This Sunday I’ll be preaching on justification from Zechariah 3. I’ve been slowly plodding my way through Justification by Faith Alone by Charles Hodge. He’s one of the old Princeton theologians. It was near his grave in the Princeton cemetary that I realized it must be love between me and the then-future Mrs. Cavman. Yes, such a romantic (I was really there to see Edwards’ grave).
While Piper’s book on the subject, Counted Righteous in Christ is another very solid book on the subject, it isn’t my “go to” book. One of the strengths of Piper’s book is that he interacts with the current movements to redefine justification and remove the concept of imputation, thereby undermining the Gospel. So, this is a must for any pastor’s bookshelf.
But there is another book that every pastor should have. This fact was spelled out while listening to a recent White Horse Inn show. Interviewees at a recent Evangelical Pastors Conference (keywords here are Evangelical & Pastor) could not accurately define justification. The majority of them included works in our justification. The majority of them, obviously, also saw it as a process rather than an act of God.
The book you should buy today if you don’t have it already is The Doctrine of Justification by James Buchanan. I picked it up while working in the seminary bookstore years ago and read it on my own (that is a sad commentary in general). Part I traces the History of the Doctrine thru the Old & New Testaments, the Church Fathers and includes controversy among Protestants. He goes into detail with the errors of neo-nomianism among others. This is a valuable service for pastors and elders since these problems pop up in new dress.
He then covers the Exposition of the Doctrine, and goes in good depth on the matter. He includes discussion about its relation to Grace & Works, and the Work of the Holy Spirit. This is a veritable treasure chest of historical theology.
Grace Publications has done many a layman a favor by editing this down to a mere 96 pages (the full volume is over 500). The titled it Not Guilty. This is a useful book to give to congregants. I’ve given other books in this series (they have abridged versions of works by Luther, Burroughs, Owen and others) to the congregation for Christmas (one of the blessings of a small church).
So, if you are laboring over this doctrine this week- some of these would be good investments of time and money.
“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24 [RSV])
🙂
Some links for those who might like to see two different and brief 20th Centurty (one early, one late) Catholic treatments of “justification”:
From the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08573a.htm
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c3a2.htm
Do any of the books you’ve recommended look at modern Catholic treatments of the subject or at the Catholic-Lutheran Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (which was also recently signed by some Methodists, I think). As to that declaration, it’s important to keep in mind the following documents as well: Response Of The Catholic Church To The Joint Declaration, Annex to the Official Common Statement.
This is such a fascinating subject. Are you going to talk about the Joint Declaration in your upcoming sermon? Or on post-Trent Catholic expositions of the subject? I’d love to read the final version of your sermon, if you will make a digital copy available.
Previous to that, “Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness.” (repeatedly used in Romans)
The context of James is those who show no evidence of salvation, and he uses an event latter in Abrham’s life to show that saving faith produces works. Since to say that justification by works would be inconsistent with the MANY passages the clearly teach it is by grace through faith (Romans 3-6; Galatians; Ephesians 2; Philippians 3) we must look at the overall context of James and see how the situation he addresses is different than that Paul addresses. James is essentially saying “How do you know someone is justified?” Their faith is not alone, but produces obedience. So… examine the context of James 2 rather than isolating a verse Michael. This is the problem Roman Catholicism has perpetrated for over 500 years.
Hi, cavman. I had made another post as a follow-up to my first one (before you made your reply); it may have gotten lost in cyberspace or may have met with your disapproval. If the latter is the case, then I apologize for any offense. I’m going to attempt to post it again below. I have some other thoughts that I’d like to offer in response to your comment, but I don’t have time at the moment to type them in the combox:
(This is a fascinating subject, and I’m not trolling; I always like to learn more and share what I’ve learned from the Catholic school of thought)
*******
edited by Cavman.
Comments with links get stuck in the spam filter.
I’m not trying to be snotty, but until the Council of Trent is rejected… the official dogma of the RCC has not changed. I may dialogue with an individual Catholic on the matter, and their personal views may be different from the official doctrine, but when discussing such matters publically, we have to go by official doctrine.
As a conservative presbyterian, I believe that the Westminster Confession of Faith is the most accurate summary of biblical teaching. When I talk to people about what our church believes, I point there.
I have taken exceptions publically, but the doctrine of justification is not one of them.
One of the ways that I think Roman soteriology errs is by not recognizing the differences between justification and sanctification. There are other ways, but this seems the most pertinent part of the problem on this issue.
The RCC does blur Justification and Sanctification. I recall a RCC apologist once saying on the Bible Answer Man Program, that after Justification we still need to be scrubbed down a little, and then of course he told of the necessity of Purgatory.
Hey whosebob, we are not trying to be argumentative, but goodness, the RCC continues to practice citing verses in isolation rather than context.
a. Where is the support for the necessity of purgatory for justified believers.
b. Paul repeatedly points to Abraham in Romans as his example for believing the promise by faith apart from works. Never does he point to Moses and the covenant at Sinai. Quite significant, don’t you think, Cavman?
Happy Reformation Day My Friend!
For those who are interested, the sermon will be available in 2 places by mid-Monday.
1. You can go to Sermon Cloud (see links on the right hand side). Look for “From Rags to Righteousness” from Steve Cavallaro. If you are a member, and you like it- you can Amen it. It will also have an outline of the sermon.
2. You can click on CavSermons, also a link on the right hand side, and look for that sermon title.
If anybody still wants more on James 2:24, here’s a good post from a friend’s blog.