“God's 'No' and God's 'Yes' in the Clavis”
—by Armand J. Boehme
How do Lutheran Christians “rightly divide the Word of Truth” so that they understand and use the Bible correctly? The answer to this hermeneutical question has troubled all Christians since the beginning of the Christian Church. Lutheranism itself has not been able to achieve consensus in the area of hermeneutics. For a significant period of time Lutherans used Matthias Flacius' Clavis Scripturae Sacrae as the standard hermeneutic text to help them in understanding and using the Bible correctly.
To put the Clavis in historical context, Flacius wrote it after the Interims and before the publication of The Formula of Concord when Lutherans were engaged in debate about many theological issues. Flacius founded a Lutheran academy at Regensburg in 1561, but that venture was not successful. In 1566 he was called to the Lutheran community at Antwerp but was forced to leave by wartime struggles. He fled to Frankfurt but was not welcomed there, forcing him to go to Strasbourg where he was, for a while, well-received. It was during this time frame that Flacius wrote the Clavis. It was published in two large volumes in 1567. In the 1674 and 1719 editions, the Clavis contains over 800 folio pages with about another 300 to 400 pages of index. The English translation in How to Understand the Scriptures, covers 26 folio pages of Flacius' monumental work covering chapters 1–4 of Tractatus I.
In the Clavis, Flacius is opposing the medieval four-fold understanding of the biblical text, those who attempted to cut and paste verses of Scripture without consideration of their context, the idea of the superiority of the inner word, and those who manipulated the Scriptural texts as they desired like Erasmus, the Sophists, Victorin Strigel, and Casper Schwenkfeld. The Clavis was written to help Lutheran pastors and theologians interpret the Scriptures properly in the spirit of Luther and the Reformation.
As we approach the 500th Anniversary of the Lutheran Reformation, one of the treasures the Church recovered as a result of the Reformation is the proper distinction between the Law and the Gospel. This is one of the basic hermeneutical principles for rightly dividing God's Word. With it the Scriptures are clear and Christ and His work of salvation are exalted.
In his hermeneutical work Flacius attempted to walk in the footsteps of Martin Luther using Luther's concept of “a threefold practice for the study of the Bible.” This threefold practice includes oratio, meditatio, and tentatio.
In this threefold scheme Luther understood human beings as the passive recipients of God's active work in the Scriptural Word of Law and Gospel. This passivity is a result of the Law humbling human beings through the Spirit's work, enabling penitent sinners to receive the gift of the Gospel in faith. Though Flacius does not lay out this threefold scheme in the way Luther does, he still uses it in the Clavis. Since many Lutherans consider the distinction between Law and Gospel an essential part of a scriptural hermeneutic, this essay will examine the Law/Gospel distinction in Flacius' Clavis.
CAUSES OF DIFFICULTIES
Flacius wrote about the difficulties Christians at times have in working with Holy Scripture. The first difficulty examined is a sophistic use of the Scriptures that attaches “philosophical and Aristotelian meanings” to words and concepts like “sin, righteousness, justification, faith, grace, flesh, spirit, and the like.” These philosophical concepts change the meaning of these biblical terms so that they point people to their own “power,” to their “own person, and away from the proper profession of the One Lamb of God and His sacrifice, merits and works as the one way of salvation” and turn people back to “Moses and good works, and the merits of men.”
Another cause of confusion was a result of Christians supposing “that the New Testament speaks and teaches something different than the Old.” In other words the New Testament preaches Gospel while the Old Testament preaches Law. In truth, both testaments preach Law and Gospel.
A further cause of difficulty was that many of the “undiscerning” believed that the Law and the Gospel were “in contention” with one another rather than seeing their proper distinction and concord. To help relieve that problem Flacius contended that everyone needs “to know that the gospel stands above the law and in that way gives the life that the law promises and yet is unable to give on account of the guilt and the vice of fallen men, who are unable to produce obedience.” The Law is “a servant to the gospel” because it has lost its original function, and now can only perform “an auxiliary function, namely, revealing sins and the wrath of God, compelling men to seek medicine. In this way it serves as a schoolmaster to lead men to Christ.”
It is because human beings are sinful that the “true and native use of the law...has come to naught” so that the Law cannot “justify” or “vivify.” Flacius spoke about the original function of the Law — that it promised salvation to all who could keep it perfectly. But since the fall, no one can keep it perfectly. Flacius saw the condemning use of the Law as being only “faintly” set forth “in the Old Testament.” He views this as problematic and as being tied together with the “manifold obscurity” caused by the “veil of Moses.”
Flacius also believes that there is a progressive character to God's revelation in Holy Scripture. “God revealed His mysteries in the beginning more obscurely and then later more clearly.” The obscurity of some parts of Scripture serves to cause the pious to “investigate the Scriptures all the more ardently and strive for a clearer discovery. In these things we must therefore be attentive with our whole hearts” meditate on the Word of God day and night, as well as being “constant and fervent in prayer.” Having received the Word the Holy Spirit will increase the faith of God's people. “Finally, we must here certainly know God and His mysteries as in a riddle and imperfectly, though in the next life we will know Him perfectly and see Him face to face.”
REMEDIES FOR THE DIFFICULTIES
Flacius gives “remedies” for the above problems. The solution to all problems begins by acknowledging that the triune God is the supplier of all the remedies human beings need, for He leads them into all truth and makes sinful human beings into those who are “taught by God.” The second remedy comes from diligent instruction and growth in the knowledge of Holy Scripture, and especially from “an awareness of our sickness [sin — Law] and subsequently also of the only Physician, Christ [grace — Gospel].” The third remedy is “a solid knowledge of the speech of Sacred Scripture.”
The fourth “remedy is persistent meditation upon and study of the divine law.” Thus Jesus urges all “to search the Scriptures (John 5:39).” The fifth remedy “is ardent prayer,” in answer to which the Spirit of God opens human minds and hearts to know those truths to which minds and hearts had been closed. The sixth remedy is “real life experience.” The seventh remedy is to see that Scripture teaches the same things in different places — at times more clearly and at other times less clearly. Let the clear passages illuminate the unclear. Flacius’ final remedy for confusion about the Scriptures is the need for “good and clear translations and faithful” interpretations of Holy Writ.
Flacius then expands on these points under the heading “RULES FOR UNDERSTANDING THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, TAKEN FROM THE SACRED SCRIPTURES THEMSELVES.” The rest of this essay will highlight Flacius' understanding of Law and Gospel in this part of his work.
LAW AND GOSPEL IN THE CLAVIS
For Flacius a proper understanding of Scripture begins with God's Son, Jesus Christ. “In Christ are all the treasures of the knowledge and wisdom of God (Colossians 2:3). We dare not seek anything beyond or above Him.” Further It “is the office of Christ to open the Scripture to us and to illuminate our heart to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45). We must all receive of His fullness. That happens, however, when we come to know Him and apprehend Him through faith.” The key (clavis) to a proper hermeneutic of Scripture begins with Christ — and with faith in Christ. This Christocentric emphasis includes the work of the Holy Spirit. “The Holy Spirit is at the same time the author and interpreter of Scripture. It is His task to lead us into all truth (John 16:13). It is His task to write Scripture on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). For prophecies, and all of Scripture, as St. Peter attests (2 Peter 1:20), are not a thing of one's own intellect or interpretation, but rather as Scripture has been given by the Holy Spirit through prophecy, the same must of necessity also be interpreted in His light.”
For Flacius any proper knowledge about the content of Holy Scripture, or faith in what it says, comes from the work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Thus there is a passive tone to Flacius’ Lutheran biblical hermeneutic.
This is not always so outside of Lutheranism. Flacius writes about the fanatics and the followers of the anti-Christ who dream up great and wondrous mysteries beyond the truths contained in the Scriptures, and beyond the crucified Christ. These supposed mysteries flow from within them and do not come from God. Thus they fall prey to “foolishness and impiety” and to an excessive emphasis on sacrifice. Flacius wrote the Clavis to help Lutheran Pastors to avoid such self-generated “foolishness and impiety.” Flacius saw that God gave His Word to human beings because God deals with sinful human beings only through means. The Scriptures are one of the means God gave human beings to “teach and convert” them. Through the external ministry God “calls out and admonishes” sinners with the Law in order that they would listen and be brought to repentance and faith.
The preaching of the Gospel redeems sinners who are moved by the Holy Spirit to “call upon God and be saved.” For Flacius, “the scope and argument of all of Scripture” is centered in “the Lord Jesus . . . His suffering and benevolent service” that saves human beings from their sins. The “end of the law is Christ.” Here Flacius echoes Luther in teaching that the Law exists to show sinners their sins, and the Gospel exists to bring penitent sinners the forgiveness of sins.
Flacius wrote that “When we are converted to Christ, the veil is taken off our heart and . . . from the Scriptures.” The Spirit enables us to see Christ who is the end of the law, “the pearl of great price.”
Flacius wanted pastors and students of the Bible to understand what the text of Scripture teaches and what should be plucked from the text so that the student would have its truths deposited “securely in” the heart.” For that understanding to occur, Bible students need to understand that we are bound under sin by the Law that condemns, and that Scripture “testifies to us about Christ” so that we are consoled and redeemed and equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16–17).
Returning to his premise that a right knowledge of Scripture and its application is centered in Christ and His work, Flacius encourages daily meditation on the Scriptures — both the Old and the New Testaments.
To aid in that study Flacius summarized all of Scripture in two syllogisms. First, “Whatever God says is true.” And secondly, “Therefore this man Jesus is the true Messiah.”
These syllogisms were offered to help those who incorrectly saw the Old Testament as a body of Law and the New Testament as the proclamation of the Gospel. Flacius again emphasized the truth that the Old Testament preaches Christ and the Gospel. Thus the first syllogism advances to these conclusions:
“Whatever the Old Testament or the prophets have preached concerning the Messiah or other things, that is most true; or Whatever description has been made about the Messiah by the prophets is most true. Our Jesus is indeed just such a person as the Messiah has been depicted by the prophets.” The prophets foretold the time of His coming, the place of His birth, His family heritage, His virginal birth, His miracles, the fact of His divine incarnation, His forerunner, as well as His death and resurrection. With Christ's coming “Moses and all the idols of the world fall to the ground.” Because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is proclaimed in both the Old and New Testaments, Law and Gospel are proclaimed in both Testaments.
The Old and New Testaments are summarized by these words “This has happened in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled.” Thus the whole of Holy Writ proclaims the good news of the Gospel that Jesus is “the true Messiah” and Savior from sin. Jesus Himself emphasized the fact that He is the central figure of the Scriptures, that His saving work is central to the Gospel, and that He is the Messiah promised in the Old Testament Scriptures when He taught His disciples that He had fulfilled all the things “written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning” Himself. (Luke 24:44)
Flacius wrote that this Christocentric Law/Gospel center will assist one in learning the doctrines taught in the Bible. The Bible contains “two kinds of doctrine...The first says (according to Paul in Romans 10:5), 'Whoever does these shall live by them,' that is, the most complete obedience of the law leads the one rendering it to eternal life. The other, however, contrarily cries out, 'Whoever believes, or apprehends through faith that One who alone is able to fulfill the law and does so for the whole human race, will be saved (John 3:16)...There are two kinds of doctrine, therefore: law and gospel. The former certainly offers salvation to none except those worthy and righteous. The latter, however, only offers salvation to the most unworthy.”
Law and Gospel are a paradox. They fit together yet one is inferior to the other. The Law is inferior to the Gospel because the Law cannot give “salvation. There is no defect in the Law. Rather the “defect is in” us, for it is the defect of sin. “The Gospel however is able to save and justify the whole human race.” The Law exposes our corrupt nature and sin and God's wrath. Thus it stands at the Gospel’s side and “drives us to seek some Savior outside of us, and thus also compels us to flee into the net of the Messiah. In this way, it is the pedagogue to lead us to Christ.” It is the alien righteousness of Christ which saves, not our works.
Flacius then emphasizes the fact that “the key (clavis) to all of Scripture, or theology” is “to know” these two doctrines, and which is superior and which is inferior, the one that can save, and the one that cannot.
Flacius writes that some are “ignorant of this” Law/Gospel “key” which is centered in Christ. They forsake this key by returning to Moses and the siren song of the Law. They hear both the Law — “Whoever does this will live by it” — and the Gospel proclaimed which says “I [Christ] have come to save sinners.” Many are troubled by what they perceive to be “contradictory” words from God and become “tone deaf” to the truth of the Word. They suppose that they must “reconcile these two doctrines . . . and somehow bring them into agreement by hook or crook.” They suppose that these two doctrines are “the same,” the “one sole doctrine” contained in God's Word.
Thus they falsely conclude that sinners “are saved partly through” the grace of Christ “and partly through the law and work, or that through Christ we receive the initial grace to enable us to perform the works of the law and be saved through it, or finally that we are indeed justified and saved through Christ first in Baptism, as in a safe and good ship, so long as we later perform no mortal sin; but if we do subsequently fall out of the ship by committing some sin, then it is necessary for us to have recourse to the second plank, to penance and good works, so that we may escape and evade the fate of a shipwrecked person. In this way they bring Moses and Christ, the law and the gospel, and grace and merits into agreement in three ways, or rather they confound them most abominably in three ways. When one has recognized” these errors, “it will be most beneficial for his study of the Sacred Scriptures.”
After the student of Scripture has learned that Law and Gospel must be properly distinguished and how they complement one another, Flacius then desires that further catechetical education would happen which should flow directly from the Scriptures themselves. Flacius sees “a sort of creed [Symbolum] . . . in the first three chapters of Genesis” which teach about “the true God, creation, the fall, and redemption through the blessed Seed” which is also found in the three Ecumenical Creeds. Further he sees the Law summarized in the Ten Commandments. He also notes the Lord's Prayer and the Sacraments and describes all these as the “chief parts of doctrine” and as “a convenient sort of catechesis.”
To avoid confusion, catechetical instruction should begin with what is easier and then proceed to those things that are harder and more difficult. This is the methodology of education in the liberal arts and it should be the methodology for Christians as well.
Flacius encourages the study of biblical history for it is the “easiest” thing to teach. That history begins in Genesis which teaches about God as Creator, the creation of the world and human beings, the worship of God, the fall into sin, and the curse of sin and death. The Law is taught in the Fall and the Gospel of salvation is preached in the promise of the Seed of the woman Who is Christ. Marriage, children, and vocation are also taught. So one should begin with these teachings “for these are easier and are also the font and foundation of all teaching.”
Flacius ties this elementary teaching with the analogy of faith. All proper understanding of Scripture “takes place according to the analogy of faith,” which is “harmonious with the above-mentioned basic catechetical teaching set forth in the early chapters of Genesis. This analogy of faith centers in the revelation of the triune God, creation, the fall and death, the Law summarized in the Ten Commandments, the promise of redemption and justification in Christ the Seed, as well as in the Lord's Prayer, the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion.” These things are the core of the analogy of faith for Flacius.
As Flacius noted before, the very words of Scripture are of prime importance as is a proper understanding of the meaning of those words. “One must therefore exercise diligent care with the words of the Sacred Scriptures.” Flacius applies this directly to his Law/Gospel hermeneutic when he writes that Paul “also wants the one explaining the Sacred Scriptures to rightly divide them (2 Timothy 2:15).” This proper explanation requires a solid understanding of the words, meanings, phrases, and sentences of Scripture, and the contexts in which they are found. There is also the need for a careful separation of things holy and profane, the Creator and creature, the ungodly and the righteous, Moses and Christ. John's Gospel early on distinguishes between Christ and Moses, Gospel and Law, as does Paul in Galatians 3 and 4, and Romans 3–8. This proper distinction helps readers see what is inferior (the Law) and what is superior (the Gospel). With the Spirit's help, this proper distinction helps people avoid seeking righteousness and salvation from the law, or from turning “the ministry and doctrine of righteousness and life” in Christ into “the accusing, judging, and condemning law.” Flacius also places great stock in learning from experience.
Lutheran pastors are encouraged to beware of human traditions. Just as Christ warned the disciples “to be on guard against the yeast of the Sadducees” — so evangelical pastors need to beware of faulty traditions for they lead back to the Law. When the Word either in the Old or New Testament speaks about Christ, what is stated must be believed above all else, and should not be “adulterated as happens with many when they mix certain works in with Christ (1 Corinthians 2:17). What does straw have to do with wheat? What do the promises of God have to do with human dreams? (John 23:28).”
In addition Flacius wrote that “Christ Himself with His sharp file, the Sermon on the Mount, removes in Matthew 5 and 6 the rustiness and dullness of the law produced by the Pharisees and their Pelagian gloss. So long as any rust or dullness clings to or resides within the law, it is useless and ineffective for us” because the dross of the Pharisees removes the gravity of God's wrath from sinners. The Law in all its fullness needs to be preached so that Christ and His salvation are seen as the remedy for sin, death, and damnation. A proper Law and Gospel distinction helps people see that Christ is not a new Moses nor is he another lawgiver. Rather, He is the Savior from sin.
Flacius warns his readers that philosophy gives false hope for it teaches that the suitable and insightful hearers will be more receptive to a message if they have the right disposition towards it. Philosophy also desires a fit and capable hearer so that he would more readily receive and accept what is being taught.
Such a perspective reverses the truth and reality of Law and Gospel. Scripture teaches that no one, by nature, has a right disposition to the truths of God's Word because human beings are by nature sinful — spiritually blind and dead to spiritual truths. By nature all human beings have a natural disposition against God, which causes them not to see and hear the truths of His Word. Thus, God needs to “prune and illumine” those who have hearts that do not perceive, eyes that do not see, and ears that do not hear. None of the disciples or followers of Christ came to Christ “of their own accord” or because of their own natural predisposition so to do. Rather they were drawn to God by His mercy and grace that comes to sinners in Word and Sacrament. Thus the Holy Spirit working through the means of grace brings sinners to faith so that they become “those taught by God.”
Philosophy teaches that one must understand in order to believe. Theology teaches that one “must believe in order to understand.” Interestingly Flacius quotes Aristotle approvingly: “The student must believe.”
Flacius expounded some very practical applications of Law and Gospel for the every day life and piety of Christians. He emphasized the fact that Christians should daily practice contrition, that is be led to have a good sense of “one's personal sin.” The Christian should also daily experience “justification and [the] peace of heart” that comes from “the remission of sin” and the “consolations of the Word” of Gospel. Other helpful spiritual experiences would include frequent prayer, bearing the cross, and wrestling with adversity and temptations.
Christians are to grow in their understanding of Scripture, and of the careful distinction between Law and Gospel. Thus one should move from milk to solid foods. The less learned receive the milk. The more learned or spiritually mature should have solid food. Growth occurs through the diligent study of God's Word. The goal of such study for Flacius “is the knowledge of God, the justification of the sinner, and the corporate worship of God.”
Flacius emphasized the fact that in theology there are two ways of gaining knowledge. First, knowledge is gained by God affirming or denying something in His Word. Secondly knowledge can be gained by making a deduction from something that God has said in His Word. It is this second method that often deceives false teachers. Sinful human beings have also constructed “a third sort of theology” which is “reasoning from philosophy or from certain other plausible propositions.”
This “third sort of theology” led the Sadducees to deny the resurrection. From Flacius' perspective this kind of theology was a “dream theology,” and was the underlying premise of the legalistic perspective of the sophists and their synergistic “free will” theology which confuses Law and Gospel. Dream theology causes its proponents to emphasize a theology of works. Thus such things as virginity were exalted and marriage was disparaged. Such dream theology makes of Christ a new lawgiver.
Though human reason is suspect when dealing with religious matters there is a proper ministerial use of reason which can and should be used. Flacius also warned pastors against disparaging the study of languages, or the use of dialectic, rhetoric, and philosophy. The proper distinction between Law and Gospel will also suffer if pastors place themselves and their reasoning above God and His holy Word.
The key (clavis) to understanding Scripture for Flacius is centered in Christ and in the proper distinction between Law and Gospel. The two are intimately connected. If one has, by the Spirit, properly divided Law and Gospel, then Christ will be at the center. For Flacius properly “dividing the text” into Law and Gospel “marvelously illuminates the true meaning” of Scripture because it will be centered in Christ and His saving work.
 This is a revised version of the paper presented at a conference entitled, “Matthias Flacius and the Lost Lutheran Hermeneutic” held at Trinity Lutheran Church, Northfield, MN on November 26, 2011. Other presenters were Wade Johnson, Jack Kilcrease, Oliver Olson, Steve Paulson, Donavon Riley, and Paul Strawn.
 This book illustrates the variety in Lutheran hermeneutics: John Reumann, ed., Studies in Lutheran Hermeneutics (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979).
 Jack Kilcrease, “Introduction to the Clavis Scripturae Sacrae: The Life and Theological Contributions of Matthais Flacius Illyricus,” in Matthias Flacius Illyricus, How to Understand the Sacred Scriptures from Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, trans. Wade R. Johnson (Saginaw, MI: Madgeburg Press, 2011) 46; This text is the primary source for the exposition of Flacius' theology.
 Henry W. Reimann, “Flacius, Matthias Illyricus,” in julius Bodensieck, ed., The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church, vol. II F-M (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1965), 859–60; Kilcrease, “Introduction to the Clavis Scripturea Sacrae,” 25.
 Flacius, How to Understand the Sacred Scriptures, 2. Tractatus I contains 104 folio pages.
 Kilcrease, “The Life,” 26–27, 33–37, 39, fn 142; “Flacius (Vlacich), Matthias,” in Erwin L. Lueker, ed., Lutheran Cyclopedia (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1954) 379.
 After reading the Clavis, one individual wrote that Flacius' biblical hermeneutic is “a new conception” which is able to lead the Church “out of the dead-end street of historical criticism.” Jorg Baur quoted in Bengt Hagglund, “Pre-Kantian Hermeneutics in Lutheran Orthodoxy,” Lutheran Quarterly Vol. 20, No. 3 (Autumn 2006) 319.
 Since C.F.W. Walther described Flacius as “the greatest theologian of his time, second only to Luther,” parallels to Walther's theology will be noted in the footnotes. C.F.W. Walther, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel: Thirty-Nine Evening Lectures, trans. W.H.T. Dau (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1928) 119. For more parallels see Raymond F. Surburg, “Walther's Hermeneutical Principles,” in Arthur H. Drevlow, John M. Drickamer, Glenn E. Reichwald, eds., C.F.W. Walther: The American Luther – Essays in Commemoration of the 100th Anniversary of Carl Walther's Death (Mankato, MN: Walther Press, 1987) 96–113.
 Kilcrease, “Introduction to the Clavis Scripturae Sacrae,” 43.
 Kilcrease, “Introduction to the Clavis Scripturae Sacrae,” 43–44.
 For example: John T. Pless, Handling the Word of Truth: Law and Gospel in the Church Today (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2004).
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 49.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 49–50.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 51. Walther, Law and Gospel, 7.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 60.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 60. Walther, Law and Gospel, 7 & 10. The Lutheran Confessions also speak of the original function of the Law. SA Part III, 2, 1; FC SD V, 17; AP IV, 159.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 60, 61.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 61–62.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 63.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 64.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 65. Also Armand J. Boehme, "Caveat Emptor! Let the Buyer - and the Reader - Beware!" LOGIA Vol. 10, No. 1 (Epiphany 2001) 23–36.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 67.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 67.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 68.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 69.
 SA Part III, Art. II; III, 1–10; IV; XIII; AE 2, 158–64; AE 8, 40–47, 161–83; AE 35, 157–74; AE 39, 175–203. Walther, Law and Gospel, 9–20.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 69.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 70. See Walther, Law and Gospel, 1, 60. For this distinction in the Confessions see FC SD V, 1; AP IV, 186, 188; FC E V, 2; FC SD V, 23–24, 27.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 70.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 70, 72.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 71.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 73.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 74. Walther, Law and Gospel, 70–71.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 74–75.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 75.
 For Flacius as well as for Walther and Luther justification was and is imputed and forensic.
Flacius opposed Osiander's infused understanding of righteousness which is condemned in FC SD III. “Joachim Morlin...objected to the description of justification as a gradual process and the subjective emphasis on the indwelling of Christ (doc. #130) . . . Both Melanchthon and Flacius agreed that Osiander's ideas about justification by the infusion of righteousness were closer to the traditional emphasis of Catholic theology than to the forensic conception of justification that had been taught by Luther (doc. #131).” Eric Lund, ed., Documents from the History of Lutheranism 1517–1750 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002) 185. Walther, Law and Gospel, 224; Armand J. Boehme, “Tributaries into the River JDDJ: Karl Holl and Luther's Doctrine of Justification,” LOGIA Online (August 2009) 1–16. http://www.logia.org/logia-online/23?rq=boehme (last accessed 28 May 2016).
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 75–76.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 76.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 76–77. Walther, Law and Gospel, 6, 61, 75, 135–37.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 77.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 79. C.F.W. Walther, The True Visible Church: An Essay for the Convention of the General Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States for its Sessions at St. Louis, Mo., October 31, 1866, trans. John Theodore Mueller (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1961) 87n; also C.F.W. Walther, “Why Should Our Pastors, Teachers, and Professors Subscribe Unconditionally to the Symbolical Writings of Our Church,” Concordia Theological Monthly, Vol. 18, No. 4 (April 1947) 242.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 80.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 81–82. Walther, Law and Gospel, 276–84.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 83–84. Walther, Law and Gospel, 42–60.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 84–85.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 86–87.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 87–88. Walther, Law and Gospel, 69.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 88–89.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 89.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 90. Italics in original.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 91. Italics in original.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 91.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 92–93.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 94.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 94.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 95.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 97–98.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 100.
 Flacius, Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, 116.