Justification and Church: Backwards Wright

May 1st, 2012 Post by

What is the Church? She is a shelter from the storm for sinners who thirst for mercy in Christ. She is the collection of all believers who have been called by the gospel into faith in Christ. She is the bride of her Bridegroom Christ, who has cleansed her from all blame by the washing of water with the Word, where new-born infants are born through baptism, being fed with that pure spiritual milk of the gospel. And she is also a family, that is, the family of God’s children who the Holy Spirit keeps in unity of spirit by working forgiveness and salvation through Jesus’ merit.

But we must be careful not to misunderstand what we mean in saying that the Church is a family. The Church is not a family that consumes  and overshadows the natural family. That is, Christian fathers and Christian mothers have no right to absorb their entire day with the “activities” in the “Church family” at the expense of their families at home. Also, the Church is not modeled after the natural family. As a natural family is active, getting the kids to school, getting to work, doing chores around the house, the family of God is also active.

But being active is not what makes and preserves the family of God.  I once read a poem in a church-basement talking about how we should be active in the congregation by joining this or that social group or participating in this or that committee.  If we are going to talk about ways to be active, how about we talk about confessing Christ before men, inviting our friends to church, bearing each other’s burdens, and caring for the poor.  But we cannot be active  unless we passively hear and learn God’s Word and receive the sacraments for the forgiveness of sins.  It is what we passively receive on which the Church rests, namely Christ and His righteousness.  Certainly acts of mercy toward the poor are intimately connected to the activity of the Church.  After all, it is safe to say that preaching God’s mercy in Christ would be accompanied with acts of mercy. But these works which proceed from faith do not define the Church. The marks of the Church are the pure preaching of the gospel and the right administration of the sacraments.

If our definition of the Church is determined apart from the doctrine of Justification that God declares the sinner righteous on account of the perfect obedience of Christ through faith in Christ, then the Church has lost her meaning. This is what happens if we follow the teaching of N. T. Wright. He looks at Justification in light of the covenant family of God (or his view of the Church). Concerning Genesis 15:6, he writes:

Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as the badge of his membership in, indeed his foundation status within, the covenant family which God was creating. (Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 2009. pg. 134)

He expresses the importance of understanding Paul’s view of Justification “within the larger framework of Paul’s theology of God’s covenant with and through Abraham for the world, now fulfilled in Christ (pg. 235),” arguing that this will help us understand the place of works in Justification.  Wright has it all backwards. He says we cannot understand Justification unless we view it in light of the covenant of the Church, the family of God. Actually, it is the other way around. We cannot understand the Church unless we understand Justification.

Paul goes back to Genesis 15 for his proof that Justification is by faith and apart from works. He does this in both Romans 4 and in Galatians 3. Paul is observing the hermeneutical principle by which we go back to the institution. Although God certainly justified even those before Abraham by faith, it is first clearly expressed with Abraham.  So Paul goes back to Abraham. He uses the same principle when he explains the Lord’s Supper to the Corinthians (1st Cor 11) by quoting the actual institution of the Lord’s Supper. Jesus does this as well in Matthew 19 when asked about marriage and divorce. He pointed back to the institution of marriage in Genesis 2:24. In his book on the Lord’s Supper, Chemnitz points this out. He writes:

Obviously there is never a time when sharp minds are lacking a pretext for finding Scripture passages which are in conflict with one another; as when the Pharisees in Matt. 19:3 ff. place in opposition to the institution of marriage the passage from Moses regarding the bill of divorcement… Christ answers the Pharisees that the basis of the doctrine of marriage is in the Words of its institution and that therefore the other passages of Scripture must be interpreted according to these Words and not vice versa. (Chemnitz, Martin. The Lord’s Supper. Translated by J.A.O. Preus II. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Pub., 1979. pg. 76.)

This is exactly what Paul does.  In Romans 4, he goes back to the covenant with Abraham to prove that “to the one who does not work but trusts in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted to him as righteousness.”

It is true that in his Epistles, Paul expresses the importance of Church unity, but his entire argument for the Church and her unity depends on the doctrine of Justification by faith. Justification is not merely a membership card to get into the Church, because there is no Church unless there are holy people, and there cannot be holy people unless their sins are taken away by Christ’s death and they are credited with that righteousness which is required to stand before God as holy people.  So how can Paul even begin to speak to the Ephesians about Church unity? He must first declare that they have redemption in Christ’s blood and that in Christ, God has chosen them to be holy and blameless in His sight (Eph 1:4ff). There is no unity in Christ unless in Christ we are reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:18-19).

There is also no unity in Christ unless the doctrine of Justification by faith alone continues in the life of the Church. Again, Justification is not merely a membership card; rather, it is the very life of the Church. Every time a Christian comes in faith to receive from Jesus His very body and blood, he receives the same declaration of righteousness of that glorious Easter Morning. This reality of Justification wrought by Christ when He suffered for our sins and rose from the grave is delivered to His Church continually through His Word. Sanctification is the constant renewal of Justification; it is the work of the Holy Spirit richly and daily forgiving the sins of all believers (SC, II, 3). This is the only way for the Church to grow, to have fellowship, or to serve the needy. The family of God is not strengthened by making itself relevant. Rather, the family of God is strengthened when Christians confess Christ before men and when families gather around the Word of truth and the altar of mercy. It is strengthened when Christian parents teach their children the gospel of Justification by faith in Christ by reading the Word of God at home, singing Christ-centered hymns, and praying in Jesus’ Name. Because it is not our praying that strengthens us, but the Name in which we pray, the Name by which He shall be called: The Lord our Righteousness (Jer 23:6).






Rules for comments on this site:


Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics.  Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand.  If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.


Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.


Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example.  If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.


If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.


Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.


Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives.  If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.


We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology.  This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.

  1. John
    May 2nd, 2012 at 08:57 | #1

    I really enjoyed reading this, Andrew. Well said.

  2. May 2nd, 2012 at 11:05 | #2

    @John #1
    Thanks John!

  3. Nathan
    May 2nd, 2012 at 14:29 | #3

    Andrew,

    “In Romans 4, he goes back to the covenant with Abraham to prove that “to the one who does not work but trusts in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted to him as righteousness.”

    I recently learned the New Perspective folks (at least some of them) see the “ungodly” here as Paul referring to the Gentiles, who at that time, were called this. So even though in Romans 5 the same word should be taken to refer to all persons, in Romans 4, Paul is using irony.

    So I’ve heard. I’ve found Andrew Das’ writings helpful in taking on the New Perspective.

    +Nathan

  4. Rolf Preus
    May 2nd, 2012 at 14:45 | #4

    You’re right about Wright.

  5. May 2nd, 2012 at 15:46 | #5

    N. T. Wright is wrong about the N. T.

  6. May 2nd, 2012 at 15:47 | #6

    @Nathan #3
    Nathan, are you referring to Das’ article in Logia from a couple of years ago? That was good. I also liked Roy Harrisville’s article on the Pistis Christou.

    @Rolf Preus #4
    Thanks, Dad.

  7. Carl H
    May 2nd, 2012 at 19:02 | #7

    From the main post: “The marks of the Church are the pure preaching of the gospel and the right administration of the sacraments.”

    From the lips of Jesus: “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” John 13:35

  8. May 2nd, 2012 at 19:10 | #8

    @Carl H #7
    So the marks of the church are our works?

    Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
    (Matthew 16:13-19)

    So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.
    (Ephesians 2:19-22)

    I would say it’s safe to say that Christ and His doctrine are the marks of the Church.

  9. May 2nd, 2012 at 19:34 | #9

    @Carl H #7

    “[We are speaking not of an imaginary Church, which is to be found nowhere; but we say and know certainly that this Church, wherein saints live, is and abides truly upon earth; namely, that some of God's children are here and there in all the world, in various kingdoms, islands, lands, and cities, from the rising of the sun to its setting, who have truly learned to know Christ and His Gospel.] And we add the marks: the pure doctrine of the Gospel [the ministry or the Gospel] and the Sacraments” Apology VII, VIII, 20.

  10. Tom
    May 2nd, 2012 at 20:38 | #10

    Great job Andrew,

    You don’t know how much I needed to hear that this week!

  11. May 2nd, 2012 at 22:41 | #11

    @Tom #10
    Thanks, Tom. I appreciate it.

  12. Nathan
    May 3rd, 2012 at 16:08 | #12

    Andrew,

    I don’t know if I read that Logia article. He did at least one for the Concordia Journal about 10 years ago which was good.

    I found these books of his helpful:

    http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Law-Covenant-Andrew-Das/dp/0801045991/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336079080&sr=1-1

    http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Jews-Library-Pauline-Studies/dp/0801045983/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336079080&sr=1-3

    They are both published by Baker Academic.

    Also, his more popular work, “Baptized into God’s Family”, is one of the best out there, I think.

    +Nathan

  13. May 3rd, 2012 at 17:26 | #13

    @Nathan #12
    Yeah, I read his baptism book when I was in college. It was a good read.

  14. Nathan
    May 7th, 2012 at 10:44 | #14

    Andrew,

    I read it right after college. Totally solidified me in my Lutheran theology after a three year flirtation with evangelicalism (where, at one point, I told my dad I was thinking about being rebaptized…).

    Hey, you might enjoy this. Just posted it this morning: http://infanttheology.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/endgame-of-the-new-perspective/

    I also saw your dad talk at our church up in Spring Lake Park a couple months ago when he presented on Rome and Lutheranism on justification. I talked with him afterwards about the issue of certainty of salvation – whether or not he had observed more modern RC apologists really backing off of the “sin of presumption”. He said he’s noticed it.

    Recently did more research on the topic and produced these. If you could pass them on to him, I’d be grateful:

    http://infanttheology.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/joan-of-arc-faith-vs-infant-faith-part-1-of-2/
    http://infanttheology.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/joan-of-arc-faith-vs-infant-faith-part-2-of-2/

    Thanks,
    Nathan
    (librarian and theology adjunct at Concordia University in St. Paul)

    P.S. Attended Concordia in St. Catherines the year of 1999-2000. Very good year!

  15. May 7th, 2012 at 15:38 | #15

    @Nathan #14
    Thanks Nathan. That is a good discussion. I like Melanchthon’s interpretation of Romans 2:13, that it is a synechdoche. But I think we can also understand it in the same way as 1st Timothy 3:16. Jesus was justified in the Spirit, or vindicated. He was not justified in the same way as we are justified, rather, He earned His justification, His vindication. His justification is our justification, so the difference between our justification and His is that our justification is one based upon an alien justification that has already happened and an alien righteousness that was already fulfilled. He is that alien who was obedient in our place, cursed, condemned, and justified in the stead of the entire world. So “the doers of the law will be justified” can still be understood apart from synecdoche if we distinguish between law and gospel. The doers of the law shall be justified, and there was and only possibly could be one doer of the law, and that was Christ. He was justified (1st Tim 3:16), His justification is given to us (Rom 5:18) freely and received by faith (Rom 3:21-25).

    Also, he draws this distinction between works/works of the law and doing the law. I would ask him about Romans 3:21 and Philippians 3:9. The former does not say, “But now the righteousness of God is revealed apart from the works of the law,” and the latter does not say, “…not having a righteousness from the works of the law…” No, Paul opposes righteousness that comes from the law and righteousness of God through faith. In the Philippians passage, “not a righteousness of my own… but the righteousness of/from God…”

    The teaching of the alien imputation of God’s righteousness is so clear in Scripture (Isaiah 53:11; Jer 23:6; Rom 1:17; 3:22; 5:18; Phil 3:9).

    Thanks for the links. That’s good stuff. I’ll pass them along to my dad.

    Did you have Dr. Grothe when you were here? His commentary on Romans is very good. We went over our Romans section in NT 2 with him.

  16. Nathan
    May 8th, 2012 at 10:27 | #16

    Andrew,

    I did have Dr. Grothe for some classes. Say “hi” from me if it comes to your mind.

    Thanks for your other thoughts. My thinking runs along those lines as well.

    +Nathan

If you have problems commenting on this site, or need to change a comment after it has been posted on the site, please contact us. For help with getting your comment formatted, click here.
Subscribe to comments feed  ..  Subscribe to comments feed for this post
Anonymous comments are welcome on this board, but we do require a valid email address so the admins can verify who you are. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. Email addresses are kept private on this site, and only available to the site admins. Comments posted without a valid email address may not be published. Want an icon to identify your comment? See this page to see how.
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.