4. Justification is an inner change. (Rom. 8:6; Rom. 5:1).
5. It is the gift of the Holy Spirit within the heart of the justified person. (Gal. 3:7-9; Gal. 4:6).
6. Justification is indeed an inner regeneration or renewal of the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor. 6:9-11; Tit. 3:5-7).
7. Justification makes us sinfree indeed, because it is the new birth. (Tit. 3:5-7; Jn. 3:5-8; 1 Jn. 3:9).
8. Justification makes us obedient to the Law of God so that good works follow it. Rom. 3:24,28,30,31.
9. The Righteousness of God or God Himself is imputed or given to us indwelling in us our hearts. (Jer. 23:5,6; Rom. 3:22; Ps. 40:10).
10. It is God alone that justifies the repentant believer. Rom. 8:33.
11. God does not “declare” us righteous, the word does not appear in the Bible as a means of how God justifies us; rather God “imputes” Righteousness to us. Impute is a “mental counting” or a “mental estimation” not a declaration.
“Logizomai…Actually the verb logizomai means to put together with one’s mind, to count, to occupy oneself with reckoning or calculations…to reason…to think…to value or esteem…” Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary NT, pg. 922.
12. Impute never means “as if” or make believe righteousness. Imputation is a divine creative counting that gives. Rom. 4:17-21; (Gal. 3:6-9,14; Gal. 4:6).
13. When we are justified, we are made sinfree indeed. Rom. 6:6,7,18.
14. We are to actually consider ourselves to be indeed dead to sin and spiritually alive to God. Rom. 6:11.
15. Sanctification is the maintenance of the freedom from sin that we received when we were justified. Rom. 6:7,11-13.
16. Sanctification is the maintenance of sinfreeness. Rom. 6:17,18,19; 1 Jn. 5:18.
xvii. The facts are, that the major popular concept of Justification attacked by the Council of Trent is not the concept as Luther presented it, but that of Melanchthon which already moved away from the true concept. Here are some points to note.
1. The sixth session celebrated on the thirteenth day of January, 1547, is what handled the doctrine of Justification in the Council of Trent.
2. Over and over again, the Schoolmen’s concept of works justification is affirmed in the different ways Catholics seek to achieve it, but this is subtlely presented in an evangelical way.
3. Justification by infusion is affirmed, but it is not an inner subjective change that God does in reality, it is a response of God to merits. This is common Catholic doctrine.
4. The false Melanchthonian formulae of Justification is attacked, but in a non-evident way that can almost be read two ways; that is, as an attack on Melanchthon’s type of Justification, or as the denial of the meaning Catholics put to these words.
xviii. The claim by some that the difference between what Rome taught about Justification and what Luther and the reformers taught about Justification is that the former taught a transformative Justification, while the latter taught a Justification that is non-transformative is absolutely false. There is not a shred of evidence about that difference.
1. Luther pointed to the fact that Rome taught a works justification with all the ramifications of infusion and other expressions; he NEVER accused Rome of teaching a subjective transformative Justification.
2. Luther always considered Justification to be truly change oriented and expressed it to be so many timed even to the time of his death.
3. The concern as to whether Justification was an inner transformation or not was never a concern of Luther, it was Melanchthon that raised such issues, and he eventually presented the doctrine as non-transformative. This was later taken up as the Reformation position everywhere, and finally attacked by the Council of Trent in a few of their clauses.
4. Reading the clauses on Justification in the Council of Trent does not yield an understanding that they are presenting the Catholic concept of Justification as transformative as against the Protestant position of a non-transformative Justification. Trent is presenting the standard Catholic merits and works Justification while they attack various aspects of the Protestant Justification that denies Rome’s position. Various concepts associated with the Reformation position, and even against the Reformation concept, but is against what Rome teaches, are all attacked. Here is Trent attacking anti-nomianism, which was also done by the Reformation and Luther.
“Canon 18. If anyone says that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in Grace, impossible to observe, let him be anathema.” The Canons And Decrees of the Council of Trent, pg. 44.
5. The concept of Justification being by Faith alone and not with works as taught by Luther; was also attacked by Trent with its merit/works oriented Justification.
6. It is thus grossly erroneous to assert that the divide between a Roman subjective inner Justification and a Protestant objective and non-transformative Justification is the issue of Trent. This is definitely not so.
xix. Here is an example of this silly, over simplistic divide being presented by a reputable theologian. Here is what he says as he reads too much into the Justification clauses of Trent.
“Justification alters the outer status of the sinner in the sight of God (coram Deo), while regeneration alters the sinner’s inner nature. Trent strongly opposed this view, and vigariously defended the idea, originally associated with Augustine, that justification is the process of regeneration and renewal within human nature, which brings about a change in both the outer status and the inner nature of the sinner.” Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, An Introduction, pg. 389.
xx. This wrong position is reinforced by a quotation from the Council of Trent on Justification that seems to say what the author is saying. Here is the quotation.
“In which words is given a brief description of the justification of the sinner, as being a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our saviour. This translation however cannot, since the promulgation of the Gospel, be effected except through the laver of regeneration or its desire, as it is written: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” The Canons And Decreed of the Council of Trent, pg. 31.
xxi. It is because one allows himself to be deceived by the crafty phrases that the Council of Trent has sought to enshroud its teaching in, that one would miss the very next statement which show a merits/works means of effecting this Justification which only appears to be a transformative one. Here is Trent showing that in this Justification, a person “converts himself to his own justification”.
“It is furthermore declared that in adults the beginning of that justification must proceed from the predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ, that is, from His vocation, whereby, without any merits on their part, they are called; that they who sin had been cut off from God, may be disposed through His quickening and helping grace to convert themselves to their own justification by freely assenting to and cooperating with that grace; so that, while God touches the heart of man through the illumination of the Holy Ghost, man himself neither does absolutely nothing while receiving that inspiration, since he can also reject it, nor yet is he able by his own free will and without the grace of God to move himself to justice in His sight…” Ibid, pg. 31-32.
xxii. This statement is a subtle attempt to deny justification by works, while truly upholding this false justification in a number of ways. It in fact says the following.
1. The beginning of justification must proceed from the predisposing grace of God which is without merit on man’s part.
2. However, God’s quickening grace helps man to convert himself to his own justification; this is justification by works. There is no Biblical concept of self- justification by the aid of divine grace.
3. Man is able, by his will being influenced, and by the grace of God, to move himself to justice (or righteousness) in God sight. This is nothing else than God helping man to save himself; again, it is works justification covered in words that make it look like proper Biblical justification.
xxiii. In many ways, and some by implications, The Council of Trent presented Rome’s works justification. Thus to claim a subjective change oriented Justification on the part of Catholicism is not the real value of the Council’s treatment on justification; it is the centuries old works justification of the Church that, expressed in a new evangelical Grace-oriented way, that shows the Roman Church’s real concept on Justification. Here are the works justification concepts that were ratified in the Council of Trent.
1. Doing penance is works merits for justification, thus it is justification by works.
“… Do penance, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”. Ibid, p. 32.
2. If the instrumental cause of our justification is the sacrament of baptism, then the works of baptism must be performed by man so that we may be justified. This is the same as saying that human works, that are ethical must precede justification, it is works justification.
“… instrumental cause [“of this justification”] is the sacrament of baptism…” Ibid, p. 33.
3. Justification is the same justification, whether a person is now converted for the first time or is re-converted after falling into sin from Righteousness. Yet Trent presents justification for the person who is restored as a blessing that succeeds rigorous works of penance. This is the sacrament of penance, and it is meritorious works justification, the real teaching of Romanism about justification.
“Those who through sin have forfeited the received grace of justification, can again be justified when, moved by God, they exert themselves to obtain through the sacrament of penance the recovery, by the merits of Christ, of the grace lost. For this manner of justification is restoration for those fallen… For on behalf of those who fall into sins after baptism, Christ Jesus instituted the sacrament of penance… Hence, it must be taught that the repentance of a Christian after his fall is very different from that at his baptism, and that it includes not only a determination to avoid sins and a hatred of them, or a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of those sins, at least in desire, to be made in its season, and sacerdotal absolution, as well as satisfaction by fasts, alms, prayers and other devout exercises of the spiritual life…” Ibid, p. 39.
xxiv. The Cannon laws written in Trent about Justification condemn various things about the doctrine. Here are some examples.
1. Luther’s Justification by Faith alone without works is condemned in Trent.
“If anyone says that all works done before justification, in whatever manner they be done, are truly sins, or merit the hatred of God; that the more earnestly one strives to dispose himself for grace, the more grievously he sins, let him be anathema” Canon 7. Ibid, p. 43.
“If anyone says 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 let him be anathema” Canon 9, Ibid, p. 43.
2. Melanchthon’s false “forensic” justification is also attacked and condemned also. Here is what we are told:
“If anyone says 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 the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema”. Canon 11. Ibid, p. 43.
“If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema”. Canon 12. Ibid, p. 43.
xxv. Now, based upon the doctrinal positions concerning Justification, we need to clarify the present truth concerning Justification.
1. Justifying Faith is not “our believing” nor is it “our believing in God or Christ”, it is called the Faith of God or the Faith of Jesus Christ which is different and distinct to our believing. Here is Scripture proof. [Rom. 3:3; Gal. 2:16; Rom. 3:22].
2. Justifying Faith is the Faith of Jesus Christ that contains the Righteousness of God. [Gal. 2:16; Phil. 3:9].
3. Justified by Faith is in fact justified by God Himself, who uses the instrument of the Faith of Jesus Christ to communicate His Righteousness into our hearts. [Rom. 8:33; Gal. 3:8; Rom. 3:22].
4. Justification is always by imputation; it is God who does the imputation which is a “mental counting”. [Gal. 3:6-8; Rom. 4:6,5].
5. Justification forgives or removes inner sins or idol-values [the carnal mind], not the past sins first. [Acts. 13:38,39; Tit. 3:5-7; Eze. 14:5,6; Eze. 36:25-27; Gal. 3:7-9,14; Gal. 4:6].
6. The Historical Past Sins are remitted in the Investigative Judgment which is also a justification. This is what is best called forensic “court” justification. [Matt. 12:36,37; Rom. 2:13,16].
7. Justification by Faith is also the gift of the Holy Spirit into the heart which we receive. [Gal. 3:7-9,14; Gal. 4:6].
8. In Justification the Spirit of Grace and Love, which is the Nature of God [1 Jn. 4:8] is given in our hearts. [Heb. 10:29; Col. 3:16; Rom. 5:1,5; Gal. 3:7-9,14; Gal. 4:6].
9. All works that were done before Justification to merit justification; are properly sins of our righteousness. [Rom. 4:1-4; Rom. 9:31, 32; Rom. 10:3; Isa 64:6].
Comments
Post a Comment