I. I am, first, to shew, What is the general ground of this whole
doctrine of justification.
1. In the image of God was man made, holy as he that created him is
holy; merciful as the Author of all is merciful, perfect as his Father
in heaven is perfect. As God is love, so man dwelling in love, dwelt in
God, and God in him. God made him to be _an image of his own eternity_,
an incorruptible picture of the God of glory. He was accordingly pure,
as God is pure, from every spot of sin. He knew not evil in any kind or
degree, but was inwardly and outwardly sinless and undefiled. He _loved
the Lord his God with all his heart, and with all his mind and soul and
strength_.
2. To man thus upright and perfect, God gave a perfect law, to which
he required full and perfect obedience. He required full obedience in
every point, and this to be performed without any intermission, from
the moment man became a living soul, till the time of his trial should
be ended. No allowance was made for any falling short. As indeed there
was no need of any; man being altogether equal to the task assigned,
and thoroughly furnished for every good word and work.
3. To the entire law of love which was written in his heart (against
which perhaps he could not sin directly) it seemed good to the
sovereign wisdom of God, to superadd one positive law: _Thou shalt not
eat of the fruit of the tree that groweth in the midst of the garden_:
annexing that penalty thereto, _In the day thou eatest thereof, thou
shalt surely die_.
4. Such then was the state of man in paradise. By the free, unmerited
love of God, he was holy and happy; he knew, loved, enjoyed God, which
is (in substance) life everlasting. And in this life of love, he was to
continue for ever, if he continued to obey God in all things: but if he
disobeyed him in any, he was to forfeit all. _In that day_, said God,
_thou shalt surely die_.
5. Man did disobey God. He _ate of the tree, of which God commanded him,
saying, Thou shalt not eat of it_. And in that day he was condemn’d, by
the righteous judgment of God. Then also the sentence whereof he was
warned before, began to take place upon him. For the moment he tasted
that fruit, he died: his soul died, was separated from God; separate
from whom the soul has no more life, than the body has when separate
from the soul. His body likewise became corruptible and mortal; so that
death then took hold on this also. And being already dead in spirit,
dead to God, dead in sin, he hastened on to death everlasting; to the
destruction both of body and soul, in the fire never to be quenched.
6. Thus _by one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin.
And so death passed upon all men_, as being contained in him who was
the common father and representative of us all. Thus _through the
offence of one_, all are dead, dead to God, dead in sin, dwelling in
a corruptible, mortal body, shortly to be dissolved, and under the
sentence of death eternal. For as _by one man’s disobedience, all were
made sinners_; so by that offence of one, _judgment came upon all men
to condemnation_, Rom. v. 12, _&c._
7. In this state we were, even all mankind, when _God so loved the
world, that he gave his only begotten Son, to the end we might not
perish but have everlasting life_. In the fulness of time, he was
made man, another common head of mankind, a second general parent
and representative of the whole human race. And as such it was that
_he bore our griefs_, the Lord _laying upon him the iniquities of us
all_. Then _was he wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our
iniquities. He made his soul an offering for sin_: he poured out his
blood for the transgressors: he _bare our sins in his own body on the
tree_, that _by his stripes we_ might be _healed_: and by that one
oblation of himself once offered, he hath redeemed me and all mankind;
having thereby made a full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice and
satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world.
8. In consideration of this, that the Son of God hath _tasted death
for every man_, God hath now _reconciled the world to himself, not
imputing to them their former trespasses_. And thus, _as by the
offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even
so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto
justification_. So that for the sake of his well-beloved Son, of
what he hath done and suffered for us, God now vouchsafes on one only
condition (which himself also enables us to perform) both to remit
the punishment due to our sins, to reinstate us in his favour, and
to restore our dead souls to spiritual life, as the earnest of life
eternal.
9. This therefore is the general ground, of the whole doctrine of
_justification_. By the sin of the first _Adam_, who was not only the
father, but likewise the representative of us all, we all _fell short
of the |favour| of God_: we all became _children of wrath_: or, as the
apostle expresses it, _judgment came upon all men_ to _condemnation_.
Even so, by the sacrifice for sin made by the second _Adam_, as the
representative of us all, God is so far reconciled to all the world,
that he hath given them a new covenant. The plain condition whereof
being once fulfilled, _there is no more condemnation for us_, but we
are _justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in
Jesus Christ_.
II. 1. But what is it to be _justified_? What is _justification_? This
was the second thing which I proposed to shew. And it is evident from
what has been already observed, that it is not, the being made actually
just and righteous. This is _sanctification_: which is indeed, in some
degree, the immediate _fruit_ of justification: but nevertheless is
a distinct gift of God, and of a totally different nature. The one
implies, what God _does for us_ through his Son; the other what he
_works in us_ by his Spirit. So that altho’ some rare instances maybe
found, wherein the term _justified_, or _justification_, is used in so
wide a sense as to include _sanctification_ also; yet in general use,
they are sufficiently distinguished from each other, both by St. _Paul_
and the other inspired writers.
2. Neither is that far-fetch’d conceit, that justification is, the
clearing us from accusation, particularly that of _Satan_, easily
proveable from any clear text of holy writ. In the whole scriptural
account of this matter, as above laid down, neither that accuser nor
his accusation appears to be at all taken in. It cannot indeed be
denied, that he is the _accuser of men_, emphatically so called. But
it does in no wise appear, that the great apostle hath any reference to
this, more or less, in all that he hath written touching justification,
either to the _Romans_ or the _Galatians_.
3. It is also far easier to take for granted, than to prove from
any clear scripture-testimony, that justification is, the clearing us
from the accusation brought against us by _the law_. At least, if this
forced, unnatural way of speaking, mean either more or less than this,
that whereas we have transgressed the law of God, and thereby deserved
the damnation of hell, God does not inflict on those who are justified,
the punishment which they had deserved.
4. * Least of all does justification imply, that God is _deceived_
in those whom he _justifies_; that he thinks them to be what in fact
they are not, that he accounts them to be otherwise than they are.
It does by no means imply, that God judges concerning us, contrary to
the real nature of things: that he esteems us better than we really
are, or believes us righteous, when we are unrighteous. Surely no. The
judgment of the all-wise God, is always according to truth. Neither can
it ever consist with his unerring wisdom, to think that I am innocent,
to judge that I am righteous or holy, because another is so. He can
no more in this manner confound me with Christ, than with _David_ or
_Abraham_. Let any man to whom God hath given understanding, weigh this
without prejudice; and he cannot but perceive, that such a notion of
justification, is neither reconcileable to reason, nor scripture.
5. The plain scriptural notion of justification is pardon, the
forgiveness of sins. It is that act of God the Father, whereby for
the sake of the propitiation made by the blood of his Son, he _sheweth
forth his righteousness_ (or mercy) _by the remission of the sins
that are past_. This is the easy, natural account of it given by
St. _Paul_, throughout this whole epistle. So he explains it himself,
more particularly in this, and in the following chapter. Thus in the
next verses but one to the text, _Blessed are they_, saith he, _whose
iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered: blessed is the
man to whom the Lord will not impute sin_. To him that is justified
or forgiven, God _will not impute sin_ to his condemnation. He will
not condemn him on that account, either in this world or in that which
is to come. His sins, all his past sins, in thought, word and deed,
_are covered_, are blotted out: shall not be remembered or mentioned
against him, any more than if they had not been. God will not inflict
on that sinner what he deserved to suffer, because the Son of his love
hath suffered for him. And from the time we are _accepted through the
Beloved, reconciled to God through his blood_, he loves and blesses and
watches over us for good, even as if we had never sinned.
Indeed the apostle in one place seems to extend the meaning of the
word much farther; where he says, _Not the hearers of the law, but
the doers of the law shall be justified_. Here he appears to refer
our justification, to the sentence of the great day. And so our Lord
himself unquestionably doth, when he says, _By thy words thou shalt be
justified_: proving thereby, that _for every idle word men shall speak,
they shall give an account in the day of judgment_. But perhaps we
can hardly produce another instance, of St. _Paul’s_ using the word in
that distant sense. In the general tenor of his writings, it is evident
he doth not. And least of all in the text before us, which undeniably
speaks, not of those who have already _finished their course_, but of
those who are now just _setting out_, just _beginning to run the race
which is set before him_.
III. 1. But this is the third thing which was to be considered, namely,
who are they that are justified? And the apostle tells us expresly,
_the ungodly_: He, that is, God, _justifieth the ungodly_: the ungodly
of every kind and degree, and none but the ungodly. As _they that are
righteous need no repentance_, so they need no forgiveness. It is only
sinners that have any occasion for pardon: it is sin alone which admits
of being forgiven. Forgiveness therefore has an immediate reference to
sin, and (in this respect) to nothing else. It is our _unrighteousness_
to which the pardoning God is _merciful_: it is our _iniquity_ which he
_remembereth no more_.
2. This seems not to be at all considered by those who so vehemently
contend, that a man must be sanctified, that is, holy, before he can
be justified: especially by such of them as affirm, that universal
holiness or obedience must precede justification (unless they mean,
that justification at the last day, which is wholly out of the present
question) so far from it, that the very supposition, is not only flatly
impossible (for where there is no love of God, there is no holiness;
and there is no love of God, but from a sense of his loving us) but
also grosly, intrinsically absurd, contradictory to itself. For it is
not a _saint_ but a _sinner_ that is _forgiven_, and under the notion
of a sinner. God _justifieth_ not the godly, but the _ungodly_; not
those that are holy already, but the unholy. Upon what condition he
doth this, will be considered quickly: but whatever it is, it cannot be
holiness. To assert this, is to say, the Lamb of God takes away, only
those sins which were taken away before.
3. Does then the good Shepherd seek and save only those that are found
already? No. He seeks and saves that which is lost. He pardons those
who _need_ his pardoning mercy. He saves from the guilt of sin (and at
the same time from the power) sinners of every kind, of every degree:
men who till then were altogether ungodly; in whom the love of the
Father was not; and consequently, in whom dwelt no good thing, no good
or truly Christian temper: but all such as were evil and abominable,
pride, anger, love, of the world, the genuine fruits of that _carnal
mind, which is enmity against God_.
4. These _who are sick, the burden of whose sins is intolerable_, are
they that _need a physician_; these who are guilty, who groan under
the wrath of God, are they that need a pardon. These who are _condemned
already_, not only by God, but also by their own conscience, as by a
thousand witnesses, of all their ungodliness, both in thought and word
and work, cry aloud for him that _justifieth the ungodly, through the
redemption that is in Jesus: the ungodly and him that worketh not_;
that worketh not before he is justified; any thing that is good, that
is truly virtuous or holy, but only evil continually. For his heart
is necessarily, essentially evil, till the love of God is shed abroad
therein. And while the tree is corrupt, so are the fruits; _for an evil
tree cannot bring forth good fruit_.
5. If it be objected, “Nay, but a man, before he is justified, may
feed the hungry, or clothe the naked; and these are good works:” the
answer is easy. He _may_ do these, even before he is justified. And
these are, in one sense, _good works_; they are _good and profitable
to men_. But it does not follow, that they are, strictly speaking, good
in themselves, or good in the sight of God. All truly _good works_ (to
use the words of our church) _follow after justification_. And they are
therefore good and _acceptable to God in Christ_, because they _spring
out of a true and living faith_. By a parity of reason, all _works done
before justification, are not_ good, in the Christian sense, _forasmuch
as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ_ (tho’ from some kind of
faith in God they may spring) _yea rather, for that they are not done,
as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not_ (how
strange soever it may appear to some) _but they have the nature of sin_.
6. Perhaps those who doubt of this, have not duly considered the
weighty reason which is here assign’d, why no works done before
justification, can be truly and properly good. The argument plainly
runs thus:
No works are good which are not done as God hath willed and commanded
them to be done:
But no works done before justification are done as God hath willed and
commanded them to be done:
Therefore no works done before justification are good.
The first proposition is self-evident. And the second, that no works
done before justification, are done as God hath willed and commanded
them to be done, will appear equally plain and undeniable, if we only
consider God hath willed and commanded, that _all our works_ should
_be done in charity_, (ἐν ἀγάπη) in love, in that love to God, which
produces love to all mankind. But none of our works can be done in this
love, while the love of the Father (of God as our Father) is not in us.
And this love cannot be in us, till we receive the _Spirit of adoption,
crying in our hearts, Abba, Father_. If therefore God doth not _justify
the ungodly_, and him that (in this sense) _worketh not_, then hath
Christ died in vain; then notwithstanding his death, can no flesh
living be justified.
IV. 1. But on what terms then is he justified, who is altogether
_ungodly_, and till that time, _worketh not_? On one alone, which is
faith. He _believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly_. And _he that
believeth is not condemned_: Yea, he _is passed from death unto life_.
For _the righteousness_ (or mercy) _of God is by faith of Jesus Christ,
unto all and upon all them that believe:――Whom God hath set forth for
a propitiation, through faith in his blood: that he might be just, and_
(consistently with his justice) _the justifier of him which believeth
in Jesus: therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by faith,
without the deeds of the law_: without previous obedience to the moral
law, which indeed he could not till now perform. That it is the moral
law, and that alone which is here intended, appears evidently from the
words that follow. _Do we then make void the law through faith? God
forbid! Yea, we establish the law._ What law do we establish by faith?
Not the ritual law: not the ceremonial law of _Moses_. In no wise; but
the great unchangeable law of love, the holy love of God and of our
neighbour.
2. * Faith in general is, a divine, supernatural ἔλεγχος, _evidence_ or
conviction _of things not seen_, not discoverable by our bodily senses,
as being either past, future or spiritual. Justifying faith implies,
not only a divine evidence or conviction, that _God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself_ but a sure trust and confidence,
that Christ died for _my_ sins, that he loved _me_ and gave himself
for _me_. And at what time soever a sinner thus believes, be it in
early childhood, in the strength of his years, or when he is old and
hoary-hair’d, God justifieth that ungodly one: God for the sake of
his Son; pardoneth and absolveth, him who had in him till then no good
thing. Repentance indeed God had given him before: but that repentance
was neither more nor less, than a deep sense of the want of all good,
and the presence of all evil. And whatever good he hath or doth from
that hour, when he first believes in God through Christ, faith does not
_find_ but _bring_. This is the fruit of faith. First the tree is good,
and then the fruit is good also.
3. I cannot describe the nature of this faith better, than in the
words of our own church. “The only instrument of salvation” (whereof
justification is one branch) “is faith: that is, a sure trust and
confidence, that God both hath and will forgive our sins, that he hath
accepted us again into his favour, for the merits of Christ’s death
and passion.――But here we must take heed that we do not halt with God,
through an inconstant, wavering faith. _Peter_ coming to Christ upon
the water, because he fainted in faith, was in danger of drowning. So
we, if we begin to waver or doubt, it is to be feared, that we should
sink as _Peter_ did, not into the water, but into the bottomless pit of
hell-fire.” Second sermon on the passion.
“Therefore have a sure and constant faith, not only that the death of
Christ is available for all the world, but that he hath made a full and
sufficient sacrifice for _thee_, a perfect cleansing of _thy_ sins, so
that thou mayst say with the apostle, he loved _thee_ and gave himself
for _thee_. For this is to make Christ _thine own_, and to apply his
merits unto _thyself_.” Sermon on the sacrament, first part.
4. By affirming that this faith is the term or _condition of
justification_, I mean, first, that there is no justification without
it. _He that believeth not is condemned already_; and so long as he
believeth not, that condemnation cannot be removed, but _the wrath of
God abideth on him_. As _there is no other name given under heaven than
that of Jesus of Nazareth_, no other merit _whereby_ a condemned sinner
can ever _be saved_ from the guilt of sin; so there is no other way of
obtaining a share in his merit, than _by faith in his name_. So that as
long as we are without this faith, we are _strangers to the covenant of
promise_, we are _aliens from the common-wealth of Israel, and without
God in the world_. Whatsoever virtues (so call’d) a man may have (I
speak of those unto whom the gospel is preached; for _what have I to
judge them that are without_?) whatsoever good works (so accounted) he
may do, it profiteth not; he is still a _child of wrath_, still under
the curse, till he believes in Jesus.
5. * Faith therefore is the _necessary_ condition of justification. Yea,
and the _only necessary_ condition thereof. This is the second point
carefully to be observed; that the very moment God giveth faith (_for
it is the gift of God_) to the _ungodly, that worketh not_, that _faith
is counted to him for righteousness_. He hath no righteousness at all,
antecedent to this, not so much as negative righteousness or innocence.
But _faith is imputed to him for righteousness_, the very moment that
he believeth. Not that God (as was observed before) thinketh him to
be what he is not. But as _he made Christ to be sin for us, that_ is,
treated him as a sinner, punishing him for our sins, so he counteth
us righteous, from the time we believe in him: that is, he doth not
punish us for our sins, yea, treats us as tho’ we were guiltless and
righteous.
6. Surely the difficulty of assenting to this proposition, that
faith is the _only condition_ of justification, must arise from not
understanding it. We mean thereby thus much, that it is the only thing
without which none is justified; the only thing that is immediately,
indispensably, absolutely requisite in order to pardon. As on the
one hand, tho’ a man should have every thing else, without faith, yet
he cannot be justified; so on the other, tho’ he be supposed to want
every thing else, yet if he hath faith, he cannot but be justified.
For suppose a sinner of any kind or degree, in a full sense of his
total ungodliness, of his utter inability to think, speak or do good,
and his absolute meetness for hell-fire: suppose, I say, this sinner,
helpless and hopeless, casts himself wholly on the mercy of God in
Christ (which indeed he cannot do but by the grace of God) who can
doubt, but he is forgiven in that moment? Who will affirm, that any
more is _indispensably required_, before that sinner can be justified?
Now if there ever was one such instance from the beginning of the
world. (And have there not been, and are there not ten thousand times
ten thousand?) it plainly follows, that faith is, in the above sense,
the sole condition of justification.
7. It does not become poor, guilty, sinful worms, who receive
whatsoever blessings they enjoy, (from the least drop of water that
cools our tongue, to the immense riches of glory in eternity) of grace,
of mere favour, and not of debt, to ask of God the reasons of his
conduct. It is not meet for us to call him in question, _who giveth
account to none of his ways_; to demand, Why didst thou make faith the
condition, the only condition of justification? Wherefore didst thou
decree, _He that believeth_, and he only, _shall be saved_? This is
the very point on which St. _Paul_ so strongly insists in the ninth
chapter of this epistle, _viz_. That the terms of pardon and acceptance
must depend, not on us, but _on him that calleth us_: that there is
no _unrighteousness with God_, in fixing his own terms, not according
to ours, but his own good pleasure: who may justly say, _I will have
mercy on whom I will have mercy_, namely, on him who believeth in Jesus.
So _then it is not of him that willeth, or of him that runneth_, to
chuse the condition on which he shall find acceptance; _but of God that
sheweth mercy_, that accepteth none at all, but of his own free love,
his unmerited goodness. _Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have
mercy_, viz. on those who believe on the Son of his love: _and whom he
will_, that is, those who believe not, _he hardeneth_, leaves at last
to the hardness of their hearts.