Do Catholics believe they are saved by works?

Do Catholics believe they are saved by works?

Ephesians 2v8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,

9. not of works, lest anyone should boast."

That's what scripture says.

If Catholics believe different, then they are wrong.

Yes, Roman Catholicism teaches expressly that they are saved by works. Roman Catholics are confident they are going to heaven, not because they have faith in Jesus Christ who died for their sins and came back to life after three days, but rather, because they received the sacraments of baptism and eucharist, and are in good standing with Rome. Officially teaching, they believe "there is no salvation outside of the Church [of Rome]," and they believe that they alone have the authority to minister that salvation. In their theology, one "gets saved" by being baptized, and one maintains their salvation through receiving eucharist at least once a year.

At least, this is the "old line" of thinking in Rome. Ever since Vatican II last century, Rome has been much more pluralistic in its thinking, allowing for the possibility of protestants to receive eternal life, as well as non-Christian people. Pope John Paul was very pluralistic in his thinking. The present pope seems much more "old line" in his thinking.

Most devout Catholics, so far as I have seen, believe "old line" in their theology.

Taken from: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13407a.htm

Individual salvation
The Council of Trent describes the process of salvation from sin in the case of an adult with great minuteness (Sess. VI, v-vi).

It begins with the grace of God which touches a sinner's heart, and calls him to repentance. This grace cannot be merited; it proceeds solely from the love and mercy of God. Man may receive or reject this inspiration of God, he may turn to God or remain in sin. Grace does not constrain man's free will.

Thus assisted the sinner is disposed for salvation from sin; he believes in the revelation and promises of God, he fears God's justice, hopes in his mercy, trusts that God will be merciful to him for Christ's sake, begins to love God as the source of all justice, hates and detests his sins.

This disposition is followed by justification itself, which consists not in the mere remission of sins, but in the sanctification and renewal of the inner man by the voluntary reception of God's grace and gifts, whence a man becomes just instead of unjust, a friend instead of a foe and so an heir according to hope of eternal life. [b]This change happens either [u]by reason of a perfect act of charity elicited by a well disposed sinner or by virtue of the Sacrament either of Baptism or of Penance[/u] according to the condition of the respective subject laden with sin. The Council further indicates the causes of this change. By the merit of the Most Holy Passion through the Holy Spirit, the charity of God is shed abroad in the hearts of those who are justified. [/b]

Against the heretical tenets of various times and sects we must hold

that the initial grace is truly gratuitous and supernatural;
that the human will remains free under the influence of this grace;
that man really cooperates in his personal salvation from sin;
that by justification man is really made just, and not merely declared or reputed so;
that justification and sanctification are only two aspects of the same thing, and not ontologically and chronologically distinct realities;
that justification excludes all mortal sin from the soul, so that the just man is no way liable to the sentence of death at God's judgment-seat.
Other points involved in the foregoing process of personal salvation from sin are matters of discussion among Catholic theologians; such are, for instance,
the precise nature of initial grace,
the manner in which grace and free will work together,
the precise nature of the fear and the love disposing the sinner for justification,
the manner in which sacraments cause sanctifying grace.
But these questions are treated in other articles dealing ex professo with the respective subjects. The same is true of final perseverance without which personal salvation from sin is not permanently secured.

What has been said applies to the salvation of adults; children and those permanently deprived of their use of reason are saved by the Sacrament of Baptism.

--

In summary, this statement from the RCC encylopedia agrees with my assesment of RCC theology. This is their official policy. Whether any Catholic actually believes it or teaches it is another matter altogether. But this is what they officially believe.

appolus wrote:
Jimmy you wrote......

"Roman Catholics are confident they are going to heaven,"

I was born and raised a Catholic in a Catholic community and an all Catholic education. No Catholic has any confidence that they are going to heaven at all. At best, most hope to make it into purgatory. The Catholic church teaches that to believe one is going to heaven is the hieght of presumption, no on knows and to claim to know is an "anathema." Literlly putting a curse upon the heads of those who claim, for instance, that if they were to die tonight they know where they are going. Very sad and of course, clear opposition to the truth of the Word of God. Imaginine being in a position where you are "shooting for purgatory," and such a place does not even exist. Truly a lost people........Frank

Typically when a loved one dies, family and friends would pay certain fees to have their names mentioned during masses in order to accumulate indulgences to get them out of purgatory into heaven. Many wealthy Catholics,who are often assigned personal "father-confessors", even donate all of their wealth and property to the Catholic church upon their deaths in order to secure a ticket to heaven.

Frank's assesment is well meaning and no doubt what he believed as a Catholic. But what he believed as a Catholic (like many other Catholics), is not consistant with the official teachings of the RCC. There is often a great disparity between the two.

On the RCC view of purgatory, from: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm

Duration
The very reasons assigned for the existence of purgatory make for its passing character. We pray, we offer sacrifice for souls therein detained that "God in mercy may forgive every fault and receive them into the bosom of Abraham" (Apostolic Constitutions); and Augustine (City of God XXI.13, 16) declares that the punishment of purgatory is temporary and will cease, at least with the Last Judgment. "But temporary punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by others after death, by others both now and then; but all of them before that last and strictest judgment."

All,

the reason I ask is because I have been studying Catholicism a new and more in depth.

As always I am seeking to get passed biases and get to the exact truth of the matter.

Therefore, I have asked some Catholics about these things.

Some say they are saved by works and some don't. Then when I discuss with them it usually seem through reasoning and defining of terms that they say they are not saved by works but faith alone. The terms that are often confused is that when they say they are not saved by faith alone they say they mean that if you have faith works will follow and not that they make you right before God. Then they say the only works that do save you are actually not works but acts towards sacraments of grace. As the woman with the flow touched the hem of Jesus for healing so they touch baptism. As it was not a work of merit but an action to receive grace for her so it is with them.

I have found this to be true with many cults that when reasoned with they will say faith alone. We usually agree on our stances. For my stance is that we are made right before God by faith alone in Christ' work. However, faith will always result in works. Therefore if you don't have works you do not have faith and cant be saved. Still though faith and works are so close they are ever so far in distinction as opposites as well.

Sometimes in this explanation people can get confused between the 2 and think because both must be there that it is faith and works that saves you or that faith and works are one and the same.

I have often seen that possibly the Evangelical Protestant Church is equally as guilty of a false Gospel as legalistic cults are just that they have erred on the extreme of lasciviousness. There is legalism, lasciviousness, which is false, and then liberty yet not license to us.

The question would then come then if faith always results in works then do we have to have perfect works to have perfect faith to have perfect salvation. Well, I don't think we have to have perfect faith to be saved, but we cannot "practice" unbelief and sin.

So, I think the question would arise is baptism a work even though it is seen as a sacrament of grace?

Some might say well maybe baptism is not a work, but surely penance is. Surely penance in having to walk on your knees or something outside of the Gospel grace. Yet, they will say well penance is not really for salvation it will only keep you from being in purgatory. At baptism you are saved and become a Christian, but after that all your works don't deal with your salvation but with your time in purgatory. Though there are some serious sins you can do to lose your salvation not so much by not doing works but not doing faith in taking Eucharist ect.

At the forum I was conversing on they stated that 50% of them were former Protestants.

There were many other things, though I do not want to branch off to them since I want to deal with this topic. Like some would say they are re crucifying Christ at Eucharist where as they would say they are only making His sacrifice again present. Or maybe the topic of security in salvation I believe they could say that they are presently secure but they do not know if they will lose faith later and this would be no different from a person who believed you could lose your salvation. Or, they will even say that non Catholics can be saved in a Christian Church that is if they are ignorant of the truth of the Church, but if they knew the Church was true and did not enter then they would be damned.

Therefore, I have asked some Catholics about these things.

It is generally not best to ask Catholics what the RCC teaches, most simply do not know. If you were going to ask, it would probably be best to ask a priest. If you don't have access to a priest to ask, I'd simply recommend studying church history, especially the major church councils, where a lot of these issues came up. Also study the writings of the "fathers" of the first few centuries, and you'll see how their present system and beliefs came into shape.

If you read the Catholic Encylopedia I cited, you'll find that they (as well as theologians like Augustine) saw no contradiction between teaching salvation by unmerited grace, but that such grace was only available through the receiving the sacraments. Such is no different than the problem Paul faced with the Galatian church over the issue of circumcision. Those who 'mutilated' themselves appealed to the grace of God for their salvation, but asserted that grace would only continue to be available to those who received circumcision. Paul said such men might as well go ahead and not stop with the forskin, but go ahead and to cut entire male organ off. Or if he were talking to Catholics, he'd probably tell them to drown in their baptism or gorge themselves with the Lord's supper to ensure they got all the grace they could for salvation.

And Frank, my elder brother, I love you too :-) Behave though... this younger brother of yours has read a LOT of St. Augustine and other dead catholic brains, and has been at various times in my life well versed in Catholic history and theology :-)

*edit* And if put under preassure, I could probably still recite the 7 sacraments without googling them :-)

Baptism
Eucharist
Confirmation
Pennance
Matrimony
Holy Orders
Last Rites

Boom shakalaka :-)

Appolus,

yes I understand about emphasizing the main things like relationship ect.

Now, it can probably be said that the average nominal Catholic is not spiritual, but so are most Evangelicals.

Traditionally, though I think the Catholics have a deep emphasis of spirituality whether good or bad in prayer, monks, and just general mystic devotion. So, I am not sure that applies so much to the more devoted.

It has been interesting to me that I have heard here and there Evangelicals honoring Catholics. Well, for instance there are the father, but I don't know much of them maybe they taught differently? Or I think of how many honor Mother Teresa and I am not sure what to think of that and I would bet she is devout in her Catholic theology? Or I think of Richard Wurmbrand or some other saying that the most devout people they had met under persecution were Catholics. Or Madame Guyon. Or Nouwen? :/

I think that sharing the spiritual with these would be to some degree like sharing it with Mormons who also emphasize "spiritual" things.

It is a good point that it matters more what the individual believes. I however am specifically trying to figure out what Rome officially teaches though of course it matters how much it is accepted in the local Churches.

I have been thinking over this verse though. For I had previously been thinking that well they mostly believe that they need grace and might have some contradiction in them, but that's okay because we all need mercy. And, I still think that to some degree. But, I hear Paul say that if we rely on one part of the Law we are demanded to keep the whole Law.

It is an interesting thing that many of men fear to not keep the Law, but it should also more so be fearful if one does not keep faith and that perfectly yet I am persuaded there is room for grace on the issue.

It is true to some extent that only God can know some are saved, though there are some we can know whether they are saved or not.

Again, I am talking to more knowledgeable Catholics some were former Protestant ministers. I am on a main apologetic forum. I have already heard them try to refute the Abraham only by faith thing by saying well you see he also had works. So, again I think maybe the terminology and thoughts were mixed up in them not saying we are made right before God by works but that it is not by faith alone in the sense that works will accompany but faith alone in the sense of our righteousness before God if I have heard them right.

As for the term on works that is an important thing you bring up. I think they use it in 2 ways. The first being the works of the law. And, the second being the works of grace or sacraments.

Jimmy,

you'll find that they (as well as theologians like Augustine) saw no contradiction between teaching salvation by unmerited grace, but that such grace was only available through the receiving the sacraments.

Now, as to the question of whether taking of sacraments for salvation is a work or not. I have to think over this some. are you sure it is the same as circumcision? I mean people were circumcised to make themselves right by the Law. Whereas people who get baptized do it to be in Christ. Or what of the woman with the flow of blood who touched the hem of Jesus and was healed. Was it a work to touch grace? Was it a work somehow because she had to wrestle through people ect? But even if so it were an action yet was by faith in grace? Someone once told me that sometimes faith needs an action to be accomplished. Like stepping out in faith beyond just believing in the heart to confessing with ones mouth ect. Or think of when Israel looked on the serpent on the rod. Would that be a work because they had to look at an object? Or was it by faith made active by looking?

I will say this that I do not believe faith is a work as Calvinist' will state. I stick with Paul in saying that faith is not a work. It is not so much a grabbing as it is a letting go. It is not so much an effort as it is a surrender. It is not so much a doing as it is receiving that which has been done for you. Nowhere in the Scriptures does it say that faith is a work, but instead that it is opposite.

I do wonder if the Reformation in formulating their doctrine in part as a reaction have gone to the other side of extremes in some cases.

As for the talking to a Priest thing. This I agree with I have not been able to get ample info from the average Catholic, but this website forum I am using as I have just previously said is a main apologetic site and some are former Protestant ministers and one is a teacher of Church history at a private university ect.

You know.. I think that as many Evangelicals think that they say they are saved by works of the Law they also believe Evangelicals think they can be saved and have no works at all. And, for some good reason since that is what some Evangelicals teach and some more self deceivingly so.

So, I was right in saying that they do not believe they are saved by the works of the Law or their own righteousness. It would seem though that many Evangelicals are saying that they say they are saved by works and faith

No. When you really think about what they teach, and read what they say, what it amounts to is works based salvation. Augustine and the like talk about the grace of God, but they teach that "saving grace" is only available to those who receive the sacraments, namely baptism. "Faith" in Catholicism isn't so much a trust in the Lord for salvation as it is simply mentally agreeing to the creeds of the Church.

Such is why the RCC in practice has had no problem converting people through force. They baptized at the point of the sword, because they saw the baptismal waters as salvific. This is also why they believe and teach that infants must be baptized. This is why they teach that the mentally retarded can experience salvation through water baptism. They believe "baptism is what saves you."

Now, as to the question of whether taking of sacraments for salvation is a work or not. I have to think over this some. are you sure it is the same as circumcision?

In the days of the apostle Paul, there were false teachers who taught amongst other things that one much be circumcised and observe the law of Moses in order to be saved. That's the exact same thing that Roman Catholicism teaches, they've simply just substituted one set of rituals for another. That's works based salvation no matter how you slice it (no pun intended).

I will say this that I do not believe faith is a work as Calvinist' will state. I stick with Paul in saying that faith is not a work. It is not so much a grabbing as it is a letting go. It is not so much an effort as it is a surrender. It is not so much a doing as it is receiving that which has been done for you. Nowhere in the Scriptures does it say that faith is a work, but instead that it is opposite.

Amen. I totally agree. The Scriptures clearly teach that faith is a work, not of man, but of God, and that faith "comes" through hearing the preached word. Many attempt to make faith a work of man, but that it is not. Faith comes from God through the hearing of the word. That word enables a person to hear the gospel, and believe in it so as to be saved. Biblical faith brings an end to man and causes him to come to a place where all that he has left is to trust God.

The doctrines of Rome never bring one to this point of emptiness and abandon. Instead, it says, "Ok, you believe these things, now get baptized, get confirmed, received eucharist, do this, do that, etc." Part of this is due to the fact that Rome doesn't teach righteousness is imputed to one on the basis of faith. In fact, the idea of a "passive righteousness" that comes as a gift of God is entirely foreign to their theology. Rather, to them righteousness is something you earn. And if you don't earn enough in this life through your own good deeds and devotion to the sacraments, you'll earn while in purgatory as you there purged of your unrighteousness and made fit for eternity.

You know.. I think that as many Evangelicals think that they say they are saved by works of the Law they also believe Evangelicals think they can be saved and have no works at all. And, for some good reason since that is what some Evangelicals teach and some more self deceivingly so.

The evangelical position is that because you are saved, you will live a transformed life that results in bearing fruit and works for God. No doubt, many have perverted this to be a million other things, which make it sound as if the evangelical position is simply a distant cousin to Catholicism. But if the evangelical position is rightly understood, one will see there is no relationship between the two whatsoever.

Appolus,

maybe for some of the reasons people have nicknames. One thing though is I do not want to be eternalized on the internet if I can help it. I know that I am prone to change and am growing. I am not sure I want to be youtube'd one day and slammed for things I no longer hold to ect.

I am not sure that I can say any real Christian could kill anyone for those purposes therefore I am not sure how much I receive any of it or them.

That is interesting what you said of Teresa can you explain or document?

As for the religious men enduring hardship well I have a hard time receiving that. I think maybe you are a bit extreme on the non salvation of Catholics. I am not sure at this point, but I cannot that easily throw it out. I know what Paul said, but it would be hard to see a man imprisoned for saying that He loves Christ. I mean many of Pauls enemies were those for money and he proved himself by carrying the marks of the Lord Jesus so... Yet, I guess Muslims and JW's have suffered in prison hmm..

I know about James I agree.

Guyon I think she held to the Church I read a bio, but that doesn't really mean all that much.

The 1,600 years thing is a big point.

I can see the expertly conveyed thing.

As for the justification thing I am not sure you read what I said. I believe they are saying that they are justified after baptism, but that they have to continue in faith just like Evangelicals who believe you can lose your salvation. All the rest of the works are not for salvation, but will be dealt with in purgatory. Not, that I am agreeing but it would seem that your view might not be right on and ect.

And while we are on the topic, I wrote a little essay some time ago on the issue of justification by faith, and how it is ultimately a life and death issue. If you have time, consider:

http://www.iamadisciple.com/articles/justification_by_faith.php