I thought it would be good to create a short post on the form amd matter of justiifcation, drawing from Voetius here: https://solideogloriaapologetics.blogspot.com/2023/12/gisbertus-voetius-1589-1676.html?m=1 and Junius here https://delatinized.wordpress.com/2023/04/09/franciscus-junius-theses-on-justification/
Formal Cause:
When coming to the formal cause of justification, Voetius notes that:
imputation occurs, which some theologians call the form of justification (properly speaking, it is the formal principle of it, or the form of the impulsive cause of justification)
So for instance, Junius says that the formal cause of justification is that:
The form is that the Son of God, according to his Spirit or Deity, dwells entirely in us, and makes his righteousness and obedience our own, not only by imputation before God, but also by the application of the forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and free reconciliation in himself.
But as Voetius notes, insofar as we are speaking about “justification” and not “imputation” it cannot be accurately said that imputation is the formal cause of justification. Thus those who speak of imputation as the form of justification speak imprecisely (this is done by e.g. Davenant, Owen, and Norton). Rather “the imputation of the righteousness of Christ constitutes the meritorious cause of justification” or the formal principle of it (and this is, btw, exactly my point in my article on active and passive justification, which will come out eventually). Junius's formulation is also imperfect inasmuch as he includes the circumstance or occasion of justification (the indwelling of the Spirit) in its definition. Thus Voeitus says that:
according to all theologians, the righteousness of Christ imputed (which is the same as the imputation of the righteousness of Christ) is the cause of justification, by which and for which the sinner is justified.
And
the imputation of the righteousness of Christ precedes, indeed, and causes justification, because God justifies us on account of it.
So if we were to be precise about the formal cause of justification, it consists:
in that twofold act of remission or absolution and the adjudication of life, justification itself formally consists.
Thus Voetius defines the “what” of justification like so:
Justification is a judicial sentence of the supreme Judge, which includes, or formally states, these two judgments: the condemnation of the guilt and punishment of sins, that is, the remission of sins or absolution from sin; and the judgment of the right to eternal life. Thus, these two moments in the act of justification are to be considered, both of which are about its essence or formal nature.
This twofold act in justification is recognized by Junius when he says:
Therefore, there are two parts to this divine action: one that absolves the ungodly man of his sins, the forgiveness of sins, and the other that makes the same person righteous in Christ Jesus our righteousness.
And of course, it was implicit in his description of the formal cause of justification (“ makes his righteousness and obedience our own, not only by imputation before God, but also by the application of the forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and free reconciliation in himself.”)
Material cause:
It seems to me that the vast majority of errors on justification come from misidentifying it’s material cause. Therefore, correctly grasping this is of great use in elenctic theology. Junius says that the material cause of justification is:
The material of justification is the Mediator of God and men, true God and true man in the unity of person, Christ Jesus: in whom, as a perfect Savior, all the causes of justification exist: who loved us, became Emmanuel God with us, and gave himself for us.
A bit more precisely, Voetius says that “the obedience of Christ is the material.” It is the for which or grounds upon which we are justified. In this sense, all meritorious causes are considered the material causes of the right which they earn. This obedience may be considered under the aspect of passive obedience insofar as it relates to absolution from sin and under the aspect of active obedience insofar as it relates to the judgment of the right to eternal life.
Voetius says that:
The meritorious cause is the obedience of Christ imputed to us. This can be considered either closely or materially, or proximately or formally. In the former consideration, Christ is our surety, mediator, and sponsor, who, with respect to his obedience, is as if the subject that is, and the principle that is. Thus, obedience is the principle by which. In this obedience, something can again be distinguished as material, namely, the obedience itself in fulfilling the debt; and something as formal, namely, satisfaction or merit. The former is said in relation to God, to whose justice it satisfies; the latter in relation to us, for whom he has obtained or acquired justice.
And for this reason the material cause is often taken as the meritorious cause. Thus Turretin denies that "the impulsive and meritorious cause (on account of which man is justified in the judgment of God) [is] inherent righteousness infused into us or good works" and affirms that "the righteousness and obedience of Christ [that is, the material cause of justification] imputed to us [is] the meritorious cause and foundation of our justification with God."
Comments