The venerable Cardinal then defines seven characteristics of all true developments:
It becomes necessary . . . to assign certain characteristics of faithful developments . . . the presence of which serves as a test to discriminate between them and corruptions . . . I venture to set down Seven Notes . . . as follows: - There is no corruption if it retains one and the same type, the same principles, the same organization; if its beginnings anticipate its subsequent phases, and its later phenomena protect and subserve its earlier; if it has a power of assimilation and revival, and a vigorous action from first to last. (23)

1) it (a doctrine) retains one and the same type,

2) it retains the same principles,

3) it retains the same organization;

4) its beginnings anticipate its subsequent phases, 

5) its later phenomena protect and subserve its earlier;

6) it has a power of assimilation and revival, and

7) it has a vigorous action from first to last.

"The further Luther advanced in his conflict with other theologians, then with Rome, then with the whole of contemporary Catholicism and finally with the Catholicism of every age, the more closely we see him identifying his affirmation about `sola gratia' with a particular theory, known as extrinsic justification. That is to say, he himself unites two statements so closely that they become inseparable - one an affirmation, grace alone saves us; the second a negation, it changes nothing in us in so doing. To recall a simile he himself popularised, the grace of God envelops us as in a cloak, but this grace leaves us exactly as we were. The sinner, after receiving grace and so saved, is no less a sinner than before . . .

"Justification by faith is not nearly so important to St. Paul as to Luther, but has been forcibly crammed by the latter into texts which in fact do not mention it . . . Without the least doubt, grace, for St. Paul, however freely given, involves what he calls `the new creation', the appearance in us of a `new man', created in justice and holiness. So far from suppressing the efforts of man, or making them a matter of indifference, or at least irrelevant to salvation, he himself tells us to `work out your salvation with fear and trembling', at the very moment when he affirms that `. . . knowing that it is God who works in you both to will and to accomplish'. These two expressions say better than any other that all is grace in our salvation, but at the same time grace is not opposed to human acts and endeavour in order to attain salvation, but arouses them and exacts their performance . . .

"Extrinsic justification, a justification independent of any interior change, of any new capability given to man to perform acts pleasing of themselves to God, is so far from being a Pauline doctrine that it is quite irreconcilable with the whole body of his teaching.

"Calvin . . . was quite conscious of this, and applied himself with some success to correcting Luther on this point. None the less, the clear-cut distinction he tried to draw between justification and sanctification, while willingly admitting that they are inseparable in fact, cannot be maintained in a scientific exegesis. Scripture, even St. Paul alone, apart from the evidence of the four Gospels, sweeps aside the last dialectical device for safeguarding the theory of extrinsic justification . . .

"The uneasiness felt by Protestant systems opposed to Catholicism is nowhere so evident than in the long controversy on the meaning in St. Paul of the word `dikaioo,' to justify. All Protestant exegetes, anxious to safeguard the expressions used by Luther and Calvin, set out to show that it can only mean `to declare just', not `to make just'; that is, it applies merely to extrinsic justice, which has nothing real to correspond with it in the person justified. Nevertheless, modern scientific exegesis unanimously acknowledges that the word can only mean `to declare officially just someone who is so in reality'. Even the idea of the Word of God creating what he says by the act of saying it - so well drawn out by Barth from the entire Bible - would be enough to show that God makes just whom he `declares just', even if he were not so beforehand, by the very fact of his declaration, so the opposition set up is without meaning."


 

"Even if the two sides did disagree about the relationship between faith and works, they both agreed (1) that faith is absolutely necessary for salvation and (2) that we are absolutely commanded by God to do good works. Both these two points are unmistakably clear in Scripture . . .

"When Luther taught that we are saved by faith alone, he meant by salvation only the initial step, justification, being put right with God. But when Trent said we are saved by good works as well as faith, they meant by salvation the whole process by which God brings us to our eternal destiny and that process includes faith, hope, and charity, the works of love . . .

(Fundamentals of the Faith, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988, somewhere between p. 277 and p. 281: I'm too lazy to look)

What did you major in in college? 

Sociology, with a minor in psychology, and several courses also in philosophy and history. I didn't become really interested in theology till my last year of college (at age 22), when I attended Inter-Varsity Fellowship and went to a new church that sort of (in conjunction with the Holy Spirit!) gave me a kick in the pants spiritually. My theology and apologetics (apart from sermons, Bible studies, etc.) is entirely self-taught. I've never taken a college-level or seminary course in theology. But I've been at it now for 27 years: off and on as my occupation.

I've known that I was called to do apologetics and evangelism as my vocation since 1981. It's taken all the time from 1981 till now for me to be able to do it full-time and to have a decent income (i.e., all from apologetics and writing) so that I don't have to sweat every bill. Lots of dues-payin' and non-theological jobs to make ends meet, all those years! I doubt that I would have been willing if I had known what I would have to go through all those years, but I'm glad I kept at it. I'm sure happy we don't know the future. We wouldn't make a tenth of the choices we make in life. 

I was telling my daughter how amazing it is that you have the ability and the time and the INCLINATION to digest all this heady stuff, critique it, and make it a little more accessible to the rest of us. 

All glory to God for the gifts and desires that He grants to each of us. You're very kind, but we need to always recognize where the source of anything good comes from. I'm just a willing vessel, and even the willingness is solely due to the grace of God. That's good Catholic theology (not just Protestant!).

She said, "But, Mom, that's FUN!" 

Yes! If you like this sort of thing, it is. I love it. That's why I have unlimited motivation. This ultimately comes from God, too: 

God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

(Philippians 2:13; RSV)

I have time because folks are willing to buy my books (so I can pay my bills), and this great job allows me to do what I love, too, courtesy of the good folks at CHNI. It's been a tremendous blessing to me and my family these past nine months. 

How I hope and pray that she continues the journey with me, she and the rest of my family, into the Catholic Church. 

Sounds like she may be beginning that road. If she has a lot of intellectual curiosity and interest in theology and history, I think you can help urge her along further, so that her own affinities will sort of pick up the ball and run with it. Chesterton said that whoever tries to be merely fair to the Catholic Church, winds up inevitably being attracted to it.

Whether or not she ever "popes," though, it sounds like she is a wonderful Christian, and will be an asset to the Body of Christ (in the larger, ecumenical sense of the word). You should be very proud. Don't push conversion on anyone, but if they are asking questions, run with that as much as you can, for sure, because it is voluntary on their part. For thinkers, intellectual curiosity is enough to drive them forward.

This is what blew me away about Cardinal Newman: it was the combination of a profound Catholic faith and equally profound genius-intellect (and fabulous prose as well). He remains my "intellectual hero" to this day. I have no doubt that he will not only be declared a saint in due course, but also a Doctor of the Church.

Last edited on Thu Jul 17th, 2008 06:22 pm by Dave Armstrong