6 thoughts on “Did Pope Francis Preach Salvation by Works?

  1. Yes he did step into the shoes of Pelagius and Pelagianism, and he has already been a Universalist. Pity the fact that one has to try to defend this, and or clean it up! The more one hears the theology of this “Francis”, the more one can see his much more than mere eclecticism, to his incompatible, irrational and irreconcilable theology! Btw, one day it sounds conservative, but closer inspection it is just old school Catholic Traditionalism, then you get this irretrievable mess! Perhaps he can get the Pope Emeritus, the older Rev. Fr. Ratzinger to write his theological pieces?! 😉

    • It does remind one of the theological importance of the Reformation vs the Counter-Reformation. Trent and the modern RC CCC have that unique spin on justification that, in liturgy, pratice, and personal devotion, always tends to veer off the road into works righteousness. Even in their Joint Declaration on Justification witht the LWF. They always want to straddle the fence. (The universalism is more modern political correctness? Something that seemingly afflicts so many because they want to be seen as being nice to all?)

    • Surely if we are going to be successful in biblical theology, we must study the Greek Text itself, and the biblical words for “Redemption”!

      Exagorazo, Luttzoo, verbs (also “lutron” for Ransom. Also, “agorazo” for Purchase is translated “redeemed”.)

      Lutrosis, Apolutrosis, the latter is a strengthened form of Exagorazo. Apoulutrosis, is also used of the deliverance of the believer from the presence and power of sin (not perfection), and of his body from bondage to corruption, at the Second Coming of Christ at the Parousia.

      Indeed our NT theology must come from the Greek Text itself (noting too the LXX or Septuagint), and we surely must study the Greek Words themselves! Sadly one does not see much of this these days, especially in some the High Church traditions.

      Btw, while I am of course Reformed, I would recommend a book written by an Anglican: Rev. F.C. N. (Nugent) Hicks, one time Bishop of Lincoln: ‘The Fullness Of Sacrifice, An Essay In Reconciliation’ (First Edition 1930). The book is rather friendly to an older age of Orthodox theologians!

      • Why exactly do you recommend Hick’s “The Fullness of Sacrifice”? Calvinist theologians have been adverse to the insight drawn from Hebrews that the cross in and of itself was not the sacrifice and the sacrifice was not complete until the resurrection and ascension because the blood had to be offered in the heavenly Holy of Holies, and that Christ was not a priest on earth nor indeed is the slaying of the victim part of the priestly act but the priest begins precisely after the slaying, ever since that truth was rediscovered during the Reformation by one Fausto Sozzini in his reading of Hebrews. Do the Calvinists think they have finally found a way of integrating this truth into their errant theology?

Post a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s