| Summary: | 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.
|
|---|