Please help me get Sola Fide out of my head once and for all!

[guanophore]

Hey all,

I’m so close to leaving Protestantism. I know it’s false, but I just need an extra push or something (plus my wife is having a really hard time with my wanting to go back to the Church). One thing that I keep going back to over and over is “what if Sola Fide is true?”

One Protestant argument that I frequently hear is that “James doesn’t actually prove faith + works. James is saying that a faith that is not evidenced by works is dead. So, if you say you believe but you don’t have any works, you probably don’t have saving faith. If you do have saving faith, it will be shown by the works that you do.” How would you refute that?

Something interesting that I got from Jimmy Akin:

1. Justification is clearly seen as a past event in scripture:
   a. Romans 5:1-2
   b. Romans 5:9
   c. 1 Cor 6:11
2. But Abraham was justified multiple times:
   a. Abraham “believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness.” - Romans 4:3; Genesis 15:5
   b. By Faith (Heb 11:2), Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out…" Heb
   11:8. This is saving faith. This event was originally recorded in
   Genesis 12:1-4, 3 chapters before he was justified in Genesis 15:6. So,
   Abraham was already justified well before he was justified in Genesis
   15:6

If Abraham had saving faith back in Genesis 12, he was justified back in Genesis 12. But, Paul clearly tells us that he was also justified in Genesis 15. The event in James 2:21-23 occurred much later, in Genesis 22, where Abraham was justified again. So, Abraham was justified before God at least 3 times.

That has helped me see that justification is not just a one-time event but, for some reason, it’s like I keep forgetting these objections to Sola Fide and start thinking “maybe the Protestants are right.” I just want to be over it once and for all.

This is why Catholics refer to being in right relationship with God being in a state of grace.

When we are transferred from the Kingdom of Darkness into the Kingdom of light, we are adopted. Falling from grace does not mean we are unadopted, but we are no longer in right relationship with God.

Catholics believe we are saved by grace, through faith, not of our own works (the Bible is aCatholic book, after all). Saving faith is faith that works, as you said above. We do not say that faith is ever alone, because it is always “working through love”.

3But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.I Cor. 13:13. Faith is never alone, but always accompanied by hope and love.

 

[Cathoholic]

Hello minorsecond.

You brought up verses that directly talk of the necessity of works. You then mentioned . . .

But the problem is, the Protestant will then come back and say . . .

. . . Jesus is saying that the fact that one is saved is shown by their doing the Father’s will - this isn’t saying that the “doing” is what saves you, but rather, the fact you’re saved causes you to “do.”

I think you are being painted into a box by some of these people.

You are being muscled into you asserting that you are saved by your own mere works, and “earning” your own salvation in a sense (instead of cooperating with God’s grace).

“Earning” our way to Heaven with “works” (or faith or hope) is not true any more than these people can claim they “earn” Heaven by their “own faith”.

Faith, hope, and charitable works need to be supernaturalized.

These virtues need Christ alive and at work IN YOU.

This is true with “faith”, and this is true with “works” too.

(This misunderstanding is because so many Protestants see “grace” as God’s Divine favor ONLY.

alluding to mentioning Catholics and Protestants sometimes speak “two different languages”?].

Catholics see “Grace” partially the same and partially differently.

Grace IS God’s Divine favor, but grace is MORE. Grace for the saved people in the New Covenant includes MUCH MORE. Grace now includes a “participation” in the life of Jesus Christ!)

Does this make sense?

I know these nuances can kindle some other issues too so I’ll make an effort to come back here to this thread and see if it did raise questions with you. If so let me know and I will try to deal with them if this is the case).

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I’m so close to leaving Protestantism. I know it’s false, but I just need an extra push or something. One thing that I keep going back to over and over is “what if Sola Fide is true?”

One Protestant argument that I frequently hear is that “James doesn’t actually prove faith + works. James is saying that a faith that is not evidenced by works is dead. So, if you say you believe but you don’t have any works, you probably don’t have saving faith. If you do have saving faith, it will be shown by the works that you do.” How would you refute that?

The key, I believe, is to turn to Paul, not James. The problem/hesitation is that you need to be convinced that Paul is not teaching Faith Alone, and so unless you go to Romans, especially Romans 4, you won’t have the evidence you need to feel secure in coming into the Catholic Church.

In my personal study, I came to realize that it’s actually Catholics who have believed in salvation by faith alone this whole time, while it’s the Protestant side who believes we are saved by works alone. You didn’t misread that, you just need to look beyond the surface to understand why it’s true.

The Protestant and the Catholic are viewing salvation very differently. The Protestant sees Heaven as a sort of Tropical Resort Vacation that’s way more comfortable than the Burning Hot Desert of Hell. The salvation question they ask is: Am I a good enough person to avoid hell? They know they’ve sinned, they know God demands a lifetime of good works, and so they know they aren’t “good enough” to pass God’s judgment seat. The “solution” they propose is that Jesus comes down form Heaven, lives a lifetime of good works without ever sinning, and then “Imputes” this perfect lifetime obedience to you, so that God can graciously count you as if you lived a life of perfect obedience. Works alone is all there is. They claim that it’s all about “faith,” but this is misleading, because “faith” to the Protestant is merely believing that Jesus kept all the commandments in your place. Works are what save in the Protestant world view, they just hide behind the word “faith” (mostly from ignorance).

The Catholic views Heaven as a Wedding Banquet, where you are invited to the wedding as friends of the Groom. The question of “Am I a good person?” makes no sense to the Catholic. I know tons of good people, but that doesn’t mean they are invited to my wedding. Many good people in the world were not invited to the Royal Wedding in England a few years back. So “works” isnt’ what the Catholic is thinking about. Instead, the real issue is friendship/relationship. We are invited to the Wedding Banquet by becoming friends, which isn’t something you work for, it’s something granted to you. Faith in the Catholic view is the infused virtue that changes you from within, causing you to be an adopted child of God. As part of God’s family, you’re automatically invited to the wedding. The only challenge is that you have to maintain that friendship until the wedding day comes. As friends, the point isn’t whether you’re 100% good, but rather that you maintain the friendship.

The Protestant believes in Once Saved Always Saved because they don’t view salvation as a relationship with the Trinity, but rather a Business Transaction. The Transaction is complete, God looked at Christ’s Imputed Righteousness instead of at you, and God passed His sentence. How you act is irrelevant to that transaction. But for the Catholic, salvation is about being in a relationship with the Trinity, which is why when we sin we harm the relationship and when we love we grow the relationship. Salvation can be lost precisely because the relationship can be broken at any time, but like any good marriage the longer you build a foundation of love the harder it will be to break that relationship. The Catholic isn’t “working” here at all, but rather loving God, and as Paul says Christians by loving “fulfill the law” (Rom 13:8). A Protestant thinks “fulfilling the law” means being perfectly obedient to all God’s commandments, but that’s not at all what Paul says! (Gal 3:13-15) Perfect obedience is a foreign idea, nowhere in the Bible.

If you read Paul’s Epistles with the Catholic glasses on, you will see how it all makes sense. And once you’re aware that Protestants believe in Works Alone, you will see how they cannot make sense of Paul. Whenever Paul speaks negatively towards “works” it is never because “we aren’t good enough,” (click here) but rather because works never saved in the first place, even if kept perfectly. Only faith saves because only relationship saves. Abraham wasn’t justified 3 separate times…Abraham was faithfully walking with God each day, growing the relationship each day: *I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven, *because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. (Gen 26:4-5)

If you follow the link in my signature below, you will see many more posts like this where Romans 4 and all the juicy Protestant verses like 2 Corinthians 5:21 are addressed (click here). In fact, you will be horrified to learn that the Gospel for Protestants is centered around Jesus being damned to hellfire in their plac (click here).

 

[Wesrock]

This understanding of the Catholic relationship as a familial relationship with God is key. We are sons and daughters developing a relationship with Our Father. We are not slaves following a series of orders, or even just citizens upholding simple law. It’s something so much more personal, loving, and not legalistic.

In following up on the last post, I reread Romans 4. I imagined some funny exchanges between God and Abraham.

God: Abraham, go to Canaan.

Abraham: I will stay here, but I believe you are the one true God!

God: Abraham, circumsize yourself and your entire household.

Abraham: No, thank you, Lord. But you are still my God! I have faith in that!

God: Abraham, take your beloved son to Moriah, and there offer him as a sacrifice.

Abraham: Nope. But don’t worry! I still believe in you!

Okay, sorry. I am definitely not attributing that oversimplification simply to Protestants. But loving and trusting God does mean following him and listening to him. Abraham wasn’t checking off a list of works, or following a simple legal code. He didn’t earn righteousness because those actions were intrinsically meritorious. He was participating in a relationship, and it was his trust and faith in God in being in that relationship that made him righteous. And a relationship is not one sided.

 

[JonNC]

The key, I believe, is to turn to Paul, not James. The problem/hesitation is that you need to be convinced that Paul is not teaching Faith Alone, and so unless you go to Romans, especially Romans 4, you won’t have the evidence you need to feel secure in coming into the Catholic Church.

In my personal study, I came to realize that it’s actually Catholics who have believed in salvation by faith alone this whole time, while it’s the Protestant side who believes we are saved by works alone. You didn’t misread that, you just need to look beyond the surface to understand why it’s true.

The Protestant and the Catholic are viewing salvation very differently. The Protestant sees Heaven as a sort of Tropical Resort Vacation that’s way more comfortable than the Burning Hot Desert of Hell. The salvation question they ask is: Am I a good enough person to avoid hell? They know they’ve sinned, they know God demands a lifetime of good works, and so they know they aren’t “good enough” to pass God’s judgment seat. The “solution” they propose is that Jesus comes down form Heaven, lives a lifetime of good works without ever sinning, and then “Imputes” this perfect lifetime obedience to you, so that God can graciously count you as if you lived a life of perfect obedience. Works alone is all there is. They claim that it’s all about “faith,” but this is misleading, because “faith” to the Protestant is merely believing that Jesus kept all the commandments in your place. Works are what save in the Protestant world view, they just hide behind the word “faith” (mostly from ignorance).

The Catholic views Heaven as a Wedding Banquet, where you are invited to the wedding as friends of the Groom. The question of “Am I a good person?” makes no sense to the Catholic. I know tons of good people, but that doesn’t mean they are invited to my wedding. Many good people in the world were not invited to the Royal Wedding in England a few years back. So “works” isnt’ what the Catholic is thinking about. Instead, the real issue is friendship/relationship. We are invited to the Wedding Banquet by becoming friends, which isn’t something you work for, it’s something granted to you. Faith in the Catholic view is the infused virtue that changes you from within, causing you to be an adopted child of God. As part of God’s family, you’re automatically invited to the wedding. The only challenge is that you have to maintain that friendship until the wedding day comes. As friends, the point isn’t whether you’re 100% good, but rather that you maintain the friendship.

The Protestant believes in Once Saved Always Saved because they don’t view salvation as a relationship with the Trinity, but rather a Business Transaction. The Transaction is complete, God looked at Christ’s Imputed Righteousness instead of at you, and God passed His sentence. How you act is irrelevant to that transaction. But for the Catholic, salvation is about being in a relationship with the Trinity, which is why when we sin we harm the relationship and when we love we grow the relationship. Salvation can be lost precisely because the relationship can be broken at any time, but like any good marriage the longer you build a foundation of love the harder it will be to break that relationship. The Catholic isn’t “working” here at all, but rather loving God, and as Paul says Christians by loving “fulfill the law” (Rom 13:8). A Protestant thinks “fulfilling the law” means being perfectly obedient to all God’s commandments, but that’s not at all what Paul says! (Gal 3:13-15) Perfect obedience is a foreign idea, nowhere in the Bible.

If you read Paul’s Epistles with the Catholic glasses on, you will see how it all makes sense. And once you’re aware that Protestants believe in Works Alone, you will see how they cannot make sense of Paul. Whenever Paul speaks negatively towards “works” it is never because “we aren’t good enough,” (click here) but rather because works never saved in the first place, even if kept perfectly. Only faith saves because only relationship saves. Abraham wasn’t justified 3 separate times…Abraham was faithfully walking with God each day, growing the relationship each day: *I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven, *because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws. (Gen 26:4-5)

If you follow the link in my signature below, you will see many more posts like this where Romans 4 and all the juicy Protestant verses like 2 Corinthians 5:21 are addressed (click here). In fact, you will be horrified to learn that the Gospel for Protestants is centered around Jesus being damned to hellfire in their plac (click here).

Which Protestants? I ask because this sounds like virtually nothing I was ever taught.
Jon

 

[josephback]

Thanks, Wesrock.

See, I get all that. But the problem is, the Protestant will then come back and say:

It’s that precise response that I have such a hard time refuting. It seems like no matter how you try to frame the argument, the response is some variation of “your works show that you’re saved.”

By saying that works merely show that we’re saved they seek to introduce a division between salvation and holiness—which is impossible. By the way, the greek verb in James is synergei (συνεργεί). We get the word synergy from it. The chief division between Rome and the original Reformers is that the latter denied human free will and the ability to cooperate with grace while Catholic writers defended this—and its essential to the assertion of a just God. If we had no free will to choose but are predetermined to heaven or hell as Calvin stated, then God would be a murderer unworthy of adoration. Faith is always a risk either way. Take the risk.

 

[JonNC]

By saying that works merely show that we’re saved they seek to introduce a division between salvation and holiness—which is impossible. By the way, the greek verb in James is synergei (συνεργεί). We get the word synergy from it. The chief division between Rome and the original Reformers is that the latter denied human free will and the ability to cooperate with grace while Catholic writers defended this—and its essential to the assertion of a just God. If we had no free will to choose but are predetermined to heaven or hell as Calvin stated, then God would be a murderer unworthy of adoration. Faith is always a risk either way. Take the risk.

Regarding Article XVIII of the Augsburg Confession, free will, the Roman confutators responded:
**. In the eighteenth article they confess the power of the Free Will - viz. that it has the power to work a civil righteousness, but that it has not, without the Holy Ghost, the virtue to work the righteousness of God. This confession is received and approved. For it thus becomes Catholics to pursue the middle way, so as not, with the Pelagians, to ascribe too much to the free will, nor, with the godless Manichaeans, to deny it all liberty; for both are not without fault. **

Further, Lutherans accept that one has the free will to reject grace.
Jon

 

[josephback]

Regarding Article XVIII of the Augsburg Confession, free will, the Roman confutators responded:
**. In the eighteenth article they confess the power of the Free Will - viz. that it has the power to work a civil righteousness, but that it has not, without the Holy Ghost, the virtue to work the righteousness of God. This confession is received and approved. For it thus becomes Catholics to pursue the middle way, so as not, with the Pelagians, to ascribe too much to the free will, nor, with the godless Manichaeans, to deny it all liberty; for both are not without fault. **

Further, Lutherans accept that one has the free will to reject grace.
Jon

What about Luther and “The Bondage of the Will” my friend? I might have been thinking more of the Calvinists which the OP is talking with, but Luther held that free will was “a horse, ridden by God or the devil.” If this isn’t monergism, then what is?

 

[GLam8833]

We are called AS A CHURCH to COOPERATE with
the Kingdom building, as Jesus said: “He who believes
in me will do what I am doing, GREATER THINGS will
he do b/c I’m going to the Father, you can ask anything
in My Name and I will do it, that the Father may be
glorified in the Son [thru the Church], you may ask any-
thing in My Name and I will do it” John 14:12
We are CALLED to good works, to do the WILL of the
Father. Eph. 2:10;Matt. 21:28ff

 

[mattp0625]

I don’t know if I’d even call it “my tradition” at this point. I’m 98% convinced it’s incorrect and am almost ready to come home (ex-Catholic) but I keep hitting this sticking point.

It’s a reformed Baptist church, so it’s Calvinist.

They do say that, but they don’t. There’s a heavy emphasis on God’s sovereignty and predestination. But if I put it the way you have, they’d reject that. Almost as if any good thing we do is not attributable to us at all, but to God. But any bad thing we do is attributable to us. In their theology, it’s all the work of the Holy Spirit when you do any good.

Yes, it’s OSAS.

Non-traditional Calvinism, which resulted in “once saved, always saved” doctrine, is a ‘reformed’ version of predestination that John Calvin taught.

I recommend looking at how new this doctrine is within context of the 2,000-year history of Christianity.

Compare this to Peter this Apostle in Acts 2: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins…”

The word repent appears in the bible over 100 times.

Compare it to the bible passages on God’s judgement and confession.

Compare it to Matthew 25 - talents or sheep and goats.

Non-traditional Calvinism does not hold up in terms of scripture or history.

 

[JonNC]

What about Luther and “The Bondage of the Will” my friend? I might have been thinking more of the Calvinists which the OP is talking with, but Luther held that free will was “a horse, ridden by God or the devil.” If this isn’t monergism, then what is?

Keep in mind that Lutheranism is not defined by Luther. Lutherans believe that we have no free will to choose or search for God, that He comes to us through Word and Sacrament, the tools of the Holy Spirit, we receive grace. The Spirit guides and maintains us. This is monergism.
But a free gift is not free if it cannot be rejected. Free will always exists in the regenerate to refuse / reject His grace.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

Keep in mind that Lutheranism is not defined by Luther. Lutherans believe that we have no free will to choose or search for God, that He comes to us through Word and Sacrament, the tools of the Holy Spirit, we receive grace. The Spirit guides and maintains us. This is monergism.
But a free gift is not free if it cannot be rejected. Free will always exists in the regenerate to refuse / reject His grace.

Jon

Is this because of total depravity?

 

[JonNC]

Is this because of total depravity?

Essentially. The main intent is to deny Pelagianism.
From the FofC:

1. Concerning this subject, our doctrine, faith, and confession is, that in spiritual things the understanding and reason of man are [altogether] blind, and by their own powers understand nothing, as it is written 1 Cor. 2:14: The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them when he is examined concerning spiritual things.

3] 2. Likewise we believe, teach, and confess that the unregenerate will of man is not only turned away from God, but also has become an enemy of God, so that it only has an inclination and desire for that which is evil and contrary to God, as it is written Gen. 8:21: The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth. Also Rom. 8:7: The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither, indeed, can be. Yea, as little as a dead body can quicken itself to bodily, earthly life, so little can man, who by sin is spiritually dead, raise himself to spiritual life, as it is written Eph. 2:5: Even when we were dead in sins, He hath quickened us together with Christ; 2 Cor. 3:5: Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything good as of ourselves, but that we are sufficient is of God.

Jon

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Which Protestants? I ask because this sounds like virtually nothing I was ever taught.
Jon

This is historic Protestantism, of the Reformed (Calvinist) and Lutheran traditions.

The Active Obedience of Christ - the Imputed Righteousness of Christ - is precisely about man needing a lifetime of good works to get into Heaven and Jesus providing this lifetime of good works for the believer. So it’s works that save for the Protestant, the only catch is that someone besides you did them. It’s salvation entirely apart from faith and grace in any meaningful sense, and to further prove this consider how Protestantism sees Adam’s original situation: Adam would have gotten to heaven if he had lived a life of perfect obedience, he didn’t need nor did he have faith or grace, because these are only given to those who cannot work for themselves. It’s that same purely human work that Adam needed which Christ gained and provides in the Protestant world-view.

Another way to think about this is to answer the following question: Why can’t our works save us? Your answer should come in the form of “because we are sinners,” which merely confirms that works really are what save, but the catch is that you need someone else to do them for you.

 

[JonNC]

This is historic Protestantism, of the Reformed (Calvinist) and Lutheran traditions.

The Active Obedience of Christ - the Imputed Righteousness of Christ - is precisely about man needing a lifetime of good works to get into Heaven and Jesus providing this lifetime of good works for the believer. So it’s works that save for the Protestant, the only catch is that someone besides you did them. It’s salvation entirely apart from faith and grace in any meaningful sense, and to further prove this consider how Protestantism sees Adam’s original situation: Adam would have gotten to heaven if he had lived a life of perfect obedience, he didn’t need nor did he have faith or grace, because these are only given to those who cannot work for themselves. It’s that same purely human work that Adam needed which Christ gained and provides in the Protestant world-view.

Another way to think about this is to answer the following question: Why can’t our works save us? Your answer should come in the form of “because we are sinners,” which merely confirms that works really are what save, but the catch is that you need someone else to do them for you.

So, in short, you are saying the work of Christ merely replaces our inability to do the good works He requires. He’s a nice guy who does us a favor.
So, what is your source (Lutheran, I don’t care about the Reformed view) for this? See, for the Lutheran it is grace alone that saves. I don’t see God’s grace as a work, at least in the traditional sense. I’ll let you pick it up from there

Jon

 

[JoyToTheWhirled]

CatholicDude, thank you for putting so neatly everything my reformed Baptist background taught me about salvation. You are absolutely right, I’ve never been able to put into words exactly why reformed salvation, while tidy to a certain degree, seemed so clinical. It is this salvation by works, albeit the works of Jesus. A transaction, rather than a relationship. Excellent. Thanks.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

So, in short, you are saying the work of Christ merely replaces our inability to do the good works He requires.

So, what is your source (Lutheran, I don’t care about the Reformed view) for this?

Correct, for the historic Protestant view (i.e. Reformed and Lutheran Confessions), the “Righteousness of Christ” is the work that Christ did which merely replaces our inability to do that same work. What Adam could and should have done for us, Christ did for us. That’s the historic Protestant view.

Here’s a quote from the Lutheran Solid Declaration of Concord (3:15):
For this reason, then, His obedience, not only in suffering and dying, but also in this, that He in our stead was voluntarily made under the Law, and fulfilled it by this obedience, is imputed to us for righteousness, so that, on account of this complete obedience, which He rendered His heavenly Father for us, by doing and suffering, in living and dying, God forgives our sins, regards us as godly and righteous, and eternally saves us.
And here is the LCMS website Encyclopedia on “Justification”:
God sent His holy, innocent Son to become man and made Him man’s Substitute. This Substitute fulfilled all requirements of the Law in our place (active obedience). He also suffered the pangs and woes which we had deserved (passive obedience).
Perfect obedience to God’s Law is what the Protestant mind thinks is the requirement to get into Heaven, and this requirement remains even after Adam sinned and made us personally unable to meet this requirement (i.e. living a lifetime of good works). So for the Protestant, it certainly is and always has been Human Works Alone that save, no faith or grace required.

And that’s why If I asked you: “Why can’t my works save me?” your response would come in the form of “Because we’re sinners,” which only confirms that works alone save in the Protestant mind, with the catch that a substitute must do it for us. Of course, these ideas are completely contrary to Paul’s explicit teachings and are found nowhere in Scripture or the Early Church Fathers.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Duplicate Post. Delete

 

[mackbrislawn]

Catholics are accused of working for salvation, with the question, “Have I done enough good works to be saved?” And then Protestants are frantically doing good works to prove to themselves that they really are saved. “Have I done enough good works to show that I am truly saved? That my faith is a saving faith?”

As a practical matter, what’s the difference? In either case, absence of works equals absence of salvation.

It would seem that the Catholics have a somewhat easier part of it, for they don’t have to worry about having a saving faith, because for them it is not their faith that saves, but Jesus. All they need to have is enough faith to come to Jesus when they sin.

 

[Cyril_Of_Canada]

We definately need to confess Jesus not merely by words but also by our actions, in charity. By sinning, we break faith with God and that is where we need to repent and follow the Way Of Life.

Furthermore, God is the same yesterday, today and forever. He once said this. Do you think he is any different today:

A counter to Eternal Security and Once Saved Always Saved?

Jeremiah 7:9-11 ESV

Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, make offerings to Baal, and go after other gods that you have not known, and then come and stand before me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, ‘We are delivered!’—only to go on doing all these abominations? Has this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, I myself have seen it, declares the Lord.