Basic HTML Version
491
d. Among Reformed theologians there is a difference of opinion. Many Presbyterians deny that
faith itself includes assurance; and in Reformed circles some share this denial. Kuyper, Bavinck,
and Vos, however, correctly hold that true faith, as including trust, carries with it a sense of
security, which may vary in degree. There is also an assurance of faith, however, that is the fruit
of reflection. It is possible to make faith itself an object of reflection, and thus to arrive at a
subjective assurance that does not belong to the essence of faith. In that case we conclude
from what we experience in our own life to the presence of the work of the Holy Spirit within
us, cf. I John 2:9-11; 3:9,10, 18,19; 4:7,20.[Cf. further, The Assurance of Faith, chap. III.]
H. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CONCEPTION OF FAITH.
Three points deserve our attention here:
1. The Church of Rome obliterates the distinction between historical and saving faith by
teaching that faith consists in a mere assent to the doctrines of the Church. This faith is one of
the seven preparations for justification in baptism, and therefore necessarily precedes this; but
as a purely intellectual activity it naturally does not lead to salvation. A man may have true, that
is, Biblical faith, and yet be lost. In so far the Church of Rome applies her principle of
externalization also to faith.
2. It has also virtually removed the element of knowledge from faith. One may be considered a
true believer, if one is but ready to believe what the Church teaches, without really knowing
what this is. Such a faith is called a fides implicita in distinction from the fides explicita, which
includes knowledge. By teaching that it is sufficient to believe what the ecclesia docens teaches,
the Roman Catholic Church applies the principle of clericalism.
3. There is still another point which characterizes the Roman Catholic doctrine of faith, namely,
the distinction between a fides informis and a fides formata. The former is the mere assent to
the doctrine of the Church, while the other is a faith which includes love as a formative
principle and is perfected in love. This is the faith that really justifies.
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY:
What was the conception of faith in the early Church? Did
Augustine’s view differ from that of the earlier fathers? How did the distinction between a fides
informis and a fides formata arise? How did Luther and Calvin differ as to the order of faith and
repentance? Do the Lutherans and the Reformed agree as to the order of faith and
regeneration? Why is it important to maintain the proper order? How did the distinction
between the actus and the habitus of faith arise, and why is it important? Can the proposition,
“I am saved,” ever be the object of saving faith? What conception of faith is found in
Schleiermacher and Ritschl? Why is it very appropriate that salvation should be contingent on
faith? How does the excessive activism of Barth affect his doctrine of faith? What does he mean