Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Justification: Agreement in 1541 between Catholics and Protestants on Justification
Mandate: The Newsletter of the Prayer Book Society ^ | July/August 2007 | Dr. Tory Lane

Posted on 08/13/2007 1:13:20 PM PDT by AnalogReigns

Printed below is a remarkable document, translated by Dr A.N.S. Lane of The London School of Theology, England. Before the Roman Catholic Council of Trent met and proceeded to reject the doctrine of Justification by Faith alone that was being confessed and taught in the Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican Churches in Europe, theologians from the Roman and Protestant sides met in Germany for study of their differences. Eventually, and amazingly, they came to a common mind on the doctrine of Justification— probably because they were all reading the New Testament in Greek not Latin, and seeking to understand it on its own terms.

Had this approach and agreement been accepted by the Council of Trent in 1547 then the whole history of European, and thus also worldwide, Christianity would have been very different. Protestant leaders such as John Calvin and Martin Bucer believed that it was a good and acceptable statement, but in the Council of Trent the majority was not much influenced by the study of the Bible in its original languages—a vocation made possible by the Renaissance—and it fell back into the safety of known medieval definitions and doctrines.

What then does the Article on Justification produced by the united theologians teach? Dr. Lane explains:

“Underlying the entire article is the idea of duplex iustitia or twofold righteousness — that conversion brings both inherent and imputed righteousness. The term itself (duplex iustitia) is not found in the article, but the article is built on the idea that there are these different ‘righteous- nesses’ (inherent and imputed), which are clearly set out.

What is the significance of this idea of twofold righteousness? Catholics and Protestants were offering two contrasting models of justification. The Protestant teaching was that God accepts us as righteous (what Protestants understand by justification) because Christ’s righteousness is reckoned or imputed to our account. That is, we are accept- able to God not because of anything that we have done, nor indeed because of the change that God brings about within us, but because of what Christ has done for us on the cross. We are acceptable not for what we are or do (which remains imperfect) but in Christ. The Catholic teaching, by con- trast, was that justification is about God changing us by the Holy Spirit and thus making us acceptable to himself. At baptism/conversion we are transformed within by the grace of God, by gratia gratum faciens, grace that makes us pleasing or acceptable, that brings about within us an inherent righteousness. Thus we have the contrast between the Protestant view that we become acceptable on the basis of imputed righteousness (the righteousness of Christ reckoned to our account) and the Catholic view that we become righteous through Christ’s righteousness being imparted to us or infused in us, through an inner change which gives us an inherent righteousness. The key contribution of Regensburg was to insist that with conversion we receive both of these: inherent and imputed righteousness.”

We need to be aware that later Protestant Confessions of Faith did not speak of two different forms of righteousness, but rather of righteousness imputed and then of sanctification (= righteousness inherent and growing by grace).

The Regensburg Agreement (1541),

Article 5

The Justification of Man

1. No Christian should doubt that after the fall of our first parent all men are, as the apostle says, born children of wrath [Eph. 2:3] and enemies of God [Rom. 5:10] and thereby are in death and slav- ery to sin [Rom. 6:16-20].

2. Likewise, no Christian should question that nobody can be reconciled with God, nor set free from slavery to sin, except by Christ the one mediator between God and men [1 Tim. 2:5], by whose grace, as the apostle said to the Romans, we are not only reconciled to God [5:10] and set free from slavery to sin [6:18, 22], but also made sharers in the divine nature [2 Pet. 1:4] and children of God [Rom. 8:14-16].

3. (1) Likewise, it is quite clear that adults do not obtain these blessings of Christ, except by the prevenient movement of the Holy Spirit, by which their mind and will are moved to hate sin. (2) For, as St. Augustine says, it is impossible to begin a new life if we do not repent of the former one. (3) Likewise, in the last chapter of Luke [24:47], Christ commands that repentance and forgiveness of sin should be preached in his name. (4) Also, John the Baptist, sent to prepare the way of the Lord, preached repentance, saying [Matt. 3:2]: ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is drawing near’. (5) Next, man’s mind is moved toward God by the Holy Spirit through Christ and this movement is through faith. Through this [faith] man’s mind believes with certainty all that God has transmit- ted, and also with full certainty and without doubt assents to the promises made to us by God who, as stated in the psalm [145:13], is faithful in all his words. From there he acquires confidence on account of God’s promise, by which he has pledged that he will remit sins freely and that he will adopt as children those who believe in Christ, those I say MandatEwho repent of their former life. (6) By this faith, he is lifted up to God by the Holy Spirit and so he receives the Holy Spirit, remission of sins, imputa- tion of righteousness and countless other gifts.

4. (1) So it is a reliable and sound doctrine that the sinner is justified by living and efficacious faith, for through it we are pleasing and acceptable to God on account of Christ. (2) And living faith is what we call the movement of the Holy Spirit, by which those who truly repent of their old life are lifted up to God and truly appropriate the mercy promised in Christ, so that they now truly recog- nise that they have received the remission of sins and reconciliation on account of the merits of Christ, through the free goodness of God, and cry out to God: ‘Abba Father’ [Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6]. (3) But this happens to no one unless also at the same time love is infused which heals the will so that the healed will may begin to fulfil the law, just as Saint Augustine said. (4) So living faith is that which both appropriates mercy in Christ, believing that the righteousness which is in Christ is freely imputed to it, and at the same time receives the promise of the Holy Spirit and love. (5) Therefore the faith that truly justifies is that faith which is effectual through love [Gal. 5:6]. (6) Nevertheless it remains true, that it is by this faith that we are justified (i.e. accepted and reconciled to God) inasmuch as it appropriates the mercy and righteousness which is imputed to us on account of Christ and his merit, not on account of the worthiness or perfection of the righteousness imparted to us in Christ.

5. (1) Although the one who is justified receives righteousness and through Christ also has inher- ent [righteousness], as the apostle says: ‘you are washed, you are sanctified, you are justified, etc.’ [1 Cor. 6:11] (which is why the holy fathers made use of [the term] ‘to be justified’ even to mean ‘to receive inherent righteousness’), nevertheless, the faithful soul depends not on this, but only on the righteousness of Christ given to us as a gift, without which there is and can be no righteousness at all. (2) And thus by faith in Christ we are justified or reckoned to be righteous, that is we are accepted through his merits and not on account of our own worthiness or works. (3) And on account of the righteousness inherent in us we are said to be righteous, because the works which we perform are righteous, according to the saying of John: ‘who- ever does what is right is righteous’ [1 John 3:7].

6. Although fear of God, patience, humility and other virtues ought always to grow in the regener- ate, because this renewal is imperfect and enormous weakness remains in them, it should nevertheless be taught that those who truly repent may always hold with most certain faith that they are pleasing to God on account of Christ the mediator. For it is Christ who is the propitiator, the High Priest and the one who prays for us, the one the Father gave to us and with him all good things [Rom. 8:32].

7. Seeing that in our weakness there is no perfect certainty and that there are many weak and fearful consciences, which often struggle against great doubt, nobody should be excluded from the grace of Christ on account of such weakness. Such people should be earnestly encouraged boldly to set the promises of Christ against these doubts and by diligent intercession to pray that their faith may be increased, according to the saying: ‘Lord increase our faith’ [Luke 17:5].

8. (1) Likewise, every Christian should learn that this grace and this regeneration have not been given to us so that we might remain idle in that stage of our renewal which we at first obtained, but so that we may grow in everything into him who is the head [Eph. 4:15]. (2) Therefore, the people must be taught to devote effort to this growth which indeed happens through good works, both internal and external, which are commanded and commended by God. To these works God has, in many passages from the Gospels, clearly and manifestly promised on account of Christ a reward — good things in this life, as much for the body as for the soul (as much as seems right to divine providence) and after this life in heaven. (3) Therefore, although the inheritance of eternal life is due to the regener- ate on account of the promise, as soon as they are reborn in Christ, nevertheless God also renders a reward to good works, not according to the sub- stance of the works, nor because they come from us, but to the extent that they are performed in faith and proceed from the Holy Spirit, who dwells in us, free choice concurring as a partial agent.

9. The joy of those who have performed more and better works will be greater and more abun- dant, on account of the increase of faith and love, in which they have grown through exercises of that kind. (1) Now those who say that we are justified by faith alone should at the same time teach the doc- trine of repentance, of the fear of God, of the judge- ment of God and of good works, so that all the chief points of the preaching may remain firm, as Christ said: ‘preaching repentance and the remission of sins in my name’ [Luke 24:47]. (2) And that is to prevent this way of speaking [i.e. sola fide] from being understood other than has been previously mentioned.

[Two fascinating essays on this Agreement by Dr Lane are to be found in two recent collections of essays on Justification: (i) M. Huisbands & D.J. Treier (eds), What’s at stake in the Current Debates on Justification, InterVarsity Press, Downer’s Grove, 2004 & (ii) B.L. McCormack (ed), Justifi- cation in Perspective, Baker, Grand Rapids, 2006. These two books are necessary reading for anyone wishing to find a reasonably quick entry into the contemporary debate concerning Justification.]


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: catholic; christian; protestant; religion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last
A long read, but VERY intersting, none the less. Emphasizes what a tradgedy Trent really was, and how, when those Church leaders who really know and believe in the scriptures put their heads together in council, Holy Spirit-led agreement results.
1 posted on 08/13/2007 1:13:29 PM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sionnsar; Huber

Anglican List Ping! (Another good one from the Prayer Book Society...)


2 posted on 08/13/2007 1:16:52 PM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

GRPL ping! Historic attempt at biblically-true ecumenicism.... (Printed by the very theologically conservative Anglican Prayer Book Society)


3 posted on 08/13/2007 1:20:27 PM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

ping for later


4 posted on 08/13/2007 1:23:27 PM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire; corbos; NYFreeper; Alexius; highimpact; nanetteclaret; guppas; ExtremeUnction; narses

for the Catholic/Pro-life ping list, of historic interest....

(A very early Roman Catholic/Protestant agreement on a critical issue of contention)

Yes, while I personally sincerly confess it may be the pot calling the kettle black, FLAMING highly discouraged here....


5 posted on 08/13/2007 1:26:20 PM PDT by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

The author says that had the Council of Trent been based in Greek instead of Latin, many of the misunderstandings that perpetuated the schisms would have been resolved. Does he mean to imply that the Catholic Church’s conclusions at Trent contradicted these, or that by using Latin instead of Greek, the Church made herself less understood by Protestants?


6 posted on 08/13/2007 1:32:38 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus
the Church made herself less understood by Protestants?

rofl Understatement of the centuries...

7 posted on 08/13/2007 1:37:47 PM PDT by badpacifist (They say your head can be a prison. Then these are just conjugal visits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns; Ottofire; marinamuffy; flynmudd; twonie; Peace4EarthNow; Nightshift; WileyPink; ...

Baptist ping


8 posted on 08/13/2007 1:39:12 PM PDT by WKB (It's hard to tell who's more afraid of Fred Thompson; The Dims or the rudibots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns; BlackElk

The various extant Greek manuscripts available in the 16th century disagreed with each other. The Latin Vulgate was translated at a time when better manuscripts were available. It is a presumption on the part of the author that reading in Greek rather than in Latin made a difference in the decision making. The eastern Church, which never used Latin, did not buy into the Luther/Calvin approach.


9 posted on 08/13/2007 1:41:18 PM PDT by sittnick (There is no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
They both got it wrong. The problem with this is that Christ's message was simple. You don't need priests; do good things to one another and the Kingdom of Heaven will be yours.

Christ's message was not about nuance and legal hairsplitting, nor about which council or educated poobah should man the turnstiles and tollbooths of Heaven. God alone, not men and churches, decipher what is in a mans heart and soul.

10 posted on 08/13/2007 1:45:07 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

Eph. 2:5-9

[5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

[6] And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

[7] That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.

I really believe GOD has it right and man who disagrees with GOD; has a self serving agenda ... .


11 posted on 08/13/2007 1:46:25 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

I don’t think Luther accepted it.


12 posted on 08/13/2007 1:48:41 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns; BlackElk
Emphasizes what a tradgedy Trent really was, and how, when those Church leaders who really know and believe in the scriptures put their heads together in council, Holy Spirit-led agreement results.

There is a reason why Christ built his Church on Simon Peter, who would become the rock. The Fathers at the Council of Trent are successors to the Apostles, this group of people was not. That is how we know what the authoritative understanding of Scripture is, the voice that calls through the narrow gate, and not the legions of variations spawned by the myriad of Protestant sects over the last 500 years is the voice of truth.

I normally don't take this tone, as this is essentially a political board, and Evangelical Christians, conservative Anglicans and Lutherans and Catholics can be on the same side of so much.

BUT, if you insist on calling one of the greatest Councils a tragedy, don't be surprised when you find your false presumptions based on a misunderstanding of the teachings of Christ and Luther's own purposeful mistranslation (he added the word "alone", when it was in neither the Greek nor the Latin, because "he would have it so") are challenged.
13 posted on 08/13/2007 1:49:41 PM PDT by sittnick (There is no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sittnick

What is most perplexing is that the argument between the Protestants and Catholics came down to the deciphering understandings of the 29 books that the Catholic Church decided would compromise the New Testament. Had the Protestants attempted to revisit and revise Canon and examining the many other works contemporary to the 29 chosen the argument might have been more about the message of God and less about political power.


14 posted on 08/13/2007 1:51:03 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

“I don’t think Luther accepted it.”

Luther accepted it. That was a burning issue amongst others with him.


15 posted on 08/13/2007 1:51:14 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sittnick
Emphasizes what a tradgedy Trent really was,<.P .

Why bring Senator Lott into this? :>) JK

16 posted on 08/13/2007 1:51:40 PM PDT by WKB (It's hard to tell who's more afraid of Fred Thompson; The Dims or the rudibots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
Henry VIII died in 1547. I don't think any openly Protestant doctrines were accepted by the Church of England until the reign of Edward VI.

The doctrine of justification was just one of a number of disagreements between Catholics and Protestants, and the animosity between the sides was so intense that I don't think there was any chance of reconciliation by the time the Council of Trent began its deliberations.

17 posted on 08/13/2007 1:52:50 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sittnick

Christ did not establish the “church” on Peter, another sinner.

It is a tragedy that the Catholic church didn’t acknowledge the obvious:

Eph. 2:5-9

[5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

[6] And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

[7] That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.

I really believe GOD has it right and man who disagrees with GOD; has a self serving agenda ... . It’s best to listen to God and not other sinners ... .


18 posted on 08/13/2007 1:53:18 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

I completely agree with your assessment.


19 posted on 08/13/2007 2:25:05 PM PDT by usurper (Spelling or grammatical errors in this post can be attributed to the LA City School System)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nmh; BlackElk; ninenot
Well, here we are in the middle of a discussion about Latin and Greek causing divisions, and you pull out one of many English translations.

You have no authority in any event to give your interpretation of a translation of a translation of a copy of a small fragment any more weight than anybody else.

Since I do not belong to the Church of nmh, and since neither Christ nor Scripture itself says sola scriptura, I will go with the unbroken teaching of the Christ passed down through His Apostles and their successors, rather than nmh or what might well-have been the 16th century equivalent of Catholics for a Free Choice. The only tragedy of the Council of Trent is that it was about 50 years too late.
20 posted on 08/13/2007 2:25:37 PM PDT by sittnick (There is no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson