Solid Declaration, Article V: Of the Law and the Gospel

p. 589 As the distinction between the Law and the Gospel is a very brilliant light, which is of service in rightly dividing God’s Word, and properly explaining and understanding the Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles, we must with especial care observe it, in order that these two doctrines may not be mingled with one another, or out of the Gospel a law be made whereby the merit of Christ is obscured and troubled consciences robbed of their comfort, which they otherwise have in the holy Gospel when it is preached in its purity, and by which also they can support themselves in their most grievous temptations against the terrors of the Law.

But here, likewise, there has occurred a dissent among some theologians of the Augsburg Confession. For the one side asserted that the Gospel is properly not only a preaching of grace, but also that it is at the same time a preaching of repentance, which rebukes the greatest sin, viz. unbelief. But the other side held and contended that the Gospel is not properly a preaching of repentance or of reproof [preaching of repentance, convicting sin], as it properly belongs to God’s Law to reprove all sins, and therefore unbelief also; but that the Gospel is properly a preaching of the grace and favor of God for Christ’s sake, through which the unbelief of the converted, which previously inherited in them and which the Law of God reproved, is pardoned and forgiven.

When we now consider aright this dissent, it is especially caused by this, viz. that the term “Gospel” is not always employed and understood in one and the same sense, but in two ways, in the Holy Scriptures, as also by ancient and modern church-teachers. For sometimes it is employed so that thereby is understood the entire doctrine of Christ our Lord, which he inculcated in his ministry upon earth, and commanded to be p. 590 inculcated in the New Testament, and thus comprised the explanation of the Law and the proclamation of the favor and grace of God, his heavenly Father, as it is written (Mark 1:1): “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” And shortly afterwards the chief heads are stated: “Repentance and forgiveness of sins.” Therefore when Christ, after his resurrection, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel in all the world (Mark 16:15), he compressed the sum of this doctrine into a few words, when he said (Luke 24:46, 47): “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations.” So, too, Paul (Acts 20:21) calls his entire doctrine the Gospel, but he embraces the sum of this doctrine under the two heads: “Repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” And in this sense the general definition, i. e. the description of the word “Gospel,” when employed in a wide sense, and without the peculiar distinction between the Law and the Gospel, is correct, when it is said that the Gospel is a preaching of repentance and remission of sins. For John, Christ and the apostles began their preaching with repentance, and explained and urged not only the gracious promise of the forgiveness of sins, but also the Law of God. Afterwards the term “Gospel” is employed in an-6 other, namely, in its peculiar sense, by which it comprises not the preaching of repentance, but only the preaching of the grace of God, as follows directly afterwards (Mark 1:15), where Christ says: “Repent and believe the Gospel.”

Parallel passages: Apology, iv.: 1 sqq.; 61 sqq. (iii.); 65 sqq., xii.: 53 sqq.; Smalcald Articles, Part III., Arts. ii., iv.; Epitome, v. Apology, chap. iii.: 66. Epitome, iv.: 19.

But also the term “repentance” is not employed in the Holy Scriptures in one and the same sense. For in some passages of Holy Scripture it is employed and understood with reference to the entire conversion of man, as Luke 13:5: “Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” And in chap. 15:7: “Likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth.” But in Mark 1:15, as also elsewhere, where a distinc-8 tion is made between repentance and faith in Christ (Acts 20:21) or between repentance and remission of sins (Luke 24:46, 47), repentance means to do nothing else than to truly acknowledge sins, from the heart to regret them, and to abstain therefrom. This knowledge proceeds from the Law, but does not suffice for saving conversion to God, if faith in Christ be not added, whose merits the consolatory preaching of the holy Gospel offers to all penitent sinners who are terrified by the preaching of the Law. For the Gospel proclaims the forgiveness of sins, not to coarse and secure hearts, but to the bruised or pen-635 itent (Luke 4:18). And that from repentance or the terrors of the Law despair may not result, the preaching of p. 591 the Gospel must be added, that it may be repentance to salvation (2 Cor. 7:10).

For since the mere preaching of the Law, without Christ, either makes men presumptuous,¹ who imagine that by outward works they can fulfil the Law, or forces them utterly to despair, Christ takes the Law into his hands, and explains it spiritually, from Matt. 5: sqq.; Rom. 7: and 1:18, and thus reveals his wrath from heaven upon all sinners, and shows how great it is; whereby they are instructed in the Law, and from it first learn aright to know their sins—a knowledge to which Moses never could coerce them. For as the apostle testifies (2 Cor. 3: sq.), even though Moses be read, yet nevertheless the veil which hangs before the face always remains unremoved, so that they cannot perceive that the Law is spiritual and how great things it requires of us, and how severely it curses and condemns us because we cannot observe or fulfil it. “Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away” (2 Cor. 3:16).

¹ Cf. Smalcald Articles, Part III., Art. ii.: 3.

Therefore the Spirit of Christ must not only comfort, but also, through the office of the Law, reprove the world of sin,² and thus do in the New Testament what the prophet calls “a strange work”³ (viz. reprove), in order that he may do his own work, which is to comfort and preach of grace. For on this account, through Christ, he was obtained [from the Father] and sent to us, and for this reason also is called the Comforter, as Dr. Luther has explained in his exposition of the Gospel for the Fifth Sunday after Trinity, in the following words:

² John 16:8.

³ Isa. 28:21. Cf. Apology, xii.: 51.

“That is all a preaching of the Law which holds forth our sins and God’s wrath, let it be done how or when it will. Again, the Gospel is such a preaching as shows and gives nothing else than grace and forgiveness in Christ, although it is true and right that the apostles and preachers of the Gospel (as Christ himself also did) sanction the preaching of the Law, and begin it with those who do not yet acknowledge their sins nor are terrified before [by the sense of] God’s wrath; as he says (John 16:8): ‘The Holy Ghost will reprove the world of sin, because they believe not on me.’ Yea, what more forcible and more terrible declaration and preaching of God’s wrath against sin is there than the suffering and death of Christ his Son? But as long as this all preaches God’s wrath and terrifies men, it is still properly the preaching neither of the Gospel nor of Christ, but of Moses and the Law, against the impenitent. For the Gospel and Christ were never provided and given to us in order to terrify and condemn, but p. 592 to comfort and cheer those who are terrified and timid.” And again, “Christ says (John 16:8): ‘The Holy Ghost will reprove the world of sin;’ which cannot happen except through the explanation of the Law” (Jena Ed., vol. ii., p. 455).

So, too, the Smalcald Articles say: “The New Testament maintains and urges the office of the Law, which reveals sins and God’s wrath; but to this office it immediately adds the promise of grace through the Gospel.”¹

¹ Ibid., chap. (iii.): 189.

And the Apology says: “To a true and salutary repentance the preaching of the Law is not sufficient, but the Gospel should be added thereto.“Therefore the two doctrines belong together, and should also be urged by the side of each other, but in a definite order and with a proper distinction; and the Antinomians or assailants of the Law are justly condemned, who abolish the preaching of the Law from the Church, and wish sins to be reproved, and repentance and sorrow to be taught, not from the Law, but from the Gospel.

But in order that every one may see that in the dissent of which we are treating we conceal nothing, but present the matter to the eyes of the Christian reader plainly and clearly:

We unanimously believe, teach and confess that the Law is properly a divine doctrine, wherein the true, immutable will of God is revealed as to how man ought to be, in his nature, thoughts, words and works, in order to be pleasing and acceptable to God; and it threatens its transgressors with God’s wrath and temporal and eternal punishment. For as Luther writes against the Antinomians: “Everything that reproves sin is and belongs to the Law, whose peculiar office it is to reprove sin and to lead to the knowledge of sins (Rom. 3:20; 7:7);” and as unbelief is the root and spring of all reprehensible sins, the Law reproves unbelief also.

But it is likewise true that the Law with its doctrine is illustrated and explained by the Gospel; and nevertheless it remains the peculiar office of the Law to reprove sins and teach concerning good works.

In this manner the Law reproves unbelief if the Word of God be not believed. Since now the Gospel, which alone peculiarly teaches and commands to believe in Christ, is God’s Word, the Holy Ghost, through the office of the Law, also reproves unbelief, i. e. that sinners do not believe in Christ, although it is the Gospel alone which peculiarly teaches concerning saving faith in Christ.

But the Gospel is properly a doctrine which teaches (as man does not observe the Law of God, but transgresses it, and his corrupt nature, thoughts, words and works conflict therewith,

Part III., Art. iii.: 1, 4.

p. 593 and for this reason he is subject to God’s wrath, death, all temporal calamities and the punishment of hell-fire) what man should believe, that with God he may obtain forgiveness of sins, viz. that the Son of God, our Lord Christ, has taken upon himself and borne the curse of the Law, has expiated and settled for all our sins, through whom alone we again enter into favor with God, obtain by faith forgiveness of sins, are exempted from death and all the punishments of sins, and are eternally saved.

For everything that comforts, that offers the favor and grace of God to transgressors of the Law, is and is properly said to be the Gospel, a good and joyful message that God does not will to punish sins, but, for Christ’s sake, to forgive them.

Therefore every penitent sinner ought to believe, i. e. place his confidence alone, in the Lord Christ, that “he was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:25), who was “made sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Cor. 5:21), “who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30), whose obedience is reckoned for us before God’s strict tribunal as righteousness, so that the Law, as above set forth, is a ministration that kills through the letter and preaches condemnation (2 Cor. 3:7), but the Gospel “is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth” (Rom. 1:16), that preaches righteousness and gives the Spirit (1 Cor. 1:; Gal. 3:2). Dr. Luther has urged this distinction with especial diligence in nearly all his writings, and has properly shown that the knowledge of God derived from the Gospel is far different from that which is taught and learned from the Law, because even the heathen had to a certain extent, from the natural law, a knowledge of God, although they neither knew him aright nor glorified him (Rom. 1: sq.).

These two proclamations [kinds of doctrines] from the beginning of the world have been always inculcated alongside of each other in the Church of God, with a proper distinction. For the successors of the venerated patriarchs, as also the patriarchs themselves, not only constantly called to mind how man was in the beginning created by God righteous and holy, and through the fraud of the serpent transgressed God’s command, became a sinner, and corrupted and precipitated himself, with all his posterity, into death and eternal condemnation; but also, on the other hand, encouraged and comforted themselves by the preaching concerning the Seed of the woman, who would bruise the serpent’s head (Gen. 3:15). Also, concerning the Seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the earth shall be blessed (Gen. 22:18). Also, concerning David’s Son, who should restore p. 594 again the kingdom of Israel and be a light to the heathen (Ps. 110:; Isa. 49:; Luke 2:32), who “was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities,” by whose “stripes we are healed.” Isa. 53:5.

These two doctrines we believe and confess, viz. that even to the end of the world they should be diligently inculcated in the Church of God, although with proper distinction, in order that, through the preaching of the Law and its threats in the ministry of the New Testament, the hearts of impenitent men may be terrified, and be brought to a knowledge of their sins and to repentance; but not in such a way that they inwardly despair and doubt, but that (since “the Law is a schoolmaster unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Gal. 3:24), and thus points and leads us not from Christ, but to Christ, who “is the end of the Law,” Rom. 10:4), they be on the other hand comforted and strengthened by the preaching of the holy Gospel concerning Christ our Lord, viz. that to those who believe the Gospel, God, through Christ, forgives all their sins, adopts them for his sake as children, and out of pure grace, without any merit on their part, justifies and saves them, but nevertheless not in such a way that they abuse and sin against the grace of God. Paul (2 Cor. 3: sqq.) thoroughly and forcibly shows this distinction between the Law and the Gospel.

Therefore, in order that the two doctrines, viz. that of the Law and that of the Gospel, be not mingled and confounded with one another, and to the one that be ascribed which belongs to the other, whereby the merit and benefits of Christ are obscured and the Gospel made again a doctrine of the Law, as has occurred in the Papacy, and thus Christians be deprived of the true comfort which in the Gospel they have against the terrors of the Law, and the door be again opened in the Church of God to the Papacy; the true and proper distinction between the Law and the Gospel must with all diligence be inculcated and preserved, and whatever gives occasion for confusion between the Law and the Gospel, i. e. whereby the two doctrines, Law and Gospel, may be confounded and mingled into one doctrine, should be diligently avoided. It is on this account dangerous and wrong to convert the Gospel, properly so called as distinguished from the Law, into a preaching of repentance or reproof [a preaching of repentance, reproving sin].¹ For otherwise, if understood in a general sense of the whole doctrine, as the Apology also sometimes says, the Gospel is a preaching of repentance and forgiveness of sins.² But close by the Apology also shows that the Gospel is properly p. 595 the promise of the forgiveness of sins, and of justification through Christ; but that the Law is a doctrine which reproves sins and condemns.

¹ Cf. Formula of Concord, Epitome, v.: 11.

² Ibid., § 1.