Talk:Justification (theology)

Information has been added based on a book whose author is Matthias Reimer, could someone tell me who he is? Rafaelosornio (talk) 15:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm a bit suspicious. It seems like a possible COI as well as undue weight. This is a published dissertation. Reimer is certainly not a notable scholar. StAnselm (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

This century, the story on Justification has changed quite dramatically as more communions have affirmed the Lutheran-Catholic Joint Declaration. I have re-jigged the lead to reflect this. Indeed, it may be that whole article needs to be revised so that instead of concentrating on the differences, it treats the consensus. It may be that the differences will progressively become of historical rather than theological interest.

That being said, certainly not all denominations have agreed to the Joint Declaration, and there are certainly individuals within all groups who disagree with the contents of the Joint Declaration, or that think that it wallpapers over important things (such as predestination), or insist that their opponents affirming it cannot be affirming it, or point out that the bodies signing may have limited authority (e.g. for the Catholics, that it would take a definite Council statement ratified by a Pope.)

Editorial considerations

Furthermore, the Joint Declaration poses an interesting challenge for Wikipedia editors, because almost all academic sources on theology and religious history have presented Catholic-versus-Protestant views as sharp dichotomies, whereas the Joint Declaration casts them in terms of obsolete anathemas against extreme positions almost no-one actually holds. I think it means that discussion in terms of slogans "Sola fide" etc needs to be severely tempered and situated in a historical context. For example, I have adjusted/softened to the lead to say that Catholics "portray" infusion and Protestants "portray" imputation, because it is simply not the case that Catholics blankly deny imputation (see John Henry Newman on justification for more on this, noting that the Catholic theological tendency is omniverous ("et et") rather than puritan.

The Joint Declaration, from what I can read, does challenge what many Catholics and Protestants have been taught to believe are their total differences, and certainly makes redundant many of the sectarian assertions bandied about at and after the Reformation. Of course, Wikipedia cannot make sides about which theology is true and correct, however, we editors may need to recognize that, in many historical sources, the basis of much partisan characterization of different church's theology on Justification is now sans culottes. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 04:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I undid an anonymous addition which said " In Catholic/Orthodox theology justification is a grace-enabled state that normally bears fruit as one cooperates, but it can be lost, and a justified person can fail and fall (mortal sin), without implying they were never justified. Moreover, the Catholic Orthodox view of justification denies good works as a fruit of justification." with ref to Council of Trent, Session VI (13 January 1547), Canon 24, Decree on Justification. It also removed "Catholic, Orthodox" from the previous sentence.

My reasons are three: first, the second sentence ("denies good works as a fruit") seems to actually contradict the Trent statement that "Jesus Christ Himself continually infuses his virtue into the said justified,-as the head into the members, and the vine into the branches,-and this virtue always precedes and accompanies and follows their good works."

Second, that original sentence that lumps the Catholic, Orthodox and Lutherans together better reflects the the Joint Declaration.

Third, that the subject of mortal sin and loss of justification is already dealt with in a subsequent paragraph."

Now obviously this is an area where people manage to see enormous differences in fine shades (i.e. if you have a vine and a branch and fruit, does saying the branch bears fruit signify that this is independent of the vine?) so there may indeed be better wording possible. I actually don't have much problem with the first added sentence " In Catholic/Orthodox theology justification is a grace-enabled state that normally bears fruit as one cooperates, but it can be lost, and a justified person can fail and fall (mortal sin), without implying they were never justified" and which is preferred may come down to which is more important to state first: the areas where denominations agree or the areas where denominations differ. I suspect that because this is an area where there has been much misinformation emphasizing differences, as the Joint Declaration teases out, it is more informative to state the commonalities first, but opinions may differ. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 06:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)