Sola Fide

[Mberg3]

I have seen several recent threads about Sola Scriptura, but not about Sola Fide. This is interesting because I find it the hardest to understand or defend out of the 4 solas of the reformation (Fide, Scriptura, Christos, Gracia). Only faith is interesting because it was the main point on which my protestant training was based, but now I realized that the understanding was distorted. One of the things that was done was to equate Grace with Faith and to equate Justification with Salvation. Examples of this would be to say
“I am saved by FAITH alone”, when the correct understanding (even for the protestant) would be to say “I am JUSTIFIED” by faith alone". These misunderstanding were why Ephesians 2:8,9 were so convincing. Because when Paul says “It is by GRACE you have been saved through FAITH, etc” I read that as saying I was saved by my faith when in reality it is not emphasizing faith at all, but Grace. Another example is that we were taught that the Catholic Church said that you needed to have works to be saved. This is another semantic error because in the Council of Trent the Church declared that you needed faith and works to be JUSTIFIED. Hopefully I would like to discuss the true meaning of Sola Fide and its role in the protestants life.

 

[Mberg3]

or Catholic Experience etc. How would you argue against Sola Fide

 

[JRKH]

In any discussion of Faith with any non-catholic it is necessary to get a good understanding of what they believe faith is and what it entails.
It’s easy to say that one is saved by faith (alone) It’s quite another to explain what is meant by that.
As a Catholic, I can also say that I am saved by faith for without faith all else is worthless. However as a Catholic I cannot say that I am saved by faith alone.

I recall a quote by somebody (a protestant?) that goes, “we are saved by faith alone but not by that that IS alone”. In other words there are other things that are attached to, or spring from, faith…

Peace
James

 

[Mberg3]

Not to be obtuse, but where in the bible does it say that we are saved by faith? Even excluding the alone part. I would like some Bible verses on this because I had thought that it had said we are saved by faith, but when I looked up all of the passages it was referring to justification not salvation.

 

[Mberg3]

But Technically the docrine of Sola Fide is the JUSTIFICATION of faith alone, not the SALVATION of faith along. At least according to the Lutheran point of view. Salvation is by grace alone, Justification is by faith along in Lutheran Theology. That is why my OP pointed out that the terms were used improperly by protestant and catholic laity.

 

[JRKH]

But Technically the doctrine of Sola Fide is the JUSTIFICATION of faith alone, not the SALVATION of faith along. At least according to the Lutheran point of view. Salvation is by grace alone, Justification is by faith along in Lutheran Theology. That is why my OP pointed out that the terms were used improperly by protestant and catholic laity.

I think that you bring in here some VERY good thoughts.

To me - the impression I get from Protestant theology is that most of it seems to use “Salvation” and “Justification”, more or less interchangeably. If one is “Justified” before God then one is also “Saved”.

Personally I’ve always thought it a bit odd to have more than one “Sola”…Seems self defeating… The only Sola that makes sens is “Sola Dei”

Peace
James

 

[JonNC]

I think that you bring in here some VERY good thoughts.

To me - the impression I get from Protestant theology is that most of it seems to use “Salvation” and “Justification”, more or less interchangeably. If one is “Justified” before God then one is also “Saved”.

Personally I’ve always thought it a bit odd to have more than one “Sola”…Seems self defeating… The only Sola that makes sens is “Sola Dei”

Peace
James

Perhaps I could help with that, James.

By grace alone is the acceptance of the fact that even the possilbility of salvation is by grace. The suffering, death, and ressurection is God’s grace, the free gift given though we are completely undeserving. Our deserving is only condemnation.

By faith alone is the simple recognition that jusitifcation is accessed only by faith, and not by works (anything we do). And even faith is a gift of grace.

In Christ alone is a recognition of the atoning actions of the Incarnate Word.

So, therefore, we are justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Each alone has a specific intention, a specific qualifier which excludes other possibilities.

The practice of sola scriptura is not directly related to the above. It simply states that scripture is the final norm, which holds doctrine, teachers and teachings accountable. IOW, it is a method of hermeunetics of the Church. The sola here means that all teachings, councils, writings, teachers, etc, regardless of their name are not equal to scripture, but instead accountable to it.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

In any discussion of Faith with any non-catholic it is necessary to get a good understanding of what they believe faith is and what it entails.
It’s easy to say that one is saved by faith (alone) It’s quite another to explain what is meant by that.
As a Catholic, I can also say that I am saved by faith for without faith all else is worthless. However as a Catholic I cannot say that I am saved by faith alone.

I recall a quote by somebody (a protestant?) that goes, “we are saved by faith alone but not by that that IS alone”. In other words there are other things that are attached to, or spring from, faith…

Peace
James

Faith is not simply an intellectual assent, or a simple belief. Faith is much deeper than that. Faith is the means by which we access justification, and even it is a gift of grace. In recognition of that, we also know that faith cannot BE alone. True faith, justifying faith is a faith that bears good fruits, a faith that not only loves the Lord, but also loves our fellow man as ourselves. How can one claim faith in the Christ and then not do what he calls us to do, including help the least of His children? A faith that doesn’t work is a dead faith, not a saving faith.

Jon

 

[bogeydogg]

I think to we must say that part of the distortion concerning how Reformed folks use the word “saved” has to do with a presupposition of Calvinist understandings about grace.

If you believe that only the elect receive grace, then grace, justification and salvation all mean the same thing since none could be received if not for the election of God.

Therefore a Reformed person will define Sola Fide as the belief that justification effects salvation which can never be lost since it only given to the elect and so salvation and justification are the same thing.

Its a big circle.

I think Luther in speaking about Sola Fide was arguing that the life of faith leading to salvation was begun by grace (sola gracia) in the sacraments and maintained by faith. That faith being a gift from God was sufficient for the justification of anyone who believed and so nothing further was required for justification apart from faith given by grace. That faith if lived out in a life of penitential humility (thesis 1) would lead to salvation.

Now you average Reformed person would say this is salvation by works, but of course they teach that you are saved by inviting Jesus into your heart so what is that if not a work. Furthermore the Reformed understanding of salvation is far more crass and works based than anything taught in RCC of Lutheran circles because both of those Churches teach that God conveys salvation by means of grace received by the unworthy because God is merciful. The Reformed church teaches that a man, by his own initiative, can obligate God to save him by saying a magic prayer.

God Bless

 

[bogeydogg]

In any discussion of Faith with any non-catholic it is necessary to get a good understanding of what they believe faith is and what it entails.
It’s easy to say that one is saved by faith (alone) It’s quite another to explain what is meant by that.
As a Catholic, I can also say that I am saved by faith for without faith all else is worthless. However as a Catholic I cannot say that I am saved by faith alone.

I recall a quote by somebody (a protestant?) that goes, “we are saved by faith alone but not by that that IS alone”. In other words there are other things that are attached to, or spring from, faith…

Peace
James

It was Luther who said that.

God Bless

 

[JonNC]

I have seen several recent threads about Sola Scriptura, but not about Sola Fide. This is interesting because I find it the hardest to understand or defend out of the 4 solas of the reformation (Fide, Scriptura, Christos, Gracia). Only faith is interesting because it was the main point on which my protestant training was based, but now I realized that the understanding was distorted. One of the things that was done was to equate Grace with Faith and to equate Justification with Salvation. Examples of this would be to say
“I am saved by FAITH alone”, when the correct understanding (even for the protestant) would be to say “I am JUSTIFIED” by faith alone". These misunderstanding were why Ephesians 2:8,9 were so convincing. Because when Paul says “It is by GRACE you have been saved through FAITH, etc” I read that as saying I was saved by my faith when in reality it is not emphasizing faith at all, but Grace. Another example is that we were taught that the Catholic Church said that you needed to have works to be saved. This is another semantic error because in the Council of Trent the Church declared that you needed faith and works to be JUSTIFIED. Hopefully I would like to discuss the true meaning of Sola Fide and its role in the protestants life.

I believe Paul is emphasizing both grace and faith, and he does this in other places as well, but Galatians 5:6 tells us that the kind of faith he is talking about, the kind of faith that justifies, is the faith that wrorks through love. My signature is perhaps my favorite Luther quote, for he says it clearly:

Faith must of course be sincere. It must be a faith that performs good works through love. If faith lacks love it is not true faith. Thus the Apostle bars the way of hypocrites to the kingdom of Christ on all sides. He declares on the one hand, “In Christ Jesus circumcision availeth nothing,” i.e., works avail nothing, but faith alone, and that without any merit whatever, avails before God. On the other hand, the Apostle declares that without fruits faith serves no purpose. To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. In this terse manner Paul presents the whole life of a Christian. Inwardly it consists in faith towards God, outwardly in love towards our fellow-men.

Jon

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
In any discussion of Faith with any non-catholic it is necessary to get a good understanding of what they believe faith is and what it entails.
It’s easy to say that one is saved by faith (alone) It’s quite another to explain what is meant by that.

Faith is not simply an intellectual assent, or a simple belief. Faith is much deeper than that. Faith is the means by which we access justification, and even it is a gift of grace. In recognition of that, we also know that faith cannot BE alone. True faith, justifying faith is a faith that bears good fruits, a faith that not only loves the Lord, but also loves our fellow man as ourselves. How can one claim faith in the Christ and then not do what he calls us to do, including help the least of His children? A faith that doesn’t work is a dead faith, not a saving faith.

Jon

I think to we must say that part of the distortion concerning how Reformed folks use the word “saved” has to do with a presupposition of Calvinist understandings about grace.

If you believe that only the elect receive grace, then grace, justification and salvation all mean the same thing since none could be received if not for the election of God.

Therefore a Reformed person will define Sola Fide as the belief that justification effects salvation which can never be lost since it only given to the elect and so salvation and justification are the same thing.

Its a big circle.

I think Luther in speaking about Sola Fide was arguing that the life of faith leading to salvation was begun by grace (sola gracia) in the sacraments and maintained by faith. That faith being a gift from God was sufficient for the justification of anyone who believed and so nothing further was required for justification apart from faith given by grace. That faith if lived out in a life of penitential humility (thesis 1) would lead to salvation.

Now you average Reformed person would say this is salvation by works, but of course they teach that you are saved by inviting Jesus into your heart so what is that if not a work. Furthermore the Reformed understanding of salvation is far more crass and works based than anything taught in RCC of Lutheran circles because both of those Churches teach that God conveys salvation by means of grace received by the unworthy because God is merciful. The Reformed church teaches that a man, by his own initiative, can obligate God to save him by saying a magic prayer.

God Bless

Thanks guys for the explanations -
Obviously “by faith alone” is more involved than those three words might convey just by themselves and that even among protestants the understanding can vary.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Perhaps I could help with that, James.

By grace alone is the acceptance of the fact that even the possilbility of salvation is by grace. The suffering, death, and ressurection is God’s grace, the free gift given though we are completely undeserving. Our deserving is only condemnation.

By faith alone is the simple recognition that jusitifcation is accessed only by faith, and not by works (anything we do). And even faith is a gift of grace.

In Christ alone is a recognition of the atoning actions of the Incarnate Word.

So, therefore, we are justified by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Each alone has a specific intention, a specific qualifier which excludes other possibilities.

The practice of sola scriptura is not directly related to the above. It simply states that scripture is the final norm, which holds doctrine, teachers and teachings accountable. IOW, it is a method of hermeunetics of the Church. The sola here means that all teachings, councils, writings, teachers, etc, regardless of their name are not equal to scripture, but instead accountable to it.

Jon

Thanks Jon

 

[Jim_Dandy]

I suggest a little book by Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers entitled The Salvation Controversy. He gives an explanation of what Protestants and Catholics mean by the words they use in discussing salvation, as well as a thorough discussion of the Catholic and Protestant points of view. Akin was a Protestant and understands both sides of the controversy. Excellent writer. Highly recommended.

 

[grandfather]

I recently spent some time with a Lutheran minister friend. He believes faith, hope and love are esentially all the same thing, kind of differnt dimensions of the same thing.

So he does not deny that all three of the theological virtues are needed for salvation, but claims that they are the same.

He also distinguishes between faith and saving faith.

It seemed to me that this was a way of admitting faith alone can not save a soul, that love is necessary, but at the same time saying something more than faith is needed, hope and love.

Catholics see faith being connected to love, or leading to love, but different from love, charity. Faith, hope and love are necessary for salvation, but they are different.

There was no need to push the point that faith is clearly different from hope and love. It would have not resolved anything.

Winning intellectual theological arguments rarely causes people to abandon their errors. All it proves is that someone lost an argument and could not answer some challenge. It does not prove there is no answer.

God may use us in assisting people in finding truth, but we can also be impediments, even if we are right.

Unity is the work of the Holy Spirit. All we can do is love one another. Love does cause conversion. It is compellng and powerful. Argument and dispute often do the opposite, harden hearts.

When someone knows that you genuinely will their good, love them, they are much more likely to be receptive to what you think and why you think it, or at least not plug their ears.

 

[Mberg3]

I believe Paul is emphasizing both grace and faith, and he does this in other places as well, but Galatians 5:6 tells us that the kind of faith he is talking about, the kind of faith that justifies, is the faith that wrorks through love. My signature is perhaps my favorite Luther quote, for he says it clearly:

Jon

I would Disagree that Paul is emphasising Grace and faith for Ephesians 4-10 reads
*Ephesians 2:4-10

New International Version (NIV)

4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. *

This passage indicates that the subject of the passage was GRACE and not faith. The portions 8,9 also indicate that the subject of the sentence is Grace. Grace is the Subject, Salvation is the result of the subject, and Through Faith qualifies the previous statement. The “this is not of yourselves, it is a gift of God” indicates that Grace is from God, not mankind. “Not by Works” indicates that the grace is received through faith, and that one cannot bribe God into giving more Grace. Simply the passage focus’s on God’s role as the giver of Grace not on man’s role of “earning” graces (especially focused on Works of the Law).

As for Galatians, that passage was on Justification, not Salvation, although you did clarify how the two are interrelated.

 

[hn160]

But Technically the docrine of Sola Fide is the JUSTIFICATION of faith alone, not the SALVATION of faith along. At least according to the Lutheran point of view. Salvation is by grace alone, Justification is by faith along in Lutheran Theology. That is why my OP pointed out that the terms were used improperly by protestant and catholic laity.

Lutheran view is that we are not save by faith alone because that would be putting faith in our faith or how strong is our faith, rather we are saved by Christ who is the object of our faith.

 

[fhansen]

I have seen several recent threads about Sola Scriptura, but not about Sola Fide. This is interesting because I find it the hardest to understand or defend out of the 4 solas of the reformation (Fide, Scriptura, Christos, Gracia). Only faith is interesting because it was the main point on which my protestant training was based, but now I realized that the understanding was distorted. One of the things that was done was to equate Grace with Faith and to equate Justification with Salvation. Examples of this would be to say
“I am saved by FAITH alone”, when the correct understanding (even for the protestant) would be to say “I am JUSTIFIED” by faith alone". These misunderstanding were why Ephesians 2:8,9 were so convincing. Because when Paul says “It is by GRACE you have been saved through FAITH, etc” I read that as saying I was saved by my faith when in reality it is not emphasizing faith at all, but Grace. Another example is that we were taught that the Catholic Church said that you needed to have works to be saved. This is another semantic error because in the Council of Trent the Church declared that you needed faith and works to be JUSTIFIED. Hopefully I would like to discuss the true meaning of Sola Fide and its role in the protestants life.

Sola Fide really means to have faith in your faith. It’s almost to say that faith=man’s justice, but in Catholic theology love actually constitutes the justice of man. So faith-or the acceptance of it- is the initial response to grace-and it’s the vehicle or basis, as per Phil 3:9, of our righteousness meaning that it must ultimately lead to love in order for us to become just, and justification (via grace and our cooperation with it) is what gains us eternal life, i.e. salvation. The Reformed doctrine of imputed righteousness makes faith alone sufficient, denying the necessity (and strangely denying even the possibility) of man’s becoming truly, ontologically just.

 

[grandfather]

Lutheran view is that we are not save by faith alone because that would be putting faith in our faith or how strong is our faith, rather we are saved by Christ who is the object of our faith.

Are you saying that Luther did not teach that salvation is by faith alone?

Or, ar you saying that Lutheran’s no longer believe salvation is by faith alone?

What Luther taught is historical fact, no?

I ran into a woman Lutheran minister once who said Luther did not teach there were two sacraments. Other Lutherans say he did. She felt very insulted that Rome questions her Orders.

I met a another Lutheran minister who said some ministers in his synod believed that Orders are necessary and it made others who insisted there is no such thing as Holy Orders angry. The same minister when he prepared prayers to be handed out for services, the responsorial kind, delineated the part for the people as “people”, and his part as “priest”. This caused some of the congregation some distress.

I did not say anything, but thought, Lutherans can not agree amongst themselves about the need or existance of Orders, they expect Rome to say they have valid Orders.

At any rate, most Lutherans I have met insist salvation is by faith alone, and others who see that is not possible, admit love of God is necessary, but to avoid repudiating Luther’s sola fide, say faith, hope and love are the same things.

The points of agreement are that salvation is by grace alone. Faith is a gift (grace). Grace or a gift can not be earned. Neither can the other two theological virtues, hope and love.

If love is necessary, even assuming faith and love are part of the same thing as the minister said, then we have to at least consider what love of God is under the light of scrpiture. Saint John writes, “The love of God consist in this, that we obey His commandments”. Jesus says, “If a man loves me he will keep my commands.”

Love then is impossible without obedience. Obedience is what we do, or do not do. What we do and do not do are works.

Our works can not save us, or salvation would not be by grace. But we can not be saved without them, or faith without works would not be dead.

The works of obedience, the love, necessary for our salvation are made possible by grace.

I think Lutherans and Catholics would agree there.

The confusion comes from Protestants believing that Catholics think they can earn salvation. Catholics do think we must do things to be saved, like repent of our sins, and what we do is a work, but that work is made possible by grace. We have to cooperate with grace.

Would any Luterans here agree with this? I am a sinner. I must repent of my sins to be saved. Repentance is something I must do, a work. I do not have the power to repent, free myself from my sins, for Jesus says whoever sins is a slave to sin. The slave must be set free by someone more powerful than the slave master. If I do repent of my sins the power to repent, to do what I must do to be saved, is given to me by God. It is a grace. All grace is unearned. God holds us responsible to do something with the gifts He gives us. We can not bury them in the ground.

 

[JonNC]

=grandfather;8623196]Are you saying that Luther did not teach that salvation is by faith alone?

Or, ar you saying that Lutheran’s no longer believe salvation is by faith alone?

What Luther taught is historical fact, no?

The entirety of Luther’s teaching includes the statement that “There is no justification without sanctification, no forgiveness without renewal of life, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow”. While it is true that we access justification by faith alone, the fact is faith can never be alone.

I ran into a woman Lutheran minister once who said Luther did not teach there were two sacraments. Other Lutherans say he did. She felt very insulted that Rome questions her Orders.

Well, actually, I question her Orders, based on the fact that she is a woman. But on the broader issue, I’m not insulted by Rome’s view of our Orders, considering their centrality of view regarding apostolic succession. I just believe they are wrong. I think, overall, however, the issue of the number of sacraments is not a great one for us.

I met a another Lutheran minister who said some ministers in his synod believed that Orders are necessary and it made others who insisted there is no such thing as Holy Orders angry. The same minister when he prepared prayers to be handed out for services, the responsorial kind, delineated the part for the people as “people”, and his part as “priest”. This caused some of the congregation some distress.

It shouldn’t, if one reads Augsburg. I think you would agree that chatechesis is a problem for Catholics, too.

I did not say anything, but thought, Lutherans can not agree amongst themselves about the need or existance of Orders, they expect Rome to say they have valid Orders.

A valid point. The protestantization of Lutheranism in America is a problem.

At any rate, most Lutherans I have met insist salvation is by faith alone, and others who see that is not possible, admit love of God is necessary, but to avoid repudiating Luther’s sola fide, say faith, hope and love are the same things.

It isn’t a repudiation. Read the Luther quote above, and the one in my signature. WHat is more, read what the confessions say about the New Obedience, or what the Formula of Concord says about the necessity of good works.

The points of agreement are that salvation is by grace alone. Faith is a gift (grace). Grace or a gift can not be earned. Neither can the other two theological virtues, hope and love.

Agreed.

If love is necessary, even assuming faith and love are part of the same thing as the minister said, then we have to at least consider what love of God is under the light of scrpiture. Saint John writes, “The love of God consist in this, that we obey His commandments”. Jesus says, “If a man loves me he will keep my commands.”

Love then is impossible without obedience. Obedience is what we do, or do not do. What we do and do not do are works.

Our works can not save us, or salvation would not be by grace. But we can not be saved without them, or faith without works would not be dead.

The works of obedience, the love, necessary for our salvation are made possible by grace.

I think Lutherans and Catholics would agree there.

Yes.

The confusion comes from Protestants believing that Catholics think they can earn salvation. Catholics do think we must do things to be saved, like repent of our sins, and what we do is a work, but that work is made possible by grace. We have to cooperate with grace.

Agreed.

Would any Luterans here agree with this? I am a sinner. I must repent of my sins to be saved. Repentance is something I must do, a work. I do not have the power to repent, free myself from my sins, for Jesus says whoever sins is a slave to sin. The slave must be set free by someone more powerful than the slave master. If I do repent of my sins the power to repent, to do what I must do to be saved, is given to me by God. It is a grace. All grace is unearned. God holds us responsible to do something with the gifts He gives us. We can not bury them in the ground.

I think we might term things a bit differently, but on the whole I agree.

Jon