2. Saving Faith Is Fiducia Cordis.
Because faith, in so far as it makes us saved, has as its object only the Gospel, which promises forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake, faith is by its very nature a (formal) trust of the heart (fiducia cordis) in the grace offered in the Gospel. This is also expressed by the expression m1otevet gic tov vidv, Joh. 3:16-18, 36; miotevew sic Xpiotoév, Gal. 2:16.:'!© As long as someone only takes note of Christ (notitia historica) and considers the news of him to be historically true (assensus historicus), without trusting in Christ of his heart, neither the whole nor a part of the faith is present, in so far as it justifies and makes him saved. Scripture calls those people unbelievers (Gmoto1) who, like the Jews, have knowledge of Christ and acknowledge his historical reality, but do not believe in Christ (gig Xptotdv) as their Savior, do not trust in him.! The reason for this designation is that Christ did not come into the world as a historical curiosity that is noted and accepted,
Epit., Il, 3, 16; Trig. 919 ff., Sol. Decl., II, 14-16, 22, 57-58]
but as the redeemer of sins and the reconciler of men,!!7® in whom, before God, men should trust.!!°) Saving faith is therefore present not sooner and not later than man relies in his heart on Christ as his Savior. Rome proves the doctrine that the justifying faith is the trust of the heart in the grace acquired by Christ, with the curse,''!® to make room for his work doctrine and to keep souls in uncertainty about grace. The Lutheran Confessions, Luther and the Lutheran teachers, on the other hand, insist with great determination that trust in the grace or mercy of God acquired by Christ and offered in the Gospel is precisely what makes faith justifiying faith (fides, qua iustificat, sive gua iustificans est). It says in the Apology: [Faith is not only knowledge in the intellect, but also confidence in the will, i. e., it is to wish and to receive that which is offered in the promise, namely, reconciliation and remission of sins. '!§ Lutheran dogmatists, from Chemnitz to Hollaz, devote a great deal of space to the argument that faith, in so far as it justifies the trust (fiducia) of the heart in the grace promised in the Gospel, is the most important thing. This was done in contrast to Rome. The Roman polemic was directed with all its might against the fiducia. It persistently repeated that faith, conceived as trust in the grace of God, was a psychological impossibility, a "chimera", a "monster". '!®) If one wanted to keep faith pure, one had to exclude from faith the trust in God's grace and let it follow only on faith as fruit of the same. If one were to
esse quam fiduciam divinae misericordiae peccata remittentis propter Christum, vel eam fiduciam solam esse, qua iustificamur, anathema sit. [Tf any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.’]
intellectu, sed etiam fiducia in voluntate, hoc est, est velle et accipere hoc, quod in promissione offertur, videlicet reconciliationem et remissionem peccatorum. Sic utitur nomine fidei Scriptura. [Faith is not only knowledge in the intellect, but also confidence in the will, i. e., it is to wish and to receive that which is offered in the promise, namely, reconciliation and remission of sins. Scripture thus uses the term ‘faith.’’]
Quenstedt, Syst. II, 1348. fiducia into faith itself, it would imply that faith is also in the will of man, that is, a will of grace. But this is a psychological impossibility, since faith has its seat only in the understanding. The dogmatists answer this with the Apology of the Augsburg Confession (139, 183 [Trig]. 205, Art. III, 183]) that faith is not only a matter of understanding but also of will, or that Christ is not only seized with understanding but also with will. The seizure with the will, however, is the fiducia of trust in the grace of God in Christ. For fiducia they therefore often say apprehensio fiducialis. ''®) Quenstedt defined: Grasping with the will (apprehensio voluntatis) "is nothing other than trust and signifies the desire for Christ and the approach to Christ" (nihil aliud est quam fiducia notatque desiderium et accessmn ad Christum). '') This actus fiduciae, by which Christ is grasped, willed, desired with the will, constitutes the essence (forma) of faith, insofar as it justifies, gua iustificat. Because the Roman Catholics wanted the fiducia to follow the faith, dogmatists distinguish between the act of trust (actus fiduciae), which belongs to the faith itself, and those acts which, as fruit of the faith, follow on from it, such as the joy of grace, the joyfulness and confidence in the invocation of God. These latter acts are not always linked to the true faith. But this act of trust, whereby grace is taken, wanted or desired with the will, is part of faith itself, insofar as it justifies it. ''®>) To further inculcate this, Quenstedt carefully distinguishes
fiducia, quae hic non accipitur pro napproia seu confidential orta ex meriti Christi receptione, haec enim fidem iustificantem et iustificationem demum sequitur, sed pro actu fidei iustificantis, qua iustificans est.... Fiduciae est Christum quaerere, Es. 55:6; Araos 5:4, avide appetere, Ps. 42:2. 3 [Google]. Thus also Dannhauer distinguishes, Hodos. XI, 670. 671. He describes the apprehensio fiducialis of faith, in contrast to the Roman faith, as an act of will that seeks its object (suopte impetu fertur), as an appropriating act that desires Christ as Savior (desiderio quaero ut meum, amplexu capio ut meum), etc. Dannhauer adds, however, that this act is different from the act by which love embraces and grasps Christ and rejoices in Christ, ab am- between a theoretical and practical grasping of Christ. The theoretical apprehension takes place when a man calculates himself in a perfect conclusion: Christ died for all men, including me. This apprehensio theoretica, says Quenstedt, can also be found with the godless who in their hearts do not desire salvation in Christ for their own person. ''8° The practical grasping of Christ, on the other hand, closes the trust of the heart and will in itself and denotes the desire (desiderium) of Christ and the coming to him, and that is the fiducia that makes faith the justifying faith.
Christ with the will or the velle gratiam, so zealous were the Lutheran teachers to record the fiducia as the moment constituting the justifying faith. This explains the fact that the dogmatists from Chemnitz to Hollaz describe the fiducia or the apprehensio fiducialis in frequent terms as a wanting, seeking, desiring, embracing of Christ, and add that the denial of the fiducia thus conceived denies the grasping or personal appropriation of Christ. Finally Chemnitz emphasizes that even the weakest faith is already fiducia. He says, "If faith is not mistaken in the object, but seizes or tries to seize it under trembling with even the weakest confidence (expetite), then that is admittedly a small and weak, but nevertheless true faith. ''®®) The same matter plexu et apprehensione caritatis distinctus, quod haec fidei apprehensionem sequatur, secunda quasi animi negotiatione; prius apprehendit manus mendica thesaurum, post eo gaudet, post amat
Christi meritum sibi obtingat salus, inferre possunt. (For even the ungodly themselves, who do not desire that salvation may be obtained for them through the merits of Christ, can bring it about.’]
totius cordis et voluntatis in merito Christi recumbentiam involvit notatque desiderium et accessum ad Christum eiusque meriti applicationem et appropriationem fiducialem; et haec proprie est fiducia. [Google
670 sq; Quenstedt, Syst. II, 1338 sq. Hollaz then repeats (Examen. qu. 13): "Most theologians mention as acts or parts of faith knowledge, agreement and trust. By trust they understand the desire for grace (sub fiducia desiderium gratiae complectuntur). As witnesses I cite Dr. Calov and Dr. Quenstedt. The latter says (Syst. X, 303) "Part of trust is to seek Christ, Isaiah 55:6, fervent desire (avide appetite), Ps. 73:28, longing for him (anhelare ad ip- must be taken again from another point of view, namely under fides actualis’. As far as the description of faith as notitia, assensus and fiducia is concerned, the following should be noted: 1. If by notitia one understands only the historical knowledge of Christ (notitia historica), which the natural man can also have, and by assensus only a consent to the message of Christ based on natural reasons!®°), then both, notitia and assensus, spoken precisely, are not parts of saving faith, because this faith has its origin and existence entirely through supernatural effect (ev duvapei Geov Cor. 2:5). Luther says (XI, 126) of the faith that knows and believes only the "history" of Christ, and which sinners and the damned also have: "It is a natural work without grace. Scripture and the Word of God does not teach about such a faith", namely when it speaks of saving faith. However, in order to reject the Roman fides implicita or carbonaria ("charcoal burner faith"), it should be noted that the fides iustificans always presupposes external acquaintance with the Gospel, according to Rom. 10:14: [lac miotevoovow ov ovK nkovoav; Luther says of the Roman fides implicita, according to which one believes what the Church believes, or what is written without knowing what the Church believes or what Scripture teaches: God preserve us from such faith! 1° 2, sum), Ps. 42:2. 3, desiring his drawing, Hohel. 1,4; Joh. 6:44/ Tiefer (Quenstedt) writes (System. IV, 291): "Confidence denotes the desire for Christ and the access to him and the appropriation and appropriation of his merit.
burner's faith" originated: "So it is said that a doctor of theology, meeting a charcoal burner on the bridge at Prague and taking into account that he was but a poor layman, asked him: Dear man, what do you believe? The charcoal burner answered: That what the Church believes. The doctor replied: "What does the Church believe? The charcoal burner: ‘The Church believes what I believe. Afterwards, when the doctor was supposed to die, he was challenged by the devil so hard in his faith that he had nowhere to stay nor rest until he spoke: I believe that what the charcoal burner believes. As it is also said of the great Thomas Aquinas, that he could not remain at his end before the devil until he spoke: " ‘I believe what this book says,’ meaning the Bible in his arms. But God preserve us from such a faith! For where they believed not otherwise than thus, both the doctor and the charcoal burner believed themselves into the abyss of hell." Gass about the "charcoal burner faith", Geschichte der Protest. Dogmatik J, 375, note 2, The Lutheran dogmatists point out that If by notitia is understood not merely the notitia historica, but the knowledge of Christ wrought by the Holy Spirit, and by assensus not an assent to the gospel based on natural reasons, but the assent wrought by the Holy Spirit to the promise of grace of the gospel, then each of the expressions, just like fiducia, denotes the whole justifying faith. This is the language of Scripture and the Lutheran confession. With the term "knowledge" Scripture refers to the whole saving faith in places like Joh. 17:3: This is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent (yiva@oxworv).?) Phil. 3:8 describes Paul with his knowledge of Christ Jesus, his Lord (16 brEpéyov Tic yyooswMs tod Kvpiov pov), his whole justifying faith (v. 9). Also Gal. 4:9; Luke 1:77. The whole saving faith is described as "assent" or "concurrence" Joh. 3:23: "This is his commandment that we believe in the name of his son Jesus Christ" (iva motevowmpev TH OvOLATL TOD Yiod adtod the Roman fides impliciita abolishes the concept of faith. Baier (II, 136): Credere non possumus, nisi quae mente apprehendimus aut apprehensione simplici cognovimus. [We cannot believe unless we have grasped with the mind or known by simple apprehension.] Apprehensio simplex is the activity of the human mind by which a thing expressed in words is only excluded in the human mind, in contrast to the activity by which the thing expressed in words (res proposita) is accepted or rejected. The apprehensio simplex of what is expressed in the words of Scripture is not only possible for the natural man (Formula of Concord 601, 53 [Trigl. 901-903.., F.C., Sol. Decl., I, 53), but is also indispensably necessary if the faith to be worked by the Holy Spirit is to come about (Formula of Concord 601, 52-54 [Trig/. 901-903., F. C., Sol. Decl., I, 52-54]). When Christ commands to preach the gospel, this presupposes that people receive into their minds what is preached and taught. Scherzer therefore says something blunt: "Anyone who says that he believes what the Church believes without knowing what the Church believes is lying (mentitur). No one can believe what he does not know." (Systema, p. 426.) This is true even from the natural world. The Roman polemic seeks to create confusion at this point by shifting the status controversiae by suggesting that the mysteria fidei are beyond human knowledge. Lutheran teachers respond by distinguishing between the "that" (16 oxi) and the "how" (16 mac). The former is possible and necessary because of clear Scripture, the latter is not commanded of us. (See Gerhard, De iustif., § 69.)
mere Os@pytikn, sed mpaktiknh et C@ovoa, eificax et viva cognitio, quatenus veram cordis fiduciam sive fiducialem apprehensionem ac receptionem includit. [yvaotc is understood, not merely theoretical, but practical and practical, effective and living knowledge, in so far as it includes the true trust of the heart, or fiduciary apprehension and reception. TInootd Xptotod); Joh. 5:1: "Everyone who believes that (St1) Jesus is the Christian is born of God. As "confidence" the whole saving faith is described by MlOTEVELV ElG TOV DLOV, ELC AVTOV, ElG TOV DIOV TOV LOVvoyEvy Joh. 3:36, 18, 16. With this use of language of the Scriptures the Lutheran Confessions is exactly right, in that it also designates with each of the three expressions the whole justifying faith. With the "knowledge" Apol. 95, 46 [Zrig/. 133, Art. IV [II], 46]: Fides, quae gratis accipit remissiohem peccatorum..., est vera cognitio Christi [Faith, which receives the forgiveness of sins..., is the true knowledge of Christ]; 105, 101 [Zrig/. ibid., 101]: Quid est notitia Christi, nisi nosse beneficia Christi, promissiones, quas per evangelium sparsit in mouth? Et haec beneficia nosse, proprie et vere est credere in Christ. [What is the knowledge of Christ, unless we know the benefits of Christ, the promises which he spread in his mouth through the gospel? And to know these benefits is properly and truly to believe in Christ.] With "applause" or "consent" is meant the whole faith Apol. 108,113 [Zrig/. 154, ibid., 113]: Sola fide, et quidem fide proprie dicta, accipitur remissio peccatorum.... Est autem fides proprie dicta, quae assentitur promissioni; de hac fide loquitur Scriptura; 95, 48: Saepe iam diximus nos de fide in Christum, hoc est, de fide remissionis peccatorum, de fide, quae vere et ex corde assentitur promissioni gratiae, loqui. [Google] The whole saving faith is described with "trust" or "confidence" Apol. 140,194 (German text) [Trigl. 207, Art. Ill, 194]: "Faith means trusting in God's mercy, that he might be merciful for Christ's sake, without undue merit, and that means believing the article of the forgiveness of sins. As synonyms "trust" and "applause" are used Apol. 95,48 [Trigl. 135, Art. IV [II], 48]: "Faith, which makes pious and just before God, is not only this, that I know the histories, how Christ was born, suffered etc. (the devils know this too), but is the certainty or the certain strong trust in my heart, because I consider with all my heart the promise of God to be certain and true, through which forgiveness of sins, grace and all salvation is offered to me without my merit through the mediator Christ. Unnecessary difficulties are caused when notitia, assensus and fiducia, inasmuch as they are worked by the Holy Spirit, are used to distinguish one part of justifying faith from another, while the expressions refer to one and the same thing, namely the faith in Christ worked by the Holy Spirit, from different points of view. What Buddeus also says is correct: Cognitio sine assensu et assensus sine fiducia non est ea cognitio nec ille assensus, qui fidem iustificantem constituit. [Knowledge without assent, and assent without faith, is not that knowledge, nor that assent, which constitutes justifying faith)!!°