Wednesday, April 13, 2005
This introduction to N.T. Wright's theology of justification seems promising despite a few (generally minor) flaws. Perhaps the most obvious flaw is that of describing Wright as a 'monocovenantalist'. It seems to me that such a description of Wright is a retrojection of certain aspects of his theology into the categories of older theological frameworks, categories which are ill-equipped to do justice to the pattern of his thought. I sometimes wonder to what degree the problems that many Presbyterians and Reformed folk have in understanding Wright flow from the Ramean philosophy of the Puritans, which seems to have the tendency of transforming the covenant from an organic and historical relationship into an abstract and static theological construct, with historical covenants as 'dispensations' of this ahistorical entity. The fact that I find Ramus' philosophy positively unhelpful may serve to explain why I find the huge stress on the faith/works, law/gospel, covenant of works/covenant of grace debates by turns both frustrating and baffling. I recommend Tim Gallant's article on the subject.