Читать книгу A Pastoral Proposal for an Evangelical Theology of Freedom - Albert J.D. Walsh - Страница 5

As stated in both title and preface, this is a pastoral proposal for the development of an evangelical theology of freedom and is, therefore, an expression of pastoral care (traditionally, care of souls) in the mode of a practical theology addressing both the ekklēsia, and the wider fields to which the ekklēsia is called in service to the one gospel of Jesus Christ, and in free obedience to the command of her Lord (there is no genuine obedience that is not free obedience, as one can only speak of genuine love as freely given). It addresses the ekklēsia out of the conviction that before we can speak of those actions endemic to graced freedom in and through her numerous avenues of service in Christ to the world, we must raise the critical issue of whether or not and to what degree such graced freedom is evident in the ekklēsia as an ontological reality. Do the actions of the church/Church give concrete testimony to the presence of graced freedom in the body and as the reality of the individual member, or are such actions reflective of a kind of liberty that is foreign to a fuller understanding of exactly what constitutes graced freedom in the ekklēsia as the body of Christ?

We will argue that there is, at present and in the contemporary church/Church, a greater sense of liberty than there is manifestation and expression of graced freedom. Such liberty is evident as an imprecise understanding of why the church/Church exists, how she is to approach decision making at every level, from whence she derives her purpose for existence, under whose authority she continues to exist as an event of free obedience, and what is, de facto, the exact nature of the message she is called, established, and commissioned to proclaim, and exactly why graced freedom is essential to the church/Church as ekklēsia, that is, as event, not merely as an institution or local organizational structure.

Are these mere generalizations that have no bearing on the day-to-day realities of the contemporary church/Church? We presume that there will be those who will think so; but we doubt that such contention will come from any pastor who, like the author of this essay, has devoted more than thirty years of life to the church/Church, and has witnessed a slow but evident diminishment of the centrality of this body as ekklēsia, together with significant and irregular changes in the body of believers over the last three decades. The concepts of a culture enamored with the ideology of self-directive free will, with individualization, relativism, pluralism, and with a growing indifference toward all claims to authority and indisputable truth claims, has not stopped short at entrance to the doors of the church/Church and her membership.

Even the leadership of the church/Church is not reluctant to employ and apply the mechanisms of culture, society, and business to the decision-making processes and planning of particular ministries in the life of the church/Church. And while such phenomena disclose a certain acculturation of the church/Church, the larger concern of this essay is to demonstrate those ways in which this also discloses a fascination with and conviction regarding the supreme value of liberty to the whole of church/Church in every aspect of her life, rather than an embrace of graced freedom as essential to the event of ekklēsia.

Furthermore, there is another manifestation of liberty evident in the church/Church—and in particular in the United States—that is equally disturbing, only because it has proven, as a misconception, to wreck havoc on the order (technically, the polity) of the local congregation and its essential associations with the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic ekklēsia. We refer to the way in which a democratic ideology has taken hold of the mind-set of many if not most of the members of the church/Church—and that, regardless of confessional position!

This phenomenon is most glaringly evident in Roman Catholic church/Church in North America, where each individual deems it appropriate to express his or her individuality, as liberty, in what should be (so they believe) a democratically administered organization (that is to say—the Church), as is any other similar voluntary organization in this nation. The voices of authority, the voice of Bishop, Magisterium, or Pope, whenever perceived to be in direct conflict with the rights of individual expression of liberty (and therefore undemocratic) are opposed with all the rigor one expects to witness in rebellion against a tyrannical oppressor; and it is troubling to hear members of Roman Catholic congregations refer to the authority of the Church in just such accusatory language. However, those who belong to any one of a number of Protestant churches can take no satisfaction in pointing an accusing finger at their Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, as this phenomenon is by no means restricted to the Roman Catholic churches; it can be discovered in almost any form of Christian church/Church and confessional body. While this may well be an expression of liberty as understood in a constitutional framework, it is far from that graced freedom which is the hallmark of the ekklēsia, genuine Christian discipleship, service to Christ through free obedience to Christ and his gospel, and serves as the heart and soul of an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity.

While we will address the following in greater detail in a later chapter, for now let us note how the apostle Paul writes, “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor. 3:17). Not liberty, which is not to be found in the New Testament (with the possible exception of the derivatives, liberator/liberation), but freedom (Gk. eleutheria, et.al.)4 and of a very particular kind!5 This essay is an attempt to re-educate the church/Church in what is, perhaps, one of her most sterling characteristics in Christ—her graced freedom for obedience to God and in service to humanity as the unique characteristic of her being as ekklēsia. So that there can be no mistake or misunderstanding from the beginning, we evidently refer to that graced freedom revealed in all its fullness (i.e., pleroma) in Jesus Christ—ontologically and as redemptive event, and subsequently and by virtue of his gracious conferral of the Holy Spirit, in its fullness (pleroma) of the ekklēsia as well—ontologically and as event.

It could be rightly said that this proposal is Christological ecclesiology; and yet it would be equally appropriate to the argument of this essay to affirm that it is also and at the same time ecclesiological Christology. There will be no apology (in the theological sense of the word) made for this in the body of the essay as the essay itself is an attempt at such an apologetic; we believe that what the contemporary church/Church needs most at present is the reclamation and reaffirmation of the fact that she has no reality other than that which is conferred upon her by the living Lord Christ; Christological ecclesiology and ecclesiological Christology, in tandem, are considered essential to such reclamation and reaffirmation. This is not, however, to vacate the incipient ecclesiology in this essay of the presence and important—central!—role of the Holy Spirit in the being, sustenance, and event of the ekklēsia (recall the words of the apostle Paul quoted in the paragraph above); without the presence of the Spirit of Lord there would be no basis for a theology of freedom, and certainly not an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity.

We would also want to be clear that, while we have respect for the variety of what is often called Liberation Theology, we do not see any such theology as truly representative of an evangelical theology of freedom; primarily because of both the presuppositions underlying such theological expositions and exaggerated attention to the externals of the socio-political reality being addressed. In point of fact, we would assert that such theological explications advocate liberty as defined above and not evangelical freedom as an ontological reality. Such theological explanation is to be appreciated for the insights offered into the disposition of the poor and oppressed, the biblical mandate for justice, and the courage of expressed prophetic conviction. One can faithfully read the exodus narrative as a story of liberation from bondage, but such reading tends to undervalue the theological reality; the liberation of the Hebrew people from slavery in Egypt clearly reflected freedom from oppressive socio-political realities, yet the fundamental purpose for their being liberated was in order to establish freedom as the basis for obedience, worship, and service to the living God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Nevertheless, we believe that the situation faced by the church/Church in North America is not one that can be addressed along socio-political lines, whether as the presupposition or as a viable proposed direction to resolution. With few exceptions, pastors in a multitude of settings in North America are seldom stunned by the plight of the poor and oppressed in any one of the congregations served or in the conditions of those living in the surrounding communities; most of the members of North American congregations are not struggling under a tyrannical regime, or severely limited by unjust laws, or wondering from where they will receive their next meal. And yet, even where such experience is the case of pastor and people (e.g., in urban centers or poor and economically depressed rural communities), the necessity for a theology of graced freedom is still a vital concern.

The last sentence of the previous paragraph simply highlights the importance of and need for the development of a theology of freedom in the North American context, among members of the church/Church, and as a proclamation of hope and promise to residents and non-believers of the wider community as well. While our culture and society experience liberty, whether one wishes to speak in terms of personal or national existence, what remains questionable is the degree to which individuals—and Christians in particular—are truly free in the ontological sense proposed in this essay. Based on experience both within and outside the church/Church, we would answer No, such freedom is foreign to members of the church/Church, and to people in general! For those who would respond, Of course I am free to do whatever I please, and to make choices for myself and at my own discretion, we would reply by advocating that such is not the deeper form of evangelical graced freedom extended to us in, with, and for Christ Jesus, but is in reality merely another manifestation of liberty in the socio-political realm.

True graced freedom, as advocated in this essay, must come from beyond us, it cannot be a reality we can secure or achieve for ourselves or through the machinations of human culture or society, simply because it is of a far higher, and at the same time deeper, reality than that which is readily at hand. The origin of such ontological freedom is transcendent and comes to us purely as a gift of grace from a loving God. Such freedom is not devoid of authority; rather such freedom perceives a transcendent authority to be an essential aspect of and necessary to the maintenance and sustainability of graced freedom.

Free obedience is given to such authority because the recipient acknowledges how, in faith and a priori, this genuine freedom has come to him or her as a gift of grace, maintained under the direct supervision of the Holy Spirit of the triune God. It is free as a manifestation of relational existence in, with, and for Christ, and obedience is a manifestation of love and gratitude for the graced freedom received. The presence of such graced freedom necessitates a continuing and maturing relationship with God in Christ; otherwise, this freedom will soon wither, leaving the formally freed person more susceptible to the bondage of sin as manifest in the numerous machinations of the principalities and powers. As actuality that must be constantly nurtured and nourished in the ekklēsia, this graced freedom is, in and of itself, an event in both outward and inward realities.

We learn of this ontological freedom from the evangelical witness of both Old and New Testaments, and acknowledge it to be supremely revealed in the person and work of Christ Jesus. And as we cannot speak of the person and work of Christ in isolation one from the other, neither can we speak of this graced freedom in terms other then ontological and manifest as event-full action(s). We refer to this gracious reality as graced freedom in order to differentiate it from all other expressions of freedom—for example, human freedom or political freedom. While such orders have their own intrinsic value, the ontological freedom of which we speak is born in an engagement with the Christ who incarnates and brings such freedom from the Father and in the power of the Holy Spirit, and confers the same on humanity; such engagement is made possible through the ekklēsia in both the reading and hearing of Holy Scripture, in proclamation as the Word of God, in the worship life of the ekklēsia, and in her fundamental configuration of the missio Dei.

Therefore, we cannot speak of such freedom in the absence of grace and faith in both the origin and continuance of such freedom in both the individual believer and the ekklēsia. From beginning to end (telos) this freedom is the act of God in Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. The reality of this ontological freedom, as the redemption, renewal, and re-establishment of the true anthropos (in Christ, the New Adam), is also and at the widest dimension imaginable, what makes this an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity.

It is more than appropriate, even at this introductory level, to raise the question as to why this particular form of freedom should be vital for us today. What is it about our contemporary cultural, social, and spiritual matrix that necessitates an exploration of and proposal for this form of freedom? In brief, we contend that while our world is awash in select forms of liberty that have, perhaps, provided latitude for self-expression, self-enrichment, and self-assertion, we are not free in the deepest and most reflective sense of the term. In fact we would argue there is a growing sense in which more and more people are struggling to overcome a very real and very frightening form of bondage; despite all protestations to the contrary, people are not living lives that demonstrate the contentment, sense of fulfillment, and beauty of ontological freedom.

Tentatively we can list some forms of such bondage as New Age spiritualities, fashion, sports of all kinds, entertainment, reality TV, casinos, overindulgence, all pornographic materials, texting, cell phone addiction, abuse of drugs and overuse of alcohol; the list could be extended to include far more lethal manifestations of this same bondage. The essence of this bondage will be explored and discussed in a later chapter of this essay as having both internal and external dimensions; in the more traditional language of theology, such bondage could be considered under the rubric of sinful existential reality and temptation to sin. And yet, what is central to the diagnosis of the essence of the dilemma this proposal will address is the far larger issue of the loss of humanity, or better said, the loss of human dignity as imago Dei; a loss that is so prevalent in the world today its manifestations need not be detailed.

As a generality it can be said that pastors are concerned with the humanity of those they have been called and charged to serve in Christ; that is to say, even at the level of the individual member, pastors are serving, providing care, and offering counsel with the desire to enrich the integrity of the individual, as representative of anthropos (as imago Dei and as a new creation in Christ), which is so often brought into question and/or injured in a culture and society that can be and often is de-humanizing in so many ways and at so many levels. Beyond the individual, the pastor is concerned to preach and teach the evangelical word that will provide his or her people with the proper biblical-theological perspective on the essential nature of human dignity and how they are—as ekklēsia—called to actively preserve such dignity, or to call for the reclamation of human dignity, wherever it has been brought into question or perhaps even threatened with extinction. This, then, is a disclosure of graced freedom as freedom for humanity!

However, it is incumbent upon one who holds the pastoral office to preach and teach the evangelical word for purposes that exceed mere attainment of knowledge of Holy Scripture and parádosis (i.e., tradition); in reliance upon the event of the Holy Spirit, the pastor preaches and teaches for transformation and, as we want to contend, the renewal and reaffirmation of freedom for humanity in the presence of God. This transformation is also an event in that it can only be attributed to the active presence and engagement of the Holy Spirit and is processive; this is the axis point at which we encounter the dialectic spoken of in a previous paragraph. The renewal and reaffirmation of humanity (as imago Dei) must be a process, not only by virtue of the active engagement (i.e., event) of the Holy Spirit, but also because this individual (and ekklēsia) is subject to the paradox of existence in faith (that which the Protestant reformers referred to as simul justus et peccator).

Should this proposal hold, it will place the ekklēsia in one of the most significant roles it could possibly have in relation to the socio-political and cultural orders; it could herald the reestablishment of the essential nature of the ekklēsia as she relates to both (and more) of these orders. Actually, it should be historically evident that this has been the role to which the ekklēsia has been called to serve her Savior and Lord, and therefore the world, from the exact moment of her birth in the event of Pentecost and under the dominion of the Holy Spirit as her Lord. From the beginning, the ekklēsia has been called to proclaim a glorious freedom for humanity revealed and given to and for the world in the incarnation, life, ministry, passion, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ, which is the substance of the evangelical word. This freedom for humanity established the ekklēsia as essential to the proclamation and promotion of justice (as defined by Christ and his gospel); it was and remains this mandate that also and often places the ekklēsia in a paradoxical position vis-à-vis those orders we have already mentioned, and others as well. An acculturated church/Church has, unfortunately, been compromised by virtue of her dependence upon something—some ideological or sociological mandate—other than the proclamation and promotion of that form of graced freedom which has been her birthright (by grace) and is demanded of her as free obedience in the powerful presence of the Holy Spirit.

Graced freedom is freedom from captivity to sin so that it might be freedom for worship of and obedience to the One True God in tri-unity; not merely worship as ritual engagement and enactment on Sunday morning, but equally, and as the word itself implies, the work of the people of God in the world, for the world, and to the glory of God. Whether one refers to the mandates of any single denominational body or to those of organizations such as the WCC Life and Work commission of the ecumenical movement, such mandates often focus attention on areas of the socio-political order that demonstrate de-humanizing characteristics and need to be addressed in and through the ekklēsia to the world as unacceptable in light of Christ and his gospel mandate. Such mandates have integrity and merit to the degree that they promote graced freedom, and not some form of socio-cultural or political liberation that simply cannot compare to the profound proclamation of an ontological freedom that need not exclude the socio-political order.

The freedom for humanity incarnate in Christ Jesus and given witness to in his gospel must always be seen as the form of graced freedom that transcends all humanly fabricated forms of freedom—regardless of their merit! The pastor in his or her study, pulpit, and lectern is called to proclaim this form of graced freedom with all the wisdom, insight, and integrity at his or her command (and let us never forget, under the presence and power of the Holy Spirit). Whether in the seminary classroom or holding pastoral office in the local ekklēsia, this is the audience we would hope to address and engage in open and constructive conversation.

We suppose someone could raise the question as to what makes this a theological expression distinctive to the context of North America, as it would seem from all that has been stated thus far, this same proposal could have been drafted on almost any continent and in almost any country in the world. And we would respond that what makes this proposal unique is that it derives from the context of the local church/Church in the United States, and not merely as a theological exploration of some cultural issue endemic to North America; it is a proposal for a critically constructive way in which theology can be done—from a pastoral perspective—and in relation to the current crises facing the church/Church in the United States. We have attempted, in this introduction, to address (even if only in a tentative fashion) one aspect of the crises, by making reference to the numerous ways in which a particular and limited understanding of liberty has adversely affected the identity, worship life, concept of discipleship, overall discernment, and theological self-understanding of the local church/Church.

If we could make an educated guess as to why Dr. Barth expressed the hope for an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity to arise from the native theological soils of the United States, we would suggest that, as was so often true of his insights, subsequent to his visit to the US, Barth saw with clarity that one of the more important issues facing the church/Church in the US is a tendency to confuse socio-political and cultural realities with the gospel as the purpose for the existence of the church/Church in North America. This has become abundantly clear in the current race for the presidency of the United States (2012), and the misappropriation and misuse of Christian language and technical theological terminology by politicians who have had little or no training in the complexities of theological explication, and yet are considered to express positions that are legitimate to both the theology of the Christian faith and, at the same time, demonstrate a knowledge of theological realities.

It is also possible that Karl Barth perceived, what is often and mistakenly referenced as the Constitutional separation of church and state, as fundamentally problematic to the degree that such separation could imply a disallowance or rejection of the legitimacy of a theological voice in the public square; therefore a theology of freedom taking its substance and direction from the evangelical testimony of evangelists, prophets, and apostles, could then enable the ekklēsia to speak with a more distinctive voice, a more concisely framed theological message, to those residents of the public square. Of course, we can only surmise that these (and no doubt other) reasons were behind the expressed hope of Dr. Barth; perhaps our Lord will grant the grace to ask Dr. Barth when we meet with him at Table in the coming kingdom of God!

Finally, without any equivocation we reassert that this essay is Christologically centered, and is so primarily because the resurrected and reigning Lord Christ stands at the horizon of human history casting a long and evident shadow of grace over all reality, the reality of human freedom being no exception. We cannot, at least from within the context of a pastoral theology, speak meaningfully of an evangelical freedom that is not grounded in Christological verities; Jesus Christ himself being the embodiment of the “Good News,” the gospel, in essence, offering testimony to the Truth, and in Truth there is graced freedom (see John 8:32). It is in Jesus Christ we witness the fullness of that graced freedom revealed in human flesh and from the human side as freedom for obedience, worship, and service to the one true God; it is in Jesus Christ we witness graced freedom as the consummation of love (as agapē) for God and neighbor, which is essential to enrichment of communal harmony and therefore revelatory of the coming kingdom of God; it is through Jesus Christ that freedom is proclaimed and conferred in the form of God’s Truth (i.e., the evangel); and it is in Jesus Christ that his body—the ekklēsia—proclaims that same evangel which, through the empowerment of the Holy Spirit is Word of God, continuing to spread the promise of graced freedom, as reality, in the lives of those who hear, acknowledge, and confess the Truth of God.

The Chapters Ahead

In this section of the introduction we provide an outline of the chapters to follow, by merely touching on the subject of each chapter. In this way we hope to provide a vehicle through which the reader can select to read particular chapters. The proposal does necessitate and involve a continuity of argument, which is best appreciated by reading each chapter in order; nevertheless, the chapters have also been written in such a fashion that they can stand on their own merit, should you desire to read at random. It should be stated at this juncture that throughout all that follows we make use of the phrase evangelical freedom when referencing the wider context of biblical-theological witness to graced freedom, and the phrase graced freedom when referencing that form of freedom which is established, sustained, and ultimately fulfilled by God and God alone, in and through the power of the Holy Spirit.

We make use of the word essay for this text only because we envision a book as having greater depth and a more thorough investigation of all of the related issues relevant to the subject at hand. An essay (at least to our understanding) is offered as a prelude to what could become a book, should there be significant dialogue to warrant such an expansion of the topic; for now, we are quite content to provide an essay!

Remaining consistent to our proposal of an evangelical freedom we must avoid the temptation to limit ourselves to a select number of biblical passages that speak directly to the issue at hand, as if proof-texting were an honored method for theological explication as an evangelical modus operandi! There are paradigmatic passages that we will consider applicable to the proposal; but on the whole we will consider the continuous thread of revelation running throughout the Old and New Testament witness to God and the plan of redemption as far more reliable in supporting the proposal. The affirmation of evangelical freedom cannot be restricted to the witness of the New Testament alone, for the simple reason that it is also evidenced (if only as proleptic reality) in the Old Testament witness, and in particular in the word of the prophets.

Chapter one will explore the biblical basis for a diagnosis of the fundamental problem for anthropos, which is not external to human being (ontological reality), but is an internal reality and as a direct result of a tragedy that has corrupted—no, has completely disfigured!—anthropos as God created him/her/them to be (i.e., the imago Dei). The fact that this horrific tragedy could neither be remedied nor repaired by virtue of any single human endeavor will be annunciated as well, together with the first hints of the proposed graced freedom as promise (and proleptic reality), which are evidenced in select narratives of the Old Testament that are paradigmatic in character.

Chapter two will explore those ways in which Israel, as a covenant partner, demonstrated the dialectic of obedience-disobedience to God and to the Torah (as the external manifestation of what is required of those who are genuinely free) and restoration (i.e., the redemptive actions of God) as renewal and reaffirmation of graced freedom by way of repentance, covenant renewal, and a return to obedience to God through confirmation of and conformation to the Torah. This will be considered under the rubric of a proleptic recapitulation of graced freedom for humanity, which is the purpose behind the call of God to and establishment of Israel as a people—an ekklēsia. In this chapter we will take a close and careful look at some of the prophetic literature as the word disclosing the intention of God for the ekklēsia as a communion whose purpose is fulfilled only and insofar as she declares the gospel of God and demonstrates the graced freedom bestowed by God as a freedom for humanity.

Chapter three will open an exploration of the New Testament, beginning with a discussion of the central importance of the characters of John the Baptist and Mary the mother of Christ as primary witnesses to that form of graced freedom which is the essential mark of anthropos as God created it to be, and as lives demonstrating the essential characteristics of graced freedom in their life-transformed testimony to what is to be revealed in Christ. Both John and Mary offer clear evidence of, again, a proleptic manifestation of that form of graced freedom to which one bears definitive and prophetic witness, and the other unequivocal ontological witness. As an added benefit, we are hopeful that the discussion of Mary, as theotokos, will once again provide her with the place she is, regrettably, too often denied in much of Protestant theology.

In Chapter four we turn our attention to the writings of the Apostle Paul and to selections from the Pastoral Epistles as well. It will be argued that the writings of the Apostle, and select Pastorals, are informed and shaped throughout by a clear and concise evangelical theology of freedom for humanity. This evangelical theology for humanity is not to be thought of as a replacement for the essential focus of faith in God; rather, because this is graced freedom, it can recognize, acknowledge, honor, and promote no other basis for such freedom save that which God and God alone has made possible. The evangelical theology of graced freedom annunciated by Paul and others is the dramatic proclamation of that Word which, under the power of the Holy Spirit, becomes event and as event makes possible the beginning of such ontological freedom for those who both hear and receive him who is this graced freedom incarnate, and give their lives to obedience, worship, and service.

In Chapter five we turn attention to the Book of Revelation as the paradigmatic text par excellance for the development of a theology of freedom for humanity. All strange imagery and apocalyptic conceptualizations aside, this narrative is a wonderfully prophetic affirmation of that graced freedom Christ came to assert as the basis for genuine anthropos. The fact that John has placed this futuristic scenario in direct relation to current issues facing a persecuted and de-humanized population and ekklēsia in his own time, is fruitful for the development of a theology of freedom that looks to the future, as well as the past and present. The Book of Revelation cannot be properly appreciated as theological proclamation of genuine freedom, as a gift of grace, so long as it remains encumbered with the silly and presumptuous forms of interpretation made popular in contemporary media; what we hope to provide is a far more faithful and profoundly hopeful engagement with this same biblical material.

Chapter six will cover, what we consider to be, novel terrain; in this chapter we will contemplate those ways in which an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity, in order to speak to the catholic ekklēsia, must be ecumenical in character—or at the very least, speak to what could reasonably be considered ecumenical concerns. We will also suggest those ways in which an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity could play a role in advancing the present impasse in the ecumenical endeavor, by revisiting the role of the ekklēsia as the free community of freed persons, seeking greater freedom for the whole of humanity.

In the Conclusion we will summarize the argument made throughout this essay and provide indications—hints, if you will—to those ways in which this particular proposal for an evangelical theology of freedom could shape and inform the services to Christ as offered by the one who is in preparation to hold, or currently holds, the pastoral office.

1. In use of the term “ontological,” we refer to that which is the fundamental and essential nature of this being as a creature created imago Dei, the complete disfigurement of that same nature subsequent to the Fall, and the redemption and restoration of that same essential nature in the God-man Jesus Christ and, subsequently, by virtue of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, evidenced as a “new creation” (in the image of the “New Adam”).

2. The reader is directed to the article addressing the Greek term ekklēsia located in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 394–402. The conclusion to this extensive article is most helpful in illuminating our choice of this term: “The NT itself makes no distinction between an invisible triumphant church and a visible militant church. The church, as the individual congregation representing the whole, is always visible, and its righteousness and holiness are always imputed through faith. Luther recognizes this when he prefers the term ‘congregation’ to ‘church’ in his rendering of Scripture. Yet if the ideal is not played off against the reality, no more is the whole church against the local congregation. Every congregation represents the whole church, that at Corinth no less than at Jerusalem. The development of larger organizations does not alter this basic truth” (401–2).

3. See the article in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 59–60.

4. “The NT sees that retreat into inwardness does not in fact bring freedom. Existence is inwardly defective, so that to take oneself in hand is simply to grasp a defective existence. Faced with a lost existence, we can come to ourselves only by subjecting our own will to the will of another. We achieve self-control by letting ourselves be controlled. Concretely, eleutheria in the NT is freedom from sin (Rom. 6:18), the law (Rom. 7:3–4; Gal. 2:4), and death (Rom. 6:21–22; 8:21). It is freedom from an existence that in sin leads to the law of death. Existing in sin, we are its slaves (Rom. 6:20). The result is anarchy (Rom. 6:19). This means surrender to craving of the sárx that is triggered by the law (Rom. 6:12). The law is intended for good, expressing God’s claim, but in our sinful existence it brings sin to light by mediating sinful affections. It is an occasion for self-seeking love of life that misuses the claim of God . . . Freedom, then, means freedom from the law as well as from sin, i.e., from the need to seek justification by the law. Freedom here is freedom from attempted autonomy, not by breaking the law, but by fulfilling our own interpretation of it in following our own needs, and doing our own will, by what seems to be an honest effort to do God’s will. Freedom from the law means freedom from moralism, from self-lordship before God in the guise of serious and obedient responsibility” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 225).

5. “How is this freedom achieved? The primary answer is: ‘By the act of Christ.’ Christ has made us free (Gal. 5:1). The reference here is to the event of the life that he offered up vicariously in obedience to God’s will (cf. Gal. 3:13; 4:4). Our freedom is not an existential return to the soul. The Son makes us free (John 8:36). The secondary answer is: ‘By the gospel call.’ We are called to freedom (Gal. 5:13). This is a call to the act of Christ which is the basis of a new life in freedom. The life-giving Spirit of Jesus is present in the call (Rom. 8:2), advancing the claim of God’s act in Christ, and making possible the true fulfillment of what the law demands as the will of God (Rom. 8:3ff.) . . . In the Spirit of Christ’s own freedom, we find our own freedom . . . How do we bring this freedom to expression? The answer is: in love, i.e., not in isolation but in a life with others. We find freedom in service, in yielding our lives to the divinely demanded righteousness of love of God and neighbor (Rom. 6:18ff.). Freedom comes to expression in righteous acts of many different kinds (Gal. 5:22). Being free, we accept civil obedience (Mt. 17:24ff.; 1 Pet. 2:13). We renounce rights for the sake of others (1 Cor. 9:19). We may forgo valid personal claims (1 Cor. 9:1)” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 226).