this is the doctrine of Protestants, both Lutheran and Reformed, cannot with any show of reason be disputed.
Calvin's Doctrine.
It is true, indeed, that by the earlier Reformers, and especially by Calvin, justification is often said to consist in the pardon of sin. But that that was not intended as a denial of the judicial character of justification, or as excluding the imputation of the righteousness of Christ by which the believer is counted just in the sight of the law, is obvious, —
1. From the nature of the controversy in which those Reform- ers were engaged. The question between them and the Roman- ists was, Does justification consist in the act of God making the sinner inherently just or holy ? or, Does it express the judgment of God by which the believer is pronounced just ? What Calvin denied was that justification is a making holy. What he affirmed was that it was delivering the believer from the condemnation of the law and introducing him into a state of favour with God. The Romanists expressed their doctrine by saying that justifica- tion consists in the remission of sin and the infusion of charity or righteousness. But by the remission of sin they meant the re- moval of sin ; the putting off the old man. In other words, jus- tification with them consisted (to use the scholastic language then in vogue) in the removal of the habits of sin and the infusion of habits of grace. In those justified, therefore, there was no sin, and, therefore, nothing to punish. Pardon, therefore, followed as a necessary consequence. It was a mere accessary. This view of the matter makes nothing of guilt ; nothing of the demands of justice. Calvin therefore, insisted that besides the subjective ren- ovation connected with the sinner's conversion, his justification concerned the removal of guilt, the satisfaction of justice, which in the order of nature, although not of time, must precede the communication of the life of God to the soul. That Calvin did not differ from the other Reformers and the whole body of the Reformed Church on this subject appears from his own explicit declarations, and from the perfectly unambiguous statements of the Confessions to which he gave his assent. Thus he says,1 " Porro ne impingamus in ipso limine (quod fieret si de re incognita disputationem ingrediremur) primum explicemus quid sibi velint istae loquutiones, Hominem coram Deo justificari, Fide justificari, vel operibus. Justificari coram Deo dicitur qui judicio
1 Institutio, in. xi. 2 ; ut supra, p. 6.
134 PART HI. Ch. XVII. — JUSTIFICATION.
Dei et ceiisetur Justus, et acceptus est ob suam justitiam : siqui dem ut Deo abominabilis est iniquitas, ita nee peccator in ejus oc- ulis potest invenire gratiam, quatenus est peccator, et quamdiu talis censetur. Proinde ubicunque peccatum est, illic etiam se profert ira et ultio Dei. Justificatur autem qui non loco peccato- ris, sed justi habetur, eoque nomine consistit coram Dei tribunali, ubi peccatores omnes cOrruunt. Quemadmodum si reus innocens ad tribunal sequi judicis adducatur, ubi secundum innocentiam ejus judicatum fuerit, justificatus apud judicem dicitur : sic apud Deum justificatur, qui numero peccatorum exemptus, Deum ha- bet suse justitiae testem et assertorem. Justificari, ergo, operibus ea ratione dicetur, in cujus vita reperietur ea puritas ac sanctitas quae testimonium justitiae apud Dei thronum mereatur : seu qui operum suorum integritate respondere et satisfacere illius judicio queat. Contra, justificabitur ille fide, qui operum justitia ex- clusus, Christi justitiam per fidem apprebendit, qua vestitus in Dei conspectu non ut peccator, sed tanquam Justus apparet. Ita nos justificationem simpliciter interpretamur acceptionem, qua nos Deus in gratiam receptos pro justos habet. Eamque in pec- catorum remissione ac justitiae Christi imputatione positam esse 4icimus."
This passage is decisive as to the views of Calvin ; for it is pro- fessedly a formal statement of the " Status Quaestionis " given with the utmost clearness and precision. Justification consists " in the remission of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ." "He is justified in the sight of God, who is taken from the class of sinners, and has God for the witness and as- sertor of his righteousness."
§ 3. Works not the Ground of Justification.
In reference to men since the fall the assertion is so explicit and so often repeated, that justification is not of works, that that prop- osition has never been called in question by any one professing to receive the Scriptures as the word of God. It being expressly asserted that the whole world is guilty before God, that by the works of the law no flesh living can be justified, the only ques- tion open for discussion is, What is meant by works of the law ?
To this question the following answers have been given, First, that by works of the law are meant works prescribed in the Jew- ish law. It is assumed that as haul's controversy was with those who taught that unless men were circumcised and kept the law of Moses, they could not be saved (Acts xv. 1, 24), all he intended