Can we drop "alone" from faith and grace?

[Judas_Thaddeus]

I can never for the life of me understand why people hold strong to “faith alone” when Scriptures states the opposite. I know many Lutherans believe that if a faith does not produce fruit then the faith is dead so why then still proclaim faith alone?

EXACTLY!

 

[Tomster]

1. What bishop are you referring too? Is this a catholic bishop?
2. Sola Fide is not acceptable to Catholicism.
3. Scripture does not say we are saved by faith alone. In fact it say just the opposite so are you changing scripture?

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

Naw. He’s just following the fallible tradition of his spiritual forefather, Dr. Martin.

They still don’t realize ( or want to admit ) that the theological virtue of hope is necessary for salvation too.

 

[aidanbradypop]

I edited my last post because I got way off topic lol. I do believe salvation is through Grace Alone but not through faith alone.

 

[steido01]

None of those other people discounted works though as Luther did. None of them would have altered Scripture as Luther did. None of them addressed the Epistle of James as the “straw-epistle,” as Luther did. The True Scriptures does not contradict itself, but Luther’s did.

You’re conflating two separate things here. The number of books in the canon is an entirely separate discussion, and has been discussed at length in other threads. But just to be clear: Luther never removed any books from the Bible (in fact, Luther’s translation included all the books found in the Roman Catholic bible AND the Prayer of Manasseh, which is not included in modern Roman Catholic bibles).

As for the issue of “altering” the actual meaning of the text, I’ve already noted that Luther’s translation did no such thing. It simply captured the original meaning of the text - as can be confirmed by anyone who reads the ECFs or Pope Benedict.

Yes, Faith is what saves you, not works, but Faith without works is dead, none of those other people would deny that, but Luther would. At the end of the day, Luther was wrong, and just because we catch Origin, Basil, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Bernard, Aquinas, Augustine, etc. saying “Faith Alone” does not make him correct.

Now that is just plain false. Luther said quite clearly in his introduction to Romans:

“Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn’t stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever…Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!”

The fault is not with Luther, but with your own misunderstanding of what he taught.

It is for reasons like this that the “Alone” part of “Faith Alone” can’t really be dropped; it would imply that works could save apart from Faith.

 

[JonNC]

1. What bishop are you referring too? Is this a catholic bishop?
2. Sola Fide is not acceptable to Catholicism.
3. Scripture does not say we are saved by faith alone. In fact it say just the opposite so are you changing scripture?

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

1). I think he meant Pope Emeritus.
2). Benedict commented to the contrary.
3). St. Paul, in many places, lists faith as that which justifies.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Interesting. Our definitions of faith probably vary, but unrelated to this discussion.

I’m curious as to how you come to a conclusion that the parable implies faith anywhere?

The focus and purpose of the parable is on preparation.

Building a back story is nice, but if it was true (or in the case of a story as it is, needed), it would have been mentioned.

Sorry, it wasn’t my intention to swerve off topic. I implied your were discussing this in light of the thread topic. Maybe you could clarify for me…

Jon

 

[aidanbradypop]

Grace>Christ>Faith in Christ>Acts of Charity

 

[JRKH]

That argument of 'adding alone because it sounded better in German" does not really sit well with me and is actually an excuse to cover up something that should not have happened.

It’s not just a question of “it sounded better”…It’s a question of relating the proper meaning of a text from one language to another. I took German in High school for two years. At first I thought it would be pretty simple…but it’s not. Some words don’t translate well and sentence structure is different. I can readily see where there can be a problem

That would be like me rewording Scripture because certain words Greek are not used in Gaelic. I would “need” to add or subtract words to make it more understandable in Gaelic?

If you were to actually try doing a translation I think you would find yourself doing exactly that. As just one example…There are 4 words in Greek that are traditionally translated as “love” in English. Likewise sentence structure in the Greek prevents a word for word translation.

I can never for the life of me understand why people hold strong to “faith alone” when Scriptures states the opposite. I know many Lutherans believe that if a faith does not produce fruit then the faith is dead so why then still proclaim faith alone?

What I have discovered is that much of the disagreement comes down to what one includes in “faith” - to the person who holds to “faith alone”…works are part and parcel of faith and do not need to be addressed separately - as in the Catholic expression, “faith and works”…
Jon made this connection in his very first reply on the thread… and it was a good connection.

Peace
James

 

[steido01]

"concretecamper:

Originally Posted by concretecamper View Post

1. What bishop are you referring too? Is this a catholic bishop?
2. Sola Fide is not acceptable to Catholicism.
3. Scripture does not say we are saved by faith alone. In fact it say just the opposite so are you changing scripture?

Naw. He’s just following the fallible tradition of his spiritual forefather, Dr. Martin.

Actually, I was referring to the Audience held by the Bishop of Rome (that’s Pope Benedict) in 2008: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081119_en.html

The wall as he says in his Letter to the Ephesians between Israel and the Gentiles, was no longer necessary: it is Christ who protects us from polytheism and all of its deviations; it is Christ who unites us with and in the one God; it is Christ who guarantees our true identity within the diversity of cultures. The wall is no longer necessary; our common identity within the diversity of cultures is Christ, and it is he who makes us just. Being just simply means being with Christ and in Christ. And this suffices. Further observances are no longer necessary. For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love

 

[Tomster]

I edited my last post because I got way off topic lol. I do believe salvation is through Grace Alone but not through faith alone.

Yes, grace alone!

But under this one word, grace, there are a lot of dynamics involved here.

1. theological virtues: faith, hope and charity
2. sins against the above
3. the mystery final perseverance
4. moral virtues

I could go on . . .

 

[aidanbradypop]

It’s not just a question of “it sounded better”…It’s a question of relating the proper meaning of a text from one language to another. I took German in High school for two years. At first I thought it would be pretty simple…but it’s not. Some words don’t translate well and sentence structure is different. I can readily see where there can be a problem

If you were to actually try doing a translation I think you would find yourself doing exactly that. As just one example…There are 4 words in Greek that are traditionally translated as “love” in English. Likewise sentence structure in the Greek prevents a word for word translation.

What I have discovered is that much of the disagreement comes down to what one includes in “faith” - to the person who holds to “faith alone”…works are part and parcel of faith and do not need to be addressed separately - as in the Catholic expression, “faith and works”…
Jon made this connection in his very first reply on the thread… and it was a good connection.

Peace
James

Hey I edited that to a because it was kind of off topic lol

 

[steido01]

JRKH, thank you for your wisdom here. It is greatly appreciated.

 

[Tomster]

Actually, I was referring to the Audience held by the Bishop of Rome (that’s Pope Benedict) in 2008: vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20081119_en.html

Check out “Spes Salvi”.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Yes, grace alone!

But under this one word, grace, there are a lot of dynamics involved here.

1. theological virtues: faith, hope and charity
2. sins against the above
3. the mystery final perseverance
4. moral virtues

I could go on . . .

Correct dear friend, but we must never forget that by the Grace of God and only the Grace of God is such salvation even possible. That is why I state that we can keep Alone after Grace but we must drop it after Faith.

 

[MaryT777]

Reading through the thread it almost seems as if some are saying there is no difference between the Catholic and Lutheran understanding of faith and grace. I’m confused now.

Are we really on the same page regarding grace and faith and alone or not alone with works? (If you know what I mean )

 

[Tomster]

Correct dear friend, but we must never forget that by the Grace of God and only the Grace of God is such salvation even possible. That is why I state that we can keep Alone after Grace but we must drop it after Faith.

Agreed. I’ve yet to read anything from those in the continuing Catholic Church (Lutherans, they don’t like the word Protestant) regarding how “hope” fits into their scheme of justification.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Reading through the thread it almost seems as if some are saying there is no difference between the Catholic and Lutheran understanding of faith and grace. I’m confused now.

Are we really on the same page regarding grace and faith and alone or not alone with works? (If you know what I mean )

Just go play scrabble. Both will make you scratch your head lol.

 

[steido01]

Agreed. I’ve yet to read anything from those in the continuing Catholic Church (Lutherans, they don’t like the word Protestant) regarding how “hope” fits into their scheme of justification.

You know, this seems like it might be a simple matter of definitions (re: hope, faith). I must confess that I am unfamiliar with Spes Salvi, and I look forward to reading it (it’s rather long…). I have a gut feeling that “hope” as you understand it, Tomster, might fall within the understanding we Lutherans have of faith… I imagine breakthroughs like the JDDJ couldn’t otherwise happen. But, again, I’ll need to read it to confirm - I am unfamiliar with the term as it is used in the document.

 

[steido01]

Reading through the thread it almost seems as if some are saying there is no difference between the Catholic and Lutheran understanding of faith and grace. I’m confused now.

Are we really on the same page regarding grace and faith and alone or not alone with works? (If you know what I mean )

Haha! Some certainly seem to think so: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

The distinction between our views on justification, if it still exists, is certainly quite small.

 

[MaryT777]

You know, this seems like it might be a simple matter of definitions (re: hope, faith). I must confess that I am unfamiliar with Spes Salvi, and I look forward to reading it (it’s rather long…). I have a gut feeling that “hope” as you understand it, Tomster, might fall within the understanding we Lutherans have of faith… I imagine breakthroughs like the JDDJ couldn’t otherwise happen. But, again, I’ll need to read it to confirm - I am unfamiliar with the term as it is used in the document.

but yet the LCMS did not sign the JDDJ and that is your synod. So we don’t have that as a breakthrough yet between Catholics and the LCMS on justification do we?