In 1517, the Reformation began with a German monk named Martin Luther. The 95 thesis of Luther were the beginning of a movement that would define the sixteenth century. Luther wanted an ecumenical council to discuss several key doctrinal issues. The church in Rome convened these conferences, but the outcome was not exactly what Luther had anticipated. The Council of Trent was a series of 25 sessions during the mid 16th century in which each of the issues of the Reformation was addressed. The sixth session dealt with the doctrine of justification. This is the central doctrine of reformation theology and the key to understanding the break from Rome. We will explore the reformation definition of justification, in terms of the five solas. We will carefully spell out the key canons on justification from the sixth session of the Council of Trent. We will contrast the two points of view. Finally, we will discuss whether there is any room for a concordat between Rome and any reformed denomination.
According to the Reformers, justification is a forensic or legal declaration that is made concerning the individual’s right standing with God. Justification is based upon substitutionary atonement and propitiation of the sinner with God. The means of this transfer of righteousness from Jesus to the sinner, and the transfer of sin to Jesus, and the reconciliation of the sinner to God is the work of Jesus on the cross, by His death, resurrection and ascension. The Holy Spirit provides the elect with faith, through the preaching of the Word, the Gospel, and the receiving of the sacraments, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, so that the elect will believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore, justification is by faith alone, in the work of Christ on the cross alone, by the Grace of God through the work of the Holy Spirit alone, to the Glory of God alone as per the recorded testimony of scripture alone. While this looks like quite a lot of information, you have probably seen it all before. We will examine each item as we walk through the Canons of Trent on justification.
This link will show the full canons of the sixth session of Trent.
Canons I-III are the refuting of the Pelagian heresy. In this, both Rome and Luther are in agreement. I have recently written on this topic. While many might at first say that they thought that Rome did believe in works righteousness, what is important to understand is that we will be dealing with some semantic issues. Justification in the mind of Rome is a two part process that the reformed break into justification and sanctification. Rome views justification part one as being according to faith, and part two is according to works. Both justification and sanctification for the reformed are external acts of Grace accomplished by Jesus and given to us as a gift of the Holy Spirit. There is the potential for confusion due to the categories used by Rome relative to the categories used by the Reformers.
In Canon III, a new term is introduced: prevenient inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The idea here is that man cannot be justified without the intervention of Grace through the Holy Spirit. While this sounds like the reformation position at first glance, remember that justification to Rome has two parts. Prevenient Grace is referring specifically to part one of justification in their theological system.
Canon IV is where the fun really starts.
CANON IV. If any one shall affirm, that man’s freewill, moved and excited by God, does not, by consenting, cooperate with God, the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if moreover, anyone shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases, but that it is inactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed"!
This canon is a direct rebuttal of what is now known as Calvin’s Irresistible Grace. The Calvinist believes that the elect must be caused to believe by the Holy Spirit and that this movement of an individual by the Holy Spirit is 100% effective. Canon IV flatly affirms a synergistic position and pronounces anyone who holds to the doctrine of monergism as accursed. Things are starting to get nasty.
Canon V is difficult to understand, as it seems to be a contradiction. Again, remember that Rome has a two part justification and that they believe in synergism.
CANON V.- If anyone shall affirm, that since the fall of Adam, man’s freewill is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing titular, yea a name, without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed"!
After affirming the doctrine of original sin, Rome turns around and says that sin is not a condition of man to the degree that free will still exists sufficiently uncorrupted to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in justification. This canon to some degree misrepresents the reformed position of free will as I discussed in the escalator metaphor (second free will section of this post,) but there can be no mistake that the reformed are now accursed on two counts.
Canon IX is the next interesting canon.
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.
Here we have the denial of the sola fide, faith alone, doctrine of the Reformation. While this seems to contradict all of the canons that precede IX, remember that the usage of the word justification by Rome is different that the reformation usage. This will help sort out the supposed incongruences.
Canon XI is the last canon I’ll discuss for now.
CANON XI.-If any one saith, 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 is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema.
Just how many times does a person have to be declared anathema or accursed to lose their salvation? This is a pretty good description of penal substitionary atonement, and by it, Rome makes us anathema.
As a whole, it is clear that the Council of Trent was drafted as a direct refutation of the 95 thesis of Luther and the arguments of Calvin. There is no room for doubt as to the position of Rome on these issues. Rome has not changed its position on Trent in 500 years. What is interesting about the concordats that are proposed between Lutheran and other protestant denominations with the Roman Catholic Church is that these protestant denominations truly believe that Rome has moved closer to their position. Actually, the liberal move of Protestantism has resulted in our more closely resembling Rome. Rome isn’t going to move at all. The sooner we all realize this, the more quickly we will realize that we are selling the farm, and the blood of the reformation martyrs for a cheap ecumenical statement that affirms nothing helpful to the dialogue and compromises severely the reformed doctrine of justification.
And so while Rome considers the reformed to be anathema, the reformed sadly acknowledge that Rome ceased to be a church at the Council of Trent. Undoubtedly there are saved persons within the Church of Rome, but institutionally, they have ceased to be a Christian church, based upon their frank denial of NT scripture as demonstrated by the Council of Trent. There is no avenue back to one holy Catholic and Apostolic church as long as Trent is upheld.
--Troll--
No comments:
Post a Comment