I had a thought (a dangerous thing!) this morning while showering (a double danger!). And, for what little it may be worth, I thought I’d share it here.
Maybe this way of stating things will bring clarification over the issue of great debate today with regard to justification and sanctification as simultaneous benefits of union with Christ. And we will consider this issue under two headings: 1) In what sense are justification and sanctification equally ultimate realities; and 2) In what sense are they not equally ultimate realities.
1.In what sense are justification and sanctification equally ultimate realities in union with Christ?
We can say that justification and sanctification are equally ultimate realities in at least two senses. First, they are equally ultimate in a once and for all and forensic sense. This means that when a sinner-turned-believer is united to Christ he is at once and immediately perfectly justified (i.e., he is declared righteous in the sight of God only because of Christ’s perfect righteousness imputed to him), and he is perfectly sanctified (i.e., he is set apart by God and declared holy by virtue of being united to the Holy One of Israel, himself). In this sense sanctification is being used in an exclusively definitive sense.
Second, justification and sanctification are equally ultimate realities in terms of origin or source. That is to say, our justification and sanctification (now in a definitive and progressive sense) both flow from the same source – namely, Christ. He – in his once and for all work – is the alone origin from which the two benefits flow. So, on this formulation, progressive sanctification flows not from the believer’s justification but from Christ himself. There is no doubt that gratitude is an important aspect of sanctification and that we ought to respond to God’s commands out of gratitude for our justification. But justification cannot be the cause/source of our gratitude and sanctification. That would make justification other than exclusively forensic, it gives it also a transformative power. And then the doctrine of forensic justification is compromised. Rather, our sanctification and our obedience – which is filled with gratitude – flow not from us or our justification but from Christ himself as now resurrected and ascended life-giving Spirit.
2.In what sense are justification and sanctification not equally ultimate realities in union with Christ?
We can say that justification and sanctification are not equally ultimate realities in at least two ways: 1) priority and 2) chronology.
In terms of priority we speak of importance. And here we say that justification has a priority over sanctification – in both its progressive and definitive senses – in terms of importance of doctrine. Here we must affirm that justification is, indeed, the article upon which the church stands or falls. It is the hinge upon which all religion turns. If you get justification wrong you lose the gospel in a way that you do not if you get sanctification wrong. Here justification and sanctification are not equally ultimate.
Second, we can say that justification has a priority over sanctification in terms of chronology. And here we speak of justification having a priority over sanctification only in its progressive sense. In other words, while justification does not have a chronological priority over definitive sanctification, it does have a chronological priority over progressive sanctification. When united to Christ, the believer is justified once and for all at the time of his union with Christ, subsequent to which the believer is progressively sanctified throughout the course of his earthly pilgrimage.
Well, I hope that this brought some clarity to the issues, even if its disagreed with. At least it may provide some helpful categories for further discussion and debate. Though I would urge us all that as these things are debated that they are done so with Christian love, patience, and kindness. In short, with charity and gratitude. After all, in Christ we have not only be united to our savior but to each other as well.
Dear Jim:
What kind of soap are you using ? Perhaps you could sell it at WTS at exam time !
Thank you for the helpful comment about preserving forensic justification. If justification is causal, that is indeed the inference, that it has transformative power (a conflation of two benefits that are distinct, but inseparable). Union with Christ is the basis for both benefits.
I was wondering: in what other ways except perhaps articulating the gospel pace Rome is justification more important than sanctification ?
Hi Bill,
It is more important in the sense that if we get justification wrong we lose the gospel itself in a way that we don’t if we get sanctification wrong. In other words, justification is a “hinge” doctrine upon which hangs the gospel – and the existence of the church – in a way which sanctification is not. That is not to take away from the importance of sanctification – whether of the definitive or progressive sort. Sanctification is very important and a the definitive sort is an indispensable benefit of union with Christ. However, the correct preaching and teaching of sanctification is not as crucial as is the correct preaching and teaching of justification. The church stands or falls on getting justification right in a way that it does not with regards to sanctification.
Is that helpful or no?
Well, I think you have overstated, brother. Both justification and sanctification are equally important to the gospel, and neither forensic benefits (addressing guilt) or tranformative benefits (addressing corruption) can be separated from each other as both stem from union with Christ.
Sorry, that should read “nor” transformative benefits….
Hi Bill,
I appreciate your concern for not wanting to separate justification and sanctification because they stem from the same source – Christ. I tried to communicate that above, so I am sorry for not being more clear! This is why these discussions are good, its iron sharpening iron! Thanks for being a sharp iron for me, brother!
That said, I still believe that justification and progressive sanctification can not be equally ultimate in terms of importance in dogmatic theology. After all, the former is necessary to salvation, the second contingent (Calvin says something like without justification there is no sanctification).
If I can draw a Christological analogy: Christ is both fully God and fully man without confusion or separation. Yet, his divinity and humanity are not equally ultimate. His divinity is necessary to his person in a way in which his humanity is not. Take away the humanity, and you still have the person of the Son.
Likewise, justification and progressive sanctification can never be separated nor confused in the salvation of the believer. However, the former is necessary to salvation whereas the latter is contingent upon the former. To continue the analogy, if you take away progressive sanctification but not justification you still have salvation (a biblical example of this would be the thief on the cross).
Perhaps that only muddies the waters. And if it does feel free to push back some.
Blessings,
Hey brother:
I have some concerns with what you have written here that only amplify my initial concerns. Let’s pursue this one in person sometime, okay ?
Preach Christ !!!
In him,
Bill