Justification and the Mass

What you'll learn

Explain the Council of Trent's teaching on justification from Session 6, including the key canons, and contrast it with Romans and Galatians
Distinguish infused righteousness from imputed righteousness and explain why the difference matters for assurance, purgatory and indulgences
Evaluate the Catholic teaching on the Mass as a sacrifice and transubstantiation in light of Hebrews and John 6

Trent on justification

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) was Rome's formal response to the Reformation. Session 6 (1547) issued a decree of sixteen chapters and thirty-three canons on justification. In the decree, Rome teaches that justification is not only the forgiveness of sins but 'the sanctification and renewal of the interior man' (chapter 7; CCC 1989). The 'single formal cause' of justification is the righteousness of God by which he makes us righteous, poured into us (infused). Faith is 'the beginning of human salvation' (chapter 8), but justification is received in baptism (CCC 1992), increased by good works, lost through mortal sin, and restored through penance (chapter 14). (You met justification by faith alone in Know Your Faith, Lesson 7, and in Doctrines Under Fire, Lesson 3; here we read Rome's answer in its own words.)

The canons pronounce anathema (a solemn condemnation, excommunication from the church) on those who teach otherwise. Learn these in summary:

Catholic friends sometimes say these anathemas no longer apply. In 1999 the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, which says that Trent's condemnations do not apply to the Lutheran teaching as it is presented in that document (JDDJ 41). But the same document adds: 'Nothing is thereby taken away from the seriousness of the condemnations related to the doctrine of justification' (JDDJ 42). Trent's decree has not been withdrawn, and the Catechism still teaches infused, increasable justification (CCC 1989-1992, 2010). So the canons remain the right place to start.

Canon 9: anathema on anyone who says the ungodly is justified by faith alone, meaning nothing else is required to cooperate in obtaining justification.
Canon 11: anathema on anyone who says people are justified by the imputation of Christ's righteousness alone or by forgiveness of sins alone, excluding grace and charity poured into hearts, or that justifying grace is only the favour of God.
Canon 12: anathema on anyone who says justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake.
Canon 24: anathema on anyone who says the righteousness received is not preserved and increased by good works, but that works are only the fruits and signs of justification.
Canon 30: anathema on anyone who says that after the grace of justification no debt of temporal punishment remains to be paid in this world or in purgatory.
Canon 32: anathema on anyone who says the good works of the justified do not truly merit an increase of grace, eternal life and an increase of glory.

Explain in your own words what the Council of Trent taught about justification.Show answer

Trent taught that justification is not only forgiveness but also the sanctification and inner renewal of the person, with its formal cause being God's righteousness poured into (infused into) us. Faith is the beginning of salvation, but justification is received in baptism, increased by good works, lost through mortal sin and restored through penance. So justification is a process that can grow, be lost and be regained.

forgiveness plus inner renewal
infused righteousness
received in baptism, increased by works
lost by mortal sin, restored by penance

Choose two of Trent's canons on justification and explain what Reformed teaching each one condemns.Show answer

Canon 9 pronounces anathema (a solemn condemnation) on anyone who says the ungodly is justified by faith alone with nothing else required to cooperate, which directly condemns sola fide. Canon 24 condemns anyone who says good works are only the fruits and signs of justification rather than preserving and increasing it, which is exactly the Reformed view of works. Other canons condemn imputation alone (11) and deny that no temporal punishment remains (30).

anathema = solemn condemnation
canon 9 condemns faith alone
canon 24 condemns works as fruit
canon 11 condemns imputation alone

A Catholic friend says the 1999 Joint Declaration cancelled Trent's anathemas. How would you answer accurately?Show answer

The Joint Declaration, signed in 1999 by the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation, says Trent's condemnations do not apply to the Lutheran teaching as presented in that document. But it also says that nothing is taken away from the seriousness of the condemnations on justification (JDDJ 42). Trent's decree has never been withdrawn, and the Catechism still teaches an infused justification that can increase, so Trent remains Rome's teaching.

JDDJ 1999, Catholic-Lutheran
condemnations said not to apply to that text
'nothing is taken away' (JDDJ 42)
Trent never withdrawn; CCC still teaches infused justification

Infused versus imputed righteousness

Here is the heart of the matter. Infused righteousness is righteousness placed into the believer, making him inwardly righteous, so that God declares him righteous because he is (increasingly) righteous. Imputed righteousness is Christ's perfect righteousness counted or credited to the believer's account, so that God declares him righteous because of Christ, while he is still in himself a sinner.

Paul uses the language of crediting: 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness' (Romans 4:3). God 'justifies the ungodly' (4:5), not the made-godly. David speaks of the blessing of the one 'to whom God counts righteousness apart from works' (4:6). Christ 'became to us... righteousness' (1 Corinthians 1:30), and we become 'the righteousness of God' in him (2 Corinthians 5:21). Sanctification, being made holy, is real and necessary, and it always follows justification, but it is not its ground. The Reformed say good works are the fruit and evidence of justification, precisely what canon 24 anathematises.

The practical stakes are enormous. If my standing rests on infused righteousness that can be lost, I can never be sure I am in a state of grace (Trent, Session 6, chapter 9, denies that anyone can know with the certainty of faith that he has obtained God's grace, and chapter 12 says that without special revelation no one can know he is among the predestined). If it rests on Christ's righteousness credited to me, I have 'peace with God' (Romans 5:1) and 'no condemnation' (Romans 8:1).

What is the difference between infused and imputed righteousness, and which does Paul's language in Romans 4 support?Show answer

Infused righteousness is placed into the believer so that God declares him righteous because he is becoming inwardly righteous. Imputed righteousness is Christ's perfect righteousness credited to the believer, so God declares him righteous because of Christ while he is still a sinner in himself. Paul uses crediting language: Abraham's faith 'was counted to him as righteousness', and God 'justifies the ungodly' (Romans 4:3-6), supported by 2 Corinthians 5:21.

infused: made inwardly righteous
imputed: Christ's righteousness credited
'counted' in Romans 4
God justifies the ungodly

Why are the practical stakes of this difference so enormous for assurance?Show answer

If my standing rests on infused righteousness that can be lost, I can never be sure I am in a state of grace, and Trent itself denies that anyone can know with the certainty of faith that he has obtained God's grace. If my standing rests on Christ's righteousness credited to me, I have peace with God and no condemnation (Romans 5:1; 8:1). Sanctification is real and necessary, but it follows justification rather than being its ground.

infused righteousness can be lost
Trent denies certainty of grace
imputed gives peace (Romans 5:1)
sanctification follows justification

Galatians and James

Paul's letter to the Galatians was written against people who affirmed Christ but added a required work, circumcision. Paul says adding even one work as a condition of justification is 'a different gospel' (Galatians 1:6-9) and that 'if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose' (2:21). Catholics reply that Paul excludes 'works of the law', meaning Jewish ceremonial markers, not grace-enabled good works. But Paul's argument in Romans 4:4-5 is about working in general: 'to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift.'

James 2:24 says 'a person is justified by works and not by faith alone'. This is the Catholic's favourite text. James is answering a different question: what kind of faith saves? A dead faith that produces no works (2:17) is not real faith. James uses 'justified' in the sense of 'shown to be righteous', as Abraham's offering of Isaac (Genesis 22) demonstrated the faith by which he was already counted righteous decades earlier (Genesis 15:6). Faith alone justifies, but the faith that justifies is never alone.

How does Galatians answer the Catholic claim that Paul only excludes Jewish ceremonial 'works of the law'?Show answer

Galatians was written against people who affirmed Christ but added one required work, circumcision, and Paul calls that 'a different gospel' and says that if righteousness came through the law, Christ died for nothing. Catholics reply that Paul excludes only Jewish ceremonial markers, not grace-enabled good works. But in Romans 4:4-5 Paul's argument is about working in general: to the one who works, wages are not a gift.

adding one work = different gospel
Christ died for nothing (2:21)
Romans 4:4-5 about working in general

How would you answer someone who says James 2:24 refutes faith alone?Show answer

James is answering a different question: what kind of faith saves? Dead faith that produces no works is not real faith (2:17). James uses 'justified' in the sense of 'shown to be righteous', as Abraham's offering of Isaac demonstrated the faith by which he had been counted righteous decades earlier (Genesis 15:6). Faith alone justifies, but the faith that justifies is never alone.

different question: what faith saves
dead faith is not real faith
'justified' = shown righteous
faith alone, but never alone

Purgatory and indulgences

The Catechism teaches that those who die in God's grace but 'still imperfectly purified' are assured of salvation but undergo purification after death to achieve holiness needed for heaven; the Church calls this purgatory (CCC 1030-1031). It cites 2 Maccabees 12:46 and the practice of praying for the dead (CCC 1032), and 1 Corinthians 3:15.

An indulgence is 'a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven', obtained through the Church, which dispenses and applies 'the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints' (CCC 1471). Indulgences may be partial or plenary (full). They are no longer sold, but the doctrine remains.

Biblically, Christ's one sacrifice 'perfected for all time those who are being sanctified' (Hebrews 10:14). To die is to be 'with Christ' (Philippians 1:23), 'at home with the Lord' (2 Corinthians 5:8). 1 Corinthians 3:15 concerns the testing of ministers' work at judgment day, not a place of purification for sins. If Christ bore the punishment for our sins, no punishment remains for us to pay (Romans 8:1; Isaiah 53:5).

How does the Catechism define purgatory and indulgences?Show answer

Purgatory is a purification after death for those who die in God's grace but still imperfectly purified, so they reach the holiness needed for heaven (CCC 1030-1031). An indulgence is a remission of the temporal punishment due to sins already forgiven, obtained through the Church as it applies the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints (CCC 1471). Indulgences are no longer sold, but the doctrine remains.

purification after death
for the saved but imperfectly purified
indulgence remits temporal punishment
treasury of merits; doctrine remains

Which texts would you use to answer the doctrine of purgatory, and how?Show answer

Hebrews 10:14 says Christ's single offering has perfected for all time those being sanctified, and Paul says to die is to be with Christ, at home with the Lord (Philippians 1:23; 2 Corinthians 5:8). The Catholic text 1 Corinthians 3:15 concerns the testing of ministers' work at judgment day, not a place of purification for sin. If Christ bore the punishment for our sins, no punishment remains for us to pay (Romans 8:1; Isaiah 53:5).

one offering perfects (Hebrews 10:14)
at death, with Christ
1 Corinthians 3:15 is about ministers' work
Christ bore the punishment

The Mass as sacrifice

Trent's Session 22 (1562) taught that in the Mass the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the cross is contained and offered in an unbloody manner, and that this sacrifice is truly propitiatory (it turns away God's wrath) for the living and the dead (chapter 2; canons 1 and 3). The Catechism says 'the sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice', with only the manner of offering different (CCC 1367). Catholics insist Christ is not re-crucified; the one sacrifice is made present (re-presented).

Hebrews stresses the once-for-all nature of Christ's offering: he offered himself 'once for all' (7:27), not 'repeatedly' (9:25), and 'by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified' (10:14). Hebrews 10:18 concludes: where there is forgiveness, 'there is no longer any offering for sin'. A daily propitiatory offering, however described, implies the work is not complete. Christ, our high priest, 'sat down' (10:12) because the work was finished.

What does Rome teach about the Mass as a sacrifice, and how does Hebrews answer it?Show answer

Trent taught that in the Mass the same Christ once offered on the cross is offered in an unbloody manner as a truly propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead, and the Catechism calls them one single sacrifice; Catholics say it is re-presented, not repeated. Hebrews stresses that Christ offered himself once for all, not repeatedly, perfecting his people by a single offering, so that 'there is no longer any offering for sin' (10:18). A daily propitiatory offering implies the work is incomplete, but Christ 'sat down' because it was finished.

Mass a propitiatory sacrifice
're-presented', not re-crucified
once for all (Hebrews 7:27; 10:14)
Christ sat down: work finished

Transubstantiation and John 6

Trent (Session 13, 1551) defined transubstantiation: by consecration, the whole substance of bread and wine changes into the body and blood of Christ, while the appearances (the 'accidents') remain (CCC 1376). Christ is present 'truly, really, and substantially' (CCC 1374), so the consecrated host is worshipped (CCC 1378).

Catholics point to John 6:53, 'unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.' But in context, eating is coming and believing: 'whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst' (6:35). Compare 6:40 (everyone who looks on the Son and believes has eternal life) with 6:54 (whoever feeds on my flesh has eternal life): same result, so believing is the feeding. Jesus explains, 'the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life' (6:63). The Last Supper had not yet been instituted. Reformed Christians, following Calvin, hold that Christ is truly and spiritually present to believers in the Supper by the Spirit; many other evangelicals hold a memorial view.

What is transubstantiation?Show answer

Trent defined transubstantiation as the change, at consecration, of the whole substance of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, while the appearances (the 'accidents') remain. Christ is held to be present truly, really and substantially. That is why the consecrated host is worshipped (CCC 1378).

whole substance changes
appearances remain
real, substantial presence
host is worshipped

How does the context of John 6 show that 'eating' Christ's flesh means believing in him?Show answer

Jesus says whoever comes to him will not hunger and whoever believes will not thirst (6:35). Verse 40 promises eternal life to everyone who looks on the Son and believes, and verse 54 promises the same result to whoever feeds on his flesh, so believing is the feeding. Jesus explains that his words are spirit and life (6:63), and the Last Supper had not yet been instituted; the Reformed hold that Christ is truly and spiritually present to believers in the Supper by the Spirit.

coming and believing (6:35)
6:40 and 6:54 give the same result
words are spirit and life (6:63)
Supper not yet instituted

In their own words

“Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man; it is conferred in Baptism.” (CCC 1989, 1992; Council of Trent, Session 6, ch. 7)

“No one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, but moved by the Holy Spirit we can merit for ourselves and others the graces needed for sanctification and for attaining eternal life.” (CCC 2010; Trent Session 6, canon 32)

“All who die in God's grace and friendship but still imperfectly purified are assured of eternal salvation, but after death undergo purification to achieve the holiness necessary to enter heaven.” (CCC 1030-1031)

“The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice; only the manner of offering is different, and the sacrifice is truly propitiatory.” (CCC 1367; Trent Session 22, ch. 2 and canon 3)

“By the consecration the whole substance of the bread becomes the substance of the body of Christ, and of the wine his blood; the Church calls this change transubstantiation.” (CCC 1376; Trent Session 13, ch. 4)

Key texts

Romans 4:3-8: Righteousness is 'counted' to the one who 'does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly'. The key text for imputation.
Romans 5:1: Justified by faith, we have peace with God now. Basis for assurance that Trent denies.
Galatians 2:16-21: No one is justified by works of the law but through faith in Christ; if righteousness came by law, Christ died for nothing.
2 Corinthians 5:21: The great exchange: our sin to Christ, his righteousness to us.
Hebrews 10:10-14, 18: Christ's single offering perfects forever; where sins are forgiven there is no longer any offering for sin. Answers the Mass and purgatory.
John 6:35, 40, 47, 63: Coming and believing parallel eating and drinking; Jesus' words are 'spirit and life'.
James 2:14-26: Rome's main proof text; James shows true faith is living and vindicated by works, not that works are the ground of justification.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“James 2:24 explicitly says 'not by faith alone'. The only place 'faith alone' appears in Scripture, it's denied!”Show a response

James is right, and so is Paul. James denies that a faith that is mere intellectual assent ('even the demons believe', 2:19) justifies. He is asking what kind of faith is real, and he uses 'justified' in the sense of 'shown righteous', as his own example proves: Abraham was counted righteous in Genesis 15:6, and decades later his offering of Isaac in Genesis 22 vindicated that faith. Paul uses the same example to show Abraham was counted righteous before any work (Romans 4:1-5, 10). The Reformers never taught that a faith without works saves; they taught that the faith which justifies is never alone. Trent's canon 24 condemns exactly this: that works are the fruit and sign of justification rather than a cause of its increase.

“Catholics don't believe in salvation by works. We are saved by grace. Canon 1 of Trent anathematises anyone who says we can be justified by our own works without grace.”Show a response

That is true and important; Trent does reject Pelagianism. The question is not grace versus works but whether grace works through our cooperation so that our justification increases and our works truly merit eternal life (canon 32). The Galatian error was not Pelagian; they also believed in Christ and grace, but added a required work. Paul calls that a different gospel (1:6-9). In Rome's system, grace enables me to merit, and my final salvation depends on remaining in a state of grace through the sacraments. In the biblical gospel, Christ's merit is credited to me as a gift, and my works flow from a justification already complete.

“The Mass doesn't re-sacrifice Christ. It re-presents the one sacrifice of Calvary, outside time, just as the Passover made the Exodus present to every generation.”Show a response

I appreciate that distinction; Catholics do not believe Christ dies again. But Trent still calls the Mass a 'truly propitiatory' sacrifice offered for the sins of the living and the dead (Session 22, ch. 2, canon 3), applied repeatedly, with its benefits needing to be obtained again and again. Hebrews' argument is that repetition is the mark of the old, ineffective system (10:1-4, 11) and that Christ's work is finished: he 'sat down' (10:12), and 'there is no longer any offering for sin' (10:18). The Passover remembered the Exodus; it did not re-offer the Exodus. The Lord's Supper proclaims Christ's death (1 Corinthians 11:26); it does not offer it.

“In John 6, Jesus' disciples left because he was speaking literally. If he was speaking symbolically, he would have called them back to explain.”Show a response

The disciples left because they took him in a crude, fleshly way, and Jesus explicitly corrects them: 'It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life' (John 6:63). He then says the real problem is unbelief: 'there are some of you who do not believe' (6:64). The whole discourse began with people seeking physical bread (6:26) and Jesus redirecting them to believe (6:29, 35). Even on a Catholic reading, transubstantiation was not yet instituted, and the disciples could not have eaten his flesh that day; the life Jesus promises in 6:47 comes to 'whoever believes'.

“Imputed righteousness is a legal fiction. If God declares a sinner righteous when he isn't, God is pretending.”Show a response

It would be a fiction if God simply ignored sin. But justification is not God pretending; it is God crediting a real righteousness, Christ's own perfect obedience, to those united to him by faith. Paul's language is deliberate: Abraham's faith 'was counted to him as righteousness', and God 'justifies the ungodly' (Romans 4:3, 5). God made Christ 'to be sin' for us, 'so that in him we might become the righteousness of God' (2 Corinthians 5:21). Our sin was really laid on Christ and really punished; his righteousness is really counted to us. Nothing about that is pretend. And God never justifies without also beginning to sanctify. Real change always follows, but it is the fruit of a verdict already given, not the ground of it. That is why a believer can have 'peace with God' (Romans 5:1) instead of endless uncertainty.

“Revelation 21:27 says nothing unclean will enter heaven. Most of us die still imperfect. So there has to be a purification after death. That's purgatory.”Show a response

I completely agree that nothing unclean will enter God's presence. The question is how we are made clean. Scripture's answer is Christ: 'the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin' (1 John 1:7), and 'by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified' (Hebrews 10:14). When believers die, Scripture speaks of them as 'the spirits of just men made perfect' (Hebrews 12:23). Paul expected to be 'absent from the body' and 'present with the Lord' (2 Corinthians 5:8), and Jesus told the dying thief, 'To day shalt thou be with me in paradise' (Luke 23:43). God finishes our sanctification at death by his grace, not by suffering we must pay off. If Christ bore the punishment for our sins, no punishment remains for us (Romans 8:1).

Written task

Write a 300-400 word explanation, for a Catholic friend who has never read the Council of Trent, of the difference between Trent's teaching on justification and the Reformation's. Quote or accurately summarise at least two canons from Session 6 and at least two Pauline texts, and explain why the difference matters for assurance.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Accurately summarises at least two Session 6 canons with correct numbers
Clearly explains infused versus imputed righteousness in plain language
Uses Romans 4 and/or Galatians accurately and addresses James 2
Explains the practical link to assurance (Romans 5:1, 8:1) and to purgatory or the Mass
Writes charitably, acknowledging that Rome affirms grace