A letter to the Right Rev. Father in God, Richard, Lord Bishop of Oxford, on the tendency to Romanism imputed to doctrines held of old, as now, in the English Church : with a preface on the doctrine of justification

Preface

ON THE

DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION.

BY THE REV.

V

E. B. PUSEY, D.D.

LATE FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE; REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH.

FOURTH EDITION.

OXFORD: J. H. PARKER: J. a. F. & J. RIVINGTON, LONDON. 1840.

" To say that in nothing they may be followed which are of the Church of ' Rome, were violent and extreme. Some things they do in that they are men, in ' that they are wise men and Christian men some things, some things in that ' they are men misled and blinded with error. As far as they follow reason and ' truth, we fear not to tread the selfsame steps wherein they have gone, and ' be their followers. Where Rome keepeth that which is ancienter and better, ■ others whom we much more affect, leaving it for newer and changing it for ' worse ; we had rather follow the perfections of them whom we like not, than ' in defects resemble those whom we love."

Hooker, Book V. ch. xxviii. sect. 1.

" They which measure religion by dislike of the Church of Rome, think every ' man so much the more sound, by how much he can make the corruptions

' thereof to seem more large Wisdom therefore and skill is requisite to

' know, what parts are sound in that Church and what corrupted.

" Neither is it to all men apparent which complain of unsound parts, with ' what kind of unsoundness every such part is possessed. They can say, that ' in doctrine, in discipline, in prayers, in sacraments, the Church of Rome hath ' (as it hath indeed) very foul and gross corruptions ; the nature whereof, not- " withstanding, because they have not for the most part exact skill and know- ' ledge to discern, they think that amiss many times which is not ; and the salve ' of reformation they mightily call for, but where and what the sores are which ' need it, as they wot full little, so they think it not greatly material to search."

Hooker, Book IV. ch. viii. sect. 2.

GILBERT 8: RlVINQTON, Printers, St. John's Square, London.

PREFACE.

The interval of rather more than a year which has elapsed since the first publication of this Letter has, by God's mercy, had much effect in healing the distractions of our Church. Rumours, which were over-hastily believed, have died away ; testimony has been borne by persons unconnected with the individuals who were thought to be schismatics, that it is no new doctrine which they teach1 ; the very fact that things remain as they were, has a tendency to reassure men's minds; since it is ever the tendency of novelty and schismatical teaching, to develope itself further, and detach itself more from the doctrines of the Church ; stationariness is a proof of adherence to some fixed and definite standard.

They who hold these views have remained, on the whole, where they were, though they have been thoughtlessly branded with schismatical and party-names; though cast off by a portion of their brethren, and taught by the use of this separatist designation to sever themselves, and account themselves a distinct body, they have still no doctrine or practice

1 See e. g. Quarterly Review.

iv peculiar to themselves ; others also keep fast and feast, Ember days and Saints' days, Lent and Easter season ; others increase weekly prayers and Communions, and are thankful for God's gift in holy Baptism ; regard Confirmation and Ordination as means of grace ; prize the privilege of being members of a Church, and in her of the Communion of Saints ; acknowledge or demand obedience to her ; regard the Creeds as the deposits of the faith, and to be accepted without questioning, on authority, antecedent to proof; look to future judgment : the common, though partially forgotten, truths, and practices, and principles, which they advocated, have been taken up by others independently of them, nay, in some degree by those who oppose them ; -or what was before more timidly held, has been openly avowed ; and now after the lapse of seven years, since the Tracts for the Times made their first feeble appearance, there is less show of any thing distinctive, less by which they can be designated as a party, than there seemed to be at first. Catholic truth cannot be fettered clown by partydenominations, but bursts the bands with which the enemy would bind it, by its intrinsic expansiveness. Party-names will adhere to party-views, and attest their human origin. Catholic truth may be miscalled heresy ; but neither the infirmities of those who set it forth, nor the misconception of others, will stamp human superscription on that which is Divine.

Then, also, strife is no element for Christian life ; and so some, having discharged what they deemed

V their duty in combating what they held to be erroneous, have been pleased, we trust, to withdraw from conflict ; content to await the issue, "whether" of the twain " God will prosper, whether this or that." Readers have been wearied of controversy, and have been glad to turn back into greener and more wholesome pastures ; so that, although there is much in the disunion still existing, to humble ourselves, much in the condition and prospects of our Church to mingle sorrow and humiliation with joy, yet is there ground, in the restored prospect of peace, to acknowledge the good hand of our God here, as elsewhere, dealing mercifully with our Church, and aiding her within, while He suffers the storms from without to beat upon her, and attest, by her increased stedfastness amid their assaults, that she is indeed founded upon The Rock.

While, however, many subjects of suspicion have been abated or removed, the misgivings felt have perhaps concentrated themselves, the rather, in some minds upon a single point, and that the more on account of the difficulties which beset it, the doctrine of justification. With some writers, indeed, (such is the inherent tendency to forget, in the struggle, the character of the things contended for) it seems to be chiefly looked upon as the strong-hold in the system whose scripturalness they contend for : they seem to think that the apparent sense of the Articles and Homilies on this point is with them, as they admit the apparent meaning of the Liturgy to be with vi those who hold baptismal regeneration. They seem accordingly to adopt it, as the most favourable battlefield in behalf of a system, of whose truth and importance they are persuaded. But others there are, of a less controversial and more practical spirit, who may naturally be unsettled by doctrines aud views inconsistent with the theory of justification which has of late been popular ; such as baptismal regeneration, an universal judgment, the necessity of continual repentance, or that real holiness is to be sought for in this life. Taught to think that a clear view of the doctrine of justification is essential to being justified, they will naturally be the more alarmed at any doubt thrown over what they had been taught ; and while some seem to fear for others, these may not unnaturally be anxious for themselves, lest they should be robbed of a doctrine which has been the stay of their conscience, and their hope and pe^ce.

On both accounts, it may not be amiss then to take this opportunity of assisting (if it may be) to remove the misgivings thus raised, in the hope of tending to restore peace to the Church or to individuals. And as the elaborate work, in connection with or in the words of which the statements of this Letter were originally made was written at the suggestion of another, with the very object of removing these perplexities, it seems the more appropriate to connect what suggests itself, with its thoughtfulness.

The misgivings are not, indeed, connected with any

1 Mr. Newman's Lectures on Justification.

vii particular language, or theory, or statements of doctrine ; they are inherent in the subject itself, and the relation of faith to works in our final acceptance. All, indeed, are agreed on the one side, that the only intrinsically meritorious cause of our salvation is the atoning death of our redeeming Lord, embraced by faith ; all but the extreme Antinomian, that good works are essential to salvation; all, that every thing we are and have, our justification and sanctification, are the free gifts of God, not for our worthiness, but effacing our unworthiness ; all, that justification and sanctification are inseparable in act, that none can be justified without being sanctified, nor remain in a state of justification any longer than he continues to be sanctified ; all, that the sanctification even of God's great saints continues to be imperfect in this life, and that they have, even to the end, need of the prayer which the Lord taught us, " Forgive us our trespasses," as well for their actual and present daily short-comings and infirmities, as for their past offences; — and so, that, superadded to sanctification, purifying us within, there is need of continual remission, cleansing us from without; that, while God sanctifies the living members of His Son, and makes them more and more righteous, He also, by remitting sin, for Christ's sake, accounts them righteous, in so far as they are not so ; — all, that the best are but " unprofitable servants ;" all, that even God's best servants have need of His merciful judgment ; all, that He will bestow a different crown upon each in proportion to their faithfulness ; all, that this crown is His gift, (grace viii rewarding, upon grace sanctifying,) not their desert ; all, that although sanctification be necessary for our ultimate acceptance, yet to the end we may and must look, over and above, to God's mercy in Christ; that our hope of salvation rests not upon our sanctification, without an accompanying act of God's mercy, forgiving our trespasses. -

It would seem, then, that persons who indeed realize the majesty of God's holiness, the manifoldness of their own infirmities, the awful sacredness of His law, and the sinfulness of transgression, are agreed in the simple statements of the truth. Persons differ as to the formulae which they adopt, to combine these truths, more than as to the truths which they receive ; often, more than even as to the relative importance in which they practically estimate those truths, or the degree of depth with which they hold them. It may be, indeed, that individuals holding but imperfect views, choose the one or the other formula, as more expressing that side of the truth which they chiefly, or almost exclusively, hold ; that, e. (j. " good works are a condition of salvation," may have been a favourite formula with persons who had in a degree rationalized Christianity, and held indistinctly its leading doctrines ; or "justification by faith only" may be urged by many, who have inadequate notions of the necessity of sanctification, or its degree, or the zealousness, diligence, self-discipline, watch fulness, necessary to " maintain good works." It is also plain, that the exclusive or paramount use of the one or the other formula will have the ix tendency to narrow persons' perception of the truth, and cast their minds into a contracted mould ; and we ought to bear in mind not only the abstract soundness of our statement, but its tendency ; not only whether it may be justified, but the impression which it would popularly produce.

Still it has been admitted by moderate theologians, even of the reformed school, that the sounder writers in the Church of Rome itself, mean substantially the same as themselves even while they use expressions which more readily bear another meaning ; and no one can have read the account of the death-beds of pious Romanists, without perceiving that they put their trust and hope, not in the works which by God's grace they had performed, but in His mercy in Christ, blotting out their sins, pardoning their imperfections, accepting them in Him.

. Truth, then, as well as charity, require us to be very careful how we cast suspicion on others in this point, in which the Church Catholic has not authoritatively pronounced, lest we be found false witnesses against our brethren. Formulae, also, which are very valuable for opposing particular error, may not be sufficient for inculcating the whole truth ; they may express it upon one side only, they may require to be filled up by other teaching. Since God, by His Apostle St. James, gave us the way of speaking, "we are justified by works, and not by faith only2," to cocrect the impression which we might derive from

1 Le Blanc, Theses Theol. do just, inhaer. ; see also Mr. Newman, Justif. p. 413. 2 James ii. 24.

X that other way of speaking by St. Paul, " we are justified by faith, without the deeds of the law '," it were plainly a dangerous idolizing of a formula of our own, so to set up the statement, " we are justified by faith only," as to make it the exclusive test of all sound teaching, and not itself to be restrained from error by the teaching of St. James, as well as to restrain the error to which it was opposed. It is obviously a safeguard against the Romanist, not against the Antinomian or the fanatic ; it corrects self-confidence, not indolence. And it may be (as has been suggested) one end for which it pleases God to permit this discrepancy of statements within our Church, that, in the imperfect state in which we now are, we may mutually furnish correctives to the tendency of the other : and that as there are " diversities of gifts," so one shall be a teacher of repentance, diligence, earnestness, self-abasement ; another, of lively hope : one, of faith chiefly as issuing in works ; another, of works as proceeding from faith : one, of trust in our Lord as pardoning our misdeeds ; another, as enabling us by His indwelling Spirit to do deeds acceptable to Him ; and so on : that so, each supplying prominently what in another is less apparent, all may, by all together, be built up into " a perfect man ;" all " may be convinced of all, be judged of all."

It appears, then, to the writer, that some narrowness of view has occasioned most of the misgivings or objections raised, as though different doctrines, 1 Rom. iii. 28.

xi which have of late been more inculcated, were at variance with the doctrine of justification by faith. Thus, for some years, the doctrine of baptismal regeneration was held up as at variance with " justification by faith," and faith opposed to the " sacrament of faith," as though justification might not, upon faith, be imparted to us through the Sacrament. And to this the writer chiefly addressed himself in his Letter ; this having been the main difficulty which he had met with.

Not less objection has been made of late to the mention of works as connected with justification, though Holy Scripture expressly sanctions the strongest formula which can be used, " we are justified by works and not by faith only ;" or to " judgment according to works," although Holy Scripture inculcates it so fully and repeatedly, and in such variety of ways ; and as if it were not our duty to receive declarations of Holy Scripture, which we might not at any time be able to reconcile, assured that they cannot be contradictory, although they might appear so to many, doubting not that we shall see hereafter, if we will be content first to believe ; and presuming not to square the statements of Holy Scripture by the formula; which we have, however truly, derived from it, but rather doubting of the accuracy of our own understanding, than of the literal meaning of its plain words.

The difficulties the writer has chiefly met with are of two sorts, both of which require to be treated xii with respect or tenderness. 1. A dread, (chiefly for others,) lest the doctrine of the free grace of Almighty God in man's salvation should be obscured. 2. In a more humble and timid sort of Christians, lest a standard should be set up which they shall fall short of ; lest, if certain doctrines be true, their own repentance should not be of the right sort, their own righteousness be found wanting in the balance, and they themselves " not stand in the judgment." Yet, while we would speak of these especially, or any others whose fears are real, with deference, it may not, in a charitable faithfulness, be suppressed, that others there are (without judging who they are) to whom this is a strife of words ; who do not realize what they are speaking of ; who have learnt the doctrine of justification by faith without knowing what " faith" is ; who shrink from the close blending of sanctification with justification, because they are really unsanctified ; who argue vehemently against judgment by works, because they are conscious that " their" own " deeds are evil ;" against self-denying practices, because they are self-indulgent. It is forbidden to judge who these are, separately, one should hope of every one that he were not such ; yet no one can observe the dry, abstract, proud way in which these doctrines are often maintained or impugned, as it may be, (especially by anonymous or periodical writers,) without fearing that there is much eager disputing, where there is little appreciation of the truth disputed about, that many are contending xiii about the title-deeds of our inheritance without caring to enter into it and take possession of it. The same charity which requires that we should not judge individually, demands that this should be said generally, and that without casting a slur upon bodies of men ; yet, as suggesting to many to examine the more their own work, and "judge" themselves that they " be not judged of the Lord." Listlessness, indolence, lukewarmness, even sensuality, may be to be dreaded in connexion with elevated and excited feelings, and profession of trust in the merits of the Redeemer, as much as dependence upon self in those who inculcate good works. Both are contradictory, yet both may be, and have been, found together.

Both the classes of difficulties above alluded to, might be removed, the writer is persuaded, by a careful study of the work before referred to : here some hints may be given, which may aid to its better understanding, as wrell to the preliminary clearing up of those misgivings.

1. With regard to those who dread lest sanctification should be unduly mixed up with justification, their difficulties appear to have arisen chiefly from confounding the act of justification with the state of justification, (or, as our Catechism expresses it, of "salvation;") God's gracious act with our condition, God's "justifying" with our "being justified;" and, again, our condition upon our first entrance into that state with our subsequent continuance. For these xiv would obviously be distinct subjects of inquiry, and would require different answers, wherein justification consisted as God's act, (which is the remission of our sins) and wherein our continuing to be justified consists, which is in our being members of His Son, which we do remain through His Spirit dwelling in us.

2. It is plain that difficult qualities are in part required in us, for the first acceptance of justification and for continuance in it ; i. e. more is required of us for the last than for the first. For the first, God justifies us, being ungodly, and we have but to accept the pardon which He offers, renouncing the past, accepting the present, looking to the future ; it is simple acceptance of a gift from without. Subsequently, we have equally nothing of our own (for all is of God), but it must now be no longer something without, but within, us ; the power and the will to use God's Gift, and the Gift itself, are from God, not given to us once for all, but daily and hourly, and at each moment, supplied for the needs of the moment, day, and hour : but still, whether we will use it or no, and the degree of our diligence, is with ourselves ; we can refuse, neglect, bury it, or we can stir it up and grow in it. " Hitherto," as St. Chrysostom so often says, " it has been all God's gift ; for the rest, thy own diligence is needed." It is plain, then, since more is required on our part, that Ave may remain justified, than for our first entrance into that state, "justification," if spoken of as " the Mate of being justified," must include more

XV than when employed of the first "act of being- justified ;" in a word, sanctification, though distinct from our original justification, and to be regarded either as its effect, or as, together with it, one of the blessed effects of our union with our Lord, becomes blended with it, so as to be co-existent with it, and separable in idea only. God's mercy in first justifying us when ungodly, is enlarged, not diminished, by His continuing to justify us, being by Him made, and by making us, godly. Christians are on the way from being accounted what they were not, holy, to being what they were accounted. This shall be realized in heaven, when, " God" being " all in all," there shall no more remain in any what is alien from, or contrary to, or without, God. We shall then, so to say, be wholly justified, because wholly sanctified. We shall be just and saints entirely. But, meanwhile, as God's true servants allow His Spirit to burn out what is impure within them, though they have still need of daily forgiveness, and feel that need the more, there is, actually, less to be forgiven. God makes them acceptable to Himself, more by creating in them what is intrinsically acceptable to Him, less by effacing what is displeasing. And thus justification becomes more and more identified with sanctification, although, since the best to the end remain imperfect, there is still need of His grace, justifying them as in part unholy, as well as making them day by day more holy. And so, in the sad reverse, when persons are gradually xvi falling out of a justified state, their justification, so long as they continue in it, consists more in the remission of sin, through the long-suffering of God ; less, in sanctification by His Spirit.

Either view, then, whether that which separates too broadly sanctification from justification, or that which too much identifies them, would seem to be defective ; that which identifies them, seems not to come up to St. Paul's strong statements, that we were justified, being ungodly, nor again to the actual fact, that justification is complete at first, sanctification gradual and increasing ; the theory which separates them, falls as much short of the declaration of St. James, as also of St. Paul's or St. John's descriptions of the new life of the Christian in his Lord. In our Articles, on the other hand, while the merits of our Lord are set forth in contrast to our own works or deservings as the sole meritorious cause of our justification, and are declared to be received " by faith," our state of justification is spoken of1 as identical with the infusion " of the grace of Christ, and the inspiration [or in-breathing] of His Spirit." In like way also is the truth inculcated practically by the Ancient Church, everywhere asserting the irrespective mercy of God in Christ, first electing, ingrafling us, remitting sins, re-creating us in Christ, justifying us freely ; everywhere insisting also on the righteousness of God, through the preventing, assisting, perfecting grace of

X V 1 1

Christ, realized in us. These two, modern systems have separated ; that of Rome, in fact, substituting sanctification for justification ; that of ordinary Protestantism detaching sanctification, and assigning to it a subordinate place. These, as has been pointed out, are re-united by the great Divines of our Church, asserting against the Church of Rome, that sanctification has no part in our primary justification, but inculcating that it is by being made righteous that we remain justified : —

" Such is the contrast," says Mr. Newman, " existing between " the practical and exact senses of the word justification ; and it " is remarkable that both the one and the other have been " adopted by our standard writers, as has been already instanced " from the Homilies. As controversialists they are Protestants, " as pastoral teachers they are disciples of the Ancient Church. " Who, for instance, is more clear than Bishop Bull in laying "down that justification means- counting righteous? yet who " more strenuous in maintaining that it consists in being righteous? " What he is, such are Hammond, Taylor, Wilson, and a multi- " tude of others ; who in this day are called inconsistent, as if " holding two views, whereas those two views are rather proved " to be one, because the same divines hold them." — Lectures on Justification, p. 111. Ed. 1.

These views, it is, again, the tendency of a low self-indulgent age to disunite ; and since error lies near at hand to all truth, so a prevailing error among many of the recent preachers of justification by faith, has been, that they have so strongly insisted on the corruption remaining in the regenerate, and so coldly on the strength bestowed upon them to overcome it, so strongly upon the necessity of imputed, and so xviii slightly and lifelessly upon imparted righteousness, as much to discourage the very attempt after high and devoted, entire and self-sacrificing obedience.

To re-unite these views has been (as far as another may with humility speak of so thoughtful and comprehensive a work) one of the leading objects in the " Lectures on Justification ;" and a careful study of these would, it is conceived, remove the suspicions which, both before and since its appearance, have been cast on the views of justification held in connection with baptismal regeneration. A main object in those Lectures has been, after the pattern of our great divines, to insist on the reality, however imperfect, of the righteousness of the Christian ; that righteousness is not imputed only, but imparted, first imputed, then imparted ; that God, in justifying us, does indeed make us what we were not, but what He therein declares us, righteous ; that over and above "the change of the Divine Mind1" towards us, there is something " really applied and communicated" to us. There is then, throughout these Lectures, a marked contrast with views now popular ; but it relates not to the Divine dealings, but to the condition of man under, in, and through them ; not to the source of justification, nor its meritorious cause, nor the means whereby it is received, but to its character when received, in the soul of the believer ; it is, whether justification issue in real, though imperxix feet, holiness, a holiness which, although imperfect, is acceptable to God, or whether, even in a justified state, man " cannot please God," but, remaining unholy, is accounted only holy for Christ's sake. It relates to the state of the soul of the individual, what it is which in it God looks upon as acceptable.

" In asking, what is our righteousness, I do not mean what " is its original source, for this is God's mercy ; nor what is " its meritorious cause, for this is the life, and above all the " death of Christ ; nor what is the instrument of it, for this (1 " would maintain) is Holy Baptism ; nor what is the entrance " into it, for this is regeneration ; nor what the first privilege " of it, for this is pardon ; nor what is the ultimate fruit, for " this is everlasting life. I am not inquiring about any thing " past, or any thing future, or any thing on God's part, but " of something present and inward. We should not say that " animal life consisted in being born, or in having parents, or " in breathing, or in sensation, or in strength, or in a certain " period of years, or in God's will, or in God's attributes, or in " God's knowledge of us. We should feel that nothing past, or " to come, or external, could be a fit account of that which we " call animal life, and that all answers so framed were beside the " mark. It would be intelligible, for instance, to say that life " consisted in the presence of the soul ; but whether we said " this or any thing else, in any case we should fix on something " in us, not out of us. And in like manner, when I ask what is " that, called righteousness, which God first clothes us with as with " a robe, then looks upon and accepts, I do not ask why Gon so " looks upon it, but what it is He looks upon."— Lect. vi. \46-7.

Before this question was proposed, the doctrine of our Church, that justification, on God's part, is " declaring us righteous, when we were not such," had

a 2

XX been maintained fully and at length1; it is even declared, that the recent formula is more scientifically correct than the more general practical statements of St. Augustine2; the question relates not at all to God's act of justifying, but to our continuance in the state of justification ; not to what He doth, when He justifieth us, or man's condition previous to justification, or whether there be any thing acceptable in him, which God in any measure considereth in justifying him ; but, assuming as undoubted, that man, being lost and utterly helpless and unable to please God, and sin adhering to all his actions, is taken out of this state by God's free mercy for the merits of Christ alone, the further question is, In what doth this result? What is it, which God, having first given, looks upon as acceptable in those whom He has thus justified? To this, two inadequate answers had been given: (1) that of Ultra-Protestants, that it is our faith ; (2) that of modern Rome, that it is our inherent righteousness. Mr. Newman suggests a third answer, combining both, and assigning the ground of both, and this in conformity with Holy Scripture and the Ancient Church, that it is our being members of Christ, our being in Christ, and this continued to us by virtue of —