Imputed Righteousness GOLDMINE (Justification by Faith Alone)

[fred_conty]

I’ll have to spend a few hours checking this out.

My point with the “clothing ourselves” comment was in response to Good Fella’s use of Colossians 3 which speaks of our clothing ourselves in Christ. But yes, if you are not sanctified, you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

However, just because both justification and sanctification are integral parts of Salvation does not make them the same thing. In this system, the delineation between justification and sanctification is not so much a prescriptive claim as description of what they think happens. Also, they believe that it is clear that justification is temporally and logically prior to sanctification. Under Catholic theology, it is not clear whether this temporal priority exists.

catholic.com/tracts/grace-what-it-is-and-what-it-does

QUOTE from the above site.
Most Fundamentalists go on to say that losing ground in the sanctification battle won’t jeopardize your justification. You might sin worse than you did before “getting saved,” but you’ll enter heaven anyway, because you can’t undo your justification, which has nothing to do with whether you have supernatural life in your soul.

Calvin taught the absolute impossibility of losing justification.

Luther said it could be lost only through the sin of unbelief; that is, by undoing the act of faith and rejecting Christ; but not by what Catholics call mortal sins.

Catholics see it differently. If you sin grievously, the supernatural life in your soul disappears, since it can’t co-exist with serious sin. You then cease to be justified. If you were to die while unjustified, you’d go to hell. But you can become re-justified by having the supernatural life renewed in your soul, and you can do that by responding to the actual graces God sends you.
UNQUOTE

So the complete idea of Justification can have various meanings depending upon a person’s faith tradition.

Just a thought.

 

[Good_Fella]

I must ask the Catholics on this thread this question. Do you believe there is a distinction between justification and sanctification? I know many Protestants who would argue that there is indeed a clear distinction between the two. And if there is a clear distinction, then we can claim that the process by which we grow to be like Christ through our works and “clothing ourselves” should properly be categorized as sanctification. Justification is a different part of the chain of salvation. If we limit justification to God’s reckoning, then there is no problem being “justified by faith alone.” Now whether or not we are sanctified will prove whether or not our faith is dead or alive, but under this system it should be kept separate from justification.

I point this out because your post seems to confuse the concepts of justification and sanctification. Under your paradigm, it seems that salvation is viewed in its entirety, and then it becomes absolutely necessary to deny things like sola fide and sola imputation.

"For I tell you, unless your justice abounds more than that of the Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 5, 20

“Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypoctites; because you are like whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men beautiful, but within are full of dead men’s bones, and of all filthiness.”
Matthew 23, 27

Justification and sanctification are distinct but essentially one in the process of the application of the redemption achieved by the merits of Christ’s passion and atoning death on the cross. Neither state precedes the other in the salvation process, for both of them are equally the result of God’s grace. By grace it must be understood to mean both divine favour - the initial unmerited grace of forgiveness and justification and faith - and the divine power or influence that achieves a real transformation of the soul, rendering it sanctified and thereby just and pleasing in God’s sight. Sanctifying grace is a constant or habitual supernatural quality of the soul which intrinsically makes a person just in God’s sight. Thus in justification everything in us that is hateful to God is removed by sanctifying grace through the operation of actual graces - faith, hope, and charity - which we cooperate with in their efficacy. Neither Christ’s formal redemption and reconciliation between God and man nor our personal salvation can be achieved without justification and sanctification. The merits of Christ’s redemption, initiated by God in his mercy, not his justice, for our predestination to grace is unmerited, do not actually apply to our individual selves unless we merit for ourselves the sanctification that renders us interiorly holy and thereby just in God’s sight by his grace. It is God who reckons us as intrinsically righteous because of his work within us. Everything charitable we do is meritorious and pleasing to God because it is the result of his effcacious grace. We are not merely considered to be just in God’s sight by having the righteousness and sanctity of Christ extrinsically imputed to us while filth remains in our souls. When referring to the Pharisees, Jesus is speaking in the context of justification. A soul that resembles a tomb full of “dead men’s bones and all corruption” is unjust and displeasing to God, since it is unholy. Blessed are the meek and humble, the merciful, the pure of heart, and those who thirst for true justice. They are the ones who are blessed and will inherit the kingdom of heaven and sit at the banquet table prepared by the Father (Mt. 22:1-14). But to be guests worthy of the invitation, we must don the proper apparel. The door to the banquet hall has been opened by the redeeming merits of Christ in strict justice as eternally decreed by God through no merit of ours. In order to merit not being thrown out as we try to get inside and sit at the table, we must clothe ourselves properly by putting on the clothing that God has presented to us in his grace.

For us to better perceive how justification and sanctification relate and cooperate with each other in the application of Christ’s redemption of humanity, we can take recourse to the metaphysics of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. He postulated that all created things exist on the principle of four causes: efficient, material, formal, and final. On the subject at hand, our interest lies with formal causality. In dictionaries of philosophy we will find that the formal cause of all things that exist consists of “the elements of a conception or thing conceived to be what it is. or the idea of a formative principle and cooperating with
matter ; each and every individual thing is composed not only of matter, but also of form. Form is the principle determination which accounts for the thing being what it is (oak tree, lion, or human being). The substantial form of a thing (a physical object or mental concept) accounts for its being the sort of thing it is, for belonging to the species to which it does belong.” It is important for us to know the meaning of formal causality, because the Council of Trent defined sanctification as “the only formal cause (causa formalis) of justification.”

In light of Aristotle’s metaphysics, justification (a concept or state) could not be substantilly what it is without its principle determination, namely sanctity (a concept or state). However, neither justification nor sanctity could assume the forms particularly belonging to them unless they were determined by the principal of efficient causality, that which puts something into effect. In this case, the efficient cause is divine grace, as both divine favour and influence. Both states are the result of the one divine initiative, and so they function interdependently like two sides of a coin: redemption. This is why the terms justification and sanctification are used interchangeably in sacred Scripture. Neither concepts can exist without the other in the divine plan of redemption and for our salvation to be complete on a personal level. God is not an impersonal judge in a court of law, but our merciful heavenly Father to whom we relate personally. Jesus exhorted us to call God “Abba.” Justification and sanctification cooperate with each other just as our souls and minds cooperate with our bodies. What distinguishes human beings from the lower forms of animal species and in principle determines their humanity are these particular faculties and their functional organization which in turn determine human capacities. Our physical bodies - material cause - alone do not determine our humanity. A corpse is not a human person once the soul leaves the body and consciousness is translated from one plane of existence to another. Nor are we human by nature without the flesh.

Likewise, salvation, seen as material cause, cannot be fully applied to us as saved persons if justification and sanctification are absent. A reedeemed person iis just that by being justified and sanctified by the grace of God. Justification and sanctification can be compared to the Holy Trinity in that they are distinct like the divine Persons, but undivided and essentially one in nature. Just as the incarnation of the divine Word was brought about by the common activity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, so too our personal salvation results by a common activity between justification and sanctification. The nature of God’s plan of salvation reflects who God is by his essence. Thus we cannot be reckoned as righteous by being both just and unholy, since God is holy and we are called to be communicants in the divine nature. Faith alone does not save. It must be accompanied by good works done in grace prompted by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us. In the words of St.Paul: “God works for good for those who love him.” We too must work for good ultimately for the sake of Him who loves us. And unless we do by actually being made righteous by divine grace, God does not reckon us as just. The Greek verb “to justify” (dikaioo) means by its -oo stem that God sees us as inherently righteous. What he declares to be just is really just as light is real by God’s declaration. Light is that which it formally is, and our righteousness is that which it formally is, since everything God creates by the power of his grace is real.

Wherefore, my dearly beloved … with fear and trembling work out your salvation. For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and accomplish, according to his good will.
Philippians 2, 13

PAX

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Every “Faith Alone” thread I’ve ever seen talks in circles about a million different things but always RUNS AWAY from James 2:24.

Why don’t people go to the heart of James 2:24?

Was the Holy spirit LYING when He inspired James to write that we’re NOT saved by “faith alone”?

The only time the words “faith” and “alone” are used together ins scripture as “faith alone” the Holy Spirit who is God says that we’re NOT saved by faith alone.

How many times does that have to be DRILLED through the brains of FAITH ALONE believers?

You’ve heard the trite saying many times in Protestant circles–God said it–I believe it–that settles it!

Well when it comes to James 2:24 I guess faith alone believers think that God couldn’t have said it because they don’t want to believe it!

All the “faith alone” heretics would have been better off if Martin Luther had thrown James out of the bible–then they wouldn’t have to face it!

I think too many Catholics here in trying to be ecumenical won’t get to the central truth of the whole “faith alone” matter and that is God said that you’re not saved by “Faith Alone” and if you don’t believe that you simply don’t believe God!

When it comes to that verse if you believe in “Faith Alone” then you’re calling God a liar!

I don’t believe anyone who says that verses in the bible mean EXACTLY opposite of what they say!

I think that the devil is behind that kind of thinking!

The choice really is whether you believe in men or you believe in God–it really is that simple!

 

[fred_conty]

Of course, Israel was different on a very “real” level. I am not saying that God reckoned falsely. What I am saying is that it is only the decision of God that made Israel so. What this article implies (indeed what all Catholic works I have seen have implied while disputing logizomia) is that God merely recognizes the fact that such a thing is righteous. As if God has a ledger and Abraham was necessarily righteous because of Action X. However, this does not hold up to the Biblical evidence. When Paul quotes Psalms saying “There is no one righteous; not even one.” (Romans 3:10), it is because there is no one righteous. The reckoning of faith as righteousness by God must be because of that reckoning itself. It is not a “legal fiction.” We actually are righteous, but it is only by the mercy of God that this is accomplished. This is why I do not defend Imputation but rather Infusion, which by the way you hold and hold to sola fide as well.

Justification is by faith alone not by works. This is how faith is initially established.
Sanctification is not by faith alone but also by works. This is after initial faith is established.

Justification is the very first time we are enabled by God to assent to our belief in Jesus.
This cannot be earned by anything we do or by works, but rather is a pure gift and invite from God.

Santification is an ongoing process after justification has been established.
Faith then enables us to continue our life in Jesus thru good works.
For example, baptism. “Unless you are born again with water and the Holy Spirit, you cannot enter the kindom of heaven” he said to Nichodemous. It is faith that enables our understanding and acceptance in these words of Jesus. Without faith, we would not be baptised because faith is the foundation of these holy things Jesus taught us to do.

“unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you cannot have life in you.” Faith again is that by which we assent to this holy food which then changes us into Jesus more and more.

We do not live by faith alone, but with a faith which enables us to live a life in all that Jesus taught us to carry out.

Just a thought.

 

[Taestron]

catholic.com/tracts/grace-what-it-is-and-what-it-does

QUOTE from the above site.
Most Fundamentalists go on to say that losing ground in the sanctification battle won’t jeopardize your justification. You might sin worse than you did before “getting saved,” but you’ll enter heaven anyway, because you can’t undo your justification, which has nothing to do with whether you have supernatural life in your soul.

Calvin taught the absolute impossibility of losing justification.

Luther said it could be lost only through the sin of unbelief; that is, by undoing the act of faith and rejecting Christ; but not by what Catholics call mortal sins.

Catholics see it differently. If you sin grievously, the supernatural life in your soul disappears, since it can’t co-exist with serious sin. You then cease to be justified. If you were to die while unjustified, you’d go to hell. But you can become re-justified by having the supernatural life renewed in your soul, and you can do that by responding to the actual graces God sends you.
UNQUOTE

So the complete idea of Justification can have various meanings depending upon a person’s faith tradition.

Just a thought.

While the news about Fundamentalists is disappointing, I would assume that this is just a misappropriation of Calvin. Though he taught that a person could never lose their justification, it is clear that this is from God’s perspective, because He knows who truly has faith.

Justification is by faith alone not by works. This is how faith is initially established.
Sanctification is not by faith alone but also by works. This is after initial faith is established.

Justification is the very first time we are enabled by God to assent to our belief in Jesus.
This cannot be earned by anything we do or by works, but rather is a pure gift and invite from God.

Santification is an ongoing process after justification has been established.
Faith then enables us to continue our life in Jesus thru good works.
For example, baptism. “Unless you are born again with water and the Holy Spirit, you cannot enter the kindom of heaven” he said to Nichodemous. It is faith that enables our understanding and acceptance in these words of Jesus. Without faith, we would not be baptised because faith is the foundation of these holy things Jesus taught us to do.

“unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you cannot have life in you.” Faith again is that by which we assent to this holy food which then changes us into Jesus more and more.

We do not live by faith alone, but with a faith which enables us to live a life in all that Jesus taught us to carry out.

Just a thought.

I wonder if official doctrine agrees with you. This is essentially the Protestant position. And while I agree with the concept of “justification by faith alone,” making piecemeal of the salvation process seems to be getting the discussion nowhere. So I think it might be better to abandon terms like sola fide and look at salvation from its entirety.

 

[Taestron]

For us to better perceive how justification and sanctification relate and cooperate with each other in the application of Christ’s redemption of humanity, we can take recourse to the metaphysics of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. He postulated that all created things exist on the principle of four causes: efficient, material, formal, and final. On the subject at hand, our interest lies with formal causality. In dictionaries of philosophy we will find that the formal cause of all things that exist consists of “the elements of a conception or thing conceived to be what it is. or the idea of a formative principle and cooperating with
matter ; each and every individual thing is composed not only of matter, but also of form. Form is the principle determination which accounts for the thing being what it is (oak tree, lion, or human being). The substantial form of a thing (a physical object or mental concept) accounts for its being the sort of thing it is, for belonging to the species to which it does belong.”** It is important for us to know the meaning of formal causality, because the Council of Trent defined sanctification as “the only formal cause (causa formalis**) of justification.”

In light of Aristotle’s metaphysics, justification (a concept or state) could not be substantilly what it is without its principle determination, namely sanctity (a concept or state). However, neither justification nor sanctity could assume the forms particularly belonging to them unless they were determined by the principal of efficient causality, that which puts something into effect. In this case, the efficient cause is divine grace, as both divine favour and influence. Both states are the result of the one divine initiative, and so they function interdependently like two sides of a coin: redemption. This is why the terms justification and sanctification are used interchangeably in sacred Scripture. Neither concepts can exist without the other in the divine plan of redemption and for our salvation to be complete on a personal level. God is not an impersonal judge in a court of law, but our merciful heavenly Father to whom we relate personally. Jesus exhorted us to call God “Abba.” Justification and sanctification cooperate with each other just as our souls and minds cooperate with our bodies. What distinguishes human beings from the lower forms of animal species and in principle determines their humanity are these particular faculties and their functional organization which in turn determine human capacities. Our physical bodies - material cause - alone do not determine our humanity. A corpse is not a human person once the soul leaves the body and consciousness is translated from one plane of existence to another. Nor are we human by nature without the flesh.

Interesting, I never knew Trent defined justification this way. I myself would initially try to say that sanctification is the final cause of justification, but then I never really understood how to make final causes what moderistss would think of as a cause without it being some sort of formal cause. But you are absolutely correct, it is folly to talk of justification of itself as if justification can be gained without sanctification. This is why I find it necessary to do away with imputation and take up infusion.

 

[Good_Fella]

Interesting, I never knew Trent defined justification this way. ** I myself would initially try to say that sanctification is the final cause of justification**, but then I never really understood how to make final causes what moderistss would think of as a cause without it being some sort of formal cause. But you are absolutely correct, it is folly to talk of justification of itself as if justification can be gained without sanctification. This is why I find it necessary to do away with imputation and take up infusion.

In philosophical jargon the final cause is the end or purpose of a thing or process. Justification is a process whose purpose is to free us from guilt in God’s sight, especially by the time of our particular judgment at death, and whose end is our predestination to glory. Without its determinant, namely the element of sanctification (formal cause), the process of justification could not accomplish its purpose and achieve its end.

May you be filled with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding to live in a manner worthy of the Lord, so as to be fully pleasing, in every good work bearing fruit and growing in the knowledge of God, strengthened with every power, in accord with his glorious might, for all endurance and patience, with joy giving thanks to the Father, who has made you fit to share in the inheritance of the holy ones in light. He delivered us from the power of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son.
Colossians 1, 9-13

PAX

 

[fred_conty]

While the news about Fundamentalists is disappointing, I would assume that this is just a misappropriation of Calvin. Though he taught that a person could never lose their justification, it is clear that this is from God’s perspective, because He knows who truly has faith.

I wonder if official doctrine agrees with you. This is essentially the Protestant position. And while I agree with the concept of “justification by faith alone,” making piecemeal of the salvation process seems to be getting the discussion nowhere. So I think it might be better to abandon terms like sola fide and look at salvation from its entirety.

U.S Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue group report: Justification by Faith. This is what they agreed on

1. Christians have no hope of final salvation and basis for justification before God other than through God’s free gift of grace in Christ, offered to them through the Holy Spirit. Our entire hope of justification and salvation rests on the promises of God and the saving work of Jesus Christ, expressed in the gospel.
2. As a result of original sin, all human beings – whoever they are and whenever and wherever they live – stand in need of justification.
3. Justification is a complete free act of God’s grace, and nothing we can do can be said to be the basis or ground of our own justification. Even faith itself must be recognized as a divine gift and work within us. We can not turn to God unless God turns us first. The priority of God’s redeeming will and action over our own actions in bringing about our salvation is expressed (and its mystery safeguarded) by the doctrine of predestination.
4. In justification we are declared righteous before God, and the process of making us righteous in His sight through the renewing action of the Holy Spirit is begun. In that justification, we receive by faith the effects of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as we respond personally to the gospel (the power of God for salvation), as we encounter the gospel through Scripture (the proclamation of the Word of God) and the sacraments, and as it initially awakens and subsequently strengthens faith in us.
5. Whoever is justified is subsequently renewed by the Holy Spirit and motivated and enabled to perform good works. That is not to say that individuals may rely on these works for their salvation, because eternal life remains a gift offered to us through the grace and mercy of God.

 

[Good_Fella]

U.S Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue group report: Justification by Faith. This is what they agreed on

1. Christians have no hope of final salvation and basis for justification before God other than through God’s free gift of grace in Christ, offered to them through the Holy Spirit. Our entire hope of justification and salvation rests on the promises of God and the saving work of Jesus Christ, expressed in the gospel.
2. As a result of original sin, all human beings – whoever they are and whenever and wherever they live – stand in need of justification.
3. Justification is a complete free act of God’s grace, and nothing we can do can be said to be the basis or ground of our own justification. Even faith itself must be recognized as a divine gift and work within us. We can not turn to God unless God turns us first. The priority of God’s redeeming will and action over our own actions in bringing about our salvation is expressed (and its mystery safeguarded) by the doctrine of predestination.
4. In justification we are declared righteous before God, and the process of making us righteous in His sight through the renewing action of the Holy Spirit is begun. In that justification, we receive by faith the effects of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as we respond personally to the gospel (the power of God for salvation), as we encounter the gospel through Scripture (the proclamation of the Word of God) and the sacraments, and as it initially awakens and subsequently strengthens faith in us.
5. Whoever is justified is subsequently renewed by the Holy Spirit and motivated and enabled to perform good works. That is not to say that individuals may rely on these works for their salvation, because eternal life remains a gift offered to us through the grace and mercy of God.

It’s good that you brought these five points up, because the classical reformed Protestant tradition of imputed righteousness is held only by a small group of orthodox Lutherans who have strictly abided by the teachings of Martin Luther, and to some extent those of John Calvin which concur with Luther’s. When we speak of imputed righteousness and justification by faith alone as a Protestant doctrine, we mustn’t assume that it is held by all Protestants of any denomination. But although there are many Protestants who believe in intrinsic righteousness by the infusion of divine grace, they still insist that we are justified and saved by faith alone. The infused virtues of faith and charity appear to lose their essential distinction in the justification process as the latter is appropriated by the former and virtually becomes an inherent characteristic of faith, which exclusively stands as the requisite of justification. Ontologically the virtue of charity forfeits its individual identity by becoming an attribute of something else.

Such a notion, I’m afraid, doesn’t square with what St. Paul meant when he said: “For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love” (Gal 5:5-6). Faith is faith, and love is love, the two virtues being mutally inclusive in the justification process. An idle faith does not profit the soul. In order for us to be reckoned as just or righteous in God’s sight, our faith must be spurred into action by charity through the prompting of the Holy Spirit who dwells in our hearts. Our intellectual apprehension of God must be coupled with a quality of the soul infused by his grace. St. James clearly teaches us that “faith of itself” does not save without charitable works done in grace. We are called to be both “hearers” (faith) and “doers” (charity) of the word of Christ in order to be saved. Neither faith nor works alone can save us if love is absent in our souls (Jas 1:22; 2:17, 20-26). An idle faith can be compared to a lifeless body. In order for the body to be animated and us to be fully human (justified), it must be united with the soul and the human spirit. Faith is just as dead as a corpse when not informed by charity, like an unanimated body deprived of spirit. And obviously the human soul is not an attribute of the body it is joined with. It is an attribute of a human being together with the attribute of his physical body. Moreover, it is just as senseless to say that a human body isn’t just that because it is unanimated by the soul as it is to assert that faith isn’t faith because charity is absent. There is no such thing as the Protestant notion of there never having been faith in the first place as there isn’t such a thing as the human body never having been there to begin with beacuse of the privation of either the human spirit or charity. Thus faith and charity are distinct virtues that regulate the justification process. They operate in mutal cooperation and dependence as separate entities for the completion of our justification, just as both the body and the soul constitute who we are as human beings. The justification process begins with faith, but finds its completion with the addition of charity, no less in principle than our humanity starts with our physical conception and is brought to completion with the infusion of the soul upon our conception.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Catholic_Dude]

It’s good that you brought these five points up, because the classical reformed Protestant tradition of imputed righteousness is held only by a small group of orthodox Lutherans who have strictly abided by the teachings of Martin Luther, and to some extent those of John Calvin which concur with Luther’s. When we speak of imputed righteousness and justification by faith alone as a Protestant doctrine, we mustn’t assume that it is held by all Protestants of any denomination. But although there are many Protestants who believe in intrinsic righteousness by the infusion of divine grace, they still insist that we are justified and saved by faith alone.

This is a very good point to bring up. There is a growing ‘gap’ of Protestant denominations who hold to the more historic view of Sola Fide (i.e. the one Luther and Calvin broke away from the Church because of), and a later ‘version’ of Sola Fide in which Imputation doesn’t really play a role. On one hand, this makes apologetics easier, on the other hand it makes it harder. The ones who tend to be in favor of the ‘classical’ definition of Sola Fide are typically the more educated and the ones who run the seminaries.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Good Fella,

You would probably enjoy a recent post at Called To Communion:

calledtocommunion.com/2012/08/imputation-and-paradigms-a-reply-to-nicholas-batzig/

It is right in the direction you’re talking about.

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

The Greek word for impute has to be set within the context.

For instance, the word for “righteousness” can many a variety of things depending on the passage. “Righteousness” is said to be “imputed” for instance, to the human creature.

When St. Paul says that David describes the man to whom God imputes (Logizomai) “Righteousness” apart from works by stating

“Blessed is the man whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
Whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute (logizamoi) sin”

It is obvious from the passage and context that Paul is speaking in terms of “forgiveness” and “remission” of sin. Therefore, to not impute sin would mean to remit the sin, or forgive the sin. And therefore to impute righteousness must mean something that can be drawn from the blessing of the remission of sins. Otherwise, Paul is not making any sense in Romans 4:7-9.

 

[Good_Fella]

Good Fella,

You would probably enjoy a recent post at Called To Communion:

calledtocommunion.com/2012/08/imputation-and-paradigms-a-reply-to-nicholas-batzig/

It is right in the direction you’re talking about.

Thanks, Catholic Dude. I’ll take a look at it.

 

[Good_Fella]

The Greek word for impute has to be set within the context.

For instance, the word for “righteousness” can many a variety of things depending on the passage. “Righteousness” is said to be “imputed” for instance, to the human creature.

When St. Paul says that David describes the man to whom God imputes (Logizomai) “Righteousness” apart from works by stating

"Blessed is the man whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
Whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute (logizamoi) sin"

It is obvious from the passage and context that Paul is speaking in terms of “forgiveness” and “remission” of sin. Therefore, to not impute sin would mean to remit the sin, or forgive the sin. And therefore to impute righteousness must mean something that can be drawn from the blessing of the remission of sins. Otherwise, Paul is not making any sense in Romans 4:7-9.

By works, St. Paul means works of the law (ergon nomou), by which we take credit for our actions and try to make God legally indebted to us. When St. James asks, “Do you see that by works (ergon) a man is justified (dikaiow); and not by faith only?”, he is speaking of charitable works done in grace (ergois agathois).

To David himself, understanding. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and* whose sins are covered***.
Blessed is the man o whom the Lord hath not imputed sin, and in whose spirit there is no guile.
*Psalm 31 (32) 1-2 *

But before all things have a constant mutual charity among yourselves: for charity covereth a multitude of sins.
1 Peter 4, 8

A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit:a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
Psalm 50 (51), 19

The paschal lambs of sacrifice (legal victims) prescribed by Mosaic law were in themselves insufficient to remit David’s sins. In order for God to pardon David and no longer hold his sins against him, his sacrificial offering had to be made with compunction and contrition. David’s conscience was bothering him, and he was truly sorry for his sins because he deeply loved God in his faith. It was because of his love and sorrow that he offered the prescribed sacrifice in humilty. In his spirit there was no guile. He detested what was hateful to God (sin) for the sake of His love and goodness. Thus God declared him to be intrinsically righteous by his act of faith informed by charity (agape). When God declares a person to be justified by having been made intrinsically righteous by his infused grace (Ps 50/51:10), he does not merely overlook sins that covertly still remain in the human soul, but actually blots (exalipho) them out from existence, so that the pentitent can avoid the justice of God and eternal punishment (Ps 50/51:9). Jesus assures us: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Mt 5:8). Unless we are truly sorry for having offended God by our sins against him and repent because of our love of God, the redeeming merits of our paschal Lamb of God will not be sufficient enough to pardon us in our personal relationship with God. Charity does indeed cover (atone for) a multitude of sins by right of friendship. Christ does not cover them alone in strict justice.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

I appreciate your thoughts. I totally agree that forgiveness only comes when our hearts are full of repentance and changing.

However, I have to correct you on the issue of “works of the law” (ergon nomou).

Now, I cope well with the people who are frustrated with Luther, particularly today’s protestant insistence, that one is externally justified (dung ball covered in snow) and faith, repentance, etc,etc is not of the matter in justification.

And I also cope well with some recent, in some senses ancient, developments with the New Perspective on Paul with regard to the Mosaic law and it’s ceremonial restrictions, even nationally.

These being said, it is fairly easy to see how Luther is wrong on some front and likewise the New Perspective on Paul is wrong.

In the book of Romans, Paul is explaining the background of the gospel in our world. That background is the wickedness of mankind, among the Gentiles and the Jews. In Chapter 2 we read

“God will render to each according to his deeds, eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but boey unrighteousness – indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish on every soul who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek. For there is no partiality with God. For as many as have sinned without law also perish without law, and as many has have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the Law will be justified)…indeed you are called a jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent…you there who teach another, do you not teach yourself? you who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? You who say 'Do not commit adultery, do you commit adultery”? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples ? You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? (Romans 2)

In this instance, it is clear that “law” while keeping all of it’s jewishness (see the distinction made with reference to the law in Romans 2 between jew and gentile), include moral prohibitions such as stealing, adultery, idolatry,etc which all are parts of the love command.

All through Romans, Paul has this jewish idea of Law and yet is very concerned with the moral commands such as “Though shall not covet” (Rom 7:13).

Therefore it is very difficult to be comfortable with the idea that “works of the law” are not including all the moral demands of the mosaic law.

And with regard to the Psalm 32, it is clear that what Paul has in mind is the gift of righteousness that brings salvation, first mentioned in 1:17 then brought up again in 3:21, which comes by way of the sacrificial death of Jesus, and so this gift of righteousness fits quite well with the concept of forgiveness in Psalm 32, which is strictly speaking of remission of sins apart from good works of anykind.

The idea of “works of law” being ONLY those that distinguish gentile pagans and jewish people is unacceptable.

 

[Good_Fella]

I appreciate your thoughts. I totally agree that forgiveness only comes when our hearts are full of repentance and changing.

However, I have to correct you on the issue of “works of the law” (ergon nomou).

Now, I cope well with the people who are frustrated with Luther, particularly today’s protestant insistence, that one is externally justified (dung ball covered in snow) and faith, repentance, etc,etc is not of the matter in justification.

And I also cope well with some recent, in some senses ancient, developments with the New Perspective on Paul with regard to the Mosaic law and it’s ceremonial restrictions, even nationally.

These being said, it is fairly easy to see how Luther is wrong on some front and likewise the New Perspective on Paul is wrong.

In the book of Romans, Paul is explaining the background of the gospel in our world. That background is the wickedness of mankind, among the Gentiles and the Jews. In Chapter 2 we read

“God will render to each according to his deeds, eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but boey unrighteousness – indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish on every soul who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek. For there is no partiality with God. For as many as have sinned without law also perish without law, and as many has have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the Law will be justified)…indeed you are called a jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent…you there who teach another, do you not teach yourself? you who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? You who say 'Do not commit adultery, do you commit adultery”? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples ? You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? (Romans 2)

In this instance, it is clear that “law” while keeping all of it’s jewishness (see the distinction made with reference to the law in Romans 2 between jew and gentile), include moral prohibitions such as stealing, adultery, idolatry,etc which all are parts of the love command.

All through Romans, Paul has this jewish idea of Law and yet is very concerned with the moral commands such as “Though shall not covet” (Rom 7:13).

Therefore it is very difficult to be comfortable with the idea that “works of the law” are not including all the moral demands of the mosaic law.

And with regard to the Psalm 32, it is clear that what Paul has in mind is the gift of righteousness that brings salvation, first mentioned in 1:17 then brought up again in 3:21, which comes by way of the sacrificial death of Jesus, and so this gift of righteousness fits quite well with the concept of forgiveness in Psalm 32, which is strictly speaking of remission of sins apart from good works of anykind.

The idea of “works of law” being ONLY those that distinguish gentile pagans and jewish people is unacceptable.

The main theme that runs current in chapters 2 to 4 in Romans is that the Jews have no ground for boasting, since it doesn’t matter whether they are in possession of the law (ceremonial or moral, or both), descended from Abraham, or circumcised. What renders the Jew and Gentile justified and made righteous is the grace of God.

In Chapter 8:1-11, St. Paul speaks of grace as a form of law of the New Covenant by which the Jew and Gentile is able to walk in the spirit instead of the flesh, that is if the Spirit of Christ dwells in us. It is through this indwelling that all Christians can be adopted as children of God (justified) and be entitled to the promises of salvation (8:12-25).

All Christian believers are justified by their faith in Christ, since our Lord is the end of the law (Rom 10:4). The fulfillment of the law of Christ is brought about by our love of others. Thus justification is an internal and personal process, not an external and impersonal event in our lives (Rom 13: 8,10). It follows that we can speak of David as having fulfilled the law of Christ by his humble act of contrition. He did not put his faith in the law of Moses by believing that the prescribed sacrifice alone was sufficient to atone for his sins. He knew that he couldn’t be restored to God’s friendship unless he was truly sorry because of his love of God, which fulfilled the law of Christ that reigned in his heart. In the psalmist’s own words: “My sacrifice a contrite spirit; a humble and contrite heart you will not spurn.” Dogmatic faith - believing in the person of Christ and the merits of his passion and death - isn’t enough to justify the person before God as he remains inherently sinful, no more than believing in God’s promises alone was for David. Through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit David was restored to justice in God’s sight by offering an acceptable sacrifice. The process of justification involves a collaboration between the divine and the human. David is an example of the remnant of Israel who are true servants in spirit whose lives reflect the Gospel. (Rom 11:1; Gal 4:1). He exemplifies how Christ dwells in us through the gifts of his Holy Spirit, which render us intrinsically righteous and just in God’s sight by the merits of his Son (2 Cor 3:18; 4:16; 5:17; 13:5; Gal 6:15; Eph 4:22-24; Col 3:10). Faith alone doesn’t save us no more than it saved David from incurring God’s wrath (justice). Not unlike the psalmist, our faith must be rooted in charity, which accomplishes all virtues (Eph 3:17; Gal 5:5-6). Christ did not come to free us from “the curse” of doing good works in charity and grace. God will accept any of our sacrifices that are rooted in faith and love, now that Christ has redeemed us who were under the curse of the law (the moral demands placed in our conscience) so that we might receive our adoption as children of God through his spiritual gifts (Gal 3:13; 4:5).

For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.
Ephesians 2, 10

For it is God who worketh in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will.
Philippians 2, 13

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Good_Fella]

And with regard to the Psalm 32, it is clear that what Paul has in mind is the gift of righteousness that brings salvation, first mentioned in 1:17 then brought up again in 3:21, which comes by way of the sacrificial death of Jesus, and so this gift of righteousness fits quite well with the concept of forgiveness in Psalm 32, which is strictly speaking of remission of sins apart from good works of anykind.

Erick, here is the passage of Psalm 32 in its entirety: 1-11. We must look at the whole passage to have a right understanding of its context.

*Happy the man whose offense is forgiven,
whose sin is remitted.
O happy the man to whom the Lord imputes no guilt,
in whose spirit is no guile.

I kept it secret and my frame was wasted.
I groaned all the day long – for night and day your hand was heavy upon me.
Indeed, my strength was dried up as by the summer’s heat.

But now I have acknowledged my sins;
my guilt I did not hide.
I said, “I will confess my offense to the Lord.”
And you, Lord, have forgiven the guilt of my sin.

So let every good man pray to you in the time of need.
The floods of water may reach high, but him they shall not reach.
You are my hiding place, O Lord;
you save me from distress.
You surround me with cries of deliverance.

I will instruct you and teach you the way you should go;
I will give you counsel with my eye upon you.

Be not like horse and mule, unintelligent, needing bridle and bit,
else they will not approach you.
Many sorrows has the wicked but he who trusts in the Lord,
loving mercy surrounds him.

Rejoice, rejoice in the Lord,
exult you just!
O come ring out your joy
all you upright of heart.*

David has arrived at acknowledging his mortal sins, and by his act of penance he has sought to obtain pardon. He justly praises God for the grace he has received to acknowledge and humbly confess his sins and be forgiven. It is by David’s cooperation with God’s grace of repentance that his sins have been effaced. His offenses continued to stain his soul while he remained silent and impenitent before his act of contrition. God does not overlook the sins that subsist in the offender. It is we ourselves who may try to conceal them as we resist divine grace until an inner torment brings us to our senses and a change of heart, not unlike David, all within the providential scope of grace. It also appears that God used the prophet Nathan to help David see and admit how unrighteous he was in God’s sight and to own his offenses before Him which were the cause of his temporal afflictions. David does acknowledge that his trials, chastisements from God, have taught him a lesson, so he wishes that other people in his position would experience the same conversion he has. The rigours of God’s justice befalls the proud and haughty of heart.

In any event, David is not concerned about people being found righteous with God, but about those who must have their personal sins forgiven, including himself, to be restored to justice. It is our personal sins that we should focus on. And for St. Paul these people should include the Jews (who have the Mosaic law) and the Gentiles (who don’t have the law of Moses). There is no indication at all that good works are unrequired of us to be just in God’s sight. If we read Romans 2: 5-15, we will see that the apostle believed otherwise. St. Paul quotes the psalm to illustrate how a person can be justified by his faith, but not faith alone. The Jew who has the Mosaic law and the Gentile who has the law written in his heart are saved by a dispostion of the will that leads to good works. A saving faith involves the will to do what God wants us to do once we have assented to his will and put our trust in him. To do what God wants is to obey his commandments, which involves wilful acts on our part that render us righteous in God’s grace. David’s conversion experience (not a one-time event) is a lesson on what it means for a person to have a will - effected by divine grace - committed to act in accord with God’s good will. This is what St. Paul means in his expression “obedience of faith”. Faith includes both the interior disposition to act accordingly and the act itself that results from such faith. As I said, David’s prescribed sacrifice would have been fruitless if he hadn’t repented with a genuine sorrow once he acknowledged his sins and the need to do penance in faith.

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

Even the Catholic Scholar Joseph Fitzmyer recognizes the fact that the problem in romans 1-3 is the universality of sin, particularly aimed at the Jews for their boast in the possession of the law, they thought they were righteous because of it.

But no, both Jews and Greek are sold under sin, guilty, condemned, and sentenced to eternal death.

It is on this basis that the “righteousness of God” is made manifest “out of faith into faith” that as it is written “The just shall live by faith” (which Paul is referring to as a righteous human being). Therefore the “righteousness of God” is God’s salvation which takes mankind from the position and fall described in Romans 1-3 and makes mankind “righteous” (Rom 5:19).

Protestant and Catholic Scholars all recognize this. Particularly Joseph Fitzmyer recognizes the forensic meaning in the Scripture.

What is the man becoming “righteous”? (Rom 3:24). It is said that we are “justified by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth to be a sacrifice of atonement”. It is very clear that “justified” means to have our stance changed from being “condemned” (Rom 8:34) to the opposite “Justification” (the removal of charges v34).

It is very difficult to escape this without sacrificing some logic in the text.

But in my understanding, we are justified in the act of “baptism” (Rom 6:1-11) which incorporates us into the events of the death and resurrection. This produces a dual effect (there are more but for this context we will look at two) of being forgiven (justified) and re-created in Christ Jesus.

This is the essence of the gospel.

Since Catholics understand man to be forgiven at baptism, I think they have it right, even if they want to insist that justification is the recreation of the person, for in my understanding justification IS the forgiveness of sin and the necessary sanctification comes by the same cause.

 

[Good_Fella]

Even the Catholic Scholar Joseph Fitzmyer recognizes the fact that the problem in romans 1-3 is the universality of sin, particularly aimed at the Jews for their boast in the possession of the law, they thought they were righteous because of it.

I don’t deny that.

But no, both Jews and Greek are sold under sin, guilty, condemned, and sentenced to eternal death.

Absolutely!

*“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” *
Romans 3, 23

It is on this basis that the “righteousness of God” is made manifest “out of faith into faith” that as it is written “The just shall live by faith” (which Paul is referring to as a righteous human being). Therefore the “righteousness of God” is God’s salvation which takes mankind from the position and fall described in Romans 1-3 and makes mankind “righteous” (Rom 5:19).

For as by one man’s disobedience, many were made sinners; so by the obedience of one,* shall many be made righteous***.
Romans 5, 19 [KJV]

Please note that St. Paul uses the future tense in reference to sinners being made righteous. He doesn’t say that the many were “made” righteous by Christ’s obedience just as they were made sinners by Adam’s disobedience. The apostle would have kept using the past tense if he believed in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to us and the transference of our guilt to the Lord. Romans 5:1-21 is an exhortation to embrace the life according to faith through our Lord and Saviour, by whose merits we have access through faith into the life of grace, for his obedience outweighs Adam’s disobedience. Our standing in God’s grace is not merely a change of status in our relationship with God. As I’ve pointed out above in this thread, our state of righteousness involves a genuine ontological transformation of our nature by the infusion of divine grace into the soul. Grace musn’t be restricted to just being divine favour in the process of justification. It is also an influential means that will make a person intrinsically righteous through his faith now that this grace has been made available to him by our Lord’s passion and death.

Protestant and Catholic Scholars all recognize this. Particularly Joseph Fitzmyer recognizes the forensic meaning in the Scripture.

I am sure that Mr. Fitzmyer and other Catholic scholars see it as all well-informed Catholics do, that God does declare us undefiled and innocent, as if by legal decree, but he does so by actually making us what he declares us to be with the help of his grace. God brings about in reality what he decrees. What God has spoken does not return to him empty (Isa 55:11).

What is the man becoming “righteous”? (Rom 3:24). It is said that we are “justified by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth to be a sacrifice of atonement”. It is very clear that “justified” means to have our stance changed from being “condemned” (Rom 8:34) to the opposite “Justification” (the removal of charges v34)…

But in my understanding, we are justified in the act of “baptism” (Rom 6:1-11) which incorporates us into the events of the death and resurrection. This produces a dual effect (there are more but for this context we will look at two) of being forgiven (justified) and re-created in Christ Jesus.

The Catholic Church teaches that “initial justification” occurs at the time we are initiated into the Christian faith upon receiving the sacrament of Baptism. On this occasion God completely washes away our sins, grants us sanctifying grace, and gives the gift of the Holy Spirit. We receive new life by incorporation into Christ and adoption into the family of God. This initial justification cannot be earned or merited by any action of ours, neither by faith nor works, because it is a gratuitous gift from God in his mercy (cf. CCC, 1262-1284). The Council of Trent has defined justification as the “translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the adoption as the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Saviour” (Decree on Justification, 6.4). Meanwhile, it should be understood that the Catholic Church does not teach that a person can merit justification by any works of his, though he should prepare himself for it.

However, once a person has been initially justified upon his baptism and is thereby in a state of sanctifying grace, through the merits of Christ, he can merit an increase in justification by doing good works out of love. An increase in justification is an increase in sanctification, as we grow in holiness and in conformity to Christ. As we grow in grace, we strive for greater perfection in our obedience to God. Thus Catholics don’t mean to say that we move from the state of being unrighteous or unjustified to the state of being righteous or justified when we do good works in grace. There is no radical change of status by the good works we do. These works complete our faith and render it profitable, for only by living our faith and growing in righteousness can we hope to merit our eternal reward. Not faith alone (hearing the word), but faith informed by charity (doing the word we have heard and have kept in our hearts) saves.

Since Catholics understand man to be forgiven at baptism, I think they have it right, even if they want to insist that justification is the recreation of the person, for in my understanding justification IS the forgiveness of sin and the necessary sanctification comes by the same cause.

Justification is the removal of guilt, but also interior healing by the grace of God, which acts like a medicinal cure. As I explained above in this thread, sanctification is the “only formal cause of justification.” The former determines in principal what it means to be justified: holy and righteous in God’s sight.

Create in me a pure heart, O God. Renew in me a steadfast spirit.
Psalm 51, 10

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Erick_Ybarra]

Baptism creates a number if different things which all can be called salvation:

1 for 6:9-12 St. Paul says that we were ‘‘washed’’, ‘‘justified’’, ‘‘sanctified’’ in the name of our lord.these are all different ways of looking at the same reality.

I believe that ppl get justified through repentance and baptism. Meaning their sins are forgiven, and they are simultaneously cleansed internally, but Paul never calls this justification, more so his language is ‘‘made alive’’