Amateur Catholic apologists also appeal to this interpretation in order to shake off their Protestant interlocutors. Their argument goes something like this: “When Paul writes that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law, he means that a man is justified apart from keeping the ceremonial law required by Jewish circumcision. Paul is not arguing against works in general but against Jewish ceremonial works.”
This explanation conveniently protects the role of the moral law and faith within justification—something universally affirmed by the Catholic Church. Notably, Saint Jerome defended this interpretation of “works of the law” as merely the ceremonial precepts of the Old Law. Certainly, within Saint Paul’s immediate historical context, he is concerned chiefly with the ceremonial precepts of Moses. We know this because Saint Paul taught that the Gentile Christians should not keep the ceremonial precepts of Judaism—they were not to be circumcised and they were not restricted by the Jewish calendar or Jewish dietary regulations.
**Nevertheless, Saint Paul includes the moral precepts (for example, “thou shalt not covet”) as belonging to the “works of the law” (Rom 7:6-8). **Consequently, the Catholic Church has officially followed the interpretation of Saint Augustine, who taught that the phrase “works of the law” refers to the entire Law of Moses—to the moral precepts, to the ceremonial precepts, as well as to the judicial precepts. Augustine recognized the “works of the law” referred specifically to the ceremonial precepts in their Jewish context, but he also understood that the message extended to a general interpretation of “works.”
The Council of Trent and the Augustinian Tradition
Corresponding to this Augustinian tradition, the Catholic Church, at the Council of Trent, declared with Paul that none of the works of the law could justify a man:
Code:Canon I. If any one says that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ—let him be anathema.
This canon from the Council of Trent demonstrates that the Catholic Church does not distinguish between “works” and “works of the law” when stating that a man is not justified by “works of the law.” Instead, the Catholic Church condemns anyone who attempts to justify himself “by his own works,” regardless of whether the works belong to the moral precepts or to the ceremonial precepts of the law. Hence, one cannot be justified even if he perfectly fulfilled the moral precepts of the Ten Commandments, since these do not equip a man for the beatific vision of God’s essence. The ceremonial precepts (“do not eat swine’s flesh”) cannot transform us into the righteousness of Christ. Moreover, not even obedience to the moral precepts (“thou shalt not kill”) can fill us with the Holy Spirit. The Council of Trent elaborates:
We are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification—whether faith or works—merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.
Sorry, it does not. It simply affirms that Paul is using the term in a manner to refer to the entire law. You’re forcing a meaning on the text that is not there.That again ignores the historical usage of the term.
Because 1) ceremonial rituals are part of the law, and 2) that was the issue he was addressing with the Galatians. Those facts, however, do not preclude the truth that when he uses the term “works of law,” he is referring to the whole law, especially when you consider Gal. 5:3:It also doesn’t explain why Paul references the works of the law in Romans 3:28 ff. as pertaining to Jews. It also ignores that in other places of Scripture where works of the law are referenced, it specifically mentions ceremonial rituals (see Gal. 4:10).