# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S415 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) ADDITIONAL THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS AND REPORTS—OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 415 The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in Confessional Lutheran Perspective An Evaluation of the Lutheran-Roman Catholic “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” by the Departments of Systematic Theology Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne and Concordia Seminary, Saint Louis In response to a request from President Alvin Barry The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod With a summary and study guide prepared by The Commission on Theology and Church Relations The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod A Summary of the Seminary Evaluations 1. The “Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” (JDDJ) was prepared between 1995 and 1997 by Roman Catholic and Lutheran theologians under the auspices of the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation (of which the LCMS is not a member). It forms the culmination, to date, of several Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogs in various places. The final version of this docu- ment was adopted by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) assembly in August 1997, by a 97% majority. Side-by-side differences 2. The basic conclusion of the JDDJ is that past and remaining differences between Lutherans and Roman Catholics do not disrupt their present “consensus” on the doctrine of justification. JDDJ identifies three types of differences that remain: differences of lan- guage, of theological elaboration, and of emphasis in the under- standing of justification. But here an important question arises about JDDJ’s own claims. How can there be a genuine consensus on basic truths if the language, the elaborations, and the emphases differ? 3. What kind of “consensus” does JDDJ have in mind? It says that “the Lutheran and the Catholic explications of justification are in their difference open to one another and do not destroy the con- sensus regarding basic truths.” What does this mean? Further, what possible differences might not be open to one another? It does not serve the cause of dialog to operate on the principle that two or more theologically contradictory statements can all be true. Such thinking does not take the history of Lutheran-Roman Catholic dif- ferences seriously enough, nor does it sufficiently honor the in- tegrity of each side. Did the two sides really intend the statements that they made in the 16th century, and since then, to amount only to “salutary warnings,” as JDDJ suggests? Unresolved issues: Justification, Grace, Faith, Original Sin 4. JDDJ does not settle the major disagreement between Lutheran theology and Roman Catholic theology on justification. Lutherans teach that justification is essentially a declaration of “not guilty” and “righteous” pronounced by God on a sinner because of Christ and His work. Roman Catholics teach that justification in- volves an internal process in which a believer is transformed and “made” more and more righteous. The non-settlement of this issue forms the chief defect of JDDJ. 5. Correspondingly, JDDJ fails to define clearly the word grace. Content to use the term “justification by grace,” the document does not resolve the classic question whether such grace is God’s unde- served favor (Lutheran) or whether it is a spiritual power poured or “infused” into the soul that enables one to love God and merit salvation (Roman Catholic). Rome’s view of grace as infused stands at the base of its theology of justification as a process. 6. Although JDDJ uses the biblical phraseology “through faith” or “by faith,” at critical points it speaks of justification “in faith.” This new wording is ambiguous and allows for the Roman Catholic idea of infused grace. It does not clearly state that faith’s role in justification is exclusively to receive Christ’s benefits given to sin- ners by God in His grace. Therefore, it fails to make clear that the cause of justification is God’s saving work in Christ, not ourselves or anything in us. 7. JDDJ contains an expression of the Lutheran position that original sin, which remains after baptism, is really sin. It also in- cludes the Roman Catholic view that original sin is eradicated by baptism, and that the desire to sin that remains after baptism is not really sin. JDDJ leaves this historic disagreement, like other dis- agreements mentioned above, unresolved. Too little attention to justification 8. Lutherans confess that justification is the article that integrates all faith and theology. This centrality of justification is lost in JDDJ. The Vatican insisted on changing a draft of JDDJ that said this arti- cle should be seen “as criterion” which “constantly serves to orient all the teaching and practice of our churches to Christ.” The Pontif- ical Council for Promoting Christian Unity would go no further than to say that “the doctrine of justification is an indispensable crite- rion” [emphasis added]—which is the final wording of JDDJ. 9. Accordingly, JDDJ does not address itself directly to disputed beliefs and practices such as the “meritorious” value of good works, purgatory, indulgences, the papacy, the significance of the saints, devotion to Mary, and so forth. Lutherans cannot speak of consen- sus on justification as long as these related issues remain unsettled. 10. If justification as the result of Christ’s atoning work is not allowed to be central in all the other articles of faith as they apply to the believer, giving them their shape, it will no longer truly serve as the doctrine by which the church stands or falls. When the other articles of faith are not related to justification, those articles will be misunderstood or misconstrued, Ultimately, Christ will be robbed of His honor as the Savior of sinners. “Hasn’t Rome changed on justification?” 11. The Second Vatican Council has exerted a massive influ- ence on the Roman Catholic Church of today. While that council retracted none of the offensive doctrines put forth by the 16th-cen- tury Council of Trent (which responded to the Reformation), nonetheless the Roman Catholic Church’s witness today is much more complex than is sometimes thought. 12. For example, in describing “Assurance of Salvation,” JDDJ says: “Catholics can share the concern of the Reformers to ground faith in the objective reality of Christ’s promise. . . . No one may doubt God’s mercy and Christ’s merit... . Recognizing his own failures, however, the believer may yet be certain that God intends his salvation.” Here is a departure from traditional Roman Catholic theology in JDDJ, although it does not connect well with the rest of the document. 13. Although change has taken place in the Roman Catholic church since Vatican II, JDDJ shows how very little headway has been made toward a genuine resolution of the differences between Lutherans and Roman Catholics on justification. This statement is not a “breakthrough.” All in all 14. All Christians can rejoice with JDDJ’s affirmation that “jus- tification is the work of the triune God. The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition 200] Convention Workbook