|
Justification
in Roman Catholicism and Reformed Protestantism Our working theme of Romans: “The righteousness of God” CHARTING THE COURSE FOR THIS STUDY: Ø Comparison of Roman Catholic and Reformed Views of Justification Ø Roman Catholic Critique Of The Reformed Position Ø Reformed Critique Of The Roman Catholic Position COMPARISON OF ROMAN CATHOLIC AND THE REFORMED VIEWS
OF JUSTIFICATION
Roman Catholics: Justification is by grace alone. Reformed Protestants: Justification is by grace alone. Roman Catholics: Justification is through faith + works. Reformed Protestants: Justification through faith alone. Reformed Protestant Criticism: Protestants emphasize that grace is unmerited/demerited favor. How can Catholics say that we are justified by grace alone + our works of merit? This is contradictory to reason and Scripture, “But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace” (Romans 11:6). “Despite the difference of viewpoint between Protestant and Roman Catholic on the nature of justification, the principal point of difference between them relates to another issue, namely, the basis upon which believers are justified by God” (Cornelis P. Venema, The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ, 36). Roman Catholics: Justification is a change in the individual wherein he is no longer a sinner. Reformed Protestants: Justification is God’s legal declaration whereby sinners are declared righteous. Roman Catholics: Justification is a process and not forensic. Reformed Protestants: Justification is an act of God (forensic) and is not a process. Rather, sanctification is a process. Roman Catholics: Righteousness is infused and inherent (personal). Reformed Protestants: Righteousness is imputed and alien (not our own but Christ’s alone). NOTE: When Roman Catholics say that justification is through faith + works they are not distinguishing between justification and sanctification. Reformed Protestants distinguish between the two. For Reformed Protestants, justification is imputed and the grounds of the Father’s acceptance of us is the work of Christ alone (solus Christus). For Reformed Protestants, sanctification can be described as the infusion of righteousness (i.e. personal and inherent). However, the ground by which the Father accepts us as righteous is justification and not sanctification. The Anglican Richard Hooker (1554-1600) insisted that the righteousness that is our own “is the righteousness of sanctification, and, being imperfect, can never be that which makes our acceptance by God what it is. The righteousness whereby we are accepted by God is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us when we are incorporated in Christ” (C. FitzSimons Allison, The Rise of Moralism, 2). Roman Catholics: Justification can be lost depending upon our works. Reformed Protestants: Justification cannot be lost because it is dependent solely upon the works of Jesus Christ. “For the quarrel between Rome and the Reformation did not have to do with whether we are justified by an active or inactive faith, or by a living or a dead faith. But the question was, just as it was for Paul, whether faith with its works, or whether faith apart from its works, justifies us before God and in our consciences” (Herman Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatiek, Vol. IV [4th ed.; Kampen: J.H. Kok, 1930], pp. 182-186, 198-207). Reformed Protestants: God justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5). Roman Catholics: God justifies the godly. Reformed Protestants: A person is at the same time sinner and righteous (Simul peccator et Justus). Roman Catholics: A person cannot be both a sinner and justified at the same time. The Protestant understanding of justification is a legal fiction. Reformed Protestants: It is not a legal fiction because the righteousness that God demands in the law is not to be found in us, but in Jesus Christ alone. Jesus Christ alone fully satisfied the righteous demands of the law. Reformed Protestant Criticism of Roman Catholicism: At this point, Protestants note that the Catholic view of justification is a legal fiction. The works of the believer can never measure up to the absolute demands of God’s law because they are always attended by sin and imperfection (Psalm 143:2; Galatians 5:1-4). “Augustine insisted that even the best works of sinners are still tainted by sin and are therefore but “splendid vices”” (R.C. Sproul, Faith Alone, 148). “We cannot by our best works merit pardon of sin, or eternal life at the hand of God, by reason of the great disproportion that is between them and the glory to come; and the infinite distance that is between us and God, whom, by them, we can neither profit, nor satisfy for the debt of our former sins, (Rom. 3:20, Rom. 4:2,4,6, Eph. 2:8–9, Tit. 3:5–7, Rom. 8:18, Ps. 16:2, Job 22:2–3, Job 35:7–8) but when we have done all we can, we have done but our duty, and are unprofitable servants: (Luke 17:10) and because, as they are good, they proceed from His Spirit; (Gal. 5:22–23) and as they are wrought by us, they are defiled, and mixed with so much weakness and imperfection, that they cannot endure the severity of God’s judgment. (Isa. 64:6, Gal. 5:17, Rom. 7:15,18, Ps. 143:2, Ps. 130:3)” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 16:5). Roman Catholics: After baptism, justification does not include the pardon of sins (venial sins). Pardon of venial sins and pardon of temporal punishment for sin is on the basis of our works (e.g. penance, purgatory, indulgences, etc.). Reformed Protestants: Justification includes the pardon of all a person’s sins. Question: If a Reformed Protestant is forgiven
of their sins then won’t this lead to lawless living? Answer: Reformed Protestants believe in repentance
whereas Roman Catholics believe in penance. Repentance is a turning from sin to
God. Penance is a work making
forgiveness conditional. Reformed
Protestants teach that repentance is a saving grace, whereas Roman Catholics
teach that penance is a work. Question: Is penance found in the Bible? Answer: Yes and no. It is found in the Latin Vulgate translation of the New Testament but not in the Greek. One of the important discoveries of the Reformation was reading the Bible in the original languages. Although provoked by the indulgences peddled by
Johannes Tetzel, the very first proposition which Luther offered for public
debate in his Ninety Five Theses put the axe to the root of the tree of
medieval theology: “When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said ‘Repent,’ he
meant that the entire life of believers should be one of repentance.” From
Erasmus’ Greek New Testament, Luther had come to realize that the Vulgate’s
rendering of Matthew 4:17 by penitentiam agite (“do penance”)
completely misinterpreted Jesus’ meaning. The gospel called not for an act of
penance but for a radical change of mind-set and an equally deep
transformation of life. Later he would write to Staupitz about this glowing
discovery: “I venture to say they are wrong who make more of the act in Latin
than of the change of heart in Greek!” (Sinclair Ferguson, “Medieval Mistakes”). Question: Where can
the official teaching of Rome be found on justification? Answer: The Council of
Trent (1545-1563) and its 32 canons on
justification; Catechism
of the Catholic Church (1992). Council of Trent If anyone shall say that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will anathema sit [let him be anathema]. If anyone shall say that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and charity that is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Spirit and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God—anathema sit. If anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us—anathema sit. If anyone says that the justice
received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good
works but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification
obtained, but not the cause of the increase, let him be anathema. If anyone says that after the
reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt
of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt
of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in
purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema. If anyone says that the good works of the one justified are in such manner the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him justified; or that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ...does not truly merit an increase of grace and eternal life... let him be anathema. Question: Where can the position of Protestants on justification be found? Answer: The Lutheran Augsburg Confession (1530); Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles (1572); Belgic Confession (1618); The Heidelberg Catechism (1619); The Westminster Confession of Faith (1649); The Westminster Larger Catechism (1649). THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION (1530) Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Also they teach that this faith is bound to bring forth good fruits, and that it is necessary to do good works commanded by God, because of God's will, but that we should not rely on those works to merit justification before God. For remission of sins and justification is apprehended by faith, as also the voice of Christ attests: When ye shall have done all these things, say: We are unprofitable servants. Luke 17, 10. The same is also taught by the Fathers. For Ambrose says: It is ordained of God that he who believes in Christ is saved, freely receiving remission of sins, without works, by faith alone. HEIDELBERG CATECHISM (1563) How are thou righteous before
God? Only by a true faith in Jesus Christ; so that, though my conscience accuse me, that I have grossly transgressed all the commandments of God, and kept none of them, and am still inclined to all evil; notwithstanding, God, without any merit of mine, but only of mere grace, grants and imputes to me, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ; even so, as if I never had had, nor committed any sin: yea, as if I had fully accomplished all that obedience which Christ has accomplished for me; inasmuch as I embrace such benefit with a believing heart. (Question 60) THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES (1572) We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification. Albeit that Good Works, which are the fruits of Faith, and follow after Justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit. THE BELGIC
CONFESSION (Originally 1561, revised 1618) ARTICLE XXIII Wherein Our Justification Before God Consists We believe that our salvation consists in the remission of our sins for Jesus Christ’s sake, and that therein our righteousness before God is implied; as David and Paul teach us, declaring this to be the blessedness of man that God imputes righteousness to him apart from works. And the same apostle says that we are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. And therefore we always hold fast this foundation, ascribing all the glory to God, humbling ourselves before Him, and acknowledging ourselves to be such as we really are, without presuming to trust in anything in ourselves, or in any merit of ours, relying and resting upon the obedience of Christ crucified alone, which becomes ours when we believe in Him. This is sufficient to cover all our iniquities, and to give us confidence in approaching to God; freeing the conscience of fear, terror, and dread, without following the example of our first father, Adam, who, trembling, attempted to cover himself with fig-leaves. And, verily, if we should appear before God, relying on ourselves or on any other creature, though ever so little, we should, alas! be consumed. And therefore every one must pray with David: O Jehovah, enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight no man living is righteous. WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH (1647) Those whom God effectually calleth, he also freely justifieth: not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God. (11:1) Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love. (11:2) WESTMINSTER LARGER CATECHISM (1647) What
is Justification? Justification is an act of God’s free grace unto sinners, in which he pardoneth all their sins, accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone. (Q.70 of the Westminster Larger Catechism) Question: Was the
Protestant view of justification new to the 16th century or can it
be found earlier in the teaching of the church? Answer: There were most certainly predecessors to the Protestant interpretation of Paul. Question: Can you give
examples? Clement of Rome wrote in A.D. 95, We, therefore, who have been called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, neither by our wisdom or understanding or piety, nor by the works we have wrought in holiness of heart, but by the faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the beginning, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. What, then, shall we do brethren? Shall we cease from good works, and shall we put an end to love? May the Master forbid that such should ever happen among us; rather let us be eager to perform every good work earnestly and willingly. [FEF 1:9, sec. 16.] [Thomas Oden, The Justification Reader, p. 45.] Clement of Alexandria (3rd century), "Justification means both the discharging of the debt of sin, and the crediting (Imputation) of Christ's righteousness (Stromata, V. 5)" [ANF II:444-46; cf. Calvin Inst., 4.16-17.] [Thomas Oden, The Justification Reader, p. 92.] Theodoret of Cyrrhus (4th century) commenting on Ephesians 2:8 said, For by grace you have been saved through faith,” in this way: “All we bring to grace is our faith. But even in this faith, divine grace itself has become our enabler. For [Paul] adds, ‘And this is not of yourselves but is a gift from God; not of works, lest anyone should boast (Eph.2:8-9).’ It is not of our own accord that we have believed, but we have come to belief after having been called; and even when we had come to believe, He did not require of us purity of life, but approving mere faith, God bestowed on us forgiveness of sins” (Interpretation of the Fourteen Epistles of Paul). John Chrysostom (4th century), "So that you may not be elated by the magnitude of these benefits, see how Paul puts you in your place. For 'by grace you are saved,' he says, 'through faith.' Then, so as to do no injury to free will, he allots a role to us, then takes it away again, saying 'and this not of ourselves.' . . . Even faith, he says, is not from us. For if the Lord had not come, if he had not called us, how should we have been able to believe? 'For how,' [Paul} says, 'shall they believe if they have not heard?' (Rom. 10:14). So even the act of faith is not self-initiated. It is, he say, 'the gift of God.' (Eph. 2:8c)." [IOEP 2:160; ACCS NT 8:134.] [Thomas Oden, The Justification Reader, p. 44.] "Scripture does not characteristically use the term "justify" to imply the direct infusion of a fully matured, full habituated behavioral quality into the recipient. Rather, it refers to an actual and legitimized declaration through which one is accredited right before the law and lawgiver. This is clear by analogy with Christ's seeming "sin" which is his real act of becoming "sin for us," a substitutional or forensic "sinfulness" on our behalf (Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians 11.5.) [NPNF 1 12:333-35.] [Thomas Oden, The Justification Reader, p. 59.] Prosper of Aquitaine (390-455) the disciple of Augustine wrote, And just as there are no crimes so detestable that they can prevent the gift of grace, so too there can be no works so eminent that they are owed in condign judgment that which is given freely. Would it not be a debasement of redemption in Christ's blood, and would not God's mercy be made secondary to human works, if justification, which is through grace, were owed in view of preceding merits, so that it were not the gift of a Donar, but the wages of a laborer? [FEF 3:195, sec. 20044] Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatus (c.530-609) bishop of Rome hymned, Man’s work faileth, Christ’s availeth, He is all our righteousness; He, our Saviour, has for ever Set us free from dire distress. Through His merit we inherit Light and peace and happiness. Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) wrote, Not to sin is God’s justice; but the justice of man, is the pardon of God (quoted in C. FitzSimons Allison, The Rise of Moralism, 19). Question: Where is the
Protestant and Roman debate over justification today? Answer: There has been no official change in Rome’s view of justification. Vatican II reiterated what the Council of Trent stated in its 32 canons on justification. However, Ø Some Catholic scholars are beginning to admit that the Greek term for justification does have a forensic sense (e.g. Joseph Fitzmyer and Raymond Brown). Ø While Rome has not revised Trent, it seems to be willing to deflect the anathemas of Trent in creative ways. Question: Can you give an example of Roman Catholic admission that the Greek term for justification is forensic? Answer: Sacramentum Mundi is a modern encyclopedia of Roman doctrine and bears the nihil obstat and Imprimatur of Roman Catholicism. In its article on Justification it teaches that justification “implies a relation with a judgment rather than a mode of being.” The article asserts that the term for Paul, always has a certain forensic flavour which prevents its becoming a mere synonym of regeneration or re-creation. In later theology, however, this sense is often lost, and justification comes to mean nothing more than the infusion of grace (D 799). Now when St. Paul applies the juridical terminology to the new Christian reality, it acquires an entirely new meaning. It refers now not to the future but to the past (Rom.5:9), not to the just man but the sinner (Rom.4:5). And so the basis of justification must also be different. It can no longer be observance of the law. It must be Christ, whom God has made our righteousness and sanctification and redemption (1 Cor.1:30), which is the same thing as saying that we are justified by faith in Christ (Rom.3:28) (Ricardo Franco, pp. 239-240). ROMAN CATHOLIC
CRITIQUE OF THE REFORMED POSITION
“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Question: Can you summarize the main criticisms of Roman Catholicism against the Reformed view of justification? Answer: There are several: (1) Justification is not declarative as Protestantism asserts but a process. (2) The Protestant view of justification will lead to antinomianism. (3) It is a legal fiction to say that God justifies the ungodly. (4) There isn’t a single biblical text which says, “Justification is by faith alone.” In fact, the Bible says just the opposite, “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). (5) The Apostle Paul teaches a judgment according to works in Romans 2:6-7, 10, 13, 26-27. REFORMED PROTESTANT CRITIQUE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC
POSITION
“Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind
of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith.
For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of
the Law” (Romans 3:27-28). “I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” (Galatians 2:21) Question: Can you summarize the main criticisms of Reformed Protestantism against the Roman Catholicism view of justification? Answer: There are several: (1) The council of Trent condemned the Gospel (see especially Canon 9 and 24). (2) The Roman Catholic view of justification is another Gospel not unlike the works righteousness that Paul condemned in the 1st century (cf. Galatians 1:8-9). (3) Roman Catholicism has an inadequate view of grace. (4) The Roman Catholic view of justification is a legal fiction because the “righteousness” of the regenerate does not meet the standard of God’s justice. (5) While
it is true that Paul never uses the exact phrase “faith alone,” his
appropriation of Psalm 62 in Romans 2:6 makes crystal clear that “faith alone”
is precisely what he is asserting.
Psalm 62 teaches “faith alone”: salvation comes only from God
and that we are to put our faith and hope in God alone. (6) The Roman Catholic view of justification leaves room for boasting. (7) Religions of works are religions of the flesh (Galatians 5). Arguably, the alleged emphasis of Roman Catholicism upon works (which is moralistic) has not made a noticeable difference in the life of her religious leaders or lay people. Indeed, the recent scandals in Roman Catholicism and how they have been (mis)handled makes one wonder where the power of the Gospel is to be found in this system. (see Bishop-Accountablility.org). (8) Because Rome denies sin in the regenerate it “seems to preclude not only any recognition of unconscious sin but also any teaching of corporate or collective guilt” (C. FitzSimons Allison, “Word made Verb”) (cf. Daniel 9:1-19). “For Christians to share responsibility for the Holocaust and other horrors which they as individuals had no part in is, off course, an unbearable burden for one whose state of grace depends upon the absence of any culpability. William Wilberforce owned no slaves and gave no consent of his individual will to the institution of slavery, but his sense of corporate responsibility drove him and others to the abolition of slavery. Surely it can be shown in both St. Augustine and St. Bernard that similar responsibilities were on the shoulders of Christians in regard to the Empire, Donatists, or papal schism. This was, however, a bearable responsibility because such acknowledgement of culpability was not tantamount to the loss of grace. Sin was a much deeper and wider phenomenon in Patristic and Medieval theology than its post-Tridentine definition in the matter of justification encompasses” (C. FitzSimons Allison, “Word made Verb”). (1) Ecumenicalism (2) New Perspective (3) Some in Reformed camps question the historic Reformed Protestant view of justification saying:
Westminster Seminary Testimony on Justification Ø Law/Gospel Ø The relationship between justification and
sanctification Ø Faith Ø Covenant of works/covenant of grace Ø Works of the Law (New Perspective) EXEGETICAL
QUESTIONS IN ROMANS RELATED TO THE ROMAN AND REFORMED VIEWS OF JUSTIFICATION Question: What are some of the key exegetical issues and texts that Catholics and Reformed Protestants disagree about? Answer: Roman Catholicism has not generally spoken dogmatically about the meaning of a particular text or words of Scripture. However, the debated exegesis regarding justification focuses upon the following: Ø Romans 2 – does Paul teach a justification by works in this chapter? Ø Romans 4:3-25 and the meaning of the Greek word logizomai Ø Romans 7:19-25 – Is Paul speaking about the unregenerate struggle with sin or the regenerate struggle with sin? [1] Ø The “differences” between Paul and James. Question: Why does this all seem so confusing? Answer: Because it is incredibly confusing! [2] Much of the confusion stems from the definition of terms. Roman Catholics and Reformed Protestants use the same terms but with different meanings. Question: Can you give examples? Answer: The significant ones are: Ø Protestants make a distinction between justification and sanctification and Roman Catholics do not. What Roman Catholics call justification Reformed Protestants will typically call “salvation.” Ø Roman Catholics differ with Reformed Protestants over the meaning of other key terms like faith and grace adding to the confusion of using the same terms and meaning different things. Question: What are the dangers of this confusion? Answer: There are at least two dangers. The first is that we live in an age of sound bite theology and most people don’t take the time or have the patience to think carefully about all these theological, terminological and exegetical nuances. The second danger is that we live in an age that disparages doctrine, creeds, and confessions. Most Christians don’t have any historical ground to plant their feet making them susceptible to every wind of doctrine. In 1997 Billy Graham was
interviewed by Larry King and asked, “What do you think of the other
[churches], like Mormonism?
Catholicism? Other faiths
within the Christian concept?” Graham
answered, “Oh, I think I have a wonderful fellowship with all of them. For example...” King interrupted, “You're comfortable with THE
PRODIGAL SON BEAUTIFULLY AFFIRMS THE REFORMED PROTESTANT POSITION OF
JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH APART FROM WORKS (Luke 15:11-32)
Rembrandt van
Rijn, “The Return of the Prodigal Son” c.1662 |
