Reformation Readings of Paul: Explorations in History and Exegesis ed. by Michael Allen and Jonathan A. Linebaugh (review)

This book examines Reformation-era interpretations of Paul by returning to the reformers’ own biblical commentaries. As obvious as that may sound, this theme arises in direct response to critiques from the “new perspective on Paul” branch of New Testament studies, which has argued that reformers—including Martin Luther and John Calvin—anachronistically overemphasized justification by faith in Paul’s writings in order to suit their contemporary theological needs. While taking the “new perspective” concerns seriously, Reformation Readings of Paul counters that general premise by showing the integrity of the exegetical methods used by Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, Martin Bucer, John Calvin, and Thomas Cranmer.

For each of these figures, a historical essay on a reformer’s typical interpretive methods sets the stage for a second essay on how that person commented upon specific biblical texts. A chapter on Luther’s broader relationship with Galatians, for instance, comes before a contemporary exegetical analysis of Luther’s Galatians commentary (especially focusing on the 1531/35 edition). On that score, John M.G. Barclay’s essay shows how Luther addressed key textual and historical issues in Paul in ways that made sense for his context, resulting in an exegetically valid interpretation. In the study of Melanchthon, Robert Kolb provides a sterling evaluation of Melanchthon’s exegetical methods (especially his use of loci communes, theological stepping stones), as well as Melanchthon’s decades-long engagement with Romans. Constructively engaging themes raised by the “new perspective on Paul,” Mark Seifrid’s essay then argues persuasively that Melanchthon’s exegetical focus on justification was rooted in the text and did not merely stem from doctrinal biases. This reviewer would, however, have appreciated more attention to Melanchthon’s opening argumentum and commentary on earlier chapters of Romans, rather than the chapter’s narrower focus on Romans 9–11. That small point aside, however, the far-reaching influence of Melanchthon’s loci method on Reformation hermeneutics makes these chapters especially valuable.

Martin Bucer wrote so much in his commentaries that the two essays dedicated to his interpretive work focus on his view of election in Ephesians 1:3–6. While it is interesting to learn that Bucer’s doctrine of predestination was more of a “broken” predestination than Calvin’s double predestination, the primary takeaway is that Bucer studied texts so exhaustively that his technical work meets, if not exceeds, today’s standards of scholarly rigor. The chapters on John Calvin’s engagement with 1 and 2 Corinthians, on the other hand, reveal a highly pastoral reformer, who strove for a middle way between scholarly analysis and popular application. Although the authors do not explicitly say this, this pastoral emphasis demonstrates many similarities between Luther and Calvin on topics like union with Christ, the work of the Holy Spirit in believers’ lives, and faith as a living relationship between God and persons. For the purpose of this study, Calvin’s humanist attention to text and context reveal him to be a worthy partner in biblical interpretation today.

The two chapters on Thomas Cranmer were perhaps the most surprising, because one does not often think of Cranmer in terms of his exegetical work. On this point, Ashley Null and Jonathan Linebaugh make strong cases for the central place of Paul’s writings in Cranmer’s theology and the English Reformation; Queen Katherine Parr’s description of her own Reformation turn powerfully illustrates the point (230–32). After so many intentionally scholarly essays, the book’s conclusion—which contains no footnotes—seems oddly general and informal. Overall, however, this book leaves the clear impression that we would do better to read the Bible in conversation with the reformers than to presume that we have forever surpassed them exegetically or theologically.