“Gospel” is a dear word to us Lutherans, the measure of all good theology and preaching. But because of its polyvalency, especially because of our law-gospel distinction, the word itself sometimes trips us up. In my recent re-read of the Book of Concord, I came across a useful little section in the Formula about two distinct senses in which this word is rightly used among Lutherans.

The question is: “Whether the preaching of the holy gospel is really not only a preaching of grace, which proclaims the forgiveness of sins, but also a preaching of repentance and rebuke, which condemns unbelief (something condemned not in the law but only by the gospel)” (p. 500; all quotations from the Kolb & Wengert edition). In response, the Formula avows that “the distinction between law and gospel is to be preserved with great diligence.” Therefore, to be technical about it, “the law is, strictly speaking, a divine teaching which gives instruction regarding what is right and God-pleasing and condemns everything that is sin and contrary to God’s will.” By contrast, “the gospel is, strictly speaking, the kind of teaching that reveals what the human being, who has not kept the law and has been condemned by it, should believe: that Christ has atoned and paid for all sins and apart from any human merit has obtained and won for people the forgiveness of sins, ‘the righteousness which avails before God,’ and eternal life.”

This accords with the more usual sense of the word “gospel” as we use it today. But the Formulators and their contemporaries were diligent Bible readers and thus recognized that this particular use of “gospel” didn’t quite cover the whole scriptural range. “However, because the word ‘gospel’ is not used in just one sense in the Holy Scripture—the reason this dispute arose in the first place—we believe, teach, and confess that when the word ‘gospel’ is used for the entire teaching of Christ, which he presented in his teaching ministry, as did his apostles in theirs (it is used in this sense in Mark 1[:15], Acts 20[:24]), then it is correct to say or write that the gospel is a proclamation of both repentance and the forgiveness of sins.” In other words, when “gospel” is used as a free-standing term, it includes both law and grace. It is only when “law and gospel are placed in contrast to each other” that the latter means strictly “a proclamation of comfort and a joyous message… of the grace and favor of God, won through Christ’s merit” (p. 501).

A good balance emerges from these two senses. The task of ministers of reconciliation is to proclaim the whole gospel, meaning the whole teaching of Christ, law and grace alike. But being conscious of both aspects of Christ’s whole teaching is the key to its proper proclamation. The natural tendency is to lean on the law, whether to terrify the unrepentant sinner or pressure the slowly-sanctifying believer into quicker progress; this is the fallback position from left to right and everywhere in between. But the truest, most proper work of Christ is to bring the “joyous message” of the gospel, what he has done for us, and this must receive the heaviest emphasis.