Salvation by Grace
Bloesch,
Essentials, chapt. viii
(THE
GIFT OF GRACE IN BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE)
p181.
Bl. says that salv'n is a free gift of God in that our works can't
satisfy "the stringent requirements of God's law."
NB: [1] they can't;
[2] they were never meant to be the
basis of our standing with God. Recall
[a] the preface to the decalogue, [b] the fact that the OT as a whole attests
the gospel rather than contradicts it. (Romans 3)
p182. The law as vehicle of our
standing with God is a perversion of
the law. If we don't understand
this, [1] we misread and reject the OT;
[2] we write off the synagogue. (See Rom. 9:4-5)
p183. Not only are we saved by
grace, we are kept by grace.
p183. Bl. correctly denies that when
grace comes upon us we remain passive; rather we are "compelled" to
respond." [1] Don't "thingify"
grace;
[2] Don't overpress "compelled";
[3] recognize the response to be authentically human.
p184. Bl. is correct: because the woman is forgiven she loves much.
God's mercy is primordial.
p184. In Bl.'s discussion of the
parable of sheep and goats: "We are to be judged according to our works,
but we are saved despite our works."
NB [1] the judg't that the Xn faces cannot condemn us.
[2] our works are to be judged in that
our concrete, daily obedience matters.
[3] God's judg't also has the force of "vindication": the Xn will be displayed as "right".
p184. re: Cornelius, a
'God-fearer".
[1] in the synagogue he would hear the declaration of God as in the OT
|[2] he
"feared" God. This means
(chiefly) he recognized God and honoured God by responding appropriately.
[3] One
aspect of his response was his righteous doing.
[4] the "man in bright apparel" = an angel = messenger of God ( or
visitation by God himself.)
[5] Corn. recognizes that J of Nazareth embodies the substance of what he had
already responded to in "fearing God."
p186. Note the discussion between
Calvin and Bloesch re: Cornelius. Calvin's
point is most important: the one and only Mediator (i.e., the gospel) was known
to Israel under the economy of the Torah.
p189. Bl., in the wake of the Calvinist
tradition, speaks of
"common grace." Calvin
himself spoke of providence. (These
aren't exact synonyms.) Neither is
to be confused with prevenient grace.
(AN
AGE-OLD CONTROVERSY)
Pelagius:
by our natural powers we can will ourselves not to sin.
Augustine:
fallen humans retain free will w.r.t. creaturely goods, but not w.r.t. the
Good: the kingdom of God, the truth of the gospel, the righteousness of Christ.
I.e., we can't will ourselves out
of our fallen state and into
right-relatedness with God.
Our every
attempt means [1] we haven't grasped the fact as sinners we've violated God;
[2] God seeks not the discharge of our "debt"; he seeks us ourselves,
reconciliation;
[3] we've lost sight of our predicament: [a] we are blind to our need, to the
gospel, to the nature of what God wants for us, [b] we are powerless to alter
our condition; to will, in this matter, is to continue willing our depravity.
(Prot. Reformers: in se curvatus.)
Semi-Pelagianism:
while we don't author our salv'n, we contribute
to it. P,m and Semi-P'm have been
condemned at several church councils. Only
by grace can we ask for grace or
appropriate grace.
p.190.
Bl. says that Semi-P'm
appears repeatedly "in the Roman church."
It does too in the Prot. church E.g.,
[1] the liberal ch.>> moral effort
[2] the evan'l ch.>> the "pursuit" of holiness, where the
pursuit, understood as simply our striving, is deemed meritorious.
>> inculcation of a psychological (rather than a moral) condition: e.g.,
we strive to be "yielded."
p190. w.r.t Bl.'s discussion of
Aquinas, Scotus, etc., it's important to understand that some forms of Prot'm,
rightly eschewing synergism, propose monergism: in someone's coming to faith
there is only one will willing: God's.
Monergism ult'ly makes God the author of evil, sin and damnation.
Synergism ult'ly makes us co-authors of our salvation.
In this matter we must speak of co-operation without synergism.
Such co-operation (recall Augustine's distinction between gratia
operans and gratia co-operans) is facilitated by grace but not forced by grace.
p190. NB Biel's trademark: an outer
structure of grace with an inner content of works; i.e., grace
makes it possible for us
to earn our salvation. (NB
the evangel'l Prot. varieties of this.)
p193. w.r.t Bl's discussion of the
Prot. Reformers, the following points need to be kept in mind:
[1] justification is an instantaneous act: ("once-for-all", rather
than Augustine's life-long process) whereby God declares
or pronounces the sinner righteous.
|
[2] we cannot prepare
ourselves (by ourselves) for the reception of grace; grace facilitates the
reception of grace.
[3] fallen
humankind doesn't seek God but rather flees him; the "seeking" is
proof of fleeing, since God hasn't hidden himself from us.
(Recall Genesis 3: who is hiding?)
[4] all sin is "mortal". What
we do expresses what we are.
See Romans 14:23.
[5] our good works, like our religiosity, are
[a] that barricade behind which (try to) hide from God,
[b] a bargaining "coin" we think we can use with God.
In 18th century Anglicanism (Wesley's era), but not in the 16th
century English Reformation, justification was God's pronouncement upon (i.e.,
evaluation of) the sanctity we had achieved at the time of our death.
I.e., it was God's recognition of us at the end of life rather than the
beginning of the Xn life and stable basis for everything in it.
p194. Grace is not simply an
"offer"; it is Christ's embracing us, not his offer to embrace us.
(Therefore to reject him is shockingly ungrateful and perverse.)
p194. The Prot. Reformers never denigrate good works, but rather insist they arise from
a salvation received and enjoyed, not in order to merit a salvation not yet
ours.
The Xn's motivation is gratitude and filial (non-servile) fear.
p195.
Jansenism is the most "Augustinian" of the RC schools of
thought on the nature of grace and the human will.
(The Jesuits are the least Augustinian.)
p196. Bl's point is no doubt correct
for some areas of "modern Catholicism", but not all; e.g., Hans Urs
von Balthasar: Mary isn't the prime example of "co-operation"
(=synergism); rather she typifies the response of the church to the annunciation
of the gospel: "Let it be to me according to your word."
p197. Karl Rahner's "anonymous
Xn" has been hugely controversial: salv'n is by grace, and grace is
imparted by the creaturely order: there is an "implicit saving
structure" to religion(s) and ethics and even secularism.
Even what appears more-or-less explicitly contradictory w.r.t. the gospel
implicitly provides a saving vehicle, the right response to which entails
salvation.
NB [1] there's no biblical sanction for Rahner's thesis.
[2] if the "world's great religions" provide the implicit vehicle,
what about the "non-great" religions?
what about satanism, etc.? then
is it only ethics that saves us? All
of this denies scripture.
[3] what about irreligious ideologies such as Marxism?
[4] R. confuses his "anonymous Xn" with prevenient grace: the latter
fosters our embracing Christ, but
never rendering embracing him
unnecessary for salv'n.
[5] R. has been criticized severely by RC missionaries who feel he's undercut
their work.
[6] still, we have to ponder the fact that vast numbers of people will live and
die without hearing the gospel (one motivation of his "anonymous Xn")
[7] he correctly sees the problems in Ref. Prot. und'g of the relation of grace,
faith and the human.
p198. Bl. returns to a discussion of
the ghost of Semi-P'm: e.g., Pietist/Puritan emphasis on the reception of Christ fostered an emphasis on the heart's inner
turbulence as the condition of
receiving Christ. Whereas RCm tended
toward a volitional condition, Piet./Pur. tended toward a psychol'l cond.
(In 19th cent. North American evangelistic services the emphasis
shifted from the conversion of the sinner as
that which glorifies God to the inner
vividness of the experience itself of conversion.
p199. Shepherd doesn't think Bl. is
entirely fair to Wesley here. Wesley
(like Calvin) admitted there to be repentance both
before and after faith. (see
Shepherd, The Nature…Calvin, chapt.
5)
Points to remember: [1] we can't repent apart from grace.
[2] repentance and faith are ultimately one event.
[3] there must always be rep'ce after we've
come to faith. (See the 1st
of Luther's 95 theses: "JC…willed the entire life of believers to be one
of repentance.")
(THE
PARADOX OF SALVATION)
P201.
The genuinely human must be honoured and preserved in the exercise of
faith, since faith is a human event, however God-wrought.
We lapse into monergism or synergism when we fail to admit the mystery
surrounding someone's coming-to -faith. Faith
is neither something God
"implants" in us nor a predisposition in us nor that which arises from
a predisposition in us.
p202. "…God's grace appeals
to [man's] deepest yearnings, and therefore when exposed to grace man is
intrinsically drawn toward it." At
first Bl. might appear to contradict all he's said for the last 20 pages, even
appear to approach Semi-P'm, even reflect Rahner.
But his "intrinsically" is none of the above; rather, he means
that grace sets the heart yearning for grace; grace finds the "responsive
chord" that grace has first quickened in the human heart.
[What is meant by "Jesus the good
(kalos rather than agathos)
shepherd"?]
p202.
Bl. carefully contrasts seeking for God with yearning for God.
The latter presupposes something akin to Calvin's sensum
divinitatis; yet because we are fallen, our "seeking" is always a
fleeing.
p204. Bl. speaks of Melanchthon's
"liberalizing tendency." Rather,
M. insisted that [1] sin isn't the essence of fallen humankind (contra
Matthias Illyricus.) Sin doesn't
define our humanness even after the Fall. (If
it did, redemption could only render us non-human rather than "fulfilledly"
human.)
[2] in the life of faith, especially in the decision/act whereby faith begins,
our humanness isn't overridden or denied; faith isn't merely
a human event, even as it most certainly is a human event.
p.204.
Edwards attempts to capture this: "God is the only proper author and
fountain; we are the only proper actors."
(But why didn't Edwards speak of God as "actor" too?)
p205. "Irresistible
grace", a concept so important to Reformed Scholasticism, must be weighed
carefully. Remember: grace is the
attitude and act of God reflecting the heart of the One who is Person.
(Consider the foregoing w.r.t. God's will.
His will isn't an arbitrary decree hidden in depths in him that are
inaccessible to us; his will is the expression of his heart or identity.)
(Shepherd) Grace is "irresistible" in the sense that [1] when I met my
wife I "couldn't resist" falling in love with her; [2] (206) grace is
that judge whom we can't avoid and whose final judgement we can't resist. Grace
welcomed is salvation; grace spurned is condemnation.
But grace can't be denatured.
p207. Bl's twofold caution about the abuses of grace must
be heard and heeded:
[1] grace confused with magic. E.g.,
baptismal regeneration.
[2] grace rendered "cheap". E.g.,
thinking we can benefit from Christ's cross without being commissioned to
shoulder our own cross; refusing to acknowledge that the saviour (salvager) who
salvages us has an exclusive right to us and claim upon our obedience.
(THE MEANS OF
GRACE)
p209.
Preaching as a sacrament. (A
sacrament is a creaturely event that becomes the occasion of a divine event: the
incursion of JC.)
p210.
Barth maintains that JC is the
means of grace; preaching attests JC but isn't a vehicle or means of the
hearer's appropriation in faith.
(Shepherd) Barth is right about the first, wrong about the second.
See Luke 10:16 and Romans 10:5-14. (Unless
preaching is a means of grace, it is purely "informational.")
p210.
Bl. says that only baptism and Lord's Supper are sacraments.
(Symbol+dominical command.)
Compare
Hendrikus Berkhof:
1)
instruction (catechetics)
2)
baptism
3)
sermon
4)
discussion
5)
the meal (Lord's Supper)
6)
diaconate
7)
the meeting (worship)
8)
office
9)
church polity (church order)
Berkhof
says #8 and #9 serve to make the other seven operative.
p211. To be sure, the Xn life is a
fruit of grace; yet Xns are the sign
of X's presence. (NB:
whenever, in Jesus's public ministry, he is asked for a "sign",
he refuses to give it; we are the sign of God's manifest presence!)
Reverend
V. Shepherd
