Our third and last exception relates to the recompense of works we maintaining that it depends not on their own value or merit, but rather on the mere benignity of God. Our opponents, indeed, admit that there is no proportion between the merit of the work and its reward; but they do not attend to what is of primary moment in the matter: that is, that the good works of believers are never so pure as that they can please without pardon. They consider not, I say, that they are always sprinkled with some spots or blemishes, because they never proceed from that pure and perfect love of God which is demanded by the law. Our doctrine, therefore, is that the good works of believers are always devoid of a spotless purity which can stand the inspection of God; nay, that when they are tried by the strict rule of justice, they are, to a certain extent, impure. But, when once God has graciously adopted believers, he not only accepts and loves their persons, but their works also, and condescends to honor them with a reward. In one word, as we said of man, so we may say of works: they are justified not by their own desert, but by the merits of Christ alone; the faults by which they would otherwise displease being covered by the sacrifice of Christ. This consideration is of very great practical importance, both in retaining men in the fear of God, that they may not arrogate to their works that which proceeds from his fatherly kindness; and also in inspiring them with the best consolation, and so preventing them from giving way to despondency, when they reflect on the imperfection or impurity of their works, by reminding them that God, of his paternal indulgence, is pleased to pardon it.
The Necessity of Reforming the Church (1543) - John Calvin
For Piper and Gaffin, the works of believers are a means to the end of final justification.
John Piper, the Debtor’s Ethic, Future Grace— “the Israelites are at their best, though, what is notable about them is not their gratitude, but THEIR FAITH.....The biblical concept of unmerited, conditional grace is nearly unintelligible to Christians who assume that unconditionality is the essence of all grace.
Richard Gaffin-- we must confront a tendency, within churches of the Reformation to view the gospel and salvation in its outcome almost exclusively in terms of justification. Sanctification is viewed as an expression of gratitude from our side for our justification, usually with the accent on the imperfection and inadequacy of such expressions of gratitude.
For others, one good way to respond to Piper and Gaffin is to teach the doctrine that the works of believers result in degrees of rewards. Of course they tend to say that you should not be directly motivated by hope for rewards corresponding to works, but it could be one incentive and byproduct of works as a means of assurance. Since faith is never alone, if you don't have works, then you don't have faith. Works are a way to prove to yourself that you believe. And those who would say that working to know you believe is not believing are trapped in " Lutheran paradigm".
I am thinking about how some Christians are "incentivized" by the idea that their works will be a means to a correspondent reward much greater than what God has worked in them. It doesn't hurt to know that "bigger glasses" for some Christians rather than others. Some of those vessels end up with a much greater capacity for inheritance than others.
Our third and last exception relates to the recompense of works we maintaining that it depends not on their own value or merit, but rather on the mere benignity of God. Our opponents, indeed, admit that there is no proportion between the merit of the work and its reward; but they do not attend to what is of primary moment in the matter: that is, that the good works of believers are never so pure as that they can please without pardon. They consider not, I say, that they are always sprinkled with some spots or blemishes, because they never proceed from that pure and perfect love of God which is demanded by the law. Our doctrine, therefore, is that the good works of believers are always devoid of a spotless purity which can stand the inspection of God; nay, that when they are tried by the strict rule of justice, they are, to a certain extent, impure. But, when once God has graciously adopted believers, he not only accepts and loves their persons, but their works also, and condescends to honor them with a reward. In one word, as we said of man, so we may say of works: they are justified not by their own desert, but by the merits of Christ alone; the faults by which they would otherwise displease being covered by the sacrifice of Christ. This consideration is of very great practical importance, both in retaining men in the fear of God, that they may not arrogate to their works that which proceeds from his fatherly kindness; and also in inspiring them with the best consolation, and so preventing them from giving way to despondency, when they reflect on the imperfection or impurity of their works, by reminding them that God, of his paternal indulgence, is pleased to pardon it.
For Piper and Gaffin, the works of believers are a means to the end of final justification.
ReplyDeleteJohn Piper, the Debtor’s Ethic, Future Grace— “the Israelites are at their best, though, what is notable about them is not their gratitude, but THEIR FAITH.....The biblical concept of unmerited, conditional grace is nearly unintelligible to Christians who assume that unconditionality is the essence of all grace.
Richard Gaffin-- we must confront a tendency, within churches of the Reformation to view the gospel and salvation in its outcome almost exclusively in terms of justification. Sanctification is viewed as an expression of gratitude from our side for our justification, usually with the accent on the imperfection and inadequacy of such expressions of gratitude.
For others, one good way to respond to Piper and Gaffin is to teach the doctrine that the works of believers result in degrees of rewards. Of course they tend to say that you should not be directly motivated by hope for rewards corresponding to works, but it could be one incentive and byproduct of works as a means of assurance. Since faith is never alone, if you don't have works, then you don't have faith. Works are a way to prove to yourself that you believe. And those who would say that working to know you believe is not believing are trapped in " Lutheran paradigm".
I am thinking about how some Christians are "incentivized" by the idea that their works will be a means to a correspondent reward much greater than what God has worked in them. It doesn't hurt to know that "bigger glasses" for some Christians rather than others. Some of those vessels end up with a much greater capacity for inheritance than others.