Thesis.
SECTION XII: ON THE JUSTICE OF GOD
Thesis.
§ 229. As God is supremely merciful, so also is He supremely just. In fact, He is justice itself. (1) Here we are taking justice [or righteousness] as it exists in God, that is, as an essential property of God through which He is just and the author of all justice, not as it is from God, by which He makes us righteous. The latter is twofold: evangelical, which consists of the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness (Rom. 3:22); and legal, which consists of conformity with the Law—and in this life it is inchoate, but will be perfect in the life to come.
(2) Here justice in God is not taken to signify God’s goodness and clemency by which He provides aid through Christ to the wretched according to His promise (Ps. 31:[1]; 51:[14]; Rom. 3:25). Ambrose, on Romans 3: “That is called ‘the justice of God’ which seems to be mercy because it begins from a promise; and when something promised is given, it is called ‘the justice of God.’ For justice belongs to God because what was promised is given. Also, when He accepts those who flee to Him for refuge, it is called ‘justice,’ because it is iniquity not to accept someone who flees to you for refuge.” Some call this “the righteousness of grace” and “the righteousness of promise,” by which God out of grace and because of the merit and satisfaction of Christ pardons, according to His promise, the sins of those who have come to their senses, and proves that He is just by keeping the trust [fides] He gave. Instead, justice here is taken to signify an essential property distinct from His mercy and truthfulness—not distinct in the nature of the thing, but with regard to our understanding.
(3) Taken in this way, the justice of God is distinguished into universal and particular justice. The universal justice of God is the uprightness of His will by which He immutably wills and approves all things that He has commanded in His Law, for the mirror of that universal justice is set forth in the Law, which is the norm of all justice. Particular justice is His eternal, constant, and immovable will to grant to each His own.
(4) By it He is just both toward Himself and toward His creatures. He is just toward Himself because He grants to Himself and commands that His creatures grant to Him the supreme glory that is owed only to Him as the supreme being and the highest good (Isa. 42:8).
(5) He is just toward His creatures both in terms of arrangement [dispositive], insofar as He arranges all His actions and works externally according to the norm of equity and justice and is the utterly just governor and master of the entire universe, and in terms of distribution [distributive], insofar as He renders to each creature according to its work.
(6) This justice is either remunerative, by which He endows good people with rewards, or punitive, by which He afflicts evil people with punishments.
Some proceed in this way: The justice of God is considered internally and externally. Internally it signifies the universal uprightness of God, which is opposed to every iniquity (Ps. 48:[10]). Externally it is that which God exercises toward His creatures, and this is fourfold: (a) Architectonic, which is the omnipotence of God that He, as architect of the world, exercised in the construction of the world (Ps. 97:6). (b) Forensic [
]. With respect to its subjects, it is considered in three ways: (α) in God; (β) in the Decalogue; (γ) in humans in the world. [α] When it is considered in God, it is called archetypal justice, and this is twofold: universal and particular. Universal justice pertains to the antecedent will of God and directs all humans to live devoutly and justly. Elsewhere it is called dispositive, regulatory, and directive. Particular justice pertains to the consequent will of God and either deals with the devout (and is called remunerative because it grants regard to the devout) or it deals with the wicked (and is called avenging because it inflicts punishment on the wicked). [β] The justice of God as comprehended in the Decalogue is called ectypal and is the token of the divine will concerning both worshiping God and loving one’s neighbor. [γ] Forensic justice in humans in the world signifies the benefits that have come from God’s grace and kindness. (c) Evangelical, which is revealed in the Gospel, and this is twofold: active and passive. Active righteousness [or justice] is that by which God Himself is righteous, and it signifies the mercy by which He has mercy on sinners and accepts them into grace (Ps. 31:[1]; Rom. 1:17). Passive righteousness is obtained by Christ and is that by which God justifies us. (d) Mixed [righteousness] is the truth and constancy of the divine promises, and this pertains to both the Law and the Gospel. The legal righteousness of God shines forth from the threat of Genesis 2, the evangelical from Luke 1:72. (Cf. our commonplace [1610 Loci Theologici, locus 3 (On the Nature of God)], § 149.)
The justice of God is proved.
§ 230. The justice of God is proved by: (I) Scripture: (1) Affirmatively, when it calls God just, avenging, holy, upright, and when it declares His justice (Exod. 9:27; Ps. 11:7; Jer. 12:1). (2) Negatively, when it removes from Him injustice, iniquity, partiality [
], the acceptance of bribes, and thus all the causes, adjuncts, and effects of injustice (Deut. 32:4; Dan. 9:14; Deut. 10:17; etc.) Job 8:3: “Does God corrupt justice? Or does the Almighty pervert the right?” (3) Affectively, when it attributes to Him zeal, wrath, fury (Exod. 20:5; 32:10; Num. 11:10), which in God are not the sort of passions that they are in us but are acts of His immutable justice. (4) Symbolically, when it calls Him “a consuming fire” (Deut. 4:24) and compares Him to an angry “lion” and an armed “soldier” (Isa. 38:13). (5) Effectively, when it asserts that He renders to each according to His work (1 Sam. 26:23; Job 34:11) and when it describes His severe threats and examples of His wrath and punishments established against the wicked, for all these are the effects and tokens of God’s justice.
We shall consider later whether one can understand the justice of God from reason. We have cited the statements of the more sound philosophers in our Commonplaces [1610 Loci Theologici, locus 3 (On the Nature of God)], § 151, to which we should add that of Philemon in Justin: “He is the eye of judgment that sees all things” (De mon. Dei, p. 82), and also that of Euripides, also in Justin (p. 83): “If anyone who is wicked by nature does what is wicked, let him redeem the time, for with time this one will later give judgment.”
§ 231. (II) The fathers have beautiful statements about divine justice. Lactantius, Instit., bk. 1, c. 1: “Therefore as God is a very forgiving Father toward the devout, so He is a very upright judge against the wicked.” Augustine, De lib. arbit., bk. 2, c. 1: “God not only is very kind in His doing but also very just in His avenging.” De civ. Dei, bk. 2, c. 23: “No one fully comprehends, and no one justly reprehends, the judgments of God.” De civ. Dei, bk. 18, c. 18: “There are many secret judgments of God but no unjust ones.” Enarr. Psalm. 32, conc. 1: “Do not think that mercy and judgment can in some way be separated from each other in God. For at times they do appear to be contrary to each other, as: ‘He who is merciful does not preserve judgment’ and ‘He who holds fast to judgment forgets mercy.’ God is omnipotent and does not lose His judgment in mercy nor His mercy in judgment.” Gerson: “When He wants to have mercy, nothing is more clement than God; when He wants to mete out justice, nothing is more terrible than He,” etc.
Antithesis.
§ 232. The justice of God is undermined by: (I) The Colluthians, who, according to Bishop Philaster, denied that God was just.
(II) Vorstius, who broadens the path for Photinian errors: “It is false that no sin at all can be left unpunished through God’s justice” (Disp. de Deo, p. 399). Parasc. ad Piscat., p. 25: “There is actually no natural justice in God nor does any ever appear to exist in God outside the hypothesis of the decree.” De satisf., p. 36: “The question arises whether there is in God some essential justice that prescribes that all sins are punished and accordingly demands full satisfaction for them, if we are to be freed of them. I respond: There is no justice like that.” There is more of the same in the followers of Vorstius: Episcopius, Voss, and Slatius (cited in Festus Hommius, Specim. controv. Belgic., art. 20, p. 68).
(III) The Calvinists: (1) Through their absolute decree of reprobation and (2) through their doctrine on the cause of sin. (See our De glor. Dei, disp. 5, §§ 31–32.)
(IV) The Photinians, who: (1) Deny that justice is an essential property of God. (2) Claim that no satisfaction of Christ was necessary for our sins with respect to divine justice. (3) Define the damnation of the wicked as completely their choice, not as the imposition of eternal punishment. (See our De glor. Dei, disp. 10, § 11.)
(V) The Papists, who: (1) Claim that our imperfect and unclean works can be set against God’s justice. (2) Demand [that we offer] our own satisfactions. (3) Believe that some sins are by their own nature venial. (See our De glor. Dei, disp. 1, §§ 36–48.)
Questions about the justice of God.
§ 233. (I) The question arises: Can human reason from its own native powers recognize God’s justice? Although on the basis of the naturally inherent distinction of right and wrong and on the basis of the punishments that accompany more serious sins, human reason somehow acknowledges that God is just—something the words of the heathen testify concerning the justice of God—nevertheless that knowledge is imperfect and weak. It is imperfect (1) because it by no means obtains a full and complete knowledge of the divine Law, which is the clearest mirror of divine justice. (2) Because it is ignorant of that temperament of divine justice and mercy revealed to us in the Gospel in the sending of the Son, the redemption of the human race, and the forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake. (3) Because it knows nothing about eternal punishments for sins.
It is weak because it is upset: (1) By the equality that sees things in this life turn out badly for the good and well for the wicked. This is the temptation that the most holy men in the Church experienced, such as Job (Job 12:6; 21:7), David (Ps. 73:3), Jeremiah (Jer. 12:1), Habakkuk (Hab. 3:4). They taught by their own example that one can seek an answer to it only from the revealed Word. (2) By thoughts, such as why God permits sins and, in fact, punishes sins with sins, though through His omnipotence He nevertheless could cause no sin at all to be committed. Reason cannot search out the causes for why He permits this, but Scripture does explain them to us.
§ 234 (II) The question arises: Is there commutative justice in God? Thomas is correct in denying this ([ST,] p. 1, q. 21, art. 1), because whatever we can give God we receive entirely from Him, and for this reason He is a debtor to no one.57 Rom 11:35: “Who has first given to Him that he should be repaid?” Because this response of Thomas subverts the Papist hypothesis concerning deserved merit (namely, that our works on the basis of their worthiness merit eternal life), Gregory of Valencia (Comm. Thom., vol. 1, p. 456) limits it with this distinction:
Two things pertain to the formal definition [ratio] of commutative justice: (1) That on this side and that something equal according to its value be received and given. (2) That he who gives and he who receives are truly and properly made equal through this. With regard to the latter, he concedes that there is no commutative justice between God and creatures because whatever a creature is or does or has depends on God in its becoming, being, and being preserved. With regard to the former, he asserts that properly and formally there is commutative justice in God with respect to a just man to the extent that God repays his merits with the reward of eternal life.
But because he sees that this equality of our works is opposed to those words of the apostle, which are written like a ray of the sun (Rom. 8:18: “Our sufferings are not worthy [condignae] for the future glory that will be revealed in us,” and 2 Cor. 4:17: “This slight momentary affliction is preparing us for an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison”), therefore he applies another ointment of distinction and says: “Our acts of obedience are considered either according to their value, which they have of themselves from their own condition even as they proceed from the habitual gift of grace, or they are considered as they proceed from grace and as they are under the divine promise and Law, by which they are owed glory on the basis of a certain arrangement of God.” In the former respect, he concedes that there is no equality of what is given and what is received toward our works and eternal glory. But in the latter respect, he asserts that there is both that equality and relation of commutative justice between our works and glory. “For to the extent that they produce glory for us if we die in grace, we can estimate that they are of as great a value as the glory itself, just as money is estimated to be of the same value as the things it purchases, even if the money perhaps is not worth as much on the basis of its material alone, because it is supported by public law.”
We respond. Not even in the latter respect is there the sort of equality of what is given and received between the works of the devout and eternal life, which is required for commutative justice. This is because: (1) The good works are not ours but God’s, who acts effectively in us through the Holy Spirit. Therefore they do not make God our debtor; rather, they obligate us to God. (2) They are not unowed acts of service, but rather by many debts they are owed to God already previously by the law of creation, preservation, dominion, redemption, sanctification, paternity. (3) They provide usefulness not to God but to us (Job 22:2; 35:7). (4) They are not perfect, they do not conform in all ways with the divine Law, they are not free from every blemish of sin. (5) They do not correspond to the exact norm of divine justice, but God repays them out of His grace with temporal and eternal rewards. Becanus says: “The rigor of justice requires the sort of contract that allows no generosity and grace to come between those involved in the contract” (Theol. schol., part 2, p. 491). Bellarmine, De poenit., bk. 2, c. 12: “Deserved merit or the merit of justice is opposed to grace.” Yet in this repayment of works, generosity and grace are involved, and as a result, eternal life is called a 
[“gift”] (Rom. 6:23). (6) We do not merit eternal life in such a way that we are not obligated by this debt to give thanks. But whatever is given out of merit in commutative justice, no thanks is owed for it (Luke 17:7). (See our treatise On Good Works [Commonplace XX], § 102.)
§ 235. (III) The question arises: Are justice and mercy equally present in God? We respond. God’s justice is considered in two ways: (1) Internally, to the extent that it is an internal, essential property of God by which God is just, holy, and upright from eternity to eternity. (2) Externally, to the extent that it reveals itself in external works of vengeance and punishment.
In the former respect, justice and mercy are in God equally because they are the essence of God. Sirach 2:[18]: “For as His majesty is, so also is His mercy.” [Sirach] 5:[6]: “Mercy and wrath quickly come from Him, and His wrath will rest upon sinners.” [Sirach] 16:[11]: “Mercy and wrath are with Him.”
In the latter respect, one must distinguish between the course of this life and its end in the Last Judgment. In this life is the time of grace and pity, and accordingly God’s mercy manifests itself more clearly than His justice. James 2:13: “Mercy triumphs over judgment.” At the Last Judgment will be the time for retribution, and hence God’s justice will be manifested more than His mercy. James 2:13: “Judgment will be without mercy to him who has not shown mercy.” For this reason Raynerius de Pisis says in his Summa on the word “Absolution” that God has a twofold forum: (1) In the present life is the forum of mercy, because now mercy is hearing the cases while justice is on vacation. (2) In the future judgment will be the forum of justice, for there justice will hear the cases and mercy will be on vacation. Moreover, Raynerius adds a third forum, namely, in purgatory, which he says is “tempered with mercy and justice.” However, the third forum is completely unknown to Scripture, and we are right in rejecting it. Likewise, we must also disapprove of the fact that Raynerius appears to speak exclusively and to attribute to the forum of this life only mercy and to the forum of future judgment only justice, because in all the works of God mercy and justice shine forth at the same time. Ps. 25:10: “All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth.” Cassiodorus, on Psalm 100, explains the words “I shall sing to You, O Lord, of mercy and justice” in this way: “There is no mercy of God without judgment nor is judgment found without mercy, for both are united in a mutual alliance.” In [ST,] p. 1, q. 21, art. 1, Thomas proves the same thing. The Scholastics say: “God repays beyond what is deserved [condignum] and punishes less than what is deserved.”
§ 236. (IV) The question arises: Is it correct to say that God’s justice is completely without law [
] and that God’s will is the most perfect and highest rule of justice? We respond. This assertion can have two meanings: (1) That God’s justice does not have some higher norm according to which it must be conformed but that it is the law and norm of equity for itself. (2) That the justice of God acts contrary to the norm of equity set forth to us in the divine Law. In the prior sense we concede it, in the latter we deny it. You see, though God may not receive a law from a superior, nevertheless He is the law to Himself and does not act contrary to His natural justice, the expression of which is set forth in the Law. (See our commonplace On Providence [Commonplace IX], § 114.) Consequently, we condemn gravely what Zwingli writes (De provid., c. 6):
For example, adultery and murder are one and the same crime. As concerns the work of God the Mover and Impeller, it is not a crime. But as concerns the work of man, it is a crime and wickedness. For God is not bound by the Law, but man is condemned by the Law. As a bull impregnates all the cows of his master without adultery (because no law is given for him)—though the owner of the bull, if he had more than one wife, could not do this legally—so also humans sin by doing evil things, because they are subject to the Law, though God does not sin by doing that, because He is outside the Law.
§ 237. (V) The question arises: Is it correct to refer chastity to God’s justice and holiness? We respond. In man, chastity restrains and moderates bodily pleasures and corrupt lusts. In this sense and respect chastity is not attributed to God. However, it is attributed in this manner and respect: (1) Because He is by nature utterly pure and clean. (2) Because He is the author and lover of chastity, who detests and punishes every uncleanness and the vagrant lusts that fight against chastity (1 Thess. 4:3). (3) Because He wants to be discerned by this mark from the impure and “unclean spirits” that drive humans to monstrous lusts (Matt. 12:43; Luke 11:24).
§ 238. (VI) The question arises: Is it correct to attribute wrath to God because of His justice? Scripture attributes wrath to God only anthropopathically, for it notes “the effect of divine vengeance but not a turbulent emotion of God” (Augustine, De civ. Dei, bk. 9, c. 5).
** Lactantius claims: “Wrath in God is an agitation” (De ira Dei, c. 17). Augustine, on Psalm 6: “Disturbance does not occur in God the Judge, but what happens in His ministers is called wrath because it happens through His laws.” Adrianus explains God’s fury and wrath as “the contrariness of the will of God against wickedness” (Isag., p. 5). Chrysostom explains wrath as “the vehemence or gravity of the punishment, because the Deity is immune to every emotion” (Ad Stelech. sive de compunct., tom. 6, f. 155). **
The Scholastics argue in this way that wrath does not belong to God properly: Wrath can be considered in two ways: (1) Materially, in which respect it is defined as the raging and boiling of His blood or of the heat that surrounds His heart. (2) Formally, in which respect it is defined as an appetite for grief to be returned to one’s adversary. But in neither can wrath be attributed to God properly. Not in the former, because that corporeal movement has no place in the noncorporeal essence of God. Not in the latter, because God, as unchangeable and impassible [
], cannot suffer grief or sorrow. Thus there is no place in Him for an appetite for grief to be returned.
§ 239. (VII) The question arises: Is divine justice undermined by the inequality that in this life things go badly for the good and well for the wicked? Add to this what Justin writes, QQ. et resp., q. 124, p. 367:
Just as the devout are said to be not of this world, so also their glory and wealth are not earthly. Therefore when we see that those things that happen to the wicked also happen to the devout, we shall think to ourselves from this that their present goods are not the worthy rewards for the virtue of their labors. The devout are by no means distinguished from the wicked by these transient and corporeal matters, for both of them experience all things both joyful and sad. However, the one group differs from the other especially in their hope for future things and by the sufferings that are tolerated in true piety, but then also in the divine help with which God often has made His own people conspicuous …. In the latter we see the providence of God; in the former, God prepares and instructs the devout to look to the other life in which people will be discerned by glory and dishonor.
Augustine, De civ. Dei, bk. 1, c. 8:
God’s patience invites the wicked to repentance in the same way as the scourge of God instructs the good in patience. So, too, the mercy of God embraces the good to foster them in the same way that the severity of God rebukes the wicked to punish them. In fact, divine providence was pleased to prepare good things in the future for the righteous that the wicked will not enjoy, and evil things for the wicked that the good will not suffer. On the other hand, God also wanted the good and evil things of this life to be common to both so that people might not hunger too passionately for the good things that the evil, too, are seen to have nor shamefully avoid the evils with which the good, too, are often afflicted …. Yet God often shows His own operation in apportioning these things more clearly. For if every sin now were afflicted with obvious punishment, one would think that nothing was being reserved for the final judgment. Again, if the Deity would not punish any sin now, one would believe that there is no divine providence. In the same way, in the case of favorable things, if God would not grant them with obvious generosity to some people who ask for them, we would say that those things do not pertain to Him. Also, if He would grant them to all who ask, we would judge that we must serve Him only for such rewards.
De civ. Dei, bk. 20, c. 2:
Although we do not know by what judgment God does those things or permits them to happen—that good people are in a bad condition and wicked people in a good one (for in God is the highest virtue, the highest wisdom, the highest justice, no weakness, no rashness, no iniquity)—nevertheless we learn in salutary fashion to value little either the good or evil things that we see are common to both good and evil people, and to seek those good things that belong to the good and to flee especially those bad things that belong properly to the wicked.
Briefly, as we must not judge a comedy before the last act, so also we must not judge the providence and works of God before the last act, for things finally will turn out well for the good and badly for the wicked, if not in this life, then in the one to come.
§ 240. (VIII) The question arises: Is divine justice undermined by the fact that the sins of parents are punished in their children?
(IX) The question arises: Is divine justice undermined (1) when the necessity of proper satisfactions is denied, (2) when the merits of works are denied, (3) when one denies that there are different heavenly crowns or nimbuses [aureolae]? See our De glor. Dei, disp. 4, §§ 45–46.
(X) The question arises: Is it undermined (1) by the doctrine of the propagation of original sin, (2) by the assertion that the first and involuntary movements of corrupt concupiscence are sins, (3) by the hypothesis of the powerlessness of our strength to fulfill the Law? See our De glor. Dei, disp. 10, §§ 39–41.
The practical use of the doctrine of God’s justice.
§ 241. (I) Consoling: (1) in the violent persecutions of our enemies. God is just; therefore in a just cause He will be at our side with His help against the unjust assaults and persecutions of our enemies. Ps. 35:24: “Judge me, O Lord, according to Your righteousness,” where “righteousness” is understood to be of cause, not of person. Ps. 94:14–15: “Jehovah will not forsake His people … but judgment will return to justice.”
(2) In afflictions of every kind. God is just; therefore He will not forget our devotion and obedience but will finally grant them rewards. “The evil will have no evil unpunished; the good will have no good unrewarded.” 2 Thess. 1:6[–7]: “God is just to repay with affliction those who afflict you and to grant rest with us to you who are afflicted when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven.” Heb. 6:10: “For God is not unjust, that He should forget your work and the love that you have worked,” etc.
(3) In serious temptations concerning the magnitude of our sins and of divine wrath. God is just; therefore He will not ultimately punish our sins in us that He has already punished in Christ nor will He ultimately demand of us the satisfaction that Christ has provided for us. For this reason the apostle asserts that “God’s righteousness” is demonstrated in the remission of sins (Rom. 3:26).
§ 242. (II) Exhorting: (1) To glorify God. Whether we consider the justice that fulfills promises or the justice that arranges all things or the justice that punishes the wicked, it supplies us everywhere with occasion for the praise of God. Ps. 7:[17]: “I shall glorify Jehovah according to His righteousness.” Ps. 51:[14]: “My tongue will sing Your righ-teousness with jubilation.” Rev. 19:1: “Alleluia! Salvation and honor and glory and power be to the Lord our God, for His judgments are true and just.”
(2) To stir up filial fear in our hearts. God is just and judges justly; therefore let us stand before Him with fear. Job 37:23[–24]: “God is great in strength and judgment, great in righteousness; therefore men will fear Him.” Mal. 1:6: “If I am a father (kind and merciful), where is My honor? And if I am the Lord (just and terrible), where is My fear? says the Lord of hosts.” Tertullian, Adv. Marc., bk. 2, p. 180: “God is Father in His clemency, Lord in His discipline; Father in gentle power, Lord in severe power; Father to be loved devoutly, Lord to be feared necessarily.”
(3) To kindle within ourselves a hatred of sin. God is just and becomes severely angry over sins; therefore we must be careful lest we provoke His wrath against us with our sins. Exod. 20:5: “I the Lord am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children,” etc. Sirach 7:[16]: “Do not count yourself among the crowd of sinners; remember that His wrath does not delay.” Therefore whenever the devil encourages us to sin, let us think of divine justice. When we have fallen into sin and are driven to despair, let us think of divine mercy. Bernard, sermon 6 on the Song of Songs, c. 506:
Let us call the one foot of God “justice” and the other “mercy,” etc. Take care not to cheat either of them. If you are pricked with sorrow for sin and with a fear of judgment, you have pressed your lips to the footprint of truth and judgment. If you temper your fear and sorrow with a consideration of goodness and with the hope of obtaining pardon, you know that you also are embracing the foot of mercy. Otherwise, it is not expedient to kiss the one without the other because the recollection of judgment alone hurls one into the pit of despair and the deceiving assent to His mercy generates a false security.
(4) To restrain rash judgment regarding divine works. God is just and, in fact, is justice itself. Therefore He does all things justly, though we do not always observe the reason of His justice. Jer. 12:1: “Righteous are You, O Jehovah, if I should wish to vie with You.” In Job 40:[8] God says to Job: “Will you make My judgment invalid? Will you condemn Me that you may be justified?”
(5) To plant humility and patience in ourselves. God is just; therefore when He chastens and rebukes us, let us acknowledge that His judgment is just and let us put our mouth in the dust. In 2 Chron. 12:5, when the prophet Shemaiah announced punishment to the Israelites, the prince of Israel and the king humbled themselves and said: “Jehovah is righteous.” Neh. 9:33: “Lord, You are just in all that has come upon us, for You have administered truth, because we have acted wickedly.” Ps. 119:137: “Righteous are You, Jehovah, and right is each of Your judgments.” Dan. 9:7: “To You, O Lord, belongs righ-teousness; but to us, confusion of face.”