Distinctions between inner and outer, between status and being, run through Berkhof’s treatment of justification in his systematic theology. For instance:
Justification does not, as some languages imply, “denote a change that is brought about in man” but rather means “to effect an objective relation, the state of righteousness, by a judicial sentence” (p. 511). Do we want to distinguish the being of man from his relation to God in this fashion?
“Justification takes place outside of the sinner in the tribunal of God, and does not change his inner life, though the sentence is brought home to him subjectively” (p. 513). Berkhof, as I’ve commented before, brings in the concept of subjective justification – the experience of joy and relief that comes with being accepted by God. That’s helpful. Yet, it seems that a declaration from God that we are righteous marks a change in who we are. That may not be exactly what Berhof means by “inner life.” In all likelihood, he has in mind moral character and subjective experience. But the distinction of inner and outer obscures the reality (or what I take as the reality) that God’s declaration of justification has an “ontological” efficacy, since we simply are who we are in God’s judgment. Or, to put it differently, status before God and our being are not separable, and I would suggest not even distinguishable.
“While [justification] has respect to the sinner, it does not change his inner life. It does not affect his condition, but his state, and in that respect differs from all the other principal parts of the order of salvation” (p. 513). Condition apparently here means “moral condition” and state means “status.” The same questions above arise here, though. Another way to ask the question is: Is the “inner” or “moral” sphere distinct from one’s status before God in such a way that one’s status can change without any change in the “inner” sphere? What is the anthropology that’s driving this distinction?
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
