1. There is a teaching common among the various Protestant denominations: namely, that man is justified before God by faith alone. Protestants claim that man must simply believe that Christ has done everything required for justification. And, once man believes in Christ, he is saved forever. Consequently, Protestants understand good works to be merely the fruit of the justified state, but not that they are meritorious for justification. Likewise, evil works do not threaten the justified state. They have already been forgiven.
  2. The Catholic Church teaches that, although the importance of faith is critical, faith only initiates the process of justification, a process that has its stages and an end. Neither is justification a single event of faith alone, nor are works merely the fruit of such faith, but rather a process by which the individual grows in justification through his faith and good works, a growth that can be delayed, or even ended, by infidelity and evil works, and that can end in perdition.
  3. For both sides, it is helpful first to clarify what we mean by the word “justification.” Basically, “justification” is the theological term used to refer to the basis on which man can “enter into eternal life.” It is the means by which a sinner is “justified” or “made righteous before God.” Since God is perfect, transcendent, and holy, and man imperfect, mortal, and sinful, there must be a “justifiable” reason why God would allow so lowly a creature to live with Him forever. Since God must preserve His honor and holiness, He cannot simply accept men into heaven without a good and “justifiable” reason for doing so, for otherwise He would be compromising His own divine character. In order to justify our entrance into heaven, God must also remain just, honorable, and holy (Romans 3:26).
  4. “Faith” and “alone”
  5. Well then, let us begin by posing an important question: Did the apostle Paul teach justification by faith alone? And if he did, why did Paul nowhere in his New Testament writings use the specific expression “faith alone”? St. Paul used the word “faith” more than two hundred times in the New Testament, but not once did he join it with the words “alone” or “only.” What would have prevented so important a union if the “aloneness” of faith for justification was at the forefront of his mind?
  6. The second reason that leads us to raise so important a question is that Paul used the words “only,” “alone,” or “the only one” (in the Douay-Rheims translation, e.g.) very frequently. In many of these cases it appears right next to the very texts that contain teachings about faith and justification (Romans 3:29, 4:12; Galatians 2:10, 3:2, 4:18, 5:13). Therefore, precisely when Paul was teaching about the nature of justification, he must have been keenly aware of the word “alone” and its qualifying properties. Its union with the word “faith” would have left this question indisputably settled.
  7. And although the Holy Spirit did not, it seems, permit Paul to use the expression “faith alone” or any equivalent, He did permit it to James, and, moreover, in a clear and forceful way, in declaring that “…by works a man is justified, and NOT by faith only” (James 2:24, Douay-Rheims). This denial appears precisely when James raises in his epistle the question of whether faith, by itself alone, is sufficient for justification. We can only conclude that the Holy Spirit’s inspiration of the equally important expression “not… by” clearly demonstrates that God was concerned that someone might misinterpret Scripture’s emphasis on faith over works as being equivalent to “faith alone.” But, having said this…, did not St. Paul say that faith was “without” works?
  8. If Paul did not intend to teach “faith alone,” then how do we explain his statement in Romans 3:28 that “…a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law”? Could it not be argued that the expression “without” is very much like the word “alone,” and thus conclude that St. Paul really did teach that faith stands alone in justification?
  9. To answer this, we must realize that “justified by faith alone” does not mean the same thing as “justified by faith without the works of the law.” Grammatically, the expression “faith alone” means that faith is the ONLY instrument of justification, whereas the statement “faith without the works of the law” merely means that “the works of the law”—whatever St. Paul means by this—are the only thing that cannot be joined with faith for justification. In other words, “faith alone” excludes adding anything at all to faith, whereas “faith without the works of the law” prevents only “the works of the law” from being added to faith. This leaves open the possibility that there may be something not considered a “work of the law” that perhaps can be added to faith, or that we may understand “faith” as associated with other virtues not technically related to the “works of the law” (cf. Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 7).
  10. Hence, although we must give due justice to Paul’s statement that faith must be without the works of the law, this does not necessarily mean that faith stands completely alone, especially apart from other virtues such as love and obedience (Galatians 5:6; Romans 1:5, 16:26). According to certain Scriptures, something happens with the “works of the law” that forces Paul to separate them from his concept of faith; nevertheless, other passages authorize, even require, the addition of other virtuous works, not necessarily associated with the works of the law, in order to obtain justification.

III. The key: St. Paul’s principle of “obligation”

  1. To begin to discover the true relationship between faith and works, we need to understand one of the most fundamental principles in Paul’s theology—the principle of legal obligation, or debt. We see this principle established in that well-known passage, Romans 4:4: “To him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned according to grace, but according to debt” (Douay-Rheims).
  2. To help us understand this principle, Paul uses the example of the employer who is obligated to pay his employee for his work. “Obligation” refers to a measured compensation that is legally owed by the employer to the employee. Since we understand work as something that requires the arduous use of our faculties, the worker is someone who must be remunerated, in some way, equally to his efforts. To put it plainly, for one hour of work, one hour’s wage must be paid. Unless the employer wishes to break the law, he is legally obligated to pay the worker what is owed to him. It does not matter whether the employer loves or hates the employee, or whether he likes or dislikes him. He is under the legal obligation to pay him.
  3. In establishing this principle of legal obligation, Paul introduces the fundamental rule for anyone who attempts to “work” his way to God. If the appeal to God is based on obligation, then the relationship between God and man becomes one in which the party that works (man) is legally obligating the party for whom the work is done (God) to pay him for the work performed.
  4. Therefore, as far as justification is concerned, a man who approaches God expecting to be legally remunerated for his efforts places God in the position of being “obligated” to reckon him righteous and acceptable, deserving to live with God and to be blessed by Him for all eternity. Since in this situation God would be forced to owe a legal debt to the man who works, the relationship would be based on law, that is, on a legal contract. If it were based on law, then it could not be based on God’s personal benevolence, also called grace.
  5. This is precisely the reason why Paul, in Romans 3:28, says “…a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law.” In a broader perspective, “the works of the law” consist of “works done only under a legal contract” that demand payment for their fulfillment, without regard to whether the person doing the work believes or not, or whether he loves his benefactor or not.
  6. Conversely, if man appeals to God’s grace, God pays him out of His benevolence, without being legally obligated to do so. This is the primary distinction between grace and works. St. Paul reiterates this principle in Romans 11:6, when he says: “And if by grace, it is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace” (Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 8, Canon 1).
  7. Faith: the beginning of salvation
  8. In contrast to works performed in an attempt to obligate God, Paul speaks of justification by God’s grace through our faith (Romans 3:22-24). God is a personal being who wants man to relate to Him personally. God is not an impersonal employer whom we approach for our spiritual “pay” and then forget about for the rest of the day. For this reason, because faith is intrinsically personal, it is the ideal word to describe one who recognizes the true identity of God; who is sincerely interested in God’s purposes and plans; who trusts that God is good and is looking after our best interests (Romans 4:18-22; Hebrews 11:1-40).
  9. Conversely, St. Paul often uses “works” or “works of the law” as contractual terms that connote a kind of impersonal employer/employee relationship: someone who is bound by a contract to do a job, but who is not interested in a personal relationship with his employer. He labors or works with the sole purpose of remuneration, but has no genuine respect for the goals and aspirations of the one who pays him. He boasts of his accomplishments and expects to be paid generously for his work. Such pretensions are an insult to God.
  10. For St. Paul, the Jews of his time were the perfect example of this thesis. The Jews performed their ceremonial works in the presence of God and claimed that, by such meticulous observance of the legal covenant that God established with Abraham, God owed them salvation, without regard to their way of life (Romans 2-4). St. Paul’s answer is clear: “Or who hath first given to him, and recompense shall be made him?” (Romans 11:35, Douay-Rheims).
  11. But do works justify?
  12. Although in many passages of Scripture Paul strives greatly to distinguish as much as possible between faith and works, in others he creates the most intimate connection between faith and obedience to God’s law. This connection is so strong that it is truly biblical to affirm that without obedience to the law it is impossible to be justified and to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. St. Paul himself says in Romans 2:13: “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (Douay-Rheims) (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, number 1963, and Council of Trent, Canon 20).
  13. To some this conclusion may seem contradictory, since it seems that we are saying that the law is at once condemnatory and salvific. However, once we understand the basis for Paul’s distinction between works done merely for legal remuneration as opposed to works performed under the auspices of God’s grace, the apparent contradiction disappears (cf. Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 5).
  14. To help understand the concept of works performed under grace, or what we may now introduce as “gracious merit,” we can borrow from St. Paul’s analogy of the employer/employee in Romans 4:4. We have already learned that if the employee contracts with the employer for payment for his work, this arrangement is formalized in a written contract and is made binding by law, that is, it is a legal contract.
  15. If, on the other hand, the employer asks the employee to do some personal work for him outside the legal contract—say, some work after hours—and promises to reward him, such an agreement is not subject to a legal contract, nor, therefore, is the employer contractually obligated to pay the employee.
  16. Even so, out of the employer’s personal integrity, and perhaps because of the personal relationship he has cultivated with the employee, he may gladly pay the latter what he feels the extra work deserves, even though he is not legally obligated to do so. The employer could easily go back on his promise to pay for the work done after hours, were it not that he is honest and precisely incapable of lowering himself to such ignoble conduct.
  17. God’s relationship with man is very similar. Although man cannot legally obligate God to pay him for his work, God can reward him for his work “outside the law.” Out of His personal integrity, and because He has cultivated a personal relationship with the individual through faith, God will repay him with His kindness. For God, who is righteous, just, and compassionate, to graciously reward the good works of man is most fitting.
  18. There is no other passage where this principle in God’s dealing with man is better stated than in Hebrews 6:10: “For God is not unjust, that he should forget your work, and the love which you have shewn in his name…” (Douay-Rheims).
  19. Once we make the effort to see our works before God from the correct perspective, we must conclude that Paul does not teach that the works of the law, understood in the proper sense, are always the antithesis of justification. We must maintain that St. Paul is condemning justification by works only with respect to legal obligation, that is, when one tries to claim from God payment for works, without really caring personally about God. Outside the realm of contractual obligation, obedience to God’s laws, in the manner in which it is expressed and practiced in virtue, cooperates fully with grace in justification.
  20. Romans 2:5-10: the reward of good works is eternal life
  21. Let us observe how St. Paul sees the distinction and the opposition between works performed under grace and works performed out of legal obligation. He elaborates this distinction when he describes God’s blessing for good works and God’s judgment for evil works. One of Paul’s earliest expressions of the positive view of works in relation to salvation is that of Romans 2:6-8 (Douay-Rheims):

“… of the just judgment of God, who will render to every man according to his works: to them indeed who, according to patience in good work, seek glory and honour and incorruption, eternal life; but to them that are contentious, and who obey not the truth, but give credit to iniquity, wrath and indignation.”

  1. St. Paul is clear in affirming that God saves or condemns on the basis of the works performed by the individual. Consequently, it is also true that “wrath and indignation” refers to the opposite of eternal life, namely, eternal condemnation. It is the same context he uses in Romans 6:23, where he says: “For the wages of sin is death; but the grace of God, life everlasting, in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
  2. In saying this, let the reader be clear that we are not saying that St. Paul teaches in Romans 2 that a man can “earn” (in the strict, legal sense of the word) the reward of eternal life. We insist, Romans 4:4 makes it unquestionably clear that, when one attempts to “earn” his salvation based on works, he is obligating God to “pay him” with eternal life, which is anathema.
  3. Therefore we must conclude that the works Paul requires in Romans 2:5-10 are not those he considers to place God in a position of obligation to pay the individual with eternal life. Rather, it is presumed that those who “persevere in doing good” and who “seek glory, honour, and incorruption” are doing so under the impulse of God’s grace and mercy.
  4. God’s grace is introduced just one verse earlier in Romans 2:4, where Paul says: “Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and patience, and longsuffering? Knowest thou not, that the benignity of God leadeth thee to penance?” The divine qualities of “goodness,” “patience,” and “longsuffering” are virtues of God that flow from His grace (Ephesians 2:7; Titus 3:4; Romans 11:22). If God were not showing grace, His response would be to show no mercy toward men and thus destroy them at the least sign of disobedience. Furthermore, God is not obligated to “lead them to penance,” or to tolerate their sin. It is the grace of God that gives men the opportunity and leads them to repent and to do good works.
  5. Since Paul speaks of “penance” in Romans 2:4, and goes on with God giving “eternal life” to those who have repented and “persevere in doing good,” and “wrath and indignation” to those who have not repented, all the elements of the New Testament gospel are present in this passage.
  6. In this light, the good works of Romans 2:6-8, done in the context of repentance for sin, are works that presuppose faith in God, as well as an acknowledgment of personal sin. One cannot repent before God and do good works (that is, works done for the purpose of “honoring God and seeking incorruption”) without truly believing in God. Therefore, the works of Romans 2:6-8, accompanied by faith and repentance, are NOT works done under the principle of debt or obligation that Paul repudiates in Romans 4:4, but rather works done with a devout attitude that seek recognition and reward from within the grace of God.
  7. If Paul raises the doing of works to obtain eternal life to the height to which he does in Romans 2:6-10, what can we then conclude about Paul’s understanding of works in relation to justification? The conclusion must be that works are necessary for justification, and, in fact, are one of the fundamental determining factors for obtaining salvation or not. We say this with the caveat that Paul roundly condemns works done boastfully with the intention of obligating God to pay the worker with salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5).
  8. The only way in which God can accept our works is by His grace, in the same way that He accepts our faith by His grace. Works done under the auspices of God’s grace, that is, works that do not claim payment from God, but are rewarded only because of God’s goodness and mercy, are the works that Paul requires for salvation. These works must continue throughout our lives in order for us to be justified (Romans 2:13; James 2:1-26).

Author: Robert Sungenis

Source: Apologetica.org

Translator: Antonio Ramos, Spain