Expert: Marco - 3/1/2011

Question
I believe that Christ's death on the cross paid the penalty for my own sins, including those which I committed before believing, and those which I commit from now until the day I die. Because of this theology, I have confidence in my eternal security by trusting that He has completed the work which began at regeneration (His work), and led to belief (my work), sanctification (my work and His), and eventually glorification (His work).

I know that orthodox Catholicism does not believe in eternal security. I also know that it believes Christ's blood is re-shed each time a mass is performed (true?). From these two doctrines, please tell me if I am correct in drawing the following conclusion regarding the position of orthodox Catholicism and the atonement as it pertains to the individual:

When someone first believes, they are at that moment justified for sins having been committed past and present. However, the sins that they commit during the week from that point onward must be atoned for by the re-shedding of Christ's blood at mass each week. In this way, Christ's atonement is retroactive only.

Thanks so much,
Ben

Answer
Dear Ben,

I am catholic but I am not sufficiently expert in theology to answer your question.
Anyway I have never heard any priests talking about eucharist as a weekly atonement for our sins; I think this is a wrong interpretation of the catholic theology.

I give you however my personal opinion about atonement.

I firmly believe that the sentence "Christ's death on the cross paid the penalty for our sins" is to be interpreted symbolically and not literally. So the question is:

Why did Jesus have to suffer on the Cross?

I believe that each of us needed know that God was willing to accept such a terrible suffering for us, in order to really trust God. Every man needed that proof of love, and God, who knew this, has accepted to give him what man consciously or unconsciously asked to Him. Jesus had to suffer and die that way to convince us about God's goodness and God's love towards us. It is man's obstinate distrust against God that has forced God to give man that proof of love, the proof he needed to trust God. By His death on the cross, Jesus destroys our distrust and our doubts, and He gives us the strength to believe in Him and trust Him. This means that each of us is personally responsible of Jesus ' sufferings and death. This distrust, this lack of faith in God is just the essence of the original sin. Christ's Passion has reconciled us to God (and therefore paid symbolically the penalty for our sins) because it has uprooted from our heart, our distrust and doubts about God; it has satisfied our (conscious or unconscious) desire and need of a proof of love, so that it has given us the strength to trust God and feel loved by Him. I can summarize my thoughts as follows: Salvation implies a deep change of ourselves. God has the power to change us but He wants to do that with our consent. Man cannot really accept to be changed by God and he cannot be in comunion with God as long as even a shadow of doubt and distrust remains in his heart ( it must be stressed that such a distrust may exist even without the man is aware of it, at the unconscious level). God had to destroy every shadow of doubt and distrust in our heart and He has chosen to give us the greatest proof of love that may exist: Christ's Passion.


Your brother in Christ,

Marco