Posted on 06/08/2018 8:54:57 AM PDT by Salvation
There are a lot of “solos” sung by our Protestant brethren: sola fide (saved by faith alone), sola Scriptura (Scripture alone is the rule of faith), and sola gratia (grace alone). Generally, one ought to be leery of claims that things work “alone.” Typically, many things work together in harmony; things are interrelated. Very seldom is anyone or anything really “alone.”
The problem with “solos” emerges (it seems to me) in our mind, where it is possible to separate things out; but just because we can separate something out in our mind does not mean that we can do so in reality.
Consider, for a moment, a candle’s flame. In my mind, I can separate the heat of the flame from its light, but I could never put a knife into the flame and put the heat of the flame on one side of it and the light on the other. In reality, the heat and light are inseparable—so together as to be one.
I would like to argue that it is the same with things like faith and works, grace and transformation, Scripture and the Church. We can separate all these things out in our mind, but in reality, they are one. Attempting to separate them from what they belong to leads to grave distortions and to the thing in question no longer being what it is claimed to be. Rather, it becomes an abstraction that exists only on a blackboard or in the mind of a theologian.
Let’s look at the three main “solos” of Protestant theology. I am aware that there are non-Catholic readers of this blog, so please understand that my objections are made with respect. I am also aware that in a short blog I may oversimplify, and thus I welcome additions, clarifications, etc. in the comments section.
Solo 1: Faith alone (sola fide) – For 400 years, Catholics and Protestants have debated the question of faith and works. In this matter, we must each avoid caricaturing the other’s position. Catholics do not and never have taught that we are saved by works. For Heaven’s sake, we baptize infants! We fought off the Pelagians. But neither do Protestants mean by “faith” a purely intellectual acceptance of the existence of God, as many Catholics think that they do.
What concerns us here is the detachment of faith from works that the phrase “faith alone” implies. Let me ask, what is faith without works? Can you point to it? Is it visible? Introduce me to someone who has real faith but no works. I don’t think one can be found. About the only example I can think of is a baptized infant, but that’s a Catholic thing! Most Baptists and Evangelicals who sing the solos reject infant baptism.
Hence it seems that faith alone is something of an abstraction. Faith is something that can only be separated from works in our minds. If faith is a transformative relationship with Jesus Christ, we cannot enter into that relationship while remaining unchanged. This change affects our behavior, our works. Even in the case of infants, it is possible to argue that they are changed and do have “works”; it’s just that they are not easily observed.
Scripture affirms that faith is never alone, that such a concept is an abstraction. Faith without works is dead (James 2:26). Faith without works is not faith at all because faith does not exist by itself; it is always present with and causes works through love. Galatians 5:6 says, For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through love. Hence faith works not alone but through love. Further, as Paul states in 1 Corinthians 13:2, if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
Hence faith alone is the null set. True faith is never alone; it bears the fruit of love and the works of holiness. Faith ignites love and works through it. Beware of the solo “faith alone” and ask where faith, all by itself, can be found.
Solo 2: Grace alone (sola gratia) – By its very nature grace changes us. Again, show me grace apart from works. Grace without works is an abstraction. It cannot be found apart from its effects. In our mind it may exist as an idea, but in reality, grace is never alone.
Grace builds on nature and transforms it. It engages the person who responds to its urges and gifts. If grace is real, it will have its effects and cannot be found alone or apart from works. It cannot be found apart from a real flesh-and-blood human who is manifesting its effects.
Solo 3: Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) – Beware those who say, “sola Scriptura!” This is the claim that Scripture alone is the measure of faith and the sole authority for the Christian, that there is no need for a Church and no authority in the Church, that there is only authority in the Scripture.
There are several problems with this.
First, Scripture as we know it (with the full New Testament) was not fully assembled and agreed upon until the 4th century.
It was Catholic bishops, in union with the Pope, who made the decision as to which books belonged in the Bible. The early Christians could not possibly have lived by sola scriptura because the Scriptures were not even fully written in the earliest years. And although collected and largely completed in written form by 100 AD, the set of books and letters that actually made up the New Testament was not agreed upon until the 4th century.
Second, until recently most people could not read.
Given this, it seems strange that God would make, as the sole rule of faith, a book that people had to read on their own. Even today, large numbers of people in the world cannot read well. Hence, Scripture was not necessarily a read text, but rather one that most people heard and experienced in and with the Church through her preaching, liturgy, art, architecture, stained glass, passion plays, and so forth.
Third, and most important, if all you have is a book, then that book needs to be interpreted accurately.
Without a valid and recognized interpreter, the book can serve to divide more than to unite. Is this not the experience of Protestantism, which now has tens of thousands of denominations all claiming to read the same Bible but interpreting it in rather different manners?
The problem is, if no one is Pope then everyone is Pope! Protestant “soloists” claim that anyone, alone with a Bible and the Holy Spirit, can authentically interpret Scripture. Well then, why does the Holy Spirit tell some people that baptism is necessary for salvation and others that it is not necessary? Why does the Holy Spirit tell some that the Eucharist really is Christ’s Body and Blood and others that it is only a symbol? Why does the Holy Spirit say to some Protestants, “Once saved, always saved” and to others, “No”?
So, it seems clear that Scripture is not meant to be alone. Scripture itself says this in 2 Peter 3:16: our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, Our Brother Paul speaking of these things [the Last things] as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Hence Scripture itself warns that it is quite possible to misinterpret Scripture.
Where is the truth to be found? The Scriptures once again answer this: you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15).
Hence Scripture is not to be read alone. It is a document of the Lord through the Church and must be read in the context of the Church and with the Church’s authoritative interpretation and Tradition. As this passage from Timothy says, the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. The Bible is a Church book and thus is not meant to be read apart from the Church that received the authority to publish it from God Himself. Scripture is the most authoritative and precious document of the Church, but it emanates from the Church’s Tradition and must be understood in the light of it.
Thus, the problems of “singing solo” seem to boil down to the fact that if we separate what God has joined we end up with an abstraction, something that exists only in the mind but in reality, cannot be found alone.
Here is a brief video in which Fr. Robert Barron ponders the Protestant point of view that every baptized Christian has the right to authoritatively interpret the Word of God.sss
Which unquestioning flag-saluting is actually indicative of uncritical thinking,
But Bible stories? Not so much...probably because you can’t prove them to the skeptical’s five senses and rational mind.
Which denial is actually indicative of superficial seeking. The overall credibility of Scripture is well evidenced, including the profound changes in hearts and lives resulting from Biblical regeneration/conversion to Christ on Bible terms. Which ultimately defy naturalistic explanations.
Watch some well made videos here and tell me the cause behind the effect without recourse to deifying nature.
So many beautifully articulated Truths on this thread ... and your post is truly one of them.
That is obvious, as is that this conclusion is being avoided.
And you have rejected JESUS telling JOhn to Write, in The Revelation. So why do you cherry pick so arduously?
placemarker
Ah, the Mormon plea has now crept from the moldy Catholic Mindset.
To me, speculation regarding what an infant is aware of might be mysticism or possibly the understanding of future science. I don’t know. To me, it’s anecdotal level info, but if it’s mysticism to you, that’s okay with me.
As to whether or not an infant is a sinner, the usual response seems to be Romans 3:23: “For all have sinned...”
How an infant has sinned, I don’t know, but the quote says “all”. That’s not mysticism to me.
As to the Eyes of our Creator being the first thing we see? That came from one of the messages in TLIG. I don’t remember which or I’d post it.
As to whether the messages in TLIG are mysticism or what they claim to be, that is still beyond my rank and pay grade. However, my first reaction was that it’s real.
However, I like stuff like that and my bias is always against placing the limits of my understanding or yours on what God is allowed to do or what His Gifts to us might be, especially so the closer we get to the end of the story.
That’s just my humble opinion, of course.
Oh really?
So what explains the major doctrinal differences between the Roman rite and the Orthodox?
They have been in schism from each other for on 1,000 years and counting, with both each claiming that they are the original Catholic church with the other being the schismatics.
You condemn your own denomination especially considering that despite those differences y'all claim that all Catholic churches are in communion with each other.
For that matter, you all don't even agree within yourselves. There's the whole pre and post Vatican 2 crowd and a whole host of FRoman Catholics here who reject the current pope.
Which by your own criteria would then prove that Catholicism isn't of God because otherwise, they'd all agree.
So when all Catholic rites don't agree on all doctrinal issues, that's OK but when it's non-Catholics, they are condem3ned for it and it's used as proof that they are not from God.
That is just such major league hypocrisy it isn't even close to being funny.
Then you need to re-read the Gospels.
1 Corinthians 1:11-17 For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
Romans 10:9-13 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Why do you think he should have to run all over the place searching the internet for something that you claim is the truth?
You got something?
Post it...
If you don’t, then you have nothing.
Just out of curiosity, Catholic traditions and Orthodox traditions seem to be similar to my untrained eye.
I’m not taking sides, just wondering why you single out the Catholics?
Is it because of the Pope or Rome or something else?
I and most readers who think about it, understand why this lie is so precious to you, a Catholic Priest. If this lie is exposed for its falseness it removes some of the power your ORG (rhymes with Bord) has vested to you. But the Scriptures expose this lie in many passages, not the least of which is 'Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.'
I can’t speak for others, but I know the reason that I tend to get defensive around Catholics on this board. It’s largely because of the continued threads on the Religion Forum that get posted that are all about bashing non-Catholic Christians. Or even if you want to not call the threads bashing, a lot of the posters tend to be very angry and hateful towards us.
A guy kind of develops a spiky exterior after months of having to deal with that, and it’s easy to introduce even the most innocent of queries to the spikes because we’re so used to the personal attacks.
Sola Placemarkia
Thank you! And the same for you and yours!
In answer to that question, it is something Christ followers are instructed to do, contend for the faith once delivered. And why contend? Because early on in the Age of God's Grace in Christ for us satan sent fo0lks into the body of believers to sow tares/lies and false dogma and blasphemous rituals. It began so early that we have record of a first Ekklesia Council (chptr 15 of ACTS) dealing with the false insertions rising in the midst of the body of believers. Oddly, what the Council sent as their message (which they said seemed good to the Holy Spirit) the admonition against has been raised to central empowerment in Catholicism ... and sadly, many Protestant communities.
I’ve learned more about how Satan attacks us, tricks and tactics, that sort of thing, and I am getting better at recognizing his assaults in/on my own thoughts, thanks largely to what I’ve read in the messages and heard elsewhere.
Satan is freaking powerful, but Jesus can take him, anytime, anywhere, and give you His Peace in place of whatever Satan doing.
Honestly, whether we are aware of it or not, without Jesus’ Supernatural intervention, I think way more of us would suicide than do.
That much, I definitely agree with.
One of the big things learning about Scripture and Jesus is the knowledge of who wins in the end. So even when terrible things happen, Jesus is the winner; end of story.
And not only does Jesus win against the devil, he also overcame my own sin nature and saved me, and promised eternal life. That’s powerful too.
Prayers that we both sustain this mindset, by the grace of God!
What I was trying to do was make a point without adding names, specifically,to the comment.
What one little back and forth revealed was that there are Protestants (protesters of Rome) in the world that are sensitive to any questioning of certain roman teachings that Protestants share with Rome..
In this case, the first/chief importance of the gospel.
Some Protestants and protesters of Rome have either been unwilling or not led to test and prove all things,even all things Rome. I am a protester of Rome that is/has.
So, there are some roman teachings that are okay to Protestants and not an arguable/debatable teaching.
I presented one that appears to be in that territory.
Not that the teaching/doctrine isn’t false- it is false teaching, but it is shared by so many Protestants that it really isn’t seen as a roman teaching to too many Protestants, but it is seen as a Christian teaching.
That there in lies the ironic twist of Catholic vs Protestant..
In this case, it’s mother and daughters vs. Sola Scriptura.
It’s mother and daughters vs His Word
It’s Rome and protesters of Rome vs. protesters of Rome.
Being on the side of Sola Scriptura, His Word as a protester of Rome is usually a comfortable spot for Protestants to be.
In this case, they aren’t on that side.
And it is probably very difficult to understand as it doesn’t fit the neat arguments that go round and round in Catholic vs Protestant debates/arguments/circles.
A protester of Rome inserted something that doesn’t fit the normal course of fruitful discourse found in Catholic vs Protestant squabbles. It challenged Protestants as much as it challenged Rome and Roman Catholics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.