely having infused agape (with the presence of venial sin) is not sufficient for entering Heaven. One needs to also show that, for Catholic theology, infused agape (with the presence of venial sin) is not sufficient for avoiding Hell.
Protestants--do they believe in temporal punishment? or why do Christians die if Christ's righteousness has been imputed?
here http://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/why-do-christians-die/
http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/11/how-the-church-won-an-interview-with-jason-stellman/ from comment 24, quote:
Jason, you say: “the Catholic Church teaches that the Spirit’s infusion of agape into our hearts is precisely what fulfills the law.”So why is there still a need for a treasury of merits and a purgatory?
I think to say that there is a “need” for the treasury of merits sort of misses the point (kind of like your daughter asking why you insist upon being bountiful with your blessings toward her even though her other siblings are better behaved than she is). God shares the family wealth with his children, even when we are less deserving of it than our brothers and sisters in Christ. God delights in being reckless and abundant, as I pointed out here:
As for purgatory, it is simply the final purging away of the clinging temporal effects of the faithful’s venial sins by the fire of God’s love. It’s not about treading water holding a bowling ball over our head for a million years.
more here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/01/indulgences-the-treasury-of-merit-and-the-communion-of-saints/
from comment 59 here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/11/how-the-church-won-an-interview-with-jason-stellman/#comment-40007
Your latest comment helps advance the discussion, in my opinion. You wrote:
So I asked: what about the treasury of merits and purgatory in the RC system? In RC theology there is a grace that works in us (Spirit-wrought righteousness), which is one benefit. But there is also a second benefit (or you can call it whatever you want) which is made useful to us in our way to eternal life: the merits of other saints in the “treasury of merits.” These merits are external to us, like, though not exactly like, the alien righteousness of Protestant theology. Plus in RC theology we need further purging at purgatory. This shows that, contrary to Jason’s claims, there is a need for perfection even in the RC paradigm in order that we can enter into glory and have the beatific vision. The explanation that you gave about how the two doctrines and Jason’s argument are not incompatible has not convinced me. You missed my point. You strained at a gnat, and swallowed a camel.
Again, talking about yourself (“has not convinced me”) side-steps the evidence, because the question is not whether you (Ádám) are convinced of x, but whether there is some incompatibility between Jason’s claim and those two doctrines. (E.g. The Pharisees could not have refuted Jesus’s claims or arguments by replying, “We’re not convinced.”) As I pointed out in both comment #35 and comment #50, in Catholic theology there is no extra nos imputation of the merits of the saints. In Catholic theology, merit (whether that of Christ or the saints) cannot be imputed to anyone other than the person who merited. Satisfaction, however, can be made on behalf of another, in order to remove a debt of punishment. Your argument conflates the distinction between imputation of merit, and payment of debt by way of satisfaction. That’s why the doctrine of the treasury of merit is fully compatible with Jason’s claim that infused agape makes extra nos imputed righteousness superfluous. What to you seems like a ‘gnat’ (from the Protestant point of view) is a camel in the Catholic paradigm. And by dismissing the distinction (between imputation of merit and payment of debt by satisfaction) as irrelevant or insignificant (e.g. a mere ‘gnat’), you beg the question by presupposing the falsehood of the Catholic position.
Second, you claim that the Catholic doctrine of purgatory “shows that, contrary to Jason’s claims, there is a need for perfection even in the RC paradigm in order that we can enter into glory and have the beatific vision.” The problem with that claim is that Jason has never claimed that perfection is unnecessary for entering glory and having the beatific vision. He agrees (with you) that perfection is necessary for entering glory and having the beatific vision. But in the Catholic paradigm there is a very important difference between fulfilling the law by having the essence of the law, and fulfilling the law by following the law to the letter. This is what I was explaining in comment #29, and the links embedded there. When Jason speaks of God accepting the “imperfect” righteousness of Zachariah and Elizabeth, he is referring to “imperfect according to the letter,” since they were not without venial sin. But they were righteous because they had infused agape, which is the essence of the telos of the law, and they walked in that agape. That is why they were truly righteous, and had no need for an extra nosimputed righteousness, even though they may have needed purgatory after death for venial sins they had committed. Your claim that purgatory is problematic for Jason’s claim presupposes that there is no difference between the essence of the fulfillment of the law, and the letter of the law. In that way, however, your claim begs the question, i.e. presupposes the falsehood of the Catholic position. Basically, the problem here is almost precisely what I addressed in “Imputation and Paradigms: A Reply to Nicholas Batzig,” in which one side is not grasping the paradigm difference (with respect to righteousness) when criticizing the other position. That’s what I was trying to explain in comment #29 above.
from comment 89 on that thread:
from comment 97 on same thread:
The TOM [treasury of merit} relates to God’s general requirement for justice, and more specifically considers that the temporal responsibility of sin is not evaded simply because the eternal responsibility of sin has been dealt with.
Thus, our desire to participate in the benefits of the TOM directly corresponds to our familial bond in Christ and our dual sense of responsibility for ourselves and each other in this life. This, of course, all flowing from the overabundant grace of Christ made present in the life of His Church. Purgatory simply means that God’s love poured out in our hearts completes what it starts — both perfectly satisfying the law (A & B) and transforming us perfectly into the image of the Eternal Son in so much that all crooked paths are made straight. Perfect justice kisses perfect mercy.
comment 98:
It might be helpful, towards appreciating the sufficiency of sanctifying grace with infused charity, to consider what is supposed to be the most important “negative” benefit of the extra nosimputation of the alien righteous of Christ: Without this kind of imputation all men would be condemned to Hell, which is the eternal penalty for not fulfilling the law. In Catholic theology, on the other hand, sanctifying grace with infused charity is sufficient for the negative benefit of not being condemned to Hell, apart from extra nos imputation of alien righteousness, apart from any additional graces (such as are made available by indulgences and pilgrimages), and even with venial sins.
from comment 102Rather, I wanted to point out that, in Catholic theology, sanctifying grace with infused charity is sufficient for salvation from Hell, even if the person who has inherent grace and charity also has venial sins, and so is temporarily prevented from entering Heaven.
...........Your question in comment #22 might be problematic for the thesis that “infused agape fulfills the law (venial sins notwithstanding) and so renders extra nos imputation redundant” if the benefit of fulfilling the law had only a positive aspect (going to Heaven) and not also a negative one (being saved from Hell). But if we agree that being saved from Hell is a benefit of fulfilling the law, then it is no telling criticism of the aforementioned thesis to point out that, for Catholic theology, merely having infused agape (with the presence of venial sin) is not sufficient for entering Heaven. One needs to also show that, for Catholic theology, infused agape (with the presence of venial sin) is not sufficient for avoiding Hell.
Protestants--do they believe in temporal punishment? or why do Christians die if Christ's righteousness has been imputed?
here http://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/why-do-christians-die/
In question and answer 42, the Heidelberg Catechism considers why Christians die. It is a logical place to address the issue because questions 37–41 deal with Christ’s death for His people in order to bear the wrath of God in their place (Rom. 3:21–26; 1 Peter 2:24–25). Those for whom Jesus did not suffer — those who remain impenitent — endure physical death as one part of the divine wrath they must suffer for their sin (Gen. 2:17; Rom. 6:23). This cannot be the case for believers, for Christ has been cursed in our place (Gal. 3:10–14). Why, then, do believers die?
There are many answers to this question. First, while the penalty for the sin of Christians has been paid, the Lord has not yet removed the presence and effects of sin from creation. Creation is groaning, waiting for the adoption of God’s children, which will be plain to all when our bodies are raised from the grave (Rom. 8:18–23). The full benefits of Christ’s work will not be consummated until He returns to bring the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21). We will suffer the results of sin until then, but we should be glad God did not wrap up His plan two thousand years ago. If He had done so, you and I would never have existed or seen His glorious grace.
Our deaths, as the Heidelberg Catechism states, do not pay the debt for our sins. Instead, they mark the point at which we enter directly into the presence of Christ (Phil. 1:21–23). The death of Christians is holy and precious to God. When we die, He receives us into heaven, where we rest before Him until the final resurrection."
Westminster:
Westminster:
Q. 85. Death being the wages of sin, why are not the righteous delivered from death, seeing all their sins are forgiven in Christ?
A. The righteous shall be delivered from death itself at the last day, and even in death are delivered from the sting and curse of it; so that, although they die, yet it is out of God’s love, to free them perfectly from sin and misery, and to make them capable of further communion with Christ in glory, which they then enter upon.
More on merit
The parable of the talents is an example. The goats and sheep parable also. The principle of merit is love. Faith alone without love is not right according to I Cor 13--we participate in the grace given . [also I think salvation is not just about me- it involves renewing the face of the earth--creation itself and new earth} Grace has to be given ie in the talents. An example is Ab offering his son--how did God respond? Gen 22 . 18 And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."
2011CCC 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. “
Good article here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/11/the-doctrine-of-merit-feingold-calvin-and-the-church-fathers/
More on merit
The parable of the talents is an example. The goats and sheep parable also. The principle of merit is love. Faith alone without love is not right according to I Cor 13--we participate in the grace given . [also I think salvation is not just about me- it involves renewing the face of the earth--creation itself and new earth} Grace has to be given ie in the talents. An example is Ab offering his son--how did God respond? Gen 22 . 18 And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."
2011CCC 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. “
Good article here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/11/the-doctrine-of-merit-feingold-calvin-and-the-church-fathers/
No comments:
Post a Comment