and darkness are .round about Him : righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne." (Ps. xcvii. 2.) Notwithstand- ing all the apparent inequalities in the distribution of his favours ; notwithstanding the prosperity of the wicked and the afflictions of the righteous, the conviction is everywhere expressed that God is just ; that somehow and somewhere He will vindicate his deal- ings with men, and show that He is righteous in all his ways aud holy in all his works.
B. Justice in its Relation to Sin. As the sense of guilt is universal among men, and as the mani- festations of sin are so constant and pervading, it is mainly in its relation to sin that the justice of God is revealed. Hence many theologians define the justice of God as that attribute of his nature which is manifested in the punishment of sin. Goodness, it is said, is manifested in bestowing good, and justice in the infliction of punishment. Schleiermacher says, " Justice is that causality in God which connects suffering with actual sin." ^ Schweizer says, " We know God as just only through the punishment of sin." Hegel says, " The manifestation of the nothingness of the finite as power, is justice." This is the philosophical statement of the principle that " Might is Right," a principle which underlies the morals and religion of the modern philosophy.
C. The Reformation of the Offender is not the Primary Object of Punishment.
As the justice of God is specially manifested in the punishment of sin, ife is of primary importance to determine why sin is punished.
One prevalent theory on this subject is, that the only legitimate /. end of punishment is the reformation of the offender. /
It is of course to be admitted, that the good of the offender is often the ground or reason why evil is inflicted. A father chastises a child in love, and for its good. And God, our heavenly Father, brings suffering upon his children for their edification. But evil inflicted for the benefit of the sufferer, is chastisement, and not pun- ishment. Punishment, properly speaking, is evil inflicted in satis- ^faction of Justice.
That the good of the sufferer is not the primary end of the in- fliction of punishment, is proved : —
1. Because-^he punishment of the wicked is always, in the Scriptures, referred to the anger of God, and the chastisement of
1 ChristUche Glaube, § 84, Works Berlin, 1843, vol. iv. p. 465. VOL. I. 27
418 PART L — THEOLOGY. [Ch. V. — Divine Attribute8. *
his people to his love. The cases, therefore, are not analogous. This difference of representation is designed to teach us that the wicked and the good do not stand in the same relation to God, as objects of benevolence ; but that the one He punishes to testify his disapprobation and satisfy his justice, and the other He chastises to bring them nearer to Himself.
2. In many cases the nature of the punishment precludes tne possibility of the good of the offender being the ground of its in- fliction. The deluge, the destruction of the cities of the plain, and the overthrow of Jerusalem, were certainly not designed for the benefit of the men who suffered from those desolating inflictions. Much less can it be assumed that the punishment of the fallen an- gels, and of the finally impenitent, is intended to be reformatory.
3. Scripture and experience both teach that suffering, when of the nature o£ punishment, has no tendency to reform. When suf- fering is seen to come from a father's hand, and to be a manifesta- tion of love, it has a sanctifying power ; but when it comes from the hand of God, as a judge and an avenger, and is the expression of displeasure and a proof of our alienation from God, its tendency is to harden and to exasperate. Hence the Apostle says, that so long as men are under condemnation, they bring forth fruit unto sin ; and that, only when reconciled to God and assured of his love, do they bring forth fruit unto God. The great New Testament prophet, in his vision of the world of woe, represents the lost as gnawing their tongues with pain and blaspheming God. The denunciation of punishment is addressed to fear, but fear is not the principle of genuine obedience.
4. On this subject, appeal may be fairly made to the- common consciousness of men. Such is our moral hebetude that it is only glaring offences which awaken our moral sensibiHties, and reveal their true nature. When any great crime is committed, there is an
, instinctive and universal demand for the punishment of the crim- inal. No man can pretend that the desire for his reformation is the feeling which prompts that demand. That is not so much as
' thought of. It is the instinctive judgment of the mind that he ought to suffer. It is not benevolence towards him which calls for the
• infliction of punishment.
D. The Prevention of Crime is not the Primary End of Pun- ishment. The doctrine that the only legitimate end of punishment is tne prevention of crime, has had great prevalence in the Church and