because they knew him to be the Christ. so that this first exception is of no force since that what the Devils professed to know the Evangelists expreslie affirm that they knew A second exception is that the Divels could not be justifyed tho they had the same kind of faith or the same act of faith whereby men are justifyed because there is no promise made unto them salvation was never tendred on anie such condition to them as unto mankind it is To this I answer 1. that the qestion is not whither the Divels should or could be justified if they had that faith or act of faith whereby men ar said to be justifyed but the qestion is whither they have or may have or are capable of such a faith for the nature of it as that is which those have who have interest in Christ and whereby they are justified and the force of the argument depends not upon the denial of the former but upon the denial of the latter To make this plain by an instance of the like suppose some should maintain that the repentance spoken of by the Apostle 2 Cor. 7. 10. where he saies godlie greif breeds repentance unto salvation never to be repented of were nothing els but a sorrow for sin or a regret and remors onlie arising from the apprehension of evil ensuing thereupon shame and confusion in regard of men death and damnation in regard of God and to disproov this conceit a man should reason in this manner That repentance which the Divels themselves may have cannot be that wholesome and saving repentance which the Apostle speaks of But the Divels may have an inward remors and sorrow for sin in regard of those evils that for it have befaln them and ly heavie upon them and unto all eternitie shal so do and it is not therefore that repentance of which the Apostle there speaks The qestion here would not be whither the Divels might be saved if they could repent but whither they ar capable of such a repentance as godlie greif produceth and works unto salvation in men and the stresse of the argument would rest upon the denial not of the former but of the latter And in like manner is it here the pith of the argument consists not in this whither the Devils should be justifyed or no if they had such a faith as men have whereby they ar justified which is not affirmed nor is at all qestioned but whither they have or can have such a faith as the Apostle here speaks of and whereby he affirms that men may be and ar justified and this onlie is that that is here denied And trulie unto me it seems as strange to affirm that the Devils have or may have that verie same faith that pretious pearl that verie same gift and grace of Gods Spirit whereby they ar justifyed tho not for the work but for the object of it as hereafter shall be shewn as to say the Devils have or may have that kindlie and godlie greif for sin as sin not for the evil ensuing it but for the evil that is in it the sincere and genuine repentance springing from the same which the Apostle there speaks of since that the one is a special gift and grace of Gods Spirit as well as the other and look what is spoken of the one in this kind to wit of Repentance Act. 5. 31. and 11. 18. 2 Tim. 2. 25. the verie same is said of faith in the places before mentioned 2. For the removal of this exception more fullie consider we that tho it be tru that there is no such promise or tender of salvation on anie such condition made unto the Devils and damned spirits yet the tender of salvation and justification upon this act of faith is made to all mankind in general without exception of anie Mark 16. 15 16. Go forth into all the world saith our Saviour and preach the Gospel unto everie creature He that beleiveth and is baptised shal be saved If then it can be made out that some men that ar not justified nor saved some wicked ones remaining unjustified unsanctified yet notwithstanding may have the faith by these men maintained to be here ment to wit a beleif onlie of the truth of the doctrine of the Gospel that Christ is the Savior and Redeemer of mankind then this exception must necessarilie fall to the ground And so I pas to a second argument which may thus be framed That faith which wicked ungodlie irregenerate unsanctified men so remaining may have yea and sometimes have had cannot be justifying faith nor the faith spoken of by the Apostle in this place But this beleif of the Gospel that Christ is the Sonne of God the Savior and Redeemer of mankind some have had have known and beleived it who yet coutinued stil wicked ungodlie irregenerate unsanctified and this cannot therefore consequentlie be the faith here spoken of For the proof of the Proposition I shal not so much insist or rest upon the necessarie conjunction of this faith and repentance the one with the other in regard of Gods ordinance and tho by means of his appointment there is a necessarie connection of Justification and Sanctification which as some of the Scholemen have observed might otherwise have ben severed so that justification might have ben where sanctification were not had God ben pleased so to dispose it and sanctification might have ben without justification if God had restored our first Parents to their original condition freelie remitting their offence without anie satisfaction as by his absolute power he might have done for I dare not say as some do that God may not as wel without breach of his justice remit a wrong done him by his creature and vassal as a man may an injurie offered to him by his fellow fellow-servant howsoever in his wisdome he hath decreed and determined to dispose things otherwise which yet divine determination disposition and ordinance were sufficient ground to make the proposition good But the main stress of my proof I shal lay upon this that therefore faith repentance cannot be severed faith and holines cannot be sundred in regard of the verie nature and propertie the condition and qalitie of this faith it self for that this faith whereby a man is justified is an holie habit or disposition and the act issuing from it an holie act termed therefore a most holie faith Jude 20. nor in regard of the objects of it because it is conversant and exercised about holie things God and Christ and the goodnes mercie of God in Christ but because it is an holie disposition in the soul whereby the heart is purified Act. 15. 9. and the partie possest of it is sanctified Act. 26. 18. such faith is a fruit of regeneration a limb or a branch of sanctification which it self is either a fruit or a branch of Regeneration either a fruit or a sprig I say because regeneration may be
signified And it s against reason to reqire a term to be so taken in this our Apostles discourse in such a sense as it is no where found used either in holie Writ wherein it so often occurres or in ordinarie speech or in anie prophane writer 2. That the things themselvs ar divers and distinct eyther from other it is apparent For it is an undoubted Axiome Qae subjecto differunt inter se differunt Those things that differ in Subject that is the one whereof may be found in some subject where the other is not are distinct and divers one from another But so it is with these two remission of sin and justification for remission may be where justification is not and justification may be where remission is not If a man have wronged me I may forgive him as David did Shimei 2 Sam. 19. 23. and yet not justifie him in his dealings 1 King 2. 8 9. And where a man is falslie accused of wrong done to another there may he be justified and yet nothing remitted because no wrong at all done so Deut. 25. 1. Psal. 51. 4. Yea in Gods dealing with the Sonnes of men tho in regard of a mans state and condition in general he never remittes sin where he doth not justifie yet in regard of some particular acts he remittes sometime where he justifies not Psal. 78. 37 38. Tho their heart was not upright with him their semblance of repentance was but counterfeit not sound and sincere yet out of the abundance of his compassion he forgave their iniqitie and destroyed them not So far forth remitted it as not instantlie to destroy them for it And sometimes he justifies where he remittes not as he did in approving of Phineaz his act as a just and righteous deed Psal. 106. 30 31. And as he is said to justifie the Prophet Esay in the discharge of his Ministrie Esay 50. 8. Yea wil you see a manifest difference between these two by an instance that may make it plain to the meanest capacitie A partie offends and wrongs his Neighbor who therefore intends or attempts to follow the Law against him if now upon the Parties own submission and bare acknowledgement of his offence or at the mediation and entreatie of some common friend to them both the Partie offended is content to let fall his suite and doth freelie forgive the wrong here is remission but no justification And if by his Heir or Executor after the wrongeds decesse the Partie who did the wrong should be qestioned for it he could not stand upon his justification he could onelie plead his pardon Again say a man have wronged his Neighbor but hath made him ful satisfaction for the wrong done him or if not able to do it himself hath procured some frend to do it in his behalf and the Partie wronged having accepted thereof doth thereupon remit it and seeks no further remedie against him for it here the Partie that did the wrong if he should at anie time after be qestioned for it he may stand upon his justification and plead not guiltie because he can plead satisfaction made and accepted and this latter not the former is the verie case between God and man in the justification of a sinner satisfaction is the main ground of the justification of him not made by him but by Christ for him So even the Papists themselvs in this regard sounder then the Socinians Bellarmine de justificat lib. 1. cap. 2. Est hoc loco breviter annotandum Christum non esse causam justificationis meritoriam qasi Pater in gratiam sllii nobis peccata dimiserit qomodo saepe reges in gratiam amicorum potentium reos absolvunt sed qoniam pretium redemptionis exactum persolvit ex rigore justitiae pro nostris omnium sceleribus satisfecit This is saith he breiflie to be here observed that Christ is not the meritorious cause of justification as if the Father in favor of the Sonne did forgive us our sinnes as Kings oftentimes assoil guiltie Persons out of favor to and at the suit of frends but because he hath paid an exact price of ransome and thereby in rigor of justice made satisfaction for the wickednesses of us all What could anie Protestant writer say in this point more And Calvine among manie other albeit that manie parcels and long passages ar produced out of him from those places wherin he bends his discours against the former conceipt of justification consisting in an infusion of habitual and inherent holines as if he restrained it unto and would have it wholie consist in a meer pardon and bare forgivenes of sin yet he places it where he speaks his mind out more expreslie in such an absolution as is obtained by a full satisfaction intervening For so he speaks in his Institutions lib. 3. cap. 11. Sect. 3. entreating of that place Act. 13. 38 39. Vides post remissionem peccatorum justificationem hanc velut interpretationis loco poni vides apertè pro absolutione sumi vides operibus legis adimi vides merum Christi beneficium esse vides fide percipi vides deniqe satisfactionem interponi You see saith he after remission of sinnes mentioned that this justification to wit such as we maintain not such as Popish writers manie of them would have ment is by way of interpretation put you see it is manifestly taken for absolution you see it is taken away from the works of the Law you see it is a meer benefit of Christ you see lastlie that satisfaction is interposed Which last clause they do not well to clip off who among manie other cite this place also of Calvine as patronizing their opinion which we here oppose in that point And in the same place Justificare nihil aliud est qam eum qi reus agebatur tanqam approbata innocentia à reatu absolvere To justifie is no other then to assoil the partie qestioned from guilt as approved innocent or guiltles which is another matter then meerlie to pardon neither is this difference a slight matter or of light weight and unworthie much regard since that herein Socinus states the Controversie between the Orthodox Divines and himself with his adherents in his Theological Prelections cap. 15. thus speaking Qaeritur utrum in justificatione nostra per Christum peccata nostra compensatione seu satisfactione aliqa deleantur an vero remissione condonatione pleriqe satisfactione interveniente id fieri arbitrantur nos vero simplici condonatione The qestion is whether in our justification by Christ our sins are done away by some compensation or satisfaction or by remission and condonation The most say this is done by satisfaction intervening but we by simple condonation And the former way Calvine expreslie takes to where he delivers herein his mind more fullie Thus having discovered and refelled the mistakes of two sorts who both give the Term of justification a single notion the one confounding it with
worketh righteousnes in us and secondlie because he hath made satisfaction to his Father for us and that his satisfaction he doth bestow on us and communicate unto us when he justifies us that he or it may wel be called our satisfaction and our righteousnes For tho saith he by righteousnes inherent in us we ar trulie just or righteous and ar trulie so termed yet do we not thereby make satisfaction to God for our faults and for eternal damnation du thereunto but both that inherent righteousnes and the remission of the fault and eternal penaltie thereto du ar the effect of Christs satisfaction which as the Councel of Trent saith is in Justification bestowed on us and applied unto us Nor were it at all absurd on this wise to say that Christs righteousnes and merits are imputed unto us since that they ar so conferred on us and applied unto us as if we had satisfied God our selves Speaks he not as much as anie Protestant doth or can do in this point yea it may be somewhat more then some will approov of so that herein and hitherto the Papists so manie of them at least as herein agree with him and most Protestants concurre howsoever in other points concerning the merit and worth of works and satisfaction made by them for venial sins to be expiated otherwise by Purgatorie penalties and some other the like differences we keep far asunder and much time and pains ar spent and wasted on either part by them on the one side in contending against such an imputation of Christs righteousnes as none of ours ever dreamed of and by manie of ours on the other side in confusing what they deliver of Justification when as by that term they mean not Justification strictlie so termed but Sanctification improperlie by them so stiled and so the Air onelie is to no purpose between them both beaten while the one either wil not see or marks not what the other means A second Use may be to minister much comfort to everie sound and tru-hearted Christian 1. Against the temtations and accusations of Satan and of the wicked of this World The Devil is stiled as the temter so the accuser of the Brethren Revel 12. 10. and the wicked of the world are over-prone to traduce them as evil doers 1 Pet. 2. 12. but the tru Christian may with the Prophet Esay Chap. 50. 8. and the Apostle Paul Rom. 8. 33. bid defiance to either God wil defend him against either If Satan shal offer to traduce him with God or to accuse him unto God as he did Job or worldlie men censure him for an Hypocrite and a formalist as Jobs frends did him God himself wil vindicate him as wel against the one as the other Job 2. 3. and 42. 7 8. he wil bring forth his righteousnes as the light and make his cause or case as clear as the noon-day Psal. 37. 6. everie toung that enforms ought against him shal it self be cast and condemned Esay 54. 17. what accuser or accusation can prevail to the conviction or condemnation of him whome Christ sues for whome God assoils Rom. 8. 33 34. 2. Against the remainders of sinne and corruption within him considering that notwithstanding them he may be and is if he have interest in Christ in the state of justification for justification regards not the filth but the guilt of sinne and tho justification be never severed from sanctification yet is sanctification here but imperfect whereas justification is grounded upon that that brings a perfect discharge of guilt with it 1 John 1. 7. 3. Against the fear of Gods indignation and wrath for being justified by Christs bloud saith the Apostle we shal much more by him be saved from wrath Rom. 5. 9. where the partie is pronounced faultles there offence must needs cease and vengeance much more Esay 54. 9 10. 4. Against the rigor of Gods justice for justification is an act of justice nor can God in justice condemn those whom he hath assoiled as guiltles in and for Christ Rom. 8. 1. God is not like Pilate who though he pronounced Christ guiltles yet for all that would scourge him condemn him and give him up to be crucified Luk. 23. 14. 16 22. John 19. 6 16. yea injustice it were to exact that from anie of those who have interest in Christ for which he had received satisfaction from Christ their suretie before Esay 53. 6 7. 5. Against their want of worth in regard of manie other of far more eminent parts of pietie and sanctimonie for howsoever in regard of those graceful parts that excellent lustre of inherent holines that renders them as wel gratious in the sight of God as conspicuous in the eyes of men there is as vast difference and as distant degrees between Saint and Saint here below upon the earth as there is between Star and Star aloaft in the Heavens 1 Cor. 15. 41. yet as in remission of sin so in justification and in Christs satisfaction the ground of either the meanest weakest and poorest Christian hath an eqal share with the most eminent and excellent And therein doth eithers blessednes principallie consist Psal. 32. 1 2. 6. Against condemnation and sentence of judicature tho justlie past here upon him and deservedlie inflicted for notwithstanding that also having his peace made with God and reconciled to him in Christ he shal with the penitent and faithful Theif on the Cross for Christs satisfaction stand discharged and be pronounced guiltles at Gods tribunal nor shal his ignominious suffering exclude him from entrance into the place of his eternal rest and blis no more then the like did his and our suretie Christ Jesus after his satisfaction finished and accepted which not for himself but for him and al Gods elect was by him both undertaken and exhibited Heb. 12. 2. Luk. 23. 43. Having thus dispatched the first Hed which we propounded to be handled concerning the right meaning of the term Justifie here used we shal proceed now to the second to wit what Faith or what act of Faith it is whereby we ar said here to be justified And herein following the same Methode that we did in the former we shall endevor to shew 1. What act of Faith it is not and 2. what it is In the former I am encountred with two erroneous as to me seems mistakes and extreams the one falling short of the tru nature of justifying Faith or that act of faith whereby we ar said to be justified and the other as in opposition it usuallie falls out going as far beyond it as the other comes short of it The former error or mistake is of those who by Faith wil have here understood nothing els but a general beleif or assent of the mind to the truth of Gods word in general or at least to the doctrine of the Gospel in special concerning salvation by Christ to wit that Jesus Christ is the onlie Saviour and Redeemer of Mankind
that which is commonlie termed Historical Faith but of some learned writers rather by a fitter term Dogmatical Faith because it respects not so much the Historie of the Scripture in general or of Christs life and death in particular as the doctrine contained in the word or that more specially concerning Christ laid down in the Gospel Some difference indeed I find herein between the Papists and those of ours the one makeing Gods word in general the object of this Faith the other restraining it to the promises of the Gospel but the difference is not great and this latter is included in the former Now tru it is and must of necessity be granted that this Dogmatical Faith or such an act of Faith as it implies is a necessarie antecedent of justifying Faith and layeth a ground and foundation for it But that it is the verie justifying act of Faith with most of our writers and teachers I cannot admit and condescend unto yet not because that the Popish partie mostlie maintain it for even the Papists hold manie truths in common both with us and other orthodox Christians nor because the most of ours oppose and impugn it for we make no meer mans or mens judgement the ground of our faith but because I deem it unsound and repugnant to Gods word My reasons ar these 1. That Faith which the Devils and damned Spirits may have cannot be justifying Faith or the justifying act of Faith For justifying Faith is a most pretious Pearl 2 Pet. 1. 1. a special gift Eph. 2. 8. and grace of God as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports Philip. 1. 29. And being so it is consqentlie such an endowment as those damned Spirits have not nor ar capable of But this beleif either of the word of God in general or of the doctrine of the Gospel concerning Salvation by Christ in particular even the Devils themselves may have and have That there is a God the Devils saith James beleiv and tremble Jam. 2. 19. they beleiv there is a God and beleiving that beleiv withal that he is a tru God and that his word is tru did they not beleiv it they would not tremble and indeed what is the reason why wretched Atheists wors herein then the Devil tremble not at Gods word but because they beleiv not that there is a God or that the word is the word of a God or that it is a word of truth yea even the Devils as they beleiv a God so they beleiv a Christ too So themselvs professe I know who thou art say they speaking to Christ even that holie one of God Mark 1. 24. and again What have I to doe with thee Jesus the Sonne of the most high God Mark 5. 7. and yet further if this be not sufficient thou art 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Christ or that Christ the Sonne of God Luk. 4. 41. what more in this kind could or did Peter say Matth. 16. 16. compare Peters confession there and the Devils here and see if not in substance onlie but in terms also they be not the verie same Hereunto might be added that Act. 16. 17. where the Spirit of divination in the Damsel possessed therewith avouches of Paul and Silas These men are the servants of the most high God who shew unto you the way of salvation he confesseth that the doctrine taught by them was the way whereby God had appointed that men should be saved It is apparent hereby that even the Divels may have yea and have that faith which these men affirm to be justifying faith and which yet in truth it cannot be But against this Argument some exceptions have ben given me by some which I shal endeavor to remoov The first exception taken by a young Divine having some employment in the Citie about the time when I delt in this argument was this that it followed not because the Devil thus spake of or unto Christ that therefore they beleived him to be so as they said they might speak it in a colloging way as did the Herodians Mat. 22. 16. when coming to tempt and entangle him they say Master we know that thou art tru and teachest the way of God trulie without respect of or regard unto the person of anie which yet it may justlie be doubted whether in truth they beleived and so may it be of what the Devils are related to have said For answer whereunto I shal not stand to discusse what likelyhood hereof there is whether the speech of the one and the other be alike or whether the Devils came at those times when those things were uttered by them on purpose as the Herodians did to tempt and entangle Christ. But I answer directlie 1. That it canot be but that the Devils must needs know as much as there they do confes To make it evident by an instance suppose the Grand Signior or Turkish Emperour holding as at this day he doth in captivity the subjects of divers Christian Princes and States not a few some one of those Princes whose subjects he so holds should undertake an expedition wherein he would go himself in person for the deliverie of his subjects so deteined enter upon his territories defeat him subdu him release his captives and set them at libertie take the Captiver of them captive and lead him in triumph were it now possible but that the tyrant thus dealt with should know that this Prince who had done all this were the deliverer of his people It is the verie case here The Divel the Prince of darknes the God of this world held in thraldome and servitude the greatest part of the world our blessed Savior comes he defeats him Luke 10. 18. dispossesseth him John 12. 31. disarmes him rifles him Luk. 11. 21 22. rescues men dailie out of his hands and bands Colos. 1. 13. leads him captive Eph. 4. 8. triumphs over him Colos. 2. 15. and is it possible that this spiritual tyrant so defeated disarmed dispossest despoiled bereaft of his prey and purchase captived triumphed should not know and beleiv this Jesus Christ by whom all this was done to be the Savior and redeemer of mankind it is a thing utterlie impossible and scarce credible that anie man should make qestion at all of it But 2. to put this out of qestion what some scriptures say that the Devils acknowledged others of them expreslie say that they knew so Mark 1. as vers 24. it is related how the Divel in the man possest said to Christ I know who thou art so vers 34. it is said of those fiends which Christ cast out that he would not suffer the Divels not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to say but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to speak becaus they knew him they professed not onlie to know him but they knew him indeed and more fullie yet Luk. 4. 41. when they made that confession of him before mentioned it is said Christ rebuked them and would not suffer them to speak
considered two ways either as an act of God working in us or as a change thereby wrought upon us Conceiv we this by the like concerning conversion conversion may be taken two ways either as an act of God working in us or a change thereby wrought upon us and we shall find both together mentioned Jer. 31. 18. Convert me O Lord there is the act of God working in him and I shall be converted there is the change thereby wrought upon him In like manner may Regeneration be considered either as an act of God working in or on a man Jam. 1. 18. 1 Pet. 1. 3. and so sanctification is an effect or fruit of it or as a change wrought thereby upon him 1 Pet. 1. 22 23. and so it is a principal branch of regeneration whereof one main arm is illumination respecting the minde and understanding and sanctification respecting the wil and affections an other shooting out and dividing it self into many sprigs as sincere repentance the filial fear the tru love of God and the like all which and among the rest this faith unfeigned 1 Tim. 1. 5. being branches of sanctification ar all holie dispositions and the acts issuing from them of no other nature or qalitie then the disposition or first act as the School termes it from which they proceed Seeing then that the habit of this faith whereby anie ar justified is an holie disposition such as makes the soul and person possest with it holie that purifies and sanctifies him that hath it and the acts of it conseqentlie such as proceed from an holie heart and a sanctified disposition it must needs follow that no wicked man no unregenerated and unsanctified person while he so continues can have the faith by the Apostle here intended And thus much shall suffice for the proof of the proposition I shal now proceed to the proof of the assumption That a man may beleiv the doctrine of the Gospel that Jesus Christ is the Sonne of God and the Saviour of mankind and yet be never a whit the holier but remain stil irregenerate and unsanctified is apparent For first the Devils as hath ben said and shewed before know and beleiv all this and that now doubtles as undoubtedlie as anie man living doth or can do and yet are no whit at all the holier for all that but remain stil as evil as ever they were yea manie wicked men limmes of the Devil have done the same And here why should I not name Balaam for one for did not Balaam know Christ yes undoubtedlie how could he els have Prophesied of him he had an heavenlie revelation a revelation from God concerning Christ that might be said of him that Christ himself said of Peter Mat. 16. 17. Flesh and bloud did not reveil this mysterie unto him but God himself that is in heaven tho he were not blessed as Peter nor sanctified therefore as he was But hear we Balaams own words Num. 24. 15-17 Balaam the son of Beor the man whose eyes were opened who heard the words of God and knew the knowledge of the most High and saw the visions of the Almightie he saith I shal see him but not now I shall behold him but not nigh as if he had said The time shal come when I shal see the Messias the Savior of Israel I shall one day behold him but afar off so as I shal not be the better for my sight of him it will be little to my comfort There shal come a Star out of Jacob and a Rod or a Scepter shal arise or stand up out of Israel c. a plain Prophecie of Christ as all confes and is generallie acknowledged Yea mark we how far he proceeds Chap. 23. 10. Let me dye or Oh that I might dye saith he the death of the righteous and that my last end might be like unto his Balaam would never have thus spoken had he not beleived that if he did take the same cours that Gods people did who trusted in the Messias and yeilded themselvs up to be ruled whollie by him he might be saved by him as they were but for all that his beleif he would not nor did condescend so to do But leave we him and proceed to some other instances What is the sin against the Holie Ghost of which our Saviour Christ saith Matth. 11. 31 32. All manner of sinne and blasphemie shal be forgiven unto men but the blasphemie against the Holie Ghost shal not be forgiven neither in this world nor in the world to come Is it not almost generallie by most Divines acknowledged that this irremissible sin is a sin always joyned with knowledge and what knowledge not a bare speculative or notional knowledg but a beleif of the truth of the Gospel accompanied with a malicious opposition thereuuto No man therefore can commit that sin but such an one as knows and beleives the doctrine of the Gospel which yet he malitiouslie opposeth and conseqentlie must needs have that Faith which these men would have to be justifying faith It was somtime the speech of a Reverend Divine that if Paul had had Peters knowledge when he opposed the Faith of Christ or Peter Pauls malice when he abjured his Master they had both them committed that unpardonable sin But Paul did what he did in ignorance and Peter what he did out of weaknes and both repented of what they had done which none of those that have committed that sin ever do Heb. 6. 6. In which place further the Apostle plainly intimates vers 4. 6. that men that have ben illightned with what think we means he but with the knowledge of Evangelical truths and have partaked of the Holie Ghost of the common graces of the Spirit and tasted of the heavenlie gift and the good word of God as those compared to the seed sowen on stonie ground that receiv the word with joy and beleiv for a time Matth. 13. 20. Luk. 8. 13. and the powers of the world to come may yet not fal onlie but fall utterlie away as those also in the Gospel Luk. 8. 13. yea not fall whollie off onlie but sin in despite of Gods Spirit Chap. 10. 26 29. and so sin that it 's a thing impossible for them to be restored again by repentance Chap. 6. 6. and what sin it is that is there so deciphered is no great difficultie to determine which albeit I dare not say that Judas committed for it seems avarice not malice that run him hedlong into that guilt of impietie little imagining it may be but that his Master would rid himself wel enough out of their hands unto whom he had betraied him as he had sometime before done the like Luk. 4. 29 30. John 8. 59. and 10. 39. and himself go away with their money the whiles yet it is verie likely that he beleived that concerning his Master to be tru that he preached unto others Howsoever the former instances shewing that wicked ones so continuing
to do is altogether needles it may be done timelie enough and well enough hereafter he may follow the world and take his pleasure pursu his own courses and persist in his own waies as long as he sees good and hath libertie and abilitie so to do and afterward when by age or cross occurrents he is so restrained that he cannot do as he did and desires stil to do if he could when he is arrested upon his sick or lies upon his deaths-bed he may then seasonablie begin to think on those things which he hath now no minde to which his minde at present goes so much against and the applieng of himself thereunto wil stand him then in as much steed as if he had put himself to such a tedious task before undergone such a toilsome pennance all his life long And many doubtles building on such vain imaginations and gulling their own souls with such groundles hopes as like Castles in the ayer they thence raise and erect to their own ruine refuse to receive Christ so tendred unto them albeit they beleiv him to be the onlie Savior of mankind and no salvation to be had without him And thus much may suffice for refutation of the former mistake of those who hold the Dogmatical Faith that is the beleif of the truth either of the word of God in general or of the Gospel in special that Jesus Christ is the Savior and Redeemer of mankind to be that Faith whereby we ar said here to be justified There remain some few Testimonies of Scripture to be answered that ar wont to be produced for the proof of that tenent either by the Papists or our own writers Now for the proof of this that justifying faith is no other then a firm assent to the truth of Gods word in general Bellarmine produceth onlie one place of Scripture to wit the Apostles words Hebrews 11. 1. Faith is the substance of things to be hoped for and the argument or evidence of things not appearing This he calls his first argument tho it have no second as elswhere he doth the like And in the prosecution of his argument from this place he spends a whole Chapter de justificat lib. 1. cap. 6. wherein he takes for granted that the Apostle in these words gives an exact definition of justifying faith and the instances that after he gives concerning the creation of the world by Gods word and the destruction of it by a floud c. shew that this faith is a beleif of the word of God in general as wel of Historical relations as of doctrinal instructions and of comminations as of promises Unto all which we may thus answer 1. It is not denied that the Apostle in this Chapter doth at large commend and set forth the strange and admirable power efficacie and excellencie of that tru lively and saving faith which he had before mentioned Chap. 10. 38. but that he intends to deliver in those first words an exact definition of faith so far forth as it justifies or either there or in the instances ensuing to point out that special act of faith whereby it doth justifie that is is a mean of assoiling a man from the guilt of his sinnes is more then the Cardinal is able to make good and indeed who almost would be so absurd as to say that anie man should be so justified by beleeving that God made the world of nothing the truth whereof some yet among us have of late flatlie denied and have not forborn to publish their flat denial and disapprooving of it in print tho tru it is that by that self same faith we beleiv as wel the worlds creation by God as mans redemption by Christ and ar thereby as firmly assured of the one as of the other 2. Nor doth it follow that Noa was assoiled from his sins and became an heir of that righteousnes that is according to faith by beleeving that the whole world should by a deluge be destroied tho by the same faith he beleived also that he and his should be saved from destruction in that universal deluge by means of the Ark which by Gods appointment and according to direction received from him he thereupon to that end built 3. Yea to return Bellarmines argument upon himself whereby he would proov that the justifying act of faith is not such as we would have it to be to wit fiducia a fiducial trust or reheng on Christ and Gods promise of justification and salvation by Christ because such a faith produceth not fear but produceth hope and expelleth fear whereas that act of Noa's faith whereby he beleived that the deluge would undoubtedlie come bred in him that fear that caused him to build the Ark. For as the warning given of the floud notwithstanding the improbability and in humane reason incredibilitie yea impossibilitie of it in natural power yet certainlie apprehended and undoubtedly beleived upon Gods word relating revealing it to him produced fear in him even as the comminatorie prediction of Ninevies destruction delivered by Jonas from God and by the Ninevites beleived bred a fear thereof in them Jon. 3. 5. so the promise of deliverance made withal unto him at the same time by God being as certainlie beleived and relied on bred in him an hopeful expectation of the undoubted performance of it and was the principal motive of his building the Ark which otherwise to have attempted had ben a most vain and foolish project and would have prooved of none effect 4. Hereunto might be added that the Apostle Peter seems to implie that that deliverance from the deluge had somewhat typical in it 1 Pet. 3. 20 21. and as in that promise to Abraham for the performance whereof his trusting upon God is said to be imputed unto him for righteousnes Gen. 15. 5 6. had beside the expression of the numerositie of his issue in general mentioned also Gen. 13. 16. an intimation withal of that blessed or blessing rather Act. 3. 26. Seed Gen. 3. 15. and 22. 18. Jesus Christ in special by whome all that relie on him and trust to him were to be justified and saved and the possession of the Land of Canaan mentioned in the Covenant that God at the same time plighted with him Gen. 15. 8-18 was a type of the right unto and interest in the heavenlie inheritance procured and purchased for all the faithful by Christ Heb. 3. 18 19. and 4. 1-11 and 6. 20. and 9. 12 24. and 10. 19 20. so that temporal deliverance promised to Noa from the destruction by the deluge proceeding from the special favor and grace of God to him Gen. 6. 8. might wel be a type of that spiritual deliverance from the power of sinne and Satan which Noa no doubt beleived to be attained by the promised seed on whom by relieng he became heir of that righteousnes that is according to faith in him 5. That the Apostle speaks of the faith of Gods people
in general whither ordinarie and that either Historical of matters as wel alreadie past the creation v. 3. as future the departure out of Egypt v. 22. or Dogmatical concerning God and his goodnes v. 6. or extraordinarie that of miracles v. 33 34. is apparent by the varietie of instances given by him as Bellarmine also himself grants and would hence proov that faith in all these instances yea that faith in general is but one and the same which if it were tru then everie one that hath justifying faith should have a power of working miracles also which is directlie contrarie both to our Saviors intimations Matth. 7. 22 23. and 17. 20. and the Apostles 1 Cor. 12. 9 10 29 30. tho it be not denied that some general notion of faith be found in each of them Lastlie albeit that Historical or Dogmatical faith or that act of faith whereby the truth of the Historie or Doctrine of the word in general or that of the Gospel in particular is beleived be of necessitie conjoyned with or antecedent unto that act of saith whereby a beleiver is justified it doth not thence follow that these two therefore ar one and the same no more then the slavish fear ariseing from a meer apprehension of wrath and greatness is the same with the filial fear ariseing from apprehension of Gods mercie and goodnes Psal. 130. 3. Jer. 31. 39 40. because the one is to the other tanqam aâ—us ad silum as the needle to the thred it goes before to make way for it and helps to introduce it or that faith and hope ar one and the same because the one is the foundation of the other nor ar they in time severed the one from the other I shal not need to examine anie of Bellarmines other arguments for this place of Scripture is not the principal onlie but the onlie one produced by him to proov that the assent to the word of God in general is that whereby we ar said to be justified and the rest proov no more then this that such a faith is reqisite to justification and salvation and that without it a man cannot be justified or saved whereas the qestion is not whither all that ar justified have such a beleif of Gods word in general or of the Gospel in particular which no man denies but wither such a beleif be that faith or that act of faith wherby we ar justified which is that alone that is here qestioned Yea the rest of his Scriptures as himself acknowledgeth ar intended onlie to disproov the particular application of the promise to be the justifyeng act of faith whereof more anon when we have done with some others of our own who of the Dogmatical Faith or beleif of the doctrine concerning Christ approov and affirm the same that of the beleif of the word in general Bellarmine doth THE PUBLISHER Of this Posthumous Peice of Work TO THE READER IT is a fruitless wish for me to utter Oh that I were not enforced to adjoyn this Epilogue Desiderantur caetera The rest is wanting and wil be wanted It wil be fitter for me to say Placeat homini qod placuit Deo Let not that discontent man which pleased God And it seemed good to the Lord of the Vineyard to interrupt this faithful Servants labour with an acute disease which supervening to age which is an incurable sickness put a period to his life which was his day or season of work He was not idle in the former part of the day but took this business in hand at his verie evening which man that knows not his time could neither fore-see nor put off And now this unfinished Peice of his must stand as an imperfect Table begun to be wrought by Apelles or Titian famous in their Generations which no surviving or succeeding Artist wil adventure to accomplish with a less-skilful hand But yet we ar not at an irrecoverable loss since we have stil the living Oracles of Gods word which are the original truth whereof humane discourses are extract Copies and besides common Reason we may by humble and earnest praâ—eâ— obtain the assistance of Gods holie Spirit for the improvement of Reason in the prosecution of what is not here exprest And tho this discourse be abruptly broken off before it fully explain what faith is yet we may from the Negative part which cuts off all Notions pretending to that Title conclude the affirmative that justifying faith is an affiance in Christ or in God through Christ and for Christs sake for absolution from our sinnes and so conseqentlie for eternal salvation and the justifying act of faith is to trust to on or in Christ commonly called beleiving in or on him by a speech somewhat improper yet not without example in Exotick Authors But if our Interpreters had ben so lucky as insteed of beleiving on God and on Christ to have rendred the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by trusting as e. g. John 14. 1. we read the words of our Savioor to his Disciples Ye beleiv in God beleiv also in me but we may very wel read thus Ye do trust or Do yee trust in God or on God trust also in me or on me use would have made the term familiar and the thing it self obvious to the understanding and it would have prevented many hot but impertinent contentions about words But mine infirmities wil not permit me to enlarge in the explication of the nature of faith which is a common Theam but deserves exact handling I entreat the Christian Reader to accept this final portion of heavenlie Treasure rescued from the dust since the earthen vessel by which it was conveyed to us is broken by death and crumbled into his primigenial Dust. Si qid novisti rectius hisce Candidus imperti si non his utere mecum Hor. FINIS 2 Tim. 3. 15. zech 8. 19 2 Cor. 4. 1. Judg. 5. 15. â— Tim. 6. 20 2 Tim. 2 2. 1 Pet. 4. 11 A. D. 1654. Greg. Naz. Dan. 4. 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. de civit I. 22. c. 7. Philo Jud. Just. Mart. Origen c. Jo. Picus Count of Mirandula Dr. Feild of the Church l. 5. c. 17. Guil. Rivet de justif part 1. c. 2. lect 3. De justificat l. 2. c. 7. Lib. eâ—d C. 10. See Peter Alliacenses ad Sent. lib. 4. qaest 1. art 3. conclus 1. See Ger. Vossius Defens Grot. de satisfact advers Ravensperg cap. 2. 8. Eccl 9. 12. Luk. 11. 1â— Bud. in Comment Fides non modo credulitatem sed fiduciam significat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro confidete sumitur Aeschin conâ— Cetesiph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diod. Sicul l. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristot. Politic. Tyrâ—â—â—orum esse notat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Latini pariter in eodem sensu usurpaâ—â—â—â—â—edere Val. Max. l. 6. Nemo debet nimium fortunâ— crâ—dere Virg. celog 2. Nimium â—crede coloti i. e. confide Serv.
as hath formerlie ben shewed and therefore no part of it 2. With them al it presumes in the matter of Justification a needles twofold act the not imputation of sinne and the imputation of righteousnes as two distinct things whereas not to impute sinne in consideration of satisfaction made for it is no other thing then to impute righteousnes to the Partie therein concerned Since that a man can not be deemed or doomed guiltles or faultles but he must of necessity be deemed or doomed just or righteous there being no medium or middle state between a delinquent or a guiltie person and one guiltles or just He that can proov himself no delinquent but free from fault must of necessity be justified acqitted and assoiled as just See Deut. 25. 1. If nothing but sinne can make a man unjust then surely the utter absence of sinne must necessarilie make a man just See Pauls plea Act. 25. 8. Hitherto we have endevored to shew what to justifie as the Apostle here takes it and as the word is most commonlie used is not we now pass on to shew what it is and what indeed it properlie imports The word Justifie therefore as our writers do generallie against the Papists maintain is forense vocabulum a term taken from Courts of Justice and courses or cases of judicature as appears plainlie from Deut. 25. 1. 1 King 8. 32. 2 Chron. 6. 23. Psal. 82. 3. Prov. 17. 15. Esay 5. 23. and 43. 9. And it is an act either of the Partie himself qestioned or of his Advocate or of the Jurie or of the Judge or of them all Of the Partie himself when he pleads not guiltie and stands upon his defence as Paul doth Act. 25. 8. of the Advocate when he defends and maintains his Client to be not guiltie as the convert theif pleaded for Christ on the Cross Luk. 23. 42. of the Jury when they give in their verdict in behalf of the Party accused as not guilty as the Pharisees did in the behalf of Paul Act. 23. 9. of the Judge when he pronounces him not guiltie and so cleeres and assoiles him as Pilate did Christ Luk. 23. 14 15. the Advocate justifies by pleading and defending as not faultie the Judge by pronouncing and sentencing as such and to Justifie conseqentlie in a judiciarie way is to discharge from guilt of sin or declare free from it either by defence as an Advocate or by sentence as a Judge Now hence the term of Justifyeng is taken and used out of such solemnities applied to other proportionable acts but retaining stil its proper and genuine notion even the same that in those set and solemn courses and cases it had Thus a man is said to Justifie himself when he stands upon his own innocencie and maintains his own faultlesnes and integritie against such as charge him with ought amisse So Job 27. 5. Luk. 16. 15. John 8. 46. and others to justifie a man when they stand in defence of him and maintain his honestie and innocencie against those that qestion it and either doubt of it or denie it So 1 Sam. 19. 4. To Justifie then in general is to defend or cleer acqit or assoil from fault or guilt from desert of blame or penaltie and conseqentlie to proov or approve and pronounce guiltles or just not to make just save in such an improper sens as when we use to say you would make me a theif or you would make me a lier that is you would aspers me with or fasten such an imputation upon me as John sayes of him that beleives not God that he makes him a liar in not giving credit to him 1 John 5. 10. and you would fain make such an one an honest man when our meaning is you would proov or approov him as such so that as to sanctifie when it is spoken of God Esay 8. 13. is not to make him holie as he doth us Heb. 2. 11. but to acknowledge him so to be and to glorifie him Psal. 50. 14. Gal. 1. 23. is not to make him glorious as he doth us Rom. 8. 30. but to acknowledge his glorie and ascribe glorie to him and to magnifie is not to make him great but to acknowledge and set forth his greatnes Psal. 34. 3. So to justifie is not to make just but to declare and pronounce just and as a mans righteousnes is said to be taken from him when he is censured or condemned as unjust tho he be never so just nor be anie whit the les just because unjustlie so deemed or doomed Esay 5. 23. Job 27. 5. In a word as a wicked or guiltie person is said to be made wicked or guiltie when he is convicted and condemned as such so is the righteous or guiltles partie said to be Justified or made righteous when he is acqitted and assoiled as such See both terms so used Deut. 25. 1. and Job 40. 8. so Job 27. 5. What the Hebrew hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and our English that I should justifie you The Greek renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that I should pronounce you righteous and the Latine ut justos judicem vos That I should judge you righteous Job 27. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine ut tu justificeâ—is That thou maiest be justified as the Greek renders the same Psal. 50. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that thou maist appear to be just Prov. 17. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that judgeth the unrighteous righteous the righteous unrighteous and the Latine more expreslie Qi justificat impium condemnat justum and our English accordinglie he that justifies the wicked and condemns the just yea so Augustine himself tho oft elswhere he go the other way as before hath ben shewed and in his tractate of the Spirit and Letter Chap. 26. discoursing of that passage of the Apostle Rom. 2. 13. Not the hearers of the Law but the doers of it shal be justified he tread a while in his wonted track yet after some forced and far-fetcht expositions given of the words at length he pitcheth upon this Aut certè ita dictum est Justificabuntur ac si diceret justi habebuntur justi deputabuntur sicut dictum est de qodam ille autem volens se justificare id est ut justus haberetur deputaretur unde aliter dicitur Deus sanctificat sanctos suos aliter autem sanctificetur nomen tuum nam illud ideo qia illos ipse facet esse sanctos qi non erant sancti hoc autem ideo ut qod semper apud se sanctum est sanctum etiam ab hominibus habeatur Or certainly it is so said they shall be justified as if he should say they shall be accounted they shall be reputed just as it is said of one he willing to justifie himself Luk. 10. 29. that is that he might be counted and reputed righteous Hence
reallie answer it as we use to say of a partie or his suretie upon payment made or satisfaction given that he hath answered the debt For the word here used even in the form here used is taken in a notion of answering Ezek. 14. 3 6. yea and that of a real kind of answering as by inflicting there so by sustaining here by taking vengeance in the one place by giving satisfaction in the other either of w ch by the term of payment we ar wont to expres Now where ful satisfaction is made and accepted for the the breach or transgression of a Law the Law is not thereby repealed or abrogated but it is rather thereby manifested to be firm and of force to oblige those whom it concerns either to the strict observation of it or to a just compensation in some kind or other made for default therein committed and this hath our Saviour Christ in our behalf exhibited For howsoever I dare not run out so far as to affirm as manie do that our Savior suffered the verie self-same torments partlie in his Agonie and partlie on the Cross that the damned souls suffer and those that have interest in the merit of his sufferings should have suffered in Hell much les that he suffered such an high degree of torments in those few howers while he hung on the Cross as did in the intension and extremitie thereof ad pondus for weight answer and was adeqate unto all those penalties made up into one Mass and comprised in one lump that unto all eternitie the whole multitude of Gods elect for all whose sinnes he satisfied were to have endured the power of his Deitie supporting and enabling his humane nature thereunto since that Christs humane nature in which the satisfaction was to be made and was made being but a finite creature could not be capable of admitting such an infinite weight of torment as such a masse of endles suffering must of necessity have amounted unto albeit for the allay hereof that were allowed which a learned man of eminent parts from Picus and Scotus suggests that unto the sinnes of the penitent because they are broken off by repentance an infinit penaltie is not du which yet seems to want sound ground of proof from Gods word wherein the Apostle speaking of the sinnes of the faithful who had now cast off the service of sinne saith in general their 's not excluded the stipend of sin or the pay du to it a militarie term is death and that eternal death is intended appeares by its opposite everlasting life said there to be Gods Donative as Tertullian wel renders it being a term of the like nature with the former that is his larges or free gift such as the Roman Generals besides their pay used to confer upon their Souldierie and tho granted would hardlie withdraw weight enough to make a finite creature capable of it within so narrow a stint of time as some three howrs could make up I conceiv that keeping our selves within the bounds of Christian sobriety in this profound mysterie we may safely say that Christs humiliation through the whole cours of his life and his sufferings as wel in Soul as in Bodie in his whole humane nature consisting of both neer upon his death together with his death in that manner inflicted and sustained the eminencie of the person being even God as wel as Man that was content to expose and abase himself unto al this Phil. 2. 6-8 being duelie weighed was such and so great as God deemed in Justice eqivalent unto and wel worthie to weigh down whatsoever was reqisite to the discharge of the debt of all those that had interest therein For as for that which the same Autor subjoins and some other also have therein concurring with him that the worth and excellencie of Christs person was onlie to make the passion availeable to manie but was not at all to dispens with the continuance nor the grievousnes of his pains and that if it might dispens with anie degree of extremitie of punishment due to sin it might dispens also with two and so conseqentlie with all seems to ty and stint Gods justice to over-strict terms and the worth and value of Christs sufferings to such a precise rate as their private estimation shal deem fit to assign it As on the other side they seem to raise it to an higher estimate then there appears good ground for and to control Gods wisdome in the disposing the means of procuring mans justification in such manner as he hath designed and in such a measure of sufferings and humiliations as he assigned Christ to undergo who stick not to affirm that the least drop of Christs bloud was of so infinite a valew as was sufficient to make a ful satisfaction to Gods Justice for the discharge of the sinnes of the whole World Which if it were tru then the bloud shed in the Circumcision of our Saviour had been sufficient to have answered Gods Justice and to have made a ful compensation to whatsoever the law of God could in utmost rigor have reqired on the part of all that had ever transgressed it And so all that Christ afterward either did or endured and his death it self the upshot of all had been superfluous and needles which how it will consist with the wisdome of God and love to his Sonne I shall leave to be deemed by others of deeper reach then my self Howsoever Christ having of his own accord become our suretie and undertaken the discharge of our debt and it being at the choise of the Creditor or Partie wronged even according to Law to reqire satisfaction of the debt or compensation of the wrong done either from the Debtor and delinquent himself or from his Suretie as it is a favor and mercie in God to forbear the exacting it of us who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of no abilitie unable utterlie to perform it Rom. 5. 6. so it is not against but according to his Law even that Law unto which we were obnoxious for the breach of it to exact of our suretie a ful compensation for all our transgressions In a word that Justification is an act of Justice and not a matter of free favor or meer mercie alone appeers evidentlie from the verie term to Justifie whence it is deduced whither we consider it in its native notion or in its ordinarie use For 1. In its native notion and proprietie the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek as also whatsoever term we can frame in Latine or English to answer in anie du analogie unto either of these two it doth and must include a notion of Justice in it For howsoever we trulie affirm that neither of those the Hebrew or Greek term do necessarilie intimate a making just save in such sens as hath formerlie ben hinted and might therefore in Latine be rendred by the word justare derived from justus
colligimus Christum eo qod Patri satisfeceret justitiam nobis comparassâ— Hence we gather that Christ by making satisfaction to the Father hath procured or purchased Justice or righteousnes for us 2. That which is exhibited whither by doing or suffring or both in way of satisfaction and so accepted being such as makes a plenarie compensation for an offence formerlie committed because it utterlie extinguisheth and abolisheth the wrong so taketh it away as if it never had ben it justly procures a guiltlesnes a blamelesnes unto the delinqent in whose behalf it is performed and makes him therefore to be reputed in the eye of Law and Justice as now no delinqent but as guiltles faultles and just there being no medium between these two just and unjust nor between guiltles and just see Deut. 25. 1. this guiltlesnes therefore is justlie termed justice and the partie conseqentlie by plea thereof upon anie emergent occasion may be trulie justified and such guiltlesnes aâ—cheived by Christs satisfaction made to Gods Law and his Justice makes the partie unto whom the same is imputed and who hath interest therein trulie named and justlie deemed just and to be in the state of justification or in a justifiable condition 2 Cor. 5. 21. and this is that not the satisfaction it self but the guiltlesnes thereby procured that is so oft in his argument termed justice or righteousnes called the Justice of God Rom. 1. 17. and 3. 21 22. and 2 Cor. 5. 21. not as some for that the satisfaction was made by Christ who is God but because contrived prepared propounded and appointed us by God for God as the partie wronged and Christ as the partie satisfying for the wrong are in this argument distinguished Rom. 3. 24 25. and 2 Cor. 5. 19 21. 3. That everie tru Christian hath a two-fold justice or righteousness the one in reference to the guilt of sinne ariseing from transgression of the Law 1 John 3. 4. Rom. 4. 15. and 5. 13. 1 Cor. 15. 56. the other in reference to the filth of sinne being a pollution and depravation of the Soul depriving it of that purity and integritie wherein at first it was created Matth. 15. 18 19. 2. Cor. 7. 1. Eph. 4. 22-24 and that these two are to be distinguished is apparent for that divers things and acts that do not in their own nature pollute or defile yet by a special Law prohibited do in the use of them by vertu of that inhibiting Law produce guilt Now in regard of this latter justice or righteousnes consisting in a freedome from the filth of sinne the faithful ar trulie and sincerelie but imperfectlie just or righteous Job 1. 1. and 9. 3 15 21. and 23. 10. Luk. 1. 6. in regard or the former consisting in a freedome from the guilt of sin they ar fullie compleatlie perfectlie just or righteous 1 John 1. 7. the one is the righteousnes of sanctification the other the righteousnes of justification that in this life at least uneqallie shared this eqallie imparted to each being in common accepted for and imputed unto all Whence that of Luther AEqè justus latro in cruâ—e atqe ipsa beata Virgo Maria that The convert theif on the Cross was all out as just or righteous as the blessed Virgin Marie Christs Mother 4. That there is a twofold Justification 1. General in regard of all sin whatsoever in general 2. Particular in regard of some special or particular crime And a man that is just and justifiable in regard of some particular offence yet may not be justifiable in general So Job charged by his frends with gros hypocrisie oppression and crueltie Job 22. 5-9 stands stiflie in justification of himself Chap. 23. 10. and 27. 5. and yet in general acknowledgeth that he could not be justified nor answer for one act of a thousand should God cal him to a strict account Chap. 9. 2 3. and a man that is unjust and cannot be justified in general yet may be just and justifiable in regard of some particular So David tho in the general he declines Gods strict dealing in way of judicature with him Psal. 143. 2. yet in particular upon false imputations cast upon him he appealeth solemnlie thereunto Psal. 7. 3 4 8 9. and 38. 19 20. yea the wickedest man in the world and the Devil himself may thus be legallie just and trulie justified because in that particular guiltles when some criminal act shall be wrongfullie charged on him that was never committed by him But it is general justification that is entreated of and intended in this place And thus we have endevored to shew what the word Justifie doth preciselie denote in this place The Use whereof brieflie may be 1. To inform us aright concerning the distinct notion and nature of divers graces of God that tho they be knit and linkt one to an other hang all on one string or chain are all fruits of Gods favor towards us in Christ concur all together in and with all those that are reconciled to God in Christ yet are things of a several and distinct nature and notion Sanctification is one thing Justification an other and Remission of sinne a third as hath been shewed And yet again so far forth to reconcile and qalifie the differences of divers of those that seem to mistake and misexpound the word here used that notwithstanding this their mistake they may not maintain anie error therefore in matter of faith onelie they use some words and Phrases improperlie and misexpound some places but otherwise say nothing but what is orthodox and agreeable to the analogie of faith Yea to remoov some groundles controversies between us and the Papists and cleer some mistakes and misunderstandings on either side while the Papists charge us to hold that a man is made formallie habituallie inherentlie holie and righteous by Christs holines and righteousnes imputed unto us as if a black-Moor saith Bellarmine were made white by casting a white garment upon him whereas we say no such matter and withall he acknowledgeth that if when our writers say that Christs righteousness is imputed unto us their meaning were no other but this that Christs merits are imputed unto us because they ar given unto us and we may tender them unto God for the discharge of our sinnes in regard that Christ hath taken upon him the burden of making satisfaction for our sinnes and of reconciling us to God his Father they held nothing therein but what is right tho saith he the manner of speaking that they use is vetie seldome or never found either in the Scriptures or the Antient Fathers And the truth is that precise form of speaking can hardlie be found in Scripture nor is that justice whereby we ar said to be justified called as we have observed the justice of Christ but the justice of God But yet the same Bellarmine elswhere confesseth that Christ is rightlie called our Justice or Righteousnes First because he