A. Justification in Contemporary Ecumenical Focus
Chapter 6: Justification in Contemporary Roman Catholic and Reformed Theology
A. Justification in Contemporary Ecumenical Focus
In her chapter, “Justification,” in The Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology, Dawn DeVries suggests, “There has been something of a renaissance of interest in the doctrine of justification at the turn of the twenty-first century.”1040 DeVries notes four developments from the preceding decades that have exemplified this movement: Hans Küng’s landmark book, Justification: The Doctrine of Karl Barth and a Catholic Reflection, the “New Perspective on Paul,” the new Finnish interpretation of Luther as expressed by Tuomo Mannermaa et al., and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. Interestingly, each of these examples have found a way of bringing forensic and transformative approaches to justification into a closer relationship.1041 To gain perspective on the ecumenical promise of this renaissance, we will examine six issues that have emerged from our study of Newman and Vermigli—human powerlessness and divine initiative; justification’s formal cause; concupiscence and sin; faith alone and works; assurance of faith; and the role of merit.
Before examining these issues, we must say a word about the ecumenical moment in which we live. As DeVries suggests, discussions between Roman Catholics and Protestants have moved beyond stereotypical approaches. The most significant example is arguably the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JD) between the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church, signed in Augsburg on October 31, 1999 in commemoration of Luther’s Ninety-five Theses. Especially indebted to previous statements—particularly the American report entitled Justification by Faith (1983) and, from Germany, The Condemnations of the Reformation Era: Do They Still Divide?1042—the JD is the culmination of earlier discussions on justification.1043
The task of enlisting support for the JD in wider Catholic and Lutheran communities was initially a significant challenge. Toward this end, a draft was distributed in 1995, and feedback was solicited from church leaders in both communities. The first iteration of the JD was then published in 1997, followed by a period of conversation. The disagreement that ensued on both sides of the ecclesial fence has been well documented.1044 Such debate culminated in the Vatican’s “Official Response” on June 25, 1998, which seemed to undermine prospects of a joint signing. Before discussions deteriorated, however, a propitiatory annex addressing critical points of ambiguity was added, thus allowing both sides to sign the “Official Common Statement.” This “Annex to the Official Common Statement” officially belongs to the JD.
The text of the JD is remarkably brief compared to previous documents (for example, Justification by Faith, 1983).1045 Nevertheless, having been formally accepted by the Roman Catholic Church at the highest level, it is recognized as “the most significant report” on justification.1046 The JD is also significant for its stated goal of officially rescinding the mutual anathemas of the sixteenth century—for those who understand justification in the way “presented in this Declaration.”1047 Nevertheless, the sixteenth-century condemnations are to be taken seriously as “salutary warnings.”1048
Despite the consensus it represents, the JD also acknowledges ongoing differences between Lutherans and Catholics on seven key issues connected to the doctrine of justification.1049 However, it describes them not as bona fide doctrinal differences, but as discrepancies “of language, theological elaboration, and emphasis,” proceeding to proclaim them “acceptable” (rather than targets of anathematizing canons).1050 Dulles regards the term “acceptable” as poorly chosen and would have preferred the word “tolerable.”1051 But even with such shortcomings, the JD is recognized as offering the most current and authoritative statement on justification among many Catholics and Protestants.1052
Finally, it is important to note that conversation between Catholics and Protestants is in some measure asymmetrical because while the Catholic Church possesses a magisterial authority binding upon the faithful (as summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church),1053 Protestants (even within the Reformed tradition) have no such referee outside of Scripture itself.1054 Therefore, it is important to clarify that our analysis will concentrate, for the Catholic side, on the Council of Trent’s Decree on Justification (1547), the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (1999);1055 Peter Martyr Vermigli will represent a Reformed Protestant approach (readers can decide for themselves the extent to which Peter Martyr is a suitable representative of Reformed Protestantism). Finally, we will also note points where John Henry Newman’s doctrine of justification indicates fresh opportunities for rapprochement.