Col. 1:19-22: Saved Through the Blood of the Cross

[JesusFan]

This is basically a nonanswer. Or are you saying that Rome has changed her mind about justification by faith alone? Many Reformers as martyrs spilt their blood over this issue.

How ironic for a Roman Catholic to tag something as unbiblical when the Bible plays 2nd fiddle to Church tradition. Besides on what ground is a biblical doctrine deemed heretical if not the Bible?

You do know the difference between justification by faith and justification by faith alone, right? You seem to be mixing the two, maybe that's the reason for the confusion.

Maybe it's a hangover from the early Chick-Track days? Or maybe it's a matter of them waking up when they started reading their Bibles and Church history?

When there was that Catholic and Lutheran "peace treaty" signed decades ago between the 2 churches, the language was written to appease Rome, they left out the all important phrasing "saved by grace alone thru faith alone", so heresy of Trent still remained in full

 

[Blank]

When there was that Catholic and Lutheran "peace treaty" signed decades ago between the 2 churches, the language was written to appease Rome, they left out the all important phrasing "saved by grace alone thru faith alone", so heresy of Trent still remained in full

Yes, I remember that quite well.

 

[Craigbythesea]

I must say that I am astonished that you claim to be a Baptist

This is simply not true. Take for example the XXXIX Articles of the Church of England. Article XI states, 'We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings: Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and is very full of comfort, as more largely expressed in the Homily of Justification.' What other Protestant confession will you bring forward to contradict this? Not the WCF, that's for sure.
Moreover, the Reformed Doctrine of Justification is entirely Biblical.
Acts 13:38-39. '.....Through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through Him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.'
Romans 3:20-22. 'Therefore by the deeds of the law [or 'works of Law'] no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of Sin. But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the law and the prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe.'
See also Romans 3:26, 28; 4:2-6; 4:13-14; 9:30-32; 10:4; 11:5-6; Gal. 2:16; 3:10-11; Eph. 2:8-9; Phil. 3:9; Titus 3:5, 7.


That is not at issue. The question is about Justification by Faith alone.

I have taken the liberty of pasting one of your posts on the Other Christian Denominations forum to see what the Roman Catholics there think about it.

​

It appears to me that you are confusing the Protestant Reformation in Europe that led to the creation of Protestantism and the English Reformation in England that led to the creation of The Church of England. The Reformed doctrine of Justification by faith alone was birthed by the Protestant Reformation. The doctrine of Justification by faith as presented in the 39 Articles of the Church of England is a different doctrine. It does not use the phrase “by faith alone” but that belief is implicit in the doctrine. More importantly, however, Reformed doctrine of Justification by faith alone is inseparably linked to all five of the points of Calvinism. The word “alone” appears only twice in the 39 articles:

15. Of Christ alone without Sin. Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which he was clearly void, both in his flesh, and in his spirit. He came to be the Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice of himself once made, should take away the sins of the world; and sin (as Saint John saith) was not in him. But all we the rest, although baptized and horn again in Christ, yet offend in many things; and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

31. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross. The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits

I have here in my study a first edition (1607) copy of Thomas Rogers’ commentary on the 39 Articles of The Church of England. Perhaps I have a more correct understanding of the 39 Articles in the context of English history.

 

[Craigbythesea]

When there was that Catholic and Lutheran "peace treaty" signed decades ago between the 2 churches, the language was written to appease Rome, they left out the all important phrasing "saved by grace alone thru faith alone", so heresy of Trent still remained in full

The full and actual wording of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification can be read here:

https://lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/joint_declaration_2019_en.pdf

 

[Martin Marprelate]

​

It appears to me that you are confusing the Protestant Reformation in Europe that led to the creation of Protestantism and the English Reformation in England that led to the creation of The Church of England. The Reformed doctrine of Justification by faith alone was birthed by the Protestant Reformation. The doctrine of Justification by faith as presented in the 39 Articles of the Church of England is a different doctrine.

On the contrary, it is exactly the same. The XXXIX Articles are generally accepted as one of the Reformed Confessions. It is not one of my favourites, which is one reason why I am not an Anglican, but it would have been good for the C of E if it had adhered to them better. The Church of England sent delegates to the Synod of Dort in 1618-19 and they were well regarded.

It does not use the phrase “by faith alone” but that belief is implicit in the doctrine. More importantly, however, Reformed doctrine of Justification by faith alone is inseparably linked to all five of the points of Calvinism. The word “alone” appears only twice in the 39 articles:

Don't be so silly. Here is Article XI again with one word emboldened: 'We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings: Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and is very full of comfort, as more largely expressed in the Homily of Justification.' Now you tell me what the difference here is between 'alone' and 'only.'

15. Of Christ alone without Sin. Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only except, from which he was clearly void, both in his flesh, and in his spirit. He came to be the Lamb without spot, who, by sacrifice of himself once made, should take away the sins of the world; and sin (as Saint John saith) was not in him. But all we the rest, although baptized and horn again in Christ, yet offend in many things; and if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

31. Of the one Oblation of Christ finished upon the Cross. The Offering of Christ once made is that perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction, for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual; and there is none other satisfaction for sin, but that alone. Wherefore the sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits

These are both clear statements of Reformed theology. What is your problem? There are other articles that I like a lot less, but these are fine and clarify further the precious doctrine of Justification by Faith only.

I have here in my study a first edition (1607) copy of Thomas Rogers’ commentary on the 39 Articles of The Church of England. Perhaps I have a more correct understanding of the 39 Articles in the context of English history.

Or maybe you don't.