Beginning with luther?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erick_Ybarra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Erick_Ybarra said:
It’s the whole body of St. John Chrysostom’s work that contradicts Catholic Theology.

According to St. John Chrysostom, Abraham was “justified by faith alone” even when he was adorned with many works which may have justified him. Chrysostom neither views “works of law” as exclusively those outward ceremonial rituals of the Torah, nor does he understand “justified” to be of the meaning “make righteous”, for he explicitly denounces such a view.

Therefore, what Catholic reading is left? Modern day Catholic exegetes would never approach Romans the way Chrysostom is approaching it. They have to portion “works of the law” with those outward jewish laws or if they are willing to accept it as any law, they have to say that “justified” means to ontologically make righteous. Both options are avoided by St. John Chrysostom, and we are left with the protestant teaching.

Namely, that Abraham, even though he worshiped God and obeyed God and had many good works, was not justified by and or through them.
Click to expand...
But St John did NOT mean that the works of Abraham were nothing and the faith (APART from the works) was all.

Catholics do not teach we are justified by works, NOR that we are justified by faith alone if by faith alone you mean some kind of ‘profession of faith’ that simply sits there and stagnates. We all know people like this: The people who will say “I am a Christian, I believe in Christ’ and who do NOTHING in their lives to know Christ, to obey Christ (who never said “just believe in me, sit back and relax on the S.S. Salvation”) but who ALWAYS followed 'your faith has saved you” (this faith always SEEN BY AN ACTION of the person) with 'Pick up your cross and follow me". . ,
 
Paul says that Abraham was justified by faith, apart from works. I am not exactly sure why this is denied by you all. And this is not Abraham’s initial conversion, this is 30 years after his initial conversion that God imputed faith as righteousness to Abraham.

There really is no exegetical reason to except the catholic view in the epistle to the romans, or galatians.

Now, are works necessary for salvation? Absolutely. Jesus said only those who have good fruit, who have done good, who have perservered in holiness, and who have been his witness will be allowed into the kingdom.

But we are speaking here of justification, which is not the same as salvation.
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
Paul says that Abraham was justified by faith, apart from works.
Click to expand...
"In the first place, Paul helps us to understand the absolutely basic and irreplaceable value of faith. This is what he wrote in his Letter to the Romans: “We hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law” (3: 28).

This is what he also wrote in his Letter to the Galatians: “[M]an is not justified by works of the law but only through faith in Jesus Christ; even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, because by works of the law shall no one be justified” (2: 16).

“Being justified” means being made righteous, that is, being accepted by God’s merciful justice to enter into communion with him and, consequently, to be able to establish a far more genuine relationship with all our brethren: and this takes place on the basis of the complete forgiveness of our sins.

Well, Paul states with absolute clarity that this condition of life does not depend on our possible good works but on the pure grace of God: “[We] are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom 3: 24)."

~ Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061108_en.html
 
The Pope does not address the question. If you were to ask the Pope if Abraham was justified by virtue of his faith alone in Genesis 15:6, he would say no.

He believes that Abraham was justified by virtue of his faith plus the merit of his works (Condign).

This is directly in opposition to Paul who teaches that Grace depends on God’s election, even before the human beings are made.
 
May I also ask my friend, when you say faith alone…how do you define faith…

do you define it as a belief that Jesus is the messiah and the son of God? or is it more complex than that?
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church on Abraham:

Abraham - “father of all who believe”

145 The Letter to the Hebrews, in its great eulogy of the faith of Israel’s ancestors, lays special emphasis on Abraham’s faith: "By faith, Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place which he was to receive as an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was to go."4 By faith, he lived as a stranger and pilgrim in the promised land.5 By faith, Sarah was given to conceive the son of the promise. And by faith Abraham offered his only son in sacrifice.6

146 Abraham thus fulfills the definition of faith in Hebrews 11:1: “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen”:7 "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."8 Because he was “strong in his faith”, Abraham became the “father of all who believe”.9

147 The Old Testament is rich in witnesses to this faith. The Letter to the Hebrews proclaims its eulogy of the exemplary faith of the ancestors who “received divine approval”.10 Yet “God had foreseen something better for us”: the grace of believing in his Son Jesus, “the pioneer and perfecter of our faith”.11

4 Heb 11:8; cf. Gen 12:1-4.
5 Cf. Gen 23:4.
6 Cf. Heb 11:17.
7 Heb 11:1.
8 Rom 4:3; cf. Gen 15:6.
9 Rom 4:11,18; 4:20; cf. Gen 15:5.
10 Heb 11:2, 39.
11 Heb 11:40; 12:2.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c3a1.htm#146
 
Without getting into any Protestant school of thought…(setting aside such)…does Pope Benedict XVI mention the Faith of Abraham? Yes. And does he quote what Paul said in Romans in reference to Gen 15:6 that Abraham believed in God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness? sure.

“Through faith, we have been built up in Jesus Christ (cfr Col 2:7), even as a house is built on its foundations. Sacred history provides many examples of saints who built their lives on the word of God. The first is Abraham, our father in faith, who obeyed God when he was asked to leave his ancestral home and to set out for an unknown land. “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness, and he was called the friend of God” (Jas 2:23).”

~Pope Benedict XVI

WYD 2011
 
Some more Chrysostom:

You see the many benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors (it bestows)! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by (personal) sin; so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be (Christ’s) members - Baptismal Catecheses in St. Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21

Reverence now, oh reverence, this table of which we all are partakers! (1 Cor 10:16-18). Christ, who was slain for us, the victim who is placed thereon! - Homilies on Romans 8

For when you see the Lord sacrificed, and laid upon the altar, and the priest standing and praying over the victim, and all the worshippers empurpled with that precious blood, can you then think that you are still among men, and standing upon the earth? Are you not, on the contrary, immediately translated to heaven? The Priesthood 3:4

For they who inhabit the earth and make their abode are entrusted with the administration of things that are in heaven, and have received an authority that God has not given to angels or archangels. For it has not been said to them, “Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”. They who rule on earth have authority to bind, but only the body: whereas this binding lays hold of the soul and penetrates the heavens; and what priests do here below God ratifies above, and the master confirms the sentence of his servants. For indeed what is it but all manner of heavenly authority has he given them when he says, “Whose sins you remit they are remitted, and whose sins you retain they are retained?”. What authority could be greater than this? “The Father has committed all judgment to the Son?”. But I see it all put into the hands of these men by the Son. For they have been conducted to this dignity as if they were already translated to heaven. The Priesthood 3:5

“So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions that you were taught, whether by word, or by letter of ours.” From this it is manifest that they did not deliver all things by letter, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a Tradition, seek no farther. Homilies on 2 Thessalonians 4:15

Let us give them aid and perform commemoration for them. For if the children of Job were purged by the sacrifice of their father, why do you doubt that when we too offer for the departed, some consolation arises to them, since God is wont to grant the petitions of those who ask for others? Homilies on 1 Corinthians 41:8

Doesn’t sound real Protestant to me…
 
As to a Christian --there the initial justification. And could it happen that the Christian is never able to “do any good works” and die and go to heaven?

Yes.

They are justified.

Now is there then-- after being justified -after they are in Christ --is there a “process”? in further justification…becoming more like Christ etc? yes. that too is true.
 
It sounds perfectly reconcilable with historic continuing anglicanism and the Orthodox.
 
There is for a Christian --the initial justification. And could it happen that the Christian is never able to “do any good works” and die and go to heaven?

Yes.

They are justified.

Now is there then-- after being justified -after they are in Christ --is there a “process”? in further justification…becoming more like Christ etc? yes. that too is true.
 
Let me take this approach. (but don’t forget to answer my questions if you have time 🙂 )

what you dispute I believe is the catholic assertion that righteousness is infused. You believe that the Roman Catholic Church is wrong on this.

You believe in a legal declaration of righteousness but that we do not receive Christ’s imputed Righteousness.

However, yours is not the historical view of Protestantism. You, yourself admitted this. Most Protestants believe that we are legally declared righteous when Christ’s righteousness is imputed upon us. I asked you if any church holds to this tradition and you said that Luther and Calvin at first held this position then shortly there after started to believe in Christ’s imputed righteousness. Luther has heavily influenced the Protestant Churches to say the least.

The Orthodox Church does not hold to the faith alone position. They hold to the beautiful theology of Theosis. Similar but not quite to the Catholic position of infusion of Righteousness. They have been separated from the Western Church for about 1000 years.

The Oriental Orthodox Churches broke away in the 5th Century right around the time of St. Chrysostom was alive and they also believe in Theosis.

Based on what you have written in various threads I must conclude that yours is a new innovation. Since even you wrote in the Chrysostom thread that no other protestant church held to this position.

I googled your ideas recently and it appears that this way of looking at things originated in the 60’s. The movement is called the New Perspectives on Paul. Reading excerpts of what the proponents of this new movement hav written sound close to what you have been saying. Until I read this, your threads were extremely confusing. I get it now.
 
I read the homily on Romans, I am nearly done, with the homily of the gospel of John. Beautiful. St. Chrysostom writes with such passion. Erick by any chance did you read the homily on the gospel of John.

Chrysostom writes this

But why speak I of a portion of doctrine? Though a man believe rightly on the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, yet if he lead not a right life, his faith will avail nothing towards his salvation. Therefore when He saith, “This is life eternal, that they may know Thee the only true God” (c. xvii. 3), let us not suppose that the (knowledge) spoken of is sufficient for our salvation; we need besides this a most exact life and conversation. Since though he has said here, “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life,” and in the same place something even stronger, (for he weaves his discourse not of blessings only, but of their contraries also, speaking thus: “He that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him”😉 yet not even from this do we assert that faith alone is sufficient to salvation. And the directions for living given in many places of the Gospels show this. Therefore he did not say, “This by itself is eternal life,” nor, “He that doth but believe on the Son hath eternal life,” but by both expressions he declared this, that the thing doth contain life, yet that if a right conversation follow not, there will follow a heavy punishment. And he did not say, “awaiteth him,” but, “abideth on him,” that is, “shall never remove from him.” For that thou mayest not think that the “shall not see life,” is a temporary death, but mayest believe that the punishment is continual, he hath put this expression to show that it rests upon him continually.
 
I believe that the “righteousness of God” is precisely “faith” working by the power of God.

Both Protestants and Catholics have missed the point that Paul taught that “faith” is accounted for “righteousness”. You see, Catholics and Protestants have wanted to define this “righteousness” as something which is bundled up in the arms of God and is then given to the human being, either by imputation of infusion; it is a gift which is from God given to mankind. I do not see it this way.

God imputes “faith”, and this is the “faith” of the human being, as “righteousness”. God is viewing the “faith” of an individual and calculating it as “righteousness”. This is grace, for “faith” is not working really hard to be sinlessly perfect, but a whole life relying on God and moving in obedience to His will according to His promise of salvation.

The gospel is the power of God unto those who are believing, precisely because it is here that the “righteousness of God” is manifest, that by “faith”, man is being accounted righteous because “faith” is defined as someone’s life trust and journey to God. It is not a strict adherence to a law, per say, but a total devotion to a person’s promise, namely, God. And this of course shapes the person’s life (see Abraham). “Faith” is encompassing of conversion, repentance, and perseverance after God’s promise. This heart deep devotion to God and an unfailing seeking for His promise, which is not the same as sinless perfection in the law, is what God imputes as righteousness. This is grace.
 
So practically speaking, Abraham’s choice to believe God’s promise in Genesis 12 while he lived in Ur, was “righteousness”. Abraham’s continuing belief and trust in God was “righteousness” to him. Because Abraham’s faith was authentic saving faith, it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

This is not obedience to the law which justified him, but his life of faith which justified him. It was not his works which justified him, but his faith alone as the character and virtue of his whole life.
 
you have a great gift for writing. I wish I could write as well as you. Thanks for clearing that up. The meaning of faith.

What Church teaches that???
 
I really get this from Paul and Hebrews. I’ve heard it from one protestant or the next. Not sure I can remember.

However, I think it is pretty clear from Paul that “faith” is man’s righteousness, when it is alive and working. Read the chapter of the old testament saints in Hebrews 10-12, you will notice that all acted out of faith, and were justified by faith. Abel, because he had faith which lead to his offering, was justified by faith. Noah, being confident and convinced of things to come, had faith and went ahead and built an ark, really believing God, and this life of faith is what God reckons as righteousness. Abraham, Rahab, David, Enoch, all these people died “in faith”. In other words “faith” is what characterized these people, not just their initial conversion, but their whole lives, and thus “faith” is the locus of their “righteousness”, according to his grace and mercy.
 
faith is man’s righteousness? I thought you said that Faith was God’s righteousness?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top