Page images
PDF
EPUB

Ghost. If righteousness, or justification, be by the law, | law. Therefore, imputation makes no difference in then Christ died in vain. Men cannot here betake this respect. Imputation can be no part of that themselves to their wonted refuge, to say, that by the righteousness by which we are justified, because it is law is to be understood the works of the law as per- no conformity with any law, nor with any part or formed by a man's self in person. For, if by the word branch of any law, that man was ever bound to keep. law in this place, we understand the works of the law Therefore, it can be no part of that righteousness by as performed by Christ, the consequence will rise up which he is justified. So that the condition of both with the greater strength against them. If righteous- covenants will be found the saine (and consequently ness were by the works of the law, as performed by both covenants the same), if justification be maintained Christ, that is, if the imputation of them were our by the righteousness of Christ imputed.” complete righteousness, the death of Christ for us had To the work last quoted the reader may be referred been in vain, because the righteousness of his life im- as a complete treatise on the subject, and a most masputed had been a sufficient and complete righteousness terly refutation of a notion, which he and other Calvinfor us."

istic divines, in different ages, could not fail to perceive The same writer also powerfully argues against the was most delusive to the souls of men, directly desame doctrine, from its confounding the two covenants structive of moral obedience, and not less so of the of works and grace. " It is true, many that hold the Christian doctrine of the atonement of Christ, and jusway of imputation are nothing ashamed of this conse- tification by “ faith in his blood.” It is on this ground quent, the confounding the two covenants of God with that men who turn the grace of God into licentiousness, men, that of works with ihat of grace. These conceive contend that, being invested with the perfect righteousthat God never made more covenants than one with ness of Christ, God cannot see any sin in them; and, man; and that the Gospel is nothing else but a gracious indeed, upon their own principles, they reason concluaid from God to help man to perform the covenant of sively. Justice has not to do with them, but with works; so that the life and salvation which are said to Christ; it demands perfect obedience, and Christ has come by Christ, in no other sense come by him, but as rendered that perfect obedience for them, and what he he fulfilled that law of works for man which men them- did is always accounted as done by them. They are, selves were not able to fulfil: and by imputation, as therefore, under no real obligation of obedience; they by a deed of gift, he makes over his perfect obedience can fear no penal consequences from disobedience; and and fulfilling of the law to those that believe; so that a course of the most flagrant vice may consist with an they, in right of this perfect obedience, made theirs by entire confidence in the indefeisible favour of God, with imputation, come to inherit life and salvation, accord- the profession of sonship and discipleship, and the hope ing to the strict tenor of the covenant of works-Do of heaven. These notions many shamelessly avow : this and live.'

and they have been too much encouraged in their fatal ** But men may as well say there was no second creed, by those who have held the same system subAdam, really differing from the first; or that the spirit stantially, though they abhor the bold conclusions of bondage is the same with the spirit of adoption. If which the open Antinoinian would draw from it. the second covenant of grace were implicitly con- The doctrine on which the above remarks have been fained in the first, then the meaning of the first cove- made is the first of the three opinions which have been nant, conceived in those words, 'Do this and live,' must held on the subject of the imputation of righteousness be, do this, either by thyself, or by another, and live. in our justification. The second is the opinion of Cal. There is no other way to reduce them to the same vin himself, and those of his followers, who have not covenant.

refined so much upon the scheme of their master as Again, if the first and second covenant were in sub- others, and with them many Arminians have also, in stance the same, then must the conditions in both be the some respects, agreed; not that they have approved the same. For the conditions in a covenant are as essential terms in which this opinion is usually expressed, but a part of it as any other belonging to it. Though there because they have thought it, under a certain interprebe the same parties covenanting, and the same things tatation, right, and one which would allow them, for the covenanted for, yet if there be new articles of agree- sake of peace, to use either the phrase, "the imputation ment, it is really another covenant. Now if the condi- of the righteousness of Christ,” or “ the imputation of tions be the same in both those covenants, then to do faith for righteousness," which latter they consider this, and to believe, faith and works, are the same; mere scriptural, and therefore interpret the former so as whereas the Scripture, from place to place, makes the to be consistent with it. most irreconcilable opposition between them. But The sentiments of Calvin on this subject may be colsome, being shy of this consequence, hold the imputa- lected from the following passages in the third book of tion of Christ's righteousness (in the sense opposed) his Institutes : and yet demur upon an identity of the two covenants. “We simply explain justification to be an acceptance, Wherefore, to prove it, I thus reason: Where the par- by which God receives us into his favour and esteems ties covenanting are the same, and the things covenant us as righteous persons, and we say it consists in the ed for the same, and the conditions the same, there the remission of sins and the imputation of the righteouscovenants are the same. But if the righteousness of the ness of Christ." "He must certainly be destitute of a law imputed to us be the condition of the new covenant, righteousness of his own, who is taught to seek it out all the three, persons, things, conditions, are the same. of himself. This is most clearly asserted by the aposTherefore, the two covenants, first and second, the old tle when he says, 'He hath made him to be sin for us and the new, are the same; because as to the par- who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousties covenanting and the things covenanted for, it is ness of God in him.' We see that our righteousness is agreed, on both sides, they are the same.

not in ourselves but in Christ. As by one man's dis"If it be objected that the righteousness of the law obedience inany were made sinners, so by the obedience imputed from another, and wrought by a man's self, of one shall many be made righteous. What is placare two different conditions; and that, therefore, it doth ing our righteousness in the obedience of Christ, but not follow, that the covenants are the same; to this I asserting that we are accounted righteous only beanswer, the substance of the agreement will be found cause his obedience is accepted for us as if it were our the same notwithstanding; the works or righteousness own? of the law are the same, by whomsoever wrought. If In these passages, the wording of which seems at Adam had fulfilled the law, as Christ did, he had been first sight to favour the opinion above refuted, there is, justified by the same righteonsness wherewith Christ however, this marked difference, that there is no sehimself was righteous. If it be said, that imputation paration made between the active and passive rightin the second covenant, which was not in the first, eousness of Christ, his obedience to the precepts of makes a difference in the condition; I answer, 1. Im- the moral law, and his obedience to its penalty; so that putation of works, or of righteousness, is not the con- one is imputed in our justification for one purpose and dition of the new covenant, but believing. If imputa- the other for another, one to take the place of our oblitution were the condition, then the whole covenant gation to obey, the other of our obligation to suffer; but would lie upon God, and nothing be required on the the obedience of Christ is considered as one, as his creature's part ; for imputation is an act of God, not holy life and sacrificial death considered together, and of men. 2. If it were granted, that the righteousness, forming that righteousness of Christ, which being imor the works of the law imputed from Christ, were puted to us, we are “ reputed righteous before God, that whereby we are justified, yet they must justify, and not of ourselves.” This is farther confirmed by the not as imputed, but as righteousness, or works of the strenuous manner in which Calvin proves, that justiti.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

cation is simply the remission, or non-imputation of sin, Christ to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood.
" Whom, therefore, the Lord receives into fellowship Whatever interpretation may be put upon these ex-
with him, him he is said to justify, because he cannot pressions, none of our divines blame Calvin, or con-
receive any one into fellowship with himself without sider him to be heterodox on this point; yet my opinion
making him from a sinner to be a righteous person. is not so widely different from his, as to prevent me
This is accomplished by the remission of sins. For if employing the signature of my own hand, in subscrib-
they whom the Lord hath reconciled to himself be ing to those things which he has delivered on this sub-
judged according to their works, they will still be ject, in the third book of his Institutes."(2)
found actually sinners, who, not withstanding, must be also Mr. Wesley, in his sermon titl “The
absolved and free from sin. It appears, then, that those Lord our Righteousness,” almost repeats Arminius's
whom God receives are made righteous no otherwise words; but though these eminent divines seem to agree
than as they are purified by being cleansed from all substantially with Calvin, it is clear that, in their inter-
their defilements by the remission of sins; so that such pretation of the phrase, the "imputed righteousness of
righteousness may, in one word, be denominated a re- Christ,” he would not entirely follow them. " As the
mission of sins. Both these points are fully established active and passive righteousness of Christ were never
by the language of Paul, which I have already cited. in fact separated from each other, so we never need se-

God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, parate them at all. It is with regard to both these
not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath conjointly, that Jesus is called the Lord our righteous-
committed to us the word of reconciliation. Then he ness. But when is this righteousness imputed ? When
adds, 'He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew they believe. In that very hour the righteousness of
no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of Christ is theirs. It is imputed to every one that be-
God in him.' The terms righteousness and reconcilia- lieves, as soon as he believes. But in what sense is
tion are here used by St. Paul indiscriminately to teach this righteousness imputed to believers? In this; all
us, that they are mutually comprehended in each believers are forgiven and accepted, not for the sake of
ether. And he states the manner of obtaining this any thing in them, or of any thing that ever was, that
righteousness to consist in our transgressions not being is, or ever can be done by them, but wholly for the sake
imputed to us; wherefore we can no longer doubt how of what Christ hath done and suffered for them. But
God justifies, when we hear that he reconciles us to perhaps some will affirm, that faith is imputed to us for
himself by lot imputing our sins to us.” "So Panl, in righteousness. St. Paul afirms this, therefore I affirm
preaching at Antioch, says, “Through this man is it too. Faith is imputed for righteousness to every be-
preached unto you the forgiveness of sins, and by him liever, namely, faith in the righteousness of Christ;
all that believe are justified. The apostle thus con- but this is exactly the same thing which has been said
nects' forgiveness of sins,' with justification,' to show before; for by that expression I mean neither more nor
that they are identically the same."(9)

less than that we are justified by faith, not by works, This simple notion of justification as the remission or that every believer is forgiven and accepted, of sins, could not have been maintained by Calvin had merely for the sake of what Christ had done and he held the notion of a distinct imputation of Christ's suffered."(3) active righteousness; for it has always followed from In this sermon, which is one of peace, one in which he that notion, that they who have held it represent justi- shows how near he was willing to approach those who tication as consisting of two parts, first, the forgiveness held the doctrine of Calvin on this subject, the author of sins, and then the imputation of Christ's moral obe-justly observes, that the terms themselves, in which it dience, so that he who is forgiven may be considered is often expressed, are liable to abuse, and intimates personally righteous, and thus, when both meet, he is that they had better be dispensed with.

This every Justified.(1)

one must feel; for it is clear that such figurative exThe view taken by Calvin of the imputation of Christ's pressions, as being clothed with the righteousness of righteousness in justification is obviously, that the Christ, and appearing before God as invested in it, so righteousness of Christ, that is, his entire obedience to that no fault can be laid to our charge, are modes of the will of his Father, both in doing and suffering, is, as speech, which, though used by Calvin and his followhe says, “ accepted for us, as though it were our own;" | ers of the moderate school, and by some evangelical so that, in virtue of it upon our believing we are ac- Arminians, who mainly agree with them on the subject counted righteous, not personally, but by the remis- of mau's justification, are much inore appropriate to

sion or non-imputation of our sins. Thus, he observes the doctrine of the imputation of Christ's active right· on Acts xiii. 38, 39, “ The justification which we have cousness, as held by the higher Calvinists, and by An

by Christ in the Gospel is not a justification with tinomians, than to any other. The truth of the case is, righteousness, properly so called, but a justification that the imputation of Christ's righteousness is held by from sin, and from the guilt of sin and condemnation such Calvinists in a proper sense, by evangelical Ardue to it. So when Christ said to men and women in minians in an improper or accommodated sense; and the Gospel, thy sins are forgiven thee,' then he justi- that Calvin and his real followers, though nearer to the fied them the forgiveness of their sins was their justi- latter than the former, do not fully agree with either. fication."

If the same phrases, therefore, be used, they are cerCalvin, however, like many of his followers, who tainly understood in different senses, or, by one party, adopt no views on this subject substantialy different at least, with limitations; and if it can be shown, that from their master, uses figurative terms and phrases neither is the “imputation of Christ's righteousness, which somewhat obscure his real meaning, and give in any good sense expressed nor implied in Scripture, much countenance to the Antinomian doctrine; but and that the phrases, being clothed and invested with his then, so liule, it has been thought, can be objected to righteousness, are not used with any reference to justhe opinion of Calvin, in the article of imputed right- tification, it seems preferable, at least when we are ineousness, in the main, that many divines, opposed to vestigating truth, to discard them at once, and fully to the Calvinian theory generally, have not hesitated, in bring out the testimony of Scripture on the doctrine of substance, to assent to it, reserving to themselves imputation. some liberty in the use of the terms in which it is often The question then will be, not whether the imputaenveloped, either to modify, explain, or reject them. tion of Christ's righteousness is to be taken in the sense

Thus Arminius: “I believe that sinners are ac- of the Antinomians, which has been sufficiently recounted righteous solely by the obedience of Christ futed; but whether there is any Scripture authority for and that the righteousness of Christ is the only meri- the imputation of Christ's righteousness as it is undertorious cause on account of which God pardons the sins stood by Calvin, and admitted, though with some hesiof believers, and reckons them as righteous as if they had tancy, and with explanations, by Arminius and soine perfectly fulfilled the law. But since God imputes the others. righeousness of Christ to none except believers, I con- With Calvin, the notion of imputation seems to be, clude that, in this sense, it may be well and properly said, that the righteousness of Christ, that is, his entire to a man who believes, faith is imputed for righteousness, obedience to the will of his father, both in doing and through grace, because God hath set forth his son Jesus suffering, is, upon onr believing, imputed, or accounted

to us, or accepted for us, "as though it were ou'R OWN." (9) Institutes, lib. 3, cap. xi.

From which we may conclude, that he admitted some (1) “To be released from the damnatory sentence is kind of transfer of the righteousness of Christ to our acone thing, to be treated as a righteous person is evidently another."-HERVEY's Theron and Aspasio. (2) NICHOL's Arminius.

(3) Sermone.

count, and that believers are considered so to be in į Lord our Righteousness, that is, the Author and ProChrist, as that he should answer for them in law, and curer of our righteousness or justification before God. plead his righteousness in default of theirs. All this, so he is said to be “the Resurrection,” “our Life," we grant, is capable of being interpreted to a good and “our Peace," &c., as the anthor of these blessings; for scriptural sense; but it is also capable of a contrary who ever dreamed that Christ is the life, the resurrection, one. The opinion of some prosessedly Calvinistic di- the peace of his people by imputation ? pr that we will vines ; of Baxter and his followers; and of the major- live by being accounted to live in him, or are raised ity of evangelical Arminians, is, as Baxter well ex- from the dead by being accounted to have risen in presses it, that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us him? in the sense of its being accounted of God the valul- “Some,” says Goodwin,“ have digged for the treaable consideration, satisfaction, and merit (attaining sure of imputation in Isaiah xlv. 24, Surely shall one God's ends), for which we are (when we consent to the say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength.'covenant of grace) forgiven and justified, against the But, first, neither is there here the least breathing of condemuing sentence of the law of innocence, and that imputation so much wandered after, nor do I find accounted and accepted of God to grace and glory.”(4) any inliniation given of any such business by any sound So, also, Goodwin. “If we take the phrase of imput- expositor. Secondly, the plain and direct meaning of ing Christ's righteousness improperly, viz. for the be- the place is, that when God should cominunicate the stowing, as it were, of the righteousness of Christ, in- knowledge of himself, in his Son, to the world, his pen. cluding his obedience, as well passive as active, in the ple should have this sense of the means of their salva. return of it, i. e. in the privileges, blessings, and bene- tion and peace, that they received them of the free grace fits purchased by it, so a believer may be said to be of God, and not of themselves, or by the merit of their justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed. But own righteousness. And Calvin's exposition is to this then the meaning can be no more than this, God justi- effect ;— Because righteousness and strength are the fies a believer for the sake of Christ's righteousness, two main points of our salvation, the faithful acknow. and not for any righteousness of his own. Such an ledge God to be the anthor of both.'” imputation of the righteousness of Christ as this is no With respect to all those passages which speak of way denied or questioned.”(5)

the Jewish or Christian churches, or their individual Between these opinions, as to the imputation of the members being “clothed with garments of salvation," righteousness of Christ, it will be seen, that there is a “ robes of righteousness," " white linen, the righteousmanifest difference, which difference arises from the ness of the saints," or of putting on Christ;" a class of different senses in which the term imputation is taken. texts on which, from their mere sound, the advocates The latter takes it in the sense of accounting or allow- of imputed righteousness ring so many changes, the ing to the believer the benefit of the righteousness of use which is thus made of them shows either great inChrist, the other in the sense of reckoning or account- attention to the context, or great ignorance of the prin. ing the righteousness of Christ as ours; that is, what ciples of criticism:--the former, because the context will he did and suffered, is regarded as done and suffered by show that either those passages relate to temporal de us. “It is accepted," says Calvin, “as though it were liverances, and external blessings; or else, not to jusour own;" so that, though Calvin does not divide the tification, but to habitual and practical sanctification, active and passive obedience of Christ, nor make justi- and to the honours and rewards of the saints in glory: fication any thing more than the remission of sin, yet —the latter, because nothing is more common in lanhis opinion easily slides into the Antinomian notion, guage than to represent good or evil habits by clean or and lays itself open to several of the same objections, filthy, by soiled or resplendent vestments, by nakedand especially 10 this, that it involves the same ness or by clothing; and this is especially the case in kind of fiction, that what Christ did or suffered is, in the Hebrew language, because it was the custom of any sense whatever, considered by him who knows the Jews, by changing their garments, 10 express the all things as they are, as being done or suffered by changes in their condition. They put on sackcloth, or any other person, than by him who did or suffered it in laid aside their upper robe (which is, in Scripture style, fact.

cailed making themselves naked), or rent their garments For this notion, that the righteousness of Christ is so when persoral or national afflictions came upon them; imputed as to be accounted our own, there is no warrant and they arrayed themselves in white and adorned apin the Word of God; and a slight examination of those parel, in seasons of festivity, and after great deliverpassages which are indifferently adduced to support ances. In all these figurative expressions there is, how. either the Antinomian or the Calvinistic view of the ever, nothing which countenances the notion that subject, will suffice to demonstrate this.

Christ's righteousness is a robe thrown upon sinful men, Psalm xxxii. 1. * Blessed is the man whose trans- to hide from the eye of justice their natural squalidness gression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." The co- and pollution, and to give them confidence in the prevering of sin here spoken of, is by some considered to sence of Gon. No interpretation can be more fanciful be the investment of the sinner with the righteousness and unfounded. or obedience of Christ. But this is entirely gratuitous, Rom. iii. 21, 22. “But now the righteousness of GOD, for the forgiveness of sin, even by ihe legal atonements, without the law, is manifested, being witnessed by the is called, according to the Hebrew idiom (though ano- law and the prophets, even the righteousness of God ther verb is used), to cover sin ; and the latter part of which is by the faith of Jesus Christ." The righteousness the sentence is clearly a parallelism to the former. This of God here is, by some, taken to signify the righteous. is the interpretation of Luther and of Calvin himself.-- ness of Christ imputed to them that beligre. But the To forgive sin, to cover sin, and not to impute sin, are very text makes it evident, that by “the righteousness in this psalm all phrases obviously of the same import, of God” the righteousness of the Father is meant, for and no other kind of imputation but the non-imputation he is distinguished from " Jesus Christ,” mentioned of sin is mentioned in it. And, indeed, the passage will immediately afterward; and by the righteousness of not serve the purpose of the advocates of the doctrine God, it is also plain, that his rectoral justice in the ad. of the imputation of Christ's active righteousness, on niinistration of pardon is meant, which, of course, is their own principles; for sin cannot be covered by the not thought capable of imputation. This is made induimputation of Christ's active righteousness, since they bitable by the verse which follows, “to declare at this hold that it is taken away by the imputation of his death, time his righteousness, that he might be just, and the and that the office of Christ's active righteousness | justifier of him that believeth on Jesus." is not to take away sin, but to render us personally The phrase, the righteousness of God, in this and se and positively holy by imputation and the fiction of a veral other passages in St. Paul's writings, obviously transfer.

means God's righteous method of justifying sinners Jer. xxiii. 6, and xxxiii. 16. “And this is the name through the atonement of Christ, and, instrumentally, whereby he shall be called, The Lord our Righteous- by faith. This is the grand peculiarity of the Gospel ness.” This passage also proves nothing to the point, scheme, the fulness at once of its love and its wisdom, for it is neither said that the righteousness of the Lord that "the righteousness of God is manifested without shall be our righteousness, nor that it shall be imputed law;" and ihat without either an enforcement of the to us for righteousness, but simply, that the name by penalty of the violated law upon the personal offender, which he shall be called, or acknowledged, shall be the which would have cut him off from hope; or without

making his justification to depend upon works of (4) Breviate of Controversies.

obedience to the law (which was the only method of (5) On Justification.

justification admitted by the Jews of St. Paul's day). and which obedience was impossible, and therefore " that we are justified through the redemption which is hopeless; he can yet, in perfect consistency with his in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth a propitiation,

justice and righteous administration, offer pardon to through faith in his blood” (a thing which the doctrine the guilty. No wonder, therefore, that the apostle, who under examination supposes to be impossible), there is discourses professedly on this subject, should lay so reason to conclude that he speaks here of his passive, great a stress upon it, and that his mind, always full of rather than of his active obedience. “If, indeed, his a subject so great and glorious, should so often advert willingness to suffer for our sins were never spoken of to it incidentally, as well as in his regular discourses on as an act of obedience, such an observation might have the justification of man in the sight of God. Thus he the appearance of a mere expedient to get rid of a diffi

ves it as a reason why he was not ashamed of the culty. But on the other hand, this should prove to be Gospel of Christ, that “therein is the righteousness of the very spirit and letter of Scripture, the justness of it God revealed from faith to faith ; as it is written, the just will be obvious. Hear, then, our Lord himself on this shall live by faith,” Rom. i. 17. Thus, again, in contrast- subject. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I ing God's method of justifying the ungodly with the lay down my life, that I might take it again.

No man error of the Jews, by-whom justification was held to taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself: I have be the acquittal of the righteous or obedient, he says, power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. “ for they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and This commandment have I received of my Father.' going about to establish their own righteousness, have John x. 17, 18. This, then, was the commandment to not submitted themselves to the righteousness of Gon," which he rendered willing obedience, when he said, Roinans x. 3. The same contrast we have in Philippians Oh, my Father, if this cup may not pass away from ii. 9, “Not having mine own righteousness which is me, except I drink it, thy will be done. Matt. xxvi. 42. of the law, but that which is through the faith of Jesus • The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.” drink it ? John xviii. 11. In conformity with this, the In all these passages the righteousness of God mani- apostle applies to him the following words: “Wherefore festly signifies his righteous method of justifying them when he cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice and that believe in Christ. No reference at all is made to offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prethe imputation of Christ's righteousness to such per- pared me. Then said I, Lo, I come to do thy will, oh sons, and much less is any distinction set up between God. By (his performance of) which will we are sanchis active and passive righteousness.

tified; through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ 1 Cor. i. 30, “ But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who once for all.” Heb. x. 5, 10. “Being found in fashion as of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and a man (says St. Paul), he became obedient unto death, sanctification and redemption.” Here, also, to say that even the death of the cross.' Phil. ii. 8. Such was his Christ is “made unto us righteousness” by imputation, obedience, an obedience unto the death of the cross. is to invent and not to interpret. This is clear, that he And by this his obedience unto the death of the cross, is made unto us righteousness only as he is made unto shall many be constituted righteous, or be justified. us“ redemption,” so that if we are not redeemed by im. Where, then, is the imputation of his active obedience putation, we are not justified by imputation. The for justification ?"(6) meaning of the apostle is, that Christ is made to us, by It proves nothing in favour of the imputation of the appointment of God, the sole means of instruction, Christ's righteousness considered as one, and including justification, sanctification, and eternal life.

what he did and suffered, in the sense of its being 2 Cor. v. 21, “ For he hath made him to be sin for us, reputed our righteousness, by transfer or by fiction of who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteous- law. For, though the imputation of Adam's sin to his ness of God in him.” To be made sin, we have already posterity is supposed to be taught in this chapter, and shown, signifies to be made an offering for sin; conse- the imputation of Christ's obedience in one or other of quently, as no imputation of our sins to Christ is here the senses above given is argued from this particular text, mentioned, there is no foundation for the notion, that the examination of the subject will show that the righé there is a reciprocal imputation of Christ's righteous- understanding of the imputation of Adam's sin wholly ness to us. The text is wholly silent on this subject, for overthrows both the Antinomian and Calvinistic view it is wholly gratuitous to say, that we are made the of the imputation of Christ's righteousness. This argurighteousness of God in or through Christ, by imputa- ment is very ably developed by Goodwin.(7) tion or reckoning to us what he did or suffered as our “Because the imputation of Adam's sin to his posacts or sufferings. This passages we have already ad- terity is frequenily produced to prove the imputation duced will explain the phrase, “the righteousness of of Christ's righteousness, I shall lay down, with as God,” in this place. This righteousness, with respect much plainness as I can, in what sense the Scriptures to our pardon, is God's righteous method of justifying, countenance that imputation. The Scriptures own no through the atonement of Christ, and our being made other imputation of Adain's sin to his posterity, than of or becoming this righteousness of God in or by Christ, Christ's righteousness to those that believe. The is our becoming righteous persons through the pardon righteousness of Christ is imputed, or given to those of our sins in this peculiar method, by renouncing our that believe, not in the letter or formality of it, but in own righteousness and by “submitting to this right- blessings, privileges, and benefits, purchased of God by eousness of God."

the merit of it. So the sin of Adam is imputed to his Rom. v. 18, 19, “ As by the offence of one, judgment posterity, not in the letter and formality of it (which is came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the the imputation commonly urged), but in the demerit righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men of it, that is, in the curse or punishment due to it. unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobe- Therefore, as concerning this imputation of Adam's sin, dience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of I answer, one shall many be made righteous." That this passage, “ First, the Scripture nowhere affirms, either the imthough generally depended upon in this controversy, as putation of Adam's sin to his posterity, or of the rightthe most decisive in its evidence in favour of the doctrine eousness of Christ to those that believe; neither is such of imputation, proves nothing to the purpose, may be a manner of speaking any wise agreeable to the lanthus demonstrated. It proves nothing in favour of the guage of the Holy Ghost; for, in the Scriptures, imputation of Christ's active righteousness. For, wheresoever the term IMPUTING is used, it is only ap.

i. Here is nothing said of the active obedience of plied to, or spoken of, something of the same persons, Christ, as distinguished from his obedient suffering, to whom the imputation is said to be made, and never, and which might lead us to aitribute the free gift of to my remembrance, to or of any thing of another's. justification to the former, rather than to the latter. So, Rom. iv. 3, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was im

2. If the apostle is supposed to speak here of the PUTED to him for righteousness,' that is, his own active obedience of Christ, as distinguished from his believing was imputed to him, not another man's. So, sufferings, his death is of course excluded from the verse 5, but to him that worketh not, but believeth, his work of justification. But this cannot be allowed, faith is IMPUTED to him for righteousness.' So, Psalm because the apostle has intimated in the same chapter, cvi. 30, 31, “ Phineas stood up and executed judgment, that we are justified by his blood,” Rom. v. 9, and, and that' (act of his)' was imputed to him for righttherefore, it cannot be allowed that he is speaking of cousness, that is, received a testimony from God of the active obedience of Christ, as distinguished from being a righteous act. So again, 2 Cor. v. 19, ónot his passive. 3. As the apostle has unequivocally decided, that we

(6) HARE on Justification. are justified by the blood of Christ, or, in other words,

(7) Treatise on Justification.

IM PUTING their trespasses' (their own trespasses), 'unto meaning be the same with the Holy Ghost's, when he them.'

saith, that by the disobedience of one, many were made " Secondly, When a thing is said simply to be imputed, sinners, there is no harm done: but it is evident by as sin, folly, and so righteousness, the phrase is not to what many speak, that the Holy Ghost and they are not be taken concerning the bare acts of the things, as if of one mind, touching the imputation or communication (for example) to impute sin to a man, signified this, to of'Adam's sin with his posterity, but that they differ as repute the man (to whom sin is imputed) to have com- much in meaning as in words. If, when they say, mitted a sinful act, or, as if to impute folly were simply Adam's sin is imputed to all unto condemnation, their to charge a man to have done foolishly: but when it is meaning be this, that the guilt of Adam's sin is charged applied to things that are evil, and attributed to persons upon his whole posterity, or that the punishment of that have power over those to whom the imputation is Adam's sin redounded from his person to his whole posmade, it signifieth the charging the guilt of what is im- terity, a main part of which punishinent lieth in that puted upon the head of the person to whom the imputa- original defilement wherein they are all conceived and tion is made, with an intent of inflicting some condign born, and whereby they are made truly sinners before punishment upon him. So that to impute sin (in Scrip. God; if this be the meaning of the term imputation, iure phrase) is to charge the guilt of sin upon a man when applied to Adam's sin, let it pass. But if the with a purpose to punish him for it. Thus, Rom. v. 13, meaning be, that that sinful act, wherein Adam transsin is said not to be IMPUTED where there is no law.' gressed when he ate the forbidden fruit, is, in the letter The meaning cannot be, that the act which a man doth, and formality of it, imputed to his posterity, so that by whether there be a law or no law, should not be imputed this imputation all his posterity are made formally sinto him. The law doth not make any act to be imputed, ners : ihis is an imputation which the Scripture will neor ascribed to a man, which might not as well have been ver justify." imputed without it. But the meaning is, that there is The iast text necessary to mention is Rom. iv. 6, no guilt charged by God upon men, nor any punishment “ Even as David declareth the blessedness of the man inflicted for any thing done by them, but only by virtue to wliom God imputeth righteousness without works." of the law prohibiting. In which respect the law is Here again the expositors of this class assume, even said to be the strength of sin, because it gives a con against the letter of the text and context, that the rightdemning power against the doer, to that which otherwise eousness which God is said to impute is the righteouswould have had none. 1 Cor. xv. 56. So again, Job ness of Christ. But Calvin himself may here be suffixxiv. 12, when it is said, “God doth not lay folly to the cient to answer them. “In the fourth chapter of the charge of them (i. e. imputé folly to them), that make Romans the apostle first mentions an imputation of the souls of the slain to cry out,' the meaning is not righteousness, and immediately represents it as consist. that God doth not repute them to have committed the ing in remission of sins. David, says he, describeth the acts of oppression or murder. For supposing they did blessedness of the man, unto whom Gop imputeth rightsuch things, it is impossive but God should repute eousness without works, saying, "Blessed are they them to have done them: but that God doth not visibly whose iniquities are forgiven,' &c. He there argues, charge the guilt of these sins upon them, or inflict not concerning a branch, but the whole of justification; punishment for them. So, 2 Sam. xix. 19, “When he also adduces the definition of it given by David, Shimei prayeth David not to IMPUTE wickedness unto when he pronounces those to be blessed who receive him, his meaning is, not to desire David not to think he the free forgiveness of their sins, whence it appears that had done wickedly in railing upon him (for himself this righteousness is simply opposed to guilt.”(8) The confesseth this in the very next words), but not to imputation of righteousness in this passage is, in Calinflict the punishment which that wickedness deserved. vin's view, therefore, the simple non-imputation of sin, So when David himself pronounceth the man blessed or in other words, the remission of sins. to whom the Lord IMPUTETH not sin, his meaning In none of these passages is there, then, any thing is, not that there is any man whom the Lord would found to countenance even that second view of imputanot repute to have comunitted those acts of sin which tion which consists in the accounting the righteousness he has committed, but that such are blessed on whom of Christ in justification to be our righteousness. It is God will not charge the demerit of their sins in the only imputed in the benefit and effect of it, that is, in the punishment due to them. So, yet again (to forbear blessings and privileges purchased by it; and though farther citations), 2 Cor. v. 19, when God is said . not we may use the phrase, the imputed righteousness of to IMPUTE their sins unto men,' the meaning is, not that Christ, in this latter sense, qualifying our meaning like God should not repute men to have committed such and Paræus, who says, “In this sense imputed righteoussuch sins against him, but that he freely discharges ness is called the righteousness of Christ, by way of them from the punishment due to them. By all which merit or effect, because it is procured for us by the testimonies from Scripture, concerning the constant use merit of Christ, not because it is subjectively or inheof the term imputing, or imputation, it is evident, that rently in Christ;" yet since this manner of speaking proposition, that the transgression of the law is im- has no foundation in Scripture, and must generally lead putable from one person to another,' hath no foundation to misapprehensions, it will be found more conducive in Scripture.

to the cause of truth to confine ourselves to the language “And, therefore, thirdly and lastly, to come home to of the Scriptures. According to them, there is no fictithe imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity, I answer, tious accounting either of what Christ did or suffered,

“First, that either to say that the righteousness of or of both united, to us, as being done and suffered by Christ is imputed to his posterity (of believers) or the us, through our union with him, or through his becomsin of Adam to his, are both expressions, at least, ing our legal representative; but his active and passive unknown to the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures. There righteousness, advanced in dignity by the union of the is neither word, nor syllable, nor letter, nor little of any Divine nature and perfection, is the true meritorious such thing to be found there. But that the faith of him cause of our justification. It is that great whole which that believeth is imputed for righteousness, are words constitutes his “merits;" that is, the consideration, in which the Holy Ghost useth.

view of which the offended but merciful Governor of “But, secondly, because I would make no exceptions the world has determined it to be a just and righteous, against words, farther than necessity enforceth, I grant, as well as a mercisul act, to justify the ungodly; and, there are expressions in Scripture concerning both the for the sake of this perfect obedience of our Lord to the coinmunication of Adam's sin with his posterity, and will of the Father, an obedience extending unto “death the righteousness of Christ with those that believe, that even the death of the cross,” to every penitent sinner will fairly enough bear the term of imputation, if it be who believes in him, but considered still in his own perrightly understood, and according to the use of it in son as “ ungodly," and meriting nothing but punishi. Scripture upon other occasions. But as it is commonly ment, “his faith is imputed for righteousness;" it is taken and understood by many, it occasions much error followed by the remission of his sins and all the benefits and mistake.

of the evangelical covenant. “Concerning Adam's sin or disobedience, many are This imputation of Faith for righteousness is the said to be made sinners by it,' Rom. v. 19. And so third opinion which we proposed to examine. " by the obedience of Christ,' it is said (in the same place) That this is the doctrine iaught by the express letter that many shall be made righteous.' But if men will of Scripture no one can deny, and, as one well observes, exchange language with the Holy Ghost, they must see " what that is which is impnted for righteousness in that they make him no loser. If, when they say, · Adam's sin is imputed to all unto condemnation,' their

(8) Institut. lib. iii. cap. li.

« PreviousContinue »