7. We hold, and unquestionably it is true, that it is faith which
justifies and cleanses. Rom 1, 17; 10, 10; Acts 15, 9. But if it
justifies and purifies, love must be present. The Spirit cannot but
impart love together with faith. In fact, where true faith is, the
Holy Spirit dwells; and where the Holy Spirit is, there must be love
and every excellence. How is it, then, Paul speaks as if faith without
love were possible? We reply, this one text cannot be understood as
subverting and militating against all those texts which ascribe
justification to faith alone. Even the sophists have not attributed
justification to love, nor is this possible, for love is an effect, or
fruit, of the Spirit, who is received through faith.
8. Three answers may be given to the question. First, Paul has not
reference here to the Christian faith, which is inevitably accompanied
by love, but to a general faith in God and his power. Such faith is a
gift; as, for instance, the gift of tongues, the gift of knowledge, of
prophecy, and the like. There is reason to believe Judas performed
miracles in spite of the absence of Christian faith, according to John
6, 70: "One of you is a devil." This general faith, powerless to
justify or to cleanse, permits the old man with his vices to remain,
just as do the gifts of intellect, health, eloquence, riches.
9. A second answer is: Though Paul alludes to the true Christian
faith, he has those in mind who have indeed attained to faith and
performed miracles with it, but fall from grace through pride, thus
losing their faith. Many begin but do not continue. They are like the
seed in stony ground. They soon fall from faith. The temptations of
vainglory are mightier than those of adversity. One who has the true
faith and is at the same time able to perform miracles is likely to
seek and to accept honor with such eagerness as to fall from both love
and faith.
10. A third answer is: Paul in his effort to present the necessity of
love, supposes an impossible condition. For instance, I might express
myself in this way: "Though you were a god, if you lacked patience you
would be nothing." That is, patience is so essential to divinity that
divinity itself could not exist without it, a proposition necessarily
true. So Paul's meaning is, not that faith could exist without love,
but on the contrary, so much is love an essential of faith that even
mountain-moving faith would be nothing without love, could we separate
the two even in theory.
The third answer pleases me by far the best, though I do not reject
the others, particularly the first. For Paul's very first premise is
impossible--"if I speak with the tongues of angels." To speak with an
angelic tongue is impossible for a human being, and he clearly
emphasizes this impossibility by making a distinction between the
tongues of men and those of angels. There is no angelic tongue; while
angels may speak to us in a human tongue men can never speak in those
of angels.
11. As we are to understand the first clause--"If I speak with the
tongues of angels"--as meaning, Were it as possible as it is
impossible for me to speak with the tongues of angels; so are we to
understand the second clause--"If I have all faith, so as to remove
mountains"--to mean, Were it as possible as it is impossible to have
such faith. Equally impossible is the proposition of understanding all
mysteries, and we must take it to mean, Were it possible for one to
understand all mysteries, which, however, it is not. John, in the last
chapter of his Gospel, asserts that the world could not contain all
the books which might be written concerning the things of the kingdom.
For no man can ever fathom the depths of these mysteries. Paul's
manner of expressing himself is but a very common one, such as: "Even
if I were a Christian, if I believed not in Christ I would be
nothing"; or, "Were you even a prince, if you neither ruled men nor
possessed property you would be nothing."
"And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor."
12. In other words, "Were I to perform all the good works on earth and
yet had not charity--having sought therein only my own honor and
profit and not my neighbor's--I would nevertheless be lost." In the
performance of external works so great as the surrender of property
and life, Paul includes all works possible of performance, for he who
would at all do these, would do any work. Just so, when he has
reference to tongues he includes all good words and doctrines; and in
prophecy, understanding and faith he comprises all wisdom and
knowledge. Some may risk body and property for the sake of temporal
glory. So Romans and pagans have done; but as love was lacking and
they sought only their own interests, they practically gave nothing.
It being generally impossible for men to give away all their property,
and their bodies to be burned, the meaning must be: "Were it possible
for me to give all my goods to the poor, and my body to be burned."
13. The false reasoning of the sophists will not stand when they
maliciously deduct from this text the theory that the Christian faith
is not effectual to blot out sin and to justify. They say that before
faith can justify it must be garnished with love; but justification
and its distinctive qualities as well are beyond their ken.
Justification of necessity precedes love. One does not love until he
has become godly and righteous. Love does not make us godly, but when
one has become godly love is the result. Faith, the Spirit and
justification have love as effect and fruitage, and not as mere
ornament and supplement. We maintain that faith alone justifies and
saves. But that we may not deceive ourselves and put our trust in a
false faith, God requires love from us as the evidence of our faith,
so that we may be sure of our faith being real faith.