"Law" or "Gospel"?

LAW? . . . . GOSPEL?

In the seminary here, they talk about the division between "law" and "gospel." They say both are necessary in faith and are part of faith. They define "law" as the rules, the judgment---the perfection we pursue, and yet of which we always fall short. The "gospel" is the news that we are loved anyway, despite our flaws---that's it's okay. We just have to do our best and trust the outcome to God.

The way I understand the pragmatic definition of them is:

LAW (Truth)
Law = it's up to us to do the work to get to heaven. We have to study enough and pray enough and do enough of the good stuff so God can clear out our garbage and make us worthy. If we go to hell it is our own fault.

GOSPEL (Love)
God is so loving and wise that everything is carefully guided and provided, so that we have everything we need along the way, and will eventually be brought into heaven. His love is essentially irresistible. We don't have to worry so much.

In the Swedenborgian tradition, these would be called "Truth" and "Good," or "Wisdom" and "Love." I was taught that all the other Christian churches have these out of balance and only our church kept them in perfect balance.

Well, what Swedenborg actually said is that "True Christians" will have these in a healthy balance.

(So, calling oneself a "true Christian" or a "New Church person" doesn't at all mean a person has good and truth in a healthy balance. Humans generally don't have them in balance. Only God knows who has them in balance. Only God knows who is a "true Christian," be they Catholic or Lutheran or Methodist or Mormon, or Agnostic....)

Given the previous definitions, we might begin to identify different congregations and denominations as essentially "Law" or "Gospel." "Law" sermons tend to emphasize our need to stay vigilant and try harder and struggle. They harness fear---fear of hell, or of doing things wrong, or of thinking bad things, to motivate followers to stop being bad. Gospel sermons remind us of what God is doing in our lives and in the world. They harness hope, and encourage us, no matter how broken or defective our efforts may be. God works with us and uses our efforts for His good will.

It seems the human tendency is to be out of balance with truth and good. We tend either to overdo truth (or "Law"), neglecting love (or "Gospel); or to overdo "Gospel" neglecting "Law."

My experience is, that to the degree that they are out of balance, they aren't even what they are created to be, but twisted, unhealthy impostors. Law becomes a harsh, death-dealing taskmaster, and Gospel becomes vapid and rudderless. Those who tend to rely on (unbalanced) Law, live in fear of tripping and falling into hell. They stereotype "gospel" Christians as vapid and rudderless, or "bleeding hearts".

Those who love gospel may know that unbalanced law deals death, but may not know how to harness mature wisdom for a vibrant, strong, and healthy faith, out of fear of becoming law-driven.

My old denomination certainly falls into the "Law" category. I had to stop going because I couldn't hear one more, "Be afraid; feel bad; try harder" sermon. (This is also known as "worm" theology. Translation: "We are nothing but filthy, evil worms in the sight of God.") Some people prefer this theology, even cling to it, as the sole path to their salvation. It is as if they are afraid to think anything else about their worth and nature.

Remarkably, Law churches tend to grow more rapidly, perhaps because they provide lots of rules and clear boundaries of "in" and "out." It feels very good to be "in." It feels safe. One is doing religion "the right way."

Unfortunately, the "rules" churches also tend to chew up and spit out their members on the other end, then blame the lost members for "not getting it" or "not loving God enough." There is no recognition that the constant striving and effort and guilt and looking over one's shoulder tends to wear down the tender spirits. So these churches tend to leave a long line of drop-outs in their wake with no acknowledgment of the loss, and to have a membership with serious self-esteem issues.

I am learning that the ELCIC (Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada), as well as my new denomination, the Swedenborgian Church of North America, are definitely "Gospel" churches. They emphasize hope in the Lord's providence. There is the understanding that of course human nature falls short of perfection, but so what? It's not like it's our fault. We can't help it! It's our nature. God still works with us where we are, loves us just the way we are, and loves us enough not to leave us just the way we are. We just need to show up, do our best, and trust Him. We have slightly different ways of saying it, but the message is the same.

So I know where I fit and where I don't fit. I know what theology is healing and redemptive for me, and what theology is toxic to my spirit.

I'm not saying that "Gospel" is good and "Law" is bad. I don't think one is right and one wrong. I think there's a healthy way and a sick way to come from a "law" emphasis , and vice versa with "gospel." I believe the closer we approach a balance---a healthy "marriage" of the two---the closer we come to a healthy theology, whichever way we lean.

But personally, I've spent so many years starved of "gospel," I'm loading up on gospel like a person stumbling out of the desert might fall upon a spring. It's easy, very easy for me right now to see how hurtful a (sick) law emphasis can be, and pretty hard to see how one could have too much gospel.

Ignorant good will can be just as hurtful a fear-based religion. I guess that "Law" seen right does not become fear-based, because it is tempered by trust in God's loving providence, and "Gospel" done right does not result in a vapid and rudderless faith because it will also be insightful, passionate, and wise.