The Doctrine of Justification by Faith

Properly it denotes an Action towards another, (as Justification, and to justify do) in Hiphil only: and a reciprocal Action of a man on himself in Hithpael [Greek or Hebrew]. Hereby alone is the true sense of these words determined. And I say that in no place, or on any occasion, is it used in that Conjugation wherein it denotes an Action towards another, in any other sense, but to absolve, acquit, esteem, declare, pronounce Righteous, or to impute Righteousness, which is the Forensic sense of the word we plead for; that is its constant use and ⟨p. 173⟩signification, nor doth it ever once signify to make inherently Righteous; much less to pardon or forgive, so vain is the pretence of some that Justification consists only in the pardon of Sin, which is not signified by the Word in any one place of Scripture. Almost in all places this sense is absolutely unquestionable; nor is there any more then one which will admit of any debate, and that on so faint a pretence as cannot prejudice its constant use and signification in all other places. Whatever therefore an infusion of inherent Grace may be, or however it may be called, Justification it is not, it cannot be; the Word no where signifying any such thing. Wherefore those of the Church of Rome do not so much oppose Justification by Faith through the Imputation of the Righteousness of Christ, as indeed deny that there is any such thing as Justification. For that which they call the first Justification, consisting in the infusion of a principle of inherent Grace, is no such thing as Justification. And their second Justification which they place in the merit of Works wherein Absolution or pardon of Sin, hath neither place nor consideration, is inconsistent with Evangelical Justification, as we shall show afterwards.

Properly it denotes an Action towards another, (as Justification, and to justifie do) in Hiphil only: and a reciprocal Action of a man on himself in Hithpael 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Hereby alone is the true sense of these words determined. And I say that in no place, or on any occasion, is it used in that Conjugation wherein it denotes an Action towards another, in any other sense, but to absolve, acquit, esteem, declare, pronounce Righteous, or to impute Righteousness, which is the Forensick sense of the word we plead for; that is its constant use and ⟨p. 173⟩