A revised and edited summary of an excerpt from Reginald Garrigrou-Lagrange, “The Three Conversions in the Spiritual Life”
It's crucial to recall the necessity and true nature of the interior life, especially considering that its authentic conception, as presented in the Gospel, the Epistles of St. Paul, and Tradition, has been obscured by various false ideas. The Lutheran theory of justification or conversion radically distorts the notion of interior life. According to this theory, the convert’s mortal sins are not eliminated by the infusion of the new life of grace and charity; instead, they are merely covered over, veiled by faith in the Redeemer, and no longer held against the individual. There's no intrinsic justification or internal renewal of the soul; instead, a person is deemed just solely through the extrinsic imputation of the righteousness of Christ. According to this perspective, one can believe in Christ the Redeemer but remain in sin, corruption, or spiritual death.
Luther's famous statement, "Pecca fortiter et crede firmius," translates to "Sin boldly and believe even more boldly; you will be saved." However, Luther did not intend to encourage sin; it was a forceful way of expressing his belief that good works are irrelevant to salvation—that faith in Christ alone is sufficient. He says, "If you believe, good works will naturally follow from your faith."1 As Maritain notes, in Luther's perspective, these good works arise from saving faith as a byproduct.2 Furthermore, the love that arises from this faith is primarily directed towards our neighbours rather than God. Thus, the concept of charity is gradually diminished, stripped of its supernatural and God-centered essence, and equated with acts of mercy. Nevertheless, Luther maintains that a person is justified solely by faith in Christ, even though sin is not erased by the infusion of charity or supernatural love for God.
This severe misunderstanding regarding our supernatural life, reducing it to faith in Christ while excluding sanctifying grace, charity, and meritorious works, was bound to lead to Naturalism gradually. Ultimately, it led to considering "just" individuals who, regardless of their beliefs, valued and practiced natural virtues recognized even by pagan philosophers predating Christ.
J. Maritain lucidly explains how Naturalism inevitably emerges from the tenets of Protestantism. According to Lutheran theology, it is solely ourselves who grasp the cloak of Christ, using it to cover all our shame. We possess this ability to leap from our sin onto the righteousness of Christ, thereby becoming as sure of possessing Christ's holiness as we are of possessing our bodies. The Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith could be termed a Pelagianism borne out of despair. Ultimately, humanity is left to pursue its redemption by fostering a desperate confidence in Christ. Human nature is then left to discard, as a superfluous theological ornament, the cloak of grace, which holds no significance for it, and to shift its faith from Christ to itself—thus giving rise to that remarkable emancipated brute, whose unwavering and continuous advancement is a marvel to the universe. In Luther and his teachings, we witness the emergence of the Ego on the spiritual and religious plane.
We assert it to be true: it is the inevitable consequence of Luther's theology. However, in theory, this does not prevent the same theology from falling into the opposite extreme. Luther states that salvation and faith are so entirely the work of God and Christ that they act alone in our redemption, without any contribution from us. Luther's theology oscillated between these two positions: theoretically, the first must prevail—Christ alone, without our involvement, is the source of our salvation. Yet, since it is psychologically impossible to eliminate human activity, the second position has inevitably gained ground.3 It is a historical fact that liberal Protestantism has led to Naturalism.
In such a worldview, the fundamental question doesn't even arise: Can man, in his current state and without divine grace, fully observe all the precepts of the natural law, including those relating to God? Can he genuinely love God, the supreme Good and author of our nature, more than himself and anything else without grace? Early Protestants would have answered negatively, as Catholic theologians have always done. Liberal Protestantism, stemming from Luther's theology, doesn't even pose the question; it denies the necessity of grace or an infused supernatural life.
St. Thomas teaches that in the state of perfect nature, man directed his love for himself and all other things towards the love of God as their ultimate end. Thus, he loved God more than himself and above all else. However, in the state of corrupted nature, man fails to achieve this due to the inclination of his rational will, which, unless healed by God's grace, pursues his selfish interests because of the corruption of nature.4 In a corrupted state of nature, man cannot fulfill all the Divine commandments without the grace of healing.5
Luther fundamentally erred, therefore, in attempting to explain justification not through the infusion of grace and charity, which remit sin, but solely through faith in Christ, devoid of works and love, and by simply extrinsically imputing the merits of Christ. This imputation covers sins without eradicating them, leaving the sinner in filth and corruption. According to Luther, there's no regeneration of the will by the supernatural love of God and humanity. Conversely, the teachings of the Scriptures and Tradition emphasize that faith and the extrinsic imputation of Christ's righteousness are insufficient for the sinner's justification or conversion. The individual must be willing to observe the commandments, especially the two great commandments of loving God and one's neighbour: "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him" (John 14:23). "He that abideth in charity abideth in God, and God in him" (1 John 4:16).
Works, Weimar edition, XII, 559 (1523)
Notes sur Luther; appendix to the second edition of Trois Réformateurs
Jacques Maritain, Trois réformateurs: Luther, Descartes, Rousseau (1928)
St. Thomas, ST I–IIae, Q. cix, art. 3
Ibid., art. 4