108. The first reason why Roman Catholics are better equipped than Protestants to become part of the New Jerusalem (that is, the new church) is this: The belief that we are justified by being assigned Christ’s merit, which is wrong and cannot live alongside the faith of the new church (see §§102– 104), has been wiped out among Roman Catholics, and should be completely eradicated. This belief is firmly fixed in Protestants, however, as if it were carved into their being. It is the chief teaching in their church.

The second reason is that Roman Catholics have more of an idea than Protestants that there is divine majesty in the Lord’s human manifestation. This is abundantly clear in the extremely sacred way in which Roman Catholics venerate the Host.

The third reason is that Roman Catholics see goodwill, good works, repentance, and the effort to live a new life as essential to salvation; the new church, too, considers them essential. Protestants who are committed to faith alone, though, have a very different view. They see these as playing a nonessential role or even no role at all in our faith; they see them as contributing nothing to our salvation.

These are three reasons why Roman Catholics, if they turn to God the Savior himself directly rather than indirectly and if they take both elements in the Holy Eucharist, are better equipped than Protestants to receive a living faith in place of a dead one and be led by the Lord, through the agency of his angels, to the gates of the New Jerusalem (the new church) and brought in shouting for joy.

[The Assignment of Christ’s Merit]

61. Brief Analysis

Surely everyone knows that God is compassion and mercy itself. He is absolute love and absolute goodness. These qualities constitute his underlying reality or essence. Surely, then, everyone sees the contradiction in saying that compassion itself or absolute goodness could look at the human race with anger, become our enemy, turn away from us, and lock us all into damnation and nevertheless continue to be his own divine essence, to be God. Attitudes and actions of that kind belong to a wicked person, not a virtuous one. They belong to an angel of hell, not an angel of heaven. It is horrendous to attribute them to God.

The fact that things like this have been taught is clear from direct statements made by many of the founders, the councils, and the churches as a whole, from the first centuries of Christianity right up to the present day.

It is also clear from indirect evidence. There are derivative teachings that must have come from thoughts like these as their source, the way effects come from a cause or bodily actions from a brain. For instance, the notion that God needed to be reconciled to us; that he was in fact reconciled through his love for his Son and through the Son’s intercession and mediation; that God needed to be appeased by seeing his Son’s final wretched suffering, and that this brought him back and more or less forced him to adopt a merciful attitude; that God went from being our enemy to being our friend and adopted us (children of wrath that we are) as children of grace.

(For the point that it would be merely human behavior for God to assign the justice and rewards of his Son to unjust people who begged him for it on the basis on their faith alone, see the last analytical section in this little work [§112].)