Homily for the 24thSunday in Ordinary Time (Cycle B)
Based on Mk 8:27-35 (Gospel),Is 50:5-9 (First Reading) and Jas 2:14-18 (Second
Reading)
From the Series: “Reflections and Teachings of the Desert”
FAITH
AND GOOD WORKS
Today’s gospel reading is taken fromMk 8:27-35.
Verse 27 says: Jesus and his disciples left
for the villages round Caesarea Philippi. On the way he put this question to his disciples, “Who do people say I
am?”
Parallel texts are:
a.
Mt 16:13-20 - When Jesus came to the region of
Caesarea Philippi, he put this question to his disciples, “Who do people say
that the Son of Man is?” (v. 13) And they said, ‘Some say he is John the
Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets’c(v.
14). He said to them, ‘But you’ he said ‘who do you say I am?’ (v. 15) Then
Simon Peter spoke up, ‘You are the Christ’ he said ‘the Son of the living God.’d(v.
16) Jesus replied, ‘Simon son of Jonah, you are a happy man! Because it was not
flesh and bloode that revealed this to you but my Father in heaven’
(v.17). So now I say to you: You are
Peterf and on this rock I will build my Church.gAnd the
gates of the underworldh can never hold out against it. I will give
you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatsoever you bind on earth shall be
considered bound in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth shall be considered
loosed in heaven.i(v.19)Then he gave his disciples strict orders to
tell not to tell anyone that he was the Christj (v. 20). Footnote c
states that “Jesus claimed the title
‘prophet’ for himself only indirectly and obscurely, Mt. 13:57p; Lk. 13:33, but
the public hailed him as such, Mt. 16:14p; 21:11,46; Mk. 6:15p; Lk. 7:16,39;
24:19; Jn. 4:19; 9:17. The title had messianic significance because the Jews confidently expected a
revival of the spirit of prophecy (extinct since Malachi) as a sign of the
messianic era. It was to revive either in the person of Elijah, Mt. 17:10-11p;
or in the form of a general outpouring of the Spirit, Ac. 2:17-18,33. Many
(false) prophets did actually arise in Christ’s time. Mt. 24:11p., etc. John
the Baptist was himself a prophet, Mt. 11:9p; 14:5; 21:26p; Lk. 1:76, precisely
because he was the Precursor who had come ‘in the spirit of Elijah’, Mt.
11:10p,14; 17:12p. Nevertheless he denied (Jn. 1:21+) that he was ‘the prophet’
foretold by Moses, Dt. 18:15. This prophet, the early Christians believed, was
Jesus and no other, Ac. 3:22-26; Jn. 6:14; 7:40. From Pentecost onwards,
however, prophecy became a familiar charismatic phenomenon in the early church,
Ac. 11:27+; for this reason the title prophet as applied to Christ soon dropped
out and was replaced by other more suited to his unique function and person”;
Footnote d says “In Mt Peter
acknowledges not only that Jesus is the Messiah but also that he is the Son of
God: this second title is not found in Mk and Lk. Cf. also 14:33 with Mk 6:51f.
Cf Mt 4:3+”; Footnote e says “The expression indicates man, emphasizing his material, limited nature
as opposed to that of the spirit world, Si 14:18; Rm 7:5+; 1 Co 15:50; Ga 1:16;
Ep 6:12; Heb 2:14; cf. Jn 1:13”;
Footnote f says “Neither the
Greek word petrosnor even, as it seems, its Aramaic equivalent kephas (rock)
was used as a person’s name before Jesus conferred it on the apostles’ leader
to symbolize the part he was to play in the foundation of the Church. This
change of name had possibly been made earlier, cf. Jn. 1:42; Mk. 3:16; Lk.
6:14”; Footnote g says
“The Hebr. qahal which the Greek renders
ekklesia means ‘an assembly called together’; it is used frequently in the OT
to indicate the community of the Chosen People, especially the community of the
desert period, cf. Ac. 7:38. Certain Jewish groups (among them the Essenes of
Qumran) regarded themselves as the chosen remnant of Israel (Is. 4:3+), which
was to survive in the latter days. These had also used the term that Jesus now
adopts to indicate the messianic community, the community of the ‘new alliance’
sealed with his blood, Mt. 26:28+; Ep. 5:25. By using the term ‘assembly’ side
by side with that of the kingdom of heaven, Mt. 4:17+, Jesus shows that this
eschatological community (community of the end times) is to have its beginning
here on earth in the form of an organized society whose leader he now appoints,
Cf. Ac. 5:11+; 1 Co. 1:2+”; Footnote h says “Greek:
Hades: Hebrew: Sheol, the dwelling place of the Dead, cf. Nb. 16:33 +. Here its
personified ‘gates’ suggest the powers of evil which first lead man into the
death which is sin and then imprison him once for all in eternal death. The
Church’s task will be to rescue the elect from death’s dominion, from the death
of the body and above all from eternal death, so that it may lead them into the
kingdom of heaven, cf. Col 1:13; 1 Co 15:26: Rv. 6:8; 20:13. In this the church
follows its Master who died, descended into the underworld, cf. 1 P. 3:19+, and
rose again. Ac. 2:27,31”; Footnote i says “The City of God, like the City of Death, has its gates too; they grant
entrance only to those who are worthy of it. Peter has the keys. It is his
function, therefore, to open or close to all who would come to the kingdom of
heaven through the Church. ‘bind’ and ‘loose’ are technical rabbinic terms;
primarily they have a disciplinary reference; one is ‘bound’ (condemned to) o
‘loosed’ (absolved from) excommunication. Their secondary usage is connected
with doctrinal or juridical decisions: an opinion is ‘bound’ (forbidden) or
‘loosed’ {allowed). Of the household of God Peter is controller (the keys
symbolize this, cf. Is. 22:22). In that capacity, he is to exercise the disciplinary
power of admitting or excluding those he thinks fit; he will also, in the
administration of the community, make necessary decision in questions of
doctrinal belief and of moral conduct. The verdicts he deliver or the
pronouncements he makes will be ratified by God i heaven. Catholic exegetes
maintain that these enduring promises hold good not only for Peter himself but
also for Peter’s successors. This inference, not explicitly drawn in the text,
is considered legitimate because Jesus plainly intends to provide for his
Church’s future by establishing a regime that will not collapse after Peter’s
death. Two other texts, Lk. 22:31f and Jn. 21:15f, on Peter’s primacy emphasize
that its operation is to be in the domain of faith; they also indicate that this
makes him head not only of the Church after the death of Christ but of the
apostolic group then and there”; Footnote j states “Vulg.
‘Jesus Christ’.”
b.
Lk
9:18-21 - Peter’s profession of faithc - Now one day when
hewas praying alone in the presence of his
disciples he put this question to them, “Who do the crowds say I am?” (v. 18)
And they answered, “John the Baptist; others Elijah; and others say one of the
ancient prophets come back to life’(v. 19).‘But you,’ he said them, “who do you
say I am?” It was Peter who spoke up, ‘The Christ of God’ he said (v. 20) But
he gave them strict orders not to tell anyone anything about this (v. 21).
Footnote c states that “Lk has
left out a whole section of Mk (6:45-8:26)”.
Verses 28, 29 and 30 say: And they told him, ‘John
the Baptist,’ they said ‘others Elijah’,
others again, one of the prophets.’ “But you,’ he asked, ‘who do you say I am?”
Peter spoke up and said to him, “You are the Christ.” Then he warned them not
to tell anyone about him.
Parallel text for verse 30 is Mk 1:34 that says: And he cured many who were suffering from
diseases of one kind or another; he also cast out many devils, but he would not
allow them to speak, because they knew who he was.i Footnote i
says “Jesus forbids the news that he is the
Messiah to be spread by the devils, 1:25,34; 3:12, by those he cured, 1:44;
5:43; 7:36; 8:26, even by the apostles, 8:30; 9:9. The silence is not to be
broken till after his death, Mt. 10:27+. Since the prevailing idea of the
Messiah was nationalistic and warlike, in sharp contrast with his own ideal,
Jesus had to be very careful, at least on Israelite soil, cf. 5:19, to avoid
giving a false and dangerous impression of his mission, cf. Jn. 6:15; Mt.
13:13+. This policy of silence (‘the messianic secret’) is not an invention of
Mk’s, as some have claimed, but is in fact Christ’s own, though Mark has given
it a special emphasis. With the exception of Mt. 9:30, Mt. and Lk. record the
injunction to silence only in passages which are parallel with Mk, frequently
omitting it even in these cases.”
Verse 31 says: He began to teach them that the Son
of Man` must suffer greatly and
be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed,
and rise after three days.
Parallel texts are:
a.
From that timek, Jesus began to show
his disciples that he* must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders,
the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be
raised (v. 21).Then Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, “God forbid,
Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you” (v. 22). He turned and said to
Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not
as God does, but as human beings do” (v. 23).
Footnote k – Jesus has just elicited from his disciples the
first explicit profession of faith in him as Messiah. At this crucial moment he
tells them for the first time of his coming Passion: he is not only the
glorious Messiah, he is also the suffering servant. Within the next few days
this teaching method will be pursued in a similar situation: the glorious
transfiguration will be followed by an injunction to silence and a prediction
of Passion, 17:1-12. It is Christ’s way of bracing the disciples’ faith for the
approaching crisis of death and resurrection.
b.
First prophecy of the Passiond -“The Son of Man’ he said, is destined to
suffer grievously,to be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes,
and to beput to death and to be raised up on the third day. Footnote d
says “This prophecy is to b followed by
several others, 9:44; 12:50; 17:25; 18:31-33. Cf. 24:7,25-27. Lk omits Peter’s
protest and his rebuke by Jesus, Mk 8:32f.”
c.
As they were coming down from the mountain, he
charged them not to relate what they had seen to anyone, except when the Son of
Man had risen from the dead (v. 9). So they kept the matter to themselves,
questioning what rising from the dead meant (v. 10).He was teaching his
disciples and telling them, “The Son of Man is to be handed over to men and
they will kill him, and three days after his death he will rise.” (v. 31) .But
they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to question him (v.
32).
d.
Third prophecy of the Passion: They were on the
way, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus went ahead of them. They were amazed, and
those who followed were afraid. Taking the Twelve aside again, he began to tell
them what was going to happen to him (v. 32).“Behold, we are going up to
Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the
scribes, and they will condemn him to death and hand him over to the Gentiles
(v. 33) who will mock him, spit upon him, scourge him, and put him to death,
but after three days he will rise” (v. 34).
Verse 32 and 33 say: He spoke this openly. Then Peter took him aside
and began to rebuke him. At this he turned around and, looking at his
disciples, rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind me, Satan. You are thinking not
as God does, but as human beings do.”
Parallel text for verse 33 is Mk 4:13 that says: He
said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand
any of the parables?cFootnote
c says “The apostles’ incomprehension of Christ’s
works and words is a favorite theme of Mk. 6:52; 7:18; 8:17-18,21,33; 9:10,32;
10:38. With the exception of certain parallel places (Mt. 15;16; 16:9,23;
20:22; Lk 9:45) and of Lk 18:34; 24:25,45. Mt and Lk often pass such remarks
over in silence, or even emend them; compare Mt 14:33 with Mk 6:51-52, and see
Mt 13:51, Cf. Jn 14:26+.”
Verse 34 says: He summoned the crowd with his disciples and said* to them, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny
himself, take up his cross, and follow me.
Parallel texts are:
a.
Mt 10:38-39 - Anyone who does not take up his
cross and follow in my footsteps is not worthy of me (v.38). Whoever finds his life will lose it; anyone
who loses his life for my sake will find itn (v. 38).Footnoten
says “In Mt this dictum is given in a
more archaic form than in Mk or Lk: ‘find’ covers the idea of ‘winning’
‘securing for oneself’, cf. Gn 26:12; Ho 12:9; Pr 3:13; 21:21. See Mt. 16:25.”
b.
Mt 16:24-28 - Then Jesus said to his disciples,
“Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and
follow me (v. 24).For anyone who wants to save his life will lose it, but
anyone who loses his life for my sake will find itm (v. 25). What
profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or
what can one give in exchange for his life? (v. 26). For the Son of Man will
come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone
according to his conduct (v. 27). Amen, I say to you, there are some standing
here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his
kingdom” (v. 28). Footnotemsays“Paradox.
This dictum and those immediately following oscillate between two senses of
human ‘life’; its present stage and its future. The Greek psyche, here
equivalent to the Hebrew nephesh, contains all three senses of ‘life’, soul’,
‘person’.
c.
Lk 9:23-27 - Then to all he said, ‘If anyone
wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross
every day and follow me (v. 23). For anyone who wants to save his life will
lose it; but anyone who loses his life for my sake, that man will save it (v.
24). What gain, then, is it for a man to have won the whole world and to have
lost or ruined his very self? (v. 25). For if anyone is ashamed of me and of my
words, of him the Son of Man will be ashamed when h comes in his own glory and
in the glory of the Father and the holy angels (v. 26). ‘I tell you truly,
there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the
kingdom of God’ (v. 27).
d. Lk
14:26-27 - “If any man comes to me
without hatingc his father, mother, wife,d children,
brothers, sisters, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple (v.
26).Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me cannot be my
disciple (v. 27).Footnotec says “Hebraism.
Jesus asks, not for hate, but for total detachment now, cf. 9:57-62”;
Footnote d says “‘wife’,
peculiar to Lk, illustrating his leaning to ascetism, cf. 1 Co 7, So Lk also,
18:29.”
Verse 35 says: For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever
loses his life for my sake and that of the gospel will save it.
Parallel text for verse 35 is Jn 12:25 that says: Anyone who loves his life loses it; and whoever hates his life in this
world will keep it for the eternal life.
The First Reading for this Sunday is Is 50:5-9.
Verse
5 says: The Lord GOD opened
my ear;d I did not
refuse, did not turn away.Footnotedsays
“The servant, cf. 42:1+, is here not so
much a prophet as a sage inspired by Yahweh”.
Parallel texts are:
a.
Ps 40:6 - You,
who wanted no sacrifice or oblation, openedb my ear, you asked no
holocaust or sacrifice for sin; then I said, ‘Here I am! I am coming!”Footnote
b says “Lit ‘dug out’. God
sees to it that his servant knows his will, cf. Is 50:5. A Greek variant, ‘you
have fashioned a body for me, was interpreted messianically and applied to
Christ, Heb 10:5”.
b.
Is 52:13-53:12- Fourth Song of the Servant of
Yahwehk-See, my servant shall prosper,he shall be lifted up,
exalted, rise to great heights (v. 13).As the crowds were appalled on seeing himl,
so disfigured did he look that he seemed no longer humanm (v. 14),So
will the crowds be astonished at himn, and kings stand speechless
before him; for they shall seesomething never told and witness something never
heard before (v. 15);Who could believe what we have heardand towhom has the
power of Yahweh revealed? (v. 1).He grew up in front of usa like a
shootb in arid ground; without beauty, without majesty (we saw him),
no looks to attract our eyes (v. 2), a thing despised and rejected by men,a man
of sorrows and familiar with suffering, a man to make people screen their facesc;
he was despised and we took no account of him (v. 3). And yet ours were the
sufferings he bore, ours the sorrows he carried. But we, we thought of him as
someone punished, struck by God, and brought low (v. 4).Yet he was pierced
through for our faults,crushed for our sins. On him lies a punishment that
brings us peace, and through his wounds we are healed(v. 5). We had all gone
astray like sheep, each taking his own way; and Yahweh burdened him with the
sins of us all(v. 6). Harshly dealt with, he bore it humbly, he never opened
his mouth, like a lamb that is led to the slaughterhouse, like a sheep dumbed
before its shearers, never opening his mouth (v. 7). By force and by law, he
was takend, would anyone plead his cause? Yet, he was torn away from
the land of the living; for ourf faults struck down in death (v.8).They
gave him a grave with the wicked, a tomb with therichg, though he
had done no wrong, and there had been no perjury in his mouth (v.9). Yahweh had
been pleased to crush him with sufferingh. If he offers his life in
atonement, he shall see his heirs, he shall have a long life,andthrough him
what Yahweh wishes will shall be done(v.10).His soul’s anguish over he shall
see the light;I and be content;j By his sufferings shall
my servant justify many, taking their
faults on himself (v.11).Hence I will great whole hordes his tributes, he shall
divide the spoil with the mighty, for surrendering himself to death, and
letting himself be taken for a sinner while he was bearing the faults of many,
and praying all the time for sinners (v.12).
For Is 52:13,footnotek says “On the
meaning of this song, cf. 42:1+. The poem is apparently in dialogue form. First
Yahweh delivers an oracle, v. 13, then the kings of the nation speak, vv. 14 f,
and next the people; the poem ends with a further oracle, 53:11-12. It is
difficult to decide, however, precisely where the speaker changes; Footnote l
- ‘On seeing him’ Targ, and Syr.; ‘on seeing you’ Hebr.; Footnote m
–says “A DSIa variant suggests the
translation ‘By my anointing I took his human appearance from him’;
Footnote n says ‘will be
astonished’ following Greek and Lat.; ‘he
will come to leap’ Hebr.; For Is 53:1 -12, footnote a says ‘in front of us’ corr.; ‘in front of him’
Hebr; Footnote b says “In
11:1,10, Immanuel is a ‘root’; Footnote c says “The expression was used of lepers.;
Footnote d says “Suggesting
that the servant has been condemned by process of law; Footnote e
says “‘cause’
corr.; ‘generation’, ‘descent’ Hebr. Interpretation uncertain. The ‘who will
explain his descent?’ of the Greek and Lat. Has been taken by Christian
tradition to refer to the mysterious origin of Christ; the Hebr. Dor ( a
generation) cannot however bear this sense; Footnote f – “‘our’ corr.; ‘of my people’ Hebr.”;
Footnote g says “With DSIa,
Hebr. ‘in his death he is with the rich man’. Early Christian preaching seems
to have had this text in mind when recording the burial of Jesus in the tomb of
Joseph Arimathea, ‘a rich man’, Mt 27:57-60. It is possible to correct to ‘in
his death he is with the evil-doers’, Lk. 22:37 which, however, refers rather
to v. 12.; Footnote hsays“‘with
suffering’ corr., cf. versions; ‘he has pierced him’ DSIa, cf. v. 5.”;
Footnote I says“‘the light’
Greek, DSIa and DSIb; absent from Hebr.; Footnote j says“‘By his suffering’ corr. following one Hebr. MS; ‘By his knowledge’ Hebr. Before
‘servant’ Hebr. inserts ‘the just one’.”
Verse 6 says: I
gave my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who tore out my beard; My
face I did not hide from insults and spitting.e Footnote esays
“The description of the servant’s
suffering recurs in the fourth song, 52:13-53:12.”
Parallel texts are:
a.
Lm 3:30 - To offer his cheek to the striker, to
be overwhelmed with insults.
b.
Mt 26:67 - Then they spat in his face and hithim
with their fists; others said as the struck him…
c. Mt
27:30 - And they spat upon him and took the reed and struck him on the head
with it.And when they had finished making fun of him, they took off the cloak,
dressed him in his own clothes, and led him off to crucify him.
Verse 7 says: The Lord GOD is my
help, therefore I am not disgraced; Therefore I have set my face like flint,
knowing that I shall not be put to shame.
Parallel texts are:
a.
Ezk 3:8-9 - But now I will make youas defiant as
they are, and as obstinate as they are; I am going to make your resolutions as
hard as diamond, and diamond is harder than flint. So, do not be afraid of
them, do not be overwhelmed by them, for they are a set of rebels(vv. 8-9).
b.
Ps 25:3 - No, those who hope in you are never
shamed, shame awaits disappointed traitors.
Verse
8 says: He who
declares my innocence is near. Who will oppose me? Let us appear together. Who
will dispute my right? Let them confront me.
Parallel text is Rm 8:31-33 that says: After saying
this, what can we add? With God on our side, who can be against us?(v. 31).
Since God did not spare his own Son but gave him up to benefit us all, we may
be certain that, after such a gift, that he will not refuse anything he can
give (v. 32). Could anyone accuse those that God has chosen? When God acquits,
could anyone condemn (v. 33).
Verse 9 says:See, the Lord GOD is my help; who will declare me
guilty? See, they will all wear out like a garment, devoured by moths.
Parallel texts are:
a.
Is 51:8 - For the moth shall eat them like
garment, the grub devour them like wool; but my integrity will remain forever,
and my salvation for all generations.
b.
Jb 13:28 - While my life is crumbling like
rotten wood, or a moth-eaten garment.
c.
Ho 5:12 - Very well I myself will be the moth
for Ephraim, the canker of the house of Judah.
The Second Reading for this Sunday isJas 2:14-18. This scripture is
entitled: Faith and good
worksf
Footnote f of this title
says “The different points of view of
James and Paul, Rm. 3:20-31; Ga 2:16; 3:2,11f; Ph3:9, are not wholly
irreconcilable. Paul is anxious to rule out the view that a human being can
earn salvation without having faith in Christ, since such a reliance on
self-made sanctity would be contradicted by the radical sinfulness of
unredeemed man, Rm 1:18-3:20; Ga 3:22, and would make faith in Christ
superfluous, Ga. 3:17; cf. Rm 1:16+. But Paul does not deny that the saint who
has been made holy by grace must show his faith by actually loving, Ga 5:6; cf.
1 Th 1:3; 2 Th 1:11; Phm 6, and in this way obeying the Law, Rm 8:4, i.e. the
Law or commandments of Christ and his Spirit, Ga 6:2; Rm 8:2, which is the
commandment to love, Rm 13:8-10; Ga 5:14. It is perfectly true, however, that
in order to teach the same truth as Paul, James in a different context and
under different circumstances explain the case of Abraham in a completely
different way from Paul.”
Verse 14 says: Take the case, my brothers, of someone who has
never done a single good act but claims he has faith? Will that faith save him?
Parallel texts are:
a.
Jm 2:24 - You see now that it is by doing
something good, and not only by believing that a man is justified.
b.
Rm 4:1 - Apply this to Abrahama
found, the ancestor from whom we are all descended?bFootnote a says “Lit. ‘What then shall we say about Abraham?’ Var. (Vulg.) ‘What then
shall we say that Abraham has gained?’; Footnote b says“The recurrence of the fatherhood of Abraham
theme marks the stages in the argument,
vv. 1:12, 16-18.”
c. Ga
5:6 - …since in Christ Jesus whether you are circumcised or not counts makes no
difference –what matters is faith that makes its power through love
Verse 15 says: If one of the brothers or one of the sisters is in need of
clothes and has not enough food to live on,
Parallel texts
are:
a.
Mt 25:41-45 - Next he will say to those on his
left hand,’Go away from me, with your curse upon you, to the eternal fire
prepared for the devil and his angels (v. 41). For I was hungry and you never
gave me food; I was thirsty and you never gave me anything to drink (v. 42); I
was a stranger and you never made me welcome, naked and you never clothed me,
sick and in prison and you never visited me.’ (v. 43). Then it will be their turn
to ask, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty, a stranger or naked, sick
or in prison, and did not come to your help? (v. 44)‘ Then he will answer, ‘I
tell you solemnly, in so far as you neglected to do this to one of these, you
neglected to do it to me (v. 45).’
b.
1 Co 13:5 - …it is never rude or selfish, it
does not take offence, and it is not resentful.
c.
1 Jn 3:17 - If a man who was rich enough in this
world’s goods saw that one of his brothers was in need, but closed his heart to
him, how could the love of God be living in him? (v. 17). My children, our love
is not to be just words or mere talk, but something real and active…
Verses 16, 17
and 18 says: and one of you says to them, “I wish you well, keep yourself warm,
and eat plenty” without giving them these bare necessities of life body, what
good is it?Faith is like that: if good
works do not go with it, it is quitedead.g This is the way to talk
to people of that kind:h “You say you have faith and I have good works; I will
prove to you that I have faith by showing you my good deeds - now you prove to
me that you have faith without any good deeds to show. Footnote g says “Lit.‘it is dead by itself’”; and
Footnote h says “The same
opponents as in vv. 17 and 26.”
Parallel text of verse 16 is Mt 7:21 that say: It is not those who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ who
will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the person who does the will of my Father
in heaven.
Discussion on
the Justification by Faith and Good Works:
J. A. Wylie, History of the
Waldenses: The whole great doctrine of justification by faith elaborated in
Paul’s epistle to the Romans is involved in Christ’s declaration in John 3:16.
The Protestant Reformation was born, apparently, of an intense conviction of
the utter sinfulness of man and his radical need of Divine regeneration. As the
only antidote to the theoretical Semi-Pelagianism and the practical Pelagianism
and the innumerable unspeakable pharisaical abominations of Catholicism, Luther
and Calvin, in the sixteenth century, proclaimed anew, in trumpet tones, to the priest-ridden millions of Europe, the
great Pauline and Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace—the entire natural
equality and total depravity of all men in the eyes of an Infinitely Holy God,
the absolute dependence of fallen man upon the sovereign mercy of the Most
High, justification by faith alone (solifidianism)—nothing like this old Bible
doctrine, when believed, to cut up human pride and merit and pharisaism by the
roots, to humble man in the dust before God, to stir him up to heartfelt
gratitude for the Divine salvation, to cause him to serve God in spirit from an
inward principle of filial love, and to comfort him in trial and despondency. All
these features are perfectly consistent and congenial with papal synergism,
Semi-Pelagianism, pharisaism, but totally irreconcilable with the great
monergistic, Pauline, Christian doctrine of Divine predestination and election,
justification by faith alone, salvation by grace alone. As established by
Ludwig Keller, the present royal archivist at Munster, in his thorough and authoritative
work on “The Reformation and the Older Reforming Parties Exhibited in their Connection,”
published at Leipzig in 1885, the evangelical Anti-Catholic Christians from the
eleventh to the sixteenth centuries, known as Petrobrusians, Henricians,
Waldenses, Pikards, Beghards, Beguins, Spirituales, Sabbati, Insabbati,
Apostolic Brethren, Poor men in Christ, Friends of God, Mystics and Bohemians,
were, in the darkness of the Dark Ages, Arminians. They exalted the Scriptures
above all human books, and accepted the doctrine of justification by faith; but
they earnestly insisted on the freedom of man’s will to accept or reject the provisions
of Divine grace, and emphasized the necessity of imitating Christ in His life
of self-denial. The earliest Waldenses are believed to have been
Anti-Pedobaptists. It appears that the early Waldenses were not established in
the doctrine of predestination, and of the redemptive work of Christ, and of
our full and free justification by faith in Him; their prevailing type of
doctrine is less that of Paul than of James. In the darkness of the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries they were more Arminian than Augustinian in their
views. They were babes in Christ, and were gradually led into the doctrine of
grace. It is highly probable, and is believed by many eminent historians, that
the Waldenses in Northern Italy were the spiritual descendants and successors
of the Novatians—like them, stigmatized as Anabaptists, rejecting the
superstitions and corruptions of Rome, and re-immersing all who joined them
from the Catholic communion.
The fifteenth (and the first
quarter of the sixteenth) century was the period of the Augustan culmination
and thorough paganization of Latin “Christianity” (in Popes Nicholas V and Leo
X); of the unspeakable abominations of John XXIII and Alexander (Borgia) VI; of
papal conspiracies, poisonings for wealth, assassinations and debaucheries; of
the papal suppression of all vernacular translations of the Scriptures; of the
burning of the Lollards in England (including Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham)
and of Hus and Jerome of Prague, and of the ferocious papal crusades against the
Bohemian Hussites and the French and Italian Waldenses; of the establishment
and operations of the so-called “improved, reformed, or modern,” diabolical,
terrific and unequalled Spanish Inquisition against Jews, Moors and “heretics,”
with Torquemada’s superintendence and his infernal autos da fe; of the
so-called “Reforming Councils” of Pisa, Constance and Basel, pretending to
correct some of the external evils of Catholicism (while leaving unnoticed the
false doctrines lying at the root of those evils), but
miserably failing in their
attempts, the popes, with Satanic, yet characteristic cunning and perseverance,
taking back more than all that had been taken from them; of two and even three
popes and Councils at once, cursing and warring against each other, and making
“confusion worse confounded;” of the unrivalled increase of the worship of
images, relics, saints, and especially Mary, and of penances, pilgrimages,
jubilees and post-jubilees, and of the sale of indulgences for the sins of the
dead and for the past and future sins of the living, a price in money being
fixed for every sin; of the abandonment of preaching by the ordinary “clergy,”
and the degradation of it by the monks to the mere rehearsal of lying legends,
indecent tales and low comic exhibitions; of the disappearance of religion from
the head, as it had long since disappeared from the heart; of the substitution
of the abominable Machiavellian politics, and of the old Pagan literature,
mythology, cruelty and sensuality for Christianity; of the abandonment of the
restraining principle of shame, and of the almost universal prevalence of
degrading and unnatural licentiousness in monasteries and nunneries, and among
the “secular clergy” and all ranks of society, and of the consequent first
appearance, at the close of the fifteenth century, of the most awful and
loathsome contagious disease that ever afflicted humanity; so that as in the
horrible chaos of the first century of the Christian era, men everywhere even
naturally despaired of their race unless it were regenerated by Divine power.
The utter hollowness of the Catholic doctrine of justification by works, and
the absolute necessity of a radically different doctrine, that of justification
by faith, were unmistakably demonstrated to all the world that had eyes to see.
And yet there were many providential events in this period of dismal spiritual
darkness, unconsciously, as it were, preparing for the widespread and
successful publication to poor lost sinners prepared to receive the message, of
the glad news of God’s free, full, holy, and omnipotent salvation.
The sixteenth century was the
period of the fixed and executed purpose of the popes to build at Rome a
religious structure to be known as “St. Peter’s,” designed to eclipse in costly
and colossal magnificence all the other temples of earth; and, though intended
by the popes to be a grand perpetual monument of Roman Catholic glory, yet
designed by Providence to be a grand perpetual monument of Roman Catholic
shame, proclaiming forever to the world the bottomless abyss of corruption into
which an organization calling itself the “Holy Catholic Church” had descended
to offer in the public marts of Europe the unblushing sale for gold of
unlimited indulgences for past, present and future sins—the declared object of
the popes being to devote the gold to the erection of the cathedral of “St.
Peter’s;” against which tremendous and unparalleled abomination Martin
Luther[2] was raised up by the Holy Spirit to utter a mighty trumpet-blast of
God’s absolute and eternal predestination of His people to everlasting life, of
justification by faith alone, and salvation by grace alone, which reverberated
all over Roman Catholic Europe, aroused sleeping millions from their nocturnal
slumbers, and shook to its center the Kingdom of Mystical Babylon. The
sixteenth was the century, too, of the great counter-blast against Luther and
Protestantism[3] in the necessitated external reformation of Catholic morals; in
the perpetration of terrific massacres, and the waging of protracted,
desolating and bloody wars; in the revivification and intensification of the
horrors of the Reformed Inquisition; in the permanent petrifaction, in the
Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, of the mediaeval Catholic heretical
doctrines of tradition, free-will, Semi-Pelagianism, falling from grace, meritoriousness
of good works, transubstantiation, baptismal regeneration, sacerdotalism, Roman
apostolical (or, as it should be called, apostatical) images, and indulgences;
and in the establishment of the Society of Jesuits, with their Pelagianism,
probabilism, and cunning casuistry, their absolute devotion, in both body and
soul, to the papacy, their perverted education of European youth, and their
accommodating, compromising, mongrel, and therefore “very successful missions”
to India, Japan, China, and North and South America. Ulrich Zwingli
(1484-1531), the able, scholarly, eloquent, clear-headed, bold-hearted and
patriotic leader of the Reformation in German Switzerland, despising papal
threats and gold, advocated, like Luther, the doctrine of justification by
faith alone, and salvation by grace alone. He declared, at the daily risk of
his life, that tradition is worthless, and the Scriptures are the only standard
of faith and practice; that the mass and image and saint worship are idolatry;
that Christ is the only sacrifice for sin, and the only mediator between God
and man.
“Over against the mock
sovereignty of the pope,” says Prof. Schaff, “Calvin set the absolute sovereignty
of God, and he made this the chief article in his system; while Luther gave the
greatest prominence to justification by faith alone; but the central place in
the Christian system belongs only to the person and work of Christ—the
incarnation and the atonement.” Calvin
had extraordinary light on the doctrine of grace and the holy effects of that
doctrine in the heart and life; but he was in great and lamentable darkness in
regard to infant baptism, indifference of the “form” of baptism, a modified
sacramentalism, alliance of “Church and State,” the civil punishment of
excommunicated persons, the subjection of the individual church to a gradation
of higher bodies, and fellowshipping Catholics and all the members of every
so-called Christian “Church.” In particular, Wesleyan ministers insist on the
doctrines of original sin, general redemption, repentance, justification by
faith, the witness of the Spirit, and Christian perfection” by “the witness of
the Spirit” meaning, they say, a sense of sins forgiven, but not necessarily final
salvation; and, by “Christian perfection,” meaning, not sinlessness, but the
perfection of love, which they believe to be attainable in the present life.
The doctrinal essence of Methodism is thus well stated in the American
Cyclopaedia: “Methodism holds that the salvation of each human being depends
solely on his own free action in respect to the enlightening, renewing and
sanctifying inworkings of the Holy Spirit (which this system holds to be
universal). If, in respect to these inworkings, he holds himself receptively,
he will be saved both here and hereafter; but if he closes his heart against
these influences of the Spirit, he will continue in death both here and in
eternity.”
This deficiency is an
essential part of all Rationalism, including Arminianism. They sometimes admit,
and sometimes deny, the innate depravity of the human race since the Fall; and
they distinctly and emphatically abandon the central doctrine of Protestantism,
the justification of the Christian by faith alone, and return to the Roman
Catholic doctrine of justification by faith and works (or rather work-baptism
being the one great work with them).
From: Andrew
N. Dugger and Clarence O. Dodd, A History of the True Church
Page 73. “The beginning of the thirteenth century saw thousands of
persons hanged or burned by these diabolical devices, whose sole crime was,
that they trusted in Jesus Christ for salvation, and renounced all the vain
hopes of self-righteousness, idolatry and superstition. Whoever has attended
closely to the subject of the epistles to the Colossians and Galatians, and has
penetrated into the meaning of the epistle, sees the great duty of HOLDING THE
HEAD, and resting for justification by faith, on Jesus Christ alone, inculcated
throughout them as the predominant precept of Christianity, in opposition to
the rudiments of the world, to human works and devices of whatever kind. Such a
person sees what true Protestantism is, contrasted with genuine popery; and, of
course, he is convicted, that the difference is not merely verbal or frivolous,
but that there is a perfect opposition in the two plans; and such as admits of
no coalition or union; and that therefore the true way of withstanding the
devices of Satan, is to be faithful to the great doctrine of justification by
the grace of Jesus Christ, through faith alone, and not by our own works or
deservings. Hence the very foundation of false religion is overthrown; hence
troubled consciences obtain solid peace, and faith, working by love, leads men
into the very spirit of Christianity, while it comforts their hearts, and
establishes them in every good work.”
Page 76."The greater part of Europe, had now forsaken the
all-important article of justification by the merit of Jesus Christ alone
through faith, and were entangled in the nets of pharisaical religion, and
readily betook themselves to numberless superstitions, to give quiet and ease
to their consciences. The Waldenses found peace and comfort, and the
expectation of heaven through Jesus Christ alone by faith, and hence despised
the whole popedom with all its appendages; while others, who trembled in
conscience for their sins; and knew not the holy wisdom of resting in Christ
alone for salvation, might well swell with indignation at the wickedness of the
court of Rome, but durst not emancipate themselves from its bonds. The power of
the Pope was then but a cement of wickedness which encouraged men with the
hopes of heaven, while living in superstition and the indulgence of the
greatest crimes.”
Page 77. "In this, Gregory, in effect, opposed the doctrine
of the atonement of Christ, and in contempt of it, taught men to expect
justification from God, on the merit of military service, rendered at the
command of his [self-styled] Viceregent. In this way, the human mind was
removed from faith in Christ, and men were taught to rely for pardon on the
sovereign pontiff, and were led to imbibe the fatal doctrines that wickedness
might be committed, with the flattering prospect of gaining the divine favor,
without a reformation of heart and life.”
From Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia, “Moravian Church”: “The
Hussite movement that was to become the Moravian Church was started by Jan Hus
(English: John Huss) in the late 14th century, in what is today the Czech
Republic. Hus objected to some of the practices of the Roman Catholic Church
and wanted to return the church in Bohemia and Moravia to early
Byzantine-inspired practices: liturgy in the language of the people (i.e.
Czech), having lay people receive communion in both kinds (bread and wine -
that is, in Latin, communio sub utraque specie), married priests, and
eliminating indulgences and the idea of Purgatory. Jan Hus rejected indulgences
and adopted a doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone;
consequently, the Moravian Church became the first Protestant church.”
Enc. Britannica, “Waldenses”: “A second period in their history began when
the French reformer Guillaume Farel introduced
Reformation theology to
the Waldensian ministers (barbes) in
1526. The Waldenses raised questions concerning the number of sacraments, the
relationship between free will and predestination,
and the problem of reconciling justification by faith with the scriptural
emphasis on the necessity of good works. At a conference at Cianforan in 1532 most
Waldenses accepted secular law courts and celibacy for their barbes and agreed to accept
only two sacraments (baptism and Holy Communion) and the doctrine of
predestination as presented by the Protestants in attendance. By further
adapting themselves to Genevan forms of worship and church organization, they
became in effect a Swiss Protestant church. Years of persecution continued,
however, before they received full civil rights in 1848.”
From
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, History of Christianity:
Martin Luther was an Augustinian friar and professor at the University of Wittenberg. In 1517, he published a list of 95 Theses, or points to be debated, concerning
the illicitness of selling indulgences. Luther had a particular disdain for
Aristotelian philosophy, and as he began developing his own theology, he
increasingly came into conflict with Thomistic scholars, most notably Cardinal Cajetan.[75] Soon, Luther had begun to develop
his theology of justification, or process by which one is "made right" (righteous) in
the eyes of God. In Catholic theology, one is made righteous by a progressive
infusion of grace accepted through faith and cooperated with through good
works. Luther's doctrine of justification differed from Catholic theology in
that justification rather meant "the declaring of one to be
righteous", where God imputes the merits of Christ upon one who remains
without inherent merit.[76] In this process, good works are
more of an unessential byproduct that contribute nothing to one's own state of
righteousness. Ulrich Zwingli was a Swiss scholar and parish priest who was
likewise influential in the beginnings of the Protestant Reformation. Zwingli
claimed that his theology owed nothing to Luther, and that he had developed it
in 1516, before Luther's famous protest, though his doctrine of justification
was remarkably similar to that of the German friar.
David C. Pack, What is your Reward in the Next Life?
“Before explaining whether or not a Christian
must perform good works in his life, we must examine a more basic question.
“Are Christians required to obey the
laws of God? What is the answer—the
truth—from the Word of God?
“Jesus never taught that people
should just “believe on Him” to receive salvation. When a young, rich man asked
Him what he must do to
have “eternal life”—receive salvation—Christ did not tell him, “Just believe in
Me.” Instead, He told him, “If you will enter into life, KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS.” Hearing this,
the disciples were shocked. (So are most ministers and churchmen.) They did not
understand how this was possible and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Christ
answered, “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible” (Matt. 19:17, 25-26). It is possible to obey God.
“In Mark 7:7-8, Christ said, “Howbeit
IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For
laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men.” It is
possible to worship Christ in vain. It is possible to think about Him, talk
about Him and refer to Him often as Lord—ALL IN VAIN!
“Now notice: “Not every one that says
unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven [“of” not “in”
heaven]; but he that does the will of My Father which is in heaven” (Matt.
7:21). Paul wrote, “the DOERS of the law [God’s] shall be justified” (Rom.
2:13).
“A Christian is one who actually does
certain things. His responsibility is more than just belief. In the context of
explaining the difference between those who build their house on a rock and
those who build on sand, Christ said, “And why call you Me, Lord, Lord, and do
not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46). A Christian does what God says to do!
Also, carefully read James 1:22-25; 2:8-12, 14, 17-20. These verses
substantiate Christ’s instruction commanding true Christians to keep the laws
of God, tying works and faith together. They show it is not faith or works but
faith and works.
“So, a Christian is a “doer” not just
a “believer” or “hearer.” Salvation is a gift, but there are
qualifyingconditions—behavior, conduct, works—that must be performed, or belief
in Christ is in vain! And one who claims to have love must perform definite
“works” of obedience to the law, which demonstrate it.Being “saved by grace” and “rewarded
according to works” are entirely different matters. Few understand that it is
not one or the other—IT IS BOTH!
“The Bible repeatedly states that
Christians will be rewarded later according
to their works now. We
will see that this is an absolutely CLEAR—PLAIN—teaching of scripture. But, what kind of works is this referring
to? The Bible actually refers to works with two different intended meanings.
This booklet will focus on one of them.
“Paul’s epistles to the Romans and
the Galatians make reference to “the works of the law.” The Greek word for
this, ergon, refers to the
tedious physical ceremonies, rituals, and sacrifices that ancient Israel was
required to perform under certain circumstances. The book of Leviticus and
other places discuss them in detail. They were often required to be
performed in conjunction with obedience
to the Ten Commandments.
“But, this is not the meaning that we
will focus upon. Ergon can
also refer to “physical work, action, labor or acts of spiritual
righteousness.” Invariably, when this meaning is intended, the word “works”
stands alone, omitting the phrase “of the law” (God’s law, the Ten
Commandments). The often-used Greek word praxis, often translated “works,” also has a nearly identical meaning.
“You cannot live your life
without doing many
things each day. All the things that you do are either good or bad. They are
your “works.” They define you for what you are. Solomon wrote, “Even a child is
known by his doings” (Prov. 20:11). If this is true of children, how much more so of adults?
“While salvation is a gift, your
reward in God’s kingdom will be determined solely by your “works” now, in this
life. Understand this!
“Before examining the scriptures that
prove this, you must first understand a little of what salvation will primarily
entail.
“Christians are overcomers. They understand
that they must “keep” Christ’s “works.” They do not sit idle, “just believing”
in Jesus. They recognize that they are in training to be teachers and rulers!
