The Regensburg Article 5 on Justification: Inconsistent Patchwork or Substance of True Doctrine? (Oxford Studies in Historical Theology)

"The question of the justification of sinners is one of the most complex regions of Christian theology. The Regensburg article on justification proposed a solution that it was hoped would be acceptable to both sides, Protestant and Catholic. In 1541 at the Regensburg Colloquy, three leading Protestant theologians (Melanchthon, Bucer, and Pistorius) and three leading Catholic theologians (Eck, Gropper, and Pflug) debated with the aim of producing a commonly agreed statement of belief. The colloquy as a whole eventually failed, but it began with a statement on justification by faith agreed by all the parties, "Article 5", leading to an initial burst of optimism. There were two contrasting reactions to Article 5. Some, like Calvin, maintained that it contained the substance of true doctrine; others, like Luther, called it an inconsistent patchwork. These two rival assessments have persisted over the centuries. The aim of this book is to decide between them. It does so by viewing the article in the light of the publications of the key participants and observers, as well as by comparing it with the Tridentine Catholic Decree on Justification. Anthony Lane puts the Regensburg article under the microscope, offering both a wide-ranging study of the article's history and a line-by-line analysis of its content, presenting the original Latin text together with an English translation and running commentary." Cover 1 Series 3 Regensburg Article 5 on Justification 4 Copyright 5 Dedication 6 Contents 8 Preface 10 Abbreviations 14 Introduction 16 1. The Regensburg Colloquy 24 Background 24 The Regensburg Colloquy 28 Article 5 37 The Rest of the Colloquy 45 2. Reactions to Article 5 48 Contemporary Protestant Reactions 48 Contemporary Catholic Reactions 61 Modern Assessments 74 3. After Regensburg 82 Debates over Article 5 82 The Cologne Reformation 84 The Second Colloquy of Regensburg (1546) 98 The Council of Trent, Decree on Justification (1546–​47) 100 4. Double Righteousness and Double Justification 104 Double Righteousness Prior to Regensburg 104 The Origin of the Regensburg Formula 110 Double Righteousness after Regensburg 123 Double Justification 144 Justification of the Ungodly and Justification of the Godly 144 Justification of Works as well as Persons 148 Double Formal Cause of Justification 152 Conclusion 159 5. Text and Commentary 162 The Text 162 The Commentators 164 The Commentary 167 Conclusion 263 6. Inconsistent Patchwork or Substance of True Doctrine? 266 The Issues 266 Doctrines Not Covered by Article 5 266 Ambiguities in Article 5 268 Duplex Iustitia 269 Reliance upon the Testimony of Works 272 The Nature of Justifying Faith 274 The Role of Fiducia 278 The Participants 281 Melanchthon 281 Bucer 281 Calvin 282 Contarini 283 Gropper 286 Pflug 287 Conclusion: Inconsistent Patchwork or Substance of True Doctrine? 288 Sed contra 288 Concerns 290 Conclusion 292 Appendix: The Drafts of Article 5 294 1. The Worms Draft 294 2. Melanchthon’s Draft (with translation) 310 3. Eck’s Draft (with translation) 317 4. Gropper’s Draft (with translation) 320 5. The Final Version (with translation) 344 Glossary of Latin Terms 350 Bibliography 352 Appendix 294 Index 378 The question of the justification of sinners is one of the most complex regions of Christian theology. The Regensburg article on justification proposed a solution that it was hoped would be acceptable to both sides, Protestant and Catholic. In 1541 at the Regensburg Colloquy, three leading Protestant theologians (Melanchthon, Bucer, and Pistorius) and three leading Catholic theologians (Eck, Gropper, and Pflug) debated with the aim of producing a commonly agreed statement of belief. The colloquy as a whole eventually failed, but it had begun with a statement on justification by faith agreed by all the parties, 'Article 5," leading to an initial burst of optimism. But from the beginning, there were two contrasting reactions to Article 5. Some, like Calvin, maintained that it contained the substance of true doctrine; others, like Luther, called it an inconsistent patchwork. Both rival assessments have continued over the centuries. The aim of this book is to decide between them. It does so primarily by viewing the article in the light of the publications of the colloquy's key participants and observers, and by comparing it with the Tridentine Catholic Decree on Justification. It also views it in the light of the four known earlier drafts of the article, all of which are included in an Appendix, together with translations of three of them. The book concludes that Article 5 is indeed consistent with a Protestant understanding of justification, though it does not always follow Protestant terminology. Agreement was possible because Gropper and Pflug, together with Cardinal Contarini, the papal legate, largely accepted the Protestant account of justification--From publisher's description "In 1541 at the Regensburg Colloquy, three leading Protestant theologians (Melanchthon, Bucer, and Pistorius) and three leading Catholic theologians (Eck, Gropper, and Pflug) debated with the aim of producing a commonly agreed statement of belief. The colloquy eventually failed, but it had begun with a statement on justification by faith agreed by all the parties, "Article 5," leading to an initial burst of optimism. But from the beginning, there were two contrasting reactions to Article 5. Some, like Calvin, maintained that it contained the substance of true doctrine; others, like Luther, called it an inconsistent patchwork. Both rival assessments have continued over the centuries. The aim of this book is to decide between them. It does so primarily by viewing the article in the light of the publications of the colloquy's key participants and observers, and by comparing it with the Tridentine Decree on Justification. It also views it in the light of the four known earlier drafts of the article, all of which are included in an Appendix, together with translations of three of them. The book concludes that Article 5 is indeed consistent with a Protestant understanding of justification, though it does not always follow Protestant terminology. Agreement was possible because Gropper and Pflug, together with Cardinal Contarini, the papal legate, largely accepted the Protestant account of justification" -- University Press Scholarship Online In 1541 at the Regensburg Colloquy, three leading Protestant theologians (Melanchthon, Bucer, and Pistorius) and three leading Catholic theologians (Eck, Gropper, and Pflug) debated with the aim of producing a commonly agreed statement of belief. The colloquy eventually failed, but it had begun with a statement on justification by faith agreed by all the parties, "Article 5," leading to an initial burst of optimism. But from the beginning, there were two contrasting reactions to Article 5. Some, like Calvin, maintained that it contained the substance of true doctrine; others, like Luther, called it an inconsistent patchwork. Both rival assessments have continued over the centuries. The aim of this book is to decide between them. It does so primarily by viewing the article in the light of the publications of the colloquy's key participants and observers, and by comparing it with the Tridentine Decree on Justification. It also views it in the light of the four known earlier drafts of the article, all of which are included in an Appendix, together with translations of three of them. The book concludes that Article 5 is indeed consistent with a Protestant understanding of justification, though it does not always follow Protestant terminology. Agreement was possible because Gropper and Pflug, together with Cardinal Contarini, the papal legate, largely accepted the Protestant account of justification. --From publisher's description The question of the justification of sinners is one of the most complex regions of Christian theology. The Regensburg article on justification proposed a solution that it was hoped would be acceptable to both sides, Protestant and Catholic. In 1541 at the Regensburg Colloquy, three leading Protestant theologians (Melanchthon, Bucer, and Pistorius) and three leading Catholic theologians (Eck, Gropper, and Pflug) debated with the aim of producing a commonly agreed statement of belief. The colloquy as a whole eventually failed, but it began with a statement on justification by faith agreed by all the parties, Article 5", leading to an initial burst of optimism. There were two contrasting reactions to Article 5. Some, like Calvin, maintained that it contained the substance of true doctrine; others, like Luther, called it an inconsistent patchwork. These two rival assessments have persisted over the centuries. 0The aim of this book is to decide between them. It does so by viewing the article in the light of the publications of the key participants and observers, as well as by comparing it with the Tridentine Catholic Decree on Justification. Anthony Lane puts the Regensburg article under the microscope, offering both a wide-ranging study of the article's history and a line-by-line analysis of its content, presenting the original Latin text together with an English translation and running commentary The aim of this book is to decide between the two rival assessments regarding Article 5 of the Regensburg Colloquy that have continued over the centuries. Tony Lane offers both a wide-ranging study of the article's history and a line-by-line analysis of its content. The book includes the original Latin text together with an English translation and running commentary.