天主教和世界信义宗经过长时间的讨论，最近在「因信成义／称义」的课题上达成共识，并于31/10/1999签署了「成义」教会的联合声明，并撇除了在马丁路德宗教改革时代互相加诸对方身上的谴责－－即天主教脱利腾大公会议（亦称「天特会议」）对信义宗教导的谴责，及信义宗信条对天主教教导的谴责（声明第41号，详见下面的附注）。在四个多月的讨论中，误解者则常说全球第二大信义会（LCMS）反对这项声明，藉此减低这声明的认受性。小弟对此谨作出一些回应。
世界信义宗（包括路德会在内）这么大，小弟不排除某些（或个别）信徒或团体对「因信称义」联合声明有不同的看法。在草签联合声明过程中信义宗教会内其中一名主要人物－－世界信义宗联会合一研究中心主任迪特尔（TheodorDieter）曾接受香港公教报两次访问，17/9/2000公教报第21版就报导说：「声明的草案初稿于1995年120个成员教会（按：指信义宗教会）发出，并于96年在收回初步反应，及至1997年公布了声明的最后建议稿，留待信义宗成员教会表决。．．．即使是信义宗教会，彼此对声明也有不同意见，．．．信义宗联会的决定对个别成员教会没约束力，成员教会有权自行决定接纳声明与否，．．．迪特尔亦提及，在97年陆续收到信义宗教会的回覆，有的赞成，有的反对，有的赞成之余附加意见，有的可不容易去理解。当中有四分三成员教会回覆，约90间，它们代表了信义宗信总人数的九成。．．．」
由此可见，即使有全球第二大信义会（LCMS）反对声明，但最后仍是通过并签署，这就反映出接受声明的内容是信义宗教会内主流（及大多数）的意见，该声明被信义宗教会普遍接纳和承认。
在「天主教资讯小集」（www.elca.org/ea/jddj/jddj.html" target="_blank">http://www.cathlinks.org/）内的「合一的．．．」一项，有此联合声明的中文及英文译本，英译本亦可见于www.elca.org/ea/jddj/jddj.html。
附注
「因信成义」联合声明第41号：「因此由十六世纪以来,两教教会就称义的部分而彼此作出教义上的谴责，有了新的亮光:在这声明中，信义宗教会的教导，不再受天特会议的谴责；同样，天主教的教导，在这声明里不再受信义宗信条的谴责。」（以上声明内容，译自信义宗戴浩辉牧师）
其英文内容如下（第40及41号）：
40.TheunderstandingofthedoctrineofjustificationsetforthinthisDeclarationshowsthataconsensusinbasictruthsofthedoctrineofjustificationexistsbetweenLutheransandCatholics.Inlightofthisconsensustheremainingdifferencesoflanguage,theologicalelaboration,andemphasisintheunderstandingofjustificationdescribedinparagraphs18to39areacceptable.ThereforetheLutheranandtheCatholicexplicationsofjustificationareintheirdifferenceopentooneanotheranddonotdestroytheconsensusregardingbasictruths.
41.Thusthedoctrinalcondemnationsofthe16thcentury,insofarastheyrelatetothedoctrineofjustification,appearinanewlight:TheteachingoftheLutheranchurchespresentedinthisDeclarationdoesnotfallunderthecondemnationsfromtheCouncilofTrent.ThecondemnationsintheLutheranConfessionsdonotapplytotheteachingoftheRomanCatholicChurchpresentedinthisDeclaration.
以下是「因信成义」联合声明第40及41号的英文注释／commentary（取自「JOINTDECLARATIONONTHEDOCTRINEOFJUSTIFICATION．ACommentarybytheInstituteforEcumenicalResearch,Strasbourg」PublishedfortheInstituteforEcumenicalResearch,Strasbourg,bytheLutheranWorldFederation,OfficeforCommunicationServices）：
JD40and41summarizetheconclusionstobedrawnfromwhatisconfessedtogetherintheDeclarationandfromwhatissaidthereindividuallybyLutheransandCatholics.Theconclusionistwo-fold:first,theclaimofaconsensusinthebasictruthsofthedoctrineofjustification(JD40);andsecond,thejudgmentthatthedoctrinalcondemnationsoftheReformationeradonottouchtheteachingsoftheRomanCatholicandLutheranchurchesheredescribed(JD41).Thesetwoconclusionsgotogether.
Ontheonehand,theassertionofaconsensusismorefar-reachingandcomprehensivethanthejudgmentthatcertaincondemnationsdonotapplytotheteachingoftheotherchurch.Personsmightforgocondemningtheteachingofanothergroupwithoutwishingorbeingabletosaythattheyareinconsensuswiththeothergroup.Thestatementthataconsensusexists,however,wouldbesenselessifthecondemnationsremaininplace.Consensusandcondemnationaremutuallyexclusive.
Ontheotherhand,thedeclarationthatthesixteenthcenturycondemnationsdonotapplytothecontemporaryteachingoftheotherchurchinacertainsensepresupposestheconsensus.PreciselybecausewehavediscoveredsomuchincommonbetweenthedifferentlyshapedLutheranandCatholicteachingsonjustification,weneednotandcannotcontinueinthejudgmentthattheother'sdoctrinecorruptsthegospelandsoischurch-dividing.
Tospeakofconsensusisnottodenytheexistingdifferences,buttheinsightintotheextensivecommonalitiesdomakepossibleanewestimateoftheirsignificance.Itisthusofgreatimportancethatthis「consensusinfundamentals」isnotlocatedinapre-linguisticdepthbutisdescribedinadifferentiatedway.Spiritualcontentisneverwithoutlinguisticform.TheCatholicandLutherandoctrinesofjustificationdospeakpartiallydifferentlanguages,sometimesusingdifferentconcepts,sometimesusingthesamewordindifferentways,sometimesdrawingdifferentdistinctions.Nevertheless,thatwhichiscommonandfundamentalisexpressedintheJDinacommonlanguage(cp.EspeciallyJD15-18,19,22,25,28,31,34,37).
Sinceitwouldbeself-contradictorytoclaimaconsensuswithoutalsostatingthatthepastcondemnationsofeachother’steachingsarenolongerapplicable,theexplicitstatementofthisnon-applicability(asinJD41)isanessentialaspectofestablishingthataconsensusexists.Conversely,thedeclarationofnon-applicabilitypresupposestheconsensusclaimedinJD40.JD40andJD41thusconditioneachother.
本文最后修改日期：２００１年９月１２日