Faith Alone for Salvation

The above video is a bit hard to listen to, but is a good summary


Sungenis in his book, Not by Faith Alone states on page 309

"...while the Protestant system may seem easy and plausible, it often misses the simple language of Scripture. Rather than taking each verse as it stands and allowing the differing 'face-value' facts of Scripture to create as many theological categories as necessary to explain its compete message, the Protestant hermeneutic invariable elevates 'faith alone', and its counterpart 'imputed righteousness', as all-encompassing theological categories into which the rest of the Scripture's language must fit. If the 'face value' information that a passage provides does not conform to the faith alone theory the Protestant hermeneutic nevertheless imposes it on the text. The theological category of faith alone becomes the overriding criterion...of biblical hermeneutics --by which to judge or interpret any other Scripture."

Through the past few months I have seen the above statement to be true. Roman Catholicism seems more balanced in taking all of Scripture into account. Some examples---

The only time faith alone is used in the Bible is in James 2: 24 "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone" . James tells us what saving faith is. What kind of faith will save a person? James 2:14 "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him? " 17 Even so faith , if it has no works, is dead, being by itself."

James, therefore makes it clear that a faith that saves has to have works. It is a living faith, an active faith, a working faith that is a true faith. It all comes from grace---it is a full faith.

What did Jesus tell the disciples to do?

Matt 20:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you.... " Here we see the need of baptism and of obedience (observing the commands of Jesus) to be a disciple.

Luke 24:47 "and that repentance for forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name...

When Peter preached in Acts 2 the response to his message was, "Brethren what shall we do?"

Peter did not say have faith alone. He said in 2:38 "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off , as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself." Here we see both repentance and baptism as commanded.

What did Peter say after preaching in Acts 3?

19. "Repent therefore and return, that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord......26 "For you first, God raised up His Servant, and sent Him to bless you by turning every one of you from your wicked ways." Here again we see the need of true repentance--turning from ones wicked ways.

Acts 5: 31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him". Here again we see repentance and obedience.

Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike." Belief and Baptism are the response. The same thing happens when Philip preaches to the Ethiopian--he is baptized.

Acts 10: 43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name every one who believes in Him has received forgiveness of sins" Here we see the necessity of believing in Him (this would includes Lord and Savior--in who he is verse 43 -Judge of the living and the dead ).

Acts 11:18 "Repentance that leads to life"

Acts 15:11 ..saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus.."

Acts 18: 8 ...believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized. 27 ...who had believed through grace.

Acts 20:21 preached "...repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ".

Acts 22:16 "...Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name."

Acts 26: 18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God in order that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me."

20:...that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance."

So again and again we see the need for a repentance (which is a turning away from sin to God which results in deeds), faith, baptism. These are all just mainly in Acts. Here is one in 1 Peter 3: 21 And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you---not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Here is how the Council of Trent defines the causes of justification (from a quote I found on line about it):

Perhaps the most important passage in the decree is the seventh chapter listing the “five causes of justification.” They are as follows:

1.the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting
2.the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance
3.the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father
4.the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified
5.lastly, the alone formal cause is the justice of God, not that whereby He Himself is just, but that whereby He maketh us just, that, to wit, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and we are not only reputed, but are truly called, and are, just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to every one as He wills, and according to each one’s proper disposition and co-operation.

Note that the meritorious cause is the suffering and death of Christ. Human being are not the source of the justifying merit. Note also that the sacraments are “instrumental”. The sacraments are the “instruments” in the hand of Christ.

The formal cause is the “justice of God” not our own justice. Nevertheless, we receive His “justice within us, each one according to his own measure.”

also Bryan Cross:

What Berkhof seems not to see is that agape is the connection between faith and works. That is why he thinks justification by works contradicts justification by faith. So he must impose on the text here two types of justification, one before God and by faith, the other before men and by works. But given the Catholic understanding of justification by a faith conjoined with agape, then there is no need for splitting justification into one before God and one before men. The initial act of turning away from sin (in repentance) and toward God (in faith informed by agape) is a small participation in the infinite righteousness of Christ. Every subsequent act of faith working through agape increases our participation in God’s righteousness. And that is how justification is both initial and yet increases; these increases in justification are also referred to as ‘being justified.’ And that is the sense in which Abraham and Rahab were justified by works, i.e. a faith working itself out through agape.http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/09/does-the-bible-teach-sola-fide/#comment-37686

Christopher Lake:

 Argument against Faith alone

 However, it was, largely, very careful study of Scripture itself– particularly, what Jesus, St. Paul, and St. James have to say about works, and their role in truly being “right with God” (right *before* Him, in a justifying sense), which convinced me that the Bible does not teach “Sola Fide”– and, moreover, that the Catholic Church teaches what the Bible teaches on justification.

For example, we have the parable of the sheep and the goats, in which Christ clearly tells us that our judgment for *eternity*– for *Heaven or Hell*– will be based, at least partially, on our works. Let’s look at the parable:

31 “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33 and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. 34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? 38 And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? 39 And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’ 41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’ 46 And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Works are very clearly involved in the *eternal* judgment in this passage. This is so much the case that, if so many passages from Christ and the apostles did not clearly say *otherwise*, one might think that our eternal judgment is going to be based *solely* on works, rather than on faith– but, obviously, by comparing Scripture with Scripture, we see that faith in Christ is of supreme importance in our eternal destiny. Does this necessarily mean that the Bible teaches Sola Fide though?

Looking at the above passage, Christ does *not*say that this eternal judgment will only be so that we can “show,” evidentially, before man (or so that we can reveal to ourselves), whether or not we were truly “justified by faith alone.” He also does not say that this judgment will only be about determining what sort of “rewards” we will, or will not, receive in Heaven.

Christ is so clear here about the role of our works in actually being right *before God*. St. James is clear too in chapter 2. St. Paul is also clear about faith and works *both* being involved in justification– *when* his statements about faith and works of the law are read in the context of their *entire passages*. (At #192, I go into the question of St. Paul and faith and works, in more detail, in my reply to you there.)

In addition, St. Paul is emphatic about the role of our perseverance in faith *and* works, in determining whether or not we *will* be saved– not simply as a matter of evidentially showing that we *were/are* “justified by faith alone.”

I know well the Reformed doctrine of the “Perseverance of the Saints.” I understand what the doctrine teaches. I held to it myself as a Calvinist. In retrospect though, in light of the many New Testament statements from Jesus, and His original apostles (including St. Paul) on the *eternal* importance of works, the Reformed understanding of perseverance as being *evidence of* justification, rather than playing a *role in* justification, does not appear to hold up against the Biblical evidence.

Again, the Bible tells us that those who endure to the end *will be* saved– not simply that those who endure to the end do so because they were “justified by faith alone in Christ alone.” (I strongly affirm the importance of grace-enabled, grace-given faith in Christ alone.)

One last thought for this comment– when you say that Catholicism and Reformed Protestantism are, supposedly, two “different religions,” and you imply that the former leads to Hell, while the latter leads to Heaven, one implication of your statement(s) is that both St. Augustine, and the great early defender of the Trinity, St. Athanasius, might well be in Hell. When both men are read at length, in more than just isolated quotes (such quotes being the way that the early Fathers are often used in Protestant polemical works against Catholicism), they affirm Catholic teaching on numerous, very serious points. Are you comfortable with implying that St. Augustine, St. Athanasius, and all “consistent Catholics” throughout history, up to the present day, have held to a false, damning gospel?

As you do, I would hope, Catholics affirm every statement in the Nicene Creed. Can people who affirm the Nicene Creed, in more than just the sense of “intellectual, notional assent,” truly be termed “non-Christians”?

from comment 212 by Christopher Lake here: http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2009/09/does-the-bible-teach-sola-fide/#comment-37734

also see what trusting Christ alone means from a Protestant and Catholic view:  http://nannykim-catholicconsiderations.blogspot.com/2012/10/trusting-christ-alone-from-protestant.html

also by Christopher L.
here 147 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/03/jason-stellman-tells-his-conversion-story/

Galatians 6:5 is appropriate for the discussion here in many ways– one of them being that, historically, to my knowledge, the Catholic Church has understood the “circumcision or uncircumcision” issue to be part of what St. Paul means by “works of the law.” That is, works of the Mosaic law. I’ll explain what I mean.

As a Reformed Baptist, I was taught that what the apostle is addressing in Galatians is the conflict between being “justified by faith alone in Christ alone” and the supposed attempt to “earn one’s salvation through works.” Through my research of both Catholic exegesis and more recent non-Calvinist Protestant exegesis though, I eventually came to a different perspective on Galatians, and I think that it makes more sense of the entire letter and of the New Testament as a whole.

That different perspective is thus: St. Paul is actually addressing a controversy in the church at Galatia between Jewish Christians (who made up the majority of the larger Church at that time) and newer Gentiles who had been converted to Christ. At least some of the Jewish Christians in the church at Galatia were trying to stipulate that Gentile converts to Christ must be circumcised (as all Jews were, obviously, as part of the Mosaic law) in order to be accepted as genuine followers of Christ. These Jewish Christians were basically saying, “True Christians must be circumcised, Jewish and Gentile.”

In opposition to this thinking, as a Jewish convert to Christ himself, St. Paul says, “For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.” {NAB} The apostle is not saying that Christians can be justified by a “faith alone in Christ alone” without *any works of love for God and neighbor* at all. He is stating that Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians are both united by faith in Christ– justified by faith in Christ *alone*, whether they are circumcised or uncircumcised.

However, significantly, St. Paul does not state that justification is by *faith alone*– and St. James explicitly says that justification is *not* by faith alone in James 2:14-26. Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians both must trust in Christ alone, but trusting in *Christ alone* (which is necessary for believers) does not equate to justification by *faith alone*. If trusting in Christ alone necessarily equated to justification by faith alone, there simply would not be so many passages and verses in the Bible that clearly indicate the contrary, such as Matthew 25:31-46 and Romans 2:6-13 and James 2:14-26, among multitudes of others.

I never would have imagined it, for most of my time as a Reformed Baptist, but the Catholic understanding of justification (which is not “earning one’s salvation through works,” but rather, faith working through love) actually makes more sense of the whole counsel of the Bible than the Reformed understanding of justification. It is that conclusion (which I found confirmed in the writings of the early Church Fathers) which played a pivotal role in my eventually having to leave Protestantism and return to the Catholic Church.