Is The Reformation Over - Justification

An old friend Pastor Matt Mitchell, sent me a link to Scot McKnight's post at Jesus Creed regarding the question "Is the Reformation Over?" McKnight is quoted significantly in Mark Noll's recent book, whose title frames the question. McKnight did a significant study of Evangelicals who had converted to Roman Catholicism. His post on the Jesus Creed site spawned, as of this writing , 78 comments, many of them lengthy.

I got around to reading Noll's book a few weeks ago. In answer to the question at hand, I think it would be good to expand just a bit on a few of Noll's key points. Noll's view seems to be that though the Reformation is not quite over, some of the key points of contention have been significantly worked on, particularly since Vatican II.

A key chapter in Noll's book is a documentation of the numerous, lasting and significant dialogue the Vatican has initiated with various Protestant groups. These included, according to Noll, dialogue with Anglicans 1966-1996, Methodists 1967-1996, Pentecostals 1969-1997, Reformed 1970-1990, Lutherans 1972-1999, Disciples of Christ 1977-1993, Baptists 1984-1988, Evangelicals 1977-1984.

All in all the dialogues are described as cordial, productive and positive. What strikes me is that almost no one I know in the Evangelical community is even aware that these dialogues have been taking place, with the possible exception of that with the Lutherans and the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification. This is unfortunate, in that it has allowed acrimony to continue rather than dialogue on local levels to be initiated.



That these dialogues are significant can only be shown by specific statements which Noll provides. I will focus primarily on the key Protestant contention that justification is by grace through faith. As Noll points out later, Ecclesiology is the key point of contention that leaves Protestants and Catholics far apart, yet even though Catholicism wishes to keep salvation firmly in the context of the church, Catholic theology has softened a great deal. In discussions between Catholics and the Disciples of Christ, it was stated jointly…

“Each Christian’s faith is inseparable from the faith of the community. Personal faith is an appropriation of the Church’s faith and depends on it for authenticity as well as nurture.

Through word and sacraments the church is the servant or instrument of God’s plan of salvation. The communion that is the church allows people to witness what Christian faith confesses: there is salvation and it comes from God through Christ." p. 86
Really, no one should say salvation is completely independent of the church, so this statement, held jointly, should be fairly agreeable to most. But more to the issue of justification, discussions between Catholics and Reformed yielded the following...

"-Justification by grace through faith is given us in the church" p.90

Again, salvation is seen as being channeled through the church, not an individual or private matter, but the words "by grace through faith" should not be ignored. And the following clarifies that grace being channeled through the church is not a rigid and absolute view.

"-If God chooses to act through the church for the salvation of believers, this does not restrict saving grace to those means." p. 90

So grace is meant to come through the church, by faith, but is not restricted to that channel alone. God is free to work in other ways. The controversial document forged by Catholics and Lutherans, the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, addressed this disagreement regarding the role of the church.

"Catholics ask whether the Lutheran understanding of justification does notdiminish the reality of the church; Lutherans ask whether the Catholic understanding of the church does not obscure the gospel as the doctrine of justification explicates it." p. 107

The Joint Declaration at the very least clarifies that Catholicism rejects any notion of salvation by works, which is precisely what many fundamentalists and evangelicals have long accused it of.

“Our new life is solely due to he forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way.”

And to remove at least some of the animosity between Lutherans and Catholics...

“The teaching of the Lutheran churches presented in this declaration does not fall under the condemnations from the Council of Trent. The condemnations of the Lutheran confessions do not apply to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church in this declaration. p.111

Relations between Catholics and Anglicans were warm for a time, but have been strained significantly by the ordination of a practicing homosexual bishop in the Episcopal Churh USA. Still the dialogue that had occured shows that Catholic teaching is not far from traditional Anglicanism, which held in its Articles of Religion that "We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification."

Considering that statement, the agreement between the two bodies on the following is remarkable:

"We are agreed that this [salvation] is not an area where any remaining differences of theological interpretation or ecclesiological emphasis, either within or between our communions, can justify our continuing separation." p. 91

What is truly stunning about this dialogue is that Rome seemed willing to even soften its stance on transubstantiation, which in my mind, was the controversy that preceded and let to battles over justification by faith. According to Noll:

“…when speaking of the change taking place in the elements in the Catholic Mass, this dialogue says of the Eucharist that ‘becoming does not her imply material change.’ It speaks of a ‘sacramental presence in which God uses realities of this world to convey the realities of new creation. Bread for this life becomes the bread of eternal life.’” p. 92

If the question "is the Reformation over" were to be answered only on the basis of the doctrine of justification, one would be hard pressed to justify (no pun intended) further separation. Alas, there are other issues, a couple of which I will look to in future posts. I do not believe the Reformation is over, but there are whole new grounds for irenic debate.

Next up will be evidence of substantial agreement on the authority of scripture.