III. Reformation and Post-Reformation Soteriology
Roman Catholic system? How do you account for the Roman Catholic position that ordinary believers cannot have an assured faith?
Literature: Means, Faith, An Historical Study, pp. 177–226; Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification, pp. 87–99; Swete, The Forgiveness of Sins, pp. 117–127; Ritschl, History of the Christian
Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, pp. 73–120; McGiffert, History of Christian Thought, II, pp.
185–312; Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatiek, III, pp. 580–586; Otten, Manual of the History of Dogmas, II, pp. 234–271, 338–360; Sheldon, History of Christian Doctrines, I, pp. 370–380; Crippen, History of Christian
Doctrine, pp. 153–158; Histories of Seeberg and Fisher, cf. Index.
III. Reformation and Post-Reformation Soteriology
1. THE LUTHERAN ORDER OF SALVATION
It was especially the system of penances as developed in the Roman Catholic Church and the traffic in indulgences closely connected with it, that prompted Luther to take up the work of reformation. He himself was deeply engaged in works of penance, when from Rom.
4:17 the truth flashed upon him that man is justified by faith only, and he learned to understand that the repentance demanded in Matt.
4:17 had nothing in common with the Roman Catholic works of satisfaction, but consisted in real inner contrition of the heart and was a fruit of the grace of God only. It dawned upon him that the really important thing in repentance was not the private confession before a priest, which has no foundation in Scripture, nor any satisfaction rendered by man, since God freely forgives sin; but a heartfelt sorrow on account of sin, an earnest desire to lead a new life, and the forgiving grace of God in Christ. Therefore he made the doctrine of sin and grace central once more in the doctrine of salvation, and declared that the doctrine of justification by faith
alone was "the article of a standing or falling Church." The result was that the Reformation rejected all that was most distinctive in mediæval theology, such as indulgences, expiatory penances, priestly absolution in the Roman Catholic sense, works of supererogation, and the doctrine of human merit.
Scholars differ as to the relation in which Luther placed repentance and faith to each other. Ritschl holds that he first regarded repentance as a fruit of faith, but afterwards placed it before faith as wrought by the law; but Lipsius denies this change and maintains that the great Reformer always regarded poenitentia as including contrition, wrought by the law, and faith as a believing acceptance of Jesus. Both are instrumental in leading the sinner to Christ, and therefore do not yet presuppose a union with Him. At the same time it can be said that in the earlier period of his life his opposition to Roman Catholic work-righteousness prompted him to stress the fact that true repentance is the fruit of faith, and that in a later period he met antinomianism with the assertion that true faith is preceded by a deep feeling of penitence. But he always conceived of the way of salvation as consisting in contritio (penitence in the limited sense, that is sorrow on account of sin), fides, and bona opera, a life consecrated to God. This order is retained by the early Lutheran theologians, and is also that of the confessional standards of the Church.
The Lutheran ordo salutis, which at first comprised only three elements, became far more elaborate in the writings of the great
Lutheran theologians of the seventeenth century. It was based rather artificially on Acts 26:17, 18, and made to include calling, illumination, conversion, regeneration, justification, renovation and glorification. In the doctrine that all who live under the Gospel receive sufficient grace, either in baptism or through the preaching of the word, whereby they are enabled to not-resist the grace of God in regeneration, the germ of synergism made its appearance in Lutheran soteriology, and the process of salvation was conceived of as follows: Children born of Christian parents, who cannot yet resist
the grace of God, are regenerated in baptism and receive the gift of faith. Others, however, are called in later life with a vocatio sufficiens, which is alike in all cases, and which by illumining the mind and strengthening the will enables them to not-resist the grace of God. If they do not resist the work of the Holy Spirit in calling, they are brought to contrition (penitence in the limited sense), are regenerated, and are endowed with the gift of faith. By faith they are then justified, receive the forgiveness of sins, are adopted as children of God, are incorporated into Christ, are renewed by the Holy Spirit, and are finally glorified.
Such is the process in all those in whom it is completed; but its beginning does not yet insure its completion. The grace of God is always resistible, can be resisted all along the line, can always be lost no matter how far its work has progressed, and that not merely once but several times. Notwithstanding the strong assertions that man owes his salvation entirely to God, it is held that man can frustrate the divine operation effectively, so that the decision really lies with him.
Furthermore, the Lutheran ordo salutis centers in faith and justification. Strictly speaking, calling, repentance, and regeneration, are merely preparatory and serve the purpose of leading the sinner to Christ. It is not until he by faith accepts the righteousness of Christ, that God pardons his sin, sets him free from the law, adopts him as His child, and incorporates him into the mystical body of Jesus
Christ. Everything, therefore, depends on faith. With it man enters increasingly on the possession of the blessings of salvation, but without it he loses all. Hence it is of the utmost importance to retain this faith. While this is the ordo salutis as it is usually represented, it does not always reveal exactly the same form in later Lutheran theology.
2. THE REFORMED ORDER OF SALVATION. In Reformed theology the ordo salutis acquired a somewhat different form. This is due to the fact that Calvin consistently took his startingpoint in an
eternal election and in the mystical union established in the pactum salutis. His fundamental position is that there is no participation in the blessings of Christ, except through a living union with the Saviour. And if even the very first of the blessings of saving grace already presupposes a union with Christ, then the gift of Christ to the Church and the imputation of His righteousness precedes all else. In the Council of Peace a union was already established between Him and those who were given unto Him by the Father, and in virtue of that union, which is both legal and mystical, all the blessings of salvation are ideally already the portion of those who are of Christ.
They are ready for distribution and are appropriated by them through faith.
From this fundamental position several particulars follow. The salvation of the elect is not conceived atomistically, since they are all eternally in Christ, and are born out of Him, who is the Head, as members of His mystical body. Regeneration, repentance, and faith are not regarded as mere preparations, altogether apart from any union with Christ, nor as conditions to be fulfilled by man, either wholly or in part, in his own strength. They are blessings of the covenant of grace, which already flow from the mystical union and the grant of Christ to the Church. Penitence assumes a different place and character than in the Lutheran order. Calvin recognized a repentance preceding faith, but saw in it merely an initial fear, a legal repentance that does not necessarily lead to faith and cannot be regarded as an absolutely essential preparation for it. He stresses the repentance that flows from faith, that is possible only in communion with Christ, and that continues throughout life. Moreover, he does not regard it as consisting of contritio and fides. He recognized the close connection between repentance and faith, and did not consider the former possible without the latter, but also pointed out that Scripture clearly distinguishes the two, and therefore ascribed to each of them a more independent significance in the order of salvation.
But however Calvin may have differed from Luther as to the order of salvation, he quite agreed with him on the nature and importance of the doctrine of justification by faith. In their common opposition to Rome they both describe it as an act of free grace, and as a forensic act which does not change the inner life of man but only the judicial relationship in which he stands to God. They do not find the ground for it in the inherent righteousness of the believer, but only in the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ, which the sinner appropriates by faith. Moreover, they deny that it is a progressive work of God, asserting that it is instantaneous and at once complete, and hold that the believer can be absolutely sure that he is forever translated from a state of wrath and condemnation to one of favor and acceptance.
Lutheran theology did not always remain entirely true to this position. Faith is sometimes represented as a work that is basic for regeneration; and the mediating theologians base justification on the infused righteousness of Jesus Christ.
3. THE ARMINIAN ORDER OF SALVATION. The Arminians teach that God bestows a universal grace on man, which is sufficient to enable the sinner to believe and obey the Gospel; and that the call which comes to man through the preaching of the Word exerts a merely moral influence on his understanding and will. If he assents to the truth, trusts in the grace of God and obeys the commandments of Christ, he receives a greater measure of divine grace, is justified on account of his faith and, if he perseveres to the end, becomes a partaker of life eternal.
The School of Saumur moved in the same general direction.
Cameron teaches that the will of man always follows the final dictate of the understanding, and that therefore in regeneration and conversion an effective illumination of the mind is all that is required and all that actually takes place. There is no supernatural operation of the Holy Spirit directly on the will of man. And Pajon holds that a special internal operation of the grace of God is unnecessary, and
that the efficacy of the divine calling depends on its congruity with the external circumstances in which it comes to man.
These Arminian teachings led to that representation of the ordo salutis, which was known in England as Neonomianism. According to the Neonomians Christ atoned for the sins of all men, that is, made salvation possible for all and brought them all into a salvable state. He did this by meeting the demands of the old law, the law of the covenant of works, and by substituting for it a new law, a law of grace which is satisfied with faith and conversion, and a true, albeit imperfect, obedience of the repentant sinner. This work of Christ may be called the sinner's legal righteousness, since it was instrumental in satisfying and abrogating the old law. But evangelical righteousness, consisting in obedience to the new law, that is, faith and conversion, constitutes the ground of the sinner's justification.
This rationalistic tendency finally resulted in that liberalism which recognizes Christ only as a great prophet and teacher, who proclaimed the truth of God and sealed it with His death, and whose example man has but to follow, in order to obtain eternal salvation.
Methodism is another, more pietistic, form of Arminianism. It is averse to the idea of gradual conversions, and knows of no lengthy period of contrition, followed by a period in which the darkness is dispelled and the light breaks through, and a still later season when doubt turns into the glad assurance of salvation. It concentrates all efforts in the preaching of the Gospel on a single point: casting the sinner down by the preaching of the law, dragging him, as it were, to the very brink of the abyss, filling his heart with fear and trembling; and then placing him at once before the glorious Gospel of redemption, and pleading with him to accept Jesus Christ by faith and be saved from eternal damnation. The sinner who does so accept
Christ passes in a single moment from the greatest misery into the most rapturous ecstasy, and from the deepest gloom into the most transcendent joy. This sudden transition carries with an immediate assurance of being saved. Many Methodists hold that a second
radical change is necessary, and is actually wrought in man, for entire sanctification.
4. MINOR CONCEPTIONS OF THE ORDER OF SALVATION
a. Antinomian. The Antinomians really leave no room for a subjective application of the redemption wrought by Christ. They do not distinguish between the work of Christ in procuring, and that of the Holy Spirit in applying the blessings of saving grace; but speak as if Christ did all there is to be done, as if he took upon himself not only our guilt but also our pollution, so that we are justified, regenerated, and sanctified—in short, are perfect in Him. In view of the fact that man is subjectively righteous and holy in Christ, the only thing required of him is to believe, that is, to become conscious of that fact. He may rest assured that God can see no sin in him as a believer. His so-called sins are not really sins, but merely works of the old man, which are not reckoned to the believer, since he is free from the law, is perfect in Christ, and glories in the grace of God.
Sometimes the Antinomian will go even farther than that, and claim that Christ did not really merit salvation, since this was eternally ready in the counsel of God, but merely revealed the love of God. To believe, is simply to lay aside the false notion that God's anger is kindled against us. Such ideas as these prevailed among some of the Anabaptists, the Libertines, the Hattemists, and certain sects both in England and in New England. b. Mystical. In Germany, England, and the Netherlands a large number of preachers arose who sought the essential thing of the Christian life in experience, and emphasized the fact that true faith is experience. They enlarged on what one must needs experience before one can be considered as a true believer, and in doing this were primarily guided, not by the representations of Scripture, but by the experiences of those who were reputed to be "oaks of righteousness."
They held that the law should be preached to all, but the Gospel only to certain "qualified" sinners. Before men might really believe themselves to be children of God, they had to be brought under the
terrors of the law, had to pass through agonizing struggles, had to feel the accusing pangs of conscience, and had to writhe in the throes of a fearful anticipation of eternal damnation. They were not permitted to believe without some special warrant of the Holy Spirit, and even then their faith could at first be only a faith that flees for refuge to Jesus Christ, a hungering and thirsting for righteousness.
This faith precedes and is the condition of justification; in it the sinner entrusts himself to Christ, in order to be justified. This refuge seeking faith does not at once turn into an assured faith. There is a great distance between the two, and it is only after many ups and downs, after all kinds of doubts and uncertainties, and through many spiritual struggles, that the believer passes into the assurance of salvation—the privilege of but a select few. This assurance often comes to him in a very special way, by a voice, a vision, a word from Scripture, and other similar means.
Questions for Further Study: What were the three usual stages of the ordo salutis in the theology preceding the Reformation? Should the ordo salutis stress the application or the appropriation of the work of redemption? How do Lutherans, Reformed, and Arminians differ on this point? What elements do the Lutherans consider as the most important in the ordo salutis? How do the Reformed differ from them in this respect? What views did Schwenkfeld, Agricola,
Osiander, and the Dutch Mennonites hold as to faith and justification? How do the Lutherans and the Anglicans conceive of regeneration by baptism? Do the Reformed connect the grace of regeneration with baptism in any way? What is the Wesleyan doctrine of entire sanctification? What views did the Reformed, the Arminians, and the Wesleyans hold as to the assurance of salvation?
Literature: Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatiek III, pp. 587–690; Buchanan, The Doctrine of Justification, pp. 100–219; Swete, The Forgiveness of Sins, pp. 128–141; Heppe, Geschichte des Pietismus; ibid., Dogmatik, II, pp. 262–395; Pope, Christian Theology, II, pp.
439–451; Bavinck, Roeping en Wedergeboorte; Kramer, Het Verband van Doop en Wedergeboorte; Sheldon, History of Christian