Scriptura actum judicis, quo causam alicujus in judicio justam esse declarat ; sive eum a crimine, cujus postulatus est, absolvat (quae est genuina, et maxime propria vocis significatio), sive etiam jus ad hanc, vel illam rem ei sententia addicat,et adjudicet."
"17. Per justificationem peccatoris intelligimus actum Dei Patris, ut judicis, quo peccatorem credentem, natura filium irae, neque ullum jus ex se habentem bona coelestia petendi, declarat immunem esse ab omni reatu, et condemnatione, adoptat in filium, et in eum ex gratia confert jus ad suam communionem, cum sa- lute aeterna, bonisque omnibus cum ea conjunctis, postulandi."
"27. Teneamus nullam carnem in se posse reperire et ex se pro- ducere causam, et fundamentum justificationis. 29. Quaerendum igitur id, propter quod peccator justificatur, extra peccatorem in obedientia Filii Dei, quam praestitit Patri in humana natura ad mortem, imo ad mortem crucis, et ad quam praestandam se ob- strinxerat in sponsione. (Rom. v. 19.)" " 32. Haec [obedien- tia] imputatur peccatori a Deo judice ex gratia juxta jus sponsi- onis, de quo ante dictum."
Owen in his elaborate work on justification,1 proves that the word to justify, "whether the act of God towards men, or of men towards God, or of men among themselves, or of one towards another, be expressed thereby, is always used in a 'forensic' sense, and does not denote a physical operation, transfusion, or transmutation." He thus winds up the discussion : " Wherefore as condemnation is not the infusing of a habit of wickedness into him that is condemned, nor the making of him to be inherently wicked, who was before righteous, but the passing a sentence upon a man with respect to his wickedness ; no more is justifi- cation the change of a person from inherent unrighteousness to righteousness, by the infusion of a principle of grace, but a sen- tential declaration of him to be righteous." 2
The ground of this justification in the case of the believing sinner is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. This is set forth at length.3 " The judgment of the Reformed Churches herein," he says, "is known to all and must be confessed, unless we intend by vain cavils to increase and perpetuate contentions. Especially the Church of England is in her doctrine express as to the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, both active and passive, as it is usually distinguished. This has been of late so fully manifested out of her authentic writings, that is, the • Ar-
1 Justification, chap. 4, edit. Philadelphia, 1841, p. 144.
2 Ibid. d. 154. « Ibid. chap. 7, p. 187.
148 PART m. Ch. XVII.— JUSTIFICATION.
tides of Religion ' and ' Books of Homilies,' and other writings publicly authorized, that it is altogether needless to give any fur- ther demonstration of it."
President Edwards in his sermon on justification1 sets forth the Protestant doctrine in all its fulness. " To suppose," he says, " that a man is justified by his own virtue or obedience, derogates from the honour of the Mediator, and ascribes that to man's virtue that belongs only to the righteousness of Christ. It puts man in Christ's stead, and makes him his own saviour, in a respect in which Christ only is the Saviour : and so it is a doctrine contrary to the nature and design of the Gospel, which is to abase man, and to ascribe all the glory of our salvation to Christ the Redeemer. It is inconsistent with the doctrine of the imputation of Christ's righteousness, which is a gospel doctrine. Here I would (1.) Ex- plain what we mean by the imputation of Christ's righteousness. (2.) Prove the thing intended by it to be true. (3.) Show that this doctrine is utterly inconsistent with the doctrine of our being justified by our own virtue or sincere obedience.
" First. I would explain what we mean by the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Sometimes the expression is taken by our divines in a larger sense, for the imputation of all that Christ did and suffered for our redemption, whereby we are free from guilt, and stand righteous in the sight of God ; and so implies the im- putation both of Christ's satisfaction and obedience. But here I intend it in a stricter sense, for the imputation of that right- eousness or moral goodness that consists in the obedience of Christ. And by that righteousness being imputed to us, is meant no other than this, that that righteousness of Christ is ac- cepted for us, and admitted instead of that perfect inherent right- eousness that ought to be in ourselves : Christ's perfect obedi- ence shall be reckoned to our account so that we shall have the benefit of it, as though we had performed it ourselves : and so we suppose that a title to eternal life is given us as the reward of this righteousness." In the same connection, he asks, " Why is there any more absurdity in supposing that Christ's obedience is imputed to us, than that his satisfaction is imputed ? If Christ has suffered the penalty of the law for us, and in our stead, then it will follow that his suffering that penalty is imputed to us, L e.y that it is accepted for us, and in our stead, and is reckoned to our account, as though we had suffered it. But why may not his obeying the law of God be as rationally reckoned to our account,
1 Serra IV. Works, edit. N. Y. 1868, vol. iv. pp. 91, 92.