Luther and Calvin on Law and Gospel
In Their Galatians Commentaries*
I. JO HN HESSELIN K
I. Historical Background
In thi s Luthe r Yea r ( 1983), whe n we celeb rate th e 500th a nni ve rsa ry of th e bi rth of th e
grea t refo rme r, it is a pp rop ri ate th at we co nsider at least o ne aspect of the rela ti o n of Luth er to
Calvin . In some ways , howeve r, this is difficult fo r, alth o ugh they we re con temporaries, they
neve r met a nd rare ly refer to each o ther, excep t ind irect ly and th rough t heir mu tu a l friend
M elanc hth o n. T hey a lso ope rated basicall y in two di fferent wo rlds, Lu ther the Germa ni c, a nd
Calvi n the F rench-Swi ss.
One sho uld a lso qu a lify the o bse rvat io n that th ey we re "contem poraries," fo r Calvin was,
in a sense, a seco nd generati o n refo rmer. Luther was bo rn in 1483 and d ied in 1546; Ca lvin was
bo rn in 1509 a nd di ed in 1564. Luther's ea rl y writings we re already being circ ul ated in Fra nce
wh en Ca lvin was a uni ve rsity student a nd prov id ed o ne o f th e earl y eva nge li cal influe nces in
his lifc. 1 When Luth er was invo lved in th e famo us M ar burg Co ll oq uy with Zwingli in 1529t he eve nt th at res ulted in the pe rma nent ri ft be twee n the Luth era n a nd Refo rmed moveme nt s
- Ca lvin was still st udy ing law in O rl ea ns a nd Bo urges. By th e time Calvin arrived in Basel in
1535 to com plete the first edit io n of his famo us Institutio Luther was fi ft y-two yea rs o ld a nd
was com pleting o ne of his last majo r wo rks, his great Com menta ry o n Ga latia ns, which is o ne
of the ma in so urces fo r this pa per.
Co nsequ entl y, a lth ough Luther m ade so me impact o n t he yo ung Ca lvin, and a lth o ugh
Luth er eve ntu ally beca me awa re of the Ge neva n refo rmer a nd a few of hi s wr it ings, notably
Calvin's "S hort T reatise on the Lo rd 's S upper" of 1543, which impressed Luth er very
positi ve ly,2 they neve r rea lly di alogued or de bated with each o ther.
T here we re differences, ho weve r, des pite a bas ic un animity and mutu a l res pect. Even in
Luther 's last yea rs, when he te nded to be negati ve a nd ce nso ri o us, Calvin " neve r ceased to
rende r ho m age to Luther and his wo rk."3 T he differences were real but no t fund a menta l. It
was la rge ly a matter of acce nt o r a pp roac h in rela ti on to q uesti o ns li ke Chri sto logy, predesti natio n, the sacra ments, a nd t he C hristi a n life. T he differences beca me sha rp a nd di visive a fter
Luther 's dea th when so me o f his ove rly-zealo us d isciples li ke Tilema n Hess husius a nd
J oachim Westph a l attac ked vicio usly Calvin 's view of the Lord 's S upper.
As a res ult of this co nt rove rsy co ncerning the Lo rd's S upper, the earli er dispute at
Marburg, and subsequent develo pments in Lutheran and Reformed C hurches, 4 it is co mm o nly ass umed th at this is the key iss ue which se pa rated Luther from Calvin . Actu a lly, wh at may
have been a bigge r barrier- eve n th o ugh it never became a m atter of co ntroversy betwee n
Luther a nd Calvin- were their differing a pp roaches to the relatio n of law and gospel.
W erner Elert , the d o ug hty Ge rma n Luth era n theologia n of a past ge nerati o n, believed
*A paper presented to the Ca lvin St udies Soc iety, meeting at Calvi n T heological Seminary, May 4, 1983.
69
th a t Ca lvin was e ngag in g in a de liberate po lem ic agai nst Luther when he descr ibes the third
use or the law (the law as a guid e a nd no rm for the C hri stian) as the " princi pal use (usu.1·
praecipuus) which pertains more close ly to th e prope r use (propriurn/inem) of th e law. "5 The
basis for Elc rt 's co nten tion is th e fact that both Luther a nd Me la nc hthon speak of th e second
use o f th e law- for Ca lvin th e first , th e usu.1· elenchticus or theologicus- as the "prope r a nd
princip al use of the law" (proprium legis divinae et praecipuwn). 6 Hence Elert co nclud es that
"Ca lvin differs from Luth e r not simp ly in tcad1in i; a third fun cti o n of the law (so does
Melan c hth on), but also in designating the third function as t he 'principal' function, th e trul y
prope r fun ction of the law. "7
Granted, there is a st riking similarit y in the language wh ich Luther uses here to desc ri be
the seco nd use of the law and Calvin th e third , but there is nothing in the co ntex t of Ca lvin 's
rem a rk s to s ugges t th a t he is a ttack ing Luther - or anyone else, for that matte r. Neverthe less,
th e re is no doubt that toda y thi s is a se rious obstacle lo Luthera n a nd Reformed und e rstand ing. In rece nt Lutheran-Reformed d ia logue in Europe and th e United S tat es this is clearly.a
matter of co ntinuing contention.
In thi s co nnection it is int e resti ng to obse rve the res ults of conversat io ns between
re presen ta ti ves of the o rth American Area of the World Alliance of Reformed C hurches
and th ei r co unter parts of th e Nationa l Com 1nittee or th e Lutheran World Federation which
co:-iclucl ed in Princeton in 1966. Three pape rs a nd severa l s ummary stateme nts were published
in a book let en titled Ethics and Ethos ("A Reexa mination of Lutheran and Reformed
Traditions- IY"). x Included a re three summ a ry statements previously issued, viz., "Gospel,
Confession and Scripture"; "Christology, the Lord's S uppe r and Its Observance in th e
Church": and "Creation and Rede mption- Ju stification and Sanctification- Law and Gospel. " One se nses that the iss ues leas t reso lved are in th e last ca tego ries. 9 Friends of mine
engaged in c urre nt Lutheran-Reformed dialog ue co nfirm th at thi s is the biggest iss ue betwee n
the two traditions. 10 This, then, gives a special re leva nce to th e s ubj ect of law a nd gospe l as
und ers tood by Luther a nd Ca lvin .
II. Texts and the Scope of the Investigation
Much has been written about th e law-gos pel di alectic from a Lutheran perspective, but
there is s urprisingly little from the Refor med sicl e. 11 Wh e reas the majority of books on
Luth e r's theology wi ll ha ve a c hapter on law a nd gos pe J, 12 in th e sta ndard works on C alvin's
theo logy the re is very little or nothing on thi s s ubj ect.13 Thus th e issue is obviously of more
interest and co nce rn to Lutherans than Reform ed; but it is for that very reason that we who
sta nd in the Refo rmed tradition s hou ld take thi s s ubj ect more seri o usly and seek to clarify the
issues and clea r up, if poss ible, certain mi sund erstandings.
It is towa rd that e ncl th a t th is paper is offered. I must ex plain , howeve r, th e reason for th e
very limited sco pe of my subj ect. One reason is that there are more than e noug h overviews of
this s ubj ect in th eo logica l encyclopedias suc h as Religion in Ceschichre und Cegenwarr and
histo ri es of dogma such as th e four vo lume work by Reinhold See berg, Lehrhuch der
Dogmengeschichre. 14 Eve n more tec hnical studies of the subj ect a re genera l a nd draw upon a
wid e va ri ety of sources, es peciall y in the case of Luther.
70
Fo r a more precise und e rstan ding o f the ex te nt to whic h L uth er a nd C al vin agreed o r
di sagreed o n thi s s ubj ec t, what is required is a se ri es o f monogra phs whi c h co mp a re the
han dlin g o f thi s s ubj ect by the two g rea t refo rm e rs in th e sa m e co ntex t. Th is is ex tre me ly
d ifficu lt , howeve r, beca use L uther neve r disc ussed th e s ubj ect o f law a nd gos pe l as s uc h in a ny
s in g le trea ti se, d es pit e th e import a nce of this s u bject for him (a lth o ug h it is a key iss ue in
seve ra l m a jo r trca ti ses 15); a nd Ca lvin docs no t eve n g ive a syste mati c trea tme nt o r the subj ect
in hi s Institutes, wi th th e possib le exce pti o n o f th e ve ry bri ef chapte r (IX) in Book 11 whi ch has
th e titl e. "C hri st , Alth o ug h He was Kn ow n to th e J e ws und e r th e Law, was a t Le ngth C learly
Revea led O nl y in th e Gospe l. " He rc, howeve r, the co ntra st is primari ly betwee n the o ld a nd
new cove nant s, no t th e narro we r meanin g of law a nd gos pe l in the typi ca l Luthera n se nse of
th ose te rm s.
Orn; a pp roac h , whi c h wou ld be fruit ful , wo uld be to co mpa re th e two refo rme rs'
ex pos it io ns o f the d eca log ue in thei r res pec ti ve ca techi sm s as we ll as in th eir co mmenta ries
a nd se rm o ns o n th is th e m e. In th e ir ca tec hi s m s, I h·ave discove red , the ir int e rpreta ti o ns a nd
und e rsta nd in g o f th e p osi ti ve a nd e ndurin g rol e of the te n co mmandm ents are stik ing ly
s imil ar . Wh e re o ne wou ld ex pect th e s ha rpes t di ve rge ncies, howeve r, wo uld be in the ir
handlin g of th e key Pauline passages dea ling with the law a nd the gos pel. He re o ne thinks
imm cd iat c ly o r th e Epistles to th e Ro m a ns a nd Ga latian s. 1 have chose n the la tter because
Luther's l .ectures on Rumans 16 we re g ive n in 15 15 a nd 15 16, prior to the posting of hi s
ninety- ri ve l heses and hi s break with R o me. He nce they a re not re prese ntative of his more
m a ture thoug ht.
Hi s 1535 Lectures on Galatians 17 (gi ve n in 1531), o n th e o th e r ha nd , a re no t o nly th e
produ ct o r th e refo rme r at the pea k o f his p owers and hi s most th oro ug h co mme nt a ry; they
are a lso rega rd ed by man y sc ho la rs as hi s m os t profound theo log ica l treatise. is In thi s se nse it
is no t un li ke Ka rl Bart h 's famou s Co mme ntary o n R o m a ns ( 19 19) w hic h was as much a major
theolog ica l treatise as an exege tica l co mme nt a ry.
The o nl y difficu lty, as far as Ca lvin is co nce rn ed , is that his Commentary on Galatians,
writt e n in I548, is a ve ry m odest work by com pa rison with Luther's great ex posit ion of
Ga latians . Th e E ng li s h tran s lati o n of C a lvin 's Co mme ntary is on ly 11 9 pages wh e reas
Luth e r's c lassic ta kes up pa rts of two vo lumes of Lwher's Works 19 and runs to a total of 604
pages 1 Co nsequ entl y, occas io na ll y 1 s ha ll fill in from C alvin's co mments o n the releva nt
Ga latians tex ts in his lnstiflltes in o rd e r to red ress the imba lance so mewhat.
Fo rtunate ly, we have exce llen t E nglis h tran sla tions in both cases, Luther's co mmenta ry
be ing tra ns la ted by the di stinguis hed Lutheran sc holar, Jaroslav Pe li kan, a nd Ca lvin's co mme nt a ry being tran slated by th e lead ing E ng lis h C alvin scholar, T. H . L. Parker.2° The
o riginal tex ts, which I am a lso using, are Vo lu me 40 (two pa rts) of D. Martin Luthers Werke,
i.e., th e We im a r Aufga be ( 1911 and 19 14), and Volume 50 of the Calvini Opera (Co rpus
Reformatorum Vol. LXXVlll).
III. A Comparison of the Exegesis of Selected Texts
1 s hall li mit m yse lf to a I"ew key tex ts whic h deal with the question of la w a nd gospe l,
co mp a re th e ex p os itions of the two reform e rs, a nd mak e a few observati o ns in each case
befo re atte mpting a ny co nc lu sio ns. It sho uld be kept in mind that in Galatian s we have the
71
sha rpest attacks aga inst the law and works of the law in the whole Pau line co rpus. Pauline
scholars recogni ze th at the tone, if not the co ntent , is perceptibly different in Romans, eve n
tho ugh there too there are some passages where there appears to be a shar p antithesis . One or
those passages is Romans 6: 14: "Yo u are not und er the law but under grace." It sho uld be
noted th at in Galatians we have what on the surface might appear to be the most "Lutheran"
portion of the New Testament. However, it wo uld be rash to presume at the outset th at the
odds are stacked in Luther's favo r.
The first passage is Galatians 2:16: "A man is no t justified by works of the law but
through fai th in J es us Christ .... "
Luther first observes that "work s of the law" ge nera ll y "mean whate ver is opposed to
grace; whatever is not grace is law," whether the law be conce ived as of civi l, ceremo nial, or
mora l (the Deca log). 21 Therefore, Pau l here is speak ing "about the entire law" (de universa
lege). says Luther, and he rejects the op inio n of J erome and ot hers who maintain that Paul
here is speak ing only of the works of the ceremonial law, not those of the moral law.22
Calvin also frequently makes such distinctions and in this case he co ncurs with Luther
and notes that "the context will show that the words [in 2: ISf.] relate also to the mora l law. " 23
Co ncerning the basic issue at stake here there is aga in no difference at all. That is, justification
is not by works but by faith. Luther writes, " When we are in volved in a discussion of
justification, there is no roo m for spea king about the Law. " 24 Calvi n is even more em ph ati c:
"We have to ascribe either nothing or everything to faith or to works."25
The ca reful reader might notice that whereas Luther speaks of the la w, Calvin speaks of
works, but since Paul's phrase is "works of the law," either word co nnotes the same thing.
Concerning 2: 19 there is also no significant difference. The text reads: "Fo r I through the
law died to the law, that I might live to God." Luther loves the way the Apostle "opposes the
Law to the Law" and desc ribes this as " most delicious language. " 26 Luther's understanding of
the key phrase here is th at "To die to the Law means not to be bound by the Law but to be free
from the Law and not to know the Law. ' '2 7 The pos itive side is that " I now li ve to Christ, where
I am under a nother Law, namely the Law of grace, which rules over sin and the Law. "2X
Calvi n comments: "Those who li ve to the law have never felt the power of the law or even
tasted what it is all abou t; for the law, when tru ly understood, makes us die to itself. ' '29 Luther
would say "Amen !" to that. Luther wo uld also enthusiasticall y end orse Ca lvin 's later comment : "The law bears within itself the cu rse which slays us. Hence it follows that the death
brought abo ut by the law is truly deadly. With it is co ntrasted another ki nd of death , in the
life-giving fellowship of Ch rist. "-11 ' Luther uses almost the same language. 'Thus against my
death , which bind s me, I have a nother death, that is life, which makes me alive in C hrist. " J I
Interestingly, it is Luther rather than Calvin who makes a dist inction in this context
between the Law of the Decalog which " used to bind me," agai nst which"! now have another
Law, [and] that of grace." Th is law of grace does not bind but liberates, it does not damn but
frees ..i 2 Ca lvin is less di alectica l and sim ply concludes, "We are delivered fr om the yoke of the
law on ly when we are made one with Christ, as the shoot draws its sap from the root on ly by
growing into one nat ure. " J.i
Thus far the differences in interpretation between Luther and Calvin ha ve been almost
nil. Calvin appears to be as much in harmony with the thrust of the apost le in this ep istle as
72
Luther when it comes to the fundamental question of salvation by grace through faith as over
aga inst salvation by works of the law; here there is no diverge nce whatsoever. This comes out
again in the reformers' interpretation of 3:2-5.
Wh en the question is justification "there can be no middle ground" (nullum medium)
Luther maintains, for "there are only two ways to justifics tion: either the Word of the Gospe l
or the Law. "3 4 Calvin adds, "there a re not many ways to righteousness," i.e., to justification,
but on ly one, the way of Abraham, the way of faith .3 5 "For faith , inasmuch (quat enus) as it
contains the free goodness of God, C hrist with a ll his blessings, the testimony of our adoption
which is given in th e Gospe l, is universally co ntrasted to th e law, the merit of works a nd
human worth. "36
Calvin, howeve r, makes an interesting distinction in his co mments on 3: l 0: "For all those
who rely on works of th e law are und er a curse." He begins with language typical of Luther: "It
is an argument (in 3: 10) from contradictions, for the same fountain does not yield both hot
and co ld . The law holds a lt men und er its curse. From th e law, therefore, it is useless to see k a
blessing. " Then after condemning the "Papists, " as Luther was a lso wont to do , for the
"detestable doctrine" that men are capable, in so me meas ure, of keeping the law, he makes a
distinction which for him, is extremely importan t: "We conclude that when the law curses, it is
accidental (accedentis), though perpetu al and inse para ble (sed perpetui et inseparabilis), for
the bless ing which it offers is excluded by our depravity, so that on ly the curse remains. " 37
Calvin here and in other placesJB wants to gua rd against the possible misundersta nding
that the la w in and of itself is negative and destructive, and even a n instrument of the devil.
Hence he contrasts the original purpose of the law, which is "sp iritual, holy, just a nd good"
and its eventual- a nd inevitable- ro le due to sin (See Romans 7: 12- 16). This is how "that
which is good" ends up bringing death to us (Romans 7: 13) :
Those fami lia r with Calvin's ge neral viewpoint on the matter of the law will recognize a
familiar concern on Calvin's pa rt here. With Luther one would not expect such distinctions in
view of his usual polemic against the law. However, in this very context, where one might least
expect it, Luther urges a similar caution. Luther, too, is always mindful, even in these
Galatians Lectures, of Romans 7: 12: "So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, just
and good." Accordingly, when Paul speaks here in Galatians 3: 10- 13 so sharply of the curse of
the law, Luther is sensitive to a see ming contradiction, namely, How can the Law be both holy
and just and also be "the Law of the curse, of sin, of wrath and of death?" Luther adds , in
langu.age characteristic of Calvin, that "except for faith," the Law "is the best, the greatest and
the loveliest (pulcherrimum) among the physical blessings of the world, namely the Law of
God ."39
Note here how Luther distinguishes between a physical and a spiritual blessing, 40 the law,
in one se nse being a phys ical blessing. I say "in one sense" because a little later Luther speaks of
the law and works in a "metaphysical sense (metaphysice). "41 By this he contrasts a superficial,
legalistic understanding of the law with a spiritual und erstanding according to its divine
intention. The occasion for making such a distinction is a passing reflection (in his Commentary on Gal atians 3: 10) on Romans 2: 13: "It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous
before God but the doers of the law will be justified. "To "do the law" in aphysical sense is to
attempt to satisfy God and his law by observance of various works. To "do the Law,"
73
howeve r, in a m etaphysical se nse is to d o wh at the law req uires s pirituall y, i.e., to believe. Then
we receive C hrist and the H o ly S pirit and "begin to kee p th e Law, to lo ve God a nd o ur
neig hbo r ... T his is rea lly kee ping t he Law; oth erwi se th e Law rema ins perm a nently un ke pt. "42 T hi s, incidenta lly, renects Luther's understa nding of the first table of the decalogue.
T hat is, the first commandment requires that God be "wo rshipped by believ ing a nd fea ring
Him. "4J T o "do the law" th en is impossible apa rt fro m fa ith anc! the gos pel.
T he di stin cti o n Luther m a kes here is not quite t he same as Calvin's, bu t their co nce rn and
purpose are similar. They are both co nscio us o f the a ppa rent co nnict betwee ri the positive
statements mad e a bo ut th e law in the O ld Tes tament and in other pa rts o f the New and ce rtain
extremely negative strictures of the A postle P a ul. Calvin reso lves the iss ue by co ntrasting the
o rigin a l intent of the law with its "accidental" functio n due to sin . Luther a ppeals instead to the
"meta ph ysical" o r "spiritua l" intent of the law ove r against the misunderstanding of its true
role by the sinner or "the self-rig hteous of a ll ages- J ews, papists, sectarians, etc. "4 4
T here a ppea rs to be so me di ve rge nce, ho wever, in the ha ndling of Galatians 3:!9Jl H ere
we have a key passage co ncernin g th e law and its place in Hei/sgeschichte. " Wh y then the
law?" asks th e Apostle. The a nswer: It was add ed because of tra nsgress io ns . . . Here Luther
find s the " prima ry purpose of the Law of M oses" and "th e true fun cti o n a nd chief a nd proper
use o f the Law (verum officium et principalis ac proprius usus legis), " i.e., "to reveal to m an his
sin, blindness, mise ry , wickedness, ignorance, hate, a nd contempt of God , death , hell,
judgment a nd the well-dese rved wrath of God . "45
Calvin agrees with Luther th at when Paul refers t o the law here he mea ns not o nly the
mo ra l law but "the whole ministry of M oses (t oto Mosis ministerio)."46 T hen he ex pla ins that
the ministry o r office of M oses a lso included "ma ny promises co nce rning the free mercy of
God a nd C hrist which belo ng to faith ," but as fa r as the pec uli ar office o f M oses is conce rned
such p ro mises are " acc identa l" (accidentale) .. . insofar as a co mp a riso n is made betwee n the
law a nd th e d octrine of g race. "47 No te that here the wo rd "accid enta l" is used to m a ke quite
ano ther di stincti o n th a n th e o ne made earlier. T here t he contrast was betwee n an o rigin a l and
accide nt a l function o f th e law; here it is between Moses ' pro per ro le as a lawgive r a nd th e
"accidenta l" inclusio n of promises of g race.
T he iss ue begins to be j oined (with Luther) when Calvin co mments o n the ph rase in 3: 19,.
"was add ed beca use of transgressio ns": "The la w has ma ny uses, but Paul co nfines himself to
one whic h se rves hi s prese nt purpose. He did no t intend to inquire in how m a ny ways the law
is o f ad vantage to men. "48 Then Calvin m a kes so me rema rks tha t o ne like Elert mig ht
co nclude we re a direct rebuke of Luther.
Read ers must be put o n their guard o n thi s m a tter; fo r I see m a ny m a ke the mi sta ke of ac kno wledging no o ther use of law th a n wh at is expressed !>ere. But
elsewh ere Pa ul himself applies the prece pts of th e law to teaching and ex ho rtati o n (2 T im. 3: 16). Therefore thi s definiti o n of the use of the law is no t co mplete
and th ose who ac kno wledge nothin g else in the law are wrong. 49
Unfortun ately, we have no clue as to wh o "the ma ny" are who mista kenly thin k thi s
Pauline statement represents the only use of the law and that there is " no thing else in the
law. "49 " Elert, had he kn o wn of this passage, wo uld have readily concluded that here Calvin is
clearly attacking Luther. T hat is possible, for Calvin m ay have read Luther's commentary,
which was published thirtee n years before his o wn; but th ere is no reference to Luther
74
a nywh ere in his comme nta ry. Th a t, admittedl y, is no t co nclusive evid e nce sin ce Cal vin ofte n
d oes no t s pecify wh o his o ppo nents are. In thi s case they appea r to be mo re radica l th a n
Luth e r (pe rh a ps the Libe rtin es o r Antin o mi a ns, like Agricola) , fo r Ca lvin says th at th ese
peo ple ac kn ow ledge " no o the r use of th e law than what is ex pressed here," i.e., to ma ke a wa re
of a nd dee pe n the conscio us ness o f sin a nd g uilt. Luthe r, ho wever, in this ve ry discussio n (of
3: 19), ex plicitly notes th a t " he re o ne mu st kn o w th a t th ere is a douhle use o f the la w. "50 T he
o ne is a civic use, the o the r a s piritua l o ne, i.e., to inc rease transg ress ions. T hi s a lone would
see m to indi cate th a t Calvin had so meo ne else in mind , althoug h the muc h de bated questi o n
still re mains as to wheth er in fact Luth e r ta ug ht a third use of th e law as a no rm or g uid e fo r th e
redee med .
" Is th e la w, th e n, again st th e pro mi ses of Go d?" as ks the A pos tle in 3:2 1. He him self
answe rs, " Ce rta inly no t." " Wh y?" as ks Luthe r. His c hief a nswe r is th a t "alth o ugh the La w
di scloses a nd increases sin , it is still no t aga inst the p ro mi ses of God but is, in fa ct, fo r th em .
Fo r in its true and pro pe r wo rk a nd purpose (in vero et pe1fec10 opere et.fi'ne) it humbles ma n
a nd prepares him - if he uses the La w co rrectl y- to yearn a nd see k fo r g race. "51
Cal vin is co ncerned he re les t o ne co nclud e th at there is a n inco nsistency in God wh o is the
a uth o r of both the la w and promises. " Wh oeve r alleges a ny co ntradicti o n betwee n the m
blas phemes against God," C al vin wa rns. T hey a re o nl y "contradictory if the law justifi es, " but
th e la w has no suc h power. Th ere are not "two oppos ing method s of justifying a ma n," but
o nly o ne, viz., th at being co nd e mned by th e law we "beta ke o urselves" to C hrist. 52 Co nce rning
3:24 C al vin spea ks ve ry muc h lik e Luthe r. "Th e threate nings (o f th e la w) urged and pressed
the m to see k refu ge from the wra th a nd curse o f Go d and gave the m no res t until they we re
co nstra ined to see k the grace o f C hri st. "53 Calvin co nclud es th a t "the who le law, in sho rt , was
no thing bu t a manifo ld vari ety of exe rcises in whic h the wo rs hip pers we re led by th e ha nd to
C hri st. "5 4
In hi s discussion of Gala ti a ns 3:25 , ho weve r, Calvin ma nifes ts a co nce rn lest so meo ne
im agin e th a t "the la w is so a bo lis hed th a t it has no thing to d o with us. " Ca lvin is o bvio usly
conce rned th a t Paul here see ms to be a bo lishing the third , and for Calvin the proper a nd
princip a l use of the la w, wh e n he says, " But no w tha t faith has co me, we a re no lo nge r und e r a
custodian ," i.e., und e r the law.
Ca lvin quic kly ex pla ins th a t "the la w, insofa r as it is a rule of li vin g well , is a bridle which
kee ps us in th e fear of the Lo rd , a s pur to co rrect th e slackn ess of o ur fles h, in sho rt , so fa r as it
is profita ble for teac hing, co rrecting, re prov ing, th a t beli eve rs may be instructed in eve ry good
wo rk , is as much in force as eve r, a nd rema ins intact. "55
One find s nothing lik e this in Luth er, a t least no t in his discussion of this ve rse. Nor does
Luthe r use a phrase which Calvin uses he re- "a rule o f living well (regula bene vivendi)56whic h he uses again and again in hi s writings to s uggest the norm ative fun cti o n of the law. For
Luth er it would appea r tha t the re are ind eed only two uses of the law- civil a nd ped agogicalsince wh en C hrist came, " He truly abolished th e e ntire Law."57 When Luther add s that
"acco rding to our conscience we a re completely free of the law, "5 8 tha t wo uld seem to settle the
matte r. Luthe r a nd Calvin , in th e las t a nalysis, see m to take diametrica lly o pposed views when
it comes to a ny continuing fun ction of the law in the life of believe rs.
Suc h a co nclusion, howeve r, d oes no t do justice to the subtlety a nd dia lectic in Luthe r's
75
thinking. Sometimes th e id ea list in him imagined that as C hristians we are virtua lly freed fr o m
and dead to the law. But Luther was too mu ch of a realist- a nd biblica l scholar- to imagi ne
that th e C hristi an co uld ge t a lo ng without the law. He was no a ntim o ni a n. Hence in thi s ve ry
co ntex t- the discussion of Ga la tians 3:25- Luther, li ke Calvin, makes so me significa nt
qu alifica tions. "If we co uld perfec tly take ho ld of C hrist, who has a broga ted the Law a nd
reco nciled us sinners to the Fa th er by his deat h, th en that custod ian (the Law) would ha ve no
jurisdiction whatever over us." Note the big i/! T herefore Luther is forced to add , "But the law
in our mem bers is at war with the law o f our mind (Rom. 7:23), a nd it interferes so th at we
ca nn ot ta ke hold of C hrist perfectly . ... So far as we are co nce rned , then , we are partly free of
the Law a nd partly und er the La w. With Paul we se rve the Law of God with our mind, but
with our Oes h we se rve the law of sin ." In short, "so long as the Oes h re mains, there remains the
Law .. .. ,,s9
So here, at least, Luther a nd Calvin are not so fa r a part after all ! Again, howeve r,
we must bewa re of facil e conclusions, fo r even though both reformers recogn ize th e necessity o f a continuing fun cti o n o f th e law in the life of the C hristi a n, there are so me
significa nt differences . For Luther the law a lmos t always has a n acc usatory function .
"Lex semper accusal" (The Law a lways accuses) is the fa mous dictum of Melanchthon,6°
and Luther wo uld appear to concur. 61 Calvin , on the other hand , can speak of the law
in a much more pos itive and fri endly fas hion beca use he sees th e curse and threa ts of th e
law bein g fund a menta ll y a thing o f the past fo r the C hristi a n since in C hrist the accusatory aspects of th e law have bee n done away with. Calvin cites Augustine in this co nnection with a ppro val: "If th e S pirit of grace is abse nt, the law is present o nly to acc use and
kill us. "62 But th e C hrist ian "lays ho ld not o nly o f the precepts, but th e accompanying
promise of grace, which a lo ne swee tens what is bitter. "6J For Luther the law tend s to
point bac k to the o ld man as sinner; fo r Calvin the law po ints fo rwa rd to the C hristian's
renewa l in C hrist.
T he differences are th ere a nd they are not insignifica nt, but my co ntenti o n is th at
they ha ve o ften bee n blow n o ut of proportion. When o ne compares their res pective exegesis of key passages in Ga latians, th e two refo rmers are much close r than most historia ns o r theologians wou ld imagine.
This is particularly tru e in th e place they ass ign to good works. A key tex t in thi s
rega rd is Ga latians 5:14: "The whol e law is fulfilled in one word, 'You shall love yo ur
neighbo r as yo urself.' "
Here, at last, we have a text which would seem to be more congenia l to Calvin than
to Luther. (The same could be said of 6:2: "Bea r one another's burdens a nd so fu lfill the
law of C hrist.") But aga in we should not prejudge th e iss ue. Com menting on 5: 13, for
example- "Do not use yo ur freedom as an opportunity for the flesh"- Luther concludes
on a surprising note: "Now Paul shows beautifully o n the bas is of the Deca log wh at it
mea ns to be a servant of love. "64 Then on verse 14 he says that "this is the real way to
interpret Scripture and the co mm a ndments of God." By this he means that good works
are on ly good if they are built o n the foundation of J es us C hrist and his righteo usness.65
Sectarians, on the other ha nd , "teach fanatic a l and superstitious works" because they
"have abandoned Christ, chopped down the tree and subve rted the foundation . '~• 6
76
Those a rc trul y good wo rks, th en, wh ich iss ue from faith in C hrist and " Oow from
this faith a nd joy co nceived in th e hea rt beca use we ha ve fo rgive ness of sins freely
th ro ug h C hri st. "67 Ca lvin agrees, fo r he too holds th at good wo rk s "whic h we perform
by th e g uida nce a nd directi o n of the H o ly S pirit are the freely g ranted fruits of adopti o n.''•'
In relat io n to 5: 14, howeve r, Ca lvin disc usses primaril y the relati o n of the two ta bles
of th e la w. His argument is bas ica ll y th e sa me as Luthe r's since he stresses that the love
of neig hb o r (seco nd ta ble) de pend s on a nd is deriva ti ve of th e love o f God (first table).''9
In o ther word s, goc,ct work s- ac ts of love- must be based o n faith in God .
Interestingly, <1 ithoug h Calvin is kn o wn as th e th eo logian of sa nct ifica ti o n a nd
Luther th at o f justification ,7° in th eir Ga lat ians Co mm entaries Luther shows more co nce rn fo r urging good work s th an Ca lvin .71 T his a ppea rs to be a res ult o f perverse notions
of good wo rk s as taught by ce rt a in fa natics a nd a lso beca use Luther was d isco uraged by
the equiva lent of "cheap g race" as he saw it in his ow n churches. He comp la ins th at " if
fa ith is preac hed as it mu st be preac hed , th e majority of men und ersta nd the teac hing
a bo ut faith in a nes hl y way and transform th e freedom of the s pirit into th e freedom of
th e fl es h. Th is ca n be o bse rved tod ay," he o bse rves, " in all classes o f society both hi gh
a nd low. " 72 Beca use of thi s proclivity of eve n evangelical C hri stian s to a buse their freedom , Luther is co nvinced that " it is as necessary th a t faithful preach ers urge good works
as that th ey urge the doctrin e of fa ith. ''7 3
Thus Luthe r, the theologian o f grace and fre edom , ex hibits a special co nce rn for
good wo rks and a ho ly li fe . Ca lvi n, th e man of law, see ms mo re co nce rned in this co ntext a bout freedom and peace of conscience. Fo r "where the S pirit reig ns, the law no
lo nge r has a ny dominion , ' '74 writes Ca lvin.
IV. Conclusion
In thi s co mpar iso n a nd ana lys is of Luther's and C a lvi n's exegesis o f key passages
relat in g to law a nd gospe l as we ll as faith a nd wo rk s in their res pecti ve Galat ia ns C ommenta ri es, it should be ·clea r th at th e sha rp diffe ~·e nces attributed to the two refo rmers
a re non-ex iste nt. Moreove r, both of them, eve n by modern cano ns of inte rpretati o n, are
rema rk ab ly pe rcep ti ve and faithfu l interpreters of Paul. 75 To be sure, they bring thei r
o wn hermeneutical a nd th eo logica l pres upp ositions, but when they stick to exegesis
propel' - as ove r again st their frequ ent polemics, es pecially in the case of Luther- th ey
co me to basica ll y the sa me conclusio ns.
This is rath er rema rkable in view of their res pective dogmatic und ersta ndings of the
law in co ntras t to their m o re strictl y exegetical o r biblical ex positi o ns. By "d ogmatic" I
mean th e theo logica l complex o r cluster of ideas evoked by th e term " law" and then by
infe rence how it relat es to the term "gospel. " Fo r Luther the law co nnotes first and
foremo st a nega ti ve, ho stile entity, eve n though he a lso speaks positi ve ly o f th e enduring
va lidit y and wo rk of natural law a nd its summ ary in th e deca logue, wh ich in turn is sharpened and deepened by J es us' interpretation in the Sermon o n the Mo unt. (H ere Luther
and Ca lvin take exactly the same approach.)76
Thus, whe n Luther is speakin g in a ge neral way a bout th e law, he co mm o nl y asso-
77
ciatcs it with the world , sin , death, the devil , a nd the wrilth of Godn Law, so co nceived ,
co nn otes bond age to the elements o f the wo rld fro m which we a re freed by C hrist a nd
the gos pel.
Calvin recognizes this mea ning o f t he law bu t, give n his theological presupp osition, is
usua lly ca reful to point out th at when the A postle Paul spea ks o f the law in a negati ve way as
th at which threatens, curses, a nd cond emns (as in Ga l. 3: 19; Rom. 3:20; 4: 15; 5:20; and 2 Co r.
3:6-7), "he was sometimes co mpelled to ta ke the bare law (nuda lex) in a narrow se nse" in
ord er to refute " perve rse teac hers who pretend ed th at we merit righteo usness by the work s of
the law." T he law co nceived of mo re broadl y and positi ve ly, the law which is a gift of God to
his people for th eir welfa re, is what Ca lvin calls the law "clothed (vestita) with the cove nant of
free ad opti on. "78 It is this law which is in the background of Ca lvin's thin king when he refers
to the law as "the perpetu a l ru le of a good and holy life. ' '79
Howeve r, when th e tex t requires it, as in th e allego ry o f A brah a m's tw o so ns (Ga l.
4:22ff.), one of whom represe nts th e cove nant of sla ve ry ( Hagar and M o unt Sanai), the
other the cove na nt o f freedo m (Sara h a nd the .J erusalem fr om a bove), Cal vin d oes not
hesitate to se t the tw o cove na nts in th e sha rpes t oppositi on. But note that in doing so he
aga in refe rs to " the ba re law." "Th ose wh o cleave to th e ba re la w (in nuda lege) and d o
not k no w it as a sch oo lmas ter to bring t hem to C hrist, but rath er ma ke it a ba rri er
aga inst co ming to him , a re the lshm aelites bo rn to slave ry. "80
Luther, in discussing this passage (4:22ff.) , a lso ma kes a di stincti o n- one betwee n
the physical promises of the law in co ntrast to th e spiritual promises about C hri st and
his kingd o m- but Luther id entifies th e !a lter exclusive ly with the cove na nt of freed o m,
i.e., the gos pel. "There was no pro mise of C hrist add ed to the Law," ma inta ins Luther,
whereas Calvin would say this was o nly true of the bare law, a bst racted from the covenant of grace. T hus th e differences a re there, reOectin g their d ogmat ic pres upp ositi o ns,
but they are fund amenta lly o ne in und erstanding the message o f Ga lati a ns.
T hey a re a lso one in their co nvicti o n that th e law co ntinues to play a role in the life
of the C hristi a n, alth ough the nu a nces a re agai n different, as I noted ea rlier. In rega rd to
the related and much debated q uesti o n a bo ut whether Luther teaches a third use of the
law, we sa w t hat in his co m me ntary he o nly explicitly teac hes two uses of th e law. As
far as th at goes, Calvin neve r specifies either two or three uses o f th e law in his co mm entary; but in both cases the rea li ty is there. Fo r "Luther saw the co mma ndments not o nl y
as a mirro r [a favo rite meta pho r of Calvin 's] in which he [the C hristia n] recognizes sina ltho ugh th ey ce rta inly a re a nd rema in th at fo r th e C hristi a n- but beyo nd this as instru cti o n abo ut the 'good wo rks' God wa nts, a nd such instructi on is necessary and
who leso me fo r the C hristi an . ... Acco rdingly, Luther structured his Treatise on Good
Wo rks, which was designed to desc ribe the C hristi an life, as a n interp retati o n of the Decalog. '"' 1
T hus, if thi s very specific a nd lim ited piece of resea rch yields any surprises, the first
wo uld be th at th e a nti -law Luther d oes not do away with the law a lt oget her a nd stresses
the im port a nce of good wo rks. x2 T he seco nd surprise is t he fac t t hat Calvin , t he so-ca lled
ma n o f law, the alleged "Gesetzlehrer,"83 teac hes in his Ga latians Co mmentary and elsewhere not o nly a relative difference bu t also an a111ithesis betwee n the law a nd the gos-
78
pet, whe n th e former is po rtrayed as lette r, as a bare law, a nd the latte r is equ a ted with
the new di s pensati o n of th e S pir it. For C alvin , no less than Luthe r, recogni zes this form
of th e law which can be eq uated wit h "the tyranny of si n, Satan a nd dea th . "85
These co nclusions, it must be pointed out aga in, a re based la rge ly on a limited
sa mpling of th e ex positions o f o nl y one epistle. H owever, if the refo rm e rs a re to be take n se riou sly in their atte mpts to be theo logians of the Word, this is where we must begin
in a tte mptin g to gain a ny fres h a nd fa ir a ppra isal of th eir views on this fundam e ntal
theme.K<>
FOOTNOTES
1
F ranco is Wende l, Calvin. Origins and Development of His Rl'ligious 1/iought (New York: Harper a nd Row,
E. T.. 1963), pp. 19, 38, 41 , 13 1ff; and T. H. L. Pa rker, John Calvin. A Biography (P hiladelphia: Westmi nster
Press, 1976). pp. X IVff., 23, 30.
2
An English translati o n is availab le in the Library of Ch ris1ii111 Classics, Vol. XX JJ·: Calvin: 7/1eological Treatises (Phi ladelphi a: West mi ns ter Press, 1954). pp. 140ff.
We nd el. op. cit .. p. 133. On 1he foll o wing page We ndel quotes a passage from Ca lvin 's " Last Warning lo
3
W es tph al" in wh ich Calvin wr ites: " I wo uld wish th at whatever fa ults may have bee n mingled among the great
virtues or Luther might rather ha ve been buried; and in truth to keep me from touching upon th em, more
lh a n th e grcal ho no r a nd reverence I bear towa rds the man y excellent gi fl s with which he was end owed . But
to wish 10 emb race the vices fo r !he virtues, that wou ld indeed be contrary to a ll good." (T he o ri gina l version
of this 1reatisc is in the Calvini Opera, Vo l. 9, p. 238.)
4
S ince World War II significant disc ussions have lake n place betwee n Lutheran and Reformed theo logians
conce rnin g !heir respecti ve views of the Lo rd 's S upper. The res ult of dial ogue in Ge rm a ny in th e 1950s was a
conse ns us of a so rt ex pressed in th e A rn o lds hain Thcsc n (Theses). See Pau l C. Empie a nd J ames I. McCord ,
editors, Marhurg Revisited. A Ree..r:mnination of Lutheran and Reformed Tradition.,· (Mi nnesota : Augsburg
Publishin g Ho use, 1966); a nd Gegemvart Christi. Beitrag zum Abendmahlsge'JHiich in der Evangelischen
Kirche in Deutsch/and (Got1i nge n: Vanderhoec k a nd Ru prcclll , 1960) .
s lnstitwes <d.the Christian Religion ( 1559 edi1i o n), 11. 7. 12. I am using the tra ns la tio n by Ford Lewis Ba ti les in
the Library of Christian Classics (LCC), edited by J o hn T . McNeill (P hiladelphia: Wcslminster Press, 1960).
•Sec Notes 119 a nd 10 in the LCC cdi1i o n of th e Institutes, p. 354, a nd th e o riginal tex ts in Werner Elc rt 's Law
and Gospel. p. 39 (cited below). Fo r Melanchth o n, sec his Laci Communes ( 152 1), Corpus Reformatorwn,
Vo l. XX I, pp. 405, 7 17. For Lulhcr, see his Co mmentary o n Galati a ns ( 1535) 3: 19 (W/\ 40. 48 1); 4:3.
7
Lmr and Go.1pel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967). p. 44. T his is a translation of an essay which o riginally
appeared in a larger work of Elcrt 's: Zwischen Gnade und Ungnade: Abhandlungen des J1"1emas Gesetz und
Evangeli11111 (Munchen, 1948).
• At o ne lime ava ilab le throu gh the U.S.A. Natio nal Co mmit1ee for the Lulhera n Wo rld Fede ratio n, 2 14 Park
Ave nu e Soulh , New York, New York 100 10. C f. The Lmv-Gb.1pel Debate by Ge rhard 0. Fo rde (Minneapo lis:
Au gs burg Publishing House, 1969). This stud y is a histo ry of lhe doctrine begin nirig in 1he ninetee nth century
wit h .I . C. K. van Ho ffmann a nd his co nl rove rsy about 1he alonemenl and co ncl uding with Karl Barth 's attac k o n Luther and Lutherans fo r thei r ri gid law-gos pel stan ce. Ca lvin is o nly mentio ned o nce in pass ing.
' Sec p. 36. op. cit.
The iss ue is comp licated, however, by 1he fact that the "enemy" for man y Luthera ns to d ay is not so much
Ca lvin as Ka rl Barth . The latlcr's fa mo us 1935 trca1isc Evangeliwn um/ Gesell (Go.1pel and La w) no t o nl y
reve rses 1hc 1rad itio na l order but a lso represents th e culm inatio n of various atlacks by Ba rth agai nst the Lutherans on this issue. An E nglish tran slati on of this monograph appears in Community, State and Church
(Garde n Ci1y: Doubleday and Co. - "Anchor Books"- 1960).
10
11
Three dissertations have been writlen a bo ui Calvin's conce pt of the law, but none of them has been published .
The three are: G. R ac ke, Gesell wul Evangeliwn bei Calvin (Mainz U., 1953); I. J o hn Hess.c link , Calvin 's
Concept and Use of the Law (Basel U., 1961); a nd Ralph R. Sundquist, Jr., 711e 711ird Use of the Law in the
Th ought o( John Calvin: An Interpretation and Evaluation (Colu mb ia U., 1970) .
12
Sec, e.g., Paul Altha us, The Theologv of Martin Luther (P hiladelphia: Fortress Press, 1966); and Philip S.
Watson , Let God Be God. An /111erpretatiu11 of the Theology o( Martin Luther (Lo nd o n: Epworth Press,
1947) . There are also many specia lized sutdies of this Iheme: Two examples: Gerh ard Heintzc, Luthers Predigt
von Geset z um/ Evangelium ( Munchen: C hr. Ka iser Verlag, 1958); and Thomas M . Mc Do nough, The Law
and the Go.1pel in Luther. A Swdy u( Luther 's Confessional Writings (Lo nd on: Oxford University Press,
1963).
79
1.1
14
Th is is true of Wend el's Calvin, op . tit.; Wilhelm Niescl's 711e 111eolof(y of Calvin (Philadelphia : Westminster
Press, 1956); A. Mitchell Hunter's 77ie Teaching of Calvin (Westwood, N.J .: Flem ing H. Revell Co., seco nd
revised ed .. 1950). The one exce ption is Wilhe lm Nicsel's Reformed Sy111bolic.1 (British title) published in the
Un ited Stales under the title T11e G1J.1pel and the Churches. A Comparison of Catholicis1n, Orthodoxy and
Protestr111ti.1m (Philad elphia: Westminste r Press, 1962). Herc he has a chapte r, "Gospel and Law" (note the
o rd er; Nicscl is a faithfu l Barthian) in which he co mpares the Lutheran and Reform ed views.
In English we have a one volume version of an ea rli er l wo-volumc edition in German: n~xtbook of the Histo-
ry of Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1952).
is The closest one co mes to a spccilic treatment of this the me is in such treatises as Two Kinds of l?ighteousness
(1 5 18); 7/w Freedom of a Christian ( 1520); Treatise 0 11 Good Works ( 1520); a nd Against th~ Antinomirms
(1539).
"The best English translation is th at by Wi lhelm Pauck in 'The Library of C hristian Classics, " Vo l. XV (Philadelphia: Westm inster Press, 196 1).
" In 15 16- 15 17 Luther first lectured on Galatia ns. Luther's own co py of these lectures has not s urvived , but
fortunat e ly we have a copy take n down by one of his students (WA . Vo l. 57). For a n ana lys is see Rupp. op .
cit .. pp. 194ff. He lectured aga in o n Gala tia ns in 151 9 (WA. Vol. 2). These lectures, translated by Richa rd
Jun gkunl z, arc found in the seco nd half of Volume 27 of Luther '.\· Works (Saint Louis: Co ncordia Publishing
House. 1964). As Jaroslav Pelikan , the editor of this vo lume, points o ut. "The term 'Luther's Galatians' could
conceivab ly be take n to refer to a ny one of five (or even six) comment ar ies on the Epistle 10 the Galatians by
M a rtin Luther," p. IX.
" Others wo uld give prid e of place to The Bondage of the Will ( 1525), his length y and ca refull y done res ponse
to Erasm us' Diatribe on Free Will ( 1524).
19
I ha ve a lready referred to Vol. 27 in footnote # 17. Ja ros lav Peli kan is the translator of the Lectures on Galatians 1535, the ex position of the first four chapters appea ring in Vol. 27 of Lwher ;· Works (1963).
20 In the Torrance ed ition of Calvin '.1· New Testament Commenrnries (Grand Rapids: Eerd mans, 1965).
" Lot. l'it .. p. 122 (WA 40, 2 18).
22 Ibid.. p. 123 (WA 40, 2 18).
" Loe. tit .. p. 39 (CO 50, 196).
" Loe l'it .. p. 137 (WA 40, 240) . If-justification happens through the Law, then it does not happen through
grace," O n 2: 17, p. 146 (WA 40, 253).
" Loe cit., p. 40 (CO 50, 196).
26
P. 155 (WA 40, 266).
" P. 157 (WA 40, 270).
" P. 158 (WA 40, 27 1).
2• P. 4 1 (CO 50, 198).
'° P. 42 (CO 50,
31
198).
P. 163 (WA 40, 278).
l2
Ibid (WA 40, 278).
n P. 42 (CO 50, 198) .
" P . 203 (WA 40, 329).
" On 3:6. p. 49 (CO 50, 204).
36
Ibid.. pp. 50-5 1 (CO 50, 206).
37
Ibid.. p. 53 (CO 50, 208). Translation mine.
38
Sec his lnstitwes 11. 7.2,7, and particularly his discussion of 2 Co r. 3:6, Co mm. foe. tit. (CO 50, 40f.); and
Comm . Acts 7:38 (CO 48, 15 1).
39
P. 25 1 (WA 40, 396).
"' Luther illustrates this distinction earlier by designating s uch thin gs as a kingdom, political ordinan ces, a wife
and children, as physical blessi ngs in contrast to "righteousness in the sight of God" which is a blessing of a
"theological" o r spiritual nature. The aforeme ntioned phys ical blessings are divine but tempora l, spiritual blessings arc eternal (p. 250; WA 40, 394).
41 P. 253 (WA 40, 398). Philip Watso n, in his translation based on the Middleton text, translates "m etaphysice
acceptis" as "in respect to their essence," A Comme111my on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians (London:
James C la rk e & Co .. 1953), p. 245.
" P. 2S5 (WA 40, 401).
" P. 253 (WA 40, 399).
44
P. 25 1 (WA 40, 395).
80
" P . .\09 (W/\ 40 , 48 1). "The prope r and abso lut e use o f th e I.a w (/1roprius er ai>.w/11111s lei;is us11s)." p . .\ 10 (W/\
40, 482). C L simi la r lan g uagc- " tru e and pro pe r use," " tru e fun cti o n and use" - on pp . 3 12 a nd 3 15 (W/\ 40,
484, 489) .
" P . 60 ( CO 50 , 2 15). Late r, in refe re nce to ve rse 2.1 he mak es a simila r e x planatio n. Paul he re (i n 3:23 ). " is
spea kin g not o nl y of th e ccrcrn o ni cs or of the moral la w. but embraces th e w hole eco no m y (uecu11umia111) by
whic h the Lo rd gove rned his peo ple under the o ld cove nant ," p. 65 (C O 50, 2 19).
47
/hit/. Translation mine.
" P. 6 1 (C O 50 , 2 15 ).
" /hid.
a It i!-1 quite poss ib le that "they " arc members of the Libertine sect (cf. Ca lvin 's Collln' la secte plw111<1.vtique des
Liheni11.\ ) or John Agri cola, ori ginal ly a fo ll ower of Luther who separat ed from him and bega n th e Antim oni-
41
'
an Co ntrove rsy in 1537. Fo rd Baltlcs ident ifies th em as probably th e "cert ain ignorant persons" who "rashl y
cas t o ut the w ho le o f M oses, a nd bid far ewe ll to th e two tab les o f the Law," /11srirwes 11. 7. 13 a nd no te 1120 . p .
36 1.
Pp . .108-9 . er. Luthe r on Ga la ti an s 3: 12, pp. 274-5 (W/\ 40, 429), and on 3:24 , p. .148 (W/\ 40, 53.1 ).
P . .128 (WA 40, 508).
P. 64 (CO 50. 2 17).
P. 66 (C O 50, 220).
" On 3:24, p. 67 (C O 50 , 22 1). Professor A nd rew J . Bands tra of C a lvin Se minary. in a n essa y, "Law and G os pel
in Calvin and in Paul ," is critical of this interpretation because it "understand s Paul to be speaking of the la w
"
"
"
"
in a positi ve manner of bringing peo ple to C hrist. . . . But thi s mo re posit ive view of the law is precise ly not in
view here: for bond age being shut up under sin and th e curse of th e la w, is Pau l's co nce rn in thi s co ntex t,"
Expluri11!( 1/Je llerirai;e of Juh11 Calvin. Essays in Him ors of" Juh11 /Jra11. David E. Hulwerrla. Edit o r ( Ci rand
Rapid s: Bake r Bo ok House, 1976), p. 25.
Band sll'a has a poin t here. but in the quota ti o n immediately preceding thi s o ne Cal vin spo ke more negati ve-
ly of th e ro le of the law as a "schoolm aster. " M o reo ver. th e sam e eriticism co uld be levelled again st Luth er.
des pite hi s m ore negati ve stru ctures. E.g., o n the Jaw as custodian Luther. apparentl y speak ing from ex perien ce. o bse rves that the La w is not like a teacher wh o is a tyrant who co ntinuall y w hips his stu denb , but
dri ves th em to C hri st "ju st as a good teacher w hips, train s. and di sciplines hi s pupil s in readi ng and w rit ing
with t he purpose o f bringin g th c rn to a kn owledge o f th e libe ral art s a nd o f o the r goo d th ings, so that eve ntu a lly they may d o with pleas ure w hat initial ly, wh en th ey we re fo rced to it by th eir teac he r. they did in vo luntarily," p . 346 (C O 40. 532 ).
" P. 67 (C O 50 , 22 1).
S<• Bot h th e older Prin gle translation and th e rece nt Park er tran slation are in acc urate here a nd simpl y ha ve " rul e
of life." T hi s type of phrase is anath ema to Elcrt. The law, he in sists. "can never be only a rul e for li fe, " O JJ .
cit., p . 11 . Cf. pp. 7. 45. E le rt d oc' no t rea lize t hat for Calvin th e law, eve n for the C h ri s tian , is " neve r o nl y a
rul e for life. " but also co ntinu e~ to remind the believer o f hi s sin and failure. See the Institute.\· 11. 7. 12 w here
C al vin e x p l ain ~ th e third use or th e law : "Even for a spi ritu al man not ye t free of the we ight of th e llcsh. th e
law remain s a con stant stin g that will not let him stand still. "
" On 3:25 , p. 349 (C O 40 , 535 ). "The e ntire law ha s bee n a brogat ed for be lieve rs in C hri st ," o n Galatian s 4 :27,
p. 447 (C O 40. 672 ).
'" P . .149 (C O 40, 536) .
59
/hid (C O 40. 535 1".). "T o the ex te nt that tak e ho ld o f C hri st by fa ith , the re fo re. to that ex te nt th e La w has
been abrogated for rn e. But m y fl es h . th e wo rld , and th e d ev il do not pe rmit faith to be pe rfect ," pp. 350- 1
(C O 40 . 5.18 ).
"1
From hi ' " Ap o logy to the /\ ugs bu rg C on fe ssio n." T hi s is fo und in 7lle /Jook of Cunnml. edit ed by Theod o re
G. Tap pe rt (Phi lad e lphia: Mu hle nbe rg. 1959). p. 150.
<• 1
" In it s highest use and force th e I.aw ca nn ot do anythin g but accuse : fright en, cond emn and ki ll ... Even in it s
best USC , th e re fore, th e Law ca n o nl y produce a kno wled ge or sin and te rro r or deat h," Lu th er on Ga latian s
4:3, p. 363 (C O 40. 554L).
r..2
Institute.\· 11. 7.7.
OJ f n.V!ifllfl'S
lf .7. 12.
"" P. 5 1 in Vo lum e 27 of L111/wr\ Works w hich co ntai n th e ex position of C hapters Five a nd S ix (WA 40 . 64).
A ll re fere nces to c hapt ers fi ve and six in the critical We imar Au sgabe (WA) wi ll be from Band 40, Zweire
Ab tcilu ng.
" /hit!. (WA 40. 64) .
"'' P. 52 (WA 40, 66).
" On 2: 16. p . 133. in Vol. 26 (WA 40, 234) . "The so und o f the promise to /\braham (in 3: 10 ff) brin gs C hri st;
a nd w he n He has bee n g ras ped by faith , the n th e H o ly S pirit is gran ted on C hri st 's account. The n G o d and
81
our neighbor arc loved. good wo rk s arc perfo rm ed. and Ille cro ss is borne. Th is is reall y keepin g the Law . ...
p. 255 !CO 40. 40 1).
''' On 6:8. pp . I 13- 114 (CO 50. 262 ).
,,, Co111 111cntary O il 5: 14. pp . 100- 1 (CO 50, 25 1). "God
" " llll S
to make trial of our love to Him by that love o r
our brothc.:r which He com mamb to us. This is why not only here but also in Roman s 18:8 and 10 love is
ca lled th e lui filli ng of th e law. n OI hct:a usc it is superio r to the worship of God. bu t because it is proof of it. "
10
p. IOI. Cf. !1wit///e.1· 11.8.53. 55.
So Karl Barth . Church Dox111atiD. IV.2, p. 509.
11
Ca lvi n\ bcsl discussio n of good works in relation to justification is in chapter 16 of Book Ill of th e !t1s1i1wes.
" On 5: I.1. p. 48 (WI\ 40, 60).
" P. 5.1 (CO 40. 67).
" O n 5:2.1. p. 106 (CO 50. 2511 ). "Now it is clea r that the members of Christ arc injured if they arc still held in
bondage to the law. from which all who have been regenerated by his love have been se t free." on 5:24. p. 106.
1s Sec /\. Ga noc7y, ··Calvin als pau linisc hcr Theologe." in Culvinu.\· 711('0/ogicus, hrsg. vo n W. H. Neuser (Neukirchc n: Nc uk irchcncr Verlag. 1976). pp . .191T. Ganocly co nce ntrates on Ca lvin 's ex position of Romans. which
provide' the hermcnc utical key for Ca lvin's theo logy as Ga la tians docs for Luther's theo logy, pp. 48, 60.
7" For Luther see the disc ussion by Althaus. 1he 7/1eolog•' of Martin Lwher, pp. 25 1-2; for Calvin sec the lnsti1L1tes, 11.8. 1. 7.
" Sec his Ga la ti ans Co mmentary o n 5: I. pp . 5-6 (WA 40, 4.5) where such characteristic co mbinati ons occur fi ve ·
times in two pages!
18
Institute.\ 1 1. 7.2~ cf. 111. 7.7. The Battle:-. lra nslati on of th is phrase reads "graced with the covenant. .. " Since th e
co ntras t is between th e bare (11uda) law and the clo thed (veslita) law. I prefe r the mo re literal translati on in
order to hring out the force of th e co ntrast. In anoth er place in the lnstit111es where the wo rd vestilll is used
Battles trnn slates it as "c loth ed": "This. th en. is th e true knowl edge of Christ. if we rece ive him as he is offered
by the Father: namely as clothed (vestitwn) with his gos pel," 111. 2.6.
Co mmentary o n 4:4. p. 74 (CO 50. 227 ). Cf. o n 3: 19. p. 6 1 (CO 50, 215), and the commentary on 3:25. p. 67.
cited above. note 55.
• 1 On 4: 24. p. 86 (CO 50, 2J 8).
79
" Althaus. op . cit., p. 272. /\ lthaus adds in a foo tnote (ff l25) a most interest ing o bservation : "U nde r no ci rc umstan ces th erefo re may one interpret the Dcca log in Luther's ca tec hism as meaning that it has a place onl y
befo re 'justi fi ca ti on.' And it is equally inco rrec t to assert that th e positi on of th e D eca log in the Heidelberg
Catec hi sm aft er 'Redemption' a nd under 'Gratitude' is specificall y Reformed rather than Lutheran . It is we ll
known that the order of the chief parts of the Heid elberg Catech ism occurs in a Lutheran catech ism as early
as 1547."
It sho uld be obvious that /\ lth aus believes that Luther docs in effect teach a third use of the law and is thus
opposed to Elcrt a nd ot he r Lutherans such as Rag na r Bring who rega rd this as a Melanchtho nia n a nd Reformed heresy even th ough it appea rs in a guarded form in the Formula of Co nco rd , a Lutheran conrcss ion !
(see Althaus. p. 273).
Cf. the essay by the Danish Lutheran ethicist, N. H. Sjle. "The Three ' Uses' of the Law," in Norm and
Con te.rt in Christian Ethics, edited by Gene H. Outka and Paul Ramsey (New York : Charles Scribner's So ns.
1968), pp. 297ff. /\long with Helmut T hiclicke, in his 1/wuloximl Ethics. Vol. I. he o bse rves that while Cal vin
acce ntu ated the third use more th an Lut her. "ac tu ally there was no essential difference betwee n th ese two
reformers oin this question," p. 3 10.
82
" He who want s to be a tru e C hristi an or to belong to the kingdo m of Christ must be trul y a believe r. But he
does not trul y believe if work s of love do not fo ll ow his fait h. " on Gal. 5:6, p. 30 (WA 40, 37). Cf. the helpful
essay by Robert Bertram ... The Radical Dia lect ic Betwee n Faith and Work s in Luther's Lcc tllres on Ga latians
(1 535)," in L.wherfor an Ecw1wnirnl Axe. Carl Meye r. editor (St. Louis: Co ncordia Publishing House. 1967).
pp. 227ff.. 235ff.
' ·' So Friedrich Brunstiid, 1heuloxie lier lwherischen Bekennt11i.rnhr!fie11 (GUierslo h, C. Bertelsmann . 195 1), p.
79.
s4 Thi s cru cial poi nt in understanding Ca lvin's view of la w and gospel is articu lated and deve loped in my doctor-
al dissertatio n. Calvin's Co11cep1 and Use of the Lmv (llasel Unive rsity, 196 1), Chapter VI I, pp . 9f. . 421T. Cf.
llandstra's essay, "Law and Gospel in Calvin and in Pau l." pp. 12ff.
" Com ment ary o n Galatians 5: I, p. 92 (CO 50, 24.1).
sti "The sixtee nth century was, above all things, th e age of the Bible. H ow strange. th en. that thi s area of history
has. apart fro m so me well trodden pat hs. been neglected . ... It is. however. whe n we co me to the comment a ries, th at 1he deepest pove rt y appea rs." T . J-1 . L. Parker, Calvin'.\· Ne \\· Testament Commentaries (London:
SCM Press. G rand Rapids:, Eerdmans. 197 1) pp . vi if. Cf. Ga noczy, op. l'it., pp . 45f. who points out that the
first " hcrmcncutical circle" fo r Calvin co mbines both the lnstitwes and Paul's Epistle to the RonH111' as the
"key" to Scripture.
82