Chapter 24 [XII.]—Who May Be Said to Wish to Establish Their Own Righteousness. “God’s Righteousness,” So Called, Which Man Has from God.

As many, therefore, as are led by their own spirit, trusting in their own virtue, with the addition merely of the law’s assistance, without the help of grace, are not the sons of God. Such are they of whom the same apostle speaks as “being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and wishing to establish their own righteousness, who have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God.”171    Rom. x. 3. He said this of the Jews, who in their self-assumption rejected grace, and therefore did not believe in Christ. Their own righteousness, indeed, he says, they wish to establish; and this righteousness is of the law,—not that the law was established by themselves, but that they had constituted their righteousness in the law which is of God, when they supposed themselves able to fulfil that law by their own strength, ignorant of God’s righteousness,—not indeed that by which God is Himself righteous, but that which man has from God. And that you may know that he designated as theirs the righteousness which is of the law, and as God’s that which man receives from God, hear what he says in another passage, when speaking of Christ: “For whose sake I counted all things not only as loss, but I deemed them to be dung, that I might win Christ, and be found in Him—not having my own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, which is of God.”172    Phil. iii. 8, 9. Now what does he mean by “not having my own righteousness, which is of the law,” when the law is really not his at all, but God’s,—except this, that he called it his own righteousness, although it was of the law, because he thought he could fulfil the law by his own will, without the aid of grace which is through faith in Christ? Wherefore, after saying, “Not having my own righteousness, which is of the law,” he immediately subjoined, “But that which is through the faith of Christ, which is of God.” This is what they were ignorant of, of whom he says, “Being ignorant of God’s righteousness,”—that is, the righteousness which is of God (for it is given not by the letter, which kills, but by the life-giving Spirit), “and wishing to establish their own righteousness,” which he expressly described as the righteousness of the law, when he said, “Not having my own righteousness, which is of the law;” they were not subject to the righteousness of God,—in other words, they submitted not themselves to the grace of God. For they were under the law, not under grace, and therefore sin had dominion over them, from which a man is not freed by the law, but by grace. On which account he elsewhere says, “For sin shall not have dominion over you; because ye are not under the law, but under grace.”173    Rom. vi. 14. Not that the law is evil; but because they are under its power, whom it makes guilty by imposing commandments, not by aiding. It is by grace that any one is a doer of the law; and without this grace, he who is placed under the law will be only a hearer of the law. To such persons he addresses these words: “Ye who are justified by the law are fallen from grace.”174    Gal. v. 4.

CAPUT XII.

24. Quotquot ergo adjuncto solo adjutorio legis, sine adjutorio gratiae, confidentes in virtute sua, suo spiritu aguntur, non sunt filii Dei. Tales sunt de quibus idem dicit apostolus, quod ignorantes Dei justitiam, et suam volentes constituere, justitiae Dei non sunt subjecti (Id. X, 3). De Judaeis hoc dixit, qui de se praesumentes gratiam repellebant, et in Christum propterea non credebant. Suam vero justitiam dicit eos volentes constituere, quae justitia est ex lege; non quia lex ab ipsis est constituta, sed in lege quae ex Deo est, suam justitiam constituerant, quando eamdem legem suis viribus se implere posse credebant: ignorantes Dei justitiam, non qua justitia Deus justus est, sed quae justitia est homini ex Deo. Et ut sciatis hanc illum eorum dixisse justitiam, quae est ex lege; hanc autem Dei, quae homini est ex Deo: audite quid alio loco dicat, cum de Christo loqueretur. Propter quem omnia, inquit, non solum detrimenta esse credidi, verum et stercora existimavi esse, ut Christum lucrifaciam, et inveniar in illo non habens meam justitiam quae ex lege est, sed eam quae est per fidem Christi, quae est ex Deo (Philipp. III, 8). Quid est autem, non habens meam justitiam quae ex lege est; cum 0896 sua non esset lex ipsa, sed Dei: nisi, quia suam dixit justitiam, quamvis ex lege esset, quia sua voluntate legem se posse putabat implere sine adjutorio gratiae quae est per fidem Christi? Ideo cum dixisset, non habens meam justitiam quae ex lege est; secutus adjunxit, sed eam quae est per fidem Christi, quae est ex Deo. Hanc ignorabant, de quibus ait, ignorantes Dei justitiam, id est, quae est ex Deo (hanc enim dat non littera occidens, sed vivificans spiritus); et suam volentes constituere, quam dixit ipse ex lege justitiam, cum diceret, non habens meam justitiam quae ex lege est: justitiae Dei non sunt subjecti, hoc est, gratiae Dei non sunt subjecti. Sub lege enim erant, non sub gratia; et ideo eis dominabatur peccatum, a quo non fit homo liber lege, sed gratia. Propter quod alibi dicit, Peccatum enim vobis non dominabitur; non enim estis sub lege, sed sub gratia (Rom. VI, 14): non quia lex mala est; sed quia sub illa sunt quos reos facit jubendo, non adjuvando. Gratia quippe adjuvat ut legis quisque sit factor, sine qua gratia sub lege positus tantummodo erit legis auditor. Talibus itaque dicit, Qui in lege justificamini, a gratia excidistis (Galat. V, 4).