The two kinds of righteousness

The first kind of righteousness is righteousness coram deo (righteousness in the eyes of God). The Reformers also called it passive righteousness, the righteousness of faith, the righteousness of the Gospel, alien righteousness, and Christian righteousness. Dr. Robert Kolb has often called it the righteousness of identity, because it restores man's identity as a child of God.[3]

This righteousness “is a righteousness that we receive from God.”[3] A person is righteous coram deo, that is, he is in a right relationship with God, when he simply receives the imputed obedience of Christ and the forgiveness of sins through faith. This righteousness is passive and comes apart from the Law. A human person is not righteous in God's eyes because of his choice or commitment, his good works or his piety, his emotions or intellect. Instead, he is righteous because the Father chooses him from the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:3-14) and declares him righteous on account of Jesus’ atoning death and justifying resurrection (Rom.3:21-28, 4:18-25). Thus, Luther describes Abraham's righteousness of faith, saying, “The other kind of righteousness is the righteousness of faith, which does not depend on any works, but on God's favorable regard and his 'reckoning' on the basis of grace."[4] Christian righteousness is freely given by the Spirit through the means of grace (i.e. baptism, the proclamation of forgiveness on account of Christ, the Lord's Supper).

In his sermon Two Kinds of Righteousness (1518), Luther compares this alien righteousness to marriage. When a man and a woman are married, they share all things in common. Through faith man is married to Christ. “Through faith in Christ, therefore, Christ’s righteousness becomes our righteousness and all that he has becomes ours; rather, he himself becomes ours.”[5]

The second kind of righteousness is righteousness coram mundo (righteousness in the eyes of the world). The Reformers also called it active righteousness, civil righteousness, proper righteousness, the righteousness of the Law, and the righteousness of reason or philosophy. Dr. Robert Kolb has often called this kind of righteousness the righteousness of character, because it deals with a person's attitudes and behaviors.[3]

A person is righteous coram mundo when he is in a right relationship with the rest of creation and this is done through man's actions. Thus, a righteous parent is a parent that cares for her child, a righteous student is a student who studies hard and respects his teachers, a righteous citizen respects the government and pays his taxes, etc.

This righteousness is active, that is, “the righteousness of works is a righteousness that we achieve by human ability.”[3] Thus, this righteousness is informed by the Law (i.e. the good will of God). Unlike the first dimension where the Law only accuses, in the second dimension the Law acts as a guide. The Law shows man how God designed the world to work and warns that there are often temporal consequences to sin. Ultimately, “the purpose of a righteousness of works is the welfare of this world,” and not man's relationship with God.[3]

The righteousness of the Law is defined by a person's vocation. God does not expect the same kinds of works from all people. Furthermore, this righteousness extends to all of creation. Humans have responsibilities to the entire earth and not just their human neighbors.

The Lutheran Reformers spoke of active righteousness in two ways.

First, they often spoke of active righteousness as something believers and unbelievers have in common. Not only Christians, but also Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and Atheists are capable of being faithful spouses, loving parents, and hard-working employees. Christians and non-Christians perform many of the same external civil works. They often share a common understanding of Ethics. Thus, Melanchthon can praise Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics as being the best work on civil righteousness ever written.[7]

However, the Reformers also spoke of active righteousness in reference to the new obedience of Christians alone. Thus, the Formula states: "It is correct to say that in this life believers who have become righteous through faith in Christ have first of all the righteousness of faith that is reckoned to them and then thereafter the righteousness of new obedience or good works that are begun in them. But these two kinds of righteousness dare not be mixed with each other."[8] Also, Luther defines active righteousness in his 1518 sermon as the “product of the righteousness of the first type, actually its fruit and consequence.”[9]

Because of this, some Lutheran theologians (such as Dr. Joel Biermann)[10] have recommended speaking of a third kind of righteousness—the active righteousness of a Christian resulting from the work of the Spirit.

There is value in talking about two kinds of righteousness and three kinds. On the one hand, the active righteousness of a Christian and of an unbeliever is the same, for both do the same external works in the same vocations. For example, a person cannot tell the difference between a faithful Christian employee and a faithful non-believing employee by sight. In a certain respect, a Christian's active righteousness is different only because the sin that taints it has been forgiven. In other words, the righteousness coram deo sanctifies the righteousness coram mundo.

On the other hand, the Bible does make a distinction between the active righteousness of believers and the active righteousness of unbelievers. In the end only the good works of Christians are God-pleasing. On the Last Day, Jesus will praise only the works of the sheep and will only condemn the works of the goats (Matt. 25:31-46). Furthermore, the Spirit works within the Christian after conversion. The Spirit gives the Christian virtuous, holy desires (commonly called the fruits of the Spirit) and crucifies his sinful flesh. The Spirit-led Christian eagerly looks to the Law of God, which no longer can accuse his conscience, so that it may guide him, whereas the non-believer always seeks guidance from man-made laws and philosophies that are full of error. In other words, Christian righteous will lead to new obedience.

Both ways of describing active righteousness are biblical and were used by the Lutheran Reformers. Therefore, it is acceptable to speak of either two kinds of righteousness or three, and it is also acceptable to define active righteousness as the works done by both believers and unbelievers or as the new obedience that occurs after conversion.

The Lutheran theologian Francis Pieper briefly mentions the Two Kinds of Righteousness paradigm in his Christian Dogmatics:

“In the terminology of Luther there are ‘two kinds’ of forgiveness of sins, or of justification, the ‘internal’ and the ‘external.’ The internal justification takes place through the gracious promise of the Gospel and through faith which lays hold of this promise. External justification takes place through the good works of Christians, which, as the consequence and fruit of the internal justification, prove to men that internal justification is there.”[11]

Theologians outside of the Lutheran Church have also noted and used this paradigm. For example, Jonathan Edwards mentions the Two Kinds of Righteousness paradigm in a famous sermon on justification:

“There is a two-fold righteousness that the saints have: an imputed righteousness, and ‘tis this only that avails anything to justification; and an inherent righteousness, that is, that holiness and grace which is in the hearts and lives of the saints. This is Christ’s righteousness as well as imputed righteousness: imputed righteousness is Christ’s righteousness accepted for them, inherent holiness is Christ’s righteousness communicated to them. They derive their holiness from Christ as the fountain of it. He gives it by his Spirit, so that ‘tis Christ’s holiness communicated, ‘tis the light of the sun reflected. Now God takes delight in the saints for both these: both for Christ’s righteousness imputed and for Christ’s holiness communicated, though ‘tis the former only that avails anything to justification.”[12]