How do Protestants and Catholics differ regarding works?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aball1035
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From Catholics I’ve been told that justification comes through faith and works.

From Protestants I’ve been told that it comes through faith. The person will then produce works after, and this will show it’s a true faith.
  1. Isn’t this essentially the same?
  2. What are the “works” Catholics refer to?
For the life of me, when it comes down to actual practical experience, I think there isn’t an iota of difference.

Saint Vincent de Paul helps people. The Salvos help people. Lifeline (Uiniting Church) helps people. ADRA (Seventh Day Adventists) helps people. Baptist World Aid helps people overseas. Caritas (Catholic) helps people overseas.

As far as I’m concerned the whole “Faith Vs. Works” issue between Protestants and Catholics is just one big idiotic dog-fight. :slapfight:
 
Bob Crowley. You said:

QUOTE:
For the life of me, when it comes down to actual practical experience, I think there isn’t an iota of difference. . . . . As far as I’m concerned the whole “Faith Vs. Works” issue between Protestants and Catholics is just one big idiotic dog-fight.

How about when a Salvation Army Protestant says Baptism is an unnecessary “work” and refuses to be Baptized . . . ever!

Now you have a guy that is not born again or “born of water and the Spirit”.

Surely you don’t think THIS situation isn’t “one iota of difference” do you?

When I carry out Eucharistic Adoration I may be doing a work of reparation for myself and other sinners.

Yet some Protestants refer to me as an “idolater” for worshiping Jesus.

This wouldn’t count as “one iota of difference” in your mind would it?

If as a Catholic, I am taught if I am in a valid marriage . . . than what God has brought together, let no man put apart.

Yet I recall reading an article years ago in a national US newspaper (USA Today if I recall correctly) a popular Christian singer who was NOT Catholic talking about ditching his wife and kids and “marrying” his new girlfriend.

He said he has been challenged on this by his fellow Christians.

His reply?

He said, works don’t figure into his justification so it was no biggie (it is a small inconsequential matter).

That’s how he rationalized dumping his wife and children!

Would you say this isn’t “one iota of difference”?

He thinks he’s out doing God’s “work”.

Jesus warns us if we cut ourselves off from the Vine, we cannot bear fruit that will last.

Do YOU think this guy is still “in the Vine” as he thinks?

If not, do YOU think this guy can bear fruit that will last anyway? Or do you think “apart from Me (Jesus), you can do nothing”?

Beliefs have consequences.
 
Bob Crowley. You said:

QUOTE:
For the life of me, when it comes down to actual practical experience, I think there isn’t an iota of difference. . . . . As far as I’m concerned the whole “Faith Vs. Works” issue between Protestants and Catholics is just one big idiotic dog-fight.

How about when a Salvation Army Protestant says Baptism is an unnecessary “work” and refuses to be Baptized . . . ever!

Now you have a guy that is not born again or “born of water and the Spirit”.

Surely you don’t think THIS situation isn’t “one iota of difference” do you?

When I carry out Eucharistic Adoration I may be doing a work of reparation for myself and other sinners.

Yet some Protestants refer to me as an “idolater” for worshiping Jesus.

This wouldn’t count as “one iota of difference” in your mind would it?

If as a Catholic, I am taught if I am in a valid marriage . . . than what God has brought together, let no man put apart.

Yet I recall reading an article years ago in a national US newspaper (USA Today if I recall correctly) a popular Christian singer who was NOT Catholic talking about ditching his wife and kids and “marrying” his new girlfriend.

He said he has been challenged on this by his fellow Christians.

His reply?

He said, works don’t figure into his justification so it was no biggie (it is a small inconsequential matter).

That’s how he rationalized dumping his wife and children!

Would you say this isn’t “one iota of difference”?

He thinks he’s out doing God’s “work”.

Jesus warns us if we cut ourselves off from the Vine, we cannot bear fruit that will last.

Do YOU think this guy is still “in the Vine” as he thinks?

If not, do YOU think this guy can bear fruit that will last anyway? Or do you think “apart from Me (Jesus), you can do nothing”?

Beliefs have consequences.
These examples are not representative of Protestantism as a whole. They are individuals that are misunderstanding their religion. It is the same thing as when protestants talk of that Catholic they know that is in a co-habitation relationship and doesn’t live a Godly life, but because they go to mass twice a year and don’t eat meat on Fridays in Lent, they think they are a great Christian. People like this exist – and protestants like you described exist. It is their misunderstanding of their beliefs that are wrong.

My Catholic friend was pointing out to me examples of the new hyper-grace movement that says one can be a Christian and live a sinful life. This is a new idea. It is not a 500 year old idea.

When Luther said, “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” he didn’t mean that there doesn’t need to be fruit of the spirit or works. I think he was just saying that good fruit are the result of a strong vine. Good fruit doesn’t cause a deeply rooted vine to form. A deeply rooted vine causes good fruit.
 
When Luther said, “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” he didn’t mean that there doesn’t need to be fruit of the spirit or works. I think he was just saying that good fruit are the result of a strong vine. Good fruit doesn’t cause a deeply rooted vine to form. A deeply rooted vine causes good fruit.
Yes. Luther was not excommunicated for this doctrine and theology, right?

Though God is the cause of the growth, faith is the door. God opened the door of faith. We were not faithful, Jesus was the faithful man.

Justification in the O.T. also depended on Jesus completing the work of faith, and só opening the door to heaven.

I have read most of the Lutheran/Catholic JD on Justification, but would be curious to know what Lutherans thought of the results of the Council of Trent. And especially Martin himself. Its unfortunate that the Council began nearly when Martin died.

In the end, the Church regards good works as the completion of faithfullness. They have an aspect of cooperation with God to do His will. Neither faith nor its work earns (merits) Justification. This is the Gospel, that Jesus opened the door of heaven through His perfect work acceptable to God the Father. The Jew was always open to faith and bound to the work of the Law. The Law proved to be an “accuser” probably not unlike our conscience. They were always aware, then, that grace was active in all things.

Faith is freely opened to us. Works are the accomplishment of the Spirit moving us. Without the Spirit, there is no good work. Jesus will judge the works and the heart. The works will not merit heaven, but the contrite heart will receive the promise of heaven and grow in grace, faith, and stature through works of mercy.
 
This is one of those topics where I feel like P’s and C’ are essentially saying the same thing, just speaking different languages and splitting hairs.

Good works are a result of God’s wonderful grace - we agree on that. Catholics would say it’s Jesus working through us as a fragrant offering to the Father.

Great debate between well known Catholic and Calvinist apologists:

youtube.com/watch?v=gkKhy9HQHDg

Scroll forward to 42:40 for the points of works, their role and justification.
 
A faith that come from God causes justification/salvation and leads to good works.

Nothing that comes before or** AFTER** the free gift of faith in those justified causes their justification or earns it .
Catholics would say that the free gift of faith doesn ot cause justification either, but God’s grace. We are saved by grace, accessed through faith, not by works.
 
Catholics would say that the free gift of faith doesn ot cause justification either, but God’s grace. We are saved by grace, accessed through faith, not by works.
Yes… 👍

And then the Sacraments have their place, which are not works but a means of receiving grace.
 
John 15

I really can not see a big difference in the theologies of faith and works with Catholicism and Protestantism. It sounds like the Catholic teaching says a believer must do good works and Protestantism says a believer** will **do good works and display fruit of the spirit.
Unless penance and indulgences are considered a “work” I don’t think there is truly a difference.
The difference, I think, lies in what “works” does in our lives…are “works” vital acts that reveal a new life in Christ, a real interior change? Or mere human responses to divine mercy?

I would suggest the article below for a more in depth explanation, and I provide a portion:

chnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/salvation.pdf

Justification By Faith
By Dr. William Marshner

A second stage is the very transition from death to life, which is the first stage of justification proper. Here the parties are at one in saying “sola fide,” though they seem to mean different things by it. Protestants tend to mean that, at this stage, by the grace of God, man’s act of faith is the sole act required of him; Catholics mean that faith is the beginning, foundation and root of all justification, since only faith makes possible the acts of hope and charity (i.e. love-for-God) which are also required.3 However, since most Protestants have a broad notion of the act of faith, whereby it includes elements of hope and love, it is often hard to tell how far the difference on this point is real and how far it is a matter of words. Finally, however, there comes a third stage, that of actual Christian life, with its problems of growth and perseverance. The man justified by faith is called to “walk” with God, to progress in holiness. It is at this stage that the parties sharply diverge. Catholics affirm, and Protestants strenuously deny, that the born-again Christian’s good works merit for him the increase of grace and of the Christian virtues. As a result, Protestant piety has no obvious place for the self- sacrifices, fasts, and states of perfection which are prominent features of Catholic piety. At each stage, neither the apparent agreements nor the apparent disagreements can be understood without looking at certain metaphysical quarrels, the chief of which is over the very existence of what Catholics call “grace.”

The Protestant Reformers, however, impatient with metaphysics, preferred not to cope with such an entity and denied its existence.4 To them it seemed simpler to say that grace is something wholly in God, namely, His favor towards us. But then, if grace is not something real in man, our “justification” can no longer be conceived as a real change in us; it will have to become a sheer declaration on God’s part, e.g. a declaration that, thanks to the work of Christ, He will henceforth consider us as just, even though we remain inwardly the sinners we always were. Hence, the Protestant doctrine of “forensic” or “extrinsic” justification. Now watch what happens to our own act of faith: it ceases to be the foundational act of an interior renewal and becomes a mere requirement, devoid of any salvific power in its own right, which God arbitrarily sets as the condition on which He will He will declare us just. Whereupon, watch what happens to our good works: they cease to be the vital acts wherein an ontologically real “new life” consists and manifests itself; they become mere human responses to divine mercy—nice, but totally irrelevant to our justification—or else they become zombie-like motions produced in us by irresistible divine impulses, whereby God exhibits His glory in His elect.
 
rcwitness. You said:
the Sacraments have their place, which are not works but a means of receiving grace.
I affirm what you are saying here, but the Salvation Army adherents (and many other Bible only Christians) see Baptism and the other Sacraments as a “work”.

And so they refuse to be Baptized thinking that faith is only natural or it has a supernatural dimension that they “receive” when they “accept Jesus into their heart as personal Lord and Savior” because they see this confession of faith as a non-work.

All of this highlights some of what the original post asked about. That is . . . .“How do Protestants and Catholics differ regarding works?”
 
susanlo. You said:

QUOTE:
Good fruit doesn’t cause a deeply rooted vine to form. A deeply rooted vine causes good fruit.

In a sense this is irrelevant.

Good faith doesn’t CAUSE a deeply rooted vine to form either.

We obtain that initial grace of God UNMERITED.

You can’t “earn” initial grace with your faith.

But ONCE we have that grace, we are expected to use the “talents” we are given. We are expected to make “interest” in those “talents” the Master gives us.

And for those that DON’T . . . . For those who do NOT persevere in their faith . . . . For those who refuse (IN GRACE) to work . . . For those Jesus warns us. For those their will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
 
Instead of saying that Catholics are saved through faith and good works, would it be more correct to say that Catholics are saved through faith maintained by good works?
 
Instead of saying that Catholics are saved through faith and good works, would it be more correct to say that Catholics are saved through faith maintained by good works?
Sure! 🙂

The Sacrament of Communion is where we are called to worship and receive His sacrificial life. Doing so in good conscience is the intention. Through living by faith, we do works which are from above. They are why He saved us… to do His work on earth. They are works of Charity and mercy.

God help us do His will.
 
Also, what is the “start” in being justified?

To the Protestant, it’s accepting Jesus as your savior.

To the Catholic, is it baptism?
 
Also, what is the “start” in being justified?

To the Protestant, it’s accepting Jesus as your savior.

To the Catholic, is it baptism?
Conversion is the first work of the Holy Spirit. Baptism brings forgiveness on God’s part. As a child, Baptism guarantees Justification. As an Adult, Belief (and Baptism or its desire) is necessary for Justification.
 
Even BEFORE Baptism God makes the first move towards the sinner.

This is called God’s prevenient grace.

Although this is not the same as justifying grace, it is necessary.

God makes the first move toward man.

Baptism is then the entrance ramp to the Christian life.

All of this is totally an unmerited gift from God based upon the work of Jesus.

In Baptism we are reborn as sons and daughters IN the Son. A Grace relationship.

Because of this being united to Christ, you DO in a sense now “merit”.

Not on your own but united to and in Christ.

These works ARE NECESSARY for justification in an ongoing sense (depending on your state in life). Not initial justification, but the ongoing justification we are called to.

Good works are not automatic with justifying grace.

We need to cooperate with Christ.
 
Android alert.

I am going to correct my last statement on my post 52.

And for those that DON’T . . . . For those who do NOT persevere in their faith . . . . For those who refuse to work (IN the GRACE they’ve been given) . . . For those Jesus warns us. For those there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
 
From James Akin:
One will note, in the definitions of the virtues offered above, the similarity between hope and the way Protestants normally define “faith”; that is, as an unconditional “placing our trust in Christ’s promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit.” The definition Protestants normally give to “faith” is the definition Catholics use for “hope.”
However, the Protestant idea of faith by no means excludes what Catholics refer to as faith, since every Evangelical would (or should) say that a person with saving faith will believe whatever God says because God is absolutely truthful and incapable of making an error. Thus the Protestant concept of faith normally includes both the Catholic concept of faith and the Catholic concept of hope.
Thus if a Protestant further specifies that saving faith is a faith which “works by charity” then the two soteriological slogans become equivalents. The reason is that a faith which works by charity is a faith which produces acts of love. But a faith which produces acts of love is a faith which includes the virtue of charity, the virtue of charity is the thing that enables us to perform acts of supernatural love in the first place. So a Protestant who says saving faith is a faith which works by charity, as per Galatians 5:6Open in Logos Bible Software (if available), is saying the same thing as a Catholic when a Catholic says that we are saved by faith, hope, and charity.
We may put the relationship between the two concepts as follows:
Protestant idea of faith = Catholic idea of faith + Catholic idea of hope + Catholic idea of charity
The three theological virtues of Catholic theology are thus summed up in the (good) Protestant’s idea of the virtue of faith. And the Protestant slogan “salvation by faith alone” becomes the Catholic slogan “salvation by faith, hope, and charity (alone).”
jimmyakin.com/library/justification-by-faith-alone

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top