Many Protestants use the word “salvation” in a very narrow and specific way. They often ask, “have you been saved”? If the answer is “yes”, then it’s accepted that this is a completed action, a thing already accomplished. But Catholics see salvation in broader terms. When a Protestant looks at Catholic documents that use the word salvation in this broader sense, they often see something that’s not really there – a denial of the sufficiency of the Cross and Christ’s sacrifice thereon.
So, when a Catholic speaks of salvation, what are these broader senses and how are they upheld scripturally?
The Tenses of Salvation
The Bible does support the idea of salvation being a thing in the past of a particular believer - something that happens when they first accept Christ.
“But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)…” Ephesians 2:5“For by grace you have been saved through faith…” Ephesians 2:8
However, the Bible doesn’t limit salvation to the past tense. Salvation is a current event as well, a process ongoing throughout the believers’ life.
“Without having seen him you love him; though you do not now see him you believe in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy. As the outcome of your faith you obtain the salvation of your souls.” 1 Peter 1:8-9“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Philippians 2:12
Both of the examples above are stated, in Greek, with verbs in the present tense. Therefore, it is right to look at salvation as a current and ongoing event in a person’s life.
Just to make things even more interesting, the Bible doesn’t just limit itself to past and present tense. There’s also a future tense involved. The following three verses all speak of salvation as something that will happen in the future.
“...and you will be hated by all for my names sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.” Matthew 10:22“But he who endures to the end will be saved.” Matthew 24:13
“Besides this you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.” Romans 13:11
“If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” 1 Corinthians 3:15
“You are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” 1 Corinthians 5:5
Catholics therefore see salvation as having a past, present and future tense. Salvation is a process. It begins, in agreement with the limited Protestant view, when the person becomes a Christian. To a Catholic, salvation continues for the remainder of their lives. It is completed only when we stand before God at the end of our earthly life. To quote John Martignoni, “I am saved; I am being saved; and I will be saved.” This is the only way to get at the full meaning of salvation as presented in Scripture.
Eternal and Temporal Salvation
In addition to the tenses, the Bible also demonstrates two different forms of salvation. These are eternal salvation and temporal salvation. Keep in mind also, that in some cases salvation comes under different terms. For example, the salvation of Israel is their deliverance from Egypt. Deliverance. Salvation. Same thing.
In the Old Testament, the word salvation is often used in reference to physical or worldly dangers. This is what we mean by temporal salvation. Not only is this found in the Old Testament, but in the New as well. Here are a few examples:
“And Moses said to the people, ‘Fear not, stand firm, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will work for you today; for the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall never see again. The Lord will fight for you, and you have only to be still’” Exodus 14:13-14“…for the Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thy enemies to thee: and let thy camp be holy, and let no uncleanness appear therein, lest he go away from thee. Deuteronomy 23:14 [Douay-Rheims Version]
“Now therefore stand still, that I may plead with you before the Lord concerning all the saving deeds of the Lord which he performed for you and for your fathers.” 1 Samuel 12:7
“And when he got into the boat, his disciples followed him. And behold, there arose a great storm on the sea, so that the boat was being swamped by the waves; but he was asleep. And they went and woke Him saying, ‘Save us, Lord; we are perishing!’” Matthew 8:23-25
The quotes above deal strictly with temporal salvation – salvation within this lifetime. I hope that it’s accepted that there are points in both the Old and New Testaments that deal with eternal salvation. It should go without saying. I'll save some space by omitting those quotes.
Two Kinds of Saviors
There is only one savior when it comes to eternal salvation. That savoir is Jesus Christ.
However, we Catholics do acknowledge that there can be temporal saviors and I think most Protestants would agree with this. It’s actually pretty simple to accept through reason alone. What if I pull you, dear reader, from a burning building? I am, by definition, your savior. Obviously (at least, I hope it’s obvious), I would be a temporal savior in this case. There are also scriptural references to temporal saviors as well.
“Nevertheless they were disobedient and rebelled against thee and cast thy law behind their back and killed thy prophets, who had warned them in order to turn them back to thee, and they committed great blasphemies. Therefore thou didst give them into the hand of their enemies, who made them suffer; and in the time of their suffering they cried to thee and thou didst hear them from heaven; and according to thy great mercies thou didst give them saviors who saved them from the hand of their enemies” Nehemiah 9:26-27“Therefore the Lord gave Israel a savior, so that they escaped from the hand of the Syrians; and the children of Israel dwelt in their homes as formerly.” 2 Kings 13:4
“I have sent you to be a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the uttermost parts of the earth. Acts 13:47 (quoting Isaiah 49:6)
In each of these cases (and others that I’ll leave off for the sake of brevity), God sends temporal saviors to deliver his people from temporal punishment caused by their sins. It is correct to say, therefore, that God is the only eternal savior but that He sometimes uses humans as temporal saviors.
The Two Kinds of Salvation
Here we get into two different kinds of salvation, and here we generally run into some disagreements with Protestants in a more fundamental way. We have a distinct difficulty with the terminology here.
Jimmy Akin, in his book The Salvation Controversy, labels the two different kinds of salvation as “middle salvation” and “general salvation”. (I don’t honestly know if Jimmy coined these terms, or if the terms themselves are part of a greater theological understanding that goes back a long way in theological history. For our purposes here, I'll attribute them to Jimmy until I'm told to do otherwise.)
Jimmy’s idea is that middle salvation “is what happens when God uses one person as an agent to bring eternal salvation to someone else.” Jimmy follows this with this clear statement: “This language rubs many Protestants the wrong way, but it is the language of the New Testament.” Let’s have a look at some scriptural examples.
“Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.” Romans 11:13-14“Wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Husband, how do you know ether you will save your wife” 1 Corinthians 7:16
“To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” 1 Corinthians 9:22
“Take heed to yourself and to your teaching; hold to that, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.” 1 Timothy 4:16
“My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his ways will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” James 5:19-20
These are important ideas. These verses of Scripture show that it is possible for one human being to save another. This DOES NOT mean that humans earn or bestow eternal salvation on other humans in the same way that Christ does. We cannot, under any circumstances, earn eternal salvation for ourselves or for anyone else. What these passages show is that it is possible for human beings to serve as agents of Christ. This is done by bringing others to His grace.
Lastly, we get to what Jimmy Akin calls General Salvation. General salvation, in scriptural terms, is anything not directly linked to temporal, middle or eternal salvation. This general way of talking about salvation is found in descriptions of God as savior. In the Scripture passages above, some specific element of God’s role as savior was being stressed. This general means of speaking about salvation often gets at the idea of humans participating in the suffering and work of Christ. Here are a few examples:
“For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too.” 2 Corinthians 1:5“But rejoice in so far as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.” 1 Peter 4:13
“Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the Church.” Colossians 1:24
Ordinary humans can serve as temporal or middle saviors. Only Christ can serve as an eternal savior. Again, quoting Jimmy Akin in The Salvation Controversy: “Humans may bring temporal salvation to others by direct action (such as pulling them out of a flood) or by indirect action (such as praying for those in a flooded area). And they may bring Christ’s eternal salvation to others by direct action (such as preaching the gospel or administering the sacraments) or by indirect action (such as praying for conversions). But in no case do humans earn eternal salvation for others and thus serve as eternals saviors the way Christ does.”
Catholics use the language of general salvation on a regular basis. Our idea of uniting our sufferings with Christ is an example of general salvation. Protestants don’t really use these broader terms to talk about salvation, and are therefore very wary when we Catholics speak in such a way. The opportunities for misunderstanding are enormous.
When we Catholics say something like, “the sacraments are necessary for salvation,” we can now see that these are terms of general salvation. We don’t mean that they provide salvation in the same way that Christ’s death on the Cross does. Christ died once and that action is complete. Trent very clearly tells Catholics that the sacraments neither substitute for nor supplement what Christ did on the Cross. It is through the sacraments – using the language of general salvation – that Christ’s sacrifice is applied to us.
We don’t limit ourselves to the one-time use of the word “salvation”, applying it strictly as an event in our past. Rather, we use the word in all its scriptural variety – eternal, temporal, middle and general. Only in this way do we get at the fullness of what the Scripture has to offer on the subject.
Thank you for this entry. I have posted a link to it in the body of my blog.
Happy to help, Mike.
We don’t limit ourselves to the one-time use of the word “salvation�, applying it strictly as an event in our past.
Neither do Protestants, if they're in any way educated in Reformation thought. Sure, us Protestants, especially Evangelicals, will emphasize a certain conversion point, but we recognize that it is something currently effective in our lives and something ultimately consummated at the eschaton -- just as it is founded upon the one time sacrifice of Christ. This reminds me of something the great Scottish Reformed theologian, T. F. Torrance, said. Whenever someone asked Torrance when he was "saved" or "born again," he responded, "Two thousand years ago on the Cross of Jesus Christ" (btw, I'm roughly quoting from memory). And this is what all Christians, Protestant or Catholic, believe. The real objection to Roman Catholic soteriology is that it turns grace into a system. It is not Christ alone, but Christ and doing your penance, avoiding such and such mortal sins, not missing Holy Days of Obligation, receiving the Eucharist at least once a year, and so forth. I'm not trying to be polemical, just honest about what Protestants believe and what the Reformers protested against.
Kevin,
Thanks for writing. I'm beat, so I may not make a lot of sense just now. Forgive any foggy thought that may creep in to this, but I want to get something of a response up sooner rather than later.
The real objection to Roman Catholic soteriology is that it turns grace into a system.
First off, just to be clear, let's define soteriology - the branch of Christian theology that deals with salvation as the effect of a divine agency. We try to stick to the basics here without scaring people away with $5 words. As Julie D says, “cutting through the theological gobbledy gook.� (Did I spell gobbledy right?)
Specifically to your point, I disagree (kinda obvious, huh?). It is called the “sacramental system� in many texts, but the systematic nature isn't the point. The grace in question is the point. The mechanisms by which this grace is received are all based on Christ's actions. Anyone that takes the system to be more important than the grace would almost certainly loose their way.
It is not Christ alone, but Christ and doing your penance, avoiding such and such mortal sins, not missing Holy Days of Obligation, receiving the Eucharist at least once a year, and so forth.
Just throw the kitchen sink at me, whydoncha...
Look, I have no hope of answering this now (and it's not “avoiding such and such mortal sins�, but avoiding sin altogether). Such a long list of objections deserve whole posts of themselves, not a spot in a combox. However...
I'm working on a whole series of posts about the Sacraments that will explore their nature in depth, with scriptural support for each. Nothing up my sleeves. I won't use the Catechism, the writings of the Church fathers, I'll even avoid the deuterocanonicals but for one reference (but I promise to use it minimally). Nothing but the materials you'll find in your very own Bible on your bedside.
I invite you to stick around. But be forewarned, it's likely going to take me a year to finish them all (my current writing pace is often described as “glacial�). Given my current work schedule, it'll likely take me forever...or nearly so. I've got enough Greek now to delve into the original. Since I got into the Greek of the New Testament, it's really opened my eyes in some startling ways.
One thing I ask of anyone coming here is honesty. Just one example: If you approach this with serious personal honestly, then I make you this promise – When I'm done with this series of posts, you won't look at the Sacraments in the same way again. You may still disagree, but I don't think you'll be able to look at it in the same way. You'll have to hang around for a while to get the details.
I'm not trying to be polemical, just honest about what Protestants believe and what the Reformers protested against.
With equal honesty, and without trying to fall into polemic myself... Someone once said that the Reformation “happened for a reason�. I agree, but let's be realistic. It happened for many reasons and not all of them were good. We're living the results today, on both sides, and for the most part the results really haven't worked out so well. I digress, I know, but if we're to be really honest with each other, we have to look at the origins of the Reformation as more than a one dimensional event. Both sides were wrong as often as they were right.
All I ask is that people come here with an open mind, an open heart, and a healthy dose of honesty. I won't try to convert you or anyone else. That's something for the Spirit, not something I can manage. All I do is explain things to the best of my meager ability. What you do with those explanations is between you and Almighty God.
And, on a final note, I generally don't spend a whole lot of time on the comboxes. The reason is simple. I'm not trying to be dismissive, but I only have so many hours in my day (and my wife is right now pestering me for the computer). Comboxes can be a great distraction from writing posts, and those are really more important in the long run. Time is my greatest enemy. I often wonder if Satan wasn't the first clock-maker.
"The real objection to Roman Catholic soteriology is that it turns grace into a system. It is not Christ alone, but Christ and doing your penance, avoiding such and such mortal sins, not missing Holy Days of Obligation, receiving the Eucharist at least once a year, and so forth. I'm not trying to be polemical, just honest about what Protestants believe and what the Reformers protested against." Speaking as a former Protestant, I think that's exactly backwards. The "Roman" Catholic system was established by Christ Himself; that's why it exists at all. He Himself said we must be born again "of water and the Holy Spirit" and must eat His Flesh and drink His Blood, and He gave the Apostles the authority to either forgive or retain sins. The Acts of the Apostles can, without leaving out much, be reduced to the repeated story of the urgent necessity of baptism for converts. St. Paul admonishes us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, and St. James tells us to go to the presbyters for anointing for the forgiveness of our sins. The Protestant system can be sustained only by maintaining that a large number of scriptures simply don't mean what they say (because Protestant theology dictates that they cannot do so).
Hey, Lane's back!
Welcome, my friend, how you doin'?
Looking for work. Other than that, okay. :-)
You are back, too: that's good!
Very good and thought provoking post. I very briefly discussed the definition of salvation just today on my blog in regards to the issue of the value of being in community. Then I run across this post on yours, so I have a lot to digest and think about.
I'm a Protestant with some interest in Catholicism. But I'm without any formal theological training, so it's not surprising my thoughts are a bit muddled. Keep up the good work on a very interesting blog.
Welcome, mhl. Happy to help.