“Being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”—Rom. iii. 24.
The foregoing illustrations shed unexpected light upon the fact that God justifies the *ungodly,*and not him who is actually just in himself; and upon the word of Christ: “Now are ye clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” (John xv. 3) They illustrate the significant fact that God does not determine our status according to what we *are,*but by the status to which He assigns us He determines what we shall be. The Reformed Confession, which in all things starts from the workings of God and not of man, became again clear, eloquent, and transparent. So the divine Word, ordinarily lowered to a mere announcementof what God finds in us, becomes once more the fiatof His creative power. He found an ungodly man and said, “Be righteous,” and behold he became righteous. “I said to thee in thy blood, Live.” (Ezek. xvi. 6)
In this way the various parts of the redemptive work are arranged chronologically each in its own place.
So long as the false and narrow idea prevailed that a man was justified afterconversion on the ground of his apparent holiness, justification could not precedesanctification, but must follow it. Then man becomes first holy, and, as a reward or as a recognition of his holiness, he is declared righteous. Hence sanctification is first, and justification *second;*a justification, therefore, without any value, for what is the use of declaring that a ball is round?
The Scripture refuses to acknowledge a posteriorjustification. In Scripture, justification is always the *starting point.*All other things spring from it and follow it. “Christ was made unto us wisdom and righteousness,” and only then “sanctification and redemption.” (1 Cor. i. 30) “Therefore *being justified by faith,*we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we also have access.” (Rom. v. 1)
“Being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Rom. iii. 24) And, “Whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified.” (Rom. viii. 30)
For this reason the Reformation made justification by faith the starting-point for the conscience, and by this confession bravely and energetically opposed Rome’s justification by good works; for in this justification by good works that priority of sanctification found its root.
The Church of Christ can not deviate from this straight line of the Reformation without estranging itself and separating itself from its Head and Fountain of Life, vitally injuring itself. Sects which, like the Ethicals and the Methodists,1 detract from this truth sever the faith from its root. If our churches desire once more to be strong in the doctrine and bold in witness-bearing, they must not repose in lethargy on the mere form of the doctrine, but must heartily embrace the doctrine; for it presents this cardinal point in a superior and excellent manner. He only who heroically dares accept justification of the ungodlybecomes actual partaker of salvation. He only can confess heartily and unreservedly redemption which is sovereign, unmerited, and free in all its parts and workings.
The last questionthat remains to be discussed is: How can the justification of the ungodly be reconciled with the divine Omniscience and Holiness?
It must be acknowledged that, in one respect, this whole representation seems to fail. It must be objected:
“Your argument is wittily thought out, but it does not stand the test. When an earthly sovereign decides that a man’s state shall be otherwise than it actually is, he acts from *ignorance, mistake,*or *arbitrariness.*And since these things can not be ascribed to God, these illustrations can not be applied to Him.”
And again: “That an earthly judge sometimes condemns the innocent and acquits the guilty, and makes the former to occupy the status of the latter, and *vice versa,*is possible only because the judge is a fallible creature. If he had been infallible, if he could have weighed guilt and innocence with perfect accuracy, the wrong could not have been committed. Hence if sin had not come in, that judge could not have acted arbitrarily, but he would have acted according to the right, and decided for the right because it is
right. And, since the Lord God is a judge who trieth the reins and who is acquainted with all our ways, in whom there can be no failure or mistake or ignorance, it is not thinkable, it is impossible, it is inconsistent with God’s Being, that as the just Judge He ever could pronounce a judgment that is not perfectly in accordance with the conditions actually existing in man.”