Reformatorische / evangelische eenheid met de RKK ?

[Gian]

Ik raad eenieder aan het boek 'Vader ik klaag u aan' te lezen. Je zal schrikken hoe rooms we in onze kringen zijn.

Hegger loopt misschien wat hard van stapel, niemand weet wat er in de toekomst gebeuren gaat. Ik begrijp van Hegger ook niet alle dingen, het streven waardeer ik wel.
Verder is het verwijzen naar martelaren in het verleden erg flauw. Ten tijde van de inqisitie's was de RKK ook heel wat anders dan de RKK nu.
Ik raad mensen aan de belijdenis van ERKO nog eens goed door te lezen. Daar kan ik tenminste niets tegenin brengen. De Bijbelse opdracht blijft de eenheid te zoeken. Waarom dan zoveel weerstand?

[Rens]

Je zal schrikken hoe rooms we in onze kringen zijn.

ja natuuuurlijk..............."schrikken" :|

maar, als "we" nu eens zouden "ontdekken" hoe evangelisch "we" zouden zijn, zouden "we" dan óók "schrikken"?????

[parsifal]

Als je zou willen streven naar een brede eenheid onder christenen begrijp ik niet hoe je op de RK komt. Zoek het dan bij de Orthodoxe Kerk. Agezien van de ontwikkeling die ook zij hebben doorgemaakt is dat toch de de opvolger in de meest rechte lijn van de eerste christen-gemeenten?

Hier ben ik het eigenlijk ook mee eens. Ik begrijp trouwens ook niet waarom in de tijd van de reformatie niet de toenadering is gezocht tot de Orthodoxie.

[Adorote]

Als je zou willen streven naar een brede eenheid onder christenen begrijp ik niet hoe je op de RK komt. Zoek het dan bij de Orthodoxe Kerk. Agezien van de ontwikkeling die ook zij hebben doorgemaakt is dat toch de de opvolger in de meest rechte lijn van de eerste christen-gemeenten?

Hier ben ik het eigenlijk ook mee eens. Ik begrijp trouwens ook niet waarom in de tijd van de reformatie niet de toenadering is gezocht tot de Orthodoxie.

Deze contacten en toenadering heeft wel degelijk plaatsgevonden, al zo met de Grieks Orthodoxe Kerk,alleen deze intensieve contacten en toenadering is vrij onbekend gebleven, daar de scheuring een zaak van de Westerse Kerk was en is, die ten principale uit de hand gelopen is.De bedoeling was de misverstanden en misstanden uit de Kerk weren en de Kerk zuiveren meer niet.

[Marnix]

Je zal schrikken hoe rooms we in onze kringen zijn.

ja natuuuurlijk..............."schrikken" :|

maar, als "we" nu eens zouden "ontdekken" hoe evangelisch "we" zouden zijn, zouden "we" dan óók "schrikken"?????

Ligt er aan op welke vlakken je daarvan moet schrikken. Met het evangelie is niets mis, integendeel, dus een beetje evangelisch zijn mag wel Overigens, als we zouden kijken hoe postmodern we in onze traditionele kerken zijn, zouden we pas echt moeten gaan schrikken. Dat is veel erger, want dat heeft vaak op jezelf gericht zijn, doen wat jij leuk vindt, individualisme, veel zelf leven en geloven, weinig interactie in de gemeente etc. tot gevolg.

[Marnix]

17 Vergeld geen kwaad met kwaad, maar probeer voor alle mensen het goede te doen. 18 Stel, voorzover het in uw macht ligt, alles in het werk om met alle mensen in vrede te leven. 19 Neem geen wraak, geliefde broeders en zusters, maar laat God uw wreker zijn, want er staat geschreven dat de Heer zegt: ‘Het is aan mij om wraak te nemen, ik zal vergelden.’ 20 Maar ‘als uw vijand honger heeft, geef hem dan te eten, als hij dorst heeft, geef hem dan te drinken. Dan stapelt u gloeiende kolen op zijn hoofd’. 21 Laat u niet overwinnen door het kwade, maar overwin het kwade door het goede.

De werken van de Geest zijn geduld, zachtmoedigheid, liefde.... ja, zelfs voor je vijanden.

Marnix, dit zijn de woorden van Johannes, ook wel de apostel van de liefde genoemd:

9 Een iegelijk, die overtreedt,27) en niet blijft in de leer van Christus, die heeft God niet;28) die in de leer van Christus blijft, deze heeft beiden den Vader29) en den Zoon.
10 Indien iemand tot ulieden komt,30) en deze leer niet31) brengt,32) ontvangt hem niet33) in huis, en zegt tot hem niet: Zijt gegroet.34)
11 Want die tot hem zegt: Zijt gegroet, die heeft gemeenschap35) aan zijn boze werken.36)

Zachte heelmeesters maken stinkende wonden. Liefde eist dat er soms harde dingen gezegd worden.

Zo geef je een kind ook een harde klap, als het zich aan een hete kachel wil branden.

Daarom hoeft dat nog niet met allemaal hoofdletters... het lijkt we alsof je staat te schreeuwen Daar ging het me om, om de manier, niet om de inhoud

[Marnix]

Het heeft onze vaderen werkelijk bloed , zweet en tranen gekost, om zich los te weken van de roomse slavendienst.
Gods Woord mocht weer blinken in de kerken , de Schrift werd weer terug gegeven aan de leken.
De afgodische Maria verering werd afgeschaft en zo vele voorbeelden meer.
Een ware reformatie ging er over de wereld.

Blijbaar zijn we dit allemaal weer snel vergeten.
Kom laat ons eten en drinken en vrolijk zijn, samen met onze Paapse vrienden.
De dogma ? dat telt niet meer, er is tenslotte toch wel eenheid ?
Kom kom, niet zo somber , eenheid al gaat het ten koste van de waarheid, al moeten we kleine afgodische ketterijen overnemen, het gaat er toch om dat we een zijn ?

Wat een zaak, wat een gedachten gang , laten we eerst in alle ootmoed wederkeren in onze kerken en in ons land , voordat we allerlei overmoedige uitspraken gaan roepen , die ons druk doen zijn met allemaal eenheidszaken.
Helaas meestal alleen met een menselijk activisme.

Prima... maar mag je dan niet zoeken naar samenwerking op bepaalde vlakken? Mag je niet proberen het meer met elkaar eens te worden? Onze voorvader Luther probeerde heel lang om in de Kerk te blijven door de dialoog aan te gaan, door op de rijksdag zijn standpunten te verdedigen etc. Hij werd tegengewerkt door een stelletje mensen die puur op macht belust waren en daar misbruik van wilden maken, die Luther afwezen omdat hij hun macht en financiele middelen ondermijnde. Luther verliet uiteindelijk de kerk omdat hij moest, omdat hij er uit werd gezet. Wat dat betreft is de RK gelukkig wel veranderd, hoewel ik niet zeg dat het allemaal super is nu... maar die dialoog weer aangaan en op bepaalde vlakken samenwerken hoeft dan nog niet verkeerd te zijn. Dat is natuurlijk heel wat anders dan leer van de Roomse kerk weer te accepteren, fouten die in het verleden gemaakt zijn weg te wuiven en terug te gaan naar de tijd van vlak voor de reformatie.

[Marnix]

De vraag die uit de eerste post naar mij toe komt is, is de zuivere dogmatiek zo belangrijk dat bij afwijking hiervande kerk ophoudt kerk te zijn? Zijn de gelovigen in de RKK mijn broeders en zusters niet meer?

Zuivere dogmatiek niet, een zuivere leer aangaande de essentiële punten van het geloof wél.

De eenheid binnen de RK is er alleen uitwendig. Intern is er groot verschil van leer, en is er een 'high' richting, die alle tradities, zowel uiterlijk (eredienst) als leerstellig als noodzakelijk zien. Anderzijds heb je een meer vrijzinnige stroming, die de contacten zoekt met andere (ook protestantse) kerken. Nu is die laatste stroming bereid concessies te doen wat betreft hun belijden, ja ze is zelfs in sommig opzicht leerstellig protestants te noemen. Het grote probleem is echter dat deze groep precies de kenmerken vertoont van de Gereformeerde Kerk: Op zoek naar uitwendige zaken, zoals een bandje in de kerk, 'kiezen-voor-Jezus' sfeer, ruimte voor Schrift-kritiek en andere trekjes die wijzen op komend verval...

Ik merk hier al een gebrek aan onderscheid tussen menselijke tradities en wat de Bijbel leert, want je noemt ze in 1 adem, en koppelt aan beiden verval als gevolg. Wat ongenuanceerd als je het mij vraagt. Wij hebben op bijbelse gronden een bandje in de kerk en het heeft niet tot verval geleid...

[mayflower]

Aan zogenaamde exRK Priester hebben we niks is bij voorbaat al vijandig en niet objectief; nog maals zie verklaring 31 october 1999 dat is de realiteit en relevant.

Het is inderdaad een realiteit als ik zo jou vrijzinninge houding mag zien en het zoeken naar een valse-eenheid, voorral hoe jij spreekt over wat jij noemt "zogenaamde ex-RK priesters".

Met wat ook een realitiet is, en zeer relevant is :

LIBERAL LUTHERANS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS AGREE TO DENY THE GOSPEL

For decades liberal mainline Protestant and Baptist denominations have been "dialoguing" with the Roman Catholic Church in an attempt to find consensus on various doctrinal issues. One of these is the doctrine of justification, the definition of which parallels the definition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The definition of justification is the definition of how man is saved.

The most amazing statement yet to come out of the whirlwind of ecumenical dialogue is the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" issued by the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and representative theologians of the Roman Catholic Church. The LWF is composed of 122 member Lutheran denominations. The first version was issued in 1995. Responses to this from various Lutheran denominations were incorporated into a revised text presented for consideration to the Lutheran World Federation in September 1996. Further modifications were subsequently made and the latest revision was issued in February 1997 for distribution to member denominations. The LWF requested that responses to this be made by June 1, 1998. Finding what the LWF calls a consensus among Lutherans on this matter, the declaration was approved. A formal signing ceremony was conducted by the Lutheran World Federation and the Vatican on October 31, 1999, in Augsburg, Germany.

I obtained a copy of this Joint Declaration in 1997. It is a very cleverly worded document that defends the false Catholic sacramental gospel in every point. The Roman Catholic Church is changing absolutely nothing it has professed to believe about justification. The 16th-century Council of Trent cursed anyone who would dare to say that justification is by faith alone through grace alone by Christ’s completed atonement alone, and this ecumenical declaration does not draw back from that one iota. Consider the following two statements from the sixth session of the Council of Trent:

"If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).

"If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 24).

If the Roman Catholic Church were suddenly to agree with Bible-believing non-Catholics that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone by Christ’s complete and all-sufficient sacrifice alone WITHOUT WORKS OR SACRAMENTS OR BAPTISM OR PRIESTHOOD, it would bring the curses of its own infallible popes upon its head. It has not done that, though. The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification does not teach that "justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us" nor does the Joint Declaration deny that justification is "increased before God through good works."

WHAT DOES THE JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION TEACH?

The Joint Declaration teaches exactly what the Roman Catholic Church has always taught on the doctrine of salvation, which is this: justification is the IMPARTATION of new life to the sinner whereby he is enabled to know and seek God. It is a PROCESS which begins with baptism and involves the doing of good works and the faithful participation in the church sacraments. It is NOT MERE IMPUTATION of Christ’s perfect righteousness and blood atonement to the sinner’s account so that he stands from that moment on and through all eternity as perfect and complete in Christ SOLELY on the basis of what Christ did at Calvary. Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia (1991) defines justification as "the PROCESS by which a sinner is made righteous, pure and holy before God. Justification in the Catholic Tradition comes about by means of faith in Christ, AND IN A LIFE OF GOOD WORKS lived in response to God’s invitation to believe." The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that "the New Testament concept of ‘good works’ which merit eternal life are different from those condemned by Paul." In other words, when Paul said that our good works have nothing to do with salvation, he was referring to the Old Testament law not to New Testament commands.

Consider the following excerpts from the Joint Declaration on Justification which teach precisely this same traditional Catholic view of justification:

JUSTIFICATION IS COMPLETED THROUGH WORKS AND SACRAMENTS: "Through Christ alone are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith. Faith is itself God’s gift through the Holy Spirit who WORKS THROUGH WORD AND SACRAMENT in the community of believers and who, at the same time, leads believers into that RENEWAL OF LIFE which God will bring to completion in eternal life" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS BY IMPARTATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, NOT BY IMPUTATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS: "...as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God IMPARTS as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way. ... The justification of sinners is forgiveness of sins and BEING MADE RIGHTEOUS by justifying grace, which makes us children of God" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS IN BAPTISM: "By the action of the Holy Spirit IN BAPTISM, they are granted the gift of salvation, which lays the basis for the whole Christian life. ... Catholics hold that the grace of Jesus Christ IMPARTED IN BAPTISM takes away all that is sin ‘in the proper sense’ and that is ‘worthy of damnation’ (Romans 8:1)" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS A PROCESS OF OBEDIENCE; NO SECURITY EXCEPT THROUGH OBEDIENCE AND SACRAMENTS: "In spite of their own weakness and the manifold threats to their faith, on the strength of Christ’s death and resurrection they CAN BUILD on the effective promise of God’s grace IN WORD AND SACRAMENT and so be sure of this grace. ... Recognizing his own failures, however, the believer MAY yet be certain that God intends his salvation" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS PRESERVED BY OBEDIENCE: "According to Catholic understanding, Good Works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, SO THAT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS THAT COMES FROM GOD IS PRESERVED and communion with Christ is deepened" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

The Roman Catholic Church brought the curse of Galatians 1 upon its head when it ADDED something to the grace of Christ for salvation. The Apostle Paul plainly taught the Gospel which was given to him by Revelation.

"But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:21-24).

REDEFINING GRACE: THE ROMAN DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION CONTRASTED WITH THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE

Biblical justification is the divine declaration that the believing sinner is righteous through Jesus Christ. It is a legal term. It is the Judge declaring the guilty sinner righteous on the basis of the satisfaction made by the payment of a Substitute. Justification is the IMPUTED righteousness of Christ. The impartation of the Holy Spirit and His work in the believer’s life is a thing separate from justification, and to confuse the two is to pervert the Gospel of the grace of Jesus Christ. The Roman Catholic Church confuses justification with sanctification and illicitly intermingles faith and works, law and grace. This was the error of the Galatian legalizers.

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:6-8).

The false teacher does not create an entirely different gospel; he merely changes the biblical Gospel. He might even say that he believes in salvation by grace alone through faith alone, but he redefines faith and grace to include works. To so redefine these glorious terms, though, is an absolute biblical impossibility because the infallible Word of God tells us "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" (Romans 11:6).

To mix grace and faith and works in any sense whatsoever is to pervert the Gospel of Christ and leads people away from the truth and brings the curse of God upon one’s head.

WHY ARE SO MANY LUTHERAN THEOLOGIANS HAPPY ABOUT THIS DECLARATION?

The question that naturally arises in this context is why are large numbers of Lutheran theologians pleased with this declaration, which obviously reaffirms the old Catholic belief on justification? The answer is not difficult. A majority of Lutheran theologians today are apostate even from their own faith as taught in the original Lutheran confessions. These apostate [apostate means having rejected the true biblical faith] Lutherans do not really care about Bible doctrine because they do not believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God. We must not forget that the wretched phenomenon of theological modernism" originated largely through the Lutheran state church of Germany more than 100 years ago. At least it was popularized and perpetuated by the German Lutherans. This modernism has since permeated most mainline denominations. Modernists believe the Bible is a mixture of "inspired" and uninspired human teaching, myth, and fable. There are endless varieties of opinion among modernistic theologians, but in general they do not believe there was a literal creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a literal fall into sin, and they do not believe there is a literal atonement which was made on Calvary. Liberal theologians question or deny practically every doctrine of the New Testament Christian faith. Purity in doctrine, therefore, is not their agenda. Ecumenism is their agenda, as inspired in these last days by their father the devil (John 8:44) with the goal of creating a one-world "church." Whatever furthers their agenda is good in their eyes, regardless of whether or not it undermines the very faith of their old Protestant fathers.

NOT ALL LUTHERANS ACCEPT THE DECLARATION

The liberal ecumenical Lutheran groups are pretending that there is a "consensus" on this issue, but that is not the case. Large numbers of old-line Lutherans have renounced the declaration on justification.

More than 240 Lutheran theologians in Germany have signed a petition criticizing the declaration. They noted that the document actually presents the Catholic interpretation of justification and that the Lutherans who are signing the agreement are compromising their own doctrine (Ecumenical News International, Oct. 22, 1999).

In America, conservative Lutheran groups such as the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod have rejected the declaration on justification. The Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod is the second largest Lutheran denomination in America, claiming 2.6-million members in 6,200 congregations. Dr. A.L. Barry, President of the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod, observes: "The document is a very carefully worded statement that makes it possible for the representatives of the Pope to sign it without changing, retracting or correcting anything that has been taught by the Roman Catholic Church since the time of the Council of Trent in the 16th century. At Trent, the Roman Catholic Church set forth a doctrinal position that specifically rejects and condemns to this day the position of the Lutheran Church on justification. We who are members of a confessional Lutheran church must say with all boldness and vigor that this so-called ‘breakthrough’ is nothing of the sort. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod and its many partner churches around the world, as well as any number of Lutheran churches not part of our confessional fellowship, have not accepted the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. The Joint Declaration is woefully inadequate and misleading and most sadly of all, is a betrayal of the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Christian News, Oct. 18, 1999, pp. 1,16).

Christian News, a weekly paper published by Lutheran pastor Herman Otten of New Haven, Missouri, has printed many articles opposing the declaration on justification.

CONCLUSION

Brethren, don’t be deceived by the claims of the ecumenical crowd that the Catholic Church has agreed that justification is by grace alone through faith alone without works or sacraments. It hasn’t happened, and it is not going to happen. The Word of God tells us that a leopard cannot change its spots, and those accustomed to doing evil cannot do good (Jeremiah 13:23).

[Adorote]

Aan zogenaamde exRK Priester hebben we niks is bij voorbaat al vijandig en niet objectief; nog maals zie verklaring 31 october 1999 dat is de realiteit en relevant.

Het is inderdaad een realiteit als ik zo jou vrijzinninge houding mag zien en het zoeken naar een valse-eenheid, voorral hoe je4 spreekt over wat jij noemtn "zogenaamde ex-RK priesters".

LIBERAL LUTHERANS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS AGREE TO DENY THE GOSPEL

For decades liberal mainline Protestant and Baptist denominations have been "dialoguing" with the Roman Catholic Church in an attempt to find consensus on various doctrinal issues. One of these is the doctrine of justification, the definition of which parallels the definition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The definition of justification is the definition of how man is saved.

The most amazing statement yet to come out of the whirlwind of ecumenical dialogue is the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" issued by the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and representative theologians of the Roman Catholic Church. The LWF is composed of 122 member Lutheran denominations. The first version was issued in 1995. Responses to this from various Lutheran denominations were incorporated into a revised text presented for consideration to the Lutheran World Federation in September 1996. Further modifications were subsequently made and the latest revision was issued in February 1997 for distribution to member denominations. The LWF requested that responses to this be made by June 1, 1998. Finding what the LWF calls a consensus among Lutherans on this matter, the declaration was approved. A formal signing ceremony was conducted by the Lutheran World Federation and the Vatican on October 31, 1999, in Augsburg, Germany.

I obtained a copy of this Joint Declaration in 1997. It is a very cleverly worded document that defends the false Catholic sacramental gospel in every point. The Roman Catholic Church is changing absolutely nothing it has professed to believe about justification. The 16th-century Council of Trent cursed anyone who would dare to say that justification is by faith alone through grace alone by Christ’s completed atonement alone, and this ecumenical declaration does not draw back from that one iota. Consider the following two statements from the sixth session of the Council of Trent:

"If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).

"If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA" (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 24).

If the Roman Catholic Church were suddenly to agree with Bible-believing non-Catholics that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone by Christ’s complete and all-sufficient sacrifice alone WITHOUT WORKS OR SACRAMENTS OR BAPTISM OR PRIESTHOOD, it would bring the curses of its own infallible popes upon its head. It has not done that, though. The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification does not teach that "justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us" nor does the Joint Declaration deny that justification is "increased before God through good works."

WHAT DOES THE JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION TEACH?

The Joint Declaration teaches exactly what the Roman Catholic Church has always taught on the doctrine of salvation, which is this: justification is the IMPARTATION of new life to the sinner whereby he is enabled to know and seek God. It is a PROCESS which begins with baptism and involves the doing of good works and the faithful participation in the church sacraments. It is NOT MERE IMPUTATION of Christ’s perfect righteousness and blood atonement to the sinner’s account so that he stands from that moment on and through all eternity as perfect and complete in Christ SOLELY on the basis of what Christ did at Calvary. Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia (1991) defines justification as "the PROCESS by which a sinner is made righteous, pure and holy before God. Justification in the Catholic Tradition comes about by means of faith in Christ, AND IN A LIFE OF GOOD WORKS lived in response to God’s invitation to believe." The Catholic Encyclopedia claims that "the New Testament concept of ‘good works’ which merit eternal life are different from those condemned by Paul." In other words, when Paul said that our good works have nothing to do with salvation, he was referring to the Old Testament law not to New Testament commands.

Consider the following excerpts from the Joint Declaration on Justification which teach precisely this same traditional Catholic view of justification:

JUSTIFICATION IS COMPLETED THROUGH WORKS AND SACRAMENTS: "Through Christ alone are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith. Faith is itself God’s gift through the Holy Spirit who WORKS THROUGH WORD AND SACRAMENT in the community of believers and who, at the same time, leads believers into that RENEWAL OF LIFE which God will bring to completion in eternal life" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS BY IMPARTATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, NOT BY IMPUTATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS: "...as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God IMPARTS as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way. ... The justification of sinners is forgiveness of sins and BEING MADE RIGHTEOUS by justifying grace, which makes us children of God" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS IN BAPTISM: "By the action of the Holy Spirit IN BAPTISM, they are granted the gift of salvation, which lays the basis for the whole Christian life. ... Catholics hold that the grace of Jesus Christ IMPARTED IN BAPTISM takes away all that is sin ‘in the proper sense’ and that is ‘worthy of damnation’ (Romans 8:1)" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS A PROCESS OF OBEDIENCE; NO SECURITY EXCEPT THROUGH OBEDIENCE AND SACRAMENTS: "In spite of their own weakness and the manifold threats to their faith, on the strength of Christ’s death and resurrection they CAN BUILD on the effective promise of God’s grace IN WORD AND SACRAMENT and so be sure of this grace. ... Recognizing his own failures, however, the believer MAY yet be certain that God intends his salvation" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

JUSTIFICATION IS PRESERVED BY OBEDIENCE: "According to Catholic understanding, Good Works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, SO THAT THE RIGHTEOUSNESS THAT COMES FROM GOD IS PRESERVED and communion with Christ is deepened" ("Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification," February 1997 edition).

The Roman Catholic Church brought the curse of Galatians 1 upon its head when it ADDED something to the grace of Christ for salvation. The Apostle Paul plainly taught the Gospel which was given to him by Revelation.

"But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:21-24).

REDEFINING GRACE: THE ROMAN DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION CONTRASTED WITH THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE

Biblical justification is the divine declaration that the believing sinner is righteous through Jesus Christ. It is a legal term. It is the Judge declaring the guilty sinner righteous on the basis of the satisfaction made by the payment of a Substitute. Justification is the IMPUTED righteousness of Christ. The impartation of the Holy Spirit and His work in the believer’s life is a thing separate from justification, and to confuse the two is to pervert the Gospel of the grace of Jesus Christ. The Roman Catholic Church confuses justification with sanctification and illicitly intermingles faith and works, law and grace. This was the error of the Galatian legalizers.

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:6-8).

The false teacher does not create an entirely different gospel; he merely changes the biblical Gospel. He might even say that he believes in salvation by grace alone through faith alone, but he redefines faith and grace to include works. To so redefine these glorious terms, though, is an absolute biblical impossibility because the infallible Word of God tells us "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" (Romans 11:6).

To mix grace and faith and works in any sense whatsoever is to pervert the Gospel of Christ and leads people away from the truth and brings the curse of God upon one’s head.

WHY ARE SO MANY LUTHERAN THEOLOGIANS HAPPY ABOUT THIS DECLARATION?

The question that naturally arises in this context is why are large numbers of Lutheran theologians pleased with this declaration, which obviously reaffirms the old Catholic belief on justification? The answer is not difficult. A majority of Lutheran theologians today are apostate even from their own faith as taught in the original Lutheran confessions. These apostate [apostate means having rejected the true biblical faith] Lutherans do not really care about Bible doctrine because they do not believe the Bible is the infallible Word of God. We must not forget that the wretched phenomenon of theological modernism" originated largely through the Lutheran state church of Germany more than 100 years ago. At least it was popularized and perpetuated by the German Lutherans. This modernism has since permeated most mainline denominations. Modernists believe the Bible is a mixture of "inspired" and uninspired human teaching, myth, and fable. There are endless varieties of opinion among modernistic theologians, but in general they do not believe there was a literal creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a literal fall into sin, and they do not believe there is a literal atonement which was made on Calvary. Liberal theologians question or deny practically every doctrine of the New Testament Christian faith. Purity in doctrine, therefore, is not their agenda. Ecumenism is their agenda, as inspired in these last days by their father the devil (John 8:44) with the goal of creating a one-world "church." Whatever furthers their agenda is good in their eyes, regardless of whether or not it undermines the very faith of their old Protestant fathers.

NOT ALL LUTHERANS ACCEPT THE DECLARATION

The liberal ecumenical Lutheran groups are pretending that there is a "consensus" on this issue, but that is not the case. Large numbers of old-line Lutherans have renounced the declaration on justification.

More than 240 Lutheran theologians in Germany have signed a petition criticizing the declaration. They noted that the document actually presents the Catholic interpretation of justification and that the Lutherans who are signing the agreement are compromising their own doctrine (Ecumenical News International, Oct. 22, 1999).

In America, conservative Lutheran groups such as the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod have rejected the declaration on justification. The Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod is the second largest Lutheran denomination in America, claiming 2.6-million members in 6,200 congregations. Dr. A.L. Barry, President of the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod, observes: "The document is a very carefully worded statement that makes it possible for the representatives of the Pope to sign it without changing, retracting or correcting anything that has been taught by the Roman Catholic Church since the time of the Council of Trent in the 16th century. At Trent, the Roman Catholic Church set forth a doctrinal position that specifically rejects and condemns to this day the position of the Lutheran Church on justification. We who are members of a confessional Lutheran church must say with all boldness and vigor that this so-called ‘breakthrough’ is nothing of the sort. The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod and its many partner churches around the world, as well as any number of Lutheran churches not part of our confessional fellowship, have not accepted the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. The Joint Declaration is woefully inadequate and misleading and most sadly of all, is a betrayal of the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Christian News, Oct. 18, 1999, pp. 1,16).

Christian News, a weekly paper published by Lutheran pastor Herman Otten of New Haven, Missouri, has printed many articles opposing the declaration on justification.

CONCLUSION

Brethren, don’t be deceived by the claims of the ecumenical crowd that the Catholic Church has agreed that justification is by grace alone through faith alone without works or sacraments. It hasn’t happened, and it is not going to happen. The Word of God tells us that a leopard cannot change its spots, and those accustomed to doing evil cannot do good (Jeremiah 13:23).

Het is jammer voor jou maar zulke lappen tekst lees ik al zo niet en zeer zeker niet in een andere taal.

En over vrijzinnigheid je weet niet wat dat is anders zou je dat niet zeggen in je voor ingenomenheid.

[Bert Mulder]

Zo Adorote,

Dus jij leest geen lange lappen stof?

Dus je meent te beweren, dat jij, als priester in de (Oud) RK, niet veel leest?

Nu meneer pastoor, dat is precies hetzelfde probleem als de kerk had in de tijd van de reformatie.

Namelijk, inplaats van herders had de kerk huurlingen die ZELF niet de waarheid kenden, mede omdat ze niet van lezen hielden

En verder, verboden ze de 'leken' het lezen van de Heilige Schrift.

[Zosinus]

Zo Adorote,

Dus jij leest geen lange lappen stof?

Dus je meent te beweren, dat jij, als priester in de (Oud) RK, niet veel leest?

Nu meneer pastoor, dat is precies hetzelfde probleem als de kerk had in de tijd van de reformatie.

Namelijk, inplaats van herders had de kerk huurlingen die ZELF niet de waarheid kenden, mede omdat ze niet van lezen hielden

En verder, verboden ze de 'leken' het lezen van de Heilige Schrift.

Zo Bert,

Heb je weer een stok gevonden?

[Adorote]

Zo Adorote,

Dus jij leest geen lange lappen stof?

Dus je meent te beweren, dat jij, als priester in de (Oud) RK, niet veel leest?

Nu meneer pastoor, dat is precies hetzelfde probleem als de kerk had in de tijd van de reformatie.

Namelijk, inplaats van herders had de kerk huurlingen die ZELF niet de waarheid kenden, mede omdat ze niet van lezen hielden

En verder, verboden ze de 'leken' het lezen van de Heilige Schrift.

Zo Bert,

Heb je weer een stok gevonden?

Zosinus, dit is zo dom en abject ,niet op in gaan totaal niet.

[Bert Mulder]

Zo Adorote,

Dus jij leest geen lange lappen stof?

Dus je meent te beweren, dat jij, als priester in de (Oud) RK, niet veel leest?

Nu meneer pastoor, dat is precies hetzelfde probleem als de kerk had in de tijd van de reformatie.

Namelijk, inplaats van herders had de kerk huurlingen die ZELF niet de waarheid kenden, mede omdat ze niet van lezen hielden

En verder, verboden ze de 'leken' het lezen van de Heilige Schrift.

Ondertussen is dit wel een direkte vraag aan je, Adorote

[refo]

Zo Adorote,

Dus jij leest geen lange lappen stof?

Dus je meent te beweren, dat jij, als priester in de (Oud) RK, niet veel leest?

Nu meneer pastoor, dat is precies hetzelfde probleem als de kerk had in de tijd van de reformatie.

Namelijk, inplaats van herders had de kerk huurlingen die ZELF niet de waarheid kenden, mede omdat ze niet van lezen hielden

En verder, verboden ze de 'leken' het lezen van de Heilige Schrift.

Ondertussen is dit wel een direkte vraag aan je, Adorote

Ik zie eigenlijk nergens een vraag.

Wat is oud RK? Verdiep je er eens in in plaats van het gelijk te schakelen met de RK.

Bovendien wordt het in onze gezindte ook verboden om de Heilige Schrift te lezen. Ja, je mag wel lezen, maar niet zelf je conclusies trekken uit het gelezene. Dat doet de kerk.