1 's T>ivine chastisement inflicted for the im-
l'rn\ I iiiiiu nt the offender, or for the sake of others. N.iih 1 I'H'^ forgiveness imply any false or arbi- tiMiy .lialiii- with the past, any condoning of sin — which is essentially immoral — or ignoring of the transgression, as if it had not been committed — which would imply a weak and false attempt to secure the impossible. Nor, again, can any kind of remission of sins be predicated of God whii-li implies unrighteousness in any form, the solemn sanctions of the eternal law of righteousness being sectired by the conditions upon which forgiveness is granted.
But the essence of forgiveness lies in the estab- lishment, or restoration, of a personal relation be- tween sinful man and a grieved and righteously
angry C!od. Omnipotence itself cannot erase the event from the history of the past, and holiness will not permit any concealment or pretence as to the heiuousness of the offence committed. But the sin may be 'covered,' the guilt cancelled, in tlie sense that on certain conditions it shall be as if it had never been, so far as the relation between God and the sinner is concerned. Hence .sin when for- given is said to be ' cast into the depth of the sea ' (Mic 7'"), 'cast behind thy back' (Is 38"), removed ' as far as the east is from the west ' (Ps 103'-), 'remembered no more' (Jer 31*^) against the sinner.
Ritschl says : * God, in for^ivinf;^ or pardoning sins, exercises His win in the direction of not permitting tiie contradiction — expressed in irnilt— in -n-hirh sinners stand to Him to hinder that f, ll.^^vli.'i, ,,t ,,,,,! witti ITini whi''h ttr- iiitends on hijjlier
time the place of mistrust towards God is talcen by the positive assent of the will to God and His saving purpose."
Foi-giveness can never be adequately understood by means of any figure of speech, commercial or other. It represents a relation of persons, and its essence lies in the restoration of impaired con- fidence, aff'ection, and favourable regard. It has to do not only with the past, but the present and the future, and it is e-xercised by God towards men just in proportion as they are capable of receiving it.
Eepcntancc is the one condition clearly laid down and repeatedly insisted on in the Gospels. It is necessary as between man and man, much more between man and God. When John the Baptist comes to prepare the way of the Saviour, nothing can be done without that thoroughgoing repent- ance which implies reformation so far as man can effect it. Repentance is indeed a necessary in- gredient of forgiveness if the two terms are rightly understood. Sorrow for sin and complete renuncia- tion of it are not arbitrary conditions which the Sovereign chooses to exact before bestowing a boon ; they belong to the very essence of the per- sonal relation between Father and son which has been impaired or broken by error and disobedience, and which is to be restored in forgiveness. For an impenitent sinner not to be punished is conceivable, but for .such a one to be forgiven is a contradiction in terms. The necessity for a forgiving spirit in one who hopes himself to be forgiven is dealt with below.
God is then ' good and ready to forgive ' (Ps 86°), a God ' keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin ' (Ex 34'). It would, however, be misleading to generalize and say that this attribute of mercy obviates all neces- sity for an atnniiiirnt. (•! vindication of the law of righteousiii -~. ,im,1 ihit throughout the whole history of X\\r wniM UMihing more is needed to obtain Divine tui-iveu. -s of sin than confession and repentance on the part <it' inan. Tln' la-nmises of the OT were given to th..-.- «li.. -in,„l in a covenantrelation with God, in \vlii.li I li^ i iuhteons- ness was effectually .safeguardeil. < liii^ts ministry was exercised amongst Jews in the lirst instance, and the presuppositions of OT Scripture must be taken into account.
Tlie same may be said of the two gracious parables of our Lord which chiefly deal with this subject. It is impossible to found accurate doc- trine on a parable only, and it is always a mistake to suppose that one jiarable can cover the whole range of doctrine. The three recorded in Lk 15 were \ittered to show the nature of Christ's mission and His desire to seek and save the worst sinners, as well as the willingness of God to receive such.
rOEGIVENESS
FORGIVENESS
617
and tlie joy of heaven and eartli when the ijenitent returns and is pardoned. The moral basis on which this becomes possible in the Divine govern- ment is another matter. Tlie cosmic conditions of forgiveness are described in their projier place in Scripture. But in the parable ol tin" l'riiiliu:il Son
the lesson is impressed that IIm' iu ~t luilure in
filial duty will be readily forgiven, il tin.' w^mderer will but repent and return. In tlie parable of the Pharisee and the I'nl.lic.iii the essential teacliing is the same — the .Lm-t r le,t those wlio comply with rules of oiiliii.nN menlity should so plume themselves on then- oliedienee :i, to Idm- tlie sense of their own de.']. nee.l .■in,l ill-Je^eil , .-ui.] Ihef.-iet that grave oH'en^lei , :i;j:i jn-i I he linHl,n!ienl:il l:i\\ s of righteousne», like tlie piihlnan niid the h.iih.t, may find their way into tlie kingiloiu of gi-ace before the self-righteous Pharisee. But it would be utterly misleading, even to the subversion of the very foundations of ethics, if the inference were drawn that it matters nothing how deeply a man sins, provided that when his evil course is o\er he regrets his errors and asks for pardon, and that tliere is no reason in the moral government of the Universe why such a man should not be at once forgiven without infraction of tlie eternal law of righteousness.