On the Continuation of Justification

“Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”

Rom. 8:33-34

“Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.”

Rom. 5:1-2

“Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation…”

1 Pet. 1:5

Subsections

Good Works: Necessary to Justification Consequently
Twofold Justification
Justification at Judgment Day

Order of Contents

Articles 8+
Westminster
Quotes 12+
Relation to Works 4
Daily Forgiveness 6+
Unity of Justification 6+
Baxter 2

Articles

1600’s

Burroughs, Jeremiah –

Cotton, John – pp. 314 & 333-46 in treatise 3 on Gal. 2:20, ‘The life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God’ in The Life of Faith in The Way of Life, or, God’s Way & Course in Bringing the Soul into, Keeping it in & Carrying it on in the Ways of Life & Peace… (London: 1641)

Goodwin, Thomas – pp. 133-39 of section 5, ch. 3, ‘2nd Head: The Special, Peculiar Influence that Intercession has into our Salvation & Justification…’ in Christ set forth in his Death, Resurrection, Ascension, Sitting at God’s Right Hand, Intercession, as the Cause of Justification… (London, 1642)

Cheynell, Francis – pp. 4 & 7-9 of An Account given to the Parliament by the Ministers sent by them to Oxford in which you have… Diverse Questions concerning the Covenant of Grace, Justification, etc. are Briefly Stated… (London, 1647)

Cheynell was a Westminster divine.

Burgess, Anthony – Lecture 20, ‘Whether Pardon of Sin be Immanent or Transient Act of God, and whether it be Antecedent to our Faith and Repentance. The Contrary Proved, viz. that God does not Justify or Pardon us Before we Believe & Repent’ in The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted and Vindicated, from the Errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians, and More Especially Antinomians (1655), pp. 185-216 on Mt. 6:12 IA

Note that a Brakel below speaks of justification as transient.

* Owen, John – pp. 143-52 in ch. 5, ‘The Continuation of Justification, whereon it does Depend’ in The Doctrine of Justification by Faith in Works (d. 1683), vol. 5. See especially pp. 147-52.

“And that the continuation of our justification depends solely on the same causes with our justification itself shall be afterwards declared.” – p. 106

“Some say that on our part the continuation of this state of our justification depends on the condition of good works… with this only proviso, that they be done in faith… As faith alone is required unto the one [justification], so faith alone is required unto the other [continuation of justification], although its operations and effects in the discharge of its duty and office in justification, and the continuation of it are diverse, nor can it otherwise be…

…the continuation of our Justification is the continuation of the imputation of righteousness and the pardon of sins.” – p. 147

Turretin, Francis – Institutes ed. James Dennison, Jr. (Presbyterian & Reformed), vol. 2

15th Topic, Calling & Faith

Question 16, ‘Whether the true believer can ever totally or finally fall from faith. We deny against the Romanists, Socinians, Remonstrants and others who favor the apostasy of the siants.’, pp. 593-616

Question 17, ‘Whether the believer can and ought to be certain of his faith and justification by a divine and not merely conjectural certainty. We affirm against the Romanists and Remonstrants.’, pp. 616-33

16th Topic, Justification

Question 10, ‘The unity, perfection and certainty of justification’, pp. 686-89

van Mastricht, Peter – Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), vol. 5, bk. 6

ch. 6, ‘Justification’

section 13
section 18
section 22, point 7

ch. 8, ‘Sanctification,’ section 19

1700’s

à Brakel, Wilhelmus – p. 378 & ‘Justification: a Daily Occurrence,’ pp. 381-91 in The Christian’s Reasonable Service, vols. 2 ed. Joel Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (1700; RHB, 1992/1999) See also the larger context on justification, pp. 341-413.

Neither everything à Brakel’s says, nor his paradigm, is wholly satisfactory. Particularly, it may appear that his paradigm is contrary to WCF 11.5: “they [believers] can never fall from the state of justification (Lk. 22:32; Jn. 10:28; Heb. 10:14)…” insofar as he teaches that justification is not an abiding act (actio permanens), but an act crossing over [transiens], or intermittent. See Burgess above who argues against justification being transient.

Yet à Brakel’s manifest intentions, to affirm a real pardon for daily sins upon repentance, that such, in some manner, involves a declaration, and hence a kind of justification, by God, and à Brakel’s intention to preserve the unity of there being one justification, are pious. The large substantial agreement à Brakel has with Owen (who is clearer and better), though articulated with a variety of categories and terminology, will be seen.

The Scriptures à Brakel cites on pp. 385-89 for a certain daily pardon of sins, when understood of God’s revealed fatherly displeasure for committed sins and its removal upon repentance and trust in God’s mercy through Christ (WCF 11.5), are very helpful.

“Sins do not place them outside of the state of grace, as if their prior justification were thereby nullified; no, God is and remains reconciled with them in Christ. God views them as His children, favorites, and heirs.” – p. 378

“Aside from the Hebrews [a Christian sect], there are also some of Reformed persuasion who maintain that justification occurs only once and for all.” – p. 381

“Thirdly, one needs to make a distinction between reconciliation and justification. God‟s justice has been satisfied in Christ; the elect, as enemies, have been reconciled with God by the death of His Son… God from His side remains reconciled, even when believers fall into the deepest possible state of backsliding. A renewed reconciliation and satisfaction are not necessary… The indwelling of the Holy Spirit, spiritual life, and the propensity of faith remains.

…man, being yet without Christ, is then still incapable of being a suitable subject for justification. When a truly converted and believing person is engaged in the practice of sin, God does not exercise the act of justification toward those who are in such a condition. At that time they are also not suitable objects for this transaction, for they do not exercise faith whereby they are justified. As far as their spiritual state is concerned, their reconciliation is a reality and remains in force, as well from God‟s side as from the side of the believer; however, justification is the declaration of a sentence.” – p. 382

“Sixthly, justification is not actio permanens, sed transiens [‘an abiding action, but a crossing-over action], that is, ‘a permanent act,’ which is effective from the very first moment of a believer‟s regeneration until their death, but rather ‘a transitory act,’ which ceases to render a pronouncement, and is therefore repeated each time again. The first pronouncement to them is past, and there is each time a new pronouncement which is not of a different nature, but is identical in nature. This is not to imply that the first act of justification is repeated, nor that God would direct a believer who prays for the forgiveness of sins to the first act of faith when He, at the outset of his conversion and faith, justified him—nor is it implied that the application of the first act of justification would be a daily occurrence… Thus it is a daily and renewed pronouncement of the very same nature.” – p. 383

“She [a Christian] prays that the guilt and punishment she has incurred by her currently committed sins would be removed on the basis of the merits of Christ, and that God by renewal would be pleased to pronounce the sentence of acquittal toward and upon her.” – p. 385

2000’s

Jones, Mark – “Fairly Vanilla Theology: Justification & Good Works” (2025) at Reformation21

Jones gives a careful analysis and quotes by Davenant, Burgess, Manton and Clarkson.

“Is evangelical obedience a condition for the continuation of our justification? This is not a straightforward question. A simple yes or no betrays an understanding of the various senses in which the statement may be true or false.”

Westminster

Confession

11.5

“God doth continue to forgive the sins of those that are justified:[o] and although they can never fall from the state of justification,[p] yet they may by their sins fall under God’s fatherly displeasure, and not have the light of his countenance restored unto them, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon, and renew their faith and repentance.[q]

[o] Matt. 6:12. 1 John 1:7,9. 1 John 2:1,2
[p] Luke 22:32. John 10:28. Heb. 10:14
[q] Ps. 89:31-33. Ps. 51:7-12. Ps. 32:5. Matt. 26:75. 1 Cor. 11:30,32. Luke 1:20“

17.3

“Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins;[g]…

[g] Matt. 26:70,72,74“

Larger Catechism

Q. 79. “May not true believers, by reason of their imperfections, and the many temptations and sins they are overtaken with, fall away from the state of grace?

A. True believers, by reason of the unchangeable love of God,[f] and his decree and covenant to give them perseverance,[g] their inseparable union with Christ,[h] his continual intercession for them,[i] and the Spirit and seed of God abiding in them,[k] can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace,[l] but are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation.[m]

[f] Jer. 31:3.
[g] 2 Tim. 2:19. Heb. 13:20,21. 2 Sam. 23:5.
[h] 1 Cor. 1:8,9.
[i] Heb. 7:25. Luke 22:32.
[k] 1 John 3:9. 1 John 2:27.
[l] Jer. 32:40. John 10:28.
[m] 1 Pet. 1:5“

Q. 194. “What do we pray for in the fifth petition?

A. In the fifth petition, (which is, Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors)… we pray for ourselves and others, that God of his free grace would, through the obedience and satisfaction of Christ, apprehended and applied by faith, acquit us both from the guilt and punishment of sin,[x] accept us in his Beloved;[y] continue his favour and grace to us,[z] pardon our daily failings,[a] and fill us with peace and joy, in giving us daily more and more assurance of forgiveness;[b] which we are the rather emboldened to ask, and encouraged to expect, when we have this testimony in ourselves, that we from the heart forgive others their offences.[c]

[x] Rom. 3:24-26. Heb. 9:22.
[y] Eph. 1:6,7.
[z] 2 Pet. 1:2.
[a] Hos. 14:2. Jer. 14:7.
[b] Rom. 15:13. Ps. 51:7-10,12.
[c] Luke 11:4. Matt. 6:14,15. Matt. 18:35“

Quotes

Order of

Ursinus
G. Downame
Maccovius
Ball
D. Rogers
Spanheim
A. Burgess
Manton
Owen
Mastricht
Vitringa

1500’s

Zacharias Ursinus

The Sum of Christian Religion: Delivered… in his Lectures upon the Catechism… tr. Henrie Parrie (Oxford, 1587), ‘Of Justification’, 7. ‘Why Christ’s satisfaction is made ours by faith only’, ‘Objections against this Doctrine of Justification’

p. 687

“6th Objection: The Messiah brings everlasting justice and righteousness. Imputed righteousness is not eternal. Therefore we are not thereby justified.

Answer: It is said that Christ’s righteousness shall be an everlasting righteousness; but after a diverse manner. For in the life to come we shall be just after another manner than in this life. For although we shall then be just by the same righteousness, even by the righteousness of Christ imputed unto us: yet with this shall also the legal justice and righteousness be continued, so that then also by the legal righteousness we shall be perfectly just, because now only we are, as concerning that, but in part and beginning just.

Each justice, both the justice of the Law, and the justice of the Gospel, is eternal, by continuation: And the justice and righteousness of the Gospel, that is, the justice of Christ imputed unto us, is eternal by continuation of the imputation: The justice of the Law is eternal by continuation of good works, even as it is continued by good works, first, and beginning in this life, until at length after this life it be perfected, and become perfect, and so continue to all eternity.”

p. 691

“18th Objection [by Osiander]: Christ has brought us eternal justice. This applied justice is not eternal: Therefore this is not our justice, but God Himself is our justice.

Answer: The Lord is our justice, that is, our Justifier. But that our applied justice is eternal, has been showed before; because the imputation thereof is continued to all eternity. That justice also of the Law which is begun in us in this life, shall be continued, and perfected in the life to come. But that justice which is God Himself is not in us: because so God should be an accident to his creature, and become justice in man. For justice and virtue are things created in us, not the essence of God.
…

19th Objection: Where sin is not, there is no place for remission or imputation. In the life to come sin shall not be. Therefore [there is] no place there for remission or imputation.

Answer: In the life to come shall not be remission of any sin then present, but the remission which was granted in this life shall continue and endure forever. And that conformity also which we shall have with God in the life to come shall be an effect of this imputation.”

1600’s

George Downame

A Treatise of Justification (London: 1633)

ch. 1, pp. 5-8

“§VI. Thirdly, when we say it [justification] is an action of God imputing to a believing sinner, etc. we consider it not as a sudden and momentary action which is of no continuance, as if all our sins both past, present and to come are remitted in an instant, but as an act of God continued from our vocation [calling], wherein the grace of faith is begotten in us, to our glorification, which is the end of our faith.

For as this action of God is called the justification of a sinner, so while we continue sinners, we have still need to be justified. And as we always have sin in this life, so that it may not be imputed, we have need, that Christ’s righteousness should be imputed unto us; and that as we sin daily, so Christ our advocate should continually make intercession for us: that notwithstanding our manifold slips, whereinto through human frailty we fall, and notwithstanding those manifold infirmities and corruptions which remain in us as the relics of original sin, we may be continued in the grace and favor of God by the continued imputation of Christ’s righteousness obtained by his continual intercession for us. For therefore does he continue his intercession for us that our justification may be continued to us, and that as we sin daily, so we may daily seek and obtain pardon.

But if justification should so be wrought once and at once, as that after that act wrought in an instance, we should no more be justified, nor no more need remission of sin, then must we erroneously conceive that the sins which after the first moment of our justification we do commit, are actually remitted before they be committed; whereas God forgives only sins past, Rom. 3:25. So shall we not only set open a gap to all licentiousness (for who will so fear to commit sin as he ought, or when he has committed it so sue for the pardon thereof who is persuaded beforehand that it is already remitted), but also shall open the mouths of our adversaries, who will be ready to say, that we Protestants ought not to pray for remission of sin, because in our opinion (as they say) we need it not: but to this calumniation of the Papist I have elsewhere answered.

§. VII. If it be said that it is a received opinion among many that justificatio simul et semel sit, that ‘justification is wrought at once, and but once,’ I answer that that assertion is not to be admitted without distinction, nor without good caution. The distinction is this, that there is a justification of a sinner before God in foro coelesti, which properly is called justification, and is that which here I have defined: and there is a justification whereby a man already justified before God is justified in foro conscientiae, in the court of his own conscience: which is not properly justification itself, but the assurance of it.

To this latter that assertion of but once and at once cannot in any good sense be applied. For neither is the full assurance of our justification attained at once, but by degrees, wherein we are to labor and to give diligence to make, as our election and calling, so also our justification more and more sure unto us. Neither is it given but once. For by committing of any crime or any grievous sin, by spiritual desertions, by the forcible temptations of Satan, this act of spiritual faith, which we call assurance, may be interrupted or lost for a time; and yet by repentance, by prayer and practice of piety it may be recovered again, and therefore not given but once.

To the former indeed it may be applied in both parts, but with a twofold caution: first, in respect of simul, at once, if it be understood as excluding degrees, and not continuance. Namely, that we are not justified by degrees, and as it were by little and little, as though our justification were not perfect at the first. For no sooner does a man truly believe in Christ, but the righteousness of Christ is imputed to him, and in and by that righteousness he stands righteous before God, as well at the first, as at the last; that righteousness of Christ by which he is justified, whether first or last, being most perfect.

Therefore the righteousness of justification cannot be increased, neither does our justification before God admit degrees, either in one and the same person, or yet in diverse men: howsoever the assurance of justification, and the work of sanctification, whereby we are to be renewed in the inner man day by day have degrees, according to the degrees of our faith, and according to the measure of grace received.

Secondly, when it is said that we are justified before God semel, but once, that also may be admitted, if by once be meant one continual act. For as we are regenerated but once, because ut semel nascimur, ita semel renascimur, [‘as we have been born once, so we have been reborn once,’] so faith, which is wrought in our regeneration is given but once. For that which saint Jude says, verse 3, of faith once given, is no less true of the habit [abiding principle] than of the doctrine of faith; which habit, being once had, is never utterly lost. For all they who have true faith, are born of God, 1 Jn. 5:1; Jn. 1:12-13. And those who are once born of God are never unborn again; but being made sons by faith, as all the faithful are, Gal. 3:26, they are also made heirs of God and coheirs with Christ, Rom. 8:17. As faith therefore is never utterly lost, no more is justification. For so long as we have faith, so long we are justified. But the habit of faith we never lose, though perhaps some act of faith may sometimes be interrupted. Therefore our justification is but one continued act, and in that sense we are justified but once.

§VIII. Now whereas we have defined and defended according to the Scriptures that justification is an action of God, and such an action as is without us and a continued act: hence we may conclude against the Papists:

First, that neither their first, nor second justification is that justification which is taught in the Scriptures… Not, that we deny, that inherent righteousness is by practice of good works increased; but that we hold that justification is not our own act, neither that we are justified by any righteousness inherent in ourselves, or performed by ourselves, nor that the righteousness of justification (which is indeed the righteousness of Christ) can be increased, and therefore no degrees of justification.
…

Thirdly, they do not hold justification to be one continued act from our vocation to our glorification, but such an act as may not only be interrupted oftentimes and lost for a time, as they say it is, by every mortal sin and again be renewed so oft as they go to shrift; but also that it may totally and finally be lost. Which error I have confuted at large in my treatise of Perseverance.”

ch. 6, ‘Of the Object of Justifying Faith,’ pp. 363-64

“Again justification or imputation of righteousness is actus continuus [‘a continued act’], which is not to be restrained to the instant of our first conversion and justification, but continued to them that believe. And therefore so long as they have faith, God imputes righteousness unto them.”

ch. 10, ‘Bellarmine’s Arguments…’, p. 391

“Neither does faith justify as the beginning of justification only: first, because there are no degrees of justification before God; for in the first act it is perfect: and to that act continued throughout this life, faith, as I showed before out of diverse of the Fathers, suffices. I say, suffices to justification: and therefore is not the beginning only, but also the continuance and consummation thereof: for as in the first act it justifies, so also in the continuance of justification: for by it we stand, and by it we live, and so long as we have faith, it is imputed unto us for righteousness even from faith to faith, as it was to Abraham, after he had long continued in the faith.”

ch. 2, ‘That we are not justified by works’, pp. 446-47

“4. The Holy Ghost speaks generally of all men, whether regenerate or unregenerate, and of all works, whether going before faith or following it, that a man, that is, every one, who is justified, is justified by faith without the works of the law, Rom. 3:28, that a man is not justified (that is, that no man is justified) by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, for by the works of the Law no flesh, that is, as the Psalmist speaks, no man living shall be justified, Gal. 2:16.

For as in the first act of justification we are justified by faith without respect of works, so our justification is continued unto us without respect of our works. And this appears most plainly in the examples of Abraham, of Job, of David, of Paul, etc. as I showed before, who, though they abounded with good works which they wrought by faith, yet were not justified by them, but by faith only.

For that which Chrysostom says of Abraham is also verified of all the godly: for, says he, that a man having not works should be justified by faith, it is no unlikely thing: [Greek], but this, that a man flourishing in good works, should not thereby be justified, but by faith, it was wonderful, and very much sets forth the force of faith.”

ch. 3, ‘Bellarmine’s answers… refuted’, p. 451

“§IV. For first, whereas justification before God is but one, wherein the Lord by imputation of Christ’s righteousness to a believing sinner does absolve him from his sins and also accepts of him as righteous in Christ, not only in the first moment of justification, wherein being a sinner in himself he was first constituted righteous in Christ: but also in the continuance of justification, wherein the believer being still a sinner in himself, is continued in the favor of God by the merits and intercession of Christ: and though a sinner in himself, yet believing in Him that justifies a sinner, is made the righteousness of God in Christ.”

Maccovius, John

Scholastic Discourse: The Distinctions & Rules of Theology & Philosophy (1644)

ch. 13, ‘On Justification’, pp. 231-37

“1. Active justification differs from passive justification.

In Latin, the nouns ending in –io are generally interpreted in this way [as active and passive]. God justifies and we are justified.

2. Passive justification is later than faith.

Passive justification follows after passive faith, because it is through faith that we receive the remission of sins, Act 26:18.

…
5. Our justification is not by degrees.

For the sins of all of us are cast upon Christ, at the same time and once and for all. But this only applies to active justification; for passive justification happens so often as man is repenting his sins and seizes the remission of sins by means of faith.

6. In the Lord’s Prayer, when we ask for the forgiveness of sins, we do not ask for the act of forgiving but for its application and its awareness.

Theologians discuss this question by asking: if our sins are remitted by one single act, for what reason, then, do we still ask for the remission of sins in the Lord’s Prayer? Answer: we only ask for the application and awareness of it, and not for the act itself.

…
9. Actual faith does justify, habitual faith does not.

The Holy Spirit testifies in Act 26,18: ‘By faith we receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among those who are sanctified.’

Objection: faith ceases in someone who sleeps. Therefore justification will cease too. Answer: No, for in justification faith is a moral act and it is not necessary that a moral act continues, but it suffices that it has happened or happens one time.

10. In the faithful justification will never be abolished, but the awareness of it sometimes disappears, as happens in temptations.

Often one reads in Holy Scripture that the faithful are so terrified that they think that God has abandoned them, i.e. they feel themselves devoid of the awareness of the grace of justification, which, however, ultimately, returns. For ‘God will not suffer his own to be tempted above they are able to bear’, 1 Cor. 10,13.

…
15. Justification is an act of God of such a kind that it can never be revoked.

I.e. someone who is once justified always remains justified. An objection is taken from Mt. 18:34 saying that God has withdrawn grace from someone to whom He had given it. Answer: it is not allowed to draw arguments from parables without keeping their scope in mind.”

ch. 14, ‘On Regeneration’, pp. 246-47 [translation has been emended]

“22. Regarding its first moment regeneration happens instantaneously.

Theologians are accustomed to distinguish regeneration from justification in this respect: namely, that regeneration is simlutaneously and at once whole, whereas justification is not simultaneously and at once whole.”

[XXII. Regeneratio quoad primum momentum fit in instanti.

Solent Theologi regenerationem à justificatione in eo distinguere, quod scilicet regeneratio sit simul et semel tota, justificatio non sit simul et semel tota.]

John Ball

A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace… (London: 1645), ch. 3, ‘Of the Covenant of Grace in General’, pp. 20-21

“Good works of all sorts are necessary to our continuance in the state of justification, and so to our final absolution, if God give opportunity: but they are not the cause of, but only a precedent qualification or condition to final forgiveness and eternal bliss.

If then, when we speak of the conditions of the Covenant of Grace, by condition we understand whatsoever is required on our part, as precedent, concomitant or subsequent to justification: repentance, faith and obedience are all conditions; but if by condition we understand what is required on our part as the cause of the good promised, though only instrumental, faith or belief in the promises of free mercy is the only condition…

Sincere, uniform and constant [obedience], though imperfect in measure and degree, and this is so necessary that without it there is no salvation to be expected. The Covenant of Grace calls for perfection, accepts sincerity, God in mercy pardoning the imperfections of our best performances. If perfection was rigidly exacted, no flesh could be saved: if not at all commanded, imperfection should not be sin, nor perfection to be labored after. The faith that is lively to embrace mercy is ever conjoined with an unfeigned purpose to walk in all well-pleasing, and the sincere performance of all holy obedience, as opportunity is offered, does ever attend that faith whereby we continually lay hold upon the promises once embraced.

Actual good works of all sorts (though not perfect in degree) are necessary to the continuance of actual justification, because faith can no longer lay faithful claim to the promises of life, than it does virtually or actually lead us forward in the way to Heaven. For:

‘If we say we have fellowship with God and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another,’ 1 Jn. 1:6-7.

This walking in the light as He is in the light is that qualification whereby we become immediately capable of Christ’s righteousness, or actual participants of his propitiation, which is the sole immediate cause of our justification, taken for remission of sins, or actual approbation with God. The truth of which doctrine St. John likewise ratifies in terms equivalent, in the words presently following: ‘and the blood of Christ cleanseth us’ (walking in the light as God is in the light) ‘from all sin.’ [v. 7]”

Daniel Rogers

Collections, or Brief Notes gathered out of Mr. Daniel Rogers’s Practical Catechism for Private Use… (London: 1648), pt. 2, article 2, 7th Branch, ‘Applying of Christ’s Merit’, p. 104

“The applying work of Christ’s merit is that solemn part of his mediation, for the sake whereof He forsook the earth, and was exalted… and sits at the right hand of God his Father, that by his intercession always made for his Church, He might apply to all the members the power of this satisfaction, that it might work faith in those that want it, and confirm it in those that have it.

Therefore He is called advocate, that the Church may enjoy the fruit of his death continually. And as the ends hereof are many, to wit… keep them in his love, to cover their daily offences, and continue their justification and acceptance…”

Friedrich Spanheim

‘Disputation on the Justification of Man before God’ in Disputationum Theologicarum Miscellaneorum Pars Prima (Geneva: Chouët, 1652), trans. AI by Roman Prestarri at Confessionally Reformed Theology

“One must, however, distinguish the benefit itself [of justification] and the right to it from the sense thereof: of the former, neither revocation nor interruption is given; of the latter, interruption is given, but also restoration, according to the decrements or increments of sanctification.”

Anthony Burgess

𝑉𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑒 𝐿𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠, Lecture 4

“A living faith justifies, not in its active state, but in its act of apprehending and laying hold upon Christ. On the other hand, faith’s second notable act is to purify and cleanse the heart and stir up other graces. In this sense, some learned individuals argue that good works are necessary to preserve a person in the state of justification, though they do not immediately contribute to that act.”

The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted & Vindicated, from the Errours of Papists, Arminians, Socinians & more especially Antinomians in 30 Lectures (London: Miller, 1651), pt. 1, Lecture 29, on Acts 3:19, pp. 256-58

“The observation is that a complete and full absolution from all sin is not enjoyed till the day of judgement. The believers have not a full discharge till then: we are in this life continually subject to new sins, and so to new guilt, whereby arise new fears, so that the soul has not a full rest from all, till that final absolution be pronounced at the Day of Judgment.

Before we show the grounds whereby it may appear that the remission of our sins is not fully completed till then: we must lay down some propositions by way of a grand work.

First, The Scripture not only in this privilege of remission of our sin, but in others also, makes the complement and fullness of them to be at the Day of Judgment. Redemption is the total sum, as it were, of all our mercies, and we are partakers of it in this life, Col. 1:14; Rom. 3:24. Yet the Scripture calls the Day of Judgment, when we shall rise out of our graves in a peculiar and eminent manner, the day of redemption, Eph. 1:7; 4:30, because at that day will be the utmost and last effects of our redemption.

Adoption, that also is a privilege we receive in this life; yea a learned man (Forbes in his book where he handles the order of God’s graces) makes adoption (as I take it) to be the first, and to go before justification; yet the apostle, Rom. 8:23, calls the last day, the day of adoption. Hence 1 Jn. 3.2, the apostle, though he says, ‘We are now the sons of God,’ yet he says ‘it doth not appear what we shall be,’ because the glory God at the Last Day will put upon us is so far transcendent and superlative to what now we are. Thus Mt. 19.28, the last day is also called the day of regeneration unto the people of God; yet in this life they partake of that grace, but because then is the full perfection and manifestation of it, therefore the Scripture calls it the day of regeneration. Even as the apostle, Acts 13:33, applies that passage of the psalm to Christ’s resurrection, ‘This day have I begotten thee,’ because then was such a solemn and public declaration that he was the Son of God. No marvel then, if the Scripture do also call the day of judgment a time when sins shall be blotted out, because then is the public absolution of the godly; and according to philosophy motions receive their names from the term to which they tend.

Secondly, howsoever justification be said to consist in pardon of sin, yet there is a great difference between the one and the other; for justification, besides the pardon of sin, does connote a state that the subject is put into, viz. a state of favour, being reconciled with God. Hence it is, that this state cannot be reiterated often, no more than a wife after that first entrance into the relation is frequently made a wife. In this sense, the Scripture always speaks of it, as connoting a state or condition the subject is put into, as well as a peculiar privilege vouchsafed to such.

It is true, there are indeed learned men, who think justification may be reiterated, as you heard, Peter Martyr and [Martin] Bucer. Others call it a continued action, as conservation. But although there is a continuance of justification, and the godly are preserved in that estate, yet we cannot say God does renew justification daily, as He does pardon of sin.

There are some that think the Scripture gives a ground for a second justification, or the continuing and increasing of it, and bring those places, Tit. 3:5-7; Rev. 22:11. The learned and excellent interpreter Ludovicus de Dieu, in ch. 8 of the Romans, verse 4, largely pleads for a twofold justification; the first he makes to be the imputing of Christ’s righteousness to us, received by faith, which is altogether perfect, and is the cause of pardon of sins: the second he makes an effect of the former, whereby through the grace of God regenerating, we are conformable unto that law in part, and are day by day more and more justified, and shall be fully so when perfection comes: of which justification he says these texts speak, Jm. 2:21, 24; Rev. 22:11; Mt. 11:37; 1 Kn. 8:32. This twofold justification he makes to differ toto coelo [by a whole heaven] from the Papists, whose first is founded upon the merit of congruity, the second upon the merit of condignity. But the discussing of this will be more proper in the other part, viz. of imputed righteousness.

Augustine seems to hold justification [to be] a frequent and continued act, bk. 2, Contra Julian, ch. 8. When we are heard in that prayer (‘Forgive us our sins’) we need (says he) such a remission daily, what progress soever we have made in our second justification. He speaks also of a justification hujus vitae [of this life], which he calls the lesser; and another plenam and perfect, full and perfect, which belongs to the state of glory, Tract 4 on John, Book on the Spirit & the Letter, last chapter. But the more exact handling of this will be in the place above-mentioned.

It seems more consonant to Scripture if we say that justification is a state we were once put into which is not repeated over and over as often as sin is forgiven; neither can it admit of increase or decrease, so that a man should be more or less justified; for even David while he was in that state of suspension, was not less justified, though the effects of justification were less upon him. It is true, in some sense learned men say justification may increase, viz. extensive, not intensive, as they express it, by way of extension, when more sins are pardoned, not intensively in its own nature. Even as the soul of a man in its information of the body admits of no increase intensively, but it does extensively, the more the parts of the body grow, the further does its information extend. But of these things more in their proper place.

Thirdly, howsoever an absolution shall be completed at the Day of Judgment, yet our justification shall not abide in such a way as it is in this life. Now our justification is by pardon of sin, and a righteousness without us imputed to us, which is instrumentally applied by faith; but this way shall then cease, for having perfect righteousness inherent in ourselves, we shall need no covering. It is true, the glory and honour of all this will redound upon Christ, and He shall not be the less glorified because He has then brought us to the full end of all his sufferings. I know some may doubt whether any righteousness but that which is infinite can please God, and therefore, as some think, the angels were accepted of God through Christ, though perfect; so it may be of the saints in heaven. But I see no ground for this. This seems to be undoubted, that the way of justification by faith in Christ arises because of our imperfection and sinfulness remaining in us, and therefore is justificatio viae, not patriae—’a justification’ of us ‘in our way,’ not when we come to ‘our home’.

Fourthly, although pardon of sin be completed at that great day, yet this is not to be understood as if God’s pardon of any sin were imperfect, and something of sin did still remain to be done away. No, those expressions of forgiveness of sin in the Scripture denote such a full and plenary pardon that a sin cannot be more remitted than it is. But because we commit new sins daily, and so need pardon daily, therefore it is that we are not completely pardoned till then. As also because the perfect pardon we have here shall then solemnly and publicly be declared to all the world.

These things thus premised, I come to show the grounds or particulars wherein our pardon of sin is thus completed.

And first, in our sense and feeling: for howsoever God pardon a sin perfectly, yet our faith which receives it is weak. This jewel is taken with a trembling and shaking hand. Hence it is that we have not full faith and confidence in our spirits. We may see this in David; though Nathan told him his sins were forgiven him, yet his faith was not so vigorous and powerful as wholly to apply this to his own soul, and therefore he had much anguish and trouble of heart afterwards. But now, at the last day, all these fears, diffidence and darkness will be quite removed out of our hearts. There shall be no more disturbance in our souls than there can be corruption in the highest heavens; we shall then have such a gourd as no worm can devour. Our souls shall not then know the meaning of sitting in darkness, and wanting God’s favour. There will then be no complaints, ‘Why has the Lord forsaken me?’ Well may God’s children be called upon to lift up their heads, when such a redemption draws nigh; and well may that day be called the times of refreshment, seeing the people of God are so often scorched with the fiery darts of Satan.

Secondly, pardon of sin will at that day be perfected. Because all the effects of pardon will then be accomplished and not so much as any scars remain, the wound will be so fully healed. Although God does fully pardon sin, yet the effects of this are delayed; many chastisements and sad afflictions are to be undergone: howsoever, death itself, and the corruption in the grave must seize upon justified persons; now these are the fruit of sin, and howsoever the sting of these be taken away, yet they are not wholly conquered till that Last Day. Then therefore may we justly say, sin is pardoned, when there shall be no more grave, no more death, no more corruption, but all shall be swallowed up in immortality and glory.

Thirdly, then, and not till then may we say remission of sins will be completed, because then shall no more iteration of pardon be. Here in this life, because the root of corruption abides in us, there are daily pullulant [sprouting] branches of sins, and so frequent guilt is contracted; whereby as we have daily sores, so we need daily plasters. It is with original corruption in us, as in that tree in Dan. 4:14-15; although the branches be cut off, yet the stump is still in the earth, and that sprouts out too fast by the temptations that are always by it. Hence it is that we always pray, ‘Forgive us our sins;’ and because of these failings the apostle, 2 Cor. 5:20, writes to, and exhorts the godly Corinthians, who were already reconciled to God, to be further reconciled to Him. But then this petition shall wholly cease; then there will be no serpent to sting us, nor will the eye of justifying faith to look upon the brazen serpent exalted be necessary any more. The Lord will not only wipe away the tear of worldly grief, but also of godly sorrow at that time. Then, and not till then, will it be true, that God sees no sin in his children. Then will the Church be without wrinkles, or any spot within her. In this respect it is, the Church of God prays so earnestly for the Bridegroom’s coming. For this it is they look for and hasten in their prayers that day.

Fourthly, at that day will pardon of sin only be completed, if you consider the nature of justification. For what is that, but an overcoming the accusing adversary, and clearing of us against every charge? Now this is most eminently and fully done in those last assizes. The Syriac word to justify is also to conquer and overcome, because when a man is justified, he overcomes all those bills and indictments which were brought in against him; now this is manifestly done in the Day of Judgment, when God shall before men and angels acquit and absolve his people: and if the apostle say in this life, Rom. 6:7, of a godly man dead in Christ, he is justified from his sins, in respect of sanctification, that sin does not conquer him, but he sin, how much more will this be true at that day, when all the guilt and filth of sin shall be totally removed? Oh what a glorious conquest will that be over sin, hell, and the devil, when the Judge of the whole world shall pronounce them free from all sin, and command them to enter into his glorious rest!”

The True Doctrine of Justification… (London: Underhill, 1654), pt. 2,

sermon 13, n.p.

“…this is not to be conceived in the way of some transient actions that pass away and leave not so much as a relative change. No, for when God does justify us at first, we are upon our believing put into a state and a fixed condition of peace with God. Thus the Scripture speaks of it as a state, like that of sanctification and glorification; so that while we are sleeping we are justified, because put into that estate, although we do not then actually believe.

The first act therefore of faith receiving Christ, in whom we are justified, is like the putting of one into a state of marriage, or of magistracy: Though the first act pass away, yet the relative change it has made continues always; We are not justified by the habit of faith, but by the act, and yet after the first act we stand justified, though we are not all the day long actually believing.

Its true, many learned divines say justification is a continued action, and it may be granted in this sense, that God does daily justify believers, even as He constantly preserves them in their natural being; but it is not true in this sense, as if we were put into a new state of justification every day. This is not only to make a first and a second justification, but a thousand justifications; remission of sins and imputation of Christ’s righteousness are reiterated; but justification besides these does connote a fixed estate of the justified person, which is but once, and the Mediator of the Covenant of grace does so firmly uphold this privilege, that there shall never be any total intercission of it, neither do ever any plenarily apostatize from this wonderful favor, that once received it.”

sermon 21, p. 204 on Gal. 3:11, ‘For the Just shall live by faith.’

“…the just man as long as he is in this world must live by faith, and that in the matter of justification as well as in other things.

A man in the progress of justification is justified still by faith as well as at first: Hence this text is again urged for continuance in justification, as well as the entrance thereunto, Rom. 1:17, where in the Gospel the righteousness of God is said to be revealed from faith to faith.”

sermon 27, ‘That the whole nature of justification is not comprehended in remission and forgiveness of sin’, p. 268

“Secondly, justification does connote a state and established condition of a man, and therefore is not frequently iterated, although it be continued. A man is not justified many times in a day, though sins be pardoned often in a day. It is true, God does continue to justify those that believe in Him, and if He should cease to do so, they would immediately fall into misery and guilt; but yet God does not renew or revive our justification, as if there were an interruption or intermission of it.

That justification does denote an estate is plain by comparing it with all the other privileges God vouchsafes his people: regeneration and vocation denote a state the person is put into, so does glorification. As therefore sanctification is one thing, and those auxiliary actings of God’s grace are another thing, so that though we may say such a man has new quickening grace every day, yet we cannot say he has a new regeneration; so it is here: though we may say that every day the believer, begging the pardon of his daily infirmities, has a new pardon, yet he has not a new justification, because this denominates the state of a man.

Neither can it be said that pardon of this sin or that sin puts a man into the state of God’s favor absolutely, but quoad hoc [so far as this]; the pardon of this or that sin does not make that universal righteousness of the person whereby he stands acquitted from all.

It is true, some learned men call this daily remission of sin justificatio particularis [a particular justification]; but we are now treating of that universal justification whereby the person of a believer stands acquitted and disobliged from the guilt of all his sins he has committed. And great is the comfort of a Christian in that his justification is a state of favor with God; for hence flow many other inestimable benefits and advantages, which the believer is to study out and improve.”

Thomas Manton

A Second Volume of Sermons… (London: Astwood, 1684), Sermons on Rom. 8, Sermon 43, on Rom. 8:33

pp. 334-35

“…once vile sinners, now washed, sanctified and justified: as soon as they believe, they are put into a state of acceptation [Greek], that is, justifying, He continues to justify them unto the death, and He keeps them in that estate wherein they have exemption from the punishment of sin and a right to eternal life…

All these things concur to our justification and do not contradict, but imply one another: The first moving cause of all is grace; the meritorious cause, is Christ’s blood: the means of applying, or the condition on our part upon which we are capable at first of receiving so great a privilege, is faith: and the means of continuing in our justified estate, is by good works, or new obedience.

I say, our first actual pardon, justification, and right to life, is given upon condition of our first faith and repentance; but this estate is continued to us both by faith, Rom. 1:17 and new obedience; these fairly accord. The grace of God will do nothing without the intervention of Christ’s merits; and Christ’s merits do not profit us ’till it be applied by faith; and sound believers will live in a course of new obedience.”

p. 336

“4. We are justified by works, and not by faith only; by which are meant the fruits of sanctification: for true faith and true holiness will show itself by good works; faith gives us the first right, but works continue it, for otherwise a course of sin would put us into a state of damnation again: therefore at the Last Judgment these are considered, Rev. 20:12, ‘And the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.’ Mt. 25:35-36:

‘For I was an hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye cloathed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.’

Faith is our consent, but obedience verifies it, or is our performance of what we consented unto; the one as covenant-making, the other as covenant-keeping; we are admitted by covenant-making, but continued in our privileges by covenant-keeping, Ps. 25:10, ‘All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his Covenant.’”

John Owen

The Doctrine of the Saints’ Perseverance, Explained & Confirmed... (London, 1654), ch. 5, pp. 118-120

“4. That the promises concerning perseverance (as has been often intimated) are of two sorts. The first, of the continuance of the favor of God to us, which respects our justification. The other, of the continuance of our obedience unto God, which respects our sanctification…
…

2. For those of the first sort, which I shall now handle… I shall propose only some few things unto consideration…
…

2. That these promises of God do not properly, and as to their original rise, depend on any conditions in believers or by them to be fulfilled, but are the fountains and springs of all conditions whatever that are required to be in them or expected from them; though the grace and obedience of believers are often mentioned in them, as the means, whereby they are carried on according to the appointment of God unto the enjoyment (or continued in it) of what is promised.”

The Doctrine of Justification by Faith… (London: Boulter, 1677), ch. 5, p. 208-10

“But if it be inquired what it is whereby we immediately concur in a way of duty unto the continuation of our justified estate, that is, the pardon of our sins and acceptance with God, we say it is such [faith] alone. ‘For the just shall live by faith,’ Rom. 1.17. And as the apostle applies this divine testimony to prove our first or absolute justification to be by faith alone, so does he also apply it unto the continuation of our justification, as that which is by the same means only, Heb. 10:38-39,

‘Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them that draw back unto perdition: but of them that believe, unto the saving of the soul.’

The drawing back to perdition includes the loss of a justified estate really so or in profession. In opposition thereunto the apostle places believing unto the saving of the soul; that is, unto the continuation of justification unto the end. And herein it is, that the just live by faith, and the loss of this life can only be by unbelief.

‘So the life which we now live in the flesh, is by the faith of the Son of God, who loved us and gave Himself for us,’ Gal. 2:20.

The life which we now lead in the flesh is the continuation of our justification, a life of righteousness and acceptation with God, in opposition unto a life by the works of the Law, as the next words declare, v. 21,

‘I do not frustrate the Grace of God; for if righteousness came by the Law, then is Christ dead in vain; and this life is by faith in Christ as He loved us, and gave Himself for us, that is, as he was a propitiation for our sins.’

This then is the only way, means and cause on our part of the preservation of this life, of the continuance of our justification; and herein are we kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation [1 Pet. 1:5].
…

…the apostle gives us another account hereof; Rom. 5:1-3. For he distinguishes three things: our access into the grace of God, (2) our standing in that grace, (3) our glorying in that station against all opposition. By the first he expresses our absolute justification. By the second our continuation in the state whereinto we are admitted thereby; and by the third, the assurance of that continuation, notwithstanding all the oppositions we meet withal. And all these he ascribes equally unto faith, without the intermixture of any other cause or condition. And other places express to the same purpose might be pleaded.

3. The examples of them that did believe and were justified which are recorded in the Scripture, do all bear witness unto the same truth. The continuation of the justification of Abraham before God is declared to have been by faith only, Rom. 4:3. For the instance of his justification given by the apostle from Gen. 15:6 was long after he was justified absolutely. And if our first justification and the continuation of it, did not depend absolutely on the same cause, the instance of the one could not be produced for a proof, of the way and means of the other, as here they are.

And David when a justified believer, not only places the blessedness of man in the free remission of sins, in opposition unto his own works in general, Rom. 4:6-7, but in his own particular case, ascribes the continuation of his justification and acceptation before God, unto grace, mercy, and forgiveness alone, which are no otherwise received but by faith, Ps. 130:3-5; 143:2.

All other works and duties of obedience do accompany faith in the continuation of our justified estate as necessary effects and fruits of it, but not as causes, means, or conditions whereon that effect is suspended. It is patient waiting by faith, that brings in the full accomplishment of the promises, Heb. 6:12, 16… And the continuation of our justification depends solely on the same causes with our justification itself.”

Peter van Mastricht

Theoretical Practical Theology (2nd ed. 1698; RHB), vol. 5, pt. 1, bk. 6, ch. 6, ‘The Justification of those to be Redeemed’, p. 125 See also Mastricht’s teaching under the ‘Unity of Justification’ section below.

“(2) “He that is just, let him be justified still” (Rev. 22:11). I respond, That is to say, He that is justified, let him continue to declare himself justified, or, He who has been justified with respect to the first constitution of justification, let him, by renewing faith, act such that his justification may be continued.”

1700’s

Campegius Vitringa

The Fundamentals of Sacred Theology Pre (d. 1722; RHB, 2024), ch. 21, ‘Justification…’, p. 186

“779. Now besides this justification of the sinner which has its place in the first conversion of the sinner to God and which is renewed so long as he repents (for the faithful life is the continual exercise of faith), he is also given a justification of the just which is by works, which James discusses.

780. By this we understand the declaration of God with respect to the accusation of Satan, since in the regenerated sinner are true, colored, and indubitable signs and proofs of true faith which are pleasing to Him, and which are required among the heirs of the goods of grace.

781. This second justification is necessarily connected with the first (it is necessary to distinguish this from the variation of the Papists) so that it cannot be separated from it for any reason.”

The Relation of the Continuance of Justification to Works

Article

1600’s

Davenant, John – section 6 in ch. 31, ‘Of the Necessity of Works to Salvation, or Justification’ in A Treatise on Justification: or The Disputatio de justitia habituali et actuali…, vol. 1 trans. Josiah Allport (d. 1641; London: Hamilton, 1844/1846), pp. 300-2

Davenant argues that “Good works are necessary for retaining and preserving a state of justification, not as causes, which by themselves effect or merit this preservation, but as means or conditions…” though they may be:

“smothered and overlaid as it were, for a time… but these acts do not properly and of themselves preserve the life of grace by securing the effect itself of preservation; but indirectly and incidentally by excluding and removing the cause of destruction.”

Quotes

Anthony Burgess

The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted & Vindicated… (London, 1654)

sermon 12, p. 118

“For though holy works do not justify, yet by them a man is continued in a state and condition of justification: so that did not the Covenant of Grace interpose, gross and wicked ways would cut off our justification and put us in a state of condemnation.”

sermon 20, p. 191

“Hence the Scripture always attributes our justification to the free grace of God, diligently excluding any works we can do; and certainly if in the continuance of our justification, that be always retained by mere grace, so that no works of ours, though regenerated, and endowed with an heavenly principle within, are causal of it…”

sermon 24, p. 229-31

“A fifth argument is that which so much sounds in all books: If good works be the effect and fruit of our justification, then they cannot be conditions, or causa sine qua non [a cause without which: nothing] of our justification.

The consequence is clear, because such a supposed condition, or causa sine qua non, must be antecedent, and going before. Now the Orthodox bring Augustine’s known position, which also may be made good out of Scripture, Bona opera non praecedunt justificandum, sed sequuntur justificatum [‘Good works do not precede being justified, but follow having been justified’]; and another to that sense is quoted out of Gregory: Non per opera venitur ad fidem, sed per fidem ad opera [‘not through works is one come to faith, but through faith to works’], faith must go before works. Till we are justified, we are not able to do anything that is good…

Seeing therefore that justification is antecedent to a holy life, good works cannot be any condition of it; and by this we may see that more things are required to our salvation than to our justification; to the possession of heaven and [versus] the entitling us thereunto. For justification does entitle and interest us in that eternal inheritance which is performed by faith; but to be made actual partakers of everlasting happiness, good works are the way to that Kingdom, not the cause of it. Therefore none contend more then the Orthodox writers for the necessity of good works, and that in respect of salvation; yet in respect of our justification, then the Scripture calls them a menstruous rag and such as are utterly unworthy.

It’s true that justification cannot be continued in a man unless he continue in good works, yet for all that they are not conditions of his justification: they are qualifications and determinations of the subject who is justified, but no conditions of his justification. As in the generation of man, though there be organical dispositions and qualifications for the soul, yet they have no causality upon the soul, but that is immediately infused by God.

Its a thousand times affirmed by our divines, many things are required to the constitution of some subject, which yet are not either causes or conditions of such and such an effect: Light is necessarily required and dryness as qualities in fire, yet it burns as it’s hot, not as light or dry. To the integral being of a man are required his head and shoulders, so that the eye could not see if not seated there; yet a man’s shoulders are not the causa sine qua non of his seeing. Many things are necessarily conjoined together, and yet one is not the condition of the others’ effect. So that this doctrine does not exclude, but [does] command holy works, only it gives faith and works their proper place.”

John Owen

The Doctrine of Justification by Faith… (London: Boulter, 1677)

p. 34

“(2) Works required by the Law are either wrought before faith, without the aid of grace; or after believing, by the help of the Holy Ghost. The former are excluded from our justification, but not the latter.

(3) Works of Obedience wrought after grace received, may be considered either as sincere only, or absolutely perfect according to what was originally required in the Covenant of Works. Those of the latter sort are excluded from any place in our justification, but not those of the former.
…

(5) Justification may be considered either as to its beginning or as unto its continuation, and so it has diverse causes under these diverse respects.

(6) Works may be considered either as meritorious ex condigno, so as their merit should arise from their own intrinsic worth, or ex congruo only with respect unto the Covenant and promise of God. Those of the first sort are excluded at least from the first justification; the latter may have place both in the first and second.

(7) Moral causes may be of many sorts; preparatory, dispository, meritorious, conditionally efficient, or only sine quibus non [without which nothing]. And we must diligently inquire in what sense, under the notion of what cause or causes, our works are excluded from our justification and under what notions they are necessary thereunto. And there is no one of these distinctions but it needs many more to explain it, which accordingly are made use of by learned men.”

p. 198

“And it is inquired what it is whereon their continuation in this state does on their part depend; or what is required of them that they may be justified unto the end. And this as some say is not faith alone, but also the works of sincere obedience. And none can deny but that they are required of all them that are justified, whilst they continue in a state of justification on this side glory…

…that which was the necessity of owning a personal obedience in justified persons, is on all hands absolutely agreed…”

pp. 207-11

“There is no grace, no duty, for the substance of them, nor for the manner of their performance, that are required either by the Law or the gospel, but they [justified persons] are obliged unto them. Where they are omitted, we acknowledge that the guilt of sin is contracted, and that attended with such aggravations, as some will not own or allow to be confessed unto God Himself.

Hence in particular the faith and grace of believers, do constantly and deeply exercise themselves in godly sorrow, repentance, humiliation for sin, and confession of it before God, upon their apprehensions of its guilt. And these duties are so far necessary unto the continuation of our justification as that a justified estate cannot consist with the sins and vices that are opposite unto them. So the apostle affirms, that if we live after the flesh, we shall die, Rom. 8:13.

He that does not carefully avoid falling into the fire or water, or other things immediately destructive of life natural, cannot live. But these are not the things whereon life does depend. Nor have the best of our duties any other respect unto the continuation of our justification, but only as in them we are preserved from those things which are contrary unto it, and destructive of it.

If this be that which is intended in this position, the continuation of our justification depends on our own obedience and good works, or that our own obedience and good works are the condition of the continuation of our justification, namely that God does indispensably require good works and obedience in all that are justified, so that a justified estate is inconsistent with the neglect of them, it is readily granted, and I shall never contend with any about the way whereby they choose to express the conceptions of their minds.
…

All other works and duties of obedience do accompany faith in the continuation of our justified estate, as necessary effects and fruits of it, but not as causes, means, or conditions whereon that effect is suspended. It is patient waiting by faith that brings in the full accomplishment of the promises, Heb. 6:12, 16.”

On Daily Sin & Forgiveness upon Repentance

See also Westminster above. See also the 5th Petition, ‘Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors’ in ‘Expositions of the Lord’s Prayer’.

Order of

Bible Verses 5
Articles 6
Quotes 6+
Latin 1

Bible Verses

2 Sam. 12:13 “And David said unto Nathan, ‘I have sinned against the Lord.’ And Nathan said unto David, ‘The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.'”

Ps. 32:5 “I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin.”

Ps. 51:1-2, 7, 14 “Nathan the prophet came unto him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba… wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. Purge me with hyssop… Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God.”

Mt. 6:11-12, 14-15 “Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors… For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”

1 Jn. 1:9 “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness… And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and He is the propitiation for our sins;”

Articles

1600’s

Burroughs, Jeremiah –

Rutherford, Samuel – A Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist: Opening the Secrets of Familism & Antinomianism… (London: J.D., 1648), pt. 2

ch. 30, ‘The justified countable to God for sin’, p. 32
ch. 59, ‘How Justification is one indivisible act, not successive, as Sanctification, and yet God daily pardons sins’, pp. 104-6
ch. 60, ‘How sins are remitted before they be committed, how not, and the Antinomian error in this point’

Willard, Samuel – pp. 146-49, points 3-6 of pt. 2, doctrine 2, ‘Guilt apprehended, Distressing to God’s Children’ in The Truly Blessed Man, or the Way to be Happy here & forever, being the Substance of diverse Sermons preached on Psalm 32 (Boston, 1650)

Burgess, Anthony – Lecture 14 on Mt. 6:12 in The True Doctrine of Justification Asserted & Vindicated… (London, 1651), pp. 110-19

This is full and good.

Witsius, Herman – Concilatory, or Irenical Animadversions on the Controversies Agitated in Britain under the Unhappy Names of Antinomians & Neonomians trans. Thomas Bell (Glasgow, 1807)

ch. 12, ‘The Explication of Certain Paradoxes’, pp. 122-28

ch. 13, ‘Our Judgment concerning these Paradoxes’, pp. 129-44 For the most relevant parts, see sections 13-21, but especially section 18.

1700’s

à Brakel, Wilhelmus – ‘Justification: a Daily Occurrence,’ pp. 381-91 in The Christian’s Reasonable Service, vols. 2 ed. Joel Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (1700; RHB, 1992/1999) See also the larger context on justification, pp. 341-413.

à Brakel is not wholly recommended. See the notes under his name in the Articles section above.

Quotes

Order of

Rollock
Downame
Scudder
Ames
Burgess
Warren
Bridge
Owen

1500’s

Robert Rollock

‘Treatise on Justification’ tr. Aaron Denlinger & Noah Phillips MAJT 27 (2016), 1.4.2. ‘The Imputation of Righteousness’, pp. 108-9 Rollock (c. 1555-1599) was a Scottish minister.

“It is asked, moreover, whether or not we seek forgiveness of sins—that is, the first aspect of justification—from God on a daily basis? And if so, how can we say that justification is completed once and for all in this life?

I respond that when we pray for the remission of sins, we are not praying for that benefit as if it were not already given to us. Rather, we are praying for the increase of our faith, and for the application of that benefit which is ours through faith and faith’s increase.”

1600’s

George Downame

The Covenant of Grace or an Exposition upon Luke 1:73-75 (Dublin, 1631), ch. 5, pp. 290-91

“…those [who err] who imagine that a faithful and regenerate man, by committing any crime or grievous sin, does for a sin loose his faith and justification.

And of this first assertion there seem also to be two degrees. For when they say that a faithful man by committing a grievous sin does loose his faith, they mean either the act of faith only or the habit [the abiding principle of it] also. If the act only, which is [for the person] to believe [the] remission of [his] sin, and namely of that crime which he has committed, and whereof he has not as yet repented, we acknowledge that that act of faith when a man is fallen into a great sin is interrupted, until he rise again by repentance.

But here is their error in that they think, because the act of faith is interrupted, that therefore there is an intercession of justification and reconciliation with God, and a falling from the state of grace and salvation, into the fearful state of damnation. Unless for the qualifying of their opinion they shall say that they speak not of justification in foro caelesti, ‘in the court of heaven,’ but in foro conscientiae, ‘in the court of their conscience,’ and of falling for a time from the assurance of salvation into the guilt of damnation, which if they shall avouch, there shall not need to be any controversy betwixt us.

For we do confess that a man cannot be assured of the remission of any crime whilst he continues in it without repentance: and that howsoever there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus; yet a faithful man by committing any crime incurs the anger of God and provokes his judgments and not only deserves damnation, and is in himself guilty, or contracts the guilt of death, but many times also by the terror and trouble of his own conscience, aggravated partly by afflictions, partly by spiritual desertions and partly by the temptation of Satan, is, in his own opinion, in the state of damnation.

But if we will speak properly, justification is to be considered an act of God, for it is God that justifies, and such an act as depends upon his eternal counsel and proceed[s] from his grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times [before the foundation of the world]. For whom He elects, them He calls, and whom He calls according to his purpose, them and no other He justifies, and whom He justifies, them and all them He glorifies. This act of God, which from our effectual vocation is continued to our glorification, is not interrupted, though the act of faith, which is the apprehension of it, be interrupted.”

Henry Scudder

A Key of Heaven the Lord’s Prayer Opened & so Applied… (London, 1633), 5th Petition, pp. 424-32

“It must be diligently observed, that though justification be but one individual act in respect of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, in the first act of faith, and conversion of a sinner, whereby the person of a man stands justified before God, and shall, without intercision of justification and loss of this favor of God, stand before the barre of God’s tribunal, and is, and always shall be absolutely justified and acquitted from all sins past, present and to come, because all obligations and handwritings against him, are in that act cancelled and blotted out: he forgiving all trespasses, Col. 2:13-14. Yet it must be known, that of this act there is (as it were) a double sentence: First, in court of heaven, at which time the elect in Christ have their names enrolled in the book of God’s effectual calling, and are numbered among the just, which sentence can never be revoked or blotted out: this is that which was passed with God (that I may so speak, after the manner of men) in the first act of conversion.

Secondly, this sentence of forgiveness is passed in the court of the con∣science of him that had the former sentence pronounced for him in heaven. This sentence is the second act of the holy Ghost, wrought in this manner. First, after that a sinner is cōvinced of his guiltiness of sin, and of his damnable condition because of his sin, then forgiveness is offered, and pronounced to the ear in that gracious promise of salvation to all that believe in Christ Jesus, which promise is proclaimed in the ministry of the Gospel, in which light of the Gospel, he shows unto a man possibility of salvation, setting before him (I speak of men of years and understanding) Christ the means of salvation; and by this means the Holy Ghost works faith in Christ; then confession and grief for sin; then prayer to ask forgiveness; and grace to live godly, and then does witness to his spirit that he is accepted of God. Thus sentence is pronounced in the conscience: from whence arises sense of God’s love, which is called the shedding abroad of the love of God in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, Rom. 5:5, also sense of the loving countenance of God, which is the sign of his loving kindness, and is that speech of God, by which he does say to our souls, he is our salvation, and then arises in our hearts peace of conscience, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

This sentence of forgiveness unto the conscience has different degrees: it is sometimes more clear in the apprehension of the soul, sometimes more dim, yea sometimes quite blotted out in the counterpane of our release, or copy of our acquittance; as it was with David, Ps. 51, so that a person perfectly just before God, has sometime little or no sense or apprehension of it in his own conscience, but doubts whether he be in state of grace or no. Which happens because of the stain and guilt of new sins, which guilt abides in the conscience, until a man do confess his sins, repent, and ask forgiveness, and, by a renewed faith, apply forgiveness: by which means the evidence of his pardon is again by the Holy Ghost exemplified, and sentence by this new application is again pronounced in his conscience; whence arises new assurance of salvation, and renewed joy in the Holy Ghost.

This is that justification, which for distinction sake, Di∣vines call justification by parts, or continued, or repeated justi∣fication, or new application of one and the same justification: which justification though in respect of the sentence pro∣nounced in heaven, is one individual act, whereby a man standeth alwayes just before God; yet in respect of the pro∣nouncing of that sentence to the heart, it is not actually applied; neither can a particular sinne be said to be everie way actually forgiven, until after it have beene committed, is con∣fessed, and repented of; nor un∣till forgivenesse be asked, and until the holy Ghost hath made new application thereof unto the conscience, through renewing of faith, by which a man doth again and again, as new sins are committed, apply the merits of the blood of Christ unto his soul. Also it must be known that the sentence of pardon which is passed in heaven with God, is not fully executed until the last degree of it, when sentence of absolution shall be pronounced by Christ Jesus: Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, Matt. 25.34. It must moreover be conceived and held, that notwithstanding this distinction of justification between an absolute justification in respect of God, and a justification by parts in respect of application to mans conscience, there are not two kinds of justification, a first and a second, as the Papists hold: but one and the same justification, considered in different respects. In respect of God’s actual acceptation of a man’s person, justification is absolute; but in respect of the actual application and manifestation of God’s acceptation unto a mans conscience, justification is by parts and degrees. When a man already justified asks forgiveness, he doth not ask a new justification, but a second or new application of pardon unto the conscience of those particular sins which are daily committed, together with continuance of God’s favor, and more clear evidence that he is sealed up unto the day of redemption.

The third thing to be spoken of for the better understanding the word [forgive] concerns the effects following the apprehension thereof; these are peace of conscience, and joy in the holy Ghost.

These things touching justification and remission of sins being opened, we may under∣stand what is prayed for, when we say, Forgive sins. We pray… Secondly, we pray that ourselves and others being justified and accepted into favor, it would please the Lord to continue this his favor, and that he would signify and make the same known to our hearts and consciences daily, by a new testification of the holy Ghost, accompanied with a new application of pardon for new sins daily committed, and that we may have more and more assurance of our perfect redemption at the day of judgment; and that we may have peace of conscience, and joy in the Holy Ghost, in the meantime.”

William Ames

The Marrow of Theology (Baker, 1997), ch. 27, ‘Justification’, pp. 163-64

“20. Justification does not free from sin and death directly by taking away the blame or stain or all the effects of sin; rather it removes the guilty obligation to undergo eternal death. Rom. 8:1, 33-34, ‘There is no condemnation… Who shall lay anything to their charge?… who shall condemn?

21. Nor does it take away guilt so that the deserving of punishment is removed from sin. This cannot be taken away as long sin itself remains. But justification does take away guilt so that its haunting or deadly effects vanish.
…

23. Not only are past sins of justified persons remitted but also those to come, Num. 23:25. God sees no iniquity in Jacob or perverseness in Israel. Justification has left no place for condemnation. John 5:24, ‘He who believes has eternal life and shall not come into condemnation’ — justification gives eternal life surely and immediately. It also makes the whole remission obtained for us in Christ actually ours. Neither past or present sins can be altogether fully remitted unless sins to come are in some way remitted.

24. The difference is that past sins are remitted specifically and sins to come potentially. Past sins are remitted in themselves, sins to come in the subject or the person sinning.

25. Yet those who are justified need daily the forgiveness of sins. This is true because the continuance of grace is necessary to them; the consciousness and manifestation of forgiveness increases more and more as individual sins require it; and the execution of the sentence which is pronounced in justification may thus be carried out and completed.”

Maccovius, John

Scholastic Discourse: The Distinctions & Rules of Theology & Philosophy (1644), ch. 13, ‘On Justification’, p. 233

“5. Our justification is not by degrees.

6. In the Lord’s Prayer, when we ask for the forgiveness of sins, we do not ask for the act of forgiving but for its application and its awareness.

Anthony Burgess

The True Doctrine of Justification, Lecture 14.4

“The incarnation of Christ was once done and is not to be done again; but remission of sin is so done as that it is continually to be done for us, and the ultimate complete effect of it will then only be when sin shall be quite taken away, so that a total and full remission will be only at the Day of Judgment, as appears, Acts 3:19, ‘That your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come:’

Not but that every sin here forgiven is fully and perfectly forgiven, but because we renew sin daily, therefore there is need of a daily pardon: Away therefore with all such opinions as shall either plead such an inherent righteousness in the Pelagian way, or such an imputed righteousness in the Antinomian way that will overthrow this petition [in the Lord’s prayer] for forgiveness of sins.”

Thomas Warren

Unbelievers No Subjects of Justification, Nor of Mystical Union to Christ… (London, 1654), ch. 11, pp. 250-51

“…upon the first moment that a man believes he is justified, and all his sins-past are actually pardoned, his sins to come virtually, so that no following sin shall unjustify him; though it may take away his aptitude for heaven, yet not his right: and though his sin may deserve damnation, and without actual repentance and faith he cannot be saved, yet grace shall be given to enable him to repent and believe, so that though there must be nova remissio [a new remission], yet there is not nova justificatio [a new justification]; though a new remission is needful, yet not a new justification; pardon of sin is a continued act, but our justification quoad statum [as far as the state] is done simul et semel, ‘once and for all’; this you know to be the Orthodox opinion…”

William Bridge

‘The Doctrine of Justification by Faith, Opened & Applied from Rom. 3:24-25…’ in Works (London: Tegg, 1845), vol. 5, pp. 384-89

“But believers sin greatly after they are in a justified state, and so stand in need of renewed pardon, from time to time.

That believers sin after they are in a justified state, sad experience, as well as God’s Word, does daily show; but the sins of those who are in a justified state come under another consideration, for their “persons are not under the law,” (or legal covenant) Rom. 6:14. They are in Christ, who is “the end of the law for righteousness, to every one that believeth,” Rom. 10:4. So that as believers have nothing to do with the law, so as to seek justification for their persons, by their obedience to the same; neither can the law, with its condemning power, reach them, so as to bring them into legal condemnation again: so that unless the covenant of grace be made void, the believer’s justified state remains, and he is no more under the law forever.

…
But if the saints are not under the law, or legal covenant, then it should seem from thence that they need no pardon of sin, and so ought not in their daily prayers to pray for the same: so where there is no law there is no transgression.

Though believers are not under the law, or legal covenant, yet it does not from thence follow that they stand in no need of daily pardon. Indeed, they stand not in need of such pardon as unbelievers stand in need of, they are under a legal condemnation, obnoxious to the curse, and stand in need of a change of their state, God being to them a God of terror. But if at any time they are, through grace, brought savingly to believe in Christ, then God, as a God of all grace, freely justifies them, by remitting of their sins, and imputing of Christ’s righteousness for their justification, and properly this is Scripture justification, Rom. 4:6, 8.

But believers standing in relation to God, as children to a tender-hearted Father, this alters the case quite, and shows a vast difference between the state of the one and of the other, the believer being “justified from all things,” Acts 13:39, and the unbeliever being “condemned already,” John 3:18. Now though God deal as a Judge with those that continue in their unbelief, yet He deals as a tender-hearted Father with all true believers. “Like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him: yea, he remembereth that we are dust,” Ps. 103:13-14. Now when the saints sin against a loving Father, then does God come forth with his fatherly corrections: “Then will I visit their transgressions with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes,” Ps. 89:32. And sometimes in a very sore manner; “Behold thou art wroth, for we have sinned,” Isa. 64:5. Indeed the sins of the saints shall not make void God’s covenant, therefore the prophet comes in the next words, saying, In those, that is, in thy mercies, is continuance, and we shall be saved; yet they highly provoke a tender-hearted Father by sinning against Him; and as often as the saints sin against their heavenly Father, in this their new covenant relation, so oft they stand in need of fatherly forgiveness.

Thus with holy David, who had sinned in the matter of Uriah, yet when brought to confess the same, “Nathan said unto David, The Lord hath put away thy sin, thou shalt not die,” 2 Sam. 12:13; for by God’s law adulterers ought to be put to death, Lev. 20:10. Now God remitting this temporal chastisement to David, is said to pardon, or put away his sin: and the Church cried out, Lam. 3:42, “We have transgressed and rebelled, thou hast not pardoned;” that is, their afflictions were not removed. And in this sense God oft lets sin lie on his otherwise justified children for some time unpardoned, and as often as He is pleased to remit these chastisements, so often He may be said to pardon his children; and as long as the saints sin against their God and Father in their new covenant relation, so long shall we need renewed pardon, which will be whilst we are in this world. And this should keep the saints at the throne of grace, daily begging of pardon, confessing of sin, bewailing of corrupt nature, and entreating a farther discovery of their covenant state.

Now in this respect, the saints daily need pardon of sin, and a more full discovery of their new covenant relation with God; so that it is not true in every respect, you see, to say all pardon is at once: but with respect to the justifying of our persons, in a proper sense, justification is but one constant, complete act of grace, admitting of no degrees, nor revocation, but remains firm for ever.

But if God correct his justified children for their sins, does it not dishonour the cross of Christ?

That God does correct his saints here for their sins, and not only from them, as some would have it, is most plain from the New, as well as from the Old Testament…

So that though God does not, as a judge, take vengeance on his justified children for their sins, yet as a loving Father He assuredly corrects them when they go astray. And certainly there can be no good argument drawn from the perfection of Christ’s satisfaction, to exempt believers from fatherly corrections here for their going astray. Nay, holy David looks on God’s corrective dispensations, as his keeping of covenant with him: “I know, O Lord, thy judgments are right (that is, thy corrections) and that them in faithfulness hast afflicted me,” Ps. 119:75.”

John Owen

The Doctrine of Justification by Faith… (London: Boulter, 1677)

“The Discourse of Albertus Pighius… shall be once again repeated, both for its Worth and Truth…:

‘…God therefore does justify us by his free grace or goodness wherewith he embraces us in Christ Jesus, when he clothes us with his innocency and righteousness as we are ingrafted into Him; for as that alone is true and perfect which only can endure in the sight of God, so that alone ought to be presented and pleaded for us before the divine tribunal, as the advocate of, or plea in our cause; resting hereon, we here obtain the daily pardon of sin; with whose purity being covered, our filth and the uncleanness of our imperfections are not imputed unto us, but are covered as if they were buried, that they may not come into the Jugdment of God; until the old man being destroyed and slain in us, divine Goodness receives us into peace with the second Adam.'”

ch. 5, pp. 202-3

“Hence in the first justification of believing sinners, all future sins are remitted as unto any actual obligation unto the curse of the Law, unless they should fall into such sins as should ipso facto, forfeit their justified estate, and transfer them from the Covenant of Grace, into the Covenant of Works, which we believe that God in his Faithfulness will preserve them from.

And although sin cannot be actually pardoned before it be actually committed, yet may the obligation unto the curse of the Law be virtually taken away from such sins in justified persons as are consistent with a justified estate, or the terms of the Covenant of Grace, antecedently unto their actual commission.

God at once in this sense forgives all their iniquities, and heals all their diseases, redeems their life from destruction, and crowns them with loving kindness and mercies, Ps. 103:2-3. Future sins are not so pardoned as that when they are committed they should be no sins, which cannot be, unless the commanding power of the Law be abrogated. But their respect unto the curse of the Law, or their power to oblige the justified person thereunto is taken away.

Still there abides the true nature of sin in every inconformity unto, or transgression of the Law in justified persons, which stands in need of daily actual pardon. For there is no man that lives and sins not, and if we say that we have no sin, we do but deceive our selves. None are more sensible of the guilt of sin, none are more troubled for it, none are more earnest in supplications for the pardon of it, than justified persons. For this is the effect of the sacrifice of Christ applied unto the souls of believers, as the apostle declares, Heb. 10:1-4, 10, 14, that it does take away conscience condemning the sinner for sin with respect unto the curse of the Law; but it does not take away conscience condemning sin in the sinner, which on all considerations of God and themselves, of the Law and the gospel, requires repentance on the part of the sinner, and actual pardon on the part of God.
…

…Now the first act of God in the imputation of righteousness cannot be repeated. And the actual pardon of sin after justification is an effect and consequent of that imputation of righteousness. If any man sin, there is a propitiation… Wherefore unto this actual pardon there is nothing required but the application of that righteousness which is the cause of it, and this is done by faith only.
…

What it is that, when a justified person is guilty of sin (as guilty he is more or less every day) and his conscience is pressed with a sense thereof, as that only thing which can endanger or intercept his justified estate, his favor with God, and title unto glory, he betakes himself unto, or ought so to do, for the continuance of his state, and pardon of his sins, what he pleads unto that purpose, and what is available thereunto….

And is it not of faith alone, which is that grace whereby they apply themselves unto the mercy or grace of God through the mediation of Christ? It is true that faith herein, works and acts itself in and by godly sorrow, repentance, humiliation, self-judging, and abhorrency, fervency in prayer and supplications with an humble waiting for an answer of peace from God, with engagements unto renewed obedience. But it is faith alone that makes applications unto grace in the blood of Christ for the continuation of our justified estate…

The Scripture expressly does declare this to be the only way of the continuation of our justification, 1 Jn. 2:1-2, ‘These things write I unto you that you sin not. And if any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous; and he is the propitiation for our sins.’ It is required of those that are justified that they sin not; it is their duty not to sin; but yet it is not so required of them as that if in anything they fail of their duty they should immediately lose the privilege of their justification. Wherefore on a supposition of sin, if any man sin, (as there is no man that lives and sins not) what way is prescribed for such persons to take, what are they to apply themselves unto, that their sin may be pardoned, and their acceptance with God continued; that is, for the continuation of their justification? The course in this case directed unto by the apostle is none other but the application of our souls by faith unto the Lord Christ, as our advocate with the Father, on the account of the propitiation that He has made for our sins. Under the consideration of this double act of his sacerdotal office, his oblation and intercession, He is the object of our faith in our absolute justification, and so He is as unto the continuation of it. So our whole progress in our justified estate in all the degrees of it is ascribed unto faith alone.”

Latin

1600’s

Tuckney, Anthony – ch. 13, ‘Past & Future Sins are Not Simultaneously Remitted’ in Theological Lectures, even Determinations of Various Momentous Question... (Amsterdam: Swart, 1679), pt. 2, p. 118-23

This section is commended by Witsius, Animadversions, pp. 136-37, section 12.

On the Oneness & Unity of Justification & its Aspects

See also ‘On a Twofold Justification’.

Order of

Note
Article 1
Quotes 6+

Note

Note that if a thing must necessarily be defined by at least its four Aristotelian causes (efficient, material, formal and end cause), then necessarily justification cannot be wholly defined by the instant God imputes Christ’s righteousness to the believer, but it must include in some respects all that which pertains to justification, that is, potentially, from eternity when it was decreed to how far it continues in eternity future.

Article

1600’s

Bedford, Thomas – ch. 4, ‘That justification is not transacted all at once, nor [is there] any pre-remission of sin before it be committed’ in An Examination of the Chief Points of Antinomianism… (London: Field, 1647), pp. 33-40

Bedford argues from Isa. 53:11, “By his knowledge shall my righteous Servant justify many,” that justification will have its culmination at Judgment Day, and in the process shows the unity of the various aspects of justification, past, ongoing and future. His discussion is very good. See his quote below.

Part of his argument is that future sins cannot be forgiven till they are committed (for until then one has not sinned), though the principle abides that they will be forgiven (this was a common reformed view). If so, then justification cannot be said to be complete and whole in all respects until Judgment Day.

Bedford and Ambrose (below) were sharing some notes, as they have some extended material that is verbatim the same.

Quotes

Order of

Rollock
Ames
Maccovius
Bedford
Ambrose
Mastricht

1500’s

Robert Rollock

‘Treatise on Justification’ tr. Aaron Denlinger & Noah Phillips MAJT 27 (2016), 1.4.2. ‘The Imputation of Righteousness’, pp. 108-9 Rollock (c. 1555-1599) was a Scottish minister.

“At this point it may be asked whether justification is perfectly completed in this life? Let me say in response to this, first of all, that God’s benefits to us in Christ fall into two categories. One category includes benefits that are not inherent in man, such as his eternal predestination, his justification, and his adoption. The other includes benefits that are inherent in man, such as his effectual calling and his glorification.

The benefits included in these two categories have this in common, that none of them—not predestination, not justification, not adoption, not effectual calling, not glorification—will be fully manifested and revealed until Christ’s own manifestation is full and perfect. Indeed, the revelation of these things in man has a beginning in the first manifestation of Christ Himself. Thus the apostle writes in Rom. 3:21, “but now the righteousness of God is revealed, etc.” But the revelation of them in believers is not yet full. Thus 1 Jn. 3:2: “We are already sons of God, but it has not yet appeared what we will be.”

But these two categories of benefits differ in this, that those which we have said do not inhere in man are perfected and summed up in this life itself. “We are already,” 1 Jn. 3:2 says, “sons of God.” We have then already been predestined. We have then already been justified. But those benefits which we have said do inhere in man are not completely perfected in this life, even if they have begun. From these considerations it is surely clear that justification is perfected and summed up in this present life, but is not fully manifested in the same.

The question remains whether Christ will in the future, on the day of judgment, justify those who have believed in this life? And if so, is it not true that justification is actually perfected in the life to come rather than in this life?

I respond that Christ will not, on that day of judgment, justify believers. He will, rather, declare on the basis of their works that they have believed and have been justified in this life. Indeed, the verb “justify” sometimes has the meaning of “declare justified.” James uses the word in this very sense when he speaks of the man who is justified according to his works.

It is asked, moreover, whether or not we seek forgiveness of sins—that is, the first aspect of justification—from God on a daily basis? And if so, how can we say that justification is completed once and for all in this life?

But justification, someone will say, is a judicial sentence of life. And life is not perfected until Christ’s second coming. Is it not the case, therefore, that justification itself will not be perfected until Christ’s second coming?

I respond that it is one thing for the judicial sentence of life to be complete, and another thing for life itself to be perfected. The sentence of life is surely complete already in this life, but life itself will not be perfected until Christ’s second coming. This argument, therefore, is fallacious and captious.”

1600’s

William Ames

The Marrow of Theology (Baker, 1997), ch. 27, ‘Justification’, p. 161

“5. The change, of course, has no degrees and is completed at one moment and in only one act. Yet, in manifestation, consciousness and effects, it has many degrees; therein lie justification and adoption.”

Maccovius, John

Scholastic Discourse: The Distinctions & Rules of Theology & Philosophy (1644), ch. 14, ‘On Regeneration’, pp. 246-47 [translation has been emended]

“22. Regarding its first moment regeneration happens instantaneously.

[XXII. Regeneratio quoad primum momentum fit in instanti.

Solent Theologi regenerationem à justificatione in eo distinguere, quod scilicet regeneratio sit simul et semel tota, justificatio non sit simul et semel tota.]

Thomas Bedford

An Examination of the Chief Points of Antinomianism… (London: Field, 1647), ch. 3, ‘A Brief Answer to the Arguments of H. D. by him brought to prove Justification before Faith, i.e. before the act of Believing’, pp. 32-33 Bedford and Ambrose were sharing some notes one way or the other.

“3. Actually, in himself is man said to be justified, when he has the possession of it: But this actual justification has its degrees of progression. The beginning thereof is laid in our first union and incorporation into Christ: The consummation of it is not till the Judge at the latter day has solemnly pronounced the sentence of final absolution, and so set us in full possession of entire remission. Between both these there is a progressive work of justification, by the constant actings of the Spirit applying the blood of Christ, by the hand of faith, to the quiet and comfort of the soul.

The first you may term initial justification, the latter perfective, and this between I would call progressive, it is the fruit of the first and the preludial assurance of the latter: This is wrought and sealed in the second sacrament [the Supper], as the former is in the first sacrament [baptism]: and both these branches of sacramental justification are to us the pre-assurance of that complemental and perfective justification; The sentence whereof puts an end to all fears, changing our faith and hope into fruition and full possession; even the first of these acts is not transacted without the seed and spirit of faith, much less the successive agitations, and progress of the work. Thus every way faith is considered as equal with, yea as foregoing the work of justification.”

Isaac Ambrose

Media: the Middle Things… (London: Field, 1649), ch. 1, 2. ‘First Privilege: Justification’, pp. 2-3 Bedford and Ambrose were sharing some notes one way or the other.

“…a man may be said to be justified either intentionally, or virtually, or actually; either in God, or in Christ, or in himself.

1. Intentionally in God in God’s purpose and decree: This is from all eternity, but this decree and intention does not put anything into a state of actual being, but in the fulness of time.

2. Virtually in Christ: And this is from the day of Christ’s passion, and in the virtue of his satisfaction; yet this intends no more but that satisfaction is made and remission purchased by the blood of Christ.

3. Actually in himself: When a man has the possession of justification, immediately after his union with the Lord Jesus Christ. Now this justification considered as it is a state of favor, a covenant state with God, which a man at his first believing is put into, is not reiterated, no more than a wife, after that first entrance into the relation, is frequently made a wife; yet the particular acts of pardon, and imputation of Christ’s righteousness, are continually by God communicated unto the believer. In this respect this actual justification (or particular acts of pardon) has its degrees of progression:

The beginning thereof is laid in our first union and incorporation into Christ; the consummation of it is not till the Judge at the latter day has solemnly pronounced the sentence of final absolution, and so set us in full possession of entire remission: Between both these, there is a progressive work of justification, by the constant actings of the Spirit, applying the blood of Christ by the hand of faith, to the quiet and comfort of the soul:

The first we may term initial justification, the second progressive, the last perfective; the second is the fruit of the first, and the preludial assurance of the last: The first is wrought and sealed in the first sacrament, the second is wrought and sealed in the second sacrament; and both these branches of sacramental justification, are to us the pre-assurance of that complemental and perfective justification, the sentence whereof puts an end to all fears, changing our faith and hope into fruition and full possession.

It has been commonly said by some of our best divines that justification is transacted in our first union and incorporation into Christ; at which time it is conceived that the pardon of all sin is sealed to the believer at once. But I fear the misunderstanding of this point (not untrue in itself, if not mistaken and misapprehended) has laid the ground upon which some build that unhappy structure which turns the grace of God into wantonness: who knows not that justification in the proper acceptation of the word, according to the Scripture phrase, is the act of a judge pronouncing a judicial sentence, wherein he absolves the person of the sinner from all sin and punishment due to him for sin, and that for the alone righteousness of the surety Christ freely imputed, and by faith received of him. And according to this, I suppose we shall not err from the truth, if we say:

1. That the main work of justification, is even as yet to us future, viz. at the great and last day of Judgment, when we shall receive a final quietus est, and discharge, and when God shall wipe away all tears from our eyes: And yet

2. That in our first union with Christ there is a work of justification, viz. actual imputation of Christ’s righteousness, and actual remission of what sin for the present the soul stands guilty of, at that time when it is first united to Christ. I dare not say that justification, quatenus [so far as] it comprehends imputation and remission of sin, is one individual act; or that all sins, past, present and to come are remitted to the believer at once; but this I say, that in our first union, all our sins past and present are actually pardoned; and this favor received is a pledge of assurance that in future also, by applying ourselves to Christ, we may and shall receive the forgiveness of our daily sins, and that at the Last Day we shall at once be absolved from all accusations and charges laid in against us; and that justification (besides those particular acts of pardon, and imputation of Christ’s righteousness) does connote a state that the subject at his first believing is put into, viz. a state of grace, and favor, and reconciliation with God for the imputed righteousness of Christ, without apostasy from it, either total or final.”

Edward Leigh

A System or Body of Divinity… (London, A.M., 1654), bk. 7, ch. 6. Of Justification, p. 515

“There are four set periods of justification:

First, in God’s purpose, which reaches as far as the eternal transactions between God and Christ, such as were set down in the Lamb’s book.

Secondly, when Christ did in the name and stead of sinners perform that which was the matter of their justification, but in neither of these periods was the soul translated out of the state of nature into the state of grace.

Thirdly, actually, at that moment when we come to own Christ as a Saviour by believing.

Fourthly, when the Spirit which translates the soul out of the state of nature into the state of grace, makes it known to the soul.

Others say there are five (as it were) periods or degrees of justification:

1. When the Lord passes a sentence of absolution on men at their first conversion, immediately upon their union with Christ, Acts 13:38-39.

2. He that is justified falls into daily transgressions, therefore there must be a daily imputation and application of the death of Christ, Jn. 13:10.

3. There is a high act of justification after great and eminent falls, though there be not an intercission, yet there is a sequestration, such cannot then plead their right. (A leper could not make use of his house, though he had a right to it.) David’s sin of adultery and murder made a great breach upon his justification, therefore he prays God, Ps. 51, to purge him with hyssop, to apply anew the blood of Christ.

4. There follows a certification, a sentence passed in the soul concerning man’s estate, 1 Jn. 5:9; Rom. 8:33.

5. Justification is never perfected till the Day of Judgment, Acts 3:19, then sentence is passed in open court before men and angels.”

Peter van Mastricht

Theoretical Practical Theology (2nd ed. 1698; RHB), vol. 5, pt. 1, bk. 6, ch. 6, ‘The Justification of those to be Redeemed’

pp. 121

“XIII… But, so that we may perceive this more easily and correctly, it must be maintained that:

(1) good works, simply, confer entirely nothing to obtain for us the right to eternal life, because that is the pure, unadulterated [Greek; charisma], gift, of God (Rom. 6:23), impetrated by only the righteousness of Christ; but at the same time

(2) their presence is required for many reasons, if not before all justification, at least with justification and after it.

Hence, three stages of justification should be diligently observed here, namely:

(1) Its constitution, wherein a person is first justified. Here is excluded not only the efficacy of good works to procure justification, but even their very presence, insofar as God justifies the sinner (Rom. 3:23) and the ungodly (Rom. 4:5).

(2) Its continuation. Here though no efficacy of good works is admitted for justification, yet their presence is required (Gal. 5:6). And in this sense perhaps, James denies that we are justified by faith alone, but requires works in addition (James 2:14, 17–18, 20–22, 24–26). Finally,

(3) Its consummation, wherein the right of eternal life conferred in the first stage and continued in the second is advanced also to its possession. Here, not only the presence of good works is required, but also some sort of efficacy of them, insofar at least as God does not will to confer the possession of eternal life, the right of which we already obtain by Christ’s merit alone, except, besides faith, with good works going before (Heb. 12:14; Matt. 7:21; 25:34–36; Rom. 2:7, 10).”

p. 124

“Justification is one, and immovable: That it is, and in what way
XVIII. The justification taught so far is certainly one, and only one,

first (1) by reason of the immutable divine decree (Gal. 3:8; Rom. 8:30), so that, just as all things are (Acts 15:18) so also the number of those to be justified, the abstract number as well as the concrete number, is known to him from eternity (2 Tim. 2:19), although from this eternal decree it ought not to be said that he justified actually from eternity (Gal. 3:8).

(2) By reason of Christ, on whom, as the common principle and head of those to be justified, God placed each and every sin of each and every elect person, once and for all (2 Cor. 5:19).

Finally, (3) also by reason of himself, insofar as after faith, once it is begun, it will continue without any interruption for eternity, nor will the sins of those once truly justified ever be actually revived again, although by succeeding sins they deserve to be revived (Ezek. 18:24).

Yet this is so by such a unity that consists in flux, insofar as to individual sins, as soon as they have been perpetrated, after particular faith and repentance, the satisfaction and merits of Christ must be applied individually. And for this reason, as we have already taught, it has its own stages:

(a) its beginning, which happens immediately after the first act of faith (John 3:16; 1:12);

(b) its continuation, which is accomplished through continued acts of believing and repenting, according to the repetition and renewal of sins (2 Sam. 12:13);

(c) its consummation, which will be accomplished before the tribunal as if by the living voice of the Judge (Matt. 25:34).

And so also each person once justified can be, from faith and repentance, by virtue of the unmoved promise of God, infallibly certain of his own justification (John 3:16; Acts 10:43), because God cannot lie (Titus 1:2; Heb. 6:17–18).”

p. 128

“XXII… (7) Protestants in common, in agreement with Augustine, think that good works do not precede the one to be justified, but follow the one who is justified, yet with the differences of stages observed, such that

for the first constitution of justification, besides faith, not even the presence of good works is necessary, just as for the first constitution of fleshly marriage nothing is required but a consent of the spouses, because God justifies the ungodly (Rom. 4:5);

then for its continuation their coexistence is required, just as for the continuation of marriage a coexistence of marriage duties is required, because faith working through love is required (Gal. 5:6);

and finally for the consummation (insofar as the possession of eternal life is pronounced), the preexistence of good works is also required for the possession of eternal life (Mt. 25:35).”

On the Continuation of Justification in Baxter’s Thought

Baxter is not always easy to understand, nor recommended in all of what he says, but some of his insights are truly good and helpful.

Quotes

1600’s

Richard Baxter

Aphorisms of Justification… (Hague, 1655), Guide to the Reader

“[You must distinguish:] 20. Betwixt pardon and justification conditional, which is an immediate effect of Christ’s death and resurrection, or rather of the making of the new Covenant. 2. And pardon and justification absolute, when we have performed all the conditions.

21. Betwixt conditional pardon and justification, which is only potential (such is that which immediately follows the enacting of the new Covenant to men before faith, or before they have sinned). 2. And conditional justification, which is actual, and of which the person has true possession, such is our justification after faith, till the Last Judgment, which is ours actually, but yet upon condition of perseverance in faith and sincere obedience.
…

25. Betwixt the accusation of the Law (from [which] Christ does justify believers). 2. And the accusation of the Gospel or new Covenant, for not performing its conditions at all (from which no man can be justified, and for which there is no sacrifice).
…

27. Betwixt our first possession of justification, which is upon our contract with Christ or mere faith. 2. And the confirmation, continuation and accomplishment of it (whose condition is also sincere obedience and perseverance).”

Richard Baxter’s Confession of his Faith… (London: 1655), ch. 10, sect. 3, pp. 322-23

“For as no man receives that general justification which discharges from the guilt of all foregoing sins, but on the concurrence of repentance, faith, a purpose of a new life, and other actions of the same kind; so no man retains a state free from guilt in respect of follow∣ing sins, but by means of the same actions of believing in God, calling on God, mortifying the flesh, daily repenting and sorrowing for sins daily committed.

The reason why all these are required on our part is this: Because these cannot be still absent, but their opposites will be present, which are contrary to the nature of a justified man—As therefore to the conservation of natural life it is necessarily required that a man carefully avoid fire, water, precipices, poisons and other things destructive to the health of the body; so to the conserving of spiritual life, it is necessarily required that a man avoid incredulity, impenitency and other things that are destructive and contrary to the salvation of souls; which cannot be avoided unless the opposite and contrary actions be exercised. And these actions do not conserve the life of grace properly and of themselves by touching the very effect of conservation, but improperly and by accident, by excluding and removing the cause of destruction.”

“But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.”

Lk. 22:32

“Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.”

Mt. 6:11-12

“Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.”

Heb. 10:38-39

Related Pages

Justification

Westminster Divines on Justification

Active Obedience of Christ

Eternal Justification

Works Against Bellarmine on Justification

Reformed Books Online

Free, Biblical, Reformed, Historic Books & Articles Online

On the Continuation of Justification