The following paper was written in 2007 for a ThM class:
Joined at the Hip: Good Works and
Salvation in the Reformed Tradition
By
D. Patrick Ramsey
Introduction
Although
each generation stands on the shoulders of its predecessor, the fact that the
same truths must be re-learned lends itself to the rehashing of
controversies. A case in point is the
doctrine of good works. Since the days
of the Reformation, Protestants have periodically engaged in debates, which
tended to be acrimonious, concerning the relationship between good works and
salvation. The Majoristic (16th
century), the Neonomian/Antinomian (17th century), and the Marrow
(18th century) controversies are just some historical examples. Contemporary controversies include the Lordship
Salvation debate, the teaching of Norman Shepherd and the so-called Federal
Vision.
All
Protestants, except the most extreme Antinomians, advocate the importance and
even the necessity of good works. They
readily admit that justified believers must engage in good works in order to
glorify God, edify one’s neighbor, express gratitude, attest true faith and
submit to God’s command. Contention
arises, however, when the necessity of good works is related to salvation. For instance, the Majoristic controversy
swirled around George Major’s assertion that good works are necessary to
salvation (bona opera necessaria esse ad
salutem).[1] Similarly, English Dissenters in the
Neonomian/Antinomian controversy argued whether or not good works are the way to
heaven and the necessary means to obtaining salvation.[2]
The Lutheran
branch of the Protestant Reformation settled this debate confessionally with
the publication of The Book of Concord. It condemned Major’s teaching[3]
while affirming “that good works were obligatory, in that they are commanded,
as well as being an appropriate expression of faith and gratitude to God.”[4] By contrast, the Reformed, in the main,
affirmed the necessity of good works to salvation. To be sure, differences existed, both verbal
and real.[5] Nevertheless, numerous Reformed theologians
did not hesitate to draw a necessary link between works and salvation.[6] Indeed, such teaching was given confessional
status. The Waldensian Confession states
that “good works are so necessary to the faithful that they cannot attain the
kingdom of heaven without the same.”[7] It also avers that eternal life is the reward
of good works.[8] According to the Westminster Standards, Spirit
wrought obedience is “the way which he hath appointed them to salvation,” and
good works are to be done “that, having their fruit unto holiness, they may
have the end, eternal life.”[9]
This paper
will attempt to unpack the Reformed understanding of the relationship between
good works and salvation by examining the writings of numerous prominent
Reformed theologians. In so doing we
will discuss the salvific necessity of good works under three headings: the requirement of the covenant, the road to heaven, and the reward of eternal life.
The Requirement of the Covenant
Since the
growth and development of covenant theology occurred primarily within Reformed
circles[10] it
is not surprising that the discussion of good works is often addressed in
covenantal terms. Geerhardus Vos
correctly observes that the Reformed, unlike the Lutherans, are not reluctant
to include new obedience as a condition or requirement of the covenant of grace
since they understand the covenant and salvation to be broader than
justification.[11] As Turretin writes: “There is not the same
relation of justification and of the covenant through all things. To the former, faith alone concurs, but to
the observance of the latter other virtues also are required besides faith.”[12]
John Ball
(1585-1640) in his influential work A Treatise
on the Covenant of Grace demonstrates from the Scriptures that though there
are many postlapsarian redemptive covenants, there is, in substance, one
overarching covenant of grace.[13] In this one covenant of Grace, God promises forgiveness
of sins, spiritual adoption and eternal life, requiring on the part of man
repentance, faith and obedience. With
respect to the condition Ball writes:
“The
stipulation required is, that we take God to be our God, that is, that we
repent of our iniquities, believe the promises of mercy and embrace them with
the whole heart, and yield love, feare, reverence, worship, and obedience unto
him, according to the prescript rule of his word.”[14]
Ball, as well as the many other Reformed covenantal
theologians, carefully distinguishes between types of conditions.[15] Generally speaking, conditions refer to
whatever is required on man’s part in the covenant; they may either be
antecedent, concomitant or subsequent to the thing promised; and they may or
may not be causal.
Faith is an antecedent, instrumental condition
of justification. Belief in Christ is
not the ground or efficient cause of our justification, as works would have
been in the covenant made with Adam.
Christ alone is the efficient cause.
Faith is simply the hand that receives Christ, in whom there is
redemption, and therefore may properly said to be a cause, albeit an instrumental
cause, of justification.[16] In this respect faith differs from
repentance, which also can be considered an antecedent or concomitant condition
of justification.[17] Although repentance is necessary to see our
sinfulness and to turn away from it to Christ, it is “no healing of our wound,
or cause of our acquittance.”[18] Repentance must accompany faith and is a sine qua non of justification but it
does not unite one to Christ. That role
belongs exclusively to faith and therefore faith alone is the instrumental
cause of our justification. In other
words, faith, unlike repentance, is not “a cause without which the thing is not
done [causa sine qua non], but a
cause whereby it is done.”[19] It is for this reason that Turretin says that
faith is the only condition of the covenant in a strict and proper sense.[20]
Holiness is a consequent or
subsequent condition of justification.[21] A consequent condition is one that is
“annexed to the promise as a qualification in the Subject, or an adjunct, that
must attend the thing promised.”[22] Chamier illustrates it thus:
“But
the consequent conditions are added to the antecedent, as following from them:
which indeed are mutual between the parties, but oblige the one only so that
the other is bound to do no more on their account: As if one having given or
sold a plot of ground, should assign an annuity to be laid out upon the
poor. Now conditions of that kind, when
not performed, usually disannul the contract: and yet they do not constitute it. Nay, there would be no annuity, except the
sale were already full and complete.”[23]
A consequent condition, therefore, is not meritorious or
causal (instrumentally or efficiently) in the sense of granting one the right
to the thing promised. Nevertheless, it
is absolutely necessary in order to avoid forfeiting the promise as well as to
obtain and possess it. In this sense,
Reformed theologians do not hesitate to include obedience, holiness and good
works as necessary covenantal conditions for salvation. Holiness is the sine qua non of salvation.
Its absence leads to condemnation whereas its presence to the enjoyment
of salvation, culminating in the beatific vision. According to Ezekiel Hopkins, obedience is
required under the covenant of grace, not only to show our gratitude but
“necessarily and indispensably in order to the obtaining of heaven and eternal
life.” [24] We see this to be case especially in the
Mosaic Covenant.
Undoubtedly,
the Mosaic Covenant, more than any other postlapsarian redemptive covenant,
emphasizes the condition of obedience. So strong is the demand for
undivided loyalty and faithfulness that some have mistaken it for a legal
covenant.[25] Such an error, however, tends to minimize the
salvific role of obedience; while the recognition of its gracious character
creates a robust link between good works and salvation. It is not surprising then that in the
judgment of the 17th century Antinomians “the Mosaic Covenant and
the Covenant of Grace are so completely contrary that the Mosaic can be
described in no other way than as a Covenant of Works.”[26] While the Reformed, who stressed the
necessity of good works to salvation, viewed the Mosaic covenant as a gracious
covenant, being identical in substance with the Abrahamic and New covenants.[27]
The substance of a covenant
consists of its promises and conditions.
If covenants have, in essence, the same promises and conditions, then
they are the same in substance.[28] Therefore, since the Mosaic covenant is the
same in substance with the new covenant, its numerous conditional statements
connecting obedience to blessing are gracious consequent conditions and
typologically depict the relationship between good works and salvation.[29] Accordingly, with respect to the Promised
Land as a sign of our eternal rest in heaven, Stephen Marshall writes:
“…neither did the Lord promise [Israel] entrance into, or continuance in that
Land, but upon the same conditions upon which hee promiseth eternall life, as
true Faith in the Gospel, with the love and feare of God, and obedience of his
Commandments: Godliness having then, as it hath now and always, the promise of
good things for this life, and the life to come.”[30]
This is not to deny that a
good number of Reformed theologians, including Stephen Marshall, also
understood the Mosaic covenant to contain a renewal or a restatement of the
covenant of works.[31] For some the covenant of works was
renewed at Mt. Sinai Israel Israel was under
a legal covenant in the Promised Land, either typologically (temporal life in Canaan ) or spiritually (eternal salvation). This is why, in spite of acknowledging
the presence of a legal element, they could still maintain that the Mosaic
covenant was the same in substance with the new covenant. To be sure, some like Samuel Bolton believed
that Israel
Concerning the
obedience required or more accurately accepted in the covenant of grace, three
distinctions need to be kept in mind.
First, we need to distinguish between gospel and legal obedience.[34] Legal obedience is an antecedent condition
that merits or causes and so is the ground for blessings or rewards received. Gospel obedience, on the other hand, is from
faith and thus by the justified in the power of the Spirit, which is why it is
a consequent or subsequent condition. It
is not meritorious or legalistic. The
good works of believers do not constitute the ground for acceptance before God
or any blessing received since all is of grace.[35] Yet, as we have already alluded to and shall
discuss more fully in the next section, they are the necessary means and way to
obtain, possess and experience salvation both in this life and in the life to
come.[36] Thus, when Turretin says that good works are
necessary to salvation because according to the covenant of grace obedience is
required to partake of the blessings of the covenant, he understands the
requirement of obedience in the sense of “the means and way for possessing
salvation,” and not in the sense of “merit, causality and efficiency.”[37] This key, yet fine distinction between gospel
and legal obedience is what differentiates the role of obedience in the
covenant of grace from that in the covenant of works.[38] As John Ball says: “In the Covenant of Nature obedience and workes were
commanded as the cause of life and justification: in the Covenant of Grace,
Faith is required as the instrumental cause of Remission and Salvation, obedience
as the qualification of the party justified, and the way leading to everlasting
blessedness.”[39]
Second, we need
to distinguish between sincere and perfect obedience. No doubt following John Calvin,[40]
Ball states that God in the covenant of grace requires perfect obedience, yet
in His mercy accepts sincere, imperfect obedience. He writes:
“The
Covenant of Grace calleth for perfection, accepteth sincerity, God in mercy
pardoning imperfections of our best performances. If perfection was rigidly exacted, no flesh
could be saved: if not at all commanded, imperfection should not be sin, nor
perfection to be laboured after… In the Covenant man doth promise to repent of
his sinnes, and repenting to cleave unto the promise of mercy made in Jesus
Christ, and in faith to yield willing, cheerefull and continuall
obedience. In contracts amongst men, one
may aske more, and the other bid lesse, and yet they may strike agreement: But
it is altogether bootlesse, for men to thinke of entering into Covenant with
God, if they be not resolved to obey in all things. The practice of all God’s people, who ever
made Covenant with his Highness, doth expressely speake thus much, when they
solemnly entred into, or renewed their Covenant [Ball then cites Ex. 24:3, 7;
Josh. 24:23; 2 Chron. 15:12, 13; 34:31; 2 Kings 23:3; Neh. 10:29; Josh. 22:5].”[41]
That God accepts sincere imperfect good works in the covenant
of grace indicates that they are not meritorious and contribute nothing to the
acquisition of salvation. It also means
that falling into sin is distinct from falling away from Christ and the
covenant. A believer may fall into sin,
even grievous sin for a time, and yet not fall away from justification and
salvation. Perseverance in the faith,
which is akin to sincere obedience, is required, while apostasy must at all
costs be avoided.[42]
Third, we need to distinguish between
the promise of obedience and the promise to obedience. God promises his elect that He will write His
law upon their hearts and grant them His Spirit so that they might be careful
to keep His commandments. God also
promises grace and blessing to those who obey.
In other words, the requirement of obedience is both a benefit and a
condition of the covenant.[43] God works in us and we work out our
salvation. The fact that God enables us
to obey does not detract from our duty to pursue holiness and
righteousness.
In sum, from the perspective
of the covenant, good works are necessary to salvation because they are a
condition of the covenant and thus of salvation.
The Road to Heaven
In
rebutting Bellarmine’s caricature of Protestantism’s view of the necessity of
good works, John Davenant fervently and repeatedly asserts that good works do
not merely attest the existence of true faith.
They also play an active and positive role in salvation.[44]
That Scripture
speaks of a positive relationship between the good works of believers and
salvation is undeniable. There are
simply too many passages to claim otherwise and the Reformed, by and large,
have not attempted to do so. The
question, therefore, between the Roman Catholics and the Reformed has not been whether
good works are connected to the obtainment of salvation or even whether they
are a cause of salvation, but rather the kind of connection and cause.[45]
To
describe this connection, Davenant uses what is arguably one of the most common
phrases on this subject in Reformed writings, including the Westminster
Standards, namely that good works are the way
to salvation/heaven/kingdom/eternal life.
Following Bernard of Clairveau[46]
and employing language from Isaiah 35:8, Matthew 7:14, and Ephesians 2:10, the
Reformed speak of good works as “the way to walk in unto eternall life,”[47]
“God’s beaten path towards the attainment of the Blessings Covenanted and
Promised,”[48]
“the Way, and Means of a Believer’s obtaining Salvation, and several other
Blessings,”[49]
“the King’s highway to heaven,”[50]
“a step toward immortality,”[51]
and “the way to the Kingdome.”[52]
The image is thus one of a
traveler on a journey to a particular destination. In order to make it he is must travel on the
road paved with good works. Taking a
different route, turning back or dropping off to the side will result in
certain disaster. The noted biblical
illustration and Old Testament type is Israel Egypt did not enter Canaan , though it was promised to them, because they
refused to obey (Heb. 3:18).
Thomas
Boston, in his sermon on Hebrews 4:11, says that there is a five-fold entering
into “heaven and life, for which we must labour.”[53]
The fourth entering is obedience. God’s commands are called everlasting life
because they land the soul in heaven.
Indeed, the pathway of obedience is the only one that leads to
heaven. Boston
“They that would enter heaven,
but not by the way of obedience, must resolve to get in over the walls, but
come not in by the door; that is, they shall never see it; ‘for without
holiness no man shall see the Lord.’ We
must follow the footsteps of our blessed Lord and the flock, who all entered
heaven this way; though in different respects, he by, and they in, obedience.”[54]
The southern
Presbyterian theologian, James Henley Thornwell, uses a different analogy, a
ladder instead of a road: “The successive rounds in the ladder must be passed
before we can reach the top.”[55] The point, however, remains the same. Good works are necessary for heaven. Hence, they may properly be called an
antecedent condition of glorification.[56]
A similar
expression used by some was working for life.
The legal principle of the covenant of works was sometimes expressed by
the phrase: “Do this and live.” By
contrast, the principle of gospel obedience was: “Live and do this.”[57] Stating the difference this way was true
enough but incomplete because the legal principle was also used evangelically
to articulate the idea that progression in holiness is commensurate with
experiencing life. Therefore, we do
because we live and we do so that we may live.
Herman Witsius was compelled by the Apostle
Paul’s commentary on Leviticus 18:5 in Romans 10 and Galatians 3 to interpret
it as a restatement—not
a renewal or establishment—of the covenant of works.[58] Nevertheless, other verses in the Pentateuch
urging obedience for life (e.g. Deuteronomy 8:1) he interpreted evangelically,
concluding that saints are to work for life. Thus, it is not contradictory to say that the
principles “Do this and live,” and “Live and do this,” equally apply to the
believer. Witsius writes:
“In fine, it is not inconsistent
to do something from this principle, because we live, and to the end, that we
may live. No man eats but he lives, but
he also eats that he may live. We both
can and ought to act in a holy manner, because we are quickened by the Spirit
of God. But we must also act in the same
manner, that that life may be preserved in us, may increase, and at last
terminate in an uninterrupted and eternal life.”[59]
Richard Baxter
was another theologian, who in his rebuttals of Antinomianism affirmed that
believers are to work from life and for life.[60] Though differing with key points in his
theology, J.I. Packer generally agrees with Baxter’s critique of Antinomianism,
noting: “Again, it is a simple matter of fact that the holiest men in the
Church’s history (among whom must be numbered Baxter himself) have been men who
have worked ‘for life’ as much as ‘from life’ and have retained a deep sense of
their own shortcomings to their dying day.”[61]
The vital
doctrine of justification by faith alone is not at all weakened or denied by
such strong affirmations of the necessity of good works because of the
distinction the Reformed made between the title or right to salvation/life and
the possession of salvation/life. The
former corresponds to justification and the latter to sanctification and good
works. We are given the right to eternal
life by faith alone, whereas holiness is the way and means by which we possess
eternal life. Herman Witsius explains:
“We must accurately distinguish
between a right to life, and the possession of life. The former must so be assigned to the
obedience of Christ, that all the value of our holiness may be entirely
excluded. But certainly our works, or
rather these, which the Spirit of Christ worketh in us, and by us, contribute
something to the latter…The practice of Christian piety is the way to life,
because thereby we go to the possession of the right obtained by Christ. For it is more than a hundred times designed
by the name of life: again the way of
righteousness, the good way, the way of peace; yea, that nothing
might be wanting, it is called the way of
life and salvation. Prov. 6:23: “The
commandment is a lamp, and the law is light, and reproofs of instruction are
the way of life.” And 10:17: “He is in
the way unto life who keepeth instruction.”
15:24: “The way of life is above to the wise.” Ps. 50:23: “Whoso ordereth his way, I will
cause him to enjoy the salvation of God.”
And what does Christ himself understand by that narrow way which leadeth unto life, Matt. 7:14
but the strict practice of Christian religion?
Which is called the way of salvation, Acts 16:17.”[62]
This distinction
notwithstanding, Tobias Crisp, among others, objected to both the manner of
speaking and the doctrine it propounded.[63] While insisting that sanctification is an
inseparable companion to justification and that believers are created in Christ
Jesus for good works, Crisp vigorously denied that good works are a way to life
or salvation. They are “the business of
a person that he hath to do in his Way, Christ; but it is not the Way it self
to Heaven.”[64]
Anthony
Burgess responded that it is not either/or but both/and: “Good works are both
our way, and imployment also.”[65] Consequently, believers pursue holiness
because they live and in order to obtain blessing and experience life. This is not to say that good works merit or
earn salvation. They are not the ground
for any salvific blessing. Nevertheless,
there is “an ordinability of them to eternall life,”[66]
“an infallible connection betwixt true obedience and glory,”[67]
in that they “have the relation of the means to the end…by which we arrive at
the full possession of the blessings of the covenant.”[68]
Thomas
Boston observes that Scripture depicts the way to heaven like the work of a
farmer, which involves plowing, sowing and reaping; a soldier who must fight;
and a runner in a race.[69] According to Samuel Rutherford, 1 Timothy 4:8, John 15:2,
Matthew 25:29, Galatians 6:8, 2 Corinthians 9:6; Philippians 4:17-18, Romans
8:13; 6:22, Revelation 22:14 and John 14:23 “evidence to us, that holy walking
is a way to heaven, as sowing is to harvest.”[70] Similarly, Francis Turretin writes: “good works have the relation of the means to the
end (Jn. 3:5, 16; Mt. 5:8); of the ‘way’ to the goal (Eph. 2:19; Phil. 3:14);
of the ‘sowing’ to the harvest (Gal. 6:7, 8); of the ‘firstfruits’ to the mass
(Rom. 8:23); of the labor to the reward (Matt. 20:1); of the ‘contest’ to the
crown (2 Tim. 2:5; 4:8).”[71] Daniel Williams is therefore correct to say
that good works are more than just concomitants of them that are saved.[72]
It
is in this respect that good works can be considered as causes of
salvation. John Calvin speaks of works
as “inferior causes” in the sense of order and sequence. They are the way and means by which we possess
the eternal inheritance.
“Those whom the Lord has destined by his mercy for the
inheritance of eternal life he leads into possession of it, according to his
ordinary dispensation, by means of good works. What goes before in the order of
dispensation he calls the cause of what comes after. In this way he sometimes
derives eternal life from works, not intending it to be ascribed to them; but
because he justifies those whom he has chosen in order at last to glorify them
[Romans 8:30], he makes the prior grace, which is a step to that which follows,
as it were the cause…In short,
by these expressions sequence more than cause is denoted.”[73]
Even more
provocatively, Piscator calls good works an “efficient cause.” Works are often denied to be an efficient
cause in salvation, but only in the narrow sense of meriting or being the
ground of salvation. Thus, Burgess, though
he considers the language dangerous, admits that “it might be true” if employed
in the broad sense,[74]
which is the way Piscator appears to use the term.[75] In responding to Bellarmine’s claim that
Philippians 2:12 teaches that good works are necessary as efficient causes,
John Davenant carefully distinguishes between efficiency in its broad and
narrow senses. He writes:
“We do not deny efficiency
altogether to works in relation to salvation, but meritorious efficiency, or
efficiency properly so understood: namely, such as reaches or produces the
effect itself of salvation: but efficiency taken in a broad sense, that is to
say, as working something preceding the effect of salvation, we willingly grant
to spring from good works. For good
works lead to progression in the way of salvation, which consequence is
antecedent to salvation itself, although it is not the meritorious or efficient
cause of the same. And in this sense, he
who performs good works is said to work out his salvation, not by effecting his
salvation, through the inherent virtue or merit of his works, but by advancing
forward to salvation by the way of good works.”[76]
Thus, on the one hand, Davenant
says that it is God who saves his elect from start to finish. By grace alone, God brings them into a state
of justification, preserves them in that state and finally glories them. He flatly denies that their good works,
indeed their feeble efforts, acquire “the efficacy or character of a
meritorious cause for the preserving of justifying grace, or the attaining to
heavenly glory.”[77] Yet, on the other hand, Davenant freely
admits that “God preserves and increases the gifts of grace in those who apply
themselves to good works, and by the zeal of good works draws them on to the
goal of salvation.”[78] So although good works are not causes, which
effect or merit salvation, “they cause the doers of them to advance in the way
of salvation.”[79]
Obedience to God’s
law, therefore, is necessary to salvation, not as the right to life but as the
means and way to possess life and salvation.
The Reward of Eternal Life
It is one
thing to say that God graciously rewards believers’ good works in this life or
even that different degrees of rewards in heaven will be measured out according
to works. It is another thing altogether,
however, to affirm that eternal life itself is a reward to those who persevere
in good works to the end. Yet, because
of the abundant testimony in Scripture John Calvin does not hesitate to confess
that eternal life is a reward bestowed upon the faithfulness of believers.[80] William Cunningham, among many others,
concurs: “Eternal life is, no doubt, represented in Scripture as the reward of
good works.”[81] One notable text in this regard is Romans
2:6-7. On this verse Matthew Henry
comments: “Heaven is life, eternal life, and it is the reward of those
that patiently continue in well-doing.”[82] Thus, believers need to pursue good works for the reward of
glory.[83]
As was the
case in the requirement of the covenant and the road to salvation, all notions
of merit and causality in the strict sense are to be shunned. This is so for a number of reasons. First, the concept of reward does not
necessarily imply merit. For example, a
king may reward a rebel army with immunity if they hand over their weapons and
swear loyalty. But it cannot be said that
in so doing the rebels earned or deserved the reward of immunity. Thus, Edward Veal notes that the term reward
can be taken in two different senses: “one proper and of debt; the other
improper and of grace.”[84] The reward of eternal life to faithful
believers is of the latter kind.
Second, Scripture portrays eternal
life as a free gift and as the believers’ inheritance. The notions of a free gift and an inheritance
necessarily imply that it is not merited or on account of good works. Holiness is necessary to the reward like a son’s
coming of age is necessary for receiving his inheritance.[85]
Third, the best works of believers
are tainted and so unworthy of any reward.
Notwithstanding, God as Father, graciously accepts and rewards the works
of His children, covering their imperfections in Christ.[86]
Finally, that which is promised to
works was already promised and given to faith.
For example, Abraham was promised a seed in whom all the nations would
be blessed and that his descendents would be as the stars in heaven. Later on, he receives the same promise
because of his obedience in being willing to sacrifice his only son. Calvin concludes:
“Did Abraham merit by his
obedience the blessing whose promise he had received before the commandment was
given? Here, surely, we have shown without ambiguity that the Lord rewards the
works of believers with the same benefits as he had given them before they
contemplated any works, as he does not yet have any reason to benefit them
except his own mercy.”[87]
That the
reward of good works is the same as that made to faith does not nullify the
necessity of good works. For the
distinction between the title and possession of salvation applies here as well.[88] Believers need to be fitted and made ready
for glory.[89] So, to spur them on in their duty and to show
that they are able to please Him, God graciously rewards His children’s good
works.
George
Downame states that eternal life is promised to believers as a free gift of God,
as our inheritance purchased by Christ and “as a free reward promised and given
to our obedience.” Of the third, Downame
says:
“And
to the end that we might be moved to performe the dueties of sanctification,
hee doth not onely in his word seconded and made effectuall by his Spirit
invite by exhortations and precepts to these dueties; but also that hee might
encourage us thereunto, in his redoubled and multiplied mercies he hath
promised not only the blessings of this life unto us, but also eternall life
itselfe, as a gracious reward of our piety and obedience…But this is a
multiplication of his grace upon us, that to encourage us to the Practice of Piety,
whereby wee are fitted for the kingdome of heaven, he doth promise to reward
our good works with everlasting happinesse, and in the end doth crowne his owne
blessings with blessednesse, which, though hee bee pleased for our
encouragement to call a reward, yet is it not deserved by us, but freely
bestowed by him, as his free gift granted unto us in Christ before all times,
as our inheritance purchased by Christ: as his bountifull reward of his owne
gifts, which as hee freely promiseth, so in his good time hee freely
bestoweth.”[90]
Similarly,
Samuel Rutherford says that God in the Gospel promises the gracious reward of
eternal life to the one who believes and to “him that doth his commandements.”[91] More specifically, there is “a promise of
life eternall, made to Evangelike and unperfect doing through the strength of
grace.”[92]
Conclusion
According to
the Reformed faith, good works and salvation are joined at the hip. There is no salvation without good works and
there are no good works without salvation.
Christians work because they live and work so that they may live. By faith in Christ they receive the title to
life and salvation. And by gospel
obedience they possess life and salvation as they walk towards the heavenly Jerusalem
[1] See The Book of Concord (eds. Robert Kolb
and Timothy J. Wengert; Minneapolis ,
MN Grand Rapids :
Baker Books, 1996), 1:274-277.
[2] Daniel
Williams, Gospel-Truth Stated and
Vindicated: Wherein some of Dr. Crisp’s Opinions Are Considered; And The
Opposite Truths Are Plainly Stated and Confirmed, 2nd Ed.
(London, 1692), 107.
[3] The
first negative thesis of Epitome, Article IV states: “Accordingly, we reject
and condemn the following manner of speaking: when it is taught and written
that good works are necessary for salvation; or that no one has ever been saved
without good works; or that it is impossible to be saved without good works,” The Book of Concord, 499.
[5] See John
Davenant, A Treatise on Justification
(trans. Josiah Allport; London : Hamilton, Adams
and Co., 1844), 1:295; Francis Turretin, Institutes
of Elenctic Theology (ed. James T. Dennison, Jr.; trans. G. M. Giger; Phillipsburg , N.J.
[6] See e.g.
Anthony Burgess, A Vindication of the
Morall Law and the Covenants (London : Thomas Underhill
[7] Adam
Blair, History of the Waldenses
(Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black, 1833), 2:611.
[8] “That,
although our good works can not merit any thing, yet the Lord will reward or
recompense them with eternal life,” Ibid.
[10] See
J.I. Packer, “Introduction: On Covenant Theology” prefaced to Herman Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants Between God and
Man (trans.
William Crookshank; London , 1822; repr., Escondido , Calif. : The
den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1990), no pagination; Peter Golding, Covenant Theology: The Key of Theology in
Reformed Thought and Tradition (Geanies House, Ross-shire ,
Scotland : Mentor
[11] Geerhardus
Vos, “The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology,” in Redemptive History and Biblical
Interpretation (ed. Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.; Phillipsburg , N.J.
[12] Institutes, 2:189.
[14] A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace (London Heidelberg Catechism
(trans. G. W. Williard; 1852; repr., Phillipsburg ,
N.J.
[15] Cf.
John Flavel’s excellent and nuanced discussion on conditions in his “A succinct
and seasonable Discourse of the Occasions, Causes, Nature, Rise, Growth, and
Remedies of MENTAL ERRORS,” in The Works
of John Flavel (1820; repr., Carlisle ,
Pa.
[16] See
John Calvin, Institutes of The Christian
Religion (ed. John T. McNeill; trans. Ford Lewis Battles; Philadelphia :
The Westminster Press, 1960), 3:14:17; Herman Witsius, Conciliatory or Irenical Animadversions on the Controversies Agitated
in Britain
[17]
Witsius, Conciliatory Animadversions,
120; James Fraser, A Treatise on Sanctification
(1774; reprint Audubon , NJ
[18] Ball, The Covenant of Grace, 18.
[19] Ibid.,
19.
[20]Institutes, 2:189.
[21] George
Downame, A Treatise of Justification
(London: Nicolas Bourne, 1633), 48, 434, 466; Ball, The Covenant of Grace, 133; Turretin, Institutes, 2:189; Francis Roberts, The Mystery and Marrow of the Bible: Viz. God’s Covenants (London:
George Calvert, 1657), 788; John Flavel,
Works, 3:526ff; Herman Witsius, Conciliatory Animadversions, 149-151;
Davenant, Justification, 1:305;
Ernest F. Kevan, The Grace of Law: A
Study in Puritan Theology (London: Carey Kingsgate Press, n.d.; repr.,
Ligonier, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1993), 203.
[22] Ball, The Covenant of Grace, 133.
[23] As
cited by Witsius, Conciliatory
Animadversions, 150.
[24] “The
Doctrine of the Two Covenants,” in The
Works of Ezekiel Hopkins (ed. Charles Quick; Philadelphia ,
1874; repr., Morgan , Pa.
[25] See
e.g. Michael Horton, God of Promise:
Introducing Covenant Theology (Grand
Rapids , MI
[26] Kevan, The Grace of the Law, 115.
[27] See WCF
7.6.
[28] Edward
Fisher, The Marrow of Modern Divinity,
with notes by Thomas Boston (repr., Edmonton, Canada: Still Waters Revival
Books, 1991), 71-72; Ball, The Covenant
of Grace, 4, 108, 163-164; Ursinus, Commentary
on the Heidelberg Catechism, 98-99; Turretin, Institutes, 2:703; David McKay, The
Bond of Love: God’s Covenantal Relationship with His Church (Geanies House,
Great Britain: Mentor, 2001), 11; David Dickson, Truths Victory Over Error (Edinburgh, 1684), 54-55.
[29] Francis
Roberts, The Mystery and Marrow of the Bible,
788, 795; Ball, The Covenant of Grace,
133. Cf. WCF 19:6; D. Patrick Ramsey, “In Defense of Moses: A Confessional
Critique of Kline and Karlberg,” WTJ
66 (2004): 385-389.
[30] A Sermon of the Baptizing of Infants (London
[31] See
Ramsey, “In Defense of Moses,” 396-399.
[32] See his
The True Bounds of Christian Freedom
(1645; repr., Carlisle , Pa.
[33] See
Ramsey, “In Defense of Moses,” 379-384.
[34]
Turretin, Institutes, 2:189; Thomas
Boston, The Complete Works of Thomas
Boston (ed. Samuel McMillan; William & Co., 1853; repr., Stoke-on-Trent : Tentmaker Publications, 2002), 4:281.
[35] Daniel
Williams, Gospel-Truth Stated, 102;
Davenant, Justification, 1:299-302.
[36] David
McKay: “Obedience is the pathway to
covenant blessings (Lev. 26:1-13), whilst disobedience brings down covenant
curses (Lev. 26:14-39),” The Bond of Love,
13.
[37] Institutes, 2:702-703.
[38] Anthony
Burgess perceptively observes, “And, however theologically, and in the notion,
we may make a great difference between holiness
as a way or means, and as a cause or merit of salvation; yet the heart doth not use to distinguish so
subtilely,” Vindication of the Morall Law,
37.
[39] The Covenant of Grace, 26.
[40] See
Peter A. Lillback, The Binding of God:
Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids
[41] Covenant of Grace, 20-21. See also, p. 135; Hopkins, Works, 2:210; Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants, 2:181-182;
Kevan, The Grace of Law, 178-181.
[42]
Davenant, Justification,
1:302-303. It was precisely because Israel,
like their forefathers in the wilderness, failed to persevere, committing the
sin of apostasy that they experienced the ultimate curse of the covenant and
were cast out of the Land (2 Kings 17:7-23).
The author of Hebrews warns his readers of this same sin, urging them to
hold fast the confession to the end, so that they might not be “destroyed” but
rather “receive what is promised” (Heb. 10:37, 39).
[43]
Turretin, Institutes, 2:184.
[44]
Davenant: “[Bellarmine] charges us falsely also with asserting that good works
are not otherwise necessary than under the character of a sign, to announce the
presence of faith… But we abhor such doatings as these with our whole soul, and
openly affirm that good works have, in reference to salvation, a necessity of
their own, not significative only,
but active…,” Justification, 1:314.
[45] Ibid.,
1:311-312.
[46] See
Burgess, Vindication of the Morall Law,
31-32.
[47] John
Ball, A Treatise of Faith (London Carlisle , Pa : The Banner of Truth Trust, 1988), 1:297; John
Downame, A Guide to Godlynesse (London
[48]
Roberts, The Mystery and Marrow of the
Bible, 795.
[49]
Williams, Gospel-Truth Stated,
102. Cf. Hopkins, Works, 2:216; Jonathan Edwards, “Justification By Faith Alone,” in The Works of Jonathan Edwards (1834;
repr., Carlisle , Pa.
[50] John
Sheffield, “Of Holiness,” in Puritan
Sermons 1659-1689 (1845; repr., Wheaton ,
Ill. Edmonton ,
Canada
[51] Calvin,
Institutes, 3:17:15.
[52] George
Downame, Justification, 438; Thomas
Boston, Works, 4:292.
[53] Works, 4:278.
[54] Ibid.,
4:281. After citing Matthew 7:14,
Davenant writes: “Hence it is plain, that a certain sure way is laid down to
the kingdom of heaven by God himself, and that the same is a narrow way,
namely, that of virtue and holiness: not the broad way of iniquity and
lust. As therefore, if there is a
certain, only, and prescribed way, which leads to any city, it is necessary to
all who wish to enter that city, to take this way; so, since by the Divine
appointment the way of good works leads to the goal of eternal glory, he must
inevitably enter upon and hold this way, who desires to arrive thither,” Justification, 1:302-303.
[55]
“Antinomianism,” in The Collected
Writings of James Henley Thornwell (repr., Carlisle , Pa
[56] George
Downame, Justification, 48; Turretin,
Institutes, 2:705.
[57] See
e.g. Edward Fisher, The Marrow of Modern
Divinity, 173-174.
[58] For a
better understanding of Paul’s view of Leviticus 18:5, see Moises Silva, Explorations in Exegetical Method: Galatians
as a Test Case (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 187-195.
[60] See
Hans Boersma, A Hot Pepper Corn: Richard
Baxter’s Doctrine of Justification in Its Seventeenth-Century Context of
Controversy (Vancouver
[61] The Redemption & Restoration of Man in the
Thought of Richard Baxter (Vancouver
[62] Conciliatory Animadversions, 161-163. Cf. his Sacred
Dissertations, on what is commonly called the Apostles’ Creed (trans.
Donald Fraser; 1823; repr., Phillipsburg , N.J. : Presbyterian and Reformed, 1993), 2:479-480; Samuel
Rutherford, The Trial and Triumph of
Faith (repr., Edmonton , Canada : Still Waters Revival Books, n.d.), 174; The Covenant of Life Opened (Edinburgh
[63] Tobias
Crisp, Christ Alone Exalted (London
[64] Ibid.,
46.
[65] Vindication of the Morall Law, 32. Cf.
Samuel Rutherford, Spirituall Antichrist,
39.
[66] Ibid.,
40.
[68]
Turretin, Institutes, 2:705, 189.
[69] Works, 4:290. On page 293 he writes, “Good works are the
seed, after which only we can expect the harvest of glory, Gal. vi. 7, 8.”
[70] Spirituall Antichrist, 2:37-38.
[71] Institutes, 2:705.
[72] Gospel-Truth Stated, 119.
[73] Calvin,
Institutes, 3:14:21. Cf. Samuel
Rutherford, The Covenant of Life Opened,
177.
[74] Vindication of the Morall Law, 46.
[75] Piscator: “Good works, with respect to eternal
life, have the reason of efficient causes, not as by merit, but as by a way or
a walk, by which one arrives at eternal life out of the ordination of
God.” Cited by Lillback, The Binding of God, 207.
[76] Justification, 1:308.
[77] Ibid.,
1:299.
[78] Idem.
[80] Institutes, 3:15:4. Cf.
Anthony N.S. Lane
[81] Historical Theology (repr., Carlisle , Pa Boston
[83] The
Reformed were not alone in this position.
The Second Confession of Bohemia (1575), which had both Reformed and
Lutheran influences, and The Confession of Saxony (1551), which was written by
Philip Melancthon, assert that eternal life is a reward of good works. See Peter Hall, The Harmony of Protestant Confessions (1842; repr., Edmonton , Canada
[84] “The
Good Works of Believers Are Not Meritorious of Eternal Salvation,” in Puritan Sermons, 6:205.
[86] See
Calvin, Institutes, 3:15:4, 3:17:5.
[87] Ibid.,
3:18:2. Cf. his Commentaries on the Book of Genesis (trans. John King; repr., Grand Rapids
[88] Ibid.,
3:18:4; Cf. Rutherford, The Covenant of
Life, 180.
[89] Veal, Puritan Sermons, 6:214.
[90] Justification, 468-469.
[91] Samuel
Rutherford, Spirituall Antichrist,
2:38.
[92] Idem.
No comments:
Post a Comment