Did the Protestant Reformation do anything good?

[joe370]

Priests are educated people. I have a most difficult time understanding, believing, accepting that one day a priest woke up and said the Eucharist is not the Eucharist and we only need two sacraments and what they mean we will debate. I cannot for the life of me understand the minds of these guys. I understand the notion of cleaning house. This is demolition.

I agree, but what did you mean when you said: This is demolition?

 

[CopticChristian]

I agree, but what did you mean when you said: This is demolition?

cleaning house is tidying up. Leaving and doing what was done was demolition. Abandonment of Authority, Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Justification, The Bible alone, Faith alone, two sacraments, declaring that Rome was the whore of babylon, the Pope the antichrist, denominating.

 

[CopticChristian]

Scroll about half way down to the 4th highlighted topic to find the specific differences … titled “how does the biblical, historic Protestant presentation of justification by faith alone contradict Roman Catholic teaching?”

… The entire article is clear and fascinating.

the-highway.com/articleJan98.html

This comes from a former Protestant now Catholic Louis Bouyer

1. Extrinsic Justification. Regarding justification by grace alone, it was the doctrine of extrinsic justification and the rejection of the Catholic view of faith formed by charity as “saving faith.” Bouyer writes, “The further Luther advanced in his conflict with other theologians, then with Rome, then with the whole of contemporary Catholicism and finally with the Catholicism of every age, the more closely we see him identifying affirmation about sola gratia with a particular theory, known as extrinsic justification.”

Extrinsic justification is the idea that justification occurs outside of man, rather than within him. Catholicism, as we have seen, holds that justification is by grace alone. In that sense, it originates outside of man, with God’s grace. But, according to Catholic teaching, God justifies man by effecting a change within him, by making him just or righteous, not merely by saying he is just or righteous or treating him as if he were. Justification imparts the righteousness of Christ to man, transforming him by grace into a child of God.

The Reformation view was different. The Reformers, like the Catholic Church, insisted that justification is by grace and therefore originates outside of man, with God. But they also insisted that when God justifies man, man is not changed but merely declared just or righteous. God treats man as if he were just or righteous, imputing to man the righteousness of Christ, rather than imparting it to him.

The Reformers held this view for two reasons. First, because they came to think it necessary in order to uphold the gratuitousness of justification. Second, because they thought the Bible taught it. On both points, argues Bouyer, the Reformers were mistaken. There is neither a logical nor a biblical reason why God cannot effect a change in man without undercutting justification by grace alone. Whatever righteousness comes to be in man as a result of justification is a gift, as much any other gift God bestows on man. Nor does the Bible’s treatment of “imputed” righteousness imply that justification is not imparted. On these points, the Reformers were simply wrong:

“Without the least doubt, grace, for St. Paul, however freely given, involves what he calls ‘the new creation’, the appearance in us of a ‘new man’, created in justice and holiness. So far from suppressing the efforts of man, or making them a matter of indifference, or at least irrelevant to salvation, he himself tells us to ‘work out your salvation with fear and trembling’, at the very moment when he affirms that ‘. . . knowing that it is God who works in you both to will and to accomplish.’ These two expressions say better than any other that all is grace in our salvation, but at the same time grace is not opposed to human acts and endeavor in order to attain salvation, but arouses them and exacts their performance.”

Calvin, notes Bouyer, tried to circumvent the biblical problems of the extrinsic justification theory by positing a systematic distinction between justification, which puts us in right relation to God but which, on the Protestant view, doesn’t involve a change in man; and sanctification, which transforms us. Yet, argues Bouyer, this systematic distinction isn’t biblical. In the Bible, justification and sanctification — as many modern Protestant exegetes admit — are two different terms for the same process. Both occur by grace through faith and both involve a faith “informed by charity” or completed by love. As Bouyer contends, faith in the Pauline sense, “supposes the total abandonment of man to the gift of God” — which amounts to love of God. He argues that it is absurd to think that the man justified by faith, who calls God “Abba, Father,” doesn’t love God or doesn’t have to love him in order to be justified.

I have more.

 

[CopticChristian]

Scroll about half way down to the 4th highlighted topic to find the specific differences … titled “how does the biblical, historic Protestant presentation of justification by faith alone contradict Roman Catholic teaching?”

… The entire article is clear and fascinating.

the-highway.com/articleJan98.html

Here is a simplified Protesant version as per your website.

To have Faith that Justifies you must be born again and regenerated by the Holy Spirit.

Justification has nothing to do with inner moral transformation. It is only a external, forensic, legal, juridical, extrinsic act of God in His actions as a Judge, imputing Christ’s righteousness.

There appears to be an inconsistency.

To be justified you have to have Faith. To have Justifying Faith you need to be reborn through the Holy Spirit, because it is the Holy Spirit that gives you Faith.

I am justified legally by Faith alone apart from any moral transformation although that moral transformation occurred prior to the justification and the Faith that justifies is the result of the inner transformation of the soul brought about by the Holy Spirit.

Regeneration is required to have Faith that justifies and I am then declared to be Justified as a legal act. I am not truly righteous, I just look that way. So if you are regenerated by the Holy Spirit, the work of the Spirit is not sufficient to cause an internal change so that the imputing of Christs righteousness is only external to make you appear to be righteous. Does this make sense?

It also appears that regeneration occurs on account of something that is done, a work.

 

[joe370]

cleaning house is tidying up. Leaving and doing what was done was demolition. Abandonment of Authority, Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Justification, The Bible alone, Faith alone, two sacraments, declaring that Rome was the whore of babylon, the Pope the antichrist, denominating.

Ah; that’s what I thought; I agree…

 

[CopticChristian]

Scroll about half way down to the 4th highlighted topic to find the specific differences … titled “how does the biblical, historic Protestant presentation of justification by faith alone contradict Roman Catholic teaching?”

… The entire article is clear and fascinating.

the-highway.com/articleJan98.html

Try a simple explanation.

Extrinsic Justification. This is justification by grace alone the doctrine of extrinsic justification and the rejection of the Catholic view of faith formed by charity as “saving faith.” Extrinsic justification is the idea that justification occurs outside of man, rather than within him. The Reformers, like the Catholic Church, insisted that justification is by grace and therefore originates outside of man, with God. But they also insisted that when God justifies man, man is not changed but merely declared just or righteous. God treats man as if he were just or righteous, imputing to man the righteousness of Christ, rather than imparting it to him. Calvin tried to circumvent the biblical problems of the extrinsic justification theory by positing a systematic distinction between justification, which puts us in right relation to God but which, on the Protestant view, doesn’t involve a change in man; and sanctification, which transforms us. Yet this systematic distinction isn’t biblical.

Intrinsic Justification. Catholicism holds that justification is by grace alone. In that sense, it originates outside of man, with God’s grace. But, according to Catholic teaching, God justifies man by effecting a change within him, by making him just or righteous, not merely by saying he is just or righteous or treating him as if he were. Justification imparts the righteousness of Christ to man, transforming him by grace into a child of God. There is neither a logical nor a biblical reason why God cannot effect a change in man without undercutting justification by grace alone. Whatever righteousness comes to be in man as a result of justification is a gift, as much any other gift God bestows on man. Nor does the Bible’s treatment of “imputed” righteousness imply that justification is not imparted. On these points, the Reformers were simply wrong:

There is no doubt that grace, for St. Paul, however freely given, involves what he calls ‘the new creation’, the appearance in us of a ‘new man’, created in justice and holiness. So far from suppressing the efforts of man, or making them a matter of indifference, or at least irrelevant to salvation, he himself tells us to ‘work out your salvation with fear and trembling’, at the very moment when he affirms that ‘. . . knowing that it is God who works in you both to will and to accomplish.’ These two expressions say better than any other that all is grace in our salvation, but at the same time grace is not opposed to human acts and endeavor in order to attain salvation, but arouses them and exacts their performance."

In the Bible, justification and sanctification–as many modern Protestant exegetes admit–are two different terms for the same process. Both occur by grace through faith and both involve a faith “informed by charity” or completed by love. Faith in the Pauline sense, “supposes the total abandonment of man to the gift of God”–which amounts to love of God. He argues that it is absurd to think that the man justified by faith, who calls God “Abba, Father,” doesn’t love God or doesn’t have to love him in order to be justified.

So with this in mind if someone offered you the opportunity to be declared righteous or to become righteous which is most appealing. Put it another way. If you are a Catholic and accept being declared righteous, are righteous are a child of God really and truly to become Protestant means you have to give this notion up and become a creature declared innocent and not be truly righteous just be declared righteous. Both are on account of the righteousness of Christ.

I like being a child of God, not an acquitted criminal, given the grace to please God and then getting rewarded by my Father and I don’t deserve it and I didn’t earn it, reminds me of my daddy…

 

[guanophore]

I have seen this website. It is slanted, confusing and makes it more complicated than necessary. It is describing to someone that accepts Justification, Sanctification, Glorification a contrast. The reality is that Sanctification is not agreed on by all Protestants.

Who disagrees with sanctification?

What do you mean “a contrast”?

Calvin made it up to support his monergistic one time justification.

This in not correct, Coptic. Sanctification was taught by the Apostles. Calvin did not “make it up”. However, I will grant you that he did change the definitions of some of the words that were handed down to us from the Apostles, to fit them with his monergistic point of view.

Justification is a process as Paul, Hebrews and James talk about concerning Abraham.

I think this conceptualization is confusing and misleading. Catholics talk about justification as being in a state of righteousness or grace with God. Sanctification describes a process of being made into the image and likeness of God. In the East, it is called theosis. It is the transformation of the human soul, which is a process. During that process, one can be in and out of a state of grace, or justification with God. Mortal sin places one in an unjustified state.

Justification for the Calvinist is being declared innocent as a guilty criminal, externally imputed righteousness. Sanctification is then being set apart.

Yes, it is completely forensic. But then, Calvin was a lawyer.

Calvanists share a very similar view of sanctification with Catholics. They also believe that we are to grow in holiness, and have our character conformed to Christ’s.

Justification for me is beind infused with grace, by Faith I have been saved so that Faith can work in love.  It is all unmerited. It is all a work of God start to finish.  Any merits are as a result of the grace that allows us to do anything pleasing and like a good Father we get an allowance.  We are declared, like John says, to be children of God imputed intrinsically.

There are some aspects of this that Calvin did retain.

I don’t like seeing my God as having a bunch of Guilty criminals running around just looking like they are righteous. Do you?

No, but if you are a defense attorney, you might feel elation!

 

[guanophore]

It also appears that regeneration occurs on account of something that is done, a work.

Yes, but according to Calvanism, this is solely a work of God, hence the term “monogersim”. God does it all, and we do nothing.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes, but according to Calvanism, this is solely a work of God, hence the term “monogersim”. God does it all, and we do nothing.

as opposed to synergism.

“For we understand that a man who is justified is not already righteous, but moving toward righteousness” Luther’s Works, 34, 52, cited in Althaus, p.237, n 63

Our justification is not yet complete…It is still under construction. It shall, however, be completed in the resurrection of the dead” Weimarer Ausgabe, 391, 252, cited in Althous, p. 237, n.63

Protestants James D. G. Dunn, E. P. Sanders and Dale Moody agree that Justification is not a one time event rather a process.

Who disagrees with sanctification?

Louis Bouyer

Calvin, notes Bouyer, tried to circumvent the biblical problems of the extrinsic justification theory by positing a systematic distinction between justification, which puts us in right relation to God but which, on the Protestant view, doesn’t involve a change in man; and sanctification, which transforms us. Yet, argues Bouyer, this systematic distinction isn’t biblical. In the Bible, justification and sanctification — as many modern Protestant exegetes admit — are two different terms for the same process. Both occur by grace through faith and both involve a faith “informed by charity” or completed by love. As Bouyer contends, faith in the Pauline sense, “supposes the total abandonment of man to the gift of God” — which amounts to love of God. He argues that it is absurd to think that the man justified by faith, who calls God “Abba, Father,” doesn’t love God or doesn’t have to love him in order to be justified.

 

[CopticChristian]

Who disagrees with sanctification?

What do you mean “a contrast”?

This in not correct, Coptic. Sanctification was taught by the Apostles. Calvin did not “make it up”. However, I will grant you that he did change the definitions of some of the words that were handed down to us from the Apostles, to fit them with his monergistic point of view.

I think this conceptualization is confusing and misleading. Catholics talk about justification as being in a state of righteousness or grace with God. Sanctification describes a process of being made into the image and likeness of God. In the East, it is called theosis. It is the transformation of the human soul, which is a process. During that process, one can be in and out of a state of grace, or justification with God. Mortal sin places one in an unjustified state.

Yes, it is completely forensic. But then, Calvin was a lawyer.

Calvanists share a very similar view of sanctification with Catholics. They also believe that we are to grow in holiness, and have our character conformed to Christ’s.

There are some aspects of this that Calvin did retain.

No, but if you are a defense attorney, you might feel elation!

Calvanists share a very similar view of sanctification with Catholics. They also believe that we are to grow in holiness, and have our character conformed to Christ’s.

For the Calvinist it is to be set apart.

I, you I hope, believe that Justication is an ongoing process akin to being born again, adolescence, adulthood and maturity. Justification matures in Christ just like a daddy raising his children. Glorification is on the other side. You may if you wish use Sanctification to say that Justification is an ogoing process however this may cause the acuitted criminals confusion and a defense attorney to shout “I object”.

 

[guanophore]

 Extrinsic justification is the idea that justification occurs outside of man, rather than within him.    The Reformers, like the Catholic Church, insisted that justification is by grace and therefore originates outside of man, with God. But they also insisted that when God justifies man, man is not changed but merely declared just or righteous.

I think this is only half right. Yes, Calvanism refers to the source of our justification as “alien”, meaning it comes from outside ourselves. But they do concur with the Apostolic faith in that one is “born again”, resulting in an inner transformation. They believe a number of internal events occur at the moment of justification, so I don’t thik it is right to say that it occurs “outside of man, rather than within him”. On the contrary, they make a strong point that God justifies the ungodly. The ungodly man is transformed, turned from darkness to light, enslavement to sin to the freedom of Christ.

… on the Protestant view,(justification) doesn’t involve a change in man; and sanctification, which transforms us. Yet this systematic distinction isn’t biblical.

I think it can be biblically supported, which is why it is such a persistent point of view. The CC teaches that a person is justified and sanctified in baptism. But if that soul does not immediately become united with the heavenly reward, then the process of becoming sanctified begins. The state of grace created in baptism (justification) is lost through post-baptismal sin.

Justification imparts the righteousness of Christ to man, transforming him by grace into a child of God.

I think a Calvanist would not disagree with this, except to say that the transformation is “positional”. We are adopted, legally becoming children of God by grace. Both would agree that the righteousness is that of Christ. The salvation is a free gift, and cannot be earned. We become members of the household of God, not by works or merit, but grace alone.

There is neither a logical nor a biblical reason why God cannot effect a change in man without undercutting justification by grace alone. Whatever righteousness comes to be in man as a result of justification is a gift, as much any other gift God bestows on man. Nor does the Bible’s treatment of “imputed” righteousness imply that justification is not imparted. On these points, the Reformers were simply wrong:

Indeed.

I like being a child of God, not an acquitted criminal, given the grace to please God and then getting rewarded by my Father and I don’t deserve it and I didn’t earn it, reminds me of my daddy…

Both things are true. We are made children of God by grace. That is the grace that acquits us. The warrant was nailed to the Cross.

 

[CopticChristian]

I think this is only half right. Yes, Calvanism refers to the source of our justification as “alien”, meaning it comes from outside ourselves. But they do concur with the Apostolic faith in that one is “born again”, resulting in an inner transformation. They believe a number of internal events occur at the moment of justification, so I don’t thik it is right to say that it occurs “outside of man, rather than within him”. On the contrary, they make a strong point that God justifies the ungodly. The ungodly man is transformed, turned from darkness to light, enslavement to sin to the freedom of Christ.

I think it can be biblically supported, which is why it is such a persistent point of view. The CC teaches that a person is justified and sanctified in baptism. But if that soul does not immediately become united with the heavenly reward, then the process of becoming sanctified begins. The state of grace created in baptism (justification) is lost through post-baptismal sin.

I think a Calvanist would not disagree with this, except to say that the transformation is “positional”. We are adopted, legally becoming children of God by grace. Both would agree that the righteousness is that of Christ. The salvation is a free gift, and cannot be earned. We become members of the household of God, not by works or merit, but grace alone.

Indeed.

Both things are true. We are made children of God by grace. That is the grace that acquits us. The warrant was nailed to the Cross.

Objection sustained.

 

[guanophore]

Louis Bouyer

Calvin, notes Bouyer, tried to circumvent the biblical problems of the extrinsic justification theory by positing a systematic distinction between justification, which puts us in right relation to God but which, on the Protestant view, doesn’t involve a change in man; and sanctification, which transforms us. Yet, argues Bouyer, this systematic distinction isn’t biblical. In the Bible, justification and sanctification — as many modern Protestant exegetes admit — are two different terms for the same process. Both occur by grace through faith and both involve a faith “informed by charity” or completed by love. As Bouyer contends, faith in the Pauline sense, “supposes the total abandonment of man to the gift of God” — which amounts to love of God. He argues that it is absurd to think that the man justified by faith, who calls God “Abba, Father,” doesn’t love God or doesn’t have to love him in order to be justified.

You didn’t answer my question. Who disagrees with sanctification?

For the Calvinist it is to be set apart.

I, you I hope, believe that Justication is an ongoing process akin to being born again, adolescence, adulthood and maturity. Justification matures in Christ just like a daddy raising his children. Glorification is on the other side. You may if you wish use Sanctification to say that Justification is an ogoing process however this may cause the acuitted criminals confusion and a defense attorney to shout “I object”.

No, I can’t really reconcile that with the Scripture and the teaching of the Church. My understanding conforms more closely with the Eastern concept of theosis.

I understand justification to be a state of right relationship with God, which seems more equivalent to being in or out of the state of grace. Definitely beyond the scope of this thread!

 

[CopticChristian]

You didn’t answer my question. Who disagrees with sanctification?

Yet, argues Bouyer, this systematic distinction isn’t biblical. In the Bible, justification and sanctification — as many modern Protestant exegetes admit — are two different terms for the same process.

Case dismissed with prejudice.

 

[Hiskid1973]

May you daily be transformed by the renewing of your mind.
/QUOTE

Amen,Thank you. He surely does,He has been incredibly faithful over the years. I have experienced some pretty incredible circumstances and answers to prayer over the years.My first brain trauma in the 60’s left me with petite mal seizures which pretty much are gone more recently after years out of a stressful job. The fall off the rail car was in 93 rattled my brain pretty good but also left my lower spine and hips with scare tissue.I believe the Lord keeps me from a lot of pain and drugs. I had a pretty powerful conversion experience along with my druggie best friend and co-worker Aug. of 73. Our office co-workers were surprised at the change in our lives and the sharing with then Christ Jesus and His salvation plan…God bless…

 

[Hiskid1973]

I think this is only half right. Yes, Calvanism refers to the source of our justification as “alien”, meaning it comes from outside ourselves. But they do concur with the Apostolic faith in that one is “born again”, resulting in an inner transformation. They believe a number of internal events occur at the moment of justification, so I don’t thik it is right to say that it occurs “outside of man, rather than within him”. On the contrary, they make a strong point that God justifies the ungodly. The ungodly man is transformed, turned from darkness to light, enslavement to sin to the freedom of Christ.

I think it can be biblically supported, which is why it is such a persistent point of view. The CC teaches that a person is justified and sanctified in baptism. But if that soul does not immediately become united with the heavenly reward, then the process of becoming sanctified begins. The state of grace created in baptism (justification) is lost through post-baptismal sin.

I think a Calvanist would not disagree with this, except to say that the transformation is “positional”. We are adopted, legally becoming children of God by grace. Both would agree that the righteousness is that of Christ. The salvation is a free gift, and cannot be earned. We become members of the household of God, not by works or merit, but grace alone.

Indeed.

Both things are true. We are made children of God by grace. That is the grace that acquits us. The warrant was nailed to the Cross.

You got a pretty good handle on it…You guys seems to know more about Calvanism then I do.I don’t do much deep thinking these days but I know God has been faithful
in keeping me over theses last 40 plus years.

 

[Contarini]

Who disagrees with sanctification?

Many Baptists and similar folks argue that sanctification is also imputed and that the Reformed understanding of sanctification through the good works wrought in us by the Holy Spirit (which as you say is actually very similar to the Catholic view) is a kind of salvation by works.

J. Vernon McGee, who died in the 80s but whose gravelly voice can still be heard on many evangelical radio stations going “Through the Bible,” started out Presbyterian, and I’ve heard him expound the difference between the two views and why he abandoned the Reformed view for the Baptist/dispensationalist view. (I was writing my dissertation on Martin Bucer at the time, and was struck by McGee’s frank awareness of how radically different the contemporary dispensationalist view is from the Reformed view.)

Edwin

 

[Hiskid1973]

Thank God we don’t have to have explanations and figure everything out to experience Christ Jesus and His work in our lives. We see through the glass darkly and come to Him as little children.

 

[Contarini]

Thank God we don’t have to have explanations and figure everything out to experience Christ Jesus and His work in our lives. We see through the glass darkly and come to Him as little children.

Indeed.

One basic problem with the Reformation was that it made “having explanations and figuring everything out” central to being a Christian.

Edwin

 

[1voice]

I have seen this website. It is slanted, confusing and makes it more complicated than necessary. It is describing to someone that accepts Justification, Sanctification, Glorification a contrast. The reality is that Sanctification is not agreed on by all Protestants. Calvin made it up to support his monergistic one time justification. Justification is a process as Paul, Hebrews and James talk about concerning Abraham.

Justification for the Calvinist is being declared innocent as a guilty criminal, externally imputed righteousness. Sanctification is then being set apart.

Justification for me is beind infused with grace, by Faith I have been saved so that Faith can work in love. It is all unmerited. It is all a work of God start to finish. Any merits are as a result of the grace that allows us to do anything pleasing and like a good Father we get an allowance. We are declared, like John says, to be children of God imputed intrinsically.

I don’t like seeing my God as having a bunch of Guilty criminals running around just looking like they are righteous. Do you?

Lutherans and Methodists have joined in a joint declaration. This website is out of the loop.

ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION
by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church
Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification signed at Augsburg on 31 October 1999

19.We confess together that all persons depend completely on the saving grace of God for their salvation. The freedom they possess in relation to persons and the things of this world is no freedom in relation to salvation, for as sinners they stand under God’s judgment and are incapable of turning by themselves to God to seek deliverance, of meriting their justification before God, or of attaining salvation by their own abilities. Justification takes place solely by God’s grace.

31.We confess together that persons are justified by faith in the gospel “apart from works prescribed by the law” (Rom 3:28). Christ has fulfilled the law and by his death and resurrection has overcome it as a way to salvation. We also confess that God’s commandments retain their validity for the justified and that Christ has by his teaching and example expressed God’s will which is a standard for the conduct of the justified also.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

THE WORLD METHODIST COUNCIL STATEMENT OF ASSOCIATION
WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION
(accompanied by the Official Common Affirmation signed by Representatives of the
Catholic Church, the Lutheran World Federation and the World Methodist Council)
Seoul, South Korea, 23 July 2006
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/meth-council-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20060723_text-association_en.html

WelI, bias is part of the lay of the land when you travel in the territory we are exploring.
Personally I found it clear in the fact that he lays out the differences by comparing the policy statements from the Council of Trent … to (at least one) Protestant view of the mechanism behind salvation/ justification and purification.
The Protestant view lines up perfectly with the scripture that states " faith comes by hearing the word of God. Just as Abraham was called righteous by God when he exercised faith by hearing and believing … plus nothing.