When the leaders of the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation con­vened the Council of Trent (1545­1563), one of their major purposes was to deal with the doctrine of jus­tification by faith. Their goal was to establish a Roman Catholic consen­sus and to condemn the new Protes­tantism by pronouncing anathemas upon the distinctive teachings of Luther and the early Lutheran confes­sions of faith.¹ Due to the importance of justification, the Tridentine Decree (Sixth Session, finalized January 13, 1547) contains a detailed exposition of Romanist teaching in sixteen "Chapters" (each containing one or two lengthy paragraphs), followed by a condemnation of thirty-three spe­cific opinions, called "Canons" (one short paragraph each).² The final ar­rangement of the Sixth Decree ex­pounds the Romanist notion of three states of justification: The first state (Chapters 1-9) describes a sinner's initial transition from a state of sin to a state of righteousness; the second state (Chapters 10-13) details how the justified sinner might increase in righteousness; the third state (Chap­ters 14-16) is concerned with the re­covery of justification through the sacrament of penance by those who have fallen from grace. The thirty-three appended Canons condemning specific heretical opinions deal largely but not exclusively with Prot­estantism. Unfortunately, Protestant teachings are so severely caricatured in these Canons that most of them are unrecognizable as Protestant doc­trines, or else they are mingled with real heresies, which Protestants them­selves would condemn as severely as Rome. Trent did make clear, however, that Romanists and Protestants differ substantially on the doctrine of justifi­cation in the following points.

First, traditional Roman Catholic teaching regards justification as a proc­ess in which a sinner is made right­eous. Rome claims that the verb "to justify" means to maize righteous. Justification follows sanctification; it is de­pendent upon an inner change in a sinner's nature (rather than his state or status), making him into a righteous person. Theologically, this results in the commingling of justification and sanctification. Justification results from being made righteous; justification is righteousness infused (Chapter 7) ­i.e. righteousness actualized rather than imputed. The believer is justified on the basis of internal righteousness; justification is granted to the righteous rather than to the sinner. According to Trent, faith is to be seen as the begin­ning of human salvation, the founda­tion and root of all justification (Chapter 8). Faith justifies as it is ani­mated by love; hence faith is never alone, but "worketh by love" (Gal. 5:6), and therefore its own virtues merit some degree of divine acceptance (Chapter 7). Canon 11 states:

If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remis­sion of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them, or also that the grace by which they were justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

More recently Jesuit scholar John Bligh has joined other Roman Catholic scholars in affirming that "to justify" often occurs in judicial contexts and can mean to acquit as a declarative act on God's part. Bligh continues the commingling of justification and sanc­tification, however, by stating that "jus­tification is more than forgiveness; it is forgiveness plus transformation."³This commingling is also evident in the united statement on justification by faith issued by the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission: "Justification and sanctification are two aspects of the same divine act."⁴

Contrary to Trent, Scripture and Protestant theology teach that in jus­tification, righteousness is imputed or reckoned to the sinner's account solely by the good will of God; justi­fication is a forensic declaration or pronouncement that a sinner is reck­oned righteous by God. It is justifica­tion of the ungodly "apart from ourselves:' i.e. by the external or alien righteousness of Christ (Is. 45:24-25; Acts 13:39; 1 Cor. 6:11; Eph. 1:7). The sinner's sin is not reckoned; Christ's righteousness is reckoned (Rom. 4:5-8) and received by faith alone. Justification and sanctification are not to be commingled. Justifica­tion by inward transformation is no way to salvation. "We are justified," Luther states in his Galatians com­mentary, "not by faith furnished with charity, but by faith only and alone." Faith does not justify because it pro­duces the fruit of love for Christ, but because it receives the fruit of Christ's love. Such faith, however, as James teaches (ch. 2:14ff.), will indeed bear fruits of love, good works, and every Christian grace. A good tree will bear good fruit, which, however, testifies to, rather than causes, its good na­ture. "Works," Luther continues, "are not taken into consideration when the question respects justification. But true faith will no more fail to produce them, than the sun can cease to give light." Justification without subsequent sanctification is impossi­ble; sanctification confirms that justi­fication has transpired. Conversely, if no works follow faith, that faith is dead; it is not a living faith in Christ.⁵

For the historic Protestant faith, justification and sanctification pos­sess like denominators in the be­liever's salvation and yet are distinct though inseparable. Both proceed from free grace, being rooted in the sovereign good pleasure of the triune God. Both are made possible only through the head of the eternal cove­nant, Jesus Christ. Both are necessary unto salvation, commencing already from the moment of regeneration. Fine-tuned distinctions, however, are numerous: Justification is extrinsic to the sinner saved; sanctification is in­trinsic. Justification declares the sinner righteous and holy in Christ; sancti­fication makes the sinner righteous and holy as fruit from Christ. Justifi­cation removes the guilt of sin, having to do with legal status; sanctification subdues the love and power of sin, having to do with spiritual condition. Justification restores to God's favor; sanctification restores His image. Jus­tification is a complete and perfect act, a once-and-for-all act in its essence; sanctification is a progressive but in­complete process, not perfected until death. Justification grants the re­deemed the title for heaven and the boldness to enter; sanctification gives them the meetness for heaven and the preparation necessary to enjoy it. Jus­tification gives the right of salvation; sanctification gives the beginning of salvation. By grace the justified are what they are in justification; by grace they work what they work in sanctification. Justification is the criminal pardoned; sanctification, the patient healed. The union of both constitutes present salvation, as John Angel James illustrates:

Conceive of a man in prison under sentence of death, and at the same time dangerously ill [with] jail fe­ver. If the monarch pardon him, this is not enough for his safety and happiness, for he will die soon of his disease, unless it be cured. On the other hand, if the physician cure his disease, it is of little con­sequence unless the monarch give him a reprieve; for though he get well of his disorder, he must soon suffer the penalty of the law; but if he be both pardoned and cured, he will be completely saved.⁶

The Roman Catholic is taught to come to faith by good works; the Prot­estant, to come to good works by faith. Trent reasoned that if salvation were given freely, regardless of works, jus­ tification by faith alone would reap complacency. Virtue and good works would serve no ultimate purpose.

In response, the Protestant Reform­ers argued that the believer, having been justified by free grace, is also reborn with a will inclined to good and to the glory of God. Faith must bear fruit. Luther wrote, "Let us conclude that faith alone justifies and that faith alone fulfils the law.... Faith is a living, restless thing. It cannot be inoperative."⁷ The Reform­ers and their successors insisted that though we are justified by faith, our faith must be justified (i.e. validated) by our works (James 2:17). Hence they spoke often of "the obedience of faith" (Rom. 16:26), stressing that faith leads to obe­dience and obedience springs from faith. "By faith Abraham... obeyed" (Heb. 11:8). As Thomas Watson remarked: "Faith believes as if it did not work, and it works as if it did not believe."⁸

The Westminster Confession of Faith (11.1-2) summarizes the Protestant po­sition succinctly here, undergirding the whole with irrefutable support from Scripture:

Those whom God effectually calleth he also freely justifieth (Rom. 8:30; 3:24), not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ's sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience, to them as their righteousness; but by imput­ing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them (Rom. 3:22-28; 4:5-8; 5:17-19; 2 Cor. 5:19, 21; Tit. 3:5, 7), they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith, which faith they have not of themselves; it is the gift of God (Acts 10:44; Gal. 2:16; Phil. 3:9; Eph. 2:7-8). Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righ­teousness, is the alone instrument of justification On. 1:12; Rom. 3:28; 5:1); yet is it not alone in the person justi­fied, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love (James 2:17, 22, 26; Gal. 5:6).

Justification is thus a sister-concept to imputation. As a forensic (i.e. legal or judicial) term, justification is the act of God's sovereign grace whereby He imputes to the elect sinner, who is in himself guilty and condemned, the per­fect righteousness of Christ, acquits him on the ground of Christ's merits of all guilt and punishment, grants him a right to eternal life, and enables him to lay hold of and appropriate to himself Christ and His benefits. Im­putation signifies to credit something to someone's account by transfer; i.e. God transfers the perfect righteousness of Christ to the elect sinner as a gracious gift, and transfers all of the sinner's unrighteousness to Christ who has paid the full price of satisfaction for that unrighteousness.⁹ By means of this mutual transfer the justified sinner is viewed by God as if he "never had had, nor committed any sin," but had himself "fully accomplished all that obe­dience which Christ has accomplished" (Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 60; cf. Rom. 4:4-6; 5:12-19; 2 Cor. 5:21).¹⁰

Second, Roman Catholicism teaches that Christ's merited righteousness must be buttressed by the sinner's own righteousness in his justification. Chap­ter 16 of Trent on justification asserts that the believer, by cooperating with grace, is entitled to merit and increase in justification. If he perseveres until the end, he will be rewarded with God's crowning gift to persevering be­lievers. But this was just the error of the Jews in Romans 10:3-4, who thought to find something in them­selves that could help them establish their own righteousness before God: "For they being ignorant of God's righ­teousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righ­teousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth."

Protestant theology teaches that Christ's merited righteousness cannot tolerate any human addition. All our works are a stench in God's nostrils in terms of meriting any righteousness in His holy sight (Is. 64:6). Neither our sweetest experiences of God's love and grace, nor our faith itself granted by the Holy Spirit can add one stitch of merit to the white robe of Christ's spotless righteousness. Nothing will satisfy the justice of God except the eternally valid righteousness of Christ Jesus. We are "justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:24; cf. Job 25:4-6).

Roman Catholicism argues for the mixing of grace and works in justifi­cation. Both are required in prepara­tion for justification and in the justification event itself. The Council of Trent stressed both the role of grace in the believer's merits and that merits are to be considered the believer's own and true merits, due to free will and inherent grace. Scripture and Protes­tantism assert that justification is by sovereign grace only through faith without any merit on the believer's part (Jonah 2:9). The ultimate foun­dation of our justification is God's sovereign election: "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his" (2 Tim. 2:19). God's eternal decree to justify is worked out through His eternal covenant of grace which in turn is grounded in Christ's meritorious satisfaction — satisfac­tion which the elect sinner receives through the means of grace by faith (Rom. 9-10).

Third, Roman Catholicism advo­cates degrees in justification and im­plicit faith in the church's teaching; Scripture and Protestantism do not. We are either justified or not justi­fied, either totally under grace or to­tally under wrath. In Luke 18 the publican returned home justified; the Pharisee remained unjustified. "I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other" (v. 14a). The faith which justified the publican here is not implicit faith in the teaching of the church, but per­sonal trust in and reliance on the sheer mercy of God (Lk. 18:13). Such justifying by faith is grounded in the absolute favor of God to a sinner, rather than to a quality, or a series of qualities, at work within his soul as Trent advocates (Chapter 16).

Finally, Roman Catholicism unites the reception of God's grace to the reception of the sacraments. Utilizing scholastic terminology, the Council of Trent teaches in Chapter 7 on justifi­cation that baptism (rather than faith) is the instrumental cause of justification; personal righteousness (rather than imputed righteousness) is the formal cause.¹¹ Thus, it was impos­sible, according to Trent, to be justified outside of the visible church, i.e. with­out being baptized. This is not only contrary to biblical example (Luke 23:39-43), but also deprives the be­liever of his immediate relation to Christ by faith. Consequently, the sacraments are allowed to come between himself and Christ. With its ceremonial rituals, automatic communications of grace, and central status in the church, the sacramental system can easily become a surrogate Christ. All forms of sacra-mentalism obscure the honor of Christ just as does anything added to faith as a condition of salvation.

The Reformed, on the other hand, maintained that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, while the alien righteousness of Christ, external to the believer and imputed to him, is the formal cause, i.e. the ground upon which God can justly justify sinners. "For he bath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21; cf. Rom. 3:26). It is critical to main­tain that this formal cause of justification resides in Christ's righteousness alone, for all the Scriptures dealing with the fundamentally depraved nature of man make clear that there is no righteous­ness inherent in the natural man upon which a divine verdict of justification could be based. "They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Psa. 14:3). For the Reformers, faith was the conscious, personal, immediate re­liance of a sinner on Christ alone. Such faith brings the sinner into Christ's church and makes him a member of Christ's body even if he had never heard of the visible church. Sacraments are not essential for salvation but for the consummation of discipleship.¹² The sacraments are signs and seals of the grace that is received by faith; they are no part of justifying faith.

If the church is the dispenser of the sacraments, and the sacraments are nec­essary for salvation, the church becomes the dispenser of salvation. And so we have arrived at Roman Catholicism's ul­timate error — the church replacing Christ — as one of many unavoidable consequences of her defective views of justification. Notwithstanding Vati­can II, Rome has yet to repudiate any of the Council of Trent's serious errors on the doctrine of justification by faith. Until such takes place, as Martin Smyth concludes, there can be "no honest compromise between the Ro­man and Reformed doctrine of justifi­cation.¹³Cooperation can only be based on evasion rather than on expla­nation, as has been witnessed yet again in the March 29, 1994 document, Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millenium, signed by forty evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholics.