Perfect Love

The Catholic view of salvation and justification are defined in the councils. The council of Trent taught man, through sanctifying grace, could grow to a state of perfect love. This was in response to Luther's doctrine that man was always to be a sinner while on earth. Catholics taught that grace enabled the Christian to be sanctified in the morals God demanded.

They actually didn't disagree, they went out of their way to twist what the other said and meant. Catholics didn't like their authority challenged so they fought hard to destroy Luther.

We are neither Catholic or protestant, so their debate is just for understanding purposes to see the background of their theology. We disagreed with Catholics over a thousand years before Luther was born.

We can see that Catholics believed Christians, through grace, grew to the level of love they termed "perfect". Thus justification through sanctification. This sanctification meant attaining perfect love.

(Trent, l. c., can. xii: "Si quis dixerit, fidem justificantem nihil aliud esse quam fiduciam divinae misericordiae, peccata remittentis propter Christum, vel eam fiduciam solam esse, qua justificamur, a.s."). Since our Divine adoption and friendship with God is based on perfect love of God or charity (cf. Galatians 5:6; 1 Corinthians 13; James 2:17 sqq.), dead faith devoid of charity (fides informis) cannot possess any justifying power. Only such faith as is active in charity and good works (fides caritate formata) can justify man, and this even before the actual reception of baptism or penance, although not without a desire of the sacrament (cf. Trent, Sess. VI, cap. iv, xiv). But, not to close the gates of heaven against pagans and those non-Catholics, who without their fault do not know or do not recognize the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Catholic theologians unanimously hold that the desire to receive these sacraments is implicitly contained in the serious resolve to do all that God has commanded, even if His holy will should not become known in every detail.

Catholics even taught love could save apart from baptism in some cases. If a person wanted to comply but couldn't or did not know. It was truly salvation by misunderstood works apart from faith in Christ.

The issue wasn't that man must love to be justified, the issues were

1. man could achieve perfect love. Catholics taught perfect love was a supernatural gift through sanctification. 

2. Man could be justified by love without faith, or not a distinct faith.

3. Man could be justified by sanctified charity before baptism.

It seems Trent was just trying to compromise with faith only protestants by saying a few could be saved by faith without baptism if they had sufficient charity.

Luther taught works of charity were part of justification only when flowing from faith. In other words love must be mixed with faith to please God. Here is a statement from Luther.

This is what St. Paul means in many places, where he

        ascribes so much to faith, that he says: Justus ex fide

        sua vivit, "the righteous man draws his life out of his

        faith," and faith is that because of which he is counted

        righteous before God. If righteousness consists of faith,

        it is clear that faith fulfils all commandments and makes

        all works righteous, since no one is justified except he

        keep all the commands of God. Again, the works can

        justify no one before God without faith.

Luther taught faith keeps every commandment, playing off of the Catholic statement above., thus he believed we must keep God's commandments. He believed we must by faith have an attitude that seeks to keep all commandments. It is only by faith that man undertakes an endeavor of full obedience to God's will. Even then he will fall short.

The Catholic argument was minimal, "dead faith devoid of charity" means no charity at all. James used the phrase "faith without works is dead". James covered all types of works, not just charity. This could make the Catholic position seem to require only charity at a minimum.

The Catholic wording was actually uncharitable, because it attempted to put words in Luther's argument, Luther never said we are saved with no charity at all.

If you view the whole argument to be about money, which it was, they were simply accusing those who did not give as required as uncharitable.

It makes it seem they are forcing people to give money. James on the other hand does not limit works to charity or giving. He mixes other areas as well,

1. receiving poor as well as rich.

2. clothing and feeding.

3. making the offering God commanded. (Abraham)

In James works aren't minimalized to one category.

Luther wasn't faith alone, he believed faith was the compelling force of all works and where faith was present works flowed without fear. He believed works were from faith, thus in works faith was being lived.

James doesn't agree with Luther, for he believes a situation where faith is devoid of works is possible, it happens enough to warn us about the state. Luther isn't faith only, he in essence denies that a person of faith can be devoid of works. Which is false. The Holy Spirit guided James to say it was possible.

Almost all protestant arguments, including the Baptist, were basically Luther's argument. Real faith is never devoid of works, but faith produces works. Some protestants said they were justified by works others said we were justified at the point of faith before works came, but almost all said real faith produces works.

The problem being that they refuse to admit faith does not naturally produce works, and faith is not perfected when works are lacking. We must be honest with ourselves, there are millions if not billions of souls claiming to be Christian who do not do what God has ordered who fall well short of their capabilities.

In recognizing faith Luther believed God recognized the works associated. He did not recognize good works without faith. I agree.

I believe love alone without faith in the Gospel cannot save, but I also believe faith in the Gospel gives us some measure of the knowledge of love as we understand what God did for us.

Joh 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Joh 3:17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Understanding the Gospel means we understand love. That does not mean we understand how to live it perfectly. We do have a good role model so we can love to some degree.

Catholics viewed charity as love perfected in works. In reality the scriptures don't teach charity is perfected love, James wrote faith is perfected by works.

It became a matter of wording, Perfect love if carried to true perfection would mean we supernaturally rise to the glory of God in that area of morality. Violating Paul's doctrine that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Catholics occasionally used it that way and that is why Luther disagreed.

Rom 3:23  For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Fall short was used by Paul in the present, post baptism, even with grace we fall short of his glory.

It also violated the concept we could be justified by the works of the law, since love was part of those works.

Rom 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The command in the law was to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

Man would never reach this standard even with grace. Not in our life on earth.

Catholic doctrine claimed to rise to perfection in love and charity through sanctification.

Their doctrine of perfect love, if tempered to mean sincere or complete or sufficient would have been more accurate.

The word perfect in Greek often means mature, not absolute perfection. It could mean perfect if viewing it by a preset standard that did not require full perfection.

Martin Luther said perfection was impossible since we are sold under sin.

"as long as we live here, we must sin".

Again the objection is wording. Will sin vs. must sin, as if there is an underlying force requiring our sin. The idea of depravity.

It seems to me that both Catholic and Protestant were uninspired and their wording was opposed to scripture in some respects.

The truth,

Love is required for justification, sincere love but not perfect love as if without any fault, as if we rise to God's level of perfection.

1Jn 3:14  We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

Our love must be real for justification, but it always has room for growth.

Jud 1:2  Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.

If they had perfect love it could not be multiplied. If they had perfect love they could not grow.

1Th 3:12  And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:

The biblical idea of perfect love is a love that is sufficient to save. It doesn't rise to God's glory, but is sincere and real and sufficient.

Perfect love has no fear.

Perfect love has confidence in Christ

1Jn 4:18  There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

I John 4:18 says the person is not made perfect (complete), not love is not made perfect. When a person's love is real they are made complete.

on the other hand, love is shown to be complete when we truly obey Christ.

1Jn 4:12  No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1Jn 2:5  But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

In reality faith and confidence cannot exist without some degree of love. The problem is that we need a different English word to describe it than perfect. In our day the word doesn't really match the Greek word, which meant more mature than complete perfection.

Total KJV occurrences: 19From G5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); neuter (as noun, with G3588) completeness: - of full age, man, perfect.tel'-i-osteleiosτέλειοςG5046

Both Catholics and Protestants were right and wrong with their wording, but they were too busy hurting each others reputation to actually love each other.

1. Love in and of itself can't justify without Christ, but it is required to some degree. It must be real and sincere.

2. Love can be multiplied and can grow with grace.

3. We will never reach the love demanded in the Old Testament law in this life. The Old law could not make us complete. Heb. 10:1

4. We will continue to sin.

5. Justification isn't faith alone. Justification isn't love alone.

6. Justification is never works alone.

God does sanctify, but not to the level of true perfection.

2Co 3:18  But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Our change is from viewing Christ, not from supernatural internal power.

We are not made perfect, but are changed into the image of Christ from glory to glory.