The Gospel According to Church History (PART 6)

Re: works only “demonstrating our faith to others”... I don’t see how the Scriptures support that view any more than they support the plain-text view of James 2:24 (we are justified by works, and not by faith alone—why not take the plain meaning of that, rather than try to move heaven and earth to “interpret” it into irrelevance?), Matthew 25:31-46 (the goats were consigned to eternal hell because they didn’t perform good works such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and other corporal works of mercy; they even called Him “Lord”, but it did no good), and the like.

Part of understanding the "plain text" of Scripture is reading passages IN CONTEXT, not snippets divorced from their intent. We can easily see in James' epistle that he is talking to believers. The context of his words "justified by works and not faith alone" is this:

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In 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? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. (James 2:14-26)

One of the most important rules of Biblical hermeneutics is that you interpret Scripture BY Scripture. Would it be wise to believe James is saying our works justify us before God - as if our works add to the finished work of Christ on the cross who bled and died for our justification - or does it make more sense if we look at the many other passages that teach we are justified by faith APART from our work and dig a little deeper into what exactly James means? The Holy Spirit wouldn't contradict Himself. Instead of James speaking of our works justifying us before God, he repeatedly refers to how others look at us and see our faith BY what we do. Even James states that Abraham was justified by faith (V. 23) and he repeats the Old Testament passage Genesis 15:6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.. Paul also repeats this in Romans 4:3, What does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

Question: if good works are only used for demonstration purposes, then isn’t it awkward for St. James to say, explicitly, that they JUSTIFY us, and don’t just “come in handy as an example/proof for others”? Isn’t “justify” a technical term which is inextricably linked to salvation?

No, it's not at all awkward because James is teaching under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that believers should be always conscious of how their profession of faith is perceived by outsiders. And, YES, justification is inextricably linked to salvation because it is a forensic justification before God - we are justifed by the blood of Christ, made righteous by His sacrifice on the cross for our sins. If our justification is by the grace of God - and it IS - then there is nothing we add to the equation of ourselves. It is an act of faith by which we receive the gift of God which is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Frankly, I find the Scriptural support of the Catholic view to be overwhelming... and requiring no one to ignore even a single verse of Scripture; while the Luther-inspired “sola fide, sola Scriptura” collides with more Scriptures than I can easily count.

Of course you do, you're a Catholic! Having formerly been a Roman Catholic, I can attest to the overwhelming support of Scripture to the doctrine of faith alone as this OP explains certainly WAS the view held by the early church as well. Along the way, Rome left behind the doctrine of justification by faith alone and moved to the false gospel of salvation by faith plus works. When you add the works of man to the sacrifice of Christ, you nullify grace - there's no way around that.

Nobody denies there's a place for good works in the life of a Christian - it was certainly expressed often enough in the writings of the Reformers (for example, see HERE). The difference is that these works we do FROM a genuine faith do not justify us before God. Like I said, He knows our hearts - He sees if our faith is true. Plenty of people can fake it by their actions and they fool others all the time, but they don't fool God.

:) Sometimes, morning is more like Colossians 1:24, but that's another story...

One of the most important rules of Biblical hermeneutics is that you interpret Scripture BY Scripture.

Up to a point, yes... but only to the extent that no Scripture will ever contradict any other Scripture (even if there are "apparent" contradictions"--they can all be resolved, at least to the extent that no actual contradiction can ever be proven), that context is absolutely necessary (though I'd add that "context" includes the oral tradition handed down from the Apostles, as referenced by 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, etc.), and that some familiarity with the original language(s) is a "must".

Beyond this, there's a definite limit to which Scripture can "interpret" Scripture; Scripture is powerless, for example, to tell us which books of the Bible *belong* in the Bible... but even beyond that, "there are things difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction" (cf. 2 Peter:3:16).

One big problem with some modern non-Catholic use of the "interpret Scripture with Scripture" idea is that it presupposes the self-contradictory and unbiblical idea of "sola Scriptura", in that they use ONLY Scripture to interpret Scripture. That's a bad idea... especially since the Bible never tells us to do that!

Would it be wise to believe James is saying our works justify us before God - as if our works add to the finished work of Christ on the cross who bled and died for our justification - or does it make more sense if we look at the many other passages that teach we are justified by faith APART from our work and dig a little deeper into what exactly James means?

I don't think those are the only two options. It's undeniable that God is the source of all good things, including our natural life and our supernatural (eternal) life; but isn't God free to use whatever means He chooses? If God chooses to make some aspects of His grace contingent on human activity, that's His prerogative... and He seems particularly fond of that method, in that He uses wretched earthen vessels to bring about His Will in many respects (think of our obligation to pray for one another--James 5:16, etc.: if the prayer of a righteous man availeth much, doesn't it make sense that a refusal of a man to pray would have some effects?).

Here's my point: good works do NOT justify us before God in the sense that God somehow "owes" us anything because of them; rather, they are the necessary fruit of OBEDIENCE. That is, God expects good works out of us (though our ability to do them is fully dependent on Him), and He has a right to make our salvation dependent on doing what He commands us. It's not a case of, "God, I did [insert good work, here], so you have to let me into Heaven, since they justified me!" Rather, it's a case of God saying to us, "I have merited all necessary justification for everyone by My passion, death, resurrection and ascension; but good works are the condition I require of all My disciples in order for you to APPROPRIATE that justification for yourself; otherwise, it will do you no good at all, and you will be cut away as an unproductive branch (cf. John 15).

Also, re: our earlier discussion about the necessity of loving God (which I would think is obvious to anyone who reads Scripture for even 30 seconds--it's on practically every page, and it's the greatest commandment!), St. Paul writes, "If any one has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed." (1 Cor 16:22) That sounds rather dire, doesn't it? Being accursed doesn't seem compatible with being saved, does it? (This would be an example of where ALL of Scrpture is to be used, and not just our favorite verses. No Scripture contradicts another; they either stand together or fall together.)

Even James states that Abraham was justified by faith (V. 23) and he repeats the Old Testament passage Genesis 15:6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.. Paul also repeats this in Romans 4:3, What does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

One problem: that's not what St. James says. He says, verbatim:

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, and the scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

So... the Scripture verse which is arguably the most deadly bullet in all of Scripture to the "justified by faith alone" idea (because it flatly contradicts it) IMMEDIATELY follows the passage about Abraham "believing God". St. James obviously considers that an example of GOOD WORKS (see the context!), or else he wouldn't have used it to bolster his last claim. Believing, as I mentioned earlier, is "pregnant" with meaning; it's not simply intellectual assent (the demons have that, and they shudder--cf. James 2:19), but it includes TOTAL, ONGOING COMMITMENT (and it includes love of God, love of neighbor, obedience to God [cf. John 14:15, Luke 6:46, etc.], and loads of other things).

A few other quick snippets, before time catches up to me...

1) Re: the list of Scriptures talking about “written”: if I were trying to argue that the Scriptures don’t find the Scriptures to be IMPORTANT, then your list would smash my position to pieces! But that’s not what I’m trying to say; rather, I object to the unscriptural, self-contradictory idea that the Scriptures are ALL-SUFFICIENT when used ALONE... which is nowhere taught in Scripture.

2) Re: my beliefs as a Catholic: :) Trust me, friend, I’ve examined my faith with a fine-toothed comb! (I almost lost my faith in Christ altogether at a liberal university—though that’s somewhat redundant, in the USA!—when confronted with a “squad” of highly-polished atheist philosophy professors; did you see the movie “God’s Not Dead?” That was what I encountered, if not worse! I wish I’d been half so courageous as Josh Wheaton was. Ironically enough it was Soren Kierkegaard who helped rescue me!) When I wrestled with my Faith, I jettisoned anything that couldn’t be proven beyond reasonable doubt... and I’ve found no objection to truth Catholic teaching (not to be confused with muddle-headedness that many random Catholics—including laity, religious sisters, priests, and even bishops—THINK are “Catholic teaching”—I was among their number, for years) which didn’t ultimately spring from a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the Faith.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.