What do you think?
Rate this book
Doctrine in Development: Johannes Piscator and Debates over Christ’s Active Obedience
Doctrine in Development examines the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s active obedience with a focus on the thought of Johannes Piscator. Challenging earlier scholarship that regarded the doctrine as clearly present in the Reformers, Heber Carlos de Campos Jr. shows how Piscator’s exegetical and theological arguments generated responses that brought together several other doctrines to support the imputation of Christ’s active obedience in a way that Reformed theologians had not previously done. Viewing Piscator’s objections to the imputation of Christ’s positive righteousness as a turning point in the Reformed understanding of active obedience, Campos highlights the process of doctrinal development regarding Christ’s satisfaction.
“When writing an essay some years ago on Calvin’s view of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness as the basis for the justification of believers, I first came across Heber de Campos’s dissertation on Johannes Piscator and debates over Christ’s active obedience in the early period of Reformed orthodoxy. Campos’s study impressed me as a fine example of careful historical study that makes an important contribution to our understanding of the diversity of opinion on the question in this period and the development of the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s entire obedience (active and passive) in subsequent Reformed theology. It fills a gap in the literature on this topic and provides helpful historical insight into the complex history of post-Reformation debates regarding the basis for God’s justifying verdict. Since these debates remain lively to the present day, Campos’s study is historically and theologically instructive. I am delighted that the editors of this fine series, Reformed Historical-Theological Studies, have deemed it worthy of publication.”
—Cornelis P. Venema, president and professor of doctrinal studies, Mid-America Reformed Seminary
“When writing an essay some years ago on Calvin’s view of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness as the basis for the justification of believers, I first came across Heber de Campos’s dissertation on Johannes Piscator and debates over Christ’s active obedience in the early period of Reformed orthodoxy. Campos’s study impressed me as a fine example of careful historical study that makes an important contribution to our understanding of the diversity of opinion on the question in this period and the development of the doctrine of the imputation of Christ’s entire obedience (active and passive) in subsequent Reformed theology. It fills a gap in the literature on this topic and provides helpful historical insight into the complex history of post-Reformation debates regarding the basis for God’s justifying verdict. Since these debates remain lively to the present day, Campos’s study is historically and theologically instructive. I am delighted that the editors of this fine series, Reformed Historical-Theological Studies, have deemed it worthy of publication.”
—Cornelis P. Venema, president and professor of doctrinal studies, Mid-America Reformed Seminary
368 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 7, 2018
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 20, 2023
"In sum, this dissertation has examined the progress of the doctrine of the
imputation of Christ's active obedience with a focus on the thought of Johannes Piscator. It has shown that the earlier scholarship that regarded the doctrine as clearly present in the Reformers was mistaken (chapter 2). Rather, examination of the sources showed how the beginnings of doctrinal formulation of the issue occurred in the 1550s and 1560s, and that significant debate over the doctrine became common only in the 1580s and 1590s (chapters 1 and 3). The shift from relatively rare formulation of the doctrine (as in Beza) to significant and extended debate took its focus from the figure of Johannes Piscator, who through exegetical (chapter 4) and theological (chapter 5) arguments refuted the doctrine. In response to his arguments, and of those who followed him, the seventeenth century witnessed several disputes surrounding Christ's active obedience
which arose in different parts of Europe (chapter 6). These disputes highlighted three issues - namely, the stability of the law in a covenantal framework, the twofold righteousness in justification and Christ's relation to the law according to his humanity -which became the trademarks of the matured doctrine (chapter 7), as it was formulated in response to Piscator and various of his followers. These later formulations constituted not a departure from the Reformation doctrine of justification by grace through faith, but a development of the understanding of Christ's satisfaction in order to provide us with such gracious redemption. There was no
shift in paradigm. The Reformers stressed faith and grace in order to substitute our passivity in justification for the Medieval understanding of our participation in the process of justification. Seventeenth century Reformed theology continued the same teaching of passive justification. It maintained the same gracious element of redemption that a righteousness extra nos was reckoned as ours in order that we be legally proclaimed just. The very fact that the majority of the Reformed theologians of the seventeenth century hinged their understanding of justification on the idea of an alien iimputed righteousness is a testimony to the continuity of grace in justification. The imputed righteousness of Christ is what made sixteenth and seventeenth century Reformed theology in contrast to the teaching of works in Medieval and Roman Catholic teachings on justification. Whereas there was continuity of grace in teaching an alien imputed righteousness, seventeenth century Reformed theology had a more robust understanding of Christ's satisfactory work. These Reformed theologians regarded that Piscator's doctrine of satisfaction did not do justice to divine law within a federal framework. The pre-Iapsarian promise of life based on perfect obedience, which even Piscator complied with, could not be abrogated after the fall. Either obedience or punishment for fallen humanity did not correspond to stability of the whole law. Since the law is primarily concerned with its precepts, the appended threats cannot be the only element ofthe law which remains stable. Therefore, Reformed orthodoxy considered both obedience and punishments as dividends of any fallen human being. Righteousness, in the fallen state, is twofold according to the demands of the law. Hence, Christ's vicarious righteousness also needs to be twofold. He merits for us both deliverance from punishment and right to eteniallife. None can be to him alone for he is not liable to the first and entitled to the second due to the hypostatical union. Covenantally, however, he assumes the role of representative viator in order to obtain the covenant promises for us. "
imputation of Christ's active obedience with a focus on the thought of Johannes Piscator. It has shown that the earlier scholarship that regarded the doctrine as clearly present in the Reformers was mistaken (chapter 2). Rather, examination of the sources showed how the beginnings of doctrinal formulation of the issue occurred in the 1550s and 1560s, and that significant debate over the doctrine became common only in the 1580s and 1590s (chapters 1 and 3). The shift from relatively rare formulation of the doctrine (as in Beza) to significant and extended debate took its focus from the figure of Johannes Piscator, who through exegetical (chapter 4) and theological (chapter 5) arguments refuted the doctrine. In response to his arguments, and of those who followed him, the seventeenth century witnessed several disputes surrounding Christ's active obedience
which arose in different parts of Europe (chapter 6). These disputes highlighted three issues - namely, the stability of the law in a covenantal framework, the twofold righteousness in justification and Christ's relation to the law according to his humanity -which became the trademarks of the matured doctrine (chapter 7), as it was formulated in response to Piscator and various of his followers. These later formulations constituted not a departure from the Reformation doctrine of justification by grace through faith, but a development of the understanding of Christ's satisfaction in order to provide us with such gracious redemption. There was no
shift in paradigm. The Reformers stressed faith and grace in order to substitute our passivity in justification for the Medieval understanding of our participation in the process of justification. Seventeenth century Reformed theology continued the same teaching of passive justification. It maintained the same gracious element of redemption that a righteousness extra nos was reckoned as ours in order that we be legally proclaimed just. The very fact that the majority of the Reformed theologians of the seventeenth century hinged their understanding of justification on the idea of an alien iimputed righteousness is a testimony to the continuity of grace in justification. The imputed righteousness of Christ is what made sixteenth and seventeenth century Reformed theology in contrast to the teaching of works in Medieval and Roman Catholic teachings on justification. Whereas there was continuity of grace in teaching an alien imputed righteousness, seventeenth century Reformed theology had a more robust understanding of Christ's satisfactory work. These Reformed theologians regarded that Piscator's doctrine of satisfaction did not do justice to divine law within a federal framework. The pre-Iapsarian promise of life based on perfect obedience, which even Piscator complied with, could not be abrogated after the fall. Either obedience or punishment for fallen humanity did not correspond to stability of the whole law. Since the law is primarily concerned with its precepts, the appended threats cannot be the only element ofthe law which remains stable. Therefore, Reformed orthodoxy considered both obedience and punishments as dividends of any fallen human being. Righteousness, in the fallen state, is twofold according to the demands of the law. Hence, Christ's vicarious righteousness also needs to be twofold. He merits for us both deliverance from punishment and right to eteniallife. None can be to him alone for he is not liable to the first and entitled to the second due to the hypostatical union. Covenantally, however, he assumes the role of representative viator in order to obtain the covenant promises for us. "
September 21, 2019
I think Piscator loses the exegetical debate, but this is a useful contribution and should be read by those who think imputation of passive obedience only is un-Reformed.
October 17, 2021
Worthwhile reading. Although the author himself affirms (against Piscator) the imputation of the active obedience of Christ, he demonstrates from many citations of Calvin, Ursinus, Olevinus, and others that this view cannot be attributed to these early Reformers. Campos provides a detailed treatment of Piscator’s exegetical and theological arguments, thus providing room for the reader to make up his own mind whether the arguments are sound.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews