Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

          No matter how impressive the Joint Declaration may look, for a real Catholic the ‘feel’ is not good. So it is the duty of thomistic philosophers to search the document beyond equivocations, platitudes, suppressions of known facts and doctrines, for its real essence, its substance, its meaning, and, if it is there, for its true value.

          Does this mean that Card. Edward Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity is not a thomistic philosopher? Is not a true Catholic, and is incapable of seeing beyond equivocations, platitudes, and suppressions of known facts and doctrines? He may be or he may not be. But his preparation for the job, that is, for the final shape and output of this Joint Declaration, is not encouraging. He once was Under-Secretary of the most influential Sacred Congregation in the papal service, the Secretariat of State, until removed from that post by the order of His Holiness Pope John Paul II because of a serious wrangle with Humanae Vitae. Such entanglements with a known doctrine have for Catholics the all too familiar ring of howling with the wolves of Modernism, in order to find some common ground with the reigning Modernists.

          Common ground ... That is what this Joint Declaration (JD) is all about. The Holy Father gave Card. Cassidy his important position in the Ecumenical Movement in a sincere expectation of trust. If a genuine conversion from his former lapse with known doctrine had taken place, the Cardinal would make a brilliant job of the JD. If not, then the JD would fall far below the Catholic mark of known doctrine. If the Truth contained in known Catholic doctrine is allowed to shine its Supernatural Light on the deliberations and is allowed to become an integral part of the final output, the JD may have been placed in the too hard basket by the Lutheran Confession, and may even never have been signed by its theologians. Yet, Catholics are instructed by Pope Pius XII:

“It is not for the Christian, be he theologian or philosopher, to give every latest fantasy of the day a thoughtless and hasty welcome. He will weigh it carefully, and with a just balance, making sure that he does not lose hold of the truth already in his possession, or contaminate it in any way, with great danger and perhaps great loss of the Faith itself.” [Humani Generis, 1950].

The doctrine of justification was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation of the 16th 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 (and?) 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.

          “... of that time ...” Here the equivocations start to creep in. The Council of Trent was far more than mere “theology of that time”. It defined infallible doctrine to be believed by all Catholics for all times. Mere theology is never forced to be believed.

          “... a church-dividing effect”. The next equivocation. The Catholic Church was never divided by the doctrines and condemnations of the Council of Trent. And because the Catholic Church is the One True Church instituted by Christ for the salvation and the justification of all, Trent never divided that unique Church. Strictly speaking the Lutheran break-away of the 16th century may be classed as a ‘confession’. But in such an important document as this JD wants itself to be taken, it may never be equated with a ‘church’ on equal footing with the Catholic Church, in order that the condemnations of the Council of Trent may be called to have a church-dividing effect.

          From these small beginnings and this loose talking already in the first paragraph it is starting to become clear what thinking was guiding Card. Cassidy ... They do not give us much hope of a real conversion.

          How official is “official” here?

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).

          Since we have absolutely no knowledge of the orthodoxy of the Catholic participants of these joint commissions, working groups and dialogues, nor what is meant here by “officially”, or by “churches”, or by “the highest possible level of ecclesiastical recognition”, we Catholics get the distinct impression here of attempts being made at bulldozing us into submission. The safest thing to do in such circumstances is to abide by the teaching of Pope Pius XII as it is expressed in the above quote from Humani Generis.

In their discussion of the doctrine of justification, all the dialogue reports as well as the responses show a high degree of agreement in their approaches and conclusions. The time has therefore come to take stock and to summarize the results of the dialogues on justification so that our churches may be informed about the overall results of this dialogue with the necessary accuracy and brevity, and thereby be enabled to make binding decisions.

          Not a scrap of evidence is being brought out here in support of all these fine-sounding words. What is being presented here are obviously ‘conclusions’ which should never be used as the opening of an argument or of a discussion. Already here in § 4, (and we are still only in the Introduction of this document), the word binding is allowed to cast its ominous shadow across any free and impartial investigation. In the end, such free investigations will never be accepted or even admitted by the architects of this ecumenical nightmare. When all is said and done, only binding will remain ... From this ‘Freudian slip’ we learn, if there is no genuine conversion in Card. Cassidy, how soon this reveals itself: already in the Introduction!

The present Joint Declaration has this intention: namely, to show that on the basis of their dialogue the subscribing Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church (9) are now able to articulate a common understanding of our justification by God's grace through faith in Christ. It does not cover all that either church teaches about justification, it does encompass a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification and shows that the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnations.

          “... on the basis of their dialogue ...”

          Once again, we notice here the presentation of a most far-reaching conclusion grabbed out of thin air and we haven’t even left the introduction to this JD! Notice, too, all the glib equivocations being used here as substitutes for facts. There sure is no conversion.

Our Declaration is not a new, independent presentation alongside the dialogue reports and documents to date, let alone a replacement of them. Rather, as the appendix of sources shows, it makes repeated reference to them and their arguments.

          It has now become of overriding importance to go in search of this ‘lack’.

Like the dialogues themselves, this Joint Declaration rests on the conviction that in overcoming the earlier controversial questions and doctrinal condemnations, the churches neither take the condemnations lightly nor do they disavow their own past. On the contrary this Declaration is shaped by the conviction that in their respective histories our churches have come to new insights. Developments have taken place which not only make possible, but also require the churches to examine the divisive questions and condemnations and see them in a new light.

          The “new insights” and the “new light” talked about here do not come from our Catholic Faith, since that Light comes from “the Father of light with Whom there is no change, no shadow of alteration”. [James 1:17]. This Light therefore is always the same: “... yesterday, today, forever.” [Hebr. 13:8]. We already know that this Light has been excluded from these deliberations by the deep shadow cast by their use of the word binding. “Binding” here has the same connotation as it is used in all human efforts to that effect, be they exerted by feminists, or Modernists, or Hitler or Stalin or Antichrist. So it was not a Supernatural Light that has guided the participants in these older ‘dialogues’ nor in this ‘not-new’ (meaning ‘old’) one, but a fallible human light. Fallible human light falls directly under the searchlight of thomistic philosophy, the Everlasting Philosophy.

Our common way of listening to the word of God in Scripture has led to such new insights. Together we hear the gospel that "God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (Jn 3:16). This good news is set forth in Holy Scripture in various ways. In the Old Testament we listen to God's word about human sinfulness (Ps 51:1-5; Dan 9:5f; Eccl/Qo 8:9f; Ezra 9:6f) and human disobedience (Gen 3:1-19; Neh 9:16f, 26) as well as of God's "Righteousness" (Isa 46:13; 51:5-8; 56:1 [cf. 53:11]; Jer 9:24) and "judgement" (Eccl/Qo 12:14; Ps 9:5f; 76:7-9).

          There is no “common way of listening to the Word of God” between Catholics and non-Catholics according to the following adage in philosophy: “All that is received is received in the mindset in which the recipients find themselves”. Catholics and non-Catholics are not in the same mindset of listening, otherwise the non-Catholics would listen to the Catholic Church, “the ground and pillar of Truth”. [1 Tim. 3:15].

          “New insights” as is so glibly talked about here do not come from an amalgamation of Catholic and non-Catholic faiths. For Catholics, “new insights” can only come from the Holy Spirit Who has guided the Catholic Church through its infallible 2000-year Tradition which by necessity must include the 16th century. “New insights” are not supplied by private interpretations, something all Protestants and Modernists are fond of.

In the New Testament diverse treatments of "righteousness" and "justification" are found in the writings of Matthew (5:10, 6:33, 21:32), John (16:8-11), Hebrews (5:3; 10:37f), and James (2:14-26) (10). In Paul's letters also, the gift of salvation is described in various ways, among others: "for freedom Christ has set us free" (Gal 5:1-13; cf. Rom 6:7), "reconciled to God" (2 Cor 5:18-21; cf. Rom 5:11), "peace with God" (Rom 5:1), "new creation" (2 Cor 5: 17), "alive to God in Christ Jesus" (Rom 6:11, 23), or "sanctified in Christ Jesus" (cf. 1 Cor 1:2; 1:30; 2 Cor 1:1). Chief among these is the "justification" of sinful human beings by God's grace through faith (Rom 3:23-25), which came into particular prominence in the Reformation period.

          “... gift of salvation ...”

Gal. 5:1-13. Here St. Paul speaks about circumcision and the uselessness of justification obtained under the Law. He did not speak of ‘salvation’.

Rom. 6:7. Here St. Paul simply states that “he that is dead is justified from sin”. (Can no longer sin). No talk of ‘salvation’.

2 Cor. 5:18-21. Here St. Paul writes about ‘reconciliation in Christ’. Verse 21: “Him who knew no sin (God) has made sin for us, that we might be made the justice of God in Him.” No talk of salvation, let alone unconditional salvation.

Rom. 5:11. Again: reconciliation.

Rom. 5:1. “... let us have peace with God through Our Lord Jesus Christ.” Let us have.

2 Cor. 5:17. “... a new creation ...”, but again, not an inevitable salvation.

Rom. 6:11, 17. Etc., etc.

          Catholics, beware! Eventually it will be necessary to quote to you, the readers, the authentic Catholic teaching on ‘Justification’ and its relationship with Faith and Grace.

Paul sets forth the gospel as the power of God for salvation of the person who has fallen under the power of sin, as the message that proclaims that “the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith” (Rom 1:16f) and that grants “justification” (Rom 3:21-31). He proclaims Christ as Our "righteousness" (1 Cor 1:30), applying to the risen Lord what Jeremiah proclaimed about God himself (Jer 23:6). In Christ's death and resurrection all dimensions of his saving work have their roots for he is "our Lord, who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification" (Rom 4:25). All human beings are in need of God's righteousness, "since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23; cf. Rom 1:18-3:20, 11:32; Gal 3:22). In Galatians (3:6) and Romans (4:3-9), Paul understands Abraham's faith (Gen 15:6) as faith in the God who justifies the sinner (Rom 4:5) and calls upon the testimony of the Old Testament to undergird his gospel that this righteousness will be reckoned to all who, like Abraham, trust in God's promise. "For the righteous will live by faith" (Heb 2:4; cf. Gal 3:11, Rom 1:17). In Paul's letters, God's righteousness is also God's power for those who have faith (Rom 1:16f; 2 Cor 5:21). In Christ he makes it our righteousness (2 Cor 5:21). Justification becomes ours through Christ Jesus "whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith" (Rom 3:25; see 3:21-28). "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God - not the result of works" (Eph 2:8f).

Justification is the forgiveness of sins (cf. Rom 3:23-25; Acts 13:39; Lk 18:14), liberation from the dominating power of sin and death (Rom 5:12-21) and from the curse of the law (Gal 3:10-14). It is acceptance into communion with God: already now, but then fully in God's coming kingdom (Rom 5:1 f). It unites with Christ and with his death and resurrection (Rom 6:5). It occurs in the reception of the Holy Spirit in baptism and incorporation into the one body (Rom 8:1f, 9f; 1 Cor 12:12f). All this is from God alone, for Christ's sake, by grace, through faith in "the gospel of God's Son" (Rom 1:1-3).

The justified live by faith that comes from the Word of Christ (Rom 10:17) and is active through love (Gal 5:6), the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22f). But since the justified are assailed from within and without by powers and desires (Rom 8:35-39; Gal 5:16-21) and fall into sin (I Jn 1:8, 10), they must constantly hear God's promises anew, confess their sins (I Jn 1:9), participate in Christ's body and blood, and be exhorted to live righteously in accord with the will of God. That is why the Apostle says to the justified: "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasures" (Phil 2:12f). But the good news remains: "There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1), and in whom Christ lives (Gal 2:20). Christ's "act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all" (Rom 5:18).

Opposing interpretations and applications of the biblical message of justification were in the 16th century a principal cause of the division of the Western church and led as well to doctrinal condemnations. A common understanding of justification is therefore fundamental and indispensable to overcoming that division. By appropriating insights of recent biblical studies and drawing on modern investigations of the history of theology and dogma, the post-Vatican II ecumenical dialogue has led to a notable convergence concerning justification, with the result that this Joint Declaration is able to formulate a consensus on basic truths concerning the doctrine of justification. In light of this consensus, the corresponding doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century do not apply to today's partner.

The Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church have together listened to the good news proclaimed in Holy Scripture. This common listening, together with the theological conversations of recent years, has led to a shared understanding of justification. This encompasses a consensus in the basic truths; the differing explications in particular statements are compatible with it.

In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God. The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and pre-supposition of justification is the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ. Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father. Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works (11).

          “... that Christ himself is our righteousness ...”

          Here, at last, we come face-to-face with the essential difference between the Reformed belief in justification which the Lutherans have held for more than 450 years, and the Catholic Faith. Here, in the use of the word “together”, it is explicitly being stated that the Catholic Faith in Justification of the ‘catholic theologians’ has changed and gone over to the Reformed belief.

          Reformed belief has always held, and apparently still holds going by the wording used here in this JD, that Christ’s merits and righteousness cover us sinners in much the same way as God covered the sinful pair of our proto-parents with the skins of animals underneath which was still their essential nakedness. “And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife garments of skins and clothed them” [Gen. 3:21]. The significance of this gesture is of course that the animals still had to be slaughtered before their skins could be used for dressing. Thus “The Lamb of God has been slain from the foundations of the world” [Rev. 13:8]. According to ‘reformed belief’ (Lutheranism) it is held, then, that underneath the covering of Christ’s merits and righteousness we remain what we were before: essentially sinners. No “new creation”.

“A whole batch of bread is made holy if the first handful of dough is made holy; all the branches are holy if the root is holy. No doubt some of the branches have been cut off and, like shoots of wild olive, you have been grafted among the rest to share with them the rich sap provided by the olive tree itself. But still, even if you think yourself superior to the other branches, remember that you do not support the root; it is the root that supports you. You will say, ‘Those branches are cut off on purpose to let me be grafted in’. True, they were cut off, but through their unbelief. If you still hold firm, it is only thanks to your faith. Rather than making you proud, that should make you afraid. God did not spare the natural branches, and He is not likely to spare you. Do not forget that God can be severe as well as kind: He is severe to those who fell, and He is kind to you, but only for as long as He chooses to be, otherwise you will find yourself cut off too, and the Jews, if they give up their unbelief, grafted back in your place. God is perfectly able to graft them back again: after all, if you were cut from your natural wild olive to be grafted unnaturally on to a cultivated olive, it will be much easier for them, the natural branches, to be grafted back on the tree they came from.” [Rom. 11:16-24].

          What is being stated here under God’s infallible inspiration is infinitely more than just being covered by Christ’s merits. Here we are being infallibly taught about an essential change into a “new creation”. Lutheran faith does not make room for such an essential change. In that faith we are only being dressed up by someone else’s merits to look pleasing to the Father while remaining essentially sinners underneath that covering. In that faith Redemption by Christ is synonymous with being still unredeemed.

          In that faith “new creation” means ‘a new dress’, ‘a new suit’, ‘a new frock’. It is becoming quite obvious that the Lutherans have not shifted ground on this, whereas the ‘theologians’ from the Catholic side have allowed themselves to be shown as having shifted from the Catholic position. That makes these so-called ‘theologians’ essentially Modernist ‘theologians’. It speaks volumes for the deceptive nature of this so-called JD that this text from St. Paul is completely absent from its sources and deliberations.

All people are called by God to salvation in Christ. Through Christ alone are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith. Faith is itself God's gift through the Holy Spirit who works through word and sacrament in the community of believers and who, at the same time, leads believers into that renewal of life which God will bring to completion in eternal life.

          Fine words, but now we know how to read them and to understand them with the eyes and the light of the two mutually exclusive faiths. In Lutheran faith, good works do absolutely nothing towards removing and improving the essential state of nakedness and sinfulness underneath the covering provided by Christ’s merits. If Christ cannot change that, and so has to ‘dress us up’, we certainly cannot. In Catholic Faith good works are essential for the growth in Faith, Hope, Love and merits: “the sap of the cultivated olive tree on which we have been grafted” after God’s free gift of Faith, Hope and Love in Baptism.

We also share the conviction that the message of justification directs us in a special way towards the heart of the New Testament witness to God's saving action in Christ: it tells us that as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way.

          For Lutherans it is a deceptive way of formulating a conclusion that does not follow from their essential concept of faith. [See above]. Truth and its opposite can never come from “sharing together”: “Does a spring pour forth from the same source both fresh water and brackish?” [James. 3: 11].

Therefore the doctrine of justification, which takes up this message and explicates it, is more than just one part of Christian doctrine. It stands in an essential relation to all truths of faith, which are to be seen as internally related to each other. It is an indispensable criterion which constantly serves to orient all the teaching and practice of our churches to Christ. When Lutherans emphasise the unique significance of this criterion, they do not deny the interrelation and significance of all truths of faith. When Catholics see themselves as bound by several criteria, they do not deny the special function of the message of justification. Lutherans and Catholics share the goal of confessing Christ in all things, who alone is to be trusted above all things as the one Mediator (I Tim 2:5f) through whom God in the Holy Spirit gives himself and pours out his renewing gifts. [cf. Sources for section 3].

“For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” [Eph. 2:10].

          As we will see, this text is crucial for the understanding of the difference between the Catholic concept of justification and predestination and the Lutheran version. Needless to say, neither this text nor this distinction do rate a mention in the consensus of this JD. The meaning of this is clear: the Lutheran faith has not shifted ground, but what the modernist ‘theologians’ of the JD understand by Catholic Faith has gone substantially over to the Lutheran persuasion.