If, therefore, those who have no righteousness of their own, who are so far from it that they never endeavoured to attain it, do j^et by faith receive that righteousness wherewith they are justified before God, they do so by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ unto them; or let some other way be assigned.
In the other side of the instance, concerning Israel, some must hear, whether they will or not, that wherewith they are not pleased.
Three things are expressed of them: — 1, Their attempt. 2. Their success. 3. The reason of it.
1. Their attempt or endeavour was in this, that they "followed after the law of righteousness." A/wxw, the word whereby their endea- vour is expressed, signifies that which is earnest, diligent, and sincere. By it doth the apostle declare what his [endeavour] was, and what ours ought to be, in the duties and exercise of gospel obedience^ Phil.
340 ox JUSTIFICATION.
iii. 1 2. They were not indiligent in this matter, but " instantly served God day and night." Nor were they hypocritical; for the apostle bears them record in this matter, that " they had a zeal of God," Rom. X. 2. And that which they thus endeavoured after was vdlioq hi7iaio6\iv7ic, — ■"■ the law of righteousness," that law which pre- scribed a perfect personal righteousness before God ; " the things which if a man do them, he shall live in them," chap. x. 5. Where- fore, the apostle hath no other respect unto the ceremonial law in this place but only as it was branched out from the moral law by the will of God, and as the obedience unto it belonged thereunto. AVhen he speaks of it separately, he calls it " the law of command- ments contained in ordinances;" but it is nowhere called "the law of righteousness," the law whose righteousness is fulfilled in us, chap, viii. 4. Wherefore, the following after this law of righteousness was their diligence in the performance of all duties of obedience, accord- ing unto the directions and precepts of the moral law.
2. The issue of this attempt is, that they " attained not unto the law of righteousness," th voijjov bixaioffuv/jg ovx s'p^affs, — that is, they at- tained not unto a righteousness before God hereby. Though this was the end of the law, namely, a righteousness before God, Avherein a man might live, yet could they never attain it
3. An account is given of the reason of their failing in attaining that which they so earnestly endeavoured after. And this was in a double mistake that they were under; — first. In the means of attain- ing it; secondly. In the righteousness itself that was to be sought after. T\iq first is declared, chap. ix. 32, " Because not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law." Faith and works are the two only ways whereby righteousness may be attained, and they are opposite and inconsistent; so that none doth or can seek after righteousness by them both. They will not be mixed and made one entire means of attaining righteousness. They are opposed as grace and works; what is of the one is not of the other, chap. xi. 6. Every composi- tion of them in this matter is, " Male sarta gratia nequicquam coit et rescinditur." And the reason is, because the righteousness which faith seeks after, or which is attainable l)y faith, is that which is given to us, imputed unto us, which faith doth only receive. It re- ceives " the abundance of grace, and the gift of righteousness." But that which is attainable by works is our own, inherent in us, wrought out by us, and not imputed unto us; for it is nothing but those works themselves, with respect unto the law of God.
And if righteousness before God be to be obtained alone by faith, and that in contradiction unto all works,— which if a man do them, according unto the law, " he shall even live in them," — then is it by faith alone that we are justified before God, or, nothing else on our
JUSTIFICATION AS DECLARED BY PAUL. 341
part is required thereunto. And of what nature this righteousness must be is evident.
Again : if faith and works are opposed as contrary and inconsistent, when considered as the means of attaining righteousness or justifica- tion before God, as plainly they are, then is it impossible we should be justified before God by them in the same sense, way, and manner. Wherefore, when the apostle James affirms that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only, he cannot intend our justification be- fore God, where it is impossible they should both concur; for not only are they declared inconsistent by the apostle in this place, but it would introduce several sorts of righteousness into justification, that are inconsistent and destructive of each other. This was the first mistake of the Jews, whence this miscarriage ensued, — they sought not after righteousness by faith, but as it were by the works of the law.
Their second mistake was as unto the righteousness itself whereon a man might be justified before God; for this they judged was to be their own righteousness, chap. x. 8. Their own personal righteous- ness, consisting in their own duties of obedience, they looked on as the only righteousness whereon they might be justified before God. This, therefore, they went about to establish, as the Pharisee did, Luke xviii. 11, 12: and this mistake, with their design thereon, " to establish their own righteousness," was the principal cause that made them reject the righteousness of God; as it is with many at this day.