Scripture as a whole is clear, and the essential message of Scripture can be understood by any ordinary reader. This does not mean, however, that each specific portion of Scripture is clear to each reader. Part of the reason for this is that our ability to understand the text is often clouded, either because of the sinful weakness of our minds or because of our historical distance from the writing, so that a passage that is clear itself does not seem clear to us. And part of the reason is that many passages of Scripture that touch on a certain topic do not deal with it comprehensively and completely. Such passages must be interpreted in the light of other passages of the Bible where the topic under question is addressed more fully and with greater detail.

In 1 Peter 4:8 the apostle quotes from Proverbs 10:2, which says that “Love covers a multitude of sins.” The Roman theologians at the time of the Reformation claimed that this passage teaches that our sins are forgiven and that we are justified before God on account of our acts of love, rather than by faith in Christ alone. In contrast, the Apology draws attention to what this quotation is actually referring to, both in the context of St. Peter’s letter and in its original context: “It is evident that Peter is also speaking about love toward the neighbor because he connects this passage to the text that commands love for one another. ... Furthermore, Peter’s statement about love is taken from Proverbs, where the antithesis clearly shows how it ought to be interpreted, ‘Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses’” (Ap IV:238, 240). Love does indeed cover “a multitude of sins” in our interpersonal relationships, as we learn, with Christian charity and forbearance, to overlook the small offenses of others, even as we would hope that others would overlook and forgive our poor behavior. But love does not cover over our many sins before the judgment of God. Only the blood of Christ does this.

In defense of their teaching about the merit of monastic vows, the papal theologians had referred to the somewhat obscure historic example of the Rechabites, “who, as Jeremiah writes (35[:6]), neither had any possessions nor drank any wine.” The Apology’s response is that “examples ought to be interpreted according to the rule [of faith], that is, according to sure and clear passages of Scripture, not contrary to the rule or the passages. It is absolutely certain that our observances of various regulations do not merit the forgiveness of sins or justification. When the Rechabites are praised, therefore, we must note that they did not observe their way of life in the belief that they would merit forgiveness of sins by it, or that this work was itself an act of worship that justified, or that because of it (and not by the mercy of God because of the promised Seed) they would attain eternal life” (Ap XXVII:59-61). Passages of Scripture that lay out God’s clear teaching on important subjects serve as guides in evaluating the significance of events that are described in other passages with a minimum of explanation.

The Lutherans’ opponents had also claimed that Jesus taught that almsgiving, as a good work, merits justification and salvation before God. They cited this statement from a sermon of our Lord, in Luke 11:41: “So give for alms those things that are within; and see, everything will be clean for you.” The reply of the Apology is that, according to many other passages of Scripture, “the law is useless apart from Christ, on account of whom good works please God.” It also goes on to say that “When this entire passage is examined, it will show that faith also is required. For Christ rebukes the Pharisees for thinking that they are cleansed in God’s sight, that is, that they are justified, by frequent washings.” And finally, the Apology states: “For Scripture says elsewhere [Acts 15:9], ‘... cleansing their hearts by faith ...’ For if hearts have been cleansed and then outwardly they give alms (that is, all kinds of works of love), they will thereby also be entirely clean, that is, not only inwardly but also outwardly. The entire sermon of Christ ought to be kept together. It has many parts, some of which teach about faith, others of which teach about works. A fair-minded reader would not single out the commands about works while omitting the passages about faith” (Ap IV). A “fair-minded reader” will not interpret an isolated phrase apart from its immediate context or apart from the larger context of the whole of Scripture – and especially not apart from those passages that speak more fully to the issue at hand.

Similarly, St. Paul’s statement in Colossians 3:14, “Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which is the bond of perfection,” had been interpreted by the Roman theologians to mean that “love justifies because it makes people perfect.” The Apology replies by observing that Paul’s teaching on the subject of justification and perfection before God—both in the immediate context of this verse and in his other writings—does not allow this interpretation. The Lutherans declare that the apostle “is obviously talking about love for our neighbor. There is no reason to think that Paul has attributed either justification or perfection before God to the works of the second table of the law rather than to the first. Besides, if love is the perfect fulfillment of the law and satisfies the law, then there is no need for Christ as the propitiator. However, Paul teaches that we are acceptable on account of Christ and not on account of the observance of the law, because our observance of the law is imperfect. Thus because he clearly denies perfection to us elsewhere, we must not think that here he is speaking about the personal perfection of individuals” (Ap IV:231-32). What then follows in the Apology is an explanation of the correct interpretation of Paul’s words, which can also serve as a fitting encouragement to the church of our day, as we seek in faith to allow the timeless message of Scripture to address our consciences according to the circumstances that we face:

He is speaking about community in the church. For he says that love is a bond or unbroken chain in order to show that he is talking about linking and binding together the many members of the church with one another. In all families and communities harmony needs to be nurtured by mutual responsibilities, and it is not possible to preserve tranquility unless people overlook and forgive certain mistakes among themselves. In the same way, Paul urges that there be love in the church to preserve harmony, to bear with (if need be) the crude behavior of the brothers, and to overlook certain minor offenses, lest the church disintegrate into various schisms, and lest enmities, factions, and heresies arise from such schisms. For harmony will inevitably dissolve whenever bishops impose excessive burdens upon the people or have no regard for their weakness. Dissensions also arise when the people judge the conduct of their teachers too severely or scorn them on account of some lesser faults, going on to seek other kinds of doctrine and other teachers. On the contrary, perfection (that is, the integrity of the church) is preserved when the strong bear with the weak, when people put the best construction on the faults of their teachers, and when the bishops make some allowances for the weakness of their people (Ap IV:232-34).

David Jay Webber is pastor of Redeemer Lutheran Church in Scottsdale, Arizona and of Sun of Righteousness Lutheran Mission in Queen Creek, Arizona.