Bye
Posted on 01/31/2005 8:28:32 PM PST by narses
Preamble
1.The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century. It was held to be the "first and chief article"[1] and at the same time the "ruler and judge over all other Christian doctrines."[2] The doctrine of justification was particularly asserted and defended in its Reformation shape and special valuation over against the Roman Catholic Church and theology of that time, which in turn asserted and defended a doctrine of justification of a different character. From the Reformation perspective, justification was the crux of all the disputes. Doctrinal condemnations were put forward both in the Lutheran Confessions[3] and by the Roman Catholic Church's Council of Trent. These condemnations are still valid today and thus have a church-dividing effect.
2.For the Lutheran tradition, the doctrine of justification has retained its special status. Consequently it has also from the beginning occupied an important place in the official Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue.
3.Special attention should be drawn to the following reports: "The Gospel and the Church" (1972)[4] and "Church and Justification" (1994)[5] by the Lutheran-Roman Catholic Joint Commission, "Justification by Faith" (1983)[6] of the Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue in the USA and "The Condemnations of the Reformation Era - Do They Still Divide?" (1986)[7] by the Ecumenical Working Group of Protestant and Catholic theologians in Germany. Some of these dialogue reports have been officially received by the churches. An important example of such reception is the binding response of the United Evangelical-Lutheran Church of Germany to the "Condemnations" study, made in 1994 at the highest possible level of ecclesiastical recognition together with the other churches of the Evangelical Church in Germany.[8]
(Excerpt) Read more at vatican.va ...
Ping.
Among confessional Lutherans it is known as the "Augsburg Concession."
IOW, it is an ecumaniacal sell-out that uses vagued-out language to make things sound nice, but it doesn't really resolve the issues.
RESPONSE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
TO THE JOINT DECLARATION OF
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION
DECLARATION
The "Joint Declaration of the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation on the Doctrine of Justification" represents a significant progress in mutual understanding and in the coming together in dialogue of the parties concerned; it shows that there are many points of convergence between the Catholic position and the Lutheran position on a question that has been for centuries so controversial. It can certainly be affirmed that a high degree of agreement has been reached, as regards both the approach to the question and the judgement it merits (1). It is rightly stated that there is "a consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification" (2).
The Catholic Church is, however, of the opinion that we cannot yet speak of a consensus such as would eliminate every difference between Catholics and Lutherans in the understanding of justification. The Joint Declaration itself refers to certain of these differences. On some points the positions are, in fact, still divergent. So, on the basis of the agreement already reached on many aspects, the Catholic Church intends to contribute towards overcoming the divergencies that still exist by suggesting, below, in order of importance, a list of points that constitute still an obstacle to agreement between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation on all the fundamental truths concerning justification. The Catholic Church hopes that the following indications may be an encouragement to continue study of these questions in the same fraternal spirit that, in recent times, has characterized the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation.
CLARIFICATIONS
1. The major difficulties preventing an affirmation of total consensus between the parties on the theme of Justification arise in paragraph 4.4 The Justified as Sinner (nn. 28-1,0 ). Even taking into account the differences, legitimate in themselves, that come from different theological approaches to the content of faith, from a Catholic point of view the title is already a cause of perplexity. According, indeed, to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in baptism everything that is really sin is taken away, and so, in those who are born anew there is nothing that is hateful to God (3). It follows that the concupiscence that remains in the baptised is not, properly speaking, sin. For Catholics, therefore, the formula "at the same time righteous and sinner", as it is explained at the beginning of n. 29 ("Believers are totally righteous, in that God forgives their sins through Word and Sacrament ...Looking at themselves ... however, they recognize that they remain also totally sinners. Sin still lives in them..."), is not acceptable.
This statement does not, in fact, seem compatible with the renewal and sanctification of the interior man of which the Council of Trent speaks (4). The expression "Opposition to God" (Gottwidrigkeit) that is used in nn. 28-30 is understood differently by Lutherans and by Catholics, and so becomes, in fact, equivocal. In this same sense, there can be ambiguity for a Catholic in the sentence of n. 22, "... God no longer imputes to them their sin and through the Holy Spirit effects in them an active love", because man's interior transformation is not clearly seen. So, for all these reasons, it remains difficult to see how, in the current state of the presentation, given in the Joint Declaration, we can say that this doctrine on "simul iustus et peccator" is not touched by the anathemas of the Tridentine decree on original sin and justification.
2. Another difficulty arises in n.18 of the Joint Declaration, where a clear difference appears in the importance, for Catholics and for Lutherans, of the doctrine of justification as criterion for the life and practice of the Church.
Whereas for Lutherans this doctrine has taken on an altogether particular significance, for the Catholic Church the message of justification, according to Scripture and already from the time of the Fathers, has to be organically integrated into the fundamental criterion of the "regula fidei", that is, the confession of the one God in three persons, christologically centred and rooted in the living Church and its sacramental life.
3. As stated in n. 17 of the Joint Declaration, Lutherans and Catholics share the common conviction that the new life comes from divine mercy and not from any merit of ours. It must, however, be remembered - as stated in 2 Cor 5:17 - that this divine mercy brings about a new creation and so makes man capable of responding to God's gift , of cooperating with grace. In this regard, the Catholic Church notes with satisfaction that n. 21, in conformity with can. 4 of the Decree on Justification of the Council of Trent ( DS 1554) states that man can refuse grace; but it must also be affirmed that, with this freedom to refuse, there is also a new capacity to adhere to the divine will, a capacity rightly called "cooperatio". This new capacity given in the new creation, does not allow us to use in this context the expression "mere passive" ( n. 21). On the other hand, the fact that this capacity has the character of a gift is well expressed in cap. 5 (DS 1525) of the Tridentine Decree when it says: "ita ut tangente Deo cor hominis per Spiritus Sancti illuminationem, neque homo ipse nihil omnino agat, inspirationem illam recipiens, quippe qui illam et abicere potest, neque tamen sine gratia Dei movere se ad iustitiam coram illo libera sua voluntate possit".
In reality, also on the Lutheran side, there is the affirmation, in n. 21, of a full personal involvement in faith ("believers are fully involved personally in their faith").
A clarification would, however, be necessary as to the compatibility of this involvement with the reception "mere passive" of justification, in order to determine more exactly the degree of consensus with the Catholic doctrine. As for the final sentence of n. 24: "God's gift of grace in justification remains independent of human cooperation", this must be understood in the sense that the gifts of God's grace do not depend on the works of man, but not in the sense that justification can take place without human cooperation. The sentence of n. 19 according to which man's freedom "is no freedom in relation to salvation" must, similarly, be related to the impossibility for man to reach justification by his own efforts.
The Catholic Church maintains, moreover, that the good works of the justified are always the fruit of grace. But at the same time, and without in any way diminishing the totally divine initiative (5), they are also the fruit of man, justified and interiorly transformed. We can therefore say that eternal life is, at one and the same time, grace and the reward given by God for good works and merits (6). This doctrine results from the interior transformation of man to which we referred in n.1 of this "Note". These clarifications are a help for a right understanding, from the Catholic point of view, of paragraph 4.7 (nn. 37-39 ) on the good works of the justified.
4. In pursuing this study further, it will be necessary to treat also the sacrament of penance, which is mentioned in n. 30 of the Joint Declaration. According to the Council of Trent, in fact (7), through this sacrament the sinner can be justified anew ( rursus iustificari ): this implies the possibility, by means of this sacrament, as distinct from that of baptism, to recover lost justice (8). These aspects are not all sufficiently noted in the above-mentioned n. 30.
5. These remarks are intended as a more precise explanation of the teaching of the Catholic Church with regard to the points on which complete agreement has not been reached; they are also meant to complete some of the paragraphs explaining Catholic doctrine, in order to bring out more clearly the degree of consensus that has been reached. The level of agreement is high, but it does not yet allow us to affirm that all the differences separating Catholics and Lutherans in the doctrine concerning justification are simply a question of emphasis or language. Some of these differences concern aspects of substance and are therefore not all mutually compatible, as affirmed on the contrary in n. 40.
If, moreover, it is true that in those truths on which a consensus has been reached the condemnations of the Council of Trent non longer apply, the divergencies on other points must, on the contrary, be overcome before we can affirm, as is done generically in n.41, that these points no longer incur the condemnations of the Council of Trent. That applies in the first place to the doctrine on "simul iustus et peccator" (cf. n. l, above ).
6. We need finally to note, from the point of view of their representative quality, the different character of the two signataries of this Joint Declaration. The Catholic Church recognises the great effort made by the Lutheran World Federation in order to arrive, through consultation of the Synods, at a "magnus consensus", and so to give a true ecclesial value to its signature; there remains, however, the question of the real authority of such a synodal consensus, today and also tomorrow, in the life and doctrine of the Lutheran community.
PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE WORK
7. The Catholic Church wishes to reiterate its hope that this important step forward towards agreement in doctrine on justification may be followed by further studies that will make possible a satisfactory clarification of the divergencies that still exist. Particularly desirable would be a deeper reflection on the biblical foundation that is the common basis of the doctrine on justification both for Catholics and for Lutherans. This reflection should be extended to the New Testament as a whole and not only to the Pauline writings. If it is true, indeed, that St. Paul is the New Testament author who has had most to say on this subject, and this fact calls for a certain preferential attention, substantial references to this theme are not lacking also in the other New Testament writings. As for the various ways in which Paul describes man's new condition, as mentioned in the Joint Declaration, we could add the categories of sonship and of heirs. (Gal 4:4-7; Rom 8: 14-17). Consideration of all these elements will be a great help for mutual understanding and will make it possible to resolve the divergences that still exist in the doctrine on justification.
8. Finally, it should be a common concern of Lutherans and Catholics to find a language which can make the doctrine on justification more intelligible also for men and women of our day. The fundamental truths of the salvation given by Christ and received in faith, of the primacy of grace over every human initiative, of the gift of the Holy Spirit which makes us capable of living according to our condition as children of God, and so on. These are essential aspects of the Christian message that should be a light for the believers of all times.
I suspect most Lutherans could care less about this so long as it doesn't touch their local congregation in any immediate way that the average Joe could perceive.
Who signed this and when? Not that it matters one bit. No such declaration can be binding in any way--but it does show the length the new religion in Rome will go to appease its adversaries--excepting traditional Catholics, of course.
”Lutherans do not deny that a person can reject the working of grace. When they emphasize that a person can only receive (mere passive) justification, they mean thereby to exclude any possibility of contributing to one's own justification, but do not deny that believers are fully involved personally in their faith, which is effected by God's Word. [cf. Sources for 4.1].”
This is interesting. I'm not Lutheran and do not understand the finer points of their denomination. But IMHO this document sound like heresy (to true Lutherans) and is to the Lutherans as the Council of Trent document was to the Catholics. It rejects the fundamental Augustine principles laid out at the Council of Orange.
Soon the whole world will encompass this “we are loved” concept in some great big ecumenical hug. Then the Lord will return and I doubt if there will be hugs going around.
To this plain Bible-believing Christian (incidentially I'm a member of an Anglican church) this is End Times Apostasy. It is one another stage-setting step to the One World Religion of Kumbaya "Why can't we all get along?"
Ping!
|
TEN ASPECTS OF JUSTIFICATION |
|
1) The Need of Justification. Romans 3:10-We lack the righteousness we need. |
|
2) The Meaning of Justification "Justify" -- Think of the word "righteous." |
|
3) The Problem of Justification Romans 3:26-HOW CAN GOD BE JUST AND AT THE SAME TIME JUSTIFY THE BELIEVING SINNER? How can a righteous God justify an ungodly, guilty person (Rom. 4:5)? Apart from Calvary’s cross there can be no solution. |
|
4) The Basis of Justification "Justified by His blood" (Romans 5:9) |
|
5) The Source of Justification "Justified freely by His grace" (Rom. 3:24) |
|
6) The Channel of Justification "Justified by faith" (Rom. 3:28; 5:1) |
|
7) The Example of Justification ABRAHAM is the prime example used by both Paul and James (Gen.15:6; Romans 4; James 2). |
|
8) The Result of Justification. God’s perfect righteousness is put to my account (Rom.4:3-5) and thus I am perfectly righteous, not in myself (I’m still a sinner), but "IN CHRIST JESUS" (2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Cor. 1:30). God now sees me just as righteous as Jesus Christ (1 John 3:7), just as if I have never sinned and just as if I have always kept God’s holy law perfectly! Being justified I now have PEACE WITH GOD (Rom.5:1) and NO CONDEMNATION (Romans 8:1; John 3:18; 5:24). See also the study 215 Things That are True of Me Now That I am Saved. |
|
9) The Evidence of Justification James says that Abraham was "justified by works" (James 2:14-22). This is how we "show our faith" and this is how we prove to men the reality of our justification! See also 1 John 2:29; 3:7; 3:10. Consider also the study entitled, Justification by Faith and Justification by Works--Did James Contradict Paul? |
|
10) The Hope (future) of Justification Romans 8:30 -- -"whom He justified, them He also GLORIFIED." Glorification is guaranteed and in the mind of God it is already done! |
This material is taken from Romans chapter 4.
For a simplified discussion of justification designed for new believers, see Why Was It Necessary for Christ to Die?
| The Middletown Bible Church 349 East Street Middletown, CT 06457 (860) 346-0907 : |
More articles under Salvation |
This has already been rejected by Rome--or by one part of Rome--nothing is ever too clear nowadays. The days of "Rome has spoken, the issue is closed" are over. What happens now is more like "Rome has mis-spoken and the issue is left hanging."
Thanks for "the rest of the story," GB...
Narses, you should have known about this 'response,' as it was in ALL the papers.
Bye
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.