W. Davd Phillips

Gorman's Book on Justification

Today, we continue looking at Justification from Michael Gorman’s book Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul’s Narrative Soteriology. The last post ended with this following:

For Paul, then, in light of Romans 5 and 2 Corinthians 4, justification has:

1. an objective basis, or means, which is Christ’s death as a gift of God’s gracious initiative (Rom 5:1, 6-8, 9-11; 2 Cor 5:18, 21), together (implicitly) with Christ’s resurrection as God’s life-giving power;

2. a required subjective response, or mode, that effects justification/reconciliation, which is usually (though not always) explicitly labeled pistis, normally translated “faith” or (in its verbal form) “believe” (Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:20)

3. substantive content, which includes reconciliation, participation, and transformation (Rom 5:1-2, 9-11; 2 Cor 5:14-15, 17, 21)

The essential content of this transformation is fidelity to God and love for neighbor, the very heart of the covenant.

To demonstrate this, Gorman sets out to address three questions arising from these conclusions:

• What is the distinctive meaning of Christ’s death for Paul?
• What is his distinctive understanding of pistis? and
• What is the connection between the meaning of Christ’s death and the meaning of pistis, on the one hand, and the significance and character of the transformation inherent in justification, on the other?

This post will deal with Christ’s death as the quintessential act.

According to Gal. 2:15-21 and Phil 2:6-11, Christ’s crucifixion simultaneously manifests both vertical and horizontal covenant-keeping. As a result, it fulfills the two tables of the Law as the quintessential covenantal act. This aspect of Paul’s interpretation of Christ’s death has been largely overlooked, according to Gorman, resulting in a significantly truncated understanding of justification.

The death of Jesus is interpreted in the New Testament as an act of love. According to Paul, Christ’s death was a demonstration of God’s love (Rom 5:7-8; 8:31-39) and a manifestation of his own love (Gal 2:20; Rom 8:34-35, 2 Cor 5:14). Paul also interprets Christ’s death as an act of obedience to God the Father and as an act of faith, as in covenantal faithfulness or faithful obedience. Recent scholarship “suggests also that Christ’s death is depicted as his act of ‘faith’ or ‘faithfulness’ (pistis) in seven passages within the undisputed letters of Paul where the Greek grammar is ambiguous: Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16 (twice), 20; and 3:22; and Phil 3:9.”

Since the Reformation, the ambiguities have been read as “faith in Christ,” but the arguments for interpreting these phrases as an example of the subjective genitive, translating them as the faith[fulness] of Christ are persuasive to many, including Gorman. If “faith of Christ” is the correct translation, “Paul says that Christ’s faithful death embodies the righteousness of God (Rom 3:22), constitutes the means of justification (Gal 2:16;3:22;Phil 3:9) as well as the mode of justification (Rom 3:26), and somehow even provides the manner of living in the present (Gal 2:20).” (59)

For Paul, “Christ’s death on the cross was simultaneously his act of self-giving faith(fulness) toward God (2:16,20) and his self-giving love toward humanity (2:20). It was a unified act of vertical and horizontal covenant fulfillment, of love for God and for neighbor.” (61) Therefore, “Christ’s death is not merely a reprentative, messianic act or substitutionary act. It is, more specifically and importantly, the quintessential covenantal act, in which love of God and of neighbor are joined and embodied in the one act of a faithful, loving death. And because Paul sees Christ not only as Israel’s Messiah but also as Adam’s antitype (Rom 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:22, 45), such an act is also the quintessential human act.” (62-63)

Justification Part One

There is a lot of discussion now about the idea of justification in the scriptures, particularly in the Pauline texts. Recently I’ve read some newer books on the topic and want to share the ideas of these books with you. What I hope is that we can have a honest discussion on the topic over the next few months. I will make a post each Thursday regarding this topic and other topics that relate to it.

I will begin the discussion with Michael J. Gorman‘s thoughts, particularly from his latest book, Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul’s Narrative Soteriology. Dr. Gorman is professor of Sacred Scripture and Dean of the Ecumenical Institute of Theology at St. Mary’s Seminary & University in Baltimore, Maryland—a United Methodist in a Catholic institution with strong ecumenical commitments.  He received the M.Div. and the Ph.D. cum laude in New Testament from Princeton Theological Seminary in New Jersey, where he was also a teaching fellow in New Testament and an instructor in New Testament Greek. Dr. Gorman is a New Testament scholar who specializes especially in the letters, theology, and spirituality of the apostle Paul.

Dr. Gorman’s particular understanding looks not only at the idea of justification, but also the theological concepts of Theosis, Faith, Kenosis, Cruciformity, and Co-Crucifixion. Gorman begins with an idea and then expands it as he builds his case.

Gorman suggests that for Paul, there is one soteriological model: justification is by crucifixion, specifically co-crucifixion which is understood as the participation in Christ’s act of covenant fulfillment. This is not a new interpretation of justification as a doctrine but rather of justification in Paul. This idea is taken from a close reading of Gal. 2:15-21 and Rom 6:1-7:6 along with several other Pauline texts. A close reading from these texts reveals that the apostle understands faith as co-crucifixion and “justification by faith” as new life/resurrection via crucifixion with the Messiah. It is inherently participatory.

Justification by co-crucifixion, then, means “restoration to right covenant relations with God and others by participation in Christ’s quintessential covenant act of faith and love on the cross: this one act fulfilled both the ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ requirements of the Law, such that those who participate in it experience the same life-giving fulfillment of the Law and therein being the paradoxical, christologically grounded process of resurrection through death.” (45) The person has been initiated into the process of conformity to the crucified Christ who is the image of God, a process of theoformity or theosis (which we will discuss at a later point).

Justification and the Covenant Law

The first aspect of justification that needs to be considered is the Law. The Law requires both vertical and horizontal covenant keeping (love of God and others) for humanity to experience present and/or eschatological life.

For Gorman, the human problem as Paul sees it is multi-faceted. There is the issue of Sin (singular), a power from which people need liberation or redemption as well as sins (plural) for which people need forgiveness.

In Romans 1:18 Paul refers to two basic categories of sin. The first is asebeia and adikia, impiety and injustice, sins against God and sins against fellow humans. These roughly correspond to idolatry and immorality. This is also evident from 1 Corinthians, where he uses the command “flee” two times, once in regard to immorality (1 Cor. 6:18) and once in regard to idolatry (1 Cor 10:14). Additionally, “these terms summarize the concerns of 1 Corinthians 10 where Paul draws upon the golden calf narrative to describe the basic existential issues facing human failure, idolatry and immorality.” (51)

The reality of sins (plural) for Paul requires a sacrifice that effects forgiveness. Paul believes the problem of Sin (singular) and sins (plural) lies with the internalization of the covenant through the circumcision of the heart and the gift of the empowering Spirit (Rom 2:25-29; 8:1-8). Justification then, must include forgiveness, but be more than forgiveness. It must be a reversal of Romans 1, of human asebeia and adikia. There “can be no justification without transformation.” (51) The justified, then “are those who have begun the process of replacing asebeia and adikia with pistis and dikaiosyne/agape by the power of the Spirit, thus fulfilling the two tables of the Law” (51)

What then is justification for Paul? Justification is the establishment or restoration of right covenant relations, both “vertical” or theological (toward God) and inseparably, “horizontal” or social (towards others) “with the certain hope of ultimate vindication and glory, all understood in light of, and experienced through, Christ and the Spirit” (53). This is what Paul most frequently calls “pistis” and “agape“. (53)

The language of justification is drawn from several interlocking realms:

1. theological – referring to the divine character – God is just

2. covenantal – referring tot he moral obligations associated with a communal, covenant relationship with God – God requires justice

3. legal – referring to juridical images of God as judge – God judges and pardons

4. eschatological – referring to future judgment and salvation – God will judge and grant approval and life (or condemnation and death) on the day of the Lord. (54)

For Paul then, “justification is not merely or even primarily juridical or judicial – the image of a divine judge announcing pardon or acquittal. That is part but only part, of the significance of justification. The judicial image must be understood within a wider covenantal, relational, participatory, and transformative framework.” (55)

We will consider that framework in our next post.