tously, and therefore af. passages which speak of ^atuitous acceptance are in favour of the doctrine of justification by faith.
Now to him that worketh, that is, either emphatically ' to him who does all that is required of him ;' or to 'him who seeks to be accepted on account of his works.' The former explanation is the better. The words then state a general proposition, ' To him that is obedient, or who performs a stipulated work, the recompense is not regarded as a gratuity, but as a debt.'
(5) But to him that worketh not, hut believeth on him who jusiijieth the ungodly, to him faith is counted for ri ghteousness. " To him that worketh not," i. e. who makes no pretence of earning or meriting a re- ward, but renouncing all dependence on his works, "believeth on him who justifieth the ungodly," to him, from the nature of the case, accept- ance is a gratuity. It lies in the nature of the faith of which Paul speaks, that he who exercises it should feel and acknowledge that he is ungodly, and consequently undeserving of the favour of God. He, of course, in relying on the mercy of God, must acknowledge that his ac- ceptance is a matter of grace, and not of debt. The meaning of the apostle is plainly this : ' To him that worketh the reward is a matter of debt, but to him who worketh not, but believes simply, the reward is a matter of grace.' Instead, however, of saying 'it is a matter of grace,' he uses as an equivalent expression, " to him faith is counted for right- eousness." That is, he is justified by faith. To be justified by faith, therefore, is to be justified gratuitously, and not by works. It is thus he proves that the passage cited in v. 3, respecting Abraham, was perti- nent to his purpose as an argument against justification by works. It at the same time shows that all passages which speak of gratuitous accept- ance, may be cited in proof of his doctrine of justification by faith. The way is thus opened for his second argument, which is derived from the testimony of David.
It is to be remarked that Paul speaks of God as justifying the wn- godly. Of course they are regarded and treated as righteous, not on the ground of their personal character; and it is further apparent that justi- fication does not consist in making one inherently just or holy ; for it is as ungodly that those who believe are freely justified for Christ's sake. It never was the doctrine of the reformation, or of the Lutheran and Cal- vinistic divines, that the imputation of righteousness affected the moral character of those concerned. It is true, whom God justifies he also sanctifies, but justification is not sanctification, and the imputation of righteousness is not the infusion of righteousness.
(6) Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man to whom God imputeth righteousness without works. Paul's first argument in favour of gratuitous justification was from the case of Abraham ; his second is from the testimony of David. The immediate connexion of this verse is with v. 5. At the conclusion of that verse it was said, to him who had no works faith is imputed in order to his justification, i. e