unto them and taken notice of so far as that he was for it esteemed righteous We shall best understand the meaning by comparing the self-same phrase as it it is extant Psal 106.31 Phineas his executing judgment was counted to him for righteousness to all generations for evermore that is he for that fact or by means thereof had the esteem of a righteous man amongst men unto all posterity So Abrahams faith was counted to him for righteousness before God that is he for believing or by means of faith was esteemed or reckoned righteous before God This as far as I conceive is the proper meaning of the phrase If that hypallage seem harsh thus conceive it His believing was reckoned unto him to righteousness that is came into reckoning so far with God on his behalf or for his benefit that thereby he obtained righteousness Faith then is of that reckoning with God as that to Abraham yea to every man endued thrrewith he allowes the esteem of a righteous man understand faith as it s before described For the better understanding of this conclusion let us see a little how faith obtains this blessing of righteousness at Gods hands or what is the reason of the connexion of righteousness with believing Bellarm. de just if lib. 1. cap. 17. Divers are the explanations Papists impute it sometimes to the merit and worth of the very habit or act of faith as if it deserved at Gods hands justification and had the force of a proper efficient cause meritoriously to procure it Against it are these Reasons First Bernard Ser. 1. de Annunciat Hereof we may say as Bernard of other good works or as he terms them merits that it s not such as as that for it righteousness should be due to the believer of right or as though God should do us wrong except he gave to us believing righteousness for this as all other good qualities or actions is the gift of God and therefore man is rather a debtor to God for it then God to man Secondly Besides this how holds the difference assigned by the Apostle betwixt the worker and the believer in the manner of obtaining righteousness if righteousness belong to the believer as a reward of debt If righteousness belong to the believer of debt as a reward of believing then vainly doth the Apostle alledg this as a difference betwixt the believer and the worker that the one hath righteousness paid as of debt the other given as of grace but the difference is sure authenticall Ergo. Their arguments will be fitlyest answered when we come to set down the opinions of our own Divines Sometimes they thus conceive it that faith is the beginning of righteousness Bellarm. qua supra and the inchoate formall cause of righteousness that is part of that righteousness whereby we are made formally righteous and that they would prove out of this text because to him that believeth in him that justifyeth the ungodly his faith is counted to righteousness But they would deceive us with a false glosse for that is not the meaning that faith is counted our righteousness but that its taken notice of so far as that to the believer righteousness is imputed A mean therefore it is of obtaining righteousness not righteousness it self except by righteousness they will understand that of sanctification 1 Ioh. 3. Wherefore we acknowledg it to be a part but what is that to the righteousness of justification whereof the question is 2. After their own glosse its righteousness only aestimativè not therefore formally Sometimes again they make righteousness depend on faith as a preparation thereto in part necessary to dispose the subject to receive justification that is as they term it the infusion of charity and other graces whereby we are made formally righteous Versipelles Where may we finde you Is it the form of righteousness and yet but a preparation to righteousness Ob. The form inchoate not compleat Answ But I demand Is it before the other graces of God in time Or are they togethes with it infused If so how then make you yet a preparation only to righteousness when as together with it other gifts which make up righteousness compleate are infused Let us leave them and come to explications of our own Divines Some thus Righteousness or justification hath its connexion with faith by an order that God hath been pleased to set down in the Covenant of grace which is this that whosoever shall believe in Christ shall be justified and saved This condition now performed on our parts justification is ours and we are as righteous in Gods esteem as if we had all the righteousness of the Law performed by our selves Now this is an evident and clear truth that in the Evangelical Covenant faith is the condition of justification But first if faith justifies us as a condition performed by us fain I would know how we may maintain that doctrine of our Churches concerning sole faith and its being the only thing in us that avails to the attainment of justification for if we view the tenour of the Covenant of grace faith is not the only condition required of us to justification and remission of sins for repentance also is a condition required in that covenant to the same end Mar. 1.15 Repent and believe the Gospel Act. 2.38 Repent and be baptized for remission of sins but faith must so justifie that in that work no other thing may share with it no not repentance it self Ergo Besides this if the act of faith qua actus be that for which we are justified how doth the Apostle describe our righteousness to be without works vers 6. How sets he the worker and believer in direct opposition in the articles of justification Perhaps it will be said that works of the law only are excluded not this which is a worker of the Gospel Answ It should seem that not only works of the law but universally all works are excluded because whatsoever may occasion boasting in man is exclnded Rom. 3.27 Now as great occasion of boasting is left to man in the act of faith as in any work of the law whatsoever Nay may some mansay for faith is the gift of God and the exercise of faith meerly his work Answ The same may as truly be said of love patience c. These being also gifts infused of God and their actions even every act of them meerly his works in us even as meerly as the act of faith It remains then that we enquire whether in the other explanations of our Divines more likelihood may be found Usully it s thus conceived to justifie namely as it is an instrument to apprehend that righteousness for which we are justified even the * 1. Cor. 1.30 righteousness of Christ whether of this life or death or both it is not pertinent to this place to enquire but in this respect righteousness is ascribed unto it And here we are asked whether we
life suprá Iâ—st judicium ut qui contemnunt Dei misericordem justitiam suam volunt constituere eidem suae justitiae relinquantur opprimendi magis quà m justificandi For us Let us learn to expect the inheritance by the means whereby God hath intended to give it What is that if not the Law the Apostle answers The Righteousness of Faith And what is that righteousness say Papists Cui fides est initium that is in short Bellarm. de Justif l. 1. c. 17. obedience which we in our own persons perform to the law after we have received to believe the word of God so great force is there in general faith to make works imperfect in themselves and therefore condemned by the law to be the mean of our inheritance and salvation But I wonder what made Paul now a believer having it in so exellent a measure yet to say he was not thereby justified 1 Cor. 4.4 Large discussing of the point I mean not on this occasion to enter into But this I am sure of the law to salvation requires perfection of obedience curses to hell even the least imperfections Gal. 3.10 and doth any man believing receive ability to perform it to the full I am sure it s Augustines and Hieromes resolution that howsoever perhaps such measure of grace may be obtained yet there never yet lived the man on earth nor should do to the end of the world so righteous that he did good and sinned not Eccles 7.20 Say others The righteousness of faith That is the righteousness which stands in faith so making faith the substance as it were of that righteousness whereby we are justified and saved against it are these reasons 1. That then our righteosness whereby we are just in Gods sight shall be a thing that is imperfect for hath any man at all times perfection of faith 2. Accordingly conscience shall never have solid peace neither in act nor in the cause 3. Righteousness of Justification shall be variable in the degrees according as faith is more or less in the same or divers subjects so that some shall be more some less justified in the sight of God and the same man according as his faith ebbs or flows shall be whiles perfectly whiles partially whiles not at all justified in the sight of God For the act of faith wherein according to this opinion our righteousness stands may by the consent of all be lost for a time The old way still is the good way by righteousness of faith that is by righteousness which faith apprehends in Christ see Rom. 5.17 By righteousness of Christ then apprehended by faith obtain we the promised inheritance Gal. 3.22 The Scripture hath concluded all under sin that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe and vers 9. They which be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham By faith they are made partakers of the Blessing Vse Exhortation in this point is more needfull then proof the whole Scripture almost running this way Be we exhorted therefore leaving all confidence in the Law for righteousness or salvation to cleave fast to the righteousness of faith It is a fearfull doom passed on the Jews by the Apostle Rom. 10.3 that going about to stablish their own righteousness they were not subject to the righteousness of God And was it for nothing think we that the Apostle counts all dung and dross for the excellent knowledge sake of Christ and desires to be found in him not having his own righteousness by the Law but that which is by the righteousness of faith Phil. 3.8.9 Surely if any had cause to trust therein the Apostle much more that from the time of his calling had lived in all good conscience before God and men Acts 23.1 and yet knowing that thereby he was not justified or saved he utterly disclaims confidence therein and rests onely in that which is by faith of Christ Whose example let us follow as we desire to have comfort in the day of judgement Bern. in tantic Ser. 30. S. Bernard elegantly comparing grace and the Law together in their effects saith Quà m dissimili vultu ad omnem conscientiam se offerunt suavitas hujus illius austeritas quis sanè ex aequo respiciat condemnantem consolantem reposcentem ignoscentem plectentem implectentem And surely they know little the terrour of the Judge and have had as little experience of the Laws arraignment in the conscience that trust to their own polluted righteousness and not to that absolute obedience of Christ the Mediatour Proceed we now in the Text. VERS 14 15. For if they which are of the Law be heirs faith is made void and the promise made of none effect Because the Law worketh wrath For where no Law is there is no transgression THe words tend to confirmation of the Apostles former argument for justification by faith the summe whereof was this That the promise of inheritance was not to be accomplished by the Law c. the proof of it is here laid down taken from a double inconvenience issuing from that manner of attaining the inheritance If they which are of the Law be heirs then is faith made void and the promise of none effect But neither is faith void nor the promise of none effect Ergò They which are of the Law be not heirs or which is equivalent the promise of inheritance is not obtained by the Law They which are of the Law That is saith Theodoret Qui ex Lege vitam instituerunt saith Cajetan Qui subditi sunt Legi Mosi Sasbout Qui Legis observatores sunt Many the like Expositions might be cited Thus I think rather They which are of the Law that is which by the works of the Law seek the inheritance as Gal. 3.9 10. The Apostle sorts them that seek righteousness and salvation into two kinds Some are of faith they are such as by faith seek the inheritance Theophylact. ad Gal. 3. Some again are of the works of the Law they are such as by the Law seek salvation or as Theophylact They are of faith Quirelictà Lege ad fidem se conferunt They of the Law which leaving faith betake themselves to the Law If these be heirs namely ex Lege as Ambrose interprets if they get the inheritance by the Law Then is faith void Whose faith Gods or Mans Gods saith Cajetan that is his fidelity in keeping promise impertinently rather Mans prescribed of God to be the means of inheritance Their faith is void or vain What is that whether frustrate in respect of fruit or unnecessary and needless in the prescript Calvin Instit lib. 3. c. 11. S. 11.13 3. or else as M. Calvin so shaken that it turns to distrust and degenerates towards desperation this latter is a truth as he explains it there being left no place for perswasion of justification if it depend upon condition of fulfilling the Law
31. but according to their opinion Remission so takes our sins ut nè vestigium quidem ullum maneat it dispels them as the sun doth clouds so that nothing of them remains washeth them away so as we become whiter then snow Well yet as clean as we are made from fault and sin yet some of the guilt may lie on our persons and the just God may inflict upon his innocent and purest servants punishments temporall yea the same for smart which the devils and damned in hel endure Out upon Popery it is Bilinguis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And of this second argument against Justification by Work thus far VERS 9 10 11 12. 9. Cometh this blessedness then upon the Circumcision onely or upon the uncircumcision also for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness 10. How was it then reckoned When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision 11. And he received the signe of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that he might be the father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that righteousness might be imputed to them also 12. And the father of Circumcision to them who are not of the Circumcision onely but also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham which he had being yet uncircumcised THe scope and dependence of this passage is diversly conceived Some think the Apostle here propounds a new argument for justification by Faith against justification by Works and these also diversly collect it Some thus Abraham was justified before he was circumcised Ergò He was not justified by circumcision nor by consequent by any works of the Law The ground of which argument is this because if circumcision were cause of his justification then must he needs have been circumcised before he was justified for the effect cannot be without or before the cause Others thus Paraeus ad loc If Abraham were justified by faith then must all men whether circumcised or uncircumcised be so justified But Abraham was justified by faith Ergo. The consequence of the proposition they imagine to have this proof because Abraham is father of both people and they both his sonnes wherefore by good consequent they think it follows that as be was justified so others must be sith there is one reason of the father and children of the pattern and the imitatours of the head of the covenant and of those that in him are admitted into the covenant The scope But methinks weighing the words the scope seems no more but this To shew that the blessing of justification belongs indifferently to Jews and Gentiles believing A point touched before chap. 3. and here again resumed and more purposely proved because he had immediately before made mention of Abrahams justification and their guess is not without ground that think the Apostle now frames answer to that second quaere of Jews Rom. 301. What profit of Circumcision which to this place he hath purposely deferred because from Abrahams case it receives fittest answer Neither let it seem strange that the Apostle should thus digress from his principall conclusion sith we know it is frequent with him in his passage as well to clear doubt as to confirm his purpose And for the scope thus far See Rom. 3. Now the passage to this Conclusion is by way of Prolepsis Came this blessedness then c. Wherein we have 1. The doubt 2. The reason of it 3. The solution The doubt is whether this blessedness that is justification belongs to the circumcision that is to the Jews onely or to the uncircumcision also that is to the Gentiles yet uncircumcised Metonymia adjuncti frequens as Rom. 2.28 the supply of the Verb whether it be falleth as Theophylact or cometh as our English or is as others we have no cause to enquire of the sense being apparently such as we have shewn The reason of the doubt For we say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousness as if he had said This is in confesso that Abrahams faith was reckoned to him to righteousness Now the question here is Whether sith it is apparent Abraham was circumcised this blessedness of justification or having faith imputed to righteousness belong to circumcision onely or also to the uncircumcised The solution follows carried artificially as this whole passage is in a Rhetoricall Dialogisme How was it then imputed c. as if he had said If this be the doubt see in what state Abraham was when he received this testimony of righteousness and you shall find it was long before he was circumcised For this imputation of faith to righteousness whereof we treat was whiles he yet had no child as appeareth Gen. 15.2 and the ordinance of circumcision began after this towards a fourteen years For after the promise made by God and the testimony of righteousness given to Abraham took he Hagar to wife and of her had Ishmael being 86 years old Gen. 16.16 and many years after was given him in charge the ordinance of circumcision and the execution thereof fell into the year 99 of Abraham and of Ishmael the 13. Gen. 17.24 25 so that by the history it is clear he was justified long before he was circumcised and this as the Apostle seems to intimate wanted not his mysterie the Lord thereby testifying that justification is not had to circumcision but that the uncircumcised believing may also be sharers with Abraham in that blessing Observ Thus far of the Context and sense of the first clause Now the things here observable are these First That very circumstances of Scripture stories afford often substantiall conclusions A weighty conclusion that justification belongs to Gentiles and that which was long controversed in the days of the Apostle See Act. 15. Gal. 5. And it is determined by a circumstance in the story Abraham was justified in time of uncircumcision therefore justification belongs not to the circumcised only A like case we have determined by like evidence Gal. 3.17 out of circumstances of story conferred the blessing must needs be ours by promise and not by the Law How is it proved because the Covenant was made with Abraham in Christ 430 years before the giving of the law in Sinai in Heb. 7.12 13 14. The Apostle proves this conclusion that perfection was not by the leviticall Priesthood What is his arguments because another Priest was to arise according to Davids prophecy not after the order of Aaron even Christ a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek And because it might be said that that other Priest though another yet might be of Aarons order nay saith the Apostle that appears false by this circumstance for our Lord Christ of whom David speaks was of another tribe even of the tribe of Judah unto which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning Priesthood I might be infinite in this kinde but a tast
was fully assured 2. The matter subject of his perswasion or the Proposition to which Abraham thus fully assented That what God had promised he was able to perform where we may also conceive to be implyed the grounds of Abrahams so firm believing The promise and power of God Observ From the First we observe That faith in her strength Beza Paraeus ad loc Calvin Instit and perfection hath firmness yea fulness of assurance others otherwise conceive the note and thus collect That fulness of perswasion is of the nature and essence of Faith That none of Gods children erre to their discomfort thinking they have no truth of believing because they want fulness of perswasion thus much understand That in exact defining the custome is to consider virtues c. Abstractly from their subjects 2. In such abstraction to express their nature in terms importing their greatest excellency and perfection 3. Virtues morall and Theologicall they describe not as they are in our practice but as they ought to be by Gods prescript What now if faith in us be doubtfull yet in it self and according to its own nature it is a full perswasion What though in the disposition and beginnings it be wavering yet in the excellency and perfection it is of infallible certainty What if our practice of faith be weak yet God requires perfection of it and our striving must be to perfection prescribed Vse Thus let us use it As an occasion to humble our selves for our doubtings Augustin Epist 29. ad Hieron for that which Augustine saith of charity is as true of faith profectò illud quod minus est quà m debt ex vitio est yet thus much withall Let us not so far deject our selves as to think we have no truth of faith because we want perfection and fulness of assurance yet may faith be in truth where that measure is not attained See Annot. ad vers 20. as the truth of humane nature in an infant wanting the strength of grown men The matter of Abrahams perswasion followeth That what he had promised he was able also to perform The points observable are 1. That faith even justifying is an assent rather then affiance having for his object terminum complexum whereof see Annot. ad vers 3. 2. Take notice of two speciall grounds for faith to rest on the promise and power of God both joyntly considered establish faith sever either from other thou makest faith either phantasticall or wavering Hereof see Annot. ad ver 17. VERS 22. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness THe fruit of Abrahams faith is here expressed that is his justification The depravations of this Scripture by Adversaries are many Let us briefly take view of them The first is from the illation Therefore it was imputed c. Hence they collect that faith avails to justification virtuously and by way of merit Man is justified by faith not because it apprehends the promise but because it obteins remission of sinns suo quodam modo etiam mereatur how infer they the conclusion out of this Scripture The Apostle in this place saith Bellarmine Bellar. de just lib. 1. cap. 17. sets down the cause why Abrahams faith was reputed justice to wit because by believing he gave glory to God therefore for the merit of that faith he justified Abraham Where first let us weigh how they utterly crosse the intention of the Apostle in his whole discourse which is to exclude all merits of men from justification can we imagine he excludes the merit of other works to substitute the merit of faith 2. Besides that it is easily observable that the Apostle maintains a continuall opposition betwixt faith and merit as ver 4. To their argument thus we answer That the Apostles illation indeed implyes a sequel of justification upon the performance of faith yet none such as is caused by the merit and excellency of the gifs or work of faith above other works and this is that deceives them that they can conceive no connexion betwixt our offices and Gods benefits but what the worth and merit of our performances causeth Know we therefore 1. That there is an infallible connexion betwixt faith and justification so that every one believing is without faith justified But 2. If the reason of this connexion be demanded it is apparently Gods covenant and promise therefore shall every believer receive remission of sins because so runs the promise in the covenant of grace Believe and thy sins shall be forgiven August de verb. Apost Serm. 16. Augustines speech for the generall let be remembred Debitor factus est Deus non aliquid à nobis accipiendo sed quod ei placuit promittendo Abraham believed and was therefore justified the cause if we seek is the promise of God not the worth of his faith which 1. Is a duty 2. Gods gift 3. In us imperfect And if Abrahams faith were the meritorious cause of his justification I demand whether as faith or as such faith that is whether in respect that he believed or in respect that he believed in this full measure was he justified If in respect of his measure then methinks it will follow that only such measure of faith sufficeth to justification so the disciples of Christ so doubtfull and wavering in many main articles till after Christs ascension must be reputed for that time unjustified if faith simply in what measure soever then can it not be meritorious sith in the beginnings it is so ful of imperfection Thus I conclude Faith is an antecedent no cause properly of justification justification a consequent of believing no effect issuing out of the virtue and merit of faith Trelcat Instit de justific the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore notes not the cause of the consequent but of the sequel or consequence saith a learned Divine Their second collection is this Rhemens ad loc That faith justifying is a generall faith whereby we assent to the truth of Gods speeches in generall Bellarm. de justif lib. 1. cap. 11. and no such speciall faith or affiance as Protestants require to justification Their reason The faith whereby Abraham was justified was no other then this A general perswasion of Gods faithfulness and power at large Ergò Answ The question hath been largely handled ad vers 3. whither I refer the Reader To their argument thus I answer their antecedent is untrue Abrahams faith was not of Gods truth and power in generall onely but of both applyed to the particular promised From these generals he concluded the particular touching the seed in whom all nations should be blessed In his believing and the matter of it we must conceive something propounded and considered as a conclusion somthing as an argument or premisses inferring the conclusion to both which Abraham assented To the conclusion by virtue of the premisses The conclusion was particular I shall have a seed in whom all
you continue as upon your souls to prize and waite upon the holy and k Heb. 10.25 publick ordinances of God keep close to the l Gal. 6.16 Rule of Gods written word his m Rom. 12.2 Iob. 17.17 revealed Will Shun spirituall pride inordinate opinion of private gifts it opens the gap to n 2 Thess 2.11 Isai 29.9 10. delusions and the spirit of giddiness Remember who said there are o Rev. 2.24 depths of Satan who more mischiefeth well-meaning souls under the vizar of an p 2 Cor. 11.14 Angell of light then he doth under the shape of an open Dragon q 1 Cor. 16.13 stand fast in the setled received truth of Christ slight not the universall approved practice of Gods true Church be not r 2 Pet. 3.17 18. led away with the errour ſ Heb. 13.9 of the wicked have regard to the precepts as well as to the promises of the Gospel and a chiefe respect to the peace of the Church It is good t 1 Thess 5.23 that the heart be established with grace And now the very God of peace sanctifie you wholly and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the comming of our Lord Jesus Christ in whom I am Your affectionate Pastor to serve you William Sclater Collompton April 3. 1650. Errata PAge 3. line 25. for assail read avail and l. 3. r. explanation p. 8. l. ult after hath cause of boasting read thus now with him that hath noe such works but faith only in him that justifieth the ungodly it s otherwise p 9. l. 6. r. saving p. 13. l. 8. r. these p. 14. l. 19. for or r. of p. 15. l. 11. r. allmost p. 17. l. 2. r. allegations p. 18. l. 34. r. perhibet p. 20. l. 14. r. tenet p. 21. l. 11. r. an and l. 14. for in r. is p. 23. l. 13. r. oweth thee p. 26. l. ult r. work p. 27. l. 15. r. usually and l. 18. r. his lise p. 28. l. 27. r. due to thee p. 35. l. 1. r. oftner p. 36. l. 29. r. of him p. 38. l. 10. r. by inherence p. 42. l. 35. r. charity p. 50. l. 3. r. they and l. 5. for when r. what p. 51. l. 10. r. imputed p. 56. l. 20. r. destined p. 59. l. 6. for contractions r. contradictions and l. 10. r. temporal and l. 30. r. with p. 67. l. 19. for had r. tyed p. 68. l. 13. r. lyeth and l. 34. r. rain p. 69. l. 18. r. viaregni and l. 22. for decree r. degree p. 70. l. 1. r. Howsoever l. 12. r. contemptus and l. 22. r. significat and l. 24. r. ille p. 75. l. 9. r. into p. 76. l. 4. for where r. whence p 77. l. 20. r. considered p. 78. l. 22. r. weakness and l. 29. for said r. say I p. 80. l. 30. r. propound p. 84. l. ult r. Two p. 92. l. 32. for free r. see p. 95. in margin r. Basil in Hexamer p. 102. l. 13. r. whether as a condition p. 106. l. 23. r expediency p. 110. l. ult r. amplectentem p. 115. l. 14. r. subjoyned p. 117. l. 17. r. this effect p. 120. l. 10. r. infalibly p. 121. l. 9. r. anathema p. 125. l. 16. 19. for bis r. eis p. 136. l. 25. r. of inheritance p. 137. l. ult r. further p. 141. l. 32. for it r. is p. 153. l. 9. r. out of mens blindness p. 159. l. 29. for tempted r. tempered p. 160. l. 13. r. comfortable p. 161. l. 2. for the r. and p. 167. l. 23. r. reputed p. 170. l. 18. r. fructus p. 171. l. 9. r. though and l. 26. r. sequele p. 174. l. 13. r. propounded p. 182. l. 19. for loving r. losing p. 183. l. 1. r. scarce and l. 18. r. conceive p. 184. l. 1. for mediate r. meditate AN EXPOSITION WITH Notes on the fourth Chapter to the ROMANES CHAP. IIII. VERS 1 2. What shall we say then that Abraham our Father as pertaining to the flesh hath found For if Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory but not before God THE Apostles purpose in this Chapter is by farther proofs to confirm his principall conclusion viz. That a man is justified by Faith without the works of the Law The chief Parts of the Chapter are three First A Confirmation of the conclusion Secondly A Laudatory declaration of Abrahams Faith Thirdly An applying of Abrahams example to us even as many as walk in the steps of Abrahams faith The Reasons brought for confirmation are 1. From Abraham's example 2. From Davids testimony 3. From time and use of circumcision 4. From meanes of conveyance of the inheritance to Abraham 5. From ends of justification The passage to Abraham's example is by most conceived thus The Apostle is imagined to prevent what Iewes might object against the conclusion of justification by faith without works If this be so what got Abraham our father according to the flesh as if they had said it seems there is no prerogative of Abraham by all that righteousness wherein he lived And the Apostle is supposed to grant their inference and to subjoyn Reasons thereof But methinks weighing the words the connexion may rather be conceived to be by way of inference out of the doctrine of the former Chapter as if it had been said if this be so that boasting must be excluded and that all that are justified must be justified by faith What shall we say then that Abraham our father found as concerning the flesh c. In no case Thus then but that I love not novelty I would read the text What shall we say then that Abraham found by the flesh And so methinks the reasons more fluently are applyed to the Negative conclusion The connexion we see The conclusion principall is here proved by the example of Abraham If Abraham obtained not righteousness by works but by faith then no man is or can be justified by works but by faith but Abraham obtained not righteousness by works c. Ergo no man is justified by works The proposition is not expressed but easily collected out of the text The assumption is Vers 1. laid down in way of inference delivered interrogatively where the interrogation implyes a negative The conclusion is Chap. 3. vers 28. The assumption is proved by an argument from inconvenience If Abraham were justified by works he had whereof to boast but not with God that is he had no cause to boast with God Ergo he was not justified by works Sence For the sence of the words Found That is obtained as Gen. 26.12 Isaac sowed in the land and found that is received or obtained in that year an hundred fold Hos 12.8 I have found substance that is gotten 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As pertaining to the flesh This particle some Ancients as well as later Expositors both Popish and Protestant refer rather to the
word Father then to the verb found And thus read Abraham our father concerning the flesh but methinks the trajection is too harsh and besides the conclusion shall want one principall term that best serves to express the things in hand and therefore I rather refer it to the verb and thus read Abraham found not by the flesh or as pertaining to the flesh According to the flesh That is saith Ambrose S. Ambrosius ad loc by his Circumcision fittingly to what we may suppose the Apostle to preoccupate and yet in as much as ye count Circumcision is a work he affirms it as well of morall works as of circumcision Say others as Cajetan by flesh that is Cajetan ad loc by righteousness which stands in works and are done by the flesh that is by the body Others as Theodoret by his own strength Theodoret ad loc Illyric in clavi Zanch. de tribus Elohim lib. 3. cap. 1. and good vvorks done thereby Generally I thus conceive it that Abraham obtained not righteousness by any work Ceremonicall Morall or whatsoever can be imagined to assail to righteousness except faith in Christ so finde I the use of the word in the same case Phil. 3.3 4 5 6 9. Where under this name of flesh comes circumcision our own righteousness which is by the Law or whatsoever is or may be opposed to that righteousness which is by the faith of Christ The whole explination amounts to this summe Abraham obtained not righteousness by any his own works See we the confirmation The argument is taken from an inconvenience issuing out of that supposition If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory But he hath not any thing whereof to glory at least with God Ergo he was not justified by works Let us see what our adversaries have to say against this full argument of the Apostle For ground of their answer they attempt an inversion of the Apostles syllogisme and thus conceive him to reason Sasbout ad loc If Abraham were justified by works then had he no glory or boasting with God he might indeed by that means procure the commendation of a man excellently righteous but with men only not with God but Abraham had cause of glorying and boasting with God Ergo was not justified by works This cross frame of the argument Augustin in prefat ad Psal 31. Ambros ad loc I could not without indignation read were it not that it hath great Authors to give it countenance for Reverence to them let us afford it tryall First then consider that the Apostle in this argument hath apparent respect to that ground laid down Rom. 3.27 That is that we are to be justified by such a mean as whereby boasting may be excluded according to which ground he here concludes That Abraham was not justified by works for if that were true then had he cause of boasting Is it not now too grosse blindness so to conceive the Apostle as if he would give Abraham cause of boasting Secondly besides this the proposition thus conceived is apparently false For if Abraham were justfied by works then sure he had cause of boasting even before God for what greater cause of glorying even before God then this That he hath wrought works to his justification and may therefore say he is not beholden to God for his greatest blessing justification as having purchased it by his own works of obedience see Rom. 3.27 Thirdly add hereunto that the assumption is apparently false for Abraham if the Apostle could judg had no cause of boasting with God his justification being as ours meerly of grace through faith in Christ Jesus leave we therefore that dream and see whether their other answers have more waight Say some Catholiques we must here understand observation of Legall Ceremonies as Circumcision Sabbaths New-Moons c. Not works of the Law Morall Answ To this idle exception see my Annotation in Rom. 3. But bring we this distinction into the Apostles argument and see whether boasting be excluded If Abraham were justified by works ceremoniall then had he cause of boasting belike not so if by works morall and how I wonder do works Ceremoniall give greater cause of boasting then works Morall is their dignity now greater then works of Morall obedience Fidem vestram Papistae Behold to obey is better then sacrifice and to hearken then the fat of rams 1 Sam. 15.22 I will have mercy and not sacrifice Hos 6.6 Mat. 9.13 sexcenta hujusmodi Bellarm. de Iustific lib. 1. cap. 19. blush at such idle evasions which your own Bellarmine willingly disclayms and confutes by Fathers Besides this according to this answer boasting is only in some part taken from Abraham namely in respect of his observance of Ceremonialls for Morall obedience is still left him for matter of boasting but boasting on any pretence is excluded in Pauls intention Ergo. Hear Hierome Ex operibus legis Hierom ad Ctesiphont Adv. Pelag. ultramed non justificabitur om nis Caro quod nè de Lege Moysis tantùm dictum putes non de omnibus mandatis quae uno legis nomine continentur idem Apostolus scribit dicens consentio Legi Dei c. iterum scimus quòd Lex spiritualis est c. We know saith Paul that the Law is spirituall Rom. 7.14 What Law I wonder if not that Morall Let us see yet whether other playsters will salve the sore Bellarm. qua supra works of Abraham are of two sorts some Praecedentia fidem going before faith some Facta per fidem done by faith the Apostle understands works done before faith and regeneration not those done in and by faith Let us bring this into the argument If Abraham were justified by works done without faith by the meer power of natural free will then had he cause of boasting not so if by works done in faith Answ And why not I marvail when works done by grace according to their opinion are done partly by strength-naturall of free-will so much then as free-will helped in the doing so much cause of boasting Abraham had of himself But Abraham had no cause of boasting c. 2. What if it be apparent that the Apostle speaks even of works done by Abraham now believing and regenerate then methinks these works must also be included in the Apostles intention Certainly if we consider the testimony alledged out of Gen. 15. in the next verse to prove that Abraham was not justified by works it will easily appear that Abraham was long before this regenerate and believing and had many works of faith whereas yet the testimony of righteousness is given him not for working but for believing It was a work of faith that Abraham did in following the Lords call out of his countrey Heb. 11.8 Other works of piety and love see Gen. 12.8 13.8 9. 14 16 20 c. Yet not these works done in faith but faith
Sitacet Christus quid sibi volunt haec Evangelia quid sibi volunt voces Apostolicae quid cantica Psalmorum quid eloquia Prophetarum in his enim omnibus Christus non tacet S. Augustin In Johan tractat 4. The Scripture Fitly doth Paul consult with Scripture as the only Competent Iudg in-questions of his nature without which if we search for resolution in matters of this quality we run into a Labyrinth The advise that Constantine gave to the fathers in the Nicene Councell should have place with us sumamus ex dictis divini spiritûs explicationes quaestionum Mark his reason Evangelici enim Thedoret Hist lib. 1. cap. 7. Apostolici liâ—ri nec non Antiquorum Prophetarum oracula planè instruunt nos sensu Numinis And truth is howsoever in matters of Morality there be to be found some good directious in nature yet in this and like matters touching reconciliation with God and means of justification before him how utterly not only blind but opposite to what truth teacheth is nature yea it may not be denied that the Fathers them selves have some of them too naturall conceits in this business and if my judgment and observation in their writings be any thing as it is not much the attentive Reader shall finde much of the popish plot of justification to be framed out of the errours and misprisions of some Ancients here therefore especially let it have place that the Prophet adviseth to the Law and to the Testimony Isai 8.20 See we now the sentence of this Judg What saith the Scripture This Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness In which sentence we have two particulars observable First Abrahams act with the object he believed God Secondly The fruit or benefit thereof It was counted to him for righteousness Touching the first Abrahams act he believed God Let us here a little largely enquire what is the nature of justifying faith so much the rather The nature of justifying faith explained because the controversie is famous betwixt us and our adversaries Concerning it two questions shall be handled First whether it be an assent to the promise Or an Affiance rather and trusting in the promise Or in plainer terms whether this to believe in this question signifie to give Credence to God speaking or else to put confidence in God The opinions both of them have great Authors both Popish and Protestant For our better understanding it shall not be amiss to fetch the consideration somewhat higher even from the generall notion of these two habits as they are conceived by Philosophers and others according to reason Faith therefore or beliefe hath this generall description It is an habit of the understanding inclining us to a firm and undoubtfull assent to something as truth for the authority and credit of the speaker or witness I call it first an habit of the understanding because the proper object thereof is truth and the act thereof an assent to truth or a perswasion and acknowledgment of the truth propounded The difference stands partly in the measure of assenting partly in the cause moving to assent for as touching absolute doubtfulness when the minde hangs in aequilibrio giving no assent either way it s quite opposite to the nature of faith Now the assent of the minde hath three degrees The first is when the minde hath some though weak inclination and hath a propension to assent to a thing propounded perhaps moved by some slight sign or by apprehension of possible truth some call this suspition more fitly perhaps conjecture The Second is when the assent is more stable and resolute yet not without fear that the contrary may be true this called opinion The Third and highest is a perfect and peremptory acknowledgment that the thing propounded is of infallible and certain truth of this last sort is the assent that faith yields Now this certain and perfect assent is of four sorts according to a fourfold means swaying the minde The first is that which is caused by sense as when the minde acknowledgeth a thing for truth because it hath received perfect intelligence from the sight hearing c. or other senses not hindered or deceived The second is that which is caused out of the clear light and evidence of the thing without arguments of any kinde to perswade it as in principles clear of themselves and that need no demonstration or evidence but their own light to convince as that omne totum majus est suâ parte The third is that which is caused by certain discourse and demonstrative arguments which they call science The last is that which is procured by the authority and credit of him that propounds a thing to be received for truth which authority being without exception breeds perswasion as firm as any can be raised by argument sense or if there be any other means more forcible with the minde to perswade And of this last sort is faith Now Fiducia confidence or affiance is that habit or act of the will whereby we hopefully repose our selves upon the power truth and goodness of the promiser for receiving of some good thing promised It differs from belief 1. In the proper seat belief being in the understanding affiance in the will 2. In the object which it s carried unto which is bonum not verum 3. As the effect from the cause this reposing of our selves on arising from a perswasion of the power truth goodness of him we trust in And of the general notion of these two qualities thus far Their difference we shall better yet see if we consider the divers phrases of speech wherein the Scripture expresseth their actions fittingly to that usuall distinction received from Austin putting difference betwixt these two acts of S. Aug. Trict. in Ioh. 29. and Serm. 61 de verb. Domini Credere deo Credere in deum The first being the act of beliefe properly so called the other expressing the act of that other habit which we call fiduciam To apply this Praemissa to the purpose the question is of whether sort that faith which we call justifying is whether a giving credit to God promising us remission of sins in Christ or a relying on his mercy and the merits of Christ for pardon of sins and life everlasting The severall opinions shall be propounded and examined that the truth may the better appear Papists well nigh all that I have seen Resolve of the former and thus determine Bellarm. de Iustif lib. 1. cap 5. 9. See Kemnit Exam. lib. 1. cap. de Fide justific That Faith justifying is no such Affiance or Confidence in Gods mercy as Protestants teach but a general assent to all things contained in the Word of God and a perswasion of their Truth Of our own Divines some not of lowest rank judg that it is meerly an assent to the truth of the Gospell or Evangelicall promise made to us in Christ And they
by ourselves The righteousness of God is the righteousness which God in Christ performed fulfilling the Law for us called the Righteousness of Faith because we are by faith made partakers of it See Illyric Zanch. ad Phil. 3. If any shall demand what the difference between these two is I answer They differ not at all in the matter or substance of righteousness for the righteousness which by Christ we are made partakers of is that very righteousness which the Law prescribes namely perfect obedience to the Law but they differ efficiente our righteousness that we in our persons perform to the law And that it is no other righteousness then what the law prescribes for substance whereof in justification we are made partakers that one place Rom. 9.32 is clear where the Apostle giving a reason why the Jews that followed the law of righteousness attained not the law of righteousness that is as most interpret the righteousness which the law prescribes The reason was because they sought it not by faith but by the works of the law as if he had said Had they sought it by believing as they did by working they had attained the righteousness which the law prescribes to justification The righteousness of the law then we obtain by faith to justification It is therefore the righteousness which in justification we are made partakers of How then is it said to be righteousness without works I answer In respect of us without works In respect of Christ the performer not so Come we now to the means how it is imputed unto us and that is by Imputation Imputation Imputation of righteousness What it is in this case we may thus describe To be an act of God ascribing to us the righteousness of Christ and counting it ours no less then if we had in our own persons performed it Touching it it is enquired whether there be any such act of God in our justification Papists generally deny it and make the righteousness of Christ to avail to justification onely as a cause procuring to us remission of sins and the gifts of the holy Ghost That which our Divines hitherto have consented in is this That the righteousness of Christ is not onely the cause for which the Lord remits sins c. but the very thing whereby we are made righteous in the sight of God Their reasons are these 1. Because we are said to be made righteous by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5.19 shall we say as by a procuring cause nay rather formally For so are we made sinners by the transgression of Adam And the purpose of the Apostle in that comparison betwixt Adam and Christ seems to be this To shew that it is no absurd thing that we should be made righteous by the righteousness of Christ seeing we were made sinners by Adams disobedience Inst But Adams disobedience was not ours by imputation but we rather were actours therein by an implicite act sinning in Adam To say nothing that the whole stream of Interpreters judge otherwise Let it be granted that we were actours in Adams sinne being in his loins Why not also actours in Christs obedience being one mystically with him by bond of the spirit 2. It is no more absurd that we should be righteous by imputation of Christs Righteousness then that Christ should be a sinner by imputation of our sins but Christ was a sinner by imputation of our sins Inst Not a sinner but a sacrifice for sinne Answ The exposition is ancient but 1. The Antithesis bears it not and 2. How could God punish him in that extremity had he not taken upon him our sins 3. For to Papists methinks of all men Imputation should be no such ridiculous matter sith they are of opinion the overplus of some Saints righteousness may be applyed to others by indulgence to make up the defects of their obedience How I wonder except by imputation 4. Quid quod Their Bellarmine plainly confesseth Bellarm. de Amiss grat stat peccat lib. 4. c. 10. Bernard ser 1. de Dom. 1. post octavas Epiphaniae that Adams sin is imputed to all his posteritie so as if they had all committed the same and alledgeth to this purpose the testimonies of Augustine and Bernard Nostra est inquit Bernardus Adami culpa quia etsi in alio nos tamen peccavimus nobis justo Dei judicio imputabatur licèt occulto And why so absurd sith Adams sin is in this manner ours Christs righteousness should also in like sort become Ours that as the same Bernard speaks aliena lavet aqua quos culpa inquinaverat aliena And so wash as the other had defiled Against it these reasons are brought First that it hath no testimonie either in Scriptures or Fathers to avow it Answ What none neither expressed nor implyed we have above shewed that the Scripture testifieth as well what it implyeth as what it expresseth how say we now to this Scripture in hand God imputeth righteousness without works whose our own that stands in works Phil. 3.9 Anothers therefore and whose else I wonder except Christs who alone is mentioned to be the procurer of our righteousness Hear S. Bernard Domine Bern. ser in Cant. 61. memorabor justitiae tuae solius Ipsa est enim mea nempe factus es mihi Tujustitia à Deo nunquid mihi verendum ne non una ambobus sufficiat non est pallium breve quod secundum Prophetam non possit operire duos Justitia tua justitia in aeternum quid longius aeternitate te pariter me operiet largiter larga aeterna justitia Object 2. No necessitie of such imputation of Christs righteousness Answ Yes That we may be found at that great day having such perfection of righteousness as for which we may be accepted and pronounced righteous See Phil. 3.9 Inst But our inherent righteousness is perfect for faith hope charity c. are perfect Answ Hear Bernard Are we better then our Fathers They said with as much truth as humility All our righteousnesses are like the clothes of a menstruous woman Isa 64.6 and again Quomodo pura justitia ubi non potest culpa deesse Augustine August epist 29. ad Hieron Charitas in aliis major in aliis minor in aliis nulla plenissima verò quae jam non potest augeri quamdiu hic homo vivit in nemine est quamdiu autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quà m debet Bern. in Cant. ser 174. ex vitio est And again Charitatis effectualis initium quidem profectúmque vitam quoque praesentem experiri divinâ posse gratiâ non negamus sed plane consummationem defendimus futurae felicitati And if any shall ask why it is commanded when it cannot be fulfilled Bernard answers Judicavit utilius ex hoc ipso suae illos insufficiontiae admoneri ut scirent sane ad quem justitiae finem
l. 4. Homo non quaerit salutem â Sacramentis quasi ab eis sed per ea à Deo Haec enim praepositio A * Scotus ad lib 4. dist 1. denotat Causam agentem per verò notat causam instrumentalem Well let us yeild them to be organa whether Morall or Physicall It pleaseth not Bellarmine Bellarm de effect Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 11. that they should be causes Morall though he confesse a stream of their own Writers run current that way But they must be Physicall instruments that is such as properly and by inherent vertue work or cause justification And if any ask what that vertue is that God hath put in them to effect this grace He answers It is nothing but Gods moving or using of them to that purpose For by this that God useth the Sacramentall action to produce grace he doth elevate it above the nature and makes it reach to an effect supernaturall Now I might be long in shewing the contrary judgement of his own side some making them means or instruments of grace per modum continentiae because they contain the grace they signifie some by concomitance onely c. I will propound the sentence of Scotus onely whom ye shall find thus to resolve There is not saith he in Sacraments aliqua Causalitas activa propriè dicta respectu gratiae but they are said to be causes of grace improperly inasmuch as the receiving thereof is an immediate disposition to grace mox For thus hath God disposed and set down the order and hereof he hath certified the Church that to him that in due manner receives the Sacrament he will give the effect thereby signified This I trow is far from Bellarmines conceit But let us further examine his conclusion In all ordinary Physical instruments which God useth to effect his purposes by there is besides Gods use of them a vertue and power and fitness given them to produce what he useth them unto as meat to nourish clothes to warm Sun to cherish the earth c. and shall Sacraments be ordinary Physical instruments and yet lack this inherent vertue What Philosophy yea or Divinitie so teacheth Besides this Sacraments all suppose those habits wherein they make justifying grace to consist Acts 8. Matth. 28. to be in him that receives them they must have faith or at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Sacraments may be applied unto them and shall we think they are elevated by this use and motion they speak of to work what is already wrought Lastly if they wrought thus Physically as it were potions methinks then every one to whom they are applyed must needs receive their effect unavoidably and so Simon Magus must receive the grace of the Sacrament as well as Simon Peter which if it be absurd as absurd it is to make them Physicall instruments or Active causes of this grace which they call justifying To conclude this whole question May it not be granted that Sacraments are instruments or means of grace Answ No doubt yes but instruments morall onely that is such as whose vertue sticks not in them but onely because where they are duely used God is present by covenant to work grace supernaturall So Scotus ut suprá so some of our Divines Yet more nearly 1. Consider what grace they are ordained to work as means 2. How they concur to the working of it The grace they work is 1. Confirmation in perswasion of justification 2. Care and increase of sanctification c. How work they it Answ Occasionally onely quatenus they represent Gods actions Christs person and benefits our duty c. by which representations Gods spirit worketh in our hearts in these or the like discourses God hath in the Gospel promised remission of sins to all those that believe in Christ and for further assurance hath been pleased to ordain Sacraments as it were his seals set to his covenant wherein I see represented the death of Christ that procured pardon of sinns and in the Ministers action delivering the Sacrament to me Gods act in delivering Christ and his benefits to me is resembled Now his promise is that if I bring faith to the use of the Sacraments the things they signifie are mine How then assumes conscience I believe what God in the Gospel promiseth what in Sacraments he seals unto me and thence follows as a conclusion my faith confirmed c. Now what say our Adversaries to this manner of Sacraments efficacy Forsooth if in this manner onely they have their efficacy there shall then be no difference betwixt Sacraments of the Old Law and those of the New Testament Answ What none at all Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 8. They confesse elsewhere that we agree with them in the differences thus far 1. The signes are others 2. The number less 3. The facility more 4. Clearness of signification greater 5. Manner of signifying different 6. Endurance of new longer Object Yea but in the point of efficacy there is left no difference For thus theirs were effectuall by stirring up faith by their significations and by the devotion of the receiver which they call The work of the Worker Observ Is that the matter then hear what I think the Apostle here teacheth or at least warrants us to teach by collection That Sacraments of the Old Testament were the same with ours in matter signified in use ends and efficacie What is Baptisme unto us more then a signe of our initiation into the Covenant Gen. 17.7 Rom. 4.11 Deut. 30.6 A feal of the righteousness of faith An occasionall mean of sanctification The same was Circumcision to Abraham and to all his posterity in the ordinary measure of efficacy there might be some odds in efficacy and manner of it none at all that can be assigned For 1. In their Sacraments they had Communion with Christ They ate the same spirituall meat 1. Cor. 10.3 4. drank the same spirituall drink that we do though under other signes or elements Object Rhenenses ad loc Bellarm. de effect Sacram. lib. 2. c. 17. August de utilit Poenit. cap. 1.2 Nay rather say Papists the same amongst themselves not the same with us Answ Then let us hear Augustine Eundem inquit cibum spiritualem manducaverunt quid est eundem nisi quia eum quem etiam nos mox Eundem non invenio quomodo intelligam nisi eum quem manducamus nos Inst What Paul there speaks of were not Sacraments Answ How then fit they Pauls intention which is apparently this to take from this people vain confidence in Sacraments 2. What means Paul to say of their passage through the sea c. it was a baptizing of them Cyprian Epist 76. August in Psal 77. Hear ancients Cyprian Mare illud Sacramentum Baptismi fuisse declarat beatus Apostolus Paulus dicens Nolo vos ignorare fratres c. 1. Cor. 10. Augustine Per mare transitus
proportion to us that is the fulfilling of the whole Law Gal. 5.3 our Saviour to such a boaster asking What he must do to inherit salvation suits answer to his proud humour Thou knowest the Commandments if doing be the means thou seekest to inherit by Keep the Commandments this do if thou wilt needs be doing and thou shalt live fail in the least apex the Curse is upon thee Gal 3.10 Now dares any arrogate power of fulfilling the Law it is strange yet what will not Popish pride assume Anathema to them saith the Trent Council whosoever shall say Dei praecepta homini etiam justificato sub gratia constituto esse ad observandum impossibilia of that question hereafter 2. Add unto this that other reason of the Apostle Christ becomes of no effect to such as by the Law seek to be justified or saved Gal. 5.4 3. They are fallen from Grace not which they had but which they might have had had they not renounced it by cleaving to their works Shal I need now to exhort in the Apostles terms Gal. 1.6 to hold Anathema all such as teach us by works to seek salvation they deprive us of the promised salvation exclude from fellowship in Christs merits the sole pillar of hope deprive us of Gods grace which alone is made the fountain of salvation I say not but other errors in the foundation obstinately holden deprive of salvation I say not but all heresies in their kind are so many blasphemies against God Neither blame I the rigour of Magistrates that with extraordinary severity labour to bring Hereticks and their heresies into ashes But surely an errour more pernicious to the souls of Gods people more derogatory to the glory of Gods grace and the validity of Christs merits I know none then this of Justitiaries and can but wonder How the severity of Laws against Popish Seminaries hath gotten relaxation that it should now no longer be holden Capitall so dangerously to seduce Gods people to evacuate the virtue of Christs death and to plunge so many souls bought with the precious bloud of Christ into eternal perdition Amongst Jews no recompense might be taken for bloud but the bloud of the slayer the bloud of souls how cries it lowder then the bloud of Abel And yet the Murtherer hath benefit of sanctuary More I add not save this onely He loves not his own salvation that hates not the enemies of the grace of God VERS 15. Proceed we in the Text Because the law worketh wratht for where no Law is there is no transgression The Scope THis verse tends to confirmation of the Apostles Consequence If they which are of the Law be Heirs then is the promise of none effect that is salvation promised can never be obtained How follows the argument The Apostle shews us by sending us to consider the effect or work of the Law such as it hath in all men since the fall The Law causeth wrath Ergò it frustrates the promise to all that cleave thereto for justification And this Antecedent hath proof from another effect of the Law betwixt which and wrath the connexion is inseparable to wit transgression it causeth transgression Ergò wrath This the context Sense For the sense view we a little the particulars they are principally two 1. The effect of the Law 2. The manner how it produceth his effect The effect of the Law is wrath whether Gods or mans Man 's saith Sasbout alledging to that purpose the judgement of Augustin neither dissent some of our own Divines Illyricus And if any ask How They answer by urging things upon the conscience as duties from which our vitious nature is most abhorrent as also by shewing how odious all a mans best actions yea his whole nature is and adjudging him to hel for his sins against those acts of the Law how doth mans vitious and proud nature storm that not without cause have learned interpreters thus expounded But fitlier to the Apostles purpose it is expounded of the wrath of God that is of the punishments which for transgression God is in his wrath ready to execute Now if any demand How the Law should have this effect Not of it self as if it were originally destined to subject man to punishment but by accident and occasionally onely in respect of our disobedience which sith it is by means of corrupt nature inevitable as inevitably doth the Law adjudge us to punishment as our vitious nature forceth us to rebellion This is the sense of the first clause It also hath its proof The Law causeth wrath for it causeth trangression betwixt which and Gods wrath the connexion is inseparable How we shall hear by and by if we shall first view the manner of the Apostles reasoning It is thus as most conceive A contrario sensu Where is no Law there is no transgression therefore where the Law is there is transgression But what if we conceive the Apostle to reason à signis Where is no Law there is no transgression an apparent signe that is that by means of the Law transgression followeth take away the Law there is no transgression therefore apparent that by putting the Law we put transgression See we how how comes it that the Law draws with it so unavoidably transgression sith it forbids and threatens disobedience enjoyns and crowns obedience Answ Not of it self but by accident through the corruption of nature ut suprâ In man corrupted the Law hath a double advantage to further transgression 1. Because by it corruption is provoked to be the more sinfull as in men unregenerate Rom. 7.5 13. 2. Through impotencie and weakness that remains in nature even reformed to perform that obedience which the Law requires in that manner it requires it Rom. 8.3 Some other explanations might be annexed as this Every sin is therefore sin because it violates some Law take away all Law thou takest away all sin for sin essentially presupposeth some prescription of Law violated Had not God by his Commandment forbidden Adam the eating of the fruit it had been no sin in him to eat it This is a truth but not all tâ—â— Apostle here intends whose purpose is to shew not sâ— much the necessity of a Law to the being of sin as the necessary sequel and exsistence of sin in man since the fall by occasion of the Law Observ The point then observable is this That the law is so far from restoring us to Gods favour that it occasioneth his wrath so far from justifying that it condemns so far from being means of righteousness that it occasioneth transgression Hence called the Ministry of condemnation and death 2 Cor. 3.7 and the very strength and vigour of sin 1 Cor. 15 56. That not without cause said Luther though therefore traduced by Papists the law alwayes accuseth terrifieth condemneth The severall branches will be evident if we shall clear the last only and shew how inevitably it draws after it transgression in