[Mr. Lucky]

I dunno. If the last couple of paragraphs had been cut off by the copier, I wouldn't have much to take issue with.

There are doctrines (such as the virgin birth) which are derived from the explicit statement of one or two verses of Scripture, while there are doctrines (such as the perpetual virginity of Mary) which are implicit from Scripture more generally.

[InterestedQuestioner]

How important would you say the doctrine of sola fide is to Christianity?

[InterestedQuestioner]

"Without going into the subject of what kind of justification is being discussed here (which is misunderstood by most Evangelical commentators on Catholicism, see below), the phrase "faith alone" is itself rejected. Even though Protestants can give the phrase orthodox theological content, the phrase itself is unbiblical. If we wish to conform our theological language to the language of the Bible, we need to conform our usage of the phrase "faith alone" to the use of that phrase in the Bible."


Thus, if we are to conform our language to the language of the Bible, we need to reject usage of the formula "faith alone" while at the same time preaching that man is justified "by faith and not by works of the Law" (which Catholics can and should and must and do preach, as Protestants would know if they read Catholic literature). James 2:24 requires rejection of the first formula while Romans 3:28 requires the use of the second.


I would have to agree with the author on this point. It turns out that the phrase "saved by faith alone" never occurs in Scripture, hence it's unbiblical, and the formulation itself contradicts Scripture quite directly.

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. (Jas. 2:24)"