In spite of this historic division between Roman Catholics and Protestants on the question of justification, there has been an unanimity of focus in both groups on the subjective reception of the righteousness of God. That is to say, both Roman Catholics and Protestants have historically tended to center their theologies of justification on what steps individuals must take to appropriate the merit of Christ. Catholics have debated amongst themselves the necessity or lack of necessity of a certain disposition to divine grace as much as Protestants have debated free will and the signs of authentic conversion.1 Within the Protestant tradition, these debates are rather ironic in light of the Magisterial Reformation’s emphasis on the externality and unconditionality of grace.
Particularly with regard to the historic Protestant tradition, this point has been made forcefully by Philip Cary in his essay: “Why Luther is not quite Protestant: The Logic of Faith in a Sacramental Promise.”2 When dealing with justification in the theology of Luther and comparing to the subsequent Protestantism, Cary observes that most Protestants have focus on the reality of faith. In this, faith and its authenticity are considered the decisive factor. This gives rise to the soteriological syllogism that Cary outlines thus: “Major Premise: Whoever believes in Christ is saved. Minor Premise: I believe in Christ. Conclusion: I am saved.”3 Of course, the raises the problem of how one knows that they have authentic faith. Many Protestants have therefore been fixated on discovering secondary signs that confirm the authenticity of faith: a particular kind of conversion experience, good works, wealth, personal holiness or spiritual gifts, and perhaps even snake handling!
When turning to Luther’s theology, Cary observes that the focus shifts from the authenticity of faith to the authenticity of God’s promise made concrete and tangible in the means of grace. Thus, Cary renders Luther’s soteriological syllogism thus: “Major premise: Christ told me, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Minor premise: Christ never lies but only tells the truth. Conclusion: I am baptized (i.e., I have new life in Christ).”4
As Cary correctly observes, although both Luther and the larger Protestant tradition do certainly agree that one receives justification through faith, there is a subtle, yet highly significant difference between the two understandings of the righteousness of faith. Whereas most Protestants hold that faith should be reflective regarding its own authenticity, Luther believes in what Cary characterizes as an “unreflective faith,” that is, a faith that does not focus on the question of its own authenticity.5
According to Cary, this unreflective faith is possible for Luther because of his belief in the sacramentality of the word.6 Here Cary echoes the work of the German Luther scholar Oswald Bayer, who claims that it was in fact the sacramentality of the word, and not justification by faith, that was central to the so-called Reformation breakthrough.7 The word of justification is objectified in both in preaching and the sacraments in such a way as to shift the focus from authentic appropriation of God’s grace to the question of the surety of God’s promise. Since the risen Jesus is genuinely present in the means of grace, he is capable of mediating a direct assurance of his justifying grace for sinners who look for him there. The tendency of believers to reflect upon and worry about their authenticity of their faith is seen by Luther as a sinful resistance to Jesus’ promise that they have already been accepted. Therefore, instead of “justification through faith” it might be appropriate to characterize Luther’s position as “justification by the word.”
[1] Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 227-340.
[2] Philip Cary, “Why Luther is Not Quite Protestant: The Logic of Faith in a Sacramental Promise,” Pro Ecclesia 14, no. 4 (2005): 447-486.
[3] Ibid., 450.
[4] Ibid., 451.
[5] Ibid., 450-55.
[6] Ibid., 455-61.
[7] Oswald Bayer, Martin Luther’s Theology: A Contemporary Interpretation, trans. Thomas Trapp (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2008), 52-3. idem, Promissio: Geschichte der reformatorischen Wende in Luthers Theologie (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971), 240-1.
From the draft manuscript for Jack D. Kilcrease, Justification by Word (Lexham Press, forthcoming).
