our sins and to rise again for our justification. In Him dwells the fulness of the Godhead, from his fulness we are filled. He to us is wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. Those who receive this Saviour as being all He claimed to be, and com- mit their souls into his hands to be used in his service and saved to his glory, are, in the Scriptural sense of the term, believers. Christ is not only the object of their faith, but their whole in- ward, spiritual life terminates on Him. Nothing, therefore, can be more foreign to the Gospel than the Romish doctrine, substan- tially revived by the modern philosophy which turns the mind away from the historical, really existing, objective Christ, to the work within us ; leaving us nothing to love and trust, but what is in our own miserable hearts.
Christ is not received in oy Special Office alone.
Admitting that Christ is the immediate and special object of those acts of faith which secure salvation, it is asked, Whether it is Christ in all his offices, or Christ in his priestly office, especially, that is the object of justifying faith ? This seems an unnecessary question. It is not raised in the Bible ; nor does it suggest itself to the believer. He receives Christ. He does not ask himself for what special function of his saving work he thus accepts Him. He takes Him as a Saviour, as a deliverer from the guilt and power of sin, from the dominion of Satan, and from all the evils of his apostasy from God. He takes Him as his wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. He takes Him as his God and Saviour,* as the full, complete, satisfying, life-giving portion of the soul. If this complex act of apprehension and surrender were analyzed it doubtless would be found to include submission to all his teaching, reliance on his righteousness and intercession, sub- jection to his will, confidence in his protection, and devotion to his service. As He is offered to us as a prophet, priest, and king, as such He is accepted. And as He is offered to us as a source of fife, and glory, and blessedness, as the supreme object of ado- ration and love, as such He is joyfully accepted.
Is the Sinner required to believe that Grod loves him f
Again, it is questioned, Whether the object of saving faith is that God is reconciled to us ; that our sins are forgiven ; that we are the objects of the saving love of God ? This is not the ques- tion above considered, namely, Whether, as Romanists say, the object of faith is the whole revelation of God, or, as Protestants
100 PART HI. Ch. XVI. — FAITH.
contend, Christ and the promise of redemption through Him, al- though many of the arguments of the Romanists are directed against the special form of the doctrine just stated. They argue that it is contradictory to say that we are pardoned because we believe; and, in the same breath, to say that the thing to be believed is that our sins are already pardoned. Again, they argue that the only proper object of faith is some revelation of God, but it is nowhere revealed that we individually are reconciled to God, or that our sins are pardoned, or that we are the objects of that special love which God has to his own people.
In answer to the first of these objections, the Reformed theolo- gians were accustomed to say, that a distinction is to be made between the remission of sin de jure already obtained through the death of Christ, and remission de facto through the efficacious application of it to us. In the former sense, " remissio peccatorum jam impetrata " is the object of faith. In the latter sense, it is "remissio impetranda," because faith is the instrumental cause of justification, and must precede it. " Unde," says Turrettin,1 "ad obtinendam remissionem peccatorum, non debeo credere peccata mini jam remissa, ut perperam nobis impingunt ; sed debeo credere peccata mihi credenti et pcenitenti, juxta promis- sionem factam credentibus et poenitentibus, remissum iri certis- sime, quas postea actu secundari et reflexo ex sensu fidei credo mihi esse remissa."
The second objection was answered by distinguishing between the direct and the reflex act of faith. By the direct act of faith, we embrace Christ as our Saviour ; by the reflex act, arising out of the consciousness of believing, we believe that He loved us and died for us, and that nothing can ever separate us from his love. These two acts are inseparable, not only as cause and effect, ante- cedent and consequent ; but they are not separated in time, or in the consciousness of the believer. They are only different ele- ments of the complex act of accepting Christ as He is offered in the Gospel. We cannot separate the joy and gratitude with which a great favour is accepted. Although a psychological analysis might resolve these emotions into the effects of the act of acceptance, they belong, as revealed in consciousness, to the very nature of the act. It is a cordial and grateful acceptance of a promise made to all who embrace it. If a general promise of pardon be made to criminals on the condition of the confession of guilt, every one of their number who makes the confession knows
1 Institute, xv. xii. 6; Works, edit. Edinburgh, 1847, vol. ii. p. 508.