Over the past week I've been reading Frank D. Macchia's book
Justified in the Spirit (2010) where his notoriously difficult reading style is discussing the current trends within the field of soteriology where Pentecostal perspectives have apparently taken a few steps forward when it comes to the Reformations "justified by faith".
What Macchia points out is that even though the Reformation made great inroads with regard to our understandiing of justification, he points out that from a Pentecostal perspective that they still virtually omitted the Holy Spirit. He pointed out that unless we have a proper understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit then we will always struggle to understand justification.
As with many other commentators, Macchia makes the point that even with the great strides that were made after the Reformation that most Protestant (and RC) theology is still Binitarian and not Trinitarian.
Justified in the Spirit,
p.4
One might be said to rise from the dead in the fullness of the Spirit, for the resurrection is, according to Paul, the ultimate in pneumatic existence (1 Cor. 15:44-46), in which mortality is “swallowed up by life” (2 Cor. 5:4) or baptized in the Spirit.3 This connection between pneumatic and resurrected existence is why the indwelling of the Spirit in this age is the “down payment” and guarantee of the immortal existence of resurrection in the new age (Eph. 1:14; Rom. 8:11; 2 Cor. 5:5).
p.5
It is interesting to read the history of justification theology in the light of the Spirit, since both Catholic and Protestant traditions have been ambivalent about the role of the Spirit in justification. . .
Many traditional Protestants describing justification, if they mention the Spirit at all, have the Spirit function from the outside, inspiring faith in the gospel but not at work as the very substance of justification itself. . .
Many traditional Protestants describing justification, if they mention the Spirit at all, have the Spirit function from the outside, inspiring faith in the gospel but not at work as the very substance of justification itself. . .
p.6
This subjective understanding of pneumatology, which identifies the Spirit with the enlightened religious consciousness or with moral progress, is precisely what is wrong with the Protestant soteriology that dominated the modern era prior to Barth and left an influence even beyond him. . .
p.11
What is not always entirely clear in this new ferment of theological reflection on justification is the role of pneumatology in its possible mediating between the classic Protestant concern for extrinsic or legal righteousness granted to us through faith and the Catholic concern for the impartation of righteousness through moral formation and the attainment of virtues. The Spirit as the link between the legal and the transformative is significant, since the Spirit functions as both advocate and vivifier. Arguably, a theology of justification that integrates various biblical accents is only possible through a Trinitarian framework that grants the Spirit proper emphasis. The idea that we partake of Christ through the indwelling Spirit is a valuable point of departure for discovering the relatively neglected pneumatological link.