Perhaps one helpful way of conceptualizing how the law can be fulfilled and abrogated coram Deo, while remain a rule of life coram mundo, is through Luther’s distinction between two (active and passive),[1] or in some cases three (civil, imputed, sanctified),[2] kinds of righteousness.[3] Coram Deo, humans are righteous or unrighteous not on the basis of what they do, but through what they receive. We passively receive our sinful nature from our parents, which in turn colors everything we do or leave undone. Likewise, faith is created by a monergistic act of the Holy Spirit, and we receive the gift of imputed righteousness and a renewed heart passively. This passive gift of righteousness completely abrogates the law coram Deo. From the perspective of this relational horizon, the law as condemnation moves to the gospel as freedom from condemnation. Once the gospel has arrived, the law no longer holds sway since it is completely fulfilled.
In terms of our external person coram mundo, humans are good or bad based on what they do (i.e., active righteousness). Under the first use of the law, the unregenerate can make better or worse decisions and likewise be judged as just or unjust based on what they do. A person is defined as a good spouse, parent, or citizen based to what extent to which they behave well in these roles. Indeed, as far as active and civil righteous is concerned, Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas are essentially correct. One can indeed train himself to act in a habitually correct way within his roles in society. Likewise, under the gospel and the third use of the law the regenerate can cooperate with the Holy Spirit and can listen to and obey the commandments of God through specific external actions. The faithful do this both as an act of gratitude for the gifts of creation and redemption that they have received, as well as restrain the wicked impulses which remain present in them this side of the eschaton.
It should be noted that fallen humans tend to reverse these two kinds of righteousness. Rather than being judged by who they are before God (children of Adam, or redeemed sinners in Christ), humans desire to be righteous on the basis of their works. As a result, humans have created the various world religions (which work on the basis of the opinio legis),[4] as well as rationalistic/moralistic schemes of theodicy.[5] Coram mundo, humans desire not to be judged righteous and worthy of status on the basis of what they do, but on the basis of who they are. Likewise, human desire to judge others on the basis of their identities. In human history, this has given rise to the sins of racism, sexism, and classism, among others.
[1] LW 26:7-8, LW 31:297-306.
[2] WA 2:43-7.
[3] See Charles Arand, “Two Kinds of Righteousness as a Framework for Law and Gospel in the Apology,” Lutheran Quarterly 15, no. 4 (2001): 417–439; and Robert Kolb, “Luther on the Two Kinds of Righteousness: Reflections on His Two-Dimensional Definition of Humanity at the Heart of His Theology,” Lutheran Quarterly 13, no. 2 (1999): 449–66.
[4] Chris Marantika, “Justification by Faith: Its Relevance in Islamic Context,” Right with God: Justification in the Bible and the World, ed. D.A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2002), 228-242; Sunand Simithra, “Justification by Faith: Its Relevance in Hindu Context,” in Right with God, 216-27; and Masao Uenuma, “Justification by Faith: Its Relevance in Buddhist Context,” in Right with God, 243-55.
[5] Gregory Boyd, God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997); and idem, Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001); Gottfried von Leibniz, Theodicy, trans. E.M. Huggard (New York: Cosmo Classics, 2010).
From the draft manuscript for Jack D. Kilcrease, Justification by Word (Lexham Press, forthcoming).
Image from R. J. Grunewald, “Two Kinds of Righteousness,” Grunewald, accessed May 24, 2021, https://www.rjgrune.com/blog/two-kinds-of-righteousness.