A month or so ago, word went out that the Papacy might be considering lifting the charge of heretic against Martin Luther. This rumor was squelched. In the course of talking about it with a friend, we were going back and forth about our feelings about Rome and the Papacy. I offered him these more personal reflections on my experiences with Rome and what a truly painful thing it is to recognize that Lutheranism and Romanism must be, and remain, separate. In light of the Pope’s coming trip to the USA, I thought I would share these thoughts, with a few modifications, more openly here:

The reason I have such strong feelings of frustration and, yes, anger,
with the errors of Romanism is precisely because there is so much in the Roman Catholic Church that
I love and cherish. "Tragic necessity" is no mere polite soundbite to me, nor to many other faithful Lutheran Christians. We cherish the Gospel that is read and heard in Roman Catholic Churches whenever and wherever it is read, or preached. We cherish the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar which is given and distributed in Roman Catholic Churches. We love and cherish these things in spite of the errors that obscure the glory and grace of God in the mercy of Christ.

I developed
close friendships with many Roman Catholics growing up in the Deep
South where Lutheran and Roman Catholics were but two sides of the same
coin in the view of Baptists, Pentecostals, etc. There was a shared history and experience of liturgy and church history that was unknown to many, if not all, Bible fundamentalists.

I attended a
Roman Catholic High School and was so deeply moved and impressed by the nuns and priests there who taught us everything from typing (thank you Sister
Mary Jean!) and drilled us to death in English and grammar (thank you
Sister Mary Margaret!). I loved Latin class when Father Pine, S.J.,
would wander in and engage in Latin with our teacher, and when he
actually corrected my writing one day, walking up and down the rows of
desks, "Ah, excuse me, Mr. McCain, but you seem to have a certain
fondness leaving your "t’s" uncrossed and your i’s undotted." As my face grew red, I was able only but to agree and say "Yes, Father. You are right."

And I recall Father
Foley regaling us with tales of youthful episodes with a
certain "fair lass" in Ireland, where he hailed from, and I recall listening to him
and Sister Mary Ellen rattle away back and forth in Gaelic, their mother tongue, the mother tongue of my ancestors as well.

And they even gave a Lutheran kid best religion student of the year award, twice in a row! And I have the warmest memories of all of the many kind notes and remembrances from the priests, sisters and brothers
who, in their own dear ways, encouraged me to become a Lutheran pastor, with quiet conversations, even whispered in some cases. We shared a love for Christ!

But as for the institution and public doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, here is where the tragic necessity of separation becomes a reality.

But
I sat seething through four years of Masses where the Gospel was
terribly obscured with all manner of nonsense that one can only imagine that would be possible in the mid-seventies, with people trying to impress teenagers
attending Mass. (It became so bad the Bishop announced he would no longer
conduct mass at our high school until the behavior in Mass got better!).

For these very personal reasons, in addition to my passion for theology, I’ve been deeply concerned and interested in Roman
Catholicism for years and feel such a kindred spirit with the Roman
Church, but also at the same time, such a heart-wrenching separation
when I watch the Gospel not really proclaimed sweetly and clearly.

Tragic necessity, indeed. Lord, have mercy.

And so, in light of the visit of the Pope to the USA, lest anyone get too caught up in the moment, or forget precisely why we continue to reject the Papacy and its claims, we need to remember that the Roman Catholic
Church still insists that it is the one, true church on earth and that all
other Christian communities are either defective (the East) or not
church at all (all us Reformation types).

I am not at all bothered by
the Pope’s pronouncement, actually quite pleased by such refreshing
clarity and integrity in the expression of Rome’s position: open and
honest. Too bad liberal Lutherans can’t be as forthcoming at times. It
is troubling that there are groups about that stand for one thing, but
hide their positions so as to try to deceive and mislead people.

So, big news! The Pope is a Roman Catholic!
Here is the official statment from the vatican. Click through to the
extended version to read it. And then, when you are finished reading
the document, read the Smalcald Articles
and the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope for a sound,
Biblical and Gospel-centered refutation of these false claims.

Read more…

OK, here’s an image you usually don’t associate with Roman Catholic Marian piety, and practices, which some might prefer to refer to as Mariolotry. This is a new on me. I present Mary: Exterminatrix of Heresies. And, no, I’m not making this up. I got this from a Roman Catholic blog site and confirmed that this is legitimate.

What is so painfully difficult for those of us who subscribe to the Book of Concord, unconditionally and without reservation, is that the Bishop of Rome and those who regard him as the Vicar of Christ on earth, are our separated brethren. As we Lutherans clearly and repeatedly confess, through even the darkest years of the Roman Church’s history, the Gospel was still read, the Body and Blood of Christ was still received by communicants, and by God’s providence, even in the midst of the darkness of Christ-obscuring error, the Gospel still shone forth, for the Word of the Lord endures forever. That is why it is all the more painful that the Church of Rome still continues to propagate such deeply anti-Gospel teachings.

To any extent that Martin Luther is regarded as less of a heretic by the Roman Catholic Church, we can be glad and rejoice, for to that degree then the writings of Luther will be read and studied and the Holy Spirit can, and will, work through the pure Gospel therein proclaimed to move hearts away from the errors of Rome and into the light of the truth of Christ. For this we can give thanks and rejoice and pray ever more fervently for the unity of the Church, a unity not consisting of compromise and faithless neglect of the truth, but a unity rooted, grounded and growing in the Truth of God’s most Holy Word.

We can all rejoice in any progress away from the traditional errors that still are very much in place, but we dare not forget, neglect the fact that the Bishop of Rome, in his role as Cardinal Ratzinger, was very careful to make it clear that the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification did not, in any way, change, alter or set aside the historic condemnations of the Council of Trent over against the Lutheran doctrine of justification.

Let’s be careful not to forget what Trent declared over against the Gospel:

CANON 9:  "If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."

CANON 12:  "If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified … let him be accursed."

Canon 14: "If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

Canon 24:  "If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema."

Canon 30:  "If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema."

Canon 33:  "If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.

Here is an excellent Q/A on the issue of Rome, Lutheranism and Justification:

Q. I would like to understand the main problem your church body has with the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (signed October 31 by representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church). Is it the fact that it implies that we are saved as a result of both faith and works?

A. Yes, you are on the right track here. The recently signed Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ) does not signal a change in the Roman Catholic church, but rather, a willingness on the part of the Lutherans who signed it to allow Rome’s doctrine of justification to stand as a valid interpretation of what the Bible teaches us about justification. This is something that the Lutheran church has never done before, and in fact, it is a great tragedy and a profoundly sad moment in the history of Lutheranism.

Rome historically has always taught that we are saved by grace, and grace alone. They emphasize that very strongly. The 16th century Council of Trent makes this point very clear. Thus, there is nothing new on this in the Declaration on this point, even though some Lutherans have made it sound as if Rome’s words about grace signal some marvelous breakthrough.

What you probably have not heard is that the JDDJ very carefully avoid precise definitions of the words grace, faith, sin, etc. That is no accident. Careful definition of those terms would have shown how far apart our two churches actually are on the doctrine of justification.

The problem with Rome’s view of justification is that they view it as a process, whereby we cooperate with God’s grace in order to merit eternal life for ourselves, and even for others (that is a paraphrase of what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches). They view grace as a sort of "substance" that God infuses into us that permits us to do those works that are necessary in order that we might earn more grace. The Bible describes grace as the loving and favorable disposition of God; in other words, grace is all about what God is doing and giving.

We distinguish between the result of justification, which is the Christian life, and the work of God to save us. Rome mixes sanctification with justification. Why is this view troublesome? Because it teaches that something other than trust in Christ is necessary for or salvation. That "something other" is what we bring to the table. And the only thing we do bring to the table is our sin, not our good works. Our works are a response that God works in us, but not a contributing cause to our justification.

The Roman Catholic Church is very careful to state that even this "something other" is made possibly only because God has given us the "initial" grace to desire more grace. But in practical reality, it is apparent that the Roman Catholic Church is finally throwing people back on relying on what they are doing, or can do, to merit eternal life. When we mix in our works in the picture of our salvation, the glory and merit of Christ always end up becoming obscured.

But the Bible is clear that it is purely by grace, not by works, or else grace would just be a "help" for us to do the works that finally are what merit God’s forgiveness. In the Roman Catholic view, justification is a process by which we participate with God in achieving our salvation. The Biblical view is that justification is God’s declaration of our complete righteousness and total forgiveness, apart from any works. This gift is received by faith alone–apart from works (Rom. 3:28; Eph. 2:8-9).

Another point to be made is this: If, in fact, Rome does teach justification as the Bible teaches it, then there should be an immediate change in its view of indulgences, prayer to the saints and the myriad of other extra-biblical traditions that it has embraced. For if justification is the heart and center of the Bible, then these other things are incompatible with it.

I hope this helps you see that the Roman Catholic view of justification and the classical Lutheran view are definitely not complementary, but diametrically opposed to one another. The JDDJ did not change that fact. The Lutherans who signed the document did not insist on careful definition of terms so as to make absolutely clear that our salvation is by faith alone, through Christ alone, by grace alone.

The best short study of the historic differences between Rome and Lutheranism on the doctrine of justification is available in a book called "Justification and Rome" by Robert Preus. You may purchase a copy of this book from Concordia Publishing House (CPH) (800-325-3040).

The most complete treatment of this subject is in the 16th century Lutheran response to Trent, which still stands today as the best and most complete treatment of Trent by a Lutheran. It is "The Examination of the Council of Trent" by Martin Chemnitz, also available through CPH.

And here is a superbly done analysis of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification which shows how, tragically, Lutherans compromised the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I’m fairly certain Martin Luther would actually not be in favor of lifting the label of "heretic" unless and until the Papacy granted the points he makes in the Smalcald Articles about the absolute "non-negotiables" that shall always separate the Biblical Gospel confession of Lutheranism from the teachings of Rome. Here is an interesting story. And so while we pray fervently for the unity of the Church, we must remember that before Christ prayed for unity, he prayed his followers would continue steadfast in the Truth. This will give us all a chance once more to study carefully, reflect deeply and ponder anew the meaning of the Reformation. Here’s the book for that.

That Martin Luther? He wasn’t so bad, says Pope

Pope Benedict XVI is to rehabilitate Martin Luther, arguing that he did not
intend to split Christianity but only to purge the Church of corrupt
practices.

Pope Benedict will issue his findings on Luther (1483-1546) in September after
discussing him at his annual seminar of 40 fellow theologians — known
as the Ratzinger Sch�lerkreis — at Castelgandolfo, the papal summer
residence. According to Vatican insiders the Pope will argue that Luther,
who was excommunicated and condemned for heresy, was not a heretic.

Cardinal Walter Kasper, the head of the pontifical Council for Promoting
Christian Unity, said the move would help to promote ecumenical dialogue
between Catholics and Protestants. It is also designed to counteract the
impact of July’s papal statement describing the Protestant and Orthodox
faiths as defective and “not proper Churches”.

The move to re-evaluate Luther is part of a drive to soften Pope Benedict’s
image as an arch conservative hardliner as he approaches the third
anniversary of his election next month. This week it emerged that the
Vatican is planning to erect a statue of Galileo, who also faced a heresy
trial, to mark the 400th anniversary next year of his discovery of the
telescope.

The Pope has also reached out to the Muslim world to mend fences after his
2006 speech at Regensburg University in which he appeared to describe Islam
as inherently violent and irrational. This week Muslim scholars and Vatican
officials met at the pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue in Rome
to begin laying the groundwork for a meeting between the Pope and leading
Muslims, also expected to be held at Castelgandolfo.

Cardinal Kasper said: “We have much to learn from Luther, beginning with the
importance he attached to the word of God.” It was time for a “more
positive” view of Luther, whose reforms had aroused papal ire at the time
but could now be seen as having “anticipated aspects of reform which the
Church has adopted over time”.

The Castelgandolfo seminar will in part focus on the question of apostolic
succession, through which the apostles passed on the authority they received
from Jesus to the first bishops. After the Reformation Protestants took the
view that “succession” referred only to God’s Word and not to church
hierarchies but some German scholars have suggested Luther himself did not
intend this.

Luther challenged the authority of the papacy by holding that the Bible is the
sole source of religious authority and made it accessible to ordinary people
by translating it into the vernacular. He became convinced that the Church
had lost sight of the “central truths of Christianity”, and was appalled on
a visit to Rome in 1510 by the power, wealth and corruption of the papacy.

In 1517 he protested publicly against the sale of papal indulgences for the
remission of sins in his “95 Theses”, nailing a copy to the door of a
Wittenberg church. Some theologians argue that Luther did not intend to
confront the papacy “in a doctrinaire way” but only to raise legitimate
questions – a view Pope Benedict apparently shares.

Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X, who dismissed him initially as “a
drunken German who will change his mind when sober”.

Source

In another reminder that Rome is still Rome, comes a report that alleged bits of bones of the three wise men will be on display in the Tucson, Arizona. The Apostolate for Holy Relics is co-sponsoring the visit along with an area Knights of Columbus group. I’m sure even many good Roman Catholics would beg to differ with Mr. Garcia who exclaimed, "This is the closest I’m going to get to God in my physical lifetime,"
said Arizona Knights of Columbus spokesman John Garcia. "And since this
is a time of Christmas, it puts us closer in touch with the birth of
Christ."

No, Mr. Garcia, the closest you are ever going to be to Christ is when you receive Him in Word and Sacrament.

But, wait! There’s more to be seen. From the article:

The exhibit is also expected to feature relics from the manger,
fabric from the Virgin Mary’s veil and Joseph’s coat, and a bone
fragment from St. Elizabeth, who was the Virgin Mary’s ninth cousin. "It’s a tangible thread between heaven and Earth," said Thomas
Serafin, a lay Catholic who is president of the Apostolate for Holy
Relics.

Well at least, as far as I can tell, they are not asking people to pay for it, but….this story illustrates the fact, which some unfortunately today wish to sidestep, that Rome is still very much Rome. We can rejoice in all the signs of the work of the Holy Spirit in Roman Catholicism, wherever and whenever the pure Gospel is read or proclaimed and received in trusting faith, but it remains true that, precisely for the sake of the Gospel, we must continue clearly to reject and condemn the errors of Rome, exemplified in the latest announcement from the Vatican, which is offering a plenary indulgence in connection with the alleged Marian apparition in Lourdes, France.  

Here is a quote from the story:

"The first way to obtain the indulgence is to visit the following
places in Lourdes between December 8, 2007 and December 8, 2008,
preferably in the order suggested: (1) the parish baptistery used for
the Baptism of Bernadette, (2) the Soubirous family home, known as the
‘cachot,’ (3) the Grotto of Massabielle, (4) the chapel of the hospice
where Bernadette received First Communion, and on each occasion they
pause for an appropriate length of time in prayer and with pious
meditations, concluding with the recital of the Our Father, the
Profession of Faith, … and the jubilee prayer or other Marian
invocation."

If the faithful are not in Lourdes, but wish to receive the plenary
indulgence, then during the week of the anniversary of the first
apparition, which is the week of  February 2, 2008 through February 11,
2008, and they must visit “in any church, grotto or decorous place, the
blessed image of that same Virgin of Lourdes, solemnly exposed for
public veneration, and before the image participate in a pious exercise
of Marian devotion, or at least pause for an appropriate space of time
in prayer and with pious meditations, concluding with the recital of
the Our Father, the Profession of Faith, … and the invocation of the
Blessed Virgin Mary."

There is also a provision for those who are unable to fulfill the
previous two ways of obtaining the indulgence. Those who "through
sickness, old age or other legitimate reason are unable to leave their
homes, may still obtain the Plenary Indulgence … if, with the soul
completely removed from attachment to any form of sin and with the
intention of observing, as soon as they can, the usual three
conditions, on the days February 2 to 11, 2008, in their hearts they
spiritually visit the above-mentioned places and recite those prayers,
trustingly offering to God, through Mary, the sickness and discomforts
of their lives."

Why does the Reformation remain necessary? Here is but the latest example. This is not surprising, actually. It is just a natural extension of the anti-Gospel theology that remains in the Roman Catholic Church. Thanks be to God that in spite of such errors the Gospel is heard in Romanism, but it continues to be deeply obscured by Rome’s errors. What is even more sad is watching Lutherans, who of all people should know better, not understand why Rome is still wrong, deeply wrong. A friend recently observed that there are a certain kind of Lutherans who finally simply can not ever confess the truth and take a stand for the specific doctrinal truths of God’s Word because they have undergone a dogmatic labotomy. It was an interesting comment, a bit harsh to be sure, but interesting nonetheless.

First Things knocks one out of the park….

By Robert T. Miller

Monday, August 20, 2007,  7:07 AM

The recent pronouncement by the Bishop of Rome (see post below for the complete text) errs most fundamentally in that it repeats the Bishop’s claim that he, by divine right, is above all bishops and pastors in the Church on earth. And he claims that this understanding of papal primacy and power is of the very essence of the Church, to the point that those churches that do not acknowledge and agree with his claim are either defective or not Church in the proper sense. This claim is nothing new, but has been the claim of the Roman bishop since the time of the early Middle Ages. While the Bishop of Rome was acknowledged from very early on as having a certain sort of "first among equals" status in the Western Church, due to the fact that Rome was the place where both Peter and Paul were martyred, the claim that he has universal primacy was not taught, or accepted, by the Early Church, and has always been rejected by the Church in the East. The single best refutation of the Roman bishop’s claims is the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, which rightly rejects this claim as godless and pernicious. I encourage you to read this Treatise. I’m posting the entire text of the Treatise in the extended entry.

Read more…

For the sake of a blogging friend who hates it when "old guys" like me try to sound cool, I added the "kicking it" phrase just to make him grind his teeth.
The Vatican is about to release a statement indicating that the celebration of the 16th Century Tridentine Mass is kosher again throughout the Roman communion. Previously, it required special dispensation of the local bishop to celebrate it and many Roman Catholic bishops have not permitted it in their dioceses. The Vatican statement would be a Papal "indult" as it is called allowing priests everywhere to celebrate the Tridentine Mass without the permission of their bishop. The big question still remains: will the Pope put any conditions on his indult, or not? The "Motu proprio," as this kind of statement is called, has been written and is being translated. It apparently has already been leaked, in Spanish, in Central America. This is all the buzz on many Roman Catholic blogs, which I enjoy monitoring. The Old Order Mass is the Mass form that was used throughout Roman Catholicism up until Vatican II introduced the New Order mass. I have attended many New Order masses, while I was a student at a Roman Catholic High School, and at friends’ churches, and I have always been struck by how insipid and banal it is in many respects, to be fair, in terms of style, no different from how poorly the Lutheran Divine Service is conducted at far too many Lutheran congregations. The Old Order mass is the form of the Mass against which Luther speaks out so powerfully in the Smalcald Articles. This is a prime opportunity for Lutherans to assert the Evangelical treasures of the Scriptures. With a Vatican approval of the Old Order of the Mass Rome will  once again clearly demonstrate that in spite of all the romanticizing done by Lutheran ecumenists about how Rome has "changed" and how it has now again "embraced the Gospel," it is in fact just the same old, same old Romanism. Interestingly, this call for the old Latin Mass is coming from younger catholics.

Dr. Erich Heidenreich provides this very cogent and well informed response to Rob Koons, a professor of philosophy, and a LCMS professor, who recently converted to Romanism. Koons has made available his explanation of his conversion. Erich asked me to "tackle" this issue on Cyberbrethren, but frankly, after reading his critique and response to a number of Koon’s point, I feel he has done a very fine job indeed. By the way, here is another good response to Koons. Dr. Heidenreich’s comments pertain to an earlier version of Koons paper which he had circulated to some mutual friends, and Erich was asked to respond to it. But the points Erich makes are all quite valid and very well done. He write:

Koons’ points in caps, to which I respond:

1) "ALL ISSUES OTHER THAN JUSTIFICATION ARE SECONDARY"

- We all agree that the Gospel exists in all Christian denominations.
Otherwise they would not be Christian.
- But the Gospel is contaminated and contradicted by secondary
doctrines in other churches.
- Only one confession can have the pure doctrine (since they all
differ), and this doctrine must be unadulterated in its official
confession.
- The doctrine of Justification cannot be separated from the whole of
doctrine, including those considered "secondary."

Read more…

A number of years ago somehow my name and home addresss made its way on to a Roman Catholic mailing list, and, as these things go, my name was passed to other RC charities, and now I regularly receive fund raising requests from various Roman Catholic charities. Today a particularly interesting one came in the mail. It is a stark reminder that for all the fine-sounding words we hear coming from certain corners in Romanism, when it comes down to it, it is, literally, "business" as usual–the business of selling masses, merits and works. The mailing I received came from the Marianist order of priests and contained a memorial card to use to give to a friend or loved one who has  had a death in the family. The fund raising letter urges you to use the card, by sending in money to the order. In the center of the card is a "Memorial Remembrance." It states: "Perpetual Membership in the Marianist Spiritual Alliance has been conferred upon (fill in the blank) who will share forever in the Masses, Prayers, and Good Works of the Marianists. Requested by (fill in the blank). And it is signed "Father Pat" Father Patrick Tonry, SM, Spiritual Director." If that were not troubling enough, it is shocking that nowhere in the card is there any word of Christ and the Gospel. There is a picture of Jesus standing in clouds, but the card nowhere mentions a word about the Resurrection of Christ. It indicates simply that many people see death as an ending, but "religious people" know that death is just the beginning of eternal life. The inside cover of the memorial card states that paying for a loved one’s "Perpetual Membership" in the Marianist Spiritual alliance will bring with it the guarantee of "One holy Mass offered each day of the year for those enrolled" and the promise that every Marianist Priest offers four masses every year for all the enrolled. It is very important for us to keep these things in mind whenever we are tempted to think that Rome really has taken a turn for the better. In fact, it is just, literally, business as usual: the same old anti-Gospel confession and teachings of Rome against which the Lutheran Confessions speak out so forcefully and reject and condemn. Why? Because the grace and glory of Christ is horribly obscured and set aside when people are led to place their hope, and find their comfort, in the good works of another human being. This is false and damning doctrine indeed. And, it just so happens I receive this mailing the day before the anniversary on which the Edict of Worms was issued, declaring Luther a heretic and public criminal, subject to the death penalty wherever he went and at any time. Yes, it’s business as usual. But thanks be to God through our Lord Jesus Christ, is still the pure, free, true Gospel, as usual, that provides the antidote to Rome’s legalism and that inherent legalist inside each of us that would have us believe that we must "do something" in an effort to placate God and earn His favor. Christ has done it all, for us.

Perhaps some of you have heard that the president of the Evangelical Theology Society, Frank Beckwith, has returned to the Roman church of which he was a part earlier in his life. It’s always sad to hear about a person turning his back on the pure and sweet Gospel to exchange it for the clouded and distorted version one finds in Rome, with whom we Lutherans have so much in common and yet, precisely to the extent we do, find our differences over the heart of the Gospel so serious and so painful. Dr. Gene Edward Veith has an excellent reflection on Beckwith’s departure.

I just popped over to the Vatican’s web site and noticed that nearly two years ago the Roman Church issues a "compendium" to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. The compendium is a condensed version of the much, much larger Catechism proper. I never noticed it before. I went to see how they summarize Justification and was particularly struck by how Rome has not changed a bit, when it comes down to it, that man does, and must, merit for himself grace in order to be saved. Oh, sure, it is couched in gentler terminology, etc. but Rome is Rome is Rome is Rome. I’m no sure how best to put this, but…anyone who actually believes that the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification was any sort of compromise or change on Rome’s part is simply out of touch with reality. All the same Roman definitions and understandings are fully intact! Where is the "great breakthrough"?

426. What is merit?

2006-2010
2025-2026

In general merit refers to the right to recompense for a good deed. With regard
to God, we of ourselves are not able to merit anything, having received
everything freely from him. However, God gives us the possibility of acquiring
merit through union with the love of Christ, who is the source of our merits
before God. The merits for good works, therefore must be attributed in the first
place to the grace of God and then to the free will of man.

427. What are the goods that we can merit?

2010-2011
2027

Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others the graces
needed for our sanctification and for the attainment of eternal life. Even
temporal goods, suitable for us, can be merited in accordance with the plan of
God. No one, however, can merit the initial grace which is at the origin
of conversion and justification.