UNION WITH CHRIST
Reformed Ethics
International
Reformed
Evangelical
Seminary
Westminster
Theological
Seminary
Philadelphia
uniocc.com
Vol. 5, No. 2 / October 2019
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REFORMED THEOLOGY AND LIFE
UNION WITH CHRIST
Editorial Committee and Staff
Editor in Chief: Paul Wells
Senior Editors: Peter A. Lillback and Benyamin F. Intan
Managing Editor: Bernard Aubert
Book Review Editor: Brandon D. Crowe
Subscription Manager: Audy Santoso
Assistant: Gospel Porquez
Copy Editor: Henry Whitney
Typesetter: Janice Van Eck
Mission Statement
Unio cum Christo celebrates and encourages the visible union believers possess
in Christ when they confess the faith of the one holy catholic and apostolic
church, the body of Christ. Thus, its mission is (1) to be an international scholarly
and practical journal for the global Reformed community—churches,
seminaries, theologians, and pastors; (2) to encourage deeper fellowship,
understanding, and growth in faith, hope, and love in the Reformed community
at large; and (3) to support small and isolated Reformed witnesses in minority
missional situations. It will seek to do so by the publication and dissemination
of scholarly contributions of a biblical, theological, and practical nature by
Reformed leaders world-wide—including leading theologians, developing
scholars, practicing missionaries, pastors, and evangelists.
Articles, interviews, and book reviews will consistently be in line with biblically
based Reformed confessional orthodoxy and orthopraxis. Submitted or
solicited contributions for its biannual issues will focus on specific themes
of importance to the Reformed tradition and present debate.
The opinions expressed in this journal represent the views only of the individual
contributors; they do not reflect the views of the editors, of Westminster Theological
Seminary, Philadelphia, or the International Reformed Evangelical Seminary, Jakarta.
This periodical is indexed in the ATLA Religion Database® (ATLA RDB®), a product of the
American Theological Library Association. Email:
[email protected], www: www.atla.com.
The journal’s “Ethics Statement” and “Peer Review and Editorial Policy Statement” can
be consulted on our website.
ISSN 2380-5412 (print)
ISSN 2473-8476 (online)
Copyright © 2019 International Reformed Evangelical Seminary and Westminster
Theological Seminary. All rights reserved. Unio cum Christo® is a registered trademark
of Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia.
Printed in the United States of America and Indonesia
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REFORMED THEOLOGY AND LIFE
UNION WITH CHRIST
Vol. 5, No. 2 / OCTOBER 2019
Reformed Ethics
Published jointly by
Westminster
Theological Seminary
P.O. Box 27009
Philadelphia, PA 19118
United States of America
International Reformed
Evangelical Seminary
Reformed Millennium
Center Indonesia
Jl. Industri Blok B14 Kav. 1
Jakarta Pusat, 10720, Indonesia
uniocc.com
[email protected]
Submissions
For questions regarding submission of articles, contact Paul Wells at
[email protected] or Bernard Aubert at
[email protected].
Guidelines of style can be found at our website: uniocc.com.
Subscriptions
Annual subscription rates for 2019 are $40.00 for institutions, $30.00 for
individuals, and $20.00 for students. Single issues may be purchased at
$14.00 per copy. Inquiries concerning subscription and orders should be
sent to
[email protected].
This periodical is indexed in the ATLA Religion Database® (ATLA RDB®), a product of the
American Theological Library Association. Email:
[email protected], www: www.atla.com.
The journal’s “Ethics Statement” and “Peer Review and Editorial Policy Statement” can be
consulted on our website.
ISSN 2380-5412 (print)
ISSN 2473-8476 (online)
Copyright © 2019 International Reformed Evangelical Seminary and Westminster
Theological Seminary. All rights reserved. Unio cum Christo® is a registered trademark of
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia.
Printed in the United States of America and Indonesia
CONTENTS
Reformed Ethics
5 Editorial: Christ’s Fourfold Declaration of Authority
(Matt 28:18–20) / ERIC KAYAYAN
ETHICS AND RELATIONSHIPS
15 Interpersonal Forgiveness as a Gospel Standard
/ DOUWE J. STEENSMA
33 Islam and Women / CHRISTINE SCHIRRMACHER
51 Healing the Wounds of Trauma and Abuse / DIANE LANGBERG
67 Women, Sex, and a Question of Double Standards
/ KATHLEEN B. NIELSON
ETHICS IN HISTORY
81 “How Firm a Foundation” and the Westminster Confession of
Faith / K. SCOTT OLIPHINT
97 Beza’s Pastoral Calling: Combat, Encouragement, and Duty
/ OTTAVIO PALOMBARO
111 The Value of Marshall’s Gospel Mystery of Sanctification
/ T. MICHAEL CHRIST
ETHICS AND SOCIETY
127 On Earth: Relational Anthropocentricism in Creation Care
/ ALESSANDRO PICCIRILLO
145 The Relevance of Calvin’s View of Work and Calling to Christians
in Newly Industrialized Countries / MATTHEW EBENEZER
163 Corruption, Bribery, African Concepts of God, and the Gospel
/ PHILLIPUS J. (FLIP) BUYS
3
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
4
181 Reformed Business Ethics—A New Approach to How
Organizations Can Flourish / CHRISTOPHER D. STEED
INTERVIEW
199 Interview with Christopher Yuan / PETER A. LILLBACK
BOOK REVIEWS
211 Alan Jacobs. The Year of our Lord 1943: Christian Humanism in an
Age of Crisis / WILLIAM EDGAR
214 Elizabeth Agnew Cochran. Protestant Virtue and Stoic Ethics
/ DAVID B. HUNSICKER
217 Frances Luttikuizen. Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth
Century Spain: A Much Ignored Side of Spanish History
/ DANIEL J. VOGEL
219 Herman Bavinck. Reformed Ethics: Created, Fallen, and Converted
Humanity / CORY C. BROCK
222 John Murray’s Principles of Conduct—Some Personal Reflections
/ SINCLAIR B. FERGUSON
227 Contributors
231 Union cum Christo: Five Year Index (2015–2019)
EDITORIAL
Christ’s Fourfold
Declaration of Authority
(Matt 28:18–20)
1
ERIC KAYAYAN
I
n spite of the emphasis in evangelical circles on Christ’s missionary
mandate to his disciples in Matthew 28, the bond between the cosmic
authority asserted in verse 18 and the church, to which the mission is
entrusted in verses 19–20, is not always acknowledged as it should be.
Misunderstanding or lack of precision about this point runs the risk
of distorting the reason for the missionary mandate, namely by displacing
it from its christological focus. We will clarify the precise nature of the
bond between Christ’s authority and the church by an examination of the
passage’s fourfold declaration of authority, which reinforces the passage in
question and uncovers how this bond establishes the New Testament
church as well.
The beginning and end of Matthew teach about the reality of the kingdom.
What Jesus declared about the kingdom when he started preaching is crucial
for understanding the final passage of Matthew’s Gospel. Matthew 4:17
states, “From that time Jesus began to preach, saying ‘Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (esv). Mark 1:27 describes the reactions of those
who witnessed this preaching accompanied by manifestations of authority:
And they were all amazed, so that they questioned among themselves, saying,
“What is this? A new teaching with authority! He commands even the unclean
1
This contribution was originally written in French and was translated by Thea Van Til
Rusthoven, a long-time French instructor at Redeemer University College in Hamilton,
Ontario, Canada.
5
6
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
spirits, and they obey him.” And at once his fame spread everywhere throughout all
the surrounding region of Galilee.
From the outset of his ministry, Jesus leaves no doubt as to who possesses
authority, even over demons.
Moreover, when Jesus addresses his disciples on the eve of his earthly
departure, he establishes the proclamation of this authority the very theme
of his disciples’ future preaching. He is the King of the kingdom. From his
Father, he has received authority to reign and exercise sovereignty over all
things. This kingdom is permanent, destined to last forever; after his victory
over death, nothing and no one will be able to take it away from him. The
prophecy in Daniel 7:13–14 is fulfilled.2 This authority is the very heart of
the gospel of the kingdom (to euangelion tēs basileias) already preached in
Matthew 4:23.
In Matthew 28:18–20, Jesus articulates what is called the Great Commission, the missionary commandment to go and make disciples from all the
nations. Although Christians often understand this commandment as a
significant ecclesiastical activity, they often view it as one among others,
and even sometimes as a secondary task. Our text, however, teaches something else, namely, that this passage is nothing less than the founding declaration of the postresurrection church, with a definition of its true
characteristics. The Great Commission is thus an integral part of this
founding declaration, and it is not one task among others.
We now turn to the first declaration of authority, that of cosmic authority
(all authority, pasa exousia). The misunderstanding about the importance
of the bond mentioned above most often arises from the fact that the Great
Commission is understood as being expressed solely in verse 19, and not
starting already in verse 18b. Such a misreading is easily documented by a
survey of various churches’ materials, websites, and brochures dedicated to
their missionary activities and their “mission and vision” statements. The
materials show that often the relationship between the indicative mood of
verse 18b and the imperative mood beginning in verse 19a is broken, or at
least obscured.
In verse 18b, using the indicative mood edothē moi (has been given to me),3
Christ indicates what the facts are, written down in the historical decree of
the Father, a decree nevertheless anchored in eternity: he is by divine right
the king whose authority extends over all things (pasa exousia) in heaven
and on earth. These two places naturally refer us back to Genesis 1:1,
2
Jesus had appropriated this prophecy in Matthew 26:64, and this assertion served as the
motif for condemnation by the Sanhedrin.
3
The verb didōmi is in the aorist indicative passive.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CHRIST’S FOURFOLD DECLARATION OF AUTHORITY
7
evoking the totality of creation and the origin of the authority in question.
Here no partial authority or kingship is in view. There is no place in this
pasa exousia for a viceroy. The kingdom of God is first characterized by
the fact that all authority has been given to Christ. Thus, we can never
speak of the kingdom without speaking of the total kingship given to Christ
and his exercise of it.
The imperative mood which follows—“You therefore, go”4—is just the
necessary consequence of the indicative mood that precedes it. Here, the
coordinating conjunction oun (“therefore, consequently”) needs to be taken
into account.5 The King James Version has exemplary clarity in this regard:
“Go ye therefore.” In other words, the only reason why the disciples are
called to go and make disciples is because of the authority/kingship of Christ,
such as it is expressed in verse 18b. It is at the center of the future proclamation. The actions that follow (the aorist imperative mathēteusate, “make disciples,” is followed by two present participles that make its content explicit,
baptizontes … didaskontes, “baptizing” and “teaching,” vv. 19–20) are included
in the dynamics of “you therefore, go,” itself generated and set in motion by
the indicative mood of universal authority that precedes it. The mission will
invariably fail if it is not grounded on this vision, one which creates it, motivates it, and determines its dynamics. Likewise, not obeying the given mandate would be a de facto rejection of the fact that all authority (pasa exousia)
has been delivered to Christ in heaven and on the earth: a rejection of his
authority corresponding in reality to a denial of his kingship.
The second declaration of authority concerns the geographical area where
the authority is exercised (to all the nations, panta ta ethnē, v. 19). The
geographical declension of the cosmic authority of Christ6 is revealed by
his sending the disciples to all the nations of the earth (panta ta ethnē) and
not just to some, which would be a denial of its universal dimension. His
word, by which he governs the entire universe, must be heard in every
place. It is the scepter of his government, referring us back, along with
other passages in the broader scope of revelation, from Psalm 2:7–9 for
the Old Testament (“Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession”) and to Philippians 2:9–11 for
the New Testament (“Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed
on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus
4
Poreuthentes oun is literally, “going therefore,” but the aorist participle has an imperative
value.
5
The variant nun (“now”) is hardly affirmed or attested (it is found only in D and a few old
Latin versions) and could be explained by an assimilation of the initial omicron into nu.
6
Here gē indicates the earth as distinguished from heaven.
8
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth, and every tongue confess
that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”). In Acts 1:8, just before
his ascension to heaven, Jesus indicates the starting and ending points of
the proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom: “You will be my witnesses
in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth.”
Any attempt to exclude one of these regions or groups from the sphere of
proclamation (in particular the Jewish people, historical custodian of the
covenants) would represent a blatant rejection of the pasa exousia of
Christ, and thus of his kingdom, so that it then becomes entirely useless
to invoke this authority about other subjects.
The third declaration of authority expounds the extent of the obedience
required (“all the things that I have commanded you,” panta hosa eneteilamēn
hymin). The “all” or “all the things” that must be taught, retained, and
practiced set apart the kingdom of Christ from the kingdoms of other gods,
masters or idols, thus showing us the marks of the kingdom. It cannot be
about making a personal or subjective choice concerning what can or cannot
be obeyed. Here we remember the third and fourth petitions of the Lord’s
Prayer: “Your reign/kingdom come, your will be done on earth as in heaven”
(Matt 6:10). The visible form of this kingdom coming on earth, of the
accomplishment of God’s will on earth as in heaven, is the obedience to the
kingdom’s laws as they are taught by the disciples, who were themselves
taught by Jesus. The faithful mission is above all a faithful transmission
(2 Tim 2:2; Jude 3b).
In short, the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ is the scepter by
which God wishes to govern the world, and his divine authority is expressed
in order that everyone submit to it. Before touching upon the fourth declaration of authority, let us say a few words first about the relationship between the kingdom and the church and then about Jesus as Lord (Iēsous
Kyrios). In parallel to the relationship between the kingdom and the mission,
our pericope illustrates the relationship between the kingdom and the church, in
the sense that the marks of the church, derived from the universal kingship
of Jesus Christ, appear rather clearly:
a) Proclamation/preaching/faithful catechesis of the Law-Word (20a: “all
that I have commanded you”)
b) Administration of baptism in the name of God—unique Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit—as a visible sign of belonging to the people of his
covenant (19b)
c) Exercise of spiritual discipline as systematic training in obedience
(20a, which makes of a person a disciplined disciple)
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CHRIST’S FOURFOLD DECLARATION OF AUTHORITY
9
d) Universality and unity under the authority of the sovereign, in the
plurality of places where preaching/catechesis is done, baptism is
administered, and discipline is exercised (19a: “all nations,” city by city,
town by town, community by community)7
In Matthew 28:18–20, the marks of the true church, namely, the church
that obeys her only sovereign, are not presented to us outside of the Great
Commission, either after it or even next to it, but, in fact, within the dynamics
themselves of this mandate. It is the raison d’être of the church, since it
proclaims the sovereignty of Christ over all things, Christ exalted at the
right hand of the Father. These marks constantly refer us back to the
sovereignty; they have no autonomy at all from it. An excellent example of
this is the very young Thessalonian church, which the missionary work of
Paul and Silas established amid great trials and tribulations (cf. Acts 17:1–9).
The Apostle Paul writes at the beginning of his first letter to them,
And you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you received the word in much
affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit, so that you became an example to all
believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. For not only has the word of the Lord sounded
forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth
everywhere, so that we need not say anything. (1 Thess 1:6–8)
In the case of the church of Thessalonica, the mission of the Apostle Paul
and his companions resulted in an immediate transmission. This transmission was a sign itself of the dynamic energy of the universal kingdom of
Christ that “goes viral,” from place to place, to the far ends of the earth, to
such an extent that we do not need to talk about it. This proclamation is central to everything that the disciples must teach the nations to obey. It is
precisely what the new disciples of Thessalonica had grasped, having received
the gospel not only in words “but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and
7
Concerning the marks of the true church, the Belgic Confession says in article 29, “The
marks by which the true church is known are these: If the pure doctrine of the gospel is
preached therein; if she maintains the pure doctrine of the Gospel; if she maintains the pure
administration of the sacraments as instituted by Christ; if church discipline is exercised in
punishing sins; in short, if all things are managed according to the pure Word of God, all things
contrary thereto rejected, and Jesus Christ acknowledged as the only Head of the Church.
Hereby the true Church may certainly be known, from which no man has a right to separate
himself.” Quoted from Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, vol. 3, The Evangelical Protestant Creeds (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), 419–20. The English translation provided by
Schaff is based on the Latin version. It is worth noting that the last phrase “from which no man
has a right to separate himself” is first found in the 1566 French version, thus a year before the
execution of Guido de Brès, the author of the Belgic Confession, as a martyr of Evangelical
faith. Cf. as well John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion 4.1.9.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
10
with full conviction” (1 Thess 1:5). This made them immediately a missionary church.
In light of these elements and the example of the church at Thessalonica,
it is vital to emphasize—in contrast to so many churches that are often
dozing off or self-absorbed—that the church itself (local or universal) does
not arbitrarily decide the nature of the relationship that unites her with her
King, setting up her own rules and priorities depending on what she thinks
is the relationship. On the contrary, it is the King who establishes the relationship by his finished work (indicative mood) and who determines the
rules and priorities of his church (imperative mood), of whose body he is
the head (Col 1:17–18). Moreover, the very first thing that he commanded
his disciples to teach all the nations was his universal authority on which
everything else depends.
The lordship of Jesus over all things has been the rallying cry of the
church since the beginning of the Christian era, as the recurring phrase
Iēsous Kyrios attests. That is why the church seemed suspicious in the
watchful eyes of the Roman authorities, who were very jealous of their
self-divinizing political claims. The extent of the sphere of “all the things
that I commanded you” (panta hosa eneteilamēn, v. 20) must be specified
within the context of the church’s mission, which aims to be both outward8
and inward.9 The mission is not about preaching to the nations a simple,
formal change of religion or about repeating the phrase Iēsous Kyrios like an
overworked mantra without much discernment, without a progressive exposition of all its aspects. That would be missing the mark with respect to the
real nature and behavior of a disciple trained in a systematic discipline.
In order to resist this easy way, under the leading of the Spirit, we should
be able and willing to explore all the implications of obedience to the authority of Christ, in a constant renewing of the mind (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23; 1 Pet
1:14). If the church, submitted to Christ-the-King, desires to take seriously
the commandment that sends her outwards into the world, she must also be
ready at any time to examine herself in order to confess her cultural sins;
obviously not the whole culture as it is, but all the sinful aspects that distort
it. The church must continually be dismantling the Asherah poles surreptitiously brought within her, avoiding the traps of compromise with the world
and its ideologies, as well as fighting with spiritual clarity to maintain a
renewed mind (1 Thess 5:21; 1 John 4:1). Everything that could disqualify
8
“Go therefore” (poreuthentes oun, v. 19a) indicates the transmission towards the world.
“Keep, preserve, obey,” (tērein, v. 20a) points to the transmission within the people of the
covenant.
9
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CHRIST’S FOURFOLD DECLARATION OF AUTHORITY
11
the church for this mission (and the world never fails to show her failures,
though with the mere intention of paralyzing her efforts), can only be corrected by meditating on the pasa exousia of the risen Christ: it is the purpose
par excellence of her proclamation. In this regard, Hebrews 1:3b–4 reminds
the church that the precursor to the Son sitting at the right hand of divine
majesty in the highest places has been the fulfillment of the purification of
sins, namely the church’s sins, the church sanctified by the Spirit of the one
who has redeemed her. The pasa exousia of the incarnated Christ-the-King
was displayed in the swallowing up of the sins of those who became his
body, whom he could not abandon, and to whom he remains near.
The fourth declaration of authority is in the form of a promise: Christ’s
presence “every day [pasas tas hēmeras] to the end of the age” (v. 20). In
addition to the indicative and imperative moods which form its initial core,
the very end of the pericope of Matthew 28:18–20 adds an eschatological
promise that is also a declaration of authority, this time about the temporal
sphere in which the mandate is carried out through all of the disciples’
successive generations (v. 20b): the King is with them every day (pasa tas
hēmeras) to the end of the age—or the dispensation (heōs tēs sunteleias tou
aiōnos). In light of Matthew 24:12—“And this gospel of the kingdom will be
proclaimed throughout the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the
end will come”—we understand that the end of the age in Matthew 18:20b
includes both the waiting for and the arrival of the parousia, even if it is not
explicitly mentioned here.
This fourth totality, a temporal one, must be understood not only in the
sense of a total period but also in a distributive sense, as the plural pasas tas
hēmeras indicates, each day displaying this accompanying presence. However, the spiritual presence of Christ “with you” (meth hymōn) is only
promised to the disciples within the context of obedience to the commission.
It would be deceptive to expect to enjoy the benefits of this presence while
at the same time ignoring the mandate (cf. again Matt 24:14). In the given
and received context, however, this promise is introduced rather solemnly
by idou (“behold”), which appears sixty-two times in Matthew, here not to
indicate a new element of the narrative, like in Matthew 28:1, 10, but to
forcefully highlight at the very end of the gospel the egō eimi (“I am”) of
divine significance. The indicative mood “I am” recalls verse 18 and the
declaration of Jesus, also made in the indicative mood, concerning the
universal authority that was given to him. Conveyed by a historic aorist, this
authority is rooted in the eternal decree of the Father; it gives rise here to
a verb in the present indicative mood that envisions this same eternity,
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
12
beyond the eschatological fulfillment of the present time (heōs tēs sunteleias
tou aiōnos, Matt 28:20).
Thus, a circle is closed that leaves no place for any usurpation of authority,
a circle that gives new weight to the title Immanuel (“God with us”),
attributed to Jesus by Matthew from 1:23 onwards, as a fulfillment of the
prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. Jesus Christ is Immanuel for his church sent in
mission. Furthermore, he is Immanuel only for the church, as a promise
and encouragement for their mission, which derives its source and power
from him alone.
Before concluding, it is worthwhile to revisit in the Gospel of Matthew
the expression egō eimi, which only appears four times in that form, in contrast to its numerous occurrences in the Gospel of John. In Matthew 14:27,
Jesus tells his frightened disciples in the boat that they are not seeing a
ghost, but that it is him walking on the sea and coming to them. He is with
them in the midst of the storm; therefore, they need not be afraid. In Matthew 18:20, where Jesus teaches his disciples about relationships inside the
ekklēsia-assembly (verses 15–21), the assurance of his presence (“there,”
ekei) where two or three are gathered in his name precedes and foreshadows
the expression of assurance in Matthew 28:20, which is final, more solemn,
and encompasses all of time and space. In Matthew 18:20, the expression
of assurance seems to await a greater fulfillment because eimi has not yet
become egō eimi. In Matthew 22:32, speaking to the Sadducees, Jesus
quotes Exodus 3:16, where God appeared for the first time to Moses on
Mount Horeb to establish the resurrection of the dead (“I am the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”). In Matthew 24:5,
Jesus warns that many will usurp his name by claiming to be the Christ—
egō eimi ho Christos (“I am the Christ”); we are led beyond these false claims
to the expression of assurance in Matthew 28:20. In Matthew 26:63–64,
during Jesus’s trial, the expression is indirectly attributed to him by
Caiaphas when he asks him under oath “I adjure you by the living God,
tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God”;10 in turn it mirrors Peter’s
confession at Caesarea Philippi (Matt 16:16). Jesus’s response, “You have
said so,” validates the predicate put forth by Caiaphas as unthinkable.
One marvels at the remarkable path that leads to the final affirmation in
Matthew 28:20, an egō eimi that was prepared and validated throughout the
gospel. The quote by Jesus from Exodus 3:16 in Matthew 22:32 seems
indeed to play a pivotal role in this progression, since he directly links it to
the question of the resurrection of the dead.
10
“If you are the Christ, the Son of God” (ei su ei ho Christos, ho huios tou theou, v. 63).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CHRIST’S FOURFOLD DECLARATION OF AUTHORITY
13
The exposition of the main elements of Matthew 28:18–20 and their
relationships has had the purpose of pointing to a missiology based on the
doctrine of the kingdom and the kingship of Christ, which we could call a
basileo-missiology. This basileo-missiology is too often confused with a
“Jesus-ology” in which the authority of the risen Christ is submerged in the
demands of a poorly motivated and weakly structured proselytism. In the
preceding pericope (Matt 28:11–15), a parallel mission was set in motion,
involving a false report (a lie bought with money) concerning the body of
Jesus snatched on the sly by the disciples. That very act, which the religious
authorities saw as plausible and dreaded (Matt 27:62–66), became the official version due to the propaganda spurred on by these authorities, despite
the contradicting initial testimony of the guards. This “fake news” was then
spread among the Jews (Matt 28:15). However, it is striking that in Matthew’s
narrative, the guards were the first witnesses to what happened at the tomb
together with Mary Magdalene and the other Mary. In Matthew 28:11, the
two groups each go and transmit to two other groups the common core of
the same fact-based reality of which they were witnesses. The guards “told
the chief priests all that had taken place [hapanta ta genomena]” (v. 11b). The
relationship of the women to the other disciples is, however, of a completely
different kind, since to this common core is added the command of Jesus to
his disciples to come and find him in Galilee; this command foreshadows
the encounter related in the final pericope of Matthew.
The reporting by the women is therefore the first postresurrection movement of a mission/transmission that is not limited to bringing the same news
that the guards gave to the chief priests, but includes a pressing invitation to
the disciples, a commandment to come and meet the King in order to get
back to obediently listening to his word and faithfully communicating it to
the ends of the earth. The authority by which the gospel must be proclaimed
in its totality to all the nations finds its source not in an interior religious
movement, whether individual or collective, but in the word of the King
whose kingship is the very object of this word.
It is by virtue of this authority that the disciples Peter and John are able
fearlessly to confront the religious authorities who threaten them: “But
Peter and John answered them, ‘Whether it is right in the sight of God to
listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak
of what we have seen and heard’” (Acts 4:19–20).
For the church of Christ currently persecuted worldwide, this should act
as a first-rate encouragement, since the one who continues to send out his
disciples, generation after generation, remains the same one who promises
them his presence every single day until the end of the present age.
E X P O S I T O R Y C O M M E N TA R Y
“Destined to become a standard Bible reference tool for
serious students of Scripture around the world.”
Phil Ryken, President, Wheaton College
Designed to help the church understand and apply the
overarching storyline of the Bible, this commentary series is
widely accessible, theologically enriching, and pastorally wise.
It features crisply running, Christ-centered exposition and
application from a team of respected pastor-theologians.
GENERAL EDITORS
Iain M. Duguid, James M. Hamilton Jr., and Jay Sklar
CURRENT VOLUMES
1 Samuel–2 Chronicles
Daniel–Malachi
(Vol. 3)
(Vol. 7)
(Vol. 9)
978-1-4335-4636-5
978-1-4335-4652-5
978-1-4335-4660-0
$60.00
$50.00
$50.00
Ephesians–Philemon
John–Acts
Hebrews–Revelation
(Vol. 11)
(Vol. 12)
978-1-4335-4668-6
978-1-4335-4672-3
$40.00
$45.00
CROSSWAY.ORG
ETHICS AND RELATIONSHIPS
Interpersonal Forgiveness
as a Gospel Standard
DOUWE J. STEENSMA
Abstract
Should a Christian forgive seventy-seven times? Must the sinner first
repent before he can be granted forgiveness? Is forgiveness possible if
the sinner does not accept the gift of forgiveness? This article focuses on
the gift of forgiveness one person offers another from the point of view
of forgiveness as a theological, social, and ethical norm. Starting with the
reality of people’s low expectation of forgiveness, the essay moves on to
evaluate the nature, origin, and limits of forgiveness in light of the gospel
imperative to forgive, the disposition to forgive, and the sinner’s acknowledgment of guilt. The last section of the essay presents the essence of
the gospel regarding the social and ethical norm of forgiveness.
U
p to seventy-times seven. Or, in the words of Augustine, seventy
times eight.1 But really, must a Christian go to such lengths?
Or did the evangelists, in representing these words of Jesus,
omit what is self-evident: there has to be a limit to the grace of
forgiveness? Must the offender first show repentance before
This article was first published in the Dutch language as D. J. Steensma, “Intermenselijke
vergeving: Maatstaf en richtsnoer voor samenleven in het licht van het evangelie,” Theologia
Reformata 62.1 (2019): 27–45. An abridged version was delivered as a lecture at the Theological
University of the Christelijke Gereformeerde Kerken at Apeldoorn, the Netherlands, on
December 20, 2017. This English translation by Aart Plug is published by permission.
1
Augustine, Sermo 83 in Aurelius Augustinus, Van aangezicht tot aangezicht: Preken over
teksten uit het Matteüsevangelie [Sermones de scripturis 51–94], ed. Joost van Neer et al. (Amsterdam: Ambo, 2004), 462–69.
15
16
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
he can be granted forgiveness? Is forgiveness even possible if the offender
does not accept it as a gift? And does remission of guilt also extend to the
harm that has been inflicted on others?
Not all aspects of this interpersonal norm will be considered in this article.
The remission of guilt that a group, a people, or a nation extends to another,
whether collectively or in relation to individual persons, as presently relevant as that aspect undoubtedly is, will be kept out of the discussion. This
article will concentrate on the offer of forgiveness by one person to another,
on forgiveness as a social and ethical norm, or (better still) on forgiveness
as a theological and ethical norm: this ethical norm—that is to say, this
guideline and standard that serves and promotes essential humanity—is
examined from a theological perspective. The effect that forgiveness has on
the person who grants it will not be considered in this article. That question
belongs—from a theological perspective—to the field of practical theology,
as does any question concerning the harm done by someone who cannot
(or can no longer) be reached.
Following a brief outline about the scarcity of forgiveness in our time, this
article will consider the nature, origin, and limits of forgiveness, and the
gospel command that applies to this matter. In order to arrive at how actual
forgiveness comes about, attention will be given to the disposition of the one
who was sinned against, and the acknowledgment of guilt by the offender.
The distinctive character of the gospel in relation to the social and ethical
norm of forgiveness will be especially highlighted in the final section,
where we will consider whether forgiveness can be offered where there is no
expression of prior repentance.
I. Scarcity
On May 13, 1981, Mehmet Ali Ağca attempted to assassinate Pope John
Paul II. Ağca was sentenced to life in prison. In 1983 the pope visited him
in prison, spoke with him privately, and granted him forgiveness. Afterward, he remained in contact with Ağca’s family, and in 2000 he appealed
to the authorities to have Ağca released from prison. Today, such willingness to forgive is the exception rather than the rule.2 In his own time, Søren
Kierkegaard made a similar observation: “But why is forgiveness so rare? Is
it not that faith in the power of forgiveness is so little and so rare?”3 It is not
2
Cf. Martha Nussbaum, Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2016).
3
Søren Kierkegaard, Works of Love, ed. David S. Swenson and Lilian Marvin Swenson, 2nd
ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949), 239.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
17
unlikely that our present-day culture suffers from a similar lack or shortness of faith. At any rate, the unwillingness or inability to forgive fits well
in a culture where people value their autonomy so highly: in general, their
attitudes and actions are not determined by the relationships in which they
exist; rather, they regard these relationships as a form of social contract, the
terms of which they wish to control themselves. Where the other party incurs
guilt, there is no obligation to act to restore the disturbed relationship, and
there is no requirement to forgive.4
Similar to forgiveness, acknowledgment of guilt has become quite problematic. Friedrich Nietzsche had a very outspoken opinion about that:
whoever admits his own guilt disgraces himself. “True” humans accept
what they did wrong, including their misdeeds. And they also accept others’
wrongful acts against them:
To be unable to take his enemies, his misfortunes and even his misdeeds seriously
for long—that is the sign of strong, rounded natures with a superabundance of a
power which is flexible, formative, healing and can make one forget…. A man like
this shakes from him, with one shrug, many worms which would have burrowed
into another man.5
Nietzsche points to the French revolutionary Mirabeau, “who had no recall
of the insults and slights directed at him because he simply—forgot.”
Forgiveness is normally seen as a sign of impotence and weakness. Seeking
the restoration of violated relationships outside of the “will to power”
conflicts with one’s true humanity. It is not possible to make universal valid
declarations concerning what has or has not been violated, for all of life is
permeated with injustice. Hence, “forgiveness” will not be found in the
vocabulary of one who is “truly human.”
Neither in classical antiquity was there such a thing as willingness to
forgive. Aristotle does not include such a disposition in his list of the virtues
of free citizens of the polis. It played no role in the ancient world.6 “Justice”
was the pre-eminent norm.
4
Cf. Frits de Lange, “Room for Forgiveness? A Theological Perspective,” in Didier
Pollefeyt, ed., Incredible Forgiveness: Christian Ethics between Fanaticism and Reconciliation
(Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 162–64. Cf. Miroslav Volf, Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a
Culture Stripped of Grace (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 211–12.
5
Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality: A Polemic, ed. Keith Ansell-Pearson,
trans. Carol Diethe, Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2007), 22.
6
Andreas Kinneging, Geografie van goed en kwaad: Filosofische essays (Houten: Spectrum,
2010), 121.
18
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
This same attitude also seems to be prevalent in our present-day culture,
in which people wish to shape reality according to their own insights.
Should anyone retain an unpleasant memory of a past event, no great harm
has been done. In Aldous Huxley’s Brave NewWorld, such qualms are a thing
of the past. A special kind of therapy removes any feeling of unpleasantness,
of whatever kind.7
Still, other voices also make themselves heard. Hannah Arendt identifies
forgiveness as one of the necessary means by which society is kept functioning when threatened by the “irreversibility … of being unable to undo what
one has done though one did not, and could not, have known what he was
doing.”8 Hence, life is a hazardous enterprise. Forgiveness, however, is a
means to alleviate that:
Trespassing is an everyday occurrence which is in the very nature of action’s
constant establishment of new relationships within a web of relations, and it needs
forgiving, dismissing, in order to make it possible for life to go on by constantly
releasing men from what they have done unknowingly. Only through this constant
mutual release from what they do can men remain free agents, only by constant
willingness to change their minds and start again can they be trusted with so great
a power as that to begin something new.9
Arendt identifies Jesus as the one who discovered the role of forgiveness
within the domain of human affairs. This disposition is a “rudimentary sign
of an awareness that forgiveness may be the necessary corrective for the
inevitable damages resulting from action.”10 Respect for the humanity of
the other is already a sufficient incentive for such willingness to forgive.11
This attribute—together with others common to our humanity—supports
a plea for the re-evaluation of the norm of forgiveness. In the twentieth
century, the awareness grew that forgiveness might serve to promote human
well-being and mental health. There was also a growing awareness that
forgiveness can play an essential role in the resolution of conflicts between
nations or ethnic groups. One example of this was the establishment of the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, after the abolition
7
Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, With an Introduction by John Sutherland, Everyman’s
Library 359 (New York: Knopf, 2013), 204.
8
Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, With an Introduction by Margaret Canovan, 2nd
ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 236–37.
9
Ibid., 240.
10
Ibid., 239.
11
Ibid., 243.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
19
of the policy of apartheid.12 There can be no future without forgiveness,
said Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Andreas Kinneging argues that over
against the ethical minimalism of present-day society,13 forgiveness needs to
be reconsidered. He supports a call to restore this norm to its rightful place
next to, and even above, the norm of justice, and points to the rediscovery
of a highly valuable ancient norm.14
II. Nature and Origin
From the perspective of social ethics, forgiveness is a standard and guideline for situations where people have suffered wrongful harm to their
humanity as a consequence of the actions of others.15 People can always
ignore all kinds of relatively minor offenses. However, there may also be
injuries that cause serious harm to one’s humanity. Examples of such injuries
may be disloyalty, betrayal, or violence. Even offenses which may in themselves be “minor” can cause considerable pain if they are intentionally or
persistently inflicted.16 The granting of forgiveness will of itself not yet bring
about a full and complete act of forgiveness. Such an act of forgiveness
can only attain its goal when those who have inflicted wrongful harm
acknowledge their guilt. Within this perspective, forgiveness is an interpersonal, two-sided event. It is more than just an intention. For—in the words
of K. J. Popma—such an intention “only attains the fullness of forgiveness
when, from the other side, guilt is confessed.”17
In themselves, however, human beings do not have the authority to forgive
offenses. The Most High God has the highest authority in heaven and on
earth. However, at the time of creation, he gave his image a role to play in
his rule on earth: “You have made him a little lower than God,” the poet
sings in Psalm 8 (v. 5 nasb).18 After the fall, this authority gained a specific,
concrete meaning, because interpersonal relationships had been seriously
12
Anthony Bash, Forgiveness and Christian Ethics, New Studies in Christian Ethics 29
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 29–34.
13
Kinneging, Geografie, 116; also Andreas Kinneging, “Over rechtvaardigheid en vergeving,”
in Edith Brugmans et al., eds., Rechtvaardigheid en verzoening: Over de fundamenten van de
moraal in een tijd van geweld (Budel: Damon, 2000), 114–15.
14
Kinneging, Geografie, 126; also Kinneging, “Rechtvaardigheid,” 121.
15
Cf. Lewis B. Smedes, Forgive and Forget: Healing the Hurts We Don’t Deserve (New York:
HarperCollins 1996), 5–13.
16
See Smedes, Forgive, 13–19.
17
K. J. Popma, Levensbeschouwing: Opmerkingen naar aanleiding van de Heidelbergse Catechismus
VII (Amsterdam: Buijten & Schipperheijn, 1965), 171.
18
Cf. Oliver O’Donovan, Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evangelical Ethics
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986).
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
20
and permanently disrupted. Because of the fall, man—to quote Popma
again—“had been trapped like a fly in a spider’s web of the tough threads of
offenses that he had committed, and that had been committed against him.”19
In his grace, God continued to allow humans to share in this authority, and
granted them a special actualization of this authority, in order to preserve
the well-being of society. Just as he continued, after the fall, to appeal to
humans in relation to being his image, so God also appealed to them in
relation to his power to grant forgiveness. In the same manner as the
servant in Christ’s parable (Matt 18:21–35), when he met his colleague at
the entrance to his lord’s palace, was empowered to forgive the personal
debt that the other owed him, so all people—since they are the image of
God—are empowered to forgive their neighbors.
How this empowerment reached its full realization has become visible in
Jesus Christ. He is the true man, as God intended from the beginning. This
Christ, this Son of Man, came to earth and had the authority to forgive sins
(Mark 2:10–12). All believers who have communion with this Son of Man
may and will, in virtue of this fellowship, also grant forgiveness to those who
have caused them harm and have expressed repentance. In this way, they
will represent and bear witness to Christ. This act of forgiveness is not an
expression of high-handed autonomy, but truly a gift of love, one that they
pass on to their repentant neighbors. It serves to take away sins. In the
words of Kierkegaard, forgiveness is even “the most outstanding way” by
which love can remove sin.20 “As one, therefore, through faith believes the
invisible in the visible, so the lover through forgiveness believes the visible
away.”21 To this authority to forgive a certain power is also attached, namely
the capacity to confer actual effect upon this authority. This authority,
however, is anything but an occasion for self-aggrandizement. After all, it is
a gift from above (cf. John 19:11).
III. Limits
The authority that God has conferred upon humans as his image, however,
has a limit. First of all, this limit is found within people themselves. No
people are empowered to grant forgiveness for wrongful harm that their
neighbors have inflicted upon another person.22 In this sense, the reaction
of Simon Wiesenthal, his refusal to grant forgiveness to a dying SS soldier
19
20
21
22
Popma, Levensbeschouwing, 196.
Kierkegaard, Works of Love, 238.
Ibid., 239.
Smedes, Forgive, 5–7.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
21
for the suffering he had inflicted upon Jews in general, is understandable. Of
course, Wiesenthal did have the power to grant forgiveness for the suffering
he himself had experienced; he could choose to see in this soldier a human
being who accepted responsibility for his actions. However, at that moment,
he was unable to bring himself to make that choice. Nevertheless, this event
haunted his memory long after the end of World War II; what he wanted
was not revenge, but justice.23
The forgiveness of suffering inflicted upon others, however, must be left
in the hands of God. Only he can determine whether such guilt can be
forgiven. Human beings only have the power to grant forgiveness for the
wrongful suffering they themselves have endured. In Matthew 18:21, the
apostle Peter spoke only of someone who had sinned against him. And Jesus
instructed his disciples about situations in which others had wronged them
(Luke 17:4). The general expression “forgive others their trespasses” must be
read in the light of “our debtors” (Matt 6:12) and “against me” (Matt 18:21).
Forgiveness has its limits, not only in the one who was wronged but also
in the administration of justice in society as a whole. Concerning this,
victims have neither authority nor power. They neither can nor may, on their
own authority, decide that the offender stands above the rights of society.
When people by their actions violate the justice of society, then that justice
must take effect, even when the victims have personally forgiven the offenders. Those who harm others have wronged not just those people, but also
others around them, and also society as a whole.24
The question may be asked whether the severity of the offense might set
a limit to its forgiveness. Ivan Karamazov tells the story of a wealthy landowner who had two thousand persons living on his estate. This man, an
army general, saw that his favorite dog was limping. What had happened? A
boy—just eight years old—had thrown a stone at the animal. The landlord
resolved to teach the boy a lesson and threw him into prison. The next
morning, he prepared for the day’s hunt, together with his attendants and
game drivers. The inhabitants of the estate were called to present themselves for inspection, with the boy’s mother in the front row. He gave orders
to strip the boy stark naked and then set his hunting dogs upon the child
until they had torn him to pieces while his mother looked on.25 Ivan is quite
23
Simon Wiesenthal, The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness, ed. Harry
James Cargas and Bonny V. Fetterman (New York: Schocken, 1998).
24
Cf. Oliver O’Donovan, The Ways of Judgment:The Bampton Lectures, 2003 (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2005), 90.
25
Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett (London:
Heinemann, 1974), 248–49. In a preceding passage, Ivan recounts the abuse a five-year-old
22
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
sure that the boy’s mother would never be able to forgive that butcher. She
did not have the right to forgive him. No-one would ever forgive such a
brutal act! Yet Ivan believes that the church does teach such forgiveness,
and as a result, he hastens to hand his membership card back to God. Still,
he says, if the mother is determined to do so, she may be able to forgive “the
immeasurable suffering of her mother’s heart.”26
Judgment concerning the suffering that has been brought upon another
must be left to God. In the case of personal suffering, the victim may grant
forgiveness, regardless of the enormity of the perpetrator’s guilt. After all,
where do we draw the line? The right to forgive such harm cannot be limited
to “everyday” wrongs, while serious crimes, like those that fall under criminal
law, would be excluded. Those who have suffered wrongful harm may grant
forgiveness to anyone, even someone who has committed monstrous crimes
against them.27 Next to monstrous crimes, an unending succession of lesser,
everyday offenses can also inflict great harm upon the other: persistent
bullying, continuous intentional annoyances, systematic put-downs, and
expressions of contempt. The gospel speaks of the number of times one is
to forgive an offender. Augustine summarizes this command as follows:
“Whenever someone sins against you, you must forgive him.”28 With “seven”
or “seventy times seven” (Matt 18:22; Luke 17:4), the gospel means an
unlimited number.29 In this sense, forgiveness has no limit.30
IV. Command
Forgiveness of personally inflicted harm is a command of God. Jesus taught
his disciples that they must forgive a brother who shows that he repents.
Even if he should sin against them seven times, and seven times returns and
says, “I repent,” they must forgive him (Luke 17:3–4). Paul says the same
thing: Forgive one another (Eph 4:32b; Col 3:13). The use of the present
tense indicates that this command always remains valid.31 Within the
child suffered at the hands of her parents (p. 247). This passage occurs in book 5, chapter IV.
It is followed by the narrative of the Grand Inquisitor.
26
Ibid., 251.
27
Cf. Bash, Forgiveness, 11–13.
28
Augustine, Sermo 83.3.
29
Augustine, Sermo 114.1 in Aurelius Augustinus, Als korrels tussen kaf: Preken over teksten uit
het Marcus- en Lucasevangelie [Sermones de scripturis 94A–116+367], ed. Joke Gehlen-Springorum
et al. (Budel: Damon, 2007), 260.
30
Eduard Schweizer, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 16th ed., NTD 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986), 99.
31
Joachim Gnilka, Der Kolosserbrief, HThKNT 10.1 (Freiburg: Herder, 1980), 195; J. P.
Versteeg, Oog voor elkaar: Het gebruik van het woord “elkaar” in het Nieuwe Testament met
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
23
congregation—that is what the expression “one another” tells us32—we
may expect that each member confers this grace upon all the others. In this
connection, Paul uses the word charizomai (χαρίζομαι), which highlights the
gracious character of forgiveness. Because God has forgiven his own, they
will also be able to grant forgiveness to each other (Eph 4:32b; Col 3:13b).
His forgiveness has made forgiveness possible within the church. The word
kathōs (καθώς), however—often translated as “just as” or “likewise”—also
conveys a comparative sense.33 Divine forgiving love is then portrayed as an
example for those who are his own: do to others as your Lord has done to
you. His love finds a reflection—as incomplete and fragmentary as it may
be—in your love for each other. Matthew also points to this necessity (Matt
18:21–25). As the master is kind and gracious, so is his servant. Forgiveness
is a part of following God.34
It is striking that the Lord’s Prayer places the same emphasis on what the
children of the kingdom should do,35 namely, to forgive their debtors (Matt
6:12).36 Moreover, the prayer is immediately followed by an elucidation of
this clause: “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you” (v. 14). This instruction, which Christ probably
drew from Jewish tradition,37 does not refer to the remission of a monetary
debt. The disciples were not wealthy; how would they have been in the
position to lend money to others? In this passage, the word “debts” is a
reference to a nonmonetary debt,38 one that was caused by the harm done to
the human person. Likewise, it is clear from the use of the word paraptōmata
(παραπτώματα, debts; Matt 6:14–15) that this is not a reference to mere
human weakness; rather, it refers to something morally reprehensible.39
The gracious gift of forgiveness, however, does impose a certain burden
on the one who grants it. The king who forgave his servant must bear the
consequences of that servant’s failure. Likewise, Christians who forgive
betrekking tot de onderlinge verhoudingen binnen de gemeente, Apeldoornse studies 15 (Kampen:
Kok, 1979), 54.
32
Cf. Versteeg, Oog voor elkaar, 46–47, 53–54.
33
Cf. Gnilka, Kolosserbrief, 196; Versteeg, Oog voor elkaar, 47, 54.
34
Cf. Augustine, Sermo 114.3.
35
Schweizer here speaks of an “interruption” to the prayer (Schweitzer, Matthäus, 97–98).
36
Here Luke uses the singular: “for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us”
(Luke 11:4).
37
Mark formulates a command here: “Forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that
your Father may forgive you your trespasses” (Mark 11:25). Here too, the reading is paraptōmata
(παραπτώματα, trespasses) instead of opheilēmata (ὀφειλήματα, debts; Matt 6:12a).
38
See R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 250.
39
Walter Grundmann, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 6th ed., THKNT 1 (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1986), 204.
24
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
their neighbors assume the burden of the guilt that these neighbors have
incurred. They would succumb to this burden, says Bonhoeffer, were it not
for the fact that they themselves are carried by the one who took every sin
upon himself. In the power of Christ’s suffering, believers are able to overcome the sins that are done to them by forgiving them. The bearing of one’s
brother’s burden is then the bearing of the latter’s sins, and that would not
be possible other than by way of forgiveness. Such forgiveness is one form
of the suffering that believers undergo for the sake of Christ.40
Those who go by the name of Christian but are unwilling to grant forgiveness to others who have acknowledged their guilt towards them and shown
repentance do not live in line with the gospel. Matthew reinforces the
emphasis of the Lord’s Prayer and the statement that immediately follows
it by adding, “But if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will
your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matt 6:15).41 This admonition is
consistent with the juxtaposition of what Augustine calls “a most terrifying
parable”:42 the servant who refuses to show his neighbor the slightest patience
or understanding, who will have nothing of any forgiveness, awaits a dreadful fate. While he may have been freed from his own debt by his master’s
decree, he is anything but free from unrighteousness (Matt 18:21–35).
While love covers a multitude of sins, unwillingness to reconcile increases a
multitude of sins. Whoever refuses to forgive “increases the sin; he makes it
greater,” says Kierkegaard, “and next, forgiveness takes the life from sin,
but denying forgiveness nourishes the sin.”43
However, there is more. The formulation of the fifth petition of the Lord’s
Prayer and the admonitions recorded in Matthew indicate that there is a
connection between what happens on earth and what happens in heaven.
God takes account of what his own will or will not do, and he responds to
that.44 In a certain sense, the granting of forgiveness is a condition for
receiving forgiveness oneself.45 Not in the sense that believers could, by
forgiving themselves, somehow earn God’s forgiveness. This principle is
not some quid pro quo, but it does emphasize the necessity of obedience to
God’s command. Matthew’s Gospel emphasizes this necessity. Those who
will not forgive their repentant neighbors’ personal debts owed to them
40
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Nachfolge: Mit einem Nachwort von Eberhard Busch, 12th ed. (Munich:
Kaiser, 1981), 66.
41
Mark 11:26 is a later addition.
42
Augustine, Sermo 83.1.
43
Kierkegaard, Works of Love, 240.
44
Grundmann, Matthäus, 204.
45
John Calvin also speaks of a “conditio” (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion,
trans. Henry Beveridge [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989], 3.20.45).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
25
have reason to be greatly worried. Their own attitude of faith is not right.
For such a faith attitude includes the forgiveness of debtors (Matt 6:12);
and where that is missing, will God hear prayer for forgiveness? How could
those unwilling to forgive others ever ask God to forgive their own sins?46
For they show that in the end, they have not accepted the divine gift of
grace.47 With the parable of the king and his servant, Jesus wanted to warn
us and so prevent that we should be lost, says Augustine.48 Similar warnings
can be found in other places in Matthew (Matt 25:31–46; 22:14). The misunderstanding that believers can earn God’s forgiveness of sins by forgiving
those who have sinned against them is excluded by the parable of the king
and his servant.49 This word of Christ is meant to exhort us to the obedience
of faith.50
Even though forgiveness is a command of God, it does not bypass the
heart and the feelings of the victim. Forgiveness is a gift that might not always
be immediately granted. Sometimes it takes time. Lewis Smedes gives several
examples to describe how such an offer might eventuate. Often, insight into
the situation of the one who has committed the offense may be helpful.
Furthermore, the process of forgiveness may be accompanied by a sense of
confusion concerning what exactly took place. There may also be residual
feelings of anger. Sometimes forgiveness may be granted little by little.51 It
must be granted freely; it can never be forced.52 However, regardless of
how the process of forgiveness develops, perhaps with difficulty, perhaps
hesitantly, and full of doubt, Christians will always be prepared to forgive.
In the words of the Heidelberg Catechism, Christians will be “fully determined wholeheartedly to forgive [their] neighbor” (Heidelberg Catechism
[HC] 126).
This disposition will not be limited to the forgiveness of brothers and
sisters within the Christian congregation. Christ speaks in a general sense of
“our debtors” (Matt 6:12), “others” (v. 14), and “anyone” (Mark 11:25). Still,
forgiveness has a particular urgency in the congregation. Paul’s admonitions clearly show this (Eph 4:32; Col 3:13). And the parable of the king and
46
Cf. J. T. Nielsen, Het evangelie naar Mattheüs I, 3rd ed., PNT (Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1978),
131; Calvin, Institutes 3.20.45.
47
Volf, Free of Charge, 156.
48
Augustine, Sermo 83.2.
49
Schweizer, Matthäus, 97.
50
Calvin says that a believer may be assured that his sins are “as certainly forgiven as we are
certainly conscious of having forgiven others, when our mind is completely purged from all
envy, hatred, and malice” (Calvin, Institutes 3.20.45).
51
Cf. Bash, Forgiveness, 166.
52
Smedes, Forgive, 95–121.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
26
his servant is placed within that chapter of Matthew’s Gospel in which life
within the congregation of Christ stands at the center (Matt 18:21–35). The
use of the word “brother” points to that.
Forgiveness as a social and ethical norm is directed to the neighbor’s
well-being, in accordance with the divine command of love towards the
neighbor. In this way, such a norm serves the restoration of broken relations
and the preservation of healthy relationships. It is directed to the future:
renewed ability and willingness to live together in peace and harmony.
People who by their actions have become estranged from the circle to which
they belong can again be received. One example of such a person in the
Gospels is Zacchaeus: he was known as a “sinner” (Luke 19:7). He had
wronged those around him. Relations had been disrupted. However, after
receiving forgiveness, his relationship with the people to which he belonged
was restored. Jesus declared him to be a “son of Abraham” (Luke 19:10).53
Forgiveness is directed not only to the well-being of the neighbor but also
to that of the victim.54 In this sense, the gift has a therapeutic dimension,
enabling victims to be released from a painful past event; they experience
inner peace and are set free from inner rancor. Forgiveness—said Augustine—sets the heart free from hatred, and that is necessary, for the more
firmly we cherish feelings of hatred, the more we ruin our heart.55 However,
in the gospel it is not this therapeutic effect that is given the most prominence. In the same manner as love towards the neighbor has priority over
love towards the self, so forgiveness with a view to the well-being of others
has priority over one’s own well-being.
V. Disposition
The gospel teaches not only that forgiveness is a command, but also that
God grants to his own what he asks from them: a disposition, a willingness
to forgive. This gift is grounded in the work of Christ, who has reconciled
his own with the Father and has paid for their offenses. This gracious gift
means that they now have a new relationship, not only with God but also
with their neighbor: in Christ the wall of separation has been broken down
(Eph 2:14). Believers now share in new interpersonal relations and a commensurate disposition. The reconciliation that began at the cross continues
into a disposition to forgive neighbors and in acts of forgiveness.
53
54
55
Cf. de Lange, “Room for Forgiveness,” 174.
See, for example, Bash, Forgiveness, 36–56.
Augustine, Sermo 114A.5; cf. also, for example, Bash, Forgiveness, 107.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
27
While this new relationship becomes most apparent in the church, it also
extends to other interpersonal relationships in which believers stand. It
includes that believers cannot but grant forgiveness to repentant neighbors.
That is a fruit of the forgiveness they have received: all who have received
forgiveness from God will as a matter of course become forgiving people.
All who sincerely pray to the Father for forgiveness will of themselves
perform good works of forgiveness. Every forgiveness of others’ offenses,
in obedience to God’s command, arises as a good fruit of their prayer for
forgiveness.56
This disposition to forgive, grounded in the work of Christ, is directed by
his example. Just as Christ is willing to forgive, so likewise are those who
have communion with him. It is an “identity marker” for those who are his
disciples, a fruit of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit not only causes this fruit to
grow and ripen, but he also equips believers to put it into practice. This
fruit is granted in the way of prayer. God grants it to “those who constantly
and with heartfelt longing, ask him for these gifts and thank him for them”
(HC 116). Every act of forgiveness finds its origin in God (cf. Eph 2:10).
This precious gift from the Triune God is, at the same time, capital to
invest.57 Because believers go to work with it, put it into practice, and make
a habit of it, it increasingly becomes a part of them. This disposition will
become more and more a distinctive trait. Believers find themselves in a
continuous learning process,58 one that takes place within their community59
and one that has as primary constituents teaching and preaching, the
celebration of the sacraments, prayer, and the exercise of mutual fellowship.
In this, believers will always keep an eye on their Master, who put this
disposition to forgive into practice in an extraordinary manner throughout
his ministry on earth, and most notably on the cross at Golgotha, when he
prayed for his enemies.
In addition, believers will learn from fellow believers who in their own
situation have applied this disposition in an especially striking way. The
parents of Miroslav Volf, for example, did not lay any charges against the
soldier who had killed their son. They chose to forego their right to compensation. They did this on the grounds of what Paul had taught. True, the
forgiveness they extended caused great pain to the boy’s mother. She had to
deal with many conflicting emotions. But she was able to grant forgiveness
56
Cf. Popma, Levensbeschouwing, 171.
Ibid., 174.
58
Alan J. Torrance, “Forgiveness and Christian Character: Reconciliation, Exemplarism
and the Shape of Moral Theology,” Studies in Christian Ethics 30.3 (2017): 297–98.
59
Ibid., 298.
57
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
28
because she was prepared to take this exceedingly difficult decision through
her communion with Christ. In the meantime, these parents were plagued
by others, who supposed they could explain why their five-year-old son had
died.60 Notwithstanding, they stuck to their intention to forgive. Believers
will take note of such examples as well as those they may encounter within
their immediate surroundings.61 In this way, they will learn to extend the
gift of forgiveness themselves.
VI. Acknowledgment of Guilt
Those who grant forgiveness affirm by doing so that the other has caused
them harm. They describe the injustice that was done and express a judgment about it, just as Joseph did when he saw his brothers as they came to
Egypt. By putting them to the test, he confronted them with their own past.
Forgiveness does not compete with justice, as if the offer of forgiveness
might, in some way, diminish the need for justice. Both of these social and
ethical norms—justice and forgiveness—have in common that they are
an attempt to bring to an end something that might otherwise continue
endlessly.62 While forgiveness is essential for the preservation of society,
justice is no less essential. Justice is integral to the structure of society.
Offenders stand in relation not only to their direct victims but also to society
and its system of justice as a whole. This system calls for acts of justice, with
a view to both the correction of offenders and the protection of society and
its morality.
The reach of such justice, however, is limited.63 An act of justice is unable
to release repentant neighbors from their guilt fully and is also unable to
restore the disrupted interpersonal relation fully. Disrupted or broken relations can only be restored through forgiveness. It is—as Kinneging puts
it—“a necessary addendum to justice.”64 Only forgiveness can bring about
the restoration that justice cannot attain, which is why it is indispensable.
The offer of forgiveness, however, is not yet the same as the acceptance of
it. The actual realization of forgiveness does not occur unless the guilty
party acknowledges his guilt. Forgiveness has its own “structure,” one that
exists by virtue of the cooperation of two parties.65 An essential element of
60
Volf, Free of Charge, 213.
Torrance, “Forgiveness,” 312–13.
62
Cf. Arendt, Vita activa, 239.
63
Cf. Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness,
and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 122–23.
64
Kinneging, Geografie, 124.
65
Popma, Levensbeschouwing, 173, 180.
61
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
29
this cooperation is acknowledgment of guilt: “otherwise there can be no
room for the possibility of forgiveness.”66 That is why repenting is part of
unpacking the gift of forgiveness; it is accompanied by the leaving behind
of harmful actions and the readiness to remove, as far as possible, the consequences of this harm. Those, however, who continue in their wrongdoing
do not accept the gift of forgiveness; they retain their guilt. Were the church
to speak of forgiveness while allowing the sin to continue, it would be proclaiming a cheap grace.67 Repentance implies a genuine change of heart. In
this connection, Scripture speaks of metanoia (μετάνοια): when “a brother”
says “I repent” (metanoeō, μετανοέω), you must forgive him. That is the rule
where he truly repents (metanoēsē, μετανοήσῃ; Luke 17:3–4), that is, where
he expresses genuine repentance, resolves to change his life in relation to
the one he has harmed, and does everything possible to make amends for
the harm he has caused.
In the same way, as people will usually find it difficult or sometimes even
impossible to grant forgiveness, they will also find it difficult to genuinely
acknowledge guilt. Who among us likes to admit that we have done something wrong? Most of us are inclined to compare ourselves with others so
that we can conclude that the wrongs of others outweigh our own failures.
We will often regard the actions of the other as not entirely right or even
entirely wrong.68 Often it will happen—writes Popma—that the guilty party
continues to evade or complain, and by means of an endless multiplicity of words
contrives to confuse or obfuscate the issue as a whole. Gaining time, then, assumes
a negative quality. The longer one harps on about it, the smaller the chances will be
of a courageous resolution. The matter drags on, and in this way, “old wounds” are
nurtured. … The long-standing conflict takes on an intractable character…. A more
or less permanent estrangement develops, one that can no longer be remedied by
the simple means of acknowledgment and forgiveness.69
If, however, trespassing neighbors truly do acknowledge their guilt, are
willing to make amends for the harm that was inflicted, and accept the
forgiveness that is offered, then the act of forgiveness has been completed,
and the relationship is restored. The offense itself can be left to sink into
oblivion, both by those who suffered the harm and by those who inflicted
it. In any case, those who were harmed may not, after the expression of
repentance and the granting of forgiveness, still declare that they will not
66
67
68
69
Ibid., 181.
Cf. Bonhoeffer, Nachfolge, 14.
Volf, Exclusion, 119.
Popma, Levensbeschouwing, 172.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
30
forget the offense. Were they to do that, they would be signaling that they
still regard their neighbors as wrongdoers.70 That does not befit a Christian.
A Christian wants nothing more than to fully restore a broken relationship.
Sadly, this does not always happen. Popma even goes so far as to assert
that the believer usually does not even receive the chance to restore the
wrong; this is destructive to the Christian life and ultimately to Christ’s
church itself:
One does not consider that mutual forgiveness is the “daily bread” of life for the
work that we have to do on earth. Forgiveness of sins is rendered brutally impossible
by hard, arrogant people, who immensely overestimate themselves, people who are
quite willing to work very hard, but who are never willing to acknowledge guilt at
any point. This attitude is deadly for Christian activity in almost every field. Does
anyone want to do Christian work? Excellent, but let him always keep in mind that
this is only possible where he is prepared, on a daily basis, to admit every offense,
right down to the smallest infraction. Not with feeble excuses, but with a full and
genuine admission. Nothing less will suffice!71
Believers are willing to forgive their repentant neighbors. In all kinds of
everyday annoyances, they are all the more willing to do so when they look
at themselves, at all of their faults and shortcomings. Moreover, the line
between the offenses of others and their own failings are not always so clear.
Often, their failings are interwoven with the wrongs of others, especially in
the fabric of everyday life.72
VII. Forgiveness before Repentance?
In some circumstances, however, forgiveness may be granted before guilt is
confessed. Those who have been harmed realize that those who have
harmed them do not see their wrongdoing, have no regret, and do nothing
to restore the harm they have caused. That evokes questions and creates
disquiet and disappointment. Nevertheless, they are willing to grant their
neighbors forgiveness, in part for the sake of their own peace of mind. Such
a situation, however, calls for wisdom. Those who grant forgiveness where
their neighbors have not acknowledged their wrongdoing must know what
they are doing, as their neighbors could all too easily take it as an insult.
Where the offense is obvious, however, such an initiative will not be out
of place. Those who have suffered wrong at the hands of their neighbors
70
71
72
Cf. Volf, Free of Charge, 175.
Popma, Levensbeschouwing, 181.
Bash, Forgiveness, 10, 64.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERPERSONAL FORGIVENESS AS A GOSPEL STANDARD
31
might see that these neighbors carry a burden of which they themselves are
unaware, one that plagues them in the present and may continue to do so
in the future. They may realize that the others are incapable, in their own
strength, of expressing regret. If they, in this situation, were to demand
immediate apology, they would only make it harder for their neighbors to
repent. Their demand for such an apology could in itself form a hindrance
to restoration. Those who first demand regret and repentance from their
neighbors before considering forgiveness might have good reasons for that.
But believers also see that the gospel teaches something different. In the
gospel, the indicative of salvation precedes the imperative of forgiveness.73 In
the same manner as God takes the initiative with humankind, so believers
will take the first step with their neighbors. Hence, they may choose to take
the initiative to forgive. For who is able, in their own strength, to acknowledge their faults, and to put them behind them? Those who have been
wronged may extend a helping hand to them. By forgiving their neighbors,
they can put the command of neighborly love into practice. In this way, evil
can be overcome by good (Rom 12:21). Unconditional forgiveness, in the
sense that the offer to forgive precedes repentance from sin, may be helpful
in the process of forgiveness and restoration.
But there is more. An initiative to grant forgiveness before repentance is
expressed fits well with the gospel itself. Proceeding from his unfathomable
love, God took the initiative to redeem sinners. He granted forgiveness
when his own were still enemies (Rom 5:8) and long before they showed
any signs of repentance: that is the kind of love he showed to a world that
had sinned against him (John 3:16). One example in the Gospels is the
forgiveness that Zacchaeus the tax collector received. Jesus wanted to be a
guest in his house and accepted him as a brother. It was not until afterward
that Zacchaeus made amends.74 While this example does not explicitly
mention the forgiveness of guilt for any wrong that Zacchaeus had done to
Jesus personally, it does demonstrate the application of the social and
ethical norm for forgiveness. Here too, it is clear that this forgiveness is not
unconditional in the sense that there was no call to repentance. Such an
initiative clearly does include a call to repentance. This example also
demonstrates that the act of forgiveness is completed by an admission of
guilt and a willingness to make amends. Zacchaeus repaid those he had
defrauded. Similarly, all believers will want to reflect Jesus in the divine love
73
Torrance speaks of “legalistic” and “evangelical” repentance, and of legalistic and evangelical metanoia (Torrance, “Forgiveness,” 308–11).
74
Cf. de Lange, “Room for Forgiveness,” 173, 175.
32
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
for sinners. How this love is realized in a concrete offer of forgiveness is
secondary, as is the specific moment when that should take place.
However, in a situation where the confession of guilt does not follow after
an offer of forgiveness, the act of forgiveness is not completed. This principle
is illustrated in the parable of the king who withdrew his forgiveness of his
servant when the latter showed that he had not accepted it. Such acceptance
is necessary in the way of confession and repentance.
When people genuinely confess their guilt and are prepared to demonstrate repentance by their actions, then the act of forgiveness is completed.
Reconciliation has taken place. The separation has been taken away. What
was broken has been healed. Instead of tension, there is now peace. Instead
of suspicion, there is now trust, however fragile it may be; there is now a
beginning. Where there was silence, people are now speaking to each other
again. Here, then, something of the new creation becomes visible; and this
new creation is precisely what—in the words of Oliver O’Donovan—the
fifth petition of the Lord’s Prayer asks for: a prayer for discontinuity, for
the inauguration of a new righteousness.75 This new creation calls for
actions that are not determined by the history of the past or the facts of the
present. Forgiveness is this kind of action, and as such is a sign of the new
creation, one that is not independent of the authority and power that God,
in the beginning, has bestowed on humans. “That we should be more than
creatures of our past, more than mere continuers of it, that is the gift
presupposed in our creation; it is the power which nature’s Creator bestowed
on creation’s lord.”76
75
Oliver O’Donovan, Self, World, and Time: Ethics as Theology 1: An Induction (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2013), 41.
76
Ibid., 42.
Islam and Women
1
CHRISTINE SCHIRRMACHER
Abstract
Little can be said about all women in Islam, as they live in widely varied
circumstances. Still, some guidelines apply to a vast majority of Muslim
women today because civil law follows, by and large, the regulations of
sharia law in most Arab countries and because the majority of Muslim
women are living in traditional settings. This article surveys several of
these fundamental guidelines without claiming to describe the actual
living conditions of all Muslim women. It will consider the status of
women, women and marriage, children, and some other laws and
customs. This contribution will conclude with a brief consideration of the
Islamic women’s movement and a comparison of marriage in Islam with
Christian marriage.
O
nly very little can be said in general about all women in Islam. Indeed, the differences in the circumstances of life
created by the urban or rural environment are too significant; the gap between women in Afghanistan and Tunisia,
between sternly religious families and secularized Muslims
1
This article builds on the author’s following contributions: Christine Schirrmacher,
“Women in Islam,” World Evangelicals, http://www.worldevangelicals.org/resources/pdf/
Women_in_Islam.pdf; Christine Schirrmacher, “Women in Islam,” Institute of Islamic Studies
of the Evangelical Alliance in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, July 13, 2005, https://www.
islaminstitut.de/en/2005/frauen-im-islam/?cn-reloaded=1; Christine Schirrmacher, Islam and
Society: Sharia Law—Jihad—Women in Islam: Essays, The WEA Global Issues Series 4 (Bonn:
Verlag für Kultur und Wissenschaft, 2008), https://epdf.pub/islam-and-society-sharia-law-jihadwomen-in-islam-the-wea-global-issues-series-v.html.
33
34
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
in the Western world, is too high. The question whether one particular
woman obtains access to schooling changes the circumstances of her life
just as decisively as does her age at marriage and one individual family’s
view about how traditional Islamic regulations are to be applied and how
strictly. In addition, ongoing secularization and the spread of Western lifestyles are rapidly changing living conditions in the cities of the Middle East.
In some countries like Iran, female students already outnumber male students. Even in Saudi Arabia, twenty percent of the seats of the Consultative
Assembly, the formal advisory body of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Arabic:
majlis ash-shura) are currently reserved for women. In the cities, an evergrowing number of Muslim women are earning their own money running
businesses. Young couples tend to be economically more independent, and
larger families do not necessarily live together in one house anymore. One
thing is sure: things are changing in the Muslim world. Still, some guidelines do apply for a vast majority of Muslim women today because civil law
still follows, by and large, the regulations of sharia law in all Arab countries
(except Tunisia) and because the majority of Muslim women are living in
traditional settings.
I. The Status of Women
1. Men and Women—Equal before God?
This article names several of these fundamental guidelines without, thereby,
claiming automatically to describe the living conditions of all Muslim
women. The public debate over women’s role in Islam tends in the West to
center around the issue of the headscarf, seen as symbolizing women’s
inferiority, yet not all practicing Muslim women wear the scarf, and not all
of them think it is indispensable. It is Islamic marriage law that cements
women’s inferior legal status as divinely ordained. The relevant provisions
of sharia are linked to local cultural norms and time-honored traditions
with roots in tribal society that were retained with the arrival of Islam.
Some of the widely accepted standards of decency are a mixture of culture,
religion, and tradition.
Muslim apologists have always insisted that Islam believes in the equality
of men and women and adduce as evidence that the qur’anic creation
account makes no distinction between man and woman (sura 39:6). God is
said to have created man and woman “from a single soul” (sura 4:1) to be
mutual “friends” and “protectors” (sura 9:71) and set “love and mercy”
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
35
between them (sura 30:21).2 The tradition praises the man who treats his
wife “best” as the best believer. Muslim apologetics further adduces the
common duty of men and women to observe the five pillars of Islam: the
creed, prayers, the fast, alms, and the pilgrimage, as well as the promise to
both of great rewards in the afterlife: “To whoever does right and believes,
be it man or woman, we will give a good life. And we will apportion them
their reward according to their best deeds” (sura 16:97).
Despite this fundamental equality, traditional Muslim theologians (who
make up the vast majority of Muslim theologians) assert that the tasks God
has given women differ from those he has given to men. As women bear the
children and the responsibility for home and family, so men are responsible
for the family’s protection and maintenance, in other words, to be the breadwinner who has dealings with society at large. Differing tasks mean different
rights. So it is seen as no more than an expression of justice between the
sexes that only a half-share of an inheritance falls to the woman, since she
does not bear the financial responsibility for the family. The principle enunciated in the Qur’an that a man’s testimony can only be outweighed by the
testimony of two women (sura 2:282) is said to take account of the fact that
women’s biology predisposes them to greater emotional fluctuations and
that it would be an imposition on their often insufficient capacity of recall
to ask them to decide another person’s fate in a court of law.
Men and women are equal in Islam in the sense that both are promised
access to paradise and expected to observe the five pillars of Islam. However,
women are excluded from religious practice during menstruation and
childbirth.
In Islam, women are prohibited from touching the Qur’an, entering a
mosque, saying liturgical prayers, and fasting during Ramadan. Only men
are required to attend Friday prayers at the mosque and to listen to the sermon, whose content is frequently of political or social importance. If women
attend the mosque at all, a practice frowned upon by some theologians and
prohibited by others, they are separated from the men in a small and usually
bare room, sometimes in a bad state of neglect through disuse, or in a balcony
or basement. Only a sixth of the 1.6 billion Muslims are native Arabic speakers, and it is difficult for most women who are unfamiliar with the language
to recite the prescribed ritual prayers in Arabic correctly and in full, to read
and understand the Qur’an, or to undertake the pilgrimage to Mecca.
2
The translation of Yusuf Ali of the Qur’an is quoted in this article; see The Holy Qur’an:
English Translation of the Meanings and Commentary (al-Madina: King Fahd Holy Qur’an
Printing Complex, n.d.).
36
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
2. Women’s Status in Family and Society
The social separation of the sexes is regarded as a means of maintaining
decorum. In traditional families, men and women live virtually in different
worlds, to a certain extent, even within the family circle. This separation is
apparent in the dress code, which does in a strict interpretation not permit
men to see a woman to whom they are not related unveiled, but also in the
fact that Islam knows no neutral ground where men and women can meet.
The wider family admits of a certain level of contact, but the innocuous
intermingling of the sexes outside the family circle is impossible and suggests
adultery. Muslim theologians have even recommended that women should
refrain from greeting relatives in public because other passers-by will not
be aware that they are related.
Children in Islam are brought up very differently according to sex. Sons
especially develop a close emotional attachment to the mother, while the
father is primarily respected as the authority figure. After circumcision,
usually between four and nine years of age, fathers increasingly initiate sons
into the male world, while the mother traditionally instructs daughters in
household responsibilities, training them for their future role as housewives
and mothers. Except in the case of serious impediment, marriage is the
norm for men and women and guarantees a woman’s livelihood.
3. Women’s Legal Status
Islamic marriage and family law is prejudicial to women in several ways.
Even if there are many loving fathers and husbands in Muslim countries, it
is part of sharia law that it is a man’s right to punish his wife by ignoring her
or by beating her in case of discord (sura 4:34). Aside from questions of
inheritance and legal testimony, women are at a disadvantage compared
with men in marital law, divorce, and custody proceedings.
The Qur’an permits men up to four wives and an unspecified number of
concubines (sura 4:3), even if in many countries polygamous marriages are
discouraged by state authorities. The traditional divorce procedure allows a
man to divorce his wife by merely pronouncing the formula “I repudiate
you” without the need for giving grounds or going to court. Some Muslim
countries have already introduced checks to this procedure and lay down
laws that an attempt at reconciliation must be made in court, but this is
usually only practiced in the bigger cities. In a rural setting, family members
might try to reconcile a couple with each other in case of discord.
Women can only obtain a divorce in court and are only granted one if
they can prove serious misconduct by the husband; in some countries like
Saudi Arabia, it is virtually impossible for the wife to obtain a divorce. A
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
37
husband is only bound to pay alimony for a few months in case of her
being pregnant, so divorce leaves a woman without means and children, for
Islamic marriage law invariably grants custody to the husband once the
children are out of infancy. Several Muslim countries have improved the
legal status of women today, but only in areas which are not in direct conflict with sharia law. There might be impediments applied for conducting a
polygamous marriage; still, in the last fifty years, no Arabic country has
formulated a law forbidding it.
II. Marriage
1. Marriage Contracts in Islam
In a rural setting—that is, in the vast majority of cases—Muslim marriages
are up to this day arranged by the families, and women are not always in a
position to give their full and free consent. Even upper-class urban women
who might have fallen in love with a young man at university will, in most
cases, make their betrothal and marriage dependent on the full consent of
their parents.
Arranged marriages tend traditionally to be associated with decency and
respectability, while marriages “for love” often smack of immorality and
Westernization. Marriage within the extended family is favored because
familiarity with the cousin and his parents make it easier to assess the
chances of a successful marriage than in the case of an outright stranger. It
also guarantees the “compatibility” of the marriage partners with respect to
social background, education, religion, and character, which Islam requires,
and ensures the dowry stays within the family. It is also easier for the bride’s
family to put pressure on a relative to save the marriage when it is in danger
of breaking up, and it guarantees that any kind of support needed will come
from within the family.
The cornerstone of the marriage contract is the husband’s responsibility to
earn a livelihood and the wife’s duty to obey (sura 4:34). The duty of obedience has of late led some wives to include “escape clauses” in the marriage
contract permitting them, for instance, to pursue education or career after
marriage, since the husband in principle has the right to determine how often
and for what purpose his wife may leave the house. Otherwise, should he
forbid his wife to attend university after the wedding because he does not
consider it compatible with decency, she should submit without demur if she
cannot make her father convince her husband to change his mind.
Islamic marriage law demands submission particularly in sexual relations,
for by paying the dowry the husband acquires the right over his wife’s body,
38
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
and she has no grounds to refuse him except for ritual impurity or during
the fast, since according to established precedent, refusal, like infertility,
gives the husband the right to repudiate her.
The traditional religious wedding ceremony is presided over by an imam,
the mosque precentor or religious official; in urban areas marriages are also
registered. The groom and the two obligatory witnesses sign the marriage
contract. Strictly speaking, the bride does not even need to be present, the
contract often being signed on her behalf by her guardian (in Arabic: wali)
acting as her legal representative. The most important clause in the contract
lays down the amount of the dowry, consisting of the “dawn gift” of clothing, furniture, jewelry, and money that the wife receives from groom’s
family at the wedding, and the “evening gift,” the compensation due to the
wife if they are divorced, since alimony only has to be paid for three months
or until the delivery of a yet unborn child.
God’s blessing is not invoked at a Muslim wedding, a civil rather than a
religious ceremony whose purpose is to seal a contract that explicitly
anticipates the possibility of divorce through the specification of the “evening
gift.” In the wedding ceremony, the marriage partners take no vow of mutual
fidelity, nor do they make a promise of mutual care “for better or for worse.”
Unlike Christian marriage vows, there is no promise of lifelong, exclusive
devotion to one person, as there is in principle the possibility of taking a
second wife (except in Tunisia and Turkey). If worse comes to worst, such
things as an incurable illness, a prison sentence, impotence, or infertility are
generally regarded in Islam as grounds for divorce for both husband and
wife. The idea of lifelong spiritual fellowship before God, marriage as a
partnership for service, is not central to the Muslim view of marriage; it is
rather a compact setting out the rights and privileges of both sides. Nor is
there any promise or vow to “love and honor” one’s partner, for the biblical
commitment to mutual love is foreign to a Muslim marriage.
2. Up to Four Women
Polygyny (multiple wives)—possibly unlimited—probably existed in preIslamic Arabia. In sura 4:3, the Qur’an limits the number of a man’s wives
to four and, beyond this, allows an unlimited number of concubines: “And
if you fear not acting justly in regard to the orphans, then marry women as
it befits you: two, three, or four. But, if you fear not acting justly, then marry
only one, or whatever [female slaves] you possess. In this way, you can most
easily avoid doing injustice” (sura 4:3).
A few countries, such as Tunisia, legally forbid polygamy. In other countries,
however—provided that the marriage contract makes no other provision—a
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
39
woman can do nothing if her husband desires to take a second wife. In
several Muslim majority countries (e.g., Egypt) today, though, she can
require in the marriage contract that she be guaranteed the right to a
divorce if her husband takes a second wife during her lifetime. In the other
Muslim majority countries, polygamy is in no way the rule, but—presumably
also for economic reasons—always the exception, and the Qur’an and
Islamic tradition demand that all women be treated justly in regard to the
material care and affection provided by the husband.
A few Muslim theologians have interpreted the only Qur’an verse that
mentions the number of four wives (sura 4:3) in the sense that the Qur’an
here actually speaks explicitly against polygamy, since the equal treatment
of several wives is never really possible, as the Qur’an itself concedes: “And
you will not really be able to treat your wives justly, however much you try
to do so” (sura 4:129). The majority of Muslim theologians, however, has
held fast to the permission, in principle, to marry up to four wives. One
important argument put forward against any criticism of polygamy is the
historical fact of Mohammed’s multiple marriages, him being the very
example for any believer after him.
3. The Duty of Marriage
In classical Islamic theology, voluntary unmarried existence is unthinkable, and so it is the case for the majority of Muslims in the Middle East
today. The Qur’an, of course, clearly commands marriages in sura 24:32:
“And give in marriage those among you who are single.” The Islamic
tradition declares marriage to be a good custom that is to be observed, that
is, it is sunna: “Marriage is a part of my sunna, and whoever is against my
sunna is against me,” so Mohammed is reported to have said.3 Unmarried,
divorced, or widowed women in the Islamic world usually do not live
alone; single women live with their extended families, and divorced and
widowed women move in again with their extended families, which often
has the goal of seeing them married again. The fundamental reason for this
is the Islamic concept of marriage that assumes that, without the control
of the extended family, a single woman living alone might give rise to rumors
about her moral conduct.
4. Early Marriages
The Qur’an makes no concrete statements about an acceptable age for
marriage. It is known of Mohammed that he married some of his wives
3
Hans Bauer, Von der Ehe: Das 12. Buch von al-Gazâlî’s Hauptwerk (Halle: Max Niemeyer,
1917), 5.
40
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
while they were very young, especially his later, favorite wife Aisha, who
is reported to have been nine years old at the time (although there are few
reports that Aisha was sixteen or seventeen). This fact was later cited repeatedly as a justification for child marriages. Today, the law books of most
Muslim majority countries contain provisions that determine a minimum
age for marriage, which is frequently set at sixteen to eighteen years for girls
and approximately eighteen years for boys, a regulation that in practice in
rural areas due to poverty is not infrequently circumvented by the misrepresentation of birth dates. Thus, for example, Moroccan law forbids
marriages for women under eighteen but allows “exceptions,” and these
exceptions are reported to have doubled in the last fifteen years. In some
countries and especially in poor and illiterate settings, girls not yet in
puberty, at the age of eleven or twelve years, can be given in marriage.
However, sometimes even nine-year-olds get married, and girls as young as
ten or eleven become mothers.4
5. Arranged Marriages and Marriage Contracts
Up to the present, marriages frequently occur within the network of family
relations, above all between cousins. This happens because marriage is
considered very much under the aspect of a bond between two families.
Once young people reach marriageable age and are not yet promised to a
cousin, the traditional way is the arrangement of a marriage through the
mother or an older female relation of the groom. Of course, modern marriages
are certainly not arranged everywhere, and the number of “love marriages”
—above all in urban areas—is steadily increasing.
If the family arranges the marriage, however, the mother of the groom
will make inquiries about the family of the chosen young woman and her
financial circumstances, and above all about her reputation, health, and
domestic abilities. One or two visits in the home of the young woman take
place when the amount of the marriage portion and the festivities are
discussed. If both families reach an agreement, then an official date for the
wedding is set, and the couple is considered engaged. The assent on the
part of the young woman plays a more important role today than in earlier
times, and the family law books of Muslim majority countries often contain
a paragraph explicitly forbidding forced marriages. Today, she is in a better
position to reject at most one candidate, but a second or third candidate
less so, since in a traditional context she then easily can be considered
4
Fatima Mernissi, ed., Der Harem ist nicht dieWelt: Elf Berichte aus dem Leben marokkanischer
Frauen (Hamburg: Lüchterhand, 1988).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
41
difficult and unmarriageable and can thus bring shame upon her family.
The actual marriage ceremony is simple: the presence of the bride is not
absolutely necessary from a legal point of view. She can have her father,
brother, or another male relative stand in for her. Originally, the inclusion
of an administrative authority in the ceremony, for the registration of the
marriage, was not required, but only the presence of an imam (prayer leader
in the mosque) and two witnesses. Today, marriages are also frequently
registered with the state authorities, which places women in a more advantageous position. The marriage is purely a contract in civil law between the
groom and the legal representative of the bride and is given no particular
divine blessing.
The marriage contract regulates, above all, the financial aspect of the
marriage portion (Arabic: mahr). The groom either pays the marriage
portion completely to his bride as her property at the time of the marriage
ceremony, or it is agreed upon that the first part (“morning portion”) is due
at the time of the wedding ceremony and the second part (“evening portion”)
in the case of divorce or the death of the husband, as a means of providing
the wife with some financial security in these cases.
6. The Wedding Celebration
At the wedding celebration, men and women by tradition celebrate separately. The high point of the festivities is the act of bringing the bride into
the house of the groom. There, the marriage is consummated and, in
traditional settings, as proof of the virginity of the young woman, the bedsheets are shown to the female relatives (modern couples no longer practice
this). The respectability of the bride and the honor of the whole family are
thus demonstrated. If the husband discovers that his bride is no longer a
virgin, she is sent back to her family in shame and dishonor. For the family
of the girl and the bride herself, this is undoubtedly the greatest conceivable
disgrace. Absolute abstinence before marriage, as a rule, is not expected
from the husband to the same extent as from the woman—even though
both sexes may discreetly disrespect these traditional rules in urban and
more anonymous settings.
7. The Provision for the Family
The husband is obligated to provide for the family. The wife, for her part,
cannot be legally forced to contribute to the livelihood of the family due to
sharia law. The wife has the obligation to care for the household and the
children. Joint ownership of property such as we know it does not exist,
since neither husband nor wife acquires the right to the property of the
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
42
other through the marriage. The dowry in the case of divorce is considered
the property of the wife and cannot be used in meeting the costs of living.
Once married, the man, according to the Qur’an, has an unlimited right
to marital intercourse whenever he wishes: “Your women are a fertile field
for you. Go to your field whenever you wish” (sura 2:223). Refusal by the
woman is always grounds for divorce, and some traditions pronounce a
curse on the wife for her refusal. The wife, too, can sue for divorce in this
regard, but only after a long period of continuous sexual neglect.
III. Children
1. Sons and Daughters
An Islamic marriage never will voluntarily remain childless. Childlessness
is considered to be a disgrace, and the wife is almost always given the blame
for it. Infertility is a common ground for divorce. Often the “evil eye” of a
third party is seen as the cause of childlessness, and many infertile women
visit the graves of holy figures or consult conjurors in order to attain fulfillment of their desire for children by use of magical practices, sacrifices, and
occult ceremonies.
A birth is always a joyful event, especially the birth of a boy. The wife is
awarded full recognition only through the birth of a child, for she now has
fulfilled the most important expectation of her parents and in-laws. To have
given birth to a son is such a tremendous event that many mothers afterward are no longer called by their own names, but rather only as the “mother
of Aziz’” (in Arabic: umm Aziz) or “mother of Isma’il’” (umm Isma’il). The
tradition says that “Paradise lies at the feet of mothers,” and the Qur’an
demands esteem for and the respectful treatment of parents, especially in
their old age: “And we have commanded the people to be good to their
parents” (sura 46:15). Only when the parents keep their child from the faith
is the child theoretically allowed to be disobedient.5
At the birth of a child, the prayer call is whispered in its left ear and the
confession of faith (“There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his
Prophet”) in its right ear. Special care is taken to ensure that the “evil eye”
might not possibly strike the child, for the high rate of infant mortality in
the Islamic world was and may still today be attributed to the effects of the
“evil eye,” that is, to the adverse magical practices of a third party. For this
reason, attempts are made to protect the child from this influence by using
various protective magical practices, such as blue beads sewn to the
5
Jacques Jomier, How to Understand Islam (London: SCM, 1989), 75.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
43
clothing of the child. Annemarie Schimmel mentions the custom of asking
forty men named Mohammed for money and then buying clothing for the
child from the money received.6 Sometimes, among other practices, a boy
will be dressed in girl’s clothes so that the demons are led astray from thinking that they have a boy before them.
2. Circumcision for Boys and Girls
Circumcision, which the Qur’an nowhere explicitly demands, is obligatory
for boys in the entire Islamic world and is celebrated with a family festival,
usually when the boy is between four and ten years of age. Afterward, the
boy belongs to masculine society and is gradually made acquainted with
the duties of his religion.
Despite its official state prohibition in most Muslim majority countries,
the circumcision of girls is practiced to a greater or lesser extent in several
states, primarily in southern Egypt, Somalia, and Sudan, as well as by the
Bedouins of North Africa. The Qur’an provides no basis at all for this
custom, which has survived in only a few Muslim majority countries, where
traditional groups defend it stubbornly as a means of preserving the chastity
of unmarried women. Some Muslim states condemn the circumcision of
girls as reprehensible, but cannot effectively prevent its practice in certain
places or levels of society. This custom may have its origins in African religions. In Egypt, the circumcision of girls was already being carried out
during the time of the Pharaohs7 and was implemented in Islamic culture
after the conquest of Islam. Thus, the circumcision of girls should not be
considered as specifically Islamic, although Islamic tradition does contain
a few positive statements about the advantages of the “mild form of
circumcision” that makes a blatant condemnation of female circumcision
unacceptable for traditional voices within Islam.
IV. Customs and Laws
1. The Veil
Although in all Muslim majority countries some of the women practice
full or partial veiling, the command to wear the veil is not at all so easy to
establish from the Qur’an, which says merely that women should cover
6
Annemarie Schimmel, “Traditionelle Frömmigkeit,” in Munir D. Ahmed et al., Der Islam
III: Islamische Kultur, Zeitgenössische Strömungen, Volksfrömmigkeit (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,
1990), 242–66, esp. 244.
7
Frank Bliss, Frau und Gesellschaft in Nordafrika: Islamische Theorie und gesellschaftliche
Wirklichkeit (Bad Honnef: Deutsche Stiftung für Internationale Entwicklung, 1986), 118.
44
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
themselves in a virtuous way for their own protection:
Oh, Prophet! Speak to your wives and daughters and to the women of the believers
that they should draw their garments down low over themselves. Thus it is most
readily ensured that they are recognized and not molested. God is, however,
compassionate and ready to forgive. (sura 33:59)
For some of these instructions, it is not easy to decide from the context
which form of “garments” are meant. Of course, one could assume inhabitants of the desert covered their heads in the extreme heat of the day.
The veil, or the headscarf, should according to traditional theology be
worn from about the age of puberty. The woman then can show herself
unveiled only before the men of her extended family. The Qur’an gives no
clear instruction about whether the “veil” means merely a headscarf worn
over the usual clothing, as is frequently usual in Turkey, or a full-length veil
that leaves the face free or provides only slits for the eyes, as is currently
usual in Afghanistan.
2. Punishing the Wife for Her “Rebellion”
Most Muslim theologians agree that the Qur’an concedes to the man the
right in certain situations as the last step to punish his wife (or wives) in
case of her disobedience:
The men take precedence over the women because God has honored them more
than the others and because they give (to their wives) from their property. … And if
you fear that the wives rebel (against you), then remove yourselves from them in the
marriage bed and beat them. If they then obey you, then undertake nothing further
against them! (sura 4:34)
The husband, as it seems, is given the right to resort to means of corporal
punishment if he fears that his wife could rebel against him. He can use
such punishment to compel her to obedience if admonishment and the
refusal of marital intercourse have not moved her to relent. Whoever examines the exact wording of the Qur’an verse could even say that the man not
only has the right but even the duty to punish, for sura 4:34 is formulated
as a command to husbands: “Beat them!”
This is not to say that in every Muslim family the husband beats his wife
and in any non-Muslim family he does not! Many Muslims today, some
Muslim theologians, and also some female feminists are opposed to the
idea that the Qur’an allows the husband to beat his wife by arguing that
the traditional application of sura 4:34 is simply wrong, claiming that
Mohammed had never supported the idea of wife-beating. However, up to
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
45
today these critical voices do not seem to be influential enough to shake the
arguments of mainstream Muslim theologians who have not moved away
from the traditional interpretation of sura 4:34. This is also the case because
not only the Qur’an but also the texts of Islamic tradition underline the
husband’s right to discipline his wife in case of discord, and as there is still
no officially recognized historical-critical hermeneutics applied to the texts
of the Qur’an and tradition today, it is still difficult to argue on principle
for the inapplicability of sura 4:34.
So there is also just as little justification for claiming that men in the
Islamic world would not avail themselves of this right. Nada Tomiche
mentions, for example, that the right of punishment is legally established in
Egypt. There are said to be courts there that concern themselves with the
permissible length of the stick with which the woman can be beaten.8
“Moderate” punishment by the husband will hardly be a cause for legal
action against him, since the wife is culturally assumed to be fundamentally
responsible for the success of the marriage and, in the case of punishment,
the assumption is of abnormal behavior on her part.
In the tradition, it is reported of Mohammed himself that he confirmed
the right of punishment for the case that a wife received as a guest in her
home someone whom the husband is not able to abide:
But, she should not allow anyone to sit in your private quarters who you do not like.
If she, however, does this anyway, then you are permitted to punish her, but not too
hard. Her rights in regard to you are that you provide her in an appropriate form
with food and clothing.9
The famous theologian Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (died 1111) demands that
the “malice” of the wife be treated with “discipline and severity,”10 and, in
the case of “disobedience on the part of the wife,” he advocates “forcibly
returning [her] to obedience.”11 If her husband punishes her and, as a last
resort, beats her, then
he should beat her without causing her injury …, that is, he should cause her pain,
but not so that one of her bones is broken or she bleeds. He also is not permitted to
strike her in the face; that is forbidden.12
8
Nada Tomiche, “Mar’a,” in Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 6:466–72, esp.
471; Bliss, Frau und Gesellschaft in Nordafrika, 69.
9
Talib Y. Fehlhaber’s translation is cited in Ahmad von Denffer, Wallfahrt nach Mekka: Das
Wichtigste über umra und hadsch, Schriftenreihe des Islamischen Zentrums München 15 (Munich: Islamisches Zentrum, 1987), 84, unfortunately with no source reference.
10
Bauer. Von der Ehe, 78.
11
Ibid., 87.
12
Ibid.
46
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
3. Adultery
Adultery in general is considered in Islam to be a serious offense; the
Qur’an requires 100 lashes for the man and the woman (sura 24:2) and
warns explicitly against leniency and compassion. In Islamic law, however,
death penalty by stoning has come to be accepted for married adulterers,
since the tradition mentions this punishment and it is assumed that earlier
the Qur’an also once contained this “stoning verse.”
However, four witnesses are required to provide proof of adultery, a
circumstance that is likely to be extremely rare. If this condition cannot be
fulfilled, then the charge is interpreted as a false accusation, which, according to Islamic law, likewise is punishable. A wife can ward off the accusation
of adultery made by her husband that cannot be proved by the evidence of
four witnesses, by calling upon God four times as her witness that her
husband is lying and the fifth time swearing to God that she is innocent
and imploring God that he otherwise might punish her with his curse (suras
24:6–9).
So these are the legal provisions that offer only a few possibilities for legal
proceedings. It is quite another question how adultery, or the suspicion of
it, is punished in practice. One can certainly assume that women are not
very frequently charged with adultery in courts of law; rather, much more
frequently the family of a woman who has fallen into “disrepute” takes on
itself the responsibility of punishment and metes it out quite severely.
It appears that, in practice, the proven case of adultery is not always
required for the punishment of a woman, but rather that only minor deviations from socially accepted behavior are sufficient. For an unmarried
woman, this immoral behavior would exist, for example, in a conversation
with an unrelated man. The woman then gains a bad reputation and thus
has fewer chances for marriage. A girl who once has exchanged a few words
with a young man in a public place can be shut up completely at home and
constantly monitored until she is married.
Jürgen Frembgen reports from his experiences gathered during several
lengthy stays in Pakistan:
Among the Pakhtun and Baluch, the forbidden glance of a woman in the direction
of a strange man, or a short conversation, already can be interpreted as unchaste
behavior and adultery, which makes further life together with her husband impossible
and often enough means the killing of the wife.13
13
Jürgen Frembgen, Alltagsverhalten in Pakistan (Berlin: Express Edition, 1987), 32.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
47
Further, “contacts between a man and a woman who are not married to
each other can … be interpreted as adultery and result in a vendetta.”14
4. Divorce and Repudiation of the Wife
The tradition, to be sure, records that Mohammed characterized divorce
as the most reprehensible of all permitted actions. However, divorces in
Islamic law were and are very simple for the man and, accordingly, in some
countries quite frequent. According to sharia law, the husband can repudiate his wife at any time and without naming his grounds for it by repeating
the divorce formula (e.g., “I repudiate you!”) three times. If he pronounces
the formula only once or twice, then the divorce is still revocable: he takes
his wife back again before the “waiting period,” the period in which a possible
pregnancy would become evident, has run out and consummates marital
intercourse with her, which amounts to a repeal of the divorce. If, however,
the divorce formula has been spoken three times, then the man can marry
this particular woman again only after she has become the wife of another
man and again has been divorced from him (suras 2:228–30).
This regulation of the three-fold divorce formula is intended actually to
protect the woman from impulsive divorces that are pronounced in annoyance, intoxication, or just in fun. Divorce, however, remained even in the
Islamic era a comparatively uncomplicated process for the husband, since
his decision alone is sufficient.
Today, however, this simple divorce has been made de facto more difficult
in several Muslim majority countries. Often (but not everywhere), legal
proceedings in a court of law are necessary. In some cases, too, the man
must initiate legal action in order to obtain a divorce; sometimes, he is
urged to undertake attempts at reconciliation. A particularly common
ground for divorce today is still likely to be the infertility of the wife or the
birth of several daughters and no son.
In most Muslim majority countries today, a wife too can obtain a divorce
in some instances, but always with the help of a formal trial. Among the
grounds that a wife can present before a court are several years’ absence of
her husband from the home and his presence at an unknown location, the
neglect of his obligation to pay support, a term in prison extending over
several years, continued impotence, neglect of marital duties for at least
three years, mental illness, dangerous, contagious, or repulsive diseases such
as leprosy or elephantiasis, exceptional cruelties on the part of the husband,
robbery of the wife’s property, hindrance of the wife in the practice of her
14
Ibid., 74.
48
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
religious duties, verifiably unequal treatment of wives, seduction of the wife
to immorality, and a permanently immoral lifestyle (individual “lapses” are
not grounds for divorce15). The principle of irreconcilable differences in the
marriage also is applied today under certain conditions.
According to Islamic law, the children from a divorced marriage always
belong to the father. They can remain with the mother until they have
grown out of infancy, that is, girls until ten or twelve and boys no older than
seven. Afterward, the children come to their father or his family and belong
to him alone. The wife then no longer has any rights in regard to her children,
including visitation rights.
V. The Islamic Women’s Movement
The model and goal of the women’s movement in the Islamic world, which
is active in all countries at different levels of intensity, is not the adoption of
what in the Islamic view is considered to be the decadent and morally
reprehensible Western social order, nor is it liberation from the regulations
of the Qur’an. The women’s movement argues that neither the Qur’an
nor the tradition is correctly interpreted today, that Mohammed’s wives
possessed a more privileged position than women today, and that women
today would experience greater freedom and society more justice by a fresh
interpretation of the qur’anic texts. A call for the assertion of women’s
rights in the framework of a suspension of Islam would have no chance of
being heard on a broad scale in the Muslim majority countries. Women’s
rights advocates who would issue such a call would be most probably
charged with being godless and Western. Thus, women in the Islamic world
have repeatedly tried to sue for their rights by “correctly interpreting” the
statements of the Qur’an and the tradition.
VI. Differences from Christian Marriage
Islamic marriage differs from Christian marriage in many respects. Through
the provision for the security of the bride with the evening portion, the
Islamic marriage in a certain sense already reckons at the marriage ceremony
with the possibility of a later divorce and of the man marrying additional
women. A promise on the part of the marriage partners with God’s help to
remain faithful to each other until death does not exist. Marriage in Islam
15
So Asaf A. A. Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law (London: Geoffrey Cumberlege;
Oxford University Press, 1949/1955), 145–47, for at least the Indo-Pakistani sphere.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› ISLAM AND WOMEN
49
is generally a contract in civil law that determines mutual obligations and is
not an eternal bond founded by God and blessed by him. The fear of a
threatened divorce is quite real for many Muslim women when they do not
fulfill the expectations of her husbands in the management of the household and the number of children.
The Christian marriage, in contrast, is intended as a lifelong companionship with only one partner. Precisely because marriage involves commitment,
it is compared in the Bible again and again with the exclusive covenant
between God and human beings for eternity. Married Christians swear an
oath before God that only death should separate them. Also, in contrast to
Islam, mental illness, prison, or the impossibility of finding a sufficient
livelihood would not be a ground for divorce according to the Bible, for it
is precisely here that it ought to be demonstrated that Christian marriages
are maintained not only so long as the marriage partners “function” flawlessly, but especially in those instances when one of them most urgently
needs counsel, help, and support.
The Christian marriage vow to be there for the partner in “good as well
as evil days” obligates self-sacrifice on the part of each partner for the other
precisely in times of need. The Bible speaks in many places of the fact that
love for the neighbor or the marriage partner is not just a feeling, but
there must be a decision of the will for love, and love means devotion and
sacrifice (cf. Eph 5:25–31). The Bible repeatedly exhorts husbands and
wives to exercise love in the marriage. It is not the codification of certain
obligations in the marriage, such as provision for the family or the care of
children, that forms the chief component of Christian marriage, but rather
the intellectual-spiritual communion of the marriage partners in their relationship to God and the mutual completion of two, in nature, different
human beings borne by love and forgiveness. The story of creation already
makes this especially clear. Adam misses a partner that is like him, who
does not stand under him like the animals and does not stand over him like
God, his Lord. After he has given all the animals a name, he rejoices at the
creation of the woman, for God says, “It is not good that the man should be
alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gen 2:18 esv). Divorce was an
“abomination” to God already in the Old Testament (Mal 2:11, 14–16) and
was only allowed because of the “hardness of heart” of the people (Jesus in
Matt 19:8 and Mark 10:5). Divorce in the biblical understanding thus is
intended to be an absolute exception, not to be reckoned as part of the
design from the very beginning. Based on this idea of lifelong companionship, divorce in many Western countries, too, is still a quite tedious affair that
“enforces” an entire year to reconsider, even in severe cases of irreconcilable
50
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
differences. If only one marriage partner desires the divorce, then even
several years can pass before the divorce is finalized.
On the other hand, the Qur’an nowhere speaks explicitly about the intellectual and spiritual communion of marriage partners and, to my knowledge,
this component remains practically unconsidered among the commentators on the Qur’an and in the literature on questions concerning marriage
and the family. Since Islam has no ecclesiastical structure encompassing all
the faithful and the mosque offers women only a limited sphere of activity,
a woman can live out her faith only in private. She is not called, however, to
intellectually and spiritually shape her environment and culture with her
husband as a service of God. For many Muslim women who have become
Christians, the respect and love Jesus Christ has shown to women as reported
in the New Testament has proven tremendously attractive to them.
Healing the Wounds of
Trauma and Abuse
DIANE LANGBERG
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to bring an understanding of trauma and
abuse, of the different types of abuse that may occur, of their prevalence
in the world and in the church, and of their effects on a life. It is critical to
understand the damage of abuse in order to serve victims well. Failure to
know what trauma does to humans and how to respond to victims
results in doing further damage to a vulnerable human. We will look at
three components of healing that are both basic and easily used across
cultures: talking, tears, and time. We will also see that responding to
trauma in the lives of others is participation in the life of Christ, who
came in part to heal the brokenhearted.
S
ome years ago, I was in Ghana, speaking on violence against
women and children. While there we visited Cape Coast Castle.
Hundreds of thousands of Africans were forced through its
dungeons and then the door of no return onto slave ships.
There were five dungeon chambers for males. The descent into
the darkness to one of those dungeons brought on claustrophobia. Two
hundred men shackled and chained together stayed in that dungeon for
about three months before being shipped across the Atlantic.
We stood in one of the male dungeons, listening in the darkness, when
our guide said this: “Do you know what is above this dungeon?” Our heads
shook. “The chapel,” he said. Directly above two hundred shackled men—
some of them dead, others screaming, all of them sitting in filth—sat God
51
52
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
worshipers. They sang, read Scripture, prayed, and, I suppose, took up an
offering for those less fortunate. The slaves could hear the service; the
worshipers could sometimes hear the slaves, though there were those making
them behave so as not to disturb the church. The evil, the suffering, the
humiliation, and the injustice were overwhelming, and the visual parable
was stunning. The people in the chapel were numb to the horrific trauma
and suffering beneath them. In fact, they were actively complicit.
Under the form of worship in that chapel in Ghana lay the darkness of
slavery, oppression, and tyranny—all things that blight and destroy humans
created in the image of God. But I think you know Christianity does not
look like being folded up with evil and worshiping on top of dungeons.
Following Christ does not look like complicity with a system that butters our
bread and fills our coffers built on the back of those created in the image of
God. It does not look like praying and singing and giving money on top of
screams, unspeakable suffering, filth, and death. Our guide pointed up to
the church above and said, “Heaven above; hell below.” But I would argue
that heaven was not above, for that is not what heaven does. And it is what
heaven does that is the reason we serve others. Heaven leaves the chapel
and goes down into the dungeon to bring those so enslaved out into light
and freedom so that they in turn can go back and bring more. Heaven uses
all power to bless.1
I invite you to enter the dungeon of abuse with me. We do not have to go
far—it is in our homes, our schools, our military, our neighborhoods, and our
churches. When I first started working with victims of abuse forty-six years
ago, the church largely ignored and often actively denied the dungeon of
abuse. We did not believe it really existed and were certain it never occurred
in the homes represented in our pews, the lives of our parishioners, and
never, never within the church itself. Sadly, it has taken the media and the
courts to make it abundantly clear that sexual abuse is in all such places and
has even been perpetrated or covered up by some we have held in high
esteem. I am grieved that it has been the media and not the voice of God’s
people that has dragged it to the light.
Like our Lord—who was anointed to bring good news to the afflicted, to
bind up the brokenhearted, and to set captives at liberty—you and I are
called to leave the comfort of our chapels and enter into the devastating
suffering of those who have been shattered by the evil of abuse. Jesus
demonstrated in the flesh the character of God; his church is to do the
1
Diane Langberg, Suffering and the Heart of God: How Trauma Destroys and Christ Restores
(Greensboro, NC: New Growth Press, 2015), 4–7. Parts of this article build on this earlier work.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
53
same. When God’s people worship above and separate from and untouched
by dungeons, they are not worshiping the God of the Scriptures. There is
nothing in the Scriptures to suggest that being indifferent, uncaring, and
deaf to the cries of suffering humans is godly.
God has sown his life in you and me. In this dark and fallen world, filled
with blasted and ruined humanity, he has sown his life in us and flung us out.
He has, however, also made it clear that the enemy has sown seed as well, and
it is growing and maturing right in there with the wheat. It is with us—not just
out there. God has said so, and he has said it will be so until he returns. The
Cape Coast dungeons were under the chapel. They were not a separate building and were not outside the walls of the fort. Ananias and Sapphira, Simon
Magus, the man in the Corinthian church who had sex with his mother—they
were part of the church. They were not out there; they were on the inside. As
we consider the topic of abuse, we must be aware that it is not a problem just
out there in the world—it is also among the people of God. We fail to understand and believe our Lord’s teaching if we think otherwise.
I. Statistics
So let us look into this dungeon of shattered, wounded, and confused
humans our God so loves—some of whom attend our churches.
1. Global Statistics about Abuse
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
20% of women report being sexually abused2
35% of women have experienced physical or sexual violence
42% of those women report an injury as a result of the violence
38% of murders of women are committed by male partners3
51% of human trafficking victims globally are women
75% of trafficked females are girls
15 million adolescent girls have experienced forced sex
87 thousand women globally were intentionally killed in 2017
Less than 40% of women who experience violence seek help4
Almost 8% of men report being sexually abused as a child
2
“Child Maltreatment,” World Health Organization, last modified September 30, 2016,
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/child-maltreatment.
3
“Violence against Women,” World Health Organization, last modified November 29, 2017,
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women.
4
“Facts and Figures: Ending Violence against Women,” UNWomen, last modified November
2018, http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/facts-and-figures.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
54
• 41,000 children under 15 die by homicide annually5
• Homicide is among the top three causes of death in adolescents
• 80% of both victims and perpetrators of homicide are boys6
2. Rates among Sexually Abused Males
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
4 times more likely for major depression
3 times more likely for bulimia
≥ 2 times more likely for antisocial personality disorder
1.5–14 times more likely to attempt suicide (does not include age range)
2 times more likely to use alcohol
5 times more likely to use drugs
Sexually abused 6th grade boys were 12 times more likely to engage in
multi-substance abuse
• Sexually and physically abused 6th grade boys were 44 times more likely
to engage in multi-substance abuse.7
These numbers are staggering, and the damage to people created in the
image of God is clear. Many of you are part of institutions that bear the name
of our Lord Christ. When we say something is “in his name,” that should
mean that it bears his character. We are called by our God to care for the
afflicted, to open our mouths for the mute, to be a light in the darkness and
a place of sanctuary for those around us. These abuses happen with shocking
frequency in our churches and Christian organizations.8 To cover up sin
“for the sake of the institution” is the equivalent of hiding a cancerous lump
in your body to preserve your life. Stop and think about the statistics in the
context of your country, your community, and your church or institution,
and you begin to grasp the prevalence of these crimes. Given the impact of
abuse on an individual life, society, and the church, and the frequency of its
occurrence, it is crucial that the church not be silent. Not only does God
call us to speak, but he also calls his church to be a refuge and a place for
hope and healing. Anything less is a failure to demonstrate his character in
this world.
5
“Child Maltreatment.”
“Violence against Children,” World Health Organization, last modified June 7, 2019,
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-children.
7
William C. Holmes and Gail B. Slap, “Sexual Abuse of Boys: Definition, Prevalence,
Correlates, Sequelae, and Management,” JAMA Pediatr. 280.21 (1998): 1855–62, doi.org/
10.1001/jama.280.21.1855.
8
Robert Dowen, Lise Olsen, and John Tedesco, “Abuse of Faith,” Houston Chronicle,
February 10, 2019.
6
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
55
II. Three Stories
How can we, both individually and corporately, be a sanctuary for those
who have been wounded by abuse? To do so, we must first grasp what it
means to be a victim. Here are three stories of abuse that will help us do that.
Picture a woman who grew up in a home where she felt loved though life
was a bit chaotic, and her parents were stressed. There were many children,
money was tight, and mom suffered from significant depression. The little
girl was lonely. A friend invited her to come to her church. They had a great
youth group, and the young pastor who ran it was energetic and warm and
had a pretty wife. She loved it, so she attended weekly for months. The
youth pastor was fun and taught them about God. She was hungry to know
more. He paid attention to her and offered to teach her individually so she
could learn more about God. He would take her to the local deli and get her
a sandwich and listen to her and answer her questions. It was wonderful;
she felt special; she felt like she mattered to the youth pastor—but even
more to God.
Then one day, it got strange. The youth pastor started talking about how
special she was and how he wanted to see more of her. He started touching
her. She did not like it, but was afraid to say so, thinking maybe she just
misunderstood. Eventually, one day, he drove her home and, on the way,
forced her into sex. She was terrified and in pain. She was thirteen years
old. She tried to tell her friend from church. The friend’s mother told the
pastor, but he never called her, and no one asked her questions. A woman
at church said she probably should not keep coming to the church because
they did not want her to damage the youth pastor’s reputation. Her friend
quit talking to her, even at school, so she disappeared.
She read in the paper years later that the youth pastor had been arrested
—it turned out she was not the only one he had treated this way. No one
came to speak with her about it. She never told her story again. Twenty
years later, she sits in a pew in your church still hungry for the God she
longed for at thirteen and yet terrified, certain her search will result in more
hurt and denial and silence. It took tremendous courage even to cross the
threshold and sit in the pew. She will hear you teach and wonder what you
would say if you knew her story. She is afraid to hear what God thinks of her
and yet remains hungry for his love. Will she ever hear truth about sexual
abuse from the pulpit or in a class? How do you think she would feel if, as
a pastor, you asked to meet with her?
What were the lessons of the church for this woman? That church is a
place of worshiping God? A refuge? A sanctuary? That sheep can safely
56
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
graze inside its walls? That truth is taught and desired? That godliness is
sought after, and sin is dealt with no matter where it is found? That the
Good Shepherd says to let the little ones come to him without hindrance?
Here is another story. Michael went away to overnight camp at age seven.
He was scared and homesick. He did not know any of the other boys. His
counselor paid him special attention. It made him feel important. But then
it got strange and scary. The counselor would teach the Bible study at night
and then take Michael for a walk and make him do things he did not like. It
kept happening every night. He tried to tell the camp nurse. She told him
he must be wrong—his counselor was the son of the director and was such
a nice kid; he would not do anything like that. Michael is now thirty-five,
married with two children, and attending your church. He has never told
his story. He is terrified others would question his sexuality—he has always
feared that response. He has a significant pornography addiction that no one
knows about, not even his wife. He does not understand why he cannot stop.
What does he think about men in power in the church? How safe does he
feel about telling the truth? How comfortable is he in the men’s ministry—
especially when they talk about things like transparency? What might he
believe God thinks of him? He is hurting himself and his wife, he is full of
shame, and he feels like he has no place to go where he can speak truth.
What will you speak in your sermons, your teachings, your small groups,
that might give him hope?
Finally, Sarah and her husband attend your church. He attends faithfully
and counts money from the offering. Sarah is quiet and does not say much.
She assists in Sunday school classes. They have two children who are also
quiet and very polite. One day Sarah comes to the pastor’s office. She is
obviously very nervous, cannot look him in the face or hold her hands still.
She says she is afraid. He says it is okay and waits to hear what she wants to
say. Eventually, she says “My husband gets angry sometimes.” Over time
you learn that her husband batters her until she is bruised where it cannot
be seen, bites her, holds a gun to her head, and terrifies the children.You are
stunned.You cannot imagine that the man who helps out at church could be
such a vicious and dangerous man. What will you say? Will you encourage
her to return home and treat her husband better—thus endangering her
health and her life? Surely, you think, she has misunderstood. Will her safety
be tossed aside so that you can keep your assumptions about this man safe
instead? How does she think about God? You sing about God as a refuge.
Will you be one for her? She has heard you teach about marriage. Has she
ever heard anyone at church teach about abuse in marriage and how God
thinks about it? What will you do to protect her and the children?
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
57
III. Analysis
We need to explore the experience of abuse if we are to understand what
victims such as these endure. Historically, when someone has endured a
traumatic event, they have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress
disorder.9 In recent years, as our understanding of trauma has grown, we
have come to realize that many people do not experience a one-time event
but instead live with relentless, ongoing trauma. They are, as it were, marinating in evil. Ongoing sexual abuse, domestic violence, verbal battering, and
growing up in a violent neighborhood all mean living with continuous
trauma. Enduring that trauma shapes humans in grievous ways. The stressors are repetitive and chronic. They usually involve direct harm or neglect
by those who should have been caregivers. How the brain works, how the
body works, how the self is understood, how thoughts are organized, how
the world is labeled, how emotions are named and regulated, and how
relationships are understood and conducted all have their roots in the
life-destroying acid of trauma.
As a result of chronic interpersonal abuse, the individual develops vigilance, constant anticipation of danger, chronic anxiety, and terror. They are
never at ease. All of the person’s psychological energy is bent by necessity
toward coping, surviving rather than learning or growing. So rather than
learning, imagining, experimenting and growing, they are instead learning
to fear, to hide, and to self-protect. They have been betrayed by or separated
from those who should be caring and nurturing and cannot find or seek
assistance and safety, as there is no safe person in their world.
Many have experienced or witnessed atrocities. They bring those memories into our churches, often hidden away but very alive. Some have or will
experience such things within our churches or institutions. All of these
things—things we find difficult to comprehend are endured by human
beings. They result in traumatized human beings. Victims live with the
recurring, tormenting memories of atrocities witnessed or borne. It infects
their sleep with nightmares, destroys their relationships and their capacity
to work or study, torments their emotions, shatters their faith, and mutilates
hope. Trauma is indeed extraordinary, not because it rarely happens but
because it overwhelms normal human coping. It swallows up and destroys
normal human ways of living. It does not take much thought to see what
these things would do to a person who is trying to learn or manage a life.
9
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM–V (Arlington, VA: American
Psychiatric Association, 2013).
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
58
The usual response to atrocity is to try to remove it from the mind. Those
who have been traumatized want to flee the memory, and we who hear find
that we want to flee also. We find it too terrible to remember and too incomprehensible to put into words, and so we choose not to believe the story.
That is why we use the phrase unspeakable atrocities. The great tension is
the futile attempt to forget the unspeakable—while it continues to live on
and sometimes scream in the mind. That push-pull between the need to
forget and the need to speak is the central dialectic of trauma, and that
tension is experienced not only by individuals and families, but also by
churches and schools and nations. It is experienced not only by the traumatized but also by those who bear witness to the trauma.
I know something of this tension. I have seen this push-pull in my clients
who are terrified to remember and speak but who cannot forget. I have seen
families, churches, institutions and yes, nations, deny both the existence of
evil and trauma in their midst and its impact. I also know this tension exists
in those who bear witness, for it exists in me. We see it on television or the
Internet; someone tells of an atrocity, and soon after we look for ways to
remove ourselves. Such stories threaten our comfort, our position, or our
system. The stories are vile and messy and very disruptive. We prefer they
stay in the dungeon. Traumatized people need attention and assistance,
often for a long time. We are busy people doing important things. The trauma
stories of our families, institutions, and organizations get buried, and geographical distance and the push of a button enable us to do the same with
entire nations. Ask Rwanda.
Ongoing abuse in a life results in a broken identity. We believe that every
human was knit together by God in their mother’s womb. We believe that
each one is created in the image of our God, no exceptions. You cannot be
repeatedly abused and not have that shape your personhood. Abuse teaches
people they are trash, expendable, shameful, and bad. Abuse is crushing,
oppressive, and silencing. Any abuse does spiritual damage. It hides the love
of the Father. It renders any idea of refuge impossible to hold. It shatters
any thoughts of a safe shepherd, let alone one who gives his own life for
the sake of his lambs.
IV. Shepherding the Traumatized
10
Our God describes a good shepherd when he says, “I will feed my flock and
… lead them to rest …. I will seek the lost, bring back the scattered, bind up
10
The following section builds on Diane Langberg, “Helping the Traumatized,” CareLeader,
September 20, 2016, https://www.careleader.org/shepherding-traumatized/.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
59
the broken and strengthen the sick” (Ezek 34:15–16 nasv). As pastors and
leaders, many of you are shepherds of God’s sheep. It is an eternally significant task and often fraught with difficulties. One of the crucial things
necessary for doing your work well is that you must know your sheep. You
cannot care for or guide those you do not know.
Given the statistics we have listed, it seems safe to conclude that all pastors
have trauma victims sitting in their pews. Most of them are silent about
what they have endured. Trauma has a profound spiritual impact. Trauma
raises questions about who God is: his character, his faithfulness, his purposes, and his capacity to keep us. That victims struggle is evidence of faith.
It is essential that we understand these struggles and not silence them or
treat them as a failure of faith. When we silence victims of trauma and their
questions, we do further damage and in fact become an obstacle in the
work that God can and wants to do in a life battered by trauma and evil.
People who are suffering long for help and comfort. It is an open door for
the church to bend down, like her Lord bent down for us, and enter into
traumatized lives with help and companionship and comfort. As we do so,
we will begin to see, like Israel of old, the trauma wilderness in which many
dwell, the valley of trouble, becoming a door of hope (Hos 2:14–15). The
church of Jesus Christ is called to bring light to dark places, love to damaged
souls, and truth about who our God is—he who entered in so that we might
know him and be like him.
V. How to Enter into Traumatized Lives
How can God’s shepherds enter into traumatized lives and lead their people
to do the same?
Of first importance is an understanding of what suffering does to humans.
If you know someone full of cancer or battling chronic pain, you know that
suffering reduces a person. It lessens all of their capacities, not just physically
but also mentally, emotionally, relationally, and spiritually. They become
less themselves. That is just as true for unseen wounds as it is for physical
diseases. It is true for a combat vet, a rape victim, an incest survivor, a
domestic violence victim, or a survivor of war. They may look fine, but the
mind and heart wounds run deep and affect them profoundly. If we attempt
to enter into the life of someone who is reduced, limited, altered by their
suffering, we must reduce ourselves as well. That is why we are quiet in a
hospital room. For those suffering trauma, fewer words, quiet voices, and
patience are vital to our entering in so we do not bring further harm. In
doing so, we are following our Savior, who was made flesh, greatly reduced
60
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
from his eternal glory so as to enter in and become like us. It is, in fact,
Christ-like to lower ourselves in the face of another’s suffering. And then,
when sufferers are slow to speak, slow to listen, or slow to change, our
responses are also to be like our incarnate Savior’s toward us. It is in part
how those who are suffering begin to see, in the flesh, a bit of who our God
truly is with his creatures when they are reduced, overwhelmed, helpless, or
slow. We bring him to them by who we are with them in their worst places.
At the same time, a truth I did not see for some time became stunningly
clear to me as the years went by. God is always working both sides. I am not
just present to sufferers so that they can receive comfort or grow. I am there
because God is exposing to me where I am unlike him so that I can run to
him and have him teach me where I am wrong and what he would do in
me to make me more like himself. It is a principle applicable to all of life.
All God’s people are called to Christ-likeness. Our failures in that area,
which are many, teach lies about who he is and damage both us and those
with whom we interact. Typically, in painful situations, humans react with
attempts to change either the other person or their circumstances. This can
be particularly true when hearing a story of overwhelming evil and suffering. We want them to get better so we can both feel better. However, God
uses ministry to the traumatized to change caregivers as much as victims.
Following a traumatic experience, every human being must make the
heartbreaking adjustment to a new world full of losses. People who experience trauma feel alone, helpless, humiliated, and hopeless. They turn inward,
away from life, because the memories and the feelings are all that they can
handle. This is not wrong; it is necessary for a while. However, eventually, if
life is to go on, the person must return to the outside world. What kinds of
things are needed to help people face what is inside, to remember well, and
yet still be able to return to us and to life in a way that is good?
VI. What Does Healing Look Like?
Recovery involves a reversal of the experience of trauma. Trauma brings
silence because victims feel like there are no words to describe what happened. Trauma brings emotional darkness and aloneness because victims
feel like no one cares and no one could possibly understand. Trauma makes
time stand still because victims get so lost in what happened they cannot
see forward and have lost hope. Three main things must occur to reverse
this experience and bring about recovery. All three must happen.
Talking is part of being human. It is how God made us. He meant for us
to talk, to express ourselves, to dialogue together with him and with each
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
61
other. When someone does not talk, something is broken. There may be
something physically wrong, or they may be emotionally wounded. Sometimes when people do not talk at all or do not talk about a particular event
it is because the pain is so great that they cannot find the words—or they
keep saying the same thing over and over again trying to find the right
words and get relief.
First, talking is necessary for trauma healing, and that means the victim
talks—not the helper! The helper is there to invite talking, to listen, to bear
witness, and to restore dignity. What happened matters. Even though words
are not enough to describe terrible things, they still must be spoken. To
remain silent is to fail to honor the event, the victim, and the memory.
Honoring the memory means speaking the truth about it, saying it really
happened, saying it was evil, and saying that it did damage. It dishonors
victims when we are silent about their experience or pretend it did not occur
or was not important. It leaves them alone, afraid, and full of lies about
what happened and about themselves. Talking says, “I am here. What
happened was wrong. I am damaged by it. Justice is needed, and so is care
for my broken heart.” At the beginning, “talking” might not be done using
words. Sometimes people only moan or sigh or cry or scream. It is the
beginning of giving voice to that which cannot be spoken. Many times,
people need us to sit with them in silence. It is a way of joining with them
so they are not alone in their experience of struggling to find words. Eventually, words will come. Trauma stories do not first come out with a
beginning, middle, and end. They come out in broken pieces, disordered,
and often unclear.
Trauma silences victims. It isolates them. They feel helpless. Talking is
about telling the truth. It connects the survivor to another person. It restores
dignity because their story matters. It gives them choice because they can
decide when to speak or be silent, and victims get to choose their own
words. It is the reversal of what happened during the trauma. It gives them
a voice in a safe relationship where they are helped back into life. Injustice,
violence, and abuse teach us lies. Such events suggest we are worthless and
do not matter. Talking tells the truth and gives dignity because the story
matters, as does its impact. Violence and abuse disconnect us from caring
relationships. We are alone, and we are not considered. Telling the story
gives a place of caring connection that helps the soul. Trauma recovery
requires talking, and as the story is repeated over and over, strength to state
and grasp the truth grows.
Second, trauma recovery also requires tears. Facing a new world full of
losses brings grief. Many emotions are the companions of trauma: fear,
62
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
sadness, aloneness, shame, despair, anger, and grief are some of them.
These are strong emotions, and they are hard to experience. These are not
feelings any of us want. However, like words, they must be expressed. Feelings tell the story as much as words. Feelings express what the trauma did
to the victim just like blood shows what a cut did to the skin. It is like seeing
and acknowledging the physical wounds on the body after an accident.
Feelings are the expression of the wounds of the heart, and they too need to
be seen and heard. Feelings are part of how our hearts “talk.”
Many survivors try hard not to feel and will often say things like, “If I
start crying, I will never stop.” Or, “If I feel the grief or hopelessness I will
fall into a black hole and never get out.” Many will try hard not to feel
anything, and often people will use alcohol or drugs to help them feel numb.
They try to stay drunk or use drugs to keep the memories and feelings
away. Or they go numb and just sit and stare. When people do such things,
they spend their lives still controlled by the trauma because everything they
are doing is about running from it. It is just as much in charge of their lives
as when it was occurring.
At the same time, all of us need to remember that telling a trauma story—
facing the truth and expressing the deep and painful emotions—takes
tremendous courage. Most people cannot do it alone. They need connection with a caring and patient person to help them have the courage to face
the truth of what happened and how it hurt them. A companion in tragedy
or difficulty always helps us have courage.
Psalm 56:8 (esv) says, “You (God) have kept count of my tossing, and
put my tears in your bottle. Are they not also in your book?” This is an
essential truth because often we are uncomfortable with strong emotions.
Some cultures say strong feelings are not proper, religious teachings may
say such feelings indicate unbelief, or family teachings may suggest we
should just be strong, or that feelings are alright for women but not for men
or for children but not for adults. Somehow strong emotions are seen as a
sign of weakness. This verse says that the God who created us considers our
pain, pays attention to it, collects our tears in a bottle, and writes them in
his book because we matter, what happened matters, and our feelings about
it matter to him also. He is recording our story and our tears for us. We will
help others if we learn to be like him in the way we treat feelings. We honor
others and help them record the story of their trauma by listening to their
words and their tears. Tears require strength and courage because it means
facing pain.
Dealing with trauma is often repetitious. Survivors will say the same
things over and over: “How could my father do that to me?” They will be
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
63
repetitious in dealing with their emotions: “I am so angry that ….” And they
will repeat their losses again and again: “I cannot believe so-and-so is dead.”
Expect it and sit with it. The weight of the trauma is so great that repetition
is necessary. The mind cannot imagine what happened. It cannot hold such
a thought. Bearing the intensity of emotions is impossible, and so the feelings
must be tried on again and again. These are attempts to bear what cannot
be borne. The victim is trying to learn “how to wear” what feels frightening
and brings great pain. They keep wanting to throw it off. They are struggling
to integrate into life what hurts and does not fit. Be patient and then be
patient some more. Telling and retelling help to reduce the size of the
memory. Talking or telling the story and expressing the feelings are instruments in the hands of the survivor that they can use toward their healing. It
is a way of gaining mastery over fear and helplessness; it is a choice toward
life rather than death. To hear a story is to be taught, but to tell a story is to
be master over it. To tell that story with all the emotions that accompany it in
a way that can be heard and understood by another is to have learned how to
speak truth and contain it so it does not swallow you up.
A third thing must occur for trauma recovery to begin and grow, and this
third thing we have no control over. We cannot make it happen and cannot
stop it from happening. It is time. Trauma recovery needs talking, tears, and
time, and it must have all three. If you do not tell the story there will be no
recovery. People will stay stuck in the past and controlled by the trauma—
either because they use tremendous energy to keep it away or because it
controls their sleep, their relationships, their feelings, their actions, and
their faith. It must be spoken over and over again. Trauma recovery needs
tears. Tears honor the victim and the awfulness of what occurred. Tears
express buried emotions that haunt sleep and disturb life. Tears honor those
who have been lost—they are worth crying over. Tears are a way of remembering. Expressing emotions, finding words for them is also a way of gaining
mastery over them. In both talking and tears, the victim is staring down the
trauma as one might stare down an enemy and saying, “I am alive. I will
speak what is true. I will be in charge of my own story rather than having
the trauma control me. I will give it the space and honor it is due. It mattered
then, and it matters now.”
It takes time for these things to happen. It takes time for words to come. It
takes time to listen and understand. It takes time for feelings to be expressed
and understood. Recovery from anything takes time. If you fall off some
steps and break a bone, it will take time for the doctor to understand what
bone is broken and how to heal it. He will need to listen and explore so he
understands exactly what the problem is. You will hurt. You will be in pain.
64
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Even after the doctor does some things to help the bone reset; it will still
hurt. You may want your leg to be better tomorrow. You may want the pain
to be over. It will not change the pace at which time proceeds. It always goes
by one minute at a time, and there is nothing you can do about it. Time is
needed for recovery. It is not the same amount for each trauma survivor.
Some take longer than others. There are many reasons for this. But no
matter how strong someone is; no matter how hard they work to tell their
story and express their feelings; it still will take time. And there are two
things I can tell you about time: there is nothing we can do to make it go
faster, and when we are in pain that is exactly what we want it to do!
We know from research that as time passes, trauma survivors end up
carrying a smaller piece of the whole—especially if the story has been told.
As life goes on around the survivor, new experiences and new relationships
affect them, and they can learn new responses to their past instead of those
the trauma taught them. Some of those new experiences are found in the
ways you treat them when they sit with you.
Conclusion
Here are the words of a genocide survivor in Rwanda who lived through
unspeakable atrocities and trauma: “I saw only evil. I no longer believed
God to be good. The church was not a sanctuary for my family; it was a
cemetery. But then you came, you listened, and you heard my broken heart.
And now I think I can believe that God too is listening and hears my pain
and will be my sanctuary because I have gotten a taste of him through you.”
The Word was made flesh for you and me. Now you and I are called to do
the same for the world. We are to flesh out the character of God for others.
When you, as a shepherd of the sheep, name the unspeakable things for your
people, gently call them to begin to speak the truth about their lives and the
wounds they bear, then over time you can teach your people to go with you
into the dark places of great suffering in your pews and around the world.
Jesus went through villages and cities, teaching, preaching, and healing.
And “seeing the people” he was moved with compassion (cf. Matt 9:36).
They were distressed, wounded, bleeding sheep. He saw what others did
not see. They were fainting, fleeced by wolves, and without a shepherd’s care.
In response to what he saw, he said to his disciples, “Harvest …” (v. 37).
These seem to be contradictory figures, mixed metaphors. A flock of sheep
wounded and fainting and harvest. Harvest is usually about a robust,
healthy, flourishing crop. Here is the profound truth about Jesus’s mission:
human need, distress, and trauma constitute harvest for him and his
OCTOBER 2019 ›› HEALING THE WOUNDS OF TRAUMA AND ABUSE
65
workers. Where the day is darkest and the need is sorest there the fields are
white to harvest. Trauma is a significant mission field of the twenty-first
century. He did not say such devastation was hopeless; he said that it was a
plenteous harvest. It is a place of service for God’s people, and in that place,
God will use the horror and the evil of trauma to transform both victim and
caregiver. In Isaiah 61:4, God speaks of rebuilding ruins, raising up what is
devastated, and restoring what is desolated. Such work is healing to those
who have been devastated. That work also is used by God to make his people,
who are called by his name, bear his image more clearly in this world.
Women, Sex, and a Question
of Double Standards
KATHLEEN B. NIELSON
Abstract
This article examines the subject of women and extramarital sex as
addressed in Old Testament law—and ultimately by Jesus himself. It is a
revised excerpt from a book that aims to show God’s good care and
purpose for his female image-bearers from beginning to end of the
Bible’s story (Women and God, 2018). A focus on Deuteronomy 22:13–30
shows that women are not only held equally responsible for sexual sin
but also carefully protected, especially in cases of mistreatment and
sexual abuse. The ultimate care and purpose revealed in the Scriptures
for women and men alike is God’s gracious redemption through the
death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus.
Introduction
A
few introductory comments will provide a framework for
the developments that follow.1 First, the original context of
this article, the book Women and God, asks a question of the
Bible from beginning to end: How does God view women?
The question arises in a world full of struggle and pain in
regard to gender and sexuality. In particular, with increasing light shed on
1
This article is a revised version of chapter 6 in Kathleen B. Nielson, Women and God: Hard
Questions, Beautiful Truth (Epsom, Surrey, UK: The Good Book Company, 2018), 93–108.
Reproduced with the permission of the Good Book Company.
67
68
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
the abuse of women globally and even in Christian communities today, we
do well to ask what all this looks like in the eyes of heaven.
We ask this question on the foundation of God’s inerrant Word, aiming to
dig deep into every part and to hear the voice of the God who made us and
redeems us through his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. As believers, we can dig
into every part of the Scriptures and expect to find God’s redemptive
purposes at work in the lives of both his male and female image-bearers.
But we must do the digging, and we must teach the rising generations to do
the digging, especially with many challenging voices and views all around.
The digging begins, of course, in the first chapters of Genesis, which hold
the seeds for the whole biblical story. It does little good to mine New
Testament texts for answers to our questions about men and women without studying the Old Testament accounts that those texts consistently and
insistently reference. The following discussion grows out of a focused study
of women in creation, in the fall, and on into the early generations of God’s
unfolding redemptive promises to his people. Both in the order of creation
and in the disorder of a world invaded by sin, everywhere we look, we see
God’s unceasing care for women and his regard for them as bearing a
crucial role in his redemptive plan. In this particular discussion of the Old
Testament law, as it treats women and sexual sin, we find the Lord’s protection and purpose for his female image-bearers again.
Second, it will be helpful to note not just the context of my writings but
the broader context of my intended audience. In general, I aim to offer not
an academic treatise but a winsome study of God’s Word on women accessible to any lay person with a Bible and a desire to explore it. I have many
friends who have told me they wish they could understand and explain
clearly what the Bible teaches about women and men—not only for themselves but also for challengers and questioners all around them. This attempt
to shine light on the Bible’s gracious teachings is one limited articulation,
one with debts to many teachers and scholars, but one that above all aims
to listen humbly and well to the Bible’s words and to share them with clarity,
compassion, and joy.
Third, I would mention an even broader context, one already alluded to:
that of our world of disruption in matters of gender and sexuality. The
twenty-first century has left the creation order far, far behind in regard to
sexual practice in general. In relation to cases of sexual abuse, the “Me
Too” movement has flooded minds and media, as women from all circles
join the call for light and justice. Church denominations are coming alive to
the topic: The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the public policy
arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, has declared that the American
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
69
church is facing an abuse crisis and has called for an immediate and urgent
response.2
Of course, the issue of abuse is not limited to one group or country or
time. Even as we rush with urgency to bring healing and justice and change,
whenever and wherever we meet it, we believers rush with an urgency
spurred on by gospel-centered faith. We know the beginning and the end of
the story, and so as we give ourselves to the work of justice, we do not
despair when the evil seems too great. We do not enlarge ourselves as especially good or especially evil, knowing the history of fallen human beings
redeemable finally and only through Christ’s death and resurrection. Most
important, through the gift of faith we know and follow the Lord God, who
is redeeming a people for himself through his Son.
Biblical passages like the ones discussed here can help us cultivate the
perspective of faith as we confront the evils of sexual sin all around us,
including that of abuse. Centuries ago, the Lord God saw and named these
evils. He does not and has not ever overlooked them. They are written down
in his revealed Word for all to see. “From the beginning it was not so,” Jesus
said, when confronted with the law’s allowance for divorce (Matt 19:8 esv).
And in the end, it will not be so. In the end, all the sinful brokenness of
God’s created order will be restored through Christ who took our sin upon
himself and died bearing God’s wrath in our place.
In the meantime, we live by faith in the One who died and rose again. We
live naming and confronting the evils named and confronted in his Word.
We live humbly, knowing our own need for a Savior from our sin. We live
with urgency, sharing with others the good news of this Savior. And we live
in hope, pointing to our Savior, who will come again to judge all and to
reign with his people forever.
In these contexts, then, the following excerpt delves into the subject of
women and extramarital sex as addressed in the Old Testament law—ultimately as addressed by Jesus himself.
I. Evangelicals and Infidelity
“So much for ‘thou shalt not commit adultery.’” The New York Daily News
offered this verdict in 2014, reporting on survey results from “Ashley
Madison,” a web-based service that helps married people find partners
for extramarital affairs. The survey revealed that a quarter of their users
self-identified as “evangelical”—by far the highest percentage among all
2
See http://www.caringwell.com.
70
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
responders.3 The truth was painfully evident when in 2015 Ashley Madison’s
online accounts were hacked, and names of over thirty million users of their
services were publicly shared.
People were shocked and embarrassed by all this, but not that shocked or
even that embarrassed. We have seen too much. How many dozens of movie
and TV scenes have drawn in even Christians, numbing our minds to the
fact that we were watching extramarital sex? (Not only watching but feeling
happy for heroes and heroines in love who consummate something that is
not a marriage.) What of our friend the successful Christian business owner
who left his wife for another woman—but who maintains his success, gives
generously to the community, and provides good jobs for many people?
Do we tend, after a while, to minimize or forget about his adultery? What
of the many students who cannot understand why Christians would hold
on to antiquated sexual standards that represent only repression—and that
seem unnecessary with the advent of birth control?
American-based websites that quantify such behavior generally report
that in around one-third of all marriages, one or both of the partners say
they have “cheated” on the other.4 One United Kingdom news source
reports that barely a third of British men and women think an extramarital
affair puts a strain on the relationship; in other words, it is not that big of a
problem.5 But if you are reading this and you have experienced adultery in
one way or another, you know statistics do not tell it all. You may be experiencing the grief of being betrayed or perhaps the guilt of having betrayed.
You may be in a relationship, not married, and struggling to figure out how
sex and commitment go together—or do not go together. Or perhaps you
have suffered the agony of sexual abuse. God’s Word speaks to it all.
We have seen in Genesis the God who designed us male and female from
the beginning; we know he cares about these issues in detail. We know he
set up marriage between a man and a woman and blessed that union. We
know the seventh of the ten commandments, plain and unadulterated: “You
shall not commit adultery” (Exod 20:14). And yet we Christians struggle
with issues of sexual ethics; we struggle with living out sexual purity, and we
struggle with talking about it. We might waver: in the Ashley Madison era,
3
Victoria Taylor, “Evangelicals Are the Least Faithful When It Comes to Spouses, Survey
Suggests,” nydailynews.com, June 3, 2014, http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/surveyreveals-faiths-unfaithful-article-1.1815733.
4
“Infidelity Statistics 2017: Why, When, and How People Stray,” February 1, 2017, https://
www.trustify.info/blog/infidelity-statistics-2017.
5
John Bingham, “Adultery Not a Problem for Most Britons,” The Telegraph, February 12,
2015, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11408328/Adultery-not-a-problem-for-mostBritons.html.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
71
are we just way too judgmental? Should we continue to hold the view that
sexual relations are a gift from God intended only for a man and woman
within the bonds of marriage? We might wonder: should these issues perhaps
just be resolved privately and individually before God, who surely understands our needs and desires our happiness? Even as we acknowledge that
sexual abuse is a great evil, we ask: how shall we regard the spectrum of
sexual sin?
It is with all this in mind that I want to invite you to join the crowd
surrounding Jesus as a woman is dragged alone before him—a woman
deserving death by stoning, say her accusers, according to the Law of Moses.
Their question to Jesus hangs in the air: “So what do you say?” (John 8:5).
And there she stands, this woman, head down, waiting for his response.
II. What Kind of Mercy?
Although this passage, John 7:53–8:11, does not appear in the earliest manuscripts, most of our Bibles include it, as most scholars take these verses as
a true encounter, if not a legitimate part of the Scriptures. The scene takes
place in the temple courts, with all the people gathered around to hear Jesus
teach. It is a vivid, emotion-filled scene—probably a shocking one for many
today, who might find it hard even to imagine a woman being stoned for
adultery. But in come the teachers of the law and the Pharisees (all the Old
Testament experts) with this woman, whom they set before the whole group
and accuse of being caught in the act of adultery. Most of us might have for
many years taken without question the Pharisees’ words: “In the Law Moses
commanded us to stone such women” (John 8:5).
The Pharisees were experts in the Old Testament law.6 And yet we must
ask: Are they representing well God’s instructions given through Moses? The
scene feels brutally harsh. Questions inevitably arise. Here is this woman
dragged alone in shame before this group in the temple courts and accused
of a sin that clearly involved two people. When she was “caught in the act”
(v. 4), there must have been a man with whom she was acting! Did he run
off? Did they let him go? Are they telling the truth? Why do these men say
only that the law condemns such women?
Jesus does not condemn this woman. He bends down and starts to write
on the ground with his finger. He is quiet, but the proud law-enforcers keep
6
By “Law,” the Pharisees would have been referring to the Torah—what we call the
Pentateuch, or the Books of Moses. They were also referring to the law given within that Law:
that is, the set of laws given by God to his people.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
72
demanding a response. They do not really care about this woman or about
keeping the law; they are just baiting Jesus, “to test him, that they might
have some charge to bring against him” (v. 6). How ironic: we know that the
Old Testament law reflects the character of the God who gave it. Here in
this scene is the very Lord God, in the flesh, and these men aim to use his
law to undermine, accuse, and destroy him. But their trap remains unsprung.
Jesus finally straightens up and speaks: “Let him who is without sin among
you be the first to throw a stone at her” (v. 7). With that, he is right back
down writing on the ground, ignoring them. They slip away one by one.
And then comes mercy. “Has no one condemned you?” he asks the woman.
“No one, Lord,” she says. “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now
on sin no more” (vv. 10–11).
But wait—before we embrace Jesus’s gentle mercy here (and it is gentle
mercy), we must ask about the law. According to the Old Testament, should
not this woman have been stoned? Why did Jesus, the Son of God, spare
her? Did his merciful response imply that the Old Testament laws on
adultery were bad, or wrong? Let us go back and find two important truths
about the Old Testament law and its treatment of women involved in extramarital sex.
III. Responsible Together
Deuteronomy 22:13–30 is a key passage, offering a series of scenarios and
related laws that help us make clear observations concerning women and
extramarital sex. The first is that women and men were in general held
equally responsible for the sin of extramarital sex. The woman was not
exempt from responsibility, but neither was she held more responsible. She
shared both the guilt and punishment.
Deuteronomy 22:13–19, first, is all about protecting a wife falsely accused
and slandered by her husband, who claims he found her not to be a virgin
when he married her:
If a man takes a wife and goes in to her and then hates her and accuses her of misconduct and brings a bad name upon her, saying, “I took this woman, and when I
came near her, I did not find in her evidence of virginity,” then the father of the
young woman and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of her virginity
to the elders of the city in the gate. And the father of the young woman shall say to
the elders, “I gave my daughter to this man to marry, and he hates her; and behold,
he has accused her of misconduct, saying, ‘I did not find in your daughter evidence
of virginity.’ And yet this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.” And they shall
spread the cloak before the elders of the city. Then the elders of that city shall take
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
73
the man and whip him, and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give
them to the father of the young woman because he has brought a bad name upon a
virgin of Israel. And she shall be his wife. He may not divorce her all his days. (Deut
22:13–19)
The scenario is complicated, and we will not go into the details, but the
point is that the woman must be given an opportunity to prove her innocence
(apparently by showing a cloth stained with the blood of her broken hymen
from her wedding night). With her innocence proven, she cannot be divorced
or disgraced but must be cared for as a wife in her husband’s house. We
are looking into scenarios of sin here; the man in this case is perpetrating
evil, slandering and mistreating his wife. The law names, reveals, and
punishes his evil while protecting his wife from it.
Those nine verses protecting a falsely accused wife are followed by two
verses (vv. 20–21) condemning a guilty one—a wife who had indeed been
falsely presented to her husband as a virgin, with no evidence to the contrary. She was to be stoned. (We will go on without comment at this point,
and come back to the nature of this severe judgment. First, we need to hear
the rest of the chapter, in order to take these verses in context.)
The very next verse (v. 22) prescribes that, if a man is found sleeping with
another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must die. The difference
between this scenario and the previous one is obviously that concrete
evidence exists in this case against both the man and the woman. Both are
present and guilty—and punished by death. (Again, we will come back to
the severity of the judgment—here, we need to notice the equality of the
judgment.) Without concrete evidence against a man, a woman condemned
by evidence was alone put to death. With evidence against both, the two
shared the same guilt and judgment.
The next section of Deuteronomy clarifies further, with another scenario
of equally shared guilt (vv. 23–24). To understand, it helps to know that in
that culture, a betrothed woman was not just engaged to be married in the
way we think of it; she was committed, as good as married. She was considered the man’s wife. These two verses picture a town scene in which a man
sleeps with a woman betrothed to another man. The implication is that the
sexual act was consensual: this is the point of noting that the woman did
not cry out. In a town with open-air dwellings in close proximity, others
would have been sure to hear her if she had. She is guilty for agreeing, and
he is guilty “because he violated his neighbor’s wife” (v. 24). They are both
to be stoned.
The Pharisees in John 8 were referring either to this scenario or the
previous one, depending on whether the woman was betrothed or actually
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
74
married. In either case, the law stipulated that both the man and the woman
were to die. However, as that woman is dragged before Jesus, the man is …
nowhere to be seen. Obviously, if she was indeed caught in adultery, the
man must have been caught there, too. The Pharisees were telling at best
partial truth, both about the incident and about the law. Their partial truth
reveals sexism—but only on their part, and not on God’s.
Even as we are shocked by the severity of the punishment in Deuteronomy 22, we can see that the punishment does not unfairly single out women.
In the whole scope of these laws, women participating in extramarital sex
are respected as equal partners in the sexual act, bearing not more but equal
responsibility. We all know, however, that women too often are not equal
partners but forced sexually against their will. We must keep reading.
IV. Protection for the Abused
Numerous laws in the Old Testament protect women (wives unjustly
accused; women captured in battle).7 Deuteronomy 22:25–29 deals with
scenarios specifically involving sexual abuse. Here is our second observation:
Old Testament law protected women in cases of sexual abuse. I wish I could
sit down and talk this through with you as you are reading this. Both adultery
and abuse are subjects that can rub hard against unhealed wounds, with deep
hurt. If you know such wounds personally, I pray God’s Word will bring healing, not hurt, to your soul. I pray that even these hard Old Testament passages
will reveal grace as you read them, the grace of our God who has redeemed
a people for himself through his beloved Son. It is his Son, our Lord Jesus,
who best knows what it means to be shamed and publicly violated.
From the next scenario (vv. 25–27) emerges one of the strongest and, I
think, most encouraging laws to be seen about this subject. In contrast to the
town setting, this sexual act takes place “out in the country” where no one
would be able to hear a woman cry out for help. In this case, the betrothed
woman is given the benefit of the doubt: she can be assumed to have cried
out when found and violated by a man. Most literally translated, as in the
English Standard Version, the man in this case “seizes her and lies with her”
(v. 25); the New International Version (2011) appropriately calls this
“rape.” Only the man is to be put to death. Verse 26 reiterates: “You shall
7
Chapter 4 of Women and God, for example, examines Deuteronomy 21:10–14, a challenging passage but one which shows God’s hand of protection on women from other nations who
undergo the humiliation of being taken captive by Israelites in war; see Nielson, Women and
God, 61–70.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
75
do nothing to the young woman; she has committed no offense punishable
by death” (esv). Verse 27 defends the woman further, acknowledging her
plight: “though the betrothed woman cried for help, there was no one to
rescue her.” God sees and steps in to defend.
Even in recent times and in many Western countries, it has often been
difficult to prosecute a man who raped a woman because female victims of
rape have commonly been portrayed as seducers, guilty of inciting men to
actions that in some way the women must have desired. So a guilty man
could himself play the role of victim, rather than being convicted for the
crime of rape against an unwilling woman. In some countries and cultures
today, a female victim of rape is considered dishonored and is even sometimes killed to protect the family’s honor. It is good to find that the Bible is
clear from the beginning in condemning the evil of rape, punishing men
who do it, and protecting women who suffer the ravages of it.
The chapter’s next (and even more challenging) scenario involves a man
who rapes an unmarried virgin (vv. 28–29; see the similar passage in Exod
22:16–17). Another scenario, you might say! If we do not regularly spend
much time reading God’s law in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, we might be amazed at the detail of all these different scenarios in
God’s inspired revelation. But we should expect such detail, for the subject
of sexual relations is central and crucial to human experience. We human
beings think about all these things in detail; how revealing and encouraging
that God likewise pays so much attention and tells us so.
The sexual union in these verses does not break an existing marriage
bond; the solution offered is marriage. This case does not resolve all well for
the woman: she evidently will be offered her rapist for a husband, who gets
off by paying fifty shekels to her father (along with the lifelong obligation
of marrying and caring for her). There are nuances here that offer a bit
more light on the subject. Daniel Block suggests that the verb in verse 29
(“He shall pay” niv) could well be translated “may pay”—which would
offer the woman’s father a choice as to whether or not to accept this potential son-in-law.8 As the extramarital sex in any case would make it difficult
for this woman to be accepted by another husband, the required money
and the security of marriage in themselves are meant as a help to the woman
who has been violated and who is viewed not as the guilty one but as the
one to whom reparation must be made. At the least, the woman is covered
by certain protections that were available to her and her family.
8
Daniel Block, Deuteronomy, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2012), 525–26.
76
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
All these Old Testament laws take place within a distorted patriarchal
system. In a patriarchal system, the husband holds authority over his household. All sorts of practices grew up around patriarchy in ancient times: for
example, a wife usually went to live in the household of her husband, and
her role in bearing children to carry on her husband’s line was crucial.
Unmarried women were often unprotected and unrespected. Married
women were often mistreated. Practices of polygamy developed. When we
use the word “patriarchy” today, it is almost impossible to separate that
word from all sorts of ungodly and sexist practices that have come to cling
to it like barnacles to a seaside dock. In many contemporary contexts and
cultures, lots of the barnacles still cling. The fulfillment of Genesis 3:16 is
everywhere in evidence in this fallen world of sin. As Jesus said, the hearts
of people are hard, and “from the beginning it was not so” (Matt 19:8).
Jesus knew the beginning of this story; he was there. Then he entered
the story to save law-breakers. But through the Old Testament law God
was mercifully revealing himself. The law points relentlessly to the truths
God established from creation, in particular, the value of women and men
alike as God’s image-bearers, worthy of his attention, provision, and mercy.
In a world full of sin and shame, laws such as the ones we have discussed
served the merciful purpose of restraining sin and protecting and providing
for the most vulnerable in the midst of it. That would often be the women.
Hence the existence of so many specific laws focused on protecting them
from the abuse of men.
V. God’s View of Extramarital Sex
Even as we see that God treats women as equally responsible and protects
women when abused, we still might have a good deal of trouble accepting
the harshness of the punishment. Stoning? Death? For adultery? This is
hard indeed. What is clear is that God views extramarital sex as a grievous
evil, not to be tolerated among his people. This is evident from the refrain
that comes after many of the scenarios in Deuteronomy 22, commanding the
people to “purge the evil” from among them (vv. 21–22, 24). Extramarital sex
in God’s eyes is evil first and foremost because of God’s established order
in creation: one husband and one wife should become one flesh. Jesus
makes clear not only that this is God’s established order but also that to
break it apart is an offense against God. It was Jesus, not some pastor or
priest, who first said: “What therefore God has joined together, let not man
separate” (Matt 19:6; Mark 10:9).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
77
The sober details of the laws we have seen, including the shocking
extremity of the penalties, tell us that in messing with God’s establishment
of sex within marriage, we are messing with the way he has set up his world
to work. To reject his creation order is to reject our Creator personally—
breaking apart what he himself created.
This is why sexual sin is just as grievous to God today as it was centuries
ago. As with all sin, it brings sickness of soul—not only in agonizing cases
of overt abuse but also in the more common and increasingly accepted
instances of disregard for God’s design for sexual union within marriage. If
we could see through to spiritual reality, we would probably tremble to
contemplate the careless breaking apart of God’s good and holy design for
human sexuality. These breaks bleed death, although all the wounds are
not always visible right now.
When a couple engages in sex outside of marriage, they often do not feel
the impact of their sin in the moment, or sometimes even in a lifetime.
Husbands or wives who commit adultery might feel satisfaction, sometimes
guilt, but not usually the heat of God’s hatred for sexual sin as an evil to
be purged. When women and men claim sexual independence, rejecting
marriage bonds, they often do not realize the harm to their souls (and the
harm to others) that comes with calling good what God calls evil. And
those women and men include all of us; Jesus nailed every one of us when
he explained that when we even look at another person lustfully, we have
already committed adultery with that person in our heart (Matt 5:27–28).
All our hearts are broken.
It is hard for us sinners to see through to spiritual reality, especially while
enjoying pleasure or power. Stoning is shocking; perhaps the shock of it
helps open our eyes. God’s Word, by God’s Spirit, does open our eyes to
the sin that infects all of us—and by his grace, we are drawn to bow in
repentance before a holy God and find the mercy that he is always ready to
extend. God is a God of justice who holds the sexually unfaithful to account.
He is a God of compassion who protects the vulnerable and abused. And he
is a God of mercy who forgives the guilty who turn to him for cleansing.
There is another aspect of the grievous evil of sexual sin: it infects not just
one person but the community of God’s people. God gave this Old Testament law to these offspring of Abraham to set them apart as his people. He
had grown them into a great nation just as he promised. He had redeemed
them from Egypt. Now they were to live as his “treasured possession,” a
“kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exod 19:5–6). This was the people
through whose offspring God would bless the world, in the promised
Christ. That offspring was not to be defiled.
78
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Today, those who live in Christ are by faith part of that offspring, and
we inherit that call to holiness—now to praise together our God who has
redeemed us in Christ: “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy
nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light”
(1 Pet 2:9). Our holiness, including our sexual purity, is not just for our
good. As the Scriptures unfold, we see that marriage is a divinely given
picture of Christ and the church. The ultimate end for keeping marriage
pure is that we his people might shine forth the glory of our Savior. God
gives such stark prohibitions about the holiness of marriage in order to
protect something beautiful and precious—a picture of his own Son.
VI. Redeeming Gomer
In the end, sexual unfaithfulness reveals the unfaithfulness of our sinful
hearts before God. Which brings us to a woman named Gomer, who lived
in Israel in the eighth century b.c. (by this time, God’s people were split
between two kingdoms—the northern one called Israel, the southern one
Judah). Gomer was a “promiscuous woman” whom God told the prophet
Hosea to marry to live out the story of God’s mercy toward his unfaithful
people. God’s initial message through Hosea was that “the land commits
great whoredom by forsaking the Lord” (Hos 1:2). The New International
Version clearly explains this verse: God’s people were “like an adulterous
wife, guilty of unfaithfulness to the Lord.”
So Hosea the prophet married Gomer the promiscuous woman—it was a
living parable. God told them to name their three children “God Scatters,”
“No Mercy,” and “Not My People,” showing God’s impending punishment
on his rebellious, idolatrous people (Hos 1:4, 6, 9). This is not a happy story.
Gomer eventually left Hosea and their three children for another man.
And what did God tell Hosea to do? “Go again, love a woman who is loved
by another man and is an adulteress, even as the Lord loves the children of
Israel, though they turn to other gods” (Hos 3:1 esv). And so Hosea bought
back his wife, paying the bride-price customarily paid to the family left
behind by a woman when she married. This was a bride who had deserted
her family; Hosea bought her back and took her home.
This is a picture of God; he tells us so. God promises ultimately to make
a way for the people he called “No Mercy” to receive his mercy. To the
people he called “Not My People” he will say, “You are my people,” and they
will say, “You are my God” (Hos 2:23).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› WOMEN, SEX, AND A QUESTION OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
79
That is how merciful God is. I am Gomer. You are Gomer. We are
Gomer—spiritual adulterers. But from the beginning God had a plan to
buy us back, and that plan has been accomplished. The God who loves us
has redeemed us, bought us back, through the blood of Christ. We his
redeemed people are pictured finally as Christ’s bride, and we will one day
be given “fine linen, bright and pure” to wear to our wedding (Rev 19:7–8).
What is God like? Look at Jesus. Look again at Jesus standing before that
woman caught in adultery. Jesus has mercy on her. He calls her to turn
from her sin. He has come to redeem her from that sin through his sacrifice
on the cross on her behalf. She does deserve death. But that is not the
whole story. Every woman and every man deserves death, the wages of our
sin. But that is not the whole story. The hope of the Scriptures, for every
woman and every man, is that Jesus came to offer us mercy. Through faith
in his death on our behalf, we receive full forgiveness and new life in him,
now and forever. That is the whole story.
Preach, teach, and lead
with confidence and wisdom.
MASTER OF DIVINITY
MASTER OF ARTS IN RELIGION
MASTER OF THEOLOGY
For nearly 90 years, Westminster Theological Seminary has
been training pastors and ministry leaders to be specialists
in the Bible to proclaim the whole counsel of God for Christ
and his global church.
wts.edu
ETHICS IN HISTORY
“How Firm a Foundation”
and the Westminster
Confession of Faith
K. SCOTT OLIPHINT *
Abstract
The Protestant and Reformed view of Scripture over against the Roman
Catholic view is that Scripture attests its own authority. This view does
not, however, mean that there are no arguments available that point to
Scripture’s self-attesting authority. The Westminster Confession of Faith
affirms in chapter 1, section 4, that Scripture is its own foundation, then
in the following section gives a helpful list of arguments that provide
useful indications of Scripture’s divine authority. These arguments are
reviewed and explained in the following presentation.
I. “How Firm a Foundation” and Scripture
M
ost people know the hymn “How Firm a Foundation.” Even
though its author remains anonymous, it has had significant
influence in the church since it appeared in the latter part of
the eighteenth century. (It was originally sung, at least in
the United States, to the tune of Adeste Fideles.)
In its opening stanza, the hymn moves directly to the character of Scripture: “How firm a foundation, you saints of the Lord, is laid for your faith
in his excellent Word.” Then, considering the excellent Word that is our only
* This lecture was originally delivered on September 20, 2018, at Westminster Theological
Seminary, Philadelphia, as the Herrell Lecture.
81
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
82
foundation, the writer asks, “What more can he say than to you he has said,
to you who for refuge to Jesus have fled?”1 What we call the sufficiency of Scripture reminds us that in the church, all that is needed is what God has said.
There is no need in our personal lives or in the church to add anything to
Scripture; we have all that we need if we desire to do and to be what the
Lord expects of his children.
However, this hymn has much more in view than an affirmation of the
doctrine of Scripture’s sufficiency, vitally important as that is. It continues
by applying the notion of the sufficiency of God’s Word in order to reach
the very recesses of our hearts. Notice how the hymn expounds on what it
means for Scripture to be sufficient. Its sufficiency means that we flee to
Jesus for refuge in the firm foundation of his Word:
Fear not, I am with you, O be not dismayed;
For, I am your God, and will still give you aid;
I’ll strengthen you, help you, and cause you to stand,
Upheld by my righteous, omnipotent hand.
When through the deep waters I call you to go,
The rivers of sorrow shall not overflow;
For I will be with you your troubles to bless,
And sanctify to you your deepest distress.
When through fiery trials your pathway shall lie,
My grace, all sufficient, shall be your supply;
The flame shall not hurt you; I only design
Your dross to consume, and your gold to refine.
The hymn moves from an affirmation of the firm foundation in the excellent
Word to the practice of that affirmation. The sufficiency of Scripture, in other
words, is meant to provide the Lord’s people with strength and comfort
through times of trial and testing: because the Lord is sufficient for you, his
Word is sufficient for you.
The hymn takes its cue from Isaiah 41 and 43, where the prophet says,
Fear not, for I am with you;
be not dismayed, for I am your God;
I will strengthen you, I will help you,
I will uphold you with my righteous right hand. (Isa 41:10)2
1
2
Emphasis in the quotes in the lecture has been added by the author.
All Scripture references are from the esv.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
83
When you pass through the waters, I will be with you;
and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you;
when you walk through fire you shall not be burned,
and the flame shall not consume you. (Isa 43:2)
The sufficiency of Scripture does not mean only that the Lord has said all
that he needs to say until Christ comes again, but also that in and through
the sufficiency of the Word, as our firm foundation, we are graciously enabled
to endure the deep waters, the rivers of sorrow. Those things will not overwhelm, but sanctify by and through his grace. We can walk through the fiery
trials, and the flame will not hurt us, because of the all-sufficiency of his
Word and his grace. Those fires will consume our dross and refine us into
the image of the beloved Son.
II. Westminster Confession of Faith: Background
The deep and rich reality of the Word of God, recognized through the deep
waters and fiery trials of the Reformation, attests the glorious riches of the
Word. We tremble at the thought of leaving, dismissing, or, even worse,
denying the all-sufficient Word the Lord gave to his church. The supreme
character of that Word is portrayed by one of the most exquisite paragraphs
ever written about it—a paragraph not inspired or infallible, but so close to
it that it deserves our full attention. According to B. B. Warfield, it is a
paragraph “of almost unsurpassed nobility of both thought and phrase.”3
Warfield is referring to section 5 of chapter 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF), which is vitally important for us. It takes its cue from
the previous section, which articulates concisely and wonderfully what it
means to confess that the Word of God is our ultimate authority.
The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed,
dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God
(who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it
is the Word of God. (WCF 1.4)
Firstly, in section 4, the Confession focuses on the authority of Holy
Scripture, specifically from what or whom Holy Scripture derives its authority.
This was a pressing issue during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It
has been a pressing issue since Satan first asked the question, “Has God
really said…?” (cf. Gen 3:1), and it remains so today. Since the Confession
3
B. B. Warfield, “The Westminster Doctrine of the Holy Scripture,” in Selected Shorter
Writings of B. B.Warfield (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1973), 2:566.
84
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
wanted the church to recognize its proper place, it began with the negative.
The first thing Protestants affirm is that “the authority of Holy Scripture,
for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or church” (WCF 1.4).
This was important during the time of the Reformation, because the issue
of authority was of paramount importance for obvious doctrinal reasons,
and its importance had deep and abiding personal and ecclesial consequences. Francis Turretin, for example, put it this way:
Still it is certain that the more common opinion of the Romanists is that of uncertainty,
especially among the Jesuits, who teach that no one without a special revelation can
be sure (with the certainty of divine faith) that his own sins have been pardoned
because they perpetually suppose that this certainty rests upon one’s own infirmity
and indisposition. Hence they conclude that the certainty of justification is only
conjectural, opinionable, deceitful (i.e., really no certainty at all).4
If the authority of Scripture is derived from the church, the certainty of
justification is uncertain. Think of that! To the question as to whether or not
we can stand guiltless before God, the answer is, “it is impossible to know
such a thing. The best we have available is conjecture.” No wonder that a
commitment to such a church produces unremitting guilt and sadness.
There is no possible way to know our standing before a holy God. We can
guess at it, but our guess is only as good as our current disposition and as
solid as our last sin. How can we be certain that the Lord will sustain us
through the deep waters and refine us through the fire when we can never
be certain if he has accepted us?
However, it is not just in Roman Catholicism that uncertainty is promoted.
One prominent evangelical, who considered his Christian commitment to
be informed by Thomas Aquinas, argues that we must first demonstrate that
the Bible is the Word of God if we are going to trust what it says.5 If this is the
case, then the truth of the matter is that the authority of Scripture depends
on us; it cannot be trusted until we adequately demonstrate it. That is just
another version of the Roman Catholic view, with an individualistic twist.
It means that Scripture’s authority is dependent on man or church. Once
that is conceded, confidence in Scripture’s supremacy is inevitably lost.
This is what the Confession has in view in section 4. The practical and
pastoral significance is that if my standing before God depends on me to
4
Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison Jr., trans. George
Musgrave Giger (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992–1997), 2:616 (15.17.1).
5
Norman Geisler, “Reviews,” Christian Apologetics Journal 11.2 (Fall 2013): 173.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
85
demonstrate it, or on others to confirm it, then confidence in my ability to
stand before a holy God is only as strong as my confidence in myself or
other people. No matter how confident we might appear at times, deep
down we know that we are sinful and stained to the deepest recesses of our
hearts. To look to ourselves as the foundation of confidence will produce
nothing but anxiety and sadness. We cannot bear a load like that. To think
that any person, or institution, is our “firm foundation” is to stand on
quicksand; we will, inevitably, sink into the morass of human sin.
Secondly, the positive focus that section 4 sets out is that the authority of
Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, depends
“wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is
to be received because it is the Word of God.”
How can we know that we can stand guiltless before God, that we will be
sustained and refined in the trials of God’s good providences? Not because
the church says so, or because we possess the proper evidences to trust what
is in Scripture. We can know because God has told us so, as Turretin affirms:
“Thus Scripture, which is the first principle in the supernatural order, is
known by itself and has no need of arguments derived from without to prove
and make itself known to us.”6
In Christ, we can be certain of our present and future righteousness
before the throne of God above. Again, to quote Turretin, the Scriptures
“have a theological and infallible certainty, which cannot possibly deceive the
true believer illuminated by the Spirit of God.”7 Because Scripture is the
very Word of God, it comes to us with all of the certainty and veracity of
God, who is truth himself. If there is one thing we know about God, it is
that God is not to be doubted. He does not offer promises tentatively and
hesitantly or tell us that maybe we will be accepted if we are in Christ. Our
acceptance is inextricably linked to the acceptance of the only begotten Son
and his work of redemption in our behalf.
As glorious as this statement is in section 4, we might imagine that it has
a possible problem attached to it. Some fear that when Scripture is affirmed
in this way we will have no sure way of knowing that Scripture is the Word
of God. We might think that our faith in the truthfulness of Scripture is a
blind faith, with no arguments to support it. It is the height of irrationality
and a groundless commitment—or so we we might think.
The Confession anticipated this kind of objection. Those who wrote of
the absolute authority of Holy Scripture recognized that we need to put
6
7
Turretin, Institutes, 1:89 (2.6.11).
Ibid., 1:69 (2.4.22).
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
86
some content into this affirmation. If we cannot trust ourselves or the church
to establish a firm foundation, who can we trust? I broached this topic in
Know Why You Believe, and that motivates me to expand on it here.8 The
apologetic and theological implications of this question are crucial. How
can we know that this book is from God himself?
III. Westminster Confession of Faith 1.5
We are now prepared to enlarge on our topic. In section 5 the Confession says:
We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church to an high and
reverend esteem of the Holy Scripture. And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy
of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole
(which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s
salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, ARE
ARGUMENTS whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God.
In his discussion of this section, Warfield reminds us of its potency. He
writes,
Sect. 5 has been strangely appealed to as outlining the Confession’s mode of determining the inspiration and consequent canonicity of Scripture …. The Confession …
is here professedly treating an entirely different matter, namely, how we are brought
practically to yield to it the authority which this inspired and canonical book ought to exercise
over us. … The Confession devotes a paragraph of almost unsurpassed nobility of
both thought and phrase, to indicating how sinful men may be brought to a full practical
persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority of Scripture.9
In other words, this section is not pointing to the establishment of Scripture’s
authority, attempting to go behind Scripture as our firm foundation. It is
outlining the strength of our confession of Scripture’s authority—a strength
so powerful that it ought to cause us to surrender when we grasp its legitimacy. Like a Greco-Roman wrestler, these arguments are meant to pin us
down so that we are compelled to yield to their strength, unable to move
until we give in.
Section 5 provides a categorical list of arguments so that we can see with
the eyes of faith the evidence of Scripture’s authority. Those arguments
cannot be outside the foundation, nor behind it. If they were, then the
foundation would need a foundation. Instead, the arguments are embedded
8
9
K. Scott Oliphint, Know Why You Believe (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2017), 13–30.
Warfield, “The Westminster Doctrine of the Holy Scripture,” 562, 566–67.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
87
in the foundation. They are the elements that are poured into the rock-solid
foundation of Scripture and give it a substance strong enough to support
everything else that is built upon it, including what we confess and believe.
So, we can indicate the “arguments” that the Confession uses for the
authority—the majesty even—of Holy Scripture, those elements that make
our foundation so gloriously firm. As we look at these “signs” we should be
asking, “Is this what I really think of my Bible? Do I take this book and open
it with this in mind?” If not, then a refresher course on the “signs of
Scripture’s supremacy” will help us see the divine content contained in this
book and help us recognize what it means to lean wholly on Christ for all
that we think and all that we are.
1. “The heavenliness of the matter”
After recognizing the testimony of the church as an external testimony to
Scripture’s authority, the Confession turns to a series of internal arguments,
firstly “the heavenliness of the matter.” Thomas Boston says that the heavenliness of the matter is “the sublime mysteries therein revealed, which nature
ever so much elevated could never attain to the discovery of.”10 The heavenliness of Scripture finds expression in those doctrines which could never be
conjured up by the efforts of mere mortals. These are matters that are and
remain beyond our ability to comprehend. As the apostle Paul says in
1 Corinthians 2:9–10:
As it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—these things God has revealed to us
through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God.
What Paul is giving to the church, under the inspiration of the Spirit, are
those truths that we could never see, hear or imagine of ourselves. Of this
passage, Charles Hodge says,
The meaning of this verse is plain. … Paul had said, he preached the hidden wisdom
of God, which none of the princes of this world knew; he taught what no eye hath
seen, nor ear heard, nor heart conceived. That is, he preached truth undiscoverable by
human reason.11
10
Thomas Boston, “An Illustration of the Doctrines of the Christian Religion, Part 1,” in
The Whole Works of Thomas Boston, ed. Samuel M’Millan (Aberdeen: George & Robert King,
1848), 1:28.
11
Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Robert
Carter & Brothers, 1857), 37.
88
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
The “heavenliness of the matter” reminds us that it is not possible, by human
wisdom, to conjure up a religion that would have, as its central focus, the
glory of the Triune God and the salvation that he offers in Jesus Christ. No
other religion has ever come close to these heavenly truths.
In one of his most articulate and inspiring moments John Owen was able
to describe for us what “heavenliness” entails. The first, long sentence alone
is worth a few hours of contemplation. Owen puts it this way:
There are some doctrines of the Scripture, some revelations in it, so sublimely glorious, of so profound and mysterious an excellency, that at the first proposal of
them, nature startles, shrinks, and is taken with horror, meeting with that which is
above it, too great and too excellent for it, which it could desirously avoid and
decline; but yet, gathering itself up to them, it yields, and finds that unless they are
accepted and submitted unto, though unsearchable, not only all that hath been
received must be rejected, but also the whole dependence of the creature on God be
dissolved, or rendered only dreadful, terrible, and destructive to nature itself. Such
are the doctrines of the Trinity, of the incarnation of the Son of God, of the resurrection of the dead, of the new birth, and the like. At the first revelation of these
things nature is amazed, and cries, “How can these things be?”…. But when the
eyes of reason are a little confirmed, though it can never clearly behold the glory of
this sun, yet it confesses a glory to be in it above all that it is able to apprehend. I
could manifest, in particular, that the doctrines before mentioned, and several others,
are of this importance; namely, though great above and beyond the reach of reason,
yet, upon search, found to be such, as, without submission to them, the whole comfortable relation between God and man must needs be dissolved.12
The “heavenliness of the matter” in Owen’s language means that the teachings of Scripture are “so sublimely glorious, of so profound and mysterious
an excellency, that at the first proposal of them, nature startles, shrinks, and
is taken with horror, meeting with that which is above it, too great and too
excellent for it.” The “heavenliness of the matter” is not reserved for the
scholarly. As Boston puts it, “The light of nature improved by the learned
to the utmost advantage, could not teach these things; yet a few fishermen
plainly delivered them.”13 Holy Scripture alone, as the very speech of God,
is the place in which heavenliness is given, and given for all, the learned and
the unlearned alike.
2. “The efficacy of the doctrine” and “the consent of all the parts”
In Luke 24:25–32, two “arguments” for Scripture’s authority go together,
“the efficacy of the doctrine” and “the consent of all the parts.” In this passage,
12
John Owen, “Of the Divine Original of Scripture,” in The Works of John Owen, ed. William
H. Goold (Edinburgh: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1853), 16:339–40.
13
Boston, “An Illustration of the Doctrines of the Christian Religion,” 28.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
89
two disciples are on a seven-mile journey from Jerusalem to Emmaus, on
the third day after the crucifixion, and Jesus begins to walk alongside them.
They cannot recognize him, and so he begins to question them, as if he has
not heard of the resurrection. They explain what they have heard about the
resurrection, but they remain perplexed. So, Jesus says to them:
“O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was
it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?”
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the
Scriptures the things concerning himself. So they drew near to the village to which
they were going. He acted as if he were going farther, but they urged him strongly,
saying, “Stay with us, for it is toward evening and the day is now far spent.” So he
went in to stay with them. When he was at table with them, he took the bread and
blessed and broke it and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they
recognized him. And he vanished from their sight. They said to each other, “Did
not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to
us the Scriptures?” (Luke 24:25–27)
What, then, is the “efficacy of the doctrine” in this passage? The first focuses
on the resurrected Christ himself, beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, and in all the Scriptures! In other words, Jesus shows the two disciples
who he is. Luke highlights the fact that they could not recognize who Christ
was as he walked beside them, but they see Christ in all of Scripture when
Christ revealed himself to them through the Old Testament. Even after
their eyes are opened to see him for who he is, they do not say to themselves,
“Wasn’t that great when all of a sudden we recognized who he was?” Instead,
they say, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he opened to us the
Scriptures?” In other words, it was the effect, the efficacy of Scripture doctrine
that caused their hearts to burn within them. This is no ordinary emotion.
It is a glorious “heart burn” as the Word of God itself, interpreted to them
by the One of whom the entire Word speaks, causes their hearts to burn
with a passion for Christ and his glory: the efficacy of the doctrine.
This passage also directs us to “the consent of all the parts.” Luke wants
us to recognize that this preeminent lesson in hermeneutics from the risen
Savior was not a random “pick and choose” lesson from Scripture. Jesus
did not select specific passages from the Old Testament to show them
who he was. Instead, “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he
interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself ”
(v. 27). The necessary conclusion that forces itself upon us is that the
entire Old Testament agrees in its testimony concerning Christ. Jesus
showed these two disciples “the consent of all the parts.” He used that
very argument in interpreting Scripture to them. “Look,” he said in effect,
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
90
“see how what has happened over these three days is all given to you in
the Old Testament!”
Jesus said something similar to the Jews, “You search the Scriptures
because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear
witness about me” (John 5:39), and then he said, “For if you believed Moses,
you would believe me; for he wrote of me” (v. 46).
The consent of all the parts means that it all points to Christ; the Old
Testament points us forward to him, as Jesus himself made clear to those
disciples on the road to Emmaus, and the New Testament points back to
him, as well as forward to our life with him now and into eternity. It all
comes together in him. This one passage includes the efficacy of the doctrine
and the consent of all the parts.
3. “The majesty of the style”
There is a reason why the Bible is the most quoted book in the world; indeed,
it has sold almost four billion copies in the last 50 years. That fact may be
related to this particular “argument”: the majesty of the style. Boston puts
it this way:
There are in several passages of the Old Testament such a loftiness of style, so grand
an assemblage of bold images and representations, such a collection of noble and
majestic sentiments, and so much magnificence and pomp of language, as cannot
be found in any human writings whatever. There is something so truly majestic and
sublime, so grand and magnificent in the style of the sacred writings, as has forced
heathen philosophers to acknowledge it …. At the same time let it be observed, that
there is nothing affected, no flights of false eloquence, no exertions of a luxuriant
genius, no laboured strokes of a warm imagination, no forced images, no distorted
metaphors, no quaint allusions, or unnatural comparisons which are frequently
found in the most admired productions of ancient and modern writers; but the
utmost plainness and perspicuity, a noble simplicity, and an elegant familiarity, level to
the capacity of the illiterate, reign throughout the sacred volume. So that its style
must engage the attention and regard of the learned philosopher and poet, and
delight the unlearned peasant.14
The Bible possesses a “noble simplicity” and “elegant familiarity.”
How about this for “noble simplicity” and “elegant familiarity”: “The
Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want” (Ps 23:1)? We hear this Psalm in all
kinds of contexts—even staged funerals in movies or on television. It may
have become so familiar to us that we can miss its nobility and elegance.
At a time and in a place where the role of “shepherd” was so familiar and
so well-defined, what do we read? “The Lord is my shepherd.” What better
14
Ibid., 28–29.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
91
way to imagine our relationship to the Lord than this? He is the shepherd;
he is the one who cares for us. We are the sheep, too inept to properly care
for ourselves. Further, if “the Lord is my shepherd,” what is the result of his
care? “I shall not want”—there is nothing that I lack. If you are one who
lacks something that you think is essential to you, then the Lord is not your
shepherd. If he is your shepherd, you shall not want.
Or, concerning the noble simplicity and elegant familiarity, how about
this passage as well: “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge
of God!” (Rom 11:33)? A simple statement, but a statement so majestic that
a lifetime of meditation could not unravel it. The very statement itself points
to our lack of ability, while it highlights the incomprehensible character of
the one we worship. It is a simple statement, a statement of praise, and the
praise is directed to what we cannot comprehend. That is true majesty that,
by definition, transcends all that is mundane, including our own thoughts.
4. “The scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God)”
This one should be most familiar to us, though it can be one of the most
difficult to grasp for many. What is the point of it all? What is the proper
scope of Scripture? “The scope of the whole,” the glory of God, should be
most familiar to us, though it can be difficult to grasp for many. Notice, for
example, how Paul’s words give glory to God in Ephesians 1:3–14, or how
he glorifies God in his explication of that difficult doctrine of eternal election
in Romans 9:21–24, or how the book of Revelation elevates God and Father:
“to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen” (Rev 1:5–6). The
end of our history and the beginning of our eternity will include the glory
of God, giving light to our eternal existence in the new heavens and the new
earth: “And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory
of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb” (Rev 21:22–23). Or, should
we desire noble simplicity and elegant familiarity combined with the scope
of the whole, nothing is better than Romans 11:36: “For from him and
through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.” The
scope of it all is to give glory to God. It all points to him; it never, ultimately,
points to us.
The Westminster Confession expresses this so well when it articulates the
doctrine of God’s eternal decree:
Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of
the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret
counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen, in Christ, unto everlasting glory,
92
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith, or good works, or
perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or
causes moving him thereunto: and all to the praise of his glorious grace. (WCF 3.5)
Much more could be said, but this proper emphasis on “the scope of the
whole” should prompt us to ask if we cherish and maintain that emphasis in
our lives, or are we too focused on ourselves to see “the light of the knowledge
of the glory of God” as it shines “in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor 4:6)?
This great truth should comfort us if we see it properly. Even in those
things—and there are many of them—where we cannot see the point or discern the reason, our first thought should be, “This is all, somehow and in
some way, to the glory of God.” When we come across a passage of Scripture
that is difficult for us, we should remember “the scope of the whole” as we
wrestle through it. It is always and everywhere about the glory of God.
5. “The full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation”
Even from the entrance of sin, the clear and stunning truth is that if man is
going to be saved from the sin that we brought into God’s good creation,
God himself would have to do it. Adam and Eve made coverings of fig
leaves to cover their shame after they had sinned. Nevertheless, even as
God pronounced judgment on them, he made clothing for them from animal skins. If Adam and Eve were to be properly clothed, only God could
provide covering for them. Fig leaves were woefully insufficient. In this act
of the Lord clothing his sinful creatures, according to John Bunyan, “the
Lord God did preach to Adam and to his wife.”15 He preached to them that
he alone could solve their problem. If they were to escape their guilt and
shame, they could not do it by fig leaves. The Lord God himself would have
to cover their shame. In providing them with skins, the Lord preached to
them that proper clothing could only come through the shedding of blood
so that our sinful condition can be covered. We could not do it; the Lord
himself would have to do it. The rest, as we know, is history. Throughout
subsequent redemptive history, the resounding refrain is that God must
accomplish what we cannot. Our sin has so radically damaged us that unless God intervenes and covers us, we will be lost, for eternity.
God spends the entirety of history intervening. What he continues to
demonstrate is that if he does not save, there is no salvation, and he demonstrates that he will intervene. Instead of us trying to save ourselves with the
15
John Bunyan, “An Exposition of the Ten First Chapters of Genesis,” in The Works of That
Eminent Servant of Christ, Mr. John Bunyan (Edinburgh: Sands, Murray, & Cochran, 1769),
6:331.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
93
weakness of fig leaves, he will save us through the blood of an acceptable
sacrifice, and that sacrifice, if it is going to be acceptable, would have to be
undefiled. There is only one who can accomplish this.
God accomplishes the exodus through the mediation of Moses. But what
has to happen if the Lord’s people are to be brought from slavery in Egypt
to the promised land? The final plague has to happen—the firstborn sons
have to die. There must be the shedding of blood, the blood of a son, if
there is going to be redemption from Egypt. And the shed blood is the mark
that causes the angel of death to “pass over” the Lord’s people. No wonder
Jesus reserved his harshest words for those who were supposed to be experts
in the Old Testament: if they really believed Moses, they would believe him.
The clarity of the gospel is given throughout redemptive history and
Scripture. However, despite that clarity, it remains one of the most difficult
things for us adequately to absorb. Our strong tendency is to descend again
into some idea that it is up to us to save ourselves. We must constantly return
to that most profound of all teachings, which was “delivered to you as of
first importance …: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the
Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4). Moreover, when Paul says, “in
accordance with the Scriptures,” he means that this gospel has been taught
since the inception of redemptive history. The “full discovery of our salvation,” which is an “argument” for Scripture’s authority, has always been
that “salvation belongs to the Lord” (Jonah 2:9). If we are to be saved, only
he can save us.
6. “The entire perfection thereof”
The final “argument” that the Confession gives us is the recognition that
Scripture does not lack anything that we need as Christians in order to live
lives that are pleasing to our Savior.
A distinction has been made, historically, between what is called perfectio
essentialis (essential perfection) and perfectio integralis (integral perfection).
Perfectio essentialis applies to what the text says, but the argument that the
Confession is concerned to highlight here is the perfectio integralis, which
means that Scripture is complete; there is nothing that needs to be, or
should be, added to the Word of God.16
This truth has deep and profound implications for the way we view Scripture. Do we view it as a kind of general roadmap for Christian living, to
16
Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from
Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985), 222.
94
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
which must be added specific “words of knowledge” or a “still, small voice”
on occasion so that we can know what the Lord really wants us to do? If
Scripture is perfect, then there is no such need.
The Westminster Confession goes on to say, in chapter 1, section 6,
The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s
salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and
necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any
time is to be added.
In other words, Scripture is perfect; it is complete. So Paul says, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for
correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be
complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16–17).
This one “argument,” as it is given in the Westminster Confession, could
have taken up the entire lecture. There are so many ways in which the perfection of Scripture is undermined and denied that it is crucial for us to
recognize its foundational import. It was, after all, one of the most central
arguments to be lodged against the Roman Catholic church, as it sought
routinely to “add” to Scripture by way of papal and church authority.
Conclusion
Two more brief, final points can be made. Now that we have seen and
contemplated all the “arguments” that are listed in this noble paragraph,
are we convinced? We should be, but the Confession goes on to recognize a
most necessary point. Because of the depth of our sin and depravity, there
are no arguments, not even thoroughly biblical arguments, that, in and of
themselves, can convince us. The problem is not in the arguments but in
ourselves. So, section 5 of the first chapter of the Confession concludes,
“Yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible
truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy
Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.”
Only by the Holy Spirit does the bright light of Scripture pierce through
our blindness and open our eyes to the beauty of its warm and glorious
rays. Apart from the Spirit’s work, the “arguments” given in this Confession
are to us foolish and without merit. We recognize, then, that, as powerful
and substantial as these “arguments” are, they require the Spirit of God to
work in us, or we will suppress them and count them as nothing. The arguments are available to every person—arguments that testify to the majestic
character of the Word of God, including its intrinsic authority. If you are
OCTOBER 2019 ›› SCRIPTURE AND THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION
95
convinced by these “arguments,” then praise the Lord for the work of his
Spirit in you.
Finally, we should see that all of these “arguments” for Holy Scripture
could be applied to Christ himself. These characteristics of the Word are
meant to point us to the Word himself, the Lord Jesus Christ. In him we see
the heavenliness of the matter as he comes down from heaven to save his
own. We see his efficacy as he himself says to his Father, “I made known to
them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with
which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them” (John 17:26). We
see his majesty as he alone is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah; we see in him
that perfect example of what it means to give all glory to God so that he
alone can say to his Father, “I glorified you on earth, having accomplished
the work that you gave me to do” (John 17:4); we see in him the full discovery of the only way of our salvation, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6); and finally, we
see in him the perfect completion of God’s revelation so that the Lord’s
people lack nothing, “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God
spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to
us by his Son” (Heb 1:1–2a).
God has spoken. He has spoken in heavenly, majestic, perspicuous, and
perfect ways. He has spoken in and through his Word, and that Word, if
indeed the Holy Spirit works by and with it in our hearts, points us now,
and every day, into eternity, to that Word who took on flesh so that we might
have perfect fellowship with him. Moreover, Scripture is sufficient. It is
sufficient for all doctrine. It is fully and perfectly sufficient for you, when
the deep waters threaten and the fire rages. In all of it the Lord has spoken.
He has, finally and completely, spoken through his majestic Son.
What more can he say than to you he has said,
To you who for refuge to Jesus have fled?
“This book is much needed.” —John Frame
“A most welcome one-of-a-kind volume, Theological English offers
a compelling introduction to theology, while effectively building
the reader’s mastery of the English language.”
— DAVID B. GARNER
“This volume brings language and content together in ways
that help students navigate the linguistic challenges of theological
works and provides an introduction to a range of topics such as
apologetics, biblical studies, and church history.”
— CHERI PIERSON
800-631-0094
www.prpbooks.com
Beza’s Pastoral Calling:
Combat, Encouragement,
and Duty
OTTAVIO PALOMBARO
Abstract
Too often in current debates of Reformed theology the focus seems to be
solely upon great figures at the expense of their successors. Theodore
Beza should have his proper place in the spread of Calvinism. Beyond
the constant struggles between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism,
Beza saw greater battles between God and the forces of darkness. In this
context, he developed the Calvinist doctrine of political resistance. Far
from being a dry Scholastic systematizer, Beza supported a pastoral use
of the doctrine of predestination. Ultimately, Beza as faithful shepherd
risked his life to care for the flock. In this essay, several French sources are
rediscovered in order to point out Beza’s personal experience and historical context behind the theological doctrines that he discussed.
O
ne of the biggest challenges for a leader is the choice of a
suitable successor, one to whom the baton can be entrusted,
who will carry on the work and the name of the predecessor.
Moses had his Joshua, Paul his Timothy, and John Calvin
his Theodore Beza. Beza’s task was to consolidate what was
begun in Geneva, which had become the “Jerusalem of the Reformation”
thanks to men such as Guillaume Farel and Calvin.1 Often the memory of
1
Fernand Aubert and Henri Meylan, eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 1,
1539–1555 (Geneva: Droz, 1960), 245.
97
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
98
such theological giants leaves their disciples in the shadows. Beza’s theology,
though in harmony with that of his predecessor, was no mere copy. He
achieved his own Reformed synthesis by refining and extending certain
areas of thought through careful definitions, systematic constructions, and
reasoned explanations that opened the way for the future fruitful development of Reformed Scholasticism.2 Much of the Calvinist heritage existing
today is therefore indebted to Beza. But why did Calvin choose Beza as his
successor? What did he see in Beza to entrust him with such a weighty
task after his departure? As a counterpart to Philip Melanchthon in the
Calvinist Reformation, Beza once wrote to Heinrich Bullinger, a fellow
Reformer, saying,
I see myself charged with a triple task, for the accomplishment of which I plead you
to ask the Lord to help me. I have to examine all the papers of our dear Master Calvin.
… Also, I will consecrate myself with all my heart to the service of my country
[France].3
He expressed a sacrificial concern for the preservation of what his teacher
left and the good of his French homeland. The third dimension was that of
the shepherd whose pastoral concern for the good of the church was evident
in all that he did.
Despite the great foundation from which he drew, Beza faced many
challenges. The Catholic armies under the Savoy leadership were waiting to
besiege the vulnerable city, Lutherans attacked his view of the sacraments
and predestination, and the future of the Academy of Geneva was in jeopardy
—not to mention the horrors of the Black Death and the persecution of his
compatriot Huguenots in France. The pressure on his shoulders was more
than the weight of just the problems of the previous generation. For Beza the
Reformation was not over, and the church needed always to keep reforming,
not just theologically but also ethically, to provide direction in a specific time
and place. In light of these historical challenges, we will seek to evaluate the
pastoral legacy of Beza’s writings, preaching, and personal life as he engaged
in spiritual warfare, trusting in God’s sovereignty and fulfilling the duties of
a true servant of Christ.
2
Ian McPhee and Clare Hall, “Conserver or Transformer of Calvin’s Theology? A Study of
the Origins and Development of Theodore Beza’s Thought, 1550–1570” (Doctoral Thesis,
University of Cambridge, 1979), 3.
3
H. V. Aubert and Eugene Choisy, “La Réforme Française après la mort de Calvin: Extraits
de la Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, 1564–1575. Théodore de Bèze à H. Bullinger,”
Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français 49.2 (February 1900): 87–88. Unless
indicated, translations into English are my own.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
THEODORE BEZA
1519–1605
99
100
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
I. A Pastor’s Spiritual Combat
Despite the fact that the great Reformers, such as Calvin, Farel, and Beza,
had been expelled from France, the Catholic authorities were not able to
stop the significant advancement of the Reformed faith, especially in the
south. This situation led to an aggravated relationship between Protestants
and Catholics in a series of open conflicts. Beza played an active and exhortative role, not only in writing but also in action during the three civil wars.
It is for this reason that the pastoral heart of Beza must be seen first and
foremost toward his nation in the context of Christian civilization (Corpus
Christianum) today largely lost. The church, according to this perspective, is
to speak to the government, the magistrate, in bringing true religion in society
as a whole. The second-generation Reformers, unlike the Anabaptists, kept
working together with the civil magistrates, addressing crimes and promoting
godly decisions, together with the matters of the church. In this sense,
Beza’s theology went hand in hand with his actions, as he used the covenant
as a theological basis for his conviction concerning resistance to political
authorities.4 His view made room for addressing moral reform in the public
sphere, while guarding society against the subversion of justice by some
Anabaptist extremists, where the church took over all matters of life into its
hands and created a separation between religious and civil spheres with the
effect that, as in much of modern society, ethics are no longer a matter for
the public sphere. Instead, the Reformed sought a state of affairs where the
two spheres were to go hand in hand for the good of society. Beza was a
good example in his deep commitment to the cause of the Huguenots as
chaplain, diplomat, propagandist, and secretary of the Prince de Condé in
Orléans (1562–1563).
Behind these events taking place in France Beza saw a decisive battle
between the forces of God and Satan; his teaching must therefore be framed
in the language of watchfulness and spiritual warfare. Commenting on the
reproach and afflictions experienced by the church, he stated, “You fought
both closely and at a distance. You felt what it is to fight for the gospel.”5
The religious wars were also spiritual combat. In his correspondence with
Elizabeth I of England, who well knew the damage that might be wrought
by the seemingly invincible Catholic Armada, Beza informed the queen
that “Satan and his henchmen afflicted Geneva,” but God turned their
4
John F. Southworth Jr., “Theodore Beza, Covenantalism, and Resistance to Political
Authority in the Sixteenth Century” (PhD diss., Westminster Theological Seminary, 2003), 5.
5
Théodore de Bèze, Cours sur les épîtres aux Romains et aux Hébreux, 1564–1566 (Geneva:
Droz, 1988), 306.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
101
schemes to nothing but “shame, loss, and pain.”6 Beza’s role was to bring
back the leaders of the nations of his days so they submitted to the Lordship
of Christ instead of plotting in vain against the Lord and against his anointed,
Christ (Ps 2:1–2). Such was the challenge Beza faced in the social context
of the French Wars of Religion, which risked bringing about a collapse of a
civilization. Beza offered ethical guidelines in these dark times.
Beza in his writings urged European Protestants to stand firm amid this
spiritual battle raging against them with the confidence that God’s truth
will finally prevail despite all the obstacles Satan would put in the way.7 His
writings became a key source for justifying political resistance against the
increasingly hostile French authorities and for preserving the true Calvinist
faith. According to this view, as expressed by Beza in Du droit des magistrats
sur leurs sujets, once tyrannical princes fail to preserve public morality and
piety, they lose their legitimacy; therefore, subordinates or “lesser magistrates” have the right to resist, as long as such resistance is led by governmental members.8 This view of obedience to government in light of ethical
issues flows from the application of the sola Scriptura to all of society. In
particular, it concerns the ethical issue of how not to violate the sixth
commandment in relation to both oneself and others. Legitimate force
has a place as a means of defense, though not in rebellion or insurrection,
but under the control of a lower magistrate.
The most decisive moment for the French Calvinists came when Henry
of Navarre, the “lower magistrate” Beza might have had in view, born of a
Huguenot family, was brought to the throne of the Kingdom of France after
the death of the Valois king. Beza saw this event as an act of providence,
since God had miraculously used a monkish assassination to send from
heaven Henry as God’s chosen instrument to resolve the French crisis.9
Beza had known the future king since childhood through Henry’s devout
Huguenot mother, Jeanne d’Albret, and had, as chaplain, supervised the
studies of the future king. Throughout Henry’s reign, Beza had confidence
in him and always encouraged him to follow the path of truth. He exhorted
the king to pray without ceasing for guidance, to discern among his friends
the just from the unjust, and to establish a group of counselors composed
6
Alain Dufour et al., eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 43, 1603–1605 (Geneva:
Droz, 2017), 6.
7
Alexandre Dufour, Théodore de Bèze, poète et théologien (Geneva: Droz, 2006), 571.
8
Richard C. Gamble, “The Christian and the Tyrant: Beza and Knox on Political Resistance
Theory,” Westminster Theological Journal 46 (1984): 132. See also John Calvin, Institutes of
Christian Religion 4.20.31.
9
Scott M. Manetsch, Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572–1598 (Leiden:
Brill, 2000), 200.
102
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
of Protestants and Catholics in equal number.10 He also urged the admiral
Gaspard de Coligny to rely upon the faithful heavenly Leader. For his part,
Henry sought counsel from the Reformer.
In one of his letters, despite Henry’s enactment of the Edict of Nantes,
Beza laments over “overt disrupters of the kingdom, mercenaries employed
for the destruction of the poor [Protestant] Churches which cannot be
charged with any rebellion, nor deserve to be disturbed.”11 Beza wished
the king to make known through his actions in France that Protestants are
no political rebels, while at the same time guarding the right of legitimate
defense should the government act against God’s law.
Henry’s reign was looked at by some at first with expectation as a model
kingdom able to restore the pure worship in the incorruptible seed of the
true church of God. This vision is seen in Beza’s diplomatic as well as devotional writings. In his sermon on the Song of Solomon, he describes the
true church of God as clothed with Christ, the spiritual bridegroom who
awaits the final consummation of all things. This true church, however, with
her infallible marks must be distinguished from the false church with its
superstition and idolatry.12 The sermon vividly depicts the situation of
Geneva and France, in a fragile peace in both church and state. Catholicism
and the papacy had subverted the nature of the true church and threatened
to quench the efforts of the Reformation on French soil. Beza sensed this
and lamented over the spiritual conditions of the church, issuing a call to
orthodoxy and Reformed purity.13
A critical event for reformation in France was Beza’s speech at the colloquy
of Poissy in 1561. There he took the opportunity to seek reconciliation,
appeasing the troubles caused by matters of religion in France, while also
defending the antiquity and Scriptural basis of the Reformed faith before
the royal court.14 The French Reformer started his series of speeches on his
knees, identifying with the sins of his people. He used the confession of sins
from Calvin’s liturgy and freely declared in front of the court the need to
10
Alain Dufour, “Conseils de Bèze à un nouveau Roi,” Lettre de la Société Henri IV 17
(December 2007): 2.
11
Théodore de Bèze, “Instructions du Roi de Navarre à Théodore de Bèze: Son envoyé près
les villes évangéliques de Suisse, 1586,” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français
11.1/3 (January 1862): 28.
12
Théodore de Bèze, Sermons upon the Three First Chapters of the Canticle of Canticles (Oxford:
Joseph Barnes, 1587), 7.
13
Tadataka Maruyama, The Ecclesiology of Theodore Beza: The Reform of the True Church
(Geneva: Droz, 1978), 150–51.
14
Paul M. Minus, review of Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 3, 1559–1561, by
Théodore de Bèze, ed. Hippolyte Aubert, Church History 34.3 (September 1965): 356.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
103
repent, to repair the temple of God (the Reformed church), and to aid
God’s scattered flock (the Huguenots).15 He enumerated the past and
present afflictions of his brothers, taking a defensive approach in favor of
Protestantism in the midst of frequent interruptions by the cardinals.16 On
this occasion, Beza found it better to avoid dealing with controversial issues
such as the Lord’s Supper, but in other writings he considered transubstantiation as a “filthy forgery and device of Satan.”17
One can also see the weight of these matters in Beza’s commentaries on
the Psalms of David and in his French translations of the psalter made
while in Lausanne (1549–1551). The Psalms occupied a great place in the
spiritual walk of Beza as he translated them, making practical meditations
on the margins. One time he recorded how as he listened to a congregation
singing Psalm 91 in their common French tongue he was
so strengthened as if God himself addressed me with comfort in the midst of the
sickness and suffering, not only because of the plague that will afflict me three years
later or as this sickness will attack my family but also for many other trials.18
As he translated the Psalms, Beza thought of Catherine de Medici and
Charles IX as “new Sauls” and Henry IV or Gaspar de Coligny as “new
Davids,” representing the faithful remnant of the Huguenots. This is what
perhaps resonated so strongly with Beza. Like David, Henry had the difficult task of restoring the purity of religion in the wicked environment of the
de Medici family and preserving the people of God from attacks. History,
however, later showed this to be a failure. Even when talking about David’s
downfall with Bathsheba, Beza seems to have in mind Henry’s abjuration
and embrace of Catholicism, as he considers that even the most virtuous
can make terrible mistakes and give in completely. More realistically, in his
paraphrases of Ecclesiastes, Beza compared the auspicious beginnings of
Solomon and those of Henry IV, both being blessed by God with wisdom
but in the end brought to temptation and idolatry because of their wives.19
Beza wrote the king, urging him to stand firm in the face of the temptation
15
Théodore de Bèze, Orations at Poissy (London: Powels, 1561), 19.
Anne Marsh-Caldwell, The Protestant Reformation in France: History of the Huguenots
(London: Richard Bentley, 1847), 261.
17
Théodore de Bèze, Sermons on the Lord’s Supper (London: Robert Walde, 1588), 59.
18
Auguste Bernus, Théodore de Bèze à Lausanne (Lausanne: Georges Bridel, 1900), 41.
19
Kirk M. Summers, Morality after Calvin: Theodore Beza’s Christian Censor and Reformed
Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 346.
16
104
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
to betray the Reformed faith.20 Concerning the abjuration of King Henry,
Beza declared, “The French spirit is repugnant toward Calvinism …. Among
the Huguenot party, how did they receive the defection of Henry IV?
Was he trapped or was it a calculated adherence? Or have they mourned
as for a mortal wound?”21 Despite this betrayal, Beza remained faithful to
Henry IV; even late in his life, the correspondence witnesses Henry trying
to call a national council to discuss the differences with the Catholics in
matters of religion.22
However, the greatest wound to the Huguenots in France came during
the night of the Feast Day of Saint Bartholomew, August 23–24, 1572,
when the regent King Charles IX ordered the massacre of the Huguenot
nobility in Paris. This became an indiscriminate murder of Protestants and
Protestant sympathizers throughout France.23 Beza warned Admiral Coligny
of the eventuality of such a catastrophe. After receiving the news of the
massacre that took place in Paris, Beza wrote,
We are in mourning and groan. May God have mercy on us! Never we have seen
such perfidy and atrocity. … Our city, where the plague and the fever still reign, is
filled with the most miserable people of the earth …. All were killed like sheep sent
to the slaughter with the pretext of a conspiracy. Lord, you saw those things, and
you will judge them! Pray for us that may have to face the same fate.24
Struggling with the plague, the number of refugees flowing from France,
and the news of this massacre, Beza had a lot to bear. His pastoral use of
Psalm 52, occasioned by Saul’s massacre of innocent priests at Doeg’s
suggestion, is evident in his comments throughout the letter on how kings
or princes persecute pastors and churches among the innumerable poor
lambs of Christ sent to the slaughter in the kingdom of France.
20
Alain Dufour et al., eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 33, 1592 (Geneva:
Droz, 2010), 411.
21
C. R., “L’abjuration de Henri IV et le parti réformé: Lettre inédite de Théodore de Bèze
communiquée par M. J. Bonnet,” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français 1.1/2
(June/July 1852): 37.
22
Alain Dufour et al., eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 42, 1601–1602 (Geneva: Droz, 2017), 13.
23
Robert M. Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement,
1564–1572 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967), 111.
24
Tuus Beza, “Deux lettres de Théodore de Bèze: Sur la Saint-Barthélemy, 1572,” Bulletin
de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français 7.1/3 (June 1858): 16.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
105
II. A Pastor’s Consolation
Beza has been caricatured as a rationalist systematizer for his predestinarian
theology. He explored and refined Calvin’s doctrine of predestination in
tune with his predecessor while also opening the way for the schematic
formulation of later Reformed Scholastic theology.25 However, in light of
the previous contextual considerations, this doctrine serves as ethical guidance for appeasement in times of warfare. Once again, the historical background of Beza helps us to see how he used God’s sovereignty to comfort
and strengthen the common man in his parish so that he might find true
rest. In the midst of persecutions from without and sickness from within,
and under the threat of all sorts of darts from the evil one, the only anchor for
a scattered church was the comforting assurance of being among the elect.
This is more visible in his sermons on the doctrine than in the theological
discourses. In a plain, experiential style of preaching, Beza used homely
language to edify his audience. He believed it essential to apply the medicine
to patients through consolation, exhortation, and reproof.26
This approach was particularly evident when Beza dealt with predestination. His supralapsarian doctrine, according to which God’s decree of
election logically precedes the decree of the fall, was christocentric, grounding assurance in the contemplation of faith in Christ rather than leading, as
some critics suggest, to a “practical syllogism” where assurance must be
rooted in good works.27 As in other points of Beza’s doctrine of predestination, such as the causes of reprobation, his intention was not to go against
his master Calvin but to further define terms while maintaining the original
pastoral intent. Defending the supremacy of God’s decrees, he insisted that
God does not elect whom he loves but loves those whom he has elected.28
According to Beza, election is essentially a pastoral doctrine, a source of
comfort for those struggling with various temptations whether through the
plague, persecution, or other challenges of life. Predestination was intended
to be a fountain of consolation for the downcast, who must look beyond
25
Michael G. Thomas, “Constructing and Clarifying the Doctrine of Predestination:
Theodore Beza’s Letters During, and in the Wake of, the Bolsec Controversy 1551–1555,”
Reformation and Renaissance Review 4 (2000): 10; Joel R. Beeke, “Calvin, Beza, and Perkins on
Predestination,” Unio cum Christo 3.2 (October 2017): 71–88, doi:10.35285/ucc3.2.2017.art4.
26
Michel Delval, “Orthodoxie et prédication: Théodore de Bèze,” Bulletin de la Société de
l’histoire du protestantisme français 134 (October 1988): 694.
27
Shane Rosenthal, Faith and Assurance in the Theology of Theodore Beza (Crawfordsville:
Reformation Ink, 2001), 2.
28
Alain Dufour et al., eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 13, 1572 (Geneva:
Droz, 2010), 404.
106
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
their circumstances to find their identity as saved, chosen before the
foundations of the world. Beza wanted his parishioners to find in God’s
sovereignty their ultimate source of joy, assurance, and salvation amid the
battles raging around them. This had a huge impact on the ethics and lifestyle of people who lived under such preaching, as well as many of the
French Reformed who were facing persecution, helping them to persevere
in the trials they had to endure. He passed on to his people the advice
once received from his master Calvin in one of his letters: “The reward of
your labours is more certain with God, in proportion as you shall see these
labours detested by the Devil.”29 Although tossed to and fro, the persecuted
Huguenots need to rest in God’s wisdom despite the evils coming from the
Catholic enemies.30 The doctrine of predestination, therefore, is essential to
Christian comfort. It is the nerve center of Beza’s theology and of priceless
value in seeking peace in times of war.31
III. A Pastor’s Duty
Lastly, Beza’s call to duty and personal commitment to true discipleship
are crucial for understanding him as a pastoral theologian. Commenting on
the right use of afflictions, Beza reminds the Christian of the call to deny
himself, take up his cross, and follow Christ in order to be a true disciple.
One must bear the afflictions and miseries of this life for the cup of bitterness
to become a spiritual medicine to “purge the leaven of sin.”32 Beza himself
was a French noble who upon leaving Catholicism was banished from
France under threat of being burnt at the stake. He left behind his titles and
fortune for the Reformed faith. He saw this earthly life as a pilgrimage
marked by spiritual conflict in which one must carry the cross, following
the Son, and cheerfully submit to God’s providence. His life story emerges
in the poetical work Abraham Sacrifiant. Through the depiction of the
sacrifice of Isaac he recalls how he had to abandon his country where he
was persecuted, finding his only comfort in the Word of God:
29
Jules Bonnet, ed., Letters of John Calvin (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publications,
1858), 3:379.
30
Shawn D. Wright, “The Pastoral Use of the Doctrine of God’s Sovereignty in the Theology
of Theodore Beza” (PhD diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2001), 54.
31
See John S. Bray, Theodore Beza’s Doctrine of Predestination (Nieuwkoop: De Graaf, 1975),
70; Shawn D. Wright, Our Sovereign Refuge: The Pastoral Theology of Theodore Beza (Carlisle:
Paternoster, 2004), 187.
32
Théodore de Bèze, Household Prayers (London: Nicholas Okes, 1607), 77.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
107
after the time that you called me out of the country where you are not worshiped
[France], leaving my goods, my parents and their gods. There [in Geneva] I lived
seventy-five years following the path of the predestined. … And between a thousand
dangers among strangers every day we were in great need.33
The parallel here between Abraham and many Huguenots is further evident
as Beza amplifies the biblical story of trial and faith under tragic testing, a
well-suited theme to the political situation of his time.34 Similarly, Beza
wrote his sermons on the Passion to encourage his Genevan compatriots
against the Catholic threat of the Dukes of Savoy. Geneva in the most
critical period of its history stood alone against the Savoyard armies, and
Beza encouraged the city to persevere in this necessary warfare by looking
at the struggle through the light of faith, understanding that God in his
providence sends trials to bring about their conversion.35 Beza draws a
parallel between the context of persecution under the Catholic powers and
the biblical story of Exodus:
My people, what did I do to you and how did I torment you? Answer me. From what
slavery have we been set free? Which Moses and Aaron have been sent to us by God?
From which immorality of Egypt have we escaped? What Red Sea of persecutions
have we gone through? … Oh God of hosts, come back, I pray thee, look down from
heaven and see and visit this vineyard.36
Beza saw himself and the church during the Reformation as paralleling
biblical Israel, freed from the idols of Egypt with deliverance from the
popish bondage, or as the Babylonian captivity of Israel, with the church
now expatriated far from the French motherland. There is such a thing as a
just war, says Beza in effect, and if God demands our lives in sacrifice for
his glory, in such a defense of the Lord and our country, so be it.
However, the greatest pastoral test for Beza came during the spread of
the Black Death. Ministers who visited the sick often died. It was a dangerous
job with almost certain death, so none of the members of the company of
pastors was eager for the position, and the majority left the area. Beza himself
was not immune from the disease, as he was struck once by it in 1551 while
his wife Claudine and his brother Nicholas were dying of it. All this involves
33
Théodore de Bèze, Abraham Sacrifiant: Tragedie Françoise (Geneva: A. Julien, 1920), 16.
Irena Backus, ed., Théodore de Bèze (1519–1605): Actes du Colloque du Genève (Geneva:
Droz, 2007), 415.
35
Michel Delval, “La prédication d’un Réformateur au XVI Siècle: L’activité homilétique
de Théodore de Bèze,” Mélanges des sciences religieuse 41.2 (1984): 70.
36
Théodore de Bèze, Sermons sur l’histoire de la passion et Sepulture de nostre Seigneur Jesus
Christ (Geneva: Iean le Preux, 1592), 17.
34
108
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
weighty spiritual questions: Why did God allow this? What is the appropriate
Christian response to the plague? Beza did not question the goodness of
God. Instead, commenting on Psalm 23, Beza writes that even while he is
going through the darkest and dreadful valley of death, the Lord is “my
shepherd, I need not fear any famine.”37 Commenting on Psalm 6, he writes
that when overwhelmed with evils, “I suffer … [the] death of this miserable
body,” but one must look to heaven and pray, “O Creator of man, behold
Thy creature quite disfigured.”38 The Genevan Reformer with pastoral
wisdom answers the questions in his Treatise on the Plague, seeing behind
the plague God’s punishment while acknowledging its natural causes. In a
Christian response to the plague, Beza emphasized the conscience’s call to
duty to the neighbor more than fear of death or the preservation of life.39
According to Beza, one must examine one’s calling before God, considering that it is almost always better to stay than flee. Does not leaving imply a
failure to love those God calls us to care for? Since eternity is near, duty
calls to remain and make sure the afflicted receive the right care. Pastors, in
particular, should not leave when the plague strikes but care for the afflicted
until the end.40 He declared at the end of his treatise, “I do not flee; and for
faithful pastors to forsake but one poor Sheep at that time when he most of
all needeth Heavenly comfort, it were too shameful, nay too wicked a part.”41
The theological and exegetical rationale of John 10:11–18 is brought to bear
on concrete ethical cases in the practice of Pastor Beza, even in the worst
of situations. In light of this, he defines good shepherds as those pastors
who possess piety, exemplary lives, and humility; at the same time, from the
Scriptures, he discovers and applies the doctrines of the text for the consolation and reproof of the flock. Pastors are to be heavenly minded. Their
way of life must not hinder the spread of the gospel. He earnestly prayed,
approaching his death (1598), this way: “O Christ, give me to represent in
your church the true image of a pastor in the same degree as the ‘anonymous
painter’ has deteriorated my face and all my appearance.”42 His sermons on
the resurrection reveal his ability to preach to human experience as he
37
Théodore de Bèze, Psalmes of David Truly Opened and Explained (London: Richard Yardley,
1590), 38.
38
Ibid., 17.
39
Shawn D. Wright, Theodore Beza: The Man and the Myth (Fearn: Christian Focus, 2015),
170.
40
Ibid., 188.
41
Théodore de Bèze, A Learned Treatise of the Plague (London: Thomas Ratcliffe, 1665), 18.
42
Jeltine Lambertha Regina Ledegang-Keegstra, “La présence de Théodore de Bèze dans
les ‘Albums Amicorum’ (1559–1605),” Bulletin de la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français
155 (April 2009): 439.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BEZA’S PASTORAL CALLING
109
describes the disciples not wanting to “leave the sepulcher,” wanting like us
to know the truth about the coming happiness of eternal rest. He comments,
“What beautiful text and full of consolation” for a suffering and dying
people under so many challenges.43
As infirmities increased, Beza’s last thoughts were toward his beloved
Geneva, as he asked, “Is the city in full safety and quiet?”44 Even on his
deathbed, the concern of this Reformer was for the welfare of the city where
he was exiled from his motherland, praying on its behalf, not only for the
church but also the wider community. In one of his last letters before his
death written to a believer from Moravia, Beza declares his faith:
Thus, it is high time, when our Lord desires, that as I have worked for others, I may
obtain the rest that I await from his mercy …. The great servants of God must die
standing, in order that in turn they may sit in the heavenly places, in the eternal
houses and dwellings that are prepared beside their head…. We hope that this great
God, who has begun [a work in us] and brought about so many miracles, will not
abandon us in the midst of danger, but will complete this great work for his glory.45
In his funeral poem, Beza was described as “exiled from his country” in
order to freely follow God as a “fugitive.” “It pleased Christ to let him die
there” as a pilgrim in the land were Calvin began a work now brought to
further completion.46 The pastoral legacy of Beza is indeed that of a shepherd
who out of duty gave his all for the sheep chosen and preserved by God in
the midst of warfare. He stood on the shoulders of Calvin and was able to
reach even new heights. To label Beza a rationalist systematizer is to detach
him from his historical background and its challenges, as well as from the
crucial personal factors that influenced his theological production.
Many lessons can be drawn from Beza’s model of reform, not least how
behind the relation between church and state Beza saw the enactment of a
serious struggle. The context of the civil wars in France among his fellow
Huguenots reminded him of that constant parallel between the earthly
and the heavenly conflicts. Beza saw at first the advent of a Huguenot king
in France as the advent of a new David, and throughout his life, he acted
43
Théodore de Bèze, Sermons sur l’histoire de la resurrection de nostre Seigneur Jesus Christ
(Geneva: Iean Le Preux, 1609), 34.
44
Henry Martyn Baird, Theodore Beza: The Counsellor of the French Reformation, 1519–1605
(New York: Burt Franklin, 1970), 350.
45
Théodore de Bèze, “A un seigneur de Moravie [Geneva, October 18, 1603],” in “Les
derniers jours d’un réformateur: Quatre lettres de Théodore de Bèze, 1599–1604,” Bulletin de
la Société de l’histoire du protestantisme français 19/20.4 (1870/1871): 162.
46
Alain Dufour et al., eds., Correspondance de Théodore de Bèze, Tome 41, 1600 (Geneva:
Droz, 2017), 167.
110
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
like Nathan to provide spiritual guidance to Henry. In this sense, he was not
oblivious to Henry’s moral and political failures to fulfill that task, but
grieved and rebuked the French king when necessary. Beza not only showed
great tact at Poissy but also expressed profound lament on the occasion of
the Saint Bartholomew’s Day massacre. As I have emphasized, Beza was an
experiential preacher. He stresses God’s sovereignty and predestination at the
heart of his theology, pastorally to comfort and strengthen a troubled people.
Ultimately, Beza’s pastoral call to duty is chiefly expressed in his sacrificial
example of discipleship and experience of the plague. In this crisis, he rebuked pastors who fled from their duties and, despite his high position,
stayed in the midst of it to comfort the sick, so giving an example of a good
shepherd. The struggle, lament, comfort, and hope that emerges from his
writings and sermons are clearly connected with his life experiences.
Further, Beza compared biblical stories with his and his people’s practical
experiences. Out of his pastoral concerns, Beza brought what Calvin had
started into completion through his many writings and actions. Beza’s dedication and sacrifice left a legacy that is often neglected in Reformed circles.
This exemplary consecration was for the good of a church that had received
many blows but which, in the end, in Beza’s own words, stood as an “anvil
that has worn out many hammers.” The Reformation must continue from
Calvin to Beza and from Beza to our days.
The Value of Marshall’s
Gospel Mystery of
Sanctification
T. MICHAEL CHRIST
Abstract
Pastors and theologians alike have praised Walter Marshall’s Gospel
Mystery of Sanctification for its value in articulating a theology of sanctification. John Murray thought it to be “the most important book on
sanctification ever written,” yet very little scholarly attention has been
given to what Marshall actually says. This article summarizes his historical
context and explains four aspects of his approach to sanctification that
make his work particularly useful within the Reformed tradition.
T
hroughout the seventeenth century, conflict erupted in the
church in England. The clash concerned how Christians understood the relationship between faith and good works—or, we
could say, how they reconciled the gratuitous nature of salvation
with the nonnegotiable need for holiness in those who claim to
be saved. Some held tightly to the freedom of grace and interacted awkwardly
with exhortations to holiness; these were labeled “antinomians” because
they were perceived as going against the law. Others held tenaciously to the
need for a renewed life at all costs; they were called “neonomians” out of
fear that they had reduced the gospel to a mere “new law.”
Unfortunately, this kind of conflict is not isolated to the seventeenth
century. The clash between Isaak da Costa and Hermann Kohlbrugge, the
111
112
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Lordship controversy, and the New Perspective on Paul—to name a few—
show that the heirs of the Reformation have often debated the meaning of
believers’ good works. The emphasis on justification raises fears one has
diminished sanctification, and a robust doctrine of sanctification raises the
suspicion that one has abandoned the Protestant principle of sola fide.
One work has often been hailed as uniquely helpful for articulating a
Reformed approach to sanctification: The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification
by Walter Marshall. He intended this work as a theoretical and practical guide
to sanctification that steers safely around the antinomian and neonomian
factions of his day. Joel Beeke and Mark Jones call it “the Puritan classic on
sanctification.”1
Despite this lavish praise, very little scholarly attention has been given to
understanding what Marshall actually said. Joel Beeke has contributed the
most extensive exposition of Marshall in a helpful introduction to the most
recent publication of Gospel Mystery. This work explains sanctification in
light of union with Christ and briefly locates Marshall in the antinomian/
neonomian context.2 This article aims to further our understanding of
Marshall by identifying four factors in his work that I believe account for its
unique usefulness within the Reformation tradition. I hope that this will
inspire further reflection on his work.3
I. Background
First, who was Marshall? Marshall was born in 1628, the son of a minister.
Marshall’s education at New College Oxford would have exposed him to
Puritan theology and pastoral care.4 He pastored in Hampshire throughout
the turbulent period of the Civil War, but was ejected from his pastorate
by the Act of Uniformity (1662) and spent the rest of his life shepherding
independent churches.
At some point during his pastorate, he had what his biographer N. N.
called a “disquieted spirit.” N. N. writes that Marshall was “much exercised
1
Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Grand Rapids:
Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 942, n. 76.
2
Joel Beeke, “Introduction,” in The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification (1954; repr., Grand
Rapids, MI: Reformed Heritage, 1999), v–xxv, esp. vii–viii.
3
For a more extensive interaction with Marshall, see T. Michael Christ, “A New Creation
in Christ: A Historical-Theological Investigation into Walter Marshall’s Theology of Sanctification in Union with Christ in the Context of the Seventeenth-Century Antinomian and
Neonomian Controversy” (PhD diss., University of Chester, 2016), Online: https://chesterrep.
openrepository.com/handle/10034/620373.
4
Blair Worden, God’s Instruments: Political Conduct in the England of Oliver Cromwell (New
York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 91.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
113
with troubled Thoughts, and that for many years, and had, by many mortifying methods, fought [for] peace of conscience; but notwithstanding all,
his troubles increased.”5 It is nearly certain that Marshall’s spiritual melancholy was occasioned by the writings of Richard Baxter, the most verbose
proponent of neonomianism in England in the seventeenth century. No
doubt, Marshall knew Baxter’s writings well.6 Marshall also seems to hint
at a troubling encounter he had with Baxterian theology when he says,
concerning a view held by Baxter, “For my part, I hate it with perfect
hatred, and account it mine enemy, as I have found it to be.”7
Marshall sought help, or perhaps clarification, from Baxter himself. N. N.
records Baxter as saying that Marshall “took [his writings] too Legally.”8
After visiting Baxter, Marshall sought counsel from Thomas Goodwin,
cataloging to Goodwin the sins “that lay heavy on his conscience.”9 Goodwin
reminded Marshall that he must take seriously the greatest sin of all, namely
“unbelief in Jesus,” and that he should look to Jesus for “the full remission
of sins and provision for the sanctifying nature.”10 After his conversation
with Goodwin, Marshall’s peace was restored, and Marshall set about
preaching Christ with a particular concern to articulate how believers
ought to make use of their union with Christ to grow in holiness.
Marshall died August 1, 1680, in “full persuasion of the truth and in the
comfort of the doctrine, which he had preached.”11 His last words were a
quotation from Paul in Romans, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of
God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:23).12
It was through Marshall’s own search for comfort that he came to write
The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification. Those who knew him well—such as his
friend Thomas Woodcock—commend his writings because they were born
5
N. N., “The Preface to the Gospel Mystery of Sanctification,” in Walter Marshall, The
Gospel Mystery of Sanctification (London: The Bible & Three Crowns, 1692), Aa 2. See also
David Bogue and James Bennett, History of Dissenters, from the Revolution in 1688, to the Year
1808 (London: Printed for the Authors and Sold by Williams and Smith, 1810), 3:455.
6
N. N., “Preface,” Aa 3.
7
Walter Marshall, The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification: Opened in Sundry Practical Directions,
Suited Especially to the Case of Those Who Labor under the Guilt and Power of Indwelling Sin, to
Which Is Added a Sermon of Justification (London: The Bible & Three Crowns, 1692), 127
(emphasis added). For the reader’s convenience, in addition to citing the pagination of the
1692 edition of Marshall’s work, I also give the location on an online pdf copy of Marshall’s
work available here: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/GospelMystery.
pdf (6.2.5).
8
N. N., “Preface,” Aa 2.
9
Ibid., Aa 3.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
114
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
out of a character that sought Christ. The subtitle of Marshall’s work,
Suited Especially to the Case of Those Who Labor under the Guilt and Power
of Indwelling Sin, indicates that he wrote for those who found themselves in
a similar state as he was before his conversation with Goodwin. Moreover,
Marshall explains that in writing Gospel Mystery, he aimed to “save some
one or another from killing themselves” and to “enlarge the hearts of many
by it to run with great cheerfulness, joy and thanksgiving in the ways of His
commandments.”13 Thus, union with Christ and free justification motivated
him to assist others. He labored to see others respond to these truths in the
same enthusiastic way.
II. Marshall’s Theology
Four aspects of Marshall’s work make it a notable contribution to the theology of sanctification within the Reformed tradition. They are: (1) an
awareness of the pendulum swing between legalism and licentiousness, (2)
a robust doctrine of union with Christ, (3) a rejection of rationalism, and
(4) a pastoral as well systematic approach.
1. Awareness of the Pendulum Swing
Marshall was aware of the pendulum swing between antinomianism and
neonomianism. Moreover, he believed that the two errors played off each
other, driving the factions further apart. The swing is perpetuated, Marshall
says, by the human tendency to take refuge in one error in order to avoid
the other. Antinomianism was spurred on by the neonomian doctrine of
“sincere gospel works,”14 and the teaching of some pastors that that assurance was grounded in one’s works fueled the fire of antinomianism. However,
then to counter antinomianism, there arose a more strident works-based
neonomianism.15 Marshall’s analysis seems to concur with recent historiography. Tim Cooper has argued that Baxter was significantly motivated by
fear.16 Antinomian writers also betray a similar dread of a return to Rome
(and given the inroads Arminian theology was making, these fears were not
entirely unfounded). Thus, fear drove both sides further apart. To counter
this, Marshall made the brilliant move of confronting both errors at the
same time.
13
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 13 (1.2.8).
Ibid., 106 (6.1.3).
15
Ibid., 127 (6.2.5).
16
Tim Cooper, Fear and Polemics in Seventeenth-Century England: Richard Baxter and Antinomianism (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2001), 193.
14
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
115
2. Union with Christ
The way he countered both errors is also significant for Marshall’s approach.
He did so with a robust doctrine of union with Christ. Broadly similar to
John Calvin and John Owen, Marshall argues that justification occurs only
in Christ, and to be in Christ for justification necessitates also being in
Christ for sanctification. Calvin’s duplex gratia is very much a part of
Marshall’s thought, the latter also similar to Owen’s covenantal structure.17
However, Marshall also translates this concept into practical terms. The
doctrine of union with Christ provided him with two limiting concepts that
counter antinomianism and neonomianism.
First, to counter antinomianism, Marshall proposed the organic connection
between justification and sanctification. That believers enter into salvation by
grace apart from works is affirmed; but that believers live out salvation
apart from works is rigorously denied. Holiness is an essential part of salvation, not because it is a condition for it but because it is a part of it:
We then conclude that holiness in this life is absolutely necessary to salvation, not
only as a means to the end, but by a nobler kind of necessity, as part of the end itself.
Though we are not saved by good works, as procuring causes, yet we are saved to
good works, as fruits and effects of saving grace, which God has prepared that we
should walk in them (Eph. 2:10). It is, indeed, one part of our salvation to be
delivered from the bondage of the covenant of works; but the end of this is not that
we may have liberty to sin (which is the worst of slavery), but that we may fulfill the
royal law of liberty, and that we may serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness
of the letter (Gal. 5:13; Rom. 7:6).18
This necessity of holiness in salvation is evident in the foundational structure
of Marshall’s theology, which he develops out of salvation history. Adam
and Eve were created for holiness in the very core of their nature as the
image of God.19 They lost their moral likeness to God in the fall, and this
ushered in a multitude of sinful acts.20 Therefore, complete rescue from the
fall (i.e., salvation) requires a new nature in which humans are renewed in
the image of God (i.e., sanctification).
Marshall also recognized that believers receive this nature in union with
Christ21 in the context of an eschatological framework.22 The believer is
17
John Owen, “The Doctrine of Justification by Faith (1677),” in Works of John Owen, ed.
William H. Goold (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1968), 5:231.
18
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 150 (8.2).
19
Ibid., 20 (2.1.3).
20
Ibid., 36 (2.4.1).
21
Ibid., 193–94 (11).
22
Ibid., 331 (14.5.7).
116
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
fully in Christ and thereby decisively new in Christ, but what being in
Christ entails is only partially realized.23 The full salvation, including complete holiness, must await heaven, when the believer’s union with Christ is
openly manifested.24
The partial realization of this union manifests itself even in the present in
acts of holiness in this life as the believer lives according to his or her real
nature by faith.25 This wedding of holiness and future glory in a partially
realized eschatological framework prevents any sense in which salvation by
grace can be pitted against the need for holiness in this present life. To reject
holiness is to reject salvation. It is a package deal. Borrowing language
from Jeremiah Burroughs,26 Marshall concludes his work with this line:
“Sanctification in Christ is glorification begun, as glorification is sanctification perfected.”27 Clearly, sanctification and glorification are part of the
same reality.
This limiting concept plainly counters the antinomian teaching of John
Eaton, Tobias Crisp, and John Saltmarsh, who were prone to speak of justification as the totality of salvation.28 But we can also notice more subtle
differences with Martin Luther, who realized the organic connection between
salvation and holiness to some degree, especially if his use of marriage as a
metaphor for salvation is given due weight,29 yet whose theology contains
tensions from which antinomian inferences can be drawn.30 For Luther, the
accent fell on the benefits of faith: “Now let faith come between them [i.e.,
Christ and the believing soul] and sins, death, and damnation will be Christ’s,
while grace, life, and salvation will be the soul’s.”31 Luther then explicates
how believers receive the benefits of righteousness and eternal life from
Christ, the bridegroom. But Marshall emphasizes that through union with
Christ, believers actually receive the bridegroom. Christ himself—who
23
Ibid., 45 (3.2).
Ibid., 48 (3.3.1).
25
Ibid., 73 (4.4.2).
26
Jeremiah Burroughs, Christ Inviting Sinners to Come to Him for Rest (London: Peter Cole,
1659), 281.
27
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 331 (14.5.7).
28
John Eaton, The Honey-Combe of Free Justification by Christ Alone (London: Printed by R.
B. at the Charge of Robert Lancaster, 1642), 65.
29
Martin Luther, “Freedom of a Christian” (1520), in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological
Writings (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1989), 603.
30
Cooper, Fear and Polemic, 20–22.
31
Luther, “Freedom of a Christian,” 603. For similar ideas in Luther, see Martin Luther,
“Lectures on Galatians” (1535), trans. Jaroslav Pelikan, in Luther’s Works (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1963), 26:132, 167–68, and Martin Luther, “Explanations of the
Ninety-Five Theses (1518),” trans. Carl W. Folkemer, in Luther’s Works (Philadelphia:
Muhlenberg, 1957), 31:189–90.
24
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
117
became incarnate, died, and rose again in glory—is the central benefit of
this union.32 By faith, the believer is brought into Christ. Marshall—like
Calvin—recognizes that Christ’s becoming “for us wisdom, righteousness,
sanctification and redemption” is the substance of salvation.33 Thus, the
benefits can in no way be separated from the person.34 Marshall’s theology
holds together justification and sanctification because the chief benefit of
salvation is Christ, who, in his person, brings both gifts to the believer. The
framework of union with Christ allows Marshall to dwell at length on the
implications of justification without justification becoming the central
benefit in salvation and therefore eclipsing the need for sanctification in
one’s life. Luther never denied this structure, but his emphasis on the benefits
that the marriage with Christ brings to the believer slightly diminishes the
organic connection between those benefits and the groom.
Sanctification, however, does not eclipse justification either, because
Marshall’s other limiting concept is that some sense of assurance precedes
sanctification. This notion prohibits neonomianism. Marshall derives this
concept from the nature of real holiness in union with Christ. Either holy
acts are performed out of love for God and by faith in his promises or by
definition they are not holy. Furthermore, holiness consists in desiring God’s
attributes—his mercy and grace as well as his justice and righteousness—to
be increasingly present in one’s life.35 In other words, a central aspect of
holiness is communion with God, and this communion presupposes union
with Christ.
Moreover, because human beings in their fallen condition know themselves to be under the wrath of God, it is impossible for them to move
voluntarily toward God without first experiencing a change that relieves
them from fearing God’s wrath any longer. Apart from reconciliation in
Christ, a person can no more love God than a criminal can love his executioner. Thus, before believers display any holiness, they must have confidence
in God’s disposition to look upon them favorably. This confidence is
obtained only through the knowledge of union with Christ and its accompanying justification.
We must stress knowledge of union and justification because the conditions
necessary for holiness include not only a right standing with God, but also
an epistemological framework that allows this good standing to be known—
32
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 43–44 (3.2), 50 (3.3.2).
Ibid., 323 (14.2.4).
34
Sinclair Ferguson, The Whole Christ: Legalism, Antinomianism, and Gospel Assurance—Why
the Marrow Controversy Still Matters (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016), 61.
35
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 1–4 (1).
33
118
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
that is, assurance. In short, one must be persuaded of God’s good favor and
be confident of heavenly reward before any holiness is possible. At the very
outset of his book, Marshall shows that holiness requires certain endowments, which include an element of assurance of present and future favor.
Here Marshall is strikingly similar to Calvin, who maintains that the believer
has in heaven not a judge, but a loving father,36 and that assurance of the
fatherly love is what allows the believer to respond to God in a familial way.
Calvin uses this argument to confront the Roman Catholic teaching that
discouraged assurance.37
Marshall uses this argument to confront Baxter, arguing that Baxter’s
doctrine of sincere obedience prior to salvation could never produce real
holiness because it fails to provide any confidence in God’s favor by which
a sinner could move toward God as Father: “The doctrine of salvation by
sincere obedience [neonomianism], that was invented against antinomianism, may well be ranked among the worst antinomian errors.”38 Marshall
assumes that only through the gospel of free grace can one be in union with
Christ, and only in union with Christ is real holiness possible. Therefore, if
one takes away the gospel of grace—even with the aim of more rigorous law
keeping—the result will be increased sin. This reality is why neonomianism
is, at root, an antinomian error.
Marshall’s uniqueness is also evident in the way he inverts the typical
question related to assurance: instead of asking, “How do I get the kind of
sanctification that will give me assurance?” he asks, “How do I get the kind
of assurance that will give me sanctification?” Marshall admits that the first
question—which puts assurance after sanctification—is legitimate because
there is a sense in which assurance flows from sanctification,39 but he leads
with the idea that a sense of assurance is grounded in faith because he sees
assurance as a precondition for sanctification. By doing this, Marshall
averts both prominent errors of his day: he avoids neonomianism by stressing
that assurance is possible and foundational; he also avoids antinomianism
by showing that the goal of assurance is not merely to leave people assured
but to lead them into holiness.
This limiting concept—some sense of assurance precedes sanctification—also
pits Marshall against one closer to his camp, namely, Anthony Burgess.
36
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John Thomas McNeill and Ford Lewis
Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), 3.11.1.
37
Ibid., 3.2.15. See also, Anthony N. S. Lane, “Calvin’s Doctrine of Assurance,” Vox
Evangelica 11 (1979): 47.
38
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 127 (6.2.5).
39
Ibid., 155–56 (9).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
119
Burgess’s lectures, directed “especially [against] Antinomians,” outline a
doctrine of justification identical to Marshall’s. Also, like Marshall, Burgess
recognizes an inherent proclivity in all people toward both antinomianism
and legalism—so he, too, acknowledges the pendulum swing. Yet differences
emerge. In a warning against antinomianism, Burgess instructs Christians,
“Follow holiness as earnestly, as if thou hadst nothing to help thee but
that.”40 In other words, one must work for holiness as if one’s work were the
only basis for one’s acceptance before God. Marshall, it seems, would not
endorse this kind of exhortation; he would say instead that the moment
one feels one has nothing but one’s own holiness for support, one is utterly
incapable of performing any true holiness because one has no solid basis by
which one can come before God as Father. In other words, one has no
union with Christ upon which one could commune with Christ, and this
communion is essential for holiness. Burgess’s approach would be tantamount to sanctification according to the flesh and would actually promote
antinomianism. Granted, Burgess immediately says that one must also
“rely upon Christ’s merits as fully, as if thou had no holiness at all.”41 Thus,
Burgess does not advocate legalism consistently. Nevertheless, Burgess
bifurcates the Christian life by juxtaposing these two systems: there is one for
promoting holiness and another for promoting comfort. This bifurcation
will lead to tension, confusion, and despair.
Marshall, in contrast, integrates the systems for confronting legalism
and licentiousness under the single heading of union with Christ, calling
believers to seek holiness precisely through the comfort and assurance of
the gospel and to recognize that comfort and assurance of the gospel
poises one for performing good works. His limiting concepts—(1) the organic
connection between salvation and sanctification and (2) assurance before
holiness—prevent the kind of dialectic tension that is programmed into
Burgess’s theology.
3. Rejection of Rationalism
Marshall also saw that antinomianism and neonomianism shared an essential
common feature: rationalism. Marshall rejects rationalism in favor of the
epistemological approach that was normative among the Reformed orthodox.
Rationalism shows up among the antinomians in the way they forced
certain conclusions upon the believers’ relationship with God, which they
40
Anthony Burgess, Vindiciae Legis or a Vindication of the Morall Law and the Covenants, from
the Errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and More Especially, Antinomians, 2nd ed. (London:
James Young for Thomas Underhill, 1647), 48.
41
Ibid.
120
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
drew from the doctrine of union with Christ. For them, the finished character of union diminished human agency, and this view led to a kind of
hyper-Calvinism, where the actions of God left little room for the actions
of humans to have any weight.42 The antinomians were known for “flying
to God’s decrees.” That is, they defended their system by extrapolating
specific implications form the eternal covenant within the Trinity.
Baxter’s rationalism led him to the opposite conclusion. The submission
to Christ demanded from all people, combined with the high significance
of human action that Baxter saw in Scripture, disallowed any aspect of
real union before the kind of behavior that would create that union in the
believer’s actual history. For Baxter, union was relative, consisting only in
the comparative relationship between two parties:43 believers do not commune with Christ because they are united; rather, they are united because
they commune. Communion with Christ—epitomized in one’s submission
to him as Lord—constitutes union. Union was the result of the believer’s
response to Christ, not the cause of it. This is what James Packer calls the
“rationalism of [Baxter’s] ‘political method.’”44
In contrast, Marshall’s doctrine of union with Christ resisted rationalism.
For Marshall, union with Christ “does not fall at all under the judgment of
sense” because it is a spiritual union.45 Marshall is not arguing that reason
has no role in theology. For instance, in his argument for the necessity of
assurance, he says, “Now let right reason judge ….”46 Marshall’s scholastic
method makes extensive use of reason; but, for Marshall, reason was not
magisterial. Scripture was the principium cognoscendi (principle of knowledge). Thus, Marshall began his understanding of union with Christ by
recognizing that it—like the hypostatic union and the Trinity—is “beyond
our comprehension” and that “we cannot frame an exact idea of the manner
of any of these three unions in our imaginations.”47 Because these unions
are beyond human comprehension, the human “judgment of sense” cannot
be the final arbitrator concerning the truth of them. “Yet,” Marshall insists,
42
For example, see Nicholas Couling, The Saints Perfect in This Life or Never (London: Printed
for Giles Calvert, and Art to Be Sold at the West End of Pauls, 1647), 32.
43
Richard Baxter, Richard Baxter’s Confutation of a Dissertation for the Justification of Infidels
(London: By R. W., 1654), 254. Cited from Hans Boersma, A Hot Pepper Corn: Richard Baxter’s
Doctrine of Justification in Its Seventeenth-Century Context of Controversy (Vancouver: Regent
College Publishing, 2003), 234. See also, Richard Baxter, The Saints’ Everlasting Rest (London,
1650), 28; and Richard Baxter, Christian Directory (London, 1673), 818.
44
James I. Packer, A Quest for Godliness:The PuritanVision of the Christian Life (Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 1994), 160.
45
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 45 (3.2).
46
Ibid., 157 (9.1.1).
47
Ibid., 43 (3.2).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
121
“we have cause to believe them all because they are clearly revealed in
Scripture.”48 He then proceeds to explain the Scriptural evidence for union
with Christ.49 This theological method, which recognized the magisterial
authority of Scripture, prevented him from following one implication of
union with Christ in such a way that it would contradict or overshadow
another. Thus, Marshall fought a two-front war against antinomianism and
neonomianism with a robust theology of union with Christ and a theological
method that rejected rationalism in favor of a strong commitment to the
authority of Scripture.
Moreover, when Marshall looked to Scripture, he saw not merely the fact
of union with Christ but the eschatological structure in which the union
functioned. This is particularly important because, for Marshall, the
eschatological structure meant that the parameters of union did not need
to fit the human conception of time. For both the antinomians and Baxter,
the sequencing of union relative to salvation history proved to be the sticking point. The antinomians diminished the instrumentality of faith because
they saw in Scripture that one is united to Christ in election and, therefore,
before faith. They were willing to speak of salvation “by Christ” but not “by
faith.”50 Baxter, in contrast, minimized any union prior to the life of faith in
order to give priority to the biblical teaching on the instrumentality of faith
and obedience. In contrast to both, Marshall’s system is not encumbered
with questions such as how the benefits of Christ are obtained for the
believer before he or she exercises faith. For Marshall, the overarching
chronological factor concerning union with Christ is the eschatological
reality of resurrection penetrating the present. As noted earlier, he concludes his work by saying, “Sanctification in Christ is glorification begun as
glorification is sanctification perfected.”51 The human mind is utterly at a
loss to explain the mechanics of this structure, yet one must believe this
structure because of the clear evidence for it in Scripture.
Believing this structure has clear implications for the believer’s experience
of sanctification as well. If union with Christ is a mystery, then everything
based on union with Christ would be equally mysterious, including the
process of sanctification. Hence, “the gospel mystery of sanctification” is a
way of sanctification that submits ultimately to Scripture and not to the
dictates of reason. Marshall’s system of sanctification requires that the
48
Ibid.
Ibid., 48–57 (3.3.1–3.3.3.5).
50
Timothy Cooper, John Owen, Richard Baxter, and the Formation of Nonconformity
(Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), 62.
51
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 331 (14.5.7).
49
122
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
believer submit to the Scripture’s promise “peremptorily”—that is, at the
most foundational level—even when it seems contrary to the evidence of
one’s reason.52 Thus, embedded in the structure of Marshall’s theology is
a principle that resists rationalism; to comprehend sanctification—and,
even more, to experience it—one must first and foremost believe in the
promises of God and then secondarily consciously submit to the authority
of Scripture.
To clarify Marshall’s position further, we should point out that his rejection
of rationalism is not quite the same as the mystical approach to assurance
that we see in Owen. Jonathan Master has argued that Owen relies upon a
subjective sense of assurance vis-à-vis one’s experience of being loved by
God in Christ.53 Marshall certainly wants to lead his readers into a subjective
experience, especially in their participation in the Lord’s Supper.54 However,
he maintains an objective anchor to assurance in the finished work of
Christ. Thus, Marshall’s antirationalism does not lead to subjectivism.
Rather, it grounds believers in the authority of Scripture and the objective
promise of salvation for all who trust in Christ. The reality that Christ died
for sinners—the likes of which include even the worst of all sinners—and
the promise that whosoever will believe will be saved provide an objective
basis for assurance and the whole experience of sanctification.55
4. Pastoral Theology
Finally, Marshall’s work is also remarkable for the way it weaves together
systematic and pastoral theology. Not only is Marshall not content with
recognizing the pendulum swing of his day and simply offering a systematic
formula that is theoretically resistant to such a swing, but also he offers a
pastoral theology that leads the reader by the hand into a proper experience
of sanctification. His goal is to teach people how to be holy.56
This pastoral theology is important. The antinomian/neonomian controversy of the seventeenth century teaches us that there is a world of difference
between affirming an orthodox definition of sanctification and actually
applying it. The charges of antinomianism and neonomianism were often
52
Ibid., 214 (11.2.1.5).
John Owen, “Of Communion with God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (1657),” in
Works of John Owen (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1966), 2:241–42. See also Jonathan
Master, A Question of Assurance: The Doctrine of Assurance after the Westminster Confession
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2015), 141–70.
54
Marshall, Gospel Mystery, 260 (12.2.7).
55
Ibid., 178 (10.1.4).
56
Ibid., 1 (1).
53
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
123
made not in theological explication but in pastoral application. Marshall’s
work is remarkable in that it attempts—and, in my judgment, succeeds—in
integrating theology and application consistently. Indeed, his whole work is
a manual for becoming holy and thus can hardly be accused of tending
toward antinomianism. Further, his whole work is also aimed at comforting
people in the gospel so that they have a sure basis for work towards holiness,
and so his approach mitigates the charges of neonomianism and antinomianism simultaneously.
A critical part of Marshall’s pastoral theology appears in the last section
of the body of the book, in which he gives directions for living a sanctified
life by faith. He begins direction 13, the penultimate one, by stressing the
centrality of faith. Holy actions are not accomplished by brute force but
through the skill of living by faith.57 He also explains faith’s role in the
Christian life, given the overlap of the ages.58 Believers belong to the new
age, and yet they live in the old. They must exercise faith in the future
promise, even as their experiences fall short of the full glory to come.
Understanding this provides believers with the ability to be concerned
about their sin, but not to let their sin overwhelm them.
In direction 14, the last, Marshall explains how to strengthen one’s faith by
the means of grace. These “means” include prayer, Scripture reading, fellowship with other believers, and the sacraments. These practices strengthen
believers in their faith, which thereby increases them in holiness.59 Again we
see remarkable balance. Marshall avoids the antinomian devaluation of the
means of grace by stressing that the practices are necessary to strengthen
our faith; but he also avoids a legalistic devotion to the means by emphasizing that what they promote is faith, a faith that brings believers into greater
awareness of the gospel. Thus, the goal of the means of grace is to make one
more aware of the gospel. More could (and should) be said about Marshall’s
pastoral theology. The point of interest here is that he coaches believers on
how they are to practice the means of grace. In order to skirt the errors of
antinomianism and neonomianism it was not enough to provide a theoretical
theology of sanctification; he also needed to train believers in the proper
skills of living by faith for them safely to reach their goal.
Conclusion
Having explored four aspects of Marshall’s work that make it useful within
the Reformed tradition, we now make some comments about how to actually
57
58
59
Ibid., 230–35 (12).
Ibid., 244 (12.2.1).
See all of direction 14, ibid., 315–32.
124
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
use Marshall’s theology in the contemporary discussion on sanctification.
We begin with a brief comment regarding one possible reason for conflicting articulations of sanctification in the church.
It is natural for anyone articulating a theology of sanctification to have
more fear of either the antinomian or the neonomian type of error, and it is
normal that this fear would make one more sensitive to any theological
system that contains a trajectory in the direction of the error one fears
more. Likewise, one should not be surprised if those speaking about sanctification differ with one another regarding those aspects of sanctification
that they feel needs to be stressed at any given moment. (Is it the absolute
need for holiness in the redeemed? Or is it the gift-character of the holiness
and the instrumentality of faith?) One should note that these differences
can arise even within the same tradition and that they do not necessarily
indicate a radically different theological structure but can reveal a different
assessment of the need of the moment. Of course, the divergent assessments of the moment’s need are driven by particular theological constructs.
Thus, though theological differences are not absent, they are perhaps not as
great as they may at first appear.
It is of interest for understanding Marshall to note that theologians who
differ on sanctification appreciate his approach, for example, Andrew Murray,
John Murray, Lane Tipton, and John Fesko.60 They articulate sanctification
differently, yet they all commend Marshall. Of course, this does not necessarily commend Marshall’s work. It could be that he is so ambiguous that
one can read a wide range of positions into his book. However, this is unlikely,
given Marshall’s careful scholastic approach. It is more likely that a wide
range of thinkers appreciate him because he affirms some aspect of sanctification that they appreciate and because he shuts down the possibility of
an erroneous view of sanctification that these thinkers also reject.
Our analysis of Marshall suggests that he successfully prevents both
antinomian and neonomian errors. He stops the pendulum from swinging
by refusing to answer one error with the other, but instead, he answers both
simultaneously with a robust theology of union with Christ. As a result,
60
Andrew Murray says, “There is but one book in the language admitted by all to be the
standard one on ‘sanctification.’ It is the work of the Rev. Walter Marshall, published in 1692,
‘The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification.’” Andrew Murray, “Introduction,” in Sanctification; or
the Highway of Holiness an Abridgment of the Gospel Mystery of Sanctification, with an Introductory
Note by A.M., ed. Andrew Murray (London: Nisbet, 1884), v. As already noted, John Murray
is reported to have said of Gospel Mystery that it was “The most important book on sanctification
ever written.” John Fesko, “Sanctification and Union with Christ: A Reformed Perspective,”
Evangelical Review of Theology 34.3 (2010): 117. Lane Tipton encouraged reading Walter
Marshall in class.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› MARSHALL’S GOSPEL MYSTERY OF SANCTIFICATION
125
neither side needs to worry that Marshall will lead to the error it fears.
Marshall stresses the gratuitous nature of our salvation in Christ without
easy-believism and emphasizes the need for holiness without abandoning
grace. As we saw, grace and holiness are not competitors for Marshall, but
they exist in joyful cooperation.
Thus, whatever aspect of sanctification one is predisposed to stress, one
can find that aspect supported in Marshall. However, in order to remain
true to Marshall’s intention, we must do more than quote those sections
that support our emphases. We must also recognize that whatever side of
the Christian life we want to stress is tied to the other because everything is
tied to union with Christ. For instance, if I am attracted to Marshall because
he stresses the need to be holy, I should recognize that holiness can only
happen in the context of free forgiveness in Christ. Or, if I appreciate
Marshall because he stresses the reality of assurance arising directly out of
faith in Christ, I should also recognize that this assurance is never an end in
itself, but always the necessary context whereby I can pursue holiness and
find even more assurance.
Marshall’s theology is, indeed, a blessing to the church, but only if we
wrestle with the deep structure of his thought, for there we will find themes
in sanctification that not only comfort us but also challenge us. May we take
up his work and read.
ETHICS AND SOCIETY
On Earth: Relational
Anthropocentrism in
Creation Care
1
ALESSANDRO PICCIRILLO
Abstract
In evaluating environmental ethics in Western thought, the definitions
and arguments of greatest importance come from consequential,
deontological, and ecocentric approaches. These approaches have
strengths and weaknesses. This article aims at addressing the issues at
stake by introducing the concept of relational anthropocentrism based
on multiperspectivalism.
I. Anthropocene
H
uman presence on earth is so extensive and its activity so
massive that it significantly conditions the planet’s internal
cycles. It is estimated that today’s world population is around
7.6 billion people, with a gradually increasing concentration
in metropolitan urban areas. In 1950 the world population
was around 2.5 billion; estimates say that it will almost quadruple within
the next century.2
1
The following is an adaptation of Alessandro Piccirillo, “Sulla Terra: Elementi per un’etica
della cura del Creato,” Studi di Teologia: Supplemento 16 (2018): 4–30.
2
See Population Division, “The Speed of Urbanization around the World,” Population
Facts 2018.1. The United Nations, Online: https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/
WUP2018-PopFacts_2018-1.pdf.
127
128
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
When one tries to manage numbers of such magnitude, it becomes clear
that the problem of resources is a concrete challenge. The issue is not just
how to feed everyone in environmental scenarios that are increasingly
subject to major climate changes.3 It is also essential to understand the
ecological sustainability of such an anthropic presence on the planet. The
footprint left by human activities has changed the face of the earth, together
with its interdependent balances, to such a degree that the planet’s capacity
for adaptation and resilience has been altered. Faced with a large-scale and
irresponsible demands for land resources, the earth system has no time either
to reproduce what has been removed or to re-create the previous conditions
of comparative abundance. The loss of these resources constitutes a failure
to provide not only for immediate human needs but also for those of other
entities whose existence is increasingly threatened.
A visible example is Lake Aral, located between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, the fourth largest lake in the world, with a surface area of over 68 km2.
Since 1960, this navigable lake has experienced one of the greatest humanmade environmental disasters. During this time, it has gradually and almost
completely dried up. In the 1950s, the Soviet Union (USSR) carried out major
operations to tap the Aral waters to irrigate the Uzbek cotton plantations.
However, the water withdrawal was so disproportionate that the formerly
moderate continental climate of the lake area has become increasingly
extreme, with very wide temperature ranges (104° F in summer, −4° F in
winter), and significantly arid. This development has led to sand storms
and the gradual sedimentation of salt and toxic substances (heavily used in
crops), creating a poisonous mix that has made the lake and the surrounding area unsuitable for life. Aquatic and terrestrial flora and fauna have
diminished dramatically. Local populations have experienced a sizeable
increase in respiratory and renal diseases.4 The region now made inhospitable has created environmental refugees, especially among those who made
a living from fishing—a work network of about forty thousand people who
provided one-sixth of the fish consumed in the former Soviet Union. This
disaster was not only to be expected, but it was also premeditated and
included in a subsequent plan of conversion of the area into rice paddies.
However, since the 1990s, with cotton cultivation in freefall, crumbling
infrastructure, and unfulfilled agreements, the collection of water already
in short supply has become an instrument of political tension and dispute
3
See FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, et al., The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World
2018: Building Climate Resilience for Food Security and Nutrition (Rome: FAO, 2018), 37–78.
4
Augusto Spuri, Cambiamenti climatici: Tra facili allarmismi e pericolose sottovalutazioni
(Turin: Claudiana, 2018), 91.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
129
between the states of the former Soviet Union. The total disappearance of
water is expected by 2025.5 A framework of sociopolitical instability has
emerged as a fitting conclusion to this ecological disaster.
Another example is in Syria. Among the various studies on the factors
that caused the ongoing civil war, there is one published by the National
Academy of Sciences (USA) that investigates the significant climate change
in an area struck by abnormal drought between 2007 and 2010.This drought,
the worst ever recorded in Syria, caused a massive loss of subsistence crops
that generated an extensive migration of farming families (about 1.5 million
people) to urban centers, many of which were already crowded with Iraqi
refugees (estimated at around 1.2–1.5 million). The inevitable result was the
escalation of social tensions due to increasing scarcity of resources, efficient
infrastructure, and jobs on the one hand, and the increase in crime, illegal
activities, and disinterest on the part of the Assad regime on the other.
These were key ingredients for the ensuing sociopolitical conflict. By studying climate trends over a century (rainfall, temperatures, atmospheric
pressure), the researchers collected data and results that give a clear picture:
the drought is of human origin. The cause? An aggressive agricultural policy
that depleted the territory and the hydrogeological resources. The government of Hafez al-Assad advocated unsustainable policies to increase agricultural production and irrigation projects (with subsidies in the form of oil
quotas to its supporters). These policies exploited the limited land and
water resources to such a degree that the groundwater was dangerously
reduced by draining rivers and making crops dependent on rainfall alone.
Once the aquifers or groundwaters were exhausted, at the first sign of
drought, there were no water reserves left, and agricultural production in
the northeast collapsed. Almost all the livestock was lost, the vegetation was
devastated, and the population started to suffer from diseases linked to
malnutrition. To make matters worse, Bashar al-Assad began to cut funds
and subsidies.6 Migration was the only solution.
These two different examples present several related critical issues caused
by the decisive action of man on the natural cycles leading to pollution,
impoverishment, and instability. In both cases, a particular type of behavior
towards the environment caused social injustice, and a specific type of social
5
Michael Wines, “Grand Soviet Scheme for Sharing Water in Central Asia Is Foundering,”
NewYork Times, December 12, 2002, https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/09/world/grand-sovietscheme-for-sharing-water-in-central-asia-is-foundering.html?pagewanted=all.
6
Colin P. Kelley, Shahrzad Mohtadi, Mark. A. Cane, et al., “Climate Change in the Fertile
Crescent and Implications of the Recent Syrian Drought,” Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences 112.11 (March 17, 2015): 3241–46, doi:10.1073/pnas.1421533112.
130
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
injustice exacerbated the ecological crisis. The interaction is very close.
This is not a particularly new phenomenon: the ancient Romans also
polluted and devastated the environment with massive deforestation. What
makes it contemporary are its immense proportions and the contribution
of advanced technology, which combined to produce sudden and unpredictable effects on the environment.
II. Pollution and Deforestation
There is still some resistance in the scientific community to the theory of
human activity as the origin of climate change. However, the data that prove
it are continually accumulating. The first major cause of this is the thinning
of the ozone layer at the poles, which causes the passage of harmful UV rays
into the atmosphere, thereby increasing the polar thaw. Other factors
undoubtedly contribute as well, such as air pollution (produced by domestic,
industrial, and transport combustion gases), water pollution (produced by
the spillage of toxic materials and liquids into water basins), and soil pollution
(produced by pesticides, herbicides, and domestic and industrial waste). It
is the quantity and the quality of the pollution mix of our times that represent
a significant step backward, compared to the situation in previous centuries.
The earth system is resilient and capable of absorbing and degrading waste,
but only within certain limits. In these three cases, pollution produces
imbalances both in the carbon cycle and in the water cycle, which, in turn,
interfere with the mechanisms of “defense” from the sun’s rays and from
the earth’s “heat mining.” With this unexpected increase in heat (caused
not by the position of the earth in relation to the sun, but by anthropic
factors), the consequences can be highly problematic, such as, for example,
the average rise in the level of the oceans.
Also, we are witnessing a high rate of deforestation (with consequent soil
erosion), which drastically decreases the carbon absorption capacity in the
form of CO2 , leading to an increase in the greenhouse effect. Trees are
fundamental not only for the carbon cycle but also for maintaining air
humidity, generating clouds that protect from the sun and produce rain.
In addition to destroying biodiversity, deforestation undermines the
stability and the organic richness of soils. There are generally two reasons
for deforestation: agricultural and residential. In the first case, the problem
arises when expanses of forest are put to intensive monocultures. We are
witnessing the rapid exhaustion of natural resources and soil erosion to the
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
131
point of desertification.7 But there is also a social cost. In Africa, Asia, and
South America, massive deforestation repeatedly affects small local communities and subsistence farmers who, when dispossessed, are relocated
elsewhere, generally in relatively infertile areas. Those displaced are therefore forced to adapt to soils with which they are not familiar and which they
cultivate with unsustainable agricultural methods (doing more harm than
good), often depending exclusively on high yield seeds and expensive technological products that drain virgin areas. Unfortunately, the dispossessed
farmers are not always given other possibilities, since the only options are
subsidies or expedients.8
Finally, with pollution and deforestation, the extinction of species has
intensified. This is by no means of minor importance, since many species
that live in symbiosis with their habitat contribute directly to balance the
dense biotic network by their presence.
III. Technological Development and Commodification of Nature
Two other factors significantly impact the environment: technological
development and the commodification of nature. Technology is not in itself
a threat to environmental health, but it is the underlying concept of both
nature and environment that can make it threatening.
Neither the increasingly advanced technological applications typical of
societies transitioning first to agriculture and then to industry nor the
constant search for new territories to colonize that is typical of modern
capitalism have been anthropologically or environmentally painless.
The conceptual bases are to be found in a progressive detachment from
a divine cosmology, which more or less kept together ontos (being) and telos
(goal), heaven and earth, scientific investigation and religious morality, in a
frame of reference that appeared relatively organic and interconnected. From
William of Ockham onwards, the world of rationality and divine purpose
started to fall apart. The impossibility of really knowing the rationality and
will of God in the realm of nature led to the deprivation of the world of
evident rationality and order. Telos (goal) and ethos (character or nature) are
7
See J. Donald Hughes, Ecology of Ancient Civilizations (Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico Press, 1975); and Clive Ponting, The Green History of the World (London: Penguin,
1988).
8
See Richard North, Life on a Modern Planet: A Manifesto for Progress (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1995), 48; Paul Harrison, The Third World Tomorrow: A Report
from the Battle Front in the War Against Poverty (London: Penguin, 1981), 4546, referred to in
Michael Northcott, The Environment and Christian Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1996), 16.
132
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
no longer self-evident in the natural world, which may now be rediscovered
with new paradigms. With the definition of the fundamental laws of physics,
Isaac Newton laid the foundation of a mechanical cosmology. Immanuel
Kant, for his part, concluded that from the physical world and its internal
laws it is not possible to derive the telos of a good God, which would have
made it possible to elaborate a moral law for civil life. If God is not comprehensible through a “natural” way, but only through an act of faith in his
existence, then faith and morals are divorced from science and reason and
remain confined to the private sphere. The order in nature is no longer tied
to God, and there is in nature no longer evidence of a divine end to which
it aims. Nature, on the other hand, is incomplete and can be remodeled.
Kant and Newton thus created the presuppositions for an atheistic cosmology that removes God from the cosmos and places its purpose in individual
human perceptions: the world is ready to be transformed and directed by
human action.9
Moving on from medieval thought, every form of relationship between
the parts of nature (or even just the notion) is reset. If in the Middle Ages the
deep interconnections were wrongly conceived of, now they are completely
rejected according to rationalistic reductionism and atomistic thought.10
This pattern is clear in Cartesian thought, where reason (res cogitans) becomes
a major discriminating element in human understanding and corporeality
is reduced to a pure extension of it (res extensa). Disenchantment and demystification of creation follow, the typical product being the anthropocentric
Enlightenment. The environment is perceived as pure and simple matter,
tangible, and recombinable. The objective is simple: to dominate nature
with increasingly refined technological tools, de facto elevating scientific
thought to a secular paradigm of salvation.11
When nature is demystified, it also becomes subject to commodification
and appropriation. In premodern Europe, nature was God’s property,
and therefore earth and work were conceived within a clear directional
divine order. However, when a monetary economy becomes dominant, the
forms of exchange and economic relations rooted in the previous order are
reformulated. Money allows spatially distanced and temporally deferred
transactions to be carried out and shifts the centers of power from those
9
John H. Brooke, Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1991), 204–6, referred to in Northcott, Environment, 59.
10
See Oliver O’Donovan, Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evangelical Ethics
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 52.
11
See also Alessandro Piccirillo, “Animalia: La questione animale tra etica delle prospettive
e antropocentrismo relazionale,” Studi di Teologia: Supplemento 11(2013): 7.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
133
who have land and take care of it to those who have currency and assets:
corporations, banks, and institutional investors. The new mobility and the
concentration of social power in monetary wealth contributes to the breaking up of traditional authorities and the mechanisms of shared exercise
of power in local communities. Distancing and abstraction from human
relations become the dominant form of economic relationships. These relationships are separated from divine restraints, from the traditional moral
obligations of good neighbor relations, from justice, and from care for other
people and creation, and they alienate people from the natural world.12
Money becomes the parameter for measuring value, and well-being is
measured in terms of the monetary economy and not in broader terms.
Profit becomes the real driving force of technological development and
investment policies. So when nature is demystified and commodified, then
the kind of productive policy adopted will not have much interest in preserving that asset, but will have interest in exploiting it.
In a biblical vision of the world it is difficult to imagine care of creation
under these conditions. It follows that care of creation and ecological
commitment are put into practice not simply through individual behavior
on single issues (an atomistic approach), but in global and realistic terms. If
we do not understand the underlying structures and the dynamics involved,
we may be well intentioned, but we will not be effective. But what are the
existing paradigms?
IV. Environmental Ethics
The ethics presented here are based on a selection of modern moral paradigms: consequentialism, deontology, and ecocentrism.13 We will present
them in a summarized form, and one should also understand them as
overlapping at times.
1. Consequentialism
A place of pre-eminence in consequentialism is occupied by Peter Singer’s
preference utilitarianism.14 Like any good utilitarian, Singer aims at promoting pleasure and reducing suffering, and not so much at defining rights
per se, as they are not always helpful in attaining the maximum good. A
12
Northcott, Environment, 78–79.
For a helpful summary of these traditions, see ibid., 90–115. For other ethical paradigms
not dealt with here (ecofeminism, religious anthropocentrism, and religious theocentrism), see
ibid., 116–63.
14
Peter Singer, Animal Liberation, 2nd ed. (London: Cape, 1990).
13
134
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
right could prevent the achievement of the maximum good, proving to be
legal but unfair. The promotion of good is extended to all beings who have
interests (e.g., in not suffering and in surviving), who are conscious of
themselves as distinct entities, and who are able to prefer one option to
another. If a being (animal or human) suffers, such suffering must be considered together with the suffering of others. If the sum of all the reasons for
not suffering implies that the actions chosen to obtain the least possible
suffering for the whole include a certain amount of suffering for some, then
those actions are justifiable. Singer’s consequentialist functionalism undoubtedly exposes him to the criticism of reductionism, because it results
in a sterile economic cost-benefit (pleasure-suffering) calculation, and
because the notion of good cannot be exhaustively explained by the
pleasure-suffering dynamic (which is essentially subjective). This kind of
consequentialism is hardly operative, given that the calculation of the best
choice between good and evil is in fact a logical fiction because of selfevident space-time limitations and its lack of predictive force. Another
considerable critical aspect of Singer’s utilitarianism is that its true area of
application is the animal world, while it is virtually oblivious to the moral
interests of nonsentient beings and the more extended community of life,
thereby showing a seriously limited scope for environmental ethics.15
2. Deontology
Deontological approaches attribute a priori inherent values to subjects.
Based on these a priori values, Tom Regan postulates the existence of natural
rights for animals.16 The first foundation for these rights lies in the concept
of “value-in-itself.” This value is an individual objective element for every
living being that entitles a living being to rights by granting it dignity and
respect. Regan links “value-in-itself” to being sentient and (self) conscious.
This requirement is possessed by all moral agents (adult humans, rational,
responsible, and self-conscious) and by all moral patients (conscious and
sentient individuals, responsible or not, rational or not). This guarantees
the attribution of positive, direct, inviolable, and extended rights to both
human and nonhuman animals, typically sensate mammals. These rights
are life, freedom, and well-being. One marked difficulty of this approach is
accounting properly for one of its strongest assumptions, the value-in-itself,
which is taken as self-evident. The entire structure may be dangerously
15
See Piccirillo, “Animalia,” 12–13.
Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (London: Routledge, 1988). A similar Christian
approach can be found in Linzey’s “theos-rights.” Andrew Linzey, Christianity and the Rights of
Animals (London: SCM, 1987); Andrew Linzey, Animal Theology (London: SCM, 1994).
16
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
135
flawed by a form of naturalistic fallacy in attributing respect to an individual
only because there is a state of consciousness. Furthermore, the categories
of moral patients and moral agents have fairly clear boundaries, but the
reason and place of such boundaries can be arbitrary.This implies a reduced
extension of rights to a few protected subjects and does not look at the
protection of entire ecosystems.
Holmes Rolston’s deontological approach acknowledges an intrinsic
value to both individuals and collectivities that is based on a purpose not
dependent on human perception.17 Rolston speaks of “objects-with-will,”
referring to all the living beings with objective and autonomous character.
Rolston therefore defends the complete otherness of natural objects and
their claims to the right to flourish, and he also includes communities and
ecosystems. Having said that, Rolston builds a hierarchy of values between
different life forms with “richer” features so that they are able to make real
choices. Although this deontological approach is by far the most operative,
it still does not address the systemic issues and the forms of alienation from
nature of modern civilizations.
3. Ecocentrism
The ecocentric paradigms of Aldo Leopold and Baird Callicott seek to
address both the purely ecological dynamics and the state of alienation
previously mentioned.18 They do so by looking at the earth as an integrated
whole. At the same time, they attribute a moral significance to ecosystems
defined as a community of interdependent lives (human and nonhuman).
In particular, the land ethics of Leopold emphasizes the community of all
life forms, forcing individuals to preserve biotic equilibria and restore their
integrity when they are undermined. A biotic unit can contain predators,
and this place must be preserved to ensure the integrity of the ecosystem.
Humanity is obliged to limit overpopulation of animal or plant species and
preserve those balances. According to Callicott, this means that a certain
degree of suffering must be factored in, contrary to the utilitarians and
proponents of animal rights. At the same time, humans are called to moderate their lifestyle so as not to threaten the rest of the biotic community.
This form of ecocentrism sees the ethics of the integrity of the earth
primarily as a guarantee of the stability of the ecosystem, which includes
17
Holmes Rolston, Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural Environment
(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988).
18
Aldo Leopold, A Sand Country Almanac and Sketches Here and There (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1968); J. Baird Callicott, In Defence of the Land Ethic: Essays in Environmental
Philosophy (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989).
136
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
human society. This perspective contrasts with a biblical vision, which
claims that when human and social life is in line with the Mosaic law and
the ethics of Jesus, then both earth and ecosystems prosper. Usually social
injustice precedes ecological disaster. A sound earth ethic must be able to
manage this structural datum to be effective and to be applied universally
instead of being valid only in national parks and wildlife reserves.
The Gaia hypothesis of James Lovelock is based on a biochemical model
that sees the world as a living entity. This entity sustains itself and has its
own intelligence that makes the biosphere livable.19 Gaia is the product of
thought that combines reductionist elements (scientific knowledge) and
holistic elements. According to this, the more humans exercise their influence, the more they take responsibility, so the moderation of their impact
is a key element. If humans put Gaia’s life at risk, she will find a way to
readjust, even eliminating humanity if necessary. To avoid reaching this
point, urbanized humans and scientists in particular must recover their
being in connection with the natural world. Lovelock’s hypothesis includes
a notion of planetary egalitarian democracy, where humanity is a partner
of planetary forces rather than an owner or a steward.
Another model of ecocentrism is deep ecology, represented by Freya
Matthews and Matthew Fox.20 In this paradigm, the real differences between
human and nonhuman are eliminated, thus producing a universal mystical
unity. This approach suffers from a form of pantheistic monism21 and risks
promoting a homogenization of nature for purely human purposes that
instead of protecting it puts it at risk. If we imagine a unified and nondiversified world, we will be prone to resetting it in a human image.
Arne Naess’s ecosophy is very similar to land ethics and the Gaia hypothesis.22 If the problem of Western humans with nature is their atomistic
conception of self and preoccupation with their own interests, Naess says,
they must rethink their self-interest starting from ecology. In doing so,
individuals and societies will pursue the positive qualities of personal
commitment and responsibility, combined with mutual dependence, in a
form of relational self-realization. The subjectivism of this position does not
consider the real differences between human and nonhuman beings and
19
James Lovelock, Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1979).
20
Freya Matthews, The Ecological Self (London: Routledge, 1991); Matthew Fox, Original
Blessing: A Primer in Creation Spirituality (Santa Fe, NM: Bear, 1983).
21
David T. Williams, “Trinitarian Ecology,” Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology 18.2
(2000): 151–52.
22
Arne Naess, Ecology, Community and Lifestyle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1993), 153 and ch. 2.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
137
ends up incorporating the other into one’s self for self-realization. Even so,
we are faced with a process of homogenization of differences and relationality that becomes a rhetorical device.
Adapting the interpretative framework of multiperspectivalism (norm,
existence, and situation, see below)23 to the paradigms briefly presented,
we may note that deontological ethics are highly normative, while the
utilitarian, ecophilosophical and deep ecology models have strongly
subjective-experiential traits. Looking further into the Gaia hypothesis, we
note that the model has normative and subjective elements. Leopold and
Callicott’s ecocentrism, with their emphasis on the ethics of the integrity
of the earth and their investment in relational structures, has a more
normative-situational approach.
V. Relational Anthropocentrism
The ethics we have seen thus far encourage us to find an overall paradigm
that can hold together at the same time the issues of safeguarding the
environment and the framework of the human-nature relationship, consisting of power dynamics, justice, and social ties. Such a platform would make
it possible to build an ethic that is based on the doctrine of creation in
relation to the Trinity (norm), on the profound essence of the imago Dei
and participation in the community of creation (existence), and, finally, on
the dynamic reality of conservation and service (situation). We call this
paradigm relational anthropocentrism.24
1. Creation
Creation does not belong to man; it is not his. It is created by God for his
own pleasure and delight. It is God’s property, and he claims sovereign
jurisdiction over it. Creation is not sustained by human beings. The laws
that keep the planet running, the food that animals consume, the life lived
23
See John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing,
1987); John M. Frame, The Doctrine of Christian Life (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008).
In Italian Reformed evangelicalism, the multiperspectival approach in ethics has been consistently applied in Leonardo De Chirico, “La pratica dell’uno del molteplice: Etica delle
prospettive,” Studi di Teologia: Supplemento 34 (2005): 156–65; CSEB, “Aborto: Un documento
del Centro Studi di Etica e Bioetica di Padova,” Studi di Teologia: Supplemento 6 (2005): 3–15;
Leonardo De Chirico, “Eutanasia: Un documento del Centro Studi di Etica e Bioetica di
Padova,” Studi di Teologia: Supplemento 1 (2005): 2–12; Alessandro Piccirillo, “L’antropologia
del ‘seno materno’ nel personalismo relazionale di Leonardo De Chirico: Per una ridefinizione
dello statuto dell’embrione,” Bioetica: Rivista Interdisciplinare 19.1 (2011): 75–96.
24
For a good summary of these perspectives, see John M. Frame, Perspectives on the Word of
God: An Introduction to Christian Ethics (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1990), 50–54.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
138
by the created beings; all depend on God’s providential support. God, after
the creation, is active in the care, management, maintenance, and nourishment of every living species (animal or plant). This providence is significant
because it reflects the value that God sets on his creation. In dealing with
ecosystems that are not in direct contact with man and that do not depend
on the presence of humans but exist independently, God emphasizes his
centrality in creation so that much flora and fauna exist regardless of
whether they are useful to man. Thus, creation does not reflect us but the
Creator, and God is a God of order. The account of creation in Genesis 1 is
indicative of the fact that the world was made ex nihilo, but it was made
with an order that permeates the profound structure of creation. Chaos and
chance are excluded. In separating the waters from the dry earth, God
places order and limits on the uncontrolled and destructive power of oceans
and seas (cf. Jer 5:22). In separating day and night with the positive interference of stars and planets, God regulates time, declaring “let them serve
as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years” (Gen 1:14).
The God of the Bible is also the God of covenants and alliances. In establishing order in the creation, God makes an asymmetrical covenant in
which the minor contractor (the created world) will be kept in order and
the laws that govern it will not be suspended. That he has established a
covenant with the day and the night and the laws of heaven and earth implies
that there is a form of stable and primordial covenant with the creation.
This creation also includes human society, with which God has made several
covenants throughout history. Further, there is an extremely close connection between the covenant with creation and those made more specifically with human societies, as Jeremiah 33:20–21 makes quite clear. This
passage refers to the cosmic aspect in the Davidic covenant and the natural
order that recalls the social order, as both natural and social order represent
the Creator. The prosperity of the social order is founded on the keeping of
the cosmic covenant; the prosperity of the natural order is marked by man’s
respect of the covenants between God and human society.25 Isaiah 24:4–6
and Jeremiah 5:23–25 indicate the consequences of breaking the covenants
between God and man. The covenantal harmony underlies the created
order and is the basis of the ecological stability of the earth.
In the covenants and the stipulations between God and humanity, there
is also an appeal to justice that is not exclusively moralistic; rather, it is an
integral call to unite justice and adoration. Adoration is to be addressed to
God alone, and not to the natural created elements, and it is because of this
25
See also Psalm 72:1–6.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
139
adoration that social ethics and harmony with the environment flourish.
The prophets of Israel repeatedly underline the direct relationship between
religious infidelity and social collapse, combined with a subsequent subversion of the natural order.26
Conceiving creation in these terms helps to orient and hold together
ecological sensitivity and the dynamics of political and social power. The
regulatory framework of reference is effectively the covenant made by God
with his creation, which is closely connected with the other covenants made
with humanity as a specific part of creation. Another highly qualifying
aspect of this bond is the institution of the Sabbath of the earth27 and the
Jubilee. Rest for the earth is not merely an exercise of precaution and faith
but also a real form of respect and ecological safeguard for the natural order.
The exploitation of the earth is controlled, and the regenerative capacities
of the ecosystem are allowed to act. The redistribution of the land among
tribes was a reference to God as the sole landowner and Israel as delegated
owner. It allowed for the exercise of justice and social mercy to safeguard
the members of society from constant exposure to vulnerability. Moreover,
if the earth is not owned by individuals for an indefinite period but belongs
to God and is entrusted to people in wider social contexts (the tribe and
redistribution of land at the Jubilee), it implies that the earth represents a
common intergenerational heritage. An approach to land management and
ownership completely different from the current economic order emerges.
2. Imago Dei
If God is Triune, and if his people are equal in essence (sharing a common
creatureliness) but distinct in function, this Trinitarian structure of multiplicity and unity is also reflected in the creation in the way God intended.
Descriptions of what it means to be in the image of God must take into
account the Tri-unity.
One of the first dimensions to be grasped is the incarnation. When the
second person of the Godhead becomes body and matter within his own
creation, then it becomes even clearer that redemption is not from corrupt
matter (but from sin) because it is in matter that the second person of the
Trinity is incarnate. Redemption does not come by eliminating matter, but
by redirecting it to a creational trajectory oriented to God’s purposes.
Therefore, it is fundamental to understand that the Trinity itself implies a
26
See Robert Murray, The Cosmic Covenant: Biblical Themes of Justice, Peace and the Integrity
of Creation (London: Sheed & Ward, 1992).
27
Northcott, Environment, 187–93.
140
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
positive conception of the created world, not only because it was declared
good at creation, but because it is declared good in the redemptive incarnation and in view of God’s eternal purposes. A clear understanding of this
dimension of the Trinity in creation allows human beings to recover a
relational ethic between human and nonhuman. Moreover, if creation also
explicates the Triune Creator, it will also express the deep and stable interconnections between the three persons of God, through the harmonious
interdependence of its parts. The eschatological perspective aims at this
restoration.28
Francis Schaeffer, in his 1977 work Pollution and the Death of Man, refers
to these aspects when he says,
It follows that if we return to the Reformation’s Biblical view that nature is worth
painting, so the nature which we paint is also worth something in itself. This is the
true Christian mentality. It rests upon the reality of creation out of nothing by God.
But it also follows that all things are equally created by God. All things were equally
created out of nothing. All things, including man, are equal in their origin, as far as
creation is concerned.29
Then, describing the relationship between an infinite God and his finite
creation, he says,
On the side of God’s infinity everything else is finite and equally separated from
God; but on the side of his personality, God has created man in His own image.
Therefore, man’s relationship is upward [as being in the image God] rather than
downward [as being part of the natural creation]. … Man is separated, as personal,
from nature because he is made in the image of God, that is he has personality, and
as such he is unique in the creation; but he is united to all other creatures as being
created. Man is separated from everything else, but that does not mean that there is
not also a proper relationship downward on the side of man’s being created and
finite. … Christians reject the view that there is no distinction—or only a quantitative
distinction—between man and other things; and they reject the view that man is
totally separated from all other things.30
Humanity is not given a choice between upward and downward; it must
relate to these dimensions in an integral way, in different yet interconnected
relationships.31 There is no room for dualism that attributes more value to
the dimension of the spirit than to matter. In other words, these divisions
28
See Romans 8:19–23.
Francis Schaeffer and Udo W. Middelmann, Pollution and the Death of Man (Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 2011), 47.
30
Ibid., 48–50.
31
Ibid., 52.
29
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
141
are overcome in the biblical worldview, because it is integral and integrated.
As the Creator values the created world (in creation, the incarnation, and
redemption), and takes charge of it, so must humanity reattribute this value
and live it out in concrete ways.
So, the imago Dei as a subjective or experiential element facilitates the
adoption of an anthropocentrism before and under the Creator. It is in itself
a by-product of theocentrism. Man will take on his covenantal responsibilities, valuing his creatureliness as God values it. A relational anthropocentrism
challenges the biocentric objection that views the imago Dei as an imperialist
pretext. It does so because, while it does not eliminate the distinction, it can
appreciate its own creatureliness by learning how to relate effectively with
other creatures.
3. Conservation and Service
Humanity is placed within the natural order and has the function of dominating it (radah, Gen 1:26) and subduing it (kabash, Gen 1:28). This is strong
language, but it must be contextualized to avoid poor misinterpretations.
If the sovereign Creator values his work by repeatedly saying “It is good,”
then when he orders humanity to dominate and subdue, he adopts the
royal language of a lord addressing one of his representatives, charging
him to go to every corner of his kingdom to assess its progress, report it, and
actively contribute to its conservation, management, and restoration. In
performing this function, humanity is called on to support techno-scientific
enterprise (naming animals, doing taxonomy, producing scientific knowledge), to innovate (developing new techniques and new skills), and to
manage (“and subdue it”). If the words radah and kabash continue to
sound strong, this is balanced by the seemingly incongruous order of
Genesis 2:15, to work and care for the earth. More specifically, the wide
meaning of the terms covers the sense of serving, working for someone
(‘abad) and taking care of and safeguarding (shamar). ‘Abad and shamar
indicate an action done in the name of and in favor of creation and not on
behalf of human beings as such. Responsibility for control passes through
service and attention to and caring for the suffering, the damage, and the
delicate balance of creation on God’s behalf. A good way to safeguard is to
strive as much as possible to favor a harmonious shalom for the ecosystem
through both sustainable development models and productive policies,
urbanization, and landscape management.
Returning to the commands concerning domination and service, we can
use the apparent oxymoron servant dominion. This understanding is useful
for an environmental ethic because it contains a balance between the
142
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
dimension of responsibility and that of care and conservation. This allows
us to have the best tools to face the different circumstances in which we
operate, getting as close as possible to God and Christ. It is, in fact, in the
incarnation of Christ and redemption that we see this tension resolved.
Thus, Christ’s incarnation asserts the value of creatureliness, and redemption qualifies this value by pointing to the end of creation. At the same time,
Christ embodies the servant king who controls reality while also serving to
the point of sacrifice. Now, mutatis mutandis, the dominion that humans
can implement is that of knowing and valuing reality and making responsible decisions about the management of creation.
In this sense, we have often talked about environmental stewardship,
administration, and custodianship. Over the years, this definition has
required further specification in light of problems arising with the interpretation of this concept. Stewardship, in particular, implies a condition in
which humans are practically in control of nature when in reality they are
not. Criticism has also been made that this concept leads to an attitude that
is too top-down and not very participatory, as in the case of those who
manage the assets of others with a certain detachment. In other words, if
you are not the owner, then there is little incentive in showing real interest
and being responsibly involved. We are seeing more and more that the tables
are being turned: individual ownership of land is often connected with a
purely commodified view of the earth, and this has repeatedly led to the
environmental crisis in which we find ourselves in the present.
Having said that, the problem of participation remains, and the value of
stewardship cannot be completely overlooked. At this point, it is worth
reinforcing this concept, with the awareness that men and women are
members of the biotic community, members of the community of creation,
or co-creatures.32 If we link this concept to that of the covenant mentioned
earlier, we see how in the biblical framework humanity, which is represented
by the people of God, and the natural order, which is represented by the
earth (promise), are both parties in the cosmic covenant that God established
with Israel at the time of Moses, but which still has its full paradigmatic
value even now.
Returning to servant dominion, which is carried out by co-creatures as
part of a cosmic covenant, service completes (and is completed by) domination, because it entails taking responsibility for the needs of creation and
caring for it without a “superiority complex” in relation to the elements of
32
See Richard Bauckham, Bible and Ecology: Rediscovering the Community of Creation (Waco,
TX: Baylor University Press, 2010), chapter 3.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› RELATIONAL ANTHROPOCENTRISM IN CREATION CARE
143
nature. Dominion and service therefore concretely dissolve the claims of
mindless exploitation of creation, and together they assume the responsibility
of coming into contact with other creatures without awe but with humility.
Conclusion
It is clear that creation care, once the many dimensions involved are understood, is realized through very different projects, since much work is to be
done. A known risk one should be aware of is that, due to a lack of coordination, many human-resource-draining projects will be activated. It therefore
becomes crucial to know the context in which one intends to operate and
to work with a clear understanding of the past. Once we recognize that
commitment to creation care is a call addressed to all humanity, not just
parts of it, we must assess how effective pioneering or reinforcement actions
are possible at a collective level.
Often the actors giving the initial impulse are the intermediate bodies. A
flexible and dynamic organization will make building around a core of strong
ideas possible, but without institutional and bureaucratic rigidity. It is
through actions of associations, committees, and lobbies that institutions are
called on to implement regulatory measures to achieve ecological objectives.
When this happens, new spaces open up for further interventions and
further demands on politics, education, and culture.
As we have seen, for an environmental ethic in the care of creation, it is
necessary not only to verify how a paradigm responds systemically to ecological urgencies, but also to assess what degree of planning and management can have an effective long-term influence in moral and political
choices. Careful observation will recognize how environmental issues
necessarily have direct relationships with the dynamics of social, economic,
and political justice, and with a plurality of world views.
The Relevance of Calvin’s
View of Work and Calling
to Christians in Newly
Industrialized Countries
MATTHEW EBENEZER
Abstract
In the context of the economies of Newly Industrialized Countries, this
article surveys the understanding of work in Islam and Hinduism and
contrasts them with John Calvin’s notion of work and calling. The
author analyzes Islamic traditions, classic Hindu texts, and Calvin’s
Institutes and Commentaries. While Islam puts a premium on religious
work, and Hinduism defines work in light of its caste system, in a
Reformed worldview, God values all types of work, and workers are
God’s stewards. This notion is of particular relevance to those involved in
economic development.
I
n recent years a group of nations has been recognized as Newly Industrialized Countries. These countries are moving from agrarian to
industrialized economies, and they are successfully harnessing the
strengths of their workforces to produce and export products, thereby
improving both their economies and standards of living. Some of
these countries, such as India and China, may have an overall low per capita
income due to their large populations, yet they have thriving economies.
In the late twentieth century, the sudden industrial expansion of Hong
Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan led to their being described as
145
146
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Newly Industrialized Countries. Other countries, such as Turkey, Thailand,
Malaysia, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Indonesia, China, and
India, whose industries grew in the late twentieth and early twenty-first
centuries, also came to be considered in this category.1 This phenomenon
of industrialization brings with it great opportunities for people in all sectors
of work, as industry impacts every area of labor.
In such contexts the issue of work becomes prominent. More jobs are
created, and a new understanding of work and the dignity of labor arises.
In class- and caste-conscious India, for example, Japanese investment in
various industrial sectors, such as automobile manufacturing, brings a new
understanding of the dignity of labor. There is a conscious attempt to
make blue-collar workers understand that their role in the production
process is crucial. This breaks down the feeling that the working class is not
as important as the management sector.2
In Newly Industrialized Country economies the question may arise
whether a person engaged in a particular work is doing something that is
God-honoring, especially in Asian contexts, where there is a clear distinction between secular and sacred, the common and the holy, and laity and
priests. A clear understanding of work, as a calling approved by God, is
vital for the Christian.
John Calvin’s contribution to the understanding of work and Christian
calling can be applied to the growing industrial economies around the world,
some of which have a significant Christian presence. Though generally
remembered as a theologian, his view of the Christian life was not limited
to spiritual issues; it encompassed all areas of life and society.
We propose broad surveys, first of work, its hierarchical features, and its
relation to slavery; second, work in Islam and Hinduism; third, Calvin’s
understanding of Christian calling as it relates to all occupations and not
just ecclesiastical calling; and finally, some evaluation.
I. The Understanding of Work
The hierarchical aspects of work in ancient times are best considered against
the background of slavery. In the Old Testament, the Israelites became slaves
1
“Newly Industrialized Country (NIC),” Encyclopædia Britannica Online, http://www.britannica.com/topic/newly-industrialized-country.
2
The many multinational corporations that are coming into the country with the liberalization of its economy have brought with them a new understanding of the importance of work.
The best known of these are the American fast food chains such as McDonalds, Kentucky
Fried Chicken, and Domino’s Pizza.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
147
in Egypt as a result of political changes, in which the rulers saw them as a
threat to their nation. Conditions were increasingly difficult for them (Exod
1:8–22). In the Pentateuch, Moses warned the Israelites to treat slaves
humanly. They were to remember that they too were slaves in Egypt. There
were situations in which Israelites would become slaves to their own people.
In such cases, there was an onus on masters to treat their slaves in a dignified
and God-honoring manner (Lev 25:39–46; Deut 15:12–18).
In the New Testament, the presence of slavery is accepted, and no attempt
was made to abolish it as part of the social order. Paul writes to slaves and
masters about their responsibility to each other. The slave ought to obey
as unto the Lord (Eph 6:5–8; Col 3:22–25), and the master needs to treat
the slave kindly, as he himself is under God, the greater Master (Eph 6:9;
Col 4:1).
Slavery and work went together in ancient times. Slaves were often spoils
of war and made to work for their captors. As slavery became a recognized
institution, the professions of slaves underwent complex changes. Slaves
were not merely engaged in physical labor; some were literate and skilled
and held different professions despite their social status.3 The different
abilities, gifts, and learning of slaves gradually led to a hierarchy in occupations.4 Manual labor was on the lowest rank, while priestly, mental, and
martial “work” occupied higher positions. This hierarchy is found in both
religion and society.
The idea of priests being set apart for religious duties is common in most
religions. A good example is the change that took place in the Roman
Empire after Constantine became emperor. Jacob Burckhardt considers
the exaltation of Christian martyrs as a force that challenged the imperial
edicts, and with this came the organization of the church with hierarchical
distinctions. “The choice of spiritual leaders or at least their confirmation
remained in the hands of the communities, but these became more and
more definitely to be distinguished from the laity as clergy.”5 This feudalistic
structure is seen in ancient religion as well as society in medieval times.
Medieval society was divided horizontally, with the king at the top followed
by priests, knights, and peasants.6
3
“Slavery, Serfdom, and Forced Labour,” Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th ed. (Chicago:
Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1974), 16:857.
4
An example is Tiro (who died in 4 b.c.); he was Marcus Tullius Cicero’s slave and freedman,
and as his secretary helped to publish his works.
5
Jacob Burckhardt, The Age of Constantine the Great, trans. Moses Hadas (New York:
Doubleday Anchor Books, 1956), 113.
6
Philip Schaff, The Middle Ages, vol. 5 of History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1907), 45–47.
148
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
II. Work in Islam and Hinduism
1. Islam
Islam claims to have a positive view of work. However, the 113 references to
“work” in 108 verses of the Quran in the Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation
refer primarily to work in the sense of righteousness or good work.7 In order
to see “work” as an action it is necessary to go to the Hadith, or Islamic
tradition that records the sayings and practices of the prophet Mohammed
gathered by followers; of these the most authentic traditions are by Sahih
Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, and it is these that will be considered. The
following examples reveal Islam’s understanding of work.
Work is closely connected with charity or good works. For example, in
response to a statement that every Muslim should give charity, a tradition
answers that they should engage in work.8 The emphasis is not so much on
work itself but work as a means of performing charitable deeds. A similar
reference speaks about the necessity for every Muslim to give sadaqa,
which is “voluntary charity.” The importance of sadaqa is shown in that one
who cannot work can still give his share of charity by passive abstinence
from evil. Even if one cannot work, he may acquire merit by passive abstinence.9 Similarly,
Narrated Al-Miqdam: The Prophet said, “Nobody has ever eaten a better meal than
that which one has earned by working with one’s own hands. The Prophet of Allah,
David, used to eat from the earnings of his manual labor.”10
Rather than good works, the accent here is on “working with one’s own
hands.” Although the reference to David is cryptic, the point is that one may
7
Quran, trans. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, https://www.searchtruth.com/search.php?keyword=
work&translator=2.
8
“Narrated Abu Burda: from his father from his grandfather that the Prophet said, ‘Every
Muslim has to give in charity.’ The people asked, ‘O Allah’s Prophet! If someone has nothing
to give, what will he do?’ He said, ‘He should work with his hands and benefit himself and also
give in charity (from what he earns).’ The people further asked, ‘If he cannot find even that?’
He replied, ‘He should help the needy who appeal for help.’ Then the people asked, ‘If he
cannot do that?’ He replied, ‘Then he should perform good deeds and keep away from evil
deeds and this will be regarded as charitable deeds’” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book 24, Hadith 524,
https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=24&translator=1&start=40).
9
Sahih Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2202, https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.
php?book=5&translator=2&start=60.
10
Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book 34, Hadith 286, https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.
php?book=34&translator=1&start=20.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
149
enjoy the blessings of his labor. Another reference to work in general is this:
Narrated Al-Aswad bin Yazid: “I asked, ‘Aisha, What did the Prophet use to do at
home?’ She said, ‘He used to work for his family, and when he heard the Adhan (call
for prayer), he would go out.’”11
History tells us that Mohammed was the founder of Islam as well as a
warrior. If this hadith is authentic, it shows that he did not shun work that
was not in keeping with his identity as a warrior and that prayer takes precedence over work, which is suspended during times of prayer.
Islamic tradition holds that even work done for religious purposes can be
remunerated. A duty performed towards God is entitled to a reward.12 When
payment is made, the receiver may use it or give it in charity; this is a call to
share what was received. For example, Fatima is advised to perform religious
duties instead of being given additional assistance for her housework.
Abu Huraira reported that Fatima came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him)
and asked for a servant and told him of the hardship of household work. He said, “You
would not be able to get a servant from us. May I not direct you to what is better than
the servant for you? Recite Subhaana Allah thirty-three times, al-Hamdu li-Allah
thirty-three times and Allah-o-Akbar thirty-four times as you go to bed.” This hadith
has been narrated on the authority of Suhail with the same chain of transmitters.13
This implies that work assigned to a person has to be done. The recitation
expected of Fatima is puzzling, as it does not lighten her work in any way.
As in the above instances, religious duties are more important than ordinary
chores, and they in some way ease the burden of physical labor, although it
is not clear how this is accomplished.
11
Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book 64, Hadith 276, https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.
php?book=64&translator=1&start=10.
12
“Ibn al-Sa‘di Maliki reported: ‘Umar b. Khattab (Allah be pleased with him) appointed
me as a collector of Sadaqa. When I had finished that (the task assigned to me) and I handed
over that to him (to ‘Umar), he commanded me to (accept) some remuneration (for the work).
I said: I performed this duty for Allah and my reward is with Allah. He said: Take whatever has
been given to you, for I also performed this duty during the time of the Messenger of Allah
(may peace be upon him). He assigned me the task of a collector and I said as you say, and the
Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to me: When you are given anything without
your begging for it, (then accept it), eat it and give it in charity.” Sahih Muslim, Book 5, Hadith
2275, https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=5&translator=2&start=140.
13
Sahih Muslim, Book 35, Hadith 6580, https://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?
book=35&translator=2&start=100.
150
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
2. Hinduism
The Hindu religious tradition in India is the soil in which the complex
social order of the rigid caste system is rooted.14 This caste system led to
the prosperity and happiness of the higher castes and the oppression of the
lower. Robert Antoine describes caste as
a theocracy ruled by divinely appointed kings (Kşatriya), who were assisted by
priestly ministers and interpreters of the traditional code of behavior (Brāhmans),
while cultivation and trade were in the hands of a third class (Vaiśyas). These three
upper classes were the ruling classes of invaders who reduced the original settlers
(Śūdras) to the state of serfdom.15
Though the last statement is debated, caste and its implications for Indian
society have continued for millennia. The fourth servant caste of Sudras is
oppressed in many ways, and their duties are spelled out in the ancient law
book of the Hindus, Manusmrti or the Laws of Manu:
IX.334. To serve brahmins who are learned in the Vedas, householders, and famous
for virtue, is the highest duty of a sudra, which leads to beatitude.
IX.335. A sudra who is pure, the servant of his betters, gentle in his speech, and free
from pride, and always seeks a refuge with brahmins, attains a higher caste.
IX.413. But a sudra … may [be compelled] to do servile work; for he was created
by the Self-existent [Lord] to be the slave of a brahmin.
IX.414. A sudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude;
since that is innate in him, who can set him free from it?16
From these laws it appears that the sudras are forever trapped in a hopeless situation. Even though IX.335 seems to imply that there is a way out
14
“Caste is a very complex reality which it is difficult to define. The best we can do is to try
to enumerate the distinctive characters which may be said to apply to all castes: (i) A caste is a
closed social group theoretically based on heredity; everyone belongs to the caste in which he
is born. (ii) It possesses an independent organization, a head and a council, which may meet
on special occasions. (iii) It has common festivals and common usages particularly in matters
of marriage and food. (iv) Its members usually practice the same profession or trade, or at least
related profession. (v) It has power to impose penalties on its members, the most grievous
being expulsion from the caste.” Robert Antoine, “Hindu Ethics: Special Ethics,” in Religious
Hinduism: A Presentation and Appraisal, by Jesuit Scholars, 2nd rev. ed. (Allahabad: St. Paul’s
Publications, 1964), 114.
15
Antoine, “Hindu Ethics,” 115.
16
Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan and Charles A. Moore, eds., A Source Book in Indian Philosophy
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957), quoted in “The Laws of Manu, c. 1500 b.c.e.,”
Hanover College History Department, http://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/ 261manu.
html. See also The Laws of Manu, trans. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty and Brian Smith (New
York: Penguin, 1991).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
151
for them, in reality it seems improbable. Though other castes do have to do
some work, the sudras’ fate seems sealed, and work is a perpetual, hereditary
yoke. The sudras are fortunate compared to the dalits, who fall outside the
four principal castes. Dalit is a word meaning downtrodden or oppressed,
and dalits until recently were termed “untouchable” because of the menial
work that they did but that no one else would do. When religion segregates
human beings into classes according to tradition, and identity is bound
with the kind of work done, there is no idea of dignity of labor.
In chapter 3 of the Bhagavad-Gita, written later than the Laws of Manu,
work appears as a means of salvation. Work is not physical, but the performance of duty for salvation, presented as Karma Yoga, one of the paths of
salvation in Hinduism.17
In Hinduism work has negative connotations viewed in terms of the caste
system. Whereas the three ruling castes enjoyed the benefits of respectability
in their occupations, the sudras had to serve the others. The plight of the
untouchables is greater. These unfortunates were (and still are, in some
places) compelled to work in subhuman conditions because of heredity.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi tried to elevate their social standing by
calling them “children of God,” or harijan, but, unfortunately, this term
became another means of identifying them as inferior.
The oppressive caste system continues to have a bearing on India as a
nation. The government, in its desire to accommodate the caste system, has
introduced social benefits to some lower castes in the form of reserved jobs
and study opportunities. This has brought unrest and dissatisfaction among
the other castes. There are occasional cases of higher castes trying to pass
as low caste in order to receive government benefits. A dire fact is that even
today, after decades of independence, lower castes are prohibited from worshiping in Hindu temples or drawing water from village wells. Caste clashes
often result in sporadic violence, including murder, rape, and arson.
In recent years the Christian church has begun to address the issue of
caste by fighting for the cause of the dalits and the oppressed classes in
Hindu society.
III. Calvin’s Understanding of Calling and Work
During his second stay in Geneva, from 1541–1564, Calvin applied some of
his experiences in Strasbourg “to address the issue of Christianity in the
17
A. C. Bhaktivendanta Swami Prabhupada, ed., Bhagvad-Gita: As it Is, rev. ed. (1872;
repr., Mumbai: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 1986), 163–213.
152
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
public arena.”18 His thought on calling and work is significant. Work was not
to be shunned for something higher, such as monastic life and meditation.
In his understanding, work and calling are closely related. We work because
God has called us to work.
Both Martin Luther and the Genevan Reformer saw work as something
positive, though with differences.19 For instance, Luther believed that a
person called to a particular occupation should remain in it for life. Calvin,
however, provided for learning another trade and changing occupation.20
Ian Hart observes that for Calvin, “the purpose of calling was that each one
should serve his fellowmen, and in turn be served by them. … Work there is
a bond which unites a man to his neighbors; work provides mutual contact
and communication.”21 This notion provides a foundation for an ideal community. Another major area of difference was usury. While Luther rejected
interest and trade itself, Calvin had a positive view of business and lending
of money on interest, with safeguards. He made a distinction between the
prohibition of taking interest in the Old Testament and the taking and
giving loans in Geneva. Whereas the former was because of poverty, in
Geneva, loans were taken for investing in business and making a profit.
Calvin says, “I conclude that it is necessary to judge usuries not according
to some certain and particular statement of God, but according to the rule
of fairness.”22
Calvin was so broadminded in his understanding of the importance of
trade and economic progress that he transformed Geneva into a model city,
not simply as a haven for refugees, but as a hub for business and banking.
Philip Schaff writes,
Efforts were made to give useful employment to every man that could work. Calvin
urged the Council in a long speech, Dec. 29, 1544, to introduce the cloth and silk
industry …. The factories were forthwith established and soon reached the highest
degree of prosperity. The cloth and silk of Geneva were highly prized in Switzerland
and France, and laid the foundation for the temporal wealth of the city. When Lyons
… surpassed the little Republic in the manufacture of silk, Geneva had already begun
to make up for the loss by the manufacture of watches.23
18
Alister McGrath, “Calvin and the Christian Calling,” First Things 94 (June/July 1999):
31–35, http://www.firstthings.com/article/1999/06/calvin-and-the-christian-calling.
19
Ian Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and Calvin about Ordinary Work: 2. John Calvin,”
Evangelical Quarterly 67.2 (1995): 121–35.
20
Ibid., 125.
21
Ibid., 126.
22
John H. Leith, John Calvin’s Doctrine of the Christian Life (Philadelphia: Westminster,
1989), 191–92, quoted in Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and Calvin,” 131.
23
Philip Schaff, The Swiss Reformation, vol. 8 of History of the Christian Church, rev. ed.
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1910), 516–17. For a purely sociological explanation of the
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
153
Here was a Reformer who was willing to view life holistically. Many followers
of Calvin have caught this vision.
Despite the trials he endured in Geneva, Calvin sees a “high calling” before
him and writes to Sadolet,
I readily agree with you that, after this sanctification, we ought not to propose to
ourselves any other object in life than to hasten towards that high calling; for God has
set it before us as the constant aim of all our thoughts, and words, and actions.24
This high calling is to be with Christ and is expressed in a prayer for suffering Christians in Europe:
In a particular manner, we commend unto thee our unhappy brethren who live
dispersed under the tyranny of Antichrist, and deprived of the liberty of openly
calling upon thy name … that thou wouldst deign, O most indulgent Father, to
support them … so that they may never despond, but constantly persevere in thy
holy calling.25
The “holy calling” is faithfulness to God. However, calling is also to Christian living: “Now, although being called to do good works, we produce the
fruits of our calling, as it is said, (Luke 1:75), that we have been redeemed
in order to serve God in holiness and righteousness, we are however always
encompassed with many infirmities while we live in this world.”26
Calvin sees a general calling of God for all Christians, but also the role of
pastor as a specific call to the task of the ministry. In discussing auricular
confession from a biblical perspective, he writes,
Now I say that they [pastors] are better fitted than the others because the Lord has
appointed them by the very calling of the ministry to instruct us by word of mouth
to overcome and correct our sins, and also to give us consolation through assurance
of pardon (Matt. 16:19; 18:18; John 20:23).27
flourishing trade and commerce in Protestant Europe, see Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and
the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Talcott Parsons (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1958).
24
John Calvin, “Reply by John Calvin to Letter by Cardinal Sadolet to the Senate and
People of Geneva,” in John Calvin, Tracts and Letters, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet,
John Calvin Collection, version 1.0 (Albany, OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 1:99.
25
John Calvin, “Forms of Prayer for the Church / Catechism of the Church of Geneva,” in
John Calvin, Tracts and Letters, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet, John Calvin Collection,
version 1.0 (Albany, OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 2:101.
26
John Calvin, “Brief Form of a Confession of Faith, for the Use of Those who Desire to
have a Compendium of the Christian Religion Always at Hand,” in John Calvin, Tracts and
Letters, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet, John Calvin Collection, version 1.0 (Albany,
OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 2:139.
27
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis
154
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
A pastor, by virtue of his call, is “better fitted” for the ministry.
Nevertheless, Calvin criticized monks for considering their calling unique
and leading to perfection. Commenting on 2 Thessalonians 3:9, he states,
Indeed, in giving it this name [a state of acquiring perfection] they distinguish it from
other ways of life as by a special mark. And who can bear such a great honor being
given to an institution nowhere approved by even one syllable; and that all other
callings of God are regarded as unworthy by comparison, though they have not only
been commanded by his own sacred lips, but adorned with noble titles? And how
great an injury, I beg of you, is done to God when some such forgery is preferred to
all the kinds of life ordained by him and praised by his own testimony?28
This judgment is to be viewed against the inordinate importance given to
monastic orders and ascetic practices, which had a special place in the
Roman Catholic Church and whose practitioners were honored for their
seemingly meritorious actions. Calvin opposed the idea that monks have a
superior calling compared to other people.
Similarly, referring to the admonishing of the lazy in Thessalonica
(2 Thess 3:10), he says that there are different ways of working:
For whoever aids the society of men by his industry, either by ruling his family, or
by administering public or private affairs, or by counseling, or by teaching, or in any
other way, is not to be reckoned among the idle. For Paul censures those lazy drones
who lived by the sweat of others. … Of this sort are our monks and priests.29
This is clarified when he explains the incident of Mary and Martha and
the visit of Jesus recorded in Luke 10:38–42. Jesus commends Mary’s
devotional attitude in contrast to Martha’s fretting over hospitality:
As this passage has been basely distorted into the commendation of what is called
a Contemplative life, we must inquire into its true meaning, from which it will
appear, that nothing was farther from the design of Christ, than to encourage his
disciples to indulge in indolence, or in useless speculations.30
He goes on to explain:
Battles, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1940), 3.4.12 (1:535–36).
28
Calvin, Institutes 4.13.11 (2:1265–66).
29
John Calvin, Commentary on 2 Thessalonians, John Calvin Collection, version 1.0 (Albany,
OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 44.
30
John Calvin, Commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, John Calvin Collection, version
1.0 (Albany, OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 2:104.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
155
Luke says that Mary sat at the feet of Jesus. Does he mean that she did nothing else
throughout her whole life? On the contrary, the Lord enjoins his followers to make
such a distribution of their time, that he who desires to make proficiency in the
school of Christ shall not always be an idle hearer … for there is a time to hear, and
a time to act.31
He then points out Martha’s two mistakes: she went beyond what was
necessary to entertain the Lord, who would have been satisfied with a
simple meal, and by her actions she forfeited the opportunity to benefit
from Jesus’s visit, being distracted by “much serving.”32 Once again, the
distinction between contemplation and action is distinguished. If it appears
that the Lord approves contemplation and devotion, he chides Martha for
overdoing hospitality.
As far as common calling and work are concerned, Calvin refers to Genesis
to show that work is an expectation of God. Commenting on Genesis 2:15,
he writes,
Whence it follows that men were created to employ themselves in some work, and
not to lie down in inactivity and idleness. This labor, truly, was pleasant, and full of
delight, entirely exempt from all trouble and weariness; since however God ordained
that man should be exercised in the culture of the ground, he condemned in his
person, all indolent repose. Wherefore, nothing is more contrary to the order of
nature, than to consume life in eating, drinking, and sleeping, while in the meantime we propose nothing to ourselves to do.33
Ordinary work is essential for Calvin. God is the source of our gifts, and
there is no place for considering spiritual callings superior to ordinary work:
Even the artisan with the humblest trade is good at it only because the Spirit of God
works in him. For though these gifts are diverse, they all come from the one Spirit;
it pleased God to distribute them to each one (I Cor. 12:4). This does not refer only
spiritual gifts, which follow regeneration, but to all the sciences which concern our
use of the common life.34
Concerning the practical outworking of the knowledge of the call of God,
Calvin says,
31
Ibid.
Ibid., 2:105.
33
John Calvin, Commentary on Genesis, John Calvin Collection, version 1.0 (Albany, OR:
Books for the Ages, 1998), 66–67.
34
Calvin commenting on Exodus 31:2, quoted in Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and Calvin,”
127. Exodus 31:2 refers to the Bezalel to whom the Holy Spirit gives skill to produce artisan
works. Though 1 Corinthians 12:4 seems to point to spiritual gifts, Calvin applies it to all
callings and gifts.
32
156
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
The magistrate will discharge his functions more willingly; the head of the household will confine himself to his duty; each man will bear and swallow the discomforts,
vexations, weariness, and anxieties in his way of life, when he has been persuaded
that the burden was laid upon him by God. From this will arise also a singular
consolation: that no task will be so sordid and base, provided you obey your calling
in it, that it will not shine and be reckoned very precious in God’s sight.35
For Calvin, knowledge of the call of God ought to help a person perform
work faithfully and sincerely. This is relevant to working in industrial situations. Often there is a tendency to downplay the role and importance of those
who work in blue-collar contexts; when such an attitude is present, payment
tends to be lower than reasonable. Calvin believed in honest dealings and
was opposed to the exploitation of labor, especially taking advantage when
there is high unemployment and a significant number of people trying to
find a means of sustenance. In another passage, Calvin writes,
When a man works in his labour to earn his living, when a woman does her housework, and when a servant does his duty, one thinks that God does not pay attention
to such things, and one says they are secular affairs. … If a chamber-maid sweeps
the floor, if a servant goes to fetch water, and they do these things well, it is not
thought to be of much importance. Nevertheless, when they do it offering themselves to God … such labour is accepted from them as a holy and pure oblation.36
This has particular reference to those whose service involves serving others.
In a broad sense, all occupations involve service to others. When Calvin
refers to chambermaids and water-fetchers, he extends the application to
all walks of life, not just privileged callings such as those of magistrates,
businesspeople, landlords, and other influential callings. This is particularly
applicable to societies with hereditary categorization of labor, such as in the
Indian caste system. It does not mean that those from castes marked for
service to others are barred from a different category of work. Calvin elsewhere makes provision for even them to advance.
In his exhaustive study on Calvin’s economic and social thought, André
Biéler makes some critical observations on work. For Calvin, there is an
intrinsic connection between man’s work and God’s work: “God’s providential activity does not suppress man’s free activity but on the contrary
provides the foundation for it. Working freely is what God himself does.”37
35
Calvin, Institutes 3.10.6 (1:725).
Calvin, “Sermon on 1 Cor 10:31–11:1” quoted in Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and
Calvin,” 128.
37
André Biéler, Calvin’s Economic and Social Thought, trans. James Greig, ed. Edward
Dommen (1961; repr., Geneva: World Alliance of Reformed Churches / World Council of
Churches, 2005), 347.
36
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
157
Biéler finds a further link between the two by asserting that to fully understand work, we need “to grasp the profound meaning of the day of rest offered
to human beings so that they may realize the meaning of God’s work and
God’s forgiveness, apart from which no work is effective in God’s sight.”38
This profound interrelationship between divine initiative and human
response extends even to the salvific dimension. Commenting on Calvin’s
thoughts on Exodus 20:8 (“remember the Sabbath day”), Biéler concludes,
“The institution of the Sabbath therefore has as its aim not the stopping of
human work first and foremost, but man’s sharing in divine sanctification—
his involving himself in the activity through which God guides and saves the
world.”39 He concludes from Calvin’s observations,
Liberation from the yoke of oppression that weighs heavily in labour relations is a
religious—not merely a social question. As reflecting God’s work, in which it is
embodied, human work must be a labour of love, a labour of service and sacrifice,
not work that enslaves.40
Similarly, Biéler observes that “Calvin points out that the curse does not wholly
do away with the blessing that was attached to work in the beginning. ‘Signs’
remain that give man the taste for work.”41 Calvin sees work as a calling:
Scripture uses this word “vocation” to show that a way of living can only be good
and approved if God is its author. And this word “vocation” also means a calling,
and the calling carries with it that God is beckoning with his finger and saying to
each and every individual, “I want you to live in this way or that.” This is what we
call “stations in life”—that is to say that one is not to work at what God condemns
through his Word.42
The close relationship between God’s work and man’s instills believers
with confidence that God himself endorses their calling. Moreover, God’s
example of work and rest reminds believers they can emulate this pattern.
For Calvin, there is no dichotomy between secular and sacred callings.
Writing on divine providence and secondary causes, he observes, “Joab,
though recognizing the outcome of the battle to be in God’s hand, has
yielded not to idleness, but diligently carries out the duties of his calling.”43
38
Ibid., 346–47.
Ibid., 347.
40
Ibid., 349.
41
Ibid., 354.
42
Calvin, Sermons LXI on Deuteronomy 8:14–20, Calvini opera 26:360, quoted in Biéler,
Economic and Social Thought, 357.
43
Calvin, Institutes 1.17.9 (1:222).
39
158
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Calvin sees the identity of Joab as a soldier as a calling of God. Calling for
Calvin is not restricted to spiritual callings; it extends to all occupations.
Writing to the Duchess of Ferrara the year of his death (1564), Calvin
tries to clarify David’s sentiments for his enemies:
But when he [King David] says he holds the reprobate in mortal aversion, it cannot
be doubted that he glories in an upright, pure, and well-regulated zeal, for which three
things are requisite: first, that we should have no regard for ourselves nor our private
interests; next, that we should possess prudence and discretion not to judge at random;
and finally, that we observe moderation not to exceed the bounds of our calling.44
Calvin’s use of calling here is inclusive; the king should observe the limits of
his calling as king of Israel. Similarly, in discussing man’s natural endowments
not being completely erased, he writes, “For why is one person more excellent
than another? Is it not to display in common nature God’s special grace
which, in passing many by, declares itself bound to none? Besides this, God
inspires special activities, in accordance with each man’s calling.”45 When he
says “each man’s calling,” he refers to every person having a divine calling.
Writing about the eighth commandment, “Thou shall not steal,” Calvin
comments, “For he who does not carry out what he owes to others according
to the responsibility of his own calling both withholds and appropriates what
is another’s.”46 Here again, “calling” is used to describe any occupation that
is done by men and women.
In a passage discussing the need to fulfill our callings, Calvin writes,
Finally, this point is to be noted: the Lord bids each one of us in all life’s actions to
look to his calling. … And that no one may thoughtlessly transgress his limits, he has
named these various kinds of living “callings.” Therefore each individual has his
own kind of living assigned to him by the Lord as a sort of sentry post so that he
may not heedlessly wander about throughout life.47
Knowing the call of God keeps us from vacillating, as it gives us confidence
to fulfill our calling, knowing that it is God who has called us. William
Bouwsma writes, “His doctrine of the calling contributed in various ways to
the efficiency of work, notably as it promoted the division of labor.”48
44
John Calvin, “Letter 664, to the Duchess of Ferrara,” in John Calvin, Letters 1559–1564,
vol. 7 of Tracts and Letters, ed. Henry Beveridge and Jules Bonnet, John Calvin Collection,
version 1.0 (Albany, OR: Books for the Ages, 1998), 366.
45
Calvin, Institutes 2.2.17 (1:276).
46
Ibid., 2.8.45 (1:409).
47
Ibid., 3.10.6 (1:724).
48
William J. Bouwsma, John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1998), 199.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
159
In discussing the views of Philipp Melanchthon and Calvin on the role of
the civil magistrate, Steinmetz writes, “While Melanchthon grounds the
state in both human reason and divine ordination, Calvin stresses divine
ordination alone. … Rulers must be obeyed, not on the grounds of human
necessity, but on the grounds of obedience to God.”49 John McNeil observes that “among the vocations, none is more honorable than that of the
magistrate.”50
Calvin sees the success of work as being due to God’s blessings. However
much we put effort into work, it is of no use unless God blesses it. Hart
refers to Calvin’s commentary on Psalm 127:1, “Unless the Lord builds the
house, those who build it labour in vain”:
The Lord does not want us to be like logs of wood, or to sit idle. He expects us to put
to use whatever abilities we may have …. But … he warns them that hard work wins
success only so far as God blesses our labour. … Whatever they attempt will quickly
come to nothing, unless the grace of God alone sustains it and makes it to prosper.51
Similarly, in Calvin’s Genevan Catechism, in answer to why Christians
should ask God to “Give us this day our daily bread” (question 276), he
writes,
Though we are to labour, and even sweat in providing food, we are not nourished
either by our own labour, or our own industry, or our own diligence, but by the
blessing of God by which the labour of our hands, that would otherwise be in vain,
prospers. Moreover, we should understand that even when abundance of food is
supplied to our hand, and we eat it, we are not nourished by its substance, but by
the virtue of God alone. It has not any inherent efficacy in its own nature, but God
supplies it from heaven as the instrument of his own beneficence.52
This understanding of daily provision as coming primarily from God
gives calling and work a different perspective, since the blessing of God
makes our labor fruitful. Hart believes that this idea flows from “Calvin’s
belief in providence which is active not just in a general way but even in the
smallest details of each person’s activities.”53 On the unfaithful steward in
the parable of the talents (Matt 25:26–30), Calvin comments,
49
David C. Steinmetz, Calvin in Context (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995),
204–5.
50
John T. McNeill, The History and Character of Calvinism (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1967), 224.
51
Quoted in Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and Calvin,” 129–30.
52
John Calvin, Catechism of the Church of Geneva, Being a Form for the Instruction for Children,
http://www.reformed.org/documents/calvin/geneva_catachism/geneva_catachism.html.
53
Hart, “The Teaching of Luther and Calvin,” 130.
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
160
Christ means that there will be no excuse for the indolence of those who both
conceal the gifts of God, and waste their time in idleness. Hence also we infer that
no manner of life is more praiseworthy in the sight of God, than that which yields
some advantage to human society.54
IV. Evaluation
The idea of work in Islam and Hinduism is contingent on each religion’s
understanding of the future life. Islam has a linear idea of history: humans
live in submission to Allah because they have to give account to him on the
last day, and this is why work in Islam is oriented to attaining spiritual
merit. Prayer and religious duties take precedence over work. Although Islam
does not have a clear-cut understanding of work, Islamic societies have
produced some outstanding examples of art, calligraphy, and architecture.
In many ways, Islam equates work with deeds of righteousness. There are
descriptive references to work, but there is no philosophy of work and its
necessity for daily living. Prayer and other religious duties take precedence
over work. The goal of all work is spiritual, to please Allah. However, work
may be substituted with passive abstinence from evil to achieve merit, and
it is closely linked with voluntary charity or sadaqa.
Hinduism, unlike Islam, has a cyclic philosophy of life with its teaching
of transmigration, the cycle of birth and death, from which humankind can
be free when moksha (release from the cycle of rebirth) is attained. This
idea offers another chance in the hereafter to make good what was lacking
in this life, but in theory, only the three higher castes are closer to liberation
than others.
In contrast, calling and work go together in Calvin’s understanding. He
uses the word “calling” in different ways, referring to spiritual matters but
also to God calling believers to their occupations. It is wrong to exalt religious
callings over the secular callings in society. The exaltation of contemplative
religion as superior to ordinary calling, so prevalent in the sixteenth century,
is unbiblical. Ordinary work is vital because God has called people to do it.
When he blesses humans, they become good stewards. There are various
callings, some of which are higher than others, but each plays a unique role
in society. The success of work depends not on the labor of humankind but
on the blessing of God.
Calvin’s understanding of calling and work is relevant to Newly Developing
Countries. In these economies, Christians find themselves taking employment opportunities ranging from investment, management, administration,
54
Calvin, Commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, 2:331.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CALVIN, WORK, AND NEWLY INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES
161
and human resources to skilled and unskilled labor. The question is often
asked, “What is the importance of my occupation in the wider scheme of
God’s work in the world today—especially in my country and in my society?”
Calvin provides a fresh prism through which to view work. God calls his
people to a variety of occupations in which they serve the common cause of
glorifying God. Each person has a calling to a particular occupation by
God, yet there is room for changing from one occupation to another.
Ordinary work of any kind takes on new importance, as it is God who has
called the Christian to the task. No amount of hard work will produce any
result unless God blesses it.
Such an understanding of work transforms Christians’ attitudes toward
their occupations, and Christians who have this understanding will work
harder, be more faithful to their employers, have a positive attitude to work,
seek to be a positive influence in society, and actively be part of it. They will
understand this once they understand that God has indeed called everyone
to work irrespective of the nature of that work. Henry Van Til rightly states,
“Every man has a divine calling to fulfill the cultural mandate, for all
things are ours, but we are Christ’s. However, we must exercise moderation,
patience, and fidelity in our daily vocation, working as unto the Lord before
the face of God (Coram Deo).”55
This vision transmits a message of hope to each person in God’s plan.
Anyone serving in any industry, commerce, or business, in whatever
profession, benefits from knowing God calls them to their work. The church
should emphasize that work and rest go together. Moreover, work should
not be viewed as something to be done slavishly but as something that
believers engage in wholeheartedly. Realizing this truth, they will work
diligently and discover their important calling in the higher purpose of the
kingdom of God.
55
Henry R. Van Til, The Calvinistic Concept of Culture (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1972), 109.
Corruption, Bribery,
African Concepts of God,
and the Gospel
PHILLIPUS J. (FLIP) BUYS
Abstract
Corruption and bribery have become a disastrous problem in SubSaharan Africa. A survey of the regular reports of Transparency
International reveals how this societal ill has reached pandemic proportions. Although several governments and organizations talk a lot about
corruption and appoint special commissions to investigate it, there is a
widespread perception that so far only a few branches of the huge tree
of corruption and bribery have been lopped off and very little has been
done to root out corruption from society. To get to the root of the issue,
this article endeavors to compare the ethical implications of African
traditional religious concepts of God with God’s self-revelation and to
apply this comparison to corruption and bribery.
Introduction
P
rofessor Patrick Lumumba, who served for several years as the
director of the Kenyan Anti-Corruption Commission, delivered
the keynote speech at the third Anti-Corruption Convention in
Kampala, Uganda, in 2013. He sounded the alarm and stated
that one of the main reasons why Africa remains the poorest
continent on earth is that Africa tolerates high levels of corruption.
163
164
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
According to him, “Africa has been invaded by its own sons and daughters
who are forever looting its resources in the name of governance and democracy.”1 About the corruption and bribery among leaders, he said, “We elect
hyenas and expect them to take care of the goats.”2 Finally, he raised the
question, Are we children of a lesser God? Although he did not explore the
relationship between corruption and African concepts of God, his remark
indicated the need to consider the relation between the two.
What is corruption? According to a standard definition, corruption is
“the abuse of public or private office for personal gain.” Vishal Mangalwadi
defines it this way:
Corruption involves abusing one’s power to harass, coerce, or deceive others (individuals, institutions, or the state) to acquire value (money, service, goods, ideas,
time, property, or honor) without returning proportionate value to them.3
A survey by Transparency International states, “Nearly 75 million people in
Sub-Saharan Africa are estimated to have paid a bribe in 2015—some to
escape punishment by the police or courts, but many [are] forced to pay to
get access to the basic services that they desperately need.”4
In his book on the roots of sin, Professor Yusufu Turaki5 from Nigeria convincingly argues that you cannot kill a tree by cutting off a few of its branches.
You need to dig down and cut off its roots. Turaki uses Holy Scriptures as
spade and ax as he digs down to examine the roots of sin. His knowledge of
traditional African beliefs and values adds depth to his discussion of the
origin, nature, effects, and power of corruption in the lives of African people.
He shows the relevance of each member of the Holy Trinity to our struggle
against the root sins of self-centeredness and pride, greed and lust, as well
as anxiety and fear. He lists bribery as one of the outstanding examples of
a branch of the deeper-lying sin of greed, which is caused by being alienated
from the Triune God of Scriptures.
1
Patrick L. O. Lumumba, “Corruption in Africa: Keynote Speech at the 3rd AntiCorruption Convention in Kampala, Uganda,” December 2, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=4cbEuwqKKqE.
2
Ibid.
3
As quoted by Dwight Vogt, “What’s the Big Deal about Corruption? Applied Biblical
Worldview,” Disciple Nations Alliance, https://www.disciplenations.org/article/whats-big-dealcorruption/.
4
“People and Corruption: Africa Survey 2015—Global Corruption Barometer,” Transparency International, December 1, 2015, https://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/people_and_corruption_africa_survey_2015.
5
Yusufu Turaki, The Trinity of Sin (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 74.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
165
The multiple cases and embarrassing scale of corruption currently surfacing in the report of the Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State
Capture in South Africa6 (publicly referred to as the Zondo Commission)
and other related enquiries, placed the Republic of South Africa seventy-third
out of 180 countries that participated in a Transparency International (TI)
survey. This survey ranks participating countries according to their perceived
levels of corruption in the public sector. Based on information emerging
from the Zondo Commission’s proceedings, political analyst Marianne
Mertin recently published an article in which she revealed that state capture
in South Africa during the second term of president Jacob Zuma’s administration hovers around R1.5 trillion of the budget for 2019:
Put differently: State Capture has wiped out a third of South Africa’s R4.9-trillion
gross domestic product, or effectively annihilated four months of all labour and
productivity of all South Africans, from hawkers selling sweets outside schools to
boardroom jockeys.7
The Corruption Perceptions Index 2018, which gave South Africa a score
of 43 out of 100, was shared by Corruption Watch. Corruption Watch’s
executive director, David Lewis, said that “South Africa’s experience of
state capture was a textbook example of the relationship between corruption and the undermining of democracy.”8
In a new report, titled Corruption in Uniform:When Cops Become Criminals,
the civil society group Corruption Watch received 1,440 reports of corruption against the police between 2012 and 2018 in South Africa, with instances
of bribery, abuse of power, and failure to act leading the complaints. The
report released on June 13, 2019, analyzes the claims lodged against the
South African Police Service (SAPS) with the antigraft group since its 2012
establishment, describing “alarming levels of corruption” across the country.9
6
https://www.sastatecapture.org.za/.
Marianne Merten, “State Capture Wipes out Third of SA’s R4.9-Trillion GDP—Never
Mind Lost Trust, Confidence, Opportunity,” Daily Maverick, March 1, 2019, https://www.
dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-03-01-state-capture-wipes-out-third-of-sas-r4-9-trilliongdp-never-mind-lost-trust-confidence-opportunity/?fbclid=IwAR0TwxZAZimecYx9Y5ie2oC5AAFuj4OdejbLrAC7V7blJqXugw39YmPFc94#.XPPIKexVB2J.
8
Sizwe Orkkonneyoo Banzi, “Global Corruption Survey Releases Devastation Stats of
Corruption in South Africa,” Daily Trends in South Africa, January 29, 2019, http://www.trendsdaily.co.za/trending/global-corruption-survey-releases-devastation-stats-of-coruptionin-south-africa/?fbclid=IwAR2IE8CsG5wcXOfmbmAQM7RhTZCU3ATe5G_wp8A6yUUiuSm664l5gXQdwn4.
9
Greg Nicolson, “Corruption Watch: Bribery, Abuse of Power Lead Reports of Police
Corruption,” Daily Maverick, June 13, 2019, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-0613-corruption-watch-bribery-abuse-of-power-lead-reports-of-police-corruption/?tl_in7
166
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Even though African leaders declared 2018 as the African year of anticorruption, that commitment has not yet translated into concrete progress.10
I. Four Personal Experiences
I have worked for 25 years as a cross-cultural missionary and theological
educator in one of the old “homelands” in South Africa. In that homeland,
I was told by locals that the tribal king rules over everything. If you want to
see him to get permission to work in the area, you first had to respect him
with a “gift.” I was told, “This is our culture: You won’t get his ears if his
eyes have not first seen the gift that you have given to his indunas.”
Then, however, I quickly learned that this rule also applies to all other
levels of government. For instance, we once had a youth group from abroad
who wanted to come and help a local church erect a church building. The
local church had to find a suitable site in the township. Even after months
of struggle, I had not succeeded in finding a site; the local municipality told
me that all the sites were already taken. When I told the church that I was
going to inform the group from abroad that we would have to cancel their
trip and drop the plans for their visit, a lady from the church pleaded that
we had to give the church one more week to look for a site. After three days
she phoned me to inform me that she had found a site and that I must go
with her and the treasurer of the church to the municipal offices to fill out
all the necessary documents and pay for the site. When I went there, we
filled out all the formal documents to buy the site, which was sold for a very
reasonable price. When we got ready to depart, the official asked the lady:
“Now when do I get my ‘cool drink’ money?” I then realized that she secured
a site for building a church by offering to pay the municipal clerk a bribe.
An African pastor in another township told me that his church had to pay
a bribe to a municipal councilor of the ruling political party of the township
to receive a site to erect the church building and orphanage that they were
planning to serve their community.
bound=1&tl_groups[0]=80895&tl_period_type=3&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Afternoon%20Thing%20Thursday%2013%20June%202019%20Home%20Suite%20
Hotels%20Bristol%20launch%20campaign&utm_content=Afternoon%20Thing%20Thursday%2013%20June%202019%20Home%20Suite%20Hotels%20Bristol%20launch%20campaign+CID_8d9cdf62471e13f51b824eeae9d20662&utm_source=TouchBasePro&utm_term=Corruption%20Watch%20Bribery%20abuse%20of%20power%20lead%20reports%20
of%20police%20corruption.
10
Banzi, “Global Corruption Survey Releases Devastation Stats of Corruption in South
Africa.”
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
167
I once traveled by car from South Africa to Lubumbashi in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to participate in a conference. A friend warned
me to make extra copies of all the car’s official documents and take them
along. He had had the experience of his documents “disappearing” when
he handed them in at the customs office at the border and then having to
pay a bribe to be allowed entrance into the country. I am glad that I was
forewarned because I had the same experience. At one counter in the
customs office, the official requested my car’s documents and instructed
me to go and wait at the next counter. At the next counter, the official again
asked to see my car’s documents. When I told him that I had handed them
in at the previous counter, he said that he had not received them and made
it clear that the problem could be solved with some “cool drink” money. He
was not happy when I pulled another set of copies of the documents from
my bag and handed them to him and he had to let me proceed without
paying him “cool drink” money.
Many more such experiences in Zimbabwe, Zambia, Kenya, Uganda, and
Rwanda have taught me that the culture of bribery and corruption is deeply
rooted in Africa. These practices have led me to research the worldview and
especially the traditional African concepts of God that are at the root of
widespread bribery and corruption.
II. Corruption and Bribery in Various Cultures and Worldviews
Several authors have revealed the influence of worldview and culture on
poverty, corruption, and bribery in different parts of the world but pointed
out that it grows from different roots in various cultures.11 Jayson Georges
explained that guilt, shame, and fear in the worldview of people are the
moral emotions that they use to organize the distribution of resources between people.12 With a circle illustration (see Figure 1), Georges visually
depicts how a person (in the center) acquires essential resources (the outer
ring), and the three potential emotional barriers to acquisition.
11
J. A. Van Rooy, “The Christian Gospel as a Basis for Escape from Poverty in Africa,” In
die Skriflig 33.2 (1999): 235–53; Darrow L. Miller and Stan Guthrie, Discipling Nations: The
Power of Truth to Transform Cultures (Seattle WA: YWAM Publishing, 1998); B. J. van der Walt,
Kultuur, lewensvisie en ontwikkeling: ‘n Ontmaskering van die gode van onderontwikkelde Afrika en
die oorontwikkelde Weste, Reeks F2: No. 76 (Potchefstroom: Wetenskaplike bydraes van die PU
vir CHO, 1999).
12
Jayson Georges, The 3D Gospel: Ministry in Guilt, Shame, and Fear Cultures (Kindle Edition, 2014).
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
168
Sp
irit
s
work RES
O
UR
FE
AR
ILT
GU
SHAME
S
CE
Community
ion
ct
te
OURCES
RES
pr
th
o
l
a
s
ion
ut
tit
Ins
CES foo
OUR
d
S
E
he
R
Figure 1. Illustration showing how guilt, shame, and fear in the worldview of
people are the moral emotions they use to organize the distribution of resources
(Jayson Georges).
rmation h
info
o
m
e
Dr. Tom Julien, Executive Director Emeritus of Encompass World Partners, summarized it well in his endorsement of Georges’s book:
Sin is the universal malady of mankind. For some cultures sin brings guilt; others
feel shame; still others, fear. An understanding of the roots of the symptom provides
the path to the solution, the Lord Jesus Christ.13
It is not the intention of this article to make a comparison between African and Western European or Asian ethics on corruption and bribery.
Traditional European ethics is not superior to traditional African ethics.
On the contrary, the influence of modern European ethics, with its deeply
ingrained individualism and disregard for the value of the community and
for parental authority, is a severe threat to transparency. There is also truth
13
Ibid.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
169
in the argument that colonialism was a selfish exploitation of Africa’s wealth.14
The reports of Transparency International also reveal even worse statistics
of corruption and bribery in other parts of the world.15 The corruption
index of Transparency International shows that the corruption in many
countries is worse than in South Africa and other African countries.16
Heather Marquette has concluded in several research papers that academics and activists are unlikely to be able to prove a direct causal relationship
between religion and corruption—either positive or negative—and certainly
not with the methodologies employed so far.17 She does acknowledge that
in many parts of the world, religion maintains a primordial hold on people’s
values, attitudes, and behavior that democratic institutions simply do not
have, and for that reason it remains an important potential source of power.
Unfortunately, she failed to do intensive research on aspects of the traditional African worldview and especially concepts of God that may open the
way for corruption and bribery.
This article wants to explore how the traditional African mindset determines the nature and extent of African responses and views about life in
general, and specifically how African concepts of God provide roots for
corruption and bribery. In this regard, it is crucial to acknowledge that the
14
The views of Oginga Odinga, a prominent Kenyan politician, deserve more in-depth
consideration. He was interviewed by Professor Henry Oruka, an expert in the sage philosophy
or worldview of Africa. Cf. Henry Odera Oruka, Sage Philosophy: Indigenous Thinkers and Modern
Debate on African Philosophy (Leiden: Brill, 1990); Henry Odera Oruka, Oginga Odinga: His
Philosophy and Beliefs (Nairobi: Initiatives, 1992). Odinga was regarded as a philosophical sage
who raised critical questions about what people usually take for granted, and he played a vital
role in the struggle for the independence of his country. However, three decades later, he regarded post-independence as in most cases wasted years and asked for a second liberation—this
time from not white but black domination. According to him, independence was given formally
but not in reality. The previous colonial powers still applied indirect economic rule by winning
the cooperation of greedy African leaders. Real freedom, however, required also cultural and
economic freedom from the outside world. According to Odinga, the first liberation instead
brought economic stagnation, mismanagement, inefficiency, a lack of accountability, political
dictatorship, and more. To him, colonialism was like a naked poison being forced into one’s
mouth while one is struggling to reject it. Post-independence, on the other hand, is like a poison
mixed with your favorite drink like greed. But the aim of both was the same.
15
For a similar perspective, see J. A. van Rooy, “Scriptural Ethical Principles and Traditional
African Ethics,” In die Skriflig 31.1–2 (1997): 94.
16
See the graph “Corruption in the World,” in “The 2014 Corruption Perception Index,”
Eyewitness News, http://ewn.co.za/Media/2014/12/03/The-2014-Corruption-Perceptions-Index.
17
Heather Marquette, “Whither Morality? ‘Finding God’ in the Fight against Corruption,”
(International Development Department, School of Government and Society, University of
Birmingham, Birmingham: Working Paper 41—2010); Heather Marquette, “Corruption,
Religion and Moral Development,” Pre-print chapter submitted for the Handbook of Research
on Development and Religion, ed. Matthew Clarke (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, January 2013),
https://www.academia.edu/2643869/Handbook_of_Research_on_Religion_and_Development.
170
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
religious mindset, conditions, and molds define and shape traditional
African conceptions, perspectives, beliefs, values, morals, behavior, attitude,
views, and practices.18
As most of the biblical references to corruption and bribery refer to God’s
revelation of his character and the relation between him and his people—as
will be indicated later in this article—the main focus in the summary of
African traditional religion and worldview will now focus on traditional
African concepts of God.
III. African Concepts of God and Their Implications for Ethics
and Stewardship
Although speaking of “African Culture and Worldview” entails an enormous generalization, several researchers have pointed out that there are
typical aspects of African culture found on the continent of Africa.
Turaki, along with many other scholars, identifies five fundamental beliefs that are found throughout Africa as the building blocks of African
traditional religion, philosophy, and worldview.19 These five fundamental
theological beliefs in African traditional religion are beliefs in (1) impersonal (mystical) powers; (2) belief in spirit beings; (3) belief in divinities/gods;
(4) belief in a Supreme Being; and (5) belief in a hierarchy of spiritual beings and powers.
Based on his research over many years, J. A. van Rooy also indicated how
the idea of limited cosmic good is intertwined with the five beliefs listed by
Turaki.20 Cosmic “good does not refer … in the first place to goods in the
sense of material possessions, but rather to vital force, power, prestige, influence, health, and good luck.”21
Although all these fundamental beliefs are related, I will now focus on
Africa’s belief in a Supreme Being and belief in a hierarchy of spiritual beings and powers.
It is significant that theologians who defend Africans’ “knowledge” of
God before the Christian gospel came to Africa base their arguments on the
18
In this regard very valuable insights have been gained from Yusufu Turaki, Christianity and
African Gods: A Method in Theology (Potchefstroom: Scientific Contributions of the Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education, 1999).
19
Turaki, The Trinity of Sin; John S. Mbiti, African Religions and Philosophy (London: Heinemann, 1969); John S. Mbiti, Concepts of God in Africa (London: Heinemann, 1970); Gabriel
M. Setiloane, African Theology: An Introduction (Johannesburg: Skotaville Publishers, 1986);
Gabriel M. Setiloane, The Image of God among the Sotho Tswana (Rotterdam: A. Balkema, 1976).
20
Van Rooy, “The Christian Gospel as a Basis for Escape from Poverty in Africa,” 235–53.
21
Ibid., 238.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
171
African belief that God is like a great African chief, so awesome and unapproachable that petitioners cannot reach him except through his intermediaries. Turaki writes,
The God who is above the lesser gods seems “not to be intimately involved or
concerned with man’s world. Instead, men seek out the lesser powers to meet their
desires.” This leads people to turn to impersonal powers, divinities, ancestors, and
spirit beings for help. God (the Supreme Being) is only occasionally mentioned,
remembered, or approached.22
This belief seems to foster a form of spirituality that does not stress intimacy
with God but with the lesser beings, divinities, or ancestors. It weakens the
development of a robust Christian spirituality and one’s intimate relationship with God. Researchers on African ethical codes23 agree that the
code of norms is not related to any personal communion with God, and therefore has
a strongly legalistic character. “It is not done,” “It is taboo,” is sufficient motivation
for declaring an action forbidden. Tradition is sufficient authority. For the same
reason this code of norms is strongly negative, concerned with what is forbidden
rather than with positive behaviour.24
Spirituality without a strong sense of the presence of God lacks a strong
concept of the holiness, righteousness, presence, and intimate care and grace
of God.25
It follows that the only persons worthy to approach the great chief directly
are those nearest to him in rank. In the same way, the beings who can
approach God directly are the glorified ancestors or the great deities who
are nearest to him. Church leaders of African-initiated churches (AIC)
then also compare the rituals of sacrifices to deities with the practices of
sacrifices prescribed in the Pentateuch and Old Testament.26
22
Yusufu Turaki, “Sharing the Burden of Defending the Gospel,” World Reformed Fellowship, http://wrfnet.org/resources/2008/01/sharing-burden-defending-gospel.
23
Edmund Ilogu, Christianity and Ibo Culture (Leiden: Brill, 1974); John S. Mbiti, The
Prayers of African Religion (London: SPCK, 1975); Malcolm J. McVeigh, God in Africa:
Conceptions of God in African Traditional Religion and Christianity (Cape Cod: Claude Stark,
1974); Emefie I. Metuh, God and Man in African Religion (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1981);
Setiloane, The Image of God among the Sotho-Tswana.
24
Van Rooy, “Scriptural Ethical Principles and Traditional African Ethics,” 95.
25
Turaki, The Trinity of Sin, 25.
26
Nicolas Nyawuza has shown through empirical research how many pastors of AIC churches
use Numbers 19 to include typical traditional African cleansing rituals (called hlambulula in the
isiZulu language) in their Christian worship services. Cf. Nicolas Nyawuza, “Purification in an
African Context from a Missio-Dei Perspective: Empowering Pastors of African Independent
Churches at Leandra to Interpret the Cleansing Tituals of Numbers 19 from a Christ-Centred
172
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Harry Sawyerr, a Catholic Church Canon, writes,
First of all, we must remember that life among Africans is communal and therefore
we must accept the notion that their God is thought of in terms of the communal
system to which they belong. …
In relation to this, we have to bear in mind that, in African communities, there
is a clear practice of rule by kings or chiefs, and that these chiefs are not easily
approachable and are therefore reached only through intermediaries. For all practical purposes, the chief is distant from ordinary men. Even if the chief is present, a
petitioner would request the intermediary to pass his plea to the chief.27
Sawyerr then suggests that the African’s attitude to God is a reflection of his
experience of his relationship with his chiefs, influenced in certain respects
by his attitude to the ancestral spirits.28
Van Rooy argues that “since the cosmic good is limited,” Africans believe
that
the amount of good possessed or controlled by a particular person or people can
only be increased at the expense of others. … Power and influence may be legitimately
increased by a chief or leader, since such persons are regarded as the incorporation
of the communal good, the pivotal point of the vital force of the group. This idea is
projected onto prestigious church leaders.29
This is the same projection that often happens with leaders in prosperity
gospel churches. Africans believe that it is the right of a chief to be wealthy
and that the more they sacrifice themselves to enrich the chief or tribal
leader, the more they themselves will have life force.
Rooy adds,
Power is sought for its own sake, not for doing good to anyone else, but only for
doing good to oneself. This not only implies that people seek power for themselves,
but also that people admire power for its own sake, and are impressed with power
more than anything else. People do not admire self-sacrifice or devotion to noble
ideals. They tend to regard that as foolishness, or suspect people who maintain
those principles and follow those ideals of having sinister hidden motives. In an
ethic where power has become the highest norm, suffering for what is good and
right and noble does not make sense. Moral good as conformation to a universal
Redemptive Perspective: A Case Study” (Master’s diss., Campus of the North-West University,
Potchefstroom, 2013).
27
As quoted by Leonard Nyirongo, The Gods of Africa or the Gods of the Bible? The Snares of
African Traditional Religion in Biblical Perspective, Series F2: Brochures of the Institute for
Reformational Studies 70 (Potchefstroom: Scientific Contributions of the Potchefstroom
University for Christian Higher Education, 1997), 16.
28
Ibid.
29
Van Rooy, “The Christian Gospel as a Basis for Escape from Poverty in Africa,” 238.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
173
norm for the common good or for the sake of obedience to God does not make
sense [in traditional African thinking]. …
One of the manifestations in Africa of this obsession with power for its own sake
is the many dictatorships, presidents-for-life and perhaps even the many one-party
states. There are still many dictatorships in Africa, and African peoples put up with
whatever these dictators do with a remarkable degree of long-suffering, because the
power of these people impresses them.30
African Christians sometimes believe that they share in the power and
prestige of the big chief. Therefore, chiefs or people higher up in the hierarchy
will seldom be held accountable for corruption and bribery.
In Africa ethical norms, rules of conduct, are not regulated according to a supposed
divine law, but according to several other principles, such as the striving after power,
the balance of cosmic good, obedience to the ancestors and their traditions.31
In his research on poverty in Africa, van Rooy came to the following
conclusion:
I would venture to say that, if all other factors change for the better, and this factor
of an unbiblical worldview does not change, Africa will remain chained in poverty.
On the other hand, if none of the other factors change, but this one factor does
change radically, Africa can become a shining example of freedom from poverty.32
IV. God’s Self-Revelation, Corruption, and Bribery
It is significant that when God introduces himself and his character, he
immediately refers to bribery:
The Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the
awesome God, who is not partial and takes no bribe. He executes justice for the
fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing.”
(Deut 10:17–18 esv)
On the one hand, his absolute sovereignty, majesty, and holiness are introduced: He is “God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and
awesome.” On the other hand, he has tender care for the fatherless, the
widow, and the sojourner, and for their daily needs. Such a description does
not admit to the reality of other gods but emphasizes the absolute
30
31
32
Ibid., 244.
Ibid., 249.
Ibid., 251.
174
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
uniqueness and incomparability of the Lord and his exclusive right to sovereignty over his people (cf. Deut 3:24; 4:35, 39). As Lord over all, he
cannot be enticed or coerced into any partiality through influence peddling
(v. 17) and is the special advocate of defenseless persons who are so often
victims of such unscrupulous behavior (v. 18).33
The standard commentary of Carl Keil and Franz Delitzsch summarizes
as follows:
To set forth emphatically the infinite greatness and might of God, Moses describes
Jehovah the God of Israel as the “God of gods,” i.e., the supreme God, the essence of
all that is divine, of all divine power and might (cf. Psalm 136:2),—and as the “Lord
of lords,” i.e., the supreme, unrestricted Ruler (“the only Potentate,” 1 Timothy 6:15),
above all powers in heaven and on earth, “a great King above all gods” (Psalm
95:3). Compare Revelation 17:14 and Revelation 19:16, where these predicates are
transferred to the exalted Son of God, as the Judge and Conqueror of all dominions
and powers that are hostile to God. The predicates which follow describe the unfolding of the omnipotence of God in the government of the world, in which Jehovah
manifests Himself as the great, mighty, and terrible God (Psalm 89:8), who does
not regard the person (cf. Leviticus 19:15), or accept presents (cf. Deuteronomy
16:19), like a human judge.34
The fear of God and transparency before people are criteria for godly
leadership avoiding corruption and bribery. The words of Exodus 18:21 are
clear:
Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands,
of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. (Exod 18:21 esv; emphasis added)
As Douglas Stuart comments on this text, “Contrary to the Israelite priesthood or the ancient Near Eastern monarchy, the Israelite judiciary was to
be appointed on the basis of honesty and ability rather than occupy an office
automatically by reason of being born into a hereditary role.”35 Keil and
Delitzsch add, Moses “was to select able men ( ַאנְ ֵׁשי ַחיִ ל, men of moral
strength, 1 Kings 1:52) as judges, men who were God-fearing, sincere, and
unselfish (gain-hating).”36
33
Eugene H. Merrill, Deuteronomy, NAC 4 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994),
203–4.
34
Carl F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (repr., Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson, 1996), 1:899.
35
Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus, NAC 2 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006). 418.
36
Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 1:377.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
175
The primary meaning of the fear of God is veneration and honor, reverence, and awe. John Murray writes, “The fear of God is the soul of godliness.”37 It is the attitude that elicits from our hearts adoration and love,
reverence and honor, focusing with awe not primarily upon the wrath of God
but upon the majesty, holiness, amazing love, forgiveness, and transcendent
glory. This concept is often given as a key to a holistic godly life and is not
an option, as the following passages show:
•
•
•
•
•
“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Prov 9:10 esv)
Live in the fear of the Lord always (Prov 23:17)
“Fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt 10:28 esv)
In all things obey, fearing the Lord (Col 3:22)
“Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially,
live your lives as strangers in reverent fear” (1 Pet 1:17 niv)
True fear of God is a childlike fear. The Puritan Wilhelmus à Brakel speaks
of a filial fear that children have for their parents: “They cannot bear to hear
someone speak a dishonouring word about their parents; it grieves them at
their heart and they will defend them with all their might.”38
To fear God is a combination of holy respect and glowing love. It is at the
same time
•
•
•
•
a consciousness of being in the presence of true Greatness and Majesty,
a thrilling sense of privilege,
an overflow of respect and admiration,
and perhaps supremely, a sense that God’s opinion about my life is the
only thing that really matters.
To someone who fears God, his fatherly approval means everything, and
to lose it is the greatest of all griefs. To fear God is to have a heart that is
sensitive to both his God-ness and his graciousness. It means to experience
great awe and a profound joy simultaneously, understanding who God is
and what he has done for us.
37
John Murray, Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1957), 229.
38
Wilhelmus à Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service (Escondido, CA: The Ephesians
Four Group, 1999), 2:430.
176
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
1. Childlike Fear of God Produces Integrity
Nehemiah is described as a model of integrity. The governors of his time
reigned through bribery and corruption. Nehemiah 5:15 says that the preceding governors “placed a heavy burden on the people …. Their assistants
also lorded it over the people. However, out of the fear of God, [he] did not
act like that” (niv). Where leaders share this sense of awareness that we live
coram Deo, before the face of God, a new honesty will mark their speech and
make them stand out in the world.
2. An Antidote to the Fear of Others
A holy fear is a source of joy (Ps 2:11) and a fountain of life (Prov 14:27).
Therefore it produces boldness and bravery. In times of persecution, the
fear of God will dominate the fear of man and cause God’s children to
speak out, although fear of man bids them be silent (Acts 4:18–21). Many
Christians are afraid to show that they are followers of Christ. Here is the
answer to our lack of courage in witness! Following his exhortation in
Matthew 10:28, Jesus says, “But if anyone publicly denies me, I will openly
deny him before my Father in heaven” (Matt 10:33 tlb). The great reformers
in history all acted with undaunted bravery. For example, friend and foe
alike said of John Knox that he feared no man because he feared God.
3. Violation of Covenantal Identity and God’s Curse
When Moses and the priests spoke to the assembled multitude on the brink
of their entrance to the promised land, they reminded them that they are
the people of the Lord and that it was for this reason that their obedience
was so crucial (Deut 27:9–10). In the list of curses that follow violation of
specific covenant stipulations, they are specifically warned about the seriousness of the consequences of bribery: “‘Cursed be anyone who takes a bribe
to shed innocent blood.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen’” (Deut 27:25).
Because bribery is such a grave sin before God, Samuel called him in as
witness that he had absolute transparency and never took bribes, and the
people affirmed God as a witness. A living and existential relationship with
Yahweh is the real antidote against corruption and bribery:
Here I am; testify against me before the Lord and before his anointed. Whose ox
have I taken? Or whose donkey have I taken? Or whom have I defrauded? Whom
have I oppressed? Or from whose hand have I taken a bribe to blind my eyes with
it? Testify against me and I will restore it to you.” They said, “You have not defrauded us or oppressed us or taken anything from any man’s hand.” And he said to them,
“The Lord is witness against you, and his anointed is witness this day, that you have
not found anything in my hand.” And they said, “He is witness.” (1 Sam 12:3–5 esv)
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
177
Other biblical texts confirm this teaching on bribery. In the defense of
his righteousness before God, Job also claimed that he never took bribes
from anyone (cf. Job 6:22). Only a person “who does not put out his money at
interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent, is allowed to sojourn
in [God’s] tent [and] dwell on [his] holy hill” (Ps 15:1). In the book of Proverbs bribery is described as wicked: “The wicked accepts a bribe in secret
to pervert the ways of justice” (Prov 17:23). Bribery is both acknowledged
(Prov 17:8) and warned against (Prov 15:27) in the wisdom tradition, and it
is condemned in the Law (Exod 23:8; Deut 16:19). It is a temptation that
can overcome even the wise.39
The admonitions do not appear only in biblical texts; many ancient Near
Eastern wisdom (particularly Egyptian) texts affirm that those who hold
political power should shun all corrupt practices. “Still, when people see
how pervasive abuse of political power is, that it is indeed so common that
it is impossible to function in politics without being tainted, bribery also
undoes the work of wisdom in that it corrupts the heart.”40
When the prophet Isaiah summons God’s people into a courtroom, so to
speak, he begins his message by summoning the heavens and the earth to
witness to the charges God has against his people.41 In this context, Isaiah
underscores the seriousness of corruption and bribery as rebellion against
God, and God is represented as burdened with their crimes. God has been
pained and grieved by their crimes; his patience has been put to its utmost
trial. Now he seeks relief by inflicting punishment on them.42
Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Everyone loves a bribe and runs
after gifts. They do not bring justice to the fatherless, and the widow’s cause does
not come to them. Therefore the Lord declares, the Lord of hosts, the Mighty One
of Israel: “Ah, I will get relief from my enemies and avenge myself on my foes.”
(Isa 1:23–24)43
When Paul paints a whole downward spiral of corrupt Christian leaders,
he emphasizes the necessity of godliness with contentment because
39
Roland Murphy, Ecclesiastes, WBC 23A (Dallas: Word, 1992), 64.
Duane A. Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, NAC 14 (Nashville: Broadman &
Holman, 1993), 320.
41
Terry R. Briley, Isaiah (Joplin, MO: College Press, 2000–2004), 39.
42
Johann P. Lange, Philip Schaff, C. W. E. Nägelsbach, S. T. Lowrie, and D. A. Moore,
Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Isaiah (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software. 2008), 49.
43
Cf. also Isaiah 5:23; 33:15; Amos 5:12; Micah 3:11–12; 7:3 to see how the prophets
declare the anger of God against the corruption and bribery of leaders in Judah and Israel.
40
178
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless
and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of
money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered
away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.” (1 Tim 6:2–10 esv)
This is part and parcel of Christian servant leadership that is needed to
avoid corruption, bribery, and bad leadership that exploits and manipulates
followers for personal gain.
Conclusion
God reveals himself as the sovereign God. He does not need anything from
any creature he has created. Therefore, no man or spirit can bribe him
(Deut 10:17). His aseity makes him radically different from traditional African concepts of the Supreme Being. In his aseity, “he has his existence in
and through himself (a se), rather than being dependent in any way on another for his existence.”44
Louis Berkhof provides a good overview of the issue:
Reformed theologians quite generally substituted the Latin word aseitas, meaning
self-originated with the word independentia (independence), as expressing, not
merely that God is independent in His Being, but also that He is independent in
everything else: in His virtues, decrees, works, and so on. … As the self-existent
God, He is not only independent in Himself, but also causes everything to depend
on Him. This self-existence of God finds expression in the name Jehovah. It is only
as the self-existent and independent One that God can give the assurance that He
will remain eternally the same in relation to His people.45
Berkhof further explains the aseitas of God as follows:
Additional indications of it are found in the assertion in John 5:26, “For as the Father
hath life in Himself, even so gave He to the Son also to have life in Himself ”; in the
declaration that He is independent of all things and that all things exist only through
Him, Ps. 94:8 ff.; Isa. 40:18 ff.; Acts 7:25; and in statements implying that He is
independent in His thought, Rom. 11:33, 34, and in His will, Dan. 4:35; Rom. 9:19;
Eph. 1:5; Rev. 4:11, in His power, Ps. 115:3, and in His counsel, Ps. 33:11.46
44
Alan W. Gomes, “Glossary 1: Technical Terminology,” in William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic
Theology, ed. Alan W. Gomes, 3rd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2003), 952.
45
Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1938), 58.
46
Ibid.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› AFRICAN CONCEPTS OF GOD AND THE GOSPEL
179
Wayne Grudem provides further helpful comments on the topic:
Scripture in several places teaches that God does not need any part of creation in
order to exist or for any other reason. God is absolutely independent and selfsufficient. Paul proclaims to the men of Athens, “The God who made the world and
everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by
man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself
gives to all men life and breath and everything” (Acts 17:24–25). In this way God’s
self-revelation is the starting point of Paul’s proclamation of God over against any
traditional thinking of God.
God asks Job, “Who has given to me, that I should repay him? Whatever is under
the whole heaven is mine” (Job 41:11). No one has ever contributed to God anything
that did not first come from God who created all things. Similarly, we read God’s
word in Psalm 50, “every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills.
I know all the birds of the air, and all that moves in the field is mine. If I were hungry,
I would not tell you; for the world and all that is in it is mine” (Ps. 50:10–12).47
Biblical ethics and the fight against widespread corruption and bribery
must flow from humans created in the image of God and therefore have to
reflect God’s character of holiness and justice. To strike to the deepest roots
of corruption and bribery in Africa, it is essential to study and proclaim
God’s revelation of himself in Africa over against traditional African concepts
of God. Only when people develop an intimate personal relationship of a
childlike fear of God will they have the spiritual and moral strength to fight
corruption and bribery.
47
Wayne Grudem, “Independence of God,” Monergism, 2018, https://www.monergism.
com/independence-god.
IN PRINT FOR THE FIRST TIME from
HERMAN BAVINCK
Reformed Ethics, Volume 1
Created, Fallen, and Converted Humanity
HERMAN BAVINCK; JOHN BOLT, ed
978-0-8010-9802-4 • 608 pp. • $59.99c
“In Reformed Ethics, we are invited to think with Bavinck about the concreteness of human life in the light
and strength of God’s deeds for us. For that, we owe the editor and translators a great deal.”
—JAMES EGLINTON, University of Edinburgh
“John Bolt and his colleagues have provided us with a fresh resource for theological and ethical reflection.”
—CRAIG G. BARTHOLOMEW, director of the Kirby Laing Institute for Christian Ethics, Cambridge
“What a treasure! John Bolt has done the church a tremendous service in translating and editing this first
volume of Bavinck’s Reformed Ethics.”
—MATTHEW J. TUININGA, Calvin Theological Seminary
u
Reformed Business
Ethics—A New Approach
to How Organizations
Can Flourish
CHRISTOPHER D. STEED
Abstract
In light of the workplace crisis and the Fourth Industrial Revolution, this
article aims to provide perspectives on how organizations can flourish.
Reformed business ethics (e.g., John Calvin and Abraham Kuyper), with
its notions of work ethics, common grace, and sphere sovereignty is
uniquely positioned to address these concerns. The author develops an
approach to wise leadership that strives not only for quantitative and
financial success but also for qualitative values—organizations that
value individuals in their relationships with the help of three principles:
look, involve, and dignify (LID). Finally, Reformed theology reinforces
and enriches this approach with its recognition of human fallenness
and the restoration of the image of God in union with Christ.
T
he modern workplace is a highly driven, stressful environment.
For high flyers and millions with mental health problems alike,
it is an insult to body and soul. If you cannot handle the stress
of working in a low-pay world, it is always and only your fault. It
is time that that presumption change. Culture is fundamental.
Businesses with positive cultures enjoy larger profits, better performance,
and happier employees. But how do you create this kind of culture? The
181
182
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
zombie workforce, an army of employees who are failing to find inspiration
at work, are the “working dead,” haunting offices and factories where once
they were valuable staff members, full of life and great ideas. There are
legions of them. According to an annual study by the consultancy Aon
Hewitt, less than one-quarter of the world’s employees are classified as
“highly” engaged in their jobs, while only forty percent admit to being
“moderately” so. Disengagement among workers seeps out to infect society
at large. When engagement levels among employees are low, businesses
report a higher staff turnover, greater absenteeism, and lower customer
satisfaction. Turn that around and a five percent increase in staff engagement results in a three percent increase in revenue.1 Lack of dignity and
respect also has a strong impact.
We will explore a new approach to making organizations positive places
and seek to bring that under the remit of a business ethics that can be
described as Reformed. The approach is part of an innovative project—the
Shared Business Value Initiative—to articulate how the value and worth of
human beings can function as a social dynamic, traced through domains
such as economics, social theory, leadership, and psychology. In the area of
management and leadership, my Smart Leadership, Wise Leadership articulates three principles for people to flourish in the workplace: look, involve,
and dignify (LID; see under section III).2
Business can be a positive agent in society. Christians ought to value the
transformative action that business can provide. Relevant to this, there has
been a strong tradition in Reformed theology to stress common grace
arising from the work of Abraham Kuyper and grounded in John Calvin.
Business is not neutral. It is the arena in which most of us make a living and
find the work that sustains life. As the Shared Value Business Initiative
proclaims, to do well, a business has to do good. What is a good place to work
or be in? What does it mean to be a good person? What are enduring qualities
and not just transient skills? How do societies nurture the empathy and
creativity that industry leaders say will survive the technological weather?
These are valid questions because they undergird how human societies work.
The perspective in this article is that the value and worth of human beings
can be operationalized—“given legs” as it were, rather than just function as
ethical aspiration. The recovery of degraded and devalued humanity in the
1
Aon Hewitt, “Trends in Global Employee Engagement,” 2011, http://www.aon.com/
attachments/thought-leadership/Trends_Global_Employee_Engagement_Final.pdf.
2
Christopher D. Steed, Smart Leadership, Wise Leadership: Environments of Value in an
Emerging Future (London: Routledge, 2017).
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
183
image of God is fundamental to redemption. Reformed commentary on
business ethics has been mainly about recognizing business as a legitimate
sphere of human action under the authority of God. What does this mean
for the culture of an organization?
Introduction
It is commonplace knowledge that the Protestant work ethic made Western
capitalism successful. The idea that accumulating wealth arose from hard
work and self-denial was conceptualized by the German sociologist Max
Weber and associated with Calvin’s religious revolution. Released from the
crushing burden of commending oneself to God, the converted soul could
demonstrate election by immersion—immersion in good deeds and works
of grace, immersion in application and dedication. Business was a legitimate sphere for activity by the godly. Attention is paid these days to business
ethics, that is, it matters how one makes money. Business ethics is generally
concerned about the validity of means. Responsible business means ethical
investment, not going into an enterprise that is damaging or potentially
dangerous to human beings. Acting ethically means acting honorably and
to the highest standards of scrutiny. It means too that the culture of a
business or organization is conducive to human flourishing. This is not just
about acting honorably in the sense of acting honestly but setting up
cultures where humanity can flourish under God.
I. Reformed Perspectives
All this matters hugely on the contemporary scene, but is it distinctively
Reformed? We do well to quote Calvin here:
Still, the surest and easiest answer to the objection is, that those are not common
endowments of nature, but special gifts of God, which he distributes in divers forms,
and, in a definite measure, to men otherwise profane. For which reason, we hesitate
not, in common language, to say, that one is of a good, another of a vicious nature;
though we cease not to hold that both are placed under the universal condition of
human depravity. All we mean is that God has conferred on the one a special grace
which he has not seen it meet to confer on the other. When he was pleased to set
Saul over the kingdom, he made him as it were a new man.3
3
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (1845; repr., Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 2.3.5 (252–53).
184
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Although some have critiqued the view that Calvin held to general natural
endowments that enabled human society to flourish, Calvin answers that
objection and rejects it. The work of God in the world does not lose its
capacity to generate recognition and praise because it results in prosperity.
God is the author and source, though so often unacknowledged despite
such palpable demonstrations of his providence, as the commentary on
Psalm 107 indicates:
But prosperity, and the happy issue of events, ought also to be attributed to his
grace, in order that he may always receive the praise which he deserves, that of being
a merciful Father, and an impartial Judge.4
Only the elect are favored with the grace of regeneration, yet Calvin could
not see any reason why
[God] should not grant the reprobate also some taste of his grace, why he should
not irradiate their minds with some sparks of his light, why he should not give them
some perception of his goodness, and in some sort engrave his word on their hearts.5
Fresh from the Geneva school, John Knox taught that
the Holy Ghost maketh a plain difference betwixt the graces and mercies which are
common to all, and that sovereign mercy which is immutably reserved to the chosen
children.6
What purposes God is working in the world that do not lead to faith and
salvation has been the subject of considerable discussion. Contemporary
Christians have much to say about the scope of the kingdom of God and
not just the church. Although the theological language has changed, this
emphasis on saving some room for divine grace has been there in
Reformed theology from early on. For example, the Westminster divine
Robert Harris said,
4
John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, trans. James Anderson (Edinburgh: Printed
for the Calvin Translation Society, 1847), 4:245.
5
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, trans. John Owen (repr.,
Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2005), 138 (commentary on Heb 6:5).
6
John Knox, “On Predestination,” in TheWorks of John Knox, ed. David Laing (Edinburgh:
James Thin, 1845), 87.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
185
There are graces of two sorts. First, common graces, which even reprobates may
have. Secondly, peculiar, such as accompany salvation, as the Apostle has it, proper
to God’s own children only. The matter is not whether we have the first sort of
graces, for those do not seal up God’s special love to a man’s soul, but it must be
saving grace alone that can do this for us.7
“Common graces” (note the plural)? The language has mostly been
expressed in terms of “common grace.” Glenda Mathes summarizes some
of the history:
In 1924 … the Christian Reformed Church Synod determined that, in addition to
the saving grace imparted only to the elect, there exists a “common grace” which is
manifested to all people in the bestowal of natural gifts, the restraining of sin in
human affairs, and the ability of unbelievers to perform deeds of civic good.
The reaction against their “Three Points of Common Grace” led to the
formation of the Protestant Reformed Churches in America, which affirmed
that these “Three Points” were contrary to Scripture and the Reformed
Confessions. The issue never went away. In a more recent debate about this
in 2003 at Sunshine Community Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, the
question “Is the doctrine of common grace Reformed?” was standing room
only.8 Speaking in defense of the doctrine of common grace was Richard
Mouw. “When we show compassion to the unbelieving,” he said, “we are
expressing a love that flows out of the heart of God.” He cited the example
of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem as “a profound glance into the heart of
God.” Richard Mouw’s book He Shines in All That’s Fair: Culture and
Common Grace, sums up his stance.9
As a fair summary of what common grace denotes, Louis Berkhof suggested that it
curbs the destructive power of sin, maintains in a measure the moral order of the
universe, thus making an orderly life possible, distributes in varying degrees gifts
and talents among men, promotes the development of science and art, and showers
untold blessings upon the children of men.10
7
“The Westminster Standards and Divines on Common Grace,” Reformed Books Online,
https://reformedbooksonline.com/topics/topics-by-subject/common-grace/
the-westminster-confession-on-common-grace/.
8
Glenda Mathes, “3000 People Attend a Debate on Common Grace,” Banner of Truth,
December 5, 2003, https://banneroftruth.org/us/resources/articles/2003/3000-people-attenda-debate-on-common-grace/.
9
Richard Mouw as quoted in Mathes, “3000 People Attend a Debate on Common Grace.”
Cf. Richard Mouw, He Shines in All That’s Fair: Culture and Common Grace (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2003).
10
Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 434–35.
186
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Is not everything in that list applicable to business? The answer must be a
resounding yes! Business is more than an alien activity practiced by
unscrupulous people. It is the lifeblood of humanity. It is where the common
wealth (I use the term on purpose) is created. Before we go to a key reference
point on this in Reformed theology, Kuyper, some context needs to be given
regarding the contemporary business context and how these proposals relate.
II. The Present Climate
The world stands at the dawn of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. It is a
transition to a network economy that has become social, to networked
individuals, “to a new set of systems, bringing together digital, biological,
and physical technologies in new and powerful combinations.”11 Much will
change fundamentally in the emerging network economy, including organizations and the role of their leaders in the nurture of enabling environments. Henrik Storm Dyrssen states, “The challenges of our time require
strategies and solutions that span private, public and civil sector spheres.”12
According to Keith Breene, “Digital technologies are unleashing new
economic and social dynamics.”13 A country’s industrial might no longer
determines its future. The prizes will go to highly adaptive leadership,
leadership with spirit, leadership with purpose.
The leadership for this day and age is the leadership of cross-sector experience and
collaboration. … But where will we find these leaders when our universities still offer
siloed professional programmes such as business, engineering, law or medicine?
How will such medical schools train the doctors needed to develop user-experiencedesign for medical technology that will make many doctors obsolete? What business
school programme helps students acquire the socio-political business savvy needed
to develop legitimate participation for private enterprise in welfare sectors without
sacrificing trading quality for profits? What about the socially conscious engineers
needed to develop scalable technologies to support social development and catastrophic relief efforts?14
Equipping organizations to tackle the future will require a management
revolution no less momentous than the one that spawned modern industry.
11
Keith Breene, “What Is ‘Network Readiness’ and Why Does it Matter?,” World Economic
Forum, July 6, 2016, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/07/what-is-networked-readinessand-why-does-it-matter/.
12
Henrik Storm Dyrssen, “How Millennials Will Save Us from Our Broken Economic
System,” World Economic Forum, April 15, 2016, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/
how-millennials-will-save-us-from-our-broken-economic-system/.
13
Breene, “What Is ‘Network Readiness’ and Why Does it Matter?”
14
Dyrssen, “How Millennials Will Save Us from Our Broken Economic System.”
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
187
As Gary Hamel described in his “Moon Shots for Management,” most of
the fundamental breakthroughs in management occurred decades ago.15
“Work flow design, annual budgeting, return-on-investment analysis, project
management, divisionalization, brand management—these and a host of
other indispensable tools” were all part of the application of scientific
principles to management. Yet “management, like the combustion engine,
is a mature technology that must now be reinvented for a new age. With this
in mind, a group of scholars and business leaders assembled in May 2008
to lay out a road map for reinventing management,” charting a new, communitarian approach to capitalism that will work as long as leaders imbue it
with a social purpose. The assembled leaders asked, How in an age of rapid
change do you create organizations that are as adaptable and resilient as
they are focused and efficient? How in a creative economy where entrepreneurial genius is the secret to success do you inspire employees to bring the
gifts of initiative, imagination, and passion to work every day? Their answer:
“To successfully address these problems, executives and experts must first
admit that they’ve reached the limits” of the industrial age paradigm “built
atop the principles of standardization, specialization, hierarchy, control, and
primacy of shareholder interests.” Further, “tomorrow’s business imperatives
lie outside the performance envelope of today’s bureaucracy-infused
management practices.” Chief among the tasks of revisiting the philosophical
foundations of management is the reality that “in tomorrow’s interdependent
world, highly collaborative systems will outperform organizations characterized by adversarial win-lose relationships.”
As a Harvard Business Review article points out,
Leaders find it tough to ensure that their people adhere to values and ethics. The
prevailing principles in business make employees ask, “What’s in it for me?” Missing
are those that would make them think, “What’s good, right, and just for everyone?”16
The notion of “the wise leader,” not just a “smart leader,” is receiving more
attention today, though this attention is hardly mainstream. In addition,
people behave less ethically when they are part of organizations or groups. Common
rationalizations, such as that you are acting in the company’s best interest, or justifications, such as that you will never be found out, lead to misconduct.17
15
Gary Hamel, “Moon Shots for Management,” Harvard Business Review, February 2009,
https://hbr.org/2009/02/moon-shots-for-management/.
16
Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi “The Big Idea: The Wise Leader,” Harvard Business
Review, May 2011, https://hbr.org/2011/05/the-big-idea-the-wise-leader.
17
Ibid.
188
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
“Capitalism” and “the free market, with its gospel of globalization and
the primacy of growth and GDP as a measure of happiness,” is under siege.18
Against the background of the 2008 global financial crisis and its aftermath,
the questions keep coming.
The impact of the global financial crisis has not only been profound, but enduring.
The crisis has not led to any fundamental reappraisal of the nature of capitalism, or
how to “govern” it. For the majority in work conditions have deteriorated, while
those without employment have been subject to ever more punitive sanctions.
Inequalities are increasing and working lives becoming more precarious.19
Perhaps it took the crash and crisis to create the conditions of mass youth
unemployment, austerity, poverty, and growing inequality that arguably
were the precursor to the new business models of digital start-ups and
sharing economy platforms. I argue elsewhere that for the future societies
to work, we need to get rid of our endemic emphasis on what work and jobs
mean to our self-worth.20 Yet for all the talk of the meaning and purpose
of our jobs being a prime means through which we are validated through
the dignity of work, most employees see them just as a means to an end.
According to a massive global survey by Gallup, only 32% of employees in
North America say they are engaged (worldwide, the number is 13%).21
Perhaps the very nature of work that allowed families to prosper and individuals to build a sense-of-self is under attack. Work might be losing its value
to people. Yet it is undoubtedly a sphere from which human beings derive
tremendous value (or not).
Even in a high-tech age, leadership remains vital. As the developing
Fourth Industrial Revolution transforms the technological foundations of
global enterprise, the phenomenon of firms growing at extremely rapid
rates has become unprecedented. What is labeled “hypergrowth” has moved
out of Silicon Valley and gone global, from high-tech start-ups to companies
both old and new. Challenges facing hypergrowth firms have a huge impact
in today’s global economy. Yet from talent shortages to regulatory impediments, growth challenges are a consistent management priority. “According
18
Dyrssen, “How Millennials Will Save Us from Our Broken Economic System.”
British Sociological Association, “Work, Employment and Society 2016 Conference:
Abstract,” University of Leeds, 2016, https://lssi.leeds.ac.uk/events/work-employment-andsociety-conference-2016/.
20
Christopher D. Steed, A Question of Worth: The Quantification Principle (London: I. B.
Tauris, 2016).
21
Annamarie Mann and Jim Harter, “The Worldwide Employee Engagement Crisis,” Gallup Workplace, January 7, 2016, https://www.gallup.com/workplace/236495/worldwide-employee-engagement-crisis.aspx.
19
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
189
to Mastering Hypergrowth, the World Economic Forum’s study of nearly
200 companies around the world, over half (55.6%) of CEOs say that
finding, motivating and keeping the best people is one of their most
pressing challenges.”22
How can we ensure that organizations are engaging places, not the kind
of toxic environments that are all too frequent?23 And how can we continue
to ensure that organizations are humane places when the future of work is
an issue that becomes hugely challenging in the wake of the gathering
flood of what may well be the job-killing Fourth Industrial Revolution?
What kind of smart leadership is needed to cultivate the human dimension
in a digital era? What does it mean to cultivate “leadership with spirit”?
Can wise, ethical, and responsible leadership that is not off-balance become
the default position and not just “smart leadership”? We will explore the
idea that leaders should be wise, lifting organizations to a higher dimension
than just the technocratic through engendering humane environments
that, under certain conditions, best translate the value of people into their
collective endeavors.
This article presents a new construct about leadership and how organizations flourish. It is the task of leaders to facilitate a workplace culture where
the value of people is best expressed. Our term for this will be an “environment of value,” an organizational “community of practice” that draws out the
inner value of its participants and translates that into external, added value
for the enterprise. It acts as a catalyst for the conversion of internal value into
the purposes of the organization. It seeks to build value precisely because it
works with the conditions by which a valuing environment can be cultivated.
An environment of value therefore digs into motivational drivers because it
mobilizes the factors that will encourage people to give of their best.
New perspectives on creating positive organizational changes are much
needed. As I write, Siemens has just offered a report about the reasons for
the productivity puzzle in the United Kingdom: United Kingdom workers
seemingly produce for longer hours than the United States or European
counterparts, but their output is up to 20% less. Siemens suggests that 75%
of the deficit is due to poor leadership and practices that do not make the
most of the potential of their staff.24
22
“Which Regions Will Build the Silicon Valleys of the Future,” World Economic Forum,
2019, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/06/what-is-standing-in-the-way-of-hypergrowthin-your-region/.
23
Oliver James, Office Politics: How to Thrive in a World of Lying, Backstabbing and Dirty Tricks
(London: Vermillion, 2013), 92.
24
“The World at One,” BBC Radio 4, July 14, 2016, www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/worldatone.
190
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
A generation ago, Peter Drucker, the leading guru of management,
argued that we were in the middle of a great social transformation akin to
the Renaissance. The computer was the symbol of this immense change
whereby the primary resource is no longer capital, land, or labor, but
knowledge (hence “post-capitalist”). Drucker argued that knowledge had
become the means of production, creating value by “productivity” and
“innovation” when applied to work. The new class of post-capitalist society
was now made up of knowledge workers and service workers. This presented
a significant challenge for society. How should we preserve the income and
dignity of service workers (who cannot become knowledge workers but
constitute the majority of the workforce)?25 Many lament that there are no
quality jobs anymore.
More recently, the financial journalist Paul Mason wondered if we are
not on the brink of a change so big, so profound, that this time capitalism
itself has reached its limits and is changing into something wholly new. It
is the information technology revolution, Mason argued, that has the
potential to reshape our familiar notions of work, production, and value
utterly; and to destroy an economy based on markets and private ownership—in fact, he contended, it was already doing so.26
As the Age of Capitalism yields to what is called the “knowledge society”
and now to the digital economy, the radical affects it will have on society,
politics, and business now and in the coming years are far reaching. Now
that far fewer people in the West have been working in factories since about
1980—and even China is busy de-industrializing—we have already moved
from a society based on capital, land, and labor to a society whose primary
source is knowledge and whose key structure is the organization.
In the digital future, environments of value will be different from the old
industrial era institutions that created public services. It will not necessarily
be the case that an organization that is well managed is also well led.
Future organizations will not be cranking out just quantity but also quality.
Creativity and empathy have not been really needed except for the creative
or caring industries. In the future, they will be vital for all enterprises. The
leadership needed to foster such environments will be different from the
old top-down style in which instructions are given. They will be open,
transformative processes, where we no longer speak about bosses and
workers, processes based on subject-object relations, but creating space for
25
Peter Drucker, Managing the Non-profit Organization (New York: HarperCollins, 1990),
63.
26
Paul Mason, Post Capitalism: A Guide to the Future (London: Allen Lane, 2015), 79.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
191
all involved, if not in equal relation then in creative dialogue. This is surely
the workplace of the future, not one that follows old hierarchical models
but one in which creativity and empathy fuse to generate all-around shared
value. The future of work will still entail successful organizations, those
employing worthwhile people doing worthwhile jobs and tasks.
Values-driven ethical leadership, not just technocratic competence, is
emphasized in the leadership literature of recent times. What that needs to
be complemented with is the dimension of spirit and soul that translates
managerialism from smart leadership into wisdom for rushing executives
whose own inner world is so often off-balance.
Axiomatic in what follows is that human beings are strongly shaped
relationally not only by their own agency, but by their social environment
and by forces that structure their life and work. A workplace is a very particular form of social environment. If the circumstances and context are right,
people will give of their best. That seems commonplace until it is realized
that the experience of so many is that the organizational environment and
culture is not conducive to human flourishing. Rather than engendering
engagement, it is demotivating and devaluing.
III. A New Lens on Human Action
This article is based on a theological reflection on the experience of participants in the workplace. It is based on client experiences at work and the
way they reflect bigger, deeper questions about what it means to be human.
There are strong lessons to be learned about the contribution that theology,
specifically an applied Reformed theology, makes to the common grace of
how people thrive in the contemporary workplace. Hopefully, this breaks
new ground, following my Smart Leadership,Wise Leadership.
Some years ago, I engaged in a research exercise that illuminates the factors
that generate inner worth being drawn out and harnessed (or shut down, as
the case may be). Crucially, looking at issues of human worth through their
contrast—what it means to be devalued or trashed in the workplace—lent
greater analytical clarity. Empirical observation in therapeutic contexts and
organizational study of both the popular and academic literature showed
me that circumstances giving rise to reports of feelings of devaluation can
be summed up as threefold through the experience of being diminished, of
being disregarded, and of not being given dignity:
• Lack of purposeful engagement (indifference)—not being seen, noticed,
recognized or listened to
192
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
• Lack of honor (inequality, insult)—being diminished rather than enlarged
through discriminatory practice; not having one’s full humanity
included
• Being invaded (indignity)—being assaulted or set aside
• Lack of involvement, inclusion, and dignity results in a deficit of the
significance that people look for in the workplace.
Case Study
Whose fault is it if you cannot cope with the stress of work? The answer
used to be simple: “It is yours, and you are probably a shiftless weakling for
even asking the question.” But a landmark case in France has shifted public
opinion:
Following an inquiry into the suicides of more than 30 employees at France Télécom
(now Orange) between 2008 and 2009, prosecutors in Paris have recommended
that Didier Lombard, a former chief executive of the company, and six other senior
managers be put on trial for psychological harassment. Union officials and prosecutors have suggested that France Télécom’s strategy may have been designed to nudge
employees into quitting of their own accord, sparing the company the expense and
bad publicity of laying them off: workers were shunted from office to office, forced
to work long, impractical hours, and subjected to conditions that few employers would
risk in a nation with relatively easy access to firearms. Instead, facing unemployment
in a recession, employees continued to work, and dozens killed themselves. … These
managers saw little wrong in pushing their employees to the brink of breakdown in
the name of profit. That this case may be taken to a criminal court is far more
shocking than it should be.27
We are dealing with the black box of applied power. Reformed people
surely need a fine-grained concept of power and how sinfulness operates
through cultures of all kinds. When it comes to corporate culture, there will
always be problems between managers and employees, even in the most
benign situation. Many difficulties are the result of people’s responses to
authority and stress. Some difficulties are the result of company policies.
There is, as observed, much good management and leadership out there.
Nevertheless, experience shows that people keep coming back to these
same factors again and again. Moreover, statements in practitioner literature
indicate that these can be replicated. There does seem to be an issue not
just with narcissistic managers but with the culture of many organizations.
It is the culture and practice on the ground that shapes behavior and nearly
27
Laurie Penny, “For Millions with Mental Health Problems, the Modern Workplace Is an
Insult to Body and Soul,” New StatesmanAmerica, September 9, 2016, http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/09/millions-mental-health-problems-modern-workplaceinsult-body-and-soul.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
193
always vitiates against “official” strategy and so often makes it practically
irrelevant. Discerning such negative factors for disvaluing environments
leads to turning these back on their head “to lift the LID” on an organization, release dynamism and address disengagement through a positive
workplace culture:
• Honor humanity—Look, learn, and listen
• Engage with purpose—Involve and include to elicit significance
• Set up a nonintrusive environment—Dignify
This awareness translates into direct benefit to leaders and managers to
understand how to build a strong culture in their organization in which
people can flourish. Using these principles, Smart Leadership,Wise Leadership
has been translated into a seminar series used at an MBA graduate college.
It is therefore useful knowledge precisely because it goes with the grain of
what makes for human flourishing. This is where theology meets organization theory and psychology. And why not, if we truly claim to have profound
insight into human behavior on account of our reading of Scripture?
There is psychological theory here relevant to our inner motivations and
the circumstances in which people thrive.28 The grounded theory is this:
• There is a strong association between the sense of inner world value
held by staff or workers as they participate in an organization and the
added, external value they generate that furthers its purpose, whether
financial or not.
• Wise leaders understand it is in the interests of the organization to
optimize those factors (proposed here as essentially threefold) that
enable a valuing environment to translate inner value into added value.
This is profoundly theological. Under common grace, the worker translates
his or her value into the dignity of labor. The craftsmanship reflects the
person who crafts; ultimately, it reflects the Maker. Kuyper would no
doubt approve.
At first glance, this is about how organizations flourish. There is, however,
a construct being developed here that potentially provides a lens on the
drivers of human action. Getting the best out of people, not just extracting
the most, requires attention to the circumstances in which their sense of
themselves and their value is translated into their projects.
28
Cf. Steed, Smart Leadership,Wise Leadership.
194
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
What advantages are there to employers and leadership in commercial,
nonprofit, or faith-based organizations in setting up work environments where
the primary goal is not making money and optimum performance? After all,
the law does not say leaders must look after their staff and make them feel
valued. However, it is surely a strategy of self-enlightenment to discern what
the ingredients of a high-value environment are. Even when ratios of capital
to labor shift, about 90% of the overhead of an organization is still staff
salaries. People continue to matter—to both the workforce and God.
But if my proposal is theological, can it claim to be Reformed in any sense?
IV. Business Ethics through a Kuyperian Lens
Following Calvin, the reference point in Reformed circles is usually that of
Kuyper, and it is through his lens that the rest of this article applies common
grace to the culture of business. This scholar-minister, who founded the
Reformed Church in the Netherlands as well as the Free University of
Amsterdam, was also Prime Minister from 1901 to 1904. Kuyper contended
vigorously that theological modernism would eventually prove as useless as
“a squeezed out lemon peel,” but traditional religious truths would survive.29
In his lectures at Princeton in 1898, Kuyper argued that Calvinism was
more than theology. It provided a comprehensive worldview and indeed
had already proven to be a decisive factor in the development of the institutions and values of modern society.30 There is an intrinsic connection
between this position and the laws he influenced or enacted. His theological
and political views are linked, proposed legislation after 1901 to improve
working conditions witnessing this fact.31 Is this purely a realm for business?
In contrast to the ideas of sovereignty through the individual (the French
model) or derivation from the State (the German model), Kuyper advocated
the notion of “sphere sovereignty,” in which schools and universities, the
press, business and industry, and the arts are sovereign in their own spheres.32
The sovereignty of business? A curious thought a century later in an age of
robust compliance procedures!
29
Arie L. Molendijk, “‘A Squeezed Out Lemon Peel’: Abraham Kuyper on Modernism,”
Church History and Religious Culture 91.3–4 (January 2011): 396–411, doi:10.1163/187124111X609397.
30
Arie L. Molendijk,. “Neo-Calvinist Culture Protestantism: Abraham Kuyper’s Stone
Lectures,” Church History and Religious Culture 88.2 (2008): 235–50, doi:10.1163/
187124108X354330.
31
James D. Bratt, Abraham Kuyper: Modern Calvinist, Christian Democrat (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2013).
32
Abraham Kuyper, “Sphere Sovereignty (1880),” in James D. Bratt, ed., Abraham Kuyper:
A Centennial Reader (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 461–90.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
195
Reformed theology is relevant for institutions in the present for two
reasons.
Firstly, more than it has been perhaps, it ought to be a cardinal principle
of Reformed theology that the soul has infinite value and worth. The high
view of God that this perspective espouses surely leads to the outcome that
humankind made in the imago Dei ought not to be trifled with. Handle
with care! The greater honor and dignity accorded to humanity (even
though that honor and dignity has been grievously compromised in the
fall), the greater the respect shown to the Creator, who made us in the
mirror of divinity. If this principle is accepted, it surely needs to take legs.
It is not a theoretical view only.
Secondly, redemption and unio cum Christo ought to be understood as a
recovery program whereby our full humanity is restored. It does not lead to
an artificial humanity, but tends towards a full restoration of what we lost
that is now gloriously reframed in Jesus Christ; we do not become less than
human when we encounter the divine grace of redemption, but return to
humanity as it should be. The new man is renewed after the image of the
one who created him (Col 3:19). We are told to put on the new man who
after God is created (Eph 4:24).
The so-called Protestant work ethic arises because the subjects produced
by Calvinism are disciplined foot-soldiers, not just for church work directly
but in society. Work is not redeeming so much as it reflects a redeemed life
made serious by being allied to a sense of purpose. Life is to be dedicated
to God, not indulged or wasted.
Yet the reality is that this high ideal is compromised every day by a workplace that trashes the lives of its workers and by organization cultures that
diminish people, disregard them, or fail to dignify them.
Redemption is not the imposition of a false humanity but a life approximating far better the life of fellowship with God. It can never take us back
to before the fall, but it can direct our lives after the fall, shaping them in
the image of Jesus, the trailblazer of the new humanity. Jesus was a working
man for the vast majority of his life. Apprenticeship in his father’s business
was reality at a practical level, as well as that of divine sonship (Luke 2:21).
Kuyper was surely on the right ground when he grasped that his Reformed
theology should translate into the organization of society and of the workplace where so much of life is lived. The emphasis here on the value and
worth of human beings did not seem to loom large as a driving principle,
but given what we know about the worth of God and value of a soul, it
surely resonates.
196
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
As Calvin observes, “the primary seat of the divine image was in the mind
and the heart, or in the soul and its powers.”33 Reformed theology should
go further than upholding the worth people have by being made in the
imago Dei. Our identity is not, after all, solitary. We are relational. The turn
to relationality in science and social philosophy has often been noticed in
recent years. Calvin’s notion of a reciprocal relationship between our
ideas of God and our self-understanding takes us in that direction,34 though
he does not underline the way that our relations to others mediate our
knowledge of God and the self. That turn is of recent progeny.
Our identity is dispersed, formed, and re-formed in interaction with God
and others. A high proportion of that interaction takes place in organizations
and the workplace. Human worth and significance does not, though, live by
itself. We need others to give us that meaning. Those around us in the
sphere in which we live, move, and have our being are needed to affirm our
value. The culture of where we work shapes us. When that goes wrong, and
people do not function at their optimum, the impact is negative.
The three principles advanced here as genuine insights into how organizations can work to their optimum are derived from human fallenness. They
are the mirror image of the negative factors that erode people, that diminish
and degrade humanity. Sinfulness paints dark colors on the workplace.
V. A Theological Project?
This article reflects a body of work35 that traces the value and worth of people
into various domains: psychology, social theory, organizations, and contemporary politics. It offers a coherent theological framework that derives human
worth from the worth of God that is conferred upon us. This matters.
It is not just people in a negative workplace; God can also be devalued.
Giving God the honor due to his name is vital to worship and Christian
liturgy. It was emphasized much in the Reformation. “Let God be God”!
Divine worth is about worship, “worthship.” To worship is to accord worth,
to recognize something as being of highest and truest value, to recognize
and give respect for the highest worth it has. “You are worthy, our Lord and
God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and
by your will they existed and were created” (Rev 4:11 niv).
33
Calvin, Institutes 1.15.3 (164).
Calvin, Institutes 1.1.1–3 (37–39).
35
For ease of reference, the reader is referred to the author’s website, www.christophersteed.co.uk.
34
OCTOBER 2019 ›› REFORMED BUSINESS ETHICS—A NEW APPROACH
197
The divine Lord is the supreme valuer, the one who bestows worth on his
craftsmanship. We are his poem, his work (Eph 2:10). There is work to be
done to show how the value of personhood connects the two and signposts
the existence of God in a way that resonates profoundly with the psychological realities of our times. The theological project under discussion projects
divine worth into the one-off incarnation of Jesus, who embraces the human
situation as just slightly lower than the angels (Heb 2:7–8). Stepping into
humanity, the Redeemer connects with human experience in a way that the
church urgently needs to come to grips with.36 The culmination of “the
identification principle” is the astonishing atonement. A symbolic exchange
is set up—characteristic, as I argue, of violence generally. Payment has to be
exacted somehow. The devalued and degraded man stands forth as the
representative of living humanity to offer himself up to death. Taking the
place of the trashed and clothed with indignity, Jesus confers his value on the
unworthy ones of the earth (2 Cor 5:21). Such is the exchange of status we
call justification. Through this lens, atonement makes sense. It is not some
alien doctrine but utterly true to life, to psychological reality, and to God!
LeRon Schults grounds a “reforming theological anthropology” in the
implications of a relational turn in late modernity in such spheres as social
sciences and developmental psychology. The way that connectivity is
central to who we are illuminates Christian revelation. Vital to this project
is the importance of personhood as it is played out at work.37 Christianity
is working!
VI. Summing Up …
It is some way from the atonement to business ethics and the life and times
of contemporary organizations. Yet with its sharp understanding of fallen
power and endemic sinfulness, Reformed theology should surely endorse
the proposition that under common grace, wise and loving leaders are
concerned to build organizations in which human beings can flourish.
Making organizations and the workplace more humane places—with the
Internet already organizing economy and society in a different way, a
premium will be placed on factors to do with the human “touch,” such as
creativity, empathy, and entrepreneurial flair, that cannot be replicated by
algorithms. There is a vital association between inner value and external,
added value that is there to be drawn out under optimum conditions.
36
37
Christopher D. Steed, The Identification Principle (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 2019).
F. LeRon Schults, Reforming Theological Anthropology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003).
198
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Leaders are often unsure about how to mobilize the participation and
engagement of their people so they are productive and contribute effectively.
That is true anytime, anywhere, but in the Fourth Industrial Revolution
even more so if it deprives us of our heart and soul.
Vital on the contemporary scene is an understanding of value that is
broader than the economic. Perhaps a sense of true value in a context
where humans can flourish and do their best work provides a link between
Reformed theology and business ethics. Human valuing is not just rooted
in individuals but in interaction with others. The workplace is a vital sphere
where the validation of our worth is performed. Deeply compromised by
invisible power as it is, where we spend so much of our lives is of prime
ethical concern.
INTERVIEW
Interview with
Christopher Yuan
PETER A. LILLBACK
(December 20, 2018)
PETER LILLBACK: It is a privilege to interview Christopher Yuan, whose concern
is to address sexual ethics and Christian witness in light of biblical theology. He
has written Holy Sexuality and the Gospel: Sex, Desire, and Relationship
Shaped by God’s Grand Story.1 Let us begin with a word of prayer:
Father, thank you for your providential care that has allowed us to meet together.We pray that this interview might be uplifting to those that read it.We pray,
Lord, that you will bless our friend Christopher as he shares his wrestling with
your Word in his personal experiences and that he will continue to have a fruitful ministry that advances your kingdom.Thank you, Lord, that we can commit
ourselves to you afresh and be reminded that the gospel is the hope of every
human being, regardless of who we are or what we have done. Thank you for
the greatness of your forgiveness and the amazing grace that is our hope. Amen.
Christopher, you are a graduate of and teach at Moody Bible Institute. Tell us a
little about your theological preparation to be a teacher and a writer.
CHRISTOPHER YUAN: I
was not raised in a Christian home. I did not have
any theological background growing up in Chicago, but I wrestled with my
1
Christopher Yuan, Holy Sexuality and the Gospel: Sex, Desire, and Relationships Shaped by
God’s Grand Story, foreword by Rosaria Butterfield (Colorado Springs, CO: Multnomah,
2018).
199
200
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
sexual identity from a young age and “came out” when I was in my 20s.
Through that crisis, my mother and father came to faith. We talk about that
in a memoir I co-authored with my mom, Out of a Far Country: A Gay Son’s
Journey to God, A Broken Mother’s Search for Hope. Through my parents’
faith and newfound witness, they began to reflect Christ to me although I
was running from God. I was pursuing my doctorate in dentistry in Louisville, Kentucky. I got involved in partying and drugs and was expelled from
dental school three months before I was to receive my doctorate. I moved
to Atlanta and kept doing what I knew how to do best, which was selling
drugs, and finally was arrested by the federal government. I was facing ten
years to life, and while I was in jail, God began miraculously and graciously drawing me to himself. I found a Bible in the trashcan and started reading
it. All my friends had left me, and my parents were the only ones who were
there for me. It was really interesting, because we get these narratives from
the world saying that Christian parents reject or do not love their gay children.
I had the exact opposite experience. Before they came to faith, my parents
could not accept it when I came out as gay. It was only after they became
Christians that they realized they needed to love me as God loved them.
PL: Would
you say that you heard the gospel for the first time clearly from your
parents? Or was it reading the Bible from the trashcan?
CY: Before I became a Christian, no one ever shared the gospel with me,
although I had some Christian friends. It was not my parents either, because
they knew how antagonistic I was to anything to do with religion or God. I
thought, “That’s fine for you, but don’t push it on me.” They had to live the
gospel before they had any chance to preach it. Their quiet testimony, not
any individual, ministry, or evangelistic system, led me to pick up that
Bible. It was simply God’s Word.
PL: Are
you comfortable with the phrase “sovereign grace”? That God somehow
decided to call you to himself?
CY: One hundred percent. I look at my life and my mother’s conversion,
and it is the only explanation. She hated Christians and wanted nothing to
do with God. God had to miraculously invade her life, tear it apart with my
coming out; at the same time, my parents’ marriage was a disaster, and they
were about to divorce. It was only sovereign grace that wooed us.
PL: As
you were facing potential prison time, what happened as the Lord started
to move in your heart?
CY: Finding a Bible in the trashcan—how can that be anything other than
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER YUAN
201
God’s irresistible grace? With nothing better to do, I began reading God’s
Word, and initially, it was not good news. I was convicted as a sinner, rebellious against God, my parents, society—and that was without touching the
issue of sexuality! Then I got some really bad news. I found out I was HIV
positive. That was the nail in the coffin, the lowest of lows. After that, God
never left me. One night in my prison cell, I saw someone had scribbled
something on the metal bunk above, and it said, “If you’re bored, read
Jeremiah 29:11”: “I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans
to prosper you, not to harm you, to give you a future and a hope.” I honestly
had no clue what it meant, but God gave me just enough faith to get through
that one day and the next.
As I studied God’s Word, one of the things that was transformative was
that God had to change my wrong thinking about identity before I could
realize that same sex relationships were sinful. It is one of the first chapters
of my book, and one of the core aspects that Christians are missing in
conversation with the gay community. If one believes being gay is a matter
of who one is, sinful behavior is inseparable from who one is. I needed to be
radically enlightened with God’s truth: sexuality is not who you are but how
you are. That was revolutionary. Once I was able to grasp that “I am gay” is
a wrong statement, I was able to move forward. In prison, I realized that we
pigeonhole ourselves into a framework of heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, categories that are insufficient to articulate God’s calling of sexuality. I
read through God’s Word and realized that God has called us in two ways:
chastity in singleness and faithfulness in marriage. I coined the term holy
sexuality to represent that. God called me to full-time ministry while I was
in prison. I got out of prison, applied to Moody, then went to Wheaton to
get an MA. I was invited to teach at Moody soon after I graduated from
Wheaton in 2007, and I finished a DMin in 2014.
PL: As
you look at the whole experience of your life—you were without Christ
growing up in the United States—are you from an ethnic family?
CY: My parents were born in China before it was Communist China. They
were among the fortunate ones to flee to Taiwan; they were raised and met
in college there before coming to the United States for graduate school. My
mother just wanted to get married. So she gave up her full-ride scholarship
and supported my dad through school. I am a cross-cultural kid, born in
America, but I am not American, some people will say. I am Chinese, but I
am not Chinese. I am sort of this in-between, culturally more American but
ethnically Chinese. I can speak Mandarin, and that is my heart language
and my ethnic background.
202
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
PL: So
in your formative years, one influence on your life was the immigrant
status, that Asian educational work ethic. You are also in America with all the
opportunities and dangers and temptations it brings.Where did the interest in the
gay movement come in?
CY: I would say same-sex attractions. They developed early on, as I was
exposed to pornography very young. No one should ever be exposed to
pornography at any age, but nine is very young. Unfortunately, that has
become the norm with it being so easily accessible and free on the Internet.
PL: Was
it an internet source where it happened for you?
was in 1979, when I was nine, before the Internet. It was surprisingly at a trusted family friend’s home. He had hidden it. Being a nosy kid,
you unfortunately find stuff you are not supposed to and are awakened to
things that are not supposed to be awoken. You often will hear that samesex attraction stems from issues in our past: our parents, an absentee father,
or dominant mother. However, a good theological anthropology needs a
proper doctrine of sin. In Adam we all died (cf. 1 Cor 15:22) and our nature
has been corrupted, perverted from birth, and that is the only primary root
cause. Other factors do come into play, not so much as causative agents but
as catalysts.
CY: No, it
PL: Would
you say then that because we all have a broken and fallen nature,
same-sex attraction is a universal possibility, rather than something that you are
born to or that circumstances force you to be?We all have the potential just because
we are in a state of rebellion to God? Or is that too strong?
CY: The sinful nature is universal, although it may be differently expressed
in different people. It is a predisposition, not as a predetermination. A
person might be born with a predisposition toward alcoholism, gossiping,
even a heterosexual lust problem, pornography, or same-sex attraction. The
universal aspect comes from original sin, expressed differently in different
people; but the core is still the sinful nature, which points right to the only
core answer, Jesus Christ. This is why in my book I talk about God’s grand
story—creation, fall, redemption, and consummation—a broad framework
for understanding sexuality.
PL: How when you were
a young person did the attraction to the drug scene come,
and was that simultaneous or different from same-sex attraction? Did they just
happen to mesh in your experience?
CY: I was a really good kid growing up; my older brother was the rebellious
one. He knew how to push my parents’ buttons. He excelled in everything.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER YUAN
203
I was an average, nice kid. In my early 20s, when I moved to Louisville, I
felt, “This is who I am.” I did not see it as rebellion. There is a lot of bad logic
in that, but it seemed logical to me at the time. I felt that I was the victim. I
got involved in drugs because I was thinking postmodern, deconstructionist:
If I had been taught to believe that same-sex relationships are wrong but
they are not, then maybe all the other things I thought were wrong really
were not. So who says doing drugs is wrong? The whole secular morality
framework says as long as I am not hurting anyone, it is my choice, and we
justify it. When you give in on one issue, you give in on another. That might
have been my thought process.
PL: What
has given you the freedom to talk and write so openly about this? Is it
therapeutic, or redemptive? Is it a mission God has given you? Why is it so vital
for you to share?
CY: Growing up, I kept the most significant thing about me secret for so
long. When I came out, I thought, “I have been keeping this down for so
long, I am going to tell everyone.” That might be why our gay friends appear
to be throwing it in our faces. If you have had to hold something down for
decades, you feel, “I can finally not have to hold it down” and want to tell
everyone. So I was transparent to the point of being obnoxious. One of those
Christians would say, “Why are you throwing your gayness, your same sex
relationship, in my face?” Also, Asians do not share. It is not natural for us
to be transparent. Chinese do not want to lose face; there is that shame base.
When I first came out, we decided that we were not going to hide it but be
open and not ashamed. God has so blessed my dad, my mom, and me in
being faithful to witness about the glory of God and the power of his grace.
PL: Your
story gives you the ability to speak theologically in a unique way because
these are truths that you have had to learn to live and apply. Some say that if
you have a same-sex attraction, you cannot be a Christian. How do you respond
from a theological perspective?
CY: We need to be consistent. How does one come to faith? It is by grace
through faith in Christ, and these are core doctrines. But what does it look
like to be a Christian? Can a Christian still be tempted? The answer is
obviously yes. The way Paul writes in Romans 7, “I do what I do not want”
(v. 1), describes a real struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. The idea
that a person who has the Holy Spirit abiding in them cannot be tempted
by same-sex attractions does not line up with Scripture’s understanding of
original sin, indwelling sin, and actual sin. The confusion comes from the
term “same-sex attraction.” In my book, I indicated that “same-sex
204
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
attraction” is not clear enough and decided not to use it when talking about
God’s sexual ethic. Rather, I chose to use the biblical terms “temptation”
and “desire.” Rewording your question: Can a person be tempted with sin
and still be a Christian? I would say yes, Jesus Christ himself was tempted
“in every respect,” the writer of Hebrews says, but was “without sin” (Heb
4:15). The critical question is whether an individual is in unrepentant serial
sin. I would define same-sex desire as sin and same-sex behavior as sin. Then
the question we need to ask is, Is that person truly redeemed, converted, or
not? If the Holy Spirit is abiding in them, they should not be in bondage to
sin, or if they are, the Holy Spirit should be convicting them of sin.
PL: Is
homosexuality the unforgivable sin? If you have been involved in a samesex relationship, is there no forgiveness? How does the gospel address this?
CY: Yes, that is an excellent question although the majority of Christians
answer no. But we need to ask ourselves, have our actions at times wrongly
communicated that we actually do view homosexuality as the unforgivable
sin? We only know one instance in the New Testament that has been
clearly identified as being the unforgivable sin, and that is grieving the
Holy Spirit (Matt 12:31–32 and parallels). So all other sins can be covered
by the blood of Christ, including mass murder, as committed by Paul,
prostitution, or adultery. These sins indeed can be forgiven, and so even
same-sex relationships or multiple-same-sex relationships can be covered
by the blood of Christ.
PL: Those
struggling to become new persons by identity with Christ feel the
temptation and desire and sometimes succumb. How do you counsel them from
a Christian perspective, desiring “holy sexuality” and recognizing that Christians
are not always holy?
CY: Those wrestling with same-sex attraction often feel the stigma of being
“the worst of sinners.” Paul calls himself that but then argues, “For this reason, I received mercy so that others would come to know him” (cf. 1 Tim
1:16). I want people to realize that they are not much different from everyone
struggling with sin. It might be a different sin, but it is still a sin struggle. The
goal is not the eradication of temptation; that is not biblical or realistic. Sanctification is instantaneous, progressive, and future, not a one-time done deal
and you are never tempted anymore. I notice in myself that the more I fixate
on my sin temptation and struggle, on simply not sinning, it can become
overwhelming, and I miss out on Christ. Our goal is daily intimacy and union
with Christ, and to apply it to sexual identity and same-sex attraction. However, if you focus on union with Christ and how to grow in spiritual depth
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER YUAN
205
and intimacy with Christ, exercising the habits of grace, you will not only be
able to receive Christ but also to have victory over the bondage of sin.
PL: How
does a person learn to see themselves not as a sinner, or a person with a
history of a gay or pornographic lifestyle, but as someone who can say, “That’s
maybe what I’ve done but that’s not who I am”?
CY: Identity in Christ is correlated with union with Christ. I still live in the
vestiges of my former identity and the body memories and its consequences.
Thus, I daily need to mortify sin, but my identity is not in my indwelling sin.
Identity in the personhood of Christ has priority. Our identity in Christ
restores that image of God distorted by the fall and guides us every day,
moment, and our every thought. We talk about what is normal or abnormal,
and honestly, what is normal and easy is to go on autopilot and let your flesh
go its way. What is abnormal is to die to self, mortify the sin nature and
indwelling sin, and surrender to Christ. That is the difficult path to take.
God has called us to do that and, more importantly, has given us the Holy
Spirit who empowers us and undergirds our sanctification.
PL: In
the gay community and beyond one argument is “I am born this way, this
is my nature, I cannot change.There is no way of being other than who I am, and
I need to accept it.” This is the world’s perspective against the idea that I can
define myself in a new way in Christ. How do you look at your fellow gay friends
and say, “No, I can be different”? How do you engage their arguments?
CY: The secular approach does not look to the Word of God as the foundation
for truth. Their epistemology is what they call facts and science. However,
scientifically there is nothing conclusive to date to say that people are born
gay, although there is good evidence saying that being gay is multifaceted.
Being gay could have a genetic or hormonal factor, but it could also have
developmental or sociological factors. We do not know, so we need to begin
with a theological anthropology. We are created in the image of God (Gen
1:27), but that image has since been distorted. Although the majority think
that people are born gay, the Lord Jesus Christ said in John 3 that you must
be born again to be a new creation in Christ. People say, “I was born a (you
fill in the blank),” but Jesus Christ told Nicodemus, “You must be born
again” (John 3:7).
PL: How
does knowing the history of redemption help someone who is engaging
the issues of a gay lifestyle? How do you tell that story in a way that speaks to
their lives?
CY: God created us in the image of God, and it is imperative to start there
206
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
to address the gender identity issue. And what does the image of God
mean? As we look at Genesis 1:27, there are three lines of parallel poetry:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.” There is a direct correlation between the
image of God and male and female. “Male” and “female” is not a biological
or psychological reality; it is a spiritual reality, essential to who we are as
God’s good image with value and dignity before God. The fall has distorted
us; this reality points to the need for the redeemer who came to restore
humanity. Understanding the need for Christ helps to see that same-sex
sexual desires, same-sex behavior, and same-sex romantic desires are sinful.
Then, if that is the problem, the sole solution is Christ. An anthropocentric
answer has been the solution sought over the past few years. Focusing on
support groups and a psychoanalytical approach is not the right approach
for dealing with this sin issue; rather, God can miraculously take away the
struggle and temptation of same-sex attraction. If he does, that will be
replaced with some other sin struggle, as our sin nature cannot be eradicated
this side of glory. The Holy Spirit gives victory over the sin nature but not
complete eradication. So temptation continues, but not more than we can
bear (cf. 1 Cor 10:13). Having eternity in mind when we think about singleness and marriage helps those with same-sex attractions have a more correct
understanding than what the world thinks.
PL: What
is a good working definition of what you call “holy sexuality”?
CY: Holy sexuality has two paths: If you are single, it means being faithful to
God by being sexually abstinent. If you are married, you are faithful to God
by being faithful to your spouse of the opposite sex. Holy sexuality is chastity
in singleness and faithfulness in marriage. For most, singleness is not a
choice, it is default, a reality for everybody at some point in their life, sometimes more than once. As true Christians we are defending the sanctity of
marriage, but sometimes we do so without truly understanding what Paul
says in Ephesians 5. It is the mystery of Christ and the church (v. 32). As
John Piper says, “Marriage between a man and a woman here on the earth
is just a shadow of the eternal reality of Christ being wed to the church. So
when that becomes actualized in the end times, there is no more need for a
shadow.” The purpose is a reflection of Christ and the perfect marriage of
Christ being wed to his bride.
PL: The
practical ethical challenge that we are facing today is, What is the
problem with chastity in a monogamous same-sex relationship? Is it better than
being promiscuous?
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER YUAN
207
CY: Marriage should in no case be viewed as the cure for sexual immorality,
whether it is an opposite-sex biblical marriage or same-sex marriage. I wrote
an article with Rosaria Butterfield, “Something Greater Than Marriage,”
to counteract the idolatry of marriage both in the world and as Christians.2
The most deceptive form of idolatry is to worship something good. Good
things are not meant to be worshiped; only God is. Marriage is not the
highest ideal of love, but an expression of love, because God himself is the
highest ideal of love. Many world religions claim their god is loving, but the
God of the Bible is love as an ontological reality. Marriage does not have a
monopoly on love, but it is one expression of love, and certainly not the
greatest. God’s love is followed by our love for God. Furthermore, the Old
Testament emphasizes marriage, family, children, offspring, tribes, and clans,
and the New still emphasizes family, but even more the church, as the body
of Christ, the spiritual family, and the local church. In 1 Corinthians 13,
read many times at weddings, the context of what Paul was talking about is
not the love between a husband and a wife, but how we are called to love each
other in the body of Christ. So when people say, “Why can’t they love each
other?”—loving each other as a brother or sister in the Lord is the relationship
that will last eternally. Marriage is not the only way to experience intimacy.
PL: How
do you counsel people who have a family member or friend who will be
entering into a same-sex marriage, since it is legal and part of our culture, and
who are wrestling with the question whether they should or should not go to witness
and participate? Do you have guidance, or is it a matter of conscience?
CY: I have heard both sides of the story. For me personally, it would be
extremely hard. There are too many things at stake in a relationship with a
loved one or friend who is gay. Do they know what we believe, not merely
on biblical sexuality but our understanding of the gospel, and have we
communicated that to them? But the other thing is, do they know we still
love them? If you do not go, what you believe is clear, but whether or not
you love them is unclear. On the other hand, if you do go, it is clear you love
them, but what you believe could be misunderstood. There is tension on
this issue. I encourage people to pray and fast. I think it is more an issue for
the individual conscience. It is not God’s will, and it is a sin to marry this
way, but what about going to the celebration? If God calls you not to go, I
2
Written after the Obergefell v. Hodges decision of the United States Supreme Court in
2015. Christopher Yuan and Rosaria Butterfield, “Something Greater than Marriage: A
Response to the SCOTUS Decision,” The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern
Baptist Convention, June 30, 2015, https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/something-greaterthan-marriage-a-response-to-the-scotus-decision.
208
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
suggest that you not tell that individual through an email, a text, or a phone
call, but do your best actually to go out of your way to tell them face-toface. Show by your actions that they are important to you. And this is a
tough decision; it is most difficult for parents who have gay children because
that decision could be a make-or-break decision. Not going might have
decades of ramifications, or forever. Parents have to communicate what they
believe to their children. Everyone at a wedding is there to celebrate, but
sometimes that is not the case. Sometimes in-laws go even though they do
not approve of the wedding. They have communicated it, but they are present
because of their love for their child, not because they approve the union.
The pinnacle wedding in the Bible is Christ and the bride. Weddings are
not something to be played with or just a ceremony. I would have a hard
time going, but I leave it up to the parents. Parents who are having a difficult
time may consider not going to the ceremony but going to the reception.
PL: What
advice do you give to Bible-believing churches about effective ministering to those who are in a same-sex relationship, whether married or not, to engage
them with both authentic love and Bible teaching?
CY: As a proponent of expository preaching, I do not think there needs to
be a focus on specific topics. God’s sovereignty leads you to address this
appropriately in preaching his Word, as sexual immorality is touched upon
many times. People ask me, “Should we allow gays in our church?” That
is kind of a nonquestion, because of course, they can sit next to the other
sinners! When a gay couple comes to your church, imagine all they went
through to walk into an evangelical, Bible-believing, gospel-centered church.
So welcome them even if they look out of place.
Then the question shifts to serving and membership. We have to be
biblical and consistent. Membership in a church has to be based upon
conversion; unconverted people do not become members. It is complex
because the church has to be different. The issue is not whether a member
is sinning or has sinned but whether that individual is in unrepentant serial
sin. So if a member has sinned, there needs to be individual biblical restoration, as in Matthew 18. If it comes to the church level in the discipline of
unrepentant serial sin, maybe probationary membership will be the outcome.
Disciplinary action practiced should be restorative, as that is its goal. The
same approach needs to be applied for someone who wants to become a
member or serve in leadership: any unrepentant serial sin needs to be
addressed before a person can move forward in serving or in leadership. I
would want to do what I can to have an unrepentant individual to stay at
that church and allow the Holy Spirit to continue working in them.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› INTERVIEW WITH CHRISTOPHER YUAN
209
Sometimes pastors ask what to do if a gay couple comes up after the
sermon and asks, “Will you marry us?” Obviously, my answer is negative,
but I would not tell them so right away, because I want to continue in dialogue with them. Rather, I would say, “Can I take you out to lunch? I want
to hear more of your story.” That would be my answer to anyone who asked,
including a heterosexual couple. If we really and truly believe in the sanctity
and the goodness of marriage, let us treat it in that way.
PL: Is
it the work of the church to try to encourage someone who has left a gay relationship to find a heterosexual relationship, or should we leave it in God’s hands?
Instinct says, “Let us do something to make it biblical,” and maybe that’s wrong.
CY: Yes, we should not push and should be consistent with all single adults.
We should avoid pushing them into marriage because if biblical marriage is
good, biblical singleness is also good. If you are single, praise God and serve
God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. If God provides a potential
partner, first get to know one another as brothers and sisters in Christ, be
friends, and serve together in the Lord. God will make it apparent whether
to marry or not. We should not hold marriage up as some success.
PL: Do
you have a final thought that maybe you did not address that you would
like to add?
CY: I am excited about my new book Holy Sexuality and the Gospel. There
are many good and excellent books on sexuality, in particular by Rosaria
Butterfield.3 I want to build on those, and one of my hopes is to remind us
that as we address the topic of sexual identity and minister to unbelievers
who have same-sex attractions or identify as gay, we need to highlight not
only the centrality of Christ but also the body of Christ. We cannot have
Christ apart from the body of Christ. Sometimes our focus on what to do
or not and practical theology eclipses the importance of the local church.
The Great Commission commands us to “go and make disciples” (Matt
28:19): disciples, not converts. The context God has provided for discipleship to happen truly is not a support group or a parachurch group, but
primarily the body of Christ, the local church. Parachurch organizations
can be helpful but are not the solution that Christ offers. That is the takeaway as we address this topic or any other topic.
PL: How
should we pray for you? You mentioned you are HIV positive. Is it a
3
See, e.g., Rosaria Butterfield, Openness Unhindered: Further Thoughts of an Unlikely Convert on Sexual Identity and Union with Christ (Pittsburgh: Crown & Covenant, 2015).
210
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
challenge that we should be lifting up as you continue to serve, or other aspects of
your life?
CY: Thank you, Dr. Lillback. Definitely my health: God has been so gracious.
I know I have a promise from Isaiah 53 that by his stripes I am healed,
whether it is on this side of glory or the other. God has given so much wisdom
to the researchers and doctors who have given us great medication, so I am
doing all right; my life and health are in God’s hands. Pray for my parents
and me. This is not my ministry, but it is our ministry. My parents and I
travel together—as I have a policy of never traveling alone—so they also
speak with me. They are getting older: my father is 78, and my mother is 76.
So pray for God’s will, that God will give us the years he wants us to serve
together, and we will do that with joy and power and energy. Also pray that
with my book coming out, that when I am attacked by gay activists, that it
will not take away the joy, and I might be able to respond and speak and
write with truth and grace.
I do want to conclude in prayer for you and respond to your wonderful
ministry: I praise God for you, Christopher.Thank you, it has been great to have
been with you.
PL:
Lord, I thank you for my brother in Christ who has been remarkably drawn
to you, who has been given deep insight into Scripture and into the unique
needs of our neighbors in some of the most challenging parts of human relationships that are negatively and diversely viewed in your church.Thank you
for the work that Christopher has been called to do with his parents. Would
you bless them, would you extraordinarily multiply his ministry of speaking
with his parents as well as the forthcoming book and other books they have
written.Would you do abundantly more than we could ask or think, for this
need is so substantial.We pray that you will help us all, and may Christopher’s
leadership be anointed by your grace.We pray, Lord, for the barbs, the fiery
darts, the criticisms, the assaults, and resistance that may come in innumerable ways. Would you help him to be strong and grounded in Christ, filled
with your joy and persevering strength that his life might bring hope to
many.We lift him up to you with gratitude. This we ask, Lord, that you will
use this interview and the things that come from it to bless many for your
kingdom’s sake.We pray it all through Christ our Lord, Amen.
Book Reviews
Alan Jacobs. The Year of Our Lord 1943: Christian Humanism in an Age
of Crisis. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.
Times of crisis naturally provoke intense reflection and soul-searching. The
occasion for Augustine’s Civitas Dei was at least in part the impending
collapse of the Roman Empire. Oswald Spengler wrote The Decline of the
West just after World War I. Not all those who reflect have been intent on
preparing the way for the future, particularly if they did not think there
would be one.Yet soberly anticipating the years following the crisis is surely
as important as discerning the nature of the crisis itself. It could be argued
that after the pioneering days of the Reformation, most leaders were concerned to lay the groundwork for the future. Admittedly, some, like Martin
Luther, were not sure there would be much more time before the end. But
when they did think about the next generations, often their attention turned
to education. Thus, Jan Amos Comenius, the Czech Reformer, advocated
learning as the only sure way to preserve and develop any gains. The same
was true in Geneva, where John Calvin, and especially Theodore Beza, took
pains to consolidate the advances made by the Reformation in that city by
means of schools and the university.
We can also think of the consequences of failing to plan as well. Examples
abound of leaders who never quite faced the issue of succession and whose
movements paid the price. When things are going well, we do not tend to
worry about the future as much as when they are not.
Important voices spoke out during one of the greatest crisis periods of
our time, or any time, World War II. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, near the end of
1942, a dreadful year for European civilization by any account, declared,
“The ultimate question for a responsible man to ask is not how he is to
211
212
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
extricate himself heroically from the affair, but how the coming generation
is to live” These words, and the sentiment they contained, appear as a leitmotif throughout this remarkable volume by Alan Jacobs. In his own words,
“the primary task of this book is to explore this [previously described]
model of Christian humane learning as a force for social renewal” (51).
The book is an extensive, learned examination of the views of five Christians, who, from very different backgrounds, address the question of the aftermath of the most global war in history. What they hold in common is the view
that the principal location for the deciding way forward will be education.
This does not entirely distinguish them from their more secular peers. What
does is the view that without the Christian faith the outcome will be fruitless.
The five authors examined are Jacques Maritain, T. S. Eliot, C. S. Lewis,
W. H. Auden, and Simone Weil. Others, like Bonhoeffer and Reinhold
Niebuhr, have walk-on parts, and a short afterword is devoted to Jacques
Ellul. At first blush, one might wonder how such odd bedfellows could be
on the same page about the future. In numerous details, they are not. But
what Jacobs manages to do is find commonalities that, when combined,
give weight to the central message. If they generally agree that somehow
education within a Christian worldview is going to be crucial to the survival
of civilization after the war is over, they also appear to unite on the diagnosis
of the danger to be faced. In a word, it is force. In different ways, all five interlocutors worried about systems. Eliot railed against repetition. Weil, though
a Christian, could never quite join the church, fearing institutional “spiritual totalitarianism.” Auden wrote against “the planned society, caesarism
of thugs or bureaucracies, paideia, Scientia.” He famously sparred with
Harvard’s president James B. Conant, who wanted the college to become a
powerhouse of science and technology, downplaying the humanities.
The authors all want to see the humanities kept alive amidst threats of
various kinds. Lewis delivered his remarkable sermon, eventually titled
“Learning in War-Time,” at Saint Mary the Virgin, the University Church
in Oxford, six weeks into the war. The question was obvious: what good is
it to engage in studies when the country is at war? His answer is compelling:
“The war creates no absolutely new situation; it simply aggravates the permanent human situation so that we no longer can ignore it. Human life has
always been lived on the edge of a precipice.” A life of learning is good but
is only one of many lives we can live—that is, as long as we do it, as well as
all things, to the glory of God (1 Cor 10:31). Perhaps, as Jacobs speculates,
Lewis not only has students in mind but himself. Cultural pursuits may
matter, or they may not. It simply depends on what you do with them
whether in wartime or not.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
213
Lewis began to write The Abolition of Man in 1942, arguing that science,
or an imperialistic view of it, was about to triumph over the other disciplines.
“Man has nature whacked” he said, quoting a friend, warning of the dangers
of the conquest of nature, which in the end is always driven by a few men.
In this same book Lewis argues with the authors of a text on English
grammar, which he calls The Green Book, who claim that when someone
says, “That waterfall is beautiful,” they are really saying they have a subjective feeling of beauty; that is because no object can be intrinsically beautiful.
Lewis retorts that the viewer might have feelings of humility before the
cascade but not of beauty. The grammarians are making the philosophical
mistake of saying objects cannot have objective beauty, but we can have
feelings about beauty. It would be like reducing any declaration of an action
as unfair to a feeling of unfairness. But in fact, if we have any feeling about
it, it would be from our sense of justice, which is an assertion that there are
objective standards.
Maritain pleads for the recovery of true humanism in an age where all
around it is being crushed. He is the only one of the five who thinks the
term humanism ought to have a wholly positive connotation. He argues that
Thomas Aquinas supplies the tools for authentic humanism. In fact, he
laments the “dissolution of the Middle Ages” and says that today “humanism” has become the opposite of Thomas’s view. Today we have the cult of
humanity, which has produced the Nazis and other perverse forms of
oppressive régimes. Yet he is not pessimistic. In The Twilight of Civilization
he explains that the present trials are but a prelude to a rebirth of true
humanism.
Interestingly, he admires Karl Barth but finds him in the end dismissive
of anthropocentric humanism. Barth’s theology of grace does not vivify
but leaves man in his annihilated state. We need much more. We need the
true humanism of the Christian worldview, which centers on man as God’s
image-bearer. We need a God who meets us with grace, not with dialectical
encounter.
Weil may be the least known of the five, although she wrote extensively
and is enjoying something of a revival today. She shares Maritain’s sense of
a decline but differs radically on his assessment of the Middle Ages. The
high point for her was the Romanesque era. Unlike many art lovers, she
does not care for the Gothic, with its heaviness and scaffolding. Such a
totalitarian mindset allowed the church to crush the faith of simple folks.
Humanism, even the humanism of the Renaissance, which may have begun
in an attempt to free people from the “evil” thirteenth century, was in the
end incapable of turning humanity toward a God of grace.
214
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Eliot’s masterpiece, “The Four Quartets,” is, among other things, a kind of
lens onto the war through spiritual eyes. After the remarkable turnaround at
Dunkirk, when 350,000 soldiers were freed from nearly certain captivity, all
eyes were on Winston Churchill, who was able to claim not victory, but temporary resistance against the dark powers in air and fire. Eliot, who had become
English for all intents and purposes, declared that the best we can do is to
“keep alive aspirations which can remain valid throughout the longest and
darkest period of universal calamity and degradation” (101). Jacobs comments
that the ethic undergirding this extraordinary poem is “homely”: do your
duty without grumbling in circumstances that are anything but propitious.
Auden gets as much attention as any of the five, perhaps because Jacobs
has spent so much of his life studying him. His marvelous book, What
Became of Wystan: Change and Continuity in Auden’s Poetry (1998), showcases the author’s skill in deciphering and then exhibiting the poet’s artistry
to the average reader. Auden wrote four long poems during the war years.
One of them, “The Age of Anxiety,” describes some of the psychological
results of war, particularly the “displaced person.” Intriguingly, the poem
describes four New Yorkers, who, like Auden himself, have been spared the
horrors of war, at least directly. One of the four, Rosetta, is Jewish and has
escaped the harrowing realities of the Shoah. The best she can say about
God is that somehow, despite all appearances, he is there. “His Question
disqualifies our quick senses / His Truth makes our theories historical sins
/ It is where we are wounded that is when He speaks” After the war, the
displaced persons are more qualified to address ultimate questions, though
the answers may be elusive.
These brief words cannot adequately describe the remarkable cataract of
insights in this book. They combine to form a real symphony of perceptions
about the human need to defend humanity in a time of crisis. That may only
be hoped for within a Christian framework.
WILLIAM EDGAR
Professor of Apologetics
Westminster Theological Seminary
Philadelphia, PA
Elizabeth Agnew Cochran. Protestant Virtue and Stoic Ethics. London:
T&T Clark, 2018.
With her latest work, Elizabeth Agnew Cochran continues her project of
retrieving virtue for Protestant theological ethics. In particular, she argues
that an ethic of constructive virtue emerges from the works of magisterial
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
215
Reformers like Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Jonathan Edwards when
we consider the affinity that they have—not with Aristotelian and Thomist
notions of virtue, but with Stoic virtue.
For the most part, Stoic virtue is overlooked within contemporary conversations on virtue because (1) Calvinism has often distanced itself from
Stoicism to avoid charges of determinism, and (2) Alasdair MacIntyre and
others have wrongly characterized Stoicism as noneudaimonist or ateleological. For Cochran, both of these are red herrings. In the first case, there
is a documented influence of Roman Stoicism on the Reformers, especially
Calvin. Thus, it makes sense that the two traditions would demonstrate
affinity with each other. In the second case, recent studies of Roman Stoicism
clearly demonstrate that Stoics are concerned with questions of human
flourishing and teleology. For that reason, the Stoic tradition has more in
common with Aristotelian accounts of practical reason and moral formation
than MacIntyre suggests. Indeed, not only can Stoicism account for these
things, it can go beyond Aristotelian accounts of virtue because it conceives
of virtue in a nonlinear, or transformative, fashion. For this reason, it is
uniquely suited to address Protestant commitments to the essential tenets
of justification by faith alone and divine providence.
Cochran focuses her retrieval on the Roman Stoics (Seneca, Epictetus,
and Marcus Aurelius) because, unlike the ancient and middle Stoics, the
Romans are more interested in questions of practical reasoning and ethics.
For the Roman Stoics, virtue is “a unified, singular, and transformative
good” (55). First, virtue is unified because for the Stoics, to have virtue is
to possess all of the virtues simultaneously. The “truly virtuous moral agent”
possesses “practical intelligence” and is, therefore, able to act virtuous in
any given circumstance (56). Second, virtue is singular because, unlike in
Aristotelian thought, happiness is independent of external circumstances.
The cultivation of virtue alone is sufficient for flourishing. Finally, virtue is
transformative because the acquisition of Stoic virtue occurs instantaneously, not progressively through habituation. This instant acquisition
occurs through transformation.
Virtue is exemplified in Roman Stoicism by the disposition of assent to
divine providence. The person who accepts that the world is governed by a
rational divine principle is the one who more readily accepts the external
circumstances they confront. This acceptance, in turn, enables the virtuous
person to focus on the internal circumstances that are within her power to
change. Thus, for Stoicism, virtue means a person putting her trust in the
basic moral order of the universe, living with a sense of gratitude for her place
in the world, and developing within herself an impartial love for all people.
216
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
For Cochran, this basic account of Roman Stoicism demonstrates
promising affinities with Protestant Christianity. In the first instance,
Cochran argues that the Protestant emphasis on the centrality of faith is
compatible with the Stoic concept of assent. Both faith and assent have
cognitive and moral components. In each case, the agent must become
aware of God’s goodness and governance. Then, trusting in her newfound
understanding, she acts in the world in accordance with God’s goodness.
This means that for Protestantism, faith, not love, is the central virtue of
the Christian life.
A second important convergence between Protestant and Stoic thought
concerns the question of moral transformation. Cochran argues that the
Stoic insistence on the unity of virtue is compatible with the Protestant
emphasis on justification by grace through faith alone. In particular, the sort
of instantaneous transformation that Protestants attribute with conversion
to faith is similar to the type of instant transformation that the Stoics describe when one goes from being vicious to being virtuous. In both instances,
the instantaneous nature of the transformation can account for divine agency.
Furthermore, this sort of account of moral transformation best describes
the Christian experience of being transformed while remaining a sinner.
The similarities that Cochran draws out between Roman Stoicism and
Protestant Christianity are undeniable; but even then, Cochran tempers
our enthusiasm, reminding us that some fundamental differences remain.
First, virtue is something that follows naturally in the Stoic account. For
Christians, God’s gracious action is the precondition for the Christian
pursuit of virtue. Second, because Stoic virtue is instantaneous, there is no
emphasis on moral formation after the transformation event. Christianity,
on the other hand, is deeply concerned with questions of moral formation
after conversion.
Overall, Cochran’s argument is compelling. It should push the agenda to
develop a Reformed virtue ethic forward by pressing questions about
whether or not Reformed theology is that radical of a break with Thomist
and Aristotelian moral thought. Recent studies of Reformed orthodoxy—
especially on the question of natural law—seem to suggest otherwise. If
there is one looming concern, it is the question of whether Protestant
Christianity and Stoicism are commensurate with each other. Kavin Rowe
has recently made the compelling case that they are rival traditions of moral
inquiry (One True Life [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2016]). While
Cochran addresses Rowe’s argument, I do not think she really overcomes
it. Her appeals to Jeffrey Stout’s argument that all moral arguments are
bricolage is anticipated by Rowe, who argues that this pragmatic account
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
217
of moral reasoning postpones the question of the truthfulness of either
Christianity or Stoicism.
DAVID B. HUNSICKER
Associate Pastor, Covenant Presbyterian Church
Huntsville, Alabama, USA
Frances Luttikhuizen. Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth Century
Spain: A Much Ignored Side of Spanish History. Refo500 Academic
Studies 30. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016.
Dr. Frances Luttikhuizen’s book, Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth
Century Spain: A Much Ignored Side of Spanish History is a timely addition to
the Reformation story. 2017 was the five-hundredth anniversary of the start
of the Reformation, when on October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his
Ninety-Five Theses on the door on All Saints’ Church in Wittenberg,
Germany. History is important, and the document that Luther shared,
meant only to be a topic for theological discussion among theologians,
shows how events that seem unimportant at the time can change the world,
as these theses that challenged the Roman Catholic Church were soon
spread throughout Europe. Luttikhuizen’s book records this dramatic
historical change and how “new ideas” even made their way to Spain, where
the Inquisition soon took action to quash any changes, so much so that
“Lutheranism” became a catchphrase for any and all heresy. While this
account is a dark story of the scandal and evil within the Roman Church
during the Reformation era, it is a complete and honest presentation that
needs to be integrated into the history of both Spain and the Christian church.
Luttikihuizen has offered a well-researched study of this era, which
required the huge task of sorting through the Inquisition records, archives,
and publications, much of it hidden until recently or not available in English.
The author takes us from the glory days of Spain to the struggles of Charles
V and Philip II to contain the growing influences of humanism and new
theology; these efforts changed Spain from a tolerant, openly progressive
power to an isolated peninsula dominated by dogmatic thugs. Luttikhuizen
quotes on page 117 from Ernest Shafer’s research that there were up to 2100
cases of persons who appeared before the Inquisition, of whom 220 were
burned at the stake and 120 were burned in effigy. This book of 434 pages
represents a herculean effort and offers a well-translated documentation of
what took place over many generations in Spain and beyond.
This book is quite readable despite the complicated history of the Inquisition and its many victims, whom the author carefully highlights. It brings
218
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
the Inquisition to life to show how it dealt with real people, their lives, and
their families, from the highly placed to the lowly; it shows how quickly this
institution could change a life and career. The author also highlights not just
the men endangered for their theological and philosophical views but also
in chapters 7 and 10 how the Inquisition had no tolerance of free-thinking
women. Literally, no one was safe, within or outside of Spain.
The treatment of Dr. Augustin de Cazalla was an example of the capricious
nature of the Inquisition. Cazalla was the court preacher and personal
chaplain to Charles V from 1543–1553 but became the main attraction of
the auto-da-fé (the execution of heretics by burning at the stake) of 1559.
His fall from grace is outlined on pages 111–13 and later on pages 118ff.
Bartolome de Carranza is another example (129–36). Carranza was the
archbishop of Toledo, as well as a professor at various universities in Spain.
As an early follower of Erasmus’s humanism, he too became the target of an
investigation that led to his demise. He had the respect and ear of Emperor
Philip II, yet that did not save him. However, he and Cazalla are only a few
of many highly placed church leaders who were disgraced, arrested, and
died at the stake or in poverty and shame.
The most dramatic chapter for me was chapter 6, “The Evangelical Circle
of Valladolid.” This chapter especially outlines the very detailed auto-da-fé
(116–28). On Sunday, May 21, 1559, “31 heretics and Lutherans were condemned to the stake.” The author outlines each heretic and his crimes against
the church. This very well organized all-day public trial of “Lutherans” was
presided over by twenty-one-year-old Princess Juana, the youngest daughter
of Philip II. This chapter recounts the pomp and ceremony at this public
worship service and lists those present. Those who were executed were found
guilty of any of twenty different heresies, among them number two: “To claim
that men were justified through the death of Christ,” a fundamental doctrine
of the Christian faith. One can only imagine attending such a local event.
I was led to this book by my interest in historic Lutheranism outside of
Germany in the sixteenth century and especially the work of Francisco de
Enzinas, one of the first translators of the New Testament from Greek into
Spanish. As a Lutheran pastor, I have been ministering to Hispanic Americans for the past forty years from Florida to Iowa. I have been fascinated at
how God brought young Francisco de Enzinas from Burgos, Spain, to
Wittenberg, Germany. At the University of Wittenberg, Enzinas studied
New Testament Greek under Philip Melanchthon, Luther’s assistant and
the author of the Augsburg Confession of 1530, the doctrinal foundation of
Lutheranism to this day. At the age of twenty-three, Enzinas finished his
translation of the New Testament and had it published at his own expense.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
219
He presented it personally to Charles V, only to be imprisoned for his gift to
his country and the empire. It is an amazing story of intolerance to Scripture
translations during the sixteenth century that has been lost for so many
years. Thankfully, in November and December of 2017, the Congreso Internacional highlighted and honored the memory and the work of this young
Reformer with a special exhibit and with many presentations in Burgos,
Spain, Enzinas’s hometown.
Along with Enzinas, the author highlights the other well-known Spanish
Lutheran (a follower of the Augsburg Confession), Cassiodoro de Reina,
whose translation of the whole Bible in 1569 (revised by Cipriano Valera in
1602) is well known and used throughout our Hispanic Protestant
Churches.
I believe this book is important because the divisions created by the
Inquisition still linger and so do the Reformation doctrinal struggles that
they sought to quash. Even to this day the Reformation has been misunderstood even by Protestant churches that do not seem to appreciate the power
of those simple but profound Reformation themes, the solas emphasized by
Luther and other Reformers: sola fide (faith alone), sola gratia (grace alone),
and sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). At this time of world persecution
against Christianity and the struggle for religious freedom, the faith of the
Bible that the Reformation sought to restore is more crucial than ever.
May this book be a reminder of what can happen even to the Christian
church when we diminish, destroy, and attack the sacred truths of Holy
Scripture for man’s power and control. But may we also remember and
cherish the truth that the church is eternal, and as this book demonstrates,
it will survive the most intense persecution to give glory to God. For the
church is Christ’s alone; he is the head (Eph 1:20–23 esv), and salvation
comes only through him (Acts 4:12), by faith (Rom 1:16–17; 3:28), and by
his grace (Eph 2:8–10).
DANIEL J. VOGEL
Emeritus Pastor
Amigos en Cristo Evangelical Lutheran Church
Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod of Denison, Iowa
Herman Bavinck. Reformed Ethics: Created, Fallen, and Converted
Humanity. Edited by John Bolt. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2019.
Herman Bavinck (1854–1921) is the most important continental and confessional theologian of modernity, and his works have captured the imagination
of a plethora of Reformed scholars and pastors of late. Perhaps the most
220
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
exciting news for the Bavinck readership since the final publication of
Reformed Dogmatics in 2008 was that, in the very same year, Dirk Van Keulen
found, by happenstance, an enormous manuscript in an archive in Amsterdam that appeared to be Bavinck’s handwritten lectures on Reformed ethics.
These pages had never been seen by any contemporary eyes as far as can be
known and had certainly never been published. In 2019, the Bavinck readership may now hold in its hands the first of three planned volumes derivative
of this eleven-hundred-page manuscript. The first volume in English spans
493 pages of prose. It is important to note, however, that Bavinck decided
not to publish this work, that it was never finished, and that it is from the
hand of the early Bavinck during his Kampen years. While the manuscript
was not in final form when found, the editor promises that these volumes
are the “genuine” voice of Bavinck.
If one might summarize the entirety of this first volume, Bavinck’s argument is that the ethical ideal, the Good, is the ideal of being truly human.
The ideal or true human would be (apart from the pollution of sin) the
norm for morality. This moral life is one in which a human both in being
and becoming is exactly what they are and should be as the image of God.
And the only hope for this form of life, the good life, is to be moved from
the Adamic and sinful state of the broken covenant of works into the
fullness of the spiritual life by the Spirit of God (20). He offers a very
similar argument in his early essay “The Kingdom of God, the Highest
Good” and continues his life-long motif of the organic (here, the organism
of the harmonious self to all its external relations).
This brief description of an ethical position dependent upon the work of
the Holy Spirit coincides with an unsurprising approach offered in the
introduction: Bavinck sharply separates the task of Christian ethics from
mere philosophical ethics. Christian ethics asks how responsible human
beings use the gifts of creation, accept the gospel of grace, and are regenerated, as well as how the whole person in intellect, feeling, and volition is
directed toward the fulfillment of God’s law. The framework of these
questions assumes the prior work of Christian dogmatics and treats
Christian ethics as a work of practical theology. Christian ethics views the
human being in relationship with God. Philosophical ethics finds a foundation in nature, utilitarian logic, custom, intuition, and the demands of an
evolutionary view of the origins of humanity. Christian ethics is theological
ethics and depends upon one foundation of knowledge: the disclosure of
God’s viewpoint (26) in the rule of doctrine and life, the Holy Scriptures.
For Bavinck, the essence of humanity is the image of God. This is the most
important point of the first six chapters (“Humanity before Conversion”),
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
221
which provide the dogmatic structure for the rest of his construction. Moral
obligation arises because human beings are created to display God, to display
his communicable attributes. It is in fulfilling the task of being what a human
being is—while being unable to do exactly so because of the total corruption of the self—that feelings of unmet duty, obligation, and therefore guilt
arise. It is only the Christian religion that can determine the essence of the
moral obligation, because that obligation is birthed in a theology of creation
and then fall from the Triune God. From creation, and even after the fall,
because of the common grace of God poured out to all, three domains of
obligation exist based upon the three relations in which all humans exist:
the self to other humans, the self to nature, and the self to God. In the
summary of the moral law, the Decalogue, God offers this fact in brief in
the very structure of the tablets: first, obligation in relation to God and
second, moral obligation in relation to Creation. The first table delineates
the demands of true religion and the second of morality. While morality, as
obligation towards nature and neighbor, is apparent and obliged of all of
humanity, only the truly religious can perform actions that are not merely
in agreement with the moral law, but that are properly “good works.” This
is so because good works as defined by Scripture are those actions worked
in the people of God by the Holy Spirit (69).
Perhaps the most helpful moment of this work is Bavinck’s taxonomy (or
“phenomenology,” as he puts it) of sin found at the conclusion of part one.
The organizing principle of all sin, according to Bavinck, is egoism, or
self-divination, or idolatrous self-love. One of his most prophetic moments
is his claim that the sin of his contemporary culture is respect for oneself,
self-esteem, which births a terrible subjectivism, a vanity, and destroys the
possibility of objectivity (133). This section is one of the most meticulous
modern accountings for the vast domain of possible sins. At its end, Bavinck
addresses the question of natural law, a topic much deliberated in contemporary Reformed theology and even in Bavinck scholarship. His approach
here is to affirm the reality of natural law but to locate its source not first in
the possibility of human reason (hence, its moral demands are not first
discovered by the intellect), but in an immediate revelation of God to the
human conscience, to the feeling aspect of knowing (see his Foundations of
Psychology in The Bavinck Review 9 [August 23, 2019], https://bavinckinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/BR9_Foundations.pdf) and as a
gift of God’s common grace (220–35) Provoking the reader to deep conviction, part two turns (and just in time) to the hope of life in the Spirit.
His work in book two, “Converted Humanity,” accomplishes one pivotal
goal: to turn the modern Christian back to the historic emphasis on the
222
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
imitation of Christ. The spiritual life of converted humanity calls the self to
imitate Christ. Christ is truly human, possessing a “completely harmonious
character, the masculine and the feminine, the lion and the lamb” (337).
Jesus Christ is, therefore, first the turning point of history and the means of
salvation and also the exemplar of the spiritual life for the whole of humanity,
men and women alike.
As is typical of a Bavinck work, the reader cannot help but be impressed
by the scale of scholarly interaction with the Greeks, the patristic fathers,
the theology of Roman Catholicism in the Middle Ages, the Protestant
fathers and their Reformed scholastic progeny, and especially the German,
Dutch, and French scholarship of the nineteenth century. Bavinck does indeed reveal some of his own cultural moment in several sweeping statements
that would be most unwelcome to the twenty-first century ear: that the sin
of the Germanic peoples is drunkenness (119), of the Greeks the lust of the
eyes, and of the Romans the pride of life; he also has a somewhat absolute
approach to the nature of women and men as, respectively, emotional and
reasonable (419). But these moments are brief. One of the most significant
benefits of this work is its devotional quality, as well as its service as an aid
to the preacher looking for guidance on ethics and application.
Thanks are due to Dirk Van Keulen, John Bolt, and others, for their work
translating and editing this significant volume. Besides some editorial oddities in this English edition (like citing Wikipedia on occasion), one of the
best decisions was to include the significant original Greek, Hebrew, Latin,
German, and Dutch terms in the footnotes. This adds immense scholarly
possibility to an exclusively English edition and is an addition not present
in the Reformed Dogmatics in English. The significance of this work is hard
to measure. It in a way fills out Reformed Dogmatics to bring Bavinck’s theological reflection closer to completion.
CORY C. BROCK
First Presbyterian Church, Jackson, MS
Belhaven University
John Murray’s Principles of Conduct—Some Personal Reflections
I deeply appreciate the invitation from the editors of Unio Cum Christo to
contribute some brief reflections on John Murray’s book Principles of Conduct.
It has now been in print for over sixty years. But given the intervening exponential growth in Evangelical publishing (not least academic publishing—
how impoverished theological students of the 1950s were by comparison!),
it is possible that a generation has arisen that “knows not Murray.”
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
223
In the interests of transparency, I should “come clean” and acknowledge
an immense personal debt to Professor Murray. I was an eighteen-year-old
second-year university student when I first heard him speak. He was recently
retired from Westminster Seminary, so I was familiar with him only through
reading Redemption—Accomplished and Applied. He gave an address at our
InterVarsity meeting on “The Obedience of Christ.”1 It proved to be a night
of major theological awakening for me. From that point on, I devoured
everything I could find by him and with my friends had the privilege of
hearing him regularly, if not frequently (how privileged we were!). Checking the date written into my Principles of Conduct, it appears my own copy
has now celebrated its fiftieth birthday!
On one occasion, we asked Professor Murray to speak on “Christian
Ethics.”2 I recall him stressing at the beginning of his address that we should
speak more properly of “the Christian ethic [singular].” In other words,
there is only one standard for Christian living, one pattern with many
applications. Something of that notion is apparent in the book: the subtitle
of my edition is “Aspects of Biblical Ethics,” but it is not long before the
singular swallows up the plural because one purpose of the studies (a developed form of his Payton Lectures at Fuller Seminary in 1955) was to explore
“the basic unity and continuity of the biblical ethic.”3
From the outset, Murray thus signaled his debt to the tutelage of Geerhardus
Vos (once described by him as the finest exegete he had been privileged to
know). He proceeds on the basis of careful exegesis and a sensitivity to
biblical theology and the history of redemption. This perspective is coupled
with Murray’s rich appreciation of the theological riches of the Reformed
tradition. Herein lies its strength.
Murray wrote long before many of the particular ethical debates of our
time had surfaced. It might be thought, therefore, that the work is passé.
Granted that he provides no discussion of many of the medical-ethical
issues of the twenty-first century, or of the specific forms of gender crisis
that are now so dominant, his work retains its strengths.
The reason for this is that Professor Murray adopted the approach of the
1
I believe the substance of this address was later published as John Murray, “The Obedience
of Christ,” in CollectedWritings of John Murray (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1976–1982),
2:151–57. But the relatively brief text gives only an impression of the spoken address and
its power.
2
The substance (but again not the extended address) is, I believe, published as John Murray,
“The Christian Ethic,” in Collected Writings of John Murray 1:174–81.
3
John Murray, Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans;
London: Tyndale Press, 1957), 7. While a teacher of systematic theology, Murray had already
ventured into ethical debate with his monograph Divorce in 1953.
224
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Lord Jesus Christ himself. Asked about the ethical issue of divorce, our
Lord responded not with a discussion of divorce as such but by pointing to
God’s original ordering of life “from the beginning of creation” (Mark
10:6). Following that pattern, the first half of Principles is devoted to an
exposition and exploration of creation ordinances (chapter 2) and, in
particular: marriage and procreation (chapter 3), work (chapter 4), and
the sanctity of life (chapter 5). Here Murray exegetes and expounds the
fundamental building blocks for thinking biblically and Christianly in any
generation. With considerable prescience, as well as a well-honed biblicotheological system, he includes a discussion of the sanctity of truth (chapter
6), before solid chapters on Christ’s teaching (chapter 7), and law and
grace (chapter 8). Five appendices provide discussions of Genesis 6:1–4;
Leviticus 18:16, 18; and 1 Corinthians 5:1, as well as slavery and antinomianism. Throughout it is one of the book’s virtues that the reader is led on
step by step in the thinking process—a great advantage in working through
any author’s writing, since it enables the reader to follow his or her reasoning
and to identify and assess any points of divergence.
All these chapters we might expect in such a work, since such topics are
central to ethical discussion in any era, even if some of the questions arising
in our day have a new twist. What is noteworthy in Principles of Conduct,
however, are the two concluding chapters whose themes are much more
likely to be overlooked. But they take us to the heart of Murray’s thinking
on the actual living out of the Christian ethic.
Chapter 9, “The Dynamic of the Biblical Ethic,” is a careful exposition of
the theme of union with Christ. Readers of Redemption—Accomplished and
Applied (which had been published two years previously) would have already
been familiar with Professor Murray’s emphasis that unio cum Christo lies at
the very heart of things. Later the theme would re-emerge, especially in the
first volume of his commentary on Romans4 and in his contribution “Definitive Sanctification” in The Calvin Theological Journal (1967).5 But in
many ways, the almost thirty pages of exposition in Principles of Conduct was
a landmark that has often been overlooked. Now, half a century later,
perhaps only within the last decade or so has there been a broader revival
of interest in the doctrine, producing a bookshelf of literature on the theme.
There can be no doubt that to an entire generation John Murray showed
the way—albeit leaving us with the intriguing question whether it was for
pedagogical rather than theological reasons that his chapter on union with
4
5
John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959, 1965).
John Murray, “Definitive Sanctification,” in Collected Writings of John Murray 2:277–84.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› BOOK REVIEWS
225
Christ in Redemption—Accomplished and Applied came at the end!6
If I may speak personally, few paragraphs in Murray’s works have made a
deeper impression on me than his powerful exhortation to “fully appreciate
the strength of Paul’s statement, ‘we died to sin’”:
We are too ready to give heed to what we deem to be the hard, empirical facts of
Christian profession, and we have erased the clear line of demarcation which
Scripture defines. As a result we have lost our vision of the high calling of God in
Christ Jesus. Our ethic has lost its dynamic and we have become conformed to this
world. We know not the power of death to sin in the death of Christ, and we are not
able to bear the rigour of the liberty of redemptive emancipation, “We died to sin”:
the glory of Christ’s accomplishment and the guarantee of the Christian ethic are
bound up with that doctrine. If we live in sin we have not died to it, and if we have
not died to it we are not Christ’s. If we died to sin we no longer live in it, for “we who
are such as have died to sin, how shall we live in it?” (Romans 6:2).7
Perhaps even more likely to be omitted in a work on developing a Christian
ethic today, however, is chapter 10, which has all the quintessentially
Murray style, flavor, and yes, gravitas. Its simple title: “The Fear of God.”
To interject a final, personal note, I feel I have gone many miles sustained
and challenged by its opening aphorism: “The fear of God is the soul of
godliness.”8 The entire chapter is worthy of separate publication and widespread distribution in our churches, for timor Domini has itself come to be
feared. We have lost a taste for what the early church knew well (Acts 2:43).
We have become insensitive to the paradox that it was when “great fear
came upon the whole church” and “none of the rest dared join them” that
believers were “held … in high esteem. And more than ever believers were
added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women” (Acts 5:11, 13–14).
If there is one thing I could have asked Professor Murray to add, it would
have been a treatment of the imago Dei. There is no discussion of it, and as
far as I can recall, the book contains only one reference to Genesis 1:26–28
(and that in the context of procreation). Sixty years on from the publication
of Principles of Conduct it is apparent that one of the greatest failures in the
Evangelical church over the last century and more has been a virtual indifference to this foundational biblical answer to the question, “What is man?”
Ink spilled on discussions of the length of the creation days in Genesis 1
makes the attention given to the imago seem a tiny raindrop by comparison
with an ocean. Yet, clearly, Genesis 1:26–28 is the telos to which the whole
6
John Murray, Redemption—Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955),
161–73.
7
Murray, Principles of Conduct, 205.
8
Ibid., 229.
226
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
creation narrative moves. As such, it is foundational not only to our understanding of creation but also of the fall, the history of redemption, the
incarnation, as well as regeneration, sanctification, and final restoration. It
is not that Professor Murray gave no attention to the doctrine.9 But I wish
he had given us more.
Reflecting again on a book that is now past its sixtieth birthday and perhaps
overlooked in favor of contemporary treatments reminds me of the TV
advertisement for a well-known brand of cornflakes. A youngster sits at
breakfast with a bowl of them before him, takes a mouthful, and comments,
“I had forgotten how good they tasted.” Rereading Principles of Conduct will
have that effect on those who are already familiar with it. And for those who
have never read it, the life-changing words Augustine heard in the garden
seem appropriate: Tolle lege. So, pick it up (or if it is not on your bookshelves,
buy it!) and read it.
SINCLAIR B. FERGUSON
Chancellor’s Professor of Systematic Theology
Reformed Theological Seminary
9
See John Murray, “Man in the Image of God,” in Collected Writings of John Murray
2:34–46.
CONTRIBUTORS
PHILLIPUS J. (FLIP) BUYS served as the Director of the World Reformed
Fellowship from 2015–2017. As a pastor in the Reformed Churches in
South Africa, a cross-cultural missionary, a church planter, and a founder
of Mukhanyo Theological College, he has initiated community development projects and authored writings on holistic Christian ministry and
church growth in Africa. A founding member of the International Steering
Committee of TOPIC (Training of Pastors International Coalition), he is
currently adjunct research professor of missiology at North-West
University, Potchefstroom, South Africa, and a regular speaker at international theological conferences in several countries in Africa.
T. MICHAEL CHRIST is a graduate of Capital Bible Seminary (MDiv),
Westminster Theological Seminary (ThM), and the University of Chester,
through the Union School of Theology (PhD). He is a member of Imprint
Community Church in Perry Hall, Maryland, and planning to serve as a
professor at the Central Africa Baptist College and Seminary in Kitwe,
Zambia.
MATTHEW EBENEZER is principal of Presbyterian Theological
Seminary, Dehradun, India. His most recent contribution is “Calvin’s View
on Civil Government: An Asian Reflection,” in 500 Years of the
Reformation, Prospects for India: Papers from the 5th SAIACS Academic
Consultation, ed. Roji Thomas George and Nigel Ajay Kumar (SAIACS
Press, 2019). He holds a PhD from Westminster Theological Seminary.
ERIC KAYAYAN is a French pastor ordained in the Reformed Churches in
South Africa, currently working as a missionary in France (www.foietviereformees.org/www.foi-vie.org.za). He is a research fellow at the
Department of Historical and Constructive Theology at the Faculty of
Theology of the University of the Free State in South Africa. His field of
interest lies in research on Calvin. He is the author of Rendre compte de
l’espérance (L’Age d’homme, 2009).
227
228
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
DIANE LANGBERG is a psychologist recognized for her clinical work
with trauma survivors, caregivers, and clergy around the world. She is
the director of Diane Langberg & Associates, a group practice in
Jenkintown, PA (www.dianelangberg.com), is on the board of GRACE
(www.netgrace.org), and serves as co-chair for the American Bible
Society’s Trauma Advisory Council (www.thi.americanbible.org). Among
Dr. Langberg’s books are Counseling Survivors of Sexual Abuse (Xulon
Press, 1997); On the Threshold of Hope (Tyndale House, 1999); In Our
Lives First: Meditations for Counselors (Diane Langberg, 2014); and
Suffering the Heart of God: How Trauma Destroys and Christ Restores
(New Growth Press, 2015).
PETER A. LILLBACK is president of and professor of historical theology
at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. He spent twentyseven years as pastor in Pennsylvania and Delaware. In 2000 he founded
the Providence Forum. His most recent work is Saint Peter’s Principles:
Leadership for Those Who Already Know Their Incompetence (P&R
Publishing, 2019).
KATHLEEN B. NIELSON is an author and speaker and has taught literature, has directed women’s Bible studies in local churches, and has a
heart for training in biblical exposition. She directed The Gospel Coalition’s
Women’s Initiatives from 2010 to 2017. She and her husband Niel make
their home partly in Wheaton, IL, and partly in Jakarta, Indonesia, where
he helps lead a network of Christian schools and universities.
K. SCOTT OLIPHINT is professor of apologetics and systematic theology
at Westminster Theological Seminary and an ordained minister in the
Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Some of his representative works are
Covenantal Apologetics: Principles and Practice in Defense of Our Faith
(Crossway, 2018); Reasons for Faith: Philosophy in the Service of
Theology (P&R Publishing, 2006); and his post “Aquinas: A Shaky
Foundation,” Westminster Theological Seminary, November 7, 2012,
https://faculty.wts.edu/posts/aquinas-a-shaky-foundation/.
OTTAVIO PALOMBARO, an Italian Reformed theologian, sociologist, and
cultural anthropologist, is a candidate for the Baptist pastorate. He holds
a PhD in Economic Sociology at the University of Milan. Among his publications are “The Italian Waldensians During the Puritan Era,” Puritan
Reformed Journal 11.1 (January 2019): 70–84; “The Assurance Debate in
OCTOBER 2019 ›› CONTRIBUTORS
229
Max Weber,” Journal of Sociology and Christianity 7.2 (Fall 2017): 25–45;
“Certitudo Salutis and Perseverance of the Saints: The Missing Piece in
the Weberian Puritan Ethic,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on
Religion 13.12 (October 2017): 1–25.
ALESSANDRO PICCIRILLO is co-pastor in an Evangelical Reformed
Baptist Church in the Modena area (Italy) and publishes regularly in the
bio/ethical supplement of the Reformed theological journal Studi di
Teologia (Padua). He earned degrees in social sciences and communication (University of Bologna), and bioethics (University of Padova).
CHRISTINE SCHIRRMACHER is professor of Islamic Studies at the
University of Bonn, Germany, and the Evangelical Theological Faculty
(ETF), Leuven, Belgium. She was appointed to the Academic Advisory
Council of the Federal Agency for Civic Education by the German
Federal Minister of the Interior. She has published many books and
articles on Sharia law and Islamic theology, women’s and minorities’
rights, religious freedom, and political movements in the Middle East.
She has recently authored “Let There Be No Compulsion in Religion”
(Sura 2:256): Apostasy from Islam as Judged by Contemporary Islamic
Theologians. Discourses on Apostasy, Religious Freedom, and Human
Rights (Wipf & Stock, 2016).
CHRISTOPHER D. STEED spent a dozen years in United Kingdom government service before embarking on full-time Christian ministry. With
doctorates in social studies and theology, he has spent three years as
director of the worldwide mission charity Operation Mobilisation, seven
years in secondary education, and a considerable amount of public
engagement. He is the author of several books, including Smart
Leadership, Wise Leadership: Environments of Value in an Emerging
Future (Routledge, 2017) and The Identification Principle: The Radical
Implications of the Incarnation (Inter-Varsity Press, 2019).
DOUWE J. STEENSMA is senior lecturer in ethics at the Theological
University of the Christelijke Gereformeerde Kerken in Apeldoorn, the
Netherlands, and pastor of the Christelijke Gereformeerde Kerk (CGK)
of Feanwâlden, the Netherlands. He authored Echtscheiding: Een
exegetisch-ethische evaluatie (Buijten & Schipperheijn, 2016). He is the
co-author of the report Homoseksualiteit en homoseksuele relaties,
adopted by the 2013 General Synod of the CGK.
230
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
CHRISTOPHER YUAN has taught the Bible at Moody Bible Institute for
over ten years, and his speaking ministry on faith and sexuality has
reached five continents. He speaks at conferences, on college campuses,
and in churches. He graduated from Moody Bible Institute in 2005, from
Wheaton College Graduate School in 2007 with a Master of Arts in
biblical exegesis, and from Bethel Seminary in 2014 with a doctorate
of ministry. He has co-authored with his mother their memoir, Out of a
Far Country: A Gay Son’s Journey to God, A Broken Mother’s Search for
Hope (Waterbrook Press, 2011). He is also the author of Giving a Voice
to the Voiceless (Wipf & Stock, 2016). His most recent book is Holy
Sexuality and the Gospel: Sex, Desire, and Relationships Shaped by
God’s Grand Story (Multnomah, 2018).
Unio Cum Christo:
Five Year Index
(2015–2019)
Table 1. Themes of Unio cum Christo issues (2015–2019)
Volume
Date
Title / Theme
Fall 2015
The Global Witness of the Reformed Faith
2.1
April 2016
Valuing the Text for All Its Worth
2.2
October 2016
The New Testament: Gift to the Reformation
3.1
April 2017
Luther and the Reformation
3.2
October 2017
Calvin and the Later Reformation
4.1
April 2018
Currents in Reformed Theology
4.2
October 2018
Current Debates in Reformed Theology: Practice
5.1
April 2019
Studies in Old Testament Biblical Theology
5.2
October 2019
Reformed Ethics
1.1–2
231
232
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
I. Contributors
Abernethy, Andrew T. Influential Old Testament Theologies. 5.1:219–22.
Adhinarta, Yuzo. The Holy Spirit and the Church’s Social Responsibility. 4.1:83–98.
Altanchimeg, N. See under John Gibbens.
Aubert, Annette G. The Enlightenment Bible in Antebellum America (1812–1831):
Archibald Alexander’s Appraisal. 2.1:149–68.
Aubert, Bernard. Desiderius Erasmus. An Exhortation to the Diligent Study of Scripture.
(Co-editor) 2.2:13–28.
———. J. Gresham Machen’s The Virgin Birth of Christ: Then and Now. 2.2:135–55.
———. Reviews. 1.1–2:305–9; 2.1:215–20; 2.2:262–64; 3.2:244–49.
Batlajery, Agustinus M. L. The Impact of Calvinist Teaching in Indonesia. 3.2:203–18.
Beale, G. K. A Review and Evaluation of J. Richard Middleton, A New Heaven and a New
Earth. (Review Article) 3.1:235–47.
Beeke, Joel R. Calvin, Beza, and Perkins on Predestination. 3.2:71–88.
———. Review. 2.1:235–37.
Beeke, Joel R., and Paul M. Smalley. Puritans on the Family: Recent Publications.
4.2:209–24.
Belcher, Richard P., Jr. Review. 5.1:235–39.
Bergèse, Daniel. Jan Hus: A Reformation before the Reformation. 1.1–2:61–76.
Bergey, Ron. The Torah of Eden and the Conception of Ishmael: Genesis 3:6 and 16:3–4.
5.1:77–86.
Berthoud, Jean-Marc. Luther and Erasmus: The Central Confrontation of the
Reformation. 3.1:65–81.
———. Review. 5.1:239–45.
Blocher, Henri A. G. “Middle Knowledge”: Solution or Seduction? 4.1:29–46.
Bloedow, Timothy. Pierre Viret: A Pastor and Ethicist for the Twenty-First Century.
4.2:181–99.
Brand, Natalie. Unio cum Christo and Reformed Complementarity. 4.2:81–93.
Bray, Gerald. The Eternal “Subordination” of the Son of God? 4.1:47–63.
———. The Martyrdom of Polycarp. 1.1–2:45–60.
Brock, Cory C. Review. 5.2:219–22.
Bryćko, Dariusz M. A Panel on Vatican II. (Contributor) 2.2:230–32.
Buys, Phillipus J. (Flip), and André Jansen. “With Heart and Hands and Voices”: Integral
Ministry of Word and Deed from a Missio Dei Perspective. 1.1–2:225–50.
Buys, Phillipus J. (Flip). Corruption, Bribery, African Concepts of God, and the Gospel.
5.2:163–79.
Campbell, W. Gordon. From Ignominy to Glory: Jesus’s Death and Resurrection in
Calvin’s Harmony of the Gospels. 2.2:97–114.
Carson, Donald A. Martyreō and Cognates in the New Testament: Some Notes.
1.1–2:13–28.
Casselli, Stephen J. God the Lawgiver according to the Westminster Divine Burgess.
4.1:99–115.
Chauny, Pierre-Sovann. Review. 5.1:225–32.
Cho, Youngchun. Luther and the Reform of Marriage and Family Life. 3.1:153–70.
Christ, T. Michael. The Value of Marshall’s Gospel Mystery of Sanctification. 5.2:111–25.
Cobb, Donald E. Review. 4.2:233–36.
———. What Paul Says about the Covenants in Galatians 3–4. 2.2:173–94.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› FIVE YEAR INDEX (2015–2019)
233
Coetsee, Albert J. Practical Principles for Church Leaders and Church Members from
Hebrews 13. 2.1:187–99.
Coleman, Stephen. Reading Jonah Backwards: Reconsidering a Prophet’s Repentance.
5.1:155–71.
Cornelius, Emmitt, Jr. The Black Church’s Response to the Racialization of Abortion in
America. 3.1:219–33.
Crowe, Brandon D. Reviews. 1.1–2:301–5; 2.1:213–15; 3.1:265–67.
Curtis, Byron G. Calvin: Interpreter of the Prophets. 3.2:37–52.
De Chirico, Leonardo. A Panel on Vatican II. (Contributor) 2.2:225–30.
———. Post-Christian Confession in Secular Context. 1:1–2:173–86.
De Lima, Leandro A. The Power of Literary Art in Revelation 12:1–6. 2.2:209–23.
Den Hollander,William. Historicus Practicus: Calvin’s Use of Josephus in the Commentaries
and Lectures. 2.1:117–33.
De Segovia, José. A Panel on Vatican II. (Contributor) 2.2:232–35.
Duguid, Iain. Preaching Christ from Proverbs. 5.1:173–89.
Ebenezer, Matthew. The Relevance of Calvin’s View of Work and Calling to Christians
in Newly Industrialized Countries. 5.2:145–61.
Edgar, William. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 3.1:249–64.
———. Reviews. 1.1–2:320–23; 2.1:222–26; 2.2:269–73; 5.2:211–14.
Erasmus, Desiderius. An Exhortation to the Diligent Study of Scripture. (Edited by
Bernard Aubert and Paul Wells) 2.2:13–28.
Estelle, Bryan D. Motifs and Old Testament Theology. 5.1:27–44.
Eudaly, Dustyn. Review. 2.1:227–31.
Felber, Stefan. The Immanuel Prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 at the Crossroads of Exegesis,
Hermeneutics, and Bible Translation. 5.1:121–36.
———. A Moratorium on Dynamic-Equivalent Bible Translating. 4.1:215–26.
Ferguson, Sinclair B. Reviews. 4.2:249–54; 5.2:222–26.
Fesko, John V. From Exegesis to Preaching: Calvin’s Understanding and Use of
Ephesians 2:8–10. 3.2:53–69.
Gaffin, Richard B., Jr. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 2.1:201–11.
———. The Reformed Dogmatics of Geerhardus Vos. 4.1:239–45.
Garamtseren, Bayarjargal. Re-Establishment of the Christian Church in Mongolia:
The Mongolian Standard Version Translation by National Christians. 2.2:49–66.
———. Response. 4.1:235–38.
Garner, David B. Commending Sola Scriptura: The Holy Spirit, the Church and
Doctrine. 4.1:117–32.
Gatiss, Lee. Abundant Sufficiency and Intentional Efficacy: Particular Redemption at
the Synod of Dort. 4.2:145–61.
George, Robert. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 2.2:237–53.
Gibbens, John, and N. Altanchimeg with Lynn Suchy. An Effective Response to the
Lessons of History in Mongolia. 4.1:227–35.
Gilchrist, Paul R. Scripture, Mishnah, and Confessions. 2.1:51–67.
Goeman, Peter J. The Impact and Influence of Erasmus’s Greek New Testament.
2.1:69–82.
Hall, Mark David. See under Sarah Morgan Smith.
Hamer, Colin. Genesis 2:24 and the New Covenant: A Profound Mystery. 4.2:63–80.
Harman, Allan M. Editorial: Dr. Edward J. Young (1907–1968). 5.1:5–11.
Haviland-Pabst, Thomas. Review. 4.2:245–49.
234
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Haykin, Michael A. G. “The Glorious Work of the Reformation”: Andrew Fuller and the
Imitation of Martin Luther. 3.1:127–37.
Helm, Paul. Vermigli, Calvin, and Aristotle’s Ethics. 3.2:89–101.
Hughes, Philip E. The Captivity Epistles of the English Reformation. 1:1–2:145–57.
Hughes, R. Kent. The Sermon and the Greek New Testament. 2.1:169–85.
Huijgen, Arnold. The Theology of the Canons of Dort: A Reassessment after Four
Hundred Years. 4.2:111–28.
Hunsicker, David B. Review. 5.2:214–17.
Imbert, Yannick. The Perennity of Anselm’s Proslogion. 4.2:175–80.
———. Review. 4.1:254–58.
———. Transhumanism: Anthropological Challenge of the Twenty-First Century.
3.1:201–18.
In Memoriam. Won Sang Lee (1937–2016). 3.2:17–18.
Intan, Benyamin F. The Ministry of Religion and the Rights of the Minority: The
Witness of the Protestant Christianity in Indonesia. 1.1–2:251–77.
Jansen, André. See under Phillipus J. (Flip) Buys.
Jensen, Matthew D. The Fourth Gospel and the Apostolic Mission: John’s Common
Evangelical Theology. 2.2:195–208.
Jeon, Jeong Koo. Reviews. 3.2:236–39; 4.2:242–45; 5.1:222–25.
Jones, Peter. The Pauline Canon and Gnosticism. 2.1:27–37.
———. Transgender: Trans-ition to Nowhere. 4.2:27–48.
Jue, Jeffrey K. Review. 1.1–2:318–20.
Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. The Canon of the Old Testament. 5.1:13–26.
Kayayan, Eric. Editorial: Christ’s Fourfold Declaration of Authority (Matt 28:18–20).
5.2:5–13.
Keister, Lane. Too Many to Choose from? The English Bible Translation Controversy.
5.1:61–76.
Kelly, Douglas F. Evangelical Reformulations of the Doctrine of the Trinity and Calvin
on the Full Equality of All Persons of the Trinity. 4.1:65–81.
Kim, Eunjin. Review. 4.2:236–39.
Kline, Meredith M. Meredith G. Kline on Covenant Community and Canon.
2.1:11–25.
Kolb, Robert. Bound, Freed, Freed to Be Bound: The Wittenberg Understanding of
Justification. 3.1:47–64.
Kristanto, Billy. Reformation and Music. 3.2:155–67.
Kwakkel, Gert. On Finding the Theological Message of Old Testament Books: A Plea
for Paying Attention to the Redemptive-Historical Context. 5.1:45–60.
Langberg, Diane. Healing the Wounds of Trauma and Abuse. 5.2:51–65.
Lee, Sang Gyoo. The Church in Korea: Persecution and Subsequent Growth.
1.1–2:279–87.
Lee, Seung-Goo. Calvin and Later Reformed Theologians on the Image of God.
2.1:135–47.
Lillback, Peter A. Editorial: A New Ninety-Five Theses on Scripture. 3.2:7–15.
———. The Forerunners of the Reformation. 1.1–2:77–101.
———. The Holy Spirit in the Gospels. 2.2:115–33.
———. Interview of Dr. Stephen Tong. 1.1–2:289–300.
———. Interview with Bruce K. Waltke. 5.1:207–18.
———. Interview with Christopher Yuan. 5.2:199–210.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› FIVE YEAR INDEX (2015–2019)
235
———. Interview with Dr. Richard B. Gaffin Jr. 2.1:201–11.
———. Interview with Dr. Robert George. 2.2.237–53.
———. Interview with Dr. William Edgar. 3.1:249–64.
———. Interview with Peter Opitz. 4.2:225–32.
———. Interview with Robert C. Sproul (†). 4.1:207–13.
———. An Introduction to Luther, Calvin, and Their Protestant Reformations.
3.1:83–107.
———. The Ninety-Five Theses Today: Interview with Drs. Timothy Wengert and Carl
R. Trueman. 3.2:219–31.
Lohrmann, Martin. Review. 3.1:267–69.
Luttikhuizen, Frances. Luther and the Spanish Reformers. 3.1:109–25.
———. The Ximenez Polyglot. 2.1:83–98.
Manetsch, Scott M. Discipline and Ignorance in Calvin’s Geneva. 3.2:103–17.
Matos, Alderi S. The Guanabara Confession of Faith. 1.1–2:133–43.
Mbewe, Conrad. The Priesthood of All Believers in Africa. 3.1:171–81.
McGowan, Andrew T. B. Review. 3.1:279–81.
McKay, David. On Serving God in Our Generation. 4.2:9–26.
McKim, Donald K. Review. 4.1:249–51.
Mock, Joe. Bullinger’s The Old Faith (1537) as a Theological Tract. 3.2:137–54.
Morales, L. Michael. How the Dwelling Becomes a Tent of Meeting: A Theology of
Leviticus. 5.1:103–19.
Mulder, Michael C. The “Presentation” of the Infant Jesus in Luke 2:22–24. 2.2:83–96.
Nichols, Stephen J. The Word Made Flesh: The Ligonier Statement on Christology.
4.1:189–204.
Nielson, Kathleen B. Women, Sex, and a Question of Double Standards. 5.2:67–79.
Oliphint, K. Scott. “How Firm a Foundation” and the Westminster Confession of Faith.
5.2:81–95.
———. A Tribute to Dr. R. C. Sproul (1939–2017). 4.1:205–6.
Opitz, Peter. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 4.2:225–32.
Palombaro, Ottavio. Beza’s Pastoral Calling: Combat, Encouragement, and Duty.
5.2:97–110.
Peels, H. G. L. (Eric). Divine Forgiveness in the Book of Jeremiah. 5.1:137–53.
Perkins, Harrison. Reviews. 3.1:276–79; 3.2:242–44; 4.1:247–49; 4.2:239–42.
Peterson, David G. Witness in the Theology of Hebrews. 1.1–2:29–43.
Piccirillo, Alessandro. On Earth: Relational Anthropocentricism in Creation Care.
5.2:127–43.
Poythress, Vern S. Paul’s Preaching and Postmodern Skepticism. 2.2:157–72.
Reeves, Ryan M. Review. 2.2:265–66.
Ryoo, David Eung Yul. Learning from Calvin’s Methodology of Biblical Interpretation.
3.2:19–36.
Santoso, Audy. Review. 3.2:250–52.
Schirrmacher, Christine. Islam and Women. 5.2:33–50.
Schirrmacher, Thomas. Persecution of Christians Today. 1.1–2:187–207.
Schwarz, Hans. Luther and the Turks. 3.1:139–52.
Selderhuis, Herman J. The Heart of the Matter: Luther’s Concept of the Reformation.
4.1:13–27.
———. A Teachable Death: Doctrine and Death in Marten Micron’s Martyrology.
1.1–2:119–31.
236
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Sheats, Rebekah A. Pierre Viret’s Consolation for the Persecuted Huguenots.
1.1–2:103–18.
Simonnin, Stéphane. Humanism and the Bible: The Contribution of Jacques Lefèvre
d’Étaples. 2.1:99–116.
Sinnema, Donald. The Documents of the Synod of Dort (1618–1619)—A New Edition.
4.2:163–73.
Skillen, James W. Witness in the Public Square. 1.1–2:159–71.
Smalley, Paul M. See under Joel R. Beeke.
Smith, Sarah Morgan, and Mark David Hall. Whose Rebellion? Reformed Resistance
Theory in America: Part I. 3.2:169–84.
———. Whose Rebellion? Reformed Resistance Theory in America: Part II. 4.1:171–88.
Sproul, Robert C., (†). Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 4.1:207–13.
Steed, Christopher D. Reformed Business Ethics—A New Approach to How
Organizations Can Flourish. 5.2:181–98.
Steensma, Douwe J. Interpersonal Forgiveness as a Gospel Standard. 5.2:15–32.
Stoker, Henk (H. G.). Facing the Apologetic Challenges of Scientific Atheism. 3.2:185–201.
Suchy, Lynn. See under John Gibbens.
Tachin, Philip. Do Judaism, Islam, and Christianity Worship the Same God? A Reformed
Theological Perspective. 3.1:183–99.
———. Review. 4.1:259–62.
———. Witnessing in Word and Deed in the Context of Religious Persecution.
1.1–2:209–24.
Telfer, Charles Kelly. Gerhard von Rad (1901–1971): A Reluctant Modernist’s Approach
to Wisdom Literature. 5.1:191–205.
Timmerman, Daniël. Bullinger on Islam: Theory and Practice. 3.2:119–35.
Tong, Stephen. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 1.1–2:289–300.
Trueman, Carl. R. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 3.2:219–31.
———. What Has Mussolini to Do with Hus? 3.1:35–46.
Tushima, Cephas T. A. The Paradigmatic Role of Genesis 3 for Reading Biblical
Narrative about Desire. 5.1:87–102.
Van Den Belt, Henk. Lessons from the Reformation for Hermeneutics Today.
4.2:95–109.
Van Dixhoorn, Chad. Review. 2.2:266–69.
Van Vliet, Jason. Election: The Father’s Decision to Adopt. 4.2:129–43.
Visscher, Gerhard H. The New Perspective on Abraham? 2.1:39–50.
——. Review. 3.2:233–36.
Vogel, Daniel J. Review. 5.2:217–19.
Wallace, Daniel B. Erasmus and the Book That Changed the World Five Hundred
Years Ago. 2.2:29–48.
Waltke, Bruce K. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 5.1:207–18.
Waters, Guy Prentiss. Review. 2.2:255–58.
Weeks, Noel. Sexuality and the Lost Proletariat. 4.2:49–62.
Wells, Alison. Henri A. G. Blocher. “Middle Knowledge”: Solution or Seduction?
(Translator) 4.1:29–46.
Wells, Alison (translator), and Paul Wells (editor). John Calvin and Philip Melanchthon’s
Sum of Theology. 4.2:201–8.
Wells, Paul. Desiderius Erasmus. An Exhortation to the Diligent Study of Scripture.
(Co-editor) 2.2:13–28.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› FIVE YEAR INDEX (2015–2019)
237
———. Developments in Church Government in Post-Reformation French Churches.
4.1:153–69.
———. Editorial: Did Arminius Win? 4.2:5–8.
———. Editorial: Freedom of Conscience: The Reformers’ and Ours. 2.2:5–12.
———. Editorial: Modern and Orthodox? 4.1:5–12.
———. Editorial: Sacred Violence and Justification. 3.1:5–12.
———. Editorial: Text and Textuality. 2.1:5–10.
———. Editorial: Winning by Losing. 1.1–2:5–11.
———. Preamble. 3.2:5–6.
———. Reviews. 1.1–2:309–13, 313–18; 2.1:231–35; 3.1:270–72, 273–76; 3.2:239–42,
252–56; 5.1:232–35.
Wengert, Timothy. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 3.2:219–31.
West, Jim. The Distinctives of “Two Kingdom” Theology. 4.1:133–51.
Williams, Garry J. The Five Solas of the Reformation: Then and Now. 3.1:13–33.
Wood, John Halsey, Jr. Review. 4.1:251–53.
Wynne, R. Carlton. Inerrancy Is Not Enough: A Lesson in Epistemology from Clark
Pinnock on Scripture. 2.2:67–81.
Yarbrough, Robert W. Review. 2.2:258–62.
Yuan, Christopher. Interview. (Peter A. Lillback) 5.2:199–210.
Zuidema, Jason. Review. 2.1:220–22.
II. Books Reviewed
Alexander, D. From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch.
(Andrew T. Abernethy) 5.1:219–22.
Anselm. Proslogion. (Yannick Imbert) 4.2:175–80.
Barclay, J. M. G. Paul and the Gift. (Gerhard H. Visscher) 3.2:233–36.
Barrett, M. The Grace of Godliness: An Introduction to Doctrine and Piety in the Canons of
Dort. (Jeong Koo Jeon) 4.2:242–45.
Bartlett, R. Why Can the Dead Do Such Great Things? Saints and Worshippers from the
Martyrs of the Reformation. (Paul Wells) 1.1–2:309–13.
Herman Bavinck on Preaching and Preachers. Translated and edited by James P. Eglinton.
(Sinclair B. Ferguson) 4.2:249–54.
Bavinck, H. Reformed Ethics: Created, Fallen, and Converted Humanity. (Cory C. Brock)
5.2:219–22.
Belcher, R. P., Jr. Finding Favour in the Sight of God: A Theology of Wisdom Literature.
(Jeong Koo Jeon) 5.1:222–25.
Bierma, L. D. The Theology of the Heidelberg Catechism: A Reformation Synthesis. (Bernard
Aubert) 3.2:244–49.
Black, C. C. Reading Scripture with the Saints. (Bernard Aubert) 2.1:215–20.
Blocher, H. Original Sin: Illuminating the Riddle. (Pierre-Sovann Chauny) 5.1:225–32.
Boyd, G. A. CrossVision: How the Crucifixion of Jesus Makes Sense of Old TestamentViolence.
(Paul Wells) 5.1:232–35.
Branch, J. A. Born This Way? Homosexuality, Science, and the Scriptures. (Philip Tachin)
4.1:259–62.
Bräutigam, M. Union with Christ: Adolf Schlatter’s Relational Christology. (Robert W.
Yarbrough) 2.2:258–62.
Cochran, E. A. Protestant Virtue and Stoic Ethics. (David B. Hunsicker) 5.2:214–17.
238
UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM
Courthial, P. A New Day of Small Beginnings. (Jean-Marc Berthoud) 5.1:239–45.
Daily, C. A. Robert Morrison and the Protestant Plan for China. (Chad Van Dixhoorn)
2.2:266–69.
De Gruchy, J. W. John Calvin: Christian Humanist and Evangelical Reformer. (Jason
Zuidema) 2.1:220–22.
Ehrman, B. D., and M. W. Holmes, eds. The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary
Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis. (Brandon D. Crowe) 2.1:213–15.
Evenden, E., and T. S. Freeman. Religion and the Book in Early Modern England: The
Making of John Foxe’s “Book of Martyrs.” (Ryan M. Reeves) 2.2:265–66.
Ferguson, S. B. The Whole Christ: Legalism, Antinomianism, and Gospel Assurance—Why
the Marrow Controversy Still Matters. (Andrew T. B. McGowan) 3.1:279–81.
Fesko, J. V. The Trinity and the Covenant of Redemption. (Jeong Koo Jeon) 3.2:236–39.
Gibson, D., and J. Gibson, eds. From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement
in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective. (Thomas Haviland-Pabst)
4.2:245–49.
Gordon, B. Calvin. (William Edgar) 2.1:222–26.
Gregory, B. S. The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society.
(Paul Wells) 3.1:273–76.
Hendrix, S. H. Martin Luther:Visionary Reformer. (Martin Lohrmann) 3.1:267–69.
Horbury, W., and B. McNeil, eds. Suffering and Martyrdom in the New Testament: Studies
Presented to G. M. Styler by the Cambridge New Testament Seminar. (Brandon D. Crowe)
1.1–2:301–5.
Jacobs, A. The Year of our Lord 1943: Christian Humanism in an Age of Crisis. (William
Edgar) 5.2:211–14.
Keller, T. Preaching: Communicating Faith in an Age of Skepticism. (Joel R. Beeke)
2.1:235–37.
Klauber, M. I., ed. The Theology of the French Reformed Churches: From Henri IV to the
Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. (Paul Wells) 1.1–2:313–18.
Kuyper, A. Common Grace: God’s Gift for a Fallen World. Volume 1: The Historical Section.
(John Halsey Wood Jr.) 4.1:251–53.
Law, D. R. The Historical-Critical Method: A Guide for the Perplexed. (Paul Wells)
2.1:231–35.
Liftin, B. M. Early Christian Martyr Stories: An Evangelical Introduction with New
Translations. (Bernard Aubert) 1.1–2:305–9.
Littlejohn, W. B., and S. N. K. Barnes, eds. Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy.
(Harrison Perkins) 4.1:247–49.
Luttikuizen, F. Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth Century Spain: A Much Ignored Side
of Spanish History. (Daniel J. Vogel) 5.2:214–19.
MacCulloch, D. All Things Made New: The Reformation and Its Legacy. (Paul Wells)
3.2:239–42.
Marshall, W. The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification. (T. Michael Christ) 5.2:111–25.
Matthews, S. Perfect Martyr: The Stoning of Stephen and the Construction of Christian
Identity. (Bernard Aubert) 1.1–2:305–9.
McGowan, A. T. B. Adam, Christ and Covenant: Exploring Headship Theology. (Harrison
Perkins) 3.1:276–79.
Metaxas, E. Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy: A Righteous Gentile vs. the Third Reich.
(William Edgar) 1.1–2:320–23.
Middleton, J. R. A New Heaven and a New Earth. (G. K. Beale) 3.1:235–47.
OCTOBER 2019 ›› FIVE YEAR INDEX (2015–2019)
239
Murray, J. Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics. (Sinclair B. Ferguson)
5.2:222–26.
Null, A., and J. W. Yates III, eds. Reformation Anglicanism: A Vision for Today’s Global
Communion. (Harrison Perkins) 3.2:242–44.
Puckett, D. John Calvin’s Exegesis of the Old Testament. (Dustyn Eudaly) 2.1:227–31.
Rainbow, P. A. Johannine Theology: The Gospel, The Epistles and The Apocalypse. (Guy
Prentiss Waters) 2.2:255–58.
Robinson, M. The Givenness of Things: Essays. (William Edgar) 2.2:269–73.
Schirrmacher, C. “Let There Be No Compulsion in Religion” (Sura 2:256): Apostasy from
Islam as Judged by Contemporary Islamic Theologians: Discourses on Apostasy, Religious
Freedom and Human Rights. (Paul Wells) 3.2:252–56.
Schreiner, T. Faith Alone—The Doctrine of Justification:What the Reformers Taught … and
Why It Still Matters. (Brandon D. Crowe) 3.1:265–67.
Selderhuis, H. Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography. (Eunjin Kim) 4.2:236–39.
Sherman, R. Covenant, Community, and the Spirit: A Trinitarian Theology of the Church.
(Donald E. Cobb) 4.2:233–36.
Siedentop, L. Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism. (Paul Wells)
3.1:270–72.
Sinnema, D., C. Moser, and H. J. Selderhuis, eds. Acta et Documenta Synodi Nationalis
Dordrechtanae, 1618–1619, vol. 1, Acta of the Synod of Dordt. (Donald Sinnema)
4.2:163–73.
Strawn, B. A. The Old Testament Is Dying: A Diagnosis and Recommended Treatment.
(Richard P. Belcher Jr.) 5.1:235–39.
Stückelberger, C., and R. Bernhardt, eds. Calvin Global: How Faith Influences Societies.
(Audy Santoso) 3.2:250–52.
Van Dixhoorn, C. God’s Ambassadors: The Westminster Assembly and the Reformation of the
English Pulpit, 1643–1653. (Donald K. McKim) 4.1:249–51.
Van Engen, C. E., ed. The State of Missiology Today: Global Innovations in ChristianWitness.
(Yannick Imbert) 4.1:254–58.
VanGemeren, W. A. Interpreting the Prophetic Word: An Introduction to the Prophetic
Literature of the Old Testament. (Andrew T. Abernethy) 5.1:219–22.
Vos, G. Reformed Dogmatics. 5 vols. (Richard B. Gaffin Jr.) 4.1:239–45.
Wallraff, M., S. S. Menchi, and K. von Greyerz, eds. Basel 1516: Erasmus’ Edition of the
New Testament. (Bernard Aubert) 2.2:262–64.
Weimer, A. C. Martyrs’ Mirror: Persecution and Holiness in Early New England. (Jeffrey K.
Jue) 1.1–2:318–20.
Willis, J. The Reformation of the Decalogue: Religious Identity and the Ten Commandments in
England, c. 1485–1625. (Harrison Perkins) 4.2:239–42.
Wright, C. J. H. The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative. (Andrew T.
Abernethy) 5.1:219–22.
CALL FOR ARTICLES FOR UNIO CUM CHRISTO
The editorial committee invites the submission of articles (7,000 words maximum
including footnotes) for future issues of the journal. Articles should be rooted
in the Reformed faith and its confessional texts, and aim to be informative,
edifying, missional in perspective, and relevant to current challenges facing
the Christian faith worldwide.
We would like to encourage theologians (including research students) and
pastor-theologians, particularly from countries in the developing world, to
submit articles on issues relevant to the role of Reformed theology in their
national and cultural contexts, and also book reviews.
We would also be pleased to consider texts translated into English that have
already been published in journals in other languages.
Submissions will be peer reviewed before acceptance.
Upcoming numbers of the journal will present the following general themes:
2020/1
2020/2
2021/1
2021/2
2022/1
2022/2
Apologetics
Public Theology
Economics and Business
J. I. Packer and Global Anglicanism
Pastoral Theology, The Impact of Biblical Counseling
Preaching
Dates of submission of completed articles are six months before the appearance
of the journal in April and October.
Before submitting an article, contact Bernard Aubert (
[email protected]) with a
proposition of subject and an abstract (less than 200 words). Details concerning
formal presentation will then be communicated to the author together with
approval of the proposition (Guidelines of Style are available at uniocc.com/
journal/guidelines).
Paul Wells
Editor in Chief
Subscription to Unio cum Christo can be done through the website
uniocc.com. Older issues of the journal are archived and available
on the site. Contributions are invited.
Editorial Board Members
Africa
Flip Buys, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa
Henk Stoker, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa
Philip Tachin, National Open University of Nigeria, Lagos, Nigeria
Cephas Tushima, ECWA Theological Seminary, Jos, Nigeria
Asia
In-Sub Ahn, Chong Shin University and Seminary, Seoul, Korea
Wilson W. Chow, China Graduate School of Theology, Hong Kong
Matthew Ebenezer, Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Dehra Dun, India
Kevin Woongsan Kang, Chongshin Theological Seminary, Seoul, Korea
In Whan Kim, formerly Daeshin University, Gyeongsan, Gyeongbuk, Korea
Billy Kristanto, International Reformed Evangelical Seminary, Jakarta, Indonesia
Jong Yun Lee, Academia Christiana of Korea, Seoul, Korea
Sang Gyoo Lee, Baekseok University, Seoul, Korea
Deok Kyo Oh, Ulaanbaatar University, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
Jason Hing Kau Yeung, China Graduate School of Theology, Hong Kong
Moses Wong, China Reformed Theological Seminary, Taipei, Taiwan
Australia
Allan M. Harman, Presbyterian Theological College, Victoria, Australia
Peter Hastie, Presbyterian Theological College, Victoria, Australia
Mark D. Thompson, Moore Theological College, Newtown, Australia
Europe
Henri Blocher, Faculté Libre de Théologie Évangélique, Vaux-sur-Seine, France
Leonardo De Chirico, Istituto di Formazione Evangelica e Documentazione,
Padova, Italy
David Estrada, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
Ian Hamilton, Inverness, formerly Cambridge Presbyterian Church, Cambridge, UK
Roel Kuiper, Kampen Theological University, Kampen, Netherlands
José de Segovia, Iglesia Reformada de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Herman J. Selderhuis, Theological University Apeldoorn, Apeldoorn, Netherlands
Henk van den Belt, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands
North America
Greg Beale, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, USA
Joel R. Beeke, Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, USA
Gerald L. Bray, Samford University, Birmingham, USA
William Edgar, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, USA
Richard B. Gaffin Jr., Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, USA
David (Eung-Yul) Ryoo, Centreville, USA, formerly Chongshin Seminary, Seoul,
Korea
Carl R. Trueman, Grove City College, Grove City, USA
Jason Van Vliet, Canadian Reformed Theological Seminary, Hamilton, Canada
South America
Davi Gomes, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil
Mauro Meister, Andrew Jumper Graduate Center, São Paulo, Brazil