forgiven thee Having removed these Limitations with the grounds of them I shall establish the Doctrine more positively And 1. By Testimony Sclater on this Verse reconciles it with Prov. 17.15 where it 's said He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just even they both are abomination to the Lord It were an abomination to justifie a wicked Man without a satisfaction but not where a satisfaction to the Government is given which is the Case of the ungodly Man in the Text. Who 's justified thro' the righteousness of Christ and this he quotes out of Pareus on the place Wilson another English Commentator with great plainness gives it thus At their justification he findeth them ungodly and maketh them godly and he doth it both by taking away the guilt and filth of their sin The Righteousness of Christ is reckoned the Righteousness of that Person who doth by Faith embrace him Pitcairn says Ungodly here is taken in the same sense as when God raiseth the dead and calls that which is not to be it being the term of alienation from which they are remov'd from whence he bids farewell to all antecedent Causes which some call inferiour others in some manner or measure others administrating others sine quo non others Causes of possession tho' not of right for all Holiness comes in as a way to the Kingdom not as Causes of Rule Diest thus Justifying Grace finds him so in himself but leaves him not so For whom he justifies them he sanctifies God Justifies us not as Holy in our selves but as wanting righteousness he imputes a righteousness to us The Anger of Abraham Gen. 15. for want of Children wanted a Pardon even then before this declaration about him that his Faith was imputed to him for righteousness Theodore Szuingerus whom Hottinger commends and notwithout reason as the best Commentator on this Epistle compares the Text with 1 Kings 8.2 condemning the wicked to bring his way on his Head and justifying the righteous to give him according to his righteousness and solves the difficulty these two ways 1. That the one is a Justification of a man's Cause and the other a Justification of his Person which is that in the Text. 2. This Justification of the Ungodly is not against a Law but according to a Law not without a righteousness but without his own only Besides says he Tho' it finds him ungodly it leaves him not in his ungodliness Bucer thus If God should not justifie the Wicked none should be justified for the Lord find us all wicked before we are justified Greneus Tho' Man may not justifie the ungodly God may who has Power to forgive above Law Pareus Tho' they are justified who are wicked in themselves yet not without Cause and against Rule since there is a satisfaction in Christ Marlorat's Ecclesiastick Exposition is thus The first Blessing of Salvation is Pardon and our Pardon being a Justification it must be a justification of the Ungodly What can they say to this that are Slaves to their Belly and yet brag of their Works are they better than Abraham who left his Countrey redeem'd his Brother and offered his Son and Hop'd in his God against all Hope but God in justifying leaves us not ungodly Such therefore ought rather to fear they are not justify'd because they want the fruits of Justification than brag they have the Causes of it in themselves Calvin thus It 's observable the Discourse is not about the way of living but about the Causes of Salvation He argues from contraries and as Bucer says not from words but sentences This Sentence is full of Energy Believeth on him that justifies the ungodly wherein both the Nature of Faith and Righteousness are contain'd In short no body can come to the Righteousness of Faith but who is in himself Ungodly for Faith adorns us with anothers Righteousness which it beggs of God hence God is said to justifie when he freely forgives and vouchsafes to love them with whom he may be justly angry Ver. 6. without Works they meerly cavil who think all Works are not excluded for he says not Works of the Law but simply and without restriction Works of all kinds Beda venerabilis Anno 700. says on this Text What can he be but ungodly until he be justified by Grace for what Grace gives it gives freely I dare not determine which of the two is the greater work to make a just man or to justifie an ungodly man both require equal power but the latter greater grace or mercy Boast not of thy works before faith for faith found thee a sinner Man works not righteousness until he be justified and that begins with Faith Tho. Aquinas 1260. on this Text To believe is the first act of Righteousness which God works in us by this man doth not merit righteousness but subject himself to God's justification and so thereby receives its effect This says he the Apostle proves 1. From David's sense v. 6. He is a blessed man to whom God gives a righteousness without forgoing works 2. From David's words proving he had no righteousness for he needed for Orignal Actual and Venial sin for the guilt of the Offence Fact and Penalty of sin Ambranat a late Papist 1665. Paris The Apostle before acted an Orator by interrogations and frequent Questions but now a Philosopher with clouds of Arguments before he oppos'd Gift and Works now he opposes a Believer and Worker a believer in him that endues the ungodly with his own righteousness Patiatur ergo si non operatur when he is not a doer he is made a receiver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erasmus says Ungodly here comprehends all kind of Unrighteousness there is no kind that is excepted But there is no end of humane testimonies for within my Cognizance I can reckon an hundred Interpreters of this Epistle I shall add two more of greatest Authority in England 1. The Westminster Assembly I shall not quote the Annotations bearing their Name but as I am inform'd on far less ground than Anthony Burgess his book of Justification which was examin'd and approv'd by them one of his Titles is That gracious works are not so much as the condition or cause sine qua non of justification and on this Text p. 288. God doth account him as righteous though a sinner in himself p. 290. While looking into our selves we see nothing but matter of death and condemnation and he has another Sermon to prove that the Act of Faith is not imputed to justification which the Assemblies Catachism expresly mentions A Second Authority is the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England But Dr. Wallis has done that in a Sermon ex preposito I shall conclude with these two noted Fathers Ambrose and Augustine the former defines a worker to be not a transgressor of the Law and a Non-worker a Transgressor the latter in his Propositions on this Epistle Tom. 4. p. 1193. Qui justificat
justified by his grace Thus we see the Scripture lays an Emphasis on each of them the gift of Faith the nature of Faith the object of Faith and indeed this Bill would be but a counterfeit one if it wanted any of these Properties or Relations 1. It must be receiv'd from him that hath the power or else it is not valid By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justifie many 2. It must be in true form rightly dictated that is its nature or not valid 3. The divine constitution the Law of Heaven has made it have such a relation to Christ's righteousness the riches of his Grace and the Wisdom of the constitution shines in the fitness of the instrument for our Souls are an open begging hand a vast Appetite It crys daily who will shew us any good some good things I want some more good and this Faith clasps the hand on Christ offer'd determines and centers the desire as on an Object that has all fullness in him full satisfactâ—on and â—o build a relation and union of right upon an union of nature a Communion upon a cement of Union honours the Wisdom of the contriver So we see all these three must be in a valid Bank-bill it is not worth a Farthing in it self a bit of Paper ink'd but relatively to such a Summe suppose 1000 l. it 's worth so much its very form consists in relation to that summe that 's its Object it signally bears it and if rightly drawn and receiv'd from the right owner their Constitution and the Law will make me Possessor in due time If any of these qualifications be wanting it is not worth a Farthing 1. Drawn in true forms 2. Bearing relation to its proper Object 3. Receiv'd from him who has the riches in his power to give And I find our Catechim and Confession insists as much on this as any Conf. c. 11. Nor by imputing it self the act of believing or any other Evangelical Obedience but by imputing the Obedience and Satisfaction of Christ unto them they receiving it by Faith which is the Gift of God 11. Thus it s the alone Instrument of Justification i. e. they are not justified until the Holy Spirit doth in due time actually apply Christ unto them Our lesser Catech. Q. How are we made partakers of the Redemption purchased by Christ R. By the effectual application of it to us by his Holy Spirit for which they quote Tit. 3.5 6 7. Q. How doth the Spirit apply the Redemption c R. By working Faith in us and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling I may from thence form this Argument Maj. When Christ and his benefits are applyed to us we are justified Min. But when God effectually calls Christ and his benefits are applyed to us Erg. When effectually call'd we are justified It is granted that Faith is the fruit of effectual Calling and it cannot be deny'd that relations viz. Justification Adoption flow as suddenly from their Foundations as effects can from their efficients Or thus Maj. The imputing Faith to Righteousness is an application of Christ and his benefits Min. But the Spirit by working Faith applys Christ and his benefits Erg. The Spirit by working Faith imputes Faith to Righteousness But I need no other Testimony but Scripture that way the Faith of Miracles temporally sav'd that way saving Faith justifies but by the Spirits working the Faith of Miracles when he saw their Faith it was certainly a miraculous Gift distinguishing and characterizing the persons to be heal'd to give him that Faith was to say thou art to live to be cured there was no cooperation of the creature to a Miracle Further compare C. 4 5. and we find imputing Faith to Righteousness and giving a Righteousness are the same but Objections are not to be answer'd as Bullets in war with the like but explication and distinction For the 1. The reason the nature or exercise of faith is insisted on in Scripture so much is for our instruction if the faith that God has given be that which entitles to Heaven and Happiness 2. The reason the object is so much intimated is to prevent a most dangerous error that the World is most liable to viz Leaning on our own righteousness such fools to take the Bill for the Summ But its certain the owner and proprietor must be the conveyer I challenge to show what he doth else that looks like it For the 2d I propose these two Distinctions 1. Between the state of justification and particular acts of pardon or between the state of adoption and particular blessings in possession the former is convey'd thorough the gift of faith the latter thorough the exercise of faith a man gets right by the receiving of a Bill from the Proprietor but when he comes for such a part of it he brings his Bill and shows it and writes a receipt on the back of it Tho' we are but once justified we daily pray Lord forgive my debts and once adopted we daily pray for more enjoyment of what is due to that title 2ly With Mr. Frost I propose a double instrumentality of Faith one on the givers part another on the receivers so it is with Bills too the Proprietor conveys his right and the Receiver afterward pleads his right so it is with faith God conveys Christ and his Righteousness thorough it and we plead for the benefit and use of it as we need daily But this I shall retain that from the first gift of saving Faith which turns us from ungodly to godly we are justified and adopted persons which entirely throws out that legal conditionality that among Socinians has thrown out Christ's satisfaction and among Arminians has impair'd and delay'd its vertue toward sinners until they come with something in themselves a conformity to a new Law And also Antinomianism which is a denomination that comprehends all Errors dishonourable to the Law or Law giver and whatever Doctrine is against the necessity stability and perfection of the Law of God is of this kind whatever Doctrine removes the necessity of the Law removes the necessity of Christ's satisfaction and what Doctrine removes perfection from the Law of God removes the Glory from God's Holiness but to suppose one under the Law sav'd and that Law neither fulfill'd nor satisfied by the personor his Surety is to suppose the Law changeable not necessary if Christ only fulfill'd the mediatorial Law and not that we were under then that Law and Government bult on it was remov'd and chang'd without satisfaction If the grand influence of Christ's righteousness by the Mediatorial Law was to get it chang'd for an easier and less perfect we must either say the influence of Christ's satisfaction did terminate on the nature of God and make a change in his temper from anger to mercy and perfection of holiness to indulgence in carnality or say that the Father and Son were of two different minds but the latter thorough his obedience gain'd him to his mind for what has influence on God as Govenrour has influence on the Law Administrations of Government must be rul'd by the Law and what has influence on the Law for our good must fulfill its precepts or satisfie its sanction The Law has no other Language and if Christ did neither the influence must not terminate on the Government but on the nature God or Fathers person in the Godhead But the Scripture informs us That God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfill'd in us In us says Vastius by application but in Christ by inhesion in us by imputation but in Christ personally says Calvin Muscus Beza Rollock Fulke Cartwright Elton says Dr. Jacomb all Protestants he adds his active and has passive as if they had obey'd it in their own Persons the Law is wholly fulfill'd in him and that very righteousness is ours in a Law sense and so fulfill'd in us 3ly It overthrows Libertinism for if the same grace sanctifies that justifies they can never pretend to the one that want the other 4ly Popery that makes justification and sanctification one that differ as far as the Category of Quality and Relation I have no place for futher use than to intreat every one as they love their own souls and long for pardon of sin not to quench or provoke the Holy Spirit of God for that is his Errand as well as sanctification 2. As ever they would enjoy this free spirit be diligent and conscientious in all Ordinances that are ministrations of the Spirit he is to be reciev'd in the bearing of Faith 3. Study this imputed righteousness of Christ until thou experience most deep humility and most sweet comfort from it Rom. 11.19 Thou standest by faith be not high minded but fear thou depends entirely for faith and righteousness on another thou wast prevented in thy ungodliness when thou receiv'd that gift 2. How much will God do for thee when thou art his Son and Servant if he did so much for thee when an eremy Rom. 5.9 Much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be sav'd thou hast now given to thee at once a perfect and an everlasting righteousness a total forgiveness of all thy sins a work of holiness God has engaged to perfect Vale. FINIS Grant me this there was never any thing so well done by man wherein there is not room for further industry Calv.
imputed to righteousness for that denotes God's Act as Judge in passing the absolving Sentence i. e. thorough the Gift of Faith he conveys a right to that Righteousness which from Eternity was assign'd in the Book of Life to all that shall ever enjoy its blessed Fruits Thus much for the coherent and relative sense of the words as they are subservient and useful to prove that we are not justified by Works I shall now consider them absolutely And I must say this of them so considered that they are as pure Gospel-Language-Expressions as full of encouragement to Sinners and comfort to Penitents as any I know in Scripture Indeed they are not alone for the same Apostle says Historically of himself what he asserts elenctically here of Free-grace 1 Tim. 1.15 viz. That he was a Blasphemer a Persecutor and injurious Person when abundant grace together with Faith and Love prevented him i. e. justifying and sanctifying grace the one in Faith and Love the other in the abundant grace conveyed thorough them and v. 16. he shows this was no singular favour for Christ made a pattern of him to them who should hereafter believe as Artists hang out a piece of their Workmanship to bring in Customers so Christ hangs up Paul for a sign that all who hear the Gospel may count Christ who came to save sinners worthy of Acceptation by all who are sinners The Language of St. Paul's Conversion is the same with that of his Doctrine Grace finds us sinners and makes us righteous and then blessed Neither is Paul the only Pattern Levi is another Mat. 2.14 Sitting at the receipt of Custom serving a Tyrannical Government in its heavy Taxes Christ calls him powerfully and effectually into the service and glory of his Kingdom and makes an Offer to the rest of the Publicans and Sinners That he came not to call the righteous who did repent but sinners to repentance His Office was to be a Physitian to the sick And Zacheus a chief Commissioner is a third who by false Methods had aggravated the Burthen of Tribute and robb'd honest subjects under the Notion of Caesar's due yet Christ tells him salvation is come to his house For that was his constant Employ To seek and to save that which was lost But here we have it doctrinally what is there historically here universally asserted what is there illustrated by Examples and Parables here in strict Logical Terms what is there under Rhetorical Flourishes that when a man is ungodly and without works then Faith is imputed for righteousness Note I shall divide them in these two parts 1st As they set forth the condition of a sinner antecedent to justification 2ly In what method God brings them from that condition into blessedness through an Imputation of Righteousness and imputation of Faith to Righteousness The First Part affords us this Doctrine Doct. That the Object of Justification antecedently to it is a person without works of righteousness an ungodly man When in our blood he bids us live the day of our Enmity was the time of his Love the Condition of our Adamical Nakedness was that he cast the skirt of his beautiful Garments over when aliens he enter'd into a Covenant of Grace with us order'd for the salvation of sinners when in our filthiness he puts his Comeliness on us Ezek. 16. The plain Gospel sence of these Prophetical Figures is To him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness There are three Limitations put on this Text by Inteepreters of differing Opinions from what is the old and common road of them call'd Protestants who usually distinguish the case thus as Altingius consider'd in himself he is ungodly and unrighteous but considered in Christ he is righteous or Dr. Tuckney finds him unrighteous but leaves him not so 1. Some distinguish as to time thus was ungodly not is they reckon some little time before for the exercise of Faith and Repentance before he can be justifi'd A Priority of Order between the Gift of Faith and Justification I willingly grant but a priority of time is pregnant with Absurdities The former doth not serve their turn who make the Exercise of faith and repentance Conditions of justification for it requires no time as the Sun is in no time before its Beams nor the Ring before the relation of Man and Wife Relations result immediately from their foundations but the mind of Man tho' it needs less time for the nimble succesion of its swift thoughts yet time it doth require 2. Man must be regenerate effectually call'd before faith and repentance for the tree must be good before the fruit Now its repugnant to think one regenerate a son of God can be in a state of Condemnation and it 's as inconsistent to think that any are out of a state of Condemnation before a pardon But to suppose any time between regeneration and forgiveness for the exercise of faith and repentance is to suppose a time when we are neither in a state of Condemnation or Justification 3. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Now we are united to Christ by a double Cement the Spirit working faith and faith therefore where that Cement is there is no condemnation but pardon 4. The Scripture says We were reconciled when enemies Rom. 5.10 The difficulty here is if this be meant the price for peace paid or the application of it in justification v. 9. shows the latter being now justifi'd by his blood either we are justifi'd at Christ's death which the party denies or else we are enemies when justifi'd and indeed reconciliation signifies a mutual peace the hatred remov'd on on side by pardon and on the other by regeneration a new temper of Mind It is true Col. 1.21 it is said Who sometime were enemies but now are reconcil'd yet that supposes the same time to continue until the reconciliation which Rom. 5.9 says was the time of Justification A 5th Argument is from the oneness of time by Scripture Connexion between regeneration and justification Col. 2.13 You hath he quicken'd together with him having forgiven you all trespasses 2 Pet. 1.3 We are call'd to glory and vertue at once and 1 Pet. 1.3 are begotten again unto an inheritance incorruptible Tit. 3.5 7. 2 Cor. 6. ult A 6th Argument is from Rom. 6. Where the Apostles solution to the objection of Libertines is from the near connection between justifying and sanctifying grace 7. I see nothing in the context to favour this distinction but é contra would overturn the Arguments and Doctrine too A 2d Limitation is from distinction of Laws they own he is an ungodly man a Non worker as to the righteousness of the Law strictly so call'd which requires perfect perpetual and personal obedience who is the Object of Evangelical Justification But they think there is a necessity of a righteousness to another new distinct Law for as Legal
are more likely sences when David said Blessed is he whose sin is forgiven to mean blessed is he who has an interest in Christ and his satisfaction than to mean blessed is he who repents Nay the Prophet adds that as another thing Blessed is he in whose spirit there is no guile i. e. Blessed is the pardon'd man and the sincere man 3ly He is ungodly when forgiven therefore his righteousness is not the condition of it 4ly C. 3. v. 25. To declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past why should we think the Terms connexed other than what before he unites as cause and effect this is to unite what the Apostle separates our Works and Justification and separate what he unites Christ righteousness and remission 2. It is not supposable to think that Christ's righteousness or satisfaction should be no where mention'd in this dispute about the causes of Justification when it s confest that that is the grand and only meriting cause It is strange that he should dispute about the cause of pardon and yet never mention the true cause but instead of it always a little petty requisite without any causality at all and the more strange that he should so frequently mention that cause under the name of Christ's blood and his being deliver'd for our offences the matter of his righteousness in the context and seldom ever the effect without it but when he calls it by the name of righteousness the proper name by which it saves us for his blood saves us as it is a righteousness a conformity to the law of Redemption that wherein the Law obtain'd its end then it should not be esteem'd his but our own 3. We may learn whose righteousness it is that is mention'd in the dispute by what was propos'd in the These or Doctrine to be disputed which he proposes both negatively and affirmatively viz. Justified not by our righteousness or works but God's we are justified by Gods righteousness this he proposes Rom. 1.17 as the grand end of the Gospel Therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith surely God's Righteousness and Faith by which it s receiv'd are distinct things from thence to v. 21. c. 3. he proves that all our own righteousness is entirely rejected from any interest in this affair and again v. 21. proposes thus the righteousness of God to be that which he now undertakes to prove to be the only righteousness we are justified by But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested and that by God he means Christ Rom. 10.3 4. may be easily learn'd from his words Vnto the righteousness of God for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness and that it is not call'd the righteousness of God because his gift we may learn from Rom. 1.8 Your faith is spoken of thoroughout the world Faith is a work this is the work of God to believe on his name and faith is a righteousness for there is a conformity to the Law in it but it is ours your faith faith differs from this righteousness as the act and object Righteousness of God reveal'd from faith to faith What unprejudic'd man would call that righteousness and faith the same faith differs from it as the effect from the cause 2 Pet. 1.1 Have obtain'd the like precious faith with us thorough the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Who would wish for a plainer expression to prove that the gift of Faith is the fruit of Christ's merit and therefore this righteousness must be imputed to us before that gift be possess'd by us 4. The Epithets of this righteousness speaks it to be Christs Rom. 3.21 22 24. 1. It s the righteousness of God God was Author Owner Contriver Acter Giver Subject of this righteousness it deserves the name by way of Eminence who could contrive it but his Wisdom give it but his Grace bear it but his Patience work it but his Power possess it but his Fulness 2. Without the Law on two accounts both as to the person and as to the righteousness 1. The person Gal. 4. Was made under the law he came under it by his own voluntary choice not natural necessity as we are hence without the Law 2. The Righteousness was that no precept of the Law requir'd to dye or suffer that was none of its duties or righteousness it was its penalty in case of Unrighteousness 3. It s a righteousness now manifested faith and repentance has shin'd in the practice of the Patriarchs and Prophets ever since Adam Heb. 11. Abel Noah Enoch believ'd indeed Christ's was a new kind the World never saw before 4. It was witness'd by the Law and the Prophets if we take the Law for the books of Moses they bear witness to it Abraham believ'd and it was imputed to him for righteousness the bruising his heel Gen. 3. witnesses his suffering the principal matter of his righteousness If we take it for the Typical Law that witnessed to it for all the sacrifices were Types and Types are visible Prophecies and all the Language is the Messias was to suffer in the room of others to obey a Law for others and the Prophets witness Isa 45. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness Jer. 23.6 The Lord our righteousness Dan. 9. To bring in everlasting righteousness There are the Testimonies of three Prophets To him gave all the Prophets witness 5. It was a righteousness convey'd thorough faith put on them that believe v. 22. which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe 6. A righteousness that consist in a conformity to a Law which to us is a Law of Faith not Works We are bound to believe his Obedience to all the Law in the Covenant of Redemption but not to work one bit of it Hence we being justified by that righteousness our boasting is excluded v. 27. 7. A faith that consists in shedding of blood in suffering v. 25. These two are to the same effect Thorough faith in his blood and righteousness by faith 8. A righteousness whose fruit is remission of sin v. 24. To declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are pass'd the same Coherence that is in the Text between imputation of righteousness and pardon 9 Rom. 9.4 A righteousness wherein the Law attain'd its full end the Subject Life and Happiness and the Law-giver honour and glory 10. A righteousness the gift whereof glorifies grace to the uttermost the righteousness of an Angel is not such a gift as this is 5. It s a righteousness that is made ours As Adam's first offence or unrighteousness was made ours that never inher'd in us but death came on us by it then it has some relation to us and we to it this is at large in C. 5. where the Author of this righteousness is plainly call'd the second Adam and if that be not plain enough v. 21. he is call'd
TWO SERMONS One on the Subject of Justification The Other on The Imputed Righteousness and Imputation of Faith to Righteousness by which we are Justified Preached Occasionally at the Merchants-Lecture in Pin-makers-Hall in Broad-street And Printed at their Desire By Walter Cross M. A. LONDON Printed by and for John Astwood at his Printing-House behind St. Christophers-Church in Thred-needle-street the back-side of the Royal Exchange 1695. SERMON I. ROM IV. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly THese words are to be consider'd both relatively and absolutely that we may in order comprehend their full sense and importance The relation they bear to the Apostle's scope and design is that of a proof and confirmation of the grand Doctrine of the Gospel which is That no man is nor can be justified by his own Works or Righteousness the only way of being justified is by the Righteousness of God The Apostle on very good ground supposes such an opposition and disjunction between them two as admits no medium for we cannot be justified without a Righteousness and that Righteousness must be either our own or anothers God's or Man's It is the Negative branch of the Doctrine the Apostle doth earnestly contend for in this 4th Chap. without any appearance of Carnality but disputes with strenuous dint of Argument and closely connected Topics with the terms of his proposed Doctrine whereof this in the Text is one either an immediate Argument thus He that worketh not or is ungodly cannot be justified by his own Works but he who is justified by Grace is one that worketh not or is ungodly Erg. Or rather a Confirmation of an immediate Argument before brought thus Maj. He that is justifi'd by Faith is not justifi'd by Works Min. But Abraham was justified by Faith Erg. Abraham was not justified by Works The Assumption being confirm'd from Scriptures Testimony Gen. 15. he proceeds to prove the grand Proposition thus Maj. He to whom righteousness is imputed of Grace cannot be justified by Works Min. But to him that is justified by Faith righteousness is imputed of Grace Erg. He that is justified by Faith cannot be justified by Works The assumption is frequently asserted in Scripture v. 16. It is of Faith that it might be by Grace The grand Proposition he supposes evident from the opposition between Grace and Debt in v. 4. for when a person is dealt with on the account of Works i. e. any thing in him or done by him it is debt his due I mean the reward but when a Man is dealt with of Grace the reward is proportion'd to the Favour and Good-will of the Donor or Judge the Goodness of the Judge on the Bench and the arraigned Person at the Bar are very opposite therefore to be treated according to this opposite goodness must be an opposite treatment This opposition or repugnancy in v. 5. he illustrates and confirms thus Maj. Where the subjects causes effects or manner of efficiency are opposite there the things themselves are opposite Min. But in Justification by Works and Faith of grace and of due the subjects causes c. are opposite Erg. The Nature of the Justifications are opposite The grand Proposition is a Maxim in Logic or Natural Light taken for granted The assumption is illustrated and confirmed in these four Verses 1. The Subjects to wit a godly and an ungodly Man a righteous and an unrighteous a Worker and a Non-worker 2. The Causes the grace favour and good-will of the Governour and the merit labour obedience and righteousness of the Subject 3. The immediate effect of this Free-grace or way of its efficiency which differs from the Method of Justice measuring its distribution by Law for the former imputes a Righteousness or as in Ch. 5. gives a Righteousness viz. in a way of accompt and reckoning that by virtue thereof and its satisfaction to the Government it may consist with governing goodness to bless the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputes righteousness without works The latter finds an inherent righteousness in the person and therefore his Justification is only an Authoritative declaration of what he is a surrender of the Honour that is his due and he proves this by David's Testimony asserting the former Justification to be a Pardon or Forgiveness As if he had said It 's call'd a Justification because that Pardon is the effect of an Imputed Righteousness Free-grace first gives by way of Account an Interest in Christ's Righteousness and conveys the Right or Interest thorough Faith Secondly Pardons on the account of that Righteousness which gives just ground for the denomination of Justification and this Name is entertain'd as the proper Name for our Pardon in the Gospel that it may be a constant Memorial of our Obligation to Christ for our Pardon and of the difficulty that there was to render a Pardon consistent with the Law and Honour of the Law-maker and Governour One chief end of this added Testimony of David's to the Example and Pattern of Abraham is to prove that we are not justified by Works from the Nature of Gospel-Justification viz. David says it 's a Pardon tho' it 's a Justification in respect to Christ's Righteousness it 's a Forgiveness with respect to our own Unrighteousness This proves the Subject also of Gospel Justification to be ungodly for we need and receive a Pardon not as righteous or godly but ungodly And the reason why the Apostle gives the sense of David's words to be the Imputing of a Righteousness is because it was inconsistent with a necessary just Law and a just Governour and Judge who cannot do violence to a righteous Law to pardon or not to impute sin until there be first a Righteousness imputed and by showing this to be the sense of it he thereby proves that our Justification is of Grace because Free grace is the only cause of the Imputation of that Righteousness It is not for Christ's sake that his righteousness is imputed for that were to say that the same thing was for the sake of it self his Merit for his Merits-sake and Righteousness for his Righteousness-sake But as Christ is the Free-grace of God's Gift so is his Righteousness without any interveening Merits and that has made me think the influence of Christ's Merit to use the accustom'd Phrase terminates on the Law or Legal constitution not on the Divine Nature God is the God Author and Owner of all Grace nothing has chang'd his mind into a more gracious temper and hence the Imputation of righteousness is only ascrib'd to Grace but Justification is ascrib'd to Grace not immediately as imputation is but at second hand Justified by his Grace thorough the Redemption Ch. 3.24 Hence something may be said for an Imputation of Righteousness from Eternity tho' not for Justification from Eternity and may be this is the reason why another Phrase is made use of for the transitory temporary Act viz. Faith