What does God's grace do?

"Grace" has many meanings. It may mean "beauty," "attractiveness," "that which charms and delights," as well as "gratitude," all usages anticipated in classical and koine Greek. ¹ In theology, its meaning is more precise. It means first of all a gift from God. Not just any gift, but life itself. It is a gift bestowed through the merits of Jesus Christ for our salvation. Grace is first and foremost God communicating Him self to man and inviting him to re stored fellowship with his Creator. This grace is necessary if a sinner is to attain eternal life. Justification by grace through faith is at the heart of the Christian message. It is also probably best known as the central issue of the sixteenth-century Reformation.

Scriptural foundations

In Scripture, justification's meaning is quite clear. In the Old Testament, "justification" has a juridical and forensic connotation. The verb sadaq means "to be just" or "to be not guilty," in the juridical sense of being in harmony with the law. The causative form hisdiq means "to justify," as in obtaining justice or vindication before a tribunal for one unjustly accused (Ex. 23:7; Deut. 25:1; Prov. 17:15; Jer. 3:11; Eze. 16:50, 51). The emphasis of the He brew term is essentially liberative in that it denotes the juridical declaration of forensic innocence, i.e., innocence that implies a relation with a judgment rather than a mode of being. That person is acknowledged or accounted or again declared to be justified or righteous. ²

In the New Testament, the verb dikaioo generally means "to declare a person to be just," more specifically, to declare that the demands of God's law as a condition of life are fully satisfied with regard to a particular person (Acts 13:39; Rom. 5:18, 19; 8:30-33).³ A man is called dikaios (just, righteous, justified) when, in the judgment of God, his relation to God's law is what it ought to be (Matt. 1:19; Acts 10:22). Thus, Jesus Christ is "the righteous man" (James 5:6, R.S.V.) who died for the "unrighteous" (1 Peter 3:18), so that "as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous" (Rom. 5:19, R.S.V.).⁴ The resulting state, justification, is denoted by the word dikaiosune— righteousness by judicial sentence. The word may include the idea that the justified person is good, but only because of his judicial relation to God. He is accounted and declared by God to be righteous. We are, rejoices Paul, "justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus" (chap. 3:24, R.S.V.). And this justification is to be "received by faith" (verse 25, R.S.V.; cf. verses 28, 30; chap. 5:1; Gal. 2:16; Phil. 3:9); faith brings the instrument by which we appropriate Christ and His righteousness.

Later theological developments

In later theology, however, this forensic sense of justification was gradually lost. History shows that Christians did not always carefully distinguish between justification as a legal act and the renewal process of sanctification. Very early, Greek Church Fathers (with nuances that cannot be treated here) anticipated the main lines that would characterize the theology of grace and justification. The notion of divinization, which emphasizes the unity of the redeemed with the indwelling Christ, and the notion of Christian liberty, through which man renews himself and grows in the image of God, were to remain the two poles around which the doctrine of justification would revolve. ⁵ At times aspects of each theme were obscured or so emphasized as to distort them. An example is the confusing of justification as a legal act with the moral process of sanctification. This aberration continued into the Middle Ages and gradually acquired a doctrinal aspect.

The pastoral and practical approach of the early Fathers, as well as Augustine's stress on justification as gratuitous remission of sins, made way for a speculative and scholastic theology. Under the influence of Aristotelian philosophy, medieval scholastics came to distinguish be tween the "negative" and "positive" sides of justification, i.e., be tween remission of sin and infusion of grace. The justified Christian was no longer forensically "declared" to be just, "regarded" forensically "as if" he were just, but, through the infusion of divine grace, was really just and made righteous. The changeover occurred within man.

Thomas Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274) established the same distinction and showed the "organic and necessary connection between remission of sin and infusion of Grace." ⁶ Two centuries later, on the eve of the Reformation, the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace and justification had taken a highly refined shape. Under Thomas' influence, Roman Catholicism came to equate justification not only with remission of sin but with renovation, a changeover of the interior man. Not only are man's sins not imputed, they are removed. The justified man changes over, in fact, from a state of sin to a state of infused grace. Logical as always, Thomas taught that the introducing of the new state (of grace) deter mined the cessation of the previous one (state of sin). ⁷ The justified man, therefore, is not merely regarded as if he were righteous; he /s righteous. Not forensically, but within himself. Besides, since justification is not only remission of sin but also inner transformation, it is a continuous experience. Never complete, it is capable of increasing and is meant to grow through man's good works and cooperation with God.

The Protestant Reformation

Luther and the Reformers reacted strongly against this theology of justification. They denounced its emphasis on seeking holiness through works. Specifically directed against an overemphasis on good works, their doctrine of justification taught man's radical corruption through the sin committed by Adam at the be ginning of human history, a corruption that poisons good works. Justified men are yet fallen men; they remain sinners, but are counted just because of Christ's atonement. The justice of God (Rom. 1:17) imputes the redemptive work of Christ to the believer (chap. 3:22) without works on his part. Thus man's justification is in no way his own achievement but only God's. He is forensically declared righteous. Man is incapable of doing anything to turn himself from a sinner into a righteous man. All he can do is throw himself in trusting faith on Christ, his Saviour. ⁸

Besides justification by faith, Calvin also stressed the change wrought in man by repentance and rebirth. In other words, good works do follow as a fruit of justification—though not as its cause or as having any sort of merits. ⁹

The Catholic answer to Luther and Calvin

Trent's comprehensive decrees on original sin and justification (Denz 1520-1583) ¹⁰ were the Catholic answer to Luther's and Calvin's theology of grace. The council rejected the concept of extrinsic-forensic justification, and maintained that man is justified by interior justice infused by the Holy Spirit, as indicated in the three following points: (1) justification implied the real re mission of sins (Denz 1561) and not merely their nonimputation for punishment (cf. Denz 1561); (2) this implies, as a necessary accompaniment, "sanctification and renewal of the inner man" by the infusion of grace (Denz 1528), i.e., a radical, ontological transformation of man, a new objective reality whatever may appear or not appear on the psycho logical level (cf. Denz 1533, 1562- 1565); (3) the need of man's voluntary acceptance of grace, his free cooperation in justification, as well as in the preparation for it (cf. Denz 1526).

Though the council dealt with other aspects of the issue, as well, these three doctrinal statements are the main dogmatic basis of its theology of justification. The council fathers seem to have emphasized these points because, as they saw it, the Reformers' teaching tended to deny or, at least jeopardize, the Catholic teaching on the true inner transformation that takes place when God justifies the sinner. And, as so often happens after a conciliar decision, what had been intended as a specific response to a particular issue be came in subsequent Catholic theology the major element in the whole treatise of grace and justification. Thus Catholic theologians began developing various aspects of sanctifying grace, an infused grace that, given by God, makes man just in the sight of God and raises him to a supernatural destiny. It is sometimes called habitual grace because it is intended to be a permanent condition of the soul. This habitual grace is the more indispensable, for justification is regarded as progressive, not instantaneous. It is a process "never complete in this life." ¹¹

On the other hand, Trent's emphasis on man's free cooperation with grace for justification led to the no less excessive concept of actual grace. Actual graces come to man without any merit on his part what soever (Denz 1525). They are divine impulses that move him to judge what is right and to do what is good. Actual graces are granted either to prepare the way for justification, to preserve sanctifying grace, or to in crease it. Their necessity had already been emphatically underlined by the Council of Trent (Denz 238- 249, 373-380). ¹² It is true that God's grace does "most of the work," as L. F. Trese points out, ¹³ but God requires man's cooperation. Man genuinely cooperates through his free will in the work of his own justification. Thus, "with the grace of Christ, he merits his final reward," ¹⁴ namely, eternal life, though such deeds are in a sense the work of God within us. ¹⁵ Still, there is no certainty about one's justification. Since man's justification re mains imperfect and in a way precarious to the very end, no believer can know "with the certainty of faith . . . that he has obtained God's grace" (Denz 1534).

Where does the difference lie?

What I have said thus far, although at times quite oversimplified, calls for three basic remarks. They will also help us to discern more clearly where the real difference lies between the two positions.

It is important to notice, first, that both the Roman Catholic Church and the Reformers declared that man is justified by God's grace. Four hundred years ago the Council of Trent affirmed that "if anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or through the teaching of the law, let him be anathema." 16 This may come as a surprise to many who have thought that the Catholic doctrine is one of justification by works. Yet, at the same January 14, 1547, session, the council added that "if anyone shall say that justifying faith is nothing less than confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified: let him be anathema." " There is little doubt that despite the Reformers' doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone the traditional Roman Catholic interpretation of the Tridentine decrees has been one of justification by faith and works.

Second, though the Catholic Church has elevated to official status the notions of grace and justification, it uses them in a sense often vastly different from the Biblical connotations. Thus justification is said to describe God's work within man. It consequently becomes almost synonymous with sanctification, and designates the process of a justification gradually acquired by the believer, and no longer, as in Paul's writings, a declaration of acquittal.

I have no intention of suggesting that in its concept of grace the Church of Rome entirely neglects the notions of acquittal and forgiveness of sin mentioned in the Scriptures. Indeed it considers them fundamental in the sacraments of baptism and penance. Here, how ever, a shift of emphasis has led to a radical change in the fundamental concepts of faith, justification, and sanctification. In Catholic doctrine, justification is asked to yield to sanctification its central place in Christian life. That which is the foundation and the heart of a life of faith becomes hardly more than its preamble. And sanctification, designed by God to be the result of one's surrender to the liberating mercy of God, becomes the center of the Christian's concern.

Finally, this view has also radically modified the content and function of faith. In traditional Roman Catholicism, faith is first of all mental assent "consisting of a firm belief in all revealed truths," ¹⁸ with its seat in the understanding, whereas the Reformers regarded it as fiducia, trust, having its seat in the will.

Again, this fact does not imply that Roman Catholic doctrine lacks all of the Biblical concept of faith, but rather that the concept has lost much of its richness. Faith is merely assent to truths, at its best the be ginning of love, but in any event nothing more than the first step, an act of preparation, opening the way to the Christian experience. As its very nature of trust and confidence is relegated to the background, faith becomes one of the justified believer's own acts, another work of merit.

No matter of minor importance

It is difficult to consider such a shift of emphasis to be a matter of minor importance. To the extent that the work accomplished by Jesus Christ on our behalf, and the justification it brings about, are denied their true and foundational role, faith loses its immutable foundation and, uprooted, finds itself isolated from the source where it should have found joy and assurance.

To the extent that justification is regarded as God's work in us rather than for us, attention is diverted from grace alone and focused on man, whose cooperation is regarded as meritorious. Instead of renunciation of one's own works and an utter rest and trust in God's work, faith becomes another of man's deeds. Hence man's life is nothing but continuous exertion, and while admit ting in principle the reality of free grace, it is nothing more than a journey toward the house of servitude, for it is deprived of any assurance of salvation. It also becomes impossible to come to a genuine experience of sanctification, for the latter can only be the fruit of our joy and gratitude toward the unconditional mercy that God shows toward us, thanks to Christ's redemptive work.

The unfaithfulness toward the Scriptures that has so solidly established itself in the Roman Catholic interpretation of justification by grace is eminently injurious to God's true character, to His free grace, and to the encouragement of those who are daily engaged in the struggle against sin.