Greetings,
I recently met someone over the internet who did not have a clear idea about the difference between justification & sanctification. I asked if they knew the difference and in reply - I'd say their answer was they punted and either missed or fell short of the goal posts.
As the confusion and/or mixing of justification & sanctification is an old Roman Catholic error that is re-occurring in certain sections of Protestant Christendom, I thought I'd share some sources that define the two terms and distinguish the two.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Justification by Faith.
1. Faith necessarily demands an object to which it clings, a foundation on
which it rests. The very moment faith springs up in the heart, it clings to the
very promise that created it, and apprehends what this promise offers. As the
Gospel offers grace and forgiveness, the believer by and through faith
immediately appropriates these blessings and makes them his own. What God has
offered in His promise He confirms in the believer. Because by faith the
believer has and holds the righteousness Christ earned for him, God declares
him just. It is thus that faith justifies the sinner before God. “Therefore we
conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law” (Rom.
3:28). By the labor of his hands a poor helpless cripple will never become
rich; but if a kind friend were to give him thousands of dollars, he would
become rich through this gift. Likewise we, who cannot keep the Law as God demands,
cannot be justified under the Law; but as God freely gives us the righteousness
of Christ through faith, we are accounted just and righteous before Him because
of this gift of God.
2. Justification in detail.—(a) All men are sinners.—“There is no difference:
for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). For this
reason they all are guilty before God and worthy of death (Rom. 3:19).
(b) Christ fully atoned for all sins.—Moved
by His love and compassion, God sent His Son to be the Savior of the world
(John 3:16), who by His vicarious life and death rendered full satisfaction for
all men (1 John 2:2). The purpose of His work of redemption was to reconcile
the world unto God (2 Cor. 5:19), and by His resurrection He proved that He had
accomplished it. “Who was delivered for our offenses, and raised again for our
justification” (Rom. 4:25).
(c) God has forgiven all sins.—Because of
the redemption through Christ God no longer imputes sins to men (2 Cor. 5:19);
He does not charge their transgressions against them, but credits them with the
merits of Christ. “For He hath made Him to be sin for us who knew no sin; that
we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). For the sake
of Christ’s complete satisfaction God “justifies the ungodly” (Rom. 4:5), i.e.,
they who by nature and by their own works were altogether ungodly, were because
of the work of Christ declared and pronounced just and righteous. Therefore,
“by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification
of life” (Rom. 5:18). “Justification properly consists in the non-imputation of
sins, or their forgiveness, to the sinner, which is the negative side; and the
imputation of Christ’s perfect righteousness, as though it were his own, which
is the positive side” (Dr. C. H. Little in Lutheran
Confessional Theology, p. 149).
The fruit of
Christ’s redemption is not that He merely opened for man the way to
reconciliation with God, and that God is now ready and willing to forgive sins,
pending certain conditions man must first fulfill. The fruit of Christ’s
redemption is that Christ actually did effect a reconciliation, that God does
no longer impute sins, but has in His heart forgiven all sins to all men. On
the part of God reconciliation and the forgiveness of sins is not a mere
possibility, but an accomplished fact, an objective reality, which is not
affected by the personal attitude of man (Rom. 3:3; 2 Tim. 2:13). By His
vicarious active and passive obedience Christ paid for the sins of all men, and
God, accepting this payment, has in His heart forgiven all sins of all men.
There is not a soul in all the world which God has not already
absolved from all sin. This is called objective or universal justification.
“Objective justification may be defined as God’s declaration of amnesty to the
world of sinners on the basis of the vicarious obedience of Christ, by which He
secured a perfect righteousness for all mankind, which God accepted as a
reconciliation of the world to Himself, imputing to mankind the merits of the
Redeemer” (Dr. C. H. Little in Disputed
Doctrines, p. 60).
(d) The Gospel reveals and offers to men the
forgiveness of sins.—This fact that in Christ the world is reconciled to
God, and that the sins of all men are atoned for and forgiven is not known to
man by nature, nor can he discover it by his own cogitation. This is a matter
we can learn only by divine revelation (1 Cor. 2:7–11). And God did make this
fact known to us in the Gospel, “for therein is the righteousness of God
revealed from faith to faith” (Rom. 1:17). This is not the personal
righteousness of God, nor the righteousness He demands of us in the Law, but
the righteousness Christ earned for us, which is to be accepted by faith (Rom.
3:21. 22). The Gospel, therefore, does not reveal to us a possible
reconciliation, a conditional forgiveness of sins; in the Gospel the
reconciliation and the forgiveness of sins are proclaimed as accomplished
facts. For this reason Christ says that “remission of sins should be preached
in His name among all nations” (Luke 24:47), and the apostle Paul writes “that
through this man” (Christ) “is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins” (Acts
13:38). Real and genuine Gospel preaching, therefore, does not consist in
merely giving all manner of interesting information about the forgiveness of
sins, but in proclaiming to sinners the fact of the forgiveness, the fact that
the world is reconciled unto God (2 Cor. 5:19. 20). And because the Gospel is
God’s own proclamation of grace to a sin-cursed world, it actually promises,
offers, and brings grace and forgiveness to all that hear it.
(e) The promise of forgiveness must be accepted
by faith.—This declaration on the part of God calls for acceptance on the
part of man. But it is impossible to accept it by means of works; it can be
accepted only by faith, for this righteousness is revealed “from faith to
faith” (Rom. 1:17). Whoever does not accept it in this manner will not be
benefited by it, for we read: “The Word preached did
not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it” (Hebr. 4:2).
But faith, which is so necessary for the acceptance of this Gospel promise, is
wrought in the heart of man by this very promise, for “faith cometh by hearing,
and hearing by the Word of God” (Rom. 10:17).
(f) Faith justifies the sinner.—Faith
clings to the promise, and thereby man appropriates to himself personally what
the promise offers to all men in general. Illustration: On January 1st, 1863, Lincoln declared a
general emancipation of all the slaves; the individual slave heard and believed
this proclamation and applied it to himself, and thus he became personally
free. Thus the reconciliation of the whole world by Christ and the forgiveness
of all sins of all men is an accomplished fact, which, in itself, is not
affected by the attitude of men (Rom. 3:3). This fact is proclaimed in the
Gospel to every slave of sin; and the very moment that he applies this fact to
himself, believing that for Christ’s sake also his sins are forgiven, he has the forgiveness of all his sins, is
free from the guilt and punishment of sin, and is personally justified before
God. That is what Paul teaches (Rom. 4:5): “To him that worketh not,” does not
seek to become righteous before God by his own works, “but believeth on Him
that justifieth the ungodly,” trusts in God, who for Christ’s sake declares all
the ungodly just, “his faith is counted for righteousness,” he by such faith
becomes personally righteous, because the righteousness of Christ, which his faith
apprehends, is by God imputed to him personally. Thus by faith one puts himself
into personal possession of that justification, which the Gospel offers to all
men in general. This is called personal or subjective justification.
If we tell a
heathen man that for Christ’s sake God has forgiven all his sins, we are simply
stating a fact, which the unbelief of man cannot make ineffectual, “without
effect” (Rom. 3:3). This fact must be accepted in true faith, which presupposes
a penitent heart, and consists in confidence and trust in this forgiveness. The
function of faith in this matter is merely instrumental; it does not achieve
forgiveness of sins; it does not earn it; it does not make us worthy of it; nor
does it move God to forgive us our sins. It is not a condition we must fulfil
before forgiveness is available for us. On the part of God the forgiving takes
place before we ever came to faith, yea, before we were bern, because with God the forgiveness rests
on the atonement of our sins through Christ. The forgiveness of sins and the
righteousness of Christ are ready for all men, and are being freely offered to
them in the Gospel. All things in the kingdom of heaven are now ready (Matt.
22:2–4). But if they are to benefit us, we must accept them; a promised gift
can be accepted in no other way than by faith. The moment, therefore, our faith
trusts in the promise of God, we apply and appropriate to ourselves what the
promise offers, and God confirms the gift upon us personally. Thus it is that
man is justified by faith (Rom. 3:28). The moment I accept the riches offered
to me I become rich. The believer does not have to wait for the forgiveness of
his sins; it is ready for him, and he has
it the moment he takes it, and he keeps it as long as he holds it. He loses it
as soon as the faith, by which he held it, ceases. Thus the function of faith
in justification is that it takes and holds with a trusting heart what God
offers in the Gospel.
Justification is
that forensic act of God, by which He, on the basis of the perfect vicarious
atonement wrought by Christ, declared the whole world to be justified in His
sight (objective justification), and transmits and imputes the effect of this
declaration to all whom He brings to faith by the work of the Holy Ghost
through the means of grace (subjective justification).
Thus it appears
that universal justification does not benefit anyone unless it is followed by
personal justification, and that personal justification is possible only
because of the preceding universal justification. In other words, the fact that
God has forgiven all sins to all men does not help anyone unless he accepts it
by faith; on the other hand, he cannot appropriate forgiveness to himself if
the sins are not yet forgiven. Illustration: Bread will not nourish us, unless
we eat it; but we cannot eat it unless it is there.
(g) Justification a judicial act of God.—Justification
is not a moral transformation, effected within the sinner by virtue of some
infused grace; but it is a judicial act of God, taking place outside of the
sinner, by which God in mercy for Christ’s sake absolves him from all sins,
pronounces and declares him righteous, who has no righteousness of his own, but
who trusts in the righteousness of his Savior (Rom. 4:5–8). God justifies the
sinner by imputing to him the righteousness of Christ. “The word ‘justify’
means in this article, to absolve, that is, to declare free from sin” (F.C.,
Epit.,
Art. III, 7, Triglot, p. 793). “To justify
signifies, according to forensic usage, to acquit a guilty one and declare him
righteous, but on account of the righteousness of another, namely, of Christ,
which righteousness is communicated to us by faith” (Apol., Art. III, 184, Triglot, p. 205). That the word
“justify” means to declare just, we see from Matt. 12:37 and from Prov. 17:15.
(h) Justification is perfect.—Justification
is not partial nor progressive, but complete and perfect. The moment there is
faith in the heart, by which we lay hold of God’s promise of grace, at that
moment there is full forgiveness of all our sins. Forgiveness of sins and the
grace of God are not a quantity, of which parts and portions are meted out to
us as we have need of them day by day, as it is the case with our daily bread;
but grace and forgiveness are facts, proclaimed in the Gospel. Whoever trusts
in this fact has the forgiveness for all his sins. God, therefore, does not
justify man partially, forgiving him some of his sins while retaining others,
but He forgives all sins and justifies man completely. “Who forgiveth all thine
iniquities” (Ps. 103:3); “Thou hast cast all my sins behind Thy back” (Is.
38:17); “Having forgiven you all trespasses” (Col. 2:13).
As Christ has
atoned for all sins (1 John 2:2), and as God has in His heart forgiven all sins
to all men, and offers this forgiveness in the Gospel to all men (2 Cor. 5:19.
20), it follows that everyone who by faith accepts this forgiveness has the
forgiveness for all sins and is completely justified before God. For this
reason faith does not look forward to forgiveness of sins, as a thing to be
hoped for, a thing that we might obtain in the future when we meet our God; it
does not say: “I am sure that God will forgive me my sins,” but it says: “From
the promise of God in the Gospel I know that He has forgiven all my sins.”
Forgiveness of sins and justification are not future blessings we are still
waiting for, but they are a present possession, which we have and hold in their
completeness as long as we continue in the faith.—There are degrees of faith,
weak and strong, but there are no degrees of justification; for the weak in
faith cling to the same promise, and obtain the same forgiveness as the strong
in faith. The difference is not in what they hold, but in the weakness or the
firmness of the hold they have on it.
3. Why does faith save us?—(a) There can
be no faith in the forgiveness of sins if there is not first sorrow and
contrition over sins in the heart. Whoever does not repent of his sins will not
care to have forgiveness of sins. But sorrow over sin, however deep and
sincere, does not give to faith its saving power. God does not forgive sin
because a person is sorry lot what he has done; (example: Judas).
(b) Good works and
a holy life necessarily proceed from faith, for faith without works is dead
(James 2:17). “Faith worketh by love” (Gal. 5:6). However, faith does not save
us because it produces good works; the fruits of faith do not give to faith its
justifying power. Man is justified without the works of the Law (Rom. 3:28).
“Contrition that precedes, and good works that follow, do not belong to the
article of justification” (F.C., Epit., Art. III, 8, Triglot, p. 795). (Read also F.C., Th. D., Art. III, 24–29, Triglot, p. 923–925.)
(c) Faith itself
may be regarded as a work of man, inasmuch as he does the believing. And it is
also a good work, well pleasing to God (John 6:28. 29). But it is not a
meritorious work. Faith does not justify and save us because of its intrinsic
worth and ethical value. Regarded as an act of man, faith is also a work of the
Law. Faith is absolutely necessary as a means of salvation, but faith is not
the Savior. “Faith justifies, not for this cause and reason that it is so good
a work and so fair a virtue, but because it lays hold of and accepts the merits
of Christ in the promise of the holy Gospel” (F.C., Th. D., Art. III, 13, Triglot, p. 919).
(d) Not the act of
eating, but the food we eat nourishes us. Thus, not the act of believing, but
what we believe saves us. However, as one must eat food that really nourishes,
so one must believe what really saves. A false doctrine, no matter how
sincerely believed, cannot save. The doctrines of the First Article of the
Apostles’ Creed are divine truths, but they are not saving
truths; one may believe them with all sincerity of heart and still be lost. The
saving truth, and, therefore, the chief doctrine of the Bible, is briefly
expressed in the words of Paul: “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto
Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them” (2 Cor. 5:19); and “in Christ
we have the redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to
the riches of His grace” (Eph. 1:7); and in the words of Christ: “God so loved
the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him
should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16); in other words, God
by grace for Christ’s sake forgave us our sins. He who truly believes these
words has forgiveness, is justified before God, and will be saved. As it is the
gold which I hold in my hand that makes me rich, so it is the merits of Christ
which I hold by faith that saves my soul. The
saving power, therefore, lies not in the hand of faith, but in the merits of
Christ, which I hold by faith. Faith is only the means, the instrument, by
which I apprehend the saving merits of my Savior. At the same time, faith is
the only means by which I can come into possession of these merits, because
they are offered to me in an unconditional promise, which can be apprehended in
no other way than by faith.
“In order,
therefore, that troubled hearts may have a firm, sure consolation, also, that
due honor be given to the merits of Christ and the grace of God, the Scriptures
teach that the righteousness of faith before God consists alone in the gracious
reconciliation or forgiveness of sins, which is presented to us out of pure
grace, for the sake of the only merit of the Mediator, Christ, and is received
through faith alone in the promise of the Gospel. In like manner, too, in
justification before God faith relies neither upon contrition nor upon love or
other virtues, but upon Christ alone, and in Him upon His complete obedience by
which He fulfilled the Law for us, which obedience is imputed to believers for
righteousness. Moreover, neither contrition nor love or any other virtue, but
faith alone is the sole means and instrument by which and through which we can
receive and accept the grace of God, the merits of Christ, and the forgiveness
of sins, which are offered us in the promise of the Gospel” (F.C., Th. D., Art.
III, 30. 31, Triglot, p. 925).
4. The results of justification.—(a) The state of grace.—The moment a person
is justified by faith, he is delivered from the state of wrath, and enters the
state of grace. In this blessed state he has peace with God (Rom. 5:1); he has
a good conscience toward God (Hebr. 9:14; 10:22); he has the assurance of God’s
protection and guidance (Hebr. 13:5; Rom. 8:28); he is delivered from all fear
(Ps. 34:4; Hebr. 2:15); he glories in tribulation (Rom. 5:3); he triumphs in
death (1 Pet. 1:3; 1 Cor. 15:55–57); he has become a child of God (Gal. 3:26)
and an heir of heaven (Gal. 4:7).—In this state of grace we continue as long as
we remain in the faith; however, the moment faith is lost, justification and
forgiveness and all the blessings resulting therefrom are likewise lost.
(b) Membership in the invisible Church, the
kingdom of grace, and title to the kingdom of glory.—Having by faith obtained
the forgiveness of sins, we are translated into the kingdom of the Son of God,
and are made partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light (Col.
1:12–14). Because we are born again of God, we are children of His household
and family (Eph. 2:19; 3:15). Justified by faith, we join the communion of
saints, the royal priesthood, etc. (1 Pet. 2:9), and have claim and title to
the kingdom of glory. While in this world, Christians may seem to be of low
degree, they should always be fully conscious of the high position to which
they are exalted through faith in Christ.
(c) The indwelling of the Holy Ghost and of the
entire Trinity.—In conversion we received the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts
2:38; 10:44; Tit. 3:5. 6). Hence, Paul writes: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth
in you? If any man defile the temple
of God, him shall God destroy; for the
temple of God is holy, which temple ye are” (1
Cor. 3:16. 17); (2 Cor. 6:16). Speaking of the Father and of Himself, Jesus
said: “And We will come unto him” (the believer) “and make Our abode with him”
(John 14:23). This mystical and inexplicable union and indwelling of God
pertains not only to the soul, and does not consist merely in the agreement of
the will of man with the will of God, nor in the mere onion of both in mutual
love, nor in a mere influence of the Holy Ghost on man, but it pertains also to
the body. “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of
God, and ye are not your own?” (1 Cor. 6:19).—This union must be distinguished
from the indwelling mentioned in Acts 17:28, which is common to all created
things, while this indwelling is peculiar to the believers only. This
indwelling of God in His believers is mystical and inexplicable, yet it is real
and actual.
What does this
indwelling of the Holy Ghost mean to us? Christ purchased and won all men, even
those who are finally lost (1 Cor. 6:20; 2 Pet. 2:1); therefore all are, in a
sense, His purchased possession. But personally we become His own the moment we
believe in Him, for then the Holy Ghost enters our hearts and takes actual
possession of us. Illustration: The home a person buys is his own, but he takes
actual possession of it when he moves in. So all men are Christ’s own by the
redemption, but in conversion the Holy Ghost takes actual possession of the
believer by dwelling in his heart. By faith we lay hold of Christ; by sealing
us with the Holy Ghost God lays hold of us. “In whom also after that ye
believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest
of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the
praise of His glory” (Eph. 1:13. 14). From this text we learn that the Holy
Ghost is the earnest of our inheritance, a pledge on the part of God to us,
that He will fulfil His promise and redeem us from this vale of tears and take
us to Himself in heaven. In the meantime, the Holy Spirit bears witness with
our spirit, assuring us that we are the children of God and the heirs of God
(Rom. 8:16). He also supports our prayers and makes intercession for us (Rom.
8:26. 27). He furthermore leads and rules us, that in our lives we bring forth
the fruits of the Spirit (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 5:16–23). So the indwelling of the
Holy Ghost in our hearts means much to us, and therefore we should heed the
warning: “Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day
of redemption” (Eph. 4:30).
(d) Initial restoration of the image of God.—The
image of God, consisting in a blissful knowledge of God and in righteousness
and true holiness of life, was lost when man fell into sin. But a beginning of
its restoration is made, when man is justified by faith in Christ. For the new
knowledge, which the believer gained from the Gospel, fills his
heart with joy and happiness, and this, in turn, moves him to forsake the ways
of sin and to walk in the paths of righteousness. Because of the old Adam, this
restoration of the image of God will never be perfect in this life. For this
reason Paul admonishes us: “Put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge
after the image of Him that created him” (Col. 3:10), and: “Put on the new man,
which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Eph. 4:24).[1]
More about Justification
The effect of faith is justification; [1] by which is to be understood that
act of God by which he removes the sentence of condemnation, to which man is
exposed in consequence of his sins, releases him from his guilt, and ascribes
to him the merit of Christ. Br.
(574): “Justification denotes that act by which the sinner, who is responsible
for guilt and liable to punishment (reus culpæ et pænæ), but who believes in
Christ, is pronounced just by God the judge.” [2] This act occurs at the
instant in which the merit of Christ is appropriated by faith, [3] and can
properly be designated a forensic or
judicial act, since God in it, as if in a civil court, pronounces a
judgment upon man, which assigns to him an entirely different position, and
entirely different rights. [4] By justification we are, therefore, by no means
to understand a moral condition existing in man, or a moral change which he has
experienced, but only a judgment pronounced upon man, by which his relation to
God is reversed, [5] and indeed in such a manner, that a man can now consider
himself one whose sins are blotted out, who is no longer responsible for them
before God; who, on the other hand, appears before God as accepted and
righteous, in whom God finds nothing more to punish, at whom he has no longer
any occasion to be displeased.
Through this act
of justification emanating from God we receive, 1. Remission of Sins (Rom. 4:7; Ps. 32:1, 2; Rom. 3:25; Luke
11:4; 2 Cor. 5:19).
2. The Imputation of the righteousness of Christ
[6] (Rom. 5:9; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:6; Phil. 3:9; Rom. 4:5); for God, from the
moment in which faith is exercised, regards all that Christ has accomplished,
as if it had been done by man, and attributes the merit of Christ to him, as if
it were his own. [7] From this can be seen what we are to designate as the
ground of our justification, and what is the means by which it is attained. The
ground lies alone in the merit of Christ, for by this our sins are blotted out,
and God is enabled to receive us again into favor. [8] The means, however,
through which we attain justification is faith. [9] In no wise, therefore, is
any merit or worthiness on our part demanded as the condition for the
impartation of justification, as if upon that our justification should depend.
It is not denied, indeed, that a moral change takes place in man, with the
entrance of faith, and therefore also with that of justification; yet this is
to be regarded as only an attendant of justification and contemporaneous with it,
but in no wise as the condition upon which we attain justification; [10] and
this the less, as it is only the grace of God which displays itself in
justification, that furnishes the ground and possibility of such a change. [11]
The moral worthiness of man cannot be made account of in the inquiry concerning
the reasons of his being received into the favor of God, [12] and it is highly
important to assert this firmly, as we would deprive ourselves of the firm
footing on which our justification rests, if we regarded it as in any degree
dependent upon anything done by us. [13] Justification is, accordingly, to be
regarded throughout as a free gift of grace on the part of God, which is
offered to us gratuitously and without requiring any addition to it on our part,
and which can be received and accepted only by faith, as it is expressed in the
declaration that we are justified, gratuitously,
by faith alone, [14] and for Christ’s sake. [15]
This doctrine,
according to which, in the act of justification, all man’s works are excluded
and the whole is considered as effected by God’s grace, constitutes the central
point of the knowledge which we owe to the Reformation; [16] in it there is
offered man a sure and firm foundation upon which he may build his hopes of salvation,
and a sure way is pointed out to him of obtaining it. [17]
[1] Quen. (IV, 286): “The immediate effect of faith is the
remission of sins, adoption, justification, union with Christ, access to God,
and peace of conscience. Among these effects of faith justification is the principal, to which all the rest can be
referred.”
[2] Quen.
(III, 526): “Justification is the external, judicial, gracious act of the most
Holy Trinity, by which a sinful man, whose sins are forgiven, on account of the
merit of Christ apprehended by faith, is accounted just, to the praise of God’s
glorious grace and justice and to the salvation of the justified.”
[3] Br.
(574): “For with and through faith man is at once justified; so that the act by
which faith is conferred upon man, and the act by which man is justified, are
simultaneous; although faith is by nature first in order and justification
subsequent to it.”
[4] Br.
(574): “Justification has a forensic
sense, and denotes that act by which God, the judge, pronounces righteous
the sinner responsible for guilt and liable to punishment, but who believes in
Jesus.”
Chmn. (Loc.
c. Th., II, 250): “Paul everywhere describes justification as a judicial process, because the conscience of the sinner accused
by the divine law before the tribunal of God, convicted and lying under the
sentence of eternal condemnation, but fleeing to the throne of grace, is
restored, acquitted, delivered from the sentence of condemnation, is received
into eternal life, on account of the obedience and intercession of the Son of
God, the Mediator, which is apprehended and applied by faith.” According to
this, justification signifies to pronounce righteous. Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec., III, 17): “The word
justification signifies in this matter to pronounce righteous, to absolve from
sins and the eternal punishment of sins on account of Christ’s righteousness, which
is imputed to faith by God.” Br.
(575): “Although the Latin word justificare
is compounded of the adjective justus
and the verb facere, it does not
denote in general usage and especially in the Scriptures, when sinful man is
said to be justified before God, the infusion of an habitual righteousness, but according to the import of the
Hebrew word הִצְדִּיק (2 Sam. 15:4;
Deut. 25:1), and the word δικαιοῦν in the
Septuagint, and Paul (Rom. 3 and 4), the Latin justificare, is also transferred from an outward to a spiritual
court, at which men are placed as before a divine tribunal, and are acquitted
after the case has been heard and sentence has been pronounced.” According to
the Catholic doctrine “justify” is equivalent in import to making righteous;
making a righteous person out of a wicked one. In opposition to this, Ap. Conf. (III, 131):
“Justification signifies not to make a wicked person righteous, but in a
forensic sense to pronounce righteous.” Quen.
(III, 515): “These words δικαιοῦν and הִצְדִּיק, nowhere and never in the whole
Scriptures, even when not used in reference to the justification of the sinner
before God, signify justification by the infusion of new qualities, but
whenever they are used of God justifying the wicked before his tribunal they
have a forensic signification.” Grh.
(VII, 4 seq,) gives in what follows the Scripture proof in detail: “The
forensic signification (of the word δικαιοῦν) is
proved, (1) because it denotes a judicial
act, not only without reference to the doctrine of gratuitous justification
before God (Is. 5:23; Deut. 25:1; 2 Sam. 15:4; Ps. 82:3; Is. 43:9), but also in
the very article of justification (Ps. 143:2; Job 9:2, 3; Luke 18:14); (2)
because it is opposed to condemnation
(Deut. 25:1; 1 Kings 8:32; Prov. 17:15; Matt. 12:37; Rom. 5:16; 8:33, 34); (3)
because its correlatives are judicial.
For a judgment is mentioned, Ps. 143:2; a judge, John 5:27; a tribunal, Rom.
14:10; a criminal, Rom. 3:19; a plaintiff, John 5:45; a witness, Rom. 2:15; an
indictment, Col. 2:14; an obligation, Matt. 18:24; an advocate, 1 John 2:1; an
acquittal, Ps. 32:1. The law accuses the sinner before the judgment-seat of
God, that he may be subject to the judgment of God. Rom. 3:19. Conscience
concurs with this accusation of the law, Rom. 2:15. Since, in consequence of
sin, the whole nature of man and all his works are miserably contaminated, he
discovers nothing to oppose to the judgment of God; the law therefore hurls the
thunder of its curse and condemnation upon man convicted of sin, but the Gospel
presents Christ the Mediator, who by his most perfect obedience has atoned for
our sins; to him the sinner, terrified and condemned by the law, flees by true
faith, opposes this righteousness of Christ to the sentence of God and The
condemnation of the law, and in view of, and by the imputation of this, he is
justified, that is, freed from the sentence of condemnation and pronounced righteous;
(4) because the equivalent phrases are
judicial. To be justified is to be not called into judgment, Ps. 143:2; to
be not condemned, John 3:18; not to come into condemnation, John 5:24; not to
be judged, John 3:18. The publican went down to his house justified, that is,
acquitted of his sins, Luke 18:14. Paul explains justification by ‘imputing for
righteousness,’ Rom. 4:3, 5; by ‘covering iniquities,’ by ‘not imputing sin,’
5:7; by ‘remitting sins,’ Rom. 3:25; by ‘forgiving trespasses,’ Col. 2:13. Here
belong the phrases ‘to be reconciled to God,’ Rom. 5:10; ‘to be made
righteous,’ 5:19; ‘to partake of the blessing,’ Eph. 1:3; ‘to receive remission
of sins,’ Acts 10:43; ‘to be saved,’ Acts 4:12. Comp. the parable, Matt.
18:27.”
[5] Br.
(577): “Justification does not mean a real and internal change of man.” Holl. (928): “Justification is
a judicial, and that, too, a gracious act, by which God, reconciled by the
satisfaction of Christ, acquits the sinner who believes in Christ of the
offenses with which he is charged, and accounts and pronounces him righteous. Since this action takes place apart from
man, in God, it cannot intrinsically change man. For, as a debtor for whom
another pays his debt, so that he is considered released from the debt,
undergoes not an intrinsic but an extrinsic change in regard to his condition,
so the sinner who is reputed and pronounced free from his sins, on account of
the satisfaction of Christ applied by true faith, is changed, not
intrinsically, but extrinsically, with respect to his better condition. The point from which this external
change takes places (terminus a quo)
is the state of being responsible for guilt and liable to punishment; because
thereby the sinner remains in a state of sin and wrath (Rom. 4:7; Eph. 1:7; 2
Cor. 5:19). The point to which it
conducts (terminus ad quem) is the
state of grace and righteousness; because God, remitting the offenses of the
sinner who believes in Christ, receives him into favor, and imputes to him the
righteousness of Christ (Rom. 4:5, 6; Gal. 3:6; 2 Cor. 5:21: Phil. 3:9; Rom.
5:19).” To the last, Br.
(579) remarks in addition: “Some refer to this place the privileges of the sons
of God, and the inheritance of eternal life, which is conferred or adjudged to
us in God’s account. Some add the dignity of the reward of righteousness which
we obtain in this act of justification. But others, and probably the majority,
distinguish the act by which the sonship, or the inheritance, or the privilege
of reward is conferred on the faithful, from justification, and consider them
as its consequences.… The Scriptures also frequently distinguish between these
two things, viz., freedom from the condemnation of sin, with power to become
the sons of God, and the heavenly inheritance, of which the latter implies the
former, and is furnished to the justified by a subsequent and new gift, viz.,
that when the judgment is finished, that sonship or adoption will take place
referred to in Rom. 8:15, 23; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5.”
[6] Quen.
(III, 524): “Our justification before God
consists in the remission and non-imputation of sins and the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ.” The Form.
Conc.
sometimes presents both these expressions conjointly, and sometimes it
describes the sentence of justification as having reference only to the
remission of sins. It says (Epit., III, 4): “We believe that our righteousness
before God consists in this, that the Lord forgives us our sins through mere
grace.… For he gives and imputes to us the righteousness of the obedience of
Christ; on account of this righteousness we are received into favor by God, and
are accounted just.” And it says (Sol. Dec., III, 9): “Concerning the
righteousness of faith, we confess that the sinner is justified before God, i.e., is absolved from all his sins and
from the sentence of most righteous condemnation, and adopted into the number
of the children of God and regarded as a heir of eternal life.” … The same course
is adopted by other Dogmaticians. No difference is thereby intended in the
matter itself. Br.
mentions, as the form of justification, only the forgiveness of sins, because
he presupposes the imputation of the righteousness of Christ as that upon which
the forgiveness is based. He says (588): “It is certain, when we call the form
of justification the forgiveness or non-imputation of sins, the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ is not excluded, … nor the imputation of this faith
itself for righteousness. That is, we mean to say, that the imputation of the
righteousness of Christ, and of faith itself, is only logically prior to that forensic act of justification
by which men are absolved from the guilt of sins; for to the question, Why does
God justify man? the a priori
explanation is given, Because God imputes to man the righteousness or merit of
Christ apprehended by faith, or so judges it to belong to man that he is on
this account absolved from the guilt of his sins.” Other Dogmaticians express
themselves differently in regard to the relation existing between the
forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.
Quen. (ib.):
“These parts (so to speak) are not different or distinct essentially (τῷ ἐ͂ιναι), but merely logically
(τῷ λόγῳ); for the imputation of
Christ’s righteousness is essentially nothing else than the remission of sins,
and the remission of sins is nothing else than the imputation of Christ’s
righteousness, so that either word separately taken expresses the whole nature
of justification. Whence the apostle Paul,
Rom. 4,
interchanges the forgiveness of sins
and the imputation of righteousness
in his description of justification, which he sometimes defines as the
forgiveness of sins, and sometimes as the imputation of righteousness. For, as
it can properly be said that at one and the same time, and by one and the same
action, the expulsion of darkness from the atmosphere is the introduction of
light, so one and the same wicked man, at one and the same time, and by the
very same act of justification, is both freed from guilt and pronounced
righteous.” Holl. (915): “Remission
of sins and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness are inseparable and
closely united acts; but distinct, indeed, in form, as the first is privative,
and the other positive, the one results immediately from the passive obedience
of Christ, the other from his active obedience. We do not deny, meanwhile, that
the one may properly be inferred from the other, for there is no sinner, whose
sins are pardoned, but has the righteousness of Christ imputed, and the
reverse.”
In earlier times, indeed, the definition of renovation or regeneration was also included in that of justification. Thus Mel. says (Loc. Com. Th., II,
207, seq.): “The first (degree) of evangelical liberty is that the forgiveness
of sins, reconciliation, justification, or the imputation of righteousness and
acceptance to eternal life, and the inheritance of eternal life, are bestowed
upon us freely on account of the Son of God.… The second degree is the gift of
the Holy Spirit, who enkindles new light in the mind and new emotions in the
will and heart, governs us, and begins in us eternal life.” And the Ap. Conf., II, 72: “Because to be
justified signifies that the wicked are made righteous through regeneration, it
signifies also that they are pronounced or reputed as righteous. For the
Scripture uses both these methods of speaking.” Ib., III, 40: “Although it is
generally admitted that justification signifies not only the beginning of
renovation, but the reconciliation by which we are afterwards accepted.” When,
afterwards, these phrases were taken separately, and in the definition of
justification only the forgiveness of sin and the imputation of Christ’s
righteousness were included, no change of doctrine was thereby introduced. Mel. and the Ap. meant thereby only to say that as
faith, by which one apprehends the merit of Christ, is wrought by the Holy
Spirit, regeneration in its beginnings is at the same time implied in it. Ap. II, 45: “This special faith, by
which any one believes that his sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake, and that
God is reconciled and rendered propitious for Christ’s sake, attains the
forgiveness of sins and justifies us. And because in penitence, i.e., in our spiritual distress, he comforts
us and encourages our hearts, regenerates us and bestows the Holy Spirit, so
that then we can obey the divine law.” To this statement the later theologians
also adhered. See Note 10. They were influenced, however, by the controversies
that afterwards arose with the Roman Catholics, and also with some Lutheran
theologians (A. Osiander), already in the definition of justification, to guard
against the appearance of admitting that the renovation thus introduced in its
beginnings along with the forgiveness of sins, was in any sense a condition of
the bestowal of the forgiveness of sins. And with this the Apol. entirely accords.
[7] Quen.
(III, 525): “The form of imputation consists in the gracious reckoning of God,
by which the penitent sinner, on account of the most perfect obedience of
another, i.e., of Christ, apprehended
by faith, according to Gospel mercy, is pronounced righteous before the divine
tribunal, ‘just as if this obedience had
been rendered by the man himself.’ ” Ap.
Conf.
(III, 184): “To be justified here signifies, according to forensic usage, to
absolve a guilty man and pronounce him just, but on account of the
righteousness of another, viz., of Christ, which righteousness of another is
communicated to us by faith.… Because the righteousness of Christ is given to
us through faith, so faith is righteousness in us imputatively, i.e., it is that by which we are caused
to be accepted of God in consequence of the imputation and ordination of God.”
The expression: the righteousness of
Christ, is explained as follows in the Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 14): “The righteousness (of Christ), which is imputed before
God out of pure grace to faith, or to believers, is the obedience, passion, and resurrection of Christ, by which he
satisfied the law for our sake and atoned for our sins.” Synonymous with the
expression: “the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us,” is that other: “the
merit or obedience of Christ is imputed to us.” And also this one: “faith is imputed to us for righteousness,”
Rom. 4:5, which is thus explained: “only in so far as it apprehends and applies
to itself the righteousness of Christ.” The
righteousness of faith, then, “is nothing else than the forgiveness of
sins, the gratuitous acceptance of the sinner solely on account of the
obedience and most perfect merit of Christ alone.” (Ib. 54.)
Chmn. (Loc. Th., 274) vindicates the doctrine
of imputation, against the Papists, as follows: “There is an imputation which
is based upon and has reference to a foundation in the person working, to whom
the imputation is made, and this is done not as a matter of grace, but as a
matter of debt. But there is another imputation, which neither has nor refers
to a foundation, in view of or by reason of which the imputation is made, but
is based upon the grace and mercy of God, who justifies the wicked. And in
this, that he says by this imputation the wicked man is justified, he shows that
the foundation is altogether different in the believer to whom this imputation
is gratuitous; to whom, namely, not righteousness but guilt would be imputed,
if God wished to enter into judgment. Paul, therefore, distinctly and clearly
shows that he wishes this word, imputation, in the doctrine of justification,
to be understood not in the former, but in the latter sense. And the same thing
he also shows more fully and proves from David, who describes the blessedness
of the man to whom God imputes righteousness without works. Therefore the
foundation of this imputation, concerning which Paul speaks, is not in him to
whom the imputation is made, for he says, ‘without works.’ And in Eph. 2:8 he
more expressly says: ‘not of yourselves.’ But he adds that sins in this
imputation are forgiven, that iniquities are covered, that crimes are not
imputed. There is, therefore, in those who believe, to whom this gratuitous
imputation is made, an altogether different foundation, if God should wish to
enter into judgment with them. The imputation of righteousness consists,
therefore, in the grace and mercy of God, which, for the sake of Christ, cover
up the inherent foundation, viz., sin, so that it may not be imputed, and
impute to the believer, through grace, the foundation which is not in him, just
as if the righteousness were inherent in that perfection which he owes. These
three things, therefore, we now infer from the true premises which belong to
the word imputation in this article: 1. There is no basis in believers, in
view, and by reason of which, righteousness is imputed for happiness, not even
in Abraham, although adorned by the Holy Spirit with distinguished gifts of
renewal. 2. A very different basis is discovered, if God wish to enter into
judgment, viz., sin, which is to be covered up, so as not to be imputed. 3. But
that imputation is a referring act (relatio)
of the divine mind and will, which, through gratuitous mercy for Christ’s sake,
does not impute their sins to believers, but imputes to them righteousness, i.e., they are regarded before God, in
his judgment, as if they possessed perfect inherent righteousness, and thus
salvation and eternal life are bestowed upon them as if they were righteous.
But what the fourth point is, that also belongs to imputation, and wherefore it
is added can be understood from what follows. When a judge, by his own
referring act (relatio), imputes the
sentence of righteousness to a guilty person without any foundation, this is an
abomination (Prov. 17:15; Ex. 23:1; Deut. 25:1; Is. 5:23; 1 Chron. 8:32). Some
may reply, God is a perfectly free agent, and as such can justify whom he will
and as he will. But God has revealed his will in the law, and this cannot be
broken.… Therefore, in accordance with that revealed will, God does not wish to
justify any one without righteousness, i.e.,
unless according to the law satisfaction has been made for sin, and the law has
been fulfilled by a perfect obedience. And Paul says, when faith is imputed for
righteousness, the law is not made void, but established, i.e., to use the scholastic terminology, the act of the divine mind
imputes to the believer the sentence of righteousness for eternal life, not
without a basis. But that basis is not in believers. But God has offered to us
his Son as Mediator, made under the law, to which he rendered satisfaction both
by bearing our sins and by perfect obedience.… Thus we will obtain a perfect
referring act whose foundation is in obedience and redemption, in Christ Jesus
our Lord. The referring act (relatio)
is the grace and mercy of God; the object of it is the believer, to whom, on
Christ’s account, sins are not imputed, but who is through Christ accounted
righteous before God unto eternal life, the righteousness of Christ being
imputed to him.” …
“This exposition explains the whole doctrine and
refutes many cavils.… The Jesuits say, a referring act (relatio) without a
foundation is an empty phantasm and an illusion, as if Crassus, burdened with
debt, were saluted as rich. Such, they say, is imputative righteousness, which
has no foundation inherent in ourselves. But these cavils are abundantly
refuted by what we have already said. For we do not teach that God, through any
levity, imputes righteousness to believers without any foundation; but we
affirm, from the Word of God, that there needs to be ever so firm a foundation
of gratuitous imputation, that the righteousness inherent even in Abraham and
David could not be the foundation of that referring act (relatio) and imputation, but there was need that the Son of God
should become incarnate.… The righteousness of faith is, therefore, not of the
least but of the greatest reality, for Christ is our righteousness; nor is it
an empty phantasm, for it is the result of the divine thought and judgment.” In
regard to the meaning of the word justification, Holl. further remarks (914): “Imputation, in the doctrine of
justification, is not taken in a physical
sense, so as to signify to insert, to implant, but in a moral, judicial, and declarative sense,
so as to signify to adjudicate, to attribute, to ascribe, to transfer, confer,
devolve upon another the effect of a voluntary act by one’s own estimate and
decision.”
The reality of imputation Br. shows as follows (581): “It is called imputation, not as an empty or imaginary transfer of the
merit of one to another, destitute alike of a basis and fruit; but because
it is an act of the intellect and will of him who exercises the judgment, by
which he adjudges that the merit of one, which is offered for another, and is
apprehended by the faith of him for whose benefit it has been offered, can be
legitimately accepted as if it were his own merit, and is willing to receive it
in such manner as if he had of himself offered it, whatever it is. Paul himself
uses this argument in Rom. 4:3–6.” Quen.
(III, 525): “This imputation is most real, whether
respect is had to the righteousness which is imputed, or to the act of imputation. The righteousness of
Christ, or his obedience, active and passive, which is imputed to us, is most
true and real, for it corresponds entirely to the mind and will of God
expressed in the law. The act of imputation, also, or the imputation itself, is
real, because its measure is the infallible intellect of God. Whence God cannot
repute or consider him just to whom true righteousness has not been
appropriated; nor can there proceed from the divine will, the rule of all
excellence, approbation of an imaginary or fictitious estimation or
righteousness. They, therefore, to whom the righteousness of Christ is imputed,
are truly righteous, though not inherently,
or by inherence, but imputatively,
and by an extrinsic designation at least they are such, for even from that
which is external a true designation may be derived. It is, therefore, an idle
question, whether, on account of that imputation, we are really righteous, or
are merely considered righteous. For the judgment of God is according to truth.
Wherefore, he is truly just who, in the judgment of God, is regarded as just.”
[8] The Dogmaticians distinguish (Quen., III, 517): “The impulsive internal cause of our
justification, which is the purely gratuitous grace of God (Rom. 3:24; 11:6;
Eph. 2:8, 9; 2 Tim. 1:9; Tit. 3:4–6),” and the “impulsive, external, and meritorious cause, which is Christ the
Mediator, by virtue of his active and passive obedience (Rom. 3:24; 2 Cor.
5:21),” (Br., 583). “The
impulsive external cause does not annul the gratuitous favor of God, in the
matter of justification, nor is it excluded from it; since, rather, the fact is
due to divine grace, that God sent his Son to make satisfaction for us, so that
we could be justified, and that he accepts this merit belonging to another as
if it were our own.” Whence it appears in what sense it is said that the ground
of justification is exterior to man. Mel.
(Loc. c. Th., I, 179): “If they duly consider these (alarms, that accompany
true penitence), they would know that thoroughly terrified minds seek
consolation outside of themselves,
and this consolation is the confidence with which the will acquiesces in the
promise of mercy, granted for the sake of the Mediator.” Quen. (III, 525): “This
imputation has a most firm foundation, not in man, who is justified, but without him, namely, in God himself, who
imputes, and in Christ the Mediator, who earned the imputation by rendering
satisfaction.” The contrary doctrine is that of the Roman Catholic Church,
which, by justification, understands, “to
make a righteous out of an unrighteous person.” According to this doctrine
the ground of our salvation does not lie in the appropriation of the merit of
Christ, but in our moral transformation. It is then said: “That, on account of
which man is justified and constituted an heir of eternal life, is an infused
habit of righteousness and love, or newness of life, or righteousness inherent
in us, by which we observe the law.” (Quen.,
III, 540.) When The Romanists use the phrase, “the righteousness of Christ,”
they employ it in a sense entirely different from that in which it is employed
in the Lutheran Church; for, while in the latter the righteousness of Christ is
understood to mean that righteousness which Christ, by obedience towards the
Father, has secured for us, the
Romanists understand by the phrase the moral perfection of Christ himself, the
righteousness inherent in him. This, however, is carefully distinguished, by
the Lutheran Dogmaticians, as the
essential, from the other, the habitual
and meritorious righteousness. Even the Lutheran divine, Andrew Osiander, understood by the
righteousness of Christ his essential righteousness, and thus confounded
justification and sanctification, like the Romanists. He says in his Conf. et Disp., A. D. 1549: “That the
fulfilment of the law, effected by Christ, and obedience and remission of sins,
prepare for righteousness, but the righteousness by which we are accounted
righteous before God, is the divine nature of Christ entering into us by faith,
and abiding in us, or the essential and eternal righteousness of God, which,
dwelling in us, enables us to act righteously.” Hence the decision of the Form. Conc. (Sol. Dec., III, 55): “As
in our churches it is considered beyond controversy by the divines of the
Augsburg Confession, that all our righteousness is to be sought outside of
ourselves and apart from the merits and works, virtues and dignity of men, and
that it exists alone in our Lord Jesus Christ, it is carefully to be considered
in what way, in the matter of justification, Christ is said to be our
righteousness. For our righteousness does not consist in his divine nature
(Osiander), nor in his human nature (Stancarus), but in his entire person, for
he, as God and man, in his entire and most perfect obedience, is our
righteousness.”
[9] Holl.
(903): “The receptive means, or that on the part of the sinner which receives
Christ’s merit, and the grace of God founded upon it, is faith.” Faith is thus,
indeed, considered a cause, but an
impulsive cause subordinate, or an instrumental
cause, organic, and receptive; only in the sense, however,
that by faith the merit of Christ, justifying grace, etc., must be received,
and by no means in the other, that in faith there is an effective cause of
justification. This is contained already in the general statement of the Apol. (II, 53, German): “Wherefore,
whenever we speak of the faith that
justifies, or of justifying faith, these three things always concur. First,
the divine promise; second, that this offers grace gratuitously, without
merit; third, that the blood and
merit of Christ constitute the treasure through which sin is paid for. The
promise is received through faith; the fact, moreover, that it offers grace
without merit utterly excludes all our worthiness and merit, and exalts the
great grace and mercy; and the merit of Christ is the treasure, for that must
indeed be a treasure and noble security through which the sins of all the world
are paid for.” More specifically, Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 13): “Faith does not justify because it is so good a work, so
illustrious a virtue, but because it apprehends and embraces the merit of
Christ in the promise of the Gospel.” Holl.
(903): “Faith justifies not by itself, by its own dignity, or value, by moving
God to justify the believer, but because, as an instrument or receptive means,
it lays hold of the merit of Christ, in view of which and without the least
detriment to his justice, God, of his mere grace, is moved to pardon and
consider righteous the penitent sinner believing in Christ. For the energy or
internal power of justifying faith is the receiving of Christ, of the grace of
God based upon Christ, pardoning sin, offered in the Gospel promise, together
with the remission of sins dependent on this, John 1:12; Rom. 5:17; Gal. 3:14;
Acts 10:43. Faith receives the effects of Christ’s satisfaction, the remission
of sins. From these sacred oracles we gather that faith is the receptive means
by which the satisfaction of Christ, and the grace of God obtained by it, are
received.” Quen. (III, 518)
distinguishes, therefore, “between the causality
of faith, which consists in apprehending and receiving, which is nothing
else than an organic and instrumental one, and the ground of that causality, or
justifying power, which pertains to faith not in itself and in its own nature,
or in so far as it is an act of apprehension. It might appropriate its own
merits, or imaginary merits, or human righteousness, and yet it would not in
this way justify. It does not pertain to it from the generous estimation of God
or his discharge of debt, as if God considered faith of so much value as to
impart to it the dignity and power of justifying, but solely on account of the
justifying object apprehended, or on account of the object, viz., so far as it
apprehends the merit of Christ. Paul expressly mentions this, Rom. 3:25, to
wit, that the entire justifying power of faith depends on the object
apprehended. As, for example, when the hand of a hungry person takes the
offered bread, that taking, as such, does not satisfy the man, for he might
receive clay, or a stone, or other things, which could not satisfy him; but the
entire satisfaction depends on the object apprehended and eaten, namely, the
bread. So the man hungering for righteousness, Matt. 5:6, apprehends indeed by
faith, or with the beggar’s hand, the bread that comes from heaven. John 6:50,
51; but the apprehending, as such, does not drive away spiritual hunger; but
the entire effect of the apprehension depends upon the object apprehended by faith,
that is, the redemption and the blood of Jesus Christ.”
[10] Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 32): “It is properly said that believers, who are justified by
faith in Christ, in this life at first obtain indeed an imputed righteousness of faith, but then also they have an incipient righteousness of new obedience
or of good works. But these two things are not to be confounded or intermingled
in the doctrine of justification by faith in the sight of God.” Chmn. (Ex. c. Trid., I, 233): “It is certain that the blessing
bestowed through the Son of God is twofold, namely, forgiveness of sins and renovation
in which the Holy Spirit enkindles new virtues in believers. For Christ by his
passion merited for us not only the remission of sins, but, in addition, this
also, that, on account of his merit, the Holy Spirit is given to us that we may
be renewed in the spirit of our mind. These benefits of the Son of God we say
are so united, that when we are
reconciled, at the same time the spirit of renovation is also given us. But
we do not on this account confound them, but distinguish them, so as to give to
each its place, order, and character, as we have learned from the Scriptures,
that reconciliation or remission of sins goes before, and that the beginning of
love or of new obedience follows. But especially that faith concludes that it
has a reconciled God and the forgiveness of sins, not on account of the
subsequent and commenced renovation, but on account of the Son of God the
Mediator.”
[11] Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 27): “It is necessary that a person should be righteous before
he can perform good works.” Ap. Conf.
(II, 36): “It is very foolishly asserted by adversaries, that men, deserving of
eternal wrath, merit the pardon of sin by an act of love which they put forth,
since it is impossible to love God unless beforehand the pardon of sins has
been apprehended by faith. For the heart truly perceiving God to be angry,
cannot love him unless he is shown to be appeased; human nature cannot raise
itself to the love of an angry, condemning and punishing God, while he
terrifies and seems to cast us into eternal death. It is easy for the indolent
to fancy these dreams of love, that one guilty of mortal sin can love God above
all things, because they do not perceive what the anger or judgment of God is;
but, in the agony and stings of conscience, the conscience itself perceives the
vanity of these philosophical speculations.”
[12] Chmn.
(Ex. c. Trid., I, 234): “This is the principal question, this the point, this
the matter to be decided; what that is, on account of which God receives the
sinner into favor; what can and ought to be opposed to the judgment of God,
that we may not be condemned according to the rigid sentence of the law; what
faith ought to seize and present, on what to depend, when it desires to treat
with God that it may be pardoned; what should intervene for which God may
become appeased and propitious to the sinner who has merited wrath and eternal
damnation; what conscience should determine that to be, on account of which
adoption is granted us, which affords a sure ground of confidence that we shall
be received to eternal life; whether it be the satisfaction, obedience, and
merit of the Son of God, the Mediator, or the renovation commenced in us, love,
and the other virtues.”
[13] Mel.
(I, 192): “As it is of much importance that this exclusive particle (gratis) should be properly understood, I
will explain the four reasons on account of which it is necessary to retain and
defend it: (1) That due honor be ascribed to Christ; (2) that conscience may
retain a sure and firm consolation (if this exclusive particle be ignored,
doubt is strengthened, to wit, if you suppose that there is no pardon unless
you have a contrition or a love sufficiently worthy, doubt will adhere, which
produces at one time contempt of God, at another hatred and despair); (3) that
true prayer may be offered; (4) that the difference between the Law and the
Gospel may be seen.”
[14] Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 36): “Paul means this when he urges with so much diligence and
zeal in the matter of justification by faith, the exclusive particles by which
works are excluded from it, such as these, ‘without works,’ ‘without the law,’
‘without merit,’ ‘by grace alone,’ ‘gratis,’ ‘not of works.’ But all these
exclusives are embraced in these words, when we teach, ‘we are justified before God, and saved, by faith alone.’ For in
this way our works are excluded, not indeed in the sense that true faith can
exist without contrition, or as if good works did not necessarily follow true
faith (as its most certain fruits); or, as if believers in Christ ought not to
perform them; but works are excluded from
the doctrine of justification before God, lest they may be introduced and
mixed in the matter of the justification of the sinner before God, as if
necessary and absolutely pertaining to it. This is the true meaning of the
exclusive particles in the doctrine of justification, which must be firmly and
sedulously retained and urged in its discussion.” Chmn. (Loc. Th., II, 283): “Should the inquiry be made why we
contend so strenuously for the particle ‘alone,’
and are not rather contented with those exclusive particles which are contained
in the Scriptures (the terms ‘by grace,
freely, without works, imputation’), the reasons are weighty and true. For
as the Church, in all its periods, has used freely some modes of speaking that
things might be most plainly propounded, explained, defended, and retained
against the various artifices of enemies; so, in the article of justification,
we give a prominent place to the exclusive particles of Paul. If it be asked
for what purpose and on what account we have adopted and desire to retain the
particle ‘alone’ we answer, the
reasons are true and weighty. This
particle ‘alone’ embraces at once, and that very significantly, all the
exclusive particles which the Scriptures use.”
In order to specify very particularly the sense in
which the phrase “we are justified by
faith alone” is used, and to guard against misunderstandings, the
Dogmaticians append a number of explanations, from which we select the
following. Quen. (III, 552 seq.):
“(1) We do not here speak of the energy (ἐνεργεία) of faith, or of the operation of justifying faith,
which manifests itself in various acts of virtues, as love, hope, etc.; but of
the operation which is peculiar to it, native
and singular, and is entirely
incommunicable to all other moral excellencies, namely, the apprehension and
application of the merit of Christ. (2) The exclusive particle ‘alone’ does not exclude different kinds of
causes, but subordinates them. For it is not opposed (a) to the grace of God, the principal efficient cause of
justification; (b) not to the merit
of Christ; (c) nor to the Word and
Sacraments, which are the instrumental causes of our justification, on the part
of God offering and granting, but to our
works, for it is they that are excluded by this proposition, so that the
proposition, faith alone justifies, is equivalent to this, faith without works
justifies. (3) Distinguish between the exclusion of works with respect to their
actual presence, and with respect to the communication of efficiency. Works are
excluded not from being present, but from the communication of efficiency; not
that they are not present to faith and the justified, but that they have no
energy or causation in connection with faith in the justification of man. (4)
Distinguish between faith considered in
respect to justification itself, and then it is only the instrument
apprehending the merit of Christ, and it alone justifies; and considered in the person justified, or after
justification, and thus it is never alone, but always attended with other
graces; indeed, it is the root and beginning of them all. (5) Distinguish
between faith alone and a solitary
faith. Faith alone justifies; that is, it is the only organ by which we lay
hold of the righteousness of Christ and apply it to ourselves, but it never
exists alone, or is solitary; that is, detached and separated from the other
virtues, because true faith is always living, not dead; therefore it has good
works present with itself as its proper effect.”
[15] The most correct and common expression is, “we are justified by faith; that is, through faith.” Synonymous in import are
the expressions, “we are justified by grace, by the merit, by the obedience of
Christ.” (Comp. Form. Conc.,
Sol. Dec., III, 9 and 12.) If the expression be used, “faith alone justifies,”
to avoid all misunderstanding, this is explained as follows. Musæus (in Holl.): “When it is said concerning faith, in the nominative
case, that it justifies, the
language seems to be figurative. The meaning is not that faith absolves a man
from sins and accounts him righteous; but faith is said to justify, because
God, in view of it, regards us righteous, or because faith (not by its own, but
by the worth of Christ’s merit) moves God to justify us.” Holl. (ib.). “Osiander justly
remarks: ‘If we wish to speak accurately and according to Scripture, it must be
said that God alone justifies (for it is an act of God alone); but by faith man
is justified.’ For faith of itself does not justify, because it is merely
apprehensive. The mode of speaking, because it has become so common to say,
faith alone justifies, can be retained, if the phrase be properly explained in
accordance with Scripture usage.”
[16] Form.
Conc.
(Sol. Dec., III, 6): “This article in regard to the righteousness of faith is
the chief one in the entire Christian doctrine, without which distressed
consciences can have no true and firm consolation, or rightly appreciate the
riches of Christ’s grace. This is also confirmed by the testimony of Luther,
when he says, if this one article remains uncorrupted the Christian Church will
remain uncorrupted, in harmony and without party divisions; but if it is
corrupted, it is impossible successfully to oppose a single error or a
fanatical spirit.”
Chmn. (Loc.
Th., II, 216): “This one point mainly distinguishes the Church from all nations
and superstitions, as Augustine says: ‘The Church distinguishes the just from
the unjust, not by the law of works but by the law of faith.’ Yea, this article
is, as it were, the citadel and chief bulwark of the entire Christian doctrine
and religion, which being either obscured, or adulterated, or subverted, it is
impossible to retain the purity of the doctrine in other points. But, this
doctrine remaining untouched, all idolatries, superstitions, and perversions in
all the other doctrines destroy themselves.”
[17] The later theologians add further: “The
effects and properties of justification.” As effects, Quen.
(III, 526) enumerates: “(1) our mystical union with God, John 15:4–6, 14, 23;
Gal. 2:19, 20; 3:27; Eph. 3:17; (2) adoption as sons of God, John 1:12; Rom.
8:14; (3) peace of conscience, Rom. 5:1; (4) certain hearing of prayer, Rom.
8:32; James 1:5–7; (5) sanctification, Rom. 6:12; (6) eternal salvation, Rom.
4:7, 8.” As properties: “(1) Immediate efficacy, for it is not
gradual and successive, as renovation, but in a moment, an instant,
simultaneously and at once. (2) Perfection,
because all sins are perfectly pardoned, so that there is need of no
satisfaction of our own, 1 John 1:7; Rom. 8:1; Heb. 10:14. (3) Identity in the mode of justification, in respect to all that are to be saved. A
common salvation of all presupposes a common faith and a common and the same
mode of justification. Acts 4:12; 15:11; Rom. 3:22–26. (4) Assurance in us, not conjectural, but
infallible and divine. Rom. 8:25, 38, 39; 5:1, 2; Eph. 3:12; 1 John 3:14. (5) Growth, not as to the act which is
instantaneous, but in regard to faith and the consciousness of justification. 2
Cor. 10:15; Col. 1:10; 2 Pet. 3:18; Eph. 4:14, 15; (6) Constant continuance. For as the forgiveness of sins, so also our
justification is renewed daily, and not only in the first beginning, but faith
daily is imputed to the believer for righteousness, and thus our justification
is continuous, Rev. 22:11; (7) Amissibility,
Ez. 18:24; Heb. 6:5, 6; John 15:2; (8) Recoverableness,
John 6:37; Rom. 5:20. The prodigal son is an example, Luke 15.”[2]
Sanctification Through Faith
1. The word “sanctification” is sometimes used in a wider sense, as in 2
Thess. 2:13: “God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through
sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” The term here
comprehends the entire work of the Holy Ghost, by which He leads the sinner
unto eternal life. However, it is also used in a narrower sense, as in 1 Thess.
4:3: “This is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain
from fornication” etc. Here the term evidently refers only to that part or
phase of the Spirit’s work, by which He incites and directs believers to lead a
godly life.
As pointed out
above, we properly distinguish between the justifying and the sanctifying power
of faith. It is the latter of which we speak now.
2. Sanctification in detail.—(a) Renewal of the heart.—Sanctification of
life begins in the heart. By nature man is carnally minded, and an enemy of God
(Rom.
8:7). But by faith he appreciates and accepts the blessings of God’s grace.
Thus there is created in his heart a gratitude and a love of God. “We love Him,
because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19). His attitude toward God is changed.
This change of
heart from enmity to love brings about also a change of mind with respect to
the things of life. The believer’s view of life and his estimate of earthly
things is changed (Phil. 3:7. 8), and his affection is set on things above
(Col. 3:2). Because the believer loves God, his mind is no longer set on the
works of the flesh, which God abhors, but on the things of the Spirit, which
are pleasing to God (Rom. 8:5). What he loved before, he now hates; what he
hated before, he now loves. Because of the mercies he
received from his God, he will not be conformed to the world, but be
transformed by the renewing of his mind to prove what is the good and
acceptable will of God (Rom. 12:2). Thus the moral attitude of man is radically
changed; morally he has become a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17). This inward change
and renewal is the essence of sanctification.
As all sins
proceed from the heart (Matt. 15:19), so does the reformation of life make its
beginning there. Compulsory laws and rules may somewhat change the outward
conduct of man, but it is the sanctifying power of faith in Christ that truly
reforms the evildoer, and renews the image of God in his life (Eph. 4:24).
(b) Struggle against sin.—Such change of
heart will inevitably induce the believer to struggle against the wicked
promptings of his flesh, in which dwelleth no good thing (Rom. 7:18). He will
not willingly yield to, and obey, the lusts thereof (Rom. 6:12); but he will
endeavor to subdue and suppress them. “They that are Christ’s have crucified
the flesh with the affections and lusts” (Gal. 5:24). He will change his former
manner of life, the “vain conversation received by tradition from your
fathers,” by putting off the old man, which is corrupt according to the
deceitful lusts (Eph. 4:22). By daily contrition and repentance the old Adam in
the believers is to be drowned, and evil desires are to be resisted and
suppressed.
But the believer
will resist also temptations that approach him from without. His faith enables
him to overcome the allurements of the world (1 John 5:4. 5; 1 Pet. 4:2), and
to stand against the wiles of the devil (Eph. 6:10–13; 1 Pet. 5:8. 9). While
before there was in him no power to resist, but rather a strong inclination to
yield to every evil temptation (Gen. 8:21), there is in him now a new power, a
new will, that struggles against Satan, the world, and the flesh.
(c) Good works.—This change of heart
manifests itself also in a positive way. The believer will bring forth fruit
meet for repentance (Matt. 3:8); his faith works by love (Gal. 5:6); he will be
zealous of good works (Tit. 2:14). He is like “a tree planted by the rivers of
water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season” (Ps. 1:3). His faith is a
light that continually
sends forth rays of good works (Matt. 5:16); it is a vital energy, always
active in doing what is pleasing to God.
Luther writes in
the Preface to St. Paul’s
Epistle to the Romans: “Thus faith is a divine work in us, that changes and
regenerates us of God, and puts to death the old Adam, makes us entirely
different men in heart, spirit, mind, and all powers, and brings with it the
Holy Ghost. Oh, it is a living, busy, active, powerful thing that we have in
faith, so that it is impossible for it not to do good without ceasing. Nor does
it ask whether good works are to be done; but before the question is asked, it
has wrought them, and is always engaged in doing them” (F.C., Th. D.,
Art. IV, 10, Triglot, p. 941).
3. True faith always sanctifies.—As a
light sends forth rays from the moment it begins to burn until it is
extinguished, so the sanctification of life begins the very moment faith is
kindled in the heart, and it continues as long as the light of faith burns.
There can be no true faith in the heart without having some effect on the life
of a person, for faith always works by love (Gal. 5:6). Where there is faith in
the heart, there is sanctification in the life. The lives Christians lead
before men are the outward evidence of their faith in God. “Faith, if it hath
not works, is dead, being alone … Shew me thy faith without thy works” (which
is impossible), “and I will shew thee my faith by my works” (James 2:17. 18).
When faith dies, sanctification of life ceases; even though the outward form of
godliness may continue, its strength and essence are gone (2 Tim. 3:5).
4. Sanctification varies.—The sanctifying
power of faith (not its justifying power) varies according to the strength or
the weakness of faith. The weak faith succumbs to temptation more easily than
the strong faith, is less productive of good works, and gives way to fear and
doubt in face of danger (Matt. 14:29–31). The fluctuations of faith are
reflected in the life of a person. For this reason the holiness of life is not
the same in all believers; not even in the same person does it continue on the
same level. Not all Christians are equally zealous and fruitful of good works.
As faith weakens, love waxes cold, and good works decrease in number and
quality. To achieve a greater sanctification of life, there must be a stronger
faith and a deeper appreciation of the goodness or God. Hence, it must be our
constant effort to continue and to grow in the faith, so that we may grow also
in holiness of life; “to be strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner
man” (Eph. 3:16). Growing in faith, we shall abound also in charity toward each
other (2 Thess. 1:3).
5. Sanctification is never perfect.—Let no
one imagine that it is possible for him to become perfect in his life. Paul confesses:
“Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect, but I
follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of
Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:12). Christ apprehended Paul that he should become
perfect, and Paul strives to attain this end; but he admits that he has not yet
succeeded. Isaiah admits that even “our right-eousnesses are as filthy rags”
(Is. 64:6). “For our best works, even after the grace of the Gospel has been
received, are still weak and not at all pure” (Apol., Art. III, 42, Triglot, p. 169).—The reason why no
believer can become perfect in his life is that besides the new man, which is
faith in its sanctifying function, he still has the old Adam, the flesh, original
sin, which is by no means eradicated from his nature, but clings to him unto
death (Rom. 7:14–24), which continually lusts against the Spirit (Gal. 5:17),
and contaminates even the good works that proceed from faith. But while a
Christian must admit imperfection in his best endeavors, he will, nevertheless,
“follow after,” earnestly strive for perfection, “to cleanse ourselves from all
filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2
Cor. 7:1). Hence, sanctification is progressive, but never perfect in this
life.
6. Sanctification of life not optional.—(a)
“This is the will of God, even your sanctification” (1 Thess. 4:3). We
sometimes forget this, and are concerned only about our final salvation in
heaven; we are anxious to live with Christ in the kingdom of glory, but are not
always so eager to live under Him in His kingdom of grace. (b) However, Christ
redeemed us that also in this life we should live under Him in righteousness
and true holiness (2 Cor. 5:15; Luke 1:74. 75). (c) Also for this purpose the
Holy Ghost has converted us. “We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus
unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them”
(Eph. 2:10). Therefore we should follow holiness, without which no man shall
see the Lord (Hebr. 12:14), abound in every good work (2 Cor. 9:8), and not be
weary in well doing (Gal. 6:9).
7. Sanctification of life has no saving power.—While
the new life we lead is, indeed, a “living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto
God” (Rom. 12:1), it is by no means a sacrifice by which we atone for past
transgressions, and on account of which God declares us just. It is rather a
sacrifice of thanksgiving for the mercies received, and it is not offered in
expectation of a reward. A life lived and a work done in expectation of reward
cease to be fruits of faith and love. God, indeed, promises to reward faithful
service (Matt. 5:12; Luke 14:14; Gal. 6:9); still, such service must not be
rendered because, and in expectation, of such reward, but because, and in
recognition, of the numerous blessings we have gratuitously received from His
hands. A holy life can never proceed from a mercenary motive, but from love.
Sanctification of life, therefore, can never be the cause of our justification
before God, but it is the result and consequence thereof. For this reason
sanctification of life can never be properly taught independent of, and
separated from, justification. Our Lutheran Confessions reject as false “that
man, after he has been born again, can perfectly observe and completely fulfill
God’s Law, and that this fulfilling is our righteousness before God, by which
we merit eternal life” (F.C., Epit., Art. II, 12, Triglot, p. 789).
8. The causes of sanctification.—(a) The
principal efficient cause of our sanctification is the Triune God. “The very
God of peace sanctify you wholly” (1 Thess. 5:23). “It is God which worketh in
you both to will and to do of His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13). More especially
this work is ascribed to the Holy Ghost, who prompts and induces us to mortify
the flesh (Rom. 8:13. 14), renews us (Tit. 3:5), and brings forth good fruits
(Gal. 5:22. 23).
To do this, the
Holy Ghost employs means. Since it is faith that worketh by love, it is
necessary that this faith be continually stimulated and strengthened, which is
done by means of the Gospel. But while the Holy Ghost uses the Gospel to
energize our faith, and to make us able and willing to serve God in our lives, He uses the Law to direct us as
to what God would have us do (Rom. 12:1. 2; Ps. 119:9).
“For the Law says
indeed that it is God’s will and command that we should walk in a new life, but
it does not give us the power and ability to begin and do it; but the Holy
Ghost, who is given and received, not through the Law, but through the
preaching of the Gospel, Gal. 3:14, renews the heart. Thereafter the Holy Ghost
employs the Law so as to teach the regenerate from it, and to point out and
show them in the Ten Commandments what is the good and acceptable will of God,
Rom. 12:2, in what works God hath before ordained that they should walk, Eph.
2:10” (F.C., Th. D., Art. VI, 11. 12, Triglot, p. 965).
(b) The secondary
cooperating cause is man. While in his conversion man is purely passive (he
does not convert himself, but is converted), he concurs in the work of his
sanctification, cooperating with the Holy Ghost by virtue of the spiritual
powers bestowed upon him. In leading holy lives and in doing good works
Christians are not automata, but they are consciously active. It is man that
suppresses evil desires, resists temptation, wills and does what is pleasing to
God; but behind all this is the energizing, prompting, directing power of the
Holy Ghost (Phil. 2:13).
“As soon as the
Holy Ghost through the Word and Sacraments has begun in us His work of
regeneration and renewal, it is certain that through the power of the Holy
Ghost we can and should cooperate, although in great weakness. But this does
not occur from our carnal natural powers, but from the new powers and gifts
which the Holy Ghost has begun in us in our conversion, as Paul expressly and
earnestly exhorts that we as workers together with Him receive not the grace of
God in vain, 2 Cor. 6:1. But this is to be understood in no other way than that
the converted man does good to such an extent and so long as God by His Spirit
rules, guides, and leads him, and as soon as God withdraws His gracious hand
from him, he could not for a moment persevere in obedience to God. But if this
were understood thus that the converted man cooperates with the Holy Ghost in
the manner as when two horses together draw a wagon, this could in no way be conceded without prejudice to the divine truth” (F.C., Th. D.,
Art. II, 65. 66, Triglot, p. 907).[3]
sanctification
Sanctification, sometimes called renovation, is technically
employed to express the continuation of the divine work begun in regeneration,
whereby the power of the new life is steadily increased and depravity and sin
are more and more overcome in both heart and life (1 Thess. 4:3; 5:23; 1 Cor.
1:30; Col. 2:6; 2 Cor. 7:1).
1. Some
distinctions are to be noted: (1) It is distinguished from justification, (a) in that justification is objective, an act of
God without us, pardoning and counting us righteous, while sanctification is a
work wrought within us. The first
absolves from the guilt of sin; this cleanses from sin itself. (b) Justification is complete at once,
while sanctification is a progressive work, and never reaches a point in this
life beyond which there is no room or demand for improvement (Rom. 7:22–24;
Phil. 3:10–14). (2) It is to be distinguished from regeneration, in that while regeneration conveys the power and
reality of the new life, this is a progressive increase of actual holiness day by day, to its completion in the
“eternal life.” (3) It differs from both
justification and regeneration,
in that while these are wholly and purely God’s work, sanctification involves
man’s own concurrence and co-operation. It includes, as plainly meant, a real synergism—that the true believer must
“work out” into manifest fruitage of holy living and righteous, loving
character, the possibilities which grace has put into the whole redemptive
provision (Phil. 2:12–13). The new life,
divinely inaugurated, must be actually and actively lived, into personal victory over evil and into goodness, if
salvation is to be consummated. The justified and regenerate man becomes a
“co-laborer with God” (1 Cor. 3:9; Rom. 2:7), a secondary cause subordinated
and enabled by God, so that he may not only renew himself daily by the power
received from above, but instrumentally co-operate in the progress of the
Redeemer’s kingdom.
2. Though
important to make and maintain these distinctions for the sake of theological
exactness in definition, according to real peculiarities and relations, it is
equally so to note and remember that they cohere in a unity that is
inseparable. They cannot be separated in normal Christian experience, so that
we may have one without the others. The theological tendency to trace out
differences and distinctions in the parts which constitute the process of
actualizing personal salvation is in danger of obscuring their essential unity
or organic integration. What to some may seem pedantic distinctions must
necessarily be made and maintained, but the certainty of the distinctions must
be attended with even greater emphasis upon their indispensable co-action in the life of Christian experience. Regeneration must appear in that experience,
if one is really “justified” through the faith whose very principle is
spiritually vitalizing—the reception of Christ into his heart and life. It is
not “justifying faith” if it be “dead” or non-vitalizing. So sanctification must follow
regeneration—the advance of the given
life, in more or less distinct measure, being the indispensable condition and
indeed the very reality of the saving
force and movement. It is the law of “life” to advance in the direction of its
own governing principle. The normal Christian life must therefore
progress—exhibit its adaptation to consummate in recovered holiness. The
reality of justification marks not only the beginning of grace, but also the
principle of the further grace of the new life—actually giving that life in initial
movement which sanctification is to carry forward to completion. But never, to
the end of his earthly life, is man’s “justification” other than at first, i. e., forgiveness and acceptance on account of Christ’s propitiation and
imputed righteousness. For he is never “justified” on the ground of his own
sinlessness. And the “regenerate state” into which he comes through
justification and the Spirit’s quickening, as it is only a progressive reaching
of the new life, must be carried forward by sanctification,
in which God, through the believer’s own co-operation, consummates the complete
salvation from sin and restored holiness. Sanctification is, in truth, only the
co-operative stage of the regenerating movement on to its completion. Both
justification and regeneration continue and move forward through sanctification
to the final salvation. The distinctive forms of work, therefore, which enter
successively into the movement of personal salvation, present a unity upon
which the success of the whole saving effort depends. Only in the real
progression of Christ “for” us in
justification into Christ “in” us of
regeneration and advancing sanctification, is Christ made in final realization
the power of “an eternal life.” Only thus is the principle or law of holiness,
righteousness, and love restored to the life of the human soul, expressed as
the writing of the law in the heart of man. Antinomianism, which resolves the
process of salvation into repeal or lowering of the standard of moral law or
ethical excellence, has no place in the theology of the Scriptures or in the
Christian life. “The law is holy, just, and good.” Redemption is the divine
movement for overthrow of moral evil, Love’s triumph for the supremacy of
ethical law (Matt 5:17–48; Rom. 3:31; 8:3–4).
3. Its efficient cause. (a) Its total aim is effectuated in the saving work of the Trinity
(1 Thess. 5:23). (b) The work of
Christ enters as a power and provision for its accomplishment (1 Cor. 1:30). (c) Especially the Holy Spirit as
applying the redemption provided in God’s grace and truth (John 14:16–17; Rom.
15:16; 2 Cor. 3:18; Tit. 3:5; Gal. 5:22).
4. Its instrumental cause. It is not effected
directly, but through appointed means, the word and sacraments (John 17:17;
Eph. 5:26).
5. Though
progressive, it is never perfect in this life (Phil. 3:12–14; 1 John 1:8–10).
It nevertheless forms the completing process in the spiritual recovery of the
soul, and in its consummation makes the ransomed “meet for the inheritance of
the saints in light” (Eph. 5:26; 1 Thess. 5:23).
The Mystical Union
As involved in God’s gaining entrance thus, through His truth and Holy
Spirit, into the human mind, effecting spiritual renewal and purification,
there is formed a peculiar, vital relation that has been not inaptly designated
the Mystical Union. This is not to be confounded with what is historically
known as “Mysticism,” which in its different types is allied with pantheism or
breaks with the evangelical teaching of redemption.1 But the
Mystical Union takes account of the evangelical reality which Mysticism failed
to apprehend, and in whose place it wove its transcendent and pantheistic
dreams and pieties. We must clearly discriminate this deep and essential
reality from the theological musings of historical mysticism.
The chief
Scriptures asserting it are the following: John 14:23; 15:1–7; 1 Cor. 3:16–17;
Gal. 2:20; Eph. 5:30. The natural and necessary interpretation of these
Scriptures, in the light of the divine working through the word and Spirit in
the mind and heart of believers, justifies us in affirming of this union: (1)
It is not simply the common immanent presence of God, by virtue of which He is
in everything, according to the truth: “In Him we live and move and have our
being” (Acts 17:28). This divine immanence in all nature, whatever it may be,
is not itself the redemptory benediction promised in the gospel as the saving
indwelling and working. (2) It is not a mere figure of speech, a word of ideal
stimulation, but most true and real. (3) It is not a making into one substance
or essence the essences of God and of the believer, or a realization of any
pantheistic idcalism. It stands apart from all the forms of varied monistic
unifications of God and man in the theosophic philosophies of our day. (4) But
it is the special presence, or indwelling, which God, the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, gives to the believer, by which He really abides in him, accomplishing
within him the work of grace, comfort, joy, and purification. It is St. Paul’s
experienced reality: “I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life
which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved
me and gave Himself for me” (Gal. 2:20); and the fulfillment of the promise:
“If a man love Me, he will keep My words, and My Father will love him, and we
will come unto him and make our abode with him” (John 14:23). Sartorius well
expresses it: “God dwells, Christ dwells, in man, and man in Him by love, not as
though any mingling or identification of the Divine and human natures took
place, for this would not be love, whose essence consists always in the union
of the distinct; they remain diverse and essentially different as the created
and the uncreated, and yet are made like and united in the fervor of love and
its return. It is not from afar, but as indwelliug (immanent) that the Holy
Spirit of the Father and the Son bears witness to our spirit that we are the
children of God.”1
Viewing thus the
gospel of salvation in its whole aim and mode, in its redemptory provision and
applicatory process, it is luminously clear in divine adaptations, both as an
impressive and touching appeal of self-sacrificing Love, and as an exact correspondence
to the constitutional faculties of the human race, for the recovery of free
personalities from the error and bondage of sin into which they had lapsed. Its
appeal and means, if rightly traced, are found to reveal the perfect philosophy
of Absolute Wisdom and Goodness, forming a distinct and impressive seal of its
divinity.[4]
The Relation of Justification to Sanctification
The teaching of Scripture and of Scriptural theology on the relation
between justification or faith and sanctification and good works may be
epitomized in these two statements: 1. There is an inseparable connection (nexus indivulsus) between justification
and sanctification; where there is justification, there is in every case also
sanctification. 2. But in this nexus
indivulsus the cart must not be placed before the horse, that is,
sanctification must not be placed before justification, but must be left in its
proper place as the consequence and effect of justification. Thus the Formula
of Concord: “This should not be understood as though justification and renewal
were sundered from one another in such a manner that a genuine faith sometimes
could exist and continue for a time together with a wicked intention, but
hereby only the order (of cause and effects, of antecedents and consequents) is
indicated, how one precedes or succeeds the other. For what Luther has
correctly said remains true nevertheless: Faith and good works well agree and
fit together (are inseparably connected); but it is faith alone, without works,
which lays hold of the blessing; and yet it is never and at no time alone.” (Trigl. 929, Sol. Decl., II, 41.)
In view of the
great importance of these two points and the strong opposition which is raised
against them today, the matter will have to be presented in greater detail. The
two points were at issue, too, in the controversies of the Lutheran Church
of the sixteenth century against Antinomianism and Majorism. On the one hand,
the nexus indivulsus between faith
and good works had to be maintained, and, on the other hand, the inversion of
the proper order of faith and good works had to be rejected.
I. As to the nexus indivulsus, Scripture teaches that
wherever the Holy Ghost works faith in the Gospel in a man, He immediately
works also sanctification and good works in that same man through that faith.8
Though justification precedes sanctification ordine causarum et effectuum, they both take place at the same
time.9
It is therefore correct to say that where there is no sanctification, there is
also no faith.
There are all
sorts of men who have no use for this nexus
indivulsus. There are the theologians of the “critical school” who shake
their heads when they see how the Apostle Paul intimately connects the inner
moral transformation, the iustitia
inhaerens, with the actus forensis
of justification, the iustitia imputata.
They say that such a connection is inconceivable. They insist that the Apostle
inadvertently mixed up “two streams of thought,” the Jewish and the
Hellenistic, which are really incompatible. (See Vol. II, p. 410 ff.) There are
also modern “positive” theologians who declare that the iustitia fidei imputata could never produce sanctification; in
order to produce sanctification, justifying faith itself must be taken not
merely as instrumental, but as an “ethical act” or as the “germ” of
sanctification. Furthermore, it must be admitted that even the Christians who
in theory maintain the inseparable connection between justification and
sanctification are ever in danger, because of their flesh, of forgetting this connection
in practice.
But
Scripture strongly emphasizes the fact that sanctification is indissolubly
connected with justification. We may not be able to explain fully the
“psychological connection” between these two occurrences, but the fact that
they are closely connected is clearly stated in Scripture. In Rom. 3:21 to the
end of chapter five the Apostle sets forth that justification is an actus forensis, nothing but the judicial
verdict of innocence,10 so much so that he places the faith which
justifies in opposition to every moral quality in man (Rom. 4:5; 3:28; Gal.
2:16; Phil. 3:9). In Rom.
6:1 Paul at once brings up the question whether in view of such a justification
a life in sin is possible; and he answers that they who are justified can
self-evidently no longer live in sin, since they have died to sin. In 6:2–11 he
presents this state of affairs as an established, indisputable fact and closes
with this summary in v. 11: “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead
indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ, our Lord.” The
thought that justified men could still serve sin and not live unto God would be
as absurd as if we assumed that men who have departed this life and are in
their graves are still participating in earthly activities. The Apostle
certainly teaches that there is an indissoluble connection between
sanctification, or the iustitia inhaerens,
and justification, the mere imputation of righteousness.11
And then there is
a “psychological connection” between justification and sanctification. Why
should Pfleiderer, Holtzmann, and others declare this matter to be
inconceivable? They will admit that the intercourse of men is regulated by the
law of psychology that love begets love. Now, God loves man with a wondrously
great love. “God so (οὕτως) loved the
world that He gave His only-begotten Son” (John 3:16). “Herein (ἐν τούτῳ) is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to
be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10). “God commendeth [συνίστησι,
proves] His love towards us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for
us” (Rom. 5:8). Convince a man of this wondrously great love of God for him,
and he cannot help loving God in return and avoiding sin for the sake of his
love to God. And God knows how to convince and assure man of His great love. He
does not appeal to the natural powers of man, for the natural man will not
believe in this love, but regards it as foolishness (1 Cor. 2:14; 1:23). Nor does He try
to demonstrate His love by the persuasive words of man’s wisdom (1 Cor. 2:4).
But He simply presents this great love as a fact, and by this preaching of the
Gospel the Holy Ghost creates faith in the love of God. Rom. 10:17: “Faith
cometh by hearing.” (John 16:14; 1 Cor. 2:5.) And when this faith in the
Gospel, faith in the love of God in Christ, has been kindled in man’s heart, he
will, as a matter of course, love God and hate sin. Thus there is a “psychological
connection” between justification and sanctification. They no longer form “two
heterogeneous strata of dogmatic construction.”
In Paul’s own case
everything was psychologically correct as to the indissoluble connection
between justification and sanctification. “The life which I now live in the
flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for
me” (Gal. 2:20). Nor did the Christians find that they were supposed to act
“unpsychologically” when they declared with John: “We love Him because He first
loved us” (1 John 4:19) and with Paul: “He died for all that they which live
should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for them
and rose again” (2 Cor. 5:15). It is the experience of all Christians that the
more certain they are of God’s grace and of their heavenly inheritance, the
more ready are they to serve God and to set their affection on things above. “I
will run the way of Thy Commandments when Thou shalt enlarge my heart” (Ps.
119:32). Also love of the neighbor flows psychologically from faith in the love
of God. “Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another” (1
John 4:11), and: “Walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us and hath given
Himself for us an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor”
(Eph. 5:2). Thus the love of God and of the neighbor, in other words, the
fulfillment of the Law (Matt. 22:34–39; Rom. 15:8–10), is connected by a nexus indivulsus with justifying faith
in a spiritual and yet most natural manner. Justification and sanctification
are certainly not two heterogeneous “streams of thought” which run side by side
without blending, but they clearly and certainly are “psychologically
connected.”
The moderns are
right from their standpoint in ruling out faith as the cause of sanctification.
The faith which they have in mind is wholly or in part the product of man, the
result of man’s self-decision or the product of scientific demonstration. Such
a faith is an impotent thing. Like all the works of man’s hands, it must fail.
In the words of Luther: “As it [fides
acquisita] is a human fiction and a dream, causing no real change of the
heart, so it also accomplishes nothing and is followed by no improvement” (St.
L. XIV:99). But the faith which is kindled by the Holy Ghost without any human
co-operation, which amidst the terrors of conscience “assents to the promise of
God, in which, for Christ’s sake, the remission of sins and justification are
freely offered” (Trigl. 135, Apol.,
IV, 48), is virile and dynamic. This faith produces sanctification and good
works. The Apology presents this psychologically: “This special faith, by which
an individual believes that for Christ’s sake his sins are remitted him, and
that for Christ’s sake God is reconciled and propitious, obtains remission of
sins and justifies us. And because in repentance, i.e., in terrors, it comforts
and encourages hearts, it regenerates us and brings the Holy Ghost, that then
we may be able to fulfill God’s Law, namely, to love God, truly to fear God,
truly to be confident that God hears prayer and to obey God in all afflictions;
it mortifies concupiscence, etc.” (Trigl.
133, IV, 45.) Luther describes the power of the divinely wrought faith thus:
“Faith is a divine work in us that changes us and regenerates us of God (John
1:13) and puts to death the old Adam and makes us entirely different men in
heart, spirit, mind, and all powers and brings with it the Holy Ghost. Oh, it
is a living, busy, active, powerful thing that we have in faith so that it is
impossible for it not to do good without ceasing. Nor does it ask whether good
works are to be done, but before the question is asked, it has wrought them and
is always engaged in doing them.… Faith is a living, bold trust in God’s grace,
so certain that a man would die a thousand times for it. And this trust and
knowledge of divine grace renders joyful, fearless, and cheerful towards God
and all creatures, which [joy or cheerfulness] the Holy Ghost works through
faith. And on account of this, man becomes ready and cheerful, without
coercion, to do good to everyone, to serve everyone, and to suffer everything
for love and praise to God, who has conferred this grace on him, so that it is
impossible to separate works from faith, yea, just as impossible as it is for
heat and light to be separated from fire.” (St. L. XIV:99 f. Trigl. 941, F. C., Sol. Decl., IV, 10
ff.)
When Scripture
states that faith works sanctification (Gal. 5:6: “Faith which worketh by
love”) and, in other passages, that the Holy Ghost works sanctification (Rom.
8:9), it presents the truth that the Holy Ghost, as the efficient cause of
sanctification, works through faith as His instrumentum.
Through faith in the grace of God, in the remission of sins for Christ’s sake,
He inscribes the love of God and all Christian virtues, i.e., the entire Law of
God, into the heart (Gal. 2:20). Viewed also from this angle, the inseparable
connection between justification and sanctification is clearly seen.
Again, Scripture
states that faith is wrought by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor. 2:4–5) and, in other
passages, that only by faith we can receive the Holy Ghost. Gal. 3:2, 5:
“Received ye the Holy Ghost by the works of the Law or by the hearing of
faith?” In the first instance the Holy Ghost is represented as approaching man
from without with the Word of the Gospel and creating faith through the Word.
In the latter instance He is represented as having already made His abode in
man’s heart. That is to say, when the Holy Ghost has created faith in the heart
He does not cease working, but through faith He continues His work in the
heart; from within He sustains man’s faith in justification and by sustaining
his faith promotes sanctification as the fruit of faith. In these various ways
Scripture teaches the nexus indivulsus
between justification and sanctification, between faith and good works.
II. Now as to the
second point. Justification and sanctification cannot be separated; however,
last things must not be put first. Sanctification must not be placed before
justification. Sanctification is the consequens,
never the antecedens, of
justification.
The natural man
protests against this divine order. According to his conception of religion,
works must be placed before justification—the cart must be placed before the
horse. That is the belief of all pagans (Acts 17:22–23; 1 Cor. 8:1; 10:20. Trigl. 177, Apol., III, 85) and of
apostate Jewry (Rom.
10:3. Trigl. 177, ibid., 86). That is the teaching of the
Papacy; while it has put on Christian trappings, it anathematizes all who will
not hitch the cart before the horse.12 And that is the teaching
of all those Protestants who in various ways and under various names let good
works, “ethical” actions, correct conduct, etc., precede conversion and
justification or make good works either expressly the causa, or at least the conditio
sine qua non of obtaining eternal salvation (Arminians, synergists,
Majorists, modern radical and positive theologians).
This general
perversion of the divine order is due to the “opinio legis, which inheres by nature in men’s mind” (Trigl. 197, ibid., 144–145). Only when men are instructed by the Holy Ghost
through the Word will they get the right view of religion and place
sanetification after justification.
Because
the flesh still clings to them, even Christians are always prone to assign to
works a place before justification (see Luther, St. L. IV:2077 f.). And even
theologians who theoretically define the relation of faith and works correctly
are tempted to lose sight of this relation in practice. When they observe how
the doctrine of grace is misused to neglect the doing of good works, they at
times succumb to the temptation to forget the “mercies of God” (Rom. 12:1) as
the sole fountainhead of good works and to approve, at least tacito consensu, such works as are not
the fruits of justification.13 (See further the section
on “The Good Works of the Heathen.”)
It is fatal folly
and blindness to pervert, either openly or secretly, the proper order of
justification and sanctification (Gal. 3:2). Scripture tells us that in every
case where good works are placed ahead of justification two things ensue. In
the first place, men do not thereby gain justification, but call down upon
themselves the curse (Gal. 3:10). And, in the second place, the very opposite
of sanctification and good works results, namely, sin is increased. Rom. 7:5:
“The motions of sins, which were by the Law, did work in our members to bring
forth fruit unto death.” Either sanctification and good works follow
justification, or there will be no sanctification and good works at all.
Scripture sets forth this truth from several viewpoints. One who does not
believe in justification by faith without the works of the Law is still under
the Law; the Law, however, does not dethrone sin, but arouses it (Rom. 7:5, 7–11.
Luther VIII:1455). The Law does not work sanctification, but—the flesh is at
fault—hypocrisy (Jer. 31:32; Luke 18:11–12) or despair (Acts 16:27). Again: He
who does not believe in the Gospel, in other words, he who trusts in his works
for justification, is not ruled by the Holy Ghost, but by the devil. And such a
one does not perform the holy will of God, but he thinks, wills, and does what
Satan works in him (Eph. 2:2; Titus 3:3; Luke 11:21). Therefore the practical
need of the individual Christian, who is concerned about his Christian faith
and Christian life, and the practical need of the Church, inasmuch as it is
concerned about faith and sanctification, demand that, on the one hand, the nexus indivulsus between justification
and sanctification and, on the other hand, the ordo antecedentium et consequentium be clearly understood and
scrupulously maintained. The following discussion also is intended to serve
that purpose.[5]
F.C., Th. D. The Formula of Concord.
Thorough Declaration.
[1] Edward
Wilhelm August Koehler,
A Summary of
Christian Doctrine: A Popular Presentation of the Teachings of the Bible,
electronic ed. (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 145–155.
Ap. Conf. Apology of the Augsburg Confession.
Ap. Conf. Apology of the Augsburg Confession.
Ap. Conf. Apology of the Augsburg Confession.
Ap. Conf. Apology of the Augsburg Confession.
[2] Heinrich
Schmid,
The Doctrinal Theology of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church, Verified from the Original Sources, trans.
Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs, Second English Edition, Revised according
to the Sixth German Edition (Philadelphia, PA: Lutheran Publication Society,
1889), 430–447.
[3] Edward
Wilhelm August Koehler,
A Summary of
Christian Doctrine: A Popular Presentation of the Teachings of the Bible,
electronic ed. (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1999), 155–161.
1
See Dr. Shedd’s “History of Christian Doctrine,”
Vol. I., pp. 77–81.
1 “Doctrine of Divine Love,” p. 250.
[4] Milton
Valentine,
Christian Theology & 2,
vol. 2 (Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1906), 272–277.
8 That was done, too,
in the case of the malefactor on the cross (Luke 23:40–41).
9 Formula of Concord: Faith which lays
hold of the blessing without works “is never and at no time alone” (931, Sol.
Decl., III, 41). Carpzov, quoted in Baier-Walther, III, 301: “In the same
instant and moment in which faith is kindled in us and in which faith, grasping
the offered justification, justifies us, we are also renewed in mind and body.”
Quenstedt: “Regeneration” (in the sense of the generation of faith),
“justification, the union with Christ and renovation all take place at the same
time; their union is closer than that of a mathematical point; they cannot be
separated and divorced. Nevertheless, according to our mode of conceiving
(notionally), regeneration and justification precede the
unio mystica.” (II, 896.)
10 Holtzmann maintains
correctly that Rom. 5:12–21 treats solely of justification, and not yet of
sanctification (II, 153).
11 Holtzmann: “When the believer passes
from the sphere of the Law intothe sphere of grace, the dominion of sin has
come definitely to an end” (II, 166).
12 Trid.,
Sess. VI, can. 24: “If anyone saith that the said works are merely the fruits
and signs of justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof,
let him be anathema.”
13 I have in mind here, e.g., the custom
of raising funds for the church by sales, socials, etc., on the plea that
unless this method is followed, the necessary “good works” will not be done.
[5] Francis
Pieper,
Christian Dogmatics,
electronic ed., vol. 3 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953), 7–13.
