Page History

...

In an earlier response to this question (9 December 1997), I have at least appeared to argue for a negative answer, although I give only one reason for doing so: that "'law' is ordinarily used to comprise only one part of God's demand – -- namely, God's demand for loyalty or fidelity to God, together with the loyalty to others as oneself that it necessarily entails." But whatever weight this reason has, it is nothing like as weighty (as I, of all people, should have recognized!) as Luther's characteristic exegesis of the lex scripta, i.e., the Decalogue. On his interpretation, what the First Commandment (and so all the others as well) demands is precisely faith – -- in the sense of confidence or trust, as distinct from loyalty or fidelity. But if this interpretation is to the point, it is, at best, misleading to say, as I do, that "the 'law' of God is rightly understood, in the first place, in relation to loyalty."

In yet another discussion (Summer 1986), however, I give a second reason for answering the question negatively – -- namely, that "law and gospel are properly understood as a special case – -- more exactly, as the decisive case – -- of what I should call 'demand' and 'gift.'" Presupposed here is that "demand" and "gift" are to be understood in a purely formal sense, in much the same way in which I use "demand" and "promise" in "What Does It Mean to Affirm, 'Jesus Christ is Lord'?," whereas "law" and "gospel" have the material meaning given them by specifically Christian faith and witness. But if this presupposition is sound, it cannot be correct to say that "law" and "gospel" are "simply traditional words for 'demand' and 'gift,"' unless, of course, "traditional" is tacitly taken to mean "traditionally Christian." So my considered answer to the question is still negative, although my reason for so answering it is no longer the first, which I can only retract, but the second.

...

One reason for answering the question negatively is that "law" is ordinarily used to comprise only one part of God's demand – -- namely, God's demand for loyalty or fidelity to God, together with the loyalty to others as oneself that it necessarily entails. The other – -- and prior – -- part of God's demand is God's demand for trust or confidence in God, and this demand is not ordinarily understood to be included in God's law, be it the lex naturalis, the lex tradita, or the lex evangelica.

...

2. This means, then, that law and gospel are related as the demand implied by the gift of God's love is related to the gift itself when it is given to a creature endowed with the capacity for self-understanding and existential freedom. God's love is freely given to all creatures in two different ways. In the first place, it is given in that each and every creature is completely accepted for exactly what it is into God's own everlasting life, this being the consummation of its existence or actuality and its definitive redemption from meaninglessness. God's love is freely given to all creatures, in the second place, in that, before any creature acts or even could act, God has always already acted to do all that could conceivably be done by anyone to optimize the possibilities for the self- and other- creative acts of each and every creature, this being God's creation of the creature and its emancipation to play its proper role in creating both itself and others, including the unique other, God. In the case of creatures endowed with the capacity for selfunderstanding and existential freedom, however, this twofold gift of God's love is not and cannot be simply given, but requires to be accepted through their own individual understanding of their existence by a free and responsible decision. For this reason, the gift of God's love to any such creature always implies the demand to accept the gift and to exist and act accordingly.

                                                                                           * * * * * * * * *
7/9/1

7/9/2

1. In my view, law and gospel are properly understood as a special case – -- more exactly, as the decisive case – -- of what I should call "demand" and "gift."

...