Law, righteousness, reason, will, and works: civil and theological uses.

Nessan, Craig L.

Employing Luther's two strategies paradigm as an overarching heuristic for interpreting his theology proves fruitful for understanding several apparent contradictions or paradoxes in his thought. Just as it has proven customary and insightful for distinguishing between two uses of the law in Luthers writings, so also we gain clarity about his discussions of righteousness, reason, will, and works by recognizing both a civil and a theological use of these key concepts.

Two uses of the law and the two kingdoms/strategies

As evidenced by classical interpreters, it has become convention to distinguish between a first civil use of the law and a second theological use. Bernard Lohse makes the bold claim that "Luther is clearly the first in all of history of dogma and theology to view the law from the viewpoint of its usus, thus in its concrete function." (2) Lohse analyzes Luther's twofold use of the law, which first appeared in his writings in 1522 and reached its most fulsome exposition in the Galatians lectures of 1531. (3) Lohse concisely summarizes Luthers two uses of the law:

   The two functions of the law are the
   "political" or "civic" and the "theological."
   Here too there is a profusion of
   formulas and terms. By means of the
   political use, external order on earth is
   to be maintained, and peace and the
   securing of justice preserved. The law
   has also the task of inculcating the divine
   commandments and of instructing the
   consciences. It also furnishes the needed
   means by which to punish evildoers.
   The order established by the political
   use of the law is affected through the
   offices of the temporal authorities, of
   parents, of teachers, and of judges, instituted
   by God for this purpose. If the
   law in its political use is obeyed, then
   an "external," "civic" righteousness is
   achieved, to which Luther assigned the
   highest value.... The "theological" use
   comprises the authentic task of the law.
   It is, so to speak, the law in its spiritual
   sense. This use serves to show persons
   their sin, to "convict" them of sin....
   The law "accuses," "horrifies," indicating
   that owing to their guilt humans
   are not what they should before God. (4)

Paul Althaus interprets the two uses of the law in a corresponding manner, as does Oswald Bayer. (5)

The distinction between the two uses of the law in Luther is grounded directly on his theological paradigm of the two kingdoms, or, more precisely, two strategies. (6) Due to the prevalent misinterpretation of the two kingdoms as separate realms or arenas dividing church from public life, which has led tragically to political quietism (for example, the failure of Christian resistance to fascism in Nazi Germany), a more dynamic approach views the two kingdoms as two distinct and complementary forms of divine activity in the world. God engages ambidextrously with both hands to rule the world with the gospel of Jesus Christ according to the right hand spiritual strategy and by means of the structures and institutions of public life according to the left hand civil strategy.

Two uses of righteousness: civil and alien

The two strategies paradigm provides background for the conventional distinction in Luther's theology between the two uses of the law. The first use of the law functions as God's way of ordering and structuring the world in the left hand strategy, while the second use of the law functions to expose and condemn sin in preparation for the proclamation of the gospel in the right hand strategy. However, it is equally compelling to parse other central themes of Luther's thought according to their contrasting uses and functions in relation to the two strategies. Thereby Luther distinguishes two contrasting forms of righteousness. In God's right hand spiritual strategy, the only righteousness that matters is the alien righteousness that belongs to the sinner through justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ Jesus.

   The righteousness of Christ is imputed
   to the sinner. God sees the sinner as
   one with Christ. He forgives his sin and
   considers the sinner to be righteous for
   Christ's sake. Thus the righteousness
   granted to the sinner is not his own
   produced by himself but an "alien"
   righteousness belonging to Jesus Christ. (7)

By the work of Christ the sinner receives the alien righteousness of Jesus Christ as pure gift (extra nos) and becomes for Christ's sake through faith truly righteous before God.

Civil righteousness, by contrast, is that form of righteousness that all individuals perform in relationship to their neighbors in God's left hand civil strategy. Even non-Christians have the capacity to engage in civil righteousness in service to neighbors in their families, workplaces, and public life. God structures and provides order in daily life through those who live out their roles with responsibility for the care of others as neighbors. Although this form of righteousness is ascribed a secondary role in Luther's thought, it remains an essential concept for accomplishing God's purposes of protecting and preserving the world.

   Thus this outward righteousness is
   indeed considered less valuable than
   the true righteousness of the Christian.
   However, it does have positive value,
   for it says "that in his station everyone
   should do his duty." If people were
   seriously concerned about this secular
   righteousness, "there would be no
   rascality or injustice, but sheer righteousness
   and blessedness on earth." (8)

Human ethical capacity, even under the condition of sin, can and does contribute a measure of civil righteousness in the created world according to the left hand civil strategy. This civil righteousness remains at best an approximation of Gods created purposes, however, due to the pervasiveness of human waywardness, which becomes manifest not only in personal but also structural sinfulness.

The distinction between the first and second uses of righteousness in Luther's thought is fruitful for elucidating both the centrality of the work of Christ in imputing alien righteousness according to Gods spiritual strategy and the ethical responsibility of human beings to contribute to public righteousness for their neighbors according to God's civil strategy. Both forms of righteousness have their proper location and uses within Luther's theology.

Two uses of reason: gift and harlot

Luther famously asserted against reason: "And what I say about the sin of lust, which everybody understands, applies also to reason; for reason mocks and affronts God in spiritual things and has in it more hideous harlotry than any harlot." (9) The standard view regarding Luther's understanding of human reason is largely informed by his polemic in The Bondage of the Will. Here Luther, in defense of the doctrine of justification by pure grace through faith in Jesus Christ, takes an aggressive stance against the synergism of late medieval scholastic theology, even as represented by a moderate figure like Erasmus. Reason confronts its absolute limit in relation to what God has revealed in Jesus Christ for accomplishing salvation. God's right hand spiritual strategy has been fulfilled neither through human reasoning nor by the cooperation of the human will, but solely by God's inscrutable action in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

   Ask reason herself whether she is not
   convinced and compelled to confess
   that she is foolish and rash in not
   allowing the judgment of God to be
   incomprehensible, when she admits
   that everything else divine is incomprehensible....
   We cannot for a while
   believe that he is righteous, even though
   he has promised us that when he reveals
   his glory we shall all both see and feel
   that he has been and is righteous. (10)

Human beings do not cooperate with God in the attainment of eternal salvation. To claim a human role, even a minor one, would be an affront to the majesty and glory of God, who has taken sole responsibility for all matters pertaining to human redemption. As Paul attests: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18).

Whereas Luther takes a decidedly negative stand against the use of reason in the right hand spiritual strategy, his writings demonstrate the positive and valued use of reason through human engagement with creation according to the left hand civil strategy.

   It is certainly true that reason is the
   most important and the highest rank
   among all things and, in comparison
   with other things of this life, the best
   and something divine. It is the inventor
   and mentor of all the arts, medicines,
   laws, and of whatever wisdom, power,
   virtue, and glory men possess in this
   life. By virtue of this fact it ought to be
   named the essential difference by which
   man is distinguished from the animals
   and other things. Holy Scripture also
   makes it lord over the earth. (11)

Luther himself was an educator, providing materials for the instruction of the church at every level, including especially the Small and Large Catechisms. Consequently, Lutheran theology always has placed a high value on the contribution of human reason for understanding the nature of the world. (12) Moreover, the Lutheran churches have dedicated themselves to institutions of higher learning, understanding education as a great contribution to civil society. (13)

Perhaps the most compelling reference by Luther to the gift of reason in the left hand civil strategy was his testimony before the Emperor at the Diet of Worms on April 18, 1521:

   Since then your serene majesty and your
   lordships seek a simple answer, I will
   give it in this manner, neither horned
   nor toothed: Unless I am convinced by
   the testimony of Scriptures or by clear
   reason (for I do not trust either in the
   pope or in councils alone, since it is well
   known that they have often erred and
   contradicted themselves), I am bound
   by the Scriptures I have quoted and
   my conscience is captive to the Word
   of God. I cannot and I will not retract
   anything, since it is neither safe nor
   right to go against conscience. (14)

Here Luther not only demonstrates the practice of sound reasoning through the logic of his statement, but he grounds his reasoning on the two sources of authority most befitting each of the two strategies: Scriptural authority in the right hand spiritual strategy and reason as authority in the left hand civil strategy. Not only Scripture but also reason has its proper use, for example, when standing before the tribunal of an emperor.

Two uses of the will: limited within creation and in bondage regarding salvation

Not only through the exercise of reason but also in the exercise of the will is it fruitful to distinguish between two uses. Regarding the saving work of God in Jesus Christ according to the right hand spiritual strategy, the will is totally and completely in bondage and of no use:

   For my own part, I frankly confess that
   even if it were possible, I should not
   wish to have free choice given to me, or
   to have anything left in my own hands
   by which I might strive toward salvation....
   But now, since God has taken
   my salvation out of my hands into his,
   making it depend on his choice and not
   mine, and has promised to save me, not
   by my own work or exertion but by
   his grace and mercy, I am assured and
   certain both that he is faithful and will
   not lie to me, and also that he is too
   great and powerful for any demons or
   any adversities to be able to break him
   or to snatch me from him. (15)

Again it is clearly demonstrated that neither human righteousness nor reason nor will has anything constructive to contribute to the winning of salvation according to the right hand spiritual strategy. God alone has secured salvation in Christ Jesus without any cooperation on the part of human beings.

Throughout his writings, Luther is overall skeptical about the human exercise of the will, affected as it always is by the power of sin. In his argument with Erasmus in The Bondage of the Will, however, he does allow for some exercise of free choice in relation to human involvements in the left hand civil strategy:

   But if we are unwilling to let this term
   go altogether--though that would be
   the safest and most God-fearing thing
   to do--let us at least teach men to
   use it honestly, so that free choice is
   allowed to man only with respect to
   what is beneath him and not what is
   above him. That is to say, a man should
   know that with regard to his faculties
   and possessions he has the right to use,
   to do, or to leave undone, according
   to his own free choice, though even
   this is controlled by the free choice of
   God alone, who acts in whatever way
   he pleases. On the other hand in relation
   to God, or in matters pertaining
   to salvation or damnation, a man has
   no free choice, but is a captive, subject
   and slave either of the will of God or
   the will of Satan. (16)

In relation to the created order the human will can play a useful role "with respect to what is beneath him." Once again the two strategies framework provides a constructive paradigm for distinguishing between two contrasting uses of the will in Luther's theology.

Two uses of works: for the neighbor and works righteousness

Finally, with regard to Luther's interpretation of human works, again there is a distinct difference between works righteousness in the right hand spiritual strategy and the performance of works for the sake of the neighbor in the left hand civil strategy. The Reformation was launched in protest of the late medieval theological program that promoted the performance of religious rituals as the way to earn status before God. The 95 Theses exposed the fallacies of a theological system that assigned merit to sinners through the trade and sale of papal indulgences, which were understood as good works. (17) Luther roared against the "claim to be justified by works, whatever their character":

   ... since faith alone justifies, it is clear that
   the inner man cannot be justified, freed,
   or saved by any outer work or action at
   all, and that these works, whatever their
   character, have nothing to do with this
   inner man. On the other hand, only
   ungodliness and unbelief of heart, and no
   outer work, make him guilty and a damnable
   servant of sin. Wherefore it ought
   to be the first concern of every Christian
   to lay aside all confidence in works and
   increasingly to strengthen faith alone and
   through faith to grow in the knowledge,
   not of works, but of Christ Jesus ... No
   other work makes a Christian. (18)

This quote from The Freedom of a Christian elucidates Luther's first thesis that

"A Christian is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none." (19) We are justified by faith alone in Jesus Christ, not by works of law. In the right hand spiritual strategy faith, trusting in the saving work of Christ, is the only good work. (20)

Luther, however, does preserve an essential place for the performance of good works--not for earning merit from God toward salvation, but completely as a service to the well being of the neighbor. This is the meaning of Luther's second thesis in his treatise on Christian freedom: "A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all." (21)

   Lastly, we shall also speak of the things
   which he does toward his neighbor. A
   man does not live for himself alone in
   this mortal body to work for it alone,
   but he lives also for all men on earth;
   rather, he lives only for others and not
   for himself.... Therefore he should be
   guided in all his works by this thought
   and contemplate this one thing alone,
   that he may serve and benefit others in
   all that he does, considering nothing
   except the need and advantage of the
   neighbor. (22)

Luther's theology retains a prominent place for the performance of good works, not in relation to God's saving work in Christ but as an indispensable aspect of God's left hand civil strategy through service to our neighbors. Good works proper, as described in the Treatise on Good Works, are those due others according to the 10 Commandments, particularly in the Second Table of the Law. (23) Once again regarding the meaning of works, Luther distinguishes two uses in accordance with the two divine strategies.

Conclusion

This essay demonstrates that it is hermeneutically fruitful to identify and distinguish in Luther's theology not only a first and second use of the law, but also a first and second use of righteousness, reason, will, and works. The subtleties of Luther's thought are elucidated by consistent reference to the fundamental paradigm of God's two complementary strategies for ruling the world. According to the first use in the left hand civil strategy, each of these human capacities has a necessary, though circumscribed, role in preserving God's creation. However, when these human capacities are exercised in relation to a second use in the right hand spiritual strategy, they are rejected by Luther as threatening divine sovereignty over the securing of salvation through Jesus Christ and procuring the gifts of the forgiveness of sins, deliverance from the power of the devil, and eternal life.

(1.) Dedicated to my teacher and colleague, Duane Priebe, in honor of his distinguished career as pastor, teacher, and academic dean in the life of the church and in service at Wartburg Theological Seminary.

(2.) Bernard Lohse, Martin Luther's Theology: Its Historical and Systematic Development, trans. and ed. Roy A. Harrisville (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 184, 270.

(3.) Lohse, 270.

(4.) Lohse, 271.

(5.) Paul Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, trans. Robert C. Schutz (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966), 253:255 and Oswald Bayer, Martin Luther's Theology: A Contemporary Interpretation, trans. Thomas H. Trapp (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 61, n. 27.

(6.) For a fuller exposition of the two kingdoms as two strategies, see Craig L. Nessan, "Reappropriating Luther's Two Kingdoms," Lutheran Quarterly 19 (Fall 2005): 302:311.

(7.) Althaus, The Theology of Martin Luther, 227.

(8.) Paul Althaus, The Ethics of Martin Luther, trans. Robert C. Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972), 49:50. The citations within the quote are from LW 46:99:100 and LW 21:26.

(9.) LW 51:374.

(10.) LW 33:290.

(11.) LW 34:137.

(12.) See the several essays underscoring the value of reason in the Lutheran tradition in Jennifer Hockenbery Dragseth, ed., The Devil's Whore: Reason and Philosophy in the Lutheran Tradition (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011).

(13.) Cf. Richard W. Solberg, Lutheran Higher Education in North America (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985).

(14.) LW 32:112.

(15.) LW 33:288:289. For further commentary, Bayer, Martin Luther's Theology, 185:192.

(16.) LW 33:70.

(17.) LW 31:25:33. Other forms of pious works earning merit included worshipping saints, pilgrimages to shrines, private masses without communicants, and venerating relics.

(18.) For this and the previous citation, LW 31:346:347.

(19.) LW 31:344.

(20.) Cf. Craig L. Nessan, Shalom Church: The Body of Christ as Ministering Community (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010), 13-19.

(21.) LW 31:344.

(22.) LW 33:364:365.

(23.) LW 44:80:114.

Craig L. Nessan

Academic Dean & Professor of Contextual Theology, Wartburg Theological Seminary