An underdeveloped distinction - Passive &. Active Justification

[Roman Prestarri]

X. The form of active justification we hold to be both the plenary remission of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ; nor do we hold that these phrases ought to be either equated or confounded. The form of passive justification we constitute in the apprehension and sense of both in subjects who are capable thereof.

XI. As therefore we seek the cause of active justification in the sole favour and grace of God — who imputes to us as our own that which was not ours, and in place of the legal mode of justifying admits an evangelical one, from a certain ineffable temperament of His justice and mercy — so the instrument of passive justification, one among the causes of its own order, we hold to be faith alone: not by the precision of its existence from other virtues, but only by its causality. Nor indeed do we regard it subjectively, whether dispositively, or habitually, or formally, or meritoriously — whether by reason of an internal dignity or an external acceptilation — but partly organically, by reason of its own act which it exercises, and partly objectively or correlatively, by reason of the object which by its act it has apprehended and applied to us. And this is what the Apostle designates when he describes justification by the phrases διὰ πίστεως [dia pisteōs, through faith], ἐκ πίστεως [ek pisteōs, out of faith], πίστει [pistei, by faith] — but never διὰ τὴν πίστιν [dia tēn pistin, on account of faith]; Rom. III.22, 25–26; V.1; and elsewhere throughout.

— Friedrich Spanheim, Disputationum Theologicarum Miscellaneorum Pars Prima (Genevae: Sumptibus Petri Chouët, 1652).

There is moreover another distinction begun to be cultivated by certain more recent writers: into active and passive, or into external and internal. The former is universal, extending itself to all who are to be saved, one in number, first made in paradise when, after the sad fall, a Mediator was given and promised; antecedent to all calling, regeneration, and faith—indeed, even to all existence of the justified, except for the protoplasts [first-formed, i.e., Adam and Eve]. Now this justification is really the same as the promise of grace and remission of sins through Christ, or as the pronouncement of the absolving sentence. The latter is particular, made as many times as there are persons to be saved, and consequent upon each one’s calling and faith.

— Gisbertus Voetius (c. 1589-1676), Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Quinta: In quâ praecipuè tractantur quaestiones ad primam Theologiae partem spectantes (Ultrajecti: Waesberge, 1669).

IV. We Orthodox therefore say that faith justifieth correlatively, that is, by way of an instrument, which apprehendeth and applieth to us the Evangelical righteousness constituted outside us in Christ. The reason for this opinion is that it is most evident from Scripture that we are absolved from the curse of the law and reputed just for and through Christ’s satisfaction alone, and received into favor. Since, therefore, the same effect is also attributed to faith, it followeth that faith justifieth only by way of an organ apprehending and applying Christ’s satisfaction to us. In the same sense, Paul saith faith is counted for righteousness, not because we are absolved from the curse of the law and reputed just for the dignity and perfection of faith, but because Christ’s righteousness, apprehended by faith, is imputed to us or accounted as ours. Yet among Evangelical theologians today, some may be found who deny that faith is a cause of justification, their reason being that otherwise justification would not be free but from us. Whence they wish justifying faith to be called so, not because it justifieth or precedeth justification, but because it is conferred on the justified and is posterior to justification, if not in time, at least in order. We judge nothing here to be innovated. We acknowledge faith as a cause of justification, not meritorious but instrumental, on the part of man apprehending the meritorious cause: for we are not justified save for the merit of Christ, which is not accounted ours unless apprehended by faith, nor are we absolved for it before we believe it to be destined for us. Whence, if not in time, at least in order, we judge faith prior to justification. Nor is there danger that justification be deemed not free in this way, for the instrument cannot confer merit, which is not from us but given by grace (Eph. 2:8). Thus, the hand apprehending offered alms hindereth not the alms and its enjoyment from being free, especially if the offerer’s grace also gave the hand. Others here distinguish between active justification, with respect to God justifying, and passive justification, with respect to man justified. Hence, they acknowledge faith as a passive, not active, instrument. Whence Trelcatius Junior, in his Institutes of Theology, Book 2, on justification, which we leave to its place. Otherwise, every transient action, with respect to the subject in which it terminates, hath the nature of passion. Whence there is some diversity among preachers. Thus also sanctification can be distinguished into active and passive. It must be distinguished here between the impetration and application of absolution: Impetration precedeth faith; with application, faith is conjoined as a cause with its effect. Actual justification consisteth more in application than in impetration, even if application cannot be where there is no impetration.

— Markus Friedrich Wendelin (c. 1584-1652), Christianae theologiae libri II (Hanau, 1634; 2nd ed, Amsterdam, 1657).

VI. It is considered either actively, in God; or passively, terminated and received by faith in man.

Trelcatius saith: Justification is taken either actively with respect to God, who justifieth; or passively, with respect to man, who is justified.

Maccovius saith: Active justification signifieth the absolution of God, whereby He absolveth the guilty man from guilt, because of the satisfaction of Christ, and reputeth him righteous, because of His righteousness imputed. That this differeth from passive justification appeareth first hence, that it is done by one indivisible act; but passive justification, which consisteth in the application of the righteousness of Christ, is not so, as when as often as we sin, we apply the righteousness of Christ unto ourselves. Hence also in the Lord’s Prayer we are commanded daily to pray that God would forgive us our sins. Second, that active precedeth faith, passive followeth, as that which is through faith; for through faith we receive the remission of sins, and a lot among the saints, Acts 26:18. And that active precedeth faith is proven:

1. Because every object is prior to its act, since this dependeth from that.
2. Because through the act of believing, as Paraeus teacheth in De Justificatione, Book 1, Chapter 10, page 257, the remission of sins is not effected, but received.
3. Because through the satisfaction of Christ we not only attain justification, but also faith itself, and repentance, that is, the circumcision of the heart; for God blesseth us with all spiritual blessings in Christ, Ephesians 1:3, even before faith and repentance the satisfaction of Christ is applied unto us, as that for which we attain effectual grace to believe in Christ and to do repentance. This same teacheth Daniel Tostanus, once the most learned theologian of the Academy of Heidelberg, in an epistle (the exemplar of which Lucius, professor of Basel, published) to Vorstius, whose words are these: “Thou confoundest, O Vorstius, the acquisition of justification and the very deletion of sin, which was made by the blood of Christ, with its application. Therefore, thou feignest to thyself a contradiction where there is no contradiction; for all the elect are justified in Christ, if thou respect His merit, even before they are born; and so before we believe, we were justified and redeemed in Christ; but afterward He giveth faith unto His elect, whereby they seek His righteousness in Christ alone.” Thus far Tostanus. Passive justification is that whereby one is absolved from guilt and is esteemed righteous, or rather the reception of absolution from guilt and of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. See Keckermann in Systema Theologicum and Trelcatius in Loci Communes.

Ames saith: The sentence of justification was:

1. As it were conceived in the mind of God, through the decree of justifying, Galatians 3:8, “The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith.”
2. It was pronounced in Christ our Head, now risen from the dead, 2 Corinthians 5:19, “To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them.”
3. It is virtually pronounced from that first relation which ariseth from ingenerate faith, Romans 8:1, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus.”
4. It is expressly pronounced through the Spirit of God testifying to our spirits our reconciliation with God, Romans 5:5, “And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” In this testimony of the Spirit, justification itself doth not so properly consist as the actual perception of it previously granted, through the act of faith as it were reflex.

Spanheim saith: We esteem the form of active justification to be both the plenary remission of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, nor do we think that these phrases are either to be equalized or confounded. We constitute the form of passive justification in the apprehension and sense of both in capable subjects.

— Johannes Hoornbeek (c. 1666), Institutiones Theologicae Ex Optimis Autoribus Concinatae (ex officinâ Francisci Moyardi, 1658).

XVII. Justification may be called either active or passive. Active justification is when God, as the supreme Judge, pronounceth the sentence of absolution for the merit of Christ, and declareth the same sentence unto our faith. Passive justification is the sense and joy, or peace, which we have through this absolution; though we perceive not this sense always in the same manner.

— Johannes Fridericus Alstein Braunius (c. 1708), Doctrina foederum, sive systema theologica didacticae et elencticae (Amstelodami , 1691).
Etc, Etc...
Such an important distinction yet so little spoken of or made use of in our discussions and treatments on this most worthy and important subject.

Of Active (External) and Passive (Internal) Justification

Genus: Of Justification In Specific See: Of Active (External) Justification Of Passive (Internal) Justification TABLE OF CONTENTS The ReformedThe 17th CenturyFrédéric Spanheim the Elder (c. 1600-16…

confessionallyreformed.wordpress.com