7/29/2019 Ritschl on Justification

1/3

Ritschl on JustificationHT206W: Historical Theology III (The Doctrine of Justification)

John Schumacher

Ritschls understandingof justification begins with an assumption that God is love and wishes tohelp human beings. Sin separates us from God, or rather, Gods presence withdraws from our sin,

justification is the divine operation by which the sinner is restored to fellowship with God.1Reconciliation is distinguished from justification as the ethical complement to justification, and is seenin secondary position. For Ritschl, justification is inseparably linked to individual lifestyle, where the

restoration of [humanitys] fellowship with God necessarily finds its concrete expression 2In short, the notions of sin and justification are for Ritschl radically different than their usual usage

in Protestant theology. According to Ritschl, forgiveness of sin is not expiation for sin, but removal of

the consciousness of guilt which is the result of humanitys failure to realize its moral destiny.3 Ritschlrejected out of hand the Anselmian notion of objective or juridicial atonement; Christ did not die to pay apenalty for our sin in the sense of sacrifice or payment of debt, but rather, as Gonzlez notes,

Ritschls theory of atonement is an exaggerated version of Luthers imputed justice,

which has become one-sided because Ritschl believes that any talk of the justice orwrath of God would contradict the central divine attribute, which is love.4

We recognize Gods eternity, Ritschl contended, not in the fact that [Gods] existence reached outbeyond that of the world without beginning or end but in the fact that amid all the changes of things . . .[God] remains the same and maintains the same purpose and plan by which [God] creates and directs the

world.5 Ritschl thus finds in Gods eternal nature a link to Gods wisdom, omniscience and disposition

to meet the needs of [humans].6 However, the first perception to arise out of the thought of the

omnipotence of God is the insignificance of man.7 Insofar as this forms our first impression of Gods

constant readiness to help, it is called righteousness, orthe consistency of Gods providence.8 Asregards the old covenant, it is validated in the existence of pious and upright adherents; as regards the

new covenant it is undertaken for the community whose salvation would bring Gods government tocompletion.9 Gods Kingdom, therefore, will be brought into existence through human cooperation withGods will, made possible by Gods justification (the forgiveness of sins) which restores rightrelationship between humans and God. Thereafter, reconciliation is that state in which human beingslive out this new relationship, based on forgiveness.

As a result, the Kingdom of Godthe culmination of new relationshipis a communal and corporate,never an individual, affair. Ritschl had little to say about the historical Jesus, as he was not particularly

1 McGrath, op. cit., 163.2 Ibid.

3 Justo Gonlez,A History of Christian Thought, Vol. III: From the Protestant Reformation to the Twentieth Century,(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1975), 375.

4 Gonzlez, op. cit., 375.5 Albrecht Ritschl, Instruction in the Christian Religion, in Albrecht Ritschl, Three Essays, Philip Hefner, trans.,

(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972), 227 [hereafter Instr].6 Ritschl, Instr, 226.7 Ibid.8 Ritschl, Instr, 227.9 Ibid.

7/29/2019 Ritschl on Justification

2/3

2

concerned with the person of Jesus Christ. The Christian community must maintain the goals of Christslifechiefly, love for neighbor. This imperative of the kingdom of God is assigned to Christians, withthe capacity for good presupposed according to the revelation of Gods love in Christ and its special

effect upon them.10This idea is far from total depravity or bondage of the will; on the contrary,Ritschl assumes that relationship with God is normative, human beings freely able not to sin (or, at least,capable of overcoming sin), and sin merely a temporary barrier to such relationship with God, easily

dismissed through justification and continued onward in the state of reconciliation.But Ritschl does not discount sin altogether: it persists, even as Christians work to bring about theKingdom of God, which presently still in the process of becoming. However, sin for Ritschl is definedmore as temptation than as inevitability: sins are evil volitions, but they are also corresponding

intentions, habitual inclinations and dispositions.11 Ritschl describes the possibility and probability ofsinning, but never the inevitabilityof sinning, nor sinfulness as state of being. In the end, Ritschl defines sinsuniversality in terms of an abuse of human freedom, not in terms of the Fall, after which sin is the onlychoice left available (thus, its inevitability), but in terms of persistently bad choices among manypossiblygoodones. Thus, the emphasis on the abuse of human freedom is more positively focused: unrestrainedfreedom is evil, but retrained freedom (meaning freedom used in cooperation and for the sake of theKingdom) is good.

Finally, forgiveness of sin and justification guarantee the existence of the Christian community.12

Bythis gift of grace, sinners are offered the opportunity to enter into communion with God, since guilt is nolonger a barrier, and are given the right to cooperate with Gods final purpose: bringingthe Kingdom ofGod. While Ritschl insists Gods action in this regard are the result of divine free choice, the emphasis onGods will to help humans out of their sin would appear to limit God to actions with anthropocentricaims in mind. Also, justification and reconciliation, insofar as they are actualized, are individualized withrespect to recognition by the justified, appearing at once to be the purpose of God and the result of thatpurpose, while adding to the person what is necessary for that person to appropriate in faith the finalpurpose of God, while giving up opposition to God. Furthermore, this occurs only insofar as the believersimultaneously takes an active role in the recognized purpose of Gods kingdom, that is, to give up thepursuit of selfish ends and inclinations, whether intentional or habitualin other words, to cease fromsinning, or at least cease from theguiltof sinning.

Forgiveness of sin and reconciliation for Ritschl are the way by which the individual appropriates thegifts of God. Such forgiveness of sin or reconciliation is as essential to the community as is the call to

recognize the Kingdom of God, with the impulse to this realization contained within the call itself.13Forgiveness is gained not from the negative concept of forgiving or paying a debt (as in Anselm), but fromthe positive Christian emphasis on Gods love, linked to Christs work. Redemption, then, is not apromise by Christ, but is linked to his death, which maintains the integrity of the covenant. Christs deathis efficacious because in it, Christ willing surrendered to death; the key is Christs obedience to the Fatherswill, an obedience which is the result of Christs distinctive vocation and which is expressed in Christs

relation to the images of priest and sacrifice, for Christ exemplifies both.14In short, Ritschls doctrine of justification precludes any notion of sin as inevitability or bondage

issue for humankind. On the contrary, the imperative assigned to Christians is cooperation with Gods

will to bring about the Kingdom of God. Grace is awareness of Gods essential nature (God is love),which is exemplified in the relationship of the Father to the Son, and thus, of God the loving Father to

10 Ritschl, Instr, 232.11 Ibid.12 Ritschl, Instr, 236.13 Ritschl, Instr, 237.14 Ritschl, Instr, 238.

7/29/2019 Ritschl on Justification

3/3

3

Gods children, all human beings. Morality becomes the key issue for Christianity in Ritschlsunderstanding, since the Kingdom comes about only through the cooperative effort of Christians on earthwith Gods plan. In this regard, God provides for justification for the sins of believers: insofar asguiltforsin is now removed, Christians are freed to go about their business of ushering in the Kingdom of God.Ritschls is a kinder, gentler God, not the harsh Anselmian judge nor the terrorizing Almighty of Luthersexperience, but a God concerned above and beyond all else with helping human beings. Relationshipbetween God and humanity is assumed, and insofar as this relationship is unfortunately broken by sin, thisis fixed through justification and continues in the fixed state in reconciliation, or the living out by theChristian of that forgiveness.