I love to see doctrine in Messiah's parables. Here we find all branches in him and clean (no tares, so to speak). He tells us these branches must remain in him and bear fruit. Otherwise, if the branches do not remain in the Messiah, they are cast away and burned in the fire. One cannot argue credibly that the branches were never in Messiah, nor that they were never clean, nor that they never bore fruit. One can but argue they did not persevere in the faith and commandments of the Messiah. He warned us so many, many, many times, as His branches, to watch, to repent, to do the works. Relying on the understanding of a Sixteenth Century French Catholic turned Protestant, or even one's own interpretation, in the face of two millennia of testimony from one holy catholic apostolic church is risky business, at the least.
I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
John, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verses one to twelve,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James There appear to be at least three major schools of thought regarding this passage:
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
(John 15:2-4)
1) One view says that "every branch in me" refers to genuine Christians who fail to remain in Christ and are removed for kindling, which, under this view equates to losing salvation. I assume this is your view. Whether it is the Roman view, I have no idea, as Rome doubtless has no
official view of this passage. Hence, if it is your view, it is no better than any Protestant/evangelical opinion.
2) Another view is that "every branch in me" refers to people affiliated with Christ's Kingdom, but not necessarily saved, because while it says they are "in Him," it does NOT say He is in them. This then would be analogous to the situation in James, where some have a kind of faith in Christ, but it is a dead faith, producing no fruit. Whereas those with a living faith will produce some fruit, however small or great.
3) The third view is this pertains to sanctification. The "branches in me not bearing fruit" are said to be genuine believers, but the being taken away does not refer to a loss of salvation but a loss of reward, as here, where nearly the same exact imagery is used:
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
(1 Corinthians 3:15)
The problem is, however you interpret this, it has to come out consistent with other passages that speak more directly to the question of salvation, such as this:
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
(John 6:37)
Notice here we have the same exact group of people moving through all three phases of the process:
A) The Father gives them to Jesus.
B) Those given to Jesus will definitely come to Him.
C) Those that come to Jesus are NOT going to be cast out.
That is an unqualified certainty. If you are one of the ones the Father gave to Jesus, you are not going to be cast out. Period. Keep in mind this is from the pen of the same author who wrote John 15, and who wrote:
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
(1 John 2:19)
John is not speaking of losing anything in the epistle. He is talking abut the revelation of a preexisting truth. This is exactly analogous to the parable of the wheats and tares, in which the viewer is allowed to peek behind the curtain and see that these two groups were always different, which difference we recognize as being made by God Himself in giving these souls to Jesus, per John 6:37.
So why did Jesus instruct the eleven "wheats" to remain in Him? Because God ordains the means as well as the ends. To change the metaphor, His sheep hear His voice, and will follow Him, but will not follow another. See John 10:27. He calls us, and we follow. He warns us to not be like the tares, that we need to remain in Him to bear fruit, and we take it seriously and remain in Him.
And any fruit at all will keep us from being fruitless branches:
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
(Galatians 5:22-23)
Any believer experiencing the above manifestations of the Holy Spirit can be well assured they are a fruit-bearing branch, and while they may be pruned to become even more fruitful, they will neither lose their salvation, nor enter Heaven without reward.
Conclusion:
Option 1 above is impossible, because it would set up a contradiction with many other passages, only a small portion of which I have cited here. And not only that, but if true, it would prove too much. Most advocates of a works-conditional salvation allow that a person can return to a state of grace after a lapse. But the analogy of the branch does not convey that, but rather says that the failure to produce fruit is a failure with no remedy. You get one chance and it's over. No coming back for salvation over and over again. This would seem to preclude even purgatory.
Option 3 is problematic, but not impossible. It is problematic because the removal of the dead branches seems too much like the failure of dead faith in James. In both cases, it seems to be expressing a difference in kind, a branch that has some connection to Christ, but not a life-giving connection, not a connection that produces fruit.
Which is why I am inclined to accept Option 2. This option reconciles well with the doctrine of the wheats and tares, the "not being of us" principle in John's epistle, and the statements that clearly declare the purpose of God to not lose any of His sheep. The elect will persevere, and may need to be pressed into action by warnings to remain in Christ, but come harvest time, the truth will out, that they were wheats all along, and had rightful assurance of the same, because they had a living faith, and the Spirit of the living God abiding in them.
Peace,
SR