02.33. Justification.
Chapter 33
Justification.
1. What is the sense in which the word
1st. Spoken of things or actions.—Matthew 20:4; Colossians 4:1.
2nd. Spoken of persons (1.) as personally holy, conformed to the law in character.—Matthew 5:45; Matthew 9:13.
(2.) In respect to their possessing eminently some one quality demanded by the law.—Matthew 1:19; Luke 23:50.
(3.) As forensically just, i. e., as conformed to the requirements of the law as the condition of the covenant of life.—Romans 1:17.
(4.) Spoken of God in respect to his possession of the attribute of distributive justice in administering the provisions of the law and the covenants. Romans 3:26; 1 John 1:9.
(5.) Spoken of Christ in respect to his character as the only perfect man, and to his representative position in satisfying all the demands of the law in behalf of his people.—Acts 3:14; Acts 7:52; Acts 22:14.
2. What is the usage of the verb
It means to declare a person to be just.
1st. Personally conformed to the law as to moral character. Luke 7:29; Romans 3:4.
2nd. Forensically, that is, that the demands of the law as a condition of life are fully satisfied with regard to him.—Acts 13:39; Romans 5:1; Romans 5:9; Romans 8:30-33; 1 Corinthians 6:11; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:11.
3. How can it be proved that the word
1st. In many instances it can bear no other sense. The ungodly are said to be justified without the deeds of the law, by the blood of Christ, by faith, freely, and of grace, through the agency of an advocate, by means of a satisfaction and of imputed righteousness.—Romans 3:20-28; Romans 4:5-7; Romans 5:1; Galatians 2:16; Galatians 3:11; Galatians 5:4; 1 John 2:2.
2nd. It is used as the contrary of condemnation.—Romans 8:33-34.
3rd. The same idea is conveyed in many equivalent and interchangeable expressions.—John 3:18; John 5:24; Romans 4:6-7; 2 Corinthians 5:19.
4th. If it does not bear this meaning, there is no distinction between justification and sanctification.—Turretin, 50. 16., Quaestio 1.
4. What is the usage of the term
Consequently, it sometimes signifies, 1st, holiness of character , Matthew 5:6; Romans 6:13;
2nd, that perfect conformity to the law in person and life which was the original ground of justification under the covenant of works, Romans 10:3; Romans 10:5; Php 3:9; Titus 3:5;
3rd, the vicarious obedience and sufferings of Christ our substitute, which he wrought in our behalf, and which, when imputed to us, becomes our righteousness, or the ground of our justification Romans 4:6; Romans 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:30; which is received and appropriated by us through faith, Romans 3:22; Romans 4:11; Romans 10:5-10; Galatians 2:21; Hebrews 11:7. The phrase, “righteousness of God,” occurs in Matthew 6:33; Romans 1:17; Romans 3:5; Romans 3:21-22; Romans 3:25-26; Romans 10:3; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Php 3:9; James 1:20; 2 Peter 1:1. It evidently means that perfect righteousness or satisfaction to the whole law, precept, and penalty alike, which God provides, and which God will accept, in contrast to our own imperfect services or self–inflicted penances which God will reject, if offered as a ground of justification.
5. What is the usage of the term
It occurs only in Romans 4:25; Romans 5:16; Romans 5:18. It signifies that relation to the law into which we are brought in consequence of the righteousness of Christ being made legally ours. We are absolved from to the penalty, and the rewards promised to obedience are declared to belong to us.
6. Define justification in its gospel sense.
God, as sovereign, elected his chosen people, and gave them to his Son in the covenant of grace, and as sovereign he executes that covenant when he makes the righteousness of Christ theirs by imputation. Justification, on the other hand, is a judicial act of God proceeding upon that sovereign imputation declaring the law to be perfectly satisfied in respect to us. This involves,
1st, pardon;
2nd, restoration to divine favor, as those with regard to whom all the promises conditioned upon obedience to the commands of the law accrue. It is most strictly legal, although he sovereignly admits and credits to us a vicarious righteousness, since this vicarious righteousness is precisely in all respects what the law demands, and that by which the law is fulfilled.—See below, Question 28.
7. What does the law require in order to the justification of a sinner? The law consists essentially of a rule of duty, and of a penalty attached to take effect in case of disobedience. In the case of the sinner, therefore, who has already incurred guilt, the law demands that, besides the rendering of perfect obedience, the penalty also should be suffered.—Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:10-13.
8. Prove that works can not be the ground of a sinner’s justification.
Paul repeatedly asserts this (Galatians 2:16), and declares that we are not justified by our own righteousness, which comes by obedience to the law.—Php 3:9. He also proves the same by several arguments—
1st. The law demands perfect obedience. All works not perfect, therefore, lead to condemnation, and no act of obedience at one time can atone for disobedience at another.—Galatians 3:10; Galatians 3:21; Galatians 5:3.
2nd. If we are justified by works, then Christ is dead in vain. Galatians 2:21; Galatians 5:4.
3rd. If it were of works it would not be of grace.—Romans 11:6; Ephesians 2:8-9.
4th. It would afford cause for boasting.—Romans 3:27; Romans 4:2.
5th. He also quotes the Old Testament to prove that all men are sinners, Romans 3:9-10; that consequently they can not be justified by works.—Psalms 143:2; Romans 3:20. He quotes Habakkuk 2:4, to prove that “the just by faith shall live”; and he cites the example of Abraham.—Galatians 3:6.
9. What are the different opinions as to the kind of works which the Scriptures teach are not sufficient for justification? The Pelagians admit that works of obedience to the ceremonial law are of this nature, but affirm that works of obedience to the moral law are the proper and only ground of justification. The Romanists admit that works wrought in the natural strength, previous to regeneration, are destitute of merit, and unavailable for justification, but they maintain that original sin and previous actual transgressions having been forgiven in baptism for Christ’s sake, good works afterwards performed through grace have, in consequence of the merits of Christ the virtue, 1st, of meriting heaven;
2nd, of making satisfaction for sins. We are justified, then, by evangelical obedience.—“Cat. Rom.,” Part 2., Chapter 5.; “Council of Trent,” Sess. 6. Can. 24., and 32. Protestants deny the justifying efficiency of all classes of works equally.
10. How may it be shown that no class of works, whether ceremonial, moral, or spiritual, can justify?
1st. When the Scriptures deny that justification can be by works, the term “works” is always used generally as obedience to the whole revealed will of God, however made known. Works of obedience rendered to one law, as a ground of justification, are never contrasted with works wrought in obedience to another law, but with grace.—Romans 11:6; Romans 4:4. God demands perfect obedience to his whole will as revealed to any individual man. But since every man is a sinner, justification by the law is equally impossible for all.—Romans 2:14-15; Romans 3:9-10.
2nd. The believer is justified without the deeds of the law, Romans 3:28, and God justifies the ungodly in Christ.—Romans 4:5.
3rd. Justification is asserted to rest altogether upon a different foundation. It is “in the name of Christ,”1 Corinthians 6:11; “by his blood,”Romans 5:9; “freely,”“by his grace,”“by faith.”Romans 3:24; Romans 3:28.
4th. Paul proves that instead of our being justified by good works, such works are rendered possible to us only in that new relation to God into which we are introduced by justification. Ephesians 2:8-10; Romans 6:1-23 and Romans 1:1-25.
11. How can James 2:14-26, be reconciled with this doctrine?
James is not speaking of the meritorious ground of justification, but of the relation which good works sustain to a genuine faith as its fruit and evidence. The meritorious ground of justification is the righteousness of Christ.—Romans 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:30. Faith is the essential prerequisite and instrument of receiving that righteousness.—Ephesians 2:8. James, in the passage cited, simply declares and argues the truth that the faith which is thus the instrumental cause of justification, is never a dead, but always a living and fruitful principle. Paul teaches the same truth often, “Faith works by love,”Galatians 5:6, and “love is the fulfilling of the law,”Romans 13:10.
12. What do the Scriptures declare to be the true and only ground of justification?
Justification is a declaration on the part of the infinitely wise and holy God that the law is satisfied. The law is, like its Author, absolutely unchangeable, and can be satisfied by nothing else than an absolutely perfect righteousness, at once fulfilling the precept, and suffering the penalty. This was rendered by Christ as our representative, and his perfect righteousness, as imputed to us, is the sole and strictly legal ground of our justification. Thus he is made for us the end of the law for righteousness, and we are made the righteousness of God in him.—Romans 3:24; Romans 5:9; Romans 5:19; Romans 8:1; Romans 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 1 Corinthians 6:11; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Php 3:9.
13. How can it be proved that Christ’s active obedience to the precepts of the law is included in that righteousness by which we are justified?
1st. The condition of the covenant of works was perfect obedience. This covenant having flailed in the hands of the first Adam must be fulfilled in the hands of the second Adam, since in the covenant of grace Christ assumed all of the undischarged obligations of his people under the covenant of works. His suffering discharges the penalty, but only his active obedience fulfills the condition.
2nd. All the promises of salvation are attached to obedience, not to suffering.—Matthew 19:16-17; Galatians 3:12.
3rd. Christ came to fulfill the whole law.—Isaiah 13:21; Romans 3:31; 1 Corinthians 1:30.
4th. The obedience of Christ is expressly contrasted with the disobedience of Adam.—Romans 5:19.
14. How may it be shown that Christ’s obedience was free?
Although Christ was made under the law by being born of the woman, and rendered obedience to that law in the exercises of his created human nature yet he did not owe that obedience for himself, but rendered it freely that its merits might be imputed to his people, because the claims of law terminate not upon nature, but upon persons; and he was always a divine person. As he suffered, the just for the unjust so he obeyed, the Lawgiver in the place of the law–subject.
15. In what sense is Christ’s righteousness imputed to believers?
Imputation is an act of God as sovereign judge, at once judicial and sovereign, whereby
(1.) he makes the guilt and legal responsibilities of our sins really Christ’s, and punishes him for them. “He was wounded for our transgression, the punishment of our peace was upon him.”—Isaiah 53:5 and Isaiah 53:11. “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.”—Galatians 3:13. “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.”—2 Corinthians 5:21; John 1:29.
(2.) He makes the righteousness of Christ ours (that is, the legal right to reward, by the gracious covenant conditioned on righteousness), and then treats us as persons legally invested with those rights.“ Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without works.”—Romans 4:6. “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”—Romans 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Php 3:9.
“Imputation” is the charging or crediting to one’s account as the ground of judicial treatment.
“Guilt” is the just obligation to punishment. The reatus poenoe, or “guilt of punishment,” is imputed to Christ in our stead. The reatus culpoe , or guilt of fault, remains ours.
“Righteousness imputed” is the vicarious fulfillment of all the covenant demands on which eternal life is conditioned.
“Merit” is that which deserves on the ground of covenant promise a reward. The merit of reward is imputed to us from Christ, the merit of praiseworthiness remains his forever. As Christ is not made a sinner by the imputation to him of our sins, so we are not made holy by the imputation to us of his righteousness. The transfer is only of guilt from us to him. and of merit from him to us. He justly suffered the punishment due to our sins, and we justly receive the rewards due to his righteousness.—1 John 1:1-10. O. For explanation of “Imputation,” see above, Chap. 21., Ques. 12, and Chap. 25., Ques. 9.
16. Upon what ground does this imputation proceed?
Upon the union federal, spiritual, and vital, which subsists between Christ and his people. Which union, in turn, rests upon the eternal decree of election common to all the persons of the Godhead, and upon the eternal covenant of grace formed between the Father as God absolute and the Son as Mediator. Thus the ultimate ground of imputation is the eternal nature and imperial will of God, the fountain of all law and all right.
17. How may the fact of this imputation be proved from scripture ?
See Romans 5:12-21. Compare Romans 4:6; Romans 3:21, with Romans 5:19. The doctrine of imputation is essentially involved in the doctrine of substitution. If Christ obeyed and suffered in our place it can only be because our sins were imputed to him, which is directly asserted in scripture, Isaiah 53:6; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:24; and, if so, the merit of that obedience and suffering must accrue to us, Matthew 20:28; 1 Timothy 2:6; 1 Peter 3:18. See above, Chapter 21., Question 12. This doctrine is also taught by those passages which affirm that Christ fulfilled the law, Romans 3:31; Romans 10:4; and by those which assert that we are justified by the righteousness of Christ, 1 Corinthians 6:11; Romans 8:1, etc. This doctrine, moreover, stands or falls with the whole view we have presented of the priesthood of Christ, of the Justice of God, of the covenants of works and of grace, and of the nature of the atonement; to which subjects, under their respective heads, the reader is referred.
18. What are the two effects ascribed to the imputation of Christ’s righteousness ?
Christ’s righteousness satisfies, 1st, the penalty of the law;
2nd, then the positive conditions of the covenant of works, i. e., obedience to the precepts of the law. The imputation of that righteousness to the believer, therefore, secures, 1st, the remission of the penalty, pardon of sins;
2nd, the recognition and treatment of the believer as one with respect to whom the covenant is fulfilled, and to whom all its promises and advantages legally accrue. See below, Question 28.
19. Are the sins of believers, committed subsequently to their justification, included in the pardon which is consequent to the imputation of Christ’s righteousness; and if so, in what way ? The elect, although embraced in the purpose of God, and in his covenant with his Son from eternity, are not effectively united to Christ until the time of their regeneration, when, in consequence of their union with him, and the imputation of his righteousness to them, their relation to the law is permanently changed. Although the immutable law always continues their perfect standard of experience and of action, it is no longer to them a condition of the covenant of life, because that covenant has been fully discharged for them by, their sponsor. God no longer imputes sin to them to the end of judicial punishment. Every suffering which they henceforth endure is of the nature of chastisement, designed for their correction and improvement, and forms in its relation to them, no part of the penalty of the law.
20. What are the different opinions as to the class of sins which are forgiven when the sinner is justified ?
Romanists teach that original sin and all actual transgressions prior to baptisms are forgiven for Christ’s sake, through the reception of that sacrament, and that after baptism, sins, as they are committed, are through the merits of Christ forgiven in the observance of the sacrament of penance. See above, Chapter 32., Question 11.
Dr. Pussy has revived an ancient doctrine that in baptism all past sins, original and actual, are forgiven; but his system makes no provision for sins subsequently committed.
Many Protestants have held that only past and present sins are forgiven in the first act of justification, and that sins after regeneration, as they occur, are forgiven upon renewed acts of faith. The true view, however, is, that in consequence of the imputation to him of Christ’s righteousness, the believer is emancipated from his former federal relation to the law, and consequently henceforth no sin is charged to him to the end of judicial condemnation. This follows from the nature of justification, as stated above, and it is illustrated by the recorded experience of Paul, who, while complaining of the law of sin, still warring in his members, yet never doubted of his filial relation to God, nor of the forgiveness of his sins.
21. What are the different opinions as to the relation between faith and justification ?
Sicilians hold that faith, including obedience, is the proper meritorious ground “Cat. Rac.,” Quest. 418–421, and 453.
Armenians teach that although faith has no merit in itself, since it is the gift of God, yet, as a living principle, including evangelical obedience, it is graciously, for Christ’s merits’ sake, imputed to us for righteousness, i.e., accepted as righteousness, upon the ground of which we are declared just. Limborch, “Theol. Christ.,” 6, 4, 22 and 6, 4, 46. The orthodox view is that the active and passive obedience of Christ satisfying both the precept and penalty of the law as a covenant of life, and thus constituting a perfect righteousness, is, upon being appropriated by the believer in the act of faith, actually made his, in a legal sense, by imputation. Faith, therefore, is the mere instrument whereby we partake in the righteousness of Christ, which is the true ground of our justification.
22. Prove from Scripture, that faith is faith the only instrument of justification.
1st. From the nature of faith itself.
(1.) It is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God.––Ephesians 2:8; Php 1:29.
(2.) It is one of the fruits of the Spirit, and, therefore, not the meritorious ground of spiritual blessings.––Galatians 5:22.
(3.) It is an act of the soul, and therefore a work, but though, by means of faith, justification is not by works.–Romans 4:2-5; Romans 11:6.
(4.) Justifying faith terminates on or in Christ, in his blood and sacrifice, and in the promises of God; in its very essence therefore, it involves trust, and, denying its own justifying value, affirms the sole merit of that on which it trusts.––Romans 3:25-26; Romans 4:20; Romans 4:22; Galatians 3:26; Ephesians 1:12-13; 1 John 5:10.
(5.) The law necessarily demands a perfect righteousness, but faith, even when combined with the evangelical obedience which springs from it, is not a perfect righteousness.
2nd. The Scriptures, when referring to the relationship of justification to faith, use the terms
3rd. Faith is distinguished from the righteousness which it apprehends.––Romans 1:17; Php 3:8-11. Turretin, 50. 16, Q. 7.
23. What is the specific object of justification ? The Socinians, denying the divinity of Christ, make the act of justifying faith to terminate “in God through Christ.”––“Rac. Cat.” Sec. 5., Ch. 9. The Romanists, confounding justification and sanctification, make the whole revelation of God the object of the faith that justifies.–– “Cat. Rom.,” Part 1, Chap. 1. The Scriptural doctrine is, that while the renewed heart believes equally every ascertained word of God, the specific act of faith, whereby we are justified, terminates upon the person and work of Christ as Mediator. This is proved, 1st, from express declarations of Scripture. Romans 3:22; Romans 3:25; Galatians 2:16; Php 3:9.
2nd. By the declaration that we are saved by believing in him.––Acts 10:43; Acts 16:31; John 3:16; John 3:36.
3rd. By those figurative expressions which illustrate the act of saving faith as “looking to Christ” etc.––Isaiah 45:22; John 1:12; John 6:35; John 6:37; Matthew 11:28.
4th. Unbeleif is the refusing the righteousness which God provides i. e., Christ.––Romans 10:3-4.
24. What is the nature of that peace which flows from justification ?
1st. Peace with God, his justice being completely satisfied through the righteousness of Christ.––Romans 5:1; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Colossians 1:21; Ephesians 2:14. In witness whereof his Holy Spirit is given to us. –Romans 8:15-16; Hebrews 10:15; Hebrews 10:17. His love shed abroad in our hearts, Romans 5:5, and our habitual fellowship with him established, 1 John 1:3.
2nd. Inward peace of conscience, including consciousness of our reconciliation with God through the operation of his Spirit, as above, and the appeasement of our self–condemning conscience through the apprehension of the righteousness by which we are justified.–Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:2; Hebrews 10:22.
25. What other benefits flow from justification ? Being justified on the ground of a perfect righteousness, our whole relation to God and the law is changed; the gift of the Holy Ghost, adoption, sanctification, perseverance, the working of all things together for good in this life, deliverance in death, the resurrection of the body, and the final glorification, all result.
OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.
26. State and Refute the principal objections made to the Protestant doctrine of justification.
1st. That it is legal, and therefore excludes grace.
We ANSWER–that it is transcendently gracious. 1. The admission of a substitute for guilty sinners was an act of grace. 2. The vicarious obedience and sufferings of the God–man were of infinite grace. 3. The imputation of his righteousness to an individual elected out of the mass of fallen humanity is an act of pure grace. Hence, 4, the entire subsequent regarding and treating the believer as righteous, is a work of grace.
2nd. That it is impious because it declares the sinner to be righteous with the very righteousness of Christ.
WE ANSWER. It is not impious because––1. This righteousness was freely wrought out with the intention it should be ours, and it is freely given to us. 2. It is not Christ’s personal subjective righteousness which is incommunicable, but his vicarious fulfillment of the covenant of life under which we were created which is imputed to us. 3. The merit of praise worthiness is retained by Christ, only its merit of rewardableness is given to us. 4. It is given to us gratuitously, that the praise of glorious grace may redound to Christ alone.
3rd. that gratuitous justification by faith leads to licentiousness.
PAUL ANSWERS. Romans 6:2-7 :
Prop.
1st. Where sin abounded grace did much more abound. Romans 5:20.
Prop.
2nd. Shall we conclude, therefore, that we are to continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid–Romans 6:1-2.
Prop.
3rd. The federal union of the believer with Christ, which secures our justification, is the foundation of, and is inseparable from, that vital spiritual union with him, which secures our sanctification.
Prop.
4th. This method of justification, so far from leading to licentiousness, secures the only conditions under which we could be holy.
(1.) This method of justification, by changing our relation to God, enables us to return to him in a way of a free, loving service.––Romans 6:14; Romans 7:1-6.
(2.) It alone delivers us from the spirit of bondage and fear, and gives us that of adoption and love.–Romans 8:1-17; Romans 13:10; Galatians 5:6; 1 John 4:18; 2 John 1:6.
27. In what respect did the doctrine of Piscator on this subject differ from that of the Reformed Churches?
Piscator, a Protestant divine, Prof. at Herbon (1584–1625), taught,
1st, that, as to his human nature, Christ was under the law in the same sense as any other creature, and that, therefore, he could only obey the law for himself;
2nd, that if Christ had obeyed the law in our place, the law could not claim a second fulfillment of us, and, consequently, Christians would be under no obligations to obey the law of God;
3rd, that if Christ had both obeyed the precept of the law and suffered its penalty, then the law would have been doubly fulfilled since the claims of the precept and the penalty of the law are alternative, not coincident. This doctrine was expressly condemned in the Reformed Churches of Switzerland and Holland, and by the French synods held in the years 1603, 1612, and 1614. In 1615, however, the Synod tacitly allowed these views to pass without condemnation.––Mosheim’s “Hist.”
28. How may it be shown that justification is not mere pardon ?
Piscator erred, from failing to distinguish––
1st. That the claims of law terminate not upon natures, but upon persons. Christ was a divine person, and, therefore, his obedience was free.
2nd. That there is an evident difference between a federal relation to the law as a condition of salvation, and a natural relation to law as a rule of life. Christ discharged the former as our federal representative. The latter necessarily attaches to the believer as to all moral agents forever.
Justification is more than pardon––
1st. Because the very word “to justify” proves it. To “pardon” is, in the exercise of sovereign prerogative, to waive the execution of the penal sanctions of the law. “To justify” is to declare that the demands of the law are satisfied, not waived. Pardon is a sovereign act ––justification is a judicial act.
2nd. As we proved under Chap. 25., Christ did in strict rigor of justice satisfy vicariously for us the demands of the law, both the obedience demanded and the penalty denounced. His satisfaction is the ground of our justification. but pardon is remission of penalty in absence of satisfaction.
3rd If justification were mere pardon it would simply release us from penal suffering, but would provide no further good for us. But “justification through faith in Christ,” secures not pardon only, but also peace, grace, reconciliation, adoption of sons, coheirship, etc., etc.––See above, Ques. l3. Romans 5:1-10; Acts 26:18; Revelation 1:5-6. In the case of justified believers “justification” includes “pardon.” Our justification proceeds on the ground of a “satisfaction,” and, therefore, is not mere pardon. But it is a “vicarious” satisfaction graciously set to the credit of the unworthy, and, therefore, it effects pardon to us sinners who believe in Christ.
29. Did not Calvin often use language to the effect that justification and pardon are the same ?
He did. But his language is to be interpreted––
1st. By the fact that he was arguing with Romanists who taught that “justification consists in remission of sins and infusion of grace.” He argued in opposition that justification consists in the former but does not include the latter.
2nd. By the conclusive fact that his full definitions of justification comprehend the full truth more accurately defined in the Symbols of the Lutheran and Reformed churches
Calvin’s “Institutes, ” Bk. 3, ch. 11, 2.—“A man is said to be justified in the sight of God, when in the judgment of God he is decreed righteous, and is accepted on account of his righteousness. . . . In the same manner a man will be said to be justified by works, if in his life or by the perfection of his works, he can answer and satisfy the divine justice. On the contrary a man will be justified by faith, when excluded from the righteousness of works, he by faith lays hold of the righteousness of Christ, and clothed in it appears in the sight of God not as sinner, but as righteous. Thus we simply interpret justification, as the acceptance with which God receives us into his favor as if we were righteous, and we say that this justification consists in the forgiveness of sins, and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.”
Calvin’s“Commentary,”1 Corinthians 1:30.—, “‘Christ is made unto us righteousness,’ by which, he (the apostle) understood that we are accepted by God in his name (Christ’s), because he expiated our sins, and his obedience is imputed to us for righteousness. For since the righteousness of faith consists in remission of sins, and in gratuitous acceptance, we obtain both through Christ.”
30. In what respect does the governmental theory of the atonement modify the doctrine of justifcation ?
See above, Chap. 25., Question 27.
1st. It follows, from that theory, that justification is a sovereign not a judicial act of God. Christ has not satisfied the law, but merely made it consistent with the government of God to set aside the law in the case of believing men. It is mere pardon, an act of executive clemency.
2nd. As Christ did not die as a substitute, it follows that his righteousness is not imputed; it is the occasion, not the ground of justification.
3rd. As Christ did not die as a substitute, there is no strictly federal union between Christ and his people, and faith can not be the instrument of salvation by being the means of uniting us to Christ, but only the arbitrary condition of justification, or the means of recommending us to God.
4th. As justification is mere pardon, it only sets aside condemnation, and renders, so far forth, future salvation possible. It does nothing to secure the future standing and relations of the believer, under the covenant of salvation, to God.
Dr. Emmons (1745–1840), one of the ablest theologians of the new England School, says (“Sermons,” Vol. 3., p. 3–67)–
(1.) “Justification, in a gospel sense, signifies no more nor less than pardon or remission of sin.”
(2.) “Forgiveness is the only favor which God bestows upon men on Christ’s account.”
(3.) “The full and final justification of believers, or their title to their eternal inheritance, is conditional. They must perform certain things, which he has specified as terms or conditions of their taking possession of their several legacies.”
(4.) “God does promise eternal life to all who obey his commands or exercise those holy and benevolent affections which his commands require.”
31. How does the Armenian theory as to the nature and design of the satisfaction of Christ modify the doctrine of justification ?
They hold––
1st. As to the nature of Christ’s satisfaction that although it was a real propitiation rendered to justice for us, it was not in the rigor of justice perfect, but was graciously accepted and acted on as such by God.–Limborch, “Apol. Theo.,” 3, 22, 5.
2nd. That it was not strictly the substitution of Christ in place of his elect, but rather that he suffered the wrath of God in behalf of all men, in order to make it consistent with justice for God to offer salvation to all men upon condition of faith.
Therefore they regard justification as a sovereign, not a judicial act––
1st. In accepting the sufferings of Christ as sufficient to enable God consistently to offer to men salvation on the terms of the new covenant of grace, i. e., on the condition of faith.
2nd. In imputing to the believer his faith for righteousness for Christ’s sake. This faith they make––
1st. To include evangelical obedience, i. e., the whole principle of religion in heart and life.
2nd. They regard it as the graciously admitted ground, rather than the mere instrument of justification; faith being counted for righteousness, because Christ died. –Limborch, “Theo. Christ.,” 6, 4, 22, and 6, 4, 46. This theory, besides being opposed by all the arguments we have above presented in establishing the orthodox doctrine, labors under the further objections–
1st. It fails to render a clear account as to how the satisfaction of Christ makes it consistent with divine justice to save men upon the condition of faith. If Christ did not obey and suffer strictly as the substitute of his people, it is difficult to see how the justice of God, as it respects them, could have been appeased; and if he did so fulfill the demands of justice in their place, then the orthodox view, as above stated, is admitted.
2nd. It fails to render a clear account of the relation of faith to justification––
(1.) Because faith in Christ, including trust, necessarily implies that the merits of Christ upon which the trust terminates is the ground of justification.
(2.) Faith must be either the ground or the mere instrument of justification. If it be the latter then the righteousness of Christ, which is the object of faith, is that ground. If it be the former, then what is made of the merits of Christ upon which faith rests?
32. How do the Romanists define justification ?
They confound justification with sanctification. It is, 1st, the forgiveness of sins;
2nd, the removal of inherent sin for Christ’s sake;
3rd, the positive infusion of grace. Of this justification they teach that the final cause is the glory of God and eternal life. The efficient cause is the power of the Holy Ghost. The meritorious cause the work of Christ. The instrumental cause baptism. The formal cause the influence of grace, whereby we are made not merely forensically but inherently righteous.–“Council of Trent,” Sess. 6., Chapter 7.
They define faith in its relation to justification to be the beginning of human salvation, the fountain and root of all justification, i. e., of spiritual life. They consequently hold that justification is progressive, and that when a man receives a new nature in baptism, and the work of justification is commenced in him with the forgiveness and the removal of sin, the work is to be carried on by the exercise of the grace implanted, i. e., by good works. Since they confound justification with sanctification, they necessarily deny that men are justified by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, or by mere faith without works.–Sess. 6, Can. 9th and 11th, “De Justificatione.”
They admit that justification is entirely gracious, i. e., of the mere mercy of God, and for the sake of the merits of Jesus Christ, as neither the spiritual exercises nor the works of men previous to justification have any merit whatsoever.––“Council of Trent,” Sess. 6., Chapter 8. A careful distinction must be made between (a) that which in the case of an adult prepares for justification, (b) the realization of justification in the first instance, (c) its subsequent progressive realization in the advance of the gracious soul in justification towards perfection, and (d) the restoration to a state of grace of the baptized Christian after backsliding into sin.
1st. The preparation of the sinner for justification proceeds from the prevenient grace of God, without any merit on the part of the subject. This grace acting through the hearing of the word leads to conviction of sin, repentance, apprehension of the mercy of God in Christ (the church), and hence to a determination to receive baptism and lead a new life (“Conc. Trent,” Sess. 6., chaps. 5. and vi).
2nd. The actual justification of the sinner is the infusion of gracious habits, the pollution of sin having been washed away by the power of God, on account of the merits of Christ, through the instrumentality of baptism, which operates its effects by an energy made inherent in it, by the institution of God. After this, inherent sin being removed, remission of guilt necessarily follows as its immediate effect. Guilt is the relation which sin sustains to the justice of God. The thing being removed, the relation ceases, ipso facto(Bellarmin, “De Amiss. Gratiae,” etc., 5. 7.
3rd. Having thus been justified and made a friend of God, the baptized Christian advances from virtue to virtue, and is renewed from day to day, through the observance of the commandments of God and of the church, faith co–operating with good works, now made possible in virtue of the previous justification, and which truly merit, and receive as a just reward, increase of grace, and more and more perfect justification. His first justification was for Christ’s sake, without any co–operation of his own merit, but by consent of his own will. His second or continued and increasing justification is for Christ’s sake, through and in proportion to his own merit, which deserves increase of grace and acceptance in proportion (a) to his personal holiness, and (b) to his obedience to ecclesiastical rules (“Conc. Trent,” Sess. 6, Chap. 10. and Can. 32).
4th. In the case of those who having been justified, have sinned, the lost grace of justification is restored, for the merits of Christ, through the sacrament of Penance, which is provided as a second plank to rescue those who have shipwrecked grace. This penance includes (a) sorrow for sin, (b) confession to a priest having jurisdiction, (c) sacerdotal absolution, (d) satisfaction by alms, prayers, fasts, etc., and this justification if not rendered perfect by these means on earth is completed by purgatorial fires. All these satisfactions, earthly and purgatorial, are meritorious satisfactions to divine Justice, cancelling the temporal punishments attaching to the sins for which they are undergone, the eternal punishment whereof has been at once and freely remitted, Bitter through the sacrament itself, or the honest desire for it (“Conc. Trent,” Sess. 6, Chaps. 14. and 16., and Can. 30, and Sess. 14, Chaps. 1.–ix).
33. What are the points of difference between Protestants and Romanists on this whole subject ?
1st. As to the nature of justification. We regard it as a judicial act of God, declaring the believer to be forensically just, on the ground of the righteousness of Christ made his by imputation. They regard it as the infusion of inherent grace.
2nd. As to its meritorious ground. Both say the merits of Christ. But they say these merits are made ours by sanctification. We, by imputation, through the instrumentality of faith.
3rd. As to the nature and office of faith. We say that it is the instrument; they the beginning and root of justification.
4th. They say that justification is progressive.
5th. That it may be lost by mortal sin and regained and increased through the sacrament of Penance, and completed in Purgatory.––See above, Chapter 32., on “Repentance and Penance.”
34. What are the leading arguments against the Romanists view on this subject?
1st. This whole doctrine is confused.
(1.) It confounds under one definition two matters entirely distinct, namely, the forensic remission of the condemnation due to sin with the washing away of inherent sin, and the introduction to a state of covenant favor with God with the infusion of inherent grace.
(2.) It renders no sensible account as to the manner in which the merit of Christ propitiates divine justice.
2nd. Their definition is refuted by all the evidence above exhibited, that the terms “justification” and “righteousness” are used in Scripture in a forensic sense.
3rd. Their view, by making our inherent grace wrought in us by the Holy Ghost for Christ’s sake the ground of our acceptance with God, subverts the whole gospel. It is of the very essence of the gospel that the ground of our acceptance with the father is the mediatorial work of the son, who is for us the end of the law for righteousness, and not our own graces.
4th. Their view of the merit of works performed by divine grace after baptism is inconsistent with what Scripture teaches and the Romish Church itself teaches as to original sin and guilt, and as to the essential graciousness of the salvation wrought by Christ. Thomas Aquinas himself (“Summa.,” Q. 114, art. 5) says, “If grace be considered in the sense of a gratuitous gift, all merit is excluded by grace.” Therefore the entire system of Papist justification falls.
5th. It is legal in its spirit and method, and consequently induces either spiritual pride or despair, but never can nourish true evangelical assurance at once humble and confident..
6th. The Scriptures declare that on the ground of the propitiation of Christ God justifies the believer as ungodly, not as sanctified. It certainly could not require an atonement to render God both just and the sanctifier of the ungodly. Romans 4:5.
7th. The phrases to impute, reckon, count sin or righteousness are absolutely consistent only with a forensic interpretation. To impute righteousness without works in the forensic sense, in the 4th chapter of Romans, is reasonable. To impute inherent grace without works is nonsense.
8th. Their definition is refuted by all those arguments which establish the true view with respect to the nature and office of justifying faith.–see above, Questions 21–23.
AUTHORITATIVE STATMENTS
ROMISH DOCTRINE.—For statement of the nature, ground, and means of justification, see above, under Ch. 39. For statement of Romish Doctrine of Good Works and Works of Supererogation, see below, under Ch. 35. and see doctrine of Penance, above, under Ch. 32.
“Counc. Trent,” Sess. 6, ch. 8.—“We are said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and the root of all justification.”Ib., can. 23.—“If any one saith that a man once justified can sin no more nor lose grace, and therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or on the other hand, that he is able during his whole life to avoid all sins, even those that are venial, except by a special privilege from God, as the church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin, let him be accursed.” Can. 24.—“If any one say that righteousness received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof let him be accursed.” Can. 29.— “If any one saith that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again, or, that he is able indeed to recover the righteousness which he has lost, but by faith alone, without the sacrament of penance .. . . let him be accursed.” can. 30.— “If any one saith, that, after the grace of justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in purgatory, before he can enter the kingdom of heaven, let him be accursed.” Can. 32.–“if any one saith, that the good works of one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, as that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified; or that the justified man, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of eternal life if he die in grace, and also an increase of glory; let him be accursed.”
BELLARMIN, “De Justificatione,” 5, 1.— “The common opinion of all Catholics holds that all the good works of justified persons are truly and properly meritorious, and deserving not merely of a reward of some sort, but of eternal life itself. 4, 7.—We say that good works are necessary to a justified man in order to his salvation, not only in the way of being present, but also in the way of efficiency, since they effect salvation, and faith without them does not effect it. Ib. 5, 5.–the merits of justified persons do not stand opposed to the merits of Christ, but they spring from these, and whatever praise those merits of the justified have, redounds entire to the praise of the merits of Christ.”
Lutheran Doctrine. – “Apologia Confessionis”–“To justify in this place (Romans 5:1), signifies in a forensic sense to absolve an accused person and pronounce him righteous but on account of another’s righteousness, i. e., of Christ; which other’s righteousness is made over to us through faith.”
“Formula Concordioe ” (Hase Ed.), p. 685.— “The term justification in this transaction means to pronounce righteous, to absolve from sins, and from the eternal punishment of sinners, on account of the righteousness of Christ, which is imputed by God to faith.”Ib. p. 684.—“Man a sinner may be justified before God . . without any merits or worthiness of ours, and apart from any works, preceding, accompanying, or following, out of mere grace.”Ib. p.584.— “We confess that faith alone is that means and instrument by which we apprehend Christ our Saviour and in Christ of that righteousness, which can stand the judgment of God.” Ib.. p. 689.— “Neither repentance, nor love, nor any other virtue but faith alone, is the single means and instrument by which we are able to apprehend and accept the grace of God, the merit of Christ, and the remission of sins.”
REFORMED DOCTRINE.
“Westminster Confession of Faith,” Ch. 11.
“Heidelberg Cat.” Ques. 60.— “Nevertheless I may now embrace all these benefits with a true boldness of mind; without any merit of mine, of the mere mercy of God, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ is imputed and given to me, as if I had myself committed no sin, nor incurred any stain, yea, as if I had myself perfectly performed that obedience which Christ performed for me.”
REMONSTRANT DOCTRINE.–Limborch, “Christ. Theol.,” 6, 4, 22.— “Let it be understood that, when we say we are justified by faith, we do not exclude works, which faith requires, and as a fruitful mother produces but we include them . . . nor by faith is a bare faith to be understood, as contradistinguished from the works which faith produces, but together with the faith, all that obedience which God in the New Testament appoints, and which is supplied by faith in Jesus Christ. 31.—But faith is a condition in us and is required of us in order that we may obtain justification. It is therefore an act which, although viewed in itself it is by no means perfect, but in many respects defective, is yet received as full and perfect by God graciously and freely and on account of it God graciously bestows remission of sins and the reward of eternal life. . . 29. The object of faith (justifying) we declare to be Jesus Christ entire, as prophet, priest, and king; not only his propitiation, but his precepts, promises, and threatenings; by it therefore we embrace the entire Christ, his word, and all his saving benefits.”
SOCINIAN DOCTRINE– “Racovian Catechism,” Sec. 5, ch. 9.—“The faith which is by itself followed by salvation, is such an assent to the doctrine of Christ that we apply it to its proper object; that is, that we trust in God through Christ, and give ourselves up wholly to obey his will, whereby we obtain his promises. . . . . If piety and obedience, when life is continued after the acknowledgment of Christ, be required as indispensable to salvation, it is necessary that the faith to which alone and in reality salvation is ascribed, should comprehend obedience. . . Ib. ch. 11.—Justification is, when God regards us as just or so deals with us as if we were altogether just and innocent. This he does in the New Covenant, in forgiving our sins and conferring upon us eternal life.”