Some Catholics accept justification(initial ) by faith alone per

[SolaScriptura]

… Dave Armstrong. Actually if you desire to be consistent with Scripture you have to affirm it in some way, because it is clear from the Scripture that some were justified by faith alone. For example:

Acts: 10:44-45 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.

There were nothing these individuals were doing besides listening. This is also the point the Apostle Paul makes to the Galatians:

Acts 3:2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?

So not only did the Apostle Paul experience this as did the Apostle Peter, but he used it as evidence against the Judiazers that one is justified by faith without works.

So how can Catholics completely deny justification by faith alone in any sense? At least Dave Armstrong tries to incorporate this biblical teaching into what Catholics teaching on justification by acknowledging initial justification can be by faith alone. Who disagrees and why?

 

[mattp0625]

Save a few verses that could be construed to sola fide as Luther did, most of the bible clearly does not support it.

The word repent appears more than 100 times. In the Book of Luke, Jesus says repent, or you will be destroyed.

Most like to point to Romans 3 as the source of sola fide, yet Romans 2 discusses following the moral law and that not doing so will lead to God’s wrath on the day of judgement.

Matthew 25 has strong language about doing works. It’s not optional.

James says faith without works is dead.

The books that Luther moved into his Apocrypha, including Tobias for example, also have strong language about doing good works.

I know the argument that its only the Holy Spirit that does it in us and we can do nothing good on our own. However, no one thought this way until the 16th century.

The Catholic view always was that we are strengthened by grace, but we have the free will to choose Jesus, who commands us to feed the poor and clothe the naked.

 

[Contarini]

… Dave Armstrong. Actually if you desire to be consistent with Scripture you have to affirm it in some way, because it is clear from the Scripture that some were justified by faith alone. For example:

There were nothing these individuals were doing besides listening. This is also the point the Apostle Paul makes to the Galatians:

So not only did the Apostle Paul experience this as did the Apostle Peter, but he used it as evidence against the Judiazers that one is justified by faith without works.

So how can Catholics completely deny justification by faith alone in any sense? At least Dave Armstrong tries to incorporate this biblical teaching into what Catholics teaching on justification by acknowledging initial justification can be by faith alone. Who disagrees and why?

I don’t think anyone disagrees that initial justification is by faith alone, at least if we are talking about merit. That is to say, Catholicism has taught since the Council of Trent at least that we cannot merit the “first grace” of justification. Merit, as Trent speaks of it, is the Holy Spirit working in us to make us worthy of further gifts of God’s grace and ultimately of glory (union with God in the eternal Kingdom).

However, we can do some things to prepare ourselves for grace. This isn’t absolutely necessary, however, since infants and perhaps some other people who were suddenly converted by a dramatic act of God’s grace don’t prepare themselves. It’s more of a negative “removal of obstacles”–if we continue to cling to our sin, then we create obstacles to receiving God’s grace.

Edwin

 

[twf]

… Dave Armstrong. Actually if you desire to be consistent with Scripture you have to affirm it in some way, because it is clear from the Scripture that some were justified by faith alone. For example:

There were nothing these individuals were doing besides listening. This is also the point the Apostle Paul makes to the Galatians:

So not only did the Apostle Paul experience this as did the Apostle Peter, but he used it as evidence against the Judiazers that one is justified by faith without works.

So how can Catholics completely deny justification by faith alone in any sense? At least Dave Armstrong tries to incorporate this biblical teaching into what Catholics teaching on justification by acknowledging initial justification can be by faith alone. Who disagrees and why?

I disagree with your premise. They did do something. You said it yourself…they listened. They responded. Making an act of faith is an act of the will…is is something we do. If works, actions, are not in anyway required, then all men would be automatically justified without having to respond at all. Yet we know that is not the case. I think Our Lord summed it best in John 15…if we are connected to the vine, that is, if the grace of Christ dwells within us, then we will indeed produce good fruit that is pleasing to the Father.

 

[twf]

… Dave Armstrong. Actually if you desire to be consistent with Scripture you have to affirm it in some way, because it is clear from the Scripture that some were justified by faith alone. For example:

There were nothing these individuals were doing besides listening. This is also the point the Apostle Paul makes to the Galatians:

So not only did the Apostle Paul experience this as did the Apostle Peter, but he used it as evidence against the Judiazers that one is justified by faith without works.

So how can Catholics completely deny justification by faith alone in any sense? At least Dave Armstrong tries to incorporate this biblical teaching into what Catholics teaching on justification by acknowledging initial justification can be by faith alone. Who disagrees and why?

St. Paul never preached against justification by works. Works of grace are absolutely necessary as preached by Christ Himself throughout the Gospels and as very clearly articulated by St. James. St. Paul preached against justification by works of the law. Of course, ultimately we cannot take credit for these works anymore than we can take credit for our faith…both are gifts from Christ whom we “put on” in baptism. In and of ourselves we cannot please the Father, but in Christ we have become partakers of the divine nature (2 Pet 1:4) and are thus given the power to become the sons of God (see John 1:12)…that is, the power to please the Father…something we could never have done on our own.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I don’t think anyone disagrees that initial justification is by faith alone, at least if we are talking about merit. That is to say, Catholicism has taught since the Council of Trent at least that we cannot merit the “first grace” of justification. Merit, as Trent speaks of it, is the Holy Spirit working in us to make us worthy of further gifts of God’s grace and ultimately of glory (union with God in the eternal Kingdom).

“I don’t think anyone disagrees that initial justification is by faith alone”, are you serious? Mostly I have come across deny it. Dave Armstrong has been one of the few and he receives flack from Catholics for affirming that. You will also notice this thread where I’m willing to bet most will take exception to it.

 

[SolaScriptura]

St. Paul never preached against justification by works. Works of grace are absolutely necessary as preached by Christ Himself throughout the Gospels and as very clearly articulated by St. James.

:

So what works of grace were the Gentiles performing in Acts 10:44-45:

Acts: 10:44-45 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.

 

[po18guy]

… Dave Armstrong. Actually if you desire to be consistent with Scripture you have to affirm it in some way, because it is clear from the Scripture that some were justified by faith alone.

But, justification is a snapshot - a point in time which passes. A point which may be lost through sin. And, one thing I do not understand: Why this non-Catholic/Orthodox obsession with justification? Yes, I see it as pure obsession. A point of contention. Anxiety producing. Angst. In short, the manifestation of the profound fears of Martin Luther - the man whose unique and aberrant psychology first professed it.

It never enters my consciousness, nor that of most Catholics, I suspect.

Q: Why the obsession?

A: Outside of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, there are no valid Sacraments of Penance or the Holy Eucharist. Thus one can never know, never be certain. To me, that would be hell on earth.

 

[Usagi]

“I don’t think anyone disagrees that initial justification is by faith alone”, are you serious? Mostly I have come across deny it. Dave Armstrong has been one of the few and he receives flack from Catholics for affirming that. You will also notice this thread where I’m willing to bet most will take exception to it.

Did you read his quotation from the Council of Trent? That was the Council convened in response to the Reformation, setting out all the places where Catholic teaching disagreed with the Protestant claims, and yet the bishops at Trent affirmed that initial justification is purely by grace. They might reject the language of “faith alone,” but only because they go even further toward sola gratia – the Catholic Church baptizes infants as members, after all, and believes in baptismal regeneration, which means that at the time they become Christian/are saved, many Catholics are incapable of personal belief and thus their status is entirely a work of God, with even faith itself coming only later, much as with the Gentiles in the passage you quote.

 

[peter26]

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

You are saved by faith. Not by any positive action you can take. Works do not save you. That is the mentality of the Old Testament where animal sacrifices (works) could take away your sin. That’s gone now, since Jesus “made by his one oblation of himself once offered a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world”. What could your good works add to that?

 

[SolaScriptura]

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

You are saved by faith. Not by any positive action you can take. Works do not save you. That is the mentality of the Old Testament where animal sacrifices (works) could take away your sin. That’s gone now, since Jesus “made by his one oblation of himself once offered a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world”. What could your good works add to that?

Hmmm … are you Catholic?

 

[peter26]

Hmmm … are you Catholic?

I sometimes wonder when I get into discussions like this, but yes.

 

[twf]

:

So what works of grace were the Gentiles performing in Acts 10:44-45:

Acts: 10:44-45 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.

Did you read my post above that one? I responded to this (well different example but same scenario).
They listened, they made an act of the will to respond to God’s gift of grace. They did something. Of course this initial act of the will, while technically a work, is different from the “works of grace” I spoke of earlier. As others have pointed out on this thread, it is impossible to merit initial justification, for outside of Christ we can merit nothing. We are required to do something, we are required to respond, to accept…which is itself a work…but it remains a free gift. Thereafter, empowered by Christ’s grace, our “good fruit” does merit us salvation, for these works are Christ acting in us and through us. Our Lord makes the criteria for salvation abundantly clear in Matthew 25 in His parable of the sheep and the goats…

 

[twf]

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

You are saved by faith. Not by any positive action you can take. Works do not save you. That is the mentality of the Old Testament where animal sacrifices (works) could take away your sin. That’s gone now, since Jesus “made by his one oblation of himself once offered a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world”. What could your good works add to that?

What could St. Paul’s sufferings add to the suffering of Christ? Yet he says they do…(see Col. 1:24). Of course Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient. Of course there is nothing we can add to Christ’s one perfect work. Yet Christ wills that we participate in His wonderful work of salvation. He wills that we who now share in His very nature, by His own free gift, do good works and make sacrifices that draw from the power of His one work, His one sacrifice, and therefore become meritorious through Him and in Him. Only the Catholic teaching on this matter squares the apparent contradictions in Scripture. On the one hand St. Paul seems to emphasize that salvation is a free gift. On the other hand, Our Lord Himself, in parables such as the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 (and in many other places), and St. James in his epistle, emphasize the necessity of good works.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Did you read my post above that one? I responded to this (well different example but same scenario).
They listened, they made an act of the will to respond to God’s gift of grace. They did something.

Yes, they were breathing, blinking their eyes, their internal organs were working. Of course no one means people are not doing anything. The point is, it is their faith alone that is the means of justification.

Of course this initial act of the will, while technically a work, is different from the “works of grace” I spoke of earlier. As others have pointed out on this thread, it is impossible to merit initial justification, for outside of Christ we can merit nothing. We are required to do something, we are required to respond, to accept…which is itself a work…but it remains a free gift.

Well you claim it is a work, but the Scriptures says otherwise.

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.

If it is a work as you say then the Apostle Paul makes no sense.

Thereafter, empowered by Christ’s grace, our “good fruit” does merit us salvation, for these works are Christ acting in us and through us. Our Lord makes the criteria for salvation abundantly clear in Matthew 25 in His parable of the sheep and the goats…

One should know be deriving major doctrine from parables.

 

[peter26]

In any event, the parable of the sheep and the goats is more about loosing salvation by bad works than being saved by good works.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I sometimes wonder when I get into discussions like this, but yes.

I can understand why

 

[USMC_Convert]

I think you are falling for the trap I see most Protestants in, and that is you believe you can either be justified by faith or by works and while most all Protestant denominations choose faith Catholics choose works.

In this thinking you are totally incorrect my friend, Catholics believe that it is not a competition but rather that faith and works go hand in hand. You must have faith, and you must also do works. But what of the bed side convert? The one who dies immediately after having faith? Is he not accepted because he did not do works? No of course not, and Jesus explains this in the parable of the workers, where the workers hired at 5:00 in the afternoon are paid the same as the workers hired at 7:00 in the morning.

Both groups will receive salvation, however the earlier are called to do more work, by the master (God), and who are we to argue? Is it not written that upon appearing before the throne of God we can only say, I am an unprofitable servant, doing only what I was told to do…

 

[peter26]

And by the same token someone could convert at a young age, and have a new “conversion”, a change of heart fro “lukewarmness” on their death bed, and be saved. Why? Because salvation is the free gift of God to which we can add nothing.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that those who believeth in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”

Those who believe in him. Not those who earn enough brownie points from their good works.

 

[SyroMalankara]

One should know [not] be deriving major doctrine from parables

Where is a list of “major” vs. “minor” doctrine?

Well you claim it is a work, but the Scriptures says otherwise.
Quote:
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.
If it is a work as you say then the Apostle Paul makes no sense.

Already here the Apostle St. Paul demolishes the “alone” in faith alone. He identifies GRACE, FAITH and WORKS to distinguish between them. Here GRACE is how salvation is attained. FAITH and not only an individual’s faith – but one could argue that the Apostle is in fact stating that God has FAITH in humanity made in His own image! So it’s God’s confidence/conviction/trust in man that saves man, neither man’s merited works or man’s conviction/faith – although both can now cooperate with God’s GRACE, FAITH and WORKS.