Faith Alone v. Forgiving Trespasses: How the Lord's Prayer Contradicts the Reformation

Catholic Defense ^ | February 25, 2015

[NYer]

Lines from the Lord's Prayer, in various languages.
From the Eucharist Door at the Glory Facade of the Sagrada Família in Barcelona, Spain.

It's Lent in Rome. That means it's time for one of the great Roman traditions: station churches. Each morning, English-speaking pilgrims walk to a different church for Mass. This morning, on the way to St. Anastasia's, I was once again struck by a line in the Our Father: “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” That's a hard thing to pray, It doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room. Even the Catechism seems shocked by it:

This petition is astonishing. If it consisted only of the first phrase, "And forgive us our trespasses," it might have been included, implicitly, in the first three petitions of the Lord's Prayer, since Christ's sacrifice is "that sins may be forgiven." But, according to the second phrase, our petition will not be heard unless we have first met a strict requirement. Our petition looks to the future, but our response must come first, for the two parts are joined by the single word "as."

Upon arriving at Mass, I discovered that the Gospel for the day was Matthew 6:7-15, in which Christ introduces this prayer. That seemed too serendipitous to simply be a coincidence. Then Archbishop Di Noia, O.P., got up to preach the homily, and it was all about how to understand this particular petition. So here goes: I think that the Lord's Prayer is flatly inconsistent with sola fide, the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone. Here's why.

In this line of the Lord's Prayer, Jesus seems to be explicitly conditioning our forgiveness on our forgiving. Indeed, it's hard to read “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us” any other way. What's more, after introducing the prayer, Jesus focuses on this line, in particular. Here's how He explains it (Matthew 6:14-15):

For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

So to be forgiven, you must forgive. If you do, you'll be forgiven. If you don't, you won't be. It's as simple as that.

So Christ has now told us three times that our being forgiven is conditioned upon our forgiving, using the most explicit of language. How does Luther respond to this? “God forgives freely and without condition, out of pure grace.” And what is Calvin's response? “The forgiveness, which we ask that God would give us, does not depend on the forgiveness which we grant to others.”

Their theology forces them to deny Christ's plain words, since admitting them would concede that we need something more than faith alone: we also need to forgive our neighbors. They've painted themselves into a corner, theologically. To get out of it, they change this part of the Our Father into either a way that we can know that we're saved (Luther's approach: that God “set this up for our confirmation and assurance for a sign alongside of the promise which accords with this prayer”) or a non-binding moral exhortation (Calvin's: “to remind us of the feelings which we ought to cherish towards brethren, when we desire to be reconciled to God”).

Modern Protestants tend to do the same thing with these verses, and countless other passages in which Christ or the New Testament authors teach us about something besides faith that's necessary for salvation. We see this particularly in regards to the Biblical teaching on the saving role of Baptism (Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21) and works (Matthew 25:31-46; Romans 2:6-8; James 2). There are three common tactics employed:

1. Reverse the causality. If a passage says that you must do X in order to be saved, claim that it really means that if you're saved, you'll just naturally do X. Thus, X is important for showing that you're saved, but it doesn't actually do anything, and certainly isn't necessary for salvation (even if the Bible says otherwise: Mark 16:16).
2. No True Scotsman. If Scripture says that someone believed and then lost their salvation (like Simon the Magician in Acts 8, or the heretics mentioned in 2 Peter 2), say that they must not have ever actually believed (even if the Bible says the opposite: Acts 8:13, 2 Peter 2:1, 20-22).
3. Spiritualize the passage into oblivion. If the Bible says that Baptism is necessary for salvation, argue that this is just a “spiritual” Baptism that means nothing more than believing. And if you need to get around the need to be “born of water and the Spirit” (John 3:5) spiritualize this, too, to get rid of the need for water. Reduce everything to a symbol, or a metaphor for faith.

In fairness to both the Reformers and to modern Protestants, they want to avoid any notion that we can earn God's forgiveness or our salvation. This doesn't justify denying or distorting Christ's words, but it's a holy impulse. And in fact, it was the theme of Abp. Di Noia's homily this morning. Grace is a gift, and what's more, grace is what enables us to forgive others. This point is key, because it explains why Christ isn't teaching something like Pelagianism.

God freely pours out His graces upon us, which bring about both (a) our forgiveness, and (b) our ability to forgive others. But we can choose to accept that grace and act upon it, or to reject it. And that decision has eternal consequences. Such an understanding is harmonious with Christ's actual words, while avoiding any idea that we possess the power to earn our salvation.

So both Catholics and Protestants reject Pelagianism, but there's a critical difference. Catholics believe that grace enables us to do good works, whereas Protestants tend to believe that grace causes us to do good works. To see why it matters, consider the parable of the unmerciful servant, Matthew 18:21-35. In this parable, we see three things happen:

1. A debtor is forgiven an enormous debt of ten thousand talents (Mt. 18:25-27). Solely through the grace of the Master (clearly representing God), this man is forgiven his debts (sins). He is in a state of grace.
2. This debtor refuses to forgive his neighbor of a small debt of 100 denarii (Mt. 18:28-30). The fact that he's been forgiven should enable the debtor to be forgiving: in being forgiven, he's received the equivalent of 60,000,000 denarii, and he's certainly seen a moral model to follow. But he turns away from the model laid out by the Master, and refuses to forgive his neighbor.
3. This debtor is unforgiven by his Master (Mt. 18:32-35). The kicker comes at the very end: “And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

Now, consider all of the Protestant work-arounds discussed above. To deny that this debtor was ever really forgiven would be an insult to the Master and in contradiction to the text. To say that, if we're forgiven, we'll just naturally forgive is equally a contradiction: this debtor is forgiven, and doesn't. To treat the need to forgive the other debtor as a non-binding moral exhortation would have been a fatal error. 

This parable gets to the heart of the issue. The Master's forgiveness is freely given, and cannot be earned. But that doesn't mean it's given unconditionally or irrevocably. Quite the contrary: Christ shows us in this parable that it can be repealed, and tells us why: if we refuse to forgive, we will not be forgiven. It turns out, the Lord's Prayer actually means what it says.

[ealgeone]

And which is made clear by reading more of Scriptural revelation For as shown, the fact is that the allegorical understanding of Jn. 6:27-69 is the only one that is consistent with the rest of Scripture, and again, which nowhere in all of Scripture is spiritual and eternal life gained by literally eating anything physical, which manner of eating is what Jn. 6:53,54 makes as an imperative according to the literalistic interpretation. Which RCs do not take fully literally as they render it an unbloody blood and transubstantiated presence, nor do they exclude all who do not believe the Cath. theory from having eternal life.

And therein is the major problem with roman catholicism.....they don't keep things in context.

Excellent summary!

[Arthur McGowan]

My parents sure believed in Limbo, and they said they both hoped to go there. They felt they were not good enough to go to Heaven, but hoped they were good enough to go to Limbo.

If your parents said that, they misunderstood the meaning of the term "Limbo."

If--IF--the theory of Limbo were true, no baptized person would ever go to Limbo. All baptized people would go to 1) Hell; 2) Heaven; 3) Purgatory, followed by Heaven.

[CynicalBear]

I was blessed to have known them both. Both God fearing men. My paternal grandfather lived to be 93. I was over 30 when he passed. I cherish the influence he had on all his children, grandchildren and great grandchildren.

[ealgeone]

It’s not a solemnly defined dogma. It is a teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium. As such, every Catholic is required to assent to it.

That's the point....there is a movement to have the pope use his "ex cathedra" to make this an officially approved dogma of the rcc.

Art, it's a simple yes or no question....are you in favor of it.....yes or no?

[CynicalBear]

>>It is preposterous to hold that a Christian can pray in Baltimore, but cannot pray in Heaven.<<

Other then we are told not to try to communicate with those who have passed from this life.

[ealgeone]

It is totally irrational to hold that my mother, now that she is living in Heaven, CANNOT pray and intercede for me.

All due respects to your mom, but like my mom who is in Heaven also, neither one can hear our prayers.

Besides, catholics go way beyond asking Mary to "pray" for them. Ya'll pray to Mary. And please don't say you don't as there are too many examples to prove otherwise.

[.45 Long Colt]

“It is preposterous to hold that a Christian can pray in Baltimore, but cannot pray in Heaven.”

Well, the Bible clearly warns against communicating with the dead. (Deuteronomy 18:11) There’s that.

Beyond the clear admonition of Scripture, there is no basis to believe she can even hear your prayers. Do you pray to her out loud? Can she hear you all the way from heaven? If you pray silently, does she now possess godlike powers to read you mind? Is she now omnipresent? What if she was never saved? I don’t believe in Rome’s purgatory, but, let’s assume you Rome is right about it, what if she’s still there?

FRiend, the Bible tells us that Christians can go boldly to the throne of grace!

Before addressing prayers to anyone other than the Father by way of Christ, I would remember this: “For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.” (Deuteronomy 4:24)

[Arthur McGowan]

You gratuitously contradict me, so I gratuitously ignore you. You provide absolutely not a shred of evidence that a Christian in Heaven cannot pray or hear requests for prayers, even though a Christian in Baltimore CAN.

The idea that people in Heaven are unaware of us on earth is just plain moronic. Read the Book of Revelation. The blessed in heaven offer prayers for their brothers and sisters on earth.

when it comes to Mary, you gratuitously make the same old, same old accusation: Namely, that we Catholics secretly are taught, behind closed doors and drawn curtains, to worship Mary. The thousands of textbooks, catechisms, conciliar declarations, papal declarations, saying that Catholics DO NOT worship Mary have all been published in an attempt to deceive Protestants. SECRETLY, Catholics are taught the OPPOSITE of what is in ALL Catholic catechisms, etc.

Riiiiight.

[Resettozero]

Perhaps Salvation should make that the catholic word of the day...”gratuitously”. You shirley like to use it.

[Resettozero]

Catholics are taught the OPPOSITE of what is in ALL Catholic catechisms...

Since there was no sarcasm-off tag, I expect an RCC priest would not lie and therefore, your statement stands.

[Grateful2God]

"Sorry you were not a veteran. 😄😃😀😊 Chill out, I am joking again."

Glad you were only joking! When you said that about yourself, it really did hurt. The soldiers from Viet Nam and Korea, deserved so much better than they got, in all seriousness, and no matter what the rank or service, what our Military does and has done is appreciated and respected. I wish, looking back, that I were able to have taken advantage of the opportunity to serve my country and develop some of the qualities instilled in our troops! God bless you, no joke! : ) (No cool emojis either, darn it!)

[rwa265]

So the Beatles were right when they sang “all we need is love?” That’s it? That’s all God demands?

---

Well, the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. /s

There was more to my comment than that one line taken out of context.

As I stated, we need to have faith in God and follow His commandments. Jesus tells us Himself: “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matthew 19:17) It is in following His commandments that we love God and each other. The first of the Ten Commandments tell us to love God and the others tell us to love our neighbor. I presume you know what Jesus tells us is the New Commandment, to “love one another as I have loved you.” You also probably know what He says the greatest and first commandment is, and that the second is like it. He further tells us “The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:40)

It is true that “if we offend the law at only one little point we are guilty of breaking the whole law.” We all do this at one time or another. But through God’s saving grace, we can be forgiven.

So no, the Beatles were not right. Love is not all we need. We are justified by faith. But as Paul tells us in his first letter to the Corinthians: “if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.” (1 Cor. 13:2) In the end, “faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” 1 Cor. 13:13.

[ealgeone]

And don’t call me shirely!

[Gamecock]

**a mistaken assurance that one is “eternally secure” and thus can commit any sin with impunity.**

Legalists of all types love to rob us of our joy in the grace we have received with that strawdummy.

Interestingly Paul anticipated that wrongheaded accusation:

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

[edwinland]

>>I thought only God was always right...

I thought Catholics were required to believe that the magisterium is always right.

If you are interested in understanding Catholic teaching on the role of the Magisterium, the following passage from St. John Paul II may help illuminate how Catholics see the relationship among Christ, the Magisterium and the Christian faithful.

Christians have a great help for the formation of conscience in the Church and her Magisterium. As the Council affirms: "In forming their consciences the Christian faithful must give careful attention to the sacred and certain teaching of the Church. For the Catholic Church is by the will of Christ the teacher of truth. Her charge is to announce and teach authentically that truth which is Christ, and at the same time with her authority to declare and confirm the principles of the moral order which derive from human nature itself ".111 It follows that the authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of conscience of Christians. This is so not only because freedom of conscience is never freedom "from" the truth but always and only freedom "in" the truth, but also because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith. The Church puts herself always and only at the service of conscience, helping it to avoid being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine proposed by human deceit (cf. Eph 4:14), and helping it not to swerve from the truth about the good of man, but rather, especially in more difficult questions, to attain the truth with certainty and to abide in it.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_06081993_veritatis-splendor.html

[Salvation]

I am astounded when people can’t stick to the subject of the thread — The Our Father.

Do you say it?

[CynicalBear]

>>You provide absolutely not a shred of evidence that a Christian in Heaven cannot pray or hear requests for prayers,<<

Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything,

Ecclesiastes 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Psalm 6:5 Among the dead no one proclaims your name. Who praises you from the grave?

Psalm 88:10 Do you show your wonders to the dead? Do their spirits rise up and praise you?

Psalm 115:17 It is not the dead who praise the LORD, those who go down to the place of silence;

Deuteronomy 18:10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead.

1 Chronicles 10:13 So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire of it; 14 And inquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse.

You have not shown one shred of evidence that those who have passed from this life are included in those we should have pray for us.

[CynicalBear]

Canon 752: “While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic Magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ's faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.”

Canon 753: “While not infallible in their teaching, [Catholic bishops] are the authentic instructors and teachers of the faith for Christ's faithful entrusted to their care. The faithful are bound to adhere, with a religious submission of mind, to this authentic Magisterium of their Bishops.”

An essential aspect of internal Catholic practice therefore requires that the Catholic give religious submission of mind and will to the authentic Magisterium of the Pope and this even if he is not speaking ex cathedra. An essential component of internal Catholic practice is that the Pope's ordinary teaching at a minimum must be religiously submitted to by both intellect and will. (I say at minimum, because if infallible teaching is involved, whether in ordinary or extraordinary mode, the full assent of faith, or theological assent, is required. This is something much more than religious submission.) [http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=49496]

[Gamecock]

**An essential component of internal Catholic practice is that the Pope’s ordinary teaching at a minimum must be religiously submitted to by both intellect and will.**

Like that is going on here with the FRoman Catholic crowd! I get the feeling they think they are more Catholic than Frank.

[redleghunter]

One detects a subtle arrogance not only of "possessing the correct theology" (unlike those Papists) but of a mistaken assurance that one is "eternally secure" and thus can commit any sin with impunity. This is a misguided and frankly dangerous attitude to take.

The antinomian construct above? It is often referred to on the pages of the RF. Yet I have yet to see anyone advocate such a position. In fact those who opine on eternal security of the believer do so using scriptural substantiation.

Romans chapter 8 tells us:

Romans 8:

24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? 25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it. 26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God. 28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. 29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. 31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? 32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

If our justification is based on the sovereignty of God, then is it inconceivable that our sanctification and eventual glorification is not also His sovereign design?

Which do we have more physical, historical examples of? Of people who claim Christ is Lord and Savior yet live like hedonists; or people who deny the same Lord and Savior who justifies is not powerful enough to sanctify and glorify?

The Divine Hand of God which justifies does not turn into a 'deistic' bystander and not keep the promises of conforming one into the Image of His Son and eventual Glorification.

Such comments as your's above lead one to consider if such a person who believes "I am saved now let's party because I'm covered" if in fact that person has been born again of the Spirit. For we know those who are His children know this as well:

1 John 1:

Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. 4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. 5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

And this:

1 Peter 1:

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations:

7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: 8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: 9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: 11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance: 15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Indeed. Being a disciple of Jesus Christ is serious and not for the faint of heart. I am sure as Christians we could all share some testimonies of the enduring and Holy Work of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Forging the metal of God's salvation in our lives. As the apostle Paul notes above in Romans chapter 8 God is involved in phases of our new born lives from cradle (justification) to grave (resurrection) unto everlasing life.

Finally, for the antinomian construct. Let's ask the question. Can someone who reads and feeds on God's Word daily, reading His holy standards of conduct truly conclude "I can do anything I want no matter how evil?" God does not sanctify sin.