LXXIV. 4.

The Difference between the Roman-catholic Church and the Lutherans and Methodists, on the subject of Justification.

WITH a short statement of this difference, we shall close this chapter.

"The justification of the sinner," to use Luther's own language, "was the principle and source "from which all his doctrine flowed." So great, in his opinion, was the importance of this article of christian faith, that he thought himself warranted in asserting, that, "while the doctrine upon it was pure, there would be no reason to fear either "schism or division; but that, if the true doctrine "of justification were altered, it would be impossi"ble to oppose error, or to stop the progress of "fanaticism." It is far from the object of these pages to enter into any thing like controversial discussion; but the writer thinks his readers will not be displeased to find in this place, an accurate statement of the doctrines of the roman-catholic and lutheran churches upon this important tenet of their respective creeds. It is expressed with extreme accuracy, in the Letters of father Scheffmacker, a work highly celebrated on the continent t. The

* Luth. Op. ed. Jenæ, 1561, tom. vi. p. 13. Ibid. tom. iii. p. 189.

+ Lettres d'un Docteur Catholique à un Protestant, sur les principaux Points de Controverse. Rouen, 1769. Deuxième lettre, sur la justification.

writer of these letters begins that, which relates to the point in question, by observing to his lutheran correspondent, "if there be a point, on which

persons have disputed with warmth, and without "sufficiently understanding one another, on either "side, it must be acknowledged, that the question the justification of a sinner, is a point of that "description.

"You teach," he proceeds to observe, “ that the "sinner is solely justified by faith; that, after hav

ing offended God, and lost his grace, we obtain "the remission of our sins, and are restored to the "friendship of God, by means only of an act of "faith:-every other act of virtue, as acts of contrition, good resolution, hope, charity, &c. having, as you pretend, no part in the sinner's justifica

❝tion.

"Now, to form a just idea of the faith, which 66 you maintain to be the only means of reconciling us with God, it is to be remarked, that it is not "the faith, which is understood by that word, in "its common acceptation; that is to say, a gene"ral faith, by which we believe all that God has "revealed to us. You require, that it should be a special faith, on the merits of Christ; and this faith, as your doctors explain it, contains first, an "act of the understanding, by which we acknow"ledge that Jesus Christ has died for us; that "he has fully satisfied for our sins; and that he

presents to us his merits, his satisfaction, and his "remission of our sins: and secondly, an act of the "will, by which we accept all this, in applying and

appropriating to ourselves what is offered to us, by Jesus Christ,-I mean his merits and the re"mission of our sins.

"It is, however, necessary, that we do you the justice to acknowledge, that you require justify"ing faith to be fruitful in good works; for you de"clare explicitly, that if faith be not accompanied

by good works, it is not a true faith; that we "must be careful to avoid imagining, that justify

ing faith can subsist with a wish to persist in sin; "that those, who have not contrition, and are re"solved to continue to live in their disorders, have "not the faith which justifies and saves them. "Luther's expression is, 'faith and good works are inseparably connected; it is faith only which justifies, but justifying faith is never single, and "without good works,'

66

66

"We believe,-First, that faith, taken in the ordinary sense of that word, that is, for the vir<6 tue which makes us believe revealed truths, is absolutely necessary for the justification of the "sinner. We are fully persuaded that no works "done before faith, or without faith, by the mere strength of free-will, or human reason, can have any part in the justification of the sinner.

Secondly,-We believe, that faith alone does "not suffice to justify the sinner; that, in addition "to it, there must be a sincere sorrow for sin, a "firm resolution not to relapse into it, a salutary "fear of the judgments of God, with a true confi"dence in the merits of Jesus Christ, and in the "Divine mercy.

"Thirdly,-We believe, that though the sinner 66 may obtain the grace of justification, in bringing "the dispositions which I have mentioned, still he "cannot merit them; so that he is justified, gra"tuitously, by the pure mercy of God, and solely, "in the view of the merits of Jesus Christ. I explain myself:-the sinner, after he has lost the

grace of God, can do nothing, which is sufficiently "agreeable to God, to entitle him to be restored to "his friendship. All the good works which he does, in such a state, are dead; and of too little "value to exact from the Divine Justice that the

grace of reconciliation should be restored to him "as the fruit of his works. When God justifies "us by restoring his friendship to us, it is not in consequence of the goodness of our works; it is solely in consequence of the infinite price of the passion and death of Jesus Christ; it is gratuit"ously; it is from the pure effect of his mercy, "that he applies to us the fruit of the merits and "the infinite satisfaction of his Son. It is true, that "God requires certain works, without which he "does not justify the sinner; and in consequence " of which, he does justify him: but he does not require them as meritorious works; he requires "them as conditions, or as necessary dispositions, "without which, he does not receive the sinner "into favour, or admit him to participate in the "merits of Jesus Christ, as to their effects in the "remission of sins. According to the doctrine of "the council of Trent*, nothing that precedes * Sess, vi. c. 8.

66

"justification, either of faith or works, can merit "the grace of justification.

"Fourthly,-We believe, that though the sinner "can only owe his justification to the merits of "Jesus Christ, yet the merits of Jesus Christ are "not the formal justice of the person justified :"he is not just of the justice of Jesus Christ; that "is extrinsic to him. He is just, by an inherent "justice,-a justice which, at the same time, is the "justice of God, and the justice of man;-the justice of man, because, having obtained it of "the Divine liberality, it is within him, and not out "of him ;—the justice of God, because it comes " from God alone; he alone gives it to the sinner, by a pure effect of his mercy, gratuitously, and

૯

only in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the "sinner being altogether unable, on his part, to "merit the justice by any imaginable work, whatever it may be."

We leave the reader to his own reflections: if he be a roman-catholic, he must concede to the protestant, that he believes no sinner to be justified without good works; if he be a protestant, he must concede to the catholic, that he believes no good works of the sinner entitle him to justification; and whether he be a roman-catholic or a protestant, he must concede, that both equally believe, that, where either faith or good works are wanting, the sinner will not be justified,—and that when he is justified, his justification is not owing either to his faith or his good works, or to both: for though both