The Law/Gospel Distinction and Justification
Nov 5, 2009
Francis Turretin's treatise on justification, taken from his famous work, Institutio, ought to be carefully read and studied by every Christian and pastor who is concerned to get the gospel right. Few, indeed, have given such precise and careful thought and clarity in regard to what Turretin calls "the principal foundation of our salvation" (p. 14).
Turretin’s clarity concerning the distinction between the law and gospel permeates his entire treatment of justification. His discussion is very instructive and provides a much-needed corrective for a great deal of contemporary Evangelical preaching and teaching, some of which has no idea that a law/gospel distinction even exists!
How then does the law/gospel distinction relate to the doctrine of justification?
The law/gospel distinction highlights two methods of justification. A man can be made just in two ways:
1. In himself, from the law, inherent, “Do this and Live”
2. Or, in another, from the gospel, imputed, “Believe and thou shalt be saved” (p. 10).
In other words, Turretin shows how the issue of inherent versus imputed righteousness rests upon the distinction between the law and gospel. In light of the law/gospel distinction, Turretin writes, “God therefore, makes him just whom he justifies; not in himself, as if from a sight of his inherent righteousness he declared him just, but from the view of the righteousness imputed- in Christ,” (p. 7).
This two-fold method of justification rests upon two covenants, the covenant of works and the covenant of grace (p. 10). He writes, “For as there are two covenants which God willed to make with men- the one legal and the other of grace- so also there is a twofold righteousness- legal and evangelical. Accordingly there is also a double justification or a double method of standing before God in judgment-legal and evangelical,” (pp. 9-10).
Each method of justification demands a perfect righteousness (p. 10). The legal method requires a man’s own perfect obedience and conformity to the law (Rom. 2:13; 10:15, inherent righteousness). The evangelical method (Rom. 1:16-17; Rom. 3:24; Phil. 3:9; Rom. 9:30-31) “admits the vicarious righteousness of a surety,” (imputed righteousness). The covenant of grace then is not founded upon inherent righteousness but rather upon the imputed righteousness of Christ. Thus, the evangelical method looks totally away from works of the law and by faith alone trusts in the righteousness of another, namely the righteousness of Christ (pp. 10-11).
When the law/gospel distinction is established, Turretin points out that the question in regard to the foundation of justification doesn’t concern legal justification. The law/gospel distinction demonstrates that inherent righteousness as the meritorious cause for justification is impossible and cannot be obtained by reason of the fact that the law has become weak by sin.
The question then is not whether inherent righteousness is infused into us through the grace of Christ (the orthodox are falsely charged that they do not allow for inherent righteousness, p. 11). The correct question is “whether that inherent righteousness enters into our justification, either as its cause or as a part, so that it constitutes some part of our justification and is the meritorious cause and foundation of our absolving sentence in the judgment of God,” (p. 11).
If justification were by inherent righteousness, justification would be based upon the law and not the gospel. However, the law and gospel are diametrically opposed to one another and the confounding of the two destroys the foundation for justification (p. 20).
Helpful and critical words of paramount importance to ponder and take to heart!
Comments