CALL OF GRACE

Norman Shepherd, Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2000.

By Darren Middleton www.pressiechurch.org

What do theological heavy weights like John Frame, Richard Gaffin, Doug Wilson, James Jordan, Peter Lillback, Don Garlington and John Piper all have in common?  In varying degrees they share or have supported the views of Dr Norman Shepherd on justification by faith and works. Until his dismissal, Shepherd taught systematic theology at Westminster Theological Seminary for close to 20 years. His dismissal in 1981 ended a seven year controversy at WTS but the debate in Reformed Churches and Seminaries is still ongoing today.

The controversy was triggered by some of Shepherd’s students in 1974 answering Presbytery questions concerning justification. Their response (true to what they were taught) was that justification is conditional upon faith, repentance and obedience and perseverance. Over the next seven years controversy raged, until finally Shepherd was dismissed in 1981.

In many ways The Call of Grace is Shepherd’s belated articulation and defense of his reformulation of the doctrine of justification as understood through Covenant theology. In the first part of this short book (105 pages) Shepherd surveys the Abrahamic, Mosaic and New Covenants and concludes that each are made up of promise and obligation (pg 50). Consequently, properly understood, all the covenants can be said to be conditional  since the signs of the covenant (circumcision, baptism) place the recipients under an obligation to live obediently (faithfully) before God if they are to receive the promise of salvation (pg 14). So we read “just as Jesus was faithful in order to guarantee the blessing, so his followers must be faithful in order to inherit the blessing” (Pg 19).

As a result, the first part of the book concludes with the belief that our acceptance with God (justification) is conditional upon, and received by a repentant and obedient faith (pg 50). All of this he hastens to add is non meritorious, since Shepherd rejects the whole concept of merit.

At this point readers ought to be aware that Shepherd is attempting to reformulate the doctrine of justification by faith predicated on the belief that the essence of faith is obedience. This is a significant departure from orthodoxy which has always spoken of obedience as an obligation for those who are justified but never as a condition for justification. In arguing that faith, repentance, obedience and perseverance are conditions for acceptance with God, he leaves himself open to the charge of justification by faith and works.

In the second part of the book, Shepherd tackles the issue of evangelism. He argues that Reformed people tend to look at covenant from the perspective of regeneration whereas they should look at regeneration from the perspective of covenant (pg 94). Thus the entry point into covenant with God is not regeneration but baptism. This is what Shepherd calls covenant evangelism as opposed to regeneration evangelism.

Shepherd agrees that from the perspective of election, regeneration is the point of conversion. But since we do not know how and when the Spirit works we should look no further than the covenant sign and seal as the mark of transition from death to life (pg 94). According to Shepherd baptism marks the entry into the Kingdom of God (pg 100) and as such it is possible for some who enter the kingdom (through baptism) to lose their inheritance because of disobedience (pg19).Though he rejects baptismal regeneration the reader can sympathise with those who get confused.

There are many insightful aspects to this book, however, on the whole Shepherd comes so close to teaching baptismal regeneration and justification by faith and works that he should be read with caution. A final word of warning, since his theology has spread to most Reformed institutions and Churches in the USA, you can be sure we will encounter it here in Australia so be warned and be well read.

Published in APL May 2005