"If, however, salutary acts can in virtue of the Divine justice give the right to an eternal reward, this is possible only because they themselves have their root in gratuitous grace, and consequently are of their very nature dependent ultimately on grace, as the Council of Trent emphatically declares (Sess. VI, cap. xvi, in Denzinger, 10th ed., Freiburg, 1908, n. 810): "the Lord . . . whose bounty towards all men is so great, that He will have the things, which are His own gifts, be their merits.".................
Hence on the part of God there can only be question of a gratuitous promise of reward for certaingood works. For such works He owes the promised reward, not in justice or equity, but solely because He has freely bound himself, i.e., because of His own attributes of veracity and fidelity. It is on this ground alone that we can speak of Divine justiceat all, and apply the principle: Do ut des (cf. St. Augustine, Serm. clviii, c. ii, in P.L., XXXVIII, 863)......
It is a defined article of the Catholic Faith that man before, in, and after justification derives his whole capability of meriting and satisfying, as well as his actual merits and satisfactions, solely from the infinite treasure of merits which Christ gained for us on the Cross (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. VI, cap. xvi; Sess. XIV, cap. viii)............
Apart from earlier dogmatic declarations given in the Second Synod of Orange of 529 and in the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 (see Denzinger, 191, 430), the Council of Trent upheld the traditional doctrine of merit by insisting that life everlasting is both a grace and a reward (Sess. VI, cap. xvi, in Denzinger, n. 809). It condemned as heretical Luther'sdoctrine of the sinfulness of good works (Sess. VI, can. xxv), and declared as adogma that the just, in return for their good works done in God through the merits of Jesus Christ, should expect an eternal reward (loc. cit., can. xxvi)....
This doctrine of the Church simply echoes Scripture and Tradition. The Old Testament already declares the meritoriousness of good works before God. "But the just shall live for evermore: and their reward is with the Lord" (Wisdom 5:16). "Be not afraid to be justified even to death: for the reward of God continueth for ever" (Ecclus., xviii, 22). Christ Himself adds a special reward to each of the Eight Beatitudes and he ends with this fundamental thought: "Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven" (Matthew 5:12) In His description of the Last Judgment, He makes the possession of eternal bliss depend on the practice of the corporal works of mercy (Matthew 25:34 sqq.). Although St. Paul insists on nothing more strongly than the absolute gratuitousness of Christian grace, still he acknowledges merits founded on grace and also the reward due to them on the part of God, which he variously calls "prize" (Philippians 3:14; 1 Corinthians 9:24) "reward" (Colossians 3:24; 1 Corinthians 3:8), "crown of justice" (2 Timothy 4:7 sq.; cf. James 1:12). It is worthy of note that, in these and many others good worksare not represented as mere adjuncts of justifying faith, but as real fruits of justification and part causes of our eternal happiness. And the greater the merit, the greater will be the reward in heaven (cf. Matthew 16:27; 1 Corinthians 3:8; 2 Corinthians 9:6). Thus the Bible itself refutes the assertion that "the idea of merit is originally foreign to the Gospel" (" Realencyklopädie für protest. Theologie," XX, 3rd ed. Leipzig, 1908, p. 501). That Christian grace can be merited either by the observance of the Jewish law or by mere natural works (see GRACE) this alone is foreign to the Bible. On the other hand, eternal reward is promised in the Bible to those supernatural works which are performed in the state of grace, and that because they are meritorious (cf. Matthew 25:34 sqq.; Romans 2:6 sqq.; 2 Corinthians 5:10).....
Nothing was more strong and frequently inculcated by the Council of Trent than the proposition that the faithful owe their entire capability of meriting and all their good works solely to the infinitemerits of the Redeemer Jesus Christ. It is indeed clear that meritorious works, as "fruits of the justification", cannot be anything but merits due to grace, and not merits due to nature (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. VI, cap. xvi). The Catholic certainly must rely on the merits of Christ, and, far from boasting of his own self-righteousness, he must acknowledge in all humility that even his merits, acquired with the help of grace, are full of imperfections, and that his justification is uncertain (see GRACE). Of the satisfactory works of penance the Council of Trentmakes this explicit declaration: "Thus, man has not wherein to glory, but all our glorying is in Christ, in whom we live, move, and make satisfaction, bringing forth fruits worthy of penance, which from Him have their efficacy, are by Him offered to the Father, and through Him find with the Father acceptance" (Sess. XIV, cap. viii, in Denzinger, n. 904). Does this read like self-righteousness?
and from comment 96 here:http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/
At the moment of initial justification (or repentance after mortal sin), the person is made a participant in eternal life, because he has received Divine Life into his soul. But during this present earthly life, we have not yet entered into the fullness of that participation. Entering into that fullness takes place in thebeatific vision. But grace is the seed of glory. Now we have grace; then we shall have glory.
Regarding merit, as Nick explained, supernatural ‘merit’ refers to what the second Council of Orange says: recompense due (by justice) to good works if they are performed in grace. The Council of Orange declared: “The reward given for good works is not won by reason of actions which precede grace, but grace, which is unmerited, precedes actions in order that they may be accomplished meritoriously.” Apart from grace, we cannot merit anything pertaining to heaven, because heaven is supernatural, and our merit would at most be at the level of nature. But once in grace, we can merit a reward at the supernatural level, because it is Christ who is working in and through us, by His Spirit.
Absolutely speaking, no man can make a debtor out of God, because every good thing we have has come from Him as a gift. All we have is a gift from God. Man’s debt of obligation to God is one of commutative justice. Because God has given us everything we have, we therefore stand in a relation of obligation to Him, by way of commutative justice, even if we can never give back all that we have been given. It is a relation of unequals, to be sure, but still a case of commutative justice (not distributive justice). This is why religion is a virtue under justice. (See Summa Theologica II-II Q.81) That’s all true even apart from grace. But God, by a free and tremendous gift of grace, elevates us such that we are proportionate to God as our supernatural end, and thus capable of meriting a supernatural end. By the infusion of sanctifying grace, and thus by our participation in the divine operation in us oriented toward God as our supernatural end, the very works which we do in God, fully satisfy the divine law according to the state of this life and truly merit eternal life. (cf. Council of Trent, Session 6, Decree 16)
The key to understanding how our acts can be truly meritorious for salvation (i.e. eternal life) is found in the three word phrase “done in God.” Without grace, our acts can be more or less meritorious or demeritorious, not for heaven (which is supernatural) but for our degree of punishment and reward in a state of separation from God. Without grace, none of our acts would be “done in God,” and hence none of our acts could be meritorious for heaven, because of the infinite gap between what can be done in the power of our own finite nature as creatures, and God. But by the infusion of supernatural Life (not just a co-spatial indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but an actual infusion such that we are truly made partakers in the divine nature) Christ works in and through us, and our acts done out of agape are not just ordered to God as our Creator and natural end, but to God as our Father and supernatural end. That is, by infused grace our acts done out of agape take on a supernatural character, directed toward heaven as our supernatural end. And this is what explains Trent 6.16, what underlies those three words “done in God.” This is why St. Thomas explains that man in grace can merit eternal life condignly. (cf.Summa Theologica I-II Q. 114 a.3) This condign merit for heaven as our supernatural end is based on commutative justice, but made possible only by the infusion of divine grace. Without the infusion of grace, there could be no merit for eternal life. Even Christ Himself, without the infusion of grace, could not have merited eternal life in His human nature.
Jesus speaks of heavenly rewards all over the gospels. The Beatitudes are one example. We see this also in Matthew 25, where Jesus shows that heaven and hell are given as rewards for (among other things) the way we treat others. Jesus elsewhere says, “For whosoever shall give you to drink a cup of water in my name, because you belong to Christ, Amen, I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.” (Mk 9:40) See also Mt 19:29, and Luke 6:38. The Holy Spirit, through St. Paul, teaches that God “will render to every man according to his works” (Rom 2:6) and that “every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.” (1 Cor 3:8) See also Col 3:24, Hebrews 10:35, 11:6. St. Paul writes in 2 Tim 4:8 of the “crown of justice, which the Lord, the just Judge, will render,” indicating that the eternal reward is not only a gift, but also a just recompense for St. Paul’s labors in grace, which is Christ working in and through Him.
The Council of Trent likewise addresses this, declaring:
[T]hose are opposed to the orthodox doctrine of religion, who assert that the just man sins, venially at least, in every good work; or, which is yet more insupportable, that he merits eternal punishments; as also those who state, that the just sin in all their works, if, in those works, they, together with this aim principally that God may be gloried, have in view also the eternal reward, in order to excite their sloth, and to encourage themselves to run in the course: whereas it is written, I have inclined my heart to do all thy justifications for the reward: and, concerning Moses, the Apostle saith, that he looked unto the reward. (Council of Trent, XI)
In other words, those who claim that the just man sins (either venially or merits eternal punishment) in every good work, are opposed to the orthodox doctrine of religion. Those also are in error, according to Trent, who claim that the just sins in all their good works if these just persons do these good works while having in view the eternal reward.
In chapter XVI of Session Six, the Council of Trent teaches:
Hence, to those who work well unto the end (Mt 10:22) and trust in God, eternal life is to be offered, both as a grace mercifully promised to the sons of God through Christ Jesus, and as a reward promised by God himself, to be faithfully given to their good works and merits (Rom 6:22).
Notice that eternal life is both a gift and a reward. It is not either/or. It is a gift, because without grace, we could never attain it. But it is also a reward because, by grace, it is also a reward for works done in grace.
The following three paragraphs from Trent 6.16 are worth quoting in full:
For this is the crown of justice which after his fight and course the Apostle declared was laid up for him, to be rendered to him by the just judge, and not only to him, but also to all that love his coming. (cf. 2 Tim. 4:8.) For since Christ Jesus Himself, as the head into the members and the vine into the branches, (John 15:1ff.) continually infuses strength into those justified, which strength always precedes, accompanies and follows their good works, and without which they could not in any manner be pleasing and meritorious before God, we must believe that nothing further is wanting to those justified to prevent them from being considered to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life and to have truly merited eternal life, to be obtained in its [due] time, provided they depart [this life] in grace, (Rev.14:13.) since Christ our Savior says: If anyone shall drink of the water that I will give him, he shall not thirst forever; but it shall become in him a fountain of water springing up into life everlasting. (John 4:13f.)Thus, neither is our own justice established as our own from ourselves, (Rom. 10:3; 2 Cor. 3:5.) nor is the justice of God ignored or repudiated, for that justice which is called ours, because we are justified by its inherence in us, that same is [the justice] of God, because it is infused into us by God through the merit of Christ. Nor must this be omitted, that although in the sacred writings so much is attributed to good works, that even he that shall give a drink of cold water to one of his least ones, Christ promises, shall not lose his reward; (Matt. 10:42; Mark 9:40.) and the Apostle testifies that, That which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation, worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory; (See 2 Cor. 4:17.) nevertheless, far be it that a Christian should either trust or glory in himself and not in the Lord, (See I Cor. 1:31; 2 Cor. 10:17.) whose bounty toward all men is so great that He wishes the things that are His gifts to be their merits.And since in many things we all offend, (James 3:2.) each one ought to have before his eyes not only the mercy and goodness but also the severity and judgment [of God]; neither ought anyone to judge himself, even though he be not conscious to himself of anything; (See I Cor. 4:3f.) because the whole life of man is to be examined and judged not by the judgment of man but of God, who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts, and then shall every man have praise from God, (1 Cor 4:5.) who, as it is written,will render to every man according to his works. (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; Rev. 22:12.) After this Catholic doctrine on justification, which whosoever does not faithfully and firmly accept cannot be justified, it seemed good to the holy council to add to these canons, that all may know not only what they must hold and follow, but also what to avoid and shun.
The relevant canons are:
Canon 26. If anyone says that the just ought not for the good works done in God to expect and hope for an eternal reward from God through His mercy and the merit of Jesus Christ, if by doing well and by keeping the divine commandments they persevere to the end, let him be anathema.Canon 31. If anyone says that the one justified sins when he performs good works with a view to an eternal reward, let him be anathema.Canon 32. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life, and in case he dies in grace, the attainment of eternal life itself and also an increase of glory, let him be anathema.
For more on ‘merit’ see the Catholic Encyclopedia article on merit.
It is de fide, i.e. something that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, that by his good works, the justified man really acquires a claim to supernatural reward from God. This is something that all Catholics must affirm, and to deny this dogma obstinately is formal heresy.
Romans 2:4-11
English Standard Version (ESV)
4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] anddo not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.
Galatians 6:7-8
English Standard Version (ESV)
7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. 8 For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.
go here for many more verses on this: http://crossed-the-tiber.blogspot.com/2011/09/catholics-work-their-way-into-heaven.html or I am copying it for myself here but it is all from the post. Here is the extended quote:
This week I am looking at the Catholic teaching on merit. The idea for this came from an article by one James McCarthy, who is no fan of the Catholic Church, that was sent to me by someone asking me to respond to what Mr. McCarthy says. So, that’s what I did. This newsletter may be a bit longer than usual, but it’s because I use so much Scripture to show thatwhat the Catholic Church teaches on merit isn’t just mentioned in the Bible, but all through it.
Mr. McCarthy’s comments are in italics and mine are interpersed between his.
Challenge/Response/Strategy
Merit and the General Judgment
James McCarthy
According to the Roman Catholic Church, whenever a person who is in a state of grace does a good work, he earns a reward. The right to a reward is called merit. Merit accumulates during a person’s life. If the Catholic commits a mortal sin, however, all merit is forfeited. But should the Catholic repent and receive the sacrament of penance, lost merit is once again restored. Merited reward takes three forms in Roman Catholicism: an increase of grace, eternal life, and an increase of glory in heaven.
When a Catholic does a good work, the Church teaches that he immediately receives the re ward of an increase of grace. This grace further justifies the Catholic. He becomes holier and more pleasing to God. This is the first kind of merited reward in Catholicism.
The Church also teaches that upon death each person must face God in the particular judgment. If God determines that the individual has died in the state of grace, the person obtains “the joy of heaven, as God’s eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ.” The Council of Trent stated:
“To those who work well right to the end and keep their trust in God,
eternal life should be held out, both as a grace promised in his
mercy through Jesus Christ to the children of God, and as a reward
to be faithfully bestowed, on the promise of God himself, for their
good works and merits.” (Council of Trent)
Vatican II stated:
“Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the
advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single
course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with
him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed . . . .”
(Second Vatican Council)
Thirdly, the Church teaches that merited reward also results in an increase of the degree of glory that an individual enjoys in heaven. God does not decide this reward until the end of the world. Christ will return to earth. The dead will rise with immortal bodies, and God will release all who are still suffering in purgatory. Then there will be a second evaluation of each person’s life. This is the universal or general j udgment. According to Roman Catholic theology, Jesus described the general judgment in the Gospel of Matthew:
“But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with
Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. And all the nations
will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one
another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
(Matthew 25:31–32)
The general judgment is the public proclamat ion of the results of the particular judgment and the determination of a person’s total reward. It occurs at the end of the world so that the complete effect of each person’s life upon all of society and history can be calculated and duly rewarded. If the person died in a state of grace, Christ will reward the individual in proportion to his good works. This will decide the degree of his glory in heaven. Similarly, if the person died without grace in his soul, Christ will decide the degree of his punishment in hell.
John Martignoni:
Mr. McCarthy does a fairly decent job of presenting an overview of Catholic teaching on merit. I would add a few minor “fixes” or clarifications to what he said, but it is good enough for now. As he moves from presenting what the Church teaches, to his opinion of what the Church teaches, I will be able to clarify and refine a few of the things that he said above.
One thing I want to point out here in the beginning of my comments, though, is that the word “merit” essentially means “reward,” in Catholic theology. So, when it is said that a Catholic can merit something through his good works, it means that the Catholic can receive a reward for his good works. Does the Bible back up the Catholic Church on this, or does it support Mr. McCarthy’s point of view? Well, we’re going to find out…
James McCarthy:
Eternal Life Is a Free Gift, not a Merited Reward
Here we will focus on th e second form of merited reward, eternal life, a Roman Catholic teaching that stands in direct contradiction to the Bible. For though the Bible teaches that God will reward faithful stewards in heaven, it never says that He will reward them with heaven.
John Martignoni:
First of all, please take note that Mr. McCarthy seems to have no problem with the general Catholic concept of merit…of receiving a reward…for one’s good works. He in fact essentially states that “faithful stewards” do indeed merit, or receive a reward, for their good works. He has a problem, though, with the particular teaching of that reward being eternal life, but apparently not with that reward being an increase in grace or an increase of glory in Heaven. So, we apparently got 2 out of 3 according to McCarthy. Wasn’t it Meatloaf who said, “2 outta 3 ain’t bad?”
Now, on to his claim that this teaching of the Church, on meriting eternal life, is in “direct contradiction to the Bible?” Really?! Well, let’s not take Mr. McCarthy’s word for it, let’s see what the Bible says. First, I would ask Mr. McCarthy to give me book, chapter, an d verse in the Bible that says, “God will reward faithful stewards in heaven, but not with heaven?” I can tell you exactly where it says that in the Bible…nowhere! Let’s look at what the Bible actually does say:
Matthew 5:3–10, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven…Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy…Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God…Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.” Sounds like folks will be rewarded “with heaven” for being “poor in spirit,” being “merciful,” being “ pure in heart,” and for being “persecuted,” or am I missing something here? They will be rewarded “with heaven” for how they live their lives. At least, that’s what Jesus said. Mr. McCarthy is certainly free to disagree with Jesus if he wants to.
Matthew 25:34–40, “Then the King will say to those at His right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink…as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.” It seems pretty clear, from the Bible, that the people at the Lord’s right hand are going to “inherit” the Kingdom of Heaven because of their good works. This doesn’t say anything about being rewarded “in heaven,” rather it is saying that they will be rewarded “with heaven.” At least, that’s what Jesus said.
Matthew 19:16–17, “What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?...[Jesus said] If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” This doesn’t say that after you enter Heaven you will be rewarded for keeping the commandments…no, no…Jesus says, very specifically and very clearly, “If you would ENTER life, keep the commandments.” In order to get into Heaven, you must keep the commandments. People will be rewarded “with heaven” for keeping the commandments. At least, that’s what Jesus said.
Matthew 19:29, “And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life.” Again, as in the Sermon on the Mount, one “inherits” eternal life, according to the Bible, by doing the things mentioned here. It does not say, “And every one who has left houses or brothers…will receive a reward in Heaven after they receive eternal life through faith alone.”
Matthew 25:21, “Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.” What do we see here? Do we see a servant who receives a reward for his labor after entering into his master’s joy, or do we see a servant who is able to enter into his master’s joy because of his labor? It’s the latter. We see a servant who enters into his master’ ;s joy (Heaven) as a reward for his labors. And he receives this reward because he did something with what his master had freely given him. We can be sure this is the case because look what happens to the “wicked and slothful servant” who did nothing with what his master had given him. Does this servant, who simply held on to what the master had given him, enter into his master’s joy? No! But, according to Mr. McCarthy’s position, that servant should have entered into his master’s joy based solely on what his master gave him. That servant, according to Mr. McCarthy, is not required to do anything in order to enter into his master’s joy. Yet, the Bible states otherwise. This servant is tossed “into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth,” (v. 30). Why? Because he did nothing with the gift he had been freely given by the master.
John 6:27, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you.” This verse fits perfectly with Catholic teaching on merit and with the Parable of the Talents referenced in the paragraph above (Matthew 25:14–30) – Jesus does indeed &# 8220;give” us the food which endures to eternal life – just as the master gave his three servants the talents – but He also very clearly says that we have to labor for that food. Contradiction? Absolutely not! We have to be just like the “good and faithful servant,” who received a free gift from his master without doing a thing to “earn” it, but then had to do something with what his master gave him in order to enter into his master’s joy.
John 6:54, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life…” Whether you take that verse literally or metaphorically, it still says that if you do something – eat His flesh and drink His blood – you will receive eternal life. It does not say that if you do this thing you will receive rewards for doing so after you get to Heaven. Heaven itself…eternal life itself…is the reward. At least, that’s what Jesus says.
Romans 2:6–7, “For He will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well–doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give rewards after he gets to Heaven.” Whoops…wa it a minute! That’s not what it says, is it? Oh, no. It says, “…to those who by patience in well–doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give eternal life.” I don’t know what book Mr. McCarthy has been reading, but I don’t think it was the Bible. The reward for “patience in well–doing,” is not some reward given after you get to Heaven. Heaven itself…eternal life itself…is the reward. At least, that’s what Paul says.
1 Corinthians 3:8, “He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor.” You labor, you receive your wages. Now, this doesn’t specifically say whether the reward is “in heaven” or if it is “of heaven,” but it nevertheless bolsters the Catholic claim of there being merit (reward) for one’s works.
Colossians 3:23–24, “Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward.” Every Christian, including Mr. McCarthy, knows that the “inheritance” referr ed to here is eternal life. This passage directly states that if you do the work the Lord has given you to do, whatever that may be, you will receive “the inheritance”…eternal life…as your reward. In other words, this passage directly contradicts Mr. McCarthy’s words. So, one must ask themselves, “Who would I rather believe – Mr. McCarthy, or the Word of God?”
Hebrews 10:35–36, “Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that you may do the will of God and receive what is promised.” What is it that is promised? For this verse to make sense in Mr. McCarthy’s theology, we must believe that what is promised is some sort of reward, exactly what no one knows, after one gets into Heaven. But that makes no sense given the context. Besides, I guarantee that if Mr. McCarthy was asked to read this verse and identify what the reward is and what the promise is, he would say, “Eternal life.”
Hebrews 11:6, “And without faith it is impossible to please Him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who seek Him.” How is it, do you think, that God “rewards” those who seek Him? Maybe, with eternal life? I’ll come back to this verse, and some of the others, in just a bit.
Mr. McCarthy’s argument appears to have a hole or two in it, and “I have not yet begun to fight,” (John Paul Jones).
James McCarthy:
Eternal life is not a reward, but the unmerited gift of God. Jesus, speaking of His sheep, said, “I give eternal life to them” (John 10:28). He promised, “I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost” (Revelation 21:6, see also: John 4:14; 6:40; 6:47; 17:2; Romans 5:17; 6:23).
John Martignoni:
Nowhere can he give me a quote from the Bible that states what he just stated: “Eternal life is not a reward, but the unmerited gift of God.” Actually, according to t he Scripture verses I cited earlier, and according to Catholic teaching, it is both a gift and a reward. Catholic theology has no problem with any of the verses McCarthy cites here from John, or Revelation, or Romans, or anywhere else for that matter.
John 10:27–28, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish…” “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. We believe that Jesus does indeed give us eternal life, just as the master “gave” the servants the talents and just as Jesus “gives̶ 1; us the food that endures to eternal life, but which we still are told to “labor for.”
Revelation 21:6 and John 4:14 talk of Jesus “giving” us water from the fountain of the water of life. “Amen, amen! says the Catholic.” Again, just as the master “gave” his servants the talents, Jesus “gives” us the water of life so that we will never thirst. Nowhere do these passages say, however, that once we receive the gift we can just sit on it like the wicked and slothful servant did and still expect to enter our master’s joy.
John 6:40 and 6:47 say that whoever believes in Jesus has eternal life. “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. But, nowhere does it say, “Believing alone,” or “Faith alone.” And, for some reason, Mr. McCarthy fails to mention John 6:51, 53, 54, 56, 57, or 58 – all of which say you must “do” something – eat His flesh and drink His blood – in order to have eternal life. It is only through the selective reading of Scripture that Mr. McCarthy can support his position. Believing and doing – as the Catholic Church and the Scriptures teach – and not just believing alone, as Mr. McCarthy teaches.
John 17:2 says that Jesus gives eternal life to all whom God has given Him. “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. That is Catholic teaching.
Romans 5:17 speaks of the “free gift” of righteousness. Romans 6:23 says that eternal life is the “free gift” of God. Catholics agree that eternal life is a gift freely given by God. But, again, just as the servants in the Parable of the Talents had to do something with the free gift given to them by their master, so we have to do something with the free gift of eternal life given to us by our master. We have to provide a return on it. In fact, Romans 6:22 says, “But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.” It seems Mr. McCarthy ignored that verse. Do we get a “return” on something if we have done absolutely nothing with it? No, just ask the “wicked and slothful” servant in the Parable of the Talents.
Now, some may say that the Catholic Church’s position seems to be contradictory – saying on the one hand that eternal life is a free gift, but saying on the other that it is a “return” or “reward” for our works. Well, again, our position is contradictory only if the Bible is contradictory. As I just showed, the Bible mentions in Rom 6:22 about receiving eternal life as a “return,” but in Rom 6:23 eternal life is a “free gift.” How can it be both? I’ll expound on that momentarily…keep reading.
James McCarthy:
Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic Church insists that eternal life is a merited reward earned by doing good. Just as a Catholic can earn an increase of grace and an increase of glory, he can earn eternal life.
The Church denounces anyone who teaches otherwise:
If anyone says that the good deeds of a justified person are the
gifts of God, in the sense that they are not also the good merits of
the one justified; or that the justified person, by the good deeds
done by him through the grace of God and the merits of Jesu s Christ
(of whom he is a living member), does not truly merit an increase in
grace, eternal life, and (so long as he dies in grace) the obtaining
of his own eternal life, and even an increase of glory: let him be anathema. (Council of Trent)
When the Council states here that Catholics can truly merit eternal life, it means that there is an equality between the work performed and the reward received. Aquinas explains this relationship saying that, by the mercy of God, good works which proceed from the grace of the Holy Spirit merit everlasting life condignly. According to Aquinas, eternal life is “granted in accordance with a fair judgment.”
Roman Catholic theologians contrast condign, or well–deserved merit, with congruous merit. This latter kind of merit applies to cases in which the reward “results from a certain graciousness in the light of God’s liberality.”
Eternal life, according to the Church, is a truly merited reward. It is merited condignly, not congruously. It is not a free gift which God graciously gives apart from anything man has done to earn it. It is the result of a fair judgment.
John Martignoni:
When Mr. McCarthy states that, “according to the Church,”eternal life “is not a free gift which God gives apart from anything man has done to earn it,” he is either speaking out of woeful ignorance, or he is being shamefully dishonest.
As the Council of Trent states, in a canon that for some reason Mr. McCarthy did not see fit to mention, “We are therefore said to be justified by faith, because ‘faith is the beginning of human salvation,’ the foundation and root of all justification, ‘without which it is impossible to please God,’ [Heb 11:6] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and are, therefore, said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace itself of justification,” (Trent; Decree on Justification, ch. 8).
The section of this quote I have bolded and underlined means that we are “justified” – or “saved” in Mr. McCarthy’s vernacular – freely, as a gift. That’s what “gratuitously” means – without cost. So, nothing we do before we are justified, or saved, whether faith or works, can merit salvation. That is a dogmatic statement of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches, dogmatically, that justification, salvation, is a free gift of God. Yet, Mr. McCarthy says the Catholic Church teaches that eternal life is “not a free gift which God graciously gives apart from anything man has done to earn it.”
The quote above was taken from the same section of the Council of Trent that Mr. McCarthy is quoting from, so I find it hard to believe that he did not s ee it.
What Mr. McCarthy fails to take note of, or deliberately refuses to understand, when he claims that the Church teaches salvation is not a free gift of God, is that in the passage he quoted from the Council of Trent, it is speaking of the good deeds of the “justified” person. The word “justified,” or saved, is referring to a person who has already freely received the gift of eternal life. So, the passage which he quotes, and from which he draws the conclusion that the Church teaches salvation is not a free gift, is referring to an already saved person or, as a Catholic would put it, a person who is in a state of grace. If one is not saved, not in a state of grace, than oneR 17;s good works merit nothing. I think that is a pretty important point that Mr. McCarthy seems to have overlooked.
So, the passage from the Council of Trent which McCarthy quotes from, and takes issue with, is talking about the good works of someone who is already saved as meriting eternal life. It is not talking about the good works of someone who is not already justified. How did that justified person become a justified person so that their good works could merit salvation? By the free gift of God.
But, one might ask, are we not contradicting ourselves by saying that we cannot merit our justification but that we can merit eternal life? Well, we are if you believe the Bible contradicts itself, because as I’ve shown with the Scripture verses referenced above, the Bible absolutely supports Catholic teaching on this matter. No, there is no contradiction in the Catholic Church’s teaching, or in the Bible’s teaching on this point. The reason there is no contradiction, is because the person who has received the free gift of salvation, can lose it. Any good works that are done are not done in order to be justified, but to keep from losing that justification.
Let me use Scripture to explain what I just said:
Ephesians 2:8–10, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God – not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” We have been saved by grace, through faith ̵ 1; either our faith or the faith of our parents (infant baptism) – not by works. Eternal life is a free gift of God. But, this passage ends by saying that God has prepared a set of good works for us, that we “should” walk in them. Well, what happens if the person who has received the free gift of eternal life from God, chooses not to do the good works that God has prepared for him?
Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father Who is in Heaven.” So, in order to get into heaven, you can’t just cry, “Lord, Lord.” You can’t just have faith alone. You have to “do” the will of the Father. Well, the will of the Father is that He has prepared some good works for you to do, as we saw in Eph 2:10. So, let’s say you’ve been saved by grace as a gift from God, and then you don’t do the will of the Father by not doing the good works He has prepared beforehand for you to do. Are you still saved? Not according to Jesus. But, if you do those good works, if you do the will of God, do those works allow you to receive salvation, or to keep the salvation that has already been given to you by God’s grace?&# 160; They allow you to keep what you have already been given.
Let’s look again at the Parable of the Talents. First of all, was the third servant in his master’s good graces at the beginning of the parable? Of course he was, or the master would have never entrusted him with the talents. But, after the servant does nothing with what he was freely given, what does the Bible say?
Matthew 25: “You ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own WITH INTEREST. So, take the talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten talents,” and then this servant is tossed into the outer darkness. The two servants who return more than what they were given, not only enter into their master’s joy, but they are set over much by their master. They kept what was given them. The servant who did nothing with what was given to him, lost it.
Moral of the story? We cannot w ork to obtain salvation – since it is a free gift of God (received through Baptism), and since no work we do before we obtain our initial justification can merit anything anyway. But, we must work to keep from losing salvation, to keep from losing what we have been freely given. Now, after we have been justified, then our works can truly be said to merit because we are cooperating with God, “at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure,” (Phil 2:13) of our own free will. As it says in John 15:4, “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.” We cannot produce fruit unless we first abide in Christ, the vine…unless we are first saved, or justified. But, if we are a branch of the vine which is Christ, and choose not to produce fruit, choose not to do the good works that God has prepared for us beforehand, then we will be cut off from Christ and wither and be thrown into the fire to be burned (John 15:6).
James McCarthy:
Romans 2:6–8
To substantiate its claim that eternal life is a merited reward, the Roman Catholic Church cites Paul’s letter to the Romans:
[God] . . . will render to every man according to his deeds: to
those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and
immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do
not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. (Romans 2:6–8)
The Roman Catholic Church interprets this passage to say that if a person dies with sanctifying grace in his soul, he deserves to go to heaven because of his good deeds:
. . . it must be believed that nothing more is needed for the
justified to be considered to have fully satisfied God’s law,
according to this stat e of life, by the deeds they have wrought in
him and to have truly deserved to gain eternal life in their time
(provided they die in a state of grace). (Council of Trent)
John Martignoni:
Okay, he seems to be deliberately slanting what he says here to focus on good deeds, while leaving out of the equation all of what the Church teaches regarding faith and justification, which is right there in the Council of Trent, and which he must have read while doing his research for this article. He is trying to make his readers think the Church puts all of her eggs in the “works” basket. He is trying to slant the phrase, “to have fully satisfied God’s law,” as meaning the Catholic Church teaches that good deeds alone can fully satisfy God’s law. He just glosses right over the fact that this passage is talking about “the justified,” or, as it mentions again, those “in a state of grace.” Well, pray tell, Mr. McCarthy, how did those who are justified, come to be justified? What does the Catholic Church teach on that? What does the Council of Trent teach on that? They came to be justified by the free gift of eternal life from Jesus Christ. Mr. McCarthy fails to mention that tiny little detail.
As I have cited above, Trent clearly states that without faith, one cannot please God. So, faith is a part of what is required “to have fully satisfied God’s law,” as well. But he ignores that. He also leaves out all of what the Bible says, about the role of works in the process of salvation, some of which I have quoted above.
James McCarthy:
The Bible, on the other hand, teaches that what every man and woman truly deserves is eternal punishment. The good news of Jesus Christ, however, is that God is willing to graciously give those who trust Christ eternal life, a gift that no one deserves! In order that these two truths would not be confused, the Holy Spirit included both of them in one verse:
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal
life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)
With such a clear statement here that eternal life is a free gift, Romans 2:6–8 cannot possibly be interpreted as teaching the direct opposite—that eternal life is a merited reward. A closer look at Romans 2:6–8 reveals the source of the Church’s misinterpretation.
John Martignoni:
I think he just made an infallible pronouncement here – “Roma ns 2:6–8 cannot possibly be interpreted as teaching…that eternal life is a merited reward.” Oh, it can’t be interpreted that way even though that’s what it actually says? Regarding Rom 6:23, as I’ve explained above, the Catholic Church agrees 100% that eternal life is the free gift of God. But, as Scripture very clearly shows, once we’ve got it, we can’t bury it in the ground, we have to do something with it or it can be taken away from us.
James McCarthy:
In Ro mans 2:6–8, Paul is addressing the kind of person who considers himself morally superior to others in character and conduct. This moralist, however, is himself practicing the very sins he condemns in others. Paul warns this hypocrite that he will not escape the judgment of God. A day is coming when God “will render to every man according to His deeds” (Romans 2:6). Those who do good—the biblical evidence of new life (John 15:8)—will receive honor and eternal life. Those who do evil—the biblical evidence of an unregenerated heart (1 John 3:7–10)—will receive wrath and indignation.
Note that Paul does not say that God will render to every man honor or wrath because of his deeds. That would make good works the cause of eternal life, as taught i n Roman Catholicism. Rather, Paul says that God will render judgment according to how a man has lived. This means that there will be a relationship of correspondence between how a person lives and the outcome of his judgment. Those who practice good—evidence of true spiritual life—will receive good from the Lord. Those who practice evil—such as the hypocritical moralist Paul is addressing—will receive wrath and indignation.
John Martignoni:
This sentence above is a masterful piece of double–speak. I think George Orwell would be left spellbound by this paragraph. It truly is amazing. McCarthy says, speaking of Romans 2:6–8, “Note that Paul does not say that God will render to every man honor or wrath because of his deeds.”
Yet, he earlier correctly quoted Romans 2:6–8 as saying: “For He, [God] will render to every man according to his deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life…” Uhmm…I don’t know about you, but it sure seems to me that Paul said God will render honor to every man – eternal life…BECAUSE OF HIS DEEDS.
“…but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.” Uhmm…I don’t know about you, but it sure seems to me that Paul said God will render wrath to every man BECAUSE OF HIS DEEDS.
Notice in this paragraph how he takes the reward of “eternal life” which is specifically mentioned in the verse, and turns it into, “will receive good from the Lord.” His subst itution of “good” for “eternal life” allows him to avoid the truth of Catholic teaching regarding a person meriting eternal life. Here is Romans 2:6–8, according to Mr. McCarthy:
“For He [God], will show that there is a relationship of correspondence between how a person lives and their judgment. Those who practice good, which thereby demonstrates that they have been saved by faith alone, will receive good from the Lord. Those who practice evil, which thereby demonstrates that they have not been saved by faith alone, will receive bad stuff – wrath and indignation – from the Lord.”
Uhh…yeah, sure.
James McCarthy:
Roman Catholicism, on the other hand, teaches that God gives eternal life to people because of their good works, to those who deserve it:
It is a universally accepted dogma of the Catholic Church that man,
in union with the grace of the Holy Spirit must merit heaven by his
good works. . . . we can actually merit heaven as our reward. . . .
Heaven must be fought for; we have to earn heaven. (Dogmatic
Theology for the Laity)
John Martignoni:
Again, he focuses on works alone when neither the Council of Trent, nor the overall teaching of the Catholic Church, does any such thing.
James 1:12, “Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love Him.”
Matthew 16:27, “For the Son of man is to come with His angels in the glory of His Father, and then He will repay every man for what he has done.”1 Cor 3:8, “He who plants and who he waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor.”Rev 22:12, “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done.”
The concept of merit, whether meriting an increase in grace here in this life, or an increase in glory in the next life, or in meriting eternal life itself, is based not on some debt that God owes us because of what we do, but on the fact that God promised us that He would give us all of these things if we love Him and do what He told us to do. That , and the fact that all merit ultimately derives from the merit Christ earned for us on the Cross, and that we can apply that merit to our lives by virtue of being members of His Body, is why the Catholic Church can teach what it teaches, that eternal life is both a gift and a reward. Which is exactly what the Bible teaches.
posted by Russ Rentler, M.D. | 11:38 PM 
Romans 2:4-11
English Standard Version (ESV)
4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.
6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] anddo not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality.
Galatians 6:7-8
English Standard Version (ESV)
7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. 8 For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.
This week I am looking at the Catholic teaching on merit. The idea for this came from an article by one James McCarthy, who is no fan of the Catholic Church, that was sent to me by someone asking me to respond to what Mr. McCarthy says. So, that’s what I did. This newsletter may be a bit longer than usual, but it’s because I use so much Scripture to show thatwhat the Catholic Church teaches on merit isn’t just mentioned in the Bible, but all through it.
Mr. McCarthy’s comments are in italics and mine are interpersed between his.
Challenge/Response/Strategy
Merit and the General Judgment
James McCarthy
According to the Roman Catholic Church, whenever a person who is in a state of grace does a good work, he earns a reward. The right to a reward is called merit. Merit accumulates during a person’s life. If the Catholic commits a mortal sin, however, all merit is forfeited. But should the Catholic repent and receive the sacrament of penance, lost merit is once again restored. Merited reward takes three forms in Roman Catholicism: an increase of grace, eternal life, and an increase of glory in heaven.
When a Catholic does a good work, the Church teaches that he immediately receives the re ward of an increase of grace. This grace further justifies the Catholic. He becomes holier and more pleasing to God. This is the first kind of merited reward in Catholicism.
The Church also teaches that upon death each person must face God in the particular judgment. If God determines that the individual has died in the state of grace, the person obtains “the joy of heaven, as God’s eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ.” The Council of Trent stated:
“To those who work well right to the end and keep their trust in God,
eternal life should be held out, both as a grace promised in his
mercy through Jesus Christ to the children of God, and as a reward
to be faithfully bestowed, on the promise of God himself, for their
good works and merits.” (Council of Trent)
Vatican II stated:
“Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the
advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single
course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with
him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed . . . .”
(Second Vatican Council)
Thirdly, the Church teaches that merited reward also results in an increase of the degree of glory that an individual enjoys in heaven. God does not decide this reward until the end of the world. Christ will return to earth. The dead will rise with immortal bodies, and God will release all who are still suffering in purgatory. Then there will be a second evaluation of each person’s life. This is the universal or general j udgment. According to Roman Catholic theology, Jesus described the general judgment in the Gospel of Matthew:
“But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with
Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. And all the nations
will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one
another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
(Matthew 25:31–32)
The general judgment is the public proclamat ion of the results of the particular judgment and the determination of a person’s total reward. It occurs at the end of the world so that the complete effect of each person’s life upon all of society and history can be calculated and duly rewarded. If the person died in a state of grace, Christ will reward the individual in proportion to his good works. This will decide the degree of his glory in heaven. Similarly, if the person died without grace in his soul, Christ will decide the degree of his punishment in hell.
John Martignoni:
Mr. McCarthy does a fairly decent job of presenting an overview of Catholic teaching on merit. I would add a few minor “fixes” or clarifications to what he said, but it is good enough for now. As he moves from presenting what the Church teaches, to his opinion of what the Church teaches, I will be able to clarify and refine a few of the things that he said above.
One thing I want to point out here in the beginning of my comments, though, is that the word “merit” essentially means “reward,” in Catholic theology. So, when it is said that a Catholic can merit something through his good works, it means that the Catholic can receive a reward for his good works. Does the Bible back up the Catholic Church on this, or does it support Mr. McCarthy’s point of view? Well, we’re going to find out…
James McCarthy:
Eternal Life Is a Free Gift, not a Merited Reward
Here we will focus on th e second form of merited reward, eternal life, a Roman Catholic teaching that stands in direct contradiction to the Bible. For though the Bible teaches that God will reward faithful stewards in heaven, it never says that He will reward them with heaven.
John Martignoni:
First of all, please take note that Mr. McCarthy seems to have no problem with the general Catholic concept of merit…of receiving a reward…for one’s good works. He in fact essentially states that “faithful stewards” do indeed merit, or receive a reward, for their good works. He has a problem, though, with the particular teaching of that reward being eternal life, but apparently not with that reward being an increase in grace or an increase of glory in Heaven. So, we apparently got 2 out of 3 according to McCarthy. Wasn’t it Meatloaf who said, “2 outta 3 ain’t bad?”
Now, on to his claim that this teaching of the Church, on meriting eternal life, is in “direct contradiction to the Bible?” Really?! Well, let’s not take Mr. McCarthy’s word for it, let’s see what the Bible says. First, I would ask Mr. McCarthy to give me book, chapter, an d verse in the Bible that says, “God will reward faithful stewards in heaven, but not with heaven?” I can tell you exactly where it says that in the Bible…nowhere! Let’s look at what the Bible actually does say:
Matthew 5:3–10, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven…Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy…Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God…Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.” Sounds like folks will be rewarded “with heaven” for being “poor in spirit,” being “merciful,” being “ pure in heart,” and for being “persecuted,” or am I missing something here? They will be rewarded “with heaven” for how they live their lives. At least, that’s what Jesus said. Mr. McCarthy is certainly free to disagree with Jesus if he wants to.
Matthew 25:34–40, “Then the King will say to those at His right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink…as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.” It seems pretty clear, from the Bible, that the people at the Lord’s right hand are going to “inherit” the Kingdom of Heaven because of their good works. This doesn’t say anything about being rewarded “in heaven,” rather it is saying that they will be rewarded “with heaven.” At least, that’s what Jesus said.
Matthew 19:16–17, “What good deed must I do, to have eternal life?...[Jesus said] If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” This doesn’t say that after you enter Heaven you will be rewarded for keeping the commandments…no, no…Jesus says, very specifically and very clearly, “If you would ENTER life, keep the commandments.” In order to get into Heaven, you must keep the commandments. People will be rewarded “with heaven” for keeping the commandments. At least, that’s what Jesus said.
Matthew 19:29, “And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life.” Again, as in the Sermon on the Mount, one “inherits” eternal life, according to the Bible, by doing the things mentioned here. It does not say, “And every one who has left houses or brothers…will receive a reward in Heaven after they receive eternal life through faith alone.”
Matthew 25:21, “Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.” What do we see here? Do we see a servant who receives a reward for his labor after entering into his master’s joy, or do we see a servant who is able to enter into his master’s joy because of his labor? It’s the latter. We see a servant who enters into his master’ ;s joy (Heaven) as a reward for his labors. And he receives this reward because he did something with what his master had freely given him. We can be sure this is the case because look what happens to the “wicked and slothful servant” who did nothing with what his master had given him. Does this servant, who simply held on to what the master had given him, enter into his master’s joy? No! But, according to Mr. McCarthy’s position, that servant should have entered into his master’s joy based solely on what his master gave him. That servant, according to Mr. McCarthy, is not required to do anything in order to enter into his master’s joy. Yet, the Bible states otherwise. This servant is tossed “into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth,” (v. 30). Why? Because he did nothing with the gift he had been freely given by the master.
John 6:27, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you.” This verse fits perfectly with Catholic teaching on merit and with the Parable of the Talents referenced in the paragraph above (Matthew 25:14–30) – Jesus does indeed &# 8220;give” us the food which endures to eternal life – just as the master gave his three servants the talents – but He also very clearly says that we have to labor for that food. Contradiction? Absolutely not! We have to be just like the “good and faithful servant,” who received a free gift from his master without doing a thing to “earn” it, but then had to do something with what his master gave him in order to enter into his master’s joy.
John 6:54, “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life…” Whether you take that verse literally or metaphorically, it still says that if you do something – eat His flesh and drink His blood – you will receive eternal life. It does not say that if you do this thing you will receive rewards for doing so after you get to Heaven. Heaven itself…eternal life itself…is the reward. At least, that’s what Jesus says.
Romans 2:6–7, “For He will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well–doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give rewards after he gets to Heaven.” Whoops…wa it a minute! That’s not what it says, is it? Oh, no. It says, “…to those who by patience in well–doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, He will give eternal life.” I don’t know what book Mr. McCarthy has been reading, but I don’t think it was the Bible. The reward for “patience in well–doing,” is not some reward given after you get to Heaven. Heaven itself…eternal life itself…is the reward. At least, that’s what Paul says.
1 Corinthians 3:8, “He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor.” You labor, you receive your wages. Now, this doesn’t specifically say whether the reward is “in heaven” or if it is “of heaven,” but it nevertheless bolsters the Catholic claim of there being merit (reward) for one’s works.
Colossians 3:23–24, “Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward.” Every Christian, including Mr. McCarthy, knows that the “inheritance” referr ed to here is eternal life. This passage directly states that if you do the work the Lord has given you to do, whatever that may be, you will receive “the inheritance”…eternal life…as your reward. In other words, this passage directly contradicts Mr. McCarthy’s words. So, one must ask themselves, “Who would I rather believe – Mr. McCarthy, or the Word of God?”
Hebrews 10:35–36, “Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that you may do the will of God and receive what is promised.” What is it that is promised? For this verse to make sense in Mr. McCarthy’s theology, we must believe that what is promised is some sort of reward, exactly what no one knows, after one gets into Heaven. But that makes no sense given the context. Besides, I guarantee that if Mr. McCarthy was asked to read this verse and identify what the reward is and what the promise is, he would say, “Eternal life.”
Hebrews 11:6, “And without faith it is impossible to please Him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who seek Him.” How is it, do you think, that God “rewards” those who seek Him? Maybe, with eternal life? I’ll come back to this verse, and some of the others, in just a bit.
Mr. McCarthy’s argument appears to have a hole or two in it, and “I have not yet begun to fight,” (John Paul Jones).
James McCarthy:
Eternal life is not a reward, but the unmerited gift of God. Jesus, speaking of His sheep, said, “I give eternal life to them” (John 10:28). He promised, “I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost” (Revelation 21:6, see also: John 4:14; 6:40; 6:47; 17:2; Romans 5:17; 6:23).
John Martignoni:
Nowhere can he give me a quote from the Bible that states what he just stated: “Eternal life is not a reward, but the unmerited gift of God.” Actually, according to t he Scripture verses I cited earlier, and according to Catholic teaching, it is both a gift and a reward. Catholic theology has no problem with any of the verses McCarthy cites here from John, or Revelation, or Romans, or anywhere else for that matter.
John 10:27–28, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish…” “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. We believe that Jesus does indeed give us eternal life, just as the master “gave” the servants the talents and just as Jesus “gives̶ 1; us the food that endures to eternal life, but which we still are told to “labor for.”
Revelation 21:6 and John 4:14 talk of Jesus “giving” us water from the fountain of the water of life. “Amen, amen! says the Catholic.” Again, just as the master “gave” his servants the talents, Jesus “gives” us the water of life so that we will never thirst. Nowhere do these passages say, however, that once we receive the gift we can just sit on it like the wicked and slothful servant did and still expect to enter our master’s joy.
John 6:40 and 6:47 say that whoever believes in Jesus has eternal life. “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. But, nowhere does it say, “Believing alone,” or “Faith alone.” And, for some reason, Mr. McCarthy fails to mention John 6:51, 53, 54, 56, 57, or 58 – all of which say you must “do” something – eat His flesh and drink His blood – in order to have eternal life. It is only through the selective reading of Scripture that Mr. McCarthy can support his position. Believing and doing – as the Catholic Church and the Scriptures teach – and not just believing alone, as Mr. McCarthy teaches.
John 17:2 says that Jesus gives eternal life to all whom God has given Him. “Amen, amen!” says the Catholic. That is Catholic teaching.
Romans 5:17 speaks of the “free gift” of righteousness. Romans 6:23 says that eternal life is the “free gift” of God. Catholics agree that eternal life is a gift freely given by God. But, again, just as the servants in the Parable of the Talents had to do something with the free gift given to them by their master, so we have to do something with the free gift of eternal life given to us by our master. We have to provide a return on it. In fact, Romans 6:22 says, “But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.” It seems Mr. McCarthy ignored that verse. Do we get a “return” on something if we have done absolutely nothing with it? No, just ask the “wicked and slothful” servant in the Parable of the Talents.
Now, some may say that the Catholic Church’s position seems to be contradictory – saying on the one hand that eternal life is a free gift, but saying on the other that it is a “return” or “reward” for our works. Well, again, our position is contradictory only if the Bible is contradictory. As I just showed, the Bible mentions in Rom 6:22 about receiving eternal life as a “return,” but in Rom 6:23 eternal life is a “free gift.” How can it be both? I’ll expound on that momentarily…keep reading.
James McCarthy:
Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic Church insists that eternal life is a merited reward earned by doing good. Just as a Catholic can earn an increase of grace and an increase of glory, he can earn eternal life.
The Church denounces anyone who teaches otherwise:
If anyone says that the good deeds of a justified person are the
gifts of God, in the sense that they are not also the good merits of
the one justified; or that the justified person, by the good deeds
done by him through the grace of God and the merits of Jesu s Christ
(of whom he is a living member), does not truly merit an increase in
grace, eternal life, and (so long as he dies in grace) the obtaining
of his own eternal life, and even an increase of glory: let him be anathema. (Council of Trent)
When the Council states here that Catholics can truly merit eternal life, it means that there is an equality between the work performed and the reward received. Aquinas explains this relationship saying that, by the mercy of God, good works which proceed from the grace of the Holy Spirit merit everlasting life condignly. According to Aquinas, eternal life is “granted in accordance with a fair judgment.”
Roman Catholic theologians contrast condign, or well–deserved merit, with congruous merit. This latter kind of merit applies to cases in which the reward “results from a certain graciousness in the light of God’s liberality.”
Eternal life, according to the Church, is a truly merited reward. It is merited condignly, not congruously. It is not a free gift which God graciously gives apart from anything man has done to earn it. It is the result of a fair judgment.
John Martignoni:
When Mr. McCarthy states that, “according to the Church,”eternal life “is not a free gift which God gives apart from anything man has done to earn it,” he is either speaking out of woeful ignorance, or he is being shamefully dishonest.
As the Council of Trent states, in a canon that for some reason Mr. McCarthy did not see fit to mention, “We are therefore said to be justified by faith, because ‘faith is the beginning of human salvation,’ the foundation and root of all justification, ‘without which it is impossible to please God,’ [Heb 11:6] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and are, therefore, said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace itself of justification,” (Trent; Decree on Justification, ch. 8).
The section of this quote I have bolded and underlined means that we are “justified” – or “saved” in Mr. McCarthy’s vernacular – freely, as a gift. That’s what “gratuitously” means – without cost. So, nothing we do before we are justified, or saved, whether faith or works, can merit salvation. That is a dogmatic statement of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches, dogmatically, that justification, salvation, is a free gift of God. Yet, Mr. McCarthy says the Catholic Church teaches that eternal life is “not a free gift which God graciously gives apart from anything man has done to earn it.”
The quote above was taken from the same section of the Council of Trent that Mr. McCarthy is quoting from, so I find it hard to believe that he did not s ee it.
What Mr. McCarthy fails to take note of, or deliberately refuses to understand, when he claims that the Church teaches salvation is not a free gift of God, is that in the passage he quoted from the Council of Trent, it is speaking of the good deeds of the “justified” person. The word “justified,” or saved, is referring to a person who has already freely received the gift of eternal life. So, the passage which he quotes, and from which he draws the conclusion that the Church teaches salvation is not a free gift, is referring to an already saved person or, as a Catholic would put it, a person who is in a state of grace. If one is not saved, not in a state of grace, than oneR 17;s good works merit nothing. I think that is a pretty important point that Mr. McCarthy seems to have overlooked.
So, the passage from the Council of Trent which McCarthy quotes from, and takes issue with, is talking about the good works of someone who is already saved as meriting eternal life. It is not talking about the good works of someone who is not already justified. How did that justified person become a justified person so that their good works could merit salvation? By the free gift of God.
But, one might ask, are we not contradicting ourselves by saying that we cannot merit our justification but that we can merit eternal life? Well, we are if you believe the Bible contradicts itself, because as I’ve shown with the Scripture verses referenced above, the Bible absolutely supports Catholic teaching on this matter. No, there is no contradiction in the Catholic Church’s teaching, or in the Bible’s teaching on this point. The reason there is no contradiction, is because the person who has received the free gift of salvation, can lose it. Any good works that are done are not done in order to be justified, but to keep from losing that justification.
Let me use Scripture to explain what I just said:
Ephesians 2:8–10, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God – not because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” We have been saved by grace, through faith ̵ 1; either our faith or the faith of our parents (infant baptism) – not by works. Eternal life is a free gift of God. But, this passage ends by saying that God has prepared a set of good works for us, that we “should” walk in them. Well, what happens if the person who has received the free gift of eternal life from God, chooses not to do the good works that God has prepared for him?
Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father Who is in Heaven.” So, in order to get into heaven, you can’t just cry, “Lord, Lord.” You can’t just have faith alone. You have to “do” the will of the Father. Well, the will of the Father is that He has prepared some good works for you to do, as we saw in Eph 2:10. So, let’s say you’ve been saved by grace as a gift from God, and then you don’t do the will of the Father by not doing the good works He has prepared beforehand for you to do. Are you still saved? Not according to Jesus. But, if you do those good works, if you do the will of God, do those works allow you to receive salvation, or to keep the salvation that has already been given to you by God’s grace?&# 160; They allow you to keep what you have already been given.
Let’s look again at the Parable of the Talents. First of all, was the third servant in his master’s good graces at the beginning of the parable? Of course he was, or the master would have never entrusted him with the talents. But, after the servant does nothing with what he was freely given, what does the Bible say?
Matthew 25: “You ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own WITH INTEREST. So, take the talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten talents,” and then this servant is tossed into the outer darkness. The two servants who return more than what they were given, not only enter into their master’s joy, but they are set over much by their master. They kept what was given them. The servant who did nothing with what was given to him, lost it.
Moral of the story? We cannot w ork to obtain salvation – since it is a free gift of God (received through Baptism), and since no work we do before we obtain our initial justification can merit anything anyway. But, we must work to keep from losing salvation, to keep from losing what we have been freely given. Now, after we have been justified, then our works can truly be said to merit because we are cooperating with God, “at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure,” (Phil 2:13) of our own free will. As it says in John 15:4, “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.” We cannot produce fruit unless we first abide in Christ, the vine…unless we are first saved, or justified. But, if we are a branch of the vine which is Christ, and choose not to produce fruit, choose not to do the good works that God has prepared for us beforehand, then we will be cut off from Christ and wither and be thrown into the fire to be burned (John 15:6).
James McCarthy:
Romans 2:6–8
To substantiate its claim that eternal life is a merited reward, the Roman Catholic Church cites Paul’s letter to the Romans:
[God] . . . will render to every man according to his deeds: to
those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and
immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do
not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. (Romans 2:6–8)
The Roman Catholic Church interprets this passage to say that if a person dies with sanctifying grace in his soul, he deserves to go to heaven because of his good deeds:
. . . it must be believed that nothing more is needed for the
justified to be considered to have fully satisfied God’s law,
according to this stat e of life, by the deeds they have wrought in
him and to have truly deserved to gain eternal life in their time
(provided they die in a state of grace). (Council of Trent)
John Martignoni:
Okay, he seems to be deliberately slanting what he says here to focus on good deeds, while leaving out of the equation all of what the Church teaches regarding faith and justification, which is right there in the Council of Trent, and which he must have read while doing his research for this article. He is trying to make his readers think the Church puts all of her eggs in the “works” basket. He is trying to slant the phrase, “to have fully satisfied God’s law,” as meaning the Catholic Church teaches that good deeds alone can fully satisfy God’s law. He just glosses right over the fact that this passage is talking about “the justified,” or, as it mentions again, those “in a state of grace.” Well, pray tell, Mr. McCarthy, how did those who are justified, come to be justified? What does the Catholic Church teach on that? What does the Council of Trent teach on that? They came to be justified by the free gift of eternal life from Jesus Christ. Mr. McCarthy fails to mention that tiny little detail.
As I have cited above, Trent clearly states that without faith, one cannot please God. So, faith is a part of what is required “to have fully satisfied God’s law,” as well. But he ignores that. He also leaves out all of what the Bible says, about the role of works in the process of salvation, some of which I have quoted above.
James McCarthy:
The Bible, on the other hand, teaches that what every man and woman truly deserves is eternal punishment. The good news of Jesus Christ, however, is that God is willing to graciously give those who trust Christ eternal life, a gift that no one deserves! In order that these two truths would not be confused, the Holy Spirit included both of them in one verse:
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal
life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)
With such a clear statement here that eternal life is a free gift, Romans 2:6–8 cannot possibly be interpreted as teaching the direct opposite—that eternal life is a merited reward. A closer look at Romans 2:6–8 reveals the source of the Church’s misinterpretation.
John Martignoni:
I think he just made an infallible pronouncement here – “Roma ns 2:6–8 cannot possibly be interpreted as teaching…that eternal life is a merited reward.” Oh, it can’t be interpreted that way even though that’s what it actually says? Regarding Rom 6:23, as I’ve explained above, the Catholic Church agrees 100% that eternal life is the free gift of God. But, as Scripture very clearly shows, once we’ve got it, we can’t bury it in the ground, we have to do something with it or it can be taken away from us.
James McCarthy:
In Ro mans 2:6–8, Paul is addressing the kind of person who considers himself morally superior to others in character and conduct. This moralist, however, is himself practicing the very sins he condemns in others. Paul warns this hypocrite that he will not escape the judgment of God. A day is coming when God “will render to every man according to His deeds” (Romans 2:6). Those who do good—the biblical evidence of new life (John 15:8)—will receive honor and eternal life. Those who do evil—the biblical evidence of an unregenerated heart (1 John 3:7–10)—will receive wrath and indignation.
Note that Paul does not say that God will render to every man honor or wrath because of his deeds. That would make good works the cause of eternal life, as taught i n Roman Catholicism. Rather, Paul says that God will render judgment according to how a man has lived. This means that there will be a relationship of correspondence between how a person lives and the outcome of his judgment. Those who practice good—evidence of true spiritual life—will receive good from the Lord. Those who practice evil—such as the hypocritical moralist Paul is addressing—will receive wrath and indignation.
John Martignoni:
This sentence above is a masterful piece of double–speak. I think George Orwell would be left spellbound by this paragraph. It truly is amazing. McCarthy says, speaking of Romans 2:6–8, “Note that Paul does not say that God will render to every man honor or wrath because of his deeds.”
Yet, he earlier correctly quoted Romans 2:6–8 as saying: “For He, [God] will render to every man according to his deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life…” Uhmm…I don’t know about you, but it sure seems to me that Paul said God will render honor to every man – eternal life…BECAUSE OF HIS DEEDS.
“…but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.” Uhmm…I don’t know about you, but it sure seems to me that Paul said God will render wrath to every man BECAUSE OF HIS DEEDS.
Notice in this paragraph how he takes the reward of “eternal life” which is specifically mentioned in the verse, and turns it into, “will receive good from the Lord.” His subst itution of “good” for “eternal life” allows him to avoid the truth of Catholic teaching regarding a person meriting eternal life. Here is Romans 2:6–8, according to Mr. McCarthy:
“For He [God], will show that there is a relationship of correspondence between how a person lives and their judgment. Those who practice good, which thereby demonstrates that they have been saved by faith alone, will receive good from the Lord. Those who practice evil, which thereby demonstrates that they have not been saved by faith alone, will receive bad stuff – wrath and indignation – from the Lord.”
Uhh…yeah, sure.
James McCarthy:
Roman Catholicism, on the other hand, teaches that God gives eternal life to people because of their good works, to those who deserve it:
It is a universally accepted dogma of the Catholic Church that man,
in union with the grace of the Holy Spirit must merit heaven by his
good works. . . . we can actually merit heaven as our reward. . . .
Heaven must be fought for; we have to earn heaven. (Dogmatic
Theology for the Laity)
John Martignoni:
Again, he focuses on works alone when neither the Council of Trent, nor the overall teaching of the Catholic Church, does any such thing.
James 1:12, “Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love Him.”
Matthew 16:27, “For the Son of man is to come with His angels in the glory of His Father, and then He will repay every man for what he has done.”1 Cor 3:8, “He who plants and who he waters are equal, and each shall receive his wages according to his labor.”Rev 22:12, “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done.”
The concept of merit, whether meriting an increase in grace here in this life, or an increase in glory in the next life, or in meriting eternal life itself, is based not on some debt that God owes us because of what we do, but on the fact that God promised us that He would give us all of these things if we love Him and do what He told us to do. That , and the fact that all merit ultimately derives from the merit Christ earned for us on the Cross, and that we can apply that merit to our lives by virtue of being members of His Body, is why the Catholic Church can teach what it teaches, that eternal life is both a gift and a reward. Which is exactly what the Bible teaches.
posted by Russ Rentler, M.D. | 11:38 PM
Good article here on the subject. To see Calvin and RC contrasted you need to scroll down a bit in the article:http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/11/the-doctrine-of-merit-feingold-calvin-and-the-church-fathers/
another good one here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/01/indulgences-the-treasury-of-merit-and-the-communion-of-saints/
And from here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/06/did-trent-teach-that-christs-merits-are-not-sufficient-for-salvation/
Reformed theologian Michael Horton recently claimed that “Trent said in no uncertain terms that Christ’s merits are not sufficient for salvation.” Whether or not that claim sounds suspicious to you, and it did to me, remember one of the cardinal rules in ecumenical inquiry: Don’t get your Catholic theology from Protestant hearsay–and vice versa. Go to the source, if you want to learn the truth.
I certainly could not find the aforementioned “no uncertain terms” while perusing the teaching of the Sixth Session of the Council of Trent. My guess is that Horton must have meant to indicate that the Catholic Church condemned the opinion that justification consists in the sole imputation of Christ’s merits. This is true. Trent taught that justification is by infusion of grace and charity and that once received, the increase in justification includes the believer’s actual participation in the merits of Christ. But this does not entail that Christ’s merits are not sufficient for salvation (quite the opposite). It appears that Horton is assuming a “zero-sum” understanding of merits, such that the works done by persons in a state of grace are “added to” the merits of Christ, thus “equaling” enough merits to be saved. But Catholic soteriology does not employee a zero-sum model of merit; rather, our merits spring from our participation in the life of Christ, even as the fruit of the branches depends upon their union with the vine. [1]......................
another quote from comment 59 here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/11/how-the-church-won-an-interview-with-jason-stellman/#comment-40031In 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
and from comment 72 on the same thread:
In reply, you wrote the following in #60:
After listening to what you say about the distinction between someone else’s merits being imputed to us and someone else paying satisfaction for our debt, and that in your opinion it is not a minor distinction, I still see a tension within Jason’s argument. If you are correct that even according to Jason Spirit-wrought-agape-fulfilling-the-law is not enough for the perfection that is needed for final salvation (I didn’t hear Jason say that), we are still exactly where we started. In the RC paradigm there is need for another benefit (beside infused grace), just like in Protestant theology (though not in the same way). Therefore Jason’s case is extremely vulnerable.
These last two lines are at the heart of your reasoning. In your mind because in Catholic theology there is another benefit besides infused grace, therefore “Jason’s case is extremely vulnerable.” But that conclusion does not follow from the premise. There are many other benefits we Catholics now enjoy. Suffering, for example, in Catholic theology is a benefit we receive in this present life. So are prayers on our behalf by the saints, and the consolation that provides. We also receive the benefit of the Holy Spirit directed guidance of the Church, including the orthodox teaching of the Church. We have the benefit of the examples of saints and martyrs. We have the benefit of the sacrament of reconciliation, and the assurance provided therein of our reconciliation to Christ and His Church. And so on. The fact that there are many additional benefits Catholics receive in this present life, in addition to the gift of infused grace and agape by the Holy Spirit, is fully compatible with Jason’s point. His point was not that in Catholic doctrine there are no additional benefits that God has provided beyond infused agape, but that the gift of infused agape makes one benefit in particular, i.e. extra nos imputed righteousness, unnecessary because superfluous. That’s why if you point to other benefits Catholics receive (according to Catholic theology), and conclude therefrom that Jason’s case collapses, you are attacking a strawman of your own making. If you wish to challenge Jason’s actual claim, then you will have to do something you have not yet done in this thread: show that even given infused agape, extra nosimputed righteousness is still necessary. If you merely claim that Jason’s case is “extremely vulnerable” [to collapse] or any other such hand-waving, Jason’s claim remains intact.
from comment 48 here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/01/holy-church-finding-jesus-as-a-reverted-catholic-a-testimonial-response-to-chris-castaldo/#comment-46784
from comment 48 here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/01/holy-church-finding-jesus-as-a-reverted-catholic-a-testimonial-response-to-chris-castaldo/#comment-46784
Second, you claim that the Catechism’s claim (CCC 2027) about the possibility of meriting grace contradicts Romans 11:6 and Romans 4:4-5. In these verses in Romans St. Paul is speaking of dead works, i.e. works done apart from grace. In this particular context he is teaching that no one is justified merely by following the Jewish law, without grace. God has not rejected the Jews. But merely carrying out the Jewish law is not sufficient for salvation; the remnant are (as always) those who have been given grace. Likewise, in Romans 4:4-5 St. Paul is speaking of works-done-apart-from-faith. But when the Catechism speaks of the possibility of meriting grace, it is referring only to works done in a state of grace, by those having living faith. So there is no contradiction between what the Catechism says, and what St. Paul is teaching in these verses. I’ve written a post on the subject of merit titled “The Doctrine of Merit: Feingold, Calvin, and the Church Fathers,” which addresses this objection in much more detail.
see also comment 10 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2011/01/indulgences-the-treasury-of-merit-and-the-communion-of-saints/#comment-47567
In a post published yesterday and titled “The Treasury of the Church – “A Satanic Mockery”,” R. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary California quotes the following paragraph from John Calvin’s Institutes, regarding the Catholic doctrine of indulgences:
Now these, to describe them rightly, are a profanation of the blood of Christ, a Satanic mockery, to lead the Christian people away from God’s grace, away from the life that is in Christ, and turn them aside from the true way of salvation. For how could the blood of Christ be more foully profaned than when they deny that it is sufficient for the forgiveness of sins, for reconciliation, for satisfaction—unless the lack of it, as of something dried up and exhausted, be otherwise supplied and filled? “To Christ, the Law and all the Prophets bear witness,” says Peter, that “through him we are to receive forgiveness of sins.” [Acts 10:43 p.] Indulgences bestow forgiveness of sins through Peter, Paul, and the martyrs. “The blood of Christ cleanses us from sin,” says John [1 John 1:7 p.]. Indulgences make the blood of martyrs the cleansing of sins. “Christ,” says Paul, “who knew no sin, was made sin for us” (that is, satisfaction of sin) “so that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” [2 Corinthians 5:21 p., cf. Vg.]. Indulgences lodge satisfaction of sins in the blood of martyrs. Paul proclaimed and testified to the Corinthians that Christ alone was crucified and died for them [cf. 1 Corinthians 1:13]. Indulgences declare: “Paul and others died for us.” Elsewhere Paul says, “Christ acquired the church with his own blood.” [Acts 20:28 p.] Indulgences establish another purchase price in the blood of martyrs. “By a single offering Christ has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” [Hebrews 10:14.] Indulgences proclaim: Sanctification, otherwise insufficient, is perfected by the martyrs. John says that “all the saints have washed their robes… in the blood of the Lamb.” [Revelation 7:14.] Indulgences teach that they wash their robes in the blood of the saints. (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 3.5.3)
When we peel back his rhetoric, Calvin’s argument in this paragraph goes like this:
(1) The merits of the saints can have a role in the forgiveness of sins only if Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient for the forgiveness of sins.
(2) The notion that Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient profanes Christ’s sacrifice.
(3) Scripture teaches that forgiveness of sins is through Christ’s sacrifice.
(4) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences makes the blood of martyrs the cleansing of sins.
Therefore,
(5) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences profanes Christ’s sacrifice. [from (1) and (2)]
(6) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences is contrary to Scripture. [from (3) and (4)]
(2) The notion that Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient profanes Christ’s sacrifice.
(3) Scripture teaches that forgiveness of sins is through Christ’s sacrifice.
(4) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences makes the blood of martyrs the cleansing of sins.
Therefore,
(5) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences profanes Christ’s sacrifice. [from (1) and (2)]
(6) The Catholic doctrine of indulgences is contrary to Scripture. [from (3) and (4)]
In light of the content of the post above, we can see how Calvin’s argument is misguided in four ways, and thereby sets up an oversimplified straw man of the Catholic doctrine concerning indulgences.
First, indulgences are not for the forgiveness of the guilt of sins, but for the reduction or removal of the debt of temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven. Calvin’s argument conflates the distinction between guilt and debt, and this allows him to imply that the Catholic doctrine makes the sacrifices of the saints equivalent to the sacrifice of Christ.
Second, Calvin’s argument conflates the distinction between eternal debt and temporal debt, and thus obscures the Catholic teaching that only Christ’s sacrifice removes our eternal debt, again allowing him to imply falsely that the Catholic doctrine makes the sacrifices of the saints equivalent to the sacrifice of Christ.
Third, he mistakenly assumes that the only possible basis for the saints having a role in [the reduction of temporal punishment] is Christ’s sacrifice being insufficient. He thereby overlooks the possibility that (a) the saints having this role is not on account of an insufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice but precisely through Christ’s sacrifice and (b) is a gift of love to the Church, by giving to her members the great gift and dignity of participating in His redemptive work and its application to others, so that the horizontal dimension of love within the Body is both from Him, and truly from us by participation, and eternally meaningful.
Fourth, he assumes that if Scripture teaches that forgiveness of sins is through Christ’s sacrifice, then the notion that the sacrifices of the saints have any role in [the reduction of temporal punishment] is contrary to Scripture. But that conclusion does not follow. In Catholic doctrine the merits of the saints are themselves participations in Christ’s merit, and their sufferings are participations in His sufferings. Without Christ’s Passions and merit, there would be no saints, and their sacrifices would not be meritorious or of any supernatural benefit to themselves or anyone else. So for this reason the role of the saints in the reduction of temporal punishment for others in the Body of Christ is not contrary to Scripture’s teaching that forgiveness of sins is through Christ’s sacrifice. Nowhere in Scripture does it state or state anything entailing that Christ’s sacrifice eliminates the possibility that the sacrifices and merits of the saints participating in Christ’s sacrifice and merit can contribute to the reduction of the debt of temporal punishment for other members of the Body of Christ.
The fact that we bring happiness and joy to each other through our acts of charity does not entail that Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient for our happiness and joy, but is by Christ’s gracious gift a genuine participation in the communication of His happiness and joy to His Body. So likewise, the reduction of temporal punishments through the merits and prayers of the saints does not entail that Christ’s sacrifice was insufficient for the elimination of temporal punishment, but is by Christ’s gracious gift a provision by which the saints genuinely participate in the communication of His merits, such that their participations in Christ’s sacrifice and merits are also within the benefits communicated to the Body of Christ, by which temporal punishment is reduced and removed.
from Catholic Answers http://www.catholic.com/blog/tim-staples/error-begets-error''For St. Paul, any works done either before entering into Christ or apart from Christ profit nothing. But works done in Christ are a different story. Before Christ, unregenerate men are “dead in trespasses and sins,” and “by nature children of wrath,” as Paul writes in Ephesians 2:1-3. But after entering into Christ, Phillipians 4:13 says, “I can do all things in [Christ] who strengthens me.” And according to Romans 2:6-7, “all things” includes meriting eternal life..................
Saying man must “accomplish something” in Christ does not deny the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice; it merely states, in agreement with St. John no less, that man must, among other things, “walk in the light” of Christ in order for Christ’s all-sufficient sacrifice to become efficaciousin his life:
… if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin… If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (I John 1:7-9).
Notice, we must walk, and we must confess
also here in comment 154 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/#comment-47772
Bryan when God accepts us into heaven because of our works, does he do so on a strict quad pro basis? Or does he do so only on account of his mercy and promise?
I’m not sure what you have in mind by “quad pro,” but perhaps you mean “quid pro quo.” The way you have framed these two questions presupposes a dichotomy that the Church does not hold, namely, that salvation is either by human works alone, or by mercy alone such that human actions have no role at all. No creature by his own power or actions can place God under any obligation. But God can freely establish an economy of salvation under which God obligates Himself by His own promises, and by grace gives to man a genuine role in his salvation. For the person who is not in a state of grace, his works have no merit toward eternal life, because they are not ordered to a supernatural end. This is why there is no salvation by keeping a law that is not internal to us, but only external. Those in a state of grace, i.e. those in whom the law is written on their heart, can truly merit, because by the grace of God within them their actions are ordered by a supernatural principle (i.e. sanctifying grace and agape) to a supernatural end, as explained in “The Doctrine of Merit: Feingold, Calvin, and the Church Fathers.”
Notice that Trent relates, as does Paul, that we do not work to earn salvation, or God ‘owing’ us salvation. Our only means of being justified before God, is God’s sheer gratuity. We can never put ourselves on equal terms with God,as though we are on contract, saying, “God gives me a job to do, I do it, and then God gives me as payment as salvation.” This is not only what Paul is arguing against, but exactly what the Council of Trent argues against in chapter 8.
To treat merit as merely contractual would leave out the role of grace in the very acts by which the saints merit. God works in the saints all their righteous deeds. We do not merit coming into a state of grace, or justification-as-translation. That’s what St. Paul is teaching, and that’s what Trent Session 6 Chapter 8 is saying. Neither St. Paul nor Trent are excluding merit for those in a state of grace, as I explained in the link provided just above. If you wish to discuss the subject of merit, please do so under that thread.
end of quote
From the Council of Orange:
commenting on this in comment 92 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/:
from comment 94:
from comment 173 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/
We do not merit (in any way) justification-as-translation. We cooperate in that justification. Subsequently, we merit justification-as-increase, and merit of that sort is not excluded in Romans 4 or anywhere else in Scripture.
...............
The Catholic Church also teaches that justification is a gift. Horton’s unwritten premise is that if justification is a gift, then in no sense can it be merited. But St. Paul does not say that. That’s an assumption Horton is bringing to the text. What St. Paul says is fully compatible with the Catholic teaching that justification-as-translation is unmerited and that for those in a state of grace through faith, their acts of love merit justification-as-increase, which increase is at the same time a gift of grace (since we could not attain it if not for God’s unmerited gift grace), and merited (since by His gift, part of the gift is the very opportunity to participate truly in its increase).
see also http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/merit.html
comment 45 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/03/aquinas-and-trent-part-7/#comment-59313 :
end of quote
From the Council of Orange:
“CANON 18. That grace is not preceded by merit. Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.”
commenting on this in comment 92 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/:
This is essentially the Catholic notion of “gracious merit,” where God’s grace enables us to do the works that He is pleased to reward (cf Heb 11:6). There is nothing “Pelagian” about this, and to deny this notion is to simply *misunderstand* the real issues.
from comment 94:
“When Catholics affirm the “meritorious” character of good works, they wish to say that, according to the biblical witness, a reward in heaven is promised to these works. Their intention is to emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, not to contest the character of those works as gifts, or far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace” (Lutheran/Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification).
........................................
In my humble and very private opinion, the language of merit is a way to speak of that necessary transformation in the Spirit that must occur if we to authentically participate in the life of the Holy Trinity. Theosis is not a fiction: it takes place in our the concrete reality of our personal lives. Incorporation into this divine life is never a matter of persuading God to forgive us; it is never a matter of earning God’s love; it is never a matter of quid pro quo. But we must be born anew in the Holy Spirit. We must repent of our sins. We must walk in the life of grace and love–not in order to earn God’s love but simply because this is what it means to participate in the life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
from comment 173 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/12/justification-catholic-church-and-the-judaizers/
We do not merit (in any way) justification-as-translation. We cooperate in that justification. Subsequently, we merit justification-as-increase, and merit of that sort is not excluded in Romans 4 or anywhere else in Scripture.
...............
The Catholic Church also teaches that justification is a gift. Horton’s unwritten premise is that if justification is a gift, then in no sense can it be merited. But St. Paul does not say that. That’s an assumption Horton is bringing to the text. What St. Paul says is fully compatible with the Catholic teaching that justification-as-translation is unmerited and that for those in a state of grace through faith, their acts of love merit justification-as-increase, which increase is at the same time a gift of grace (since we could not attain it if not for God’s unmerited gift grace), and merited (since by His gift, part of the gift is the very opportunity to participate truly in its increase).
see also http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/merit.html
comment 45 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/03/aquinas-and-trent-part-7/#comment-59313 :
“grace was in Christ not merely as in an individual, but also as in the Head of the whole Church, to Whom all are united, as members to a head, who constitute one mystical person. And hence it is that Christ’s merit extends to others inasmuch as they are His members” *Summa*, “Third Part,” Question 19, Article 4Do not Aquinas’ words at least open the door (perhaps unintentionally) for the teaching that Christ’s merit-righteousness is literally the righteousness of His people–as the Reformation taught?
No, because St. Thomas wrote many other things that explain what he is saying here. What the early Protestants meant by Christ’s “merit” was a legal record or account of perfect obedience to the law. Such a record could (it was claimed) be transferred to our account. But that’s not what St. Thomas means by ‘merit.’ He is speaking of the grace Christ (in His human will) merited for us, that is, sanctifying grace and agape, by which we partake of the divine nature. Christ, being God, already had all grace, so He did not (and could not) merit *more* grace. Rather, by His loving obedience in His human nature even unto death, He merited that we would be made sharers in this grace, which, by infusion into our souls, makes us truly righteous, not just counted righteousness while inwardly unrighteous, as I explained in “Imputation and Paradigms.” So St. Thomas means something quite different here, because of what he means by ‘merit’ and what he means by ‘grace’ and what he understands ‘righteousness’ to be.
from comment 19 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/06/did-trent-teach-that-christs-merits-are-not-sufficient-for-salvation/
Catholic Answers provides a brief description of the Catholic understanding of merit. The entry on “Merit” in the Catholic Encyclopedia is also helpful, and goes into much more detail. This section, in particular, is relevant to Horton’s claim:
Clearly, an infinite treasure of merits (“which Christ gained for us on the Cross”) is a sufficient treasure of merits. One cannot go beyond infinity. But one can, through living faith and the sacraments, participate in the infinite merits of Christ. And that is the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic magisterium (both ordinary and extraordinary), from St. Peter to the present day.
from comment 503 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/08/imputation-and-paradigms-a-reply-to-nicholas-batzig/#comment-158840
From the Catholic perspective, there is only one human nature, to which, when grace is added (infused/imparted), truly merits the reward. We do not disagree that this ability is a gift, but it is a gift to nature, not something separate from nature. The “fallen human nature” is not a different nature or a different essential definition of humanity, else Jesus could not have truly shared our fallen nature when He was Incarnate.
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. “
from comment 19 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/06/did-trent-teach-that-christs-merits-are-not-sufficient-for-salvation/
Catholic Answers provides a brief description of the Catholic understanding of merit. The entry on “Merit” in the Catholic Encyclopedia is also helpful, and goes into much more detail. This section, in particular, is relevant to Horton’s claim:
Christian faith teaches us that the Incarnate Son of God by His death on the cross has in our stead fully satisfied God’s anger at our sins, and thereby effected a reconciliation between the world and its Creator. Not, however, as though nothing were now left to be done by man, or as though he were now restored to the state of original innocence, whether he wills it or not; on the contrary, God and Christ demand of him that he make the fruits of the Sacrifice of the Cross his own by personal exertion and co-operation with grace, by justifying faith and the reception of baptism. It is a defined article of the Catholic Faith that man before, in, and after justification derives his whole capability of meriting and satisfying, as well as his actual merits and satisfactions, solely from the infinite treasure of merits which Christ gained for us on the Cross (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. VI, cap. xvi; Sess. XIV, cap. viii).It is precisely because Christ’s merits are sufficient for our salvation that the Church teaches “that man before, in, and after justification derives his whole capability of meriting and satisfying, as well as his actual merits and satisfactions, solely from the infinite treasure of merits which Christ gained for us on the Cross” (emphasis added).
Clearly, an infinite treasure of merits (“which Christ gained for us on the Cross”) is a sufficient treasure of merits. One cannot go beyond infinity. But one can, through living faith and the sacraments, participate in the infinite merits of Christ. And that is the clear and consistent teaching of the Catholic magisterium (both ordinary and extraordinary), from St. Peter to the present day.
from comment 503 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2012/08/imputation-and-paradigms-a-reply-to-nicholas-batzig/#comment-158840
From the Catholic perspective, there is only one human nature, to which, when grace is added (infused/imparted), truly merits the reward. We do not disagree that this ability is a gift, but it is a gift to nature, not something separate from nature. The “fallen human nature” is not a different nature or a different essential definition of humanity, else Jesus could not have truly shared our fallen nature when He was Incarnate.
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. “
No comments:
Post a Comment