“Being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”—Rom. iii. 24.
The Heidelberg Catechism teaches that true conversion consists of these two parts: the dyingof the old man, and the rising againof the new. This last should be noticed. The Catechism says not that the new life originatesin conversion, but that it arisesin conversion. That which arises must exist before. Else how could it arise? This agrees with our statement that regeneration precedes conversion, and that by the effectual calling the newborn child of God is brought to conversion.
We now proceed to consider a matter which, tho belonging to the same subject and running parallel with it, yet moves, along an entirely different line, viz., Justification.
In the Sacred Scripture, justification occupies the most conspicuous place, and is presented as of greatest importance for the sinner: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Rom. iii. 24). “Therefore, being justifiedby faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. v. 1); “Who was delivered for our offenses and raised again for our justification” (Rom. iv. 25); “Who of God is made unto us from God, wisdom and righteousnessand sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor. i. 30).
And not only is this so strongly emphasized by *Scripture,*but it was also the very kernel of the *Reformation,*which puts this doctrine
of “justification by faith” boldly and clearly in opposition to the “meritorious works of Rome.” “Justification by faith” was in those days the shibboleth of the heroes of faith, Martin Luther in the van.
And when, in the present century, a self-wrought sanctification presented itself again, as the actual power of redemption, it was the not insignificant merit of Köhlbrugge, that he, tho less comprehensively than the reformers, fastened this matter of justification, with penetrating earnestness, upon the conscience of Christendom. It may have been superfluous for the churches still truly Reformed, but it was exceedingly opportune for the circles where the garland of truth was less closely woven, and the sense of justice had been allowed to become weak, as partially in our own country, but especially beyond our borders. There are in Switzerland and in Bohemia groups of men who have heard, for the first time, of the necessity of justification by faith, through the labors of Köhlbrugge.
Through the grace of God, our people did not go so far astray; and where the Ethicals, largely from principle, surrendered this point of doctrine, the Reformed did and do oppose them, admonishing them with all energy, and as often as possible, not to merge justification in sanctification.
Regarding the question, how justificationdiffers, on the one hand, from “regeneration,” and, on the other, from “calling and conversion,” we answer that justification emphasizes the idea of right.
Right regulates the relations between two persons. Where there is but one there is no right, simply because there are no relations to regulate. Hence by rightwe understand either the right of man in relation to man, or the claim of God upon man. It is in this last sense that we use the word right.
The Lord is our Lawgiver, our judge, our King. Hence He is absolutely Sovereign: as Lawgiver determining what is right; as Judge judging our being and doing; as King dispensing rewards and punishments. This sheds light upon the difference between justification and regeneration. The new birth and the call and conversion have to do with our beingas sinners or as regenerate men; but justification with the relationwhich we sustain to God, either as sinners or as those born again.
Apart from the question of right, the sinner may be considered
as a sick person, who is infected and inoculated with disease. After being born again he improves, the infection disappears, the corruption ceases, and he prospers again. But this concerns his personalone, how he is, and what his prospects are; it does not touch the question of right.
The question of right arises when I see in the sinner a creature not his own, but belongingto another.
Herein is all the difference. If man is to me the principal factor, so that I have nothing else in view but his improvement and deliverance from misery, then the Almighty God is in this whole matter a mere Physician, called in and affording assistance, who receives His fee, and is discharged with many thanks. The question of right does not enter here at all. So long as the sinner is made more holy, all is well. Of course, if he is made perfect, all the better. Clearly understanding, however, that man belongs not to himself, but to another, the matter assumes an entirely different aspect. For then he can not beor do as he pleases, but another has determined what he must be and what he must do. And if he does or is otherwise, he is guilty as a transgressor: guilty because he rebelled, guilty because he transgressed.