Yes, my friend, I have read Hebrews and am familiar with Hebrews 11. I would also view it as a comparative opposite, an “on the one hand on the other” to that of Hebrews 3-4 the “not entering the rest”. The pivotal point between the two handed argument being Melchizedek in Hebrews 7.
I am largely interested in establishing whether there is a difference between the way Catholics view “faith” and how it is efficacious, and the way Protestants view “faith” and how it is efficacious.
I would appreciate your own words on this, my friend, as rcwitness states “As I understand it …”.
Without pointing out the protestant point of view cause I’m not…
You can probably read between the lines to see where Protestantism disagrees.
Catholicism recognizes that faith is a gift. While it is a gift, it is an invitation that asks for a response. Clearly, for faith to be
efficacious the gift must be accepted and lived. While almighty God gives us faith, it is not forced on us. We must choose to accept it. God fully respects our humanity, our choices.
This acceptance itself is a “work”. It is a human act. Faith and works are not at odds. Faith and works are frequently pitted against one another. It is a silly argument, and many protestants agree with that.
The gift of faith is embodied in Jesus Christ, who is a person, not a book.
Jesus Christ reveals himself
in-carne, in the flesh. Our faith is in a person. That is the very definition of Christian faith.
The first revelation of Christ is his birth to a human mother. From the beginning of his life, Christ himself subjects himself to human obedience and submission, first of all to a young unwed Jewish woman. God does not rape Mary. He offers himself, her response of faith is fertile.
This is the efficaciousness of faith embodied. From Mary’s acceptance of God’s gift, salvation comes to us. Wow.
This is a radical concept of faith that is extremely difficult to accept. God reveals himself by subjecting himself to flesh and living in a community. He continues to live in a community. This community is his Mystical Body. Faith in Christ cannot be separated from submission, trust, assent, and obedience… to the whole (cataholos) of the Body of Christ. If one has a “faith” separated from the whole of the body, he does not in fact have faith. Faith is not
efficacious for salvation outside that body. (The Church accepts that there are different paths to communion with Christ’s body, and not all are explicit.)
Christian faith is only
efficacious for our salvation to the degree that it unites us to Christ. Christ has a Mystical Body which is inseparable from him. Faith cannot be a personal endeavor. While Christ
is our “personal” Lord and Savior, Amen, he is not our
exclusively personal Lord and Savior, in an individualist way. In Christ all are one.
I think one problem we have is that modern notions of submission and obedience have been so distorted by individualism that we reject them as slavery.
Even Christ trusted his human community, right? He went to the cross, and left the bumbling disciples in charge. Is that something a wise and powerful and efficacious king would do? Yes it is, and we have a difficult example of faith to follow. But we are not greater than our Lord. We are called to follow him
in faith.
Christ’s obedience of faith: ob-audiere, “to listen”. Christ listened to his Father and his disciples listened to him when he invited them. “He who hears you hears me”.
The efficacy of faith is bound up with the person of Christ
with his whole body, which is truly and substantially present and alive on earth and in heaven.
As a side note, this is why our RCIA candidates do not simply learn the Creed and profess it at the altar. That would be “lip-service”.
RCIA is a process of developing trust, submission, obedience, with the Body of Christ. (or it should be anyway)
