Grace alone

[thessalonian]

I was accousted by the "Catholics don't believe in grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone.". To which I responded that we had a problem with the faith alone, siting Romans 2:4-8 and Matt 25, sheep and goates.

Then I got back:


[quote name='"Dave..."']Evidence does not justify us.

Peace[/quote]

My response to this seems a bit too simple. Where am I slipping up? How is he going to respond?


"Where did I say it did? I said grace justifies. The grace the produces the works has power, do you agree?

Eph 3
[20]
Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think,
[21] to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen.
I was accosted by the old "catholics don't believe in grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone" arguement today. Then when I responded about works being what we are judged on according to Romans 2:4-8 and Matt 25, I go the "we are not saved by evidence" response. My answer seems to simple. Where am I slipping up.

"How can faith even justify us? Faith, i.e. a statement proclainng Jesus as Lord, is evidence of grace is it not? Do you say that the grace that produces faith has power while the grace that produces works does not? If faith is not evidence of grace, i.e what God has produced in us by grace, then faith is something we produce. Thus our salvaiton is not by grace alone, but by something we produce that God responds to with grace. Of course works without faith are powerless as well. For there is no grace.
However if the work is not performed the grace is cast aside and has no effect in maintaining the strength of the soul.

Do you not see that the works that we do that give glory to God (i.e. him working in us) are very powerful, but only because of the grace that produces them? For your statements on Catholicism to hold true you would have to say that we believe in works alone. We do not for all works show the grace and power of God working in us to our salvation.

Blessings"

Comments welcome

Thess

Edited August 22, 2005 by thessalonian

[phatcatholic]

if you are trying to establish the role of grace in catholic theology, quote our church documents. the council of trent and the CCC in particular have much to say about the role of grace. i believe the council of orange had much to say on this as well. show them that its right there, in black and white, the way in which the Church affirms the role of grace.

of course, its tricky b/c when we talk about meritorious works and the grace that prompts them, we have to address the role of free will as well. protestants tend to respond to this by asserting that our inclusion of human involvement denegrates the power of God's grace. so, make sure you use terminology that they are fond of employing. talk about a "relationship", about "working with God" for good. afterall, one person forcing another person to do things, even good things, is not much of a relationship. but, two people working together to do good things--that's a relationship, and that's what Catholics believe in.

there are some good bible verses about working w/ God that usually help here:

[b]1 Cor 3:9 [/b]For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

[b]Mark 16:20 [/b]And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it. Amen.

[b]Rom 8:28 [/b]We know that in everything God works for good [i][b]with[/b][/i] those who love him, who are called according to his purpose.

[b]2 Cor 6:1 [/b]Working together with him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.


i hope that helps

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[thessalonian]

I think the root of my question is really the faith as a work question. Your info was helpful however.

[son_of_angels]

Be careful when speaking of grace. A lot of people, especially Catholics, fall into an almost Pelagian mode when talking of free-will. On the other hand, more than a few counters to this problem have been labeled as heretical.

It is enough to say that we cannot be saved without God's grace, and that we depend on it for salvation, but that only through free-will can we experience the graces which he pours out on our soul. So, to avoid ancient heresies, we dare not say God's grace is undeniable, but rather that it is our hope and companion.

[Guest JeffCR07]

The problem with most Protestants is that they approach the issue of Grace/Free-Will with a faulty Nominalist philosophical underpinning. Thus, they create dichotomy where a more classical philosophy sees synthesis.

The nominalist/protestant will demand to know "how much" is free will and "how much is grace? Is it 50%-50%? Is it 60%-40%? What?

To the Catholic though, this dichotomy is ridiculous. It is all by free will, and it is all by grace, they are two aspects of the same operation, namely, salvation. To a Catholic, asking for a percentage free will and a percentage grace would be like asking of the plane I took a plane from Germany to Washington: How did you get home, was it by the plane, or by the fuel, and what percentage of each?

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Aug 26 2005, 02:20 PM']The problem with most Protestants is that they approach the issue of Grace/Free-Will with a faulty Nominalist philosophical underpinning. Thus, they create dichotomy where a more classical philosophy sees synthesis.[right][snapback]700258[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Could you explain what that is a little more?

[Guest JeffCR07]

Nominalism is a school of philosophy that has its origins in the late middle ages. It was, in certain respects, championed by William of Ockham, of whom you may be familiar by virtue of the principle of "Ockham's Razor."

In a very, very brief overview (because I am currently packing to head back to school) Nominalism rejects the idea of universals. It maintains that only particulars exist and that "universals" as such are nothing more than a set of names we assign to stand for a series of similar phenomenon or attributes found in particulars.

The school as a whole tends to, in my opinion, overuse the disjunctive syllogism form of argumentation on account of the fact that it denies the existence, even in a moderate form, of universals, and therefore deals only in terms of particulars. Thus, the school as a whole appears (to anyone who is not a Nominalist) to create false dichotomies, such as the one regarding Grace and Free Will.

- Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff

[phatcatholic]

Jeff is officially the coolest person i know