Sola Fide Apology

[ICTHUS]

This is an apology I wrote on the topic of Sola Fide, to someone who sent me a PM on Christian Guitar Resources. The PM asked me to respond to five allegations in an article by Michael Spencer, the Internet Monk - a Reformed, Liturgical Southern Baptist who would enter the Catholic Church, were it not for five objections which he sees as insurmountable. The first of these objections is quoted, and my response to it, for the benefit of the gentleman who messaged me.

1. The Catholic Church has badly mangled the Gospel. Mangled it to the point that to become Catholic would be to forsake the Biblical Gospel, and I have read Galatians 1. I believe the church is in serious error on justification and all the doctrines that precede and flow from it. In two thousand years, Rome has gotten better in talking about the Gospel, but hasn't come one step from where Luther stepped back and called the church apostate on the Gospel. Yes, often Rome holds forth one of the jewels of the Gospel in its liturgy or tradition or in the voice of one its eloquent saints. But Rome has never come beyond Trent, and this is an uncrossable boundary.

He seems here to be referring to the faith/works issue, and to imputed versus infused righteousness.

Firstly, the Faith/Works issue, in my opinion, is often blown way out of proportion. This is NOT to say that I consider it unimportant, for Paul tells us that the Law is totally impotent to save a man. This, the Catholic Church affirms.

Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 1

The holy council declares first, that for a correct and clear understanding of the doctrine of justification, it is necessary that each one recognize and confess that since all men had lost innocence in the prevarication of Adam,[3] having become unclean,[4] and, as the Apostle says, by nature children of wrath,[5] as has been set forth in the decree on original sin,[6]they were so far the servants of sin[7] and under the power of the devil and of death, that not only the Gentiles by the force of nature, but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses, were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom, though free will, weakened as it was in its powers and downward bent,[8] was by no means extinguished in them.

By blown out of proportion, I mean that the Reformation doctrine of sola fide creates a false dicohtomy between Faith and obedience (i.e. works) that simply doesn't need to be there.

Basically, the Church teaches that a man is justified by obedient faith. Period. She denies Justification by Faith Alone (sola fide) because, in her understanding,justifying faith is never alone, but always produces obedience!!

This relationship is clearly demonstrated from Scripture.

James 2:20-26

You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless[4] ? 21Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,"[5] and he was called God's friend. 24You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

25In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

Romans 4:1-5

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? 2If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about--but not before God. 3What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."[1]

4Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.

I find it interesting here that St. Paul and St. James bring to the table the exact same event. Abraham, our forefather, is a perfect example of how a man is justified, and thus, they both use him as an example.

At first glance, it seems as though these passages are horribly and utterly contradictory. According to Paul, a man is not justified by works. According to James, a man is justified by what he does, and not by faith alone! This apparent (but false, as I'll show) dichotomy was so apparent in the mind of the author of the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther, that he had no choice but to reject it from his translation of the Scriptures in order for his doctrine not to be self-contradicting, attributing its authorship (the Epistle) to "...some Jew.....who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any."

With that said: I believe the crux of the issue is this: A man is justified by grace, through obedient faith. Note that this scripture (Rom 6) would seem indeed to indicate that Abraham was reckoned righteous by God for merely believing on Gods promise, yet, there is more to it than that. Paul in Romans 6 is speaking against a unique heresy that taught that a man must be circumcised and obey the Law of Moses in order to be just before God. Paul, for obvious reasons, responds with a resounding "NO" to this heresy, and calls Abraham to the stage, saying that Abraham was justified by his faith, and concluding that if it were possible for a man to 'work his way to heaven' by obeying the Law, then indeed a man would have cause to boast about it to people!! But, his whole point in Romans 6 is to say "No, a man is justified freely, by faith" - but, this does not necessitate the faith/works dichotomy imposed by Protestantism, for the following reason.

St. James, similarly to St. Paul, uses Abraham to make his point. He is constructing an argument to the Church, that a man who says he has faith, but has no works, essentially, does not have faith, or, at the very least, a false, dead faith, impotent to justify (v.26) However, we notice something in this passage pecuiliar.

21Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,"[5] and he was called God's friend. 24You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

This passage clearly indicates, that in the same passage in which Paul says that Abraham was justified by his faith, James says that Abrahams works were active alongside his faith, and his faith was actually made complete by his works. He then goes on to make the point that a man is not justified by faith alone, but by what he does. In other words, obedience proceeding from faith and manifesting itself in works, is inseparable, and an integral part of, saving faith. This concept is thoroughly Biblical, and it is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

[phatcatholic]

icthus,

excellent apology. since you focus on the life of Abraham that is alluded to in the NT letters, you may want to provide for him the following articles as a way to possibly supplement your remarks on this subject:

--Rescuing Romans from the Reformers

--The Justifications of Abraham

--When Was Abraham Justified?

also, i noticed that he seems to think that catholic theology concerning justification was acceptable before Trent, but not after it. so, another angle you may wish to take could be to prove that catholic theology on justification has never changed. it is the same both before and after Trent. this could be done by providing testimony from Early Church Fathers that parallels the theology set forth at Trent. i have provided much testimony from the ECF's in the salvation entry.

i hope this helps........pax christi,

phatcatholic

[hermit]

Thanks Icthus, I always thought works were the works refered to in Matt 25:35-46.

Putting obedience to Church Doctrine under this heading lends a whole new dimension to the word for me..

Hope it does the same for the person you wrote it for. God Bless...hermit

[ICTHUS]

Thanks Icthus, I always thought works were the works refered to in Matt 25:35-46.

Putting obedience to Church Doctrine under this heading lends a whole new dimension to the word for me..

Hope it does the same for the person you wrote it for. God Bless...hermit

Thanks Icthus, I always thought works were the works refered to in Matt 25:35-46.

They are, and my understanding still holds true. For, the Lord tells us that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Clearly, those who are condemned in this passage are those who acknowledge the Lord with their lips, but clearly fail to obey one of His greatest commandments!!

Putting obedience to Church Doctrine under this heading lends a whole new dimension to the word for me..

Glad I could be of help in deepening your understanding, bro! :D