I received an e-mail from a Southern Baptist and decided to take a few minutes to respond. Thought others might be edifited by it so I have posted it here without using his name. His email is contained in regular text and MY RESPONSE IS IN CAPITAL LETTERS.
****************************************************
HELLO FRIEND:
I WILL ANSWER BRIEFLY (IN CAPITAL LETTERS TO DISTINGUISH MY WORDS FROM YOURS
) SINCE I GET OVER 100 EMAILS A DAY AND SOME ARE NOT ALWAYS HONEST — TRYING TO SET ME UP FOR AN ARGUMENT — BUG HOPEFULLY NOT YOUR E-MAIL. SO, I WILL TRUST YOU THAT YOUR ADMITTED INTEREST IS GENUINE AND I WILL ANSWER VERY BRIEFLY.
Dear Mr. Ray, I listened to a CD of yours,
WHICH ONE? I HAVE ABOUT 50.
but could not determine all of what you believe or find your Doctrinal Statement on the web. What we believe is pretty important (I know you agree). Do you have a Doctrinal Statement besides the Nicene Creed?
APOSTOLIC, NICENE, AND ATHANASIAN CREEDS. I USED TO SAY I HAD “NO CREED BUT THE BIBLE ALONE,” BUT EVEN PROTESTANTS CANNOT ACTUALLY DO THAT. THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN “EXTRA-BIBLICAL STATEMENT” TO ADD TO THE “BIBLE ALONE” TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY BELIEVE BECAUSE THE BIBLE DOESN’T SEEM TO BE ADEQUATE. BUT FOR ME NOW — FOR THE WHOLE SHABANG — MY STATEMENT OF FAITH IS CONTAINED IN “THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.”
Having been to 12 years of Catholic School, a faithful altar boy, a good catholic, and an x-president of the local CYO, I am not altogether unfamiliar with Catholicism (at least the Catholicism of the 1950s, 60s and 70s).
IF YOU WERE EDUCATED DURING THAT TIME FRAME, I HATE TO DISAPPOINT YOU BUT YOU ARE PROBABLY VERY UNFAMILIAR WITH CATHOLICISM. THAT WAS A VERY BAD PERIOD OF THE CHURCH — JUST LIKE IT WAS VERY BAD FOR US BAPTISTS RAISED DURING THAT TIME PERIOD.
I “got saved”, as Baptist like to say, at age 24 by reading the Bible (unheard of in my Catholic Church at that time).
MY GUESS, BASED ON GOOD EXPERIENCE, IS THAT YOU DIDN’T GET SAVED BY READING THE BIBLE ALONE BUT BY ACCEPTING A NEW AND NOVEL BAPTIST-ISH TRADITION AS COACHED BY SOME WELL-MEANING FUNDAMENTALIST — BASED ON THE BIBLE ALONE TRADITION WHICH IS VERY NEW ON THE RELIGIOUS SCENE AND NOT FOUND IN HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY.
So, from the Catholic perspective, since I have not attended Mass in 35 years, am I doomed to hell for un-confessed mortal sins? Or, is it possible that I may be saved outside of the Catholic Church? If so, how is that possible from a Catholic perspective?
THIS IS A VERY PREGNANT QUESTION. FIRST, ONLY GOD CAN READ THE HEART AND KNOW IF ONE IS “SAVED” OR NOT. SECOND, IT DEPENDS ON HOW KNOWLEDGEABLE OR IGNORANT ONE IS OF THE TRUTH DUE TO NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. THIRD, IT DEPENDS ON IF ONE ACTUALLY HAS MORTAL SINS WHICH ARE ONLY MORTAL IF THE THREE QUALIFICATIONS FOR A MORTAL SIN HAVE BEEN MET.
FOURTH, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHES THAT ONE CAN BE OUTSIDE THE VISIBLE BOUNDS OF THE VISIBLE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND STILL BE SAVED, INCLUDING OTHER RELIGIONS OR NON-RELIGIONS (CCC 1260). IF YOU THINK THIS QUESTION YOU ASK IS UNANSWERED BY THE CHURCH, IT SHOWS YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND CATHOLICISM, SINCE THAT WAS CAREFULLY EXPOUNDED AT VATICAN II WHICH WAS AN ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCH. AND FIFTH, I BELIEVE THAT MANY CATHOLICS WITHIN THE CHURCH WILL GO TO HELL FOR NOT OBEYING THE GOSPEL, NOT JUST THOSE OUTSIDE WHO HAVE REJECTED THE CHURCH EVEN THOUGH THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING.
I am heavily involved with cold call (door to door) evangelism in my community – not from a Baptist viewpoint, but simply from a general concern for the lost.
I WAS VERY INVOLVED WITH DOOR TO DOOR EVANGELISM TOO, BUT I ALWAYS ADMITTED I HAD A BAPTIST-TYPE TRADITION.
I often talk with Catholics of all sorts. I always tell them and others that I don’t care where they go to church, as long as they have a heavenly home when they die. It would be nice to know what a leading Catholic author would say to me if he came to my Southern Baptist door evangelizing, and heard my story. When you ask someone if they are going to heaven when they die – as I am sure you know – you get a whole lot of interesting information in the response.
I USED TO QUOTE 1 John 5:13 UNTIL I REALIZED IT HAD TAKEN COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT BY MY BAPTIST TRADITION. I HAVE WRITTEN EXTENSIVELY ON THAT VERSE IN MY BOOK “CROSSING THE TIBER.” DO YOU HAVE THAT BOOK?
I DARE SAY YOU WILL ALSO GET A LOT OF INTERESTING ANSWERS IF YOU ASK BAPTISTS THAT QUESTION — OR METHODISTS, OR ASSEMBLIES OF GOD, OR PENTECOSTALS, OR LUTHERANS, OR JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES.
ALL IT PROVES IS THAT TOO MANY PEOPLE IN ALL THEIR VARIOUS TRADITIONS ARE POORLY CATECHIZED AND SADLY IGNORANT OF SCRIPTURE AND THE HISTORIC TEACHING OF THE CHURCH.
BY THE WAY, BAPTISTS DON’T “KNOW” IF THEY ARE GOING TO HEAVEN FOR SURE. THAT IS WHY SCRIPTURE CALLS IT “HOPE” AND WE KNOW THAT ONLY THOSE WHO PERSEVERE TO THE END WILL BE SAVED (Matt 10:22). EVEN BAPTISTS BELIEVE THAT IF ONE FAILS TO DISPLAY THE APPROPRIATE WORKS TOWARD THE END IT PROBABLY MEANS THAT “IT NEVER TOOK.” SO, EVEN A BAPTIST IS NOT SURE UNTIL THE END AND THE NECESSARY WORKS CONTINUE TO BE DONE.
My beliefs, if you knocked on my door – I just happen to attend a Southern Baptist church right now (it is kind of like a mission field for me) – about salvation are simple. One is justified by faith in Jesus Christ as Savior – born again if you will.
I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW YOU WOULD EXPLAIN HOW ONE BECOMES “BORN AGAIN.” WHEN SOMEONE ASKS ME THAT I RESPOND BY SAYING, “YES, I AM BORN AGAIN, BUT I AM BORN AGAIN THE BIBLE WAY.” THIS OF COURSE IS BY “WATER AND SPIRIT” — WATER BAPTISM (Jn 3:3-5)
THE GOSPEL IS SIMPLE, THE THEN AGAIN IT IS NOT SIMPLE. FUNDAMENTALISTS TEND TO TALK ABOUT SALVATION WITH CONVENIENT “SOUND BITES” AND IN A TRUNCATED MANNER WHICH YOU WILL FIND NO WHERE IN THE EARLY YEARS OF THE CHURCH.
WHEN I USED TO TELL PEOPLE THEY WERE SAVED BY ONE THING: “BELIEVING IN CHRIST” — NOT BY ANYTHING WE CAN DO — WELL, I FORGOT THAT ‘BELIEVE” IS A VERB AND IS SOMETHING I MUST DO. SO WE DO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. WE DO HAVE TO “BELIEVE” AND “CONFESS WITH OUR MOUTH” (Rom 10:9-10) WHICH ONLY PROVES WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, SOME WORKS — WE HAVE TO “BELIEVE,” REPENT, CONFESS, EXERCISE FAITH, PRAY THE “SINNER’S PRAYER,” SURRENDER OUR LIVES — ALL THINGS WE MUST DO — WORK. (CF. John 6:28-29).
However, if there are no works following shortly thereafter, that one was not really saved (or justified). There must be works! However, those works are not a part of “justification”, but a part of the “sanctification” process. Works are a “sure-enough” sign of justification.
WE AGREE IN PART THAT WORKS MUST ACCOMPANY INITIAL JUSTIFICATION. HOWEVER, THE REST OF WHAT YOU SAY IS INTERESTING BECAUSE SCRIPTURE SEEMS TO DISAGREE, WHICH IS WHY MARTIN LUTHER GOT HIS KNICKERS IN A KNOT). TOO MANY PARROT MAM-MADE BAPTIST TRADITION AND TRITE SOUND BITES — CERTAINLY NOT SCRIPTURE IN ITS HISTORICAL AND CONTEXTUAL CONTEXT. I USED TO DO THAT TOO. BUT THE REALITY IS — JAMES IS PRETTY CLEAR EVEN IN THE NIV:
James 2:21: WAS NOT OUR ANCESTOR ABRAHAM CONSIDERED RIGHTEOUS [JUSTIFIED] FOR WHAT HE DID [WORKS] WHEN HE OFFERED HIS SON ISAAC ON THE ALTAR?
James 2:24-26 YOU SEE THAT A PERSON IS JUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE DOES [GREEK: WORKS] AND NOT BY FAITH ALONE.
IN THE SAME WAY, WAS NOT EVEN RAHAB THE PROSTITUTE CONSIDERED RIGHTEOUS [JUSTIFIED] FOR WHAT SHE DID [WORKS] WHEN SHE GAVE LODGING TO THE SPIES AND SENT THEM OFF IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION?
I USED TO TRY TO TWIST JAMES AROUND LIKE A RUBBER NOSE TO KEEP IF FROM SAYING WHAT IT SAID. BUT THE FACT IS IT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS.
NOW WE AS CATHOLICS, AND YOU AS PROTESTANTS, DON’T BELIEVE WE GAIN INITIAL JUSTIFICATION THROUGH ANYTHING WE DO. NO ONE WILL STAND BEFORE GOD AND SAY, “YOU OWE ME.” HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT DISMISS THAT FACT THAT ONCE INITIAL JUSTIFICATION HAS TAKEN APPLIED FREELY AND GRATUITOUSLY BY GOD, WE ARE THEN REQUIRED TO COOPERATE WITH THE GRACE OF GOD IN OUR JUSTIFICATION AND SANCTIFICATION. IN THE END REVELATION DOES NOT SAY WE ARE COVERED WITH THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST, BUT WITH THE RIGHTEOUS OF THE SAINTS! REV. 19:8.
FROM MY BOOK “CROSSING THE TIBER”:
How does one receive salvation, justification, new birth and eternal life?
By believing in Christ (Jn 3:16; Acts 16:31)?
By repentance (Acts 2:38; 2 Pet 3:9)? [SOMETHING WE DO]
By baptism (Jn 3:5; 1 Pet 3:21; Titus 3:5)? [SOMETHING WE DO]
By the work of the Spirit (Jn 3:5; 2 Cor 3:6)?
By declaring with our mouths (Luke 12:8; Rom 10:9)? [A WORK]
By coming to a knowledge of the Truth (1 Tim 2:4; Heb 10:26)? [OUR ACHIEVEMENT]
By works (Rom 2:6, 7; James 2:24)?
By grace (Acts 15:11; Eph 2:8)?
By perseverance (Matt 10:22; Mk 13:13; Col 1:22-23)?
By his blood (Rom 5:9; Heb 9:22)?
By His righteousness (Rom 5:17; 2 Pet 1:1)?
By His cross (Eph 2:16; Col 2:14)?
I know the Catholic party line about faith and works from listening to your CD. My question above is outside of the typical party line and can most likely only be appreciated by someone with your background. Your response might help me deal with some of the less faithful Catholics (in greater proportion than any other group) that I come across from time to time.
I WOULD LOVE TO ASSIST YOU IF TIME ALLOWS. I HOPE MY RESPONSE IS HELPFUL TO ASSIST YOU IN UNDERSTANDING CATHOLICS. I MIGHT SUGGEST YOU GET MY BOOK “CROSSING THE TIBER” AND READ THE “CATECHISM” WHICH IS A MARVELOUS GIFT TO THE CHURCH. IT IS USED BY MANY PROTESTANT PASTORS IN PREPARING THEIR SERMONS 🙂
DON’T EXPECT ALL CATHOLICS TO ALWAYS UNDERSTAND AND BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THEIR FAITH, ANY MORE THAN I EXPECT TO FIND BAPTISTS WHO CAN EVEN COME CLOSE TO EXPLAINING THEIR BELIEFS. IT IS NOT THE COMPETENCE OR INCOMPETENCE OF THE PERSON THAT MATTERS BUT THE ACTUAL TRUTH ITSELF. I RESPECT YOU FOR SEEKING FOR IT.
GOD BLESS AND STAY LOVING AND SERVING OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.
STEVE RAY
This Post Has 16 Comments
Great dialogue. Keep us posted on further outcomes. Other than issues of authority and salvation, having been a revert from Southern Baptist myself, I think a good thing to emphasize to any Protestant brother or sister is that the Church is the BODY not just the SOUL of Christ. Once this is grasped more deeply a person can understand why we have sacraments, saints, priests, bells, smells, etc. They’re all visible different parts of the Body of Christ that keep us connected and living in Him. Otherwise without understanding how the Church functions as a visible instrument of grace everything in Catholicism seems like extra stuff or mediators that get in the way of God. If they can see this logic is grounded in the Bible and history no Baptist would ever want to stay out of the Catholic Church. Even many Catholics don’t seem to grasp this. I know I once didn’t. Problem is even with the best catechesis sometimes people just jump through the sacramental hoops without fully understanding what they are doing.
Dear Baptist,
There need not be a dividing wall between justification and sanctification. The Council of Trent clarified the Church’s doctrine of justification, by focusing on sanctification as part of justification. Justification makes the soul just through grace. Sin is not covered, but is cleansed away by purification of sanctifying grace. Justification consists of one act of God that includes forgiveness of sin and sanctification of the soul. Thus a justified person is truly made pleasing to God.
Steve and Baptist,
You are both credits to your faiths, and being a Catholic I am proud of the job you’re doing championing the faith. That said, I do wonder if we as philosophers and men of faith aren’t wasting our lives bickering about minutiae when we should simply enjoy our brotherhood in the Savior.
Yours in Christ,
Tom
My answer: Yes and No. We need to recognize them as brothers, but love requires us to confront error at the same time.
“…some of the less faithful Catholics(in greater proportion than any other group)…”
How is he qualified to make such a judgment? Has God given him the ability to read the souls of others?
I would like to ask our separated brother in Christ two questions.
1- for a Christian, when it comes to matters of Faith and Morals,
What is the “Pillar” and “Ground” of “The Truth” ?
2-Can you spot the error in this quote bellow?
Luke 8:21
21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren
are these which hear the word of God, and believe it.
I would like to ask our separated brother in Christ two questions;
1- for a Christian, when it comes to matters of Faith and Morals,
What is the “Pillar” and “Ground” of “The Truth” ?
2-Can you spot the error in this quote bellow?
Luke 8:21
21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren
are these which hear the word of God, and believe it.
wow.. Bro. Steve ur just awasome.. i just started to watch ur videos on Catholic beliefs.. it is helping me a lot in Theological studies.. keep up this good works.. please keep me in ur prayers…
Sometime I get the sense that life is simply the extrapolation of a Calvin and Hobbes cartoon. ;))
We live in a world where there are multiple expressions of Christianity.
Within the context of Pope Benedict XVI words here:
“It was the error of the Reformation period that for the most part we could only see what divided us and we failed to grasp existentially what we have in common in terms of the great deposit of sacred Scripture and the early Christian creeds. For me, the great ecumenical step forward of recent decades is that we have become aware of all this common ground, that we acknowledge it as we pray and sing together, as we make our joint commitment to the Christian ethos in our dealings with the world, as we bear common witness to the God of Jesus Christ in this world as our inalienable, shared foundation.”
… I certainly haven’t first hand knowledge of all 33,000 + expressions.
That given, I get the distinct impression that many of those variations/ expressions of Christianity, contained in Pope Benedict’s observation, are fairly open and accepting of one another. Allowing full participation in corporate worship/ formal church services despite denominational differences is fairly common. Formal membership may be desirable but not required in order to receive the full benefit of the corporate celebration of worship/ communion with God … overtly expressing: “existentially what we have in common in terms of the great deposit of sacred Scripture and the early Christian creeds”.
Which percolates a question… Are the barriers that still exist to “full communion” a result of ‘nature’ or ‘nurture’?
One has to remember that much of scripture is based on tradition. That which was handed down to subsequent generations in oral form. Both must be carefully sorted out.
What I can't understand is how someone can say that anything to do with the Christian faith is simple. Yes, certain aspects have been simplified. Water baptism versus Circumcision etc…
However, if it is as simple as they say then why put Israel through 4,000 years of a tumultuous history, why a book that's almost an inch and a half thick? If it's that simple why all the competing interpretations? even among the Jews; then and now?
If it's that simple why not a Holy Brochure instead of Holy Bible?
It's a messy proposition at best without an official Church sanctioned by Christ himself teaching and defining the truth through out history and, as our times is a witness to can even get muddled within the walls of the real Church. Scripture and the handed on Tradition and long consensus of the Church is the only way to make sense of it all.
STEVE RAY HERE: Bravo Pete!
Vatican II, as Popes John XXIII and Paul VI insisted was not a defining council, but pastoral No ex cathedra definitions were issued. The 4th Lateran and Florence on the other hand did issue ex cathedra definitions:
“Indeed, there is but one universal Church of the faithful outside of which no one at all is saved.”
“The holy Roman Church believes, professes, and preaches that no one remaining outside the Catholic Church, not just pagans, but also Jews or heretics or schismatics, can become partakers of eternal life; but they will go to the ‘everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Matt. 25:41), unless before the end of life they are joined to the Church. For the union with the body of the Church is of such importance that the sacraments of the Church are helpful to salvation only for those remaining in it; and fasts, almsgiving, other works of piety, and the exercise of Christian warfare bear eternal rewards for them alone. And no one can be saved, no matter how much alms he has given, even if he sheds his blood for the name of Christ, unless he remains in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
True charity demands that we proclaim to non-Catholics that “there is no salvation outside the Church”. To imply otherwise is against charity: “Charity rejoices with the truth” and “[God] will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
Brian Kelly: Your understanding of the 4th Lateran is somewhat off the mark. This council proclaimed a number of positions, some of which were clearly neither binding nor correct. Examples are the prohibition of clergy performing medical surgery, the banning of new religious orders and the command that non-believers (Jews) were distinctive clothing. There a number of other statements that read more like civil commands than religious belief and are clearly in opposition to the biblical (Christ's) injunction to render to God and Ceasar in their own spheres. There is are a number of Church writings on exactly what the council had competence to address and what it stated was belief at the time. A thorough review would probably address most of the apparent confusion among various provisions of the provisions of which, if any, met the rather stringent requirements to be ex cathedra.
STEVE RAY HERE: Thanks Don!!
STEVE RAY HERE: I thank David for his irenic tone and courteous comments. I have responded I hope in kind in my response (See above or below.)
David writes:
Regarding the discussion of the book of James (faith vs. works):
I believe that Evangelicals rightly emphasize that we are saved by grace through faith alone. We are saved by trusting in what Jesus did on the cross and not by earning our salvation by doing a list of required good works. This is taught throughout the New Testament and is especially clear in Ephesians 2:8-9. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith— and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” This clearly says that we are saved by faith in God’s grace, not by our works. We don’t earn our salvation. Grace is a free gift; but we must receive it by faith. Faith is a combination of believing and trusting in what Jesus did.
Catholics often make the argument that James supposedly teaches that we are not saved by faith alone, but by faith and works. This is total misunderstanding of what James teaches. James 2:14-26 is not talking about whether we are saved by faith alone, or by faith plus works. On the contrary, James is describing the difference between a faith that is alive and a faith that is dead. Alive faith is proven to be alive by what it does (good works). Dead faith is demonstrated to be dead by what it lacks in action (no works). The whole focus on whether someone’s faith is alive or dead.
James 2:17 “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” James 2:26: “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.”
James uses Abraham and Rahab as examples to show that their faith was alive and real because their faith was followed by action. Those actions did not “save” them, or earn their salvation. Those actions proved that their faith was real, alive, and genuine.
James is not teaching that faith alone is insufficient to save us, and therefore we need to do some works to earn our salvation. James is teaching that saving faith, which is alive, will be demonstrated by what it does. It is not “faith plus works,” but “faith that works.” True faith and good works are inseparable. Faith is the cause of our salvation. Good works are the result of that faith. When Evangelicals say that we are saved by “faith alone,” we are not saying that we are saved by dead faith; we are saying that we don’t earn our salvation through good works. Those are just the result of saving faith.
This idea of good works following genuine faith is clearly taught in Ephesians 2:8-10. Verse 10 says that we are “created in Christ Jesus to do good works”. The good works are the result of our salvation, not the means of salvation.
David: Please accept my comments here in a kind and irenic tone similar to the kind way you wrote to me. God bless.
I am responding to a polite gentleman named David Martin who posted a comment on my blog. He is kind and well-spoken and I wish we could sit and have a cup of coffee together to discuss this more personally. I have responded only briefly and with a few random thoughts while on the run. I would suggest he and others read a new book by Steve Wood entitled, Grace & Justification: An Evangelical's Guide to Catholic Beliefs.?
David’s words are italicized and my words are in regular text:
I would like to make two opening comments which are touched on only briefly below. First, the argument about "faith vs. works" has been twisted by Luther and subsequent Protestants into a Protestant vs. Catholic debate. However, Paul never intended that in his letters. There was no Protestant vs. Catholic debate — it was rather a Jew vs. Gentile. Works of the law were not required of Gentiles to become followers of the Jewish Messiah. Only faith like that of Abraham was required.
Second, Catholics are often accused of believing works is what saves us. This is not the case. It is the grace of God through the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus that saves us, though we believe we must cooperate with the Holy Spirit to bring that justification-sanctification to its heavenly fulfillment. Jesus does not say those with faith alone will be resurrected and saved, rather he says, John 5:28–29 "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment." I am always amazed how the words of Jesus are set aside in preference to a poor interpretation of the words of St Paul.
David starts:
I believe that Evangelicals rightly emphasize that we are saved by grace through faith alone. We are saved by trusting in what Jesus did on the cross and not by earning our salvation by doing a list of required good works. This is taught throughout the New Testament and is especially clear in Ephesians 2:8-9. “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith— and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” This clearly says that we are saved by faith in God’s grace, not by our works. We don’t earn our salvation. Grace is a free gift; but we must receive it by faith. Faith is a combination of believing and trusting in what Jesus did.
You are correct. And we Catholics believe the same. No one will stand before God and say, “You OWE me because of my good works!” Initial salvation or justification is a free gift of God based on the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross which is received through faith and baptism. Ephesians 2:8-9 is central to Catholic teaching. Of course, Protestants and uneducated Catholics often misrepresent Catholic teaching, as did Luther, by saying we Catholics think we get saved by our works. This is a sad misrepresentation. Remember, Catholics have been around for 2,000 years and have built their whole theology on Scripture and they were quite aware of Ephesians 2:8-9. But they were also aware of Ephesians 2:10.
A “bible alone” Christian has to be a bit wary in his terminology. First, the Bible never teaches Bible Alone. That is a Martin Luther tradition. Second, Paul never says we are saved by faith alone, whereas James specifically says are are not saved by faith alone.
Catholics often make the argument that James supposedly teaches that we are not saved by faith alone, but by faith and works. This is total misunderstanding of what James teaches. James 2:14-26 is not talking about whether we are saved by faith alone, or by faith plus works. On the contrary, James is describing the difference between a faith that is alive and a faith that is dead. Alive faith is proven to be alive by what it does (good works). Dead faith is demonstrated to be dead by what it lacks in action (no works). The whole focus on whether someone’s faith is alive or dead.
Yet, this is the only place in the Bible where the words “faith” and “alone” are used together. It is why Luther rejected this book, but can you imagine how much he would have loved the book if James had eliminated the word “not” in James 2:24.
But to your point, you say “Catholics often.” These are Catholics who either don’t know their faith or who are explaining it without nuances. We are not saved by our works. Like I said, initial justification is by faith and baptism. Following initial justification, justification is continued and realized in faith and works. Even the fact that Protestants emphasize works as a sign or proof of justification demonstrates that even for Protestants works are necessary.
Catholic believe that initial justification is given freely by faith. But we also recognize the rest of Scripture which tells us other things are also necessary for salvation. For example on page 100 of my book Crossing the Tiber: Evangelical Protestants Discover the Historic Church, I provide these paragraphs and this list:
“One last comment, even though it will be discussed in more detail later: there is no attempt here to pit baptism against faith, or belief against baptism. Things are rarely that simple. Faith and baptism are two sides of the same coin. Are we saved by faith or by baptism? Are we saved by believing or by the Spirit? These are false dichotomies that should have no place in our thinking.
“How does one receive salvation, justification, new birth, and eternal life?
By believing in Christ (Jn 3:16; Acts 16:31)?
By repentance (Acts 2:38; 2 Pet 3:9)?
By baptism (Jn 3:5; 1 Pet 3:21; Titus 3:5)?
By the work of the Spirit (Jn 3:5; 2 Cor 3:6)?
By declaring with our mouths (Lk 12:8; Rom 10:9)?
By coming to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4; Heb 10:26)?
By works (Rom 2:6, 7; James 2:24)?
By grace (Acts 15:11; Eph 2:8)?
By his blood (Rom 5:9; Heb 9:22)?
By his righteousness (Rom 5:17; 2 Pet 1:1)?
By his Cross (Eph 2:16; Col 2:14)?
By perseverance (Matt 10:22; Col 1:22-23)
“Can we cut any one of these out of the list and proclaim it alone as the means of salvation? Can we be saved without faith? without God’s grace? without repentance? without baptism? without the Spirit? These are all involved and necessary; not one of them can be dismissed as a means of obtaining eternal life. Neither can one be emphasized to the exclusion of another. They are all involved in salvation and entry into the Church. The Catholic Church does not divide these various elements of salvation up, overemphasizing some while ignoring others; rather, she holds them all in their fullness.” (Stephen K. Ray, Crossing the Tiber: Evangelical Protestants Discover the Historical Church (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1997), 100–101.)
Notice too that Abraham had righteousness was accounted to him based on his faith, but in Psalm 106:31, using the exact same words, Phinehas has righteousness accounted to him for his work which was an action he exerted for the honor of God. Of course, for this who claim “faith alone” they must of necessity correct this passage to insert that it was actually the faith underlying the actions that was rewarded.
Catholics do not teach that salvation, at least initial justification is achieved by faith and works. Initial salvation is by faith and baptism and is an utterly free gift of God (see Eph 2:8,9). No Catholic who knows what the Church teaches would ever say we are saved initially by works. However, even here it can get a bit sticky for a Protestant since “believe” is a verb, something we do and could be considered a “work.” We have to do something — believe. But said I, the former Evangelical, “No you just need to receive the free gift.” Ah, yes, but even the word “receive” is a verb—something I must do.
James 2:17 “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” James 2:26: “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.”
James uses Abraham and Rahab as examples to show that their faith was alive and real because their faith was followed by action. Those actions did not “save” them, or earn their salvation. Those actions proved that their faith was real, alive, and genuine. < /p>
But it says Rehab was “justified” when she did what she did. Luther hated this verse, and like you, he had to add the words to “show their faith was alive” in order to fit this square verse into your round hole. The Catholic Church has done a beautiful job of letting the Bible speak for itself without trying to make it say something it doesn’t say.
James is not teaching that faith alone is insufficient to save us, and therefore we need to do some works to earn our salvation. James is teaching that saving faith, which is alive, will be demonstrated by what it does. It is not “faith plus works,” but “faith that works.” True faith and good works are inseparable. Faith is the cause of our salvation. Good works are the result of that faith. When Evangelicals say that we are saved by “faith alone,” we are not saying that we are saved by dead faith; we are saying that we don’t earn our salvation through good works. Those are just the result of saving faith.
You keep taking whole paragraphs to tell James what he really meant to say, whereas James does not say it in a way that you like it. You have to keep filling in for James and adding words to make his passage fit your theology. That is called eisegesus, not exegesis.
This idea of good works following genuine faith is clearly taught in Ephesians 2:8-10. Verse 10 says that we are “created in Christ Jesus to do good works”. The good works are the result of our salvation, not the means of salvation.
Christians are initially justified by faith, not works. But in our continuing Christian life cooperation with the Holy Spirit, in the form of good works and holiness, for our salvation. This is the aspect rejected by Protestants because it doesn’t fit the newly invented novelty of Luther’s “faith alone.” The Early Church knew nothing of “faith alone.”
Lastly, and I am writing this on the fly and just adding random thoughts, so to speak, I would remind you that Protestants have turned Paul and James words about faith and works into a Catholic vs. Protestant debate. In actuality, a whole new world of understanding will come to you if you realize in the historical context that the word regarding faith and works are primarily in the historical context of a debate between Jew vs. Gentile. Works are the markers, such as circumcision, by which Jews thought they were justified or saved. Paul is arguing that one does not have to fulfill the Jewish markers (called “works of the law”) but one is saved by faith in Christ. This is exactly understood by Catholics who really understand their teaching.
You may want to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church to better understand what we really believe and not what you’ve been taught we believe.
A good 8 minute video clip by a friend on the context of faith and works in biblical times can be listened to here: https://catholicproductions.com/blogs/blog/the-dead-sea-scrolls-paul-and-the-works-of-the-law
My eyes were open about how Catholics and Protestants talk past each other regarding "works" or "works of the law" I listened to a multi-CD series from Dr John Bergsma regarding new discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls and found it very interesting.
Here is 11 minute video that addresses "Works of the Law"
https://catholicproductions.com/blogs/blog/the-dead-sea-scrolls-paul-and-the-works-of-the-law
STEVE RAY HERE: Thanks Deacon Greg. Good stuff! I added the link to my response.
Comments are closed.