liever himself. It was not any moral excellence in man, that determined God to interpose for his redemption, while He left the apostate angels to their fate. This was a matter of grace. To deny this, and to make the provision of a plan of salvation for man a matter of justice, is in such direct contradiction to every- thing in the Bible, that it hardly ever has been openly asserted. The gift of his Son for the redemption of man is ever represented as the most wonderful display of unmerited love. That some and not all men are actually saved, is expressly declared to be not of works, not on account of anything distinguishing favourably the one class from the other, but a matter of pure grace. When a sinner is pardoned and restored to the favour of God, this again is declared to be of grace. If of grace it is not founded upon any- thing in the sinner himself. Now as the Scriptures not only teach that the plan of salvation is thus gratuitous in its incep- tion, execution, and application, but also insist upon this charac- teristic of the plan as of vital importance, and even go so far as to teach that unless we consent to be saved by grace, we cannot be saved at all, it of necessity follows that the doctrine of sub- jective justification is contrary to the whole spirit of the Bible. That doctrine in all its forms teaches that that which secures our acceptance with God, is something in ourselves, something which constitutes character. If so, then salvation is not of grace ; and if not of grace, it is unattainable by sinners.
§ 7. The Consequences of the Imputation of Righteousness.
It is frequently said that justification consists in the pardon of sin and in the imputation of righteousness. This mode of state- ment is commonly adopted by Lutheran theologians. This exhi- bition of the doctrine is founded upon the sharp distinction made in the " Form of Concord " between the passive and active obe- dience of Christ. To the former is referred the remission of the penalty due to us for sin ; to the latter our title to eternal life. The Scriptures, however, do not make this distinction so promi- nent. Our justification as a whole is sometimes referred to the blood of Christ, and sometimes to his obedience. This is intel- ligible because the crowning act of his obedience, and that with- out which all else had been unavailing, was his laying down his life for us. It is, perhaps, more correct to say that the righteous- ness of Christ, including all He did and suffered in our stead, is imputed to the believer as the ground of his justification, and that the consequences of this imputation are, first, the remission
VOL. III. ll
162 PART HI. Ch. XVII. -justification.
of sin, and secondly, the acceptance of the believer as righteous. And if righteous, then he is entitled to be so regarded and treated. By the remission of sin Romanists understand the removal of the pollution of sin. So that their definition of justification as consisting in the remission of sin and infusion of righteousness, is only a statement of the negative and positive aspects of sanctifi- cation, i. e., putting off the old man and putting on the new man. The effect of remission is constantly declared to be that nothing of the nature of sin remains in the soul. The Council of Trent says, " Justificatio .... non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et sanctificatio, et renovatio interioris hominis per volunta-
riam susceptionem gratis et donorum Quanquam nemo
possit esse Justus, nisi cui merita passionis Domini nostri Jesu Christi communicantur : id tamen in hac impii justificatione fit, dum ejusdem sanctissimae passionis merito per Spiritum Sanctum caritas Dei diffunditur in cordibus eorum, qui justificantur, atque ipsis inhseret." " Quibus verbis justificationis impii descriptio insinuatur, ut sit translatio ab eo statu, in quo homo nascitur filius primi Adas, in statum gratiaset adoptionis filiorum Dei, per secun- dum Adam Jesum Christum, salvatorem nostrum : quae quidem translatio post evangelium promulgatum sine lavacro regenera- tionis, aut ejus voto fieri non potest." * By " status gratiae " in this definition is not meant a state of favour, but a state of sub- jective grace or holiness ; because in other places and most com- monly justification is said to consist in the infusion of grace. In this definition, therefore, the pardon of sin in the proper sense of the words is not included. Bellarmin 2 says this translation into a state of adoption as sons of God, " non potest .... fieri, nisi homo per remissionem peccati desinat esse impius ; et per infu- sionem justitiae incipiat esse pius. Sed sicut aer cum illustratur a sole per idem lumen, quod recipit, desinit esse tenebrosus et in- cipit esse lucidus : sic etiam homo per eandem justitiam sibi a sole justitiaB donatam atque infusam desinit esse injustus, delente videlicet lumine gratiae tenebras peccatorum." The remission of sin is therefore defined to be the removal of sin. Bellarmin argues in support of this view that guilt is removed by holiness, that guilt is a relation ; the relation of sin to justice. When the thing itself is taken away, the relation itself of course ceases.8 Hence remission of sin, even in the sense of pardon, is effected by the
1 Sess. VI. cap. 7, 4; Streitwolf, Libri Symbolici, Gbttingen, 1846, pp. 24, 25, 22. a De Justificatione, n. ii. ; Disputationes, edit. Paris, 1608, vol. iv. pp. 780, e, 781, a. • De Amissione Gratia et Statu Peccati, v. vii., Ibid. p. 287, a, b.