From Heavy Theology to Easy Believism

A friend of mine who is a scholar and has written on this topic extensively even to the point of published material, gave me some additional insight regarding the nature of saving faith according to proponents of the active obedience school.

He writes,

"On the active obedience, people who believe in the imputation of active obedience will argue that if the faith is genuine (i.e., Spirit-wrought) then it will produce repentance and obedience as evidence of the genuineness of faith. The problem here is that the Bible represents repentance and obedience not simply as flowing from faith, but as necessary for justification and salvation.
Repentance is unto the forgiveness of sins. Except you repent you will likewise perish (Luke 13:1-9)."

~~~~

So, I am wondering how much the ordo salutis has to do with this debate. But this debate seems centered around the temporal order of the Holy Spirit's effectual call, regeneration, faith, repentance, obedience, and the applications of those being justification and sanctification, whereas the ordo concerns the logical flow of these things: if one then the other. Even so, it is difficult to wrestle with in a non-temporal fashion for if one cannot have faith without regeneration, it is easy to think of the former not existing in time without the latter occurring first. On the other hand, faith and regeneration could happen simultaneously. The Spirit moves where it wills...

~~~~

The active obedience school appears to be more Lutheran in its approach to the order of salvation than the Reformed. From what I have read, the active obedience school acts out on this paradigm because of its commitment to the idea of what Luther called glauben allein (faith alone). In fact, Luther translated Romans 3:28 in the German as allein durch den Glauben ("alone through the faith," literally); notice the emphatic position of the word allein in this translation. For Luther, it was very important to put forth the idea of being justified through "faith alone" because otherwise, in Luther's view, the only alternative was the Roman Catholic view of justification and sanctification being one in essence, and assurance of salvation--even salvation itself, would be impossible. Luther was so emphatic upon his position of glauben allein that he wanted the epistle of James taken out of the canon. Luther simply could not wrap his mind around the idea of faith working in conjunction or being the same is essence as repentance.

~~~~

It appears this is indeed the key issue in the debate in the Reformed world regarding the whole idea of justification by glauben allein: are we justified by glauben allein, which is then followed by repentance and obedience (Lutheran view), or are we justified by a faith that is wrought by means of the Holy Spirit's effectual call, regeneration and consequent repentance and faith stemming from being in union with Christ by the Spirit's regenerative power (Reformed view). As my friend earlier noted, the Bible says, "Except you repent, you will all likewise perish," (Luke 13:5).

~~~~

And, Paul says in Acts 26 19ff: "Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, 20but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance." And, "When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life,'" (Acts 11:18).

~~~~

It seems that the Lutheran view of justification has with it a certain level of unhealthy scholasticism that removes the idea of repentance from dead works from the idea of a saving faith. In fact, the original text of the NT in Romans 3:28 does not have the word "alone" in it: that was Luther's predisposition acting out in creating a gloss in the text. The text actually says, "For we consider that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the law." The word "alone" is not present. The active obedience school has, it seems, taken advantage of the Lutheran view of justifying faith, and added the theological construct of the imputation of righteousness to the believer as a consequence of the active obedience of Jesus. And, it appears that the "easy believism" is indeed a negative consequence of this doctrine for the parishioner hears that upon faith, one is justified, and that sanctification occurs temporally after such faith.

~~~~

Therefore, repentance is not preached in churches, and although the Lutheran view teaches that a justification by glauben allein should and must produce a progressive sanctification in the believer, I think something else happens. What happens is that the mind of the parishioner interprets faith as belief, or intellectual assent, and casts off sanctification as something to be considered as "works" apart from the "faith" that they had (note the temporal significance), and many people do not sense the pressing need to repent, otherwise they too would perish.