Chapter XIII: Section II: The Application Of Christ’s Redemption In Its Actual (7)

(_d_) The declaration that the sinner is restored to God’s favor, has its ground, not in the sinner’s personal character or conduct, but solely in the obedience and righteousness of Christ, to whom the sinner is united by faith. Thus Christ’s work is the procuring cause of our justification, in both its elements. As we are acquitted on account of Christ’s suffering of the penalty of the law, so on account of Christ’s obedience we receive the rewards of law.

All this comes to us in Christ. We participate in the rewards
promised to his obedience: _John 20:31_—“_that believing ye may
have life in his name_”; _1 Cor. 3:21‐23_—“_For all things are
yours; ... all are yours; and ye are Christ’s; and Christ is
God’s._” Denovan, Toronto Baptist, Dec. 1883, maintains that
“grace operates in two ways: (1) for the _rebel_ it provides a
scheme of _justification_,—this is judicial, matter of debt; (2)
for the _child_ it provides pardon,—fatherly forgiveness on
repentance.” _Heb. 7:19_—“_the law made nothing perfect ... a
bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw nigh
unto God._” This “_better hope_” is offered to us in Christ’s
death and resurrection. The veil of the temple was the symbol of
separation from God. The rending of that veil was the symbol on
the one hand that sin had been atoned for, and on the other hand
that unrestricted access to God was now permitted us in Christ the
great forerunner. Bonar’s hymn, “Jesus, whom angel hosts adore,”
has for its concluding stanza: “’T is finished all: the veil is
rent. The welcome sure, the access free:—Now then, we leave our
banishment, O Father, to return to thee!” See pages 749 (_b_), 770
(_h_).

James Russell Lowell: “At the devil’s booth all things are sold.
Each ounce of dross costs its ounce of gold; For a cap and bells
our lives we pay: Bubbles we buy with a whole soul’s tasking; ’T
is heaven alone that is given away, ’T is only God may be had for
the asking.” John G. Whittier: “The hour draws near, howe’er
delayed and late, When at the Eternal Gate, We leave the words and
works we call our own, And lift void hands alone For love to fill.
Our nakedness of soul Brings to that gate no toll; Giftless we
come to him who all things gives, And live because he lives.”

H. B. Smith, System of Christian Doctrine, 523, 524—“Justification
and pardon are not the same in Scripture. We object to the view of
Emmons (Works, vol. 5), that ‘justification is no more nor less
than pardon,’ and that ‘God rewards men for their own, and not
Christ’s, obedience,’ for the reason that the words, as used in
common life, relate to wholly different things. If a man is
declared just by a human tribunal, he is not pardoned, he is
acquitted; his own inherent righteousness, as respects the charge
against him, is recognized and declared. The gospel proclaims both
pardon and justification. There is no significance in the use of
the word ‘justify,’ if pardon be all that is intended....

“Justification involves what pardon does not, a righteousness
which is the ground of the acquittal and favor; not the mere favor
of the sovereign, but the merit of Christ, is at the basis—the
righteousness which is of God. The ends of the law are so far
satisfied by what Christ has done, that the sinner can be
pardoned. The law is not merely set aside, but its great ends are
answered by what Christ has done in our behalf. God might pardon
as a sovereign, from mere benevolence (as regard to happiness);
but in the gospel he does more,—he pardons in consistency with his
holiness,—upholding that as the main end of all his dealings and
works. Justification involves acquittal from all the penalty of
the law, and the inheritance of all the blessings of the redeemed
state. The penalty of the law—spiritual, temporal, eternal
death—is all taken away; and the opposite blessings are conferred,
in and through Christ—the resurrection to blessedness, the gift of
the Spirit, and eternal life....

“If justification is forgiveness simply, it applies only to the
_past_. If it is also a title to life, it includes the future
condition of the soul. The latter alone is consistent with the
plan and decrees of God respecting redemption—his seeing the end
from the beginning. The reason why justification has been taken as
pardon is two‐fold: first, it _does_ involve pardon,—this is its
negative side, while it has a positive side also—the title to
eternal life; secondly, the tendency to resolve the gospel into an
ethical system. Only our acts of choice as meritorious could
procure a title to favor, a positive reward. Christ might remove
the obstacle, but the title to heaven is derived only from what we
ourselves do.

“Justification is, therefore, not a merely governmental provision,
as it must be on any scheme that denies that Christ’s work has
direct respect to the ends of the law. Views of the atonement
determine the views on justification, if logical sequence is
observed. We have to do here, not with views of natural justice,
but with divine methods. If we regard the atonement simply as
answering the ends of a governmental scheme, our view must be that
justification merely removes an obstacle, and the end of it is
only pardon, and not eternal life.”

But upon the true view, that the atonement is a complete
satisfaction to the holiness of God, justification embraces not
merely pardon, or acquittal from the punishments of law, but also
restoration to favor, or the rewards promised to actual obedience.
See also Quenstedt, 3:524; Philippi, Active Obedience of Christ;
Shedd, Dogm. Theol., 2:432, 433.

4. Relation of Justification to God’s Law and Holiness.

A. Justification has been shown to be a forensic term. A man may, indeed, be conceived of as just, in either of two senses: (_a_) as just in moral character,—that is, absolutely holy in nature, disposition, and conduct; (_b_) as just in relation to law,—or as free from all obligation to suffer penalty, and as entitled to the rewards of obedience.

So, too, a man may be conceived of as justified, in either of two senses: (_a_) made just in moral character; or, (_b_) made just in his relation to law. But the Scriptures declare that there does not exist on earth a just man, in the first of these senses (Eccl. 7:20). Even in those who are renewed in moral character and united to Christ, there is a remnant of moral depravity.

If, therefore, there be any such thing as a just man, he must be just, not in the sense of possessing an unspotted holiness, but in the sense of being delivered from the penalty of law, and made partaker of its rewards. If there be any such thing as justification, it must be, not an act of God which renders the sinner absolutely holy, but an act of God which declares the sinner to be free from legal penalties and entitled to legal rewards.

_Justus_ is derived from _jus_, and suggests the idea of courts
and legal procedures. The fact that “justify” is derived from
_justus_ and _facio_, and might therefore seem to imply the making
of a man subjectively righteous, should not blind us to its
forensic use. The phrases “_sanctify the Holy One of Jacob_” (_Is.
29:23_; _cf._ _1 Pet. 3:15_—“_sanctify in your hearts Christ as
Lord_”) and “_glorify God_” (_1 Cor. 6:20_) do not mean, to _make_
God subjectively holy or glorious, for this he _is_, whatever we
may do; they mean rather, to _declare_, or _show_, him to be holy
or glorious. So justification is not making a man righteous, or
even pronouncing him righteous, for no man _is_ subjectively
righteous. It is rather to count him righteous so far as respects
his relations to law, to treat him as righteous, or to declare
that God will, for reasons assigned, so treat him (Payne). So long
as any remnant of sin exists, no justification, in the sense of
making holy, can be attributed to man: _Eccl. 7:20_—“_Surely there
is not a righteous man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth
not._” If no man is just, in this sense, then God cannot pronounce
him just, for God cannot lie. Justification, therefore, must
signify a deliverance from legal penalties, and an assignment of
legal rewards. O. P. Gifford: There is no such thing as “salvation
_by_ character”; what men need is salvation _from_ character. The
only sense in which salvation by character is rational or
Scriptural is that suggested by George Harris, Moral Evolution,
409—“Salvation by character is not self‐righteousness, but Christ
in us.” But even here it must be remembered that Christ _in_ us
presupposes Christ _for_ us. The objective atonement for sin must
come before the subjective purification of our natures. And
justification is upon the ground of that objective atonement, and
not upon the ground of the subjective cleansing.

The Jews had a proverb that if only one man could perfectly keep
the whole law even for one day, the kingdom of Messiah would at
once come upon the earth. This is to state in another form the
doctrine of Paul, in _Rom. 7:9_—“_When the commandment came, sin
revived, and I died._” To recognize the impossibility of being
justified by Pharisaic works was a preparation for the gospel; see
Bruce, Apologetics, 419. The Germans speak of Werk‐, Lehre‐,
Buchstaben‐, Negations‐, Parteigerechtigkeit; but all these are
forms of self‐righteousness. Berridge: “A man may steal some gems
from the crown of Jesus and be guilty only of petty larceny, ...
but the man who would justify himself by his own works steals the
crown itself, puts it on his own head, and proclaims himself by
his own conquests a king in Zion.”

B. The difficult feature of justification is the declaration, on the part of God, that a sinner whose remaining sinfulness seems to necessitate the vindicative reaction of God’s holiness against him, is yet free from such reaction of holiness as is expressed in the penalties of the law.

The fact is to be accepted on the testimony of Scripture. If this testimony be not accepted, there is no deliverance from the condemnation of law. But the difficulty of conceiving of God’s declaring the sinner no longer exposed to legal penalty is relieved, if not removed, by the three‐ fold consideration:

(_a_) That Christ has endured the penalty of the law in the sinner’s stead.

_Gal. 3:13_—“_Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having
become a curse for us._” Denovan: “We are justified by faith,
instrumentally, in the same sense as a debt is paid by a good note
or a check on a substantial account in a distant bank. It is only
the intelligent and honest acceptance of justification already
provided.” _Rom. 8:3_—“_God, sending his own Son ... condemned sin
in the flesh_” = the believer’s sins were judged and condemned on
Calvary. The way of pardon through Christ honors God’s justice as
well as God’s mercy; _cf._ _Rom. 3:26_—“_that he might himself be
just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus._”

(_b_) That the sinner is so united to Christ, that Christ’s life already constitutes the dominating principle within him.

_Gal. 2:20_—“_I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no
longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me._” God does not
justify any man whom he does not foresee that he can and will
sanctify. Some prophecies produce their own fulfilment. Tell a man
he is brave, and you help him to become so. So declaratory
justification, when published in the heart by the Holy Spirit,
helps to make men just. Harris, God the Creator, 2:332—“The
objection to the doctrine of justification by faith insists that
justification must be conditioned, not on faith, but on right
character. But justification by faith is itself the doctrine of a
justification conditioned on right character, because faith in God
is the only possible beginning of right character, either in men
or angels.” Gould, Bib. Theol. N. T., 67‐79, in a similar manner
argues that Paul’s emphasis is on the spiritual effect of the
death of our Lord, rather than on its expiatory effect. The course
of thought in the Epistle to the Romans seems to us to contradict
this view. Sin and the objective atonement for sin are first
treated; only after justification comes the sanctification of the
believer. Still it is true that justification is never the sole
work of God in the soul. The same Christ in union with whom we are
justified does at that same moment a work of regeneration which is
followed by sanctification.

(_c_) That this life of Christ is a power in the soul which will gradually, but infallibly, extirpate all remaining depravity, until the whole physical and moral nature is perfectly conformed to the divine holiness.

_Phil. 3:21_—“_who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation,
that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to
the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto
himself_”; _Col. 3:1‐4_—“_If then ye were raised together with
Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated on
the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things that are above,
not on the things that are upon the earth. For ye died, and your
life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life,
shall be manifested, then shall ye also with him be manifested in
glory._”

Truth of fact, and ideal truth, are not opposed to each other. F.
W. Robertson, Lectures and Addresses, 256—“When the agriculturist
sees a small, white, almond‐like thing rising from the ground, he
calls that an oak; but this is not a truth of fact, it is an ideal
truth. The oak is a large tree, with spreading branches and leaves
and acorns; but that is only a thing an inch long, and
imperceptible in all its development; yet the agriculturist sees
in it the idea of what it shall be, and, if I may borrow a
Scriptural phrase, he _imputes_ to it the majesty, and excellence,
and glory, that is to be hereafter.” This method of representation
is effective and unobjectionable, so long as we remember that the
force which is to bring about this future development and
perfection is not the force of unassisted human nature, but rather
the force of Christ and his indwelling Spirit. See Philippi,
Glaubenslehre, v, 1:201‐208.

Gore, Incarnation, 224—“’Looking at the mother,’ wrote George
Eliot of Mrs. Garth in The Mill on the Floss, ‘you might hope that
the daughter would become like her—which is a prospective
advantage equal to a dowry—the mother too often standing behind
the daughter like a malignant prophecy: Such as I am, she will
shortly be.’ George Eliot imputes by anticipation to the daughter
the merits of the mother, because her life is, so to speak, of the
same piece. Now, by new birth and spiritual union, our life is of
the same piece with the life of Jesus. Thus he, our elder brother,
stands behind us, his people, as a prophecy of all good. Thus God
accepts us, deals with us, ‘_in the Beloved_,’ rating us at
something of his value, imputing to us his merits, because in
fact, except we be reprobates, he himself is the most powerful and
real force at work in us.”

5. Relation of Justification to Union with Christ and the Work of the Spirit.

A. Since the sinner, at the moment of justification, is not yet completely transformed in character, we have seen that God can declare him just, not on account of what he is in himself, but only on account of what Christ is. The ground of justification is therefore not, (_a_) as the Romanists hold, a new righteousness and love infused into us, and now constituting our moral character; nor, (_b_) as Osiander taught, the essential righteousness of Christ’s divine nature, which has become ours by faith; but (_c_) the satisfaction and obedience of Christ, as the head of a new humanity, and as embracing in himself all believers as his members.

Ritschl regarded justification as primarily an endowment of the
church, in which the individual participated only so far as he
belonged to the church; see Pfleiderer, Die Ritschl’sche
Theologie, 70. Here Ritschl committed an error like that of the
Romanist,—the church is the door to Christ, instead of Christ
being the door to the church. Justification belongs primarily to
Christ, then to all who join themselves to Christ by faith, and
the church is the natural and voluntary aggregation of those who
in Christ are thus justified. Hence the necessity for the
resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus. “For as the ministry
of Enoch was sealed by his reception into heaven, and as the
ministry of Elijah was also abundantly proved by his translation,
so also the righteousness and innocence of Christ. But it was
necessary that the ascension of Christ should be more fully
attested, because upon his righteousness, so fully proved by his
ascension, we must depend for all our righteousness. For if God
had not approved him after his resurrection, and he had not taken
his seat at his right hand, we could by no means be accepted of
God” (Cartwright).

A. J. Gordon, Ministry of the Spirit, 46, 193, 195, 206—“Christ
must be justified in the spirit and received up into glory, before
he can be made righteousness to us and we can become the
righteousness of God in him. Christ’s coronation is the
indispensable condition of our justification.... Christ the High
Priest has entered the Holy of Holies in heaven for us. Until he
comes forth again at the second advent, how can we be assured that
his sacrifice for us is accepted? We reply: By the gift of the
Holy Spirit. The presence of the Spirit in the church is the proof
of the presence of Christ before the throne.... The Holy Spirit
convinces of righteousness, ‘_because I go unto the Father, and ye
see me no more_’ (_John 16:10_). We can only know that ‘_we have a
Paraclete with the Father, even Jesus Christ the Righteous_’ (_1
John 2:1_), by that ‘_other Paraclete_’ sent forth from the
Father, even the Holy Spirit (_John 14:25, 26; 15:26_). The
church, having the Spirit, reflects Christ to the world. As Christ
manifests the Father, so the church through the Spirit manifests
Christ. So Christ gives to us his name, ‘Christians,’ as the
husband gives his name to the wife.”

As Adam’s sin is imputed to us, not because Adam is in us, but because we were in Adam; so Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us, not because Christ is in us, but because we are in Christ,—that is, joined by faith to one whose righteousness and life are infinitely greater than our power to appropriate or contain. In this sense, we may say that we are justified through a Christ outside of us, as we are sanctified through a Christ within us. Edwards: “The justification of the believer is no other than his being admitted to communion in, or participation of, this head and surety of all believers.”

_1 Tim. 1:14_—“_faith and love which is in Christ Jesus_”;
_3:16_—“_He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the
spirit_”; _Acts 13:39_—“_and by him_ [lit.: ‘_in him_’] _every one
that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could
not be justified by the law of Moses_”; _Rom. 4:25_—“_who was
delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our
justification_”; _Eph. 1:6_—“_accepted in the Beloved_”—Rev.
Vers.: “_freely bestowed on us in the Beloved_”; _1 Cor.
6:11_—“_justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ._” “We in
Christ” is the formula of our justification; “Christ in us” is the
formula of our sanctification. As the water which the shell
contains is little compared with the great ocean which contains
the shell, so the actual change wrought within us by God’s
sanctifying grace is slight compared with the boundless freedom
from condemnation and the state of favor with God into which we
are introduced by justification; _Rom. 5:1, 2_—“_Being therefore
justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus
Christ; through whom also we have had our access by faith into
this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in hope of the glory
of God._”

Here we have the third instance of imputation. The first was the
imputation of Adam’s sin to us; and the second was the imputation
of our sins to Christ. The third is now the imputation of Christ’s
righteousness to us. In each of the former cases, we have sought
to show that the legal relation presupposes a natural relation.
Adam’s sin is imputed to us, because we are one with Adam; our
sins are imputed to Christ, because Christ is one with humanity.
So here, we must hold that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to
us, because we are one with Christ. Justification is not an
arbitrary transfer to us of the merits of another with whom we
have no real connection. This would make it merely a legal
fiction; and there are no legal fictions in the divine government.

Instead of this external and mechanical method of conception, we
should first set before us the fact of Christ’s justification,
after he had borne our sins and risen from the dead. In him,
humanity, for the first time, is acquitted from punishment and
restored to the divine favor. But Christ’s new humanity is the
germinal source of spiritual life for the race. He was justified,
not simply as a private person, but as our representative and
head. By becoming partakers of the new life in him, we share in
all he is and all he has done; and, first of all, we share in his
justification. So Luther gives us, for substance, the formula: “We
in Christ = justification; Christ in us = sanctification.” And in
harmony with this formula is the statement quoted in the text
above from Edwards, Works, 4:66.

See also H. B. Smith, Presb. Rev., July, 1881—“Union with Adam and
with Christ is the ground of imputation. But the parallelism is
incomplete. While the sin of Adam is imputed to us because it is
ours, the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us simply because
of our union with him, not at all because of our personal
righteousness. In the one case, character is taken into the
account; in the other, it is not. In sin, our demerits are
included; in justification, our merits are excluded.” For further
statements of Dr. Smith, see his System of Christian Theology,
524‐552.

C. H. M. on Genesis, page 78—“The question for every believer is
not ‘What am I?’ but ‘What is Christ?’ Of Abel it is said: ‘_God
testified of his gifts_’ (_Heb. 11:4_, A. V.). So God testifies,
not of the believer, but of his gift,—and his gift is Christ. Yet
Cain was angry because he was not received _in his sins_, while
Abel was accepted _in his gift_. This was right, if Abel was
justified in himself; it was wrong, because Abel was justified
only in Christ.” See also Hodge, Outlines of Theology, 384‐388,
392; Baird, Elohim Revealed, 448.

B. The relation of justification to regeneration and sanctification, moreover, delivers it from the charges of externality and immorality. God does not justify ungodly men in their ungodliness. He pronounces them just only as they are united to Christ, who is absolutely just, and who, by his Spirit, can make them just, not only in the eye of the law, but in moral character. The very faith by which the sinner receives Christ is an act in which he ratifies all that Christ has done, and accepts God’s judgment against sin as his own (John 16:11).

_John 16:11_—“_of judgment, because the prince of this world hath
been judged_”—the Holy Spirit leads the believer to ratify God’s
judgment against sin and Satan. Accepting Christ, the believer
accepts Christ’s death for sin, and resurrection to life for his
own. If it were otherwise, the first act of the believer, after
his discharge, might be a repetition of his offences. Such a
justification would offend against the fundamental principles of
justice and the safety of government. It would also fail to
satisfy the conscience. This clamors not only for pardon, but for
renewal. Union with Christ has one legal fruit—justification; but
it has also one moral fruit—sanctification.

A really guilty man, when acquitted by judge and jury, does not
cease to be the victim of remorse and fear. Forgiveness of sin is
not in itself a deliverance from sin. The outward acquittal needs
to be accompanied by an inward change to be really effective.
Pardon for sin without power to overcome sin would be a mockery of
the criminal. Justification for Christ’s sake therefore goes into
effect through regeneration by the Holy Spirit; see E. H. Johnson,
in Bib. Sac., July, 1892:362.

A Buddhist priest who had studied some years in England printed in
Shanghai not long ago a pamphlet entitled “Justification by Faith
the only true Basis of Morality.” It argues that any other
foundation is nothing but pure selfishness, but that morality, to
have any merit, must be unselfish. Justification by faith supplies
an unselfish motive, because we accept the work done for us by
another, and we ourselves work from gratitude, which is not a
selfish motive. After laying down this Christian foundation, the
writer erects the structure of faith in the Amida incarnation of
Buddha. Buddhism opposes to the Christian doctrine of a creative
Person, only a creative process; sin has relation only to the man
sinning, and has no relation to Amida Buddha or to the eternal law
of causation; salvation by faith in Amida Buddha is faith in one
who is the product of a process, and a product may perish.
Tennyson: “They are but broken lights of Thee, And thou, O Christ,
art more than they.”

Justification is possible, therefore, because it is always accompanied by regeneration and union with Christ, and is followed by sanctification. But this is a very different thing from the Romanist confounding of justification and sanctification, as different stages of the same process of making the sinner actually holy. It holds fast to the Scripture distinction between justification as a declarative act of God, and regeneration and sanctification as those efficient acts of God by which justification is accompanied and followed.

Both history and our personal observation show that nothing can
change the life and make men moral, like the gospel of free pardon
in Jesus Christ. Mere preaching of morality will effect nothing of
consequence. There never has been more insistence upon morality
than in the most immoral times, like those of Seneca, and of the
English deists. As to their moral fruits, we can safely compare
Protestant with Roman Catholic systems and leaders and countries.
We do not become right by doing right, for only those can do right
who have become right. The prodigal son is forgiven before he
actually confesses and amends (_Luke 15:20, 21_). Justification is
always accompanied by regeneration, and is followed by
sanctification; and all three are results of the death of Christ.
But the sin‐offering must precede the thank‐offering. We must
first be accepted ourselves before we can offer gifts; _Heb.
11:4_—“_By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice
than Cain, through which he had witness borne to him that he was
righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts._”

Hence we read in _Eph. 5:25, 26_—“_Christ also loved the church,
and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having
cleansed_ = [after he had cleansed] _it by the washing of water
with the word_” [= regeneration]; _1 Pet. 1:1, 2_—“_elect ...
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in
sanctification of the Spirit_ [regeneration], _unto obedience_
[conversion] _and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ_
[justification]”; _1 John 1:7_—“_if we walk in the light, as he is
in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood
of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin_”—here the “cleansing”
refers primarily and mainly to justification, not to
sanctification; for the apostle himself declares in _verse 8_—“_If
we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us._”

Quenstedt says well, that “justification, since it is an act,
outside of man, in God, cannot produce an intrinsic change in us.”
And yet, he says, “although faith alone justifies, yet faith is
not alone.” Melanchthon: “Sola fides justificat; sed fides non est
sola.” With faith go all manner of gifts of the Spirit and
internal graces of character. But we should let go all the
doctrinal gains of the Reformation if we did not insist that these
gifts and graces are accompaniments and consequences of
justification, instead of being a part or a ground of
justification. See Girdlestone, O. T. Synonyms, 104,
note—“Justification is God’s declaration that the individual
sinner, on account of the faith which unites him to Christ, is
taken up into the relation which Christ holds to the Father, and
has applied to him personally the objective work accomplished for
humanity by Christ.”

6. Relation of Justification to Faith.

A. We are justified by faith, rather than by love or by any other grace: (_a_) not because faith is itself a work of obedience by which we merit justification,—for this would be a doctrine of justification by works; (_b_) nor because faith is accepted as an equivalent of obedience,—for there is no equivalent except the perfect obedience of Christ; (_c_) nor because faith is the germ from which obedience may spring hereafter,—for it is not the faith which accepts, but the Christ who is accepted, that renders such obedience possible; but (_d_) because faith, and not repentance, or love, or hope, is the medium or instrument by which we receive Christ and are united to him. Hence we are never said to be justified διὰ πίστιν, = on account of faith, but only διὰ πίστεως, = through faith, or ἐκ πίστεως, = by faith. Or, to express the same truth in other words, while the grace of God is the efficient cause of justification, and the obedience and sufferings of Christ are the meritorious or procuring cause, faith is the mediate or instrumental cause.

Edwards, Works, 4:69‐73—“Faith justifies, because faith includes
the whole act of unition to Christ as a Savior. It is not the
nature of any other graces or virtues directly to close with
Christ as a mediator, any further than they enter into the
constitution of justifying faith, and do belong to its nature”;
Observations on Trinity, 64‐67—“Salvation is not offered to us
upon any condition, but freely and for nothing. We are to do
nothing for it,—we are only to take it. This taking and receiving
is faith.” H. B. Smith, System, 524—“An internal change is a _sine
qua non_ of justification, but not its meritorious ground.” Give a
man a gold mine. It is _his_. He has not to work _for_ it; he has
only to work _it_. Working _for_ life is one thing; working _from_
life is quite another. The marriage of a poor girl to a wealthy
proprietor makes her possessor of his riches despite her former
poverty. Yet her acceptance has not _purchased_ wealth. It is
hers, not because of what she is or has done, but because of what
her husband is and has done. So faith is the condition of
justification, only because through it Christ becomes ours, and
with him his atonement and righteousness. Salvation comes not
because our faith saves us, but because it links us to the Christ
who saves; and believing is only the link. There is no more merit
in it than in the beggar’s stretching forth his hand to receive
the offered purse, or the drowning man’s grasping the rope that is
thrown to him.

The Wesleyan scheme is inclined to make faith a work. See Dabney,
Theology, 637. This is to make faith _the_ cause and ground, or at
least to add it to Christ’s work as a _joint_ cause and ground, of
justification; as if justification were διὰ πίστιν, instead of διὰ
πίστεως or ἐκ πίστεως. Since faith is never perfect, this is to go
back to the Roman Catholic uncertainty of salvation. See Dorner,
Glaubenslehre, 2:744, 745 (Syst. Doct., 4:206, 207). C. H. M. on
_Gen. 3:7_—“They made themselves aprons of fig‐leaves, before God
made them coats of skin. Man ever tries to clothe himself in
garments of his own righteousness, before he will take the robe of
Christ’s. But Adam felt himself naked when God visited him, even
though he had his fig‐leaves on him.”

We are justified efficiently by the grace of God, meritoriously by
Christ, instrumentally by faith, evidentially by works. Faith
justifies, as roots bring plant and soil together. Faith connects
man with the source of life in Christ. “When the boatman with his
hook grapples the rock, he does not pull the shore to the boat,
but the boat to the shore; so, when we by faith lay hold on
Christ, we do not pull Christ to us, but ourselves to him.” Faith
is a coupling; the train is drawn, not by the coupling, but by the
locomotive; yet without the coupling it would not be drawn. Faith
is the trolley that reaches up to the electric wire; when the
connection is sundered, not only does the car cease to move, but
the heat dies and the lights go out. Dr. John Duncan: “I have
married the Merchant and all his wealth is mine!”

H. C. Trumbull: “If a man wants to cross the ocean, he can either
try swimming, or he can trust the captain of a ship to carry him
over in his vessel. By or through his faith in that captain, the
man is carried safely to the other shore; yet it is the ship’s
captain, not the passenger’s faith, which is to be praised for the
carrying.” So the sick man trusts his case in the hands of his
physician, and his life is saved by the physician,—yet by or
through the patient’s faith. This faith is indeed an inward act of
allegiance, and no mere outward performance. Whiton, Divine
Satisfaction, 92—“The Protestant Reformers saw that it was by an
inward act, not by penances or sacraments that men were justified.
But they halted in the crude notion of a legal court room process,
a governmental procedure external to us, whereas it is an
educational, inward process, the awakening through Christ of the
filial spirit in us, which in the midst of imperfections strives
for likeness more and more to the Son of God. Justification by
principle apart from performance makes Christianity the religion
of the spirit.” We would add that such justification excludes
education, and is an act rather than a process, an act external to
the sinner rather than internal, an act of God rather than an act
of man. The justified person can say to Christ, as Ruth said to
Boaz: “_Why have I found favor in thy sight, that thou shouldest
take knowledge of me, seeing I am a foreigner?_” (_Ruth 2:10_).

B. Since the ground of justification is only Christ, to whom we are united by faith, the justified person has peace. If it were anything in ourselves, our peace must needs be proportioned to our holiness. The practical effect of the Romanist mingling of works with faith, as a joint ground of justification, is to render all assurance of salvation impossible. (Council of Trent, 9th chap.: “Every man, by reason of his own weakness and defects, must be in fear and anxiety about his state of grace. Nor can any one know, with infallible certainty of faith, that he has received forgiveness of God.”). But since justification is an instantaneous act of God, complete at the moment of the sinner’s first believing, it has no degrees. Weak faith justifies as perfectly as strong faith; although, since justification is a secret act of God, weak faith does not give so strong assurance of salvation.

Foundations of our Faith, 216—“The Catholic doctrine declares that
justification is not dependent upon faith and the righteousness of
Christ imputed and granted thereto, but on the actual condition of
the man himself. But there remain in the man an undeniable amount
of fleshly lusts or inclinations to sin, even though the man be
regenerate. The Catholic doctrine is therefore constrained to
assert that these lusts are not in themselves sinful, or objects
of the divine displeasure. They are allowed to remain in the man,
that he may struggle against them; and, as they say, Paul
designates them as sinful, only because they are derived from sin,
and incite to sin; but they only become sin by the positive
concurrence of the human will. But is not internal lust
displeasing to God? Can we draw the line between lust and will?
The Catholic favors self here, and makes many things _lust_, which
are really _will_. A Protestant is necessarily more earnest in the
work of salvation, when he recognizes even the evil desire as sin,
according to Christ’s precept.”

All systems of religion of merely human origin tend to make
salvation, in larger or smaller degree, the effect of human works,
but only with the result of leaving man in despair. See, in
Ecclesiasticus 3:30, an Apocryphal declaration that alms make
atonement for sin. So Romanism bids me doubt God’s grace and the
forgiveness of sins. See Dorner, Gesch. prot. Theol., 228, 229,
and his quotations from Luther. “But if the Romanist doctrine is
true, that a man is justified only in such measure as he is
sanctified, then: 1. Justification must be a matter of degrees,
and so the Council of Trent declares it to be. The sacraments
which sanctify are therefore essential, that one may be
increasingly justified. 2. Since justification is a continuous
process, the redeeming death of Christ, on which it depends, must
be a continuous process also; hence its prolonged reiteration in
the sacrifice by the Mass. 3. Since sanctification is obviously
never completed in this life, no man ever dies completely
justified; hence the doctrine of Purgatory.” For the substance of
Romanist doctrine, see Moehler, Symbolism, 79‐190; Newman,
Lectures on Justification, 253‐345; Ritschl, Christian Doctrine of
Justification, 121‐226.

A better doctrine is that of the Puritan divine: “It is not the
quantity of thy faith that shall save thee. A drop of water is as
true water as the whole ocean. So a little faith is as true faith
as the greatest. It is not the measure of thy faith that saves
thee,—it is the blood that it grips to that saves thee. The weak
hand of the child, that leads the spoon to the mouth, will feed as
well as the strong arm of a man; for it is not the hand that
feeds, but the meat. So, if thou canst grip Christ ever so weakly,
he will not let thee perish.” I am troubled about the money I owe
in New York, until I find that a friend has paid my debt there.
When I find that the objective account against me is cancelled,
then and only then do I have subjective peace.

A child may be heir to a vast estate, even while he does not know
it; and a child of God may be an heir of glory, even while,
through the weakness of his faith, he is oppressed with painful
doubts and fears. No man is lost simply because of the greatness
of his sins; however ill‐deserving he may be, faith in Christ will
save him. Luther’s climbing the steps of St. John Lateran, and the
voice of thunder: “The just shall live by faith,” are not certain
as historical facts; but they express the substance of Luther’s
experience. Not obeying, but receiving, is the substance of the
gospel. A man cannot merit salvation; he cannot buy it; but one
thing he must do,—he must take it. And the least faith makes
salvation ours, because it makes Christ ours.

Augustine conceived of justification as a continuous process,
proceeding until love and all Christian virtues fill the heart.
There is his chief difference from Paul. Augustine believes in sin
and grace. But he has not the freedom of the children of God, as
Paul has. The influence of Augustine upon Roman Catholic theology
has not been wholly salutary. The Roman Catholic, mixing man’s
subjective condition with God’s grace as a ground of
justification, continually wavers between self‐righteousness and
uncertainty of acceptance with God, each of these being fatal to a
healthful and stable religious life. High‐church Episcopalians,
and Sacramentalists generally, are afflicted with this distemper
of the Romanists. Dr. R. W. Dale remarks with regard to Dr. Pusey:
“The absence of joy in his religious life was only the inevitable
effect of his conception of God’s method of saving men; in parting
with the Lutheran truth concerning justification, he parted with
the springs of gladness.” Spurgeon said that a man might get from
London to New York provided he took a steamer; but it made much
difference in his comfort whether he had a first class or a second
class ticket. A new realization of the meaning of justification in
our churches would change much of our singing from the minor to
the major key; would lead us to pray, not _for_ the presence of
Christ, but _from_ the presence of Christ; would abolish the
mournful upward inflections at the end of sentences which give
such unreality to our preaching; and would replace the pessimistic
element in our modern work and worship with the notes of praise
and triumph. In the Pilgrim’s Progress, the justification of the
believer is symbolized by Christian’s lodging in the Palace
Beautiful whose window opened toward the sunrising.

Even Luther did not fully apprehend and apply his favorite
doctrine of justification by faith. Harnack, Wesen des
Christenthums, 168 _sq._, states the fundamental principles of
Protestantism as: “1. The Christian religion is wholly given in
the word of God and in the inner experience which answers to that
word. 2. The assured belief that the Christian has a gracious God.
‘Nun weisz und glaub’ ich’s feste, Ich rühm’s auch ohne Scheu,
Dasz Gott, der höchst’ und beste, Mein Freund und Vater sei; Und
dasz in allen Fällen Er mir zur Rechten steh’, Und dampfe Sturm
und Wellen, Und was mir bringet Weh’.’ 3. Restoration of simple
and believing worship, both public and private. But Luther took
too much dogma into Christianity; insisted too much on the
authority of the written word; cared too much for the _means_ of
grace, such as the Lord’s Supper; identified the church too much
with the organized body.” Yet Luther talked of beating the heads
of the Wittenbergers with the Bible, so as to get the great
doctrine of justification by faith into their brains. “Why do you
teach your child the same thing twenty times?” he said. “Because I
find that nineteen times is not sufficient.”

C. Justification is instantaneous, complete, and final: instantaneous, since otherwise there would be an interval during which the soul was neither approved nor condemned by God (Mat. 6:24); complete, since the soul, united to Christ by faith, becomes partaker of his complete satisfaction to the demands of law (Col. 2:9, 10); and final, since the union with Christ is indissoluble (John 10:28, 29). As there are many acts of sin in the life of the Christian, so there are many acts of pardon following them. But all these acts of pardon are virtually implied in that first act by which he was finally and forever justified; as also successive acts of repentance and faith, after such sins, are virtually implied in that first repentance and faith which logically preceded justification.

_Mat. 6:24_—“_No man can serve two masters_”; _Col. 2:9, 10_—“_in
him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and in him ye
are made full, who is the head of all principality and power_”;
_John 10:28, 29_—“_they shall never perish, and no one shall
snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who hath given them unto
me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of
the Father’s hand._”

Plymouth Brethren say truly that the Christian has sin in him, but
not on him, because Christ had sin on him, but not in him. The
Christian has sin but not guilt, because Christ had guilt but not
sin. All our sins are buried in the grave with Christ, and
Christ’s resurrection is our resurrection. Toplady: “From whence
this fear and unbelief? Hast thou, O Father, put to grief Thy
spotless Son for me? And will the righteous Judge of men Condemn
me for that debt of sin, Which, Lord, was laid on thee? If thou
hast my discharge procured, And freely in my room endured The
whole of wrath divine, Payment God cannot twice demand, First at
my bleeding Surety’s hand, And then again at mine. Complete
atonement thou hast made, And to the utmost farthing paid Whate’er
thy people owed; How then can wrath on me take place, If sheltered
in thy righteousness And sprinkled with thy blood? Turn, then, my
soul, unto thy rest; The merits of thy great High‐priest Speak
peace and liberty; Trust in his efficacious blood, Nor fear thy
banishment from God, Since Jesus died for thee!”

Justification, however, is not eternal in the past. We are to
repent unto the remission of our sins (_Act 2:38_). Remission
comes after repentance. Sin is not pardoned before it is
committed. In justification God grants us actual pardon for past
sin, but virtual pardon for future sin. Edwards, Works,
4:104—“Future sins are respected, in that first justification, no
otherwise than as future faith and repentance are respected in it;
and future faith and repentance are looked upon by him that
justifies as virtually implied in that first repentance and faith,
in the same manner that justification from future sins is implied
in that first justification.”

A man is not justified from his sins before he has committed them,
nor is he saved before he is born. A remarkable illustration of
the extreme to which hyper‐Calvinism may go is found in Tobias
Crisp, Sermons, 1:358—“The Lord hath no more to lay to the charge
of an elect person, yet in the height of iniquity, and in the
excess of riot, and committing all the abomination that can be
committed ... than he has to the charge of the saint triumphant in
glory.” A far better statement is found in Moberly, Atonement and
Personality, 61—“As there is upon earth no consummated penitence,
so neither is there any forgiveness consummated.... Forgiveness is
the recognition, by anticipation, of something which is to be,
something toward which it is itself a mighty quickening of
possibilities, but something which is not, or at least is not
perfectly, yet.... Present forgiveness is inchoate, is
educational.... It reaches its final and perfect consummation only
when the forgiven penitent has become at last personally and
completely righteous. If the consummation is not reached but
reversed, then forgiveness is forfeited (_Mat. 18:32‐35_).” This
last exception, however, as we shall see in our discussion of
Perseverance, is only a hypothetical one. The truly forgiven do
not finally fall away.

7. Advice to Inquirers demanded by a Scriptural View of Justification.

(_a_) Where conviction of sin is yet lacking, our aim should be to show the sinner that he is under God’s condemnation for his past sins, and that no future obedience can ever secure his justification, since this obedience, even though perfect, could not atone for the past, and even if it could, he is unable, without God’s help, to render it.

With the help of the Holy Spirit, conviction of sin may be roused
by presentation of the claims of God’s perfect law, and by drawing
attention, first to particular overt transgressions, and then to
the manifold omissions of duty, the general lack of supreme and
all‐pervading love to God, and the guilty rejection of Christ’s
offers and commands. “Even if the next page of the copy book had
no blots or erasures, its cleanness would not alter the smudges
and misshapen letters on the earlier pages.” God takes no notice
of the promise “_Have patience with me, and I will pay thee_”
(_Mat. 18:29_), for he knows it can never be fulfilled.

(_b_) Where conviction of sin already exists, our aim should be, not, in the first instance, to secure the performance of external religious duties, such as prayer, or Scripture‐reading, or uniting with the church, but to induce the sinner, as his first and all‐inclusive duty, to accept Christ as his only and sufficient sacrifice and Savior, and, committing himself and the matter of his salvation entirely to the hands of Christ, to manifest this trust and submission by entering at once upon a life of obedience to Christ’s commands.

A convicted sinner should be exhorted, not first to prayer and
then to faith, but first to faith, and then to the immediate
expression of that faith in prayer and Christian activity. He
should pray, not _for_ faith, but _in_ faith. It should not be
forgotten that the sinner never sins against so much light, and
never is in so great danger, as when he is convicted but not
converted, when he is moved to turn but yet refuses to turn. No
such sinner should be allowed to think that he has the right to do
any other thing whatever before accepting Christ. This accepting
Christ is not an outward act, but an inward act of mind and heart
and will, although believing is naturally evidenced by immediate
outward action. To teach the sinner, however apparently well
disposed, how to believe on Christ, is beyond the power of man.
God is the only giver of faith. But Scripture instances of faith,
and illustrations drawn from the child’s taking the father at his
word and acting upon it, have often been used by the Holy Spirit
as means of leading men themselves to put faith in Christ.

Bengel: “Those who are secure Jesus refers to the law; those who
are contrite he consoles with the gospel.” A man left work and
came home. His wife asked why. “Because I am a sinner.” “Let me
send for the preacher.” “I am too far gone for preachers. If the
Lord Jesus Christ does not save me I am lost.” That man needed
only to be pointed to the Cross. There he found reason for
believing that there was salvation for him. In surrendering
himself to Christ he was justified. On the general subject of
Justification, see Edwards, Works, 4:64‐132; Buchanan on
Justification, 250‐411; Owen on Justification, in Works, vol. 5;
Bp. of Ossory, Nature and Effects of Faith, 48‐152; Hodge, Syst.
Theol., 3:114‐212; Thomasius, Christi Person und Werk, 3:133‐200;
Herzog, Encyclopädie, art.: Rechtfertigung; Bushnell, Vicarious
Sacrifice, 416‐420, 435.