Passive Righteousness, Total Depravity And Other Weird Doctrines
Do we really have to do nothing in order for Christ to do everything?
Fair warning, this is going to be rather long and kind of convoluted and perhaps a bit too esoteric for some readers. With that warning out the way, let’s carry on.
There’s a basic theological point in Protestantism, the rallying cry of the Reformation: by faith alone!
Lutherans and other Protestants are supposed to believe (and teach) that we are completely, 100% reliant upon God’s grace and cannot “do” anything to earn salvation. Instead, the saving work of God in Christ is a gift of grace received by faith (trust). No laws to fulfill. Nothing on our side to contribute to the complete work of Christ on the cross.
Christ does everything. We do nothing. And then in this wondrous exchange, we receive the everything of Christ, and Christ takes on our nothing-ness.
An aspect of this doctrinal position arises out of, or is related to, the Augustinian-coded notion of “Original Sin.” Because we are born with sinfulness imputed and not just guilty for actual sins we commit, we are therefore incapable of making ourselves right with God because we are guilty not only of sinning, but also guilty as heirs of the sin, the original sin, Adam’s sin.
We can’t do anything to get ourselves off the hook. Christ imputes all of his righteousness to us and we receive it passively. This is called passive righteousness, and the doctrine, amped up a bit by Calvinist-tinging of the Augustinian-coding, names this “total depravity.” We are completely and utterly and without exception bound up in this original sin, we cannot in any way free ourselves or do anything, and we rely on the merits of Christ and the grace of God.
This doctrine is interesting as far as it goes. It’s helpful inasmuch as it shifts our attention from attempting to save ourselves to the saving work of Christ. Since attempting to save ourselves is sometimes a fraught and harmful exercise, replete with anxiety and distraction, you can see the value in a theological worldview that takes the focus off our own powers and instead invites us to trust God and God’s promises in Christ.
But you knew there was going to be a “but,” right?
Here’s the “but.” But why in order for Christ to accomplish everything do we have to emphasize that we do nothing? Why in order for God to be good do we have to be totally depraved? Why in order to see Jesus as a Savior does the description of our own anthropological position require such severity?
Let me offer an analogy. Let’s say somebody loves you. Could be your dad, or your spouse, or God, or even your dog. Of course, the most wonderful kind of love to receive from any of these folks is the kind of love that comes before you’ve done anything, in spite of what you’ve done. We call that unconditional love.
But the cool thing about unconditional love: one of the conditions is not that you have to be unloveable in order for unconditional love to be extended. In order for it to be love, you don’t have to be awful.
No, unconditional love is so capacious it has space in a kind of both/and manner for you to be loved undeservingly, unconditionally AND loved because you do certain things or are a certain way that is lovable.
Your dog can love you just because you are you, and ALSO because you give them dog treats and pet their belly.
God can love you for the sake of Christ alone and because God is love AND because you’ve been busy caring for widows and orphans. God’s love is not dependent on you being depraved. God’s grace can flow out and shower upon you even if you’re perfect.
I mean heck, God loves Jesus that way.
So the problem with the Protestant paradigm around passive righteousness and total depravity isn’t so much the emphasis on the profound grace of God, or the fulness of what Christ has done for us. It’s the second part that’s weird, that somehow because Christ is awesome, or because God is gracious, doctrinally we have to declare ourselves depraved, or consider ourselves passive, in the light of this righteousness and love.
Now, I’m sure some readers, especially pastors and theologians, having gotten this far, are going to find a variety of ways to still try and repeat the Protestant doctrine of “by grace alone by faith alone,” and there will be and is general concern that we make sure and emphasize that Christ does everything for us and we do nothing.
That’s the doctrine I’m challenging.
So I’ll just end with a couple of quotes from Paul and Jesus that I think can help us see it differently. I’d contend that my Protestant colleagues who love these doctrines of total depravity and passive righteousness so much are going to need to explain these texts within the context of Paul’s letters and Jesus’ teachings. I don’t think they can, unless they accept the critique I’m offering. Because my critique is really just based on a) Scripture, and b) a better practical description of who we truly are before God.
Here’s the first quote:
Colossians 1:24 I am now rejoicing in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am completing what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.
It’s pretty clear that Paul understood himself to be contributing to the work of Christ through his own sufferings. There’s a lot to unpack here (because at least in part this means the ways we aren’t “passive” in relationship to God’s grace are probably especially those ways in which we suffer as Christ suffered), but the basic point is quite simple. Paul understands himself to be contributing to Christ’s work, completing it.
Here’s the second quote:
Matthew 3:13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him. 14 John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” 15 But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. 16 And when Jesus had been baptized, just as he came up from the water, suddenly the heavens were opened to him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.”
Again, there’s a lot here, but notice just this one thing: Jesus doesn’t “need” to be baptized (theologians who emphasize that Christ was without sin would agree because baptism is the sacrament through which sins are forgiven) and yet Christ flips the script and gets baptized anyway in order to “fulfill all righteousness.” But then look what God does! God declares this human one, Jesus, who is without sin, who is not depraved, their beloved Son.
Wow! God can love someone even though they are perfect and good and lovable. God doesn’t need us to be depraved in order to shower baptismal gifts on us and call us Beloved.
I know it’s a crazy idea, but maybe we can be recipients of God’s grace, maybe Christ can be all in all, and this doesn’t erase us or make us passive, but simply invites us into being all in all with Christ.
Thanks Pastor Clint. What about pacifism as a kind of passive righteousness, or a sabbath ethics of "do no harm"?
The thing is that in worshipping as a Presbyterian in Gainesville, Florida for 12 years and in Fort Smith for 4 years, I never once heard a sermon on total depravity. Rarely was sin mentioned. The emphasis, like at GSLC, was on what we could/should do in response to a good God. So, there's that.