Justification in the Second Century

Brian J. Arnold

• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9783110476835
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

This book seeks to answer the following question: how did the doctrine of justification fare one hundred years after Paul's death ( c. AD 165)? This book argues that Paul's view of justification by faith is present in the second century, a thesis that particularly challenges T. F. Torrance's long-held notion that the Apostolic Fathers abandoned this doctrine ( The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers, 1948). In the wake of Torrance's work there has been a general consensus that the early fathers advocated works righteousness in opposition to Paul's belief that an individual is justified before God by faith alone, but second-century writings do not support this claim. Each author examined—Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Diognetus, Odes of Solomon, and Justin Martyr—contends that faith is the only necessary prerequisite for justification, even if they do indicate the importance of virtuous living.

This is the first major study on the doctrine of justification in the second century, thus filling a large lacuna in scholarship. With the copious amounts of research being conducted on justification, it is alarming that no work has been done on how the first interpreters of Paul received one of his trademark doctrines. It is assumed, wrongly, that the fathers were either uninterested in the doctrine or that they misunderstood the Apostle. Neither of these is the case. This book is timely in that it enters the fray of the justification debate from a neglected vantage point.

1Introduction

With a hammer in one hand and a list of grievances in the other, Martin Luther nailed his ninety-five theses to the door of All Saints’ Church on All Hallows’ Eve 1517. Luther’s theses served as the precursor to his belief that justification is on the basis of faith alone. He then placed this doctrine at the epicenter of the Reformation “because if this article stands, the Church stands; if it falls, the Church falls.”1 John Calvin echoed this thought when he said that justification is “the main hinge on which religion turns.”2 Justification by faith has stood at the center of Protestantism since that time.

The traditional Lutheran reading of Paul understands that justification is forensic, which means that the sinner is declared righteous in God’s sight by faith and found not guilty of sin.3 Over the past century or better, an impressive number of scholars have challenged this definition, suggesting that Protestants have misunderstood Paul for centuries.4 The purpose here is not to get bogged downin the quagmire of Pauline studies by asking who has interpreted Paul rightly. Such a task should be left to Pauline scholars. This book enters the discussion on justification from a historical vantage point, seeking to understand how justification was received in the earliest era of the church.

Justification has not always been approached with enough historical sensitivity. There are two particular errors regarding Luther that need to be cleared up. The typical narrative is that Luther either rediscovered or created the doctrine of justification by faith.5 As this book will show, the problem with the narrative that Luther created this view of justification is that several second-century fathers spoke of justification in a similar way, meaning that Luther was not the first one to suggest that justification is by faith or that justification is forensic. And the story that Luther rediscovered justification by faith leads us to believe that the doctrine went into hibernation immediately after the apostles and stayed dormant until the Reformation.6 But is this account historically accurate? Alistair McGrath already amended this tale when he argued that justification by faith was not altogether absent in the years preceding Luther. Tracing this doctrine from the dry sands of the ancient Near East to the towering cathedrals of medieval Europe, McGrath posits that justification played a significant role in the formation of western Christianity. However, despite his great care of the sources from Augustine on, he argues like many before him that the early patristic period has little to offer on this doctrine, which leaves a noticeable gap between Paul and Augustine.7 The question is whether this gap is one of scholarship or one of history. That is to say, is there a gap between Paul and Augustine because the earliest fathers disregarded the doctrine of justification, or is the gap a result of scholars who have not given due attention to the earliest sources, or have even misinterpreted them? The gap, I suggest, is one of scholarship.

There are two possible ways to close this gap. First, a diachronic study could start with Luther and trace his view of justification backward in time. The problem is that this approach places too much emphasis on Luther and ends up reading justification through the lens of his writings and historical situation.8 The second option, and the approach used here, is to assess the doctrine of justification from the perspective of those who immediately followed the apostles. By opening one’s ear to the texts and listening to words and phrases that others have overlooked, it will be apparent that the fathers were concerned with the doctrine of justification, and that they looked to the Apostle Paul for their argument, though they presented it in their own words.

This book seeks to answer the following question: how did the second-century fathers understand the doctrine of justification? It is argued that the fathers sampled in this period believed in justification by faith, and that their view was consistent with the so-called “traditional” reading of Paul.9 At times they present their view of justification forensically and they often contrast justification with works righteousness. Additionally, they use other doctrines associated with Paul, such as imputation and substitutionary atonement. A few caveats, though, are in order. First, this does not mean that the fathers are correct about Paul’s view of justification. All this affirms is that the second-century fathers examined below held to a view of justification that was in large measure congruent with the Lutheran reading of Paul. Second, we must be careful not to exaggerate the evidence. To suggest that the fathers were monolithic in their view, or to say that their views are expressed with the clarity of the Reformers, would be to overdraw the bow.10 Doctrines are not forged until they have passed through the furnace of controversy and been pounded out on the anvil of debate. Justification did not enter the white-hot intensity of this furnace until the Reformation.11

Answering this question is more complicated than it may appear. Typically a work of this nature would examine the δικ- word group to determine how various authors viewed justification. While each chapter will certainly incorporate the δικ- words, it is imperative to look below the surface at conceptual links as well. Even though a particular author may not use δικαιόω or δικαιοσύνη, the concept of justification may still be present. James Barr has decisively shown that bare etymological studies are insufficient.12 It is no problem, then, to hunt for justification’s tracks even where the word itself is absent.

Justification was a central issue to the Apostle Paul.13 But what happened to the doctrine of justification in the second century? Was it abandoned? Was it ignored? Neither of these is the case. These chapters demonstrate that Paul’s influence extended into the second century, even when these fathers do not cite the Apostle directly.

1.1Paul and the Second Century

A steady stream of scholarship has been produced over the past few decades that sufficiently demonstrates Paul’s place among the early fathers. The three years between 1979 and 1981 proved to be particularly fruitful on the subject of the reception of Paul in the second century. Four dissertations, two of which became monographs, were produced during this brief period, all challenging nineteenth-century, higher-critical scholarship that claimed that Paul was subsumed by Gnostics and considered suspect by the proto-orthodox.14 F. C. Baur popularized this nineteenth-century view in his The Church History of the First Three Centuries.15 Each commentator after him had his own phrase to articulate what he saw as an abandonment of Paul. For E. J. Goodspeed it was the “Pauline Eclipse,”16 for Hans Conzelmann the “Pauline School,”17 for Donald Penny the “Pauline Fragmentation,”18 and, most notably, for Walter Bauer the “Pauline Captivity.”19 Paul was captive to the Gnostics, exiled from the thoughts and theology of the proto-orthodox, not to make his return to orthodoxy until a later juncture in history.

This view held surprising sway for a century until the revolutionary work of Andreas Lindemann, Paulus im ältesten Christentum. This massive tome is a comprehensive guide to Paul’s theology in the second century up until the time of Marcion.20 His thesis, that Paul was a central figure in the rise of orthodox Christianity in the second century, was intended to overcome the previously entrenched view that “Paulus habe in der nachpaulinischen Kirche nur einen sehr geringen Einfluss besessen.”21 Moreover, Lindemann sought to correct the view that has dominated since the time of Adolf von Harnack that Paul was the Apostle to the heretics.22 Along the way Lindemann highlights various tenets of Pauline theology to demonstrate just how closely those in the second century followed Paul. In his review of Lindemann’s work, Eric Osborn states, “The substance of Paul’s theology especially on justification is not found in early Christian writers, but says [Lindemann], these writers use their own words to say the same thing and their success or failure is not settled out of hand.”23 Lindemann is to be credited with the realization that justification is present but that it is repackaged for a different context, an idea that will become apparent as we survey the primary sources. Though Lindemann is exhaustive, and at times “tedious” and “repetitive,”24 a fresh look at the sources reveals more dependence on Paul for their view of justification than even he noticed. As much as he tried to rescue Paul from the exclusive hold of the Gnostics, Lindemann was still not willing to see that these fathers looked to Paul for their doctrine of justification. He writes, “Die theologische Substanz der Paulus-Tradition, insbesondere die Rechtfertigungslehre, ist in der ältesten Kirche selten gesehen und ausgesprochen worden; bei Marcion und bei den Gnostikern fehlt sie freilich ganz.”25 Lindemann’s aim is broad, encompassing a number of doctrines as they relate to Paul, whereas this work narrows on one particular doctrine.26 Justification was seen and spoken of more frequently in the second century than Lindemann realized.

The focus of David Rensberger’s dissertation, “As the Apostle Teaches: The Development of the Use of Paul’s Letters in Second-Century Christianity,” is almost entirely dedicated to the reception of Paul’s letters and not his theology.27 His purpose is to discredit the captivity theory propounded by those in the Tübingen School. Silence does not equate to rejection in Rensbeger’s reckoning, and he is right on this score.28 This idea is central to this book because three of the sources examined (Diognetus, Odes of Solomon, and Dialogue with Trypho) make no mention of Paul and yet bear the marks of Pauline influence.

Donald Penny’s dissertation is less helpful for our purpose because he addresses what he considers pseudo-Pauline letters, such as the Pastorals, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, 3 Corinthians, and Laodiceans. His attention remains on Pauline pseudepigraphy and the contribution of pseudepigraphy to the legacy of Paul. Again, this matters little because the second-century fathers were not asking questions about pseudepigraphy. Many of them assumed that Paul was the author of thirteen epistles, and so to trace Pauline influence means to see how all the letters ascribed to him were appropriated.29

More than Rensberger or Penny, Ernst Dassman came closer to the present aim, that is, the discovery of Pauline theology in the second century. Dassman’s dissertation, published as a monograph, Der Stachel im Fleisch: Paulus in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Irenäus, explores a wide assortment of l...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of Abbreviations
• 1 Introduction
• 2 “But Through Faith”: Clement of Rome
• 3 “Faith and Love”: Ignatius of Antioch
• 4 “O Sweet Exchange!”: Epistle to Diognetus
• 5 “My Chains Were Cut Off”: Odes of Solomon
• 6 “Δικαιοπραξιας Εργον”: Dialogue with Trypho
• 7 Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index of Authors
• Index of Scripture References
• Index of Ancient Sources
• Topical Index