Köhler’s article "Legalism Among Us" (originally titled "Gesetzlich Wesen unter uns") appeared in installments in 1914 and 1915 in the Theologische Quartalschrift and was translated and printed in The Wauwatosa Theology 2:229-282; the pagination in this blog will refer to the latter. Köhler makes four arguments: “Legalism among Christians consists in that they take the motives and forms of their actions from the law instead of letting them flow from the gospel” (p. 229). “This behavior manifests itself in the Lutheran church chiefly and principally in bravado of orthodoxy” (p. 229). “Where these factors gain the upper hand in every phase of ongoing church life and become a condition to the point of style, the decline sets in, evident externally when we adopt all kinds of unhealthy traits copied from the sectarian churches” (p. 230). The only antidote is repentance “brought about when again we search more deeply into the gospel and cling to it all the more incessantly” (p. 230).
Köhler is not arguing that the confessional Lutherans of his day were teaching a salvation by works. It is not that kind of a crass legalism, but rather a more subtle kind, one where the law rather than the gospel motivates Christian behavior. Köhler notes that this legalism appears in more than one form. Among the Reformed and the Pietists the legalism appears as a stress upon sanctification, but among Lutherans it often comes in the form of “bragging about orthodoxy” (p. 239). Köhler is not opposed to orthodox teaching, but he knows that the goal of orthodox teaching is not itself, but to preach faith in Christ (pp. 239-240). When orthodoxy becomes more of an intellectual exercise used to congratulate its adherents than to lead to a genuine life of repentance and faith, it makes people factious and more eager to dispute over words rather than facts (p. 239). The result is intellectualism, which turns “the words of Scripture, especially of the gospel, into a law for which one demands rational assent” (p. 241, emphasis in the original) and an unhealthy traditionalism that elevates an inherited system above the Scriptures. While the legalism of the Reformed usually leads to doctrinal indifferentism in that they stress godly living over doctrine, legalism among Lutherans tends toward sectarianism (p. 247).
He has much to say about the way that legalism was shaping late 19th and early 20th century Lutheranism that I cannot fully explore in this essay: on giving (p. 277), on administration (p. 269-279), and dialogue with other Christians (pp. 248-249, 279-281). But rather than summarize more of the essay, I would rather have you read it on your own so that I can devote the rest of this blog to considering its ongoing relevance.
Köhler keenly saw that people tend to fall into legalism in those matters that they are most concerned about. Those who stress godly living will be tempted to become legalistic about sanctification. Those who stress the pure teaching of God’s Word will be tempted to become legalistic about orthodoxy. There is nothing wrong with sanctification or orthodoxy. In fact, we should have more of both. But legalism introduces bravado rather than the substance. To underscore the bravado, those who are doing the boasting will have to do everything they can to distinguish themselves from the great unwashed. For those who stress sanctification, it will mean inventing all sorts of rules (e.g., no card playing). For those who stress orthodoxy, it will mean an unthinking traditionalism removed from the Scriptures. Ironically, though, legalists end up with less than they had hoped to gain. Sanctification-based legalists in the end are less sanctified; they don’t play cards, but they bicker and lack the other virtues. Orthodoxy-based legalists in the end are less orthodox; they don’t exactly teach false doctrine, but they know the Homiletisches Real-Lexikon better than they know the Scriptures and they use their knowledge to find fault with others rather than to teach the faith.
Köhler also noted how often the church lurches from one legalism to another without recovering the gospel. In effect that is what happened to the Missouri Synod in the middle of the twentieth century, as some of its theologians argued against its parochialism. If previously the synod had been legalistic about being orthodox, many became legalistic about being unorthodox. In fact, I know several pastors whose theological thinking goes no further than “I’m for whatever most undercuts traditional morality or articles of faith and will call anyone who differs from me a legalist.” Of course, that is a legalism all of its own—a blind unthinking anti-traditionalism that, unlike the legalism of orthodoxy, doesn’t even have the virtue of teaching God’s truth.
The clash between the orthodox and the anti-orthodox came to a head in the Missouri Synod in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Perhaps one reason that some of the issues still smolder a half century later is because we have not confronted the issue of legalism head on. There are still some people for whom sound doctrine is a giant game of “gotcha” rather than a reveling in the mercy and love of God as revealed in Scripture. And those people keep others from taking doctrine seriously. Perhaps as we work on the Koinonia Project to bring about a deeper unity in synod, we can all do what Köhler rightly recognized as the only antidote to legalism: digging deeply into the gospel and clinging to it for all its worth.
