The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: The "No Boasting" and "All Glory to God" Objections

Objection: If good works are in any way meritorious and necessary for salvation, then this would give those who are saved grounds to boast of their moral accomplishments having earned them their salvation, which would usurp the glory of God in the context of what is most important to man, namely his salvation. This is unacceptable. Hence, Paul teaches, “Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith…What then shall we say about Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God” (Romans 3:27; 4:1-2). Likewise, Paul teaches, “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” (Ephesians 2:8-9, emphasis added). And if good works contribute to salvation and thereby give us grounds to boast, then God would be robbed of glory. As John MacArthur sums up, “You can’t earn your way into the kingdom. A works salvation system blasts the glory of God. Man becomes a usurper who boasts that he has earned his way to God” (Justification by Faith, pg. 80). God alone gets the glory for our salvation (and everything else, for that matter). As God says in Isaiah, “I am the Lord, that is my name; my glory I give to no other” (Isaiah 42:8). This is the doctrine of Soli Deo Gloria (glory to God alone). Therefore, good works cannot be necessary for salvation, nor can it be maintained that they make a contribution to justification. As John Calvin explains:

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: The Proverbial Bus and the Good Thief

Objection: It seems highly implausible that good works are necessary for salvation. Suppose, for instance, that someone is baptized and therefore brought into a state of salvation. Further, suppose that this person is then immediately hit by a bus and killed, without having had the opportunity to do any good works. If good works are necessary for salvation, then this person would be damned, which is absurd. After all, he was just saved through being baptized. Or what about an infant who is baptized and then dies due to health complications? The infant in such a case has not performed any good works. But surely that infant will be in Heaven. Finally, we can take an example from Sacred Scripture. The Good Thief on the cross next to Christ repented, and Jesus told him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). The Good Thief, therefore, was brought into a state of salvation, and Jesus assured him that he would be in Heaven. And clearly, he had not performed any (supernatural) good works at that point, and he would not have the opportunity to do so since he would soon die on the cross. For all of these reasons, therefore, it must not be the case that good works are necessary for salvation.

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: The "Legalism" Objection

Objection: The idea that good works contribute to justification can’t be right. The Gospel is a message of grace, not works-righteousness. We are “justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith” (Romans 3:24-25). Our entrance into Heaven is secured by God’s mercy, not by our good deeds outweighing our bad deeds. Such a notion constitutes a cold and servile legalism that falsifies the Gospel and causes us to pridefully look in on ourselves. As Martin Luther put it, “Turning to myself and looking into myself, into what I am and ought to be and do, I lose sight of Christ, who alone is my righteousness and my life…[W]orks…only compel us to look to ourselves again, and turn our eyes from that brazen serpent, Christ crucified” (Commentary on Galatians, 1535; quoted in A Lutheran’s Case for Roman Catholicism, pg. 15-16).

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: Calvin's "No Contribution" Objection

Objection: Even if our good works are the products of God’s grace, what we could contribute to them would only detract from their goodness. Thus, any contribution we could make to our good works would be an evil contribution. Since merit can accrue to us only insofar as we make a good contribution to a praiseworthy action, it follows, therefore, that our good works cannot be meritorious. Everything deserving of praise in our good works is attributable solely to God’s grace. As John Calvin explains:

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: The "Not a Righteousness of my Own" Objection

As discussed in previous posts (such as HERE), the Catholic understanding of justification differs from the Protestant view primarily with respect to the kind of righteousness that is received in justification. On the Catholic view, we receive a real, ontological righteousness that inheres in our soul and makes us a new creation. By contrast, on the Protestant view, we are merely imputed with the perfect, alien righteousness of Christ (the iustitia Christi aliena). We are credited with being as righteous as Christ even though, intrinsically, we are unchanged. On the Catholic view, because the righteousness received in justification is a real righteousness inhering in our soul and is distinct from Christ's personal and perfect righteousness (and hence is finite), it follows that the righteousness received in justification—referred to in Catholic theology as sanctifying grace—can be increased. And, according to Catholic teaching, good works done through God's grace contribute to growing in sanctifying grace, growing in righteousness, growing in justification (cf. Romans 2:13, James 2:24). I have argued for this doctrine HERE. On the Protestant view, however, the righteousness received in justification cannot be increased. This is because, on the Protestant view, in justification we are imputed with Christ's perfect righteousness. Since Christ's righteousness does not increase, therefore, our righteous standing before God does not and cannot increase. Hence, good works cannot contribute in any way to justification, not even to a growth in justification.

Sola Gratia and Solo Christo

Using traditional Protestant terminology, the Catholic understanding of justification and salvation affirms sola gratia (by grace alone) and solo Christo (through Christ alone) but rejects sola fide (by faith alone). We are saved by grace alone (cf. John 10:27-28; 15:5, Acts 15:11, Romans 3:24; 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:4-7) through Christ alone (cf. John 10:9-16; 14:6, Acts 4:12), and we are justified not by faith only but also by our good works wrought by grace (cf. Matthew 25:31-46, Romans 2:6-8; 2:13, Galatians 5:6, Philippians 2:12-13, James 2:24). This is well explained in a paper by Richard A. White, a Calvinist convert to Catholicism:

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: The "All or Nothing" Objection

Objection: Paul teaches, “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them’” (Galatians 3:10). Paul is here referencing Deuteronomy: “’Cursed be he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen’” (Deuteronomy 27:26). The referent of “law” in this passage is the entire Law of Moses as laid out in Deuteronomy, which includes the Ten Commandments (cf. Deuteronomy 5:6-21). Thus, the moral law and not just the ceremonial law is in view. Consequently, Paul is excluding not just ceremonial works but also (morally) good works from justification, and this is because whoever would be justified by such works would have to perfectly keep the entire law, including the moral law, and this is manifestly impossible. In a similar vein, James teaches that, “[W]hoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it” (James 2:10). And James cites two of the Ten Commandments in the very next verse, which clearly indicates that the moral law is what James has in mind. What is being taught is that in order for works, good works included, to justify, one would have to keep the entire law perfectly. But it is evident that no one is capable of doing this. Hence, for both Paul and James, works, good works in particular, cannot play any role in justification. As John Calvin taught:

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: Calvin's "Impurity and Dirt" Objection

A common Calvinist objection to the Catholic doctrine of merit is that our good works are always finite and human. They cannot possibly have supernatural merit in God’s eyes. They simply cannot be meritorious with respect to the infinite value of eternal life. Something of finite value cannot merit something of infinite value. Furthermore, according to Sacred Scripture, “We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment” (Isaiah 64:6). Now, that which is polluted does not have merit in God’s eyes; hence, our good works have no merit. As John Calvin taught,

The Catholic Doctrine of Merit: Meriting Unmerited Favor?

A common objection to the Catholic doctrine of merit is that it amounts to the contradiction of asserting that we can merit unmerited favor. The Catholic Church teaches that Christians can merit an increase of grace and even eternal life:

If anyone shall say, that the good works of a man that is justified are in such wise the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or, that the said justified, by the good works which are performed by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life, if so be, however, that he depart in grace, and, moreover, an increase of glory; let him be anathema (Council of Trent, On Justification, Canon XXXII).