Those I would call the “old evangelicals” have made several observations on this subject. One wrote: “Luther was right in the 16th century, but the question of justification is no longer a problem now. “A second claiming to be evangelical commented at a press conference I attended: “The 16th-century Reform debate on justification for faith was just a storm in a cup of tea. “However, another prominent European theologian argued in the press that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is no longer a major problem in the Church. We are dealing with a multitude of people who are said to be Protestants, but who, of course, have completely forgotten what they are protesting.
Contrary to some of these contemporary claims about the importance of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, we recall a different perspective than the great reformers of the 16th century. Luther made his famous comment that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is the article on which the church stands or falls. Joel Calvino added a different metaphor, saying that justification is the hinge through which everything turns. In the 20th century, JIPacker used a metaphor to indicate that justification by faith alone is “the Atlas that carries all other doctrines on its shoulders. ” Later, Packer departed from this strong metaphor and made it a much weaker one, saying that justification by faith is “the fine print of the gospel. “
- The question we must face in light of these discussions is: what has changed since the 16th century? Well.
- There is good news and bad news.
- The good news is that people have become much more civilized and tolerant of theological disputes.
- We do not see people burned at the stake or tortured on the stand due to doctrinal differences.
- We have also seen in recent years that the Roman community has stood firm on other key themes of Christian orthodoxy.
- Such as the divinity of Christ.
- His substitute atonement.
- And the inspiration of the Bible.
- While many liberal Protestants abandoned these doctrines indiscriminately.
- We have also seen that Rome has stood firm on critical moral issues.
- Such as abortion and ethical relativism.
- In the 19th century.
- At the First Vatican Council.
- Rome called Protestants “heretics and schismatics.
- ” In the 20th century.
- At Vatican II.
- Protestants were called “separated brothers.
- ” We see a clear contrast in the tone of the different boards.
- However.
- The bad news is that many doctrines that separated Orthodox Protestants from Roman Catholics centuries ago have been declared dogmas since the 16th century.
- Virtually all the major Mariological decrees have been declared in the last 150 years.
- The doctrine of papal infallibility.
- Although it functioned long before its formal definition.
- Was nevertheless formally defined and declared true (necessary to believe for salvation) in 1870.
- At the Vatican Council I.
- We also see that these In recent years.
- The Roman Communion has published a new Catholic catechism that unequivocally reaffirms the doctrines of the Council of Trent.
- Including Trent’s definition of the doctrine of justification (and thus affirms the anathema of the Council against the doctrine of justification by faith of the Reformation ).
- With the reaffirmations of Trent came a clear reaffirmation of the Roman doctrine of purgatory.
- Indulgences.
- And the value of merits.
In a discussion among leading theologians about the question of the continued relevance of the doctrine of justification only by faith, Michael Horton asked the question: “What, in recent decades, has made the gospel of the first century irrelevant?”The justification does not hizo. se refers to a technical question of theology that could be delegated to the margins of the deposit of biblical truth. Nor could it simply be considered a storm in a cup of tea. This storm extended far beyond the tiny volume of a single vessel. what I have to do to be saved is always a critical question for anyone who is exposed to God’s wrath.
The answer is even more critical than the question, because the answer goes to the very heart of the truth of the gospel. Finally, the Roman Catholic Church affirmed in Trent and continues to affirm now that the basis on which God will declare a person just or unjust is found in “inherent justice. ” If justice does not exist in the person, that person, in the worst case, will go to hell and, in the best case (if there is an impurity in his life), he will go to purgatory for a time that can extend for years. millions of years ago. years. In stark contrast to this, the biblical and Protestant view of justification is that the sole basis of our justification is the righteousness of Christ, whose righteousness is imputed to the believer, so that by the time a person has genuine faith in Christ, whatever it takes for salvation to become yours by virtue of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. The fundamental question is: is the basis on which I justify myself a justice of mine? Or is it a justice that is, as Luther said, “the justice of others”, a justice that is additional to us, separate from us? the righteousness of others, that is, the righteousness of Christ? From the 16th century to the present, Rome has always taught that justification is based on faith, Christ, and grace. The difference, however, is that Rome continues to deny that justification is based on Christ alone, received by faith alone, and given by grace alone. The difference between these two positions is the difference between salvation and its opposite. There is no major problem with a person separated from a just God.
At a time when the Roman Catholic Church condemned the biblical doctrine of justification only by faith, it denied the gospel and ceased to be a legitimate church, regardless of all its other affirmations of Christian orthodoxy. The biblical doctrine of salvation is a fatal attribution. We live in a time when theological conflict is considered politically incorrect, but declaring peace when there is no peace is to betray the essence and soul of the gospel.