Lecture 16 Conclusion

On a review both of the History, and the Exposition, of the Doctrine of Justification, many reflections might be profitably suggested; but we can only indicate, without attempting to illustrate, a very few of these.

Any one who really understands the subject, can hardly fail to be impressed with the conviction, that the method of Justification which is revealed in Scripture,—considered simply in its intellectual aspect as a scheme of thought,—bears upon it the legible impress of profound wisdom. Were it only an invention of man, it must still be regarded as one of the most remarkable, and original, products of human reason. It is an attempt to solve the deepest problem, and to answer the most anxious question, which conscience continually prompts men to raise, but which their minds strive in vain to determine—‘How shall man be just with God?’ or, ‘How can God be just,’ and yet ‘justify the ungodly?’ That great problem may seldom occur to those that are habitually unmindful of God, and of their relation to Him; and should it be suggested to their minds, it will probably be lightly dismissed, as long as they cherish slight views of sin, and have little or no sense of their solemn responsibilities and prospects as subjects of the righteous government of God. Some vague opinion in regard to His general mercy, or some undefined purpose to propitiate His favour by future repentance and amendment of life, before they are brought face to face with the awful realities of death, and judgment, and eternity, may suffice, in the meantime, as an answer to the accusing voice of conscience, and as an opiate to allay its forebodings and fears. But minds in this state never grapple with any of the real difficulties of the problem, and can scarcely be said to have the slightest apprehension of its true meaning. They overlook all the most momentous conditions which are involved in it, and on which its right solution depends. The Gospel of Christ alone has presented that problem in all its magnitude, and in its just proportions; and the Gospel of Christ alone has offered a solution of it, based on a full view of the Attributes of God,—of the unalterable requirements of His Law,—of the principles and ends of His Moral Government,—and of the state, character, and prospects of man, as a dying yet immortal being, chargeable with past guilt, and still depraved by inherent sin.

It lays a deep foundation for the doctrine of a sinner’s pardon and acceptance with God, by revealing, in the first instance, the infinite holiness of God, His intense hatred of sin, His inflexible justice in punishing it,—the spiritual nature, the supreme authority, and unchangeable character of His law, as being, like Himself, ‘holy, and just, and good,’—the principles and ends of His Moral Government, as a scheme which is designed and fitted to glorify His great Name, by manifesting, in their actual exercise, all the moral perfections of His nature, and making Himself known to His intelligent subjects as He really is,—the fallen, guilty, and depraved state of man, as a sinner, subject to condemnation, and utterly unable to save himself, while he is passing on, with the swiftness of time itself, to a state of strict and eternal retribution; and it is not till after it has revealed these great truths, which might seem to render his salvation hopeless, that it reveals a method of Grace and Redemption by which God Himself has solved the problem; and announces the stupendous fact, that He gave up His own Son,—to become incarnate, to assume the burden of our sins, to endure the punishment which these sins deserved, to shed His own precious blood for their expiation,—and all this that the Grace and the Justice of God might be made manifest, in their actual exercise, in the Cross of Christ;—and that thus,—His law having been ‘magnified and made honourable,’ and all the ends of His moral government effectually secured,—He might be more signally glorified by the pardon, than He could have been by the punishment, of the sinner,—and be revealed in the Gospel as ‘the Just God and the Saviour,’ as ‘Just, and yet the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.’

The mere statement of such a problem, and of its indispensable conditions,—including the glory of God, the honour of His law, and the ends of His moral government, as well as the pardon of sin, and the salvation of sinners,—is peculiar to the Gospel of Christ, and may well be regarded as a proof of its superhuman origin: but the solution of it, by the Incarnation, Substitution, and Satisfaction of the Son of God Himself, is such a marvellous manifestation of divine wisdom as ‘it could never have entered into the mind of man to conceive.’ For none other than the infinite mind of God was capable of such a conception, either of Love, or of Justice, as that on which it is based; and far less of carrying it into effect in the stupendous work of Redemption. It may be esteemed as ‘foolishness’ by those who have never seriously considered, or sufficiently realised, the conditions of the great problem; but no sooner is any one brought, under the teaching of the Word and Spirit of God, to apprehend them aright, and to apply them in earnest to the case of his own soul, than that which hitherto seemed to be ‘foolishness,’ is seen to be the ‘wisdom of God.’ Hence,—while the very repugnance with which it is regarded by many affords ample evidence that it could never have been invented by men,—the best and most convincing evidence of its divine origin is discerned, when it is seen to be worthy of the infinite perfections of God, as well as adapted to the most urgent wants of man; and when ‘He who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, shines into our hearts, to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.’ (1)

But, if the method of Justification by faith in a divine Redeemer, when it is considered intellectually, as a scheme of thought, be so profound in itself and so peculiar to the Gospel of Christ, that method, when it is considered practically, as the only remedy for the evils of our condition as sinners, and the only means of obtaining pardon and acceptance with God, must be regarded as of supreme importance. For what can be more important, in any circumstances, than the relation in which we stand to God? and what can be more urgent, in our circumstances as sinners, than the question, how we may be delivered from a state of wrath and enmity, and brought into one of reconciliation and peace, with Him? Some may be disposed to say that the doctrine of Sanctification is more important, and more practical, than that of Justification: but have they duly considered, that God has revealed His own method of sanctifying, as well as of justifying sinners; and that there may be much danger in reversing that order of relation which He has established between the two? We are both ‘sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus,’ when we are united to Him by faith; but with this difference, that our Justification is immediate and complete, while our Sanctification is gradual and progressive, but never perfect, in the present life. So far from being founded on our Sanctification, our pardon and acceptance with God is simultaneous with its commencement,—precedes its subsequent stages,—and is largely conducive to its advancement. We are not sanctified by the law, any more than we are justified by the law; for the Apostle insists on its inefficacy in both respects, and shows that without the grace of Christ, the law, so far from subduing our corruptions, serves only to inflame and irritate them; while the same faith which justifies us ‘worketh by love,’ ‘purifieth the heart,’ and animates us in the path of cheerful and devoted obedience. For ‘the end of the law is charity;’ but it must be ‘charity out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned.’

Another reflection, which is naturally suggested by a review both of the History, and the Exposition, of the Doctrine, is that, numerous and conflicting as have been the speculations of men on the subject, all the various shades of opinion in regard to it may be reduced, in their ultimate analysis, to one or other of these two opposite systems;—the system, which ascribes our Justification entirely to the grace of God, through the righteousness of Christ, by faith only,—and the system, which leaves it to depend, in whole or in part, on the personal holiness and obedience of man. The latter system includes many distinct grades of doctrinal belief,—from that of the mere moralist,—whether Atheistic, or Deistic, or Socinian,—who thinks that he may depend on his virtuous dispositions, and his integrity in the offices of common life, without considering, whether he discharges his duties in obedience to the will of God, or whether he is animated by the love of Christ,—up through that of the nominal Christian, who rests on his religious profession, and his regular observance of religious ordinances,—to the Evangelical Arminian, who trusts sincerely in Christ for the pardon of his past sins, but depends on his own inherent holiness, and his personal obedience, for his title to eternal life. These different grades of doctrinal belief are more or less dangerous in proportion as they recede more or less from the truth which is revealed in Scripture; but while some of them are fatal, none of them can fail to be injurious, to those who cherish them. ‘From an early period in the history of the Church,’ says the venerable Dr. HODGE, of Princeton, ‘there have been two great systems of doctrine in perpetual conflict. The one begins with God, the other with man. The one has for its object the vindication of the divine supremacy and sovereignty in the salvation of men; the other has for its characteristic aim the assertion of the rights of human nature. It is specially solicitous that nothing should be held to be true, which cannot be philosophically reconciled with the liberty and ability of man…. Such directions as—receive Christ,—come to Him,—trust in Him,—commit the keeping of the soul to Him, naturally give place under this system to the exhortation—submit to God,—determine to keep His commands,—make choice of Him in preference to the world. The view which this system presents of the plan of salvation,—of the relation of the soul to Christ,—of the nature and office of faith,—modifies and determines the whole character of experimental religion. The system antagonistic to the one just described … regards the work of Christ as designed to satisfy justice, and to fulfil the demands of the law, by His perfect obedience to its precepts, and by enduring its penalty in the room and stead of sinners. His righteousness is so imputed to believers, that their Justification is not merely the act of a sovereign dispensing with law, but the act of a judge declaring the law to be satisfied.’ (2)

Attempts have sometimes been made to show that there is no real, or at least no radical, difference between these two systems (3); and that neither the Popish, nor the Socinian, doctrine should be regarded as incompatible with the salvation of those who sincerely embrace them. It is not for us to sit in judgment on any class of men, or to determine, either their present relation to God, or their future prospects under His government. ‘To their own Master, they stand or fall.’ But if He has revealed the only method of pardon and acceptance with Him, we cannot regard it as a matter of indifference, whether they comply with it, or not. It is their duty to ascertain His mind and will on that subject, as it is revealed in His Word; and if they fail in the discharge of that duty,—whether from carelessness, or prejudice, or hatred to the truth,—they are guilty of sin. The attempts which have been made to minimize the difference, on this subject, between the Popish and Protestant Churches, on the one hand, and between the different sections of Protestants, on the other, by those who have assumed the name of ‘reconcilers,’ have often resulted in the sacrifice of some portion of God’s revealed truth, and have seldom, if ever, been conducive to the real peace, and spiritual edification, of His Church.

We conclude, in the brief, but clear and comprehensive, words of the Westminster Divines:

‘JUSTIFICATION IS AN ACT OF GOD’S FREE GRACE,—WHEREIN HE PARDONETH ALL OUR SINS,—AND ACCEPTETH US AS RIGHTEOUS IN HIS SIGHT,—ONLY FOR THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST,—IMPUTED TO US,—AND RECEIVED BY FAITH ALONE.’