Some Catholics accept justification(initial ) by faith alone per

[SolaScriptura]

Well, you’ve shown me that my initial statement was too strong. I stand by the revised version, though. Sungenis has pretty uniformly bad judgment and is a marginal figure these days (thank goodness).

He’s arguing that the language could be used, because Trent clearly affirms that the first grace cannot be earned. Chapter 8 of the Decree on Justification seems pretty clear to me: "But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God[45] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.[46]"

Not in my book

Because they understand the debate to be about whether anything other than faith has any causal role in justification at any point. And these are all valid arguments.

But as Trent says, faith is the beginning. Nothing that precedes faith (and indeed not faith itself) can merit God’s grace. But once God’s grace is infused into the believer, it transforms the will so that our actions are done by God in us and “merit” further grace, in the sense that they make us the kind of people in whom God’s Spirit can increasingly dwell. (I don’t like the word “merit” myself, but coming from a Wesleyan background, when I actually read Trent carefully and came to understand the historical background of the language I realized that there wasn’t much of a divide between what I had been brought up to believe and what the Church taught.)

Edwin

Hey Edwin,

I may respond a bit more to your thoughts, but have you read the links Bobcat provided from BENEDICT XVI? I think what he says goes a bit farther than how Dave was expressing it. Thoughts?

 

[rcwitness]

The fact that we Baptize infants is sufficient proof that we are justified apart from works. And Baptism leaves an indelible mark on our soul. Yet, what is inevitable, is faith to be tested. Faith cannot remain alone after its conception in us. Virtues of the love of God must be added to our faith, otherwise our faith is incomplete, lacking, stifled, ect.

Faith allows us to know that God’s grace has delivered us from the bond age of flesh, to receive the life of the Spirit. If we have the life of the Spirit, we have His works. If we do not have His works, we do not have His Spirit.

 

[Bookcat]

Wow!! The first two paragraphs of that first link was so moving and written so beautiful!! All I could say was Amen and Amen!! This is pretty encouraging from my perspective and also so surprising, because very seldom do I hear Catholics say anything close to this.

Pope Benedict XVI is yes teaching the Catholic Faith…

Make sure to read it all …and maybe more than once …lots there.

 

[rcwitness]

Pope Benedict XVI is yes teaching the Catholic Faith…

Make sure to read it all …and maybe more than once …lots there.

Thanks Bookcat.
At the end, we can only pray the Lord that he help us to believe; really believe. Believing thus becomes life, unity with Christ, the transformation of our life. And thus, transformed by his love, by the love of God and neighbour, we can truly be just in God’s eyes.

There aren’t a “certain amount of work” that justifies. We are freely justified. But we depart from being just in faith, if we do not love our neighbor and do what the faith compells. But we also fail at times to please the Lord in faith. We then have Reconciliation through His sacrifice in His body and blood, when we confess and repent.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Pope Benedict XVI is yes teaching the Catholic Faith…

Make sure to read it all …and maybe more than once …lots there.

Well let me ask you this, where do you see the difference between what he is saying and what Reformed Protestants are saying?

 

[rcwitness]

Well let me ask you this, where do you see the difference between what he is saying and what Reformed Protestants are saying?

Can you show us what Reformed Protestants say about it?

 

[JonNC]

Wow!! The first two paragraphs of that first link was so moving and written so beautiful!! All I could say was Amen and Amen!! This is pretty encouraging from my perspective and also so surprising, because very seldom do I hear Catholics say anything close to this.

Pope Benedict will do that to you.

Jon

 

[SolaScriptura]

Well, you’ve shown me that my initial statement was too strong. I stand by the revised version, though. Sungenis has pretty uniformly bad judgment and is a marginal figure these days (thank goodness).

yeah, i know, but it wasn’t so because of his views on justification. As a matter of fact his book, “Not By Faith Alone” is endorsed by a Who’s Who of Catholic Apologetics, a number of PhDs, and it carries with a Nihil Obstat, and a Imprimatur,

He’s arguing that the language could be used, because Trent clearly affirms that the first grace cannot be earned. Chapter 8 of the Decree on Justification seems pretty clear to me: "But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God[45] and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.[46]"

Yes, but as I’m sure you know. Saying it is by grace or even “grace alone” does not mean “faith alone”. You will also notice in the quote from Trent it puts faith and works in the same category(i.e. because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.). This seems remarkably different than what Benedict XVI is saying.

Also you quote if by grace it is not now by works, but why is this the case for the first justification and not the case for subsequent justifications? I’m sure you are not saying subsequent justifications are not by grace.

Because they understand the debate to be about whether anything other than faith has any causal role in justification at any point. And these are all valid arguments.

But as Trent says, faith is the beginning. Nothing that precedes faith (and indeed not faith itself) can merit God’s grace. But once God’s grace is infused into the believer, it transforms the will so that our actions are done by God in us and “merit” further grace, in the sense that they make us the kind of people in whom God’s Spirit can increasingly dwell. (I don’t like the word “merit” myself, but coming from a Wesleyan background, when I actually read Trent carefully and came to understand the historical background of the language I realized that there wasn’t much of a divide between what I had been brought up to believe and what the Church taught.)

Edwin

You stated, “But as Trent says, faith is the beginning. Nothing that precedes faith” , but for the last “faith” you meant justification,right? But Trent also puts works in the category with faith of things before justification that cannot merit justification. Therefore, you could argue that faith and works are both required for initial justification and they don’t merit it.

Whereas on the other hand Benedict XVI says:

“For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love.”

Well, no Reformed Protestant I know contend faith alone is opposed to “faith in charity, in love”, however we would say they are distinct, but true faith will always be accompanied by love and good works. This is typical of how the Reformed interpret James when he condemns “faith alone”, it is a faith that is not accompanied by love and good works. So it seems to me that Benedict XVI view is even more nuanced toward the Reformed view than what you and Dave are saying.

 

[rcwitness]

The doctrine of Faith and Works is not that our works or our faith is the cause of personal justification. It means that faith without works is dead. That the love of neighbor must be added to faith, or we have denied the faith. Faith is how we see, that God chose to justify us even though we deserve condemnation. He accomplished this through the Holy body and blood of Jesus. Works of righteousness are what He does through faith. Faith comes first, and knowing we are justified apart from works is accepting faith. Responding to faith means willfully cooperating with grace. This requires a converted heart and assisted will. It is not “by our own will” or because our hearts are good apart from His healing. He creates and convicts us, in order to sanctify us.

Our Initial Justification is apart from our coperation. Our Final Justification is faith that works in the love from God.

 

[rcwitness]

Well, no Reformed Protestant I know contend faith alone is opposed to “faith in charity, in love”, however we would say they are distinct, but true faith will always be accompanied by love and good works…

If this is the doctrine of “Faith Alone”, that it is always accompanied by love and good works, then it is compatible with Catholic Teaching. As long as we don’t say we are justified because we were faithful and did works of righteousness.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Can you show us what Reformed Protestants say about it?

From the Westminster Confession of faith on justification:

"Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.

Here is what Pope Benedict XVI says:

For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life.

A faith without charity, without this fruit, would not be true faith. It would be a dead faith.

To be honest I did not find any disagreement with Pope Benedict’s articles, but if I start a discussion on this site the disagreements start immediately. So that is why I was curious as to where do you guys see the differences.

 

[SolaScriptura]

If this is the doctrine of “Faith Alone”, that it is always accompanied by love and good works, then it is compatible with Catholic Teaching. As long as we don’t say we are justified because we were faithful and did works of righteousness.

This has always been the case since the Reformation as it is in the confessions of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches. I quoted the WCF in a previous post that shows this.

 

[rcwitness]

From the Westminster Confession of faith on justification:

"Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.

Here is what Pope Benedict XVI says:

For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life.

A faith without charity, without this fruit, would not be true faith. It would be a dead faith.

To be honest I did not find any disagreement with Pope Benedict’s articles, but if I start a discussion on this site the disagreements start immediately. So that is why I was curious as to where do you guys see the differences.

The disagreements are over what Protestants think is wrong in Catholic Teaching, and what Catholics think is wrong is Protestant beliefs. The Catholic Church and certain Lutheran federations are reconciled in the matter, if I’m not mistaken. But that is a small portion of the Protestant world.

 

[rcwitness]

This has always been the case since the Reformation as it is in the confessions of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches. I quoted the WCF in a previous post that shows this.

So what do you disagree from the detailed expression of Trent or any other official Catholic Teaching?

 

[rcwitness]

From the Westminster Confession of faith on justification:

"Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification: yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.

Thanks. I think James considers works of faith, as completing faith and not a separate thing.

James 2:21

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?

James 2:24

You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
Why do Protestants not get angry at St James and these Scriptures? Because they try to understand their meaning, when they say “justified by works”.

These works were necessary to do, in order to keep the faith.

 

[SolaScriptura]

So what do you disagree from the detailed expression of Trent or any other official Catholic Teaching?

Well from Catholics it is simple. That flatly deny justification by faith alone and assert when the are justified by faith and grace infused works. When the Apostle Paul says faith apart from works he is not talking about grace infused works. I disagree with that. The other variant I have come across is when Catholics say we are justified by faith alone if by faith alone you mean: faith = faith + love + hope . Well to be honest this is not faith alone but faith + hope + love. Now when we say “faith alone” we don’t mean those other saving graces are not with the justified one as the WCF states, but these other things are not the instrumental cause of the justification. It is only faith or faith alone, as the Scriptures state over and over again faith is what justifies. Furthermore, the scriptures themselves makes the distinction between faith, hope, and love in 1 Cor. 13:13:

“So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”

 

[rcwitness]

Well from Catholics it is simple. That flatly deny justification by faith alone and assert when the are justified by faith and grace infused works. When the Apostle Paul says faith apart from works he is not talking about grace infused works. I disagree with that. The other variant I have come across is when Catholics say we are justified by faith alone if by faith alone you mean: faith = faith + love + hope . Well to be honest this is not faith alone but faith + hope + love. Now when we say “faith alone” we don’t mean those other saving graces are not with the justified one as the WCF states, but these other things are not the instrumental cause of the justification. It is only faith or faith alone, as the Scriptures state over and over again faith is what justifies. Furthermore, the scriptures themselves makes the distinction between faith, hope, and love in 1 Cor. 13:13:

“So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”

Yes. More times than not, Scripture uses faith apart from these virtues. And faith without love is the knowledge of Christ’s grace, but not necessarily cooperating and persevering in it. Take Peter’s admonishment, for example.

2 Peter 1
For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these things are yours and abound, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

Now, is the final state of a person justified apart from these virtues?

 

[SolaScriptura]

Thanks. I think James considers works of faith, as completing faith and not a separate thing.

James 2:21

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?

James 2:24

You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
Why do Protestants not get angry at St James and these Scriptures? Because they try to understand their meaning, when they say “justified by works”.

These works were necessary to do, in order to keep the faith.

Actually, I agree with Pope Benedicts XVI position on this. He says the following:

“Often there is seen an unfounded opposition between St Paul’s theology and that of St James, who writes in his Letter: “as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead”(2: 26). In reality, ***while Paul is primarily concerned to show that faith in Christ is necessary and sufficient, James accentuates the consequential relations between faith and works (cf. Jas 2: 24). Therefore, for both Paul and James, faith that is active in love testifies to the freely given gift of justification in Christ. ***Salvation received in Christ needs to be preserved and witnessed to “with fear and trembling. For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure… Do all things without grumbling or questioning… holding fast the word of life”, St Paul was to say further, to the Christians of Philippi (cf. Phil 2: 12-14, 16).”

So I would say as Pope Benedict XVI that James is making a different point then Paul. He is showing that lively faith does works and this is the faith that justifies, not a dead faith. This is seen in James references to “show” and so you “see”.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Yes. More times than not, Scripture uses faith apart from these virtues. And faith without love is the knowledge of Christ’s grace, but not necessarily cooperating and persevering in it. Take Peter’s admonishment, for example.

2 Peter 1
For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. For if these things are yours and abound, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

Now, is the final state of a person justified apart from these virtues?

We believe there is only one justification. The justification in the present is an intrusion of the eschaton justification. So we are never justified based on our virtues in the sense of establishing a right relationship with God. Instead our standing with God is based on the virtues of Jesus Christ in our place. Now when God justifies us, He does changes us and our faith is working through love to do good works, but these good works are a validation and demonstration of our justification, not the cause.

 

[rcwitness]

We believe there is only one justification. The justification in the present is an intrusion of the eschaton justification. So we are never justified based on our virtues in the sense of establishing a right relationship with God. Instead our standing with God is based on the virtues of Jesus Christ in our place. Now when God justifies us, He does changes us and our faith is working through love to do good works, but these good works are a validation and demonstration of our justification, not the cause.

but neither faith or its works are the cause of our justification. Faith is how we know that Jesus is our justification. Works are the result of faith in a man.

I agree with Benedict XVI also… that primarily, justification is freely given. Works don’t earn justification. Works show that a person has faith. Can a person have faith and not works? Initially, but has forgotten what has forgiven his sins, and so does not persevere in faith.