'Sola Caritas' Trumps 'Sola fide'

[mcq72]

If Abraham had not obeyed and “did” not do what he was instructed to do, he would not have continued in righteousness, he would not have received the promises.

Would you then say like others have that we aren’t fully justified til we get to heaven, even justified ?

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Well of course he writes to Jews in book of Hebrews but the other books i would think were mostly with gentiles in mind. To Titus, a gentile, he writes we are not saved “by works of righteousness”. I would think that would be much more inclusive than just Jewish law.

He is frequently speaking to Gentiles and at that time there were Judaizers who were misleading Christians, Jewish and nonJewish alike into believing they needed to be circumcized. There was a definite need for Paul to instruct them that the Old Law could not save.

In Titus 3 he is referring to baptism and it is true we aren’t saved or justified by good works. We are justified by faith and works of charity, (obeying the teachings of Christ, His new law of love). Titus 3:8 says, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to apply themselves to good deeds, these are excellent and profitable to men.

Would you then say like others have that we aren’t fully justified til we get to heaven,

So by others I am thinking you mean people who have posted here.? I haven’t read through all the posts.

Justification is a process. It is not a one time event. It is received through faith-believing, given in baptism and preserved by obedience so yes, if we are not persevering in obedience, we can lose that righteousness. The sacrament of confession can restore that righteousness and we need to persevere unto the end.

1 Timothy 4 - Attend to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in both tasks,
for by doing so you will save both yourself and those who listen to you.

1 Timothy 6 - pursue righteousness, devotion,faith, love, patience, and gentleness.
Compete well for the faith. Lay hold of eternal life,

 

[Johan]

Pretty sure this has been said several times in this thread but the works Paul speaks of in Romans and other places is the OT Mosaic law. He is not referring to the obedience we need to give to the NT laws of Christ.

Just because it has been said several times, it does not follow that it is true. Abraham was not under the Mosaic Law. In fact, he predated it by several centuries (Gal. 3:17). Yet, Paul claims that Abraham was not justified by works (Rom. 4:1-3). It should be noted that Paul does not qualify “works” as being “of the Law”. He speaks of works of all shapes and sizes. Abraham was not justified by what he did, but by the fact that he believed in the promise of God.

Abraham’s justification was a process, he believed, he obeyed and he continued to obey, though had his incidence with Hagar where he slipped in his faith.

The Scriptures do not say that Abraham’s justification was a “process”. He believed, and he was justified because he believed. Simple as that.

Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness. (Gen. 15:6)

“It” refers to his faith.

If Abraham had not obeyed and “did” not do what he was instructed to do, he would not have continued in righteousness, he would not have received the promises.

Pure conjecture.

 

[Johan]

LOL. Protestant scholarship at its best.

Well, if you laughing is the best “counterargument” you can come up with, then we really have nothing to worry about. The word μόνον (“only”) is an adverb. Adverbs qualify verbs, just like adjectives qualify nouns. These are all linguistic facts and not “Protestant scholarship”.

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. (Jas 5:14,15)

Sounds almost verbatim to the sacrament of Holy Unction.

Right, sounds like. You know what it’s called when you read an idea or a doctrine into the biblical text. Eisegesis.

 

[mcq72]

(obeying the teachings of Christ, His new law of love).

Yes and law of faith

 

[mcq72]

Pretty sure this has been said several times in this thread but the works Paul speaks of in Romans and other places is the OT Mosaic law. He is not referring to the obedience we need to give to the NT laws of Christ.

The following is article excerpt:

“The moral law is in reality confirmed and established through faith in Christ, inasmuch as it was given for this end—to lead man to Christ by showing him his iniquity;”
“(Rom. 3:27–28). Yet as the Apostle Paul teaches in today’s passage, justification by faith alone does not overthrow or do away with the law of God but upholds it. Justification by faith alone reveals the law’s true purpose and provides the way forward in fulfilling it.”

Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law” (v. 31).

• Romans 3:29–31

Upholding the Law by Faith | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org

The article I believe states what I posted. Paul covers any moral law, Jewish or otherwise. It ( moral or Jewish law) is the “schoolmaster” and fulfills it’s obligation in teaching one thing, that we need the “Master.”

“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”
Gal 3:24

“Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith.” Rom.3:27

 

[mcq72]

1 Timothy 6 - pursue righteousness , devotion,faith, love, patience, and gentleness

Not sure that means pursue “justification”. We would call it ssnctification.

“For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.”
Heb10:14

So we are justified perfectly but are in process of being made perfect, holy, ourselves.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Just because it has been said several times,

I was only said that because I had not read through all the responses and there are alot, so I figured I was repeating something that had already been discussed.

Abraham was not under the Mosaic Law. In fact, he predated it by several centuries

While this is true, the people who Paul was speaking to did not predate it and were being encouraged to go back to that Mosaic law and be circumcised, which is why he brings up Abraham, for the very reason Abraham wasn’t under the Mosaic law.

Since most of the debate at that time was whether or not Gentiles should be circumcised, that is the law Paul is talking about. No where does he say we don’t have to follow any law of any shape or size because that would go against what Christ said when He said, if you love me you will keep my commandments. He would also be contradicting himself when he says to obey those in authority.

He believed, and he was justified because he believed. Simple as that.

It can’t be as simple as you say above unless you throw out James 2 which clearly says Abraham was justified by works.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Yes and law of faith

I am certainly not saying we obey without faith. Hebrews 11 says Abraham had faith and obeyed.

Yet as the Apostle Paul teaches in today’s passage, Rom. 3: 27-28

I am not sure why you are saying this is today’s passage, this was not the reading at Mass this morning.

I agree we must have faith but NOT faith alone. That passage no where says ONLY faith. Reading it that way contradicts other things St. Paul says. Not only that if you go back to the beginning of Romans 3 it is clear they are discussing circumcision, which brings us back to St. Paul referring to the Mosaic law.

Not sure that means pursue “justification”. We would call it ssnctification.

Yes I realize that protestants see justification and sanctification in this way but justification is the growth in righteousness and grace that takes place in the believer who embraces the demands of the gospel and yields himself or herself to the leading of the Spirit. Catholic Bible Dictionary

In 2 Peter 3, St. Peter says:

So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error

We need to be very careful to hear all of Scripture and not twist St. Paul’s writings. St. Peter also says in his 2 letter:

But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

justification is the growth in righteousness and grace

 

[mcq72]

justification is the growth in righteousness and grace

Again, that suggests a justification by works, even if done in faith.

Can we ever do better than His imputed righteousness in Christ Jesus?

Again, growing in grace and holiness and in acting righteous does not make more acceptable, propitiated before the Father. He does not love us more as would be man’s default way.

Again we call it sanctification, and rewards for our works being part of glorification, but not justification, which is having right standing with God.

Per Catholic dictionary:

"The process of a sinner becoming justified or made right with God. As defined by the Council of Trent, “Justification is the change from the condition in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption among the children of God through the Second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior”

Dictionary : JUSTIFICATION, THEOLOGY OF | Catholic Culture

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Again, that suggests a justification by works, even if done in faith.

Well that is only one sentence out of my whole post and it may sound like that to you but it is not what it is and it is not what Scripture says nor what the Church teaches. We are not justified by works alone, nor are we justified by faith alone. Neither one is supported by Scripture.

Can we ever do better than His imputed righteousness in Christ Jesus?

No but we, if in a true relationship with Him, love and obey what He commands and cooperate with Him as Scripture says, we work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.

"The process of a sinner becoming justified or made right with God. As defined by the Council of Trent, “Justification is the change from the condition in which a person is born as a child of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption among the children of God through the Second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior”

Yes and it says more:

Depending on the sins from which a person is to be delivered, there are different kinds of justification. An infant is justified by baptism and the faith of the one who requests or confers the sacrament. Adults are justified for the first time either by personal faith, sorrow for sin and baptism, or by the perfect love of God, which is at least an implicit baptism of desire. Adults who have sinned gravely after being justified can receive justification by sacramental absolution or perfect contrition for their sins.

 

[mcq72]

I agree we must have faith but NOT faith alone. That passage no where says ONLY faith. Reading it that way contradicts other things St. Paul says. Not only that if you go back to the beginning of Romans 3 it is clear they are discussing circumcision, which brings us back to St. Paul referring to the Mosaic law.

Lol…you just made me read the first three chapters of Romans.( thank you)

No, i think Paul in Romans adresses both Jew and Gentile carefully, yet together…for God is not a respector of persons 2:11…and Gentiles are a law unto themselves, the law written on their hearts 2:14…and both Jew and Gentile are guilty and have no excuse 3:9, 2:1…so by written law or Gentile “law” as earlier noted the whole world is guilty 3:19…Paul does not say only Jews are guilty because only they have written law, nor does he say Gentiles are guilty because of written law…he says everbody has a “law” and therefore the whole world is under sin…and by works of the law no man is justified, and now faith in Jesus shows righteousness without Jewish law and Gentile law 3:20,21

So thank you, but Paul is not speaking of circumcision alone, but Gentile law also, and really any deed does not justify, which is reserved for faith in Christ.

 

[mcq72]

Yes and it says more:

Yes, but such definition closely resembles my impression of justification as being related to intial salvation…so Catholic definition covers infant and adult intial salvation. Where we differ slightly is depiction reconciliation from mortal sin, falling out of grace, calling it justification.

I do not see deeds of love/ charity or maturing in Christ, or working out such salvation, growing in holiness in justification definition.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Lol…you just made me read the first three chapters of Romans.( thank you)

You’re welcome. Starting with chapter 2 you should have read the word circumcision anywhere from 6 - 10 times, depending on which version you use.

You are also correct, he was talking to both Jews and Gentiles, but he wasn’t addressing any Gentile law. There wasn’t any Gentile law from God. He included the Gentiles because the Judiazers wanted the Gentiles to be circumcized and follow the Mosaic law. He is saying that the OT law does not save and that there is no reason for Jew or Gentile Christian to be circumcized.

We can’t ignore the words of Christ in the Gospels. He says to obey His commands. He gave us a new law, the law of love and it is profitable to us.

John 13 A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

such definition closely resembles my impression of justification

If you are close to what the Catholic church says justification is that is a good thing.

I do not see deeds of love/ charity or maturing in Christ, or working out such salvation, growing in holiness in justification definition.

The definition you read is a very short clip of what the Catholic church teaches on justification. Here are a couple of lines from the Catechism but there is a lot more.

CCC 1989 Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, thus accepting forgiveness and righteousness from on high. "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man

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

CCC 2016. The children of our holy mother the Church rightly hope for the grace of final perseverance and the recompense of God their Father for the good works accomplished with his grace in communion with Jesus.

2019 Justification includes the remission of sins, sanctification, and the renewal of the inner man.

2020 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ. It is granted us through Baptism. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who justifies us. It has for its goal the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life. It is the most excellent work of God’s mercy.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm

 

[Johan]

While this is true, the people who Paul was speaking to did not predate it and were being encouraged to go back to that Mosaic law and be circumcised, which is why he brings up Abraham, for the very reason Abraham wasn’t under the Mosaic law.

The issue discussed in chapter 4 of Romans is much larger than that of circumcision. The focus is still on justification per se and the question of how sinful man may attain a status of righteousness before God. Paul did not ask whether Abraham was justified by the act of circumcision, but by works as such.

If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. (Rom. 4:2)

This is called a modus tollens argument. Paul reasons that if Abraham was justified by works, then he had something to boast about. But since he had nothing to boast about before God, it follows that he was not justified by works. So this superficially contradicts what James is saying. Even though Abraham received the commendation “Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees, and my instructions” (Gen. 26:5), Paul concludes that this was not sufficient for being justified before God.

Since most of the debate at that time was whether or not Gentiles should be circumcised, that is the law Paul is talking about.

But the act of circumcision was just a symbol for a much more comprehensive commitment, namely to adhere to the commands of the Mosaic Law (cf. Acts 15:5).

No where does he say we don’t have to follow any law of any shape or size because that would go against what Christ said when He said, if you love me you will keep my commandments. He would also be contradicting himself when he says to obey those in authority.

But that is a different discussion entirely. The doctrine of sola fide is not a denial of the notion that we are supposed to keep the commandments of Christ (or other commandments). It merely states that no such obedience forms the basis of our righteous standing before God. We are justified by the blood of Christ alone through faith alone (cf. Rom 3:25; 4:5; 5:9).

It can’t be as simple as you say above unless you throw out James 2 which clearly says Abraham was justified by works.

It is as simple as that because the Scriptures plainly state that Abraham believed and his faith was credited to him as righteousness. Paul also argues that Abraham was not justified by works before God. But rather than asserting that we are not justified by faith as such, James claims that we are also justified by works. Unless we think that the two writers contradict each other, we have to assume that they are using “justify” in different ways. Paul explains how we attain a righteous standing before God, whereas James is underlining that faith has to be manifested by works.

 

[mcq72]

You are also correct, he was talking to both Jews and Gentiles, but he wasn’t addressing any Gentile law. There wasn’t any Gentile law from God

“for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness”

He included the Gentiles because the Judiazers wanted the Gentiles to be circumcized and follow the Mosaic law. He is saying that the OT law does not save and that there is no reason for Jew or Gentile Christian to be circumcized.

Yes, some books and verses combat this, but Romans was was written well after that controversy was settled at Jerusalem council. If Paul really wanted to address this again you would think he would mention and use the council’s ruling with all it’s weight and authority.

Never the less, the context dictates a bigger scope of “law/ deeds” beyond Jewish. Notice that would include circumcision but much more, else how could God condemn the “whole world” if only a tiny portion (Israel) had the law?

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”

“For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin.”( no law, no sin…gentiles had law of conscience )

So agree, no Jewish work needed for Salvation, just not sure why you would deny any “gentile” work also. I mean “blessed is the man who is forgiven, imputed with righteousness, without works”, but by “law of faith”…

Yes, the example is circumcision, yet it is used to represent any law or deed that would nullify grace, and law of faith, or that would have God imputing righteousness “out of debt”.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The focus is still on justification per se

Yes, but it is not the only place in Scripture that justification is discussed. It is not the only place Paul discusses justification. He is faced with the dilemma of Judaizers wanting Christians to be circumcised and follow the OT Law. No where does He say we do not follow any law. That would contradict the words of Christ saying He gave us a new commandment and the book of James and other epistles.

Paul reasons that if Abraham was justified by works, then he had something to boast about.

Yes works of the OT Mosaic law and he is right. We are not saved by anything we do on our own but it is the Holy Spirit poured out upon us in baptism and because of our faith, that gives us the abilities to co-operate with Christ, in the works of Christ. The only thing we can boast on is Christ in us.

So this superficially contradicts what James is saying.

In all charity, this has been the protestant argument for years, starting with Martin Luther but Scripture is the inerrant Word of God and nothing contradicts but completes instead. The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself.

It merely states that no such obedience forms the basis of our righteous standing before God.

The Catholic church also teaches that we are not saved by works. Absolutely. Instead we are saved or justified by faith and works, faith working through love
Scripture just does not support anywhere the word “alone”. That has been added by protestant theology.
And if what you are saying was correct, and it is not, we would not be in the mess we are in because of Adam and Eve’s disobedience. Because of their disobedience we were left with original sin and the need for a Savior.

James claims that we are also justified by works. Unless we think that the two writers contradict each other,

Here you are contradicting your own thinking, as above you said Paul and James contradict each other.

Faith and works, neither are alone. We absolutely must have faith, but not faith alone. Scripture and the leading of the Holy Spirit just does not support it. There is only one place where the word is alone is used and it is Scripture and it says we are not justified by faith alone.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

“for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness”

Yes, speaking again of the OT law, not just any law. The law written in our hearts is the natural law, our consciences bearing witnness to that but I am pretty sure Paul is not saying we do not obey the natural law written in our hearts. So again, we are back to the Mosaic law that could not save.

Notice that would include circumcision but much more, else how could God condemn the “whole world” if only a tiny portion (Israel) had the law?

It wouldn’t be just a tiny portion. The promise starts in Israel and Paul knew the message and the gospel was spreading beyond Israel and did not want confusion. He did not want anyone to believe that because the Gospel started in Jerusalem would anyone have to follow the old Jewish laws… Every soul is important. In Galations he reminds the Galatians that anyone who tries to live by the law but breaks any tiny part of the law is cursed.

Yes, the example is circumcision, yet it is used to represent any law or deed that would nullify grace, and law of faith, or that would have God imputing righteousness “out of debt”.

I’m sorry and in all charity, that is just reading something into the Scriptures, that just isn’t there. No where in Scripture does anyone, Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, anyone say, you do not have to follow any law.
There definitely is a law of faith. We must have faith but we must absolutely obey the new law of charity also and if we sin and mess up and lose our state of grace, the sacrament of confession is there.

Scripture is the inerrant Word of God and every part is true, including James and Christ’s words in the Gospels.

 

[mcq72]

The law written in our hearts is the natural law, our consciences bearing witnness to that but I am pretty sure Paul is not saying we do not obey the natural law written in our hearts.

No need to guess or not be totally sure because Paul is very explicit…Paul is saying natural law has had as much success (failures) as the OT law.

So again, we are back to the Mosaic law that could not save.

Please show me where conscience law saves, that the majority of the world whom Paul has in mind since the beginning of time are saved who have not the Law? Paul explicitly references both laws of Jews and Gentiles as lacking. He is saying for sure to Gentiles that Jewish law will not save but even more so, their “Gentileness”, living unto their own law, even of conscience, will not save.

He is saying that the OT law does not save and that there is no reason for Jew or Gentile Christian to be circumcized.

I believe that is very narrow read of Romans. He is saying both Jew and Gentile fall short morally and need salvation by grace and faith in Jesus Christ…deeds and laws/ conscience didnt save before and can’t be compared to the efficacy of faith in Christ.

 

[fhansen]

If you believe that smoking is wrong & you smoke anyways, your faith is “dead” because you are not demonstrating that what you believe is true. But if you demonstrate your faith by the “work” of not smoking, you are demonstrating to other people, as well as to God, that your faith is genuine.

"Nevertheless, many of the leaders believed in Him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue. For they loved praise from men more than praise from God." John 12:42

Pride has always been the main obstacle to man’s coming to know and love the true God. People often fail to do what they know is right.