Nick says:
Hello Don,
You asked, “What’s the big deal about imputation?”
That’s a good question to ask. The “big deal” is not so much that Catholics cannot think of different ways to explain how God saves, but rather because Protestants tore apart God’s Church and brought Christendom to ruin all over the world because they claimed Imputation was so crucial that it was worth dividing the Church to proclaim it. If it can be shown that Imputation is totally bankrupt and not found in Scripture, then the Reformation is totally debunked and can only be seen as a abominable schismatic act. The only man standing at that point is the same man standing before Luther came along, the Catholic Church.
When the difference between Imputation and Infusion are examined theologically, one can see how many other serious errors flow from Imputation as well, such as the claim that Jesus was damned to hellfire in place of the believer and that man’s salvation is “Eternally Secure” such that even if he unfortunately falls into grave sin his salvation is none-the-less secure. Such things amount to preaching “a different Gospel” that Paul warned about in Galatians 1:8, that he also called “anathema”.
Hi Don,
I agree with Nick, but my perspective is a bit different.
don says:
October 2, 2012 at 12:46 pm
I appreciated your careful and scholarly explanation of “imputed ” . NowI would like to ask you what is the practical applications of utilizing a ” imputed” vs an ” infused” model what Christ does in the believer ?
October 2, 2012 at 12:46 pm
I appreciated your careful and scholarly explanation of “imputed ” . NowI would like to ask you what is the practical applications of utilizing a ” imputed” vs an ” infused” model what Christ does in the believer ?
First, I’m not sure whether you intended to say what I’m reading. My answer to your question according to the way you said it, we, Catholics find no application (I.e. no merit) in utilizing the Protestant “imputed” model over the Catholic “infused” model.
Why?
Because the imputed model:
1. Contradicts other Protestant doctrines. According to Protestant doctrine, “grace is irresistible”. Yet, grace can seemingly do nothing for the sinner. The sinner can’t become truly righteous according to the grace given to Him by God. He must be covered over with the righteousness of Christ.
1. Contradicts other Protestant doctrines. According to Protestant doctrine, “grace is irresistible”. Yet, grace can seemingly do nothing for the sinner. The sinner can’t become truly righteous according to the grace given to Him by God. He must be covered over with the righteousness of Christ.
2. Makes God a liar. When God rules that someone is righteous, it becomes a “legal fiction”. God, who can see a man’s heart, does not rule according to what is truly in the man’s heart, but declares the unrighteous man to be righteous.
3. Makes God weak. God, who created the universe with a word, when He declares a man just, that man, according to this doctrine, does not become just.
The “infusion” model is precisely the opposite:
1. It does not contradict any Catholic doctrines but fits perfectly in the Catholic understanding of the Omniscience, Omnipotence and Omnipresence of God.
1. It does not contradict any Catholic doctrines but fits perfectly in the Catholic understanding of the Omniscience, Omnipotence and Omnipresence of God.
2. Confirms that God does not lie. When God judges a man righteous, it is because that man has BY FAITH become righteous by striving to keep God’s commandments and persevering in well doing.
3. It also shows forth the efficacy of the grace of God, which was freely given to the man and which brought about the man’s conversion.
4. Shows forth the power of God because justification is the work of God. In justification, it is God who, by the renewal of the Holy Spirit, washes and regenerates the faithful man’s soul.
At this point, I refer you to Nick’s response.
At first glance when a doctrinal matter is examined and different interpretations are offered , it is not immediately obvious ” what is the big deal ? ” , at least not obvious , to those not as theologically equipped as myself . But , in this instance I would greatly want to understand ” what is riding on getting this correct ?” I realize you are saying , ” see the Protestants got this wrong …..so , who you gonna believe now ?” I got that part but beyond that why is this ” imputed / infused” issue important ?
The big deal for me is that one of those doctrines is true and therefore from God. And the other is false and therefore from the Enemy.
I personally don’t see how anyone can believe the imputation model. Luther, the author of that doctrine, summarized it this way:
I said before that our righteousness is dung in the sight of God. Now if God chooses to adorn dung, he can do so (Luther’s Works, Vol. 34, page 184).
Really? God wants to adorn “dung”? I’ll stick with the Catholic Teaching, thank you very much.
I need some help.
I hope that helped.
Thank you ,
don
You’re welcome,
De Maria
