Q. Conclusion
Q. Conclusion
This chapter has compared and contrasted salient elements of Newman’s and Vermigli’s doctrine of justification. In view of their common concerns (i.e., the danger of meritorious works, cheap grace, and a proper relationship between forensic and actual righteousness) and common theological commitments (an Augustinian harmatology, union with Christ, the need for a forensic imputation, the internal renewal of the Holy Spirit, and duplex iustitia), the notion of duplex iustitia has served as a heuristic lens for understanding the catalysts of their respective doctrines. Following from these concerns, two-fold righteousness also sheds light on the reasons and methods by which these doctrines are constructed, illustrating how a commitment to upholding both forensic and operative righteousness encourages theological decisions that are shared by Roman Catholics and Reformed Protestants.
These commonalties have implications for interaction at the Roman Catholic and Reformed Protestant intersection. On a practical level, for example, a shared concern for the danger of meritorious works and cheap grace will lead both traditions to carefully articulate and qualify their doctrines of justification in order to avoid these errors. Common theological commitments such as an Augustinian view of sin, union with Christ, and the dynamic work of the Holy Spirit are also points of agreement. At the very least, this recognition of commonalities has the power to ameliorate the unfortunate tendency of reacting to the other tradition by retreating from elements that truly belong to a doctrine of justification, such as when Protestants categorically deny the fructifying role of the Spirit or when Catholics refuse to recognize the possibility of forensic imputation.
We have also noted, however, that just because two theologians agree on duplex iustitia in the context of justification, it does not mean that they will agree fully. Newman and Vermigli illustrate this in spades. Despite the aforementioned affinity between Newman’s and Vermigli’s doctrine, they maintain fundamentally different commitments on key points (i.e., the sacramental framework of justification and sola fide) which naturally drive them toward divergent conclusions, particularly with reference to justification’s formal cause, the existence of a disposition [habitus], and the doctrine of perseverance. In the concluding, we will reflect on the implications of these differences, and our similarities, for contemporary Roman Catholic and Reformed Protestant dialogue.
848. Vermigli specifically focuses on the terms “justification” and “faith.” Romanos, 1181–83 [87–89].
849. “I say, then, that the words of Scripture, as of every other book, have their own meaning, which must be sought in order to be found.” Jfc, 118.
850. In his Romans locus, (far more than in his Genesis and 1 Corinthians loci), Vermigli devotes significant attention to the fathers and church councils. This attention is concentrated at the conclusion of each of the three propositions, 1237–53 [143–60], 1297–1311 [202–18], 1316–24 [221–30].
851. Vermigli, Romanos, 1236–51 [143–58]. For example, to support his argument that the unregenerate cannot be justified by works, he cites Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, Augustine, Chrysostum, Ambrose, Cyprian, and Origen.
852. Ibid., 1236 [143]: “Sed quonium quosdam habemus adversarios, qui aut parum, aut nihil a scripturis pendeant, omnem autem suam pietatem, Patribus, et Concilijs metiantur, ut magis Patrologi, quam Theologi dici possint.” Those who commit this error are said to “easily obscure the truth” (Ibid.).
853 Ibid., 1245–47 [152–55]. Because Vermigli’s central concern is the problem of Pelagianism, he cites councils that explicitly renounce it, namely Milevis (A.D. 416) and the Second Council of Orange (A.D. 529).
854. Newman, Jfc, 183 [160].
855. Ibid., 348–52 [394–98].
856. Ibid., 190 [220].
857. Ibid.
858. Vermigli, Romanos, 1208 [114].
859. Newman, Jfc., 186–87 [216–17].
860. Vermigli, Romanos, 1234–35 [141–42].
861. Ibid., 1234–35 [141–42].
862. Ibid., 1290 [197]. Elsewhere, Vermigli wrote, “Therefore, we must take away all merit, not only in those who are not yet justified, but also in those who have been justified” (1288 [195]).
863. Ibid., 1248–49 [156]. As noted, Vermigli’s portrayal of Trent’s position vis-à-vis Pelagianism, is less than fair. Chapter eight of the Council’s Decree on Justification explicitly states that justification comes as a “free gift,” and does so on the perennial consent of the Catholic Church, on the basis of faith, “without which ‘it is impossible to please God’” (Heb 11:6). Decree on Justification, in Tanner, Decrees, 2:674.
864. Newman, Jfc., 147 [163–64].
865. Ibid., 190 [statement contained in Footnote 1 of the third edition, absent from the 1838 version]. Emphasis added.
866. Ibid., 63 [112].
867. Ibid. Newman explains his understanding of imputation at some length on pages 67–78 [72–83].
868. Sheridan, Newman on Justification, 26–29, 265.
869. Newman, Jfc., 291–93 [331–33].
870. Vermigli, Romanos, 1312 [218].
871. Ibid., 1227–28 [134]. Cf. Institutes, 3:17:5, 10.
872. Ibid., 1307 [212]. Quoting Jerome, Vermigli wrote: “‘If love is absent, faith also departs with it.’ These words clearly declare that his judgment was that true faith cannot be divided from love, something we also teach and defend, but Pighius and his colleagues scorn it and cry out against it. Yet let him growl as much as he will; it is enough for us that this doctrine agrees with both the Scriptures and the fathers.”
873. Newman, Jfc., 182–88 [211–18].
874. Ibid., 36 [38].
875. Vermigli, Romanos, 1182 [87].
876. Newman, Jfc., 79–80 [86].
877. Ibid., 80 [86].
878. Ibid., 80–81 [86–87].
879. Ibid., 41 [44].
880. Ibid., 57 [61].
881. Vermigli, PMR, 147.
882. Ibid.
883. Vermigli, Romanos 1288 [195], 1291 [196].
884. Ibid., 1318 [224]
885. Newman, Jfc., 200 [231]. When Newman describes this righteousness—that which is associated with the believer’s obedience—he calls it “actual.” Ibid., 351 [397]).
886. Ibid., 86 [93].
887. Ibid., 348–52 [394–98].
888. Ibid., 187 [218].
889. Ibid., 67 [71–72].
890. Ibid., 1181 [87]: “Iustificentur ne homines operibus, ab fide.”
891. Ibid., 1182 [88].
892. Ibid.
893. Walgrave, Newman the Theologian, 42–44. Newman explains how divine grace overcomes the unrighteousness of original sin in Newman, Jfc., 88–91 [95–96].
894. Bouyer, Newman: His Life and Spirituality, 19.
895. Newman, Jfc., 72 [77].
896. Vermigli, Romanos, 1196 [101]: “Accedit adhaec, quòd tanti mali causa exprimitur.”
897. Ibid., 1196 [102]: “iam inde à prima ipsa origine per primum hominem perditi sumus & damnati.”
898. Ibid., 1301 [201]: “.opera hominum non renatorum esse peccata.”
899. James, “The Complex of Justification,” 52–53.
900. Vermigli, Romanos, 1218–19 [125].
901. Pressed through the framework of his intensive Augustinianism, Vermigli can’t begin to countenance the idea that meritorious works of the unregenerate are somehow pleasing to God. Ibid., 1195 [101], 1199 [105], 1214–15 [121–22], 1235–36 [142–43], 1260–61 [168], 1288 [194], 1313–14 [219–20].
902. Ibid., 1216 [123].
903. Newman, Jfc., 89 [96].
904. Dessain, “Cardinal Newman and the Eastern Tradition,” 95.
905. Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, 140.
906. Newman, Jfc., 173 [200].
907. Ibid., 134 [148].
908. Newman, PPS, xi, 10, 1270. These sermons were published between 1834 and 1843.
909. Newman, Jfc., 150 [167].
910. Vermigli, Romanos, 1196 [102].
911. Ibid., 1249 [157]: “Sed animus humanus nisi innovetur spiritu.”
912. Similar to John Calvin, Institutes, 3.16.1.
913. Vermigli, Romanos, 1196–97 [102].
914. Ibid., 1196–97 [102–103].
915. McLelland argues that union with Christ is a key to understanding Vermigli’s doctrine of justification, even though the language is not made explicit in the Romans locus. McLelland, Visible Words, 113, 142.
916. Newman, Jfc., 67 [71–72].
917. Ibid., 67 [72].
918. Ibid., 68 [72–73].
919. Ibid., 72 [76–77].
920. Ibid., 187 [217]. Newman does not use the phrase extra nos to describe the external dimension of imputation. In keeping with his doctrine of God’s adherent presence, he prefers to emphasize its interiority (cf. Ibid., 187 [218]).
921. Vermigli, Romanos, 1182 [87].
922. Ibid., 1201 [107], 1314 [220].
923. Ibid., 1194 [100].
924. Ibid., 1252 [159].
925. The one significant point of discontinuity is Newman’s contention that actual righteousness accrues merit coram deo. Newman, Jfc., 151–52 [168–69].
926. Ibid., 1194 [100].
927. Ibid., 1264 [172].
928. Ibid., 1182 [87]: “Deus absolvendo à peccatis.”
929. Ibid., 1217 [123].
930. Ibid., 1274 [182].
931. Jfc., 80–81 [86–87].
932. Ibid., 202–3 [233–35].
933. Vermigli, Romanos, 1182 [87].
934. Emphasis added. Ibid., 1191 [96]: “columen totius pietatis.” Calvin uses similar language to describe justification: “quae pietatis est totius summa” in Calvin, Institutes 3:15:7. Johannis Calvini Opera Selecta , 4:245.
935. Ibid., 1282 [190].
936. Newman, Jfc, 156 [177–78].
937. Ibid., 162–63 [186].
938. Ibid., 163 [187].
939. Ibid.
940. Ibid.
941. Vermigli, Romanos, 1182 [87], 1215–16 [122].
942. Ibid., 1249–50 [156–57].
943. Ibid., 1284 [191].
944. Ibid., 609.
945. Ibid., 1284 [191].
946. Ibid., 1288 [195].
947. Newman, Jfc., 101 [112].
948. Holtzen, “Union with God and the Holy Spirit,” 181–82.
949. Newman, Jfc., 348 [394].
950. “Mussus” is a reference to Cornelio Musso (1511–74), Bishop of Bitonto, an outspoken advocate of double justice at the sixth session of the Council of Trent. Malloy, Engrafted into Christ, 71.
951. Newman, Jfc., xi, 361 [407], 367 [413], 381–82 [423–25].
952. Ibid., 368 [414]. In this context, Newman also mentions the “Ratisbon [Regensburg] Conference” as another example of the sort of duplex iustitia with which he is sympathetic (369 [415]).
953. Vermigli, Romanos, 1196–97 [102].
954. James, “De Iustificatione,” 346.
955. Newman, Jfc., 278 [318].
956. Ibid., v.
957. Ibid., 280–82 [320–22].
958. Ibid., 1208–9 [115–16].
959. Ibid., 1212 [118–19].
960. McLelland, The Visible Words of God, 130–35.
961. Vermigli, Romanos, 1212 [119]. Later in his locus, in proposition three, Martyr makes a similar point: “As to the sacraments, we have often taught how justification is to be attributed to them, for they stand in relation to justification as does the preaching of the Gospel and the promise of Christ offered to us for salvation.” Ibid., 1318 [224].
962. Ibid., 1251 [158].
963. Ibid., 1251 [159]. See also 1315 [221].
964. Ibid., 1315 [221–22].
965. Ibid., 1316 [222].
966. As Newman put it in his advertisement, “The present Volume originated in the following way: It was brought home to the writer from various quarters, that a prejudice existed in many serious minds against certain essential Christian truths, such as Baptismal Regeneration and the Apostolical Ministry, in consequence of a belief that they fostered notions of human merit, were dangerous to the inward life of religion, and incompatible with the doctrine of justifying faith.” Newman, Jfc., v.
967. Ibid., 1316 [222]. McLelland, Visible Words of God, 130–35.
968. Newman, Jfc., 244 [279]. Although in the third edition (1874) of his Lectures, the Catholic Newman retreated from faith alone in a brief footnote: “Catholics hold that, not faith only, but faith, hope, and charity, are the ‘sustaining causes of justification.’” Ibid., 255.
969. Ibid., 226 [259].
970. Ibid.
971. Newman explicitly rejects the notion, attributed to Luther, that faith is the “primary instrument” of justification. Ibid., 244 [279].
972. Ibid., 236–7 [271].
973. Ibid., 252 [288].
974. Ibid., 253–54 [289–90].
975. Ibid., 266–73 [304–13].
976. Ibid.
977. Ibid., 283 [324].
978. Vermigli, Romanos, 1253 [160], 1261 [169], 1283 [190], 1292 [198], 1321 [227].
979. Ibid., 1278–79 [186].
980. Ibid., 1184 [90]. Martyr uses Hebrews 11 as a touchstone in his definition of faith from pages 1184 to 1187 [90 to 92].
981. Ibid., 1254–55 [161–62]. Martyr also considers Ephesians, Philippians, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, the Gospels, Acts, and the Old Testament. Ibid., 1258–64 [165–72].
982. Ibid., 1262 [170]: “apprehendimus promissiones Dei.”
983. Ibid., 1183 [89].
984. Ibid., 1183 [89].
985. Ibid., 1318 [224].
986. Ibid.
987. Ibid., 1321 [227].
988. After Andreas Osiander (1498–1552) moved from Nuremburg to the University of Königsberg, as professor of theology, he published his controversial book, De Iustificatione (1550), in which he proposed an alternative Lutheran view of justification. Osiander, “Eine Disuptation von der Rechtfertigung,” 427–47. For more on the Osiandrian controversy, see Billings, Calvin, Participation, and the Gift, 53–63; Seeberg, Textbook of the History of Doctrines trans. Charles E. Hay, vol. 2, 369–74; Garcia, Life in Christ, 43–45, 197–99, 201–18, 239–52; Steinmetz, Reformers in the Wings, 91–99; cf. Alister McGrath, ID, 241–43.
989. Toon, Evangelical Theology, 1833–1856, 155.
990. Newman, Jfc. 387–89 [426–28]. Newman admits that he was unable to obtain Osiander’s writings first hand: “His Confessio de Justificatione was published in Latin and German, but neither it nor any of his other works have fallen in my way” (387 [426–27]).
991. Ibid., 388 [427].
992. This is a fundamental difference between Osiander and Newman, as the latter makes no such distinction between the natures of Christ’s indwelling presence.
993. Seeberg, Textbook of the History of Doctrines, 370.
994. Osiander, “Eine Disuptation von der Rechtfertigung,” 439.
995. Steinmetz summarizes the basic logic of Osiander’s hypothesis, “As the flesh of Jesus was the bearer of the Logos, so now the spoken word of the preacher is the bearer of the divine word which is received by faith alone. When the word is grasped by faith, it indwells man and unites with him. Where the word is present it transforms man and renews him in the image of God. Man is justified not because his works are now holy, but because Christ indwells him. The indwelling Christ is the basis of man’s acceptance, and not the renewal as such, though where Christ is present man is renewed in the image of God.” Steinmetz, Reformers in the Wings, 96.
996. Undergirding Osiander’s hypothesis is a redemptive historical understanding of Adam which regards his prelapsarian state to be originally righteous on account of having been made in God’s image. This image was thought to consist in the divine Logos, which constituted Adam’s righteousness before God. At the fall, Adam lost the indwelling presence of the Logos and thus lost his original righteousness. In the unfolding of salvation history, however, it was through the incarnation of Jesus Christ that the effects of the fall were ostensibly reversed. When Christ, the “inner Word,” is brought to the soul of the believer through the preaching of the gospel, one is made essentially righteous through the indwelling of Christ, the divine Logos. On this basis one is justified. Seeberg, Textbook of the History of Doctrines 371; Steinmetz, Reformers in the Wings, 96–97.
997. McGrath points out how Melanchthon’s doctrine of justification employed images and categories from the sphere of human law, while Luther drew from the thought world of personal relationships (i.e., human marriage). McGrath, ID, 238–39.
998. Osiander, De Justificatione, 73, cited in Seeberg, Texbook of the History of Doctrines, 369–70.
999. Ibid.
1000. Melanchthon, Melanchthon on Christian Doctrine, 168–69.
1001. Calvin refutes Osiander in the final edition of his Institutes, 3.11.5–12.
1002. The letter is written from Strasbourg, 14 February 1556, and is found in Loci Communes, 1114. A recent English translation is found in Donnelly, Life Letters and Sermons, 153.
1003. So Calvin writes, “We do not, therefore, contemplate [Christ] outside ourselves from afar in order that his righteousness may be imputed to us but because we put on Christ and are engrafted into his body—in short, because he deigns to make us one with him.” Calvin, Institutes, 3.11.10. For Calvin, solidarity with Christ is always the work of the Holy Spirit who unifies us to Christ.
1004. Vermigli makes it clear that union with Christ is by the Spirit. Romanos, 1196–97 [102]. With reference to the person and natures of Christ, Vermigli does not have a specific volume, but he did engage the subject in a letter written to address a dispute in Poland in 1560, when the Italian theologian Francesco Stancaro (1501–74) was teaching that Christ is mediator only in his human nature. After the death of Martyr’s friend, John a Lasco (1499–1560, also called Jan Łaski), Martyr replaced him in the role of opposing Stancaro, by writing to the church in Poland on behalf of the ministers in Zürich (dated May 27, 1560). Martyr asserts in good Chalcedonian fashion that “Christ Jesus is one person in whom the two natures subsist in a way that they are joined with each other so that they cannot in any way be pulled apart from each other.” PMR, 127–31.
1005. With regard to the ultimate meaning of justification, Vermigli asserts, “Then ‘to justify’ means that through judgment, words, witness, or assertion one counts the person just” (1182 [88]). This conviction is also illustrated by the overall structure of Martyr’s locus, that justification is “Not by Works,” “It Is by Faith,” and “Faith Alone.”
1006. So Calvin writes: “When it comes to Scripture, Osiander completely corrupts every passage he cites. In Paul’s statement that ‘faith is reckoned as righteousness’ not for the ‘one who works’ but for the ‘one who believes in him who justifies the ungodly’ [Rom 4:4–5], Osiander explains ‘justify’ as ‘to make righteous.’” Calvin, Institutes, 3.11.6.
1007. Given the state of sixteenth-century polemics, it is hard to imagine Vermigli saying too many flattering things in response to the Catholic Newman. But if Calvin could affirm a bit of Osiander in the midst of his invectives, it is conceivable that Vermigli could do the same. (Calvin says, for example, “[Osiander] says that we are one with Christ. We agree.” Calvin, Institutes, 3.11.5.)
1008. Newman, Jfc., 348 [394]. Elsewhere in his appendix, Newman claims that a two-fold righteousness position on justification is more commonly held than one might at first realize. In various places one finds support, says Newman, in such people as Hooker, Mr. Alexander Knox, Calvin, Baxter, and Barrow. Ibid., 378–84 [420–26].
1009. Ibid., 348 [426]. In fact it would have been more accurate for Newman to say that Bucer’s position posits imputation as the interposing principle, accessed through the instrumentation of faith.
1010. Ibid., 291–93 [331–33].
1011. Vermigli, Romanos, 1205 [111].
1012. Newman, Jfc., 368 [414].
1013. As Holtzen notes in his dissertation: Holtzen, “Union with God and the Holy Spirit,” 178.
1014. Newman, Jfc., 164 [188].
1015. Vermigli, Romanos, 1182 [87].
1016. Ibid., 1250 [158]: “et gratia, atque spiritu instauratus cum divina virtute una cooperatur.”
1017. Vermigli quotes Augustine with approval “with regard to the righteousness that adheres in us.” (Augustinum sensisse de iustitia inhaerente) Ibid., 1320 [226].
1018. Ibid., 1299 [205]: “sed de illa intrinseca nobis inhaerente, quam recte vivendo perpetuo acquirimus, et confirmamus.”
1019. Newman, Jfc., 151 [168].
1020. Newman, PPS, 5.13, 1079.
1021. Ibid., 1253–54 [160–61], 1292–93 [198–200], 1315–16 [221–22].
1022. Vermigli, Romanos, 1278 [186].
1023. Ibid., 1302 [208]: “amitti . . . aut ita consopiri ut suum.”
1024. Ibid., 1288 [194].
1025. Newman, Jfc., 2 [2].
1026. Ibid.
1027. Ibid. 199–200 [230]. Newman usually describes this inherent righteousness in terms of “actual righteousness” in order to support his doctrine of uncreated grace and avoid the notion of habitus (80).
1028. Ibid., 151–52 [168–69].
1029. Ibid.
1030. “Therefore, we must take away all merit, not only in those who are not yet justified, but also in those who have been justified.” Vermigli, Romanos, 1288 [195].
1031. Vermigli, Corinthios Commentarii, 19 [147]. Cf. Romanos, 1182 [88].
1032. Ibid.
1033. Alister E. McGrath, ID, 313.
1034. Vermigli, Romanos, 1228, [135].
1035. Ibid., 1227–28 [134]; cf. Corinthios Commentarii, 19 [147].
1036. Ibid., 1288 [195].
1037. Martyr writes, “I answer that such [non-meritorious] works are profitable to the regenerate, for by living uprightly and orderly they are renewed and made perfect.” Ibid., 1291 [196].
1038. Ibid., 1228–29 [135]. “And Christ would want everyone to understand that none except the just are received into the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, he considers these external works so that it might be clearly understood by them that righteousness is imputed to men by faith.”
1039. Vermigli, PMR, 147.