(Continued from p. 381.)
XVIII. But among the orthodox we do not deny that some difference of opinion exists concerning the necessity of satisfaction.
For although all defend with tooth and nail the necessity of satisfaction against the common enemy, so that we could be freed in no other way from the imputation of our sins and from death but by it, since there is no salvation in any other than Christ, Acts, iv. 12., all do not together and in the same way urge the necessity of it; for some agree that satisfaction was indeed necessary, but only from the supposition of a divine decree, according to which God determined thus in Himself and proclaimed it in His Word, of course, that we should be delivered by the ransom of our Surety and Mediator; they acknowledge here also a necessity of convenience, because it was especially agreeable to His divine majesty, lest His precepts might be said to be violated, and so His very justice be impaired somewhat, that sins should be passed by in any other way than by receiving the satisfaction of Christ, but they do not consider it to be so absolutely necessary but that other ways of liberation and salvation were possible to God, and Augustine seems to have been of this opinion when he says eloquently, Book xiii, concerning the Trinity, c. x., “Another possible way was not lacking to Him who hath all things equally in His own power, but He could have no other way that was more convenient:” others verily urge not only a certain hypothetical necessity which depends on the mere will of God, but also an absolute necessity which is founded on His justice; whence they maintain that God decreed the death of His own Son as the price of our redemption, not only because He is unwilling to pardon sin without satisfaction, but also because He is unable on account of His justice; and this sentiment we willingly accept, both because it is more agreeable to Holy Scripture, and because it is more advantageous for smashing up the pertinacity of that most poisonous heretic, who is befriended not a little, although imprudently, by those who insist that there is another way.
XIX. To come to the confirmation of our opinion we have decided that the necessity of satisfaction depends on two primary foundations, the nature of God, of course, and His will;
the former shines forth in His attributes and virtues; the latter is declared in His Law and the word of the gospel: and as far as what pertains to His nature indeed is concerned we easily prove that satisfaction was necessary; for, if God is by nature just, if He utterly hates and abhors sin as being directly opposed to His holiness and righteousness, He will not be able to abstain from punishing it, and consequently He will not be able to pardon it apart from satisfaction. But the former statement is most certain; for besides what cannot be denied that justice is an integral part of our conception of divinity, if anything is altogether opposed to it, it would be blasphemous as a matter of fact to conceive of a deity which would be unjust, if we consult Scripture, that justice is assigned to God so often that there is no room for doubt left: For what else does the royal Psalmist mean when he says, Ps. v. 4, 5, “Thou hatest all who work iniquity, evil shall not dwell with thee,” and Ps. exix. 137, “Righteous are thou, O Lord, and upright are thy judgments?” What else does Abraham mean, Gen. xviii. 25, “Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?” What else, Dan. ix. 7, “To thee, O Lord, belongs justice.” and Hab. i. 13, “Thou art of purer eyes than to behold iniquity,” and Josh. xxiv. 19, “Ye are not able to serve God” (of course, by hypocritical worship) because He is an holy God, He is a jealous God, He will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins.” What else Paul, when he says, Rom. i. 18, “For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men” and ver. 32, “Convicted in their own consciences that this the judgment of God that they who do such things are worthy of death.” Finally not to collect any more passages here, God Himself says, more than once “that He is strong and jealous and will in no wise clear the guilty, but visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children,” Exod. xx. 5; xxxiv. 7.
XX. Once this justice in God is admitted, it necessarily follows that punishment is owed in accordance with it to the sinner;
for since this justice is thus amending and distributive, which consists in giving to each one his due, as Cicero describes it to Herennus, while he says that equity is the law of rendering to each one according to his deserts, and Simonides, to whom Aristotle refers in his Politics says that it exists when every one receives what is due to him, it is absolutely required that to the same extent as good is owed to the good, evil must happen to the evil, Rom. ii. 6, 7, 8. Thus if it is our wish to reason concerning the hatred and anger of God the matter is clear; since both are assigned to God only in deference to human weakness, but must be understood to be acted divinely, they signify no sickness or discomposure of mind in God, but only the highest degree of displeasure and abhorrence of some offence with a sure and unbending intention to punish it: again since God has no desire which He is not able to fulfil, if He hates sin by nature He will on no account allow it to go unavenged, whence the Psalmist (Psal. v. 5. 6), on account of the fact that God hates iniquity he concludes it will not continue unpunished, and by this he shows that He is bound between His hatred of sin and its punishment, so that that link can no way be broken. He is not like the fictitious deities of the Gentiles, which were supposed to lay aside their anger easily, contented with a feigned and imaginary atonement, whence among those it was customary to accept painted victims for the expiation of sins, which Alexander, after the time of Thucydides, handed down, and Jupiter himself more than once was placated when only the fire brands were lit: but our God is a consuming fire, who is of purer eyes than to behold evil, much less to allow it to go unavenged.
Only they that are made partakers of a divine nature do escape the corruption that is in the world through lust.—Thomas Manton.