6. Jahrgang MBS Te x t e 138 2009

Thomas K. Johnson Law and Gospel The Hermeneutical / Homiletical Key to Reformation Theology and Ethics

BUCER IN S T E M

R

A I

N

M A

R

2

1

: E P 4 H

ReformedReformiertes Forum Forum TableInhaltsverzeichnis of Contents

Some Differences...... 3 The Centrality of the Relationship between Law and Gospel...... 5 The Gospel...... 7 Faith and Works...... 8 The Gospel and the Old Testament...... 10 Reason and the Moral Law...... 14 The Proper Uses of the Law...... 18 Comments...... 24 Annotation...... 26 Bibliography...... 28 The Author...... 30 Impressum...... 31

1. Aufl. 2009 Law and Gospel

Law and Gospel The Hermeneutical / Homiletical Key to Reformation Theology and Ethics Thomas K. Johnson

The differences between the Lutheran on this set of questions did much to and Reformed traditions in such mat­ establish patterns and standards for ters as liturgy, architecture, and church what came to be regarded as truly high polity have led some observers to think quality teaching and writing on theol­ there must be substantial differences ogy and ethics in the entire Protestant between the theology and ethics of tradition. For this reason, it is wise to their important figureheads – Martin see the relationship between law and Luther and John Calvin. This impres­ gospel as a hermeneutical/homiletical sion of substantial differences became key to Reformation theology and eth­ more pronounced because of the unre­ ics, both in the historical sense of being solved debates at the Marburg Col­ the key to understand the Reformation loquy (1529). It is now common for proclamation of the Christian message people to think Luther and Calvin had and in the normative sense of setting a very significantly different points of pattern for those who wish to reappro­ view on such diverse areas as the mean­ priate the Reformation heritage for late ing of predestination, the relationship modernity. The Reformation under­ between the two natures of Christ, the standing of law and gospel provides a extent of the atonement, and the nature necessary key for understanding the of the presence of Christ in the Eucha­ biblical message, proclaiming the bibli­ rist. However, while there were some cal message both in church and soci­ real theological differences between ety, providing balanced and authentic Calvin and Luther, which seem very pastoral care, and relating the classical large because of large differences in evangelical faith to the questions of cul­ personality, culture, and literary style, ture and politics. there is also a truly massive degree of agreement in the realm of theology and ethics. This agreement is especially Some Differences true concerning the questions that were always prominent in the Protestant tra­ To avoid misunderstanding, it is good dition – the relationship between law to describe some of the real dif­ferences and gospel. Indeed, the significant between Luther and Calvin. One of similarity between Luther and Calvin these differences is at the level of liter­

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 3 Thomas K. Johnson ary style and method. Calvin labored is in any way connected to the themes to achieve elegance of expres­sion and mentioned in a biblical text. In a cer­ an orderly arrangement of his teach­ tain sense, his Lectures on Galatians are ing. With this in mind, just the Table lectures on faith and life in light of the of Contents of his Institutes of the Chris­ biblical book of Galatians, not merely tian Religion forms a worthy study in an exegetical study in the Pauline book. itself, giving a significant overview of Luther had a tremendously systematic, how he thought the various themes in orderly, logical mind, but his desire to Christian proclamation should be con­ tell his students and readers all about nected to each other. Consistent with the riches of the Christian gospel con­ this desire, Calvin was very concerned stantly breaks his orderly presentation. not to be repetitive in his writing. In This gives Luther’s book a somewhat his commentaries, to avoid repetition, repetitive character, though decidedly he will often refer the reader to one of not a monotonous character. Luther’s his previous works if he believes he has repetition is always filled with joy, life, already given a satisfactory exposition and gratitude to such an extent that his of a particular biblical text or theologi­ repetitions are always lively and inter­ cal theme. Also, Calvin had in mind a esting. clear distinction between writing sys­ Behind the difference in literary style tematically about theology and ethics between Luther and Calvin lies a dif­ and writing biblical exegesis. He rep­ ference in personality so great that it resented the Renaissance care for pre­ would be easy to mistake it for a dif­ cision in dealing with historical texts, ference in fundamental theology. Lewis and he saw a real difference between Spitz summarized this difference very giving an overview of how Christians nicely: should think about a topic and inter­ preting particular biblical texts that Calvin and Luther were temperamen­ might contribute to such an overview tally quite different. The younger man of Christian teaching. Therefore, to was shy to the point of diffidence, pre­ appreciate Calvin’s total perspective on cise and restrained, except for sudden a topic, one needs to turn to his Insti­ flashes of anger. He was severe, but tutes, not primarily to his biblical com­ scrupulously just and truthful, self- mentaries. contained and somewhat aloof. He had In contrast, Luther did not keep this many acquaintances but few intimate clear distinction between exegesis and friends. The older man was sociable to theology. In his Lectures on Galatians, the point of volubility, free and open, he often digresses from the text of Gala­ warm and cordial with people of all tians to bring in many other biblical stations of life. But in spite of their texts and generally tells his students all differences in personality, Calvin and that he thinks they should know that Luther retained a mutual respect for

4 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

each other that was rooted in their con­ erly between law and gospel is what fessional agreement.1 qualifies a theologian as a theologian:

Spitz describes a “confessional agree­ Therefore whoever knows well how ment” between Luther and Calvin that to distinguish the gospel from the law is deeper than the many disagreements. should give thanks to God and know This is precisely what we find when that he is a real theologian. I admit that looking at their respective views of the in the time of temptation I myself do relationship between law and gospel – not know how to do this as I should.2 a profound level of agreement that is sometimes covered over by differences The real problem in Christian theol­ in terminology that are probably rooted ogy up to and including Luther’s time in their different personalities and life was the failure to make this crucial dis­ experiences. A careful examination of tinction between law and gospel: key texts by Luther and Calvin shows a remarkable similarity on this central You will not find anything about this set of questions, and part of that agree­ distinction between the law and the ment is that the relationship between gospel in the books of the monks, the law and gospel is central for evangeli­ canonists, and the recent and ­ancient cal theol­ogy and ethics. Luther’s key theologians. Augustine taught and text on this subject is his great Lectures expressed it to some extent. Jerome on Galatians from 1535. Calvin’s Gala­ and others like him knew nothing at tians Commen­tary of 1548 can serve as all about it. In other words, for many a convenient point of comparison, but centuries there has been a remarkable Calvin’s com­mentary must be supple­ silence about this in all the schools and mented by sec­tions of his Institutes churches. This situation has produced to comprehend his entire perspective a very dangerous condition for con- because of the differ­ences in literary sciences.3 method already noted. For Luther, the distinction between law and gospel was no mere theoretical The Centrality of the abstraction; it was an existential reality Relationship between Law of the highest import. It was the heart and Gospel of the Christian faith and the Christian life; it was the key to keeping the gospel Most theologians recognize that pure and to distinguishing authentic Luther thought the relationship Christianity from distorted versions of between law and gospel is central to the faith and from non-Christian reli­ the Christian proclamation. Indeed, for gions. Therefore, “let every Christian Luther, the ability to distinguish prop­ learn diligently to distinguish between

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 5 Thomas K. Johnson the law and the gospel.”4 Without this like to repeat himself, just this state­ distinction, people tend to either fall ment would suffice to make the reader into despair, thinking they cannot earn expect that Calvin saw the difference God’s favor on the basis of the law, or between the righteousness of the law else they fall into false confidence, pre­ and the free righteousness of the Gospel suming they have earned God’s favor as truly central to Christian theology by means of keeping the law. However, and ethics. making the proper distinction is not a The fact that Calvin saw the distinc­ matter of memorizing the proper terms tion between law and gospel as truly or using certain words; it is more like an central to authentic faith can be seen art than a science or a technique. The in his statements on Christian liberty. real distinction has to be made in the Calvin commented on the actions of midst of the ongoing experience of life. the apostle Peter described in Galatians “Anyone who knows this art well would chapter 2:7 deserve to be called a theolo­gian.”5 Not all theologians and historians Peter had withdrawn himself from the have recognized the centrality of the Gentiles in order to drive them from the relationship between law and gospel communion of the Church, unless they in the thought of Calvin. This is prob­ would relinquish the liberty of the gospel 8 ably because Calvin does not make so and submit to the yoke of the law. To many sweeping statements about this bind the consciences of godly men by an being the key ability that qualifies a obligation to keep the law, and to bury person as a theologian. Further, Calvin in silence the doctrine of liberty, was to does not say a large amount on this purchase unity at an exorbitant price.9 theme in the table of contents of his Institutes or in the titles of his other Commenting on Abraham’s faith, books. Nevertheless, a clear distinction Calvin explained: between law and gospel was something Calvin learned from Luther and the For faith, – so far as it embraces the other first generation Reformers. This undeserved goodness of God, Christ distinction became a normative part of with all his benefits, the testimony of the structure of his thought. The way our adoption which is contained in the this is seen in Calvin is by observing gospel, – is universally contrasted with how he interprets the writings of the the law, with the merit of works, and apostle Paul, which he saw as normative with human excellence.10 for all Christians. Calvin wrote: “[Paul] is continually employed in contrasting Calvin sounds a lot like Luther when the righteousness of the law with the he summarizes: free acceptance which God is pleased to bestow.”6 Because Calvin does not

6 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

We see then that the smallest part of But the work of Christ, properly spea­ justification cannot be attributed to the king, is this: to embrace the one whom law without renouncing Christ and his the law has made a sinner and pro­ grace.11 nounced guilty, and to absolve him from his sins if he believes the gospel. “For Christ is the end of the law, that The Gospel everyone who has faith may be justi­ fied” (Rom. 10:4); He is “the Lamb Very clearly the relationship between of God, who takes away the sin of the law and gospel was a central, really the world” (John 1:29).13 central, question in theology and ethics for both Luther and Calvin. To under­ Calvin’s gospel is recognizably the stand this more fully, we need to see same gospel as that proclaimed by what each meant under the term “gos­ Luther, though Calvin used somewhat pel.” different language. Salvation is accom­ According to Luther, justification by plished solely by the work of Christ; sal­ faith alone is the key to the Christian vation is received solely by faith. Com­ message. By faith (which especially menting on Galatians 2:15 and 16 (“We means trust in the promise which is who are Jews by birth and not ‘Gentile the gospel) a person is united with sinners’ know that a man is not justified Christ and received by Christ so that by observing the law, but by faith in Christ’s righteousness becomes his/her Jesus Christ.”), Calvin observed: own and the believer is declared righ­ teous by God. While the legal status Since the Jews themselves, with all their of being justified, according to Luther, advantages, were forced to betake them­ is an enduring, stable situation in rela­ selves to the faith of Christ, how much tion to God, a person’s faith is always more necessary was it that the Gentiles dynamic. This means that the believer should look for salvation through faith? may only be aware of his/her status Paul’s meaning therefore is: “We . . . of justification to the extent that the have found no method of obtaining believer trusts in the promise of the salvation, but by believing in Christ: gospel. Luther offered many short sum­ why, then, should we prescribe another maries of the gospel, of which a couple method to the Gentiles?”14 will suffice: Calvin continues, “We must seek jus­ If it is true faith, it is a sure trust and tification by the faith of Christ, because firm acceptance in the heart. It takes we cannot be justified by works.”15 hold of Christ in such a way that Christ Obviously there is much about the is the object of faith, or rather not the gospel as preached by both Luther and object of faith but, so to speak, the one Calvin that is worthy of a detailed who is present in the faith itself.12 study. These short summaries suffice

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 7 Thomas K. Johnson to show that both Luther and Calvin Luther desired. As early as 1520 in his understood the gospel by means of a treatise The Freedom of the Christian, contrast to the law as a means of attain­ Luther clearly rejected any antinomian­ ing a proper relationship with God. ism with his ear-catching ironic thesis To believe in the gospel is the direct that, in addition to being a perfectly opposite of seeking to achieve a proper free lord of all, each Christian is also a relationship with God by means of fol­ perfectly dutiful servant of all. Luther lowing the law or any other form of claimed that true faith in Christ moves human “works.” people to love and serve others within the context of the everyday social structures, without any rejection of the Faith and Works moral law. Faith leads to good works, and if real faith is present, good works Students of Calvin know that he can be expected to follow. Luther used described the third and primary use of very careful words to articulate his con­ God’s law as that of giving guidance to victions: the life and works that follow from faith in the gospel. This was one of Calvin’s Therefore we, too, say that faith without ways of saying that real faith leads to a works is worthless and use­less. The papists distinct type of life. Luther may have and the fanatics take this to mean that suffered more misunderstandings than faith without works does not justify, or did Calvin on this topic; therefore, it that if faith does not have works, it is of will be valuable to see the similarities no avail, no matter how true it is. That in their ways of describing the type is false. But faith without works – that of “works,” meaning style and type of is, a fantastic idea and mere vanity and life, which follows from true Christian a dream of the heart – is a false faith faith. and does not justify.16 From the early days of the Reforma­ tion movement, Luther was sometimes Luther interpreted the papists, mean­ misunderstood to be saying that if peo­ ing the official representatives of the ple do not need to earn their eternal Roman Catholic Church of his time, salvation by doing good works or fol­ to be saying that works were necessary lowing the moral law, then people are in order to be justified, and that this free from all moral restraint – really doctrine was the central religious and free to do whatever they might want. ethical problem of “the papists.” Luther This antinomian misunderstanding of also thought that the “fanatics,” his Luther’s teaching threatened to con­ term for parts of the Anabaptist move­ tribute to the widespread social chaos ment, followed the papists at this most of the time, which was not at all what important point – a claim that has not

8 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel always received significant attention holy, are wicked, since there exists no from later scholars. Luther responded commandment of God or testimony that good works would always follow in Sacred Scripture about them; and, any justification that is authentic, but on the other hand, that other ways such good works do not contribute to of life, which do have the word and one’s justification. commandment of God, are holy and In addition to holding a different divinely instituted. . . , on the basis view of the relation between faith and of the Word of God we pronounce the works, Luther also claimed to teach a sure conviction that the way of life of a different view of what constitutes an servant, which is extremely vile in the appropriate Christian “good work.” sight of the world, is far more acceptable Previously, he had done works that to God than all the orders of monks. For were explicitly religious in nature; he God approves, commends, and adorns had entered a monastery, fasted, gone the status of servants with his Word, on pilgrimages, spent long hours in but not that of the monks.19 confessing sins, and physically denied himself.17 But after coming to the Ref­ In summary, for Luther, works do ormation version of his faith, he taught not in any way contribute to our jus­ that good works were practiced primar­ tification before God. We are justified ily in the everyday world: by faith alone, meaning nothing we do contributes to our justification. But For such great blindness used to pre­ real justifying faith necessarily leads to vail in the world that we supposed that works of obedience to God’s command the works which men had invented found in the Word of God. Real good not only without but against the com­ works follow from faith and are guided mandment of God were much better by God’s command. than those which a magistrate, the Calvin’s doctrine of the relation head of a household, a teacher, a child, between faith and works is remarkably a servant, etc., did in accordance with similar to Luther’s doctrine. Though God’s command.18 some historians may have misperceived Calvin to be a stern legalist, in his time The good works that should follow a large problem he faced was that the from and be the result of justification French speaking Reformation move­ by faith are those commanded by God ment was perceived to be antinomian in the Word within the everyday cre­ in a manner that contributed to social ated orders: chaos and wanton vice in society. This was similar to the problem faced by Surely we should have learned from the Luther and results from saying that Word of God that the religious orders good works and following the moral of the papists, which alone they call law do not contribute to our salvation.

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 9 Thomas K. Johnson

From the “Prefatory Address to King two tables, the first of which instructs us Francis” at the beginning of Calvin’s concerning the worship of God and the Institutes, it is clear that Calvin clari­ duties of piety, and the second instructs fied his doctrine of the relation of faith us concerning the love of neighbor; for it to good works partly in relation to the is ridiculous to make a part of the same pastoral needs of his people and partly with whole. . . . Piety to God, I ack­ as an apologetic response to the attacks nowledge, ranks higher than love of the on the Reformation movement. brethren; and therefore the observance While discussing Galatians 5:6 (“The of the first table is more valuable in the only thing that counts is faith express­ sight of God than the observance of the ing itself in love.”), Calvin defended his second. But as God himself is invisible, teaching: so piety is a thing hidden from the eyes of man. . . .God therefore chooses to It is not our doctrine that the faith make trial of our love to himself by that which justifies is alone; we maintain love of our brother, which he enjoins us that it is invariably accompanied by to cultivate.21 good works; only we contend that faith alone is sufficient for justification.20 In light of later debates, it may be worth noting that Calvin used the Moving from Luther to Calvin, there term “law” to describe the function is a very small development in the ter­ of Holy Scripture in guiding the life minology used to describe proper good of gratitude and good works, whereas works. Whereas Luther talks about lov­ Luther used the term “commandment” ing service within the created orders of to describe this function of Scripture society and everyday life in obedience in relation to good works. This tiny to the command of God in Scripture, difference in terminology is based on Calvin usually talks about obedience a foundational agreement – real faith to the law of God as the standard for leads to good works that are practiced good works. But this transition is really in the middle of everyday life in obedi­ only a very small change in terminol­ ence to the commands or law of God ogy, not any substantial development in found in Scripture. content. Like Luther, Calvin continu­ ally describes good works as love for other people within the framework of The Gospel and everyday life. About good works Calvin the Old Testa­ment writes: Throughout Christian history, a But we must inquire into the reason recurring issue of great importance why all the precepts of the law are has been the relationship between the included under love. The law consists of Old and New Testaments in the Chris­

10 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel tian Bible. Some, such as the group If this were all Luther had to say, one that probably disturbed the churches might imagine that he saw an absolute in Galatia, minimize any transition antithesis between the two Testaments. from the Old to the New Testament. However, just a few pages later, with Oth­ers, such as Marcion in the second no sense of self-contradiction, Luther cen­tury or radical dispensationalism describes the patriarchs (Abraham, in the twentieth century, minimize or Isaac, and Jacob) whose lives are pre­ deny any continuity between the two sented in the books of Moses, saying, tes­taments, believing the Old Testa­ “the patriarchs and all the Old Tes­ ment only has to do with law, while tament saints were free in their con­ the New Testament only has to do with science and were justified by faith, not gospel. In contrast to such extremes, in by circumcision or the law.”24 It is true, spite of some little differences, Luther according to Luther, that “Moses, the and Cal­vin agreed on the fundamen­ minister of the law, has the ministry of tal issue of seeing both law and gospel law, which he [the apostle Paul] calls in both the Old and the New Testa­ a ministry of sin, wrath, death, and ments. Neither of the Reformers oblit­ damnation,”25 yet the books of Moses erates all distinc­tions between the two also bear a real and significant witness Testaments, while they agree in seeing to the gospel of justification by faith very substan­tial continuity between the alone. Testaments. The gospel which one finds in the Luther loved to speak of Moses as Old Testament, Luther claims, is also being the one who speaks of the righ­ a gospel about Jesus Christ. The faith teousness by law: expressed by the patriarchs was a faith that looked to the future acts of God Moses does not reveal the Son of God; on their behalf, for their salvation. he discloses the law, sin, the conscience, “The sound of the promise to Abraham death, the wrath and judgment of God, brings Christ; and when he has been and hell. . . . Therefore only the gospel grasped by faith, then the Holy Spirit reveals the Son of God. Oh, if only one is granted on Christ’s behalf.”26 could distinguish carefully here and not Though the promises related to the look for the law in the gospel but keep gospel were initially and specially given it as separate from the law as heaven is to Abraham, these promises were also distant from earth.22 available widely to whoever believed. In discussing the exact sense in which A little later, speaking as if repre­ the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts senting the apostle Paul, Luther writes, 9) was righteous before he heard the “You have not heard me teach the righ­ Gospel as proclaimed by Peter, Luther teousness of the law or of works; for this claimed: belongs to Moses, not to me.”23

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 11 Thomas K. Johnson

Cornelius was a righteous and holy man the gospel, they are not the gospel; they in accordance with the Old Testament are expositions of the law and appendi­ on account of his faith in the coming ces to the gospel.30 Christ, just as all the patriarchs, pro­ phets, and devout kings were righteous, Calvin’s distinction between the Old having received the Holy Spirit secretly Testament and the New Testament on account of their faith in the coming was very similar to Luther’s. At the Christ.27 very beginning of his Galatians com­ mentary, he complains that the prob­ The main contrast between the gos­pel lem with the Judaizers, the false apos­ of the Old Testament and the gos­pel of tles who were disturbing the Galatian the New Testament is that “the faith congregations, was that they removed of the patriarchs was attached to the the distinction between the two Testa­ Christ who was to come, just as ours ments, which is the distinction between is attached to the One who has already law and gospel. “It is no small evil to come.”28 Indeed, the book of Genesis, quench the light of the gospel, to lay which Luther loved deeply, was primar­ a snare for consciences, and to remove ily a book about the gospel: the distinction between the Old and the New Testament.”31 In Jewish fashion Paul usually calls the As did Luther, Calvin regarded the first book of Moses “law.” Even though Old Testament as being largely a book it has no law except that which deals of law, whereas the New Testament is with circumcision, but chiefly teaches largely a book of gospel: faith and testifies that the patriarchs were pleasing to God on account of That office which was peculiar to Moses their faith, still the Jews called Genesis consisted in laying down a rule of life together with the other books of Moses and ceremonies to be observed in the “law” because of that one law of cir­ worship of God, and in afterwards cumcision.29 adding promises and threatenings. Many promises, no doubt, relating to Just as Luther claims there is much the free mercy of God and of Christ, are gospel in the Old Testament, so also he to be found in his writings; and these finds law in the New Testament, even promises belong to faith. But this is to though the New Testament is preemi­ be viewed as accidental.32 nently gospel: It is worth noticing that though Cal­ The gospel, however, is a proclama­ vin agrees with Luther that Moses is tion about Christ: that he forgives sins, primarily a writer of law, Calvin’s state­ grants grace, justifies, and saves sinners. ments about Moses tend to be more Although there are commandments in positive than statements about Moses

12 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel by Luther. Calvin genuinely loved Like Luther, Calvin heard the gospel Moses, including the Law of Moses, so being preached throughout the Old Tes­ that he wrote a multi-volume study on tament, making the difference between the last four books of the Pentateuch. the two Testaments one of degree and Luther chose to write more on the book place in the history of redemption: of Genesis than on the other Mosaic books, probably because he saw Genesis The doctrine of faith, in short, is attested as containing more gospel. by Moses and all the prophets: but, as For Calvin, the way of salvation was faith was not then clearly manifested, so the same under the old covenant as the time of faith [Galatians 3:23] is an under the new, justification by faith appellation here given, not in an abso­ alone: lute, but in a comparative sense, to the time of the New Testament.35 Abraham was justified by believing, because, when he received from God a Indeed, the elaborate ceremonies of promise of fatherly kindness, he embra­ the Old Testament Law itself spoke of ced it as certain. Faith, therefore, has a Christ and served as a schoolmaster to relation and a respect to such a divine lead to the coming Christ: promise as may enable men to place their trust and confidence in God.33 Beyond all doubt, ceremonies accom- plished their object, not merely by alar­ Calvin addressed the question of why ming and humbling the consci­ence, Moses had to add the law so many years but by exciting them to the faith of the later if the gospel had already been coming Redeemer. . . . The law, in short, given to Abraham. His answer is one was nothing else than an immense vari­ that would have pleased Luther – to ety of exercises, in which the worship­ show people their sin and need for pers were led by the hand to Christ.36 the gospel. Interpreting Galatians 3:19 (“What, then, was the purpose of the Luther and Calvin agree very signifi­ law? It was added because of trans­ cantly in seeing continuity with devel­ gressions until the Seed to whom the opment from the Old Testament to the promise referred had come.”), Calvin New Testament. Old Testament believ­ commented: ers looked forward to the redemption in Christ, whereas New Testament believ­ He means that the law was published ers look back in history to the redemp­ in order to make known transgressions, tive work of Christ, but all believers are and in this way to compel men to ac- justified by faith alone in the promise knowledge their guilt. . . . This is the of the gospel of Christ. In addition, true preparation for Christ.34 while the New Testament is preemi­ nently a book of gospel, that gospel is

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 13 Thomas K. Johnson properly understood only in relation to According to Luther, the primary the moral law that is contained in both problem with human reason is that it Testaments. continuously proclaims that people can Whether in the time of the Old Tes­ be justified by works of obedience to tament or the time of the New Tes­ the law, which is a complete rejection tament, Luther and Calvin saw the of the gospel: biblical message as always having two distinct but inseparable dimensions: Human reason and wisdom do not command and promise, law and gos­ understand this doctrine [the gospel]. pel. This is the continuous structure of Therefore they always teach the oppo­ the biblical divine-human encounter, site: “If you want to live to God, you because it is based on the divine and must observe the law; for it is written human natures. (Matthew 19:17) ‘If you would enter life, keep the commandments.’”38

Reason and the Moral Law Let reason be far away, that enemy of faith, which, in the temptations of sin “Reason cannot think correctly and death, relies not on the righteous­ about God; only faith can do so.”37 ness of faith or Christian righteousness, Frequent statements such as this have of which it is completely ignorant, but given Luther the reputation for being on its own righteousness or, at most, on opposed to the life of the mind and the righteousness of the law. As soon as the serious use of reason. Some have reason and the law are joined, faith viewed him as being almost an irra­ immediately loses its virginity. For tional romantic. In contrast, Calvin is nothing is more hostile to faith than the sometimes presented as being a cold, law and reason.39 unfeeling rationalist, working out an entire system of thought on the phil­ To understand these statements cor­ osophical basis of immutable divine rectly, one must remember that for decrees. Neither of these interpretations Luther, faith is never the construc­ of the Reformers is accurate because tion of an abstract system of religious they assume no differentiation in terms propositions, though Luther clearly of the object to which reason must be accepted the classical Christian creedal applied. Both Reformers saw reason as statements, such as the Apostles’ and properly pertaining to the realm of the Nicene Creeds. Faith is primarily per­ law, and when reason is used within the sonal reliance on the gospel. The prob­ realm of law, it is seen as a tremendous lem is that in experience, especially in gift of God. But when reason seeks to the experience of assaults on the soul exceed its proper bounds, going into (Anfechtungen in German), our fre­ the realm of gospel, reason can easily quent temptations to doubt God’s favor become an enemy of faith. and grace, believers are always prone to

14 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel move from trusting in the gospel to do more than he really can,” Luther’s trusting in works of obedience to the method of relating reason to practical, law, and fallen, sinful reason supports everyday affairs is clear: this tendency. Reason, in this precise sense and in this frequently recurring This is actually a good statement, but situation, moves people to confuse law in its proper place, that is, in politi­ and gospel, so that believers either fall cal, domestic, and natural affairs. For into the despair of doubting their abil­ example, if I, who exist in the realm of ity to please God or fall into the false reason, rule a family, build a house, or confidence that says they can please carry on a government office, and I do God on their own and do not need the as much as I can or what lies within gospel to become acceptable to God: me, I am excused.41

When it comes to experience, you will It is because of this distinct under­ find the gospel a rare guest but the law a standing of the proper realm of rea­ constant guest in your conscience, which son that Luther can speak so highly of is habituated to the law and the sense of Greek political philosophy and Roman sin; reason too supports this sense.40 law, even though he also speaks of reason and philosophy in very nega­ The problem with reason is that it tive terms. Reason can, of itself, know continually confuses law and gospel nothing about the gospel and tends to because it is the reason of proud, unbe­ confuse law and gospel; nevertheless, lieving people; even among believers, reason can know much about law and reason never completely overcomes the application of the moral law and this tendency to think we do not need practical wisdom in everyday life. In the gospel because we can do whatever this realm, reason is to be treasured. God demands in the law. However, The knowledge of the moral law pos­ it does not follow in any sense at all sessed by reason is the result of God’s that Luther thought people should be revelation through creation. However, unreasonable or irrational. The proper because of sin and unbelief, this rea­ solution is to employ reason to its full­ sonable knowledge of the moral law est in its proper realm – the realm of will often need to be corrected and everyday, practical affairs. It is impor­ supplemented by the command of God tant to notice that Luther likes to speak in the Scriptures; nevertheless, reason of reason as being applied in the realm can know the law. By the good use of of the “orders” – the realm where the reason, civil righteousness is possible civil use of the law applies. In discuss­ for many people who do not know the ing a popular proverb of his day, “God gospel: does not require of any man that he

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 15 Thomas K. Johnson

The sophists, as well as anyone else who to man in the gospel (no. 2 in this does not grasp the doctrine of justifica­ quotation). Though reason may not tion, do not know of any other righ- always be completely wrong in terms of teousness than civil righteousness or understanding God’s Being, statements the righteousness of the law, which are on this topic by philosophers “always known in some measure even to the show a certain giddy imagination.”44 Of heathen.42 course, unaided reason is completely wrong, blinder than a mole, in regard Calvin’s doctrine of the proper use of to understanding God’s fatherly care reason is so similar to Luther’s that one and the gospel. To properly trust in might be tempted to think that nothing the gospel and God’s fatherly care, the needs to be added to Luther’s doctrine, gospel, Scripture, and the internal tes­ but close analysis will discover a very timony of the Holy Spirit are needed. subtle shift of emphasis. For this topic, Though unaided reason is worthless one must turn to Calvin’s Institutes, in the realm of the gospel, Calvin was since the subject is rarely mentioned careful to articulate the great value of in his studies on Galatians. After a reason in area no. 3, that of “how to lengthy celebration of the ability of frame our life according to the rule of human rea­son in the natural realm, all his law.” This is the realm of the civil of which is the result of God’s general or public use of God’s moral law, some­ grace and general revelation, Calvin times called the natural moral law – the turns to the topic of what reason can realm of civil righteousness. Calvin know of God: returned to this theme:

We must now analyze what human There remains the third aspect of spiri­ reason can discern with regard to God’s tual insight, that of knowing the rule Kingdom and to spiritual insight. This for the right conduct of life. This we cor­ spiritual insight consists chiefly in three rectly call the “knowledge of the works things: (1) knowing God; (2) know­ing of righteousness.” The human mind his fatherly favor in our behalf, in which sometimes seems more acute in this than our salvation consists; (3) kno­wing how in higher things. For the apostle testifies: to frame our life according to the rule “When Gentiles, who do not have the of his law. In the two first points – and law, do the works of the law, they are especially in the second – the greatest a law to themselves . . . and show that geniuses are blinder than moles!43 the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears Calvin sometimes distinguishes witness, and their thoughts accuse them between knowing what God is like in among themselves or excuse them before and of himself (no. 1 in this quota­ God’s judgment” [Rom. 2:14–15]. If tion) from knowing how God relates Gentiles by nature have law righ teous­

16 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

ness engraved upon their minds, we does not allow us to sleep a perpetual surely cannot say they are utterly blind insensible sleep without being an inner as to the conduct of life. There is nothing witness and monitor of what we owe to more common than for a man to be suf­ God, without holding before us the dif­ ficiently instructed in a right standard ference between good and evil and thus of conduct by natural law.45 accusing us when we fail in our duty. But man is so shrouded in the darkness Calvin’s claim is that reason can of errors that he hardly begins to grasp often know right and wrong based on through this natural law what worship the natural (God-given) moral law, and is acceptable to God. . . . Accordingly that this knowledge often provides suf­ (because it is necessary both for our dull­ ficient knowledge for people to know ness and for our arrogance), the Lord how to organize their lives in a respon­ has provided us with a written law to sible manner. Calvin would never sug­ give us clearer witness of what was too gest that this knowledge equips people obscure in the natural law, shake off to earn God’s favor. Even though peo­ our listlessness, and strike more vigo­ ple often know the good and may do rously our mind and memory.46 the good well enough to attain a type of civil righteousness, they are still There may be a slight difference sinful; the natural knowledge of right between how Luther and Calvin under­ and wrong received by reason renders stand the influence of sin on our ability people that much more blameworthy to perceive the natural moral law. Cal­ before God for their sin. vin emphasizes the way in which the Calvin is also careful to qualify content of our knowledge is darkened, what reason knows about the moral while Luther emphasizes the way in law, so that no one mistakenly thinks which people tend to use this knowl­ the writ­ten moral law is unnecessary. edge to imagine they can earn God’s Sin has a deep effect on our knowing favor. But Luther and Calvin agree process. We do not always know what that there is knowledge of God’s natu­ we should be able to know by reason ral moral law available to reason that based on the natural moral law. This allows people to know right and wrong renders the written moral law extremely and order their lives together. There­ important: fore, reason must be used to order our lives in society. They also agree that Now that inward law [the natural unaided reason cannot know how to moral law], which we have above relate properly to God. Moreover, they described as written, even engraved, agree that the biblical revelation of the upon the hearts of all, in a sense asserts moral law is truly needed to know more the very same things that are to be fully what kinds of good works should learned from the two Tables [the Ten flow from true faith. Commandments]. For our conscience

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 17 Thomas K. Johnson

The Proper the law restrains sins, it justifies? Not at Uses of the Law all. When I refrain from killing or from committing adultery or from stealing, It is common to hear the claim that or when I abstain from other sins, I do a great difference between Luther and not do this voluntarily or from the love Calvin is to be found in their doctrines of virtue but because I am afraid of the of the proper uses of the moral law. sword and of the executioner. This pre­ What the evidence indicates is that vents me, as the ropes or chains prevent there is a difference in terminology, lit­ a lion or a bear from ravaging some­ erary style, and personality driven reac­ thing that comes along. . . . Thus the tions concerning the uses of the moral first understanding and use of the law law, but there are substantial similari­ is to restrain the wicked. For the devil ties between Luther and Calvin on this reigns in the whole world and drives subject. Calvin may have taken Luther’s men to all sorts of shameful deeds. This basic doctrine and lightly refined the is why God has ordained magistrates, terminology in a way that Calvin saw parents, teachers, laws, shackles, and all as compatible with Luther’s intentions, civic ordinances, so that, if they cannot though Luther might have been mildly do any more, they will at least bind the dissatisfied with some aspects of this hands of the devil and keep him from development. raging at will. . . . This civic restrain is The background for the discussion extremely necessary and was instituted lies in the apprehension that the moral by God, both for the sake of public law is not to be used to earn God’s peace and for the sake of preserving favor. Then, what are the proper uses everything, but especially to prevent the or functions of God’s law? Luther spoke course of the gospel from being hindered of two proper uses of the law, the civic by the tumults and seditions of wild and the theological, with the theologi­ men.47 cal use being ultimately primary. While discussing Galatians 3:19 (“What, As important as the civic use of the then, was the purpose of the law? It was law is, to hinder societal chaos and added because of transgressions until make a mere, external, civic righteous­ the Seed to whom the promise referred ness possible, it is not the most impor­ had come.”), Luther claimed: tant use of the law. The ultimate use of the law is to show us our sin and need Here one must know that there is a for the gospel: double use of the law. One is the civic use. God has ordained civic laws, The other use of the law is the theo­logical indeed all laws, to restrain transgres- or spiritual one, which serves to increase sions. Therefore, every law was given to transgressions. This is the primary pur­ hinder sins. Does this mean that when pose of the law of Moses, that through

18 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

it sin might grow and be multiplied, apostle Paul discussed all three proper especially in the consci­ence. Therefore uses of the law in that text. In discuss­ the true function and the chief and ing the same biblical text, Galatians proper use of the law is to reveal to man 3:19, Calvin mentioned one of his few his sin, blindness, misery, wickedness, understated criticisms of Luther: ignorance, hate, and con­tempt of God, death, hell, judgment, and the well For many, I find, have fallen into the deserved wrath of God.48 mistake of acknowledging no other advantage belonging to the law, but Hence this use of the law is extremely what is expressed here. Paul him­ beneficial and very necessary. For if self elsewhere speaks of the precepts of someone is not a murderer, adulterer, the law as profitable for doctrine and or thief, and abstains from external exhortations (2 Timothy 3:16). The sins, . . . he develops the presumption definition here given of the use of the of righteousness and relies on his good law [in Galatians 3:19] is not complete, works. God cannot soften and humble and those who refuse to make any other this man or make him acknowledge his acknowledgment in favor of the law do misery and damnation any other way wrong.50 than by the law.49 Calvin agrees with Luther that the At this point in his discussion, Luther Pauline book of Galatians teaches the waxes eloquent for many pages about two proper uses of the law taught by the value and use of the law of God, Luther. Calvin also insists that Paul but his point is already clear – there are and the rest of the Bible teach a third two distinct uses of the law that must use of the law. Calvin’s whole theory be clearly distinguished. In one usage, merits explanation. the law restrains sin to make civic life Calvin’s first use of the law is what possible, whether the law in this use he calls the “primitive” function of the comes directly from God or indirectly law; it is equivalent to Luther’s theo­ through human laws, civic authorities, logical or condemning use of the law: or other civilizing influences. The law’s other usage leads a person to despair But to make the whole matter clearer, and prepares him or her for hearing the let us survey briefly the function and use gospel. Because of its close relation to of what is called the “moral law.” Now, the gospel, the condemning or theo­ so far as I understand it, it consists of logical use of the law is primary. three parts. Calvin spoke about three uses of the law, but he did not discuss all three The first part is this: while it shows uses in the context of his studies in God’s righteousness, that is the righ­ Galatians because he did not think the teousness alone acceptable to God, it

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 19 Thomas K. Johnson

warns, informs, convicts, and lastly The second function of the law is this: at condemns, every man of his own least by fear of punishment to restrain unrighteousness. For man, blinded and certain men who are untouched by any drunk with self-love, must be compelled care for what is just and right unless to know and to confess his own feeble­ compelled by hearing the dire threats ness and impurity.51 in the law. But they are restrained not because their inner mind is stirred or Calvin goes on to compare the law affected, but because, being bridled, in this function with a mirror; just as a so to speak, they keep their hands from mirror shows one the spots on his face, outward activity, and hold inside the so also the law point out his sins. In this depravity that otherwise they would function, the law has different results wantonly have indulged.52 with believers and unbelievers. Unbe­ lievers are terrified, but believers flee to The differences here between Luther God’s mercy to find the perfect righ­ and Calvin are small but worth men­ teousness of Christ. Calvin and Luther tioning. Luther understood the moral used somewhat different language to law in its civic use as largely mediated describe this use of the law that may through societal orders, whether the reflect differences in life experience and state, the family, the school, or the personality. Luther seems to have gone church. Calvin seemed to conceive of through a two-step process. First, drop­ the civil use of the law as being largely ping into despair and terror, he then unmediated, coming in the direct turns away from the law as a means of encounter of every individual with salvation and turns to the gospel. With God. Of course, Calvin thought the the continuing assaults on his soul, the civil magistrate had the job of main­ law in this use seems to have repeat­ taining order in society and preventing edly driven Luther close to despair of societal chaos, which he thought to be God’s mercy. Luther’s language about about the worst of evils. Nevertheless, the moral law sometimes contains when he turned his mind to his second echoes of this despair and terror. Calvin use of the law, he first thought of each seems to have gone through a one-step person’s direct encounter with God. process, of immediately turning from Calvin’s third use of the law, which he the law to the gospel, without an inter­ considered its primary use, has evoked mediate step of deep despair, so that some discussion. He claimed: Calvin’s language about the moral law does not usually contain such echoes of The third and principal use, which per­ despair and terror. tains more closely to the proper use of the Calvin’s second use of the law is law, finds its place among believers in equivalent to Luther’s first use – the whose hearts the Spirit of God already civic or political use: lives and reigns. For even though they

20 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

have the law written and engraved For Calvin, the law can be a constant upon their hearts by the finger of God friend and companion of the Christian (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 10:16), that is, have in a way Luther might not have imag­ been so moved and quickened through ined. Calvin knew, like Luther, that the directing of the Spirit that they long the law always accuses believers, but to obey God, they still profit by the law for Calvin, this accusation is in light in two ways.53 of a deep and continuing assurance of God’s fatherly care, so all the threats Calvin goes on to say that the two and harshness can be removed from the ways in which the law helps believers believer’s experience of the accusations are by teaching what the will of God is, of the law. Like Luther, Calvin fully which believers desire to do, and also by affirmed the principle of simul justus et providing exhortations that rouse believ­ peccator, that the believer is simultane­ ers to continued obedience. Though ously justified and sinful; therefore, the Calvin does not use this termi­nology, believer needs the law of God as a guide this could be called “Use 3A” and “Use to life. But the new obedience to the 3B” of the moral law. Concerning “Use law should be an expression of gratitude 3A,” Calvin claims the law “is the best for the gospel without any hint of an instrument for them to learn more attempt to use the moral law as a tool thoroughly each day the nature of the for self-justification. Lord’s will to which they aspire, and to Was Calvin’s gentle criticism of confirm them in the understanding of Luther correct, if one assumes the it.”54 He uses vivid language to describe validity of Calvin’s three-fold use of “Use 3B” or the second benefit of the the law? The answer is “probably not,” moral law for believers: “by frequent because Luther’s view of the proper uses meditation upon it to be aroused to of the law is closer to Calvin’s than Cal­ obedience, be strengthened in it, and vin may have recognized, even though be drawn back from the slippery path Luther did not use the terminology of of transgression.”55 a “third use of the law.” One key reason Lest he be accused of thinking the for this claim is that the content com­ inner desires of the believer are entirely municated by Calvin’s “Use 3B” of the negative, he explains: law, that believers “be drawn back from the slippery path of transgression,” For the law is not now acting toward us would be included in Luther’s civic as a rigorous enforcement officer who is use of the law, that of restraining sin. not satisfied unless the requirements are Luther and Calvin both thought the sin met. But in this perfection to which it of believers needs to be restrained. The exhorts us, the law points out the goal small difference in terminology only toward which throughout life we are to relates to whether this is the first or strive.56 third use of the law.

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 21 Thomas K. Johnson

Then there is the question of know­ Luther perceived; namely, the works he ing the will of God, to which believers had been doing were the wrong works. should aspire. Calvin called this third True good works had to be done in obe­ use of the law “primary” in a way that dience to God’s word in the Scriptures Luther did not. But for Calvin this use and flow from faith in the gospel, not of the moral law was “primary” in an as a substitute for faith in the gospel. It ideal sense that would only obtain if is hard to see a large difference between the people of God were all walking by this teaching of Luther and Calvin’s faith and merely questioning what they “Use 3A.” should do. In practice, Calvin seems It is true that Luther made many to make the theological or condemn­ negative statements about the law. In ing use of the law more important. the “Preface” to his study on Galatians, This is seen from the very outline of he claimed: his Institutes, because the long discus­ sion of the Decalogue is included in The highest act and wisdom of Chris­ the section analyzing the human pre­ tians is not to know the law, to ignore dicament, prior to his discussion of works and all active righteousness, just the gospel of Christ. Calvin is clearly as outside the people of God the highest using the law in its theological use of wisdom is to know and study the law, showing sin in a preeminent manner works and active righteousness.57 in his most important book. If Calvin had only emphasized the “third” use of Nevertheless, Luther also said believ­ the law, then he would have discussed ers are to obey the moral law, even after the law at length after his discussion of their justification: Christology and justification by faith. In practice, Calvin’s use of the law is When outward duties must be perfor­ very close to following Luther’s recom­ med, then, whether you are a preacher, mendations about which use of the law a magistrate, a husband, a teacher, a is most important. pupil, etc., this is not time to listen to At the same time, Luther’s notion the gospel. You must listen to the law of the “Command of God” found in and follow your vocation.58 Scripture as the norm for the Christian life is remarkably close to Calvin’s “Use But the works of the law must be per­ 3A” of the law, showing how Christians formed either before justification or should live in faith and in gratitude for after justification.59 the gospel. The main problem with most of the works Luther had done as It is important to notice that Luther a monk was that they were intended to thinks the works of the law must be deserve or earn God’s favor. However, performed even after justification. This there was also a second problem that sounds similar to Calvin. Additionally,

22 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

Luther says the works of obedience to Therefore Moses, together with Paul, the moral law do not only follow jus­ necessarily drives us to Christ, through tification in a chronological manner; whom we become doers of the law and works of obedience to the law are the are accounted guilty of no transgression. spiritual fruit of justification by faith: How? First, through the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of righteous­ Anyone who wants to exert himself ness, on account of faith in Christ; toward righteousness must first expert secondly, through the gift of the Holy himself in listening to the gospel. Now Spirit, who creates a new life and new when he has heard and accepted this, impulses in us, so that we may keep the let him joyfully give thanks to God, and law also in a formal sense.62 then let him exert himself in good works that are commanded in the law; thus Neither Luther nor Calvin thought the law and works will follow hearing it possible for believers to keep the with faith. Then he will be able to walk law completely – what was then called safely in the light that is Christ; to be keeping the law in a “material” sense, certain about choosing and doing works but Luther taught that law-keeping by that are not hypocritical but truly good, believers had at least three important pleasing to God, and commanded by purposes: him; and to reject all the mummery of self-chosen works.60 Then what is the purpose of keeping it [the law] if it does not justify? The final In another context, after contrasting cause of the obedience of the law by the the righteousness of the law with the righteous is not righteousness in the righteousness of faith, Luther declares: sight of God, which is received by faith alone, but the peace of the world, grati­ When he [Christ] has been grasped by tude toward God, and a good example faith, then the Holy Spirit is granted by which others are invited to believe on Christ’s account. Then God and the gospel.63 neighbor are loved, good works are per­ formed, and the cross is borne. This is Like Calvin, Luther taught that really keeping the law; otherwise the keeping the moral law of God was the law remains permanently unkept. . . . proper expression of gratitude for the Hence it is impossible for us to keep the gift and promise of the gospel. There law without the promise.61 were small differences in terminology regarding the proper uses of the law, A little later Luther elaborated this with differences of personality and per­ conviction: sonal history behind those differences in terminology, but the massive level of agreement between Luther and Calvin

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 23 Thomas K. Johnson set a direction for responsible Protes­tant to keep the moral law, or falling into discussions of the use of God’s law. false confidence because of supposed earned righteousness, or turning to the gospel for forgiveness and justification. Comments People also have a strong tendency to believe some gospel, whether the Gos­ Luther and Calvin thought that the pel of Christ, the “gospel” of their own relationship between law and gospel self-righteousness, or the “gospel” of was central for evangelical theology some other messiah. Believing a gospel and ethics for several reasons. The first is hard to avoid. This existential rela­ is that they saw this relation as central tion to law and gospel is constant and in the Bible, in both the Old and New dynamic; it continues throughout a Testaments; in other words, the biblical lifetime. For this reason, it will be wise exegete or interpreter has not properly for evangelical pastors to address these examined the Scriptures if this rela­ issues continually in preaching and pas­ tion between law and gospel has not toral care. In sermons, Bible studies, been perceived in the entire Bible. This and pastoral counseling, evangelical consideration must not be forgotten in Christians should see law (in its mul­ responsible evangelical hermeneutics. tiple uses) and gospel as truly central Following directly from this, the ability to the application of the biblical mes­ to clearly distinguish and relate law and sage and central to the divine-human gospel was regarded as central to rec­ encounter.64 ognizing a person as a true evangelical There have been recurring weaknesses theologian – something to be remem­ in the evangelical tradition that can be bered while interviewing people for addressed by means of the Reformation positions of leadership in evangelical teaching on law and gospel. One of churches. This ability is what enables a these weaknesses has been the tendency person to apply the biblical message to to forget the connection between the human experience in a balanced man­ moral law and God’s general revelation ner that flows from a central structure through creation.65 Forgetting this con­ of the biblical proclamation. nection has caused some evangelicals to Closely related to these considerations miss the way in which people who do is the apprehension by the Reform­ not yet believe the gospel will already ers, not always clearly stated, that the be encountering God’s law in both its relationship between law and gospel theological and civic uses. This will addresses one of the deepest existen­ influence our approach to social ethics, tial dynamics inside human beings. culture, and missions. In social ethics, People will always do something with believers with a Reformation theology the moral law, whether falling into will work on the assumption that all despair because of a thorough inability people have already encountered God’s

24 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel moral law through creation; therefore, A further weakness in the evangeli­cal moral claims that are rooted in the tradition has been a tendency to for­get Bible will clarify and strengthen moral the civic use of the moral law, which knowledge that people should, in prin­ can be observed in Pietism, Methodism, ciple, already know, even though this Revivalism, and Fundamentalism. This knowledge may be darkened or sup­ has made it more difficult for evangeli­ pressed. In missions, Reformation cals to develop responsible social ethics based Christians can expect that peo­ that do not either sound like an attempt ple will have questions and anxieties to flee the world under the influence of arising from their encounter with the an ethics of holy community, or else moral law in its theological use; for this sound like an attempt to take over the reason, there is a correlation or ques­ world in an ethics of theocratic domi­ tion/answer relation between the gospel nation. There is a distinct and proper and human experience.66 In relation to relation of the moral law, given by God, culture, each of the uses of the moral to human experience, reason, and soci­ law, as well as the gospel, implies a dis­ ety, which we must learn to use in our tinct relationship of believers and the civic ethics. This will enable us to talk biblical message to culture. With these and act as responsible citizens contrib­ things in mind, it is wise to think of uting to the public good, while being Christianity as having a four-part rela­ clear and open about our Christian tion or four distinct relationships to faith, without following the fight or culture.67 flight relation to society seen in both Another weakness sometimes the ethics of a holy community and the observed in the evangelical tradition ethics of domination.68 We can learn to has been a tendency to miss the way that proclaim the moral law in its civil or moral law relates to reason and the way political use. the gospel relates to reason. The gospel Therefore, I believe it will be wise to way is very different. The claim that see the relation between law and gos­ “we are justified in Christ” is purely a pel as a hermeneutical/homiletical key statement of faith in the promises of the in a two-fold sense. On the one hand, gospel, whereas the claim that “murder in a historical sense, this is the key to is wrong” is closely tied to reason as the Reformers’ hermeneutics and homi­ well as to faith. This should lead to far letics (and all of their practical theol­ more differentiation in our discussions ogy), so that we must understand what of faith and reason. This differentiation they said on this topic if we wish to should have a sig­nificant influence on understand the Reformation and its how we discuss the proper ways of inte­ effects. On the other hand, we should grating evangeli­cal theology and ethics see the relation between law and gos­ with learning in the various academic pel as a hermeneutical/homiletical key fields. if we wish to stand in the evangelical

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 25 Thomas K. Johnson and Reformation tradition to interpret, give a substantial and unified structure apply, and proclaim the biblical message to our hermeneutics, theology, ethics, in late modernity. This distinction will practical theology, and homiletics.

AnnotationAnmerkungen

1 Lewis W. Spitz, The Renaissance and Reforma­ So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that tion Movements, 2 volumes (St. Louis: Concordia we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by Publishing House, 1971), vol. 2, The Reforma­ observing the law, because by obser­ving the law tion, p. 412. no one will be justified.” 2 Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, ed. and trans. 8 Calvin 63. Jaroslav Pelikan, assoc. ed. Walter A. Hansen, 9 Calvin 64. vol. 26: Lectures on Galatians, 1535 (St. Louis: 10 Concordia Publishing House, 1963), p. 115. Calvin 85. 11 3 Luther 313. Calvin 151. 12 4 Luther 120. Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 129. 13 5 Luther 342. Luther 143. 14 6 John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul Calvin, Galatians, p. 66. to the Galatians and Ephesians, trans. Wil­liam 15 Calvin 67. Pringle, (Edinburgh: The Calvin Transla­tion 16 Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 155. Society, 1854. Reprinted Grand Rapids: Baker 17 This is what later scholars often call “extra- Books, 1979), p. 67. In the quotations from the mundane asceticism” in contrast with the “intra- Pringle translation of Calvin, the English spelling mundane asceticism” taught by Luther and and punctuation have been freely modernized. Calvin. Luther and Calvin taught that believers 7 The biblical text Calvin is considering is Galat- should practice a serious religious self denial, ians 2:11–16. In the New International Version it but that real self-denial, “taking up one’s cross,” reads: “ 11When Peter came to Antioch, I oppo­ should occur in the everyday realm. sed him to his face, because he was clearly in the 18 Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 212. wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, 19 he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they Luther 213. Luther is thinking about the New arrived, he began to draw back and separate him­ Testament commands to servants in which the self from the Gentiles because he was afraid of apostles exhorted the slaves and servants in the those who belonged to the circumcision group. early church to serve their masters respectfully 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, and sincerely before God. According to Luther, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led the fact of these commands indicates that being astray. 14When I saw that they were not acting a servant is a proper way of serving God. in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter 20 Calvin, Galatians, p. 152. in front of them all, „You are a Jew, yet you live 21 Calvin 159–160. like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, 22 that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 72. 15“We who are Jews by birth and not ‚Gentile 23 Luther 73. sinners‘ 16know that a man is not justi­fied by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.

26 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

24 Luther 85. With the term “free in their consci­ 59 Luther 123. ence,” Luther seems to mean aware of a status of 60 Luther 214–215. full acceptance before God. 61 Luther 255. 25 Luther 147. 62 Luther 260. 26 Luther 255. 63 Luther 273. The term “final cause” was a way 27 Luther 210. of talking about purpose that was inspired by the 28 Luther 239. terminology of Aristotle. 29 Luther 433. 64 The second question and answer of The Heidel­ 30 Luther 150. berg Catechism (1563) clearly used this frame­ 31 work for explaining the Reformation faith. After Calvin, Galatians, pp. 14, 15. the wonderful first question and answer about 32 Calvin 99. Christian comfort, the learner is asked, “How 33 Calvin 84. many things must you know that you may live and die in the blessedness of this comfort?” 34 Calvin 100. The answer makes use of the clear Reformation 35 Calvin 107. distinction between law and gospel, empha­ 36 Calvin 109. sizing the theological (convicting of sin) and 37 Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 238. third use, defining the type of works that are suitable in response to God’s grace proclaimed 38 Luther 156. and made effective by the Gospel. That answer 39 Luther 113. says, “Three. First, the greatness of my sin and 40 Luther 117. wretchedness. Second, how I am freed from all my sins and their wretched consequences. Third, 41 Luther 173, 174. Emphasis added. what gratitude I owe to God for such redemp­ 42 Luther 261. tion.” These answers set a precedent and direc­ 43 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, tion for the understanding and application of the ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles biblical message; unfortunately, the “civil use” of (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), the moral law gets little mention here. Quota­ II,ii,18. tion from the 400th anniversary edition, United Church Press, 1962. 44 Calvin II,ii,18. 65 Unfortunately, Karl Barth did much to pro­ 45 Calvin II, ii, 22. mote this problem by his rejection of general 46 Calvin II,viii,1. revelation. 47 Luther, Galatians, 1535, 308–309. 66 It is proper to use the term “correlation” in 48 Luther 309. Reformation based theology without necessarily 49 Luther 310. intending everything that Paul Tillich meant by that term. 50 Calvin, Galatians 99–100. 67 51 I have explained this further in “Christ and Calvin, Institutes II,vii,6. Culture,” MBS Text 79. See www.bucer.eu. 52 Institutes II,vii,10. 68 I have addressed these topics in my Natu­ 53 Institutes, II, vi,12. ral Law Ethics: An Evangelical Proposal (Bonn: 54 Institutes, II, vi,12. VKW, 2005) and in “Biblical Principles in the Public Square,” MBS Text 108, available at 55 Institutes, II, vi,12. www.bucer.eu. This also forms the background 56 Institutes, II, vi,13. for my Human Rights: A Christian Primer (World 57 Luther, Galatians, 1535, p. 6. Evangelical Alliance, 2008). 58 Luther 117.

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 27 Thomas K. Johnson

BibliographyBibliografie

Althaus, Paul. Kirche und Staat nach lutherischer Barth, Karl, and Brunner, Emil. Natural Theo­ Lehre. Leipzig: Deichert, 1935. logy. Translated by Peter Fraenkel. Intro­ ___. The Divine Command: A New Perspective duction by John Baillie. London: Geoffrey on Law and Gospel. Translated by Franklin Bless: The Centenary Press, 1946. Sherman. Introduction by William H. Laza­ Bloesch, Donald G. Freedom for Obedience. New reth. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966. York: Harper & Row, 1987. ___. The Theology of Martin Luther. Translated Bruce, F. F. “The Grace of God and the Law of by Robert C. Schultz. Philadelphia: Fortress Christ: A Study in Pauline Ethics.” In God Press, 1966. and the Good, an essay in honor of Henry ___. The Ethics of Martin Luther. Translated Stob, pp. 22–34. Edited by Clifton Orle­ by Robert Schultz. Philadelphia: Fortress, beke and Lewis Smedes. Grand Rapids: 1972. Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1975. Aquinas, Thomas.Treatise on Law (Summa Theo­ Budziszewski, J. Written on the Heart: The Case logica Questions 90–97). Introduction by for Natural Law. Downers Grove: Intervar­ Stanley Parry. South Bend: Regnery/Gate­ sity Press, 1997. way, no date. Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Barth, Karl. The Epistle to the Romans. Trans­ Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Edited by lated from the sixth edition by Edwyn John T. McNeill. Volumes 20 and 21 in the C. Hoskyns. London/Oxford/New York: Library of Christian Classics. Philadelphia: Oxford University Press, 1933. Westminster Press, 1960. ___. Die protestantische Theologie im 19. Jahrhun­ ___. Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the dert. Zurich: Evangelischer Verlag, 1946. Galatians and Ephesians. Translated by Wil­ liam Pringle. Edinburgh: The Calvin Trans­ Eine Schweizer Stimme 1938–1945 ___. . Zolli­ lation Society, 1854. Reprint edition: Grand kon-Zurich: Evangelischer Verlag, 1948. Rapids: Baker Books, 1979. The Faith of the Church ___. . Edited by Jean- Cromartie, Michael, ed. A Preserving Grace: Louis Lueba. Translated by Gabriel Vaha­ Protestants, Catholics, and Natural Law. nian. Cleveland/New York: The World Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Publishing Company, 1958. Center/Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, ___. Church Dogmatics: a Selection. Selected and 1997. introduced by Helmut Gollwitzer. Trans­ Curry, Dean. “Reclaiming Natural Law,” an lated and edited by G. W. Bromiley. New article reviewing Written on the Heart by J. York: Harper & Row, 1962. Budziszewski and A Preserving Grace, edited ___. Community, State, and Church: Three Essays. by Michael Cromartie, in First Things, 77 Introduction by Will Herberg, “The Social (Nov. 1997), pp. 56–59. Philosophy of Karl Barth.” Gloucester, Mas­ Dowey, Edward. “The Third Use of the Law sachusetts: Peter Smith, 1968. in Calvin’s Theology,” in Social Progress, ___. Church Dogmatics, Vol. 1: The Doctrine of November, 1958. the Word of God, Part One. Translated by Forde, Gerhard O. The Law-Gospel Debate: An Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Edinburgh: T&T Interpretation of Its Historical Development. Clark, 1975. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1969.

28 MBS Te x t e 138 Law and Gospel

Forell, George W. Faith Active in Love: An Inve­ Hadidian, General Editor. Allison Park: stigation of the Principles Underlying Luther’s Pickwick Publications, 1992. Social Ethics. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publis­ Johnson, Thomas K. Helmut Thielicke’s Ethics of hing House, 1954. Law and Gospel. Ph.D. dissertation, Univer­ ___. Ethics of Decision: An Introduction to Chri­ sity of Iowa, 1987. stian Ethics. Philadephia: Fortress Press, ___. Natural Law Ethics: An Evangelical Propo­ 1955. sal. Bonn: Verlag für Kultur und Wissen­ ___. “The Political Use of the Law.” In Luther schaft, 2005. and Culture, by George W. Forell, Harold ___. Human Rights: A Christian Primer. World J. Grimm, and Theodore Hoelty-Nickel. Evangelical Alliance, Global Issues, Vol. 1, Decorah, IA: Luther College Press, 1960. 2008. ___. “Realized Faith, the Ethics of Dietrich Bon­ Johnson, Wayne. Theological Method in Luther hoeffer.” In The Place of Bonhoeffer. Edited and Tillich: Law-Gospel and Correlation. by Martin E. Marty. New York: Association University Press of America, 1982. Press, 1962. Leith, John H. “Creation and Redemption: Law ___. “Law and Gospel.” In Marburg Revisited: and Gospel in the Theology of John Calvin.” A Reexamination of Lutheran and Reformed In Marburg Revisited: A Reexamination Traditions, pp. 128–140. Edited by Paul C. of Lutheran and Reformed Traditions, pp. Impie and James I. McCord. Minneapolis: 141–151. Edited by Paul C. Empie & James Augsburg Publishing House, 1966. I. McCord. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publis­ ___., ed. Christian Social Teachings: A Reader in hing House, 1966. Christian Social Ethics from the Bible to the Luther, Martin. The Bondage of the Will. Trans­ Present. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing lated by J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston. House, 1971. Introduction by J. I. Packer. Westwood, NJ: ___. The Proclamation of the Gospel in a Plura­ Revell, 1957. listic World: Essays on Christianity and Cul­ ___. Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings. ture. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973. Edited with an introduction by John Dil­ ___. The Christian Lifestyle. Philadelphia: lenberger. Garden City: Doubleday Anchor Fortress Press, 1975. Books, 1961. ___. The Protestant Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress ___. Luther’s Works. Volumes 26 and 27. Lectu­ Press, 1975. res on Galatians, 1535. Edited and transla­ ___. History of Christian Ethics. Vol. 1: From the ted by Jaroslav Pelikan in association with New Testament to Augustine. Minneapolis: Walter A. Hansen. St. Louis: Concordia Augsburg Publishing House, 1979. Publishing House, 1963. Hesslink, I. John. “Christ, the Law, and the McNeill, John T. “Natural Law in the Thought of Christian: An unexplored aspect of the third Luther.” Church History, X (1941): 211–227. use of the Law in Calvin’s Theology.” In ___. “Natural Law in the Teaching of the Refor­ Reformation Perennis,, pp. 11–26. Edited by mers.” The Journal of Religion, XXVI (1946): B. A. Gerrish in collaboration with Robert 168–182. Benedetto. Pittsburgh: The Pickwick Press, ___. The History and Character of Calvinism. 1981. Oxford University Press, 1954. ___. On Being Reformed: Distinctive Characteri­ Peters, Albrecht. Gesetz und Evangelium. stics and Common Misunderstandings. Ann Handbuch Systematischer Theologie, no. Arbor: Servant Books, 1984. 2. Guetersloh: Guetersloher Verlagshaus ___. Calvin’s Concept of the Law. Princeton Mohn, 1981. Theological Monograph Series, Kikran Y.

Re f o rm i e rt e s Fo r u m 29 Thomas K. Johnson

Soe, N. H. Christliche Ethik. Translated from ___. Theologische Ethik, Band II,2: Entfaltung. 2. Danish into German by Walter Thiemann. Teil: Ethik des Politischen. Tuebinggen: J. C. Munich: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1949. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1958. Spitz, Lewis W. The Renaissance and Reformation ___. The Freedom of the Christian Man: A Chri­ Movements, 2 volumes. St. Louis: Concordia stian Confrontation with the Secular Gods. Publishing House, 1971. translated by John W. Doberstein. New Thielicke, Helmut. Theologische Ethik, Band I: York: Harper & Row, 1963. Prinzipienlehre. Dogmatische, philosophische, ___. Theologische Ethik, Band III, Entfaltung: 3. und kontrovers-theologische Grundlegung. Teil, Ethik der Gesellschaft, des Rechtes, der Tuebingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Sexualitaet und der Kunst. Tuebingen: J. C. 1951. Most of this book was translated as B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1964. Theological Ethics: Volume I: Foundations, Verhey, Allen. “Natural Law in Aquinas and translated and edited by William H. Laza­ Calvin.” In God and the Good, essays in reth. Fortress: 1966. honor of Henry Stob, pp. 8–92. Edited by ___. Theologische Ethik, Band II: Entfaltung. 1. Clifton Orlebeke and Lewis Smedes. Grand Teil: Mensch und Welt. Tuebingen: J. C. B. Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1975. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1955.

TheÜber den Author Autor

Thomas K. Johnson received his Ph.D. in ethics from the Uni- versity of Iowa (1987) after being a research scholar at Eberhard Karls Universität (Tübingen). He has an ACPE from Missouri Bap- tist Hospital (St. Louis, 1981), a Master of Divinity (Magna Cum Laude) from Covenant Theological Seminary (St. Louis, 1981), and a BA (Cum Laude) from Hope College (Michigan, 1977). He is a pastor of the Presbyterian Church in America. Since 1994 he has served the International Institute for Christian Studies and is now IICS Profes- sor of Theology, Philosophy, and Public Policy. He was a visiting professor at the European Humanities University in Minsk, Belarus, 1994–1996. (UHU is a dissident, anti-Communist university, forced into exile by the Belarusian dicta- tor in 2004.) Since 1996 he and his wife have lived in Prague, where he taught philosophy at Anglo-American University (4 years) and at Charles University (8 ½ years). He is MBS Professor of Apologetics and Ethics (2003) and Vice President for Research (2007). His wife, Leslie P. Johnson, is director of the Christian International School of Prague.

30 MBS Te x t e 138 BUCE Martin Bucer Seminar N R I S T E Berlin • Bonn • Chemnitz • Hamburg • Pforzheim R M

A

I

Ankara • Innsbruck • Prag • Zlin • Zürich N

M

A

2

R

Studienzentrum Berlin 1

:

E 4

P Martin Bucer Seminar, Breite Straße 39B, 13187 Berlin H E-Mail: [email protected] Studienzentrum Bonn Martin Bucer Seminar, Friedrichstr. 38, 53111 Bonn E-Mail: [email protected] Publisher: Studienzentrum Chemnitz: Thomas Schirrmacher, Martin Bucer Seminar, Mittelbacher Str. 6, 09224 Chemnitz E-Mail: [email protected] Prof. Dr. phil., Dr. theol., DD. Studienzentrum Hamburg Editor: Ron Kubsch Martin Bucer Seminar, c/o ARCHE, Editorial Committee: Doerriesweg 7, 22525 Hamburg Thomas Kinker, Titus Vogt, E-Mail: [email protected] Contact: Studienzentrum Pforzheim [email protected] Martin Bucer Seminar, Bleichstraße 59, 75173 Pforzheim www.bucer.de E-Mail: [email protected] Website: www.bucer.de E-Mail: [email protected]

Studycenters outside Germany: MBS-Te x t e (MBS-Te x ts ) Studienzentrum Ankara: [email protected] Studienzentrum Innsbruck: [email protected] Reformiertes Forum Studienzentrum Prag: [email protected] (Reformed Forum) Studienzentrum Zlin: [email protected] Es erscheinen außerdem Studienzentrum Zürich: [email protected] folgende Reihen: Martin Bucer Seminary is no university according to German (The following series of MBS law, but just offers courses and lists all courses in a final di- Texts are also being published:) ploma. Whitefield Theological Seminary (Florida, USA) and other schools outside of Europe accept thoses courses un- Hope for Europe der their own legal responsibility for granting their degrees Theologische Akzente to students. Much of the teaching is by means of Saturday (Theological Accents) seminars, evening courses, extension courses, independent study, and internships. Geistliche Impulse (Spiritual Impulses) The work of the seminary is largely supported by the con- tributions of donors. North American supporters may send Pro Mundis contributions to our American partner organization, The Ergänzungen zur Ethik International Institute for Christian Studies. Checks should (Ethics) be made out to IICS, with a note mentioning MBS and sent to: Philosophische Anstöße (Philosophical Initiatives) The International Institute for Christian Studies: Vorarbeiten zur Dogmatik P.O. Box 12147, Overland Park, KS 66282-2147, USA (Preliminaries for a Systematic EU: Theology) IBAN DE52 3701 0050 0244 3705 07 BIC PBNKDEFF