I refer to Henry Hamann's splendid little volume *On Being a Christian: A Personal Confession.* My friend, Ed Wolfe, first introduced me to this volume some years ago, and I've read and reread it several times. I don't think that the Lutheran take on the Christian faith has ever met with a more winsome and beautiful exposition outside of the Symbols. If you can get hold of one, by all means do so. You will not be disappointed. I just reread this delightful section today:
"There is no more selfish person than the moral individual intent on personally securing an eternal, happy future by doing what the law of God demands. The fulfilling of the law, the more seriously and conscientiously it is carried out, becomes more and more an exercise in selfishness. But for those who are in Christ, all that is cared for and attended to already. They are forgiven persons; they are justified for Christ's sake, and there's no worry on that score. And as God is *for them* in every way, so that, as free children of God, can be *for their neighbor - for others-* in every way. It is only when the faith that God is well disposed toward them grows weak and feeble and departs or is forgotten that they revert to the selfishness that is theirs by inheritance and membership in a sinful race.... The example of Jesus - the free man who is loves and the loving man who is free - is there for every Christian to follow." (pp. 61, 62)
13 comments:
The book "On Being a Christian" can be purchased on the Northwestern Publishing web site http://www.nph.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?catalog
for $12.99.
But...herein lies the problem. Can we joyfully believe, teach and confess that we are not saved by works, that we know all is cared for, all taken care of AND then...because of that...precisely because of that...love God because He FIRST loved us?
This is where I see so many well-intentioned folks getting themselves all tripped over the doctrine of sanctification. They end up eschewing any mention of good works, they eschew earnes striving to be holy, they eschew the life of good works, thinking that therein lies the solution to holding high the Gospel.
Can't we rather say simply that precisely *because* all is taken care of that we are FREE to be earnest, serious and conscientious about carrying out the demands of the Law. We don't HAVE to, so much as we GET to.
But being "serious" about obeying God's Law is ok, as long as you do not believe therby you are winning brownie points toward salvation.
Something has gone goofy here in modern Lutheran preaching/teaching.
"It is only when the faith that God is well disposed toward them grows weak and feeble and departs or is forgotten that they revert to the selfishness that is theirs by inheritance and membership in a sinful race."
This seems to be a wonderful restatement of 1 Peter 1:9, "For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins." There's nothing goofy about that.
Paul,
Have you had the chance to read the book? He's not an antinomian by any means.
And as God is *for them* in every way, so that, as free children of God, can be *for their neighbor - for others-* in every way...The example of Jesus - the free man who is loves and the loving man who is free - is there for every Christian to follow
Pastor McCain with all due respect, how could you miss this?
Surely you know that all striving after holiness and all good works are done for our neighbor, which seems to be what Hamann is getting at with the above quote.
Bill, yes, read it years ago. A real gem. My remarks were directed to the discussions you and I are both aware of.
The point is that, as you and I have discussed, we do have Lutheran pastors out there misleading the laity into believing that they need not concern themselves with lives of holiness, good works and keeping the Ten Commandments.
Of course it is for the neighbor. It is also to glorify God and honor Him.
Not because we *have* to in order to earn his love, but because we, as New Men in Christ, *want* to.
There is nothing wrong for a Christian to strive to keep the Ten Commandments, to earnestly seek to do so, etc.
The issue is why he is doing it.
W've had things so muddled up on this point that there is a de facto denial of the third use of the Law and a "don't ask, don't tell" policy in place in some circles when it comes to good works being mentioned in Lutheran sermons.
My remarks were not, of course, directed at Pr. Weedon, but to the same crowd of people who have an allergic reaction to any talk of good works and striving after holiness for the baptized child of God.
Talk to some pastors who are dealing with the fall-out over years of laity hearing nothing much more than, "You don't have to do anything! You can't do anything!" and then they figure, "Great! I'm saved! I've got a free pass! Now I don't have to give much thought to good works. No more striving to follow God's commandments, no sir! I'm free of that."
We are set free precisely for the sake of a life of service to God and neighbor, to glorify Him and to serve others.
Ritchie's remarks show just how confused things have become out there thanks to deficient teaching about these things.
Sanctification is like a pair of deuces against Justification's full house. I'm with Forde, "Sanctification is merely the art of getting used to one's justification." I'd even go so far as to say that good works are not necessary.
It is impossible to separate works from faith. Just as impossible as it is for heat and light to be separated from fire.
2 Pet. 1, 10: Give diligence to make your calling and election sure, it says as follows: Peter teaches why good works should be done, namely, that we may make our calling sure, that is, that we may not fall from our calling if we again sin. "Do good works," he says, "that you may persevere in your heavenly calling, that you may not fall away again, and lose the Spirit and the gifts, which come to you, not on account of works that follow, but of grace, through Christ, and are now retained by faith. But faith does not remain in those who lead a sinful life, lose the Holy Ghost, and reject repentance."
How many times do we have to go round and round about sanctification. :)
Can we just say:
Are good works necessary for salvation? No
Are good works necessary and commanded by God, and we perform these good works through serving our neighbor in the discharge of our vocations? Yes
Is that fair? :)
Ep IV:6
"Good works certainly and without doubt follow true faith, if it is not a dead, but a living faith, as fruits of a good tree."
I would respectfully submit that if I tell the tree that it's bearing bad fruit, and condemn that in the harshest tree, and then tell the tree that Christ has been cut down and thrown into the fire for its sake, so that it might be declared a good tree, that the good tree will then bear good fruit, even if I don't tell it to.
The accusations of denial of the third use of the law often end up denying SD VI:21.
Er... "in the harshest way."
The regenerate do good works from a free spirit, this is not to be understood as though it is at the option of the regenerate to do good when he feels like it, and that he can nevertheless retain faith if he intentionally perseveres in sins.
Post a Comment