March 25, 2007
Justification Redux
The Pontificator, a recent convert to Romanism from the Episcopal Mess, has this post on a recent article by Peter Leithart on the subject of justification. Leithart's article appears in the theological journal Pro Ecclesia, which is the creation of orthodox Lutherans of ECLA persuasion—all three of them. (Although several of Pro Ecclesia's contributors have written well on my theology of the Cross.)
So what happens when we are justified? Better yet—what happens at baptism? We Lutherans retain and defend the ancient doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
What exactly is the nature of this regeneration? Is it only a proclamation of the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake? Does it entail the gift of the Holy Spirit? If so, does not God's own presence within us effect a change within us? (How can God be anything—or anyone—but Himself?) If so, is justification both forensic/declarative and transformative?
And, as important, if there is a transformative dimension to baptism/justification, can there be a retrogression, such that another sacrament is needed to rekindle the divine spark within?
Do you see where this is leading? A strange direction for a Calvinist like Herr Leithart, no? Then again, Calvinists do not believe in baptismal regeneration. Regeneration procedes faith in the Elect. While I assume one can be regenerate from baptism on, most Calvinists demand a confession of faith as an adult as a sign of regeneration, i.e., a sign that they are Elect. This is required for church membership.
In essence, they are backward Anabaptists—first you are baptized and then you are regenerated. And so Paul is incorrect—there is not one Lord, one faith, one baptism, but two baptisms: water and the regeneration wrought by the Holy Spirit as a separate event in time. So one can be baptized and never regenerated—merely a member of the covenant who is left incapacitated, unable to meet the covenant's demands.
Nice.
Discuss. I must nap.
So what happens when we are justified? Better yet—what happens at baptism? We Lutherans retain and defend the ancient doctrine of baptismal regeneration.
What exactly is the nature of this regeneration? Is it only a proclamation of the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake? Does it entail the gift of the Holy Spirit? If so, does not God's own presence within us effect a change within us? (How can God be anything—or anyone—but Himself?) If so, is justification both forensic/declarative and transformative?
And, as important, if there is a transformative dimension to baptism/justification, can there be a retrogression, such that another sacrament is needed to rekindle the divine spark within?
Do you see where this is leading? A strange direction for a Calvinist like Herr Leithart, no? Then again, Calvinists do not believe in baptismal regeneration. Regeneration procedes faith in the Elect. While I assume one can be regenerate from baptism on, most Calvinists demand a confession of faith as an adult as a sign of regeneration, i.e., a sign that they are Elect. This is required for church membership.
In essence, they are backward Anabaptists—first you are baptized and then you are regenerated. And so Paul is incorrect—there is not one Lord, one faith, one baptism, but two baptisms: water and the regeneration wrought by the Holy Spirit as a separate event in time. So one can be baptized and never regenerated—merely a member of the covenant who is left incapacitated, unable to meet the covenant's demands.
Nice.
Discuss. I must nap.
