Part 9

This is certainly a doctrine of the highest importance, inasmuch as it contains in it the way of peace, the foundation of all our hope, of the acceptance both of our persons and services, and beholding the face of God, at last, with joy. Some have styled it the very _basis_ of Christianity; and our forefathers thought it so necessary to be insisted on and maintained, according to the scripture-account thereof, that they reckoned it one of the principal doctrines of the reformation. And, indeed, the apostle Paul speaks of it as so necessary to be believed, that he concluded that the denying or perverting of it was the ground and reason of the Jews being rejected; _who being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish a righteousness of their own, have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God_: and when they shall be called, if their call be intended, in that account which we have, of _the marriage of the Lamb, and his wife having made herself ready_, Rev. xix. 7. as many suppose, it is worth observing, that she is described as _arrayed in fine linen, which is the righteousness of saints_, or Christ’s righteousness, by which they are justified: this is that in which they glory; and therefore are represented as being convinced of the importance of that doctrine which, before, they were ignorant of. This we have an account of in these two answers, which we are now to explain, and shall endeavour to do it in the following method.

I. We shall consider what we are to understand by the word _justify_.

II. What are the privileges contained therein, as reduced to two heads, to wit, pardon of sin; and God’s accounting them who are justified, righteous in his sight? And,

III. What is the foundation of our justification? namely, a righteousness wrought out for us.

IV. The utter inability of fallen man to perform any righteousness, that can be the matter of his justification in the sight of God.

V. That our Lord Jesus Christ has wrought out this righteousness for us, as our surety, by performing active and passive obedience; which is imputed to us for our justification.

VI. We shall consider it as an act of God’s free grace. And,

VII. Shew the use of faith in justification, or in what respects faith is said to justify.

I. We shall consider in what sense we are to understand the word _justify_. As there are many disputes about the method of explaining the doctrines of justification; so there is a contest between us and the Papists, about the sense of the word; they generally supposing, that _to justify_, is to make inherently righteous and holy; because righteousness and holiness sometimes import the same thing; and both of them denote an internal change in the person who is so denominated; and accordingly they argue, that as to _magnify_ signifies to make great; to _fortify_, to make strong; so to _justify_ is to make just or holy: and they suppose, that whatever we do to make ourselves so, or whatever good works are the ingredients of our sanctification, these must be considered as the matter of our justification. And some Protestant divines have supposed, that the difference between them and us, is principally about the sense of a word; which favourable and charitable construction of their doctrine, would have been less exceptionable, if the Papists had asserted no more than that justification might have been taken in this sense, when considered, not as giving us a right to eternal life, or being the foundation of that sentence of absolution, which God passes upon us: but since this is the sense they give of it, when they say that we are justified by our inherent holiness, we are bound to conclude, that it is very remote from the scripture sense of the word.

We do not deny that justification is sometimes taken in a sense different from that which is intended by it, when used to signify the doctrine we are explaining. Sometimes nothing more is intended hereby, than our vindicating the divine perfections from any charge which is pretended to be brought against them. Thus the Psalmist says, _That thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest_, Psal. li. 4. And our Saviour is said to be justified, that is, his person or character vindicated or defended from the reproaches that were cast on him; as it is said, _Wisdom is justified of her children_, Matt. xi. 19. Luke vii. 35. Also we frequently read of the justification of the actions or conduct of persons, in scripture; in which sense their own works may be said to justify or vindicate them from the charge of hypocrisy or unregeneracy. Again, to justify is sometimes taken, in scripture, for using endeavours to turn many to righteousness: and therefore our translators have rendered the words, in the prophecy of Daniel, which signify, _they who justify many, they who turn many to righteousness, shall shine as the stars_, Dan. xii. 3.[28]

There are various other senses which are given of this word, which we pass over as not applicable to the doctrine we are maintaining, and therefore shall proceed to consider the sense in which it is used, when importing a sinner’s justification in the sight of God; wherein it is to be taken only in a forensick sense, and accordingly signifies a person’s being acquitted or discharged from guilt, or a liableness to condemnation, in such a way as is done in courts of judicature: thus we read in the judicial law, that _if there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked_, Deut. xxv. 1. where _to justify the righteous_, is to be understood for acquitting or discharging one that appears to be righteous, or not guilty, from condemnation; whereas _the wicked_, that is, they who appear to be guilty, are to be _condemned_: and in this sense the word is used, when applied to the doctrine of justification, in the New Testament, and particularly in Paul’s epistles; who largely insists on this subject.

Now that we may understand how a sinner may expect to be discharged at God’s tribunal, let us consider the methods of proceeding used in human courts of judicature: herein, it is supposed, that there is a law that forbids some actions which are deemed criminal; and also, that a punishment is annexed to this law, which renders the person that violated it, guilty; and then persons are supposed to be charged with the violation thereof; which charge, if it be not made good, they are said to be justified, that is, cleared from presumptive, not real guilt: but if the charge be made good, and he that fell under it, liable to punishment; if he suffer the punishment he is justified, as in crimes that are not of a capital nature; or if he be any otherwise cleared from the charge, so that his guilt be removed, then he is deemed a justified person: and so the law has nothing to lay to his charge, with respect to that which he was before accused of. Thus when a sinner, who had been charged with the violation of the divine law, found guilty before God, and exposed to a sentence of condemnation, is freed from it, then he is said to be justified; which leads us to consider,

II. The privileges contained in justification; which are forgiveness of sin and a right and title to eternal life. These are sufficiently distinguished, though never separated; so that when we find but one of them mentioned in a particular scripture, which treats on this subject, the other is not excluded. Forgiveness of sin is sometimes expressed in scripture, by a not imputing sin; and a right to life, includes in it our being made partakers of the adoption of children, and a right to the inheritance prepared for them. The apostle mentions both these together, when he speaks of our having _redemption through the blood of Christ, even the forgiveness of sins_; and being _made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light_, Col. i. 12, 14. And elsewhere he speaks of Christ’s _redeeming them that were under the law_; which includes the former branch of justification, and of their _receiving the adoption of children_, which includes the latter. And again he considers a justified person as _having peace with God_, which more especially respects pardon of sin, and of their _having access to the grace wherein they stand_, and their _rejoicing in hope of the glory of God_, Rom. v. 1, 2. which is what we are to understand by, or includes in it, their right to life.

That justification consists of both these branches, we maintain against the Papists, who suppose that it includes nothing else but forgiveness of sin, which is founded on the blood of Christ; whereas, according to them, our right to life depends on our internal qualifications, or sincere obedience. And besides these, there are some Protestant divines, who suppose that it consists only in pardon of sin; and this is asserted, by them, with different views; some do it as most consistent with the doctrine of justification by works, which they plead for; whereas, others do it as being most agreeable to another notion which they advance, namely, that we are justified only by Christ’s passive obedience; which will be considered under a following head. Again, there are others, whose sentiments of the doctrine of justification are agreeable to scripture, who maintain, that it includes both forgiveness of sins, and a right to life; but yet they add, that the former is founded on Christ’s passive obedience, and the latter on his active: whereas, we cannot but think, that the whole of Christ’s obedience, both active and passive, is the foundation of each of these; which will also be considered, when we come to speak concerning the procuring cause of our justification.

All that we shall observe at present, is, that these two privileges are inseparably connected; therefore, as no one can have a right to life, but he whose sins are pardoned; so no one can obtain forgiveness of sin, but he must, as the consequence hereof, have a right to life. As by the fall, man first became guilty, and then lost that right to life which was promised in case he had stood; so it is agreeable to the divine perfections, provided the guilt be removed, that he should be put in the same state as though it had not been contracted, and consequently, that he should not only have forgiveness of sins, but a right to life. Forgiveness of sin, without a right to eternal life, would render our justification incomplete; therefore, when any one is pardoned by an act of grace, he is put in possession of that which, by his rebellion, he had forfeited, he is considered, not only as released out of prison, but as one who has the privileges of a subject, such as those which he had before he committed the crime. Without this he would be like Absalom, when, upon Joab’s intercession with David, the guilt of murder, which he had contracted, was remitted so far, as that he had liberty to return from Geshur, whither he was fled: nevertheless, he reckons himself not fully discharged from the guilt he had contracted, and concludes his return to Jerusalem, as it were, an insignificant privilege; unless, by being admitted to see the king’s face, and enjoy the privileges which he was possessed of before, he might be dealt with as one who was taken into favour, as well as forgiven, 2 Sam. xiv. 2. which was accordingly granted. This leads us to consider these two branches of justification in particular. And,

1. Forgiveness of sin. Sin is sometimes represented as containing in it moral impurity, as opposed to holiness of heart and life; and accordingly is said, _to defile a man_, Matt. xv. 19, 20. and is set forth by several metaphorical expressions in scripture, which tend to beget an abhorrence of it as of things impure; in which sense it is removed in sanctification rather, than in justification; not but that divines sometimes speak of Christ’s redeeming us from the filth and dominion of sin, and our deliverance from it in justification: but these are to be understood as rendering us guilty; inasmuch as all moral pollutions are criminal, as contrary to the law of God; otherwise our deliverance from them would not be a branch of justification; and therefore, in speaking to this head, we shall consider sin as that which renders men guilty before God, and so shew what we are to understand by guilt.

This supposes a person to be under a law, and to have violated it; accordingly sin is described as the _transgression of the law_, 1 John iii. 4. The law of God, in common with all other laws, is primarily designed to be the rule of obedience; and in order thereunto, it is a declaration of the divine will, which, as creatures and subjects, we are under a natural obligation to comply with; and God, as a God of infinite holiness and sovereignty, cannot but signify his displeasure in case of disobedience; and therefore he has annexed a threatening to his law, or past a condemning sentence, as that which is due for every transgression: this divines sometimes call the sanction of the law, or a fence, with which it is guarded, that so, through the corruption of our nature, we may not conclude, that we may rebel against him with impunity: this the scripture styles, _The curse of the law_, Gal. iii. 10. So that guilt is a liableness to the curse or condemning sentence of the law, for our violation of it: this is sometimes called a debt of punishment, which we owe to the justice of God, for not paying that debt of obedience which was due from us to his law. Thus, when our Saviour advises us to pray, that our sins may be forgiven; he expresses it by _forgiving us our debts_, Luke xi. 4. Matt. vi. 12. so that forgiveness, as it is a freeing us from guilt, discharges us from the guilt of punishment which we were liable to.

There is a twofold debt which man owes to God; one he owes to him as a creature under a law; this is that debt of obedience, which he cannot be discharged from; and therefore, a justified person is, in this sense, as much a debtor as any other. There is also a debt which man contracts as a criminal, whereby he is liable to suffer punishment; this alone is removed in justification.

Moreover, we must carefully distinguish between the demerit of sin, or its desert of punishment; and the sinner’s obligation to suffer punishment for it. The former of these is inseparable from sin, and not removed, or, in the least lessened, by pardoning mercy; for sin is no less the object of the divine detestation; nor is its intrinsic evil, or demerit, abated by its being forgiven; and therefore, a justified person, remaining still a sinner, as transgressing the law of God, has as much reason to condemn himself, in this respect, as though he had not been forgiven. The Psalmist speaking concerning a person that is actually forgiven or justified, says, notwithstanding, that _if thou Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?_ Psal. cxxx. 3. He was, at the same time, in a justified state; but yet he concludes, that there is a demerit of punishment in every sin that he committed; though, when it is pardoned, the obligation to suffer punishment is taken away:[29] and therefore, the apostle speaking of such, says, _There is no condemnation to them_, Rom. viii. 1. We must farther distinguish between our having matter of condemnation in us; this a justified person has; and there being no condemnation to us; that is, the immediate result of being pardoned.

There are several expressions in scripture, whereby forgiveness is set forth, namely, God’s covering sin: thus the Psalmist says, _Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered_, Psal. xxxii. 1. or, his hiding his face from it, and blotting it out; or, _when it is sought for_, Psal. li. 9. its _not being found_, Jer. l. 20. and, _casting our sins into the depths of the sea_, Micah vii. 19. And elsewhere it is said, That when God had pardoned the sins of his people, _he did not behold iniquity in Jacob, nor see perverseness in Israel_, Numb, xxiii. 21. which amounts to the same thing as the foregoing expressions of its being covered, hid, blotted out, _&c._

I am sensible there have been many contests about the sense of this scripture; which might, without much difficulty, have been compromised, had the contending parties been desirous to know each others sense, without prejudice or partiality. It is not to be thought, that when God forgives sin, he does not know, or suppose that the person forgiven, had, before this, contracted guilt by sins committed; for without this, he could not be the object of forgiveness. When God is said not to look upon, or hide his face from their sins, it is not to be supposed, that he knows not what they have done, or what iniquities they daily commit against him; for that would be subversive of his omniscience: and when he is said not to mark our iniquities, we are not to understand it, as though he did not look upon the sins we commit, though in a justified state, with abhorrence; for the sinner may be pardoned, and yet the crime forgiven be detested. But God’s not seeing sin in his people, is to be taken in a forensic sense; and accordingly, when an atonement is made for sin, and the guilt thereof taken away, the criminal, in the eye of the law, is as though he had not sinned; he is as fully discharged from the indictment, that was brought in against him, as though he had been innocent, not liable to any charge founded upon it; and therefore the apostle says, _Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth_, Rom. viii. 33. and it is the same, as for God _not to enter into judgment_, as the Psalmist elsewhere expresses it; or to _punish us less than our iniquities have deserved_, Psal. cxliii. 2. In this sense the indictment that was brought against him, is cancelled, the sentence reversed, and prosecution stopped; so that whatever evils are endured as the consequence of sin, or with a design to humble him for it, as bringing sin to his remembrance, with all its aggravating circumstances, he is, nevertheless, encouraged to hope, that these are not inflicted in a judicial way, by the vindictive justice of God demanding satisfaction; but to display and set forth the holiness of his nature, as infinitely opposite to all sin, and the dispensations of his providence agreeably thereunto; and that with a design to bring him to repentance for it.

And, that this privilege may appear to be most conducive to our happiness and comfort, let it be considered; that wherever God forgives sin, he forgives all sin, cancels every debt that rendered him liable to punishment, otherwise our condition would be very miserable, and our salvation impossible; our condition would be like that of a person who has several indictments brought in against him, every one of which contain an intimation that his life is forfeited; it would avail him very little for one indictment to be superseded, and the sentence due to him for the others, executed: thus the apostle speaks of the _free gift_, being _of many_, that is, of the multitude of our _offences unto justification_, Rom. v. 16. And elsewhere he speaks of God’s forgiving his people _all trespasses_, Col. ii. 13. And as he forgives all past sins, so he gives them ground to conclude, that iniquity shall not be their ruin; and therefore, the same grace that now abounds towards them herein, together with the virtue of the atonement made for sin, shall prevent future crimes being charged upon them to their condemnation. Thus concerning forgiveness of sin.

2. The other privilege, which they who are justified are made partakers of, is the acceptation of their persons, as righteous in the sight of God: thus they are said to be _made accepted in the Beloved_, Eph. i. 6. and as their persons are accepted, so are their performances, notwithstanding the many defects that adhere to them. Thus God is said to have _had respect unto Abel, and to his offering_, Gen. iv. 4. And, together with this, they have a right and title to eternal life; which is that inheritance which Christ has purchased for, and God, in his covenant of grace, has promised to them. This is a very comprehensive blessing; for it contains in it a right to all those great and precious promises, which God has made, respecting their happiness both here and hereafter. But since we shall have occasion to insist on this in a following answer, under the head of adoption, which some divines, not without good reason, conclude to be a branch of justification, or, at least, to contain in it those positive privileges, which they, who are justified, partake of, either here of hereafter, we shall proceed to consider,

III. What is the foundation of our justification; and that must be either some righteousness wrought out by us; or for us. Since justification is a person’s being _made righteous_, as the apostle styles it, Rom. v. 29. we must consider what we are to understand hereby; and accordingly a person is said to be righteous who never violated the law of God, nor exposed himself to the condemning sentence thereof: in this respect man, while in a state of innocency, was righteous; his perfect obedience was the righteousness which, according to the tenor of the covenant he was under, gave him a right to eternal life; especially it would have done so, had it been persisted in, till he was possessed of that life; but such a righteousness as this, cannot be the foundation of our justification, as the apostle says, _By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified_, Gal. ii. 16. Therefore, the righteousness we are now speaking of, must be something wrought out for us, by one who stood in our room and stead, and was able to pay that debt of obedience, and endure those sufferings that were due for sin, which the law of God might have exacted of us, and insisted on the payment of, in our own persons, which, when paid by Christ for us, is that, (as will be considered under a following head,) which we generally call Christ’s righteousness, or what he did and suffered in our stead, in conformity to the law of God; whereby its honour was secured and vindicated, and justice satisfied; so that God hereby appears to be, as the apostle says, _Just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus_, Rom. iii. 26.[30]

IV. We are now to consider the utter inability of fallen man to perform any righteousness that can be the matter of his justification in the sight of God; whereby it will appear, as it is observed in this answer, that we are not accounted righteous in his sight, for any thing wrought in us, or done by us. That we cannot be justified by suffering the punishment that was due for sin, appears from the infinite evil thereof; and the eternal duration of the punishment that it deserves; as our Saviour observes in the parable concerning the debtor, who did not _agree with his adversary while in the way_, but was _delivered to the officer_, and _cast into prison_; from whence he was not to come out _till he had paid the uttermost farthing_, Matt. v. 25, 26. that is to say, he shall never be discharged. A criminal who is sentenced to endure some punishments short of death, or which are to continue but for a term of years, when he has suffered them, is, upon the account hereof, discharged, or justified: but it is far otherwise with man, when fallen into the hands of the vindictive justice of God; therefore the Psalmist says, _enter not into judgment with thy servant_, or do not punish me according to the demerit of sin; _for in thy sight shall no flesh living be justified_.