Chemnitz on Justification and Renewal

Chemnitz cites the views of the German Roman Catholic Johann Gropper (1503-59). According to Chemnitz, he ?argues at great length that Christ by his obedience did not merit only the remission of sins but also the Spirit of renewal; and that God remits sins to no one without at the same time renewing the spirit of his mind . . . . He also contends that faith in Christ lays hold not only on the benefit of reconciliation but also that by faith the Spirit of renewal is received, etc. Thus justification does not consist only in the remission of sins and free reconciliation, but it also includes the renewal of the mind and the will through the Spirit.?EUnfortunately, Chemnitz does not explain why he finds this position as ?subterfuge.?ELater, he explains the distinction between Pelagius and Augustine on the question of ?grace?Ein these terms: ?Pelagius . . . said that the grace of God availed only for the remission of sins we had already committed. But for putting to death the law of sin in our flesh and beginning the new obedience, there was no need for the giving of the Spirit, or for the special grace of God; but man by the powers of his free will could perform this and satisfy the law of God.?EAugustine by contrast ?rightly contended that the benefit of Christ and His merit does not consist only in the fact that past sins are remitted, but that also the giving of the Spirit of renewal is a gift of God for the sake of the merit of Christ, and that man cannot be reconciled without the giving and grace of the Holy Spirit, that he cannot mortify the deeds of the flesh and walk in newness of life by the powers of his own free will.?ESo, he accepts Gropper?s point that Christ achieved both forgiveness and renewal, but differs apparently in refusing to characterize this combination of renewal and reconciliation as ?justification.?E

Yet, there is a tension in Chemnitz?s view: He claims that ?man cannot be reconciled without the giving and grace of the Holy Spirit,?Eyet he elsewhere associates reconciliation with justification and the gift of the Spirit with sanctification/renewal. For instance, he distinguishes between the meaning of grace as it pertains to justification and the meaning of grace as it pertains to the renewal. As I have noted before on this site, within the article of justification grace simply means ?the free goodness of God, His favor, His benevolence, and His mercy, by which not according to our works and worthiness but out of sheer mercy, for the sake of Christ, God receives into grace sinners who are repentant and flee for faith to the Mediator.?EIn this context, we are not to understand grace to mean ?that we are justified and saved either entirely by our own newness of life or by a combination of God?s mercy and our own newness within us,?Ebut rather ?in the article of justification before God the word ?grace?Emeans only the mercy of God, which is the remission of sins and free acceptance to eternal life for the sake of the Mediator.?EOn the other hand, ?the Spirit of renewal?Eand other gifts ?follow after this acceptance by God.?EThus, in the article on ?renewal,?E?grace?Emeans ?gifts of newness. (All quotations from Chemnitz, Justification: The Chief Article of Christian Doctrine as Expounded in Loci Theologici ; trans JAO Preus; Concordia, 1985, pp. 58, 139-141.)

But is this coherent? Can we imagine God being gracious without giving gifts of grace? Can we imagine the grace/favor of God impinging on human experience except AS a gift of grace? To Chemnitz?s specific distinction: How does one come to know he is accepted before God, if there are no gifts given in justification? How does that verdict enter into our experience? How does it come to consciousness? Once we are aware that God is gracious, we are already a recipient of a gift.

Certainly, from God?s perspective, the gracious attitude is prior to the gift; God gives Himself and His gifts because He is graciously disposed to sinners. His gracious attitude does not arise from or depend on His recognition of the gifts He has given; He is not responding to the righteousness that He achieves in us but justifies the ungodly. From this angle, we can affirm the priority of justification to renewal.

Within human experience, however, it is difficult to see how God?s gracious attitude could be prior to His gifts. Does not our knowledge of God?s gracious attitude toward us come through His gifts? God speaks His word of promise to us and we believe and know the peace of God?s mercy; but we would not know it except that He has spoken, and that is a gift. We might even say that in human experience the gifts of God are prior to our experience of God?s grace. We come to know that God is gracious because of the gifts that He gives. How would we otherwise know of His favor?