Grace Before Christ

A reader writes:

A question about grace and the Jews did they have grace?  As Mary
was full of grace but Paul talks about being in the flesh before his
conversion. I know the Jewish elders were anointed by the Holy Spirit
but why would they need conversion if they already had some grace? I am
sure you can explain this to me. Thank you so much for your time.

The
Jews before the time of Christ clearly had grace. The Old Testament is
filled with declarations of God’s graciousness to his people. This does
not mean that they had all the kinds of grace that Christians do today, however.

We do read about some pre-Christian Jewish individuals
receiving the Holy Spirit, such as the seventy elders or the prophets,
but the Holy Spirit was not given generally to all believers, as is the
case with Christians (John 7:39).

Another grace that was not given at the time–at least in a general
fashion–was the regeneration of the heart that was promised with the
New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33). This regeneration of the heart,
accomplished in baptism (cf. John 3:3-5), is what makes one a "new
creation" in Paul’s terminology (2 Cor. 5:17), and thus what causes the
Christian to be no longer "in the flesh." Christians are thus given
additional spiritual resources in combatting sin that were not given
generally in the prior age.

This does not mean that there was no general grant of grace to
pre-Christian Jews. There was, as the Old Testament abundantly
demonstrates.

As to why conversion would be needed for one who already had some grace, there are two answers:

1) To obtain the additional graces now being given, and

2) To fulfill God’s requirements. If God gives new public
revelation, men are obligated to accept it. If he thus sends his Son
and reveals him to be the Messiah, men are obligated to accept that
even if they were already right with God. Culpable failure to do so
will result in one losing the grace one has.

The situation is somewhat analogous to what happens if the pope
defines a dogma. Dogmas are not new public revelation, but the
situation is analogous. If a person is a faithful, grace-filled
Catholic prior to the defintion and then the pope defines a dogma,
acceptance of the dogma becomes obligatory, and if one culpably refuses
to accept it then one rejects the virtue of faith and sins mortally.
One thus loses the grace one had.

Bottom line: In order to be in a state of grace, one must be willing
to accept the authoritative teachings of God. If a prophet gives a new
teaching as public revelation, one must accept it to remain aright with
God. If the pope clarifies a teaching through a dogmatic definition,
one must also accept it to remain aright with God. Being right with God
is not a permanent state that nothing can alter. One must be willing to
accept the progressive unfolding or deepinging of God’s teaching to
remain in a state of grace, for otherwise one is rejecting God’s
authority as a teacher and the means by which he has chosen to teach
(be they prophet or pope).

Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live." View all posts by Jimmy Akin