I have said little about the question of how literally the forensic language ought to be taken. I must confess a natural bias towards seeing it mostly in metaphorical terms, for the restoration of relationship, but the question is not vital to my main contention.

As the basic thesis has already been stated (Ch. 9), no elaborate statement of conclusions is now necessary. The intention in the outline exegesis of the relevant parts of Galatians and Romans was to show that a quite reasonable sense is obtained if we start from the assumption that Paul uses the δικαι- word-group in the way indicated by the Hebrew and Greek background. If we take the verb as essentially relational or forensic, and the noun and adjective as describing behaviour within relationship, and if we also make full use of the corporate Christ idea, we arrive at an exegesis which satisfies the concerns of both traditional Catholicism and traditional Protestantism. Nothing is lost: justification is entirely by grace through faith, it is declaratory, yet on the other hand, Paul's ethical seriousness is fully allowed for, within the one section of vocabulary.

The relation between justification and righteousness is not uniform. Sometimes, especially in forensic passages, it seems that justification depends on righteousness in Christ by faith. Sometimes, justification initiates the relationship in which righteousness becomes a possibility. Always, solely by God's grace is man forgiven, acquitted, restored to right relationship, but also made a new creature whose life is now righteous in Christ, really and observably.