Suppose we respond to the gospel call. Perhaps God is
Arminian and, with the help of prevenient grace, we mustered some faith from
within. Or perhaps God is a Calvinist and it was all by grace. We can, at the
moment, sidestep this question we love to ponder. Instead we ask, simply, what now?
For the Arminian and the Calvinist the answer is the same.
It may sound impertinent, but the next step is for God to fulfill his part of
the agreement. For if we turn to Christ in faith the promise is that our sins
will be forgiven.
Justification is the process by which this occurs. And it is done in response to our faith.
Justification allows us to stand without the stain of sin
before a holy God. We present ourselves righteous
before God. Consider that for a moment: Through justification we are made righteous
before God.
But not really—that is we cannot really stand before God
without the stain of sin. We are still sinners. This is quite the puzzle—the conundrum which
we must unravel in this study—that we are made acceptable before God while at
the same time we are sinners. Luther understood this oh-so-clearly, and described
it as Simul
iustus et peccator - "At the same
time righteous and a sinner".
What caused the Reformation? Luther (and the Reformers)
believed that scripture taught simul iustus et peccator. The Roman Catholic Church,
as we will see, considered this heresy. According to Roman Catholicism you
cannot be righteous and a sinner—they are mutually exclusive.
We are not going to argue the case yet. We will just
introduce some thinking on the matter. First of all. let's look the scriptural attribution
as to the sole source of the justification—God. In Romans Paul writes:
And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
He justified. We do not justify ourselves, God justifies us.
Rome and the Reformers agreed on this point. But that is about all they agreed
on.
Rome, we will see, believes, reasonably at first blush, that for a person to be righteous
before God, that person must be, in fact, righteous. Truly righteous. Stands to reason. But Rome also
believes in Original Sin and man’s fallen nature. And therein lies the problem.
Even supposing a man could achieve actual righteousness before God—it would not
last long. Rome understands this—the Catholic Church recognizes that a
righteous man is in a state of highly unstable equilibrium, like a ball resting
on a small peak. The slightest perturbation—a single wayward thought, and the
condition of righteousness is lost, and the ball of righteousness rolls down the hill into oblivion. The sinner must then actively seek to
restore himself through the complex system of penance provided by the Church.
The Reformers taught a very different view—a forensic view of
justification. In this view, man does not “really” become righteous. He is
declared righteous by God. It is a legal declaration. God says: I will treat you as righteous because my
son was righteous, and I will impute his righteousness to you. I know that you
still sin—but I am going to regard you as if you had no sin. Simul iustus et
peccator. And it is once-for-all for a believer.
Rome accused the Reformers of creating a legal fiction that
impugned God’s character. The Reformers accused Rome of ignoring the plain
teaching of scripture and taking for herself the role of justifier. Each side declared the other guilty of the unthinkable crime of teaching a false gospel—and the Reformation was off and
running.
It was not about indulgences for pardon from temporal
punishment of sin.
It was not about Marian doctrine.
It was about how we can present ourselves before a holy God.
Just come across your blog. Does my old heart good.
ReplyDelete