Why do people find the book of James controversial?

A_Thinker

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 23, 2004
11,911
9,064
Midwest
✟931,284.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good works are the mark of the disciple is what I learned from it. And to turn to God's grace instead of the worldly desires.

James provides much practical admonition in his writing, ...

* Be faithful in prayer
* Bridle the tongue
* Visit the widows and fatherless
* Keep your lives unspotted from the world
* Don't be a respecter of persons
* Abstain from bitterness, envy, and strife
* Be peaceable, gentle, easy to approach
* Be full of mercy and good fruits
* Abstain from hypocrisy
* Don't be friends with the world
* Submit to God
* Resist the devil
* Humble yourself before God
* Speak no evil of one another
* Judge not one another
* Boast not, but give place to God's will
* Confess your faults to one another
* Grudge not one another
* Do not swear
* Seek the ministry of the elders
* Pray fervently for the afflicted
* Be patient unto the coming of the Lord
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There is disagreement among the Church Fathers as to whether James was apostolic. Therefore its status in our canon is called Antilegomena, and cannot be the basis for doctrine in Lutheran churches.

The Epistle of James is read in our churches, however. It expounds the Law: it shows us our sinfulness and is a guide to conduct in life. But it's not the Gospel.

Well, James was not talking about soteriology, and I'm sure he'd agree. As A_Thinker said, James was speaking about personal relationships within the Body of Christ.

I suspect he was specifically responding to gnostic thought which proposed that salvation and faith were solely spiritual elements that need not be manifest in any physical manner.

I also suspect that when James said "dead faith" he really meant "no faith at all," and if he was going to get soteriological about it, I suspect he'd say that faith that did not manifest itself in physical action wasn't saving faith, either.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Might I make the bold proposition ... that there are no professed (as opposed to secret) christians who do not have works.

Professing Christ is a work (as did the thief on the cross).
Joining with a Christian body is a work.
Praying is a work.
Fellowshipping with other Christians is a work.

Now, I realize that James was arguing for more here (i.e. feed the poor, rather than just wish them "God-speed"), ... but the fact is that simply the action of publicly confessing Christ is in the realm of works. As christians, we should continue in such as these.

Now, as for "secret" christians (i.e. un-professed), the matter may be a bit more nuanced, but even Nicodemus ultimately came to Jesus by night.

Here is where we have to zero in on what Paul was really talking about, particularly in Romans and Galatians.

Paul is talking about what "legalism" really means, and he is actually referring to the scripture “The worker is worthy of his reward.”

The Jews in general and the Jewish Christians in particular believed that salvation is the legal obligation of God to persons who had performed particular work for which salvation was the proper and due payment.

The thought was: If I perform certain rituals and live a certain way, then God owes me salvation. I did the work, so God had better pay up.

That is what Paul means by "work"--activities that someone thinks will obligate God to save them as proper and due payment.

But Paul preaches that nothing a man can do will ever obligate God to save him, and the proper payment for anything a man can do is only death.

It's necessary for Paul to have this discussion with the Romans because that particular congregation had been through the experience of having been initially organized by Jewish Christians (Aquila and Priscilla), then operated for several years by only gentile Christians (when Emperor Claudius expelled the Jews), and then had come back under Jewish leadership when Aquila and Priscilla had returned under Emperor Nero.

I suspect that back-and-forth of congregational leadership between Jewish Christians and gentile Christians set up some internal controversy. That's why you see Paul addressing the Jews and the gentiles separately in the early chapters--and dressing both of them down.

Then in Galatians, you see Paul addressing something similar with the same message.

We can't lose sight of what Paul and James were specifically trying to address. We can't lose sight of the points they were trying to make.

Paul was talking about one particular issue of soteriology that was at issue between Jews and gentiles who came to Christ. James was not talking about soteriology at all.

Paul and James (and as well, the author of Hebrews) would have agreed that faith was "substance" and "evidence" (operational in the physical realm, not merely spiritual) that would necessarily make anyone who had substantive and evidentiary faith get off his okole and start acting like Christ.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
James refutes Paul?
Paul defined the sinner’s justification through faith. Sinners are justified by faith alone making the whole world savable based on belief in Christ.
The book of James is concerned with the believer’s faith that shows justification by the works. Already faith has justified but the product of faith is an outward sign to others who are sitting in judgement as to whether one is a believer see the fruit outwardly.
God sees the fruit inwardly of the renewed moral content. But outwardly that translates to action seen.
Love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, gentleness, etc ; act on those things because there is no law against them.
They start with the things that one thinks on; whatsoever is beautiful, whatsoever is of good report, whatsoever is pure etc.
Those things are not tied up in law.
The fruit of faith is what the trial of faith produces which produces the blessing of patient endurance. Patience being the perfect work of having the Word govern the soul.
But first the Word must be heard. Secondly the Word must be shown be a truth found. But mainly, I think, it’s because when we see the truth mirrored it’s too easy to walk away and forget it. Putting it in action is the best way to preserve what has been revealed within the new nature, rather than forgetting what it looks like.
 
Upvote 0

YeshuaFan

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
3,003
996
63
Macomb
✟56,324.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I did a careful study of this short book, it is very clear that faith will naturally produce good works, also to be steadfast and faithful not double-minded or in the mist of the world.

Good works are the mark of the disciple is what I learned from it. And to turn to God's grace instead of the worldly desires.
Some, like martin Lutjer, saw james teaching salvation by works, instead of salvation by grace. Both James and paul held saved by grace alone/faith alone, but James concerned with a mere profession of faith that produces no evidence of a changed life.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟107,193.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Faith without works is dead is not the statement that's at issue. This is:

Jas 2:24 - You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

James plainly states that our works are part of our salvation. That has been the teaching of Christianity since the beginning.

If you read line by line the letters of Paul, and list how many times he says we are justified by faith and not works, then list what he actually said, that being "works of the law" you will begin to see the mistake so many have made in reading Paul.

We are not justified by the works "of the law", that's why Christianity has never required its adherents to perform the works "of the law".

Justified by the works of Christ. Seems our individualist thinking though would interpret James 2:24 to include our works as individuals, but were that the case, some would have cause to boast for their many works, where others may have few works. Infants whom die in infancy, the thief of the cross and deathbed converts have not works to justify them, if indeed the verse is referring to works as individuals.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Justified by the works of Christ. Seems our individualist thinking though would interpret James 2:24 to include our works as individuals....
If we confine ourselves to that one verse, it might be interpreted that way, but if we take account of the rest of the book/epistle, no, it does refer to the good deeds performed by the individual.
 
Upvote 0

tz620q

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 19, 2007
2,658
1,038
Carmel, IN
✟567,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The problem there is what people think those works are, because its not the sacraments.
The sacraments are the means for God to bestow His grace on us. So they are God working in us, not us working for God. So I think we can agree that God's Grace is needed for salvation and that the sacraments, while conveying that Grace are not the only means that God has to give it to us. So while they are efficacious, they are not the sole route to salvation.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The sacraments are the means for God to bestow His grace on us. So they are God working in us, not us working for God. So I think we can agree that God's Grace is needed for salvation and that the sacraments, while conveying that Grace are not the only means that God has to give it to us. So while they are efficacious, they are not the sole route to salvation.
Sometimes we have reminders of God's grace and forget what they mean. These sacraments are the to remind us of the cross, and what it means to be a disciple. Yes, there is grace in that, if you let the message change your heart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tz620q
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟107,193.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If we confine ourselves to that one verse, it might be interpreted that way, but if we take account of the rest of the book/epistle, no, it does refer to the good deeds performed by the individual.

I agree, and I agree with the expositor John Gill, he explains it thus:

"and not by faith only: or as without works, or a mere historical faith, which being without works is dead, of which the apostle is speaking; and therefore can bear no testimony to a man's justification; hence it appears, that the Apostle James does not contradict the Apostle Paul in Romans 3:28 since they speak not of the same sort of faith; the one speaks of a mere profession of faith, a dead and lifeless one; the other of a true faith, which has Christ, and his righteousness, for its object, and works by love, and produces peace, joy, and comfort in the soul. Moreover, the Apostle Paul speaks of justification before God; and James speaks of it as it is known by its fruits unto men; the one speaks of a justification of their persons, in the sight of God; the other of the justification and approbation of their cause, their conduct, and their faith before men, and the vindication of them from all charges and calumnies of hypocrisy, and the like; the one speaks of good works as causes, which he denies to have any place as such in justification; and the other speaks of them as effects flowing from faith, and showing the truth of it, and so of justification by it; the one had to do with legalists and self-justiciaries, who sought righteousness not by faith, but by the works of the law, whom he opposed; and the other had to do with libertines, who cried up faith and knowledge, but had no regard to a religious life and conversation; and these things considered will tend to reconcile the two apostles about this business."
:oldthumbsup:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I agree, and I agree with the expositor John Gill, he explains it thus:

"and not by faith only: or as without works, or a mere historical faith, which being without works is dead, of which the apostle is speaking; and therefore can bear no testimony to a man's justification; hence it appears, that the Apostle James does not contradict the Apostle Paul in Romans 3:28 since they speak not of the same sort of faith; the one speaks of a mere profession of faith, a dead and lifeless one; the other of a true faith, which has Christ, and his righteousness, for its object, and works by love, and produces peace, joy, and comfort in the soul. Moreover, the Apostle Paul speaks of justification before God; and James speaks of it as it is known by its fruits unto men; the one speaks of a justification of their persons, in the sight of God; the other of the justification and approbation of their cause, their conduct, and their faith before men, and the vindication of them from all charges and calumnies of hypocrisy, and the like; the one speaks of good works as causes, which he denies to have any place as such in justification; and the other speaks of them as effects flowing from faith, and showing the truth of it, and so of justification by it; the one had to do with legalists and self-justiciaries, who sought righteousness not by faith, but by the works of the law, whom he opposed; and the other had to do with libertines, who cried up faith and knowledge, but had no regard to a religious life and conversation; and these things considered will tend to reconcile the two apostles about this business."
:oldthumbsup:
As I recall James presided over the Council of Jerusalem where Peter refuted the Pharisees with justification by faith. Then he decides, and everyone agree a letter should be sent the Galations. In Galations 5:22-25 Paul is making the exact same point James does in his discussion of the 'royal law' in James 2. These guys aren't making it up as they went along, Jesus taught every tree that doent bear fruit is cut down and cast into the fire. I dont know anyone arguing that works do not follow but there is a vast difference beteeen bearing fruit, from the Holy Spirit, and being infused with grace through the agency of ecclesiastical authority.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

~Zao~

Wisdom’s child
Supporter
Jun 27, 2007
3,060
957
✟100,595.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
STRONGS NT 3466: μυστήριον

μυστήριον, μυστηρίου, τό (μύστης (one initiated; from μυέω, which see)), in classical Greek a hidden thing, secret, mystery: μυστήριον σου μή κατειπης τῷ φιλῶ, Menander; plural generally mysteries, religious secrets, confided only to the initiated and not to be communicated by them to ordinary mortals; (cf. K. F. Hermann, Gottesdienstl. Alterthümer der Griechen, § 32). In the Scriptures:

1. a hidden or secret thing, not obvious to the understanding: 1 Corinthians 13:2; 1 Corinthians 14:2; (of the secret rites of the Gentiles, Wis. 14:15, 23).

2. a hidden purpose or counsel; secret will: of men, τοῦ βασιλέως, Tobit 12:7, 11; τῆς βουλῆς αὐτοῦ, Judith 2:2; of God: μυστήρια Θεοῦ, the secret counsels …..


Genesis 1:1 (KJV)


I’m not seeing a connection to earthly rule in any of that. Except for earthly reasonings.


Mat 13:11

He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries G3466 of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

TOOLS

Mar 4:11

And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery G3466 of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

TOOLS

Luk 8:10

And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries G3466 of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

TOOLS

Rom 11:25

For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, G3466 lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

TOOLS

Rom 16:25

Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, G3466 which was kept secret since the world began,

TOOLS

1Co 2:7

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, G3466 even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

TOOLS

1Co 4:1

Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries G3466 of God.

TOOLS

1Co 13:2

And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, G3466 and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

TOOLS

1Co 14:2

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. G3466

TOOLS

1Co 15:51

Behold, I shew you a mystery; G3466 We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

TOOLS

Eph 1:9

Having made known unto us the mystery G3466 of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

TOOLS

Eph 3:3

How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; G3466 (as I wrote afore in few words,

TOOLS

Eph 3:4

Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery G3466 of Christ)

TOOLS

Eph 3:9

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, G3466 which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

TOOLS

Eph 5:32

This is a great mystery: G3466 but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

TOOLS

Eph 6:19

And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery G3466 of the gospel,

TOOLS

Col 1:26

Even the mystery G3466 which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

TOOLS

Col 1:27

To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery G3466 among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

TOOLS

Col 2:2

That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery G3466 of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;

TOOLS

Col 4:3

Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery G3466 of Christ, for which I am also in bonds:

TOOLS

2Th 2:7

For the mystery G3466 of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

TOOLS

1Ti 3:9

Holding the mystery G3466 of the faith in a pure conscience.

TOOLS

1Ti 3:16

And without controversy great is the mystery G3466 of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

TOOLS

Rev 1:20

The mystery G3466 of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.

TOOLS

Rev 10:7

But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery G3466 of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

TOOLS

Rev 17:5

And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, G3466 BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

TOOLS

Rev 17:7

And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery G3466 of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns.


That which is made known to all is within the confines of the bible. That which is secret is hidden away in congregational vaults.
 
Upvote 0

HTacianas

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2018
8,458
8,967
Florida
✟321,765.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
James refutes Paul?

Martin Luther, the "father of sola fide", wanted to remove James from the Canon specifically because he saw James as a refutation of his doctrine. Luther's idea of justification by faith alone is a misinterpretation of the writings of Paul, but James was seen by Luther as a refutation of Paul.

"Faith alone" is only mentioned once in the bible, and that is when James states that faith alone cannot save a person. James wrote of justification by works to counter the misinterpretation of Paul's letters in the early Church, and uses the very same biblical examples Paul used that began the controversy.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: ~Zao~
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Martin Luther, the "father of sola fide", wanted to remove James from the Canon specifically because he saw James as a refutation of his doctrine. Luther's idea of justification by faith alone is a misinterpretation of the writings of Paul, but James was seen by Luther as a refutation of Paul.
He never removed it from his German Bible.

You might be surprised Luther as a doctor of theology had his doubts based on long standing church history.

Among those dissenting at Trent was Augustinian friar, Italian theologian and cardinal and papal legate Girolamo Seripando. As Catholic historian Hubert Jedin (German), who wrote the most comprehensive description of the Council (2400 pages in four volumes) explained, “he was aligned with the leaders of a minority that was outstanding for its theological scholarship” at the Council of Trent.” Jedin further writes:

►: “Tobias, Judith, the Book of Wisdom, the books of Esdras, Ecclesiasticus, the books of the Maccabees, and Baruch are only "canonici et ecclesiastici" and make up the canon morum in contrast to the canon fidei. These, Seripando says in the words of St. Jerome, are suited for the edification of the people, but they are not authentic, that is, not sufficient to prove a dogma. Seripando emphasized that in spite of the Florentine canon the question of a twofold canon was still open and was treated as such by learned men in the Church. Without doubt he was thinking of Cardinal Cajetan, who in his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews accepted St. Jerome's view which had had supporters throughout the Middle Ages.” (Hubert Jedin, Papal Legate At The Council Of Trent (St Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1947), pp. 270-271)

►“While Seripando abandoned his view as a lost cause, Madruzzo, the Carmelite general, and the Bishop of Agde stood for the limited canon, and the bishops of Castellamare and Caorle urged the related motion to place the books of Judith, Baruch, and Machabees in the "canon ecclesiae." From all this it is evident that Seripando was by no means alone in his views. In his battle for the canon of St. Jerome and against the anathema and the parity of traditions with Holy Scripture, he was aligned with the leaders of a minority that was outstanding for its theological scholarship.” (ibid, 281-282; Alpha and Omega Ministries)

Cardinal Cajetan who himself was actually an adversary of Luther, and who was sent by the Pope in 1545 to Trent as a papal theologian, had reservations about the apocrypha as well as certain N.T. books based upon questionable apostolic authorship.

►"On the eve of the Reformation, it was not only Luther who had problems with the extent of the New Testament canon. Doubts were being expressed even by some of the loyal sons of the Church. Luther's opponent at Augsburg, Cardinal Cajetan, following Jerome, expressed doubts concerning the canonicity of Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. Of the latter three he states, "They are of less authority than those which are certainly Holy Scripture."63

►The Catholic Encyclopedia confirms this saying that “he seemed more than three centuries in advance of his day in questioning the authenticity of the last chapter of St. Mark, the authorship of several epistles, viz., Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, Jude...”—CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Tommaso de Vio Gaetani Cajetan

►Erasmus likewise expressed doubts concerning Revelation as well as the apostolicity of James, Hebrews and 2 Peter. It was only as the Protestant Reformation progressed, and Luther's willingness to excise books from the canon threatened Rome that, at Trent, the Roman Catholic Church hardened its consensus stand on the extent of the New Testament canon into a conciliar pronouncement.64http://bible.org/article/evangelicals-and-canon-new-testament#P136_48836

►Theologian Cardinal Cajetan stated, in his Commentary on All the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament (dedicated to Pope Clement VII ):

"Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St. Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecciesiasticus, as is plain from the Protogus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome.

Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the Bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.” . ("A Disputation on Holy Scripture" by William Whitaker (Cambridge: University, 1849), p. 48. Cf. Cosin's A Scholastic History of the Canon, Volume III, Chapter XVII, pp. 257-258 and B.F. Westcott's A General Survey of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 475.)

►Following Jerome, Cajetan also relegated the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament to a secondary place where they could serve piety but not the teaching of revealed doctrine. — Jared Wicks tr., Cajetan Responds: A Reader in Reformation Controversy (Washington: The Catholic University Press of America, 1978). See also Cardinal Cajetan, "Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament," Bruce Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Oxford, 1957), p. 180.)

Cajetan was also highly regarded by many, even if opposed by others: The Catholic Encyclopedia states, "It has been significantly said of Cajetan that his positive teaching was regarded as a guide for others and his silence as an implicit censure. His rectitude, candour, and moderation were praised even by his enemies. Always obedient, and submitting his works to ecclesiastical authority, he presented a striking contrast to the leaders of heresy and revolt, whom he strove to save from their folly." And that "It was the common opinion of his contemporaries that had he lived, he would have succeeded Clement VII on the papal throne.” — Catholic Encyclopedia>Tommaso de Vio Gaetani Cajetan

In more detail,

►“This question was not only a matter of controversy between Catholics and Protestants: it was also the subject of a lively discussion even between Catholic theologians. St Jerome, that great authority in all scriptural questions, had accepted the Jewish canon of the Old Testament. The books of Judith, Esther, Tobias, Machabees, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, which the majority of the Fathers, on the authority of the Septuagint, treated as canonical, Jerome described as apocryphal, that is, as not included in the canon though suitable for the edification of the faithful…The general of the Franciscans Observant, Calvus, dealt thoroughly with the problems raised by Cajetan in a tract drawn up for the purposes of the Counci1. He defended the wider canon, and in particular the canonicity of the book of Baruch, the story of Susanna, that of Bel and the dragon, and the canticle of the three children (Benedicite). On the other hand, he refused to accept the oft-quoted Apostolic Canons as authoritative for the canonicity of the third book of Machabees. The general of the Augustinians, Seripando, on the contrary, was in sympathy with Erasmus and Cajetan and sought to harmonise their views with the Florentine decree on the ground that the protocanonical books of the Old Testament, as "canonical and authentic", belong to the canon fidei, while the deuterocanonical ones, as "canonical and ecclesiastical books", belong to the canon morum. Seripando, accordingly, follows the tendency which had made itself felt elsewhere also in pre-Tridentine Catholic theology, which was not to withhold the epithet "canonical" from the deuterocanonical books, yet to use it with certain restrictions.”

“Two questions were to be debated, namely, should this conciliar decision be simply taken over, without previous discussion of the subject, as the jurists Del Monte and Pacheco opined, or should the arguments recently advanced against the canonicity of certain books of the Sacred Scriptures be examined and refuted by the Council, as the other two legates, with Madruzzo and the Bishop of Fano, desired? The second question was closely linked with the first, namely should the Council meet the difficulties raised both in former times and more recently, by distinguishing different degrees of authority within the canon?

With regard to the first question the legates themselves were not of one mind. In the general congregation of 12 February, Del Monte, taking the standpoint of formal Canon Law, declared that the Florentine canon, since it was a decision of a General Council, must be accepted without discussion. On the other hand Cervini and Pole, supported by Madruzzo and a number of prelates familiar with the writings of the reformers and the humanists, urged the necessity of countering in advance the attacks that were to be expected from the Protestants by consolidating their own position, and of providing their own theologians with weapons for the defence of the decree as well as for the instruction of the faithful...The discussion was so obstinate that there remained no other means to ascertain the opinion of the Council than to put the matter to the vote. The result was that twenty-four prelates were found to be on Del Monte's side, and fifteen (sixteen) on the other. The decision to accept the Florentine canon simpliciter, that is, without further discussion, and as an article of faith, already contained the answer to the second question.” — Jedin,, History of the Council of Trent, pgs 55,56
 
Upvote 0

straykat

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2018
1,120
640
Catacombs
✟22,648.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
James is only controversial to Protestants (or at least some). Mostly due to over emphasis on Sola Fide.. even while Protestant tradition has a dogma of Sanctification. It was never controversial before this. Our salvation should bear the minimum amount of fruit, to at least indicate it's real. What's the point of faith otherwise?
 
Upvote 0

A_Thinker

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 23, 2004
11,911
9,064
Midwest
✟931,284.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
James is only controversial to Protestants (or at least some). Mostly due to over emphasis on Sola Fide.. even while Protestant tradition has a dogma of Sanctification. It was never controversial before this. Our salvation should bear the minimum amount of fruit, to at least indicate it's real. What's the point of faith otherwise?

Fruit (particularly the fruit of the Spirit) can be an indicator ... of our spiritual health.

As I mentioned before, true faith will always produce some works ... and those works (or lack thereof, in any way) is an indicator of the HEALTH/MATURITY of our faith.

Apple trees grow apples. Healthy apple trees grow MORE and BETTER apples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: straykat
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,137
20,169
US
✟1,440,830.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Fruit (particularly the fruit of the Spirit) can be an indicator ... of our spiritual health.

As I mentioned before, true faith will always produce some works ... and those works (or lack thereof, in any way) is an indicator of the HEALTH/MATURITY of our faith.

Apple trees grow apples. Healthy apple trees grow MORE and BETTER apples.

A former house we owned had a big, fairly old tree in the back yard. We'd heard that the house had once backed an orchard half a century earlier, but hadn't thought much about it.

About the third year we lived there, that big old tree produced pears. Not many pears...but they were very good pears. We hadn't realized it was a pear tree, and when I did some quick reading, it had should have actually died decades earlier, and was certainly too old to still be bearing fruit.

But there it was, still being as good a pear tree as it could. Every three or so years, it bore a few pears.
 
Upvote 0