In light of last week’s discussion regarding Roman Catholicism, we wanted to offer some concluding thoughts and observations on the issue.
Because this is our “last word” on last week’s dialogue, we will not be allowing comments on today’s post.
1) First, Regarding Gerry’s Challenge
Part of what sparked the discussion was the challenge which Gerry (who defended his position as Roman Catholic) issued on May 8: “I challenge anyone to find the current protestant beliefs and practices before the 1500’s.” He reiterated this challenge on May 14, when he wrote:
I have still not received an answer to my challenge from 5/8 to show me where Protestant theology existed before the 1500’s (sola fide, sola scriptura for instance). Since you are studying the fathers in detail, I’m sure that if those tenents [sic] of your theology existed that you can show some history behind it as I have.
Since sola fide and sola Scriptura were specifically mentioned, we accepted this challenge and focused primarily on those two doctrines. Throughout the week, we provided roughly 70 patristic quotations from numerous sources to support these two Reformation principles. We were also careful to define what the Reformers meant by sola fide and sola Scriptura.
The quotes we amassed are far too long to list here (taking up roughly 12 pages, single-spaced in a Word document). More could surely be found if an exhaustive study were undertaken. In any case, whether or not one agrees with sola fide or sola Scriptura, it is wishful thinking to suggest that such doctrines had no historical precedent before 1500.
Here are just a few snippets from the lists we put together:
Sola Scriptura
Tertullian (155 – 240): The Scriptures . . . indeed furnish us with our Rule of faith.
Hippolytus (d. 235): There is, brethren, one God, the knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scriptures, and from no other source.
Origen (c. 185 – 254): In the two testaments every word that pertaineth unto God may be sought and discussed, and out of them all knowledge of things may be understood. And if anything remains which Holy Scripture does not determine, no other third scripture ought to be received to authorize any knowledge . . . .
Augustine (354 – 430): What more shall I teach you than what we read in the apostle? For Holy Scripture fixes the rule for our doctrine, lest we dare be wiser than we ought.
Athanasius (295 – 375): In the Holy Scriptures alone is the instruction of religion announced—to which let no man add, from which let no man detract—which are sufficient in themselves for the enunciation of the truth.
Chrysostom (344 – 407): When there is a question of Divine things, would it not be a folly rashly and blindly to receive the opinions of others, when we have a rule by which we can examine everything? I mean the Divine law. It is for this reason that I conjure you all, without resting in the slightest degree on the judgment of others, to consult the Scriptures.
Augustine (354–430): In those things, which are plainly laid down in Scripture, all things are found, which embrace faith and morals.
Theodoret of Cyrus (393–457): Bring me not human reasonings and syllogisms, for I rely on the divine Scripture alone.
Sola Fide
Polycarp (c. 69–155): I know that through grace you are saved, not of works, but by the will of God, through Jesus Christ.
Didymus the Blind (c. 313-398): This does not mean that works can be put before faith, because a person is saved by grace, not by works but by faith.
Hilary of Poitiers (c 315-67): Wages cannot be considered as a gift, because they are due to work, but God has given free grace to all men by the justification of faith.
Athanasius (295 – 375): By surrendering to death the body which He [Jesus Christ] had taken, as an offering and sacrifice free from every stain, He immediately abolished death for His human brothers by the offering of the equivalent. For naturally, since the Logos of God was above all, when He offered His own temple and bodily instrument as a substitute for the life of all, He fulfilled by death all that was required.
Basil of Caesarea (329-379): This is perfect and pure boasting in God, when one is not proud on account of his own righteousness but knows that he is indeed unworthy of the true righteousness and is (or has been) justified solely by faith in Christ.
Ambrose (339–97): Therefore let no one boast of his works, because no one can be justified by his works; but he who is just receives it as a gift, because he is justified by the washing of regeneration. It is faith, therefore, which delivers us by the blood of Christ, because blessed is he whose sins are forgiven, and to whom pardon is granted.
Jerome (347–420): He who with all his spirit has placed his faith in Christ, even if he die in sin, shall by his faith live forever.
Chrysostom (344 – 407): But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting, and this too without needing works, but looking for faith only.
Ambrosiaster (c. 366-384): God has decreed that a person who believes in Christ can be saved without works. By faith alone he receives the forgiveness of sins.
Cyril of Alexandria (412-444): For we are justified by faith, not by works of the law, as Scripture says (Gal. 2:16). By faith in whom, then, are we justified? Is it not in him who suffered death according to the flesh for our sake? Is it not in one Lord Jesus Christ.
We would also note that we believe there are many other areas of Roman Catholic theology that do not accurately represent the doctrine or practice of the early church. As we noted in our discussion, men like William Webster (in his books The Church of Rome at the Bar of History and Roman Catholic Tradition: Claims and Contradictions) have already discussed these things in detail. Some of Webster’s articles can be read at his website (see below).
Finally, we would add that, while Protestants find great encouragement and confirmation in historical testimony, we do not face the same dilemma as the Roman Catholic (for whom ecclesiastical tradition is considered authoritative). Protestants need not be overly concerned when the church fathers disagree with each other, or even when a few of the church fathers present views contrary to modern Protestant practice. Our authority is not in history, it is in the Scriptures. For the Roman Catholic, however, the contrary views of history present a major problem — since church tradition carries enormous weight, and is often in conflict with biblical teaching.
2) Second, regarding the Roman view of justification:
In our discussion this past week, it was suggested from the Roman Catholic perspective that justification is wholly by grace but not wholly by faith. As Gerry’s citation (on May 17) from Catholic Answers put it: “Good works are meritorious.” The Catholic Catechism further states:
The Council of Trent teaches that the Ten Commandments are obligatory for Christians and that the justified man is still bound to keep them [fn, Cf. DS 1569-1570]; the Second Vatican Council confirms: “The bishops, succors of the apostles, receive from the Lord … the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments” (P 2068; ellipse in original, emphasis mine).
In our interaction last week, it became clear that Roman Catholics attempt to differentiate the “good works” of Roman Catholicism from the “works of the Law” – arguing that while “good works” (such as the sacraments) are necessary for salvation, the “works of the Law” are not (being condemned by Paul in Galatians and Romans). They further contend that while we do not “earn” our salvation by works, our good works are rewarded with eternal life. Here’s a further quote from Catholic Answers:
We do not “earn” our salvation through good works (Eph. 2:8–9, Rom. 9:16), but our faith in Christ puts us in a special grace-filled relationship with God so that our obedience and love, combined with our faith, will be rewarded with eternal life (Rom. 2:7, Gal. 6:8–9; emphasis mine).
Thus, on the one hand, our good works are meritorious such that they will be rewarded with eternal life and salvation. But on the other hand, we do not “earn” our salvation through good works. On the one hand, we are to reject the “works of the Law.” But on the other hand, we must attain salvation in part by keeping the ten commandments (the heart and summary of the Law).
Such reasoning seems utterly contradictory to us. If salvation is based, even in part, on works — then it is no longer salvation wholly by grace. As Clement of Rome (who died around 100) wrote in his epistle:
And we [Christians], too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Or as the apostle Paul said:
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Eph. 2:8-9)
But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 2:4–7)
Though the Roman system claims to base salvation on grace, its emphasis on works as necessary for salvation renders such “grace” something wholly different. As Paul wrote, “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace” (Rom. 11:6).
Insofar as Roman theology confuses the basis of justification (faith in Christ alone) with the results of justification (good works that flow from faith), it is teaching something other than the biblical gospel (cf. Gal. 1:6–9).
3) Third, regarding Roman Catholic Theology in General
Our articles this last week focused on two primary areas: (1) justification by faith alone, and (2) the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. We believe these two doctrines are clearly taught in Scripture, and it is on that basis that we embrace them as authoritative. However, we also see the testimony of church history confirming these two doctrines—and we are thankful for that historic witness (even if it is not infallible).
But there are other areas of disagreement between Protestants and Catholics, beyond just sola Scriptura and sola fide. Some of these were mentioned in the discussion. Some were not. As a Protestants, here are some additional major concerns that we would have with the Roman Church:
The veneration of Mary to the point of worship; such that she is considered a co-redeemer with Christ. To a lesser extent, the veneration of the saints (such that prayers are offered to them for guidance and protection)
While we do not have time to go into depth on each of these issues, we would recommend the following websites as a helpful place to start (for those who are interested):
No comments:
Post a Comment