Reforming the Christian Faith

Theological Interpretation after the Protestant Reformation

Karlberg

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781532637681
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

Central to the mission of the church with each passing generation is the elucidation of the gospel of Christ, which is the heart of the Christian message. Witness to God's saving word in Scripture comes in response to discussions and debates arising over the course of church history. Our study highlights some of the unity and disunity found within the Reformed tradition, Reformation and modern. Beginning with the subject of the development of doctrine over the course of church history, we take up the foundational issue of biblical hermeneutics (the question of how we are to interpret the Bible). The year 2017 marks the Protestant Church's 500th anniversary (October 31). We consider, secondly, Protestantism's two leading theological principles--the formal (the doctrine of Scripture) and the material (the doctrine of justification by faith alone). In the final section, we critique departures from the teaching of historic federalism found within contemporary Reformed orthodoxy, which strikes at the very heart of what it means to be "Reformed" in theology. Crucial in this long-standing and ongoing dispute is the interpretation of the Mosaic Covenant as in some sense a "republication" of the original Covenant of Works with Adam at creation. Covenant and justification are the focal doctrines under study.

Section Three

Departure from Historic Reformed Federalism

Chapter Five

Controversy within Present-Day Reformed Orthodoxy

Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia52

Introduction

Once sound institutions can and do err, resulting in the loss of theological and moral footing. This fact of church history is readily acknowledged by those committed to the preservation and propagation of Reformed orthodoxy in its essentials. The hard part for many is to recognize when and where deviation in the fundamentals of doctrine occurs in institutions once held in high regard. It is required, above all, that one remain faithful by taking a stand for truth, rather than demonstrating an unwillingness, a reluctance, or a refusal to speak out. Of course, there are those who will continue to support an institution for gain, whether personal or otherwise. Seduced by false rhetoric, charmed by personalities, threatened by retaliation or retribution of one kind or another, far too many individuals and organizations retreat from their obligation. Rather than “cross the line”—a line drawn by the miscreants themselves—many take shelter in silence and/or willing ignorance, oftentimes in varying combinations of the two.

Given the current upheaval within the Reformed community, the question arises: What accounts for the unending stream of articles, books, and “statements of faith”—institutional and organizational—upholding the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone (apart from good works)? Why the necessity for all these writings and reaffirmations? The answer is simply the fact that the biblical, Reformed doctrine of justification (more broadly, the doctrine of union with Christ) is under fierce assault from a variety of sources. Hence the urgency over the last four decades to restate and to defend the teaching of historic Protestant-Reformed orthodoxy. A second question to be asked is: What is the chief source of defection within the evangelical-Reformed camp? And why the widespread reticence to name this source in academia? Should there be any doubt, let it be clearly said: the primary source of deviant teaching so prevalent today is Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia.53 In the final instance it is fair to ask: Why are so many students leaving Westminster with views contrary to that of classic Reformed teaching, especially as regards the formal and the material principles of the Protestant Reformation (the doctrine of Scripture and the doctrine of justification by faith respectively)? What lies before us is not a minor skirmish, but a crisis of confidence and trust. What we are facing is an ever-widening spread of theological corruption, one that is severely impeding the work of the kingdom of Christ and witness to his Gospel of saving grace.

As noted often in my previous writings, Reformed theology is the theology of the covenants. This essay addresses two related elements in the system of doctrine—one that is primary, the other secondary. Denial of the first element results in a radical reinterpretation of covenant theology (leading to heterodoxy); a faulty understanding of the latter results in a defective view of the Covenant of Works, one nevertheless falling within the bounds of historic Reformed orthodoxy.54 A leading feature of covenant theology (or federalism) is the antithesis between the two principles of inheritance/reward in the covenant(s) between God and his people: (1) meritorious works in the covenant established by God with humankind at creation, as well as in the temporal, symbolico-typical sphere of life in earthly Canaan during the Mosaic economy (the law serving as Israel’s pedagogue), and with respect to the reconciling work of Christ as Second Adam (necessitating his meritorious obedience in the place of the sinner’s transgression, covenant-breaking, and guilt); and (2) saving faith as instrumental in the reception of Christ’s perfect righteousness imputed to the elect, and to them alone. On this point of doctrine we meet up with the Protestant consensus (Lutheran and Reformed) concerning the law/grace antithesis. Within the Reformed tradition this contrast has been uniquely applied to the covenantal structure of biblical history, redemptive and pre-redemptive. And so it is that this doctrine of the covenants distinguishes the Reformed tradition from all other Protestant traditions. In modern times, the first major assault on this doctrine came from Karl Barth; in more recent times, in the work of Norman Shepherd and Richard Gaffin Jr. of Westminster Seminary.55

My doctoral study at Westminster in Philadelphia began under Shepherd. As early as matriculation into the M.Div. program, I was captivated by the work of Meredith G. Kline. Before long, I became instrumental in encouraging Professor Kline’s return to Westminster to teach on a part-time basis (he was serving on the faculty of Gordon-Conwell Seminary at the time). In God’s providence, my study at Westminster coincided with the outbreak of the Shepherd controversy on campus, first surfacing in 1975. Subsequent study at Westminster led to my master’s thesis on Romans 7, giving special attention to the apostle Paul’s interpretation of the Mosaic law. That was followed by the writing of my 1980 dissertation (The Mosaic Covenant and the Concept of Works in Reformed Hermeneutics). All told, these studies had an impact on the course of the Shepherd controversy. After careful study of the issues in dispute (including my studies on the doctrine of the covenants and justification), President Edmund Clowney reversed his prior, favorable stance toward Shepherd, and now began taking the steps necessary to have Shepherd removed from the faculty (the decision having been based upon Shepherd’s erroneous, heterodox teaching). This complete about-face soon led to the writing of “Reasons and Specifications Supporting the Action of the Board of Trustees in Removing Professor Shepherd by the Executive Committee of the Board” (February 26, 1982). As part of the review process, I had been asked by the Committee charged with producing this document to provide a critique of Shepherd’s theology on justification, election, and the covenants. Needless to say, these years at Westminster were exceedingly turbulent. Up to the current time, the situation remains much the same within the seminary community-at-large.

Prior to Clowney’s reversal, he had attempted unsuccessfully to contain the crisis within the seminary, denouncing Shepherd’s critics (notably, the signers of the May 4, 1981 “Letter of Concern”) for having sounded the alarm to outside scholars and pastors.56 In the end, in statements made in the Christian media and elsewhere, Clowney committed his biggest mistake by misleading the public regarding the true grounds for Shepherd’s dismissal—downplaying Shepherd’s false teaching, and emphasizing the need to distance the seminary from ongoing controversy. This misjudgment was motivated, in part, by legal challenges raised by the theological accrediting agencies standing in the wings to protect the name and reputation of tenured professors. The same miscalculation—and for the same reason—was later repeated by President Peter Lillback and the seminary faculty in the dismissal of Peter Enns from the Old Testament department. Making matters more difficult in the prior case, President Clowney found Gaffin—Shepherd’s staunchest supporter and the co-author, if not father, of the new teaching—to be a formidable force with which to contend. Since the time of Shepherd’s dismissal, rupture within the faculty has never been repaired, and differences never resolved. Collegial estrangement continues to prevail to this day. Of course, the chief reason for ongoing conflict is fundamental disagreement in theological interpretation, involving issues of doctrinal substance.

Westminster East Today

Espousing anew a high view of Scripture—which members of the faculty have done throughout the history of the institution, even during its latter-day forage into novel and at times relativistic views of Scriptural interpretation (beginning in the mid-1970s57)—Westminster today is hoping that its attempt to “hold the line” with regard to the authority and inerrancy of Scripture will overshadow the justification dispute, relegating the latter to a controversy in the distant past. What has been up for grabs is the interpretation of Scripture, including radical reinterpretations. Here we note five instances of such : (1) Harvie Conn’s utilization of contextualization and its effect upon the (re)statement of modern-day Reformed dogmatics; (2) Peter Enns’ allegorical interpretations in portions of recorded biblical history (building upon the prior work of Raymond Dillard and Tremper Longman);58 (3) Moisés Silva’s promotion of redaction criticism, which in this instance amounts to a variation on multiple theological perspectives such as that advocated by John Frame; (4) the employment of Barthian doctrine (specifically, the notion of the priority of grace to law resulting in denial of the traditional Protestant Law/Gospel antithesis) by Norman Shepherd, Richard Gaffin, Sinclair Ferguson, David Garner, Peter Lillback, Carl Trueman, William Edgar, and Scott Oliphant (to name only some of Westminster’s faculty); and (5) Frame’s invention of multi-perspectivalism as a replacement for traditional Reformed systematics, resulting in a change in theology and methodology.59 All of these streams feed into the single delta, the theological watershed known as New School Westminster.

In the February 8, 2014 issue of World magazine, P&R Publishing advertised two new, “seminal” books, Thy Word is Still Truth (edited by Lillback and Gaffin), and Frame’s Systematic Theology.60 With regard to the latter, the advertisement claims: “This magisterial opus—at once biblical, clear, cogent, readable, accessible, and practical—summarizes the mature thought of one of the most important and original Reformed theologians of the last hundred years.” Together these two books once again bring into view the formative principles of the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of Scripture and the doctrine of justification by faith alone, two of many crucial doctrines in Reformed dogmatics. In Frame’s book, the author takes yet another occasion to castigate Shepherd’s critics; he proceeds then to instruct the Reformed world how to think theologically.61 To be sure, Frame’s methodology and doctrinal formulation do find a following among some, but his work nevertheless remains highly controversial and highly contentious.62

Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief63 is a distillation of Frame’s theological ruminations over the course of his teaching career (billed as his magnum opus). As has been pointed out by many, Frame’s book and approach are subjective, amounting to a subtle, and not so subtle, attempt to repudiate traditional Reformed dogmatics at a number of key points in the theological system. His methodology can only yield at best an “introduction,” not a summary or compendium of Reformed, biblical teaching. The author prides himself on his own thinking—free of what he sees to be the dogmatism of the “traditionalists”—with token regard for historic Reformed theology on several critical p...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Section One: The Development of Doctrine in the History of the Church
• Section Two: The Formal and Material Principles of the Protestant Reformation
• Section Three: Departure from Historic Reformed Federalism
• Epilogue: Christ, Church, and Covenant
• Bibliography