Tags
For much of this week I have been traversing the confines of a narrow mind and understanding, and showing how, through Grace, these things were widened. Much divides us, but where I don’t find a problem is where our traditions have located it for so long – in the issues of works and faith and their relationship to salvation.
James and Paul do not disagree on works and faith, they simply mean slightly different things. Faith is not like an apple, it has two meanings, one narrow, the other broad: the narrow one is what is called intellectual assent: do we believe in Jesus? Is this intellectual assent enough to secure salvation; yes, if by salvation we mean that we are justified in the eyes of God. But there is a broader meaning to the word faith, that is inviting God into your life. There is no great intellectual trial here – the Good Thief had it on the Cross and he was received into paradise. But justification is not the same as sanctification – and becoming a Saint is the purpose of our life in Christ.
So, Paul is right, and so is James. There is not a single effort of our own which will justify us in the eyes of God; but we shall not be sanctified without our own efforts. Christ’s blood does what we cannot in any wise do – justifies us in the eyes of God. Sanctification is the process of Grace operating in us to make us more and more like Christ, so yes, if there is no faith there will be no works as a result of it: ‘For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.’ The justified person is actively involved in submitting to God’s will, resisting sin, seeking holiness, and working to be more godly.
The Scriptures teach us that we are to live holy lives and avoid sin (Col. 1:5-11). Just because we are saved and eternally justified before God (John 10:28), that is no excuse to continue in the sin from which we were saved. Of course, we all sin (Rom. 3:23). But the war between the saved and sin is continuous (Rom. 7:14-20) and it won’t be until the return of Jesus that we will be delivered from this body of death (Rom. 7:24).
Salvation is by Grace alone, and it is through Grace we receive the gift of faith. I have no idea why I am able to believe. I have tested the hope that is within me for about fifty-five years, but not a thousand difficulties has given me a single doubt. This is no merit to me, it is a cause for me to thank God for his infinite mercy to this and all other sinners.
Whatever divides me from the instiution that is the Catholic Church, I am united with those Catholics who believe in Jesus, and long ago it came to me that I would rather be in a trench with an orthodox Catholic than a heterodox Protestant. I see the old dividing lines begin to fade now – for a time of trial is coming, and in it, much that we have taken for granted will be no more. As John said on Patmos:
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
All Along the Watchtower 
Your writing reminds me of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. This was a document that was made together with the Lutherans and Catholics a number of years back.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
Especially, the part on The Good Works of the Justified (Section 4.7). Have you read it, Geoffrey, as it would seem that you did?
LikeLike
Yes, I should really have referenced it, as it was certainly somewhere in my mind. Thank you for this reminder.
LikeLike
I thought so. It was a good summary in a way.
LikeLike
Good document, SF. I had heard of it but never chased it down. Thanks.
LikeLike
Your welcome Neo. We can see that there is little that really divides the Lutherans and the Catholics and I am supposing that other denominations could probably agree in most part to the document as well.
LikeLike
No, there isn’t, in truth. It was a little surprising to see that from the Ev. Lutheran church, they have picked up a little much predestination for my taste but still, they’re close to us as well. 🙂
LikeLike
Much can be learned about one another if we just take the time to discuss the issues without getting carried away with emotion. 🙂
LikeLike
Very, very true 🙂
LikeLike
I think Jessica would be pleased with us 🙂
LikeLike
She is 🙂 Thank you, dear SF for this reference.
LikeLike
That’s always a worthy goal 🙂
LikeLike
That would certainly be my charge, Servus.
LikeLike
Mine as well Geoffrey; probably why we get along so well.
LikeLike
I think so, and am glad of it – it is good when the brethren dwell in peace 🙂
LikeLike
Indeed, it was our Lord’s great hope for us, as Jess wrote today in her post. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, and it is good that we are. 🙂
LikeLike
. . . and a good way to end the week on this Lord’s Day. 🙂
LikeLike
It is so, and I am glad of it, as I am of this place and the company of folk such as yourself and NEO. Makes me feel that young Jessica is on to something here 🙂
LikeLike
I think so as well. Jessica has a Guide that aids her in the cat herding, I think. 🙂
LikeLike
You know, I think she does, and I thank her for her perseverence 🙂
LikeLike
Amen. There is much to thank her for. 🙂
LikeLike
*blush* – what can I say, except to thank you, and all those who post here in this spirit. I am but the handmaid of this place, but it delights me when those who, like yourselves, are so much more versed in these things, find The Watchtower a useful place to be. Thank you – all of you 🙂 xxx
LikeLike
We are all grateful to you – as you probably are quite aware by now. 🙂
LikeLike
The gratitude is entirely reciprocated. When I began I had no idea what I was doing, but followed the promptings in me. I am glad I did 🙂 xx
LikeLike
We’ll be making you blush again Jessica, so we’ll give it a break for your sake – but you know how we feel, and it is good, occasionally, for us to tell you lass. 🙂
LikeLike
🙂 xxx
LikeLike
Me too. 🙂 xx
LikeLike
Thank you 🙂 x
LikeLike
It is certainly an exceptional company, to which I am very pleased indeed to belong 🙂
LikeLike
Well, I think you make up a goodly part of it my friend, and as a late-comer here, I am happy to be part of that company by adoption. 🙂
LikeLike
Well, I’ve been here a bit, and all you have said of our hostess is very true, and I have found her to be an incredible help in my thinking as well, she has a knack of clarifying things that I have rarely if ever seen, not to mention a way of defusing tension while not inhibiting discourse. A most exceptional young lady indeed, as well as the reason that we gather here. 🙂
LikeLike
Well said Neo. 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you, sir 🙂
LikeLike
Isn’t the difference between Paul and James a concern about Torah – i.e. do Christians have to keep the Jewish law ? I think so. “Works” in this context means keeping the Jewish law and it’s rituals. Paul, who as we know thought differently, says ‘no’, faith alone is key. That is to say, to follow the way is sufficient to be a member of the new Jesus movement, without needing to keep the law (Jewish).
However, many people seem to project different understandings of ‘faith’ and ‘works’ onto these texts. I suspect that this is the approach Geoffrey is taking.
I very much like ‘The First Paul’ by Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan.
Thoughts ?
S,
LikeLike
I agree, but it seems folly to me to ignore the way Christians have read these texts for much of the past two thousand years, so it seems incumbent upon us to engage with them where we find them, not where we might like to, if that makes sense>
LikeLike
Yes, Geoffrey. I can see your point – which has not been immediately apparent to me before. Thank you for making me reflect on this.
LikeLike
My pleasure. We certainly need to think about what Tom Wright says, and he’s surely right on the issue of what Paul meant in that context – but of course we have to take into account other contexts, so to say.
LikeLike
Struans – I don’t see any difference between James and Paul. I think that Paul deals with everything – the hedonistic man in Romans 1, moving onto the ‘good pagan’ of Romans 2, where he proves that ‘good works’ aren’t good enough – (just as James is saying) and moving onto the ‘religious man’ of Romans 3, where he establishes that religious observance doesn’t save you either. He goes through the whole lot.
In Romans 6, when he asks ‘should we continue in sin so that grace may abound? God forbid!’ I can’t see how ‘sin’ is connected with Jewish law here; it doesn’t make sense to me. He has already established what he means by sin in Romans 1.
LikeLike