Is the Reformation dead?

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,173
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What I can find of the Lutheran position, is that the term mortal and venal is used, but it refers to the attitude and effect upon the person, and is not technically a distinction in the kind of sin. Why Do We Distinguish Between Sins? by Martin Chemnitz | Steadfast Lutherans

Westminster more explicitly rejects the distinction, and was probably what I was thinking of: "As there is no sin so small, but it deserves damnation;[8] so there is no sin so great, that it can bring damnation upon those who truly repent.[9]"
:) now that's down in to micro detail to me, and I never worry on such details, and here's why. If a sin is serious, we feel guilty, because of the Spirit at work on us, and then we feel a need to confess/repent, and then His amazing grace restores us and cleanses us -- 1rst John chapter 1.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,173
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Our fight for the truth today is the same as theirs, justification by faith in Christ alone and not by works of righteousness which we have done. Luther also knew that election and predestination were true apart from the will of the man, that our salvation is truly of God by making us new creations in Christ.

John 1
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Ephesians 2:1-10 is the most complete and beautiful statement of it, and notice how verse 10 helps to complete the fullness, and bring things together with the totality of the gospel, and all the epistles, from John, Peter, James, Paul -- all aligned to Christ in the gospels.
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,776
3,376
✟242,001.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Sort of. "But Scripture testifies that there are also some other sins in which also the reconciled, when they have fallen, lose faith," I don't believe such a person remains justified, since justification is by faith. As I understand, in Lutheran theology it is possible to lose faith, and this often happens through serious sin.

Right, I wasn't saying that they remain justified.

In principle it's not in Reformed theology, although from a practical point of view that's not so clear.

Right, hence my, "for all intents and purposes."

Westminster more explicitly rejects the distinction, and was probably what I was thinking of: "As there is no sin so small, but it deserves damnation;[8] so there is no sin so great, that it can bring damnation upon those who truly repent.[9]"

I suppose the first part does contradict the idea of venial sin, but the second part doesn't contradict the idea of mortal sin. No one thinks mortal sin brings damnation to those who repent. In fact, implied in this part of the WC may be the idea that there are great sins that bring damnation absent repentance.

...Yet even the venial sin part is tricky. For a good portion of my tradition venial sin is only possible to those who have been justified, but that's another topic.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
My critique of the "reformation" is that it has no built-in Off switch. If the faith could reformed in the 16th century, why stop then? Why not "reform" the faith further in the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, and on into today? How much "reform" is too much? Or too little? When (if ever) will the task be complete?

The off switch is what you call "The Consummation"!

*After the Bride has made herself ready...
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,887
3,526
✟320,837.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The personal crisis that originally sparked Luther’s change was caused by the Catholic idea that if we have any mortal sins that we haven’t repented, we’re doomed. He was unable ever to believe that he had really done that.

As I understand the conclusion, the Reformation consensus was (1) there are no mortal sins, all sins alike will doom you if you aren’t Christ’s (2) all those who have faith are justified, independent of works.

I’m not finding very many posters that actually hold to what I understand is the Reformation consensus, even Protestants that you’d expect would. It seems that almost everyone has a list of sins that no Christian could possibly commit, and they’re convicted that anyone who hasn’t repented for these sins is doomed. But this is precisely the concept of mortal sin that the Reformation we rejecting.

The original Protestant response would have been that what we’re seeing now is a kind of self-righteousness. I’m OK because I haven’t committed *that* sin. My sins are of the acceptable kind. A few decades ago no Protestant would have tried that. But today it seems like the norm.

Have I missed something?

My theory is that the culture wars have killed justification by faith. Does that bother anyone else?
I think people intuitively know that what they do counts, even as we need God in order to do it, which is the New Covenant promise, in fact, emphasized by John 15:5: "Apart from Me you can do nothing". We can't sin wantonly and be a serious holder of faith, and the "works prepared for us in Christ Jesus" or those done for the "least of these" certainly aren't "filthy rags", or "works of the law". I think we know that man is still under obligation to be righteous, even if that righteousness cannot be realized while under the law, but only by and under grace.

And, if we're saved by a "faith that is not alone", because such faith necessarily involves good works, then man must actually receive justice at justification, rather than his justice or righteousness merely being imputed or declared. Otherwise, what would compel him to now wish to do these works, if nothing has changed internally. Because we have changed! We're now cleansed and made new creations, with the Trinity dwelling within. Imputed righteousness has to do with forgiveness and the taking away of sin. We're not just "snow-covered dung-heaps". God wants, and expects, more from and for us than that. He never made us to be worthless sinners after all, even as some think it's all noble and humble to continue admitting that they are. It's a struggle, but one we're expected to get better and better at overcoming, moving onwards and upwards more than we backslide in the overall scheme of things. We're to "invest" our talents, and increase them even.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
13,887
3,526
✟320,837.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
For me, it has always been Jesus' two commands, which are to love God and to love others.
Yes, righteousness is expected as a result of this new gift, this relationship or communion with
God that faith establishes in response to grace. And so the church can actually teach in para 1022 of the catechism, quoting John of the Cross: "At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."

Love is the only right and authentic motivator for man's works, and the true definition of man's justice, which is why the Greatest Commandments are what they are.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
My theory is that the culture wars have killed justification by faith. Does that bother anyone else?

Justification by faith has never meant that we do not need to repent of known sins. Our repentance is never perfect, but it needs to be present and growing. A lack of repentance would indicate a lack of the true faith through which we are justified.

For example, consider a person who knowingly engages in adulterous relationships and shows no signs of a growing awareness that these relationships are sinful. The person claims to be a Christian and they are a member of a church. They are lovingly confronted with the error of their ways, but they refuse to believe the plain teaching of Scripture and they don't see their lifestyle as sinful. I could not with any confidence say that this person had true faith. Could you?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
My critique of the "reformation" is that it has no built-in Off switch. If the faith could reformed in the 16th century, why stop then? Why not "reform" the faith further in the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, and on into today? How much "reform" is too much? Or too little? When (if ever) will the task be complete?

Semper Reformanda means "always reforming". This was one motto of the reformation era. The church has always been reforming and will always be reforming until Jesus returns. This is because there are heresies that crop up in every age, unbiblical traditions that get tacked on and taken too seriously, and imbalances which threaten the pure preaching of the gospel. The church in every age must always be seeking to purify itself from the barnacles which it picks up along the way as it travels through a fallen world.
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Semper Reformanda means "always reforming". This was one motto of the reformation era. The church has always been reforming and will always be reforming until Jesus returns. This is because there are heresies that crop up in every age, unbiblical traditions that get tacked on and taken too seriously, and imbalances which threaten the pure preaching of the gospel. The church in every age must always be seeking to purify itself from the barnacles which it picks up along the way as it travels through a fallen world.
As I say, it looks like some Protestants will, within the next century, "purify" their ecclesial communities right out of the recognizable Christian faith entirely.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: fhansen
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,821
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
As I understand the conclusion, the Reformation consensus was (1) there are no mortal sins, all sins alike will doom you if you aren’t Christ’s (2) all those who have faith are justified, independent of works.

But the Reformation did not endorse antinomianism. The unrepentant were understood not to be saved.

Heidelberg Catechism #87: Q. Cannot they then be saved, who, continuing in their wicked and ungrateful lives, are not converted to God?
A. By no means; for the Holy Scripture declares that no unchaste person, idolator, adulterer, thief, covetous man, drunkard, slanderer, robber, or any such like, shall inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Ephesians 5:5-6, 1 John 3:14-15, Galatians 5:19-21).
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,776
3,376
✟242,001.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
But the Reformation did not endorse antinomianism.

I didn't realize that the word originated with Luther:

Antinomianism -​

The heretical doctrine that Christians are exempt from the obligations of moral law. The term first came into use at the Protestant Reformation, when it was employed by Martin Luther to designate the teachings of Johannes Agricola and his sectaries, who, pushing a mistaken and perverted interpretation of the Reformer's doctrine of justification by faith alone to a far-reaching but logical conclusion, asserted that, as good works do not promote salvation, so neither do evil works hinder it; and, as all Christians are necessarily sanctified by their very vocation and profession, so as justified Christians, they are incapable of losing their spiritual holiness, justification, and final salvation by any act of disobedience to, or even by any direct violation of the law of God.

-Catholic Encyclopedia
I like that concise phrase, "As good works do not promote salvation, so neither do evil works hinder it." That is very much the crux of a lot of these debates.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
As I say, it looks like some Protestants will, within the next century, "purify" their ecclesial communities right out of the recognizable Christian faith entirely.

Yes many have already done so. But many Catholic people and parishes have also become so burdened with man-made tradition that they've stopped preaching the gospel.
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
The personal crisis that originally sparked Luther’s change was caused by the Catholic idea that if we have any mortal sins that we haven’t repented, we’re doomed. He was unable ever to believe that he had really done that.

As I understand the conclusion, the Reformation consensus was (1) there are no mortal sins, all sins alike will doom you if you aren’t Christ’s (2) all those who have faith are justified, independent of works.

I’m not finding very many posters that actually hold to what I understand is the Reformation consensus, even Protestants that you’d expect would. It seems that almost everyone has a list of sins that no Christian could possibly commit, and they’re convicted that anyone who hasn’t repented for these sins is doomed. But this is precisely the concept of mortal sin that the Reformation we rejecting.

The original Protestant response would have been that what we’re seeing now is a kind of self-righteousness. I’m OK because I haven’t committed *that* sin. My sins are of the acceptable kind. A few decades ago no Protestant would have tried that. But today it seems like the norm.

Have I missed something?

My theory is that the culture wars have killed justification by faith. Does that bother anyone else?

Far be it from me to justify the culture wars! But Justification by Faith, if killed, has been killed by the same thing that produced the culture wars.

But you have brought up a very good point. that "Christians" commonly think they can be good enough to merit grace, or even if not that, to think that they have worked hard enough for God, and are good enough, (or wise enough, or learned enough in the things of God, etc etc) they deserve a certain respect from God or at least from others.

Like I heard of one speaker saying to a woman who told him she could not believe God could ever forgive her for the awful things she had done, "You have no idea how bad you've been!" God owes us nothing. Least of all forgiveness, no matter how sincere our repentance, it is filthy rags apart from his work.
 
Upvote 0

PaulCyp1

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 4, 2018
1,075
849
78
Massachusetts
✟239,255.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The Protestant Rebellion was dead as soon as it began. It has resulted in nothing but the fragmentation of Protestantism into thousands of conflicting denominations, each claiming to teach from the Bible, yet the teaching of each denomination contradicting the teaching of the others. Total doctrinal chaos. Truth cannot contradict truth, so obviously untruth is rampant throughout the teaching of this ungodly manmade tradition. Which is why the plainly stated will of Jesus Christ concerning His followers was, and still is, "That they all may be ONE, even as I and My heavenly Father are ONE".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
The personal crisis that originally sparked Luther’s change was caused by the Catholic idea that if we have any mortal sins that we haven’t repented, we’re doomed. He was unable ever to believe that he had really done that.

As I understand the conclusion, the Reformation consensus was (1) there are no mortal sins, all sins alike will doom you if you aren’t Christ’s (2) all those who have faith are justified, independent of works.

I’m not finding very many posters that actually hold to what I understand is the Reformation consensus, even Protestants that you’d expect would. It seems that almost everyone has a list of sins that no Christian could possibly commit, and they’re convicted that anyone who hasn’t repented for these sins is doomed. But this is precisely the concept of mortal sin that the Reformation we rejecting.

The original Protestant response would have been that what we’re seeing now is a kind of self-righteousness. I’m OK because I haven’t committed *that* sin. My sins are of the acceptable kind. A few decades ago no Protestant would have tried that. But today it seems like the norm.

Have I missed something?

My theory is that the culture wars have killed justification by faith. Does that bother anyone else?
It is my understanding that we're currently undergoing a second reformation, and many doctrines are in knee jerk status to it.
 
Upvote 0