
“The little word genometha in 5:21b-‘that we might become God’s righteousness in him’-does not sit comfortably with the normal interpretation, according to which ‘God’s righteousness’ is ‘imputed’ or ‘reckoned’ to believers. If that is what Paul meant, with the overtones of ‘extraneous righteousness’ that normally come with that theory, the one thing that he ought not to have said is that we ‘become’ that righteousness. Surely that leans far too much towards a Roman Catholic notion of infused righteousness? How careless of Paul to leave the door open to such a notion!”Question 1: You seem to indicate here that Saint Paul does in fact teach the “Roman Catholic notion of infused righteousness.” How would we be wrong if we were to assume that you are here denying justification by imputation and favoring “a Roman Catholic notion of infused righteousness”?
I am sorry to think that there are people out there whose Protestantism has been so barren that they never found out about sacraments, transformation, community or eschatology. Clearly this person [that’s me, Taylor] needed a change. But to jump to Rome for that reason is very odd.
I would like to point out that I am not simply an isolated “this person” who “needed a change.” It’s quite ironic that Wright should says this the wake of the Pope’s announcement of the new Anglican Personal Ordinariates. I’m not the only one. Thousands and thousands of clergy and laity from his own denomination have appealed to the Pope as a result of the Anglican Communion losing its sacramental and communal nature. If Anglicanism can provide a Christianity that is “sacramental, transformational, communal, and eschatological,” then why are these Anglicans so deeply dissatisfied with Anglicanism? Would Wright also say that their “jump to Rome” is “very odd”?
Thank you for reading. As a grateful fan and reader of N.T. Wright’s books, I am continually amazed by his profound insights into Sacred Scripture. As a Catholic, I continue to enjoy his books and find myself returning to his works on a regular basis. I have the highest regard for Bishop Wright and wish him all the best.
I’d like to open up the comments and ask for responses. Would you agree that within Wright’s writings and public comments, “there are some things in them hard to understand”? What are we to make those passages that allege to be “not magisterially Protestant” but “not magisterially Catholic” either?

Please look for my new book: The Catholic Perspective on Paul (Summer 2010). It is based on the conviction that the Pauline epistles contain the primitive and pristine doctrines of the Catholic Faith (that is, the Patristic "old perspective" on Paul). In the Pauline corpus we discover a Paul who is Catholic, a theologian who is sacramental, a churchman who is hierarchical, a mystic who is orthodox.
Listen to Episode #1: RABBI SAUL BECOMES APOSTLE PAUL.
Labels: Catholicism, Justification, N.T. Wright, Trent


| A sermon of St Augustine | |
|---|---|
| By faith she believed; by faith, conceived | |
Stretching out his hand over his disciples, the Lord Christ declared: Here are my mother and my brothers; anyone who does the will of my Father who sent me is my brother and sister and my mother. I would urge you to ponder these words. Did the Virgin Mary, who believed by faith and conceived by faith, who was the chosen one from whom our Saviour was born among men, who was created by Christ before Christ was created in her – did she not do the will of the Father? Indeed the blessed Mary certainly did the Father’s will, and so it was for her a greater thing to have been Christ’s disciple than to have been his mother, and she was more blessed in her discipleship than in her motherhood. Hers was the happiness of first bearing in her womb him whom she would obey as her master. Now listen and see if the words of Scripture do not agree with what I have said. The Lord was passing by and crowds were following him. His miracles gave proof of divine power. and a woman cried out: Happy is the womb that bore you, blessed is that womb! But the Lord, not wishing people to seek happiness in a purely physical relationship, replied: More blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it. Mary heard God’s word and kept it, and so she is blessed. She kept God’s truth in her mind, a nobler thing than carrying his body in her womb. The truth and the body were both Christ: he was kept in Mary’s mind insofar as he is truth, he was carried in her womb insofar as he is man; but what is kept in the mind is of a higher order than what is carried in the womb. The Virgin Mary is both holy and blessed, and yet the Church is greater than she. Mary is a part of the Church, a member of the Church, a holy, an eminent – the most eminent – member, but still only a member of the entire body. The body undoubtedly is greater than she, one of its members. This body has the Lord for its head, and head and body together make up the whole Christ. In other words, our head is divine – our head is God. Now, beloved, give me your whole attention, for you also are members of Christ; you also are the body of Christ. Consider how you yourselves can be among those of whom the Lord said: Here are my mother and my brothers. Do you wonder how you can be the mother of Christ? He himself said: Whoever hears and fulfils the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and my sister and my mother. As for our being the brothers and sisters of Christ, we can understand this because although there is only one inheritance and Christ is the only Son, his mercy would not allow him to remain alone. It was his wish that we too should be heirs of the Father, and co-heirs with himself. Now having said that all of you are brothers of Christ, shall I not dare to call you his mother? Much less would I dare to deny his own words. Tell me how Mary became the mother of Christ, if it was not by giving birth to the members of Christ? You, to whom I am speaking, are the members of Christ. Of whom were you born? “Of Mother Church,” I hear the reply of your hearts. You became sons of this mother at your baptism, you came to birth then as members of Christ. Now you in your turn must draw to the font of baptism as many as you possibly can. You became sons when you were born there yourselves, and now by bringing others to birth in the same way, you have it in your power to become the mothers of Christ. | |

As a Catholic, I understand the Greek verb dikaio as juridical AND transformative. A sinner “becomes righteous” and this is why the Greek word was rightly translated as iustificatio—“making just.”
I’m saying that a legal, declarative change is not merely what God does for us. Salvation involves a union with Christ to the sinner and that union transforms the sinner into a new creation.
I was not merely “declared righteous” through faith, rather I “became righteous,” because Christ washed away my original sin and my personal sins so that I was a new creation. Grace filled my soul and the Holy Spirit came upon me. As Saint Paul wrote:
“For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor 5:21)
We BECOME THE RIGHTEOUSNESS of God. It’s not merely imputed. Luther didn’t do justice to the entire Pauline corpus, in my opinion. He stopped way too short of the glory of justification.
You wrote:
“A Lutheran would say that a perfect righteousness identical to that of Christ, which is recieved through faith (being the first of the cardinal virtues), would be a stronger type of righteousness (if not the only type of righteousness) than anything that could dwell within a more or less sinful man.”
Joseph, that’s the just the rub. If God’s righteousness can’t dwell in a man, how could a sinful man ever enter Heaven? You’ve got to have a transformation/infusion for this whole thing to work. If God’s righteousness is to holy to dwell in a sinner, then how can the sinner ever dwell in God??!!
You wrote:
“The quality of our righteousness and participation is made the qualifications for our eternal life. Why is this necessary to believe?”
Jesus said, “If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned” (Jn 15:6).
I read this (as a Catholic) as saying that if you don’t participate in Christ through union with Him, then you’re going to Hell.
Just a few bits of difference that I picked up from your email:
One final thought. Which is better?:
A) To be married on paper – that is, to be declared married.
B) To experience the union of marriage, being transformed as “one flesh”?
Clearly, matrimony includes both realities. As I understand it, you’re choosing (A) to the exclusion of (B). As a Catholic, I’m saying both (A) and (B). God declares us righteous because He has made us righteous. When a baby is baptized, he is 100% holy.
Looking forward to your response. This is a very helpful dialogue.
In Christ,
Taylor
Please listen to a related podcast: What did Paul Teach about Justification?
Labels: Justification, Luther, Lutherans
The Story of my Conversion to Catholicism (Audio Version)
- and Information about the Anglican Personal Ordinariates by Taylor Marshall
Click on the triangular “play” button above.
This recording is in two parts. The first half explains how I became a Christian (through a baseball autograph from Tom Monaghan), then an Episcopal priest, and then how I became a Catholic Christian. The second half is a presentation on the Anglican Personal Ordinariates and a public Q&A session on that topic.
You have to wait about 8 seconds to hear anything, so please don't give up after you hit play.A special thanks to an Anglo-Catholic friend Tony Clark who recorded this talk and edited it.
Click on the triangular “play” button above.
You can also download the
mp3 file directly by right clicking
Labels: Podcasts
I'm starting to hear back from folks who have finished reading my new book The Crucified Rabbi: Judaism and the Origins of Catholic Christianity. Some readers are people that I know, some of them are people that I have never met, but heard about the book via Twitter, a friend, etc. So far, (insert sigh of relief), everyone likes it and has positive things to say (insert knock on wood).
Some have asked about the "next book." Please remember that The Crucified Rabbi is actually the first book in a Trilogy. The second book is already finished, but not yet published. The third book is almost finished (needs two more chapters). The Trilogy is called "Origins of Catholic Christianity." Here are the three books:




