Engaging Westminster Calvinism

The Composition of Redemption's Song

Karlberg

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781621896647
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

This collection of writings contains articles and book reviews that are not readily accessible to most readers. Many of them are written for a wider audience of informed lay students of Scripture, as well as seminarians. They have been brought together here in a fresh way with other new writings. As a result, this study is somewhat unique, drawing upon the author's career in theology and church music. Over the course of four decades of scholarly research and writing Mark Karlberg has also been engaged in the music ministry of the church, serving as organist and choir director. Chief influences in his study and practice of music in the church have been Robert Elmore and Gerre Hancock, leading organists, choral masters, and composers of our generation. In the course of their stellar careers Elmore and Hancock have served in different ecclesiastical settings--Moravian, Presbyterian, Southern Baptist, and Anglican. What they both share in common is their exceptional skill in the art of improvisation. Part of their accompaniment was off the written musical score, resulting in service-playing that was creative and engaging. In the spirit of their artistic expression we offer this collection of writings bearing as its theme the great Song of Redemption, composed by the singing Christ (Heb 2:12).

1

Sola Gratia: The Signature of the Reformation

Part 1—Today’s Church: Standing or Falling?

A staple in international, orthodox Calvinism from the opening days of the Protestant Reformation has been the theological distinction between the “Law” and the “Gospel.” What does this distinction mean, and how important is it? Simply put, it contrasts two, divinely ordained ways to the obtainment of life eternal, one by meritorious works (i.e., by the Law) and one by unmerited grace and favor (i.e., by the Gospel). This fundamental antithesis—reiterated time and again throughout the Bible, both Old and New Testaments—lies at the very core of Protestant evangelical theology, Lutheran and Reformed. Contrary to the claim made by some recent historians of doctrine, there is no disagreement or discord between these two leading Protestant traditions concerning this vital, theological distinction. Differences of interpretation within Lutheranism and Calvinism do appear with respect to how these two principles of inheritance, works versus faith (i.e., law versus grace), apply to the various covenants in the Bible, beginning with the unique Covenant of Works established by God with Adam in the Garden of Eden at creation, and followed by the subsequent covenants spanning the history of redemption, all of which are subsumed under the rubric of the Covenant of Grace (exceptions include God’s covenantal pledge to uphold and govern all humankind in accordance with his common grace).

It was this basic, theological antithesis between the Law and the Gospel that led Martin Luther to recover the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone—justification apart from the works of the Law, even the “good works” of believers (see Eph 2:10). In his classic study, The Bondage of the Will, Luther described the desperate plight of sinners. By nature (since Adam’s transgression), humankind is in bondage to sin and death. Only the mercy and grace of God in Christ can remedy the consequences of the Fall. The salvation of sinners is the manifestation of the predestinating, electing love of God. The sovereign Lord of the covenant secures for the sinner that which he cannot obtain for himself. Salvation is all of grace.

So important was this teaching of the Bible that Luther insisted it was the defining article (i.e., doctrine) of the standing or falling church. Any admixture of faith and works (obedience which is in accordance with the law of God, the “good works” of those regenerated, sanctified, and renewed in the image of Christ) is, according to the great apostle Paul, anathema. Why are the good works of believers—works that evidence the “obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5), works truly pleasing to God—excluded from justification (with respect to its constitutive aspect)? Very simply put, the reason is that what is required by the justice and holiness of God for salvation, (re)union and communion with God, is perfect obedience. The purpose of Christ’s first coming was to make atonement for sin and to secure the promised inheritance, viz., a people redeemed by the blood of the Lamb. The ground or basis of salvation is the righteousness of Christ alone. His perfect obedience is the exclusive, meritorious basis of life and salvation for sinners, those chosen in Christ by the Father in eternity past. The doctrine of Christ’s meritorious obedience is meaningful only in the context of the system of doctrine taught in the Bible. Here the interpreter of Scripture must come to grips with the Protestant-Reformed teaching concerning the Law and the Gospel.

Before commenting further upon the distinctive formulations of Reformed covenant theology, views different from classic Lutheranism, we must first consider why at present we are facing a radical shift in theological thinking—a shift that has led to a crisis in modern-day Protestant evangelicalism. The single most important factor giving rise to radical reinterpretations of the biblical doctrine of justification, election, and the covenants is the impact that the Neo-orthodox theology of Karl Barth has had upon evangelicalism, both Reformed and non-Reformed varieties. Barth is (mistakenly) considered by many to be the leading Reformed thinker of the twentieth century. Recognizing the fallacy and bankruptcy of nineteenth-century Protestant theology, Barth undertook a remake of traditional Protestant “orthodoxy,” what resulted in a theology having superficial resemblance to the theology of Luther and Calvin (most especially the latter). Barth ended up with a new school of theology known as “Neo-orthodoxy.” To be sure, Barth is a complex theologian. But one thing is certain upon a close reading of his work: Barth is no friend of orthodox, biblical Christianity. (Of course, there are “evangelicals” who will challenge this evaluation. They do so erroneously.) From the standpoint of the history of doctrine, it was Barth who spearheaded the transformation of contemporary evangelical theology, the form now dominant. He has vigorously maintained that there is no theological antithesis between the Law and the Gospel. On this subject, argues Barth, the orthodox Protestant scholastics were wholly misguided and misinformed. (It is important to recognize here that Barth distinguished sharply between the teachings of Calvin and that of scholastic Calvinism.)

Among the philosophico-theological considerations that entered into Barth’s thinking was the (unbiblical) notion of divine grace as that which undergirds and sustains all creation—including the recreation of all things in Christ, the Elect Man, the one man for all. Jesus Christ, according to Barth, is the mysterious, yet sublime, revelation of God’s electing and reprobating will, the seemingly contrary motion of God at work in the redemption of the world. Stated in terms of the doctrine of justification, election, and covenant, Barth taught that there is but one covenant in Scripture, the Covenant of Grace (hence Barth’s doctrine of mono-covenantalism). Implicit in this interpretation is Barth’s christomonism, the notion that Christ is the fountain or source of life and death, so that in him lie the final resolution and reconciliation of all things in heaven and in hell—all to the benefit of the world’s redemption (hence Barth’s implicit universalism). There is no ultimate conflict between the love and the wrath of God. Christ has overcome evil; such is the triumph of divine grace.

According to Barth, Law and Gospel are merely twin sides of God’s promissory command—the divine command that humankind be in subjection to his sovereign rule and reign, and the divine promise that he is Lord of all. Law is an expression of God’s grace; Grace is an expression of God’s law in the world. God’s image-bearer is never in a position of “earning” or “meriting” the love and favor of God. All is received by grace through faith. Humankind’s “fall” from grace is remedied in the death and resurrection of Christ on behalf of all humanity. Christ is the New Man, the new humanity. The Old Man—humanity in rebellion against God, in rejection of his grace—has been subdued and renovated by the messianic Lord, the Son of Man. In Christ humanity stands righteous before God, free from all condemnation and sin. Jesus Christ has exhausted the wrath of God for every man. Although evangelicalism may certainly not agree with Barth in all respects of his formulations, there is growing consensus that Law and Grace are not antithetical means of inheriting the favor and blessing of God. In particular, the Reformed doctrine of an original Covenant of Works has been widely denounced as speculative and unbiblical.

Historic covenant theology represents Reformed thinking in its most consistent expression. From the beginning of the Calvinistic tradition, the doctrine of the covenants—in conjunction with the traditional Protestant Law/Gospel contrast—played a determinative role in the exposition of Scripture. What gives covenant theology its peculiar character within the broad stream of Christian interpretation is the emphasis placed upon the history of redemptive revelation and the relation of this history to the original goal of creation (biblical protology and eschatology). For purposes of this presentation, we highlight five crucial and essential biblical-theological elements within the system of covenant theology: (1) the doctrine of probation as that pertains to Adam’s original assignment in the Garden of Eden, Israel’s temporal life and prosperity in the land of Canaan, and the Son of God’s messianic fulfillment of all righteousness (under the law of Moses); (2) the doctrine of meritorious reward (i.e., legal obedience) associated with the original Covenant of Works (which covenant was perfectly fulfilled by the Second Adam, Jesus Christ, and by him alone); (3) the term “grace,” which, in accordance with the Protestant Law/Gospel distinction, pertains exclusively to the postlapsarian situation (the revelation of God’s saving grace to undeserving sinners after Adam’s transgression in the Garden); (4) the doctrine of the imputation of the First Adam’s sin to all humankind and the subsequent imputation of the Second Adam’s righteousness to all the elect of God; and (5) the explanation of the continuity/discontinuity between the old and new covenants (including the letter/Spirit contrast).

These five elements—elucidated over the course of five centuries of biblical interpretation—are vital to the system of Reformed doctrine. Regarding the evangelical doctrine of justification by faith specifically, modern-day detractors would have us abandon or radically reinterpret each of these points of doctrine. Current debate within several American-Reformed communions (reflecting developments in contemporary evangelicalism at large) focuses upon the distinctive teachings of Norman Shepherd, former systematics professor and successor to John Murray at Westminster Seminary (see his The Call of Grace: How the Covenant Illuminates Salvation and Evangelism [Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2000]). My exposé, The Changing of the Guard: Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, republished in my Gospel Grace: The Modern-Day Controversy (2003), chronicles developments at Westminster. This case study is illustrative of changes within contemporary evangelicalism—changes that are for the worse, not the better. (The debate over Open Theism within the “Evangelical” Theological Society underscores the plight of biblical Christianity at the opening of this third millennium of church history.) To be sure, new questions require a fresh restatement of biblical teaching. Traditional views must always be reevaluated and reformulated in the light of the Scriptures. That task ever remains for the faithful guard, those standing in defense of the biblical, Reformed faith. The responsibility of our generation of exegetes and dogmaticians, and of the generations to follow, is to carry through consistently the insights of our Reformed forefathers concerning the biblical doctrine of the covenants. In Part 2 we turn directly to the question regarding the relationship between the doctrine of justification by faith alone and the doctrine of judgment according to works, what stands as the crux of the contemporary dispute.

Part 2—Judgment According to Works:
The Crux of Today’s Dispute

Rightly, we individually and corporately confess what Scripture teaches after a careful, exegetical study and elucidation of the text of Scripture, not because it is the view of our Reformed forebears. Having reflected upon the text of Scripture, we may or may not agree with the teachings of historic, confessional Reformed dogmatics. It is the case that I write in defense of traditional covenant theology. Minor differences aside, I remain persuaded that our tradition has rightly interpreted the biblical doctrine of justification, election, and the covenants. Not all within the Reformed camp today assume this same posture. What stands as our chief disagreement? What causes divisions within our camp? Unity in the faith requires conformity to teachings of the Word of God. Let Scripture be our guide, our standard of truth.

The apostle Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians declares that we shall all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, in order that we might be judged according to our works, whether good or bad (5:10). This judgment includes believers. Similarly, in Romans the apostle writes in the same vein: God will render to each “according to his deeds” (2:6). Paul proceeds to demarcate two classes of people: those who obey God and keep covenant with him, and those who disobey and fall under divine condemnation. It is a minor disagreement among biblical commentators whether or not the class of individuals who keep the law is actual or hypothetical in this passage of Romans (2:6-13). I maintain that the apostle Paul instructs his readers here concerning the twofold classification of humankind: covenant-keepers and covenant-breakers. Those keeping covenant with God obey his commandments. They are the “doers of the law” (2:13). Paul is not telling his readers at this point in his argument how sinners become ”doers of the law.” Nor is Paul suggesting that the “doers of the law” are justified by works, i.e., constituted righteous in God’s sight on grounds of the “obedience of faith” (1:5). That would flatly contradict what Paul explains later in this letter and elsewhere in his writings. In summary statement we affirm, in light of Scripture’s teaching, that judgment is according to works, but not on the basis of works. There is no conflict between the doctrine of judgment according to works and the doctrine of justification by faith (apart from “good works”).

Modern-day revisionists contend that the very notion of “meritorious” reward is unscriptural. These expositors, having imbibed to one degree or another the Neo-orthodox interpretation of Karl Barth, insist that the traditional Protestant-Reformed contrast between the Law and the Gospel is entirely speculative. God’s covenantal commitment to humankind, so they reason, is all of grace, never a matter of human “works” (i.e., works antithetical to faith). Many of these revisionists conclude that the relationship between the Father and the Son in the eternal covenant (or pact) is purely gracious, not legal. What is accented here is the paternal love and grace of God, not the just requirement of Christ’s satisfaction of divine law necessary for bringing closure to the period of probationary testing (what pertains to the First and Second Adams in their representative capacities as federal heads of humanity). The idea of a legal requirement associated with God’s covenant is jettisoned altogether. Accordingly, Christ’s obedience is not meritorious of the Father’s favor and reward. Other revisionists inconsistently (and superficially) hold to the meritorious work of Christ in making satisfaction for the righteous demands of the law of God, while denying the prospect of meritorious reward for the First Adam, had he passed his time of probation. Unlike Barth’s speculative theologizing, Reformed interpreters have correctly assessed and weighed in their system of doctrine the explicit parallel drawn by the apostle between the “one act of righteousness” of the Second Adam and the “one act of disobedience” of the First Adam (see Rom 5:12–21). Were the First Adam not in a position to merit the reward of the covenant (viz., the Covenant of Works established at creation), then it is utterly meaningless to speak of the necessity of Christ’s substitutionary satisfaction of the legal requirement associated with this covenant at creation and reinstituted under Moses. (The legal covenant made in Eden was reinstituted in part with Israel at Sinai for pedagogical, typological purposes.) The principle of inheritance in the Covenant of Works is that of works; the principle of inheritance in the Covenant of Grace is that of faith (i.e., grace, Gospel-grace). When all is said and done, the classic Protestant-Reformed antithesis between the Law and the Gospel is absolutely essential to the biblical and evangelical doctrine of justification by faith alone.

To be sure, there is room for further clarification and explanation of the role of faith and works in justification and final judgment (judgment according to works). The current controversy in the church has afforded biblical interpreters yet another opportunity to reassess and reevaluate the teachings of confessional orthodox Protestantism, and Reformed orthodoxy in particular. The centerpiece in recent discussion and debate is the relation between Paul and James on justification. We do not have space to give full account of the arguments advanced on both sides of the theological dispute. What follows is a summary restatement of the biblical doctrine, which restatement reflects the positive contributions that have been made in the church’s ongoing polemical defense of the truth of Scripture.

There is only one divine act, not two, with respect to the justification of sinners reclothed in the righteousness of Christ. Soteric justification is twofold in signification, constitutive and demonstrative (so Paul and James). In speaking of justification by works James is not contemplating a different justification from that taught by Paul. (The Protestant reformer Martin Bucer, for example, mistakenly spoke of a “double” justification.) Nor is James introducing good works as the meritorious grounds or instrument in the justification of the ungodly. Rather, James brings into view the demonstrative aspect of God’s justifying act in the salvation of the elect. Good works are demonstrative (i.e., evidential) of God’s saving grace in the lives of believers. As such, they are necessary in the Christian life. But they are not the meritorious grounds of salvation. These two aspects of justification, the constitutive and the demonstrative, must never be confused or confounded. They are distinct, though inseparable, in the divine act of justification. Believers are constituted righteous on the grounds of Christ’s meritorious obedience imputed through saving faith, faith being the sole instrument receiving the righteousness of Christ. We are justified by faith alone, on the exclusive grounds of Christ’s active and passive obedience. Nevertheless, good works are evidential of true, saving faith. “Justification by works” (as taught by James) brings into view the role of good works as evidential of our righteous standing in Christ. Those united to Christ by faith are “the doers of the law.”

Similarly, there is only one divine act, not two, with respect to the sanctification of sinners, those remade in the image of Jesus Christ. It was John Murray, longtime professor of systematics at Westminster Seminary, who carefully and convincingly explained the biblical doctrine of sanctification in its twofold aspects, definitive and progressive. Union with Christ at the moment of spiritual regeneration not only places the sinner in right relationship with God (by means of justification on grounds of the imputed righteousness of Christ), but union with Christ also sets the sinner apart unto God as wholly sanctified (see Romans 6 and 8). To be sure, the emphasis in Scripture falls upon the progressive aspect of God’s sanctifying power at work in those regenerated and renewed in Christ. But this teaching must not obscure the aspect of the believer’s definitive sanctification. Only in terms of this teaching can we understand and heed the biblical admonition to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect (Matt 5:48). To be sure, we are not yet what we shall be. But the final glorification of the saints of God has already been secured through the redemptive work of Christ (Rom 8:28-30). We are pilgrims on the way to the Eternal City. What the Spirit of God begins in the life of his children he will see to completion. Perseverance in the faith is the outworking of God’s grace in the lives of the saints.

Renewed interest and appreciation for the biblical, Reformed doctrine of eschat...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Author’s Foreword
• Prelude
• Section One: The Song of Redemption: Justification by Grace through Faith
• Chapter 1: Sola Gratia: The Signature of the Reformation
• Chapter 2: Conflating Faith and Works in Final Judgment/Justification
• Section Two: Sweet Canaan: Covenant Life in Anticipation of the End of the Age
• Chapter 3: Recovering the Mosaic Covenant as Law and Gospel
• Chapter 4: How Should Moses Be Read?
• Section Three: The Music of Heaven: Worship in Spirit and Truth
• Chapter 5: The Glory of God: Archetypal and Ectypal
• Chapter 6: The Distinctiveness of Reformed Worship
• Chapter 7: Music in Worship
• Chapter 8: Patriotic Music in Worship
• Chapter 9: A Brief Interpretive History of Music in the Service of the Church
• Chapter 10: Theological Reflections on Church Music, Arts, and Architecture
• Postlude
• Appendix 1
• Appendix 2
• Author Bibliography
• General Bibliography