Wright on Justification in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (After Thoughts)

Back in 1997 or 1998 when I first read What Saint Paul Really Said, as a good friend of mine from Marquette University often liked to say—I was scandalized. Back then I was so entrenched in my reformed thinking that this book offended me. Almost ten years later, tons of research in Paul’s epistles, deeper research into the Catholicity of the Reformation, a deeper and formal study of hermeneutics (inside and outside the classroom), and my studies in Luther's theology, I’m not as scandalized with this second reading.

For the last ten years I have struggled with certain aspects of reformed theology, especially as it has been presented by contemporary thinkers (i.e. the confusion between the gospel proclamation and the doctrine of imputation, the casting away completely of Church Tradition as if it had no importance at all, etc.). Moreover, when I always came to the texts of Paul (and the book of James), there were various things that just did not “click” within my reformed framework, certain texts that did not make sense in light of certain thinkers/reformed commentaries. After reading Wright for the second time certain things about Paul’s Epistles just jumped out at me and they made more sense. It was as if I was in a dark room and could surmise the things that were in the room with me, and knew where they were located and to a certain extent what they were, but then someone came into the room and turned the light on and my vision cleared up a bit.

All that being said, the question remains, am I totally convinced by Wright’s small work? Not completely, but it has at least opened my eyes to a newer way of looking at Paul. Furthermore, many of the Pauline texts that “baked” my mind when I read them many years ago and confused my “reformed” senses suddenly made much more sense. So, with this history of entrenchment in reformed doctrine I can fully understand that when someone who is in that same position reads Wright they seemed “scandalized.” As it was stated in the comments to one of these posts, a person simply cannot read Wright’s work once and then suddenly be convinced by it — “it takes an extended discussion face to face walking through numerous texts after much reading to make some progress” as David declared. This work by Wright is a culmination of about 25 to 30 years of researching Paul’s text and hammering out the issues to understand Paul’s thought. However, I would also venture to say that someone cannot read Wright's work once and then suddenly be unconvinced by it. There is simply more to it than that.

In summation, I think what Paul is getting at, in a very broad sense, is the gospel is the proclamation of the Jewish Messiah who is Jesus, and His fulfillment of the Law, His life, death and bodily resurrection. As Wright describes it, “The gospel itself is neither a system of thought, nor a set of techniques for making people Christians; it is the personal announcement of the person of Jesus. That is why it creates the church, the people who believe that Jesus is Lord and that God raised him from the dead. ‘Justification’ is then the doctrine which declares that whoever believes that gospel, and wherever and whenever they believe it, those people are truly members of his family, no matter where they came from, what colour their skin may be, whatever else might distinguish them from each other.”

Regardless of your theological background, whether reformed or not, I do recommend Wright's work to you. It is at least worth considering.