A Reformed View of Justification: But Which One?
I’ve heard people refer to the “Reformed view” of justification by faith.
Now, you could argue that the Reformed (i.e., Protestant) view of justification is broadly based on the idea that the believer is forensically righteous before God due to the addition of an alien righteousness to them from Christ. In other words, God counts/regards people as righteousness not due to an analytic assessment of their lives, but because of the synthetic spiritual addition of Christ to the believer. That is perhaps the baseplate of the Reformed view.
But, here’s the thing, beyond that agreement, the Reformed can become very diverse when it comes to getting into the finer detail. Areas, where there was considerable diversity, were:
The relationship between justification by faith and judgment according to works.
The relationship between justification and sanctification.
The role of union with Christ in justification.
How does justification by faith avoid antinomianism and inspire good deeds?
James Payton (Getting the Reformation Wrong) shows how the Reformers, though agreeing on key details, still had some differences among themselves on justification. He writes:
The various Reformers reflected on how the great transaction promised in the gospel 'worked,' and they came to somewhat different insights. These sometimes reinforced each other, but at times they were in conflict. Luther emphasized the 'sweet exchange' between the sinner and 'Christ and that sinners are united to Christ by that faith impelled in them by the Holy Spirit. Melanchthon's regular stress on divine mercy fits closely with this, although bringing a different accent. Zwingli tied justification to the divine decree of election, with fail the temporal manifestation of what God intended from eternity past from his chosen. Bucer stressed that justification includes the reception of the Holy Spirit, who leads believers to live for God: 'Hence he [St. Paul] never uses the word "justify" in this way without appearing to speak no less of this imparting of true righteousness than of the found and head of our entire salvation, the forgiveness of sins.' Calvin stepped back from Bucer's declaration when he asserted that justification by faith precludes 'the sense ... that we receive within any righteousness,' but Calvin brought another emphasis when he asserted, 'Christ, therefore, makes us thus participants in himself in order that we, who are in ourselves sinners, may be, through Christ's righteousness, considered just before the throne of God.' But these differences were variant modulations within the Reforms' concerto. The Protestant Reformers agreed in emphasizing justification sola fide.
One interesting piece of diversity within the Reformed fold was Martin Bucer’s attempt to reconcile Lutheran and Reformed views in Germany through the Tetrapolitan Confession. Sadly, this confession did not win people over and Lutheran confessions such as the Augsburg Confession were adopted instead. It is viewable at Google Books. It is interesting that there is no mention of imputation, but it also says this about good works:
“But since they who are the children of God are led by the Spirit of God, rather than that they act themselves (Rom 8:14), and ‘of him, and through him, and to him, are all things’ (Rom 11:36), whatsoever things we do well and holily are to be ascribed to none other than to this one only Spirit, the Giver of all virtues. However it be, he does not compel us, but leads us, being willing, working in us to both will and to do (Phil 2:12). Hence Augustine writes wisely that God rewards his own works in us. By this we are so far from rejecting good works that we utterly deny that anyone can be saved unless by Christ’s Spirit he be brought thus far, that there be in him no lack of good works, for which God has created in him”.
So there you go. There was both unity and diversity in Reformed accounts of justification by faith.
If you want to read more, check out my book The Saving Righteousness of God and my entry in Justification: Five Views.