(Luther received an official copy on Oct. 10,1520.)

Among the forty-one errors named as heretical are those relating to the sacramental and hierarchical systems, especially those that focused on the authority of the Pope and the Roman Church. The Pope professes fatherly love and forbearance, but also infallibility in judging all matters of faith. Failing to recant, Luther and all his associates will be cut off and be punished as obstinate heretics. This means they shall be burned at the stake. All princes, magistrates, and citizens are exhorted, on threat of excommunication and promise of reward, to seize Luther and his followers and to hand them over to the apostolic chair. Christians are forbidden to read, print, or publish any of his books or writings: indeed, they are to burn them. Places which harbor him or any of his follows are threatened with the interdict.

Surprisingly, Luther’s fundamental doctrine of justification by faith is nowhere expressly men-tioned!

December 10, 1520, marked the end of the sixty-day grace period for Luther to recant! Students and faculty alike shared breakfast that morning in an atmosphere of excitement and anticipation, for they had received an invitation from no lesser person than Philip Melanchthon, Luther’s right hand man, to gather at 9:00 a.m. outside the eastern gate near the city dump to witness Luther’s response.

The bonfire was already ablaze when they arrived. In their presence and that of his faculty colleagues, Luther ceremoniously consigned to the flames a copy of the canon laws of the Roman Church, a number of books that supported papal authority, various papal decretals, and several writings of his antagonists, Doctors Eck and Emser. Last of all, he belligerently cast into the fire a copy of Exsurge domini with these words; "As thou (the Pope) has vexed the Holy One of the Lord, may the eternal fire vex thee!" Instead of the bull causing Luther and his associates to be burned, it was burned by Luther!³

The students had a field day! Several hundred tarried by the fire chanting Te Deum followed by funeral dirges for papal laws! Making mock procession through the town, they collected piles of books that promoted the papacy and scholastic theology which they in turn cremated back at the town dump!

Luther did not act on impulse, rather from a growing anger over the papal attack expressed in Exsurge domini. The original document was signed by Pope Leo X on June 15, 1520, then widely published and circulated in Europe. In fact, the Pope himself sent Cardinal Jerome Alexander on such a mission to the Rhineland and the low countries, while Doctor Eck was to do the same in eastern Europe. It did not reach Luther’s hands until October 10.

But advance reports of its contents arrived much earlier. Luther was so shocked by what he heard that he doubted that Pope Leo X was its author: he felt it a forgery by Eck. Moreover, reports of the public burning of his books in Cologne, Mainz, and Louvain at the instigation of these papal nuncios infuriated him. He wasted no time in drafting a reply which he titled Against the Execrable Bull of Antichrist (remember: Luther had not yet received an official copy). It reads in part:

Addressing the Pope and the Papacy at Rome, he closed this vitriolic tract saying:

But it was indeed by the Pope’s hand. Luther defended his bonfire burning afterward with these words:

From this dramatic moment, sixteenth century Europe would experience radical change. Every area of life – social, political, economic, religious – would be affected, even revolutionized. Of course, other factors than theology contributed, but at the forefront was the accurate biblicism promoted by Luther and the Reformers. It was the theological Reformation that led the way to the inversion of the status quo. And the common denominator of that theology as we have shown: the doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ alone based upon the Scriptures alone.

So prolific was this movement that by the death of Pope Paul IV (Caraffa) in 1559, only Spain and Italy stood firm with the Papacy.⁵ Like Samson, this mighty force had shaken the Roman edifice to which every fiber of society was connected. Indeed, it appeared that all Europe would be turned upside down, or, from the Protestant perspective, right-side up. By Caraffa’s death, German lands were predominantly Lutheran as were those of the Scandinavians to the north. France and the Netherlands were gathering to the banners of Calvin, while in Bohemia, Hungary and even Poland, the trend turned to the position of the Reformers. Great Britain had separated herself, and in Scotland, allegiance had shifted to the message, both Calvinist and nationalist, of John Knox.

Imagine the consternation of the Papacy over this truculent theological upheaval! Excommun- ications, counciliar declarations, vituperative denunciations, even enactments of the ban failed to impede the spread of reformation doctrines.

Something had to be done. The answer: the Catholic Counter-Reformation whose key thrusts included the Council of Trent, the Jesuit movement, and the Inquisition.

Paul III, Pope from 1534-1549, recognized the gravity of the situation. He excommunicated Henry VIII in England, encouraged the Inquisition to handle diversion in Italy, and in 1540, recognized the Jesuit Order which would serve as his militant/educational arm in the winning back of the heretics. The Jesuits swore absolute dedication, even a literal blind obedience, to the Pope and to his authority.⁶ Lastly, Paul III summoned the Council of Trent in 1542 to deal with the doctrinal issues. Due to a series of wars between Charles V and Francis I, the first session did not convene until 1545.

The Council, interrupted by wars and deaths of Popes, met in three assemblies (First,1545-47; Second, 1551-52; Third, 1562-63) that comprised a total of twenty-five sessions. The details cannot be our concern here: our interest is the Doctrine of Justification by Faith. This they debated in the first assembly.

Even within the Roman hierarchy, there were leanings toward acceptance of Luther’s position on justification. Cardinals Reginald Pole and Girolamo Seripando saw much merit in his scriptural arguments. And they were not alone: many of the Spanish, French and Imperial delegates were desirous not only of complete reform of the papacy, but also a thorough review of this doctrine.

But the Pope, thoroughly apprised of these sympathies, sent only delegates who totally supported the status quo of the Curia. From the beginning, there were only about seventy voting members present, most of whom were Italian! And contrary to previous councils at Constance (1414-18 A.D.) and Basel (1431-49 A.D.) where legates, theologians, and canonists where allowed to vote, here they could only serve as consultants. Thus with a preponderance of Italians continually in attendance (voting by proxy, also, was outlawed), the papacy was assured of control.

For further assurance, Pope Paul III hand picked two theologians from the Jesuit Order who were committed to defending and maintaining catholic doctrine and papal authority. Their names were Alonzo Salmeron and Diego Lainez.⁷

The debates on justification raised the greatest furor in the first assembly. Fights even broke out in the heat of debate! One bishop was imprisoned for a night charged with assault on another!

Cardinal Seripando argued for a theory of justification that resembled that of Luther. But Jesuit Lainez rose to the occasion with a three-hour speech of refutation that so impressed the Council that they requested it in written form. As such, it was eventually included in the official Acts of the Council, the one and only document from a theologian’s pen to be so honored.⁸

The influence of Lainez and Salmeron on the delegates was not limited to their defense of scholastic doctrine. It extended to their preaching, for they alone were permitted to preach publicly at Trent! Lainez was heard every Sunday and feast-day in the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore, the meeting place of the voting Fathers.

Only the Pope could have so limited public proclamation at Trent. He desired to render the breach with Protestants past healing, and he succeeded, despite the opposition of many in the First Assembly of the Council. When the vote was taken, the near Protestant doctrine of justification was rejected 32 to 5. His Jesuit representatives had carried the day.

Justification by faith henceforth and to our very day would be defined in the Roman Church as perceived by the Medieval Scholastics. The view of Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and the Swiss Anabaptists (and the Apostle Paul!) would be anathematized.

The following propositions on justification were anathematized by the Council of Trent. Protestant readers should be aware that these were and still are Canon Law in the Roman Church.

It is anathema to believe (the numbers refer to the actual order in the canons of the Council):

Readers are not to understand this "acquisition of the grace of justification" as that taught by the Reformers (and Paul). Both the meaning and means of justification are different in Roman Catholic theology. Justification scripturally defined by the Apostle Paul in Romans and Galatians refers to a judicial act of God whereby He declares the sinner, who places his faith solely in the work of Christ at Calvary, as righteous. This is precisely the view of the Reformers. Justification is something God does for the sinner, not something God does in the sinner. Catholics according to the Council of Trent are to view justification in the latter sense, i. e., as something God does progressively in the sinner: it is never complete or finalized. The forensic sense of the word as used in scripture is foreign to their theology and exegesis.⁹

That is, there is no assurance of justification/salvation according to the Council of Trent. This is official Roman Catholic doctrine as practitioners of that faith well know. In 1990, Cardinal O’Conner is quoted in the New York Times as saying: "Church teaching is that I do not know at any given moment what my eternal future will be. I can hope, pray, do my very best – but I still do not know. Pope John Paul does not know absolutely that he will go to heaven, nor does Mother Teresa… ."¹⁰ Contrast this with the clear statement of I John 5:13, " These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life… ." You may know beyond any shadow of doubt. You may know that you have (a present active indicative verb, meaning, you have it right now and you will continue to have) eternal life. The Bible teaches assurance of salvation/just-ification.

Paul says in II Corinthians 5:21: "He (God) has made him (Christ) to be sin, who knew no sin, that we might be made (aorist passive subjunctive verb) the righteousness of God in him." The Council of Trent affirms that this righteousness of God which the Believer has because he is in Christ is not enough nor does it have quality enough for acceptability with God. The Council insists that the righteousness of Christ must be improved upon through good works, and, even at best, it will never be enough to give the believer surety of heaven. Jesus Christ and his work at Calvary in their theology is simply not enough to accomplish salvation. In other words, works help God improve upon the righteousness of the Believer; they are the means of righteousness: whereas, the Reformers in keeping with the teachings of the Apostle Paul saw works as the result salvation, not a means to it.

The Council of Trent was a tremendous victory for the Papal cause. Not only was the ecclesiastical machinery tightened and centralized, but doctrines were more sharply defined. Medieval Scholastic theology was transformed into authoritative dogma binding on all the faithful universally. At the close, the Council requested that the Pope confirm its decisions with a Papal bull (request granted,1563). Another bull containing a summary of the faith formulated at Trent was issued in 1564: it is known as the Tridentine Profession of Faith.

Issued to be recited publicly by all bishops and beneficed clergy as well as any convert from Protestantism, it reads in part:

The breach between the Roman Catholic understanding of justification by faith and that of biblicists like the Reformers was now fixed in Canon Law. And so until and in our day. Vatican II in this century changed nothing relative to the Roman Catholic view of justification and the Mass.

At issue is the basic doctrine of salvation. How is one saved or justified before almighty God? Bible believers and the Roman Catholic Church are miles apart.

The purpose of this series is not to attack the Roman Catholic Church. I have simply attempted to trace historically the confusion and perversion of the biblical doctrine of justification from the time of Paul. That there is a very clear and important difference in biblical faith and Roman Catholic faith on this critical issue is obvious.

But the same difference could also be said of many (most?) Protestant churches. How clear is the doctrine of justification/salvation in Protestant circles? How clear is it in your local church? Dear Reader: How clear is it with you? Are you mixing works-righteousness with righteousness that comes only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his substitutionary death for your sins? This is not a minor issue: your salvation/justification before God is at stake! Paul says, "If righteousness came by works of the law (i.e., good works), then Jesus Christ died in vain!" Galatians 2:21. He further states, "By grace are you saved through faith… (it is) not of works lest any man should boast!" Ephesians 2:8,9. Believe God’s Word and be saved/justified for eternity.

Footnotes: