I am going to talk to you today about something vital to your welfare. However, most of us take it for granted. In fact, most of us aren’t even aware that it exists. I am going to talk about an idea that is one of the foundation stones of our modern legal system. Without this principle equal justice for all would be merely an idealistic dream, a rhetorical slogan, a piece of propaganda. However, with this concept modern civilization can dare to conceive the dangerous dream of a democratic society offering freedom and equality for all. This idea makes possible the impossible. This idea puts within reach the unreachable. The application of this idea can attain the unattainable.
Let me illustrate this point. Consider with me for a moment the legal system of eleventh century England. English common law evolved from court decisions rather than legislation. This system that resulted was a monumental achievement. In fact, it eventually became the basis of our United States legal system.
However, it was far from perfect. You see, in time the common law became so narrow and strict that it actually denied justice to some. Unless your case fell within one of its norms, you would fail to receive justice. The magistrate would give a verdict that would be legal, but it would also be unfair. Such was the problem that common law brought to England.
For example, suppose someone was cutting down shade trees on your land. The English common law would allow you to bring charges against this person and it would fine him accordingly. However, it wasn’t the money you wanted. You wanted the trees. Once cut down, no amount of money could ever repay you for their loss. Unfortunately, The court could only impose a fine after the deed. It could not legally force the person to stop cutting down your trees. Therefore, in your case the law was not fair, though the judge’s decision was perfectly legal.
Furthermore, suppose you entered into a contract with someone who later defaulted. Under English common law you could sue for damages and the court would impose penalties upon the one breaking the contract. Again, however, it is not the money but the performance of the contract that you need. Unfortunately, the common law could not legally enforce the performance; it could only impose penalties for nonperformance. Therefore, law again was not fair to you, though the judge’s decision was perfectly legal. This placed justice and fairness at odds with each other.
As time passed, people began to complain to the king about the unfairness of decisions based on common law. So the king passed these matters on to his chancellor and gave him the power to adjust on the basis of fairness. The chancellor could do this even if his verdict went contrary to a principle of common law. Thus, a new court system came into existence called the court of equity.
In the court of equity, a new principle operated. Common law only dealt with the letter of the law. However, the court of equity concerned itself with the spirit of that law. Therefore, the limits placed on this court were not the strict limits of written law. To the contrary, the only limit binding the court of equity was the limit of conscience. This meant that if a conflict arose between common law and equity, the principle of equity would win. Fairness became the final criteria, rather than the narrow letter of the law.
This had some important results on many cases. For example, now the court could forbid the trespasser from cutting down your trees before he ruined your land. Though there was no provision for this in common law, the principle of equity made it possible. The court could also force the performance of a contract. Now it was not enough to pay a penalty for defaulting as stated in common law. No, the principle of equity required the offender to make good on his agreement.
Thus, the court of equity mixed mercy with justice; it provided grace as well as law. This created an important principle upon which much of our legal system today rests. Now we can talk about the equity we have in our property or other possessions. Now we can talk about our right of equity of redemption in a a forfeited estate. Now we can argue for equitable rights and equitable claims. Now justice and fairness, law and grace can go hand in hand to serve the needs of our citizens. Man’s equity unites with man’s laws to provide equal and fair treatment for all.
With this principle in mind, please consider with me an interesting verse from Psalm 98. "Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise. ...for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity" (Psalm 98:4,9).
Now let’s analyze this verse. The psalmist urges us to sing a new song because God is going to judge the earth. Why is that something to be joyful about? The answer is that not only will God judge the earth with righteousness, but he will also judge the people with equity.
Dear radio friends, the judgment is good news! It’s good news because God now has two ways of judging mankind. He must judge in righteousness, but he can now also judge with equity. He is both a God of justice as well as a God of mercy. He upholds both the letter and the spirit of the law. Therefore, the judgment is good news!
Not everyone sees the judgment as good news. In fact, some teach there is no judgment. However, the Scripture plainly teaches that in Scripture God will judge every person. Ecc. 12:14 says, "For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil."
To be sure, the judgment is good news only to those whom God finds not guilty. To the rest it is bad news, the worst news they could ever hear. For this reason God’s court of justice created some real problems for both God and man. Now Satan’s sin was in the light of the full revelation of God. Therefore, the judgment of the law on him was perfectly fair.
However, consider the case of Adam and Eve. Their sin was of a different nature than Satan’s. They didn’t know what he knew. Therefore, it wouldn’t be fair for God to judge them on the same basis as he judged Satan. Yet this is what the law did because it could not make any distinction. This means that the condemnation of Adam and Eve was perfectly legal. However, it was far from fair. Furthermore, if this was true of Adam and Eve, what should we say about us? After all, we enter this world with a corrupt nature.
So God has also established a court of equity. Here the legal limits of the law no longer force him to condemn us. Now he can also judge on the basis of conscience, fairness, and mercy. Now he can consider all the factors, including faith and repentance. While God’s Ten Commandments present the letter of the law, God’s equity reveals the loving spirit behind that law.
Now God can consider all the factors about man’s condition. For example, consider the story of the woman taken in adultery. "And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. "...he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more" (John 8:3-7,9-11).
Let’s compare the judgment of the Pharisees with the judgment of Christ. The Pharisees judged her by the letter of the law, but in her case that was unfair. They had set her up, and they had not even brought charges against the equally guilty man. Christ, however, understood this and judged her by the principle of equity. Thus, he did not condemn her because he soon would die on the cross as her substitute. Therefore, he fulfilled both the claims of the law as well as the principles of equity.
Now while we do not include the word equity very often in our religious vocabulary, we do use another word that has the same meaning. You are all familiar with that word. It’s the word grace. The principle of equity illustrates the meaning of not being under law but under grace.
The point is that God will judge every man. No one can avoid this. However, you can choose the way God will judge you. You can have him judge you according to the letter of the law. If he does, he will condemn you. If you prefer, you can have him judge you according to equity or grace. If he does, he will save you. The choice is yours. Now isn’t that good news?
