catholicsphere

Q.   Is the Catholic doctrine on salvation based on works?

Protestants often reject the Catholic “formula” for salvation as based on works. Apologists and evangelists have long tried to explain that Catholicism believes no such thing, while rejecting a false notion of “faith alone” that was put forth by the Reformers of the 16th century. Unfortunately, it sometimes seems that something is lost in the communication between lay Catholics and Protestants (and sometimes clergy) when discussing and explaining the matter. Oftentimes, in discussions around the internet, I’ve seen well-intentioned and faithful Catholics who do not pick up properly on the objections raised by their Protestant brethren, and thus cannot adequately answer those objections.

I have also, at times, heard or read sermons that attempt to expound on the Scriptural position on salvation from Protestant pastors and apologists that just don’t seem to hit the mark, and leave many questions to be answered.

Q.   What are the problems in the way this doctrine is explained?

While it is, perhaps, the most widely discussed topic (other than Mary) among Protestants and Catholics, it is also one of the most difficult to explain — not only for Catholics, but also for Protestants; since I find Protestantism usually oversimplifies the issue and seems to leave the believer with an incomplete understranding. For example, I often hear pastors, evangelists and apologists say that “we are not saved by our works, but only by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ”. This is a seemingly simple phrase that really has huge theological implications.

At first, the Catholic will not be able to get past the phrase “we are not saved by our works”. The Protestant will attempt to explain that away as Catholics not understanding the Scriptures and their entanglement in a “religion of works”. Yet, such characterization is unfair because usually when one digs deeper into the issue, there will be an admission by the Protestant that works are a part of faith — although, in my experience, sometimes when faced with having to admit such, there is a fear that they will reject the doctrine of grace and thus they will do what they can to keep from admitting that out loud. The disagreement between Catholics and Protestants here seems to be due to an improper emphasis on one over the other; Catholics have traditionally been taught that their works are a reflection, and extension, of their faith, and therefore they retain the evidentuary; doing acts of faith. Protestants on the other-hand, at least in my experience, seem to be almost exclusively spiritual-minded; acknowleging their belief in God and His doctrines, but sometimes failing to explain that works (such as obedience to God’s commands, and turning away from sin) are absolutely necessary to having what they call a “saving faith”.

Yet, it is with the second part of the phrase above that the objection comes between those Catholics who understand the matters more deeply. Imputation is the key phrase — because it seems to ignore the true conversion of the soul, and points outside of the person to Christ’s righteousness. It seems to resign itself to the idea that we can’t help but sin, so the righteousness of Jesus is our substitute. In the Protestant interpretation, only the righteousness of Christ — applied in a seemingly external manner — can satisfy what God requires. We are perfect only insofar as Christ is perfect. Strangely, personal perfection is foreign to us, and God admits to heaven sinners on the basis of a (shallow, in my opinion) intellectual faith.

Q.   What is wrong with the Protestant explanation?

In my view, this is problematic because it seems to ignore that the person, particularly their soul, is truly indwelt by the Holy Spirit, which ultimately conforms their will to God’s will, and thus they become — as God declares — perfect. The main problem I see is that it divorces faith from its necessary partner, works. In the Scripture, with precious few exceptions, works are intimately attached to faith, and are a necessity.

My Protestant brethren may object to that characterization, but that is the truth of that matter. Just like the objection — from Catholics and Protestants alike — to politicians who express faith, but vote as secularists, so is the problem of the believer who fails to live out his/her belief. The traditional Protestant doctrine gives the sinning believer no reason, after initial justification, for repentance, confession and conversion because any sin they commit is “covered over” by the righteousness of Christ.

Q.   How does the Catholic doctrine differ?

On the other hand, the Catholic doctrine recognizes the need for interior conversion, and the necessity of not only turning from commission of sins, but also sins that fail to do what is right. For this reason the Catholic says not only have I not committed theft, dishonor or murder (among others), but also that I have fed the poor, clothed the naked, and aided the sick (again, among other things); not having let those opportunities pass by.

Q.   Isn’t that salvation by one’s own works; as Protestants charge?

In my discussions with some of my Protestant brethren, the objection is raised about the necessity of doing “works”, such as going to Mass, and receiving the sacraments, praying the rosary, etc. Of course, there is much more to explaining why the Mass, sacraments, prayers, etc are unique in the life of the believer, to fully substantiate the necessity of these things, but it should suffice to say that failure to be a part of them and practice them is actually a neglect of one’s spiritual life, and failure to properly recognize God as the source and sustainer of that life. This is often what I feel is not necessarily recognized by those who object to these things.

Q.   Where does grace fit in then?

So, does this mean that it is by one’s own works, and not by grace, that we are saved? That we must be righteous of our own accord in order to attain to heaven? Not at all! The Scriptures tell us that “God is at work in us both to will and to work for His good pleasure.” Therefore, the work that we do is God’s work; which we cooperate with — God spurs us, by grace and power of the Holy Spirit within, to do good and turn from sin. He does not force this upon us.

Q.   Doesn’t that mean that we can twart God’s will?

That we do not always do good, despite God’s Spirit and grace within us, is no failure or lacking in God’s grace and power. Rather it is the coupling of those things with His respect for the free will that He endowed us with.

Therefore, in summary, the typical and traditional Protestant position expresses the righteousness of Christ as the basis of the believer’s own righteousness, but often fails to see that it places no impetus on the believer to receive God’s grace in such a way as to really and truly become “perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.” There is a sense of an allowable disconnect between the ideal and the real. By contrast, Catholicism recognizes that sin by the believer is a moment of rejection of grace that affects one’s “perfection”, thus Catholicism instructs the believer of the necessity to “put on Christ”, and, with the aid of God’s grace, make that righteousness His own.