BY the righteousness of Christ is meant all He became, did, and suffered to satisfy the demands of divine justice and merit for His people the forgiveness of sin and the gift of eternal life. The righteousness of Christ is commonly represented as including His active and passive obedience. This distinction is, as to the idea, Scriptural. The Bible does teach that Christ obeyed the Law in all its precepts, and that He endured its penalty, and that this was done in such sense for His people that they are said to have done it. They died in Him. They were crucified with Him. They were delivered from the curse of the Law by His being made a curse for them. He was made under the Law that He might redeem those who were under the Law. We are freed from the Law by the body of Christ. He was made sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. He is the end of the Law for righteousness to all them that believe. It is by His obedience that many are made righteous (Rom 5:19). We obeyed in Him according to the teaching of the Apostle in Romans 5:12-21 in the same sense in which we sinned in Adam. The active and passive obedience of Christ, however, are only different phases or aspects of the same thing. He obeyed in suffering. His highest acts of obedience were rendered in the garden and upon the cross. Hence this distinction is not so presented in Scripture as though the obedience of Christ answered one purpose and His sufferings another and a distinct purpose. We are justified by His blood. We are reconciled unto God by His death. We are freed from all the demands of the Law by His body (Rom 7:4), and we are freed from the Law by His being made under it and obeying it in our stead (Gal 4:4, 5). Thus the same effect is ascribed to the death or sufferings of Christ and to His obedience because both are forms or parts of His obedience or righteousness by which we are justified. In other words the obedience of Christ includes all He did in satisfying the demands of the Law.

The righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer for his justification. The word impute is familiar and unambiguous.[1] To impute is to ascribe[2] to, to reckon to, to lay to one's charge. When we say we impute a good or bad motive to a man or that a good or evil action is imputed to him, no one misunderstands our meaning. Philemon had no doubt what Paul meant when he told him to impute to him the debt of Onesimus.[3]

We use the word impute in its simple admitted sense, when we say that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer for his justification.

It seems unnecessary to remark that this does not and cannot mean that the righteousness of Christ is infused[4] into the believer or in any way so imparted to him as to change or constitute his moral character. Imputation never changes the inward, subjective state of the person to whom the imputation is made. When sin is imputed to a man he is not made sinful; when the zeal of Phinehas[5] was imputed to him, he was not made zealous. When you impute theft to a man, you do not make him a thief. When you impute goodness to a man, you do not make him good. So when righteousness is imputed to the believer, he does not thereby become subjectively righteous. If the righteousness be adequate, and if the imputation be made on adequate grounds and by competent authority, the person to whom the imputation is made has the right to be treated as righteous. And, therefore, in the forensic,[6] although not in the moral or subjective sense, the imputation of the righteousness of Christ does make the sinner righteous. That is, it gives him a right to the full pardon of all his sins and a claim in justice to eternal life.

That this is the simple and universally accepted view of the doctrine as held by all Protestants at the Reformation, and by them regarded as the cornerstone of the Gospel . . . has never been disputed by any candid or competent authority. This has continued to be the doctrine of both the great branches of the Protestant Church, so far as they pretend to adhere to their standards.

It may be remarked in passing that according to the Protestant doctrine there is properly no "formal cause" of justification. The righteousness of Christ is the meritorious, but not the formal cause of the sinner's being pronounced righteous. A formal cause is that which constitutes the inherent, subjective nature of a person or thing. The formal cause of a man's being good is goodness; of his being holy, holiness; of his being wicked, wickedness. The formal cause of a rose's being red is redness and of a wall's being white is whiteness. As we are not rendered inherently[7] righteous by the righteousness of Christ, it is hardly correct to say that His righteousness is the formal cause of our being righteous.

The ground of this justification in the case of the believing sinner is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.

Dr. Shedd[8] says, "A second difference between the Anselmic[9] and the Protestant soteriology[10] is seen in the formal distinction of Christ's work into His active and His passive righteousness. By His passive righteousness is meant His expiatory[11] sufferings, by which He satisfied the claims of justice, and by His active righteousness is meant His obedience to the Law as a rule of life and conduct. It was contended by those who made this distinction that the purpose of Christ as the vicarious[12] substitute was to meet the entire demands of the Law for the sinner. But the Law requires present and perfect obedience, as well as satisfaction for past disobedience. The Law is not completely fulfilled by the endurance of penalty only. It must also be obeyed. Christ both endured the penalty due to man for disobedience and perfectly obeyed the Law for him; so that He was a vicarious substitute in reference to both the precept and the penalty of the Law. By His active obedience He obeyed the Law and by His passive obedience He endured the penalty. In this way His vicarious work is complete"[13] . . . the distinction between the active and passive obedience of Christ is, in one view, unimportant. As Christ obeyed in suffering, his sufferings were as much a part of His obedience as His observance of the precepts of the Law. The Scriptures do not expressly make this distinction, as they include everything that Christ did for our redemption under the term righteousness or obedience. The distinction becomes important only when it is denied that His moral obedience is any part of the righteousness for which the believer is justified or that His whole work in making satisfaction consisted in expiation or bearing the penalty of the Law. This is contrary to Scripture and vitiates[14] the doctrine of justification as presented in the Bible.

Proof of the Doctrine

That the Protestant doctrine as above stated is the doctrine of the word of God appears from the following considerations:

1. The word dikaioo, as has been shown, means "to declare dikaios [righteous]." No one can be truthfully pronounced dikaios to whom dikaiosune [righteousness] cannot rightfully be ascribed. The sinner has no righteousness of his own. God, therefore, imputes to him a righteousness which is not his own. The righteousness thus imputed is declared to be the righteousness of God, of Christ, the righteousness which is by faith. This is almost in so many words the declaration of the Bible on the subject. As the question, "What is the method of justification?" is a Biblical question, it must be decided exegetically,[15] and not by arguments drawn from assumed principles of reason. We are not at liberty to say that the righteousness of one man cannot be imputed to another; that this would involve a mistake or absurdity; that God's justice does not demand a righteousness such as the Law prescribes as the condition of justification; that He may pardon and save as a father without any consideration, unless it be that of repentance; that it is inconsistent with His grace that the demands of justice should be met before justification is granted; that this view of justification makes it a sham, a calling a man just, when he is not just, etc.—all this amounts to nothing. It all pertains to that wisdom which is foolishness with God.

All we have to do is to determine, (1.) What is the meaning of the word to justify as used in Scripture? (2.) On what ground does the Bible affirm that God pronounces the ungodly to be just? If the answer to these questions be what the Church in all ages, and especially the Church of the Reformation has given, then we should rest satisfied. The Apostle in express terms says that God imputes righteousness to the sinner (Rom 4:6, 24).

By righteousness every one admits is meant "that which makes a man righteous, that which the Law demands." It does not consist in the sinner's own obedience or moral excellence, for it is said to be "without works" (Rom 4:6). And it is declared that no man can be justified on the ground of his own character or conduct. Neither does this righteousness consist in faith, for it is "of faith," "through faith," "by faith." We are never said to be justified on account of faith. Neither is it a righteousness or form of moral excellence springing from faith, or of which faith is the source or proximate[16] cause because it is declared to be the righteousness of God, a righteousness which is revealed, which is offered, which must be accepted as a gift (Rom 5:17). It is declared to be the righteousness of Christ, His obedience (Rom 5:19). It is, therefore, the righteousness of Christ, His perfect obedience in doing and suffering the will of God, which is imputed to the believer and on the ground of which the believer, although in himself ungodly, is pronounced righteous and therefore free from the curse of the Law and entitled to eternal life.

The Apostle's Argument

2. All the points above stated are not only clearly affirmed by the Apostle, but they are also set forth in logical order and elaborately sustained and vindicated in the Epistle to the Romans. The Apostle begins with the declaration that the Gospel “is the power of God unto salvation” (Rom 1:16). It is not thus divinely efficacious[17] because of the purity of its moral precepts; nor because it brings immortality to light; nor because it sets before us the perfect example of our Lord Jesus Christ; nor because it assures us of the love of God; nor because of the elevating, sanctifying, life-giving influence by which it is attended. There is something preliminary to all this.

The first and indispensable requisite to salvation is that men should be righteous before God. They are under His wrath and curse. Until justice is satisfied, until God is reconciled, there is no possibility of any moral influence being of any avail. Therefore the Apostle says that the power of the Gospel is due to the fact that "therein is the righteousness of God revealed" (Rom 1:17). This cannot mean "the goodness of God," for such is not the meaning of the word. It cannot in this connection mean His justice because it is a righteousness which is "of faith"; because the justice of God is revealed from heaven and to all men; because the revelation of justice terrifies and drives away from God; because what is here called the righteousness of God is elsewhere contrasted with our "own righteousness" (Rom 10:3; Phi 3:9); and because it is declared to be the righteousness of Christ, which is explained by His "obedience" (Rom 5:18-19) and elsewhere declared to be "his blood" (3:25; 5:9).

The question, "How shall man be just with God?" had been sounding in the ears of men from the beginning. It never had been answered. Yet it must be answered or there can be no hope of salvation. It is answered in the Gospel, and therefore the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth (Rom 1:16), i.e., to every one, whether Jew or Gentile, bond or free, good or bad, who, instead of going about to establish his own righteousness, submits himself in joyful confidence to the righteousness which his God and Savior Jesus Christ has wrought out for sinners and which is freely offered to them in the Gospel without money and without price.

This is Paul's theme, which he proceeds to unfold and establish . . . he begins by asserting, as indisputably true from the revelation of God in the constitution of our nature, that God is just, that He will punish sin; that He cannot pronounce him righteous who is not righteous. He then shows from experience and from Scripture, first as regards the Gentiles, then as regards the Jews, that there is none righteous, no not one; that the whole world is guilty before God. There is therefore no difference, since all have sinned.

Since the righteousness which the Law requires cannot be found in the sinner nor be rendered by him, God has revealed another righteousness, "the righteousness of God" (Rom 3:21), granted to every one who believes. Men are not justified for what they are or for what they do, but for what Christ has done for them. God has set Him forth as a propitiation for sin in order that He might be just and yet the justifier of them that believe.

The Apostle teaches that such has been the method of justification from the beginning. It was witnessed by the Law and the prophets. There had never, since the Fall, been any other way of justification possible for men. As God justified Abraham because he believed in the promise of redemption through the Messiah, so He justifies those now who believe in the fulfillment of that promise (Rom 4:3, 9, 24). It was not Abraham's believing state of mind that was taken for righteousness. It is not faith in the believer now, not faith as a virtue, or as a source of a new life, which renders us righteous. It is faith in a specific promise. Righteousness, says the Apostle, is imputed to us, "if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead" (Rom 4:24). Or, as he expresses it in Romans 10:9, "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." The promise which Abraham believed is the promise which we believe (Gal 3:14); and the relation of faith to justification in his case is precisely what it is in ours. He and we are justified simply because we trust in the Messiah for our salvation. Hence, as the Apostle says, the Scriptures are full of thanksgiving to God for gratuitous[18] pardon, for free justification, for the imputation of righteousness to those who have no righteousness of their own.

The Parallel between Adam and Christ

3. Not content with this clear and formal statement of the truth that sinners can be justified only through the imputation of a righteousness not their own; and that the righteousness thus imputed is the righteousness (active and passive if that distinction be insisted upon) of the Lord Jesus Christ; he proceeds to illustrate this doctrine by drawing a parallel between Adam and Christ. The former [Adam], he says, was a type of the latter [Christ]. There is an analogy[19] between our relation to Adam and our relation to Christ. We are so united to Adam that his first transgression was the ground of the sentence of condemnation being passed on all mankind. And on account of that condemnation we derive from him a corrupt nature so that all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation,[20] come into the world in a state of spiritual death. In like manner we are so united to Christ, when we believe, that His obedience is the ground on which a sentence of justification passes upon all thus in Him. And in consequence of that sentence they derive from Him a new, holy, divine, and imperishable[21] principle of spiritual life. These truths are expressed in explicit terms. "For the judgment was by one (offence) to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification" (Rom 5:16). "Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous" (v. 18, 19).

These two great truths, namely, the imputation of Adam's sin and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, have graven themselves on the consciousness of the Church universal. They have been reviled, misrepresented, and denounced by theologians, but they have stood their ground in the faith of God's people, just as the primary truths of reason have ever retained control over the mass of men in spite of all the speculations of philosophers. It is not meant that the truths just mentioned have always been expressed in the terms just given; but the truths themselves have been and still are held by the people of God, wherever found among the Greeks, Latins, or Protestants.

The fact that the race fell in Adam; that the evils which come upon us on account of his transgression are penal[22]; and that men are born in a state of sin and condemnation, are outstanding facts of Scripture and experience . . . it is implied in every act of saving faith which includes trust in what Christ has done for us as the ground of our acceptance with God, as opposed to anything done by us or wrought in us.

Such being the real and only foundation of a sinner's hope towards God, it is of the last importance that it should not only be practically held by the people, but that it should also be clearly presented and maintained by the [ministry of the pulpit]. It is not what we do or are, but solely what Christ is and has done that can avail for our justification before the bar of God.

Other Passages Teaching the Same Doctrine

4. This doctrine of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ; or in other words, that His righteousness is the judicial ground of the believer's justification, is not only formally and argumentatively presented as in the passages cited, but it is constantly asserted or implied in the Word of God. The Apostle argues, in the fourth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans, that every assertion or promise of gratuitous forgiveness of sin to be found in the Scriptures involves this doctrine. He proceeds on the assumption that God is just; that He demands a righteousness of those whom He justifies. If they have no righteousness of their own, one on just grounds must be imputed to them. If, therefore, He forgives sin, it must be that sin is covered, that justice has been satisfied. "Even as David also," he says, "describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered" (Rom 4:6-8).

In Romans 5:9, we are said to be "justified by his blood." In Romans 3:25, God is said to have set Him forth as a propitiation[23] for sin, that He might be just in justifying the ungodly. As to justify does not mean to pardon, but judicially to pronounce righteous, this passage distinctly asserts that the work of Christ is the ground on which the sentence of justification is passed. In Romans 10:3-4, he says of the Jews, "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." It can hardly be questioned that the word righteousness [dikaiosune] must have the same meaning in both members of the first of these verses. If a man's "own righteousness" is that which would render him righteous, then "the righteousness of God" in this connection must be a justifying righteousness. It is called the righteousness of God because, as said before, He is its author. It is the righteousness of Christ. It is provided, offered, and accepted of God.

Here then are two righteousnesses; the one human, the other divine; the one valueless, the other infinitely meritorious. The folly of the Jews, and of thousands since their day, consists in refusing the latter and trusting to the former. This folly the Apostle makes apparent in the fourth verse. The Jews acted under the assumption that the Law as a covenant, that is, as prescribing the conditions of salvation, was still in force, that men were still bound to satisfy its demands by their personal obedience in order to be saved, whereas Christ had made an end of the Law. He had abolished it as a covenant in order that men might be justified by faith. Christ, however, has thus made an end of the Law, not by merely setting it aside, but by satisfying its demands. He delivers us from its curse, not by mere pardon, but by being made a curse for us (Gal 3:13). He redeems us from the Law by being made under it (Gal 4:4, 5) and fulfilling all righteousness.

In Philippians 3:8-9, the Apostle says, he "suffered the loss of all things," that he might be found in Christ, not having his "own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith." Here again one's own righteousness is contrasted with that which is of God. The word must have the same sense in both members. What Paul trusted to, was not his own righteousness, not his own subjective goodness, but a righteousness provided for him and received by faith.

The Apostle says Christ "of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption" (1Co 1:30). In this enumeration,[24] sanctification and righteousness are distinguished. The one renders us holy; the other renders us just, i.e., satisfies the demands of justice. As Christ is to us the source of inward spiritual life, so He is the Giver of that righteousness which secures our justification . . . we are accepted, justified, and saved, not for what we are, but for what He has done in our behalf. God "made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2Co 5:21). As Christ was not made sin in a moral sense; so we are not (in justification) made righteousness in a moral sense. As He was made sin in that He "bare our sins," so we are made righteousness in that we bear His righteousness. Our sins were the judicial ground of His humiliation under the Law and of all His sufferings; so His righteousness is the judicial ground of our justification. In other words, as our sins were imputed to Him, so His righteousness is imputed to us. If imputation of sin did not render Him morally corrupt, the imputation of righteousness does not make us holy or morally good.

Argument from the General Teachings of the Bible

5. It is unnecessary to dwell upon particular passages in support of a doctrine which pervades the whole Scriptures. The question is, "What is the ground of the pardon of sin and of the acceptance of the believer as righteous (in the forensic or judicial sense of the word) in the sight of God?" Is it anything we do, anything experienced by us or wrought in us? Or is it what Christ has done for us? The whole revelation of God concerning the method of salvation shows that it is the latter and not the former.

From their nature, grace and works are antithetical.[25] The one excludes the other. What is of grace is not of works. And by works in Scripture in relation to this subject is meant not individual acts only, but states of mind, anything and everything internal of which moral character can be predicated.[26] When, therefore, it is said that salvation is of grace and not of works, it is thereby said that it is not founded upon anything in the believer himself . . . the gift of His Son for the redemption of man is ever represented as the most wonderful display of unmerited love. That some and not all men are actually saved is expressly declared to be not of works, not on account of anything distinguishing favorably the one class from the other, but a matter of pure grace.

When a sinner is pardoned and restored to the favor of God, this again is declared to be of grace. If of grace, it is not founded upon anything in the sinner himself. Now as the Scriptures not only teach that the plan of salvation is thus gratuitous in its inception, execution, and application, but also insist upon this characteristic of the plan as of vital importance, and even go so far as to teach that unless we consent to be saved by grace, we cannot be saved at all.

From Systematic Theology, III, xvii, 4-6.

Charles Hodge (1797-1878): the most influential American Presbyterian theologian of the nineteenth century. Taught theology at Princeton Seminary. Best known for his three volume Systematic Theology. Born in Philadelphia, PA.

1 unambiguous — clear; not open to more than one interpretation.
2 ascribe — to assign a quality or character to.
3 Philemon 1:18.
4 infused — to pour into; to cause to be filled with something.
5 Psalm 106:30-31.
6 forensic — pertaining to or connected with courts of law.
7 inherently — in inward nature.
8 W. G . T. Shedd (1820-1894) — considered by some the greatest American systematizer of grace theology next to Charles Hodge in the period between the War Between the States and W W I. Best known for his three volume Dogmatic Theology and two volume History of Christian Theology.
9 Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) — medieval theologian. Born in northern Italy and educated in the best schools of modern France. His theological treatises, prayers, meditations, and letters are considered literary masterpieces. His "satisfaction" view of Christ's atonement has greatly influenced redemptive theology down to modern times.
10 soteriology — the study of the doctrine of salvation.
11 expiatory — having the attribute of making satisfaction for offense.
12 vicarious — achieved by one in the place of another; substitutionary.
13 History of Christian Doctrine, Vol II, p. 341.
14 vitiates — to corrupt; to pervert so as to lead to false judgments.
15 exegetically — pertaining to the analysis and interpretation of Scripture.
16 proximate — coming next in a chain of causation.
17 efficacious — producing the intended or desired effect; effective.
18 gratuitous — freely bestowed; costing nothing to the recipient.
19 analogy — a similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise not similar.
20 generation — the act of physically begetting children.
21 imperishable — undying; perpetual.
22 penal — related to punishment for breaking the law.
23 propitiation — an appeasement; a sacrifice that turns away wrath.
24 enumeration — named one by one; list.
25 antithetical — being diametrically opposed; opposite.
26 predicated — based or established on.