C Hodge on Guilt

[KMK]

Hodge explains that there are two senses to the word 'guilt'...

The word guilt, as has been repeatedly remarked, expresses the relation which sin bears to justice, or, as the older theologians said, to the penalty of the law. This relation, however, is twofold. First, that which is expressed by the words criminality and ill-desert, or demerit. This is inseparable from sin. It can belong to no one who is not personally a sinner, and it permanently attaches to all who have sinned. It is not removed by justification, much less by pardon. It cannot be transferred from one person to the other. But secondly, guilt means the obligation to satisfy justice. This may be removed by the satisfaction of justice personally or vicariously. It may be transferred from one person to another, or assumed by one person for another. When a man steals or commits any other offence to which a specific penalty is attached by the law of the land, if he submit to the penalty, his guilt in this latter sense is removed. It is not only proper that he should remain without further molestation by the state for that offence, but justice demands his exemption from any further punishment. Charles Hodge, "Systematic Theology", Vol II, pg. 476

Looking at both senses of the word we would say that a sinner who repents and has faith in Christ as his substitute remains a 'criminal' but God is no longer under any obligation to punish him. If I am reading Hodge correctly, Christ's atonement, in and of itself, does not change the fact that a sinner is a criminal.

What do you think?