The Distinction Between Law and Gospel as the Basis and Boundary of Theological Reflection by John D. Koch, Jr. (review)

The distinction between law and gospel is not merely one locus amongst others in the Lutheran understanding of theology. Instead, it determines the entire enterprise of Lutheran theology. In this volume John D. Koch adopts this viewpoint, defends it from its detractors, and explores the heights and depths of what this distinction means for theological method, justification, sanctification, and eschatology, as well as for life itself.

Koch begins with an assessment of the theological situation of the twenty-first century, in which there seems to be some consensus that the doctrine of justification by faith alone should be abandoned in the quest for organic ecumenical unity and the preservation of cultural Christianity (3–5). Against this, Koch argues that justification is the matter upon which the church will fall or stand, and that whether the church falls or stands is dependent on a proper understanding of law and gospel (25). In advocating for a renewal of the Lutheran sense of law and gospel for the life of the church today, Koch draws from Gerhard Ebeling, Gerhard Forde, and Oswald Bayer.

For Koch, a proper understanding of law and gospel is one that takes seriously the reality of what Luther labelled Anfechtungand how it affects the accused sinner. Anfechtungis not merely the attack on conscience that comes through the law. While it includes the law's work of convicting sinners of their sin and demonstrating the need for salvation, Anfechtungalso includes the believer's experience of the contradiction of the gospel. Following Bayer, Koch understands the experiences of evil and suffering in the world as how Anfechtungis experienced, namely, as the contradiction of the comfort that comes from justification by faith. Anfechtungincludes the work of the law, but its parameters are not limited to it (7–8).

Following both Bayer and Forde, Koch takes a somewhat functional approach to the understanding of law and gospel. Koch argues that the law and the gospel should both be understood in terms of what they do. On the one hand, the law, through Anfechtung, makes sinners constantly aware of the reality of death and judgment. The gospel, on the other hand, does what it says; it justifies sinners before God and makes them new creatures.

Koch responds to many critiques of the Lutheran view of law and gospel and of justification by faith alone, including those by Krister Stendahl, Karl Barth, Ernst Ratzinger, Robert Jenson, David Yeago, and the New Finnish School of Luther studies through its progeny in the United States, Paul Hinlicky and Christine Helmer. Koch carefully and charitably represents these views and then defends the Lutheran view through arguments that are both theologically and historically responsible. Koch's responses to Jenson and Yeago are especially important and warrant attention, as these theologians have consistently argued that the law and gospel theological method leads inexorably to antinomianism and Gnosticism (55–56, 184,197). Responding to these charges, Koch makes a detailed exploration into Forde and Bayer's shared understanding of sanctification as the continual re-creation of the new creature in Christ (158). Koch cites Forde's warning against antinomianism as "fake theology" (185–191) and Bayer's insistence that justification and creation must be understood in the context of one another and that justification is a return to creation and creatureliness through the sacramental mediation of justification. Koch argues that the errors of antinomianism and Gnosticism are precluded in the views of Forde and Bayer because the law puts works righteousness to death and the gospel opens the sinner as a new creation to God and others (153–159).

Koch organizes and articulates well the view of law and gospel he believes to be vital to the life of the church. While his account is theologically faithful and rich, it lacks commentary on a major figure in the law and...