Philippians 3:9 and Sola Fide

[Autocur]

“and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,”

What is the catholic interpretation of this? I’ve heard people use this verse to prove that righteousness come through faith and is entirely alien to us.

 

[EndTimes]

“and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,”

What is the catholic interpretation of this? I’ve heard people use this verse to prove that righteousness come through faith and is entirely alien to us.

For the sake of Understanding - that passage should be viewed in a fuller context …

If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.

7 But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. 8 What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in[a] Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith. 10 I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead.

12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13 Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.

Paul does not place his focus upon Mosaic laws re: any personal Righteousness any more…

But Now - Righteousness solely depends upon (the ill-understood by some) FAITH IN JESUS…

INTERESTING TOO - is how Paul does not represent: Once Saved, Always Saved

Salvation - is NOW - an Ongoing Faithfilled Activity to be Maintained throughout one’s entire Life!

 

[irenaeuslyons]

Holy Bible (Douay Rheims)
Phil 3:9 • ‘And may be found in him, not having my justice, which is of the law, but that which is of the faith of Christ Jesus, which is of God, justice in faith:’

Commentary:

Ver. 9. I may be found in him not having my justice, which is of the law; i.e. not pretending to be justified either by my own works or by the works of the Jewish law, but by that which proceedeth from faith in Christ, and by his merits. (Witham).

— S. Austin expounds the sense thus: not that justice which is in God, or by which God is just, but that which is in man from God, and by his gifts. l. 3. cont. 2. ep. Pelag.

 

[fhansen]

I use this verse to prove sola fide to be wrong. To be “under the law” means to attempt to be righteous on my own as if I possessed it apart from God. But we’re to have a real righteousness, which is alien to us in our fallen state only because that fallen state consists in man determining righteousness or morality for himself, apart from God; that was Adam’s sin. We know that the law cannot justify us-or make us righteous IOW- only God can do so. “Apart from Me you can do nothing.” John 15:5. The purpose of the New Covenant is to unite man and God first of all.

Faith, then, establishes communion with God so that He may do that work in us. A real righteousness, “on the basis of faith”, not a merely imputed righteousness that’s declared to be ours simply because we believe, nor a so-called righteousness that comes from mere external obedience of the law, which Paul described as “garbage” even though he excelled at it as a Pharisee.

In Catholic teaching faith is the beginning, not the end of salvation for man. It’s the “foundation and root of all justification” according to the Council of Trent. Faith is not the end all of righteousness for man, or the equivalent of righteous as if that’s all God wants. Rather faith is the means to true righteousness; we’re justified by faith, via faith, through faith, on the basis of faith.

So if you understand this, we’re not saved by faith alone, but by what faith is intended to lead us to, ultimately to the virtue of love, which is the epitome of man’s justice/righteousness. And as Augustine said, “Without love faith may indeed exist, but avails nothing.”

 

[TULIPed]

not a merely imputed righteousness

Just for the record, Reformed theology never, ever puts the word “merely” together with “imputed righteousness”. It would be the same for us as saying Christ was - on our behalf - was “merely” tortured, “merely” bore our sins, “merely” died a shameful death.

We believe that by his stripes we are healed - completely in God’s eyes. Yes, we believe (mostly by looking at our lives) that righteousness is imputed - but this doesn’t mean we “sin so that grace abounds”.

On the contrary - faith without works is indeed dead. Where we differ is who is ultimately and totally responsible for what we do. We believe it’s all Him - in spite of us. You believe you cooperate with Him. Fine. But the word “merely” is uncommon to us both - at least as it pertains to what our great King did for us. In any case, I pray we both do the following:

“Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ. For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me.”

 

[fhansen]

Just for the record, Reformed theology never, ever puts the word “merely” together with “imputed righteousness”. It would be the same for us as saying Christ was - on our behalf - was “merely” tortured, “merely” bore our sins, “merely” died a shameful death.

Just for the record, God isn’t satisfied with merely imputing righteousness. Jesus’ stripes accomplished much more than that.

 

[TULIPed]

We can agree to disagree on what God is satisfied with.

I was speaking to how Reformed theology views the importance and seriousness of the concept of imputed righteousness. On that point (as a Reformed Christian), I’m pretty sure I’m correct.

 

[fhansen]

Yes, I’m sure you’re correct regarding their incorrect doctrine.

 

[TULIPed]

Nothing like theological humor to brighten my day.

I am curious about your empirical experience though with righteousness. My experience has been that as I’ve grown in my faith, I’ve become more and more aware of how sinful I am. On the one hand, with God’s help, I have been able to overcome a number of troublesome sins. However, as I said, I am so much more aware of how subtly and insidiously sin invades aspects of my life.

The older I get, the more I identify with the tax collector in the temple who says “Lord have mercy on me a sinner!” I also identify with Paul in Romans - “For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.“

The good news is that this awareness convinces me of 2 things. First, it convinces me of my need for a savior. Second, it convinces me that I am not righteous - not even close. Salvation is thus only possible - for me at least - with God declaring me so in spite of my sinfulness.

 

[fhansen]

Ok, I honestly think that the two go hand in hand; a greater sensitivity to and conviction of sin with corresponding growth in justice/righteousness, which is more than lack of sin, but is most aptly defined as love, sin’s opposite in a sense-and conqueror. Either way love is more than an exhortation, it’s a command, by He who knows its achievable even if much grace & struggle are required. I’ve found, especially as I’ve grown older. that I will opt for the demands of love no matter how great the temptation and how beautiful the fruit appears that seeks to sway me. There are many sins that appeal to our pride, and that promise wisdom and praise from man that I nevertheless resist, while so many others don’t-and the temptations and tests don’t cease-they grow stronger IMO. And guess what- I still may not make the cut at the end of the day! Anyway, it’s not a picnic. Here are some RCC teachings:

409 This dramatic situation of "the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one"makes man’s life a battle:

The whole of man’s history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil, stretching, so our Lord tells us, from the very dawn of history until the last day. Finding himself in the midst of the battlefield man has to struggle to do what is right, and it is at great cost to himself, and aided by God’s grace, that he succeeds in achieving his own inner integrity.

1731 Freedom is the power, rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that, and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. By free will one shapes one’s own life. Human freedom is a force for growth and maturity in truth and goodness; it attains its perfection when directed toward God, our beatitude.

1732 As long as freedom has not bound itself definitively to its ultimate good which is God, there is the possibility of choosing between good and evil , and thus of growing in perfection or of failing and sinning. This freedom characterizes properly human acts. It is the basis of praise or blame, merit or reproach.

And when we dismiss this struggle and the role of man’s will in it as being legalism or self-righteousness we miss a huge part of the gospel. God wants us righteous, as He made us to be. He did not create us to be sinners, and Scripture is explicit about sinners not entering heaven.

Imputed righteousness makes a mockery out of God’s intentions and Christ’s mission IMO. It makes sin ok, more or less, for believers; it certainly remains cozy with it. Satan must be rolling with laughter. So how’s your ‘empirical experience with righteousness’? God hasn’t wrought any such thing? Awareness of sin is about the best you can attain?

continued:

 

[fhansen]

Should we be, ahem, proud of being sinners? And ashamed of being righteous? “Please God, don’t make me better or I won’t be able to identify with the humble tax collector anymore?” Does being truly righteous really beget pride? While the first right thing to do is acknowledge our sinfulness, isn’t that so that sin can be overcome? Is sin good? Do you think the tax collector just remained a sinner, a snow-covered dung heap at best, and that was the extent of his conversion and the work God wanted to do in him??

 

[TULIPed]

There are many sins that appeal to our pride, and that promise wisdom and praise from man that I nevertheless resist, while so many others don’t-and the temptations and tests don’t cease-they grow stronger IMO.

You’re a way better person than I am then (many times I’m in the “so many others” camp I’m afraid).

Satan must be rolling with laughter. So how’s your ‘empirical experience with righteousness’?

It’s not often I’m told my musings are amusing to Satan. A further example I suppose of my lack of righteousness and need for Christ. At this point I’m also in need of sleep, so off I go.

 

[fhansen]

Me too, but I ain’t done yet. I’m saying that Satan would be happy with a theology that means we can stay as we were before conversion. And that remaining sinful is somehow better and more pleasing to God than growing in righteousness. Sleep on that.

And I never said I arrived. I said it was a struggle. But certainly a Christian must be gaining ground. Investing his talents and realizing a return. Producing fruit. We don’t have to be proud of it-we just need to do it. Anyway there’s something intrinsically wrong with any theology that separates justification from…justice, i.e. righteousness. Or that denies that real righteousness or “inner integrity” is still obligatory for man. Or maintains that God has suddenly decided to ignore sin/injustice in us, the very thing that earned us death, the separation between man and God to begin with. Christ died so that we may have life, to bring about a change in us which begins with forgiveness of our sins. Are we to go on sinning then?

 

[TULIPed]

And that remaining sinful is somehow better and more pleasing to God than growing in righteousness.

Good morning! The doctrine of imputed righteousness doesn’t mean that we remain sinful. I’ll start with the theory and then move to how it squares with my experience. From the Westminster Confession of Faith:

“CHAPTER XI. OF JUSTIFICATION

I. Those whom God effectually calleth, He also freely justifieth, (Rom 8:30; Rom 3:24): not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, (Rom 4:5-8; 2Co 5:19, 21; Rom 3:22, 24-25, 27-28; Tts 3:5, 7; Eph 1:7; Jer 23:6, 1Co 1:30, 31; Rom 5:17-19); they receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness, by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God, (Act 10:44; Gal 2:16; Phl 3:9; Act 13:38-39; Eph 2:7-8).

II. Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification, (Jhn 1:12; Rom 3:28; Rom 5:1): yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love, (Jam 2:17, 22, 26; Gal 5:6).”

 

[TULIPed]

So we have imputed righteousness, and we also have sanctification:

“CHAPTER XIII. OF SANCTIFICATION

I. They, who are once effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart, and a new spirit created in them, are further sanctified, really and personally, through the virtue of Christ’s death and resurrection, (1Co 6:11; Act 20:32; Phl 3:10; Rom 6:5-6); by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them, (Jhn 17:17; Eph 5:26; 1Th 2:13): the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, (Rom 6:6, 14); and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified, (Gal 5:24; Rom 8:13); and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, (Col 1:11; Eph 3: 16-19); to the practice of true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord, (2Co 7:1; Hbr 12:14).”

 

[TULIPed]

So - imputed righteousness doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Sanctification is a real and necessary result of a lively and fruitful faith in Christ. It happens slowly though - at least for me. Very, very slowly. I find it to be like wack-a-mole.

And this is why I asked about “empirical experience”. How do we square God’s requirement for perfection (His son), and our slow metamorphosis? How do we hold being a “new creation” in tension with our temporal state? For me, imputed righteousness makes sense.

In any case, I know we agree on this - we are both thankful for God’s mercy and love.

 

[fhansen]

Good morning! The doctrine of imputed righteousness doesn’t mean that we remain sinful.

I understand this. The problem is that it effectively means that God sees one as righteous and deserving of entrance into heaven without being righteous. But in Christianity, one is forgiven of unrighteousness and made righteous, and necessarily so. We repent of sin.

“Just as you used to offer yourselves as slaves to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer yourselves as slaves to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Rom 6:19:23

 

[fhansen]

So - imputed righteousness doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

You know a lot of this, unfortunately, depends on the individual or ecclesial interpretation or understanding of sola fide. But either way, there’s a dividing line in Protestantism between imputed righteousness /justification and sanctification where no such line exists in Catholicism. Clarity is very important in theology.

 

[fhansen]

So we have imputed righteousness, and we also have sanctification:

But why do you insist on remaining a sinner then, almost congratulating yourself for it, it seems?

 

[TULIPed]

I am literally laughing out loud right now! I don’t insist on being sinful - I just am darn it!

I look back on my life and I see how God’s been working to rid me of sin. Generally speaking, this process has - many times - involved pain. The worst part is that it involves patience. Actually as I write this, the worst part is that most of the time it involves others that I love - usually those closest to me. I see how my sin affects them. It’s as if scales fall off and you start to become more and more aware of brokenness.

The good news though is that you also become more and more aware of Christ’s work in your life, no? You see how being less selfish for example, directly and positively affect your relationship with your spouse. You start to control your anger (especially behind the wheel!). And you know that none of this was possible on your own.