Are we saved by faith alone, or do we need works, too?

[DavidFilmer]

Here’s what you said:

[my quote]

I actually don’t think that the precept to confess annually has anything to do with the Church’s teaching regarding the likelihood of falling into mortal sin (because I maintain, as I always have, that the Church has never actually taught about the likelihood of falling into mortal sin).

You “speculated wildly” that this precept somehow teaches a doctrine about the likelihood of mortal sin. I “speculated wildly” that the fact that confession is an annual requirement (whereas Mass is a weekly+ requirement) that, IF the precept taught anything about the likelihood of mortal sin, that it would teach that it is unlikely.

But I don’t actually think the precept has any relevance to this topic.

My response remains:

Originally Posted by Philthy
I wish you were right, but you are sadly mistaken. Perhaps there was a time - like when the precepts were originally issued - when the relative sinlessness of the population was the rule. But those days are long gone - at least in our culture. For example: Is fornication mortal sin?

No.

Divorce and remarriage?

No.

Failing to attend Mass on Sunday?

No.

If you would like to reword your rhetorical questions to include the disclaimer, “given complete freewill consent to the sin, and full knowledge of the mortally sinful nature of the act at the time the act is committed” then I would change my answers to “yes.” But there is no thing as an act that is mortally sinful by the nature of the act itself.

Would you like to go over the stats of the percentages of Catholics guilty of just these few offenses? It would be well over 75% guilty multiple times per year.

I’m not sure where you are getting your statistics. But the acts alone are not sufficient. What percentage of these acts were committed with complete freewill consent and full knowledge of the mortally sinful nature of the act? Because that is a statistic that is known to God alone, and cannot be known by you or I. You seem to think it is also a large percentage. And that’s fine - you are free to hold that opinion, as Church teaching neither confirms nor opposes it. Others are free to feel otherwise, for the same reason.

Failing to forgive someone is a sin. The reasons why failing to do so might constitute mortal sin. If so, it should be confessed, absolved and…rectified through appropriate penance.

Absolutely correct.

I think you’re being a little too rigid in your approach.

I am trying to be precise. “Rigid” implies a refusal to accept contrary ideas. “Precise” means a firm adherence to an established standard. My established standard is the teaching of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism, and by nothing else. Not by (personal) faith, nor by works, nor by beliefs.

I can’t improve too much on my previous articulation here:

All of the people who end up in Heaven end up there because they received the grace of justification through the sacrament of Penance and/or the grace of Baptism.

If I may suggest an editorial improvement: what you probably meant to say is this:

Everyone on earth has been justified by the Sacrifice of Calvary. All of the people who end up in Heaven (ie, are “saved”) end up there because they received the Grace of Christian Baptism, renewed (if necessary) by Sacramental Confession.

It is quite improper to say

[saved] through the sacrament of Penance and/or the grace of Baptism

We have no spiritual capacity to receive Sacramental Penance if we have not first received the Grace of Christian Baptism, and the only role of Penance is to restore that Grace should we forfeit it through mortal sin. The “and/or” is incorrect (and, umm, actually, heretical - we cannot attain salvation through Penance without being Baptized).

 

[neophyte]

Are we saved by faith alone, or do we need works, too?

Faith IS a work. It’s something we do.

 

[Paul_Edwards]

We need works, we also need the sacraments, although one could say they come under the category of faith while almsgivings comes under works

 

[Philthy]

I actually don’t think that the precept to confess annually has anything to do with the Church’s teaching regarding the likelihood of falling into mortal sin (because I maintain, as I always have, that the Church has never actually taught about the likelihood of falling into mortal sin).

Well, then it seems you have changed your mind…(bolding mine):

** I would claim that**, by requiring confession ONLY once a YEAR, the Church might be teaching that we are seldom in a state of mortal sin… I would argue that this precept indicates that the Church feels that we seldom fall into mortal sin…

It certainly seems like that was what you were saying.

You “speculated wildly” that this precept somehow teaches a doctrine about the likelihood of mortal sin. I “speculated wildly” that the fact that confession is an annual requirement (whereas Mass is a weekly+ requirement) that, IF the precept taught anything about the likelihood of mortal sin, that it would teach that it is unlikely.
But I don’t actually think the precept has any relevance to this topic.

I don’t that’s quite how it happened. I said this:

There is no work that we can do to earn the state of grace. We both agree. There are, however, mortal sins in the form of works that we may FAIL TO DO that can jeopardize our state of grace and thereby our salvation. (Agreed? Y or N please) And so how do we express this reality? This is where the allegation of semantics comes in.***
Some*** might simply say that good works are “required” of those who have been blessed by God with the opportunity and means to provide them to the needy in order to remain in the state of grace. You might even call it our sacred duty. Since being in a state of grace at the moment of death is a requirement of going to Heaven, and since failing to do those works can jeopardize that state of grace, some would describe that reality as “good works are a requirement of salvation”. I recognize - and articulated the limitations of such a claim: namely that works are not “technically” a requirement because not all who enter a state of grace through Baptism have the opportunity or means to do or to fail to do good works (cf the baptized infant who dies).***
Others*** - and I questioned whether you fell into this group and meant no disrespect in doing so - might choose to say that the only “absolute”, requirement of salvation is being in a state of grace and the only things that place you in a state of grace are Sacraments (ie Baptism and Confession). They would further clarify that doing works don’t place into a state of grace and therefore they are not “necessary” for salvation.**In my opinion it is a matter of semantics. **All of the people who end up in Heaven end up there because they received the grace of justification through the sacrament of Penance and/or the grace of Baptism. That would seem to be the “slam dunk” for the “Others” side. But there is a counterpoint: some of the people who end up in Hell also received the grace of Baptism/Penance… but, in willingly, purposefully choosing love of self over love of God/Neighbor, fell from that state of grace. And it is that falling, based upon their failure to love and not upon their having received Baptismal or Penance grace, that determined their eternal destiny. In recognition of this reality, they choose to articulate that works are “necessary” - for most of us - in order to go to Heaven.

It was here - after the above comment - that you questioned my implication that most of us, following the reception of baptismal grace, are exposed to the possibility of mortal sin through a sin of omission by responding with:

David:

Can you cite Catholic Doctrine which claims that “most of us” fall into mortal sin?

To which I responded with -

…the facts support it: The second precept of the church is that we confess our sins at least once a year. As in everyone is required to do this. Saint JPll went to sacramental confession several times a week. There are very few canonized Saints. I could go on and on. What evidence or implication or doctrine is there to suggest otherwise??

It was then that you opined…

 

[Philthy]

But I don’t actually think the precept has any relevance to this topic.

It only came up because you seem reluctant to accept the reality of the probability of committing a mortal sin of omission following Baptism. I suggested the precept of annual confession implies we are all subject to commit mortal sin, that some were sins of omission, and that works were necessary to avoid them. Matt 25 corroborated this reality. If such sins were common then the answer to the OP is, "No we are not saved by faith alone. We are saved by Baptismal grace through faith and we need works to avoid falling from that state of grace which saves us." The truth is probably that the question is technically unanswerable because the “do we need works too” fragment is ambiguous. Is it asking do we need works to be saved? Is it asking do we need works to go to Heaven? Who, precisely is the we? the discussion of all the issues involved is more complicated.
Your positions seems to be to avoid by appealing to the “economy of salvation”: "All we need to do is be validly Baptized and sacramentally confess every mortal sin we commit - works are irrelevant, sin is irrelevant “in the economy of salvation”.The problem is that no one asked what you’ve answered. The phrase “in the economy of salvation” isn’t included in the OP. And your introducing it may clarify what you wish to say, and allow you to be precise, but in doing so you fail to answer the question asked. At least that’s my perspective.

I’m not sure where you are getting your statistics. But the acts alone are not sufficient. What percentage of these acts were committed with complete freewill consent and full knowledge of the mortally sinful nature of the act? Because that is a statistic that is known to God alone, and cannot be known by you or I.

I never said I could know it nor is relevant.

You seem to think it is also a large percentage. And that’s fine - you are free to hold that opinion, as Church teaching neither confirms nor opposes it. Others are free to feel otherwise, for the same reason.

What, exactly, do you mean by “Church teaching” here? Encyclicals? Papal audiences?

My established standard is the teaching of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism, and by nothing else. Not by (personal) faith, nor by works, nor by beliefs.

**So how do you answer the OP then? Let’s hear it. As a hint, I’ll point out that the second half of the question is ,"…or do we need works too?"
And I’d also like to request that you reconcile your answer with Matt 25 - the parable of the goats and sheep.
**

 

[Christidiscipl1]

This is my conclusion, We are saved(past tense) by Grace of God, but to keep and maintain our salvation we must do(present tense) works of faith , love and Obedience .
God Bless You All , Thank You for Clearing this For me

 

[Christidiscipl1]

Another example . The Story of the Young Rich Man
The Rich Young Man
\ Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” \ “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.” \ “Which ones?” the man inquired. Jesus replied, " ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, \ honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’
" “All these I have kept,” the young man said.
"All these I have kept ", The Young Man did and obeyed Gods commandments(Works)
“What do I still lack?”\ Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” \ When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth
Even though he did Works, he didn’t received Salvation. Because he couldn’t give up his possessions and follow Christ, he didn’t receive Grace of God.
So he Obeyed Gods Commandment and did Works, but still He didn’t found favor in God’s eyes, not being saved. Because if he really had faith in God , he would’ve of listen to Jesus Christ.
Romans 11:6
But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.
Titus 3:5
He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
I saw that most of You used James 2 to show we are saved by works.

What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15 Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that–and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless ? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
James is explaining the two types of Christians, the Doers ( Real Christians, Obey God) and Pretenders(Those who say they believe in God, but still Sin(Constantly) and Live the Worldly Lifestyle)

 

[DavidFilmer]

Well, then it seems you have changed your mind…(bolding mine)

I would claim that, by requiring confession ONLY once a YEAR, the Church might be teaching that we are seldom in a state of mortal sin… I would argue that this precept indicates that the Church feels that we seldom fall into mortal sin…

I have not changed my mind. I am (and always have been) of the firm opinion that the Church has never taught about the likelihood of a person of good will falling into mortal sin, and the Church has not indirectly “taught” about this through the precepts (or otherwise).

I conditioned my remarks (per your quotes) with “wiggle words” such as “might be teaching” and “seldom” and “indicates.”

If I really believed this, I would have said “teaches” and “frequently” and “proves.” I usually choose my words carefully. Do not read more into my comments than I actually say. You speculated (and continue to speculate) that the precepts indicate a disposition to mortal sin. I speculated that the precepts indicate otherwise. But I never claimed that the precepts actually prove anything one way or another, because I maintain (as I have always maintained) that the Church has never directly or indirectly addressed this topic.

I believe that the precepts are intended to keep the Catholic Faithful connected to the sacramental and secular life of the Church - not to imply some sort of doctrine about the necessity or timing of any particular Sacrament. You continue to speculate that the precept of annual Confession proves something that the Church does not explicitly state - that mortal sin is likely for a person of good will. You have your opinion (speculation) on this aspect of this precept, and I have mine, but neither of us can cite Magesterial authority which clearly establishes any such doctrinal conclusion (and I have acknowledged this, whereas you have not).

 

[Porknpie]

Another example . The Story of the Young Rich Man
The Rich Young Man
\ Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” \ “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.” \ “Which ones?” the man inquired. Jesus replied, " ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, \ honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’
" “All these I have kept,” the young man said.
"All these I have kept ", The Young Man did and obeyed Gods commandments(Works)
“What do I still lack?”\ Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” \ When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth
Even though he did Works, he didn’t received Salvation. Because he couldn’t give up his possessions and follow Christ, he didn’t receive Grace of God. There is nothing in this text that says the man did not receive salvation. You are adding to the text. Christ is teaching a lesson here. As a side note, the Catholic Church does not proclaim that anyone is in hell.

Haydock commentary below:

If thou wilt be perfect. This shews there is a difference betwixt things that are of precept, and those that are of counsel only, which they aim at, that aspire to the greatest perfection. (Witham) — Evangelical perfection essentially consists in the perfect observance of God’s commandments, which is greatly assisted by embracing not only voluntary poverty, but also the other counsels given to us in the gospels, such as perpetual chastity, and entire obedience. — Follow me. Thus to follow Christ, is to be without wife and care of children, to have no property, and to live in community; this state of life hath a great reward in heaven. This state, we learn from St. Augustine, the apostles followed; and he himself not only embraced it, but exhorted as many others as he possibly could to embrace it. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxix, in fine, and in Ps. ciii. conc. 3. post. med.) (Bristow) — The whole perfection of a Christian life consists in following Christ, by an imitation of his virtues. So that he who possesses poverty and chastity, does not immediately become perfect, but only enters upon the way of perfection, by facilitating his progress to perfection, removing hindrances, and laying aside all care of temporal concerns. (Nicholas of Lyra.) — In this chapter Jesus Christ delivers the evangelical counsels. In ver. 12, he recommends continency—here he proposes voluntary poverty, and immediately adds that of obedience, follow me. St. Augustine teaches, that the apostles bound themselves by vow to the observance of these three counsels. (De civit. Dei. Book xvii. chap. 4.)

I am curious though, who else do you judge besides the rich man, is in hell?

 

[steve_b]

There is nothing in this text that says the man did not receive salvation. You are adding to the text. Christ is teaching a lesson here. As a side note, the Catholic Church does not proclaim that anyone is in hell.

Nor does the Church proclaim hell is empty.

The Church teaches ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=hell&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

 

[DavidFilmer]

Nor does the Church proclaim hell is empty.

The Church teaches ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=hell&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

None of which says whether hell is occupied or not. A person may be a faithful Catholic and believe that hell is empty, or believe that hell has an overcrowding problem.

The story of Lazarus was a parable, not a news story. We are free to believe that no such person actually existed.

 

[Christidiscipl1]

Sorry, for the misinterpretations. Not very good explaining from a computer , I rather talk to and person face to face. All I’m trying to Expained " We are saved by faith alone"

The following is a list of verses about being saved by faith. Please take note that faith and works are contrasted. In other words, we are saved by faith “not by works” and “apart from works,” etc. The point is that there are only two options. We are saved by faith alone, or we are not. Since we have faith and works (both conceptually and in practice), then we are either saved by faith alone or by faith and works. There is no other option.

If we see that the scriptures exclude works in any form as a means of our salvation, then logically, we are saved by faith alone. Let’s take a look at what the Bible says about faith and works. Then, afterwards, we will tackle James’ statement about “faith alone”.

Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one."
Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness,"
Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;"
Rom. 9:30, "What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;"
Rom. 10:4, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes."
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."
Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.
Gal. 3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 6Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith."
Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast."
Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."

Again, works/Law is contrasted with faith repeatedly; and we are told that we are not justified by works in any way. Therefore, we are made right with God by faith–not by faith and our works, hence, faith alone.
James 2:24, not by faith alone

The scriptures clearly teach that we are saved (justified) by faith in Christ and what He has done on the cross. This faith alone saves us. However, we cannot stop here without addressing what James says in James 2:24, “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.”

There is no contradiction. All you need to do is look at the context. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.

James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith but has no works, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” (James 2:14). In other words, James is addressing the issue of a dead faith–a faith that is nothing more than a verbal pronouncement, a public confession of the mind, and is not heart-felt. It is empty of life and action. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17, words without actions). Then he shows that type of faith isn’t any different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith that has words followed by actions. Works follow true faith and demonstrate that faith to our fellow man but not to God. James writes of Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds.

In brief, James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, “Faith without works is dead,” (James 2:20). But, he is not contradicting the verses above that say salvation/justification is by faith alone.

Also, notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul quotes in Rom. 4:3 amongst a host of verses dealing with justification by faith. James 2:23 says, “and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.’” If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we can see that justification is by faith alone, and that James was talking about false faith–not real faith–when he said we are not justified by faith alone.
God Bless

“Are We Saved by Faith Alone, or Do We Need Works, Too?” We Are Saved by Faith Alone, Not by Faith and Works. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.

 

[Abu]

Follwers of Christ heed the truth.

**What do Catholics teach about being saved?
Answer by Fr. John Echert on 09-02-2007 (EWTN): **
You are getting closer to the truth, but I must make further distinctions. The Catholic Church teaches that faith is necessary for salvation but not of itself sufficient. Our Lord Himself commanded that the disciples go forth and baptise the nations, which confers a particular grace of sanctification. This grace of sanctification is necessary for salvation – at least in the case of those who have access to baptism. The good works and repentance which you cite in James are essential, but we say that they proceed from supernatural charity as a motive, and not simply faith. In other words, someone can truly have faith in Christ by which they are drawn to Him and accept Him, but would not necessarily do acts of charity for the motive of faith alone – which is why we typically call them acts of charity, that is, supernatural love.
tinyurl.com/k27zdzs

faith and works
Answer by Bill Bilton on 04-16-2002 (EWTN):
Excerpts:
‘Catholics believe that faith and good works are both necessary for salvation, because such is the teaching of Jesus Christ. What Our Lord demands is ``faith that worketh by charity .’’ (Gal. 5 :6). Read Matthew 25:31-46, which describes the Last Judgment as being based on works of charity.’

‘The Catholic Church does not teach that purely human good works are meritorious for salvation; such works are not meritorious for salvation, according to her teaching. Only those good works performed when a person is in the state of grace – that is, as a branch drawing its spiritual life from the Vine which is Christ (John 15:4-6)–only these good deeds work toward our salvation, and they do so only by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ. These good works, offered to God by a soul in the state of grace (i.e., free of mortal sin, with the Blessed Trinity dwelling in the soul), are thereby supernaturally meritorious because they share in the work and in the merits of Christ. Such supernatural good works will not only be rewarded by God, but are necessary for salvation.’

‘St. Paul shows how the neglect of certain good works will send even a Christian believer to damnation: But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.'' (1 Tim. 5:8). Our Lord tells us that if the Master (God) returns and finds His servant sinning, rather than performing works of obedience, He shall separate him, and shall appoint him his portion with unbelievers.’’ (Luke 12:46).’

 

[steve_b]

None of which says whether hell is occupied or not. A person may be a faithful Catholic and believe that hell is empty, or believe that hell has an overcrowding problem.

The story of Lazarus was a parable, not a news story. We are free to believe that no such person actually existed.

Are you discounting parables as not being realities? Jesus named Abraham and lazarus in that parable. They are certainly real people. While the rich man isn’t named, I don’t doubt for one second he doesn’t represent a real person.

Jesus also teaches

Mt 7:13 “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy,] that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

That suggests to me, Jesus who will do the judging of EVERYONE, is telling us, in advance, that hell is bursting at the seems…so to speak. It also suggests to me, few go to heaven as opposed to those who don’t.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Are you discounting parables as not being realities?

I’m saying that we do not need to understand them to reflect any actual event.

Jesus named Abraham and lazarus in that parable. They are certainly real people.

I read historical fiction that includes actual people. The First Duke of Wellington was certinally an actual person (and a brilliant general), but no rifleman named Richard Sharpe ever served under him.

While the rich man isn’t named, I don’t doubt for one second he doesn’t represent a real person.

You are free to have that opinion. You are not free to represent it as Catholic teaching. It is your own Biblical exegesis.

But, of all of Our Lord’s parables, this one seems to me the least likely to be factual. It would mean that the damned are able to communicate beyond hell. That’s a strange notion.

That suggests to me, Jesus who will do the judging of EVERYONE, is telling us, in advance, that hell is bursting at the seems…so to speak. It also suggests to me, few go to heaven as opposed to those who don’t.

You are free to have that opinion. You are not free to represent it as Catholic teaching. It is your own Biblical exegesis.

 

[steve_b]

I’m saying that we do not need to understand them to reflect any actual event.

I don’t have a problem seeing this as an actual event.

Let me ask you

Do you believe Moses & Elijah appeard in front of Peter James & John during the transfiguration of Jesus? Do you believe Moses and Elijah talked with Jesus during their appearance and it was overheard by Peter such that Peter seeing them and hearing them, wanted to make 3 tents for Jesus Moses and Elijah? Moses and Elijah aren’t in heaven yet because heaven wasn’t open. So they were in the bosom of Abraham. Do you accept this as an actual event or was this some pius fiction?
D:

I read historical fiction that includes actual people. The First Duke of Wellington was certinally an actual person (and a brilliant general), but no rifleman named Richard Sharpe ever served under him.

You are free to have that opinion. You are not free to represent it as Catholic teaching. It is your own Biblical exegesis.

But, of all of Our Lord’s parables, this one seems to me the least likely to be factual. It would mean that the damned are able to communicate beyond hell. That’s a strange notion.

You are free to have that opinion. You are not free to represent it as Catholic teaching. It is your own Biblical exegesis.

Your opinions about parables are duely noted

Jesus used parables for a reason

Mt 13:13 I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah which says: ‘You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 15 For this people’s heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.’

As for me, I’d like to hear Jesus say to me

16 blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. 17 Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I don’t have a problem seeing this as an actual event.

I don’t either. I only have a problem seeing this as the Church teaching it is an actual event. You are free to your opinion, but you may not call it doctrine.

Do you believe Moses & Elijah appeared in front of Peter James & John during the transfiguration of Jesus?

Of course! But this is not presented as a parable.

BTW, you might want to upgrade to a modern browser that does spell checking. I would be lost without it.

 

[PoorKnight]

…James 2:24, not by faith alone

The scriptures clearly teach that we are saved (justified) by faith in Christ and what He has done on the cross. This faith alone saves us. However, we cannot stop here without addressing what James says in James 2:24, “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.”

There is no contradiction. All you need to do is look at the context. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.

James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith but has no works, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” (James 2:14). In other words, James is addressing the issue of a dead faith–a faith that is nothing more than a verbal pronouncement, a public confession of the mind, and is not heart-felt. It is empty of life and action. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17, words without actions). Then he shows that type of faith isn’t any different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith that has words followed by actions. Works follow true faith and demonstrate that faith to our fellow man but not to God. James writes of Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds.

In brief, James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, “Faith without works is dead,” (James 2:20). But, he is not contradicting the verses above that say salvation/justification is by faith alone.

Also, notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul quotes in Rom. 4:3 amongst a host of verses dealing with justification by faith. James 2:23 says, “and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.’” If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we can see that justification is by faith alone, and that James was talking about false faith–not real faith–when he said we are not justified by faith alone.
God Bless

“Are We Saved by Faith Alone, or Do We Need Works, Too?” We Are Saved by Faith Alone, Not by Faith and Works. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.

In Paul, “Works” usually means “Works of the Law”. You must take that into consideration in your study above.

You’re also forming a false dichotomy: Faith VS Works.

Let me ask this: Did both the Sheep and the Goats have faith that Jesus was “Lord”?

Let me ask this also: If Jello isn’t setting because the powder doesn’t have water in it, is it the powder or the liquid that makes the Jello set?

This assessment of James “Begs the Question”. You have to pre-believe that James is talking about salvation by Faith Alone in order to believe this personal interpretation of James.

This assessment also misses that “like a body without a soul, faith without works is dead.” To rephrase this with the interpretation above we would have to believe James is saying “like a body with out a soul, dead faith with out works is dead.” which makes no sense.

Or we would have to believe that a body can survive on it’s own, without a soul, for it is the body ALONE that is alive… the soul just “shows” us that the body is alive. The soul is not necessary for life.

Again, this makes no sense. The only way, with out all the gymnastics and re-interpretations to make plain texts of Scripture say the opposite of their plain text meanings (James 2:24 to mean that Faith Alone saves) is the Catholic position: Grace alone saves, but once we have Grace we must have faith and do works to maintain a state of grace. Works before grace do not save (faith before grace doesn’t save either)

The Catholic position is the only one that seamlessly “merges” Paul and James. All the other positions one has to change the definition of “salvation” or “justification” in either; or one has to ignore that Paul and James are using “works” in two different ways.

God Bless,
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church

 

[steve_b]

I don’t either. I only have a problem seeing this as the Church teaching it is an actual event. You are free to your opinion, but you may not call it doctrine.

what truth can NOT be taught in that parable?
D:

Of course! But this is not presented as a parable.

then in extension, you’re saying parables aren’t true?

 

[PoorKnight]

To add one more to my last post, not addressed was that Abraham’s faith was completed by his works.

To believe the private interpretation above, we’d have to believe that Abraham’s “dead faith” was made alive by his works… that would mean works are not only necessary but what actually does the saving (Pelagianism). OR we’d have to say faith is completed by good works, which is the Catholic position - and fits with the plain texts of Scripture.

God Bless,
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church