Reconciling Romans 2:13 with the rest of New Testament

[lanman87]

I was wondering how Catholics reconcile Romans 2:13

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

with the numerous text that say we are righteous by faith, apart from the law? (I’ve listed a couple)

Such as Romans 3: 21-23 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus

Galatians 3:11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law , for “The righteous shall live by faith.”

Was Paul contradicting himself or is there a reason he says you are justified by doing the law then turns around and says we are justified by apart from the law?

I know the Evangelical/Protestant answer to this question. I was just wondering how Catholics see it?

 

[Wesrock]

I may have more to write later, but a quick thought.

Romans 2: 14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts

…

28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter.

Saint Paul is referring to the internalization of the spirit of the Law rather than the keeping of the letter of Law simply as written by Moses. We are still expected to “do.” In Romans 2 he also accuses the Jewish Christian community who boast in the keeping of the law of examining whether they commit adultery or steal.

In a similar but slightly different context in Romans 3 Paul is still speaking of the Mosaic Law, not just works in general, and he’s addressing disputes between the Jewish Christian and Gentile Christian community, and letting them know that neither should not boast of being superior to the other. It is not contrary to the notion of keeping the spirit of the Law, but about whether the Jewish Christians should feel superior for keeping the letter of the Mosaic Law.

If you examine chapters 2 and 3, they’re very much concerned as a whole with relations between Jewish and Gentile Christians. That’s what he’s speaking to.

Sorry for the rushed response.

 

[Hodos]

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

The law always accuses. That is Paul’s entire point regarding this section of Romans because we are all alike lawbreakers (Chapters 1-3.5). Paul is not contradicting himself when he says we are saved by faith apart from works.

 

[Wesrock]

Maybe I’m a bit lazy, but I’m also going to link to the Haydock Commentary in case you’d like to review. I always find his responses orthodox, and here he definitely makes up for where my response was lacking.

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/title.shtml#ROMANS

2: 12. Whosoever have sinned without the law. That is, without the written law of Moses, against their reason and conscience, &c. And also those who being Jews, have sinned under this written law, shall be judged, even with greater severity, for having transgressed against the known law. Wi.

2: 14-15. When the Gentiles . . . do by nature, or naturally, that is, without having received any written law, these men are a law to themselves, and have it written in their hearts, as to the existence of a God, and their reason tells them, that many sins are unlawful: they may also do some actions that are morally good, as by giving alms to relieve the poor, honouring their parents, &c. not that these actions, morally good, will suffice for their justification of themselves, or make them deserve a supernatural reward in the kingdom of heaven; but God, out of his infinite mercy, will give them some supernatural graces, by which they come to know, and believe, that he will reward their souls for eternity. Such, says S. Chrys. were the dispositions of Melchisedech, Job, Cornelius the Centurion, &c. Wi.

 

[Wesrock]

3:20. &c. To the end of this chapter, the apostle shews that the Jews cannot be truly justified, and sanctified by the works of the written law of Moses only; that a knowledge of sin, or of what is sinful, came by the law, but if they did not comply with the precepts of the law, this knowledge made them more guilty. Now, at the coming of Christ, the justice of God, that is, the justice by which he made others just, and justified them, cannot be had without faith in Christ, and by the grace of our Redeemer Jesus Christ, whom God hath proposed to all, both Gentiles and Jews, as a sacrifice of[3] propitiation for the sins of all mankind, by faith in his blood; that is, by believing in him, who shed his blood and died for us on the cross. It is he alone, (v. 26.) that is the just one, and the justifier of all. And as to this, there is no distinction. The Gentiles are justified and sanctified without the written law, and the Jews who have been under the law, cannot partake of the justice of God, that is, cannot be justified, sanctified, or saved, but by the faith and grace of Christ Jesus. S. Paul does not pretend that the virtue of faith alone will justify and save a man; nothing can be more opposite to the doctrine of the gospel, and of the apostles in many places, as hath been observed, and will be shewn hereafter. He tells us in this chap. (v. 20. and 28.) that man is justified without the works of the written law: and he teaches us, that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, that is, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God. And when he seems to say, that men are justified or saved by faith, or by believing, as he says of Abraham in the next chapter, (v. 3. and 5.) he never says (as some both ancient and later heretics have pretended) that faith alone is sufficient. And besides by faith, he understands the Christian faith and doctrine of Christ, as opposite to the law of Moses, to circumcision, and the ceremonies of that law, as it evidently appears by the design of the apostle, both in this epistle and in that to the Galatians. He teaches us in this epistle (c. ii. 6.) that God will judge every man according to his works: (v. 13.) that “not the hearers of the law,” but the doers, shall be justified. See also c. vi. He tells the Galatians (c. v, v. 6.) that the faith, by which they must be saved, must be a faith working by charity. He also tells the Corinthians (1. vii. 19.) that circumcision is nothing, nor uncircumcision, but the keeping of the commandments of God. That though a man should have a faith, that so he could remove mountains, it would avail him nothing without charity. How often does he tell us that they who commit such and such sins, shall not inherit or possess the kingdom of God? Does not S. James tell us, that faith without good works is dead? See chap. ii. Of this more hereafter. Wi.

 

[lanman87]

that man is justified without the works of the written law: and he teaches us, that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, that is, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God.

Please tell me where Paul says this?

What I read is we are justified by faith apart from the law, that is separate from the law. I don’t see anywhere where Paul says that works that a man does is sufficient to justify (or help justify) a man if they are joined with faith.

 

[ZMystiCat]

One thing to keep in mind is Paul frequently had to deal with a heresy known as the Judaizer heresy, which is detailed in Acts 15:1:

Some who had come down from Judea were instructing the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the Mosaic practice, you cannot be saved.”

Romans and Galatians are arguably his two main works against this group. You may even notice that later in Romans 2, he expanded on verse 13 with regards to circumcision, specifically verses 25-29:

Circumcision, to be sure, has value if you observe the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision…Indeed, those who are physically uncircumcised but carry out the law will pass judgment on you, with your written law and circumcision, who break the law…

But that still leaves open the question about why Paul would use the language he did. In this case, it is best to keep in mind that, as far as Catholics are concerned, justification is a process that includes sanctification. (This is different from Protestants who often separate the two.) The basics are covered in CCC 1989-1991:

1989 The first work of the grace of the Holy Spirit is conversion…Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man.

1990 Justification detaches man from sin…

1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ…

Ultimately, Paul is attempting to get the Judaizers to understand that it is not their Jewish-ness (“neither Jew nor Greek” as he says in Galatians) or their circumcision that saves them. As he most succinctly summarizes in Galatians 5:6:

For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

As expressed at the end of Acts 2, it is not being circumcised that justifies, it is following God. However, the crux here is faith, not circumcision. Doing what is right without faith and charity can turn us Pharisaical. On the other hand, as James says, there must be works with that faith (James 2:14-26). Both are necessary, and Paul in some places recognizes the importance of even works (Acts 2, Galatians 5, Philippians 2:12-13), but due to the Judaizer heresy (and maybe other less known ones), much of his audience was still working out the faith part.

 

[lanman87]

But that still leaves open the question about why Paul would use the language he did.

That is the real question. It seems to me that saying For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. then turning around and saying But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus would be counter intuitive.

It seems Paul is saying that “Yes, you are justified by doing the work of the law” but then says “you are made righteous and justified by faith and not doing the work of the law”. If he is addressing the Judaizers then why would he ever tell them that they are justified by doing the “work of the law”? Isn’t that what he was trying to teach against?

 

[ZMystiCat]

It seems Paul is saying that “Yes, you are justified by doing the work of the law” but then says “you are made righteous and justified by faith and not doing the work of the law”.

Thinking of it in terms of him laying out an argument, it could go:

Premise: Circumcision means nothing unless you observe the law (Rom. 2:25-29)

Objection: But I do obey the law!

Response: No, you are under the dominion of sin (3:9), and the Law condemns you for it (3:19-20), since “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23).

Effectively, he acknowledges that their circumcision could mean something if they followed the Law. At that point, they’re justified, since they already obey and follow God perfectly. However, he retorts that none of them have done this, forcing them to come to terms with the dilemma that they have been refusing to acknowledge - that they have already failed in their attempts to justify themselves. It’s at that point he delves into their hope - faith in Christ and the grace given because of His sacrifice (Rom. 3:21-31).

So in a way, any agreement Paul may have with the Judaizers in Chapter 2 is his way of building up how he’s going to show their own teaching condemns them. They had staked their justification on a standard that they had already failed to uphold. Their only hope is to put their faith in God and rely on His grace for justification.

Now, again, from a Catholic perspective, justification is a process. It starts with faith and submission to God’s grace, but it is by that that we carry forward in love of God and others. This submission to and cooperation with God’s grace is itself a necessary part of justification as acknowledged by Christ (Matt. 25:31-46), Paul (Gal. 5:6, Phil. 2:12-13), and most notably and explicitly James (James 2:14-26).

 

[lanman87]

So in a way, any agreement Paul may have with the Judaizers in Chapter 2 is his way of building up how he’s going to show their own teaching condemns them. They had staked their justification on a standard that they had already failed to uphold. Their only hope is to put their faith in God and rely on His grace for justification.

So if someone asked me how to be justified would I be wrong to quote Romans 2:13?

 

[ZMystiCat]

So if someone asked me how to be justified would I be wrong to quote Romans 2:13?

If speaking practically, yes. If speaking theoretically, no, but in that case it would be wise to point out the futility of it practically.

 

[De_Maria]

I was wondering how Catholics reconcile Romans 2:13

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

Well, this is the consistent Teaching of Scripture. Let’s start with Exodus 18:6:

Exodus 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Now let’s skip to Titus 3:5

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Notice upon whom God’s sheds His mercy. In Exodus 20:6, upon those who keep the Commandments. In Titus 3:5, upon those who have done righteous works.

This the consistent Teaching of Scripture.

with the numerous text that say we are righteous by faith, apart from the law? (I’ve listed a couple)

I believe that Protestants have misunderstood the portions of Pauline Teachings where he is describing what takes place in the Sacraments.

Such as Romans 3: 21-23 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus

Ok, notice this. The law to which he makes reference, is the Law of Moses. And the Faith to which he makes reference is tghe Faith of Christ. Let’s look at another verse.

Acts 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

This man, is Jesus Christ.

39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Those who have faith in Jesus Christ are justified from all things which could not be justified by the law of Moses. What are those things?

Well, in Catholic Teaching, they are:
a. the temporal punishment due to sin.
b. original sin.

These are the things which kept the Old Testament Saints out of heaven until Jesus died upon the Cross. See Heb 11

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

Galatians 3:11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law , for “The righteous shall live by faith.”

Let’s compare to Rom 2:13

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified

Notice how it says that “doers of the Law will be justified.” It does not say that they are justified by the Law. Doers of the Law will be justified by God. Simply keeping the Commandments is not enough. Scripture says:

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

It is those who do righteous deeds because of their faith in God, that He rewards with justification.

Was Paul contradicting himself or is there a reason he says you are justified by doing the law then turns around and says we are justified by apart from the law?

He doesn’t say you are justified by doing the law. He says that those who do the Law are justified by God.

1. Those who do the Law are righteous in the eyes of God. In so doing, they have proved themselves faithful.
2. If these righteous individuals then turn around and present themselves for the Sacraments, God sees their faith, declares them righteous and pours out His mercy upon them in the Washing of Regeneration which is the Sacrament of Baptism.

I know the Evangelical/Protestant answer to this question. I was just wondering how Catholics see it?

I hope that helps.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Wesrock:

that man is justified without the works of the written law: and he teaches us, that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, that is, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God.

Please tell me where Paul says this?

What I read is we are justified by faith apart from the law, that is separate from the law. I don’t see anywhere where Paul says that works that a man does is sufficient to justify (or help justify) a man if they are joined with faith.

Bear in mind that Luther could only expand on his theology of justification by diminishing James 2 as the Word of God.

Jas 2 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder. 20 Do you want to be shown, you senseless person, that faith apart from works is barren?

Catholic Scripture scholars recognise James and Romans as informing each other in understanding the scope of true faith.

 

[De_Maria]

lanman87:

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

The law always accuses. That is Paul’s entire point regarding this section of Romans because we are all alike lawbreakers (Chapters 1-3.5). Paul is not contradicting himself when he says we are saved by faith apart from works.

How do you reconcile that with?

Galatians 6:6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. 7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Compare:

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

to:

Romans 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

What’s the difference?

 

[De_Maria]

ZMystiCat:

But that still leaves open the question about why Paul would use the language he did.

That is the real question. It seems to me that saying For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. then turning around and saying But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus would be counter intuitive.

It seems Paul is saying that “Yes, you are justified by doing the work of the law” but then says “you are made righteous and justified by faith and not doing the work of the law”. If he is addressing the Judaizers then why would he ever tell them that they are justified by doing the “work of the law”? Isn’t that what he was trying to teach against?

He is talking about the Sacraments.

Adults, who seek to become Christian, must go through RCIA and study and show that they are determined to change their lives in accordance with God’s will.

After they have repented of their sins, and amended their lives, they can seek Baptism. There, they come before God in faith, apart from their works and call upon the name of Jesus. God, seeing their faith, counts it to them as righteousness and pours out His mercy upon them. Washing them of their sins and gifting them the Holy Spirit. And we become children of God.

 

[Hodos]

I don’t need to reconcile it with one another. They are different letters, written to different audiences for different reasons. Therefore each would have to be addressed on its own before a comparison would be made. I am happy to discuss the occasion and provide exegesis for a given text, but given the bad faith twisting of my words you have shown in previous conversations, somehow I don’t think you will allow me the time or the text space to offer exegesis on all three. If you would like to refer back to the original question posed by the OP, I am glad to discuss Romans 2 in its context given the foundations Paul lays in Romans 1 and the conclusions he reaches in Romans 3.

 

[De_Maria]

I don’t need to reconcile it with one another. They are different letters, written to different audiences for different reasons. Therefore each would have to be addressed on its own before a comparison would be made. I am happy to discuss the occasion and provide exegesis for a given text, but given the bad faith twisting of my words you have shown in previous conversations, somehow I don’t think you will allow me the time or the text space to offer exegesis on all three.

What’s stopping you from doing it now?

If you would like to refer back to the original question posed by the OP, I am glad to discuss Romans 2 in its context given the foundations Paul lays in Romans 1 and the conclusions he reaches in Romans 3.

Do it. Then I’ll do the same and we can compare to see whose makes more sense.

 

[lanman87]

• Those who do the Law are righteous in the eyes of God. In so doing, they have proved themselves faithful.
• If these righteous individuals then turn around and present themselves for the Sacraments, God sees their faith, declares them righteous and pours out His mercy upon them in the Washing of Regeneration which is the Sacrament of Baptism.

Does God still justify us by “doing the law”?

 

[lanman87]

He is talking about the Sacraments.

Where does it say that?