to three heads The first is the authority of Gods word For if the Scriptures any where expresly say that faith alone doth justifie it must he beleeved though no other cause could be rendred The second is the will of God justifying namely because it hath pleased God to grant justification upon the onely condition of faith The third is the nature of faith it selfe because it is the properâ—…y of faith alone to apprehend justification and to apply it unto us and to make it ours Besides these I have rendred other causes the chiefe and principall whereof is this because we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which being out of us in him is imputed onely to them that beleeve and is received onely by faith § II. But these three causes or reasons which he mentioneth will not easily be remov'd the first the authority of the Scriptures this being the maine doctrine of the Gospell Yea but saith Bellarmine it is no where said in expresse termes that faith alone doth justifie when we saith he have expresse termes that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely Iam. 2. 24. Answ. To the place in the Epistle of Iames I shall answere fully in his due place Onely here I say thus much That Saint Iameâ—… speaketh not of the justification of a sinner before God by which he is made or constituted just of which our question is but of that whereby a just man already justified before God may be approved declared and knowne both to himselfe and others to be just And that the Apostle Iames speaketh not either of workes as causes but as signes of justification or of the habit of true faith but of the profession of faith or faith professed onely and concludeth that a man is justified that is knowne and approved to be just not onely by the profession of the true faith but by workes also a godly conversation being as it were the life and soule of the profession and without which it is dead But though in expresse tearmes it be not said in so many words and Syllables that faith doth justifie alone yet this doctrine is by most necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures And what may by necessary consequence be deducted out of the Scriptures that is contained in the scriptures as all confesse Wherunto may be added that the Fathers so conceived of the doctrine of the scriptures who with one consent as you have heard have taught according to the scriptures that by faith we are justified alone And the Papists must remember that by oath they are bound to expound the scriptures according to the coÌ„sent of the fathers § III. Now that this doctrine is contained in the Scriptures I have plentifully proved before and something here shall bee added There are but two righteousnesses onely mentioned in the Scriptures by which wee can bee justified either that which is prescribed in the Law which is a righteousnesse inherent in our selves and performed by our selves or that which is taught in the Gospell which is the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in him and performed for us The former is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes the latter is the righteousnesse of faith A third righteousnesse by which wee should bee justified cannot be named And betweene these two there is such an opposition made in the Scriptures that if wee bee justified by the one we cannot by the other If therefore the Scriptures teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes it is all one as if they said that wee are justified by faith alone If it bee all one to say by faith and not by the workes of the Law or by faith alone then saith Bellarmine I demand whether all workes and every Law be excluded or not For if all workes be excluded then faith it selfe which Ioh. 6. 29. is the worke of God and if every Law then the Law of faith and consequently faith it selfe and so to be iustified by faith shal be nothing else but to be justified without faith Answ. it is plaine that by the Law is meant the Law of workes and by the workes of the Law all that obedience which is prescribed in the Law Now in the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed Then saith Bellarmine faith it selfe and the act of faith is excluded from the act of justification I answere first in this question the Apostle opposeth faith to workes and therefore faith is not included under workes Secondly faith as it is either an habit or an act and so part of inherent righteousnesse doth not justifie but as hath beene said relatively in respect of the object which being received by faith doth justifie as it was the brâ—…sen serpent apprehended by the eye which did heale and not the eye properly § IV. Againe the Scriptures teach that we are justified gratis gratiâ per sanguinem Christi per fidem Gratis that is freely without respect of any good workes done by us no not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done Tit. 3. 5. but by his meere grace and favour when we had deserved the contrary through the bloud and alone satisfaction of Christ received onely by faith To the word gratis Bellarmine answereth that it excludeth our owne merits which indeed can be none but not the free gifts of God as love and penitencie and the like for then faith also should be excluded That followeth not for when wee are justified by faith onely we are justified gratis gratis saith the Apostle freely by his grace through the merits of Christ by faith bringing onely faith to justification as the Fathers have taught and that not to bee any essentiall cause of our justification but onely to be the instrument and hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnes and therfore it is the condition required on our part in the covenant of grace The rest as love and hope and repentance c. being not the conditions of the covenant but the things by covenant promised to them that beleeve Vpon the condition of faith which is also the free gift of God the Lord promiseth remission of sins and justification and to those who are redeemed and justified by faith he doth by oath promise the graces of sanctification So that faith only on our part is required to the act of justification besides which we bring nothing else thereunto but love and the rest of the graces as Augustine saith of workes non precedunt justificandum sequuntur justificatum and therefore wee are justified by faith alone § V. And by this the second head is also proved namely that it is the good pleasure of God to grant justification upon the condition of faith alone If ye looke into all the promises of the Gospell ye shall find that they interpose only the
he hath deserved And how then can he by the sufferings of this life wherby he is not able to â—…atisfie for his sinne deserve eternall life The third out of Bernard we doe know saith he that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to the future glory nec si unas omnis sustineat No that they are not though one man should sustayne them all which though it be a very great yet is a very true amplification that if one man should beare all the afflictions of all men in this world yet his afflictions of this time would not be worthy of the glory that shall be revealed Such amplifications are used no lesse truely by Chrysostome and Anselm Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If we should dye ten thousand deaths and if wee should shew forth al virtue yet could wee not recompence the least part of those honours that God hath already bestowed upon us And if wee cannot by all such meanes be answearable to God for his favours â—…ouchsafed in this world by what meanes might we hope to merit eternall life in the world to come If a man should serve God most devoutly a thousand yeares yet he should not condignely merit to bee in the kingdome of heaven halfe a day saith Anselme § XXII In the sixth place Bellarmine alleageth three testimonies as objected by us viz. Phil. 3. 7 8 9. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5 7. The first we doe not use to produce against merit of salvation but against justification by inherent righteousnesse and was the sixth Testimony of ours which Bellarmine endevoured to answere as hee doth here See Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 15. The second was the fourth Testimony which he tooke upon him to answer See my reply Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 13. The third was the fifth Testimonie of which see Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 14. But though we doe not alleage the first against merit of workes yet by by consequent it doth disprove it For if workes doe not concurre to justification as the matter therof then can they not be the merit of salvation as hath beene said Secondly if in the question of justification which concerneth our title to Salvation they are to be accounted as things of no worth yea as losse then are they not meritorious of eternall life And whereas Bellarmine challengeth us to alleage any one Father that understandeth Paul to speake of workes done after grace I alleaged before Saint Chrysostome upon the place who understandeth the Apostle as speaking of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said all both old and new both past and present and that I confirmed by reason And when he saith that Augustine calleth the righteousnesse of the faithfull Eminentissimam it is apparant that he speaketh not of that which wee have by our obedience performed to the Law but of that most eminent righteousnesse which wee have by faith The other two places exclude workes from being any causes as well of Salvation as of justification And it is plaine that the Apostle speaketh of salvation and of all the degrees thereof that it is wholly to bee ascribed to the grace of God and not our worthinesse His words in the former By grace you are saved through faith noâ—… of workes The latter not by workes of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercie he saved us Whence ariseth this argument If by our merits we are saved then by workes but not by our workes therefore not by merits Or thus If not by workes we are saved because we are saved by grace then much lesse are we saved by our owne merits CAP. III. A new supply of reasons produced against merits and maintayned against Bellarmines cavills § I. OVr first reason The true Doctrine of justification and Salvation taketh from us all cause of boasting in our selves that he which glorieth may glory in the Lord and contrariwise that which doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves is not the true Doctrine The Doctrine of justification by faith without workes and of salvation by Gods free grace without our merit taketh from us all cause of our boasting in our selves but the Doctrine of justification by workes and of salvation by our owne merits doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves Both proved Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Ephes. 2. 8 9. The effect of Bellarmines answere is that they who plead their owne merits as proceeding from grace doâ—… not glory iâ—… themselves but in the Lord. Reply First so long as they bee ours though given of God as all other good things are we are apt to glory in them as appeareth by the Pharisee who boasteth of his merits though he acknowledgeth that hee received them from God and therefore rendreth thankes for them Secondly the pleading of merit is it selfe a proud boasting Matth. 20. 12. Thirdly the Papists plead merit as proceeding from their owne free will which they require as a necessary condition of merit Fourthly If the good worke proceed meerely from Gods grace then can we not by it merit any thing of God But the Papists teach that by it they merit of God and consequently deny it so farre forth as it meriteth to proceed fâ—…om the grace of God and therefore when they plead merit they glory in themselves rather than in the Lord. § II. Our second reason That doctrine which derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ is to bee renounced as false and Antichristian The Popish doctrine of merits viz. that we are to be saved by our owne merits and that the faithfull by their owne workes doe truely and condignely merit eternall life derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ. Therefore it is false and Antichristian The assumption they deny yea though indeed they doe derogate from the merit of Christ yet they denounce anathema against them that shall say so But we not only say it but prove it For first If Christ hath already most sufficiently and fully merited heaven for us then our merits are needlesse or if our merits bee needfull as they teach then are not Christs sufficient for us which is no better than blasphemie Secondly they who teach that Christ hath not merited for all that beleeve and as soone as they truely beleeve the right of eternall life doe greatly derogate from the merit of Christ. For the Scriptures doe teach that Christ hath so merited the right of eternall life to all the faithfull that by him they have alreadie eternall life being alreadie translated from death to life But they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good Workes doe in effect teach that CHRIST hath not merited it to the faithfull Therefore they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good workes doe greatly derogate from
imputed as a full satisfaction for sinne the other by imputation of Christs perfect obedience as a sufficient merit of eternall life by the former we are freed from hell by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven Of them both the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. that we are justified that is absolved from our sinne by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified that is constituted just by his obedience vers 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent saying that there are no parts of justification but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes Indeed if it were the onely matter of justification as some of them teach and the entire formall cause of justification as others avouch of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter I say if both these opinions were true then I would confesse that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne but whiles it is either but the matter as some say or but the forme as others or neither of both as I avouch it is a manifest errour to say that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes Againe in every mutation though it be but relative we must of necessity acknowledge two termes tâ—…rminum à quo terminum ad quem the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice from which terme justification hath its name from a state of death and damnation to a state of life and Salvation But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne but no acceptation as righteous a freedome from hell but no title to heaven To this they answere that to whom sinne is not imputed righteousnesse is imputed and they who are freed from hell are admitted to heaven I doe grant that these things doe alwayes concurre but yet they are not to bee confounded for they differ in themselves and in their causes and in their effects in themselves for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne another thing to be made righteous as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors in their causes for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory sufferings the acceptation as righteous unto life to Christs meritorious obedience In their effects for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell and by imputation of Christs obedience we have right unto heaven § XVII If unto justification there be required besides remission of sinne Imputation of righteousnesse then there are two formall causes of justification Answ. It followeth not for although there bee two tâ—…rmini in this mutation yet there is but one action and this one action is the onely forme of justification viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse of which are two effects which also be the two parts of justification remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous as I said in the definition that justification is an action of God wherein hee imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner doth not onely absolve him from his sinnes but also accepteth of him as righteous and as an heire of eternall life § XVIII Notwithstanding this so evident truth some of the Divines of whom we spake when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely take this position for granted that justification is nothing but remission of sinne and hereupon inferre that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ we are justified by his bloud onely And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne to all which we readily subscribe But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes as entrance into heaven and salvation c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche putting the chieâ—…e and most eminent part of his obedience for the whole Others labour to prove this assertion that justification is nothing but remission of sinne by testimonies and by reasons and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines who against the Papists have maintained that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely But this assertion as hereafter I shall shew is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists who unto justification besides remission of sinnes require inward renovation or sanctification and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification not imputation of righteousnesse which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne and without which there can be no remission for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse we have both remission of sinnes and acceptation unto life but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis from the proper nature of justification as if they had said wee are not justified both by remission and renovation as the Papists teach but by remission without renovation that is in their meaning by remission onely and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe as hereafter shall bee shewed And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 6 7. therefore when it is said that we are justified by remission onely and not by renovation it is all one as if wee said that wee are justified by imputation onely and not by infusion of righteousnesse § XIX Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission As therefore he whose sinnes of commission are remitted is reputed as if hee had done nothing forbidden so whose sinnes of omission are remitted is reputed as if hee had left undone nothing that is commanded Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing forbidden nor left undone any thing that is commanded hee is reputed as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law I answer by distinction if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse as they must if they will make good their assertion then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission is freed from the guilt of both but not from the fault For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes he is a sinner as having both committed what is forbidden and also omitted what is commanded Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment and a râ—…atu poenae from the guilt binding over to punishment as if hee had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded Hee therefore that hâ—…th remission is reputed as having neither committed any evill nor omitted any good not simply
God the formall cause in the word Grace the meritorious cause in the word redemption the disposing cause in the word faith all of them almost depraved or misapplyed by Bellarmine For neither is the true efficient cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he calleth vocabulo nimis diluto Gods liberality signified by the word gratis but the false 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or meritorious cause is by this word excluded and the true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the merit of Christ included in the word redemption As if he had said we are justified gratâ—…s in respect of us that is without any cause or desert in us without any worthinesse of ours but not gratis in respect of Christ by whose pretious death and merits we are justified Neither by Grace is meant iustice given and infused of God which hee saith is the formall cause of justification but the grace of God as I have shewed signifieth the gracious favour of God which is not the formall cause of justification but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficient or moving cause Neither is redemption passively understood the meritorious cause of our justification for that as well as reconciliation or justification it selfe is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fruit and effect of Christ his death and obedience which as they are the matter and meritorious cause of our justification so also the price and merit of our redemption How then are we said to be justified through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus either by a metonymy of the effect for the cause redemption being put for Christs satisfaction or paying of a price of ransome for us by which we were redeemed or else we are said to be justified by his redemption as we may be said to be justified by remission of sinnes For by Christ wee have redemption that is remission of sinnes Col. 1. 7. Ephes. 1. 14. and so Occumenius expoundeth these words by the redemption c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But how is he justified by the forgivenesse of sinnes which wee obtaine in Christ Iesu. Neither is faith the disposing cause as he saith for then a man might have a true lively justifying faith and not bee actually justified which is contrary to the Scriptures Act. 13. 39. Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. but the instrumentall cause which is therefore said to justifie because the object which it receiveth doth justifie in which sense the same benefits which wee receive from Christ are ascribed to faith Now the object of faith being the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him it is evident that when wee are said to bee justified by faith it is meant that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inherent but by that righteousnesse which faith doth apprehend § II. Yea but Bellarmine will prove by divers arguments that Grace in this place doth not signifie the gracious favour of God first because the favour of God was sufficiently signified by the word gratis For hee that justifieth freely doth it out of good will and liberality therefore that addition by grace doth not signifie the favour it selfe but some thing else that is to say the effect of that favour I answere that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Chinnam is a particle exclusive of any cause price worth or desert in us which may be shewed by many examples Where it signifieth first without cause or desert As where it is said they hated me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is without any cause in me or desert of mine Ioh. 15. 25. ex Psalm 35. 19. and vers 7. where Symmachus readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psalm 69. 4. So Ezech. 14. 23. 1 Sam. 19. 5. 25. 31. 1 King 2. 32. Psalm 109. 3. 119. 161. Lam. 3. 52. Secondly freely without paying any price as Exod. 21. 11. Numb 11. 5. 2 Sam. 24. 24. Esai 52. 3. 5. Mat. 10. 8. Apoc. 21. 6. 22. 17. So that this exclusive particle was inserted not to set downe the true cause of justification but to exclude the false that we are justified freely without any cause in us or desert of ours or price paid by us meerely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Iesus Christ. And thus is the word expounded by all Writers almost both Old and New and those as well Papists as Protestants Ambrose as you heard gratis saith he quia nihil operantes nec vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei freely because working nothing nor making any recompence they are justified through faith alone by the gift of God Augustin Prorsus gratis das gratis salvas qui nihil invenis unde salves multum invenis unde damnes Altogether freely thou givest and freely thou savest because thou findest nothing for which thou shouldest save and thou findest much for which thou maist condemne Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely that is without any good deeds of thine thou art saved and againe as bringing nothing else but faith and after because all have sinned therefore all that beleeve in Christ are justified freely bringing onely faith to their justification Hugo Cardinalis glossa interlin gratis i. sine meritis So Thomas Aguinas and other Popish Writers yea Bellarmine himselfe to bee justified freely is to bee justified without merit without workes This particle therefore sheweth not by or for what wee are justified but by or for what wee are not justified § III. His second reason because the preposition per when it is said per gratiam being not a note as hee saith of the efficient cause is not rightly applied to the favour or good will of God which is the efficient cause but either to the formall cause or to the meritorious cause or to the instrument For wee could not well say that God doth justifie us per favorem aut per suam benevolentiam by his favour or by his good will but wee say well by grace inherent though not very well by his grace inherent for that which is inherent is ours though from him by the merit of his sonne by faith by the sacraments First I answere that the preposition is not in the originall text where the Apostle doth not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as noting in Bellarmines conceit the formall cause but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as noting the antecedent or moving cause which is principium actionis as is usuall in the like actions which the efficients working per se are done naturâ arte consilio or voluntate c. in which wee doe not say per naturam per artem c. And therefore this objection is very frivolous Secondly I answer that per in Latine and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke are very often applyed to the efficient cause whereof even in the New Testament there are as I suppose more examples than there bee leaves whereof some are attributed to God as Rom. 11. 36.
say it doth The exclusive particle used by some of our Divines doth exclude infusion not imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth For wee doe hold though all perhaps have not so plainely expressed their meaning and some few have delivered their private opinions that remission of sinne is but a part of justification and that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we are both absolved from our sinnes and also accepted as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life But Bellarmine howsoever he would seeme to acknowledge the concurrence of remission of sinne unto justification yet indeed excludeth it For by remission of sinne concurring to justification hee doth not understand the not imputing or forgiving of sinne but the extinction and abolition thereof wrought by the infusion of habituall righteousnesse which expelleth its contrary as heat doth cold and light darkenesse And howsoever there bee duo termini two termes in this motion or mutation as he conceiveth of justification as being a passage b or change from sinne to righteousnesse yet there be not two causes nor yet two distinct actions but the onely cause is justice infused and the action is but one and the same the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne Even as in creation which is transitâ—…s à non esse ad esse in illumination which is transitâ—…s à tenebris ad lâ—…cem in calefaction which is a passage from cold to heat But if this be all that is required in the Popish justification as undoubtedly it is the whole and onely forme thereof being infused of righteousnesse or as they love rather to speake righteousnesse infused their justification also not differing from that which the Scriptures call sanctification saving that they dreame of a totall mortification or deletion of sinne and of a perfect renovation then what is become of the absolving of â—…â—…tom the guilt of sinne by which wee are freed from hell and the acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by we are intitled to the kingdome of heaven Both which are wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in which true justification doth consist For infused righteousnesse though it were perfect could not discharge us from our former debts and being unperfect as their owne consciences cannot but tell them it cannot entitle them to the kingdome of heaven Wherefore if they will be saved they must of necessity flee to the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ who hath fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty by his sufferings and also in regard of the commandement by his obedience which obedience and sufferings being transient and gone so long since can no otherwise bee communicated unto them but by imputation Now if they can be content to acknowledge the imputation of Christs satisfaction which sometimes they doe and must doe if they will bee saved for there is no other meanes either to escape hell or to come to heaven then let them according to the Scriptures acknowledge this imputation of Christs satisfaction by which they are to bee acquitted and freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also accepted as righteous in Christ and heires of eternall life to be their justification As for the mortification of sinne and the renovation of us according to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse both which are but in part and by degrees wrought in us by the Spirit of regeneration let them bee acknowledged to bee the two parts of our sanctification § II. But Bellarmine will needs have our renovation to be the righteousnesse of justification And this he indevoureth to prove by Testimonies of Scripture by the authority of Saint Augustine and by reason The texts of Scripture which he citeth are six The first Rom. 4. 25. who was delivered up for our sinâ—…es and rose for our justification From whence Bellarmine argueth thus to what the Apostle giveth the name of justification in that justification consisteth rather than in that unto which hee doth not give the name But to renovation in this place the Apostle doth give the name of justification and not to remission of sinne Therefore justification consisteth rather in renovation than in remission of sinne Before I answere I thinke good to advertise the reader againe that Bellarmine here by remission of sinne doth not understand the not imputing of sinne or as we in plaine English call it forgivenesse of sinne but the utter deletion the extinction the totall mortification of sinne And that hee doth foure times at the least signifie in this one passage Now I answer by denying his assumption because the Apostle in this place doth give the name of justification neither to remission nor yet to renovation which is not mentioned so much as once in all the Chapter Indeed in some other places the Apostle and his Disciple Saint Luke doe give the name to remission of sinnes that is to the not imputing of sinne or to the absolving and acquitting from sinne Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 〈◊〉 13. 38 39. but never to renovation § III. His assumption Bellarmine proveth because it cannot be doubtâ—…d but that the Apostles meaning was that Christ his death was a samplar or patterne of the death of sin that is saith he of remission or deletion of sins and that his resurrection was a samplar or patterne of our renovation and inward regeneration by which we walke in newnesse of life And is this the meaning of the Apostle Then be like wee are justified by imitation and not by imputation of Christs death and by imitation of his resurrection and then also by the same reason we are made sinners by imitation and not imputation of Adams transgression But indeed in this place the Apostle doth not propound by way of exhortation the death and resurrection of Christ as an example to bee followed in dying to sinne and rising to righteousnesse represented in Baptisme as hee doth in the sixth to the Romans where he exhorteth to sanctification as an inseparable consequent and companion of justification but by way of Doctrine hee speaketh of the death and resurrection of Christ as the cause of our justification of which he had spoken in the whole Chapter and even in the verses next going before that righteousnesse shall bee imputed to us as well as to Abraham if wee beleeve in him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead who was given by his father and by himselfe to us and for us that by the obedience of his life untill death but especially at his death he might satisfie for our sinnes and was raised from the dead that we might be justified and saved by his life which he liveth after his death Christ by his death and obedience did satisfie for our sinnes paying a full ransome for them and so did justifie us meritoriously and in that sense we are said to bee justified by his bloud and by his obedience both as the matter
according to the perfection of it and as it is in it selfe considered in the abstract Otherwise we acknowledge degrees of assurance And if any of our Divines have held the speciall faith to be the onely justifying faith they are to be understood as speaking of justification in the court of conscience and as judging them onely to be justified and to have remission of sinnes who are in their owne consciences perswaded and in some measure assured thereof But besides and before the speciall faith whereby wee are justified in our owne conscience applying the promise of the Gospell to our selves a formall degree of faith is to bee acknowledged being the condition of the Evangelicall promises by which we aprehend receive and embrace Christ as hath been shewed and by which we are justified before God This degree of faith in order of nature goeth before repentance though in time repentance seemeth to goe before faith as being sooner discerned But in order of nature as well as of time repentance goeth before speciall faith Because no man can be assured of Gods favour in remitting his sinnes who hath not repented thereof CAP. XII Of foure other dispositions viz. love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament the purpose of a new life § I. HIs fourth disposition is Love for so soone as a man doth hope for a benefit from another as namely justificacation from God hee beginneth to love him from whom hee doth expect it In which words there is some shew that hope disposeth to love but that love doth dispose to justification not so much as a shew But that some love goeth before justification and disposeth thereto he endeavoureth to prove which if he could performe were to little purpose â—…or so long as this love doth not justifie his assertion doth not disprove justification by faith alone but indeed he proveth it not though to that purpose hee produceth besides foure testimonies of Scripture the authority of the Councell of Aurenge His first testimony is a supposititious senrence of an Apocryphall Booke For neither is the sentence in the originall Greeke nor the Booke canonicall neither is the sentence it selfe to the purpose Yee that feare the Lord love him and your hearts shall be he doth not say justified but enlightened that is as Iansenius expoundeth comforted For they that feare God and love him are already justified by faith from which both feare and love doe spring § II. His second testimony Luk. 7. 47. Many sinnes are forgiven her because she loved much therefore love is the cause of forgivenesse I answer by denying the consequence For here in the Papists are many times grossely mistaken who thinke that in every aetiologie the reason which is rendred is a cause so properly called when as indeed it may be any other argument or reason as well as the cause For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cause in a large sense doth not onely fignifie that which causeth the effect which properly is called the cause of a thing or action but also any reason which proveth the thing propounded which is a cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of the action or thing it selfe but of the reasoning or conclusion or as wee use to say consâ—…quentiae non consequentis of the consequence not of the consequent Thus it is called the fallacie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non causa pro causa when that is brought for any argument which it is not So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is traÌ„slated redditio causae is the rendring of any reason from any argument whatsoever For in any syllogism that which is the medium though it bee the effect of the thing is the cause of the conclusion because it is the reason which proveth it and in this sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which cause and wherefore is all one Thus the Papists prove Christs humiliation to have beene the cause of his exaltation as wee heard before because â—…he Apostle saith therefore God exalted him c thus they prove the workes of mercie to bee the cause of salvation because our Saiour saith for I was hungry c so here that love is the cause of forgivenesse because it is said for she loved much when indeed our Saviour argueth not from the cause to the effect but from the effect to the cause as is most evident First by the parable of a creditour who having two debtors whereof the one owed him five hundred pence the other fiftie and neither of them having any thing to pay he freely forgave them both their debt Our Saviour therâ—…fore demanding of the Pharisee who had invited him which of these debtours would love the creditour most the Pharisee truely answered I suppose he to whom he forgave most which answer approved by our Saviour plainely proveth that love was not the cause of forgivenesse but forgivenesse of love and the forgiveing of more the cause of greater love and the forgivenesse of lesse the cause of lesse love and consequently that the greater love was not the cause of greater forgivenesse but the effect of it This parable our Saviour applying to the Pharisee that invited him as the lesse debtour and to the woman which had been a notorious sinner as the greater debtor to both which he had forgiven their debts they having nothing to pay sheweth that her greaâ—…er love was an evidence of her greater debt forgiven Secondly by the antithesis in the same verse but to whom little is forgiven hee loveth but a little It is therefore plaine that the forgivenesse is the cause of love and the forgiving of more of more love and the forgiving of lesse of lesse love And as lesse love is a token of the lesse debt forgiven so greater love of more forgiven hee speaketh therefore of her love not as the cause going before but as the effect following after justification § III. And such is Bellarmines argument out of 1 Ioh. 3. 14. we are translated from death to life that is we are justified because we love the brethren therefore the love of the brethren is the cause of justification I deny the consequence the love of the brethren is not the cause but the fruit of our justification whereby it may be knowne And this appeareth manifestly out of these words which Bellarmine hath fraudulently omitted Nos scimus quia translati sumus c. wee know that wee are translated from death to life because wee love the brethren Our loue then is not the cause of justification but a manifest signe and evidence whereby it is knowne that we are already justified for so he saith speaking in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we are already passed or translated from death to life And to the like effect our Saviour speaketh Luk. 7. 47. as if hee had said hereby it appeareth that many sinnes are forgiven her because shee loved much But that it was not her love
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ—… it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good â—…orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriâ—…us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiâ—…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ—… in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righâ—…eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils â—…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
that unto salvation contrary to the Lutherans who deny good workes to be necessary to salvation and againe we have that patience is necessary not onely in respect of presence but also of relation to salvation that they may receive the promise Answ. Hee hath not here the terme Necessary but in the vulgar translation the phrase in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opus habetis you have need of patience which phrase is often used in the Scriptures to signifie things usefull or needfull without any shew or colour of signification implying the necessity of efficiency as Matth. 6. 8. Your father knoweth whereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you have need the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath need of the Asse and her colt Matth. 21. 3. Buy those things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof we have need against the feast Ioh. 13. 29. c. But wee grant that patience is a necessary vertue and that also to salvation yea but It is necessary saith he with relation to salvation for so he saith that you may receive the promise Ridiculous for how can it bee necessary to salvation without some relation to it But every relation is not causall or importing a cause as in those examples which he alleageth Meate is necessary that we may be nourished c. But many times the relation is of other arguments as of meanes and helpes and such other things without which the thing desired cannot well be had as the Asse and her colt were needfull for Christ going to Ierusalem Shooes or bootes are needfull for him that travaileth And such is the relation of the way to the journies end Hee therefore that would goe to heaven had need to goe the way which leadeth to it that is the way of good workes which God hath prepared for us to walke in them And that is the meaning of this place yee have need of patience as of a necessary fruit of faith that having by faith runne the race that is set before you viz. Of patience you may come to the end of your faith which is the salvation of your soules § IV. His second testimony 1 Tim. 2. 14 15. The woman being deceived was in the transgression But shee shall be saved by bearing of children if shee continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety Where saith hee perseverance not onely in faith but in faith love sanctification and sobriety is put as necessary to salvation and as a certaine condition without which the woman cannot bee saved Answ. All this we grant but Conditio sine qua non is no cause nor doth import any efficiency If hee would have taken hold of any thing in this Text as implying efficiencie hee should rather have urged the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per filiorum generationem by childe-bearing as it is better translated than by bearing of children to avoid ambiguity because it is said in the words following if they shall continue which is not to bee understood of the children but of the woman that is to say the sexe which being a word collective signifying a multitude is per synthesin joyned to a verbe of the plurall as turbaruunt As if childe-bearing were a cause or had some relation of efficiency to salvation which notwithstanding is so farre from being in it selfe a cause of salvation that it was inflicted upon that sexe as a curse Howbeit to the faithfull the nature of it as of all other afflictions which in themselves be evill is changed and they sanctified to them as the strait way or as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a way of affliction by which they are to come to heaven In such places therefore though the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which many times importeth a cause bee used yet not the cause but sometimes the way is signified and sometimes the estate The way as Acts 14. 22. Paul and Barnabas confirming the soules of the Disciples and exhorting them to continue in the faith affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through many aflictions wee must enter into the Kingdome of God Not that afflictions or the patient bearing of them is the cause of salvation as the Papists would collect out of some other places but that afflictions patiently borne are the way to it The estate as Rom. 4. 11. Abraham the father of all that beleeve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being in uncircumcision So in this place as Beza hath well observed where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And him doth Bellarmine follow This is to bee noted saith hee that per by the bearing of children is put for in For it was not the Apostles meaning that procreation of children is a cause of salvation but that a woman in the state of marriage or in the state of childebearing shall bee saved if shee abide in the faith c. § V. His third Testimony Phil. 2. 12. With feare and trembling worke your salvation Surely saith hee if good actions worke salvation they are necessary not onely by way of presence but also of efficiency Answ. Very true But where doth the Apostle say that good actions doe worke salvation Hee exhorteth indeed the Philippians that they should worke or rather worke out their salvation not that they are the Authours or Workers of it for salvation and every degree thereof is the worke of God We are his workemanship even in respect of our spirituall life He hath made us and not we our selves He worketh all our workes in us wee are not able to thinke a good thought as of our selves but as it followeth in the next words God worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure And we are to observe that this exhortation is directed to the Saints at Philippi in whom God had begun this good worke As therefore God himselfe having begun this worke would as the Apostle saith finish it or bring it to perfection so the Apostle exhorteth them who had entred into the course of salvation that they should goe on in the same course cooperating with God and accomplishing their sanctification in the feare of God as the Apostle elsewhere speaketh § VI. His fourth Testimony 2 Cor. 7. 10. For the sorrow that is according to God worketh penance unto salvation that is stable Here also wee see saith hee the respect of efficiency For sorrow worketh penance penance worketh stable salvation For sorrow doth truly worke in a man penance that is detestation of sinne and a purpose to avoid sinne Therefore penance also it selfe dâ—…th truly worke stable salvation and is therefore necessary not oneâ—… in regard of presence but as a cause Answ. It is true that godly sorrow or the Spirit of God by it worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentance never to be repented of even repentance unto salvation But it is not said that
mainetaine the contradictory of our assertion and maketh the question to be this whether by good workes men are justified that is to say made more just viz. in respect of righteousnesse inherent But we deny that there are any degrees of justification or that a man may be more justified or that justification doth ever signifie increase of righteousnesse wee reject their new found distinction of justification into the first and second and acknowledge no other justification but that which in the Scriptures and Fathers is called the justification of a sinner and thereby wee understand a continued act of God who as when we being sinners did first beleeve did justifie us so remaining sinners in our selves he doth still justifie us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse acquitting us from our sinnes and accepting of us as righteous in Christ. And this justification which is onely acknowledged by the Scriptures and Fathers is every where ascribed to faith Whereas the first justification of the Papists is ascribed to charity as the onely forme the second to workes as to the merit thereof But all this ariseth from their erroneous and wilfull confounding of justification and sanctification For their first justification is that which the Scriptures call regeneration and is the first act of Sanctification by which we are habitually sanctified for they make it to be nothing else but the infusion of the habits of grace Their second justification is their actuall fanctification or exercise of good workes whereby their inherent righteousnesse or sanctification is increased But the question is not of sanctification but of justification which the Papists by their wicked doctrine confounding it with sanctification have wholly abolished it being the maine benefit of the Messias by which we are both freed from hell and entitled to heaven Neither is the question understood of justification before men but before God For before men we doe confessâ—… that by good workes men are justified that is declared and knownâ—… to be just as by the fruits effects consequents and signes of justification by faith but before God we are not justified that is made or constituted just by workâ—…s as any cause thereof for good workes goe not before justification but follow after which is a plaine evidence that they are no cause of it § II. But let us examine his proofes the first and principall is out of Iames 2. which being the onely place of Scripture whereupon with any shew of probability they ground their doctrine of justification by workes I will not content my selfe to answere Bellarmines cavils alone but I will endevour to stop the mouthes of all the Papists who use to vaunt of this place especially of the 24. verse where they bragge that their assertion is expressed and ours confuted in plaine termes yee see then that a man is justified by workes and not by saith onely Which words are a consectary or conclusion deduced from the example of Abraham who though he were justified by faith without works as Saint Paul teacheth yet was hee also justified by workes and not by faith onely as Saint Iames affirmeth A conclusion therefore in shew of words contradictory to that of the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. 28. wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law and Gal. 2. 16. we know that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is but onely by faith which no doubt was the Apostles meaning For as I have shewed heretofore if this be a good disjunction that we are justified either by faith or by works that is either by the righteousnes of Christ which is out of us in him apprehended by faith or by the works of the Law that is by righteousnes inherent in our selves all which is prescribed in the Law as undoubtedly it is for a third thing cannot be named whereby we might be justified and by both we cannot for if by faith then of grace and if of grace then not of works and contrary wise Rom. 4. 4 5. 11. 6. then it followeth necessarily that if we are not justified by workes we are justified by faith alone Hence ariseth this great controversie between the true Catholiks and the Papists we affirming that we are justified by faith without works or by faith alone The Papists contending that wee are justified by workes and not by faith only we alleaging the authority of Saint Paul in his Epistles to the â—…omanes Galatians Ephesians the Papists this Testimony of Saint Iames. § III. The way to determine this weighty Controversie is to reconcile the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles Some a when they were not able to untye this Gordian knot have sought with Alexander to cut it by questioning without just cause the authority of that Epistle of Saint Iames. But the Papists and wee are thus farre agreed First as they doe not deny those Epistles of S. Paul which were never questioned so we acknowledge this of Saint Iames though it hath beene questioned to bee canonicall Secondly that the two Apostles acted by the same Spirit of truth in penning their Epistles could not possibly deliver contrary assertions and consequently that they onely are to bee esteemed to hold the truth who fitly reconciling the seeming variance betweene the two Apostles doe teach that doctrine which is agreeable to both Here then I am to demonstrate both against the Papists and for our selves against the Papists three things First that the doctrine which they ground upon this place of Saint Iames is contrary to that of Saint Paul Secondly that their exposition of Saint Iames they make him contradict the Apostle Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot be grounded upon this Text. For our selves two things First that by our exposition the two Apostles are easily reconciled Secondly that the assertion of the two Apostles according to our doctrine not onely may well stand together but also of necessity must goe together For the first wee have the same controversie with the Papists as I have noted before which the Apostle maintayned against the justiciaryes of his time And their opposite doctrine to Saint Paul which they would gladly father upon Saint Iames standeth in those six maine errours which I have plainely and fully confuted in this treatise And namely in this particular they affirming that men are justified by workes which the Apostle every were constantly denyeth To the second whiles they understand the two Apostles to speake in the same sense of faith of workes of justifying as namely that both speake of a true justifying faith of workes as causes of justification of justifying as making just by righteousnesse inherent they make the one directly to contradict the other For if Paul affirme that men are justified by a true faith without workes and Iames deny it If Paul deny that we are justified by workes as the causes of justification and Iames affirme it If Paul deny that wee are
workes Saint Iames having to deale with carnall Gospellers vaine men turning the grace of God into wantonnesse who having heard that faith doth justifie without workes did cast off all care of good workes thinking it sufficient to professe themselves to beleeve though their life were dissolute Against these Saint Iames proveth that vaine is the profession of faith without good works â—… that the faith which is without works is not a true liuely justifying faith but a dead and counterfeit faith that whosoever is justified before God by faith must also be justified that is declared and approved to bee just not onely by profession of his faith but also by the practise of good workes Wherefore in this respect there is no more difference betweene the two Apostles Paul and Iames than betweene Lâ—…ther and us who are Preachers of the Gospell at this day For as Luther having to deale with Popish justitiaâ—…ies who taught justification by workes urgeth most zelously justification by faith alone and in the question of justification after the example of Saint Paul speaketh contemptuously of workes so we having to dâ—…le with Libertines and carnall gospellers insisting in the steppes of Saint Iames urge the necessity of good workes § XVII Secondly wee are to consider the divers acceptions of the words faith workes justifie in the writings of the two Apostles Paul speaking of a true lively faith which worketh by love saith in effect that faith alone doth justifie Iames speaking of the faith of hypocrits which is in profession only sâ—…vered from the grace of sanctification and destitute of good workes â—…aith that such a faith doth neither justifie alone nor at all as being not a true but a dead and counterfeit faith Paul speaking of the câ—…uses of justification before God denyeth workes to concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof Iames speaking of the effects and â—…ignes of justificatiâ—…n whereby it may beâ—… knowne affirmeth that workes must concurre in the parties justified that by them our faith may be demonstrated â—…nd our justification manifested Paul therefore rejecteth workes obtruded as causes of justification Iames urgeth thâ—…m as effects and signes thereof Paul speaking of Iustification in the proper sense as it signifieth that gracioâ—…s action of God whereby wee are made or constituted just affirmeth that wee are justified by faith without workes Iames speaking of thâ—…t justificâ—…tion whereby we are not mâ—…de just before God but declared and 〈◊〉 to God our 〈◊〉 and our conscience to bee just and indued with a true faith 〈◊〉 that we are so justified not onely by the profession of faith but also by good workes Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very well stand together For although it be most true which Saint Paul affirmeth that true faith doth just fie alone yet it is 〈◊〉 true which Saint Iames faith that the faith which is alone doth not justifie neither â—…lone nor at all because it is not 〈◊〉 true and a lively but a 〈◊〉 and dead faith For 〈◊〉 the living eye though it see alone yet is not alone so a liuely fâ—…ith though it justifie alone yet never iâ—… alone though it justifie without workes yet it is not without workâ—…s Though good workes doe not 〈◊〉 to the act of justification aâ—… any cause therâ—…of according to Saint Pauls doctrinâ—… yet they must concurre in the same subject that is the party justified as necessary fruitâ—… and 〈◊〉 of â—… true justifying â—…aith 〈◊〉 Saint Iaâ—…esâ—…cheth â—…cheth Though we be justified before God that is both absolved from our 〈◊〉 and accepted in Christ as righteous by faith alone without respect of workâ—… as Saint Paul teacheth yet according to the doctrine of â—…aint Iames weâ—… are to bee justified that is declared and approved to be just not onely by faith professed but also by good workes Finally though good workes nâ—…n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet 〈◊〉 justificaâ—… as Augustinâ—… useth to speake or as he also saith non prâ—…edunt iustifiâ—…andum sed justificatâ—… 〈◊〉 though they doe not goâ—… before justification as causâ—…s 〈◊〉 Pâ—…l teacheth yet they must follow in the parties justified as effects according to Saint Iames his doctrine § XVIII But the assertions of the 2. Apostles not only may wel stand togeâ—…her but also according to our doctrine they must necessarily goe together For if we shall be altogether conversant in setting forth the commendation of good works and in urging the necessity thereof not informing the people in the doctrine of justification by faith alone they will be ready to place the matter of their justification and the merit of their salvation in themselves as the Papists doe And so being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse they doe not submit themselves to the righteousnes of God But wee must so urge the necessity of good workes in the doctrine of sanctification that wee remember that in the question of justification they are of no value On the other side if wee shall be wholly taken up in the doctrine of justification by faith alone teaching that in the question of justification they are of no worth and doe not withall informe the people of the profit and necessity of good works in other respects how ready will they bee to cast off all care of good workes and content themselves with a bare profession of faith But wee joyne these assertions together after the doctrine and practise of the Apostles in their Epistles Wee teach that justification and sanctification are unseparable companions And theresore as they who are sanctified may bee assured of their justification so without sanctification none can bee assured of their justification It is true that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus but who are they that live not after the flesh but after the Spirit Râ—… 8. 1. that are new creatures 2 Cor. 5. 17. that crucifie the flesh with the lusts thereof Gal. 5. 24. It is true that a true lively faith doth justifie alone but what manner of saith is that that purifieth the heart Act. 15. 9. and worketh by love Gal. 5. 6. and may be demonstrated by good workes Iam. 2. 18. It is true that wee are not justified by our workes nor saved for them yet those are neither justified nor saved that are without them for as they are necessary consequents of justification so they are necessary antecedents of salvation For though they be not the cause of our salvation yet they are the way by which we are to come to salvation though they be not causa regâ—…andi as Bernard saith yet they are via regni Though they bee not the merit of salvation yet they are the evidence according to which God will judge us By faith wee have our inheritance and our title to Gods Kingdome but it is to be inherited among those that are sanctified A godly conversation though it be not properly a cause of our glorification yet it is causa
true â—…aith may bee severed from charity lib. 6. cap. 3. The first oâ—…t of Ioh. 12. 42 43. § 1. The second out of 1 Cor. 13. 2. § 2 3. 4. The third out of Iam. 2. 14. § 5. The fourth because in the Church there are both good and bad § 6. The fifth from the â—…ature of faith and charity § 7 8 9. The sixth from an absurdity § 10. The seventh Testimonies of Fathers § 11. Whether iustifying faith may be without speciall apprehension of Christ. lib. 6. c. 4. No iustifying faith but that which laieth hold on Christ. § 1. To beleâ—…ve in Christ is to receive and embrace him § 2. Two degrees of faith the former specially apprehending the other actually applying Christ. § 3. Of the former degree § 4. Of the latter § 5. The necessity of this speciall apprehension to iustifioâ—…tion § 6 7. The Popish obiections against speciall faith lib. 6. cap. 4. § 8. Their obiections concerning fiducia affiance § 9. By alively assent men beleeve in Christ. § 10. That affiance is not faith § 11. The subiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 5. vid. subiect The obiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 6. vid. obiect Of the actor effect of faith which is to iustifie First whether indeed it dâ—…th iustifie or only dispose to iustification lib. 6. cap. 7. § 1 2. Secondly whether faith doth iustifie formally § 3. The Papists cavill that we debase faith § 4. which themselves have 〈◊〉 § 5. Thirdly whether faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 8. the state of the â—…troversie § 1. The explanation of the three termes Fides ibid. Iustificat § 2. Sola § 3 4 5. Our proofes § 6. Testimonies of Scripture § 7. Reasons § 8 9. 10 11. Testimonies of Fathers and other â—…ters in all ages lib. 6. cap. 9. Bellarmines arguments that faith dâ—…th not iustifie aloue lib. 6. cap. 10. This question he disputeth three waies ail which are impertinent § 1 2. The first that it doth not iustifie alone by way of disposing which bee proveth by five principall arguments the first because there are seven dispositions whereof faith is one which discourse of the seven dispositions is idle and impertinent lib. 6. cap. 10. § 3. VVhether any preparative dispositions be indeed required § 4. Of the first disposition which is faith lib. 6. cap. 10. § 5. His argument because it but beginneth iustification and therefore dâ—…th not instâ—…fie alone § 6. His first proofe Heb. 11. 6. § 7. His second Rom. 10. 13 14 § 8. His third Ioh. 1. 12. § 9. Testimonies oâ—… Fathers that faith is the beginning § 10. His reasons § 11. Of feare the second disposition lib. 6. cap. 11. § 1 2. ad 6. Of hope the third disposition lib. c. 11. § 6. c. Of love the fourth lib. 6. cap. 12. 1 2. c. ad 9. Of 〈◊〉 the fifth lib. 5. cap. 12. § 9. 10. The sixth disposition a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament lib. 6. c. 12. § 11. The seventh a purpose of a new life lib. 6. cap. 12. § 12. His second principall argument because faith being alone and severed from charity and other graces cannot 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 13. His third principall argument from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the causes which may bee given why faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 14. which are â—…hree First authority of Scriptures § â—… 3 4. Secondly â—…he will and pleasure of God § 5. Thirdly because it is the property of faith alone to receive Christ. § 6. that is to 〈◊〉 and to apply him § 7. 8. His â—…ourth principall 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith dâ—…th 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 15. I. Because it iustifieth as a causâ—… â—… â—… c. ad 7. II. As the beginning of righteousnesse § 7 8 9. III. As the merit § 10. c. ad finem capitis His fifth principall argument from two principles viz. first from the formall cause of iustification Lib. 6. cap. 15. § 17. Secondly from the â—…ecessity oâ—… good workes for if faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would 〈◊〉 alone lib. 7. 〈◊〉 5. § 1 2. That good workes are necessary by way of efficiency § 3. VVhether faith doth save alone lib. 7. cap 5. § 15. Bellarmines reasons to the contrary § 16. Feare The second disposition iâ—… iustification according to the councell of Trent lib. 6. cap. 11. The finall cause of iustification see End Forme The formall cause of iustification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse l. 1. cap. 3. § 1. 7. lib. 5. per totum Private opinions of some Divines concerning the forme of iustification lib. 1. cap. 5. Their depravation of our assertion as if wee held that wee are formally iust by Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 5. § 2. Their errours § 3. The private opinioâ—…s concerning the matter and the forme of iustification very dangerous lib. 1. cap. 5. § 13 14. G God The principall cause of iustification lib. 1. cap. 2. § 1. c. The righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified is the maine doctrine of the Gospell lib. 1. cap. 1. § 1. It is called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of Christ who is God lib. 4. cap. 2 3 4. Gospell The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell lib. 7. cap. 4. § 3. The acceptions of the words Law and Gospell either more large or more stâ—…ict § 3 4. Bellarmines disproofe of the difference by uâ—… given § 5. Because in the Gospell is contained the Doctrine of good workes ibid. Whether the promise of salvation made to our obedience doth prove the merit of good workes Eternalll life promised in three respects First as a free gift lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. Secondly as our inheritance § 7. Thirdly as a free reward § 8. The Example of Gods dealing with Abraham § 9. Though eternall life bee the reward of our obedience yet it is not merited by it § 10. Some places of Scriptures which the Papists understand of causes are to bee understood as notes § 11. Or evidences § 12. Three other answeres § 13. Testimonies wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised in the Gospell alleaged by Bellarmine § 14. The I. Matth. 5. 20. lib. 7. cap. 4. § 14. II. Matth. 19. 17. § 15. III. Testimonies out of the Apostles § 16. IV. Out of the Prophets Ezec. 18. 21. § 17. V. From the condition of faith § 18. Bellarmines second argument from the differences betweene the Law and the Gospell § 19. Eight differences betweene the Law and the Gospell assigned by Bellarmine § 19. 20. Grace The moving cause of iustification l. 1. cap. 2. § 2. VVhat is meant by the word Grace lib. 3. The Papists by the grace of God by which we are iustified understand the habit of grace inherent in us lib. 3. cap. 1. § 1. The divers acceptions of the word Grace § 3. The distinction of Grace § 3. The state of the question concerning Grace
Law and the same was taught by Calvin not to mention all the rest of our Divines Christum sc. nos reconciliasse Deo justitiam acquisivisse toto obedientiae suae cursu § X. But against this assumption divers things are objected first they feare not to say which I feare to relate that Christ obeyed the Law not for us but for himselfe for they say that Christ as he was man was bound to obey the Law for himselfe which assertion detracteth from the merit of his obedience from the bounty of his Grace from the dignity of his person From his merit for if his obedience were of duety then were it not meritorious as himselfe teacheth Luk. 17. 10. for Debitum non est meritum And if this be true that Christs obedience is not meritorious than have we no title to heaven From his bounty if what he did indeed for us and not for himselfe hee should be thought to have done for himselfe and not for us From the dignity of his peâ—…son as if either he needed to obey for himselfe or by his obedience hee were any way bettered in himselfe or improved But these men shold have remembred that the person who as both of us confesse did obey the Law was and is not onely man but God also and therefore as his bloud was Gods bloud so his obedience was the obedience of God and consequently was performed not of duty nor for himselfe For if of duty then had God been a debtor to the Law Neither needed the humane nature being by personall union united to the divine to obey or to merit for it selfe seeing from the first moment of the conception thereof it was personally united to the Deity of the Sonne of God in whose person it subsisting was from the beginning of the being thereof most happy and enjoying the beatificall vision being at that time as the Schoolemen speake both viator comprehensor Neither did the humane nature which doth not subsist by it selfe work any thing by it selfe in the worke of our redemption but God manifested in the flesh did in and by it both obey and suffer for us And as the eternall Son of God being God coequall with the Father assumed the humane nature and became man not for himselfe for his incarnation was an abasing of himselfe as it were to nothing for man compared to God is as nothing if not as lesse than nothing but for us men and for our salvation so being man whatsoever he did or suffered in obedience to God was not for himselfe for it was a further debasing of himselfe but for us and as for us he sanctified himselfe Iohn 17. 17. so for us he performed all righteousnesse Matth. 3. 15. and fulfilled the Law for us Matth. 5. 17. that whatsoever the Law requireth to justification might bee fulfilled in it Rom. 8. 4. § XI But here the Papists object that our Saviour Christ by his humiliation did merit his exaltation because the Apostle saith that therefore God exalted him Phil. 2. 9. Answere In every aetiologie the reason which is rendred is in a large sense called the cause though it may be any other argument which is not the cause of the Consequent but of the consequence as here humiliation was not the cause but the way to exaltation and exaltation not the effect but the consequent as it is said Luk. 24. 26. ought not Christ to suffer these things and so to enter to his glory And this appeareth by the scope of the Apostle in that place which is to exhort us to the imitation of our Saviour Christ his charity and humility Of his charity in that hee being God for our sakes became man and being man humbled himselfe further and became obedient untill his death even the death of the crosse Of his humility in that it was the way to his glory For before honour is humility and he that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted But humiliation is so farre from being the cause of exaltation that it is the contrary to it even as corruption to generation and losse to recovery yet because recovery presupposeth losse and the generation of one the corruption of another and the exaltation of the Sonne of God his foregoing humiliation therefore each of these may be said to be causa sine qua non as all necessary forerunners may though they be no causes Even as Fabius when Livius Salinator bad him remember that by his meanes hee had recovered 〈◊〉 Why should I not remember it saith he I had never recovered it unlesse thou haddâ—…st lost it Cic. 2. de Oratore And further I adde that the exaltation of Christ whereof the Apostle speaketh was not the exaltation of him to be the Sonne of God for that hee was from all eternity but the manifestation thereof For although in respect of Christs resurrection especially it be said Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee yet was not Christ then first begotten whose generation is eternall but then he was mightily declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection Rom. 1. 4. and this was that name above all names which God did give unto him after his humiliation his manifesting and declaring him by his resurrection to be the Sonne of God So the Apostle saith Heb. 1. 4 5. that Christ hath obtained a more excellent name than the Angels For unto which of the Angells said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day I have begotten thee This exaltation was a necessary consequent of his humiliation and that in two respects first for avoyding the scandall of the crosse for having taken upon him the forme of a servant and therein having humbled himselfe to become obedient untill death and to the death of the crosse it was necessary lest men should take offence at his great humiliation and refuse to beleeve in a man that had beene crucified that he should mightily be declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection ascension and sitting at the right hand of his Father secondly this declaration of Christ to bee the Sonne of God was to follow his humiliation as a necessary stay of our faith in Christ for if Christ had not risen againe then had our faith beene vaine and wee had remained in our sinnes But by his resurrection and exaltation whereby he was powerfully declared to be the eternall Sonne of God wee understand that the obedience which he had performed and the suffering which hee sustained for us were not the obedience and sufferings of mâ—…re a man but of him that is God for which cause Saint Peter saith that God did raise him and give him glory that our faith and hope might be in God § XII If they will needs with the Arrians understand the place of Christs exaltation it selfe which is his filiation and not of the declaration thereof thereupon
according to charity sanctified from the corruption of sinne and justified from the guilt of the same therefore they should take heed lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified or made guilty of those crimes from which they were justified § V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified Answ. The Context doth shew that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed that whom the Lord calleth hee doth justifie and whom he doth justifie them also hee doth glorifie from thence hee inferreth this consolation who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth as was said verse 30. who shall condemne c. Where justifying most plainely is used as a judiciall word signifying by sentence to justifie as Chrysostome and Oâ—…cumenius on this place doe note as opposed to accusing and condemning and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word infusion of righteousnesse But heere it may bee objected that in this place where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation sanctification is either included in justification or left our Answ. It is left out for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of salvation in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter left out sanctification as being no cause of salvation but the way unto it and the cognizance of them that are saved And these degrees are so set downe Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed first Vocation that men should bee called and thereby brought to beleeve secondly Iustification that by faith they may receive remission of sinnes thirdly Glorification that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified where sanctification is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved Againe sanctification is left out because it is included in respect of the beginning thereof which is our conversion or regeneration in vocation and in respect of the consummation in glorification for as sanctification is gloria inchoata so glorification is gratia consummata § VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him who justifieth the ungodly Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence his faith is imputed for righteousnesse which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit that it plainely confutes it first it is called the justification of the ungodly that is of one who is a sinner in himselfe for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne and so remaineth cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent secondly because to him that beleeveth in Christ faith relatively understood that is the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse thirdly because in this place justification is expressed by these termes not imputing sinne remitting or covering of sinne imputing righteousnesse without workes imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not that is that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse but beleeveth in him that justifieth a sinner CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justification assigned by Bellarmine § I. THirdly saith Bellarmine justification is taken for increase of justice for even as he is said to be heated not only who of cold is mà de hot but also who of hot is made hotter even so he is said to be justified who not onely of a sinner is made just but also of just is made more just Ans. In this comparison of like there is a great unlikenesse for calefaction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot but in justification the change is not reall but relative as before hath beene shewed Bellarmine therefore must prove that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteousnesse inherent before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of inherent justice But if the former cannot be proved much lesse the latter But yet he bringeth three proofes such as they be § II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justificari quâ—…niam merces Domini manet in aeternum feare not to be justified untill death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever Answ. To omit that the booke is Apocryphall which ought not to bee alleaged in controversies of faith the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved The words in the Originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is stay not untill death to be justified or as their own interlinear translation readeth it ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari wait not untill death to be justified where it is evident that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion which he would not have differred untill the time of death and not of the continuance or increase of it for then the sentence would beare a contrary and indeed an ungodly sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abide not or continue not to be justified or to be just untill thy death And the words untill death are not to be joyned with the last word justified but with the first stay not untill death And their translation of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether as Bellarmine here readeth ne verearis or as some editions have ne vetéris hath no affinity with the Originall But our interpretation as it agreeth with the words of the Text so it is confirmed by the context Vse Physike before thou bee sicke before judgement prepare thy selfe humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke and in the time of sinnes that is whiles thou mai'st yet sinne shew thy conversion let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season and deferre not untill death to be justified or to become just § III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and proceeding in justice and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are as much as cease not And this he would prove by that which goeth before be not hindred to pray alwayes where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continuall prayer and also by that which immediately followeth because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked but indulgence Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted when it shal be proved first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to cease secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwaies fourthly that those words but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth stay not or waite not and not cease not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render the vow and not to pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
were an utter deletion or abolition of sinne then in those that are justified there is no sinne But there is no mortall man though justified in whom there is no sinne Therefore in justification there is not a Totall deletion of sinne § XI Sixthly if remission of sin be an utter deletion of the corruption by infusion of righteousnesse and nothing else concurre to justification but infusion of righteousnesse expelling sin what then becommeth of the guilt of sinne and the punishment how is our debt satisfied The justice infused though it should utterly expell the corruption yet it neither doth nor can satisfie for the punishment as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Neither is there any other satisfaction or propitiation for our sinnes whereby Gods justice may be satisfied our debt discharged our selves freed from hell and damnation but onely the satisfaction of Christ without imputation whereof there is no justification nor salvation but none of this is done by righteousnesse infused expelling sinne Wherefore the Papists if they will bee saved must acknowledge besides the benefit of the infusion of righteousnesse expelling the corruption of sinne which they call justification but is indeed sanctification another greater benefit whereby we are both freed from hell and entituled to heaven by imputation of Christs satisfaction called in the Scriptures justification which they by their Antichristian doctrine have utterly abolished § XII Seventhly that which worketh no reall change in the party doth not really take away and expell all sin from him by infusion of righteousnesse for that cannot bee done without a reall yea and a great change in the party True remission of sinne doth not worke a reall change in the party Therefore the true remission of sinne doth not really take away and expell all sinne by infusion of righteousnesse The assumption is thus proved first the forgiving of a debt worketh no reall change in the debtor but relative The true remission of sinne is the forgiving of our debt therefore the true remission doth not worke a reall change in the party Secondly that which is imputative doth not worke a reall change in the party but is an act wrought without the party True remission of sinne is imputative as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 4. 6 7 8. consisting in the not imputing of sinne presupposing the imputing of righteousnesse without workes therefore it worketh not a reall change § XIII My eighth argument is from theabsurdities which follow upon this Popish Doctrine First Necessity of despairing not onely to the tender conscience labouring under the burden of sinne but also to all not cauterized consciences which have any sense of their owne estate For if remission of sinne bee the utter deletion of sinne then have not they neither can they have remission of sinne in whom any sinne remaineth and those that neither have nor can have remission of sinne in this life because sinne doth ever remaine in them what remaineth to them but despaire Secondly that there is no necessity of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse for justification because there is in them both a totall deletion of sinne and an infusion of perfect righteousnesse whereby sinne is wholly expelled And these as you shall heare hereafter are two of Bellarmines principall Arguments to prove the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to bee needlesse both because when our sinnes are remitted they are utterly abolished so that whosoever is justified is no longer a sinner in himselfe nor hath any sinne remaining in him and also because in justification there is an infusion of perfect righteousnesse The third that to remission of sinne there needeth no favour or indulgence for pardon or forgivenesse for if remission of sinne be a totall deletion of sinne by infusion of perfect righteousnesse then without any accession of favour the one contrary is necessarily expelled by the other And this doth Vasques professe in expresse termes Mihi semper necessarium visum fuit asserere maculam peccati ipsa justitia inherente tanquam forma contraria nullo accedente favore condo natione deleri § XIV These absurdities doe necessarily follow upon their Antichristian doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse For if a man be justified before God by inherent righteousnesse then is he not a sinner in himselfe and consequently hath no sinne in him And if by infusion of righteousnesse there be a totall deletion of sinne then must that righteousnesse which is infused be perfect For that which is unperfect cannot wholly expell sinne the imperfection being of it selfe a sinne and if upon infusion of perfect righteousnesse there doth necessarily and of its owne accord follow a totall deletion of sinne then to remission of sinne favour and condonation is needlesse And yet we have not done with their absurdities For to dreame that men who are but infants in Christianity yea infants in age before they have the use of reason or are capable of habits are endued and that ordinarily with perfect righteousnesse in their first imaginary justification which is inciptentium of such as be but incipients whereunto the best proficients doe not in this life attaine is a monstrous absurdity CAP. VIII Bellarmines dispute that remission of sinne is the utter deletion of it confuted § I. BVT how absurd soever their assertion is Bellarmine will maintaine it and set a good face upon it telling us first that wee may not deny it unlesse wee will deny the Scriptures For the Scripture saith he useth all manner of words to expresse the true remission of sinne so that if a man would of purpose seeke words to signifie the utter abolition of sinne hee could not devise any which the Scripture hath not already used And to this purpose citeth eighteene Testimonies nine out of the Old Testament viz. 1 Chron. 21. 8. Esai 44. 22. Ezek. 36. 25. Psalm 51. 7. Prov. 15. 27. alias 16. 6. Psalm 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19. Psalm 10. 15. Cant. 4. 7. And nine out of the New Ioh. 1. 29. Act. 3. 19. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. Act. 22. 16. Heb. 1. 3. 9. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Ephes. 5. 8. and 27. § II. Answ. These places are to be distinguished for either they are alleaged to prove the abolition of sinne or perfection of righteousnesse the former mention either the taking away of sinne or the wiping or blotting of it out or the purging of it or the not being of it For the taking away of sinne these are brought 1 Chron. 21. 8. Psalm 103. 12. Mic. 7. 19 Ioh. 1. 29. Heb. 9. 28. In 1 Chron. 21. 8. the word is Hahaber transire fac cause it to passe that is remove it out of thy sight not that it bee not at all but that it bee not punished or which is all one take away the guilt and so the word seemeth to be expounded 2 Sam. 12. 13. where Nathan saith to David the Lord hath taken away thy sinne thou shalt not
without the Law is revealed in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith But all men without exception both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore seeing all have sinned and are fallen short of the glory of God that is excluded from eternall glory they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law but they are justified by a righteousnesse which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel to wit the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith And that is it which is said in this text that those who have sinned and are fallen short of Gods glory and from their title to heaven are justified that is acquitted from their sinnes and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven freely without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves by the meere gracious favor of God when they had deserved the contrary through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse c. To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare § III. Secondly it is proved by the words of the text alleaged the first wherof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being justified Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have proved heretofore doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse and therfore here it is not meant that wee are justified by grace infused Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject but relative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath beene shewed And wee must remember that as it is called so it is justificatio impii the justification of a sinner not onely because before justification men are sinners but also because being justified they still remaine sinners in themselves though in Christ they are made righteous And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation to our glorification whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner as righteous in Christ not onely at his first conversion but also afterwards whiles hee beleeveth in Christ though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us that the merit of his obedience may beâ—… continually imputed unto us As for the Papists they being in their owne conceit justified as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie or absolved when they come to yeares they are no sinners neither is there any thing in them which God hateth or which may properly bee called sinne But justification being of sinners and they being no sinners but â—…aying they have no sinne and avouching that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne hereby it appeareth that neither are they justified neither is there any truth in them § IV. The next word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an exclusive particle excluding the false causes of justification and signifying that wee are justified without any desert or worthinesse in our selves without works without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us which directly overthroweth the assertion of the Papists for proofe whereof this place was alleaged § V. The third word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his grace that is by the gracious favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him as hath beene proved that is by his love of us and not by our love of him Neither is there any shew of reason why it should in this place above all others signifie as it never doth an habit of justifying grace inherent in us especially if that bee true which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate that wee are not justified by that which is inherent And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words gratia Dei gratis justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei they are justified freely because neither working before their justification nor rendring any recompence after their justification they are by faith onely justified by the grace that is as he expoundeth it the gift of God And on those words by the redemption which is in Christ Iesu he testifieth saith hee that the grace of God is in Christ but not in us because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit The name of Grace saith he when it is here said justified freely by his grace though it may signifie that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man and inherent therein yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei bâ—…nitatem benignitatem erga hominem the free or gracious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man Grace therefore doth not signifie either the matter or the forme but the efficient cause of our justification § VI. The fourth word is through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law both in respect of the precept and of the penalty by which being as the Papists themselves confesse imputed unto us we are redeemed and justified as being the matter and merit of justification § VII The fifth word is by faith whereby is noted the instrument by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified which is indeed out of us in him but imputed to those that beleeve The righteousnesse therefore by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of faith that is the righteousnesse of God or of Christ apprehended by faith § VIII The sixth and last is the end why God did give his Sonne to be a propitiation for our sinnes to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes and that hee might bee just and the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For in the worke of our redemption and justification Gods justice is declared to be such that he forgiveth no sinnes but those onely for which his justice is satisfied by Christ neither doth he justifie any but those whom by communication of Christs righteousnesse unto them he maketh just But how should the satisfaction of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings being transient and so long agoe performed bee communicated unto us for our justification otherwise but by imputation And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse then not by inherent grace or infused righteousnesse CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted § I. NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon this place Here saith he all the causes almost of justification are set forth together The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis freely importing the liberality of
performed as well as we can because commanded knowing that God will accept of our upright though weake indevour § XXI The sixth and the last who seeth not that these words good workes are mortall sinnes imply a contradiction for they shall be good and not good c. Answ. We doe not affirme that good workes are mortall sinnes neither doe we deny them to be truly good Onely we deny them to bee purely and perfectly good And we acknowledge the impurity and imperfection concurring with them to bee a sinne and consequently that the good workes of the faithfull are good per se as being commanded as being the fruits of the Spirit and of faith working by love but sinfull per accidens as being stained with the flesh yea but saith Bellarmine Bonum non existit nisi ex integra causa malum verò ex quolibet vitio that is that is not to bee accounted a good worke whereunto all things doe not concurre which are requisite but that is evill wherein there is any defect therefore if there be any defect or imperfection to bee found in any worke that worke is not to be accounted good but evill Answ. that rule of Diony sius is true according to the rigour of the Law which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from which our Saviour hath delivered us but it is not true according to the covenant of grace wherein the Lord accepteth the sincere and upright indevours of his children though defective and unperfect for perfect performance their wants being not imputed unto them but covered with the robe of Christs perfect righteousnesse As therefore their persons though in themselves sinners are in Christ accepted as righteous so their actions though in themselves defective are acceptable in Christ. Here therefore wee may justly retort both the accusation it selfe and all these absurdities upon the Papists who be necessary consequence are proved to hold that all the workes of the righteous are simply evill and so absolutely to be called sinnes Those works wherein is found any defect or imperfection are not good but absolutely they are to bee called sinnes as the Papists teach But in all even the best works of the righteous there is to be found some defect imperfection or blemish as being stained with the flesh This assumption is plainely taught in the holy Scriptures as I have proved heretofore Therefore all even the best actions of the righteous are absolutely to be called sinnes as the Papists teach Here then let all men againe take notice of the Popish pharisaisme or pharisaicall hypocrisie of Papists with whom no man is just or justified in whom is any sinne no action good but simply evill in which is any defect and yet their persons are just and their actions not onely good but also meritorious and that ex condigno and that ratione operis of eternall life CHAP. V. Our fourth Argument that the righteousnesse by which wee are justified satisfieth the Law so doth Christs righteousnesse so doth not that which is inherent in us § I. NOw I returne to our owne proofes The fourth argument therefore to prove joyntly that we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by ours may be this By that righteousnesse alone and by no other we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousnesse of Christ alone the Law is fully satisfied and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us For the proofe of the proposition three things are to be acknowledged first that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousnesse for as I have shewed heretofore to thinke that a man should be justified without justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without apparell secondly that all true righteousnesse is a conformity to the law of God which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse insomuch as what is not conformable to the Law is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is iniquity and sinne thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled either by our selves or by another for us For our Saviour when he came to justifie us and save us protested that hee came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it and professeth that not one jot or tittle of the Law should passe unfulfilled Matth. 5. 17 18. Saint Paul likewise avoucheth that by the doctrine of justification by faith the Law is not made void but established Rom. 3. 31. The proposition therefore is undenyable The assumption hath two parts the former affirmative that by the righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully satisfied the other negative that by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us the Law neither is nor can be fully satisfied For the clearing of the assumption in both the parts wee are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are required the one in respect of the penalty unto the suffering whereof sinne hath made us debtours the other in respect of the precept to the doing wherof the Law doth bind us The former to free us from hell and damnation the other to entitle us to heaven and salvation according to the sanction of the Law If thou dost not that which is commanded thou art accursed if thoudoest it thou shalt be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath oncetransgressed it but by eternal punishment or that which is equivalent in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a totall perfect and perpetuall obedience § II. Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly beleeve in him in both respects For hee hath superabundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and by his death and he hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all righteousnesse in obeying his Father in all things even unto death and by them both he hath justified us freeing us from hell by his sufferings and entituling of us unto heaven by his obedience And therefore the holy Ghost affirmeth that wee are justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 9. and by his obedience verse 19. For his sufferings were the sufferings of God in which respect they who put him to death are said to have killed the Author of life Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of glory 1 Cor. 2. 8 and for the same cause the bloud by which we are redeemed is called the bloud of God Act. 20. 28. or which is all one the bloud of the Sonne of God 1 Iohn 17. His obedience likewise was the obedience of God For Iesus Christ the word that is the second person in Trinity being in the forme of God God coequall with his Father for our sakes became
fiction of the hereticks of our time Nay we say more that by the preaching of the Word faith is not onely excited where it was before but that it is first wrought ordinarily and begotten by the ministry of the Gospell The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments and the stirring of it up to the Word As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word But the Scripture teacheth us that faith commeth by hearing the Word that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve that without a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 4. 15. that therefore preachers are their Fathers in the faith that they justifie men Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them whereby they are justified Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached to repent and to be baptized I answer that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life in Lydia Act. 16. 14 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized even as Abraham was before he was circumcised Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience and much more that they might be saved many other things as repentance and a godly life with the use of the Sacraments and of all other good meanes are required besides that faith whereby alone they are justified before God And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized not that Baptisme properly doth justifie and much lesse that it begetteth â—…aith for in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized not onely at the time of Baptisme but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve And whereas he saith that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought I confesse it is true that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith but to the true lively and effectuall faith which in some measure purifieth the heart and worketh by love causing a man though not to fulfill all things that are commanded as Bellarmine speaketh yet to will to desire and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded according to the measure of grace received But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe § V. As for his similitude of the Physitian I answer the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules which are our sinnes by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ is to beleeve in him and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes on our part to apply them is faith For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that which was but a figure of Christ be healed even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse that whosoever being stung as we all are by the old Serpent and made subject to eâ—…all death shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith shall bee saved To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience when the Iaylour Act. 16. 30 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling and falling downe before Paul and Silas demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saved And this remedy â—…in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. § VI. Thirdly where the Apostle in this place nameth onely remission of sinnes hee saith it hindreth not but that justâ—…fication may bee understood to consist in remission of sinnes and infusion of righteousnesse For as we have not once shewed saith hee remission of sinnes is not onely the pardâ—…ning of the punishment but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice comming in the place which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice Reply Not once but very oft hath hee said that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse because by infusion of justice sinne is expelled as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment that he hath utterly excluded from justification For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse which as hee teacheth is the onely act of justification whereof there is but one formall cause which is righteousnesse insuâ—…ed as the Councel of Trent hath defined but by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused as Bellarmine hath confessed doth not or cannot satisfie for our sinnes Now if there bee but one formall cause of justification as indeed there is but one and that one be not the imputation but the infusion of justice or as they rather use to speake the justice infused which expelleth sinne which expulsion or deletion they call the remission yea the true remission of sinne then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justification But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment be the not imputing of sinne which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth and the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes when hee imputeth not sinne then it will necessarily follow that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justification whereby we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne is another thing which the Scriptures call Sanctification And this I take to be a manifest truth which being granted we have obtained the whole cause § VII Fourthly againe saith he although there were mention made in this place of justification only from sinnes yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification of cleansing of washing and renewing which shew
by some inherent gift The proposition which no man denieth he laboreth to prove by three arguments which he might very well have spared but that he would have the world to thinke that we deny sanctification to be inherent The assumption which do we deny he proveth by his own authority alleaging that in the fifth and the sixth verses The Apostle describeth justification which indeed he doth not to be regeneration and renâ—…vation wroughâ—… in us out of the bounty of God by the laver of Baptisme and effusion of the holy Ghost This we deny first because the word justifie never in the whole Scriptures is used in that sense secondly here the Apostle in plaine termes saith that we are justified and saved not by works of righteousnesse whereby is excluded all justice inherent but by Gods grace How then doth he prove it because in these words vers 7 that being justified by his grace wee might bee heires in hope of eternall life the Apostle rendreth a reason why God by the laver and by the Holy Ghost did regenerate and renew us and saith the cause was that being justified that is saith he that being by that regeneration and renovation justified we might deserve to be made heires of the kingdome and of life everlasting Answ. This glosse maketh the Apostle not like himselfe but like a popish merit-monger corrupteth the text which indeed doth paralell that 1 Cor. 6. 11. shewing how men converted from Gentilisme to Christianity shuld be exhorted to the performance of Christian duties For howsoever whiles they were Gentiles they were addicted to many vices and sinnes yet after they were called which the Apostle expresseth thus after that the bounty and humanity of God was manifested viz. by the preaching of the Gospel God not out of any desert of theirs but out of his meere mercy saved them by Baptisme as Saint Peter also speaketh that is justified them for that is the salvation we have here to bee intitled to salvation or saved in hope that being justified by his grace that is as he said before by his undeserved mercy they should be made heires according to hope of eternall life that is they might be saved in hope Of this sentence therefore stripped of its amplifications as it were its garments the naked substance is this But after we were called God by Baptisme justified us that being justified by his grace we might be saved in hope The amplifications which are added are to set forth and describe Baptisme unto us which as hee had noted to be the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith when he saith that God justified or saved us by it so he calleth it the laver of regeneration and of the renovation wrought by the Spirit which God hath plentifully bestowed upon us So that these words are not a description of justification as Bellarmine dreameth waking but of Baptisme And they are added according to the purpose of the Apostle in this place as arguments to move men to Christian duties Why Because Baptisme as it was a seale unto them of their justification so also a Sacrament of their regeneration and renovation of the Spirit which Spirit God hath poured forth plentifully upon the faithfull which he speaketh to this end that the faithfull which are Baptized should make this use of their Baptisme not onely as of a seale to assure them of their justification and salvation but also to be a Sacrament token memoriall of their regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit plentifully poured upon them To which purpose the Apostle telleth the Romans that so many as were baptized into Christ were baptized into the similitude of Christs death and resurrection whereupon the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers 8. this is a faithfull saying and these things I will thou shouldest affirme and confirme that they which have beleeved in God ought to bee carefull precedents of good workes The Aposâ—…le therefore doth not say as Bellarmine maketh him speake that we are justified or saved or made heires of salvation by regeneration or renovation and much lesse that thereby we merit our inheritance but that God hath justified or saved us Sacramentally by Baptisme which as it is the seale of our justification and salvation so it is also the laver of regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit that being justified by his grace we might according to hope bee made heires of eternall life For howsoever we are neither justified nor saved nor made heires of eternall life by our Sanctification yet Sanctification is both the way wherein from our justification wee are to walke unto glorification For God hath chosen us to salvation through the sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thes. 2. 13. and therefore sanctification as it is a necessary consequent of our justification so it is a necessary fore-runner of glorification a necessary marke and cognizance of all that are justified and to be saved And therefore ouâ—… Saviour saith that by faith in him wee receive remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified and so the Apostle also Act. 20. 32. § IX His fifth testimony is Heb. 11. and some other places of the Scripture which doe give testimony to some men that they were truly and perfectly just and that not by an imputative justice but inherent his reason is because the Scriptures would not call them absolutely just if they were not absolutely just Answ. To omit that it is one thing to be absolutely called just and another to be just absolutely and perfectly I answere that the faithfull who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous were righteous by a twofold justice both imputative and inherent The former being the righteousnesse of justification the latter of sanctification the former absolute and perfect the latter inchoated and unperfect By the former they were justified before God in respect of the latter though they were also called just yet they were not justified thereby that is they were neither absolved thereby from their sinnes past nor intitled to the kingdome of heaven as may appeare by all those Arguments which before I produced against justification by inherent righteousnesse As for those examples which hee alleageth out of Heb. 11. which is the Chapter of saith namely of Abel vers 4. and Noah vers 7. c. it is evident that they were justified by the righteousnesse which is of faith as is expresly said of Noah vers 7. that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and imputed to them that beleeve for the righteousnefse which is of faith is imputative Rom. 4. 5. And when it is said that without faith they could not possibly have pleased God it is plainely intimated that by faith they pleased God and that they being besore justified by faith brought forth the fruits of faith acceptable unto God by which their faith was approved But as they were just by imputation that
flesh is communicated unto us by imputation and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we had performed the same in our own persons To conclude therefore it is not the image of Christs righteousnesse and obedience by which we are justified But we are justified by the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ it selfe § XVII His seventh Allegation of Rom. 6. 4. 6. is scarce worth the answering wherein hee proveth which no man denieth that the godly doe truly and not putativè dye unto sinne and rise unto righteousnesse even as Christ whose death and resurrection is represented in Baptisme did truly dye and rise againe For this dying unto sinne and rising unto righteousnesse are the two parts of our sanctification which never any denied to bee inherent But that justification and sanctification are not to bee confounded I have before proved at large If hee would have said any thing to the purpose he should have said any thing to the purpose hee should have proved that our justification consisteth in our mortification and vivification and then might he well have concluded that we are not justified by imputation but by inherent righteousnesse But I cannot sufficiently wonder at the blind malice of these men who either would perswade themselves or would goe about to perswade others that we hold the righteousnesse of sanctification and the parts thereof which we acknowledge to be wrought in us by the holy Spirit not to bee inherent but imputative As for these words vers 7. he that is dead is justified from sinne the meaning is as I have shewed before that he is freed from sinne as our translation readeth and as Chrysostome and Oecumenius expound it the speciall sense of freeing from guilt opposed to condemnation which is the proper sense of the word Act. 13. 38 39. extended to the generall signification of freedome he that is dead is freed from committing of sinne according to that place of Peter 1 Epist. 4. 1. which Bellarmine paralelleth with this he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sinne § XVIII In his eighth allegation hee patcheth divers places of Scripture together as it were invita Minerva out of which nothing can be concluded but that the Papists have not one found Argument to prove their justification by inherent righteousnesse The places which he patcheth together are these Rom. 8. 15. That wee now by Christ have received the Spirit of Adoption of the sonnes of God quoad animam saith he in respect of the Soule the which as it is there said viz. vers 10. liveth by reason of justification although the body be dead that is be mortall as yet by reason of sinne But saith he â—… little after viz. vers 23. he addeth that wee having the first fruits of the Spirit doe groane within our selves expecting the adoption of the sonnes of God even the redemption of our body For as the same Apostle saith Phil. 3. 20. 21. wee expect our Saviour who shall reforme the body of our humility configured to the body of his glory But the adoption of sonnes which wee expect in the redemption of the body shall be most true and inherent in the body it selfe that is to say immortality and impossibility not putative but true Therefore the adoption which now we have in the spirit by justification must also be true not putative otherwise as we expect the redemption of the body so also wee should expect the redemption of the soule Answ. See what poore shifts so learned a man is put unto according to the ancient profession of Sophistres noted by Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make good a bad cause This is Bellarmines whole dispute word for word where with much travell he hath brought forth this conclusion that our adoption which now we have by justification is true and not in conceit onely which we freely confesse For whoever denied that our adoption is as true as our justification But doth it from hence follow that wee are justified by inherent righteousnesse A good syllogisme concluding that assertion from those premisses had beene worth his labour The most that can bee said in this matter as I suppose is this That when our gracious God by his holy Spirit doth regenerate us he doth beget in us the grace of faith As soone as faith is wrought in us wee are engrafted into Christ to us being in Christ the Lord communicateth the merits of his Sonne by imputation of whose righteousnesse unto us hee remitting our sinnes doth not onely accept of us as righteous in Christ but also in him hee adopteth us to bee his Sons and heires of eternall life § XIX Let this proposition then tanquam commune principium bee agreed upon betweene us Such as is our adoption such is our justification and let us see what either of us can inferre thereupon Bellarmine assumeth thus but our adoption is not imputative for that I suppose is his meaning by that odious word putative as though if it were imputative it were but putative which is most false For he that either is a sinner by imputation of Adams transgression is as truely a sinner as by transfusion of the corruption yea if he had not beene truely a sinner by imputation of Adams guilt hee should never have beene punished either with the transfusion of the coâ—…ruption or with death unto which by the guilt he was bound over or hee that is righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is as truely righteous before God yea more truely than by infusion of inherent righteousnesse For that is perfect this is stained with the flesh and therefore is but a sinnefull righteousnesse which cannot stand in judgement before God judging according to the sentence of his Law But Bellarmine assumption as I was saying is this Our adoption is not imputative but by grace inherent therefore our justification is not imputative but by righteousnesse inherent The assumption which is utterly false hee endevoreth to prove because the Apostle Rom. 8. 15. saith that now by Christ wee haâ—…e received the Adoption of the sonnes of God quoad animam saith Bellarmine that he might patch with it vers 10. in respect of the soule which as it is there said liveth prâ—…pter justificationem although the body bee dead that is to say mortall by reason of sinne These places Belâ—…mine alleaged before to prove that the grace by which wee are justified is inherent and namely charity because charity is that by which wee cry in our hearts Abba Father Secondly because it is said that the Spirit liveth by reason of justification though the body bee dead by reason of sinne to both which I have before answered § XX. But here Bellarmine maketh a twofold Adoption the one of the soule patched out of Rom. 8. 10. 15. the other of the body pieced out of Rom. 8. 23. and Phil. 3. 20 21. when as indeed Adoption is not of either part but of
the punishment thereof be inflicted upon us which is both our originall corruption and death it selfe besides many other calamityes then is it to be presupposed that the sin it selfe is imputed to us For if the sin it selfe had not been imputed then as Bellarmine himselfe somewhere argues neither the guilt nor the corruption had belong'd unto us Again things that are transient when they are once past and gone cannot bee communicated otherwise than by imputation That transgression of Adam as all other actions was transient and therefore if it be demanded how it being so long past and gone can bee communicated to us Bellarmine truly answeareth it is communicated unto us by generation eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit nimirâ—…m per imputationem in that manner according to which that may be communicated which is transient and gone to wit by imputation If it be objected which was Bellarmiâ—…es prime argument for inherent righteousnesse that through the disobedience of the first Adam wee were made sinners by inherent unjustice and therefore by the like reason through the obedience of the second Adam wee are made just by righteousnesse inherent I answere that from Christ we have both justification and sanctification the former answering to the guilt of Adams transgression imputed the latter answerable to the originall corruption by generation derived but though wee have them both from Christ yet not after one manner the former wee have by imputation the latter by infusion But of this place I have spoken heretofore at large § II. Our seventh argument Whosoever is a sinner in himselfe and so continueth whiles he remaineth in this life cannot bee justified otherwise than by imputation This I take to bee a most certaine and undeniable truth But every many whatsoever Christ onely excepted is in himselfe a sinner and so continueth whiles hee remaineth in this life Therefore no man whatsoever can othervise bee justified but by imputation Or thus The justification of a sinner is imputative for to a sinner the Lord when hee justifieth him imputing not sinne imputeth righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4. 6. 8. The justification of every Christian is the justification of a sinner and so is called of all writers boâ—…h old and new both Protestants and Papists Therefore the justification of every Christian is imputative The assumption of the former syllogisme is denyed by the Papists but against the testimony of their owne Conscience and against the common experience of all men in all times and places But this I prove it briefly All that sometimes doe sinne or have sinne abiding in them are sinners all men sometimes do sinne and have sinne remaining in them therefore all men are sinners the assumption is proved by Iames the just and by the holy beloved Apostle including themselves in many things wee offend all of us and if wee say wee have no sinne wee deceive our selves and there is no truth in us But that all mortall men are sinners I have sufficiently proved before Vnlesse therefore the Papists will say they are no sinners and that in them there is no sinne which if they doe say wee may bee bold to tell them that there is no truth in them they must confesse justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § III. Our eigth argument To whom faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes hee is not justified by workes that is by righteousnesse inherent but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse To Abraham and all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes Therefore they are not justified by workes but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse The former part of the proposition is proved by opposition of faith to workes in the question of justificâ—…tion and by the testimony of the the Apostle Rom. 4. 3 4 5 6 7 8. The latter part is proved by the former for if not by inherent righteousnesse then by imputed and if by faith and yet not by inherent righteousnesse then not by faith in respect oâ—… it selfe as it is an habit inherent in us but in respect of the object which it apprehendeth Of which that is verified properly which by a trope viz. a Metonimy is ascribed to faith namely that it justifieth and saveth that by it wee have remission of sinne and the inheritance c. that is Christ received by faith doth justifie and save c. The assumption in expâ—…esse termes is delivered Rom. 4. 3. 5 6. 22 23 Here Bellarmine confesseth that faith indeed is imputed unto righteousnesse and that is our righteousnesse which confession doth not well agree with his assertions elsewhere that faith doth but dispose unto justification and that our formall righteousnesse is our charity that faith is an habit of the Vnderstanding but justice is an habit of the Will But our glosse hee doth not allow when wee say by faith that is by Christs righteousnesse apprehended by faith because it is repugnant to the Apostle for two causes For first hee doth not say Christs righteousnesse but faith is imputed Now faith is not Christs righteousnesse but ours by Gods gift Which notwithstanding is the maine doctrine of the Gospell revealing the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God from faith to faith the righteousnesse of God by faith that is which is apprehended by faith For faith it selfe is not the righteousnesse of God which doth justifie or save us but the instrument to receive Gods righteousnesse and therefore doth not justifie or save properly but relatively in respect of the object which it doth receive that is to say the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie and save those which receive it by faith and therefore when it is said in the Gospell more than once thy faith hath saved thee the meaning is that Christ received by faith hath saved those which did beleeve in him Act. 3. 16 it is said that faith in Christ had cured the lame man but it is thus to be understood that the name of Christ by faith in his name did cure him For we are justified and saved by a perfect righteousnes which is of infinite value and merit which is not faith nor any other grace or graces inherent but onely the righteousnesse of Christ. And yet because by faith wee are united to Christ and by it are made partakers of his benefits therefore all the benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed to faith as elsewhere I have shewed To faith metonimically but properly to Christ himself His second reason because the word imputare in this place doth not signifie a bare reputing but a reputing unto which the truth is answer able in the thing it selfe as is plaine by these words Ei qui operatur merces imputatur c. for it is certaine that to him that worketh not onely in opinion and conceipt but truely and indeed the reward is due Answ. This reason doth not
God grounded upon the infallible authoritie of God the relator and finally not being ignorant that we hold the proper object of faith to be the truth But we hold that it is seated both in the understanding and in the will and my reason brieâ—…ely is this because it is a voluntary assent and is so defined not onely by some of the ancient Fathers but also by the ancient Philosophers who as Thcodoreâ—… reporteth doe define it to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a willing assent of the soule Thâ—…refore to beleeve is an act both of the understanding and of the will Of the understanding as it is an assent of the will as it is voluntary Even as liberum â—…rbitrium as it is arbitrium belongeth to the understanding and as it is liberum to the will not that we seate it in two divers parts of the soule but onely in the mind that is the reasonable or intellectuall part though it worketh upon the affections also For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that when the holy Ghost is pleased to worke the grace of faith in the soules of any of the elect which ordinarily he doth by the ministery of the Gospell he openeth their hearts as he did the heart of Lydia to assent to the Gospell which he doth first by illuminating their understanding and opening the eyes of their minde that they may rightly conceive and judge of the doctrine of salvation and secondly by opening as it were the eares of the mind and enclining the will to affect and embrace what the understanding hath judged and approved to be true and good The understanding therefore approving and the Will which is intellectus extensus and ordinarily followeth the judgement of the practick understanding embracing the doctrine of the Gospell which promiseth salvation by Christ to all that beleeve the mind which containeth both these faculties being thus opened by the holy Ghost doth williugly assent to the doctrinâ—… of the Gospell concerning salvation by Christ. Faith therefore is a voluntary assent of the mind to the promise of the Gospell unto which the acts of both the faculties of the mind concurre of the understanding to judge that the thing propounded to be beleeved is true and good I meane that the promise is true and the thing promised good of the Will to accept and to embrace that for true and good which the understanding hath judged to be such Out of both which ariseth the voluntary assent of the minde which wee call faith This faith thus wrought by the holy Ghost the Spirit of regeneration being lively and effectuall worketh upon the heart and affections which also being renewed by the holy Ghost readily follow the willing assent of the minde both to affect Christ to desire to bee made partakers of him to love him and torest upon him for salvation and also to dis-affect and to detest those things which are repugnant to the Doctrine of the Gospel the chiefe whereof is Sinne. § III. Now that the act of the will doth concurre to faith and that faith which is an habit of the minde is seated as well in the will as in the understanding is a thing testified by the Fathers and confessed by the Schoole-men and by the Moderne Doctors of the Romane Church And first for the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus saith that faith it the willing assent of the soule and so Theodoret doth define it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ambrose Fides non necessitatis sed voluntatis res est Faith is a matter of will and not of necessity therefore the Apostle saith not that wee domineere over your faith for dominion is cause of necessity and againe â—… to beleeve or not to beleeve it is an act of the Will Augustine Grace therfore preventeth or goeth before faith otherwise if faith prevent it then also the will prevenâ—…eth it quia fides sine voluâ—…late â—…on potest esse because faith cannot be without Will Againe what is it to beleeve but to consent that the thing is true which is said consensio autemutique volentis est and consenting undoubtedly is of him that is willing Every man when he willeth beleeveth cum credit volens credit and when he doth beleeve hee doth willingly beleeve Voluntate utique credimus verily we beleeve with our will Fides in credentium voluntate consistit faith standeth in the will of the beleevers And writing upon Ioh. 6. 44. What say we here brethren if we be drawne unto Christ then wee beleeve against our wills No saith hee A man may enter into the Church nolens against his will hee may come to the Altar nilling hee may receive the Sacrament nilling credere non potest nisi volens hee cannot beleeve unlesse hee bee willing And lastly in the elect the will is prepared of the Lord that therefore belongeth to faith quâ—… in voluntate est which is in the will § IV. Bonaventure it were not virtuovs to beleeve if it were not voluntary ipsum velle credere est essentiale ipsi fidei to beleeve willingly is essentiall to faith it selfe Vnto the being of the vertue of faith with the act of reason or understanding concurreth the act of the Will Faith never should be a vertue though it did enlighten the understanding never so much if it did not also rectifie the will Thomas Aquinas writing on Rom. 10. 10. Signanter autem dicit corde creditur id est voluntate he â—…peaketh remarkeably men beleeve with the hearr that is with the Will For all other things which appertaine to the outward worship of God 〈◊〉 potest a man may doe them nilling sed credere non potest nisi volens but none can beleeve that is not willing for the understanding of him that beleeveth is not determined to assent unto the truth by necessity of reason as of him that hath science but by the Will Againe Intellectus credâ—…ntis determinatur ad unum non per rationeâ—… sed per voluntatem Credere est actus intellectus assentientis veritati divinae ex imperio voluntatis à Deo motae per gratiam Credere est actus intellectus secùndum quod movetur a voluntate ad assentiendum procedit autem hujâ—…smodi actus à voluntate ab intellectu Actus fidei dicitur consistere in credentium voluntate in quantum ex imperio voluntatis intellectus credibilibus assentit Gabriel Biel the act of faith is to beleeve which is an act of the understanding assenting to the truth proceeding from the command of the will quiâ—… nullus credit nisi volens because no man beleeveth that is not willing as Saint Augustâ—…e teacheth § V. Cardin all Contarenus actus fidei quam vis sit elicitus ab intellectu est tamen imperatus à 〈◊〉 Salmeron Paul saith men beleeve with the heart to exclude fayning
which are a few testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers impertinentâ—…y alleaged His first testimony is Prov. 28. 25. qui sperat in Domino sanabitur The second Psal. 37. 40. Salvabit eos quia speraverunt in eo The third Psal. 91. 14. quoniam in me speravit liberabo eum Answ. None of these three places doe speake either of justification or preparation thereunto nor of hope otherwise than as it is included in affiance which as it hath reference to the future time is all one with hope nor of hope or affiance as it goeth before but as it followeth justifying faith what therefore could be more impertinently alleaged The first place according to the originall is but he that trusteth in the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be made fat The Latine in the next verse translateth the same words thus qui confidit and the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second Psalm 37. 40. the word chasah is translated sometimes confidere to trust sometimes and as I take it in that place onely sperare to hope in the same sense of affiance those that thus trust or hope in God he delivereth them from the wicked and saveth them But before they can either be saved or trust in God they must be justified by faith And therefore this hope or affâ—…ance is no forerunner of justification but a follower thereof The third Psalm 91. 14. the Hebrew chashak which by some is translated sperare by others valde or vehementer amare amore in aliquem propendere and might better have beene alleaged for love than for hope both which are consequents of justifying faith The words then are because he hath set his love upon me therefore I will deliver him he doth not say I will justifie him But let us heare Bellarmines commenting upon this place the Hebrew word saith he doth signifie to adhere to love to please therefore not every hope but that affiance which proceedeth out of a good conscience and out of Love and filiall adhering to God doth deliver a man c. § VIII His fourth testimony Matth. 9. 2. confide fili have a good heart sonne so the Rhemists translate thy sinnes are forgiven thee For our Lord faith Bellarmine did not as some falsely teach justifie the man who had the palsey before he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be of good courage my sonne but contrariwise as the Councell of Trent very learnedly signifieth first he saith be confident my sonne and when he saw him raised up in hope of health hee added thy sinnes remittuntur tibi are forgiven thee Whereby Bellarmine would signifie that by this hope or affiance the man was prepared for justification Answ. First the party and those that brought him had faith as all the three Evangelists note Matth. 9. 2. Mark 2. 5. Luk. 5. 20. and therefore was justified before God for if they who brought him had faith much more he who no doubt desired them to bring him and had already his sins forgiven Secondly the Verbe is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the time past and ought to be translated not as Bellarm. readeth remittuntur are now forgiven or in forgiving but remissasunt they are already forgiven And by that argument our Saviour putteth him in comfort that hee should be cured because his sinnes which were the meritorious cause of his sicknesse were forgiven By which glad tydings hee would have him to be assured by speciall saith of the remission of his sinnes and in that assurance to be confident So that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confident were uttered first yet the words following containe the cause of that confidence And therefore not onely remission of sinnes but assurance thereof by speciall revelation went before his confidence which therefore could be no preparative disposition thereunto And this is usuall in such consolations first to bid the party to be confident or not to feare and then to set downe the cause thereof as Genes 15. 1. Feare not Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Esai 43. 1. Feare not Israel for I have redeemed thee In the same ninth of Matthew verse 22. Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole Luk. 1. 30. Feare not Mary for thou hast found grace or favour with God Luk. 2. 10. Feare not for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy and so in other places And these were his testimonies of Scriptures in which he hath found no releefe § IX Let us see what helpe the Fathers will afford him No man saith Ambrose can well repent him of his sinnes who doth not hope for pardon Answ. Hope of pardon is a motive to repentance and to the use of other good meanes whereby wee may through Gods grace attaine both to justification and to sanctification Howbeit repentance belongeth to sanctification and not to justification Augustine whatsoever thou declarest so declare it that hee to whom thou speakest by hearing may beleeve by beleeving may hope by hoping may love From whence nothing can be gathered but that as faith by which we are justified commeth by the hearing of the word as the Apostle also teacheth so from faith proceedeth hope and from both faith and hope love So that here hope which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification is made a disposition not to justification but to love Cyprian to those who had fallen in time of persecution giveth this advice that they should acknowledge their grievous crime neither despairing of the Lords mercy nor as yet challenging pardon viz. untill they had truely repented thereof which was indeed wholesome counsell For no man can be assured of the pardon of any crime untill he have truly repented of it Vpon which words of Cyprian Bel. larmine though he can gather nothing out of them for his purpose but that those who desire pardon must not despaire of Gods mercy yet as a notable bragger he insulteth over us as if he had us at some advantage when God knoweth hee hath scarce brought any thing worth the answering By which words saith he our adversaries are plainely refuted who begin not to repent before they are fully assured that they are highly in Gods favour and are confident that they are to be ranked with the Cherubin and Seraphin which is an impudent and yet a witlesse slander as though wee were either so arrogant as the Papists who assume to themselves perfection which we doe not or so senselesse that we should teach that men are tyed to begin their repentance when they have attained to perfection and not till then If it be said that wee make repentance to be the fruit of faith which we define to be a full assurance of Gods favour c. I answere that that definition agreeth onely to speciall faith Not that all speciall faith is a full assurance but that every virtue is to be defined
renounceth speciall faith For canst thou love Christ and rejoyce in him as thy Saviour if thou be not by speciall faith perswaded that thou shalt be saved by him Seeing then unto our justification before God we are to receive Christ as hath beene said by a true and lively assent and unto justification in the court of our owne conscience by a plerophory or assured perswasion we are to apply the promises to our selves which are the peculiar acts of faith and cannot be attributed to any other grace it followeth therefore from the proper nature of faith that by it alone we are justified § VIII His second cavill is taken from the Sacraments which by our confession as he saith doe apply the promises and justification it selfe to the receiver therefore saith he faith doth not justifie alone after the manner of an instrument applying In this argument he greatly pleaseth himselfe but without cause For first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we meane that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification with faith but without us we acknowledge many things to justifie Secondly faith justifieth alone ut manus accipientis the Sacraments ut manus dantis Thirdly faith doth actually justifie before God the Sacraments doe not justifie before God but serve to seale our justification to our owne consciences neither doe they actually conferre grace but confirme it as the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith When as therefore the termes of washing cleansing sanctifying saving are attributed to Sacraments these phrases are to be understood Sacramentally And this is our answere as for those which Bellarmine frameth for us hee hath good leave to make or to marre them at his pleasure CHAP. XV. Bellarmines fourth principall argument taken from the manner how faith doth justifie and the fifth from the formall cause of justification § I IF Faith saith hee doth justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit of justification then faith doth not justifie alone for love and penance and other good acts doe the like but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent I deny first the consequence of the proposition and the proofe thereof For neither love or penance nor other good acts doe either cause begin or merit justification And therefore though faith did justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit whereby justification is obtained it might for all them justifie alone This were sufficient to overthrow his whole Dispute But all his care is to prove the assumption which hee endeavoureth in all the parts thereof And first that faith is a cause of justificatition which we doe not deny yea we affirme that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as a cause thereof but faith onely But you will aske what cause We say the instrumentall onely If Bellarmine meane any other cause as no doubt but he doth he should have done well to have named it and to have proved it § II. He proveth faith to be a cause by the prepositions ex and per by and through attributed to faith whereto I answere that these particles sometimes are used to signifie the instrumentall cause As namely when we are said to be justified or saved through or by the word or the Sacraments Rom. 6. 4. Tit. 3. 5. Ioh. 17. 20. 1 Cor. 1. 21. 15. 2. Faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 17. Preachers are Ministers by whom you doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Ephes. 3. 6. And first for those plà ces wherein it is said that we are justified by faith or saved by faith Rom. 3. 28. 30. 5. 1. Ephes. 2. 8. In these and the like places saith he the preposition by or through doth signifie a true cause But he should have done well to have set downe what cause for an instrumentall cause is also a true cause The preposition per saith Bâ—…llarmine in another place is not fitly accommodated to the favour of God which is the efficient cause of justification but either to the formal as per gratiam or meritorious as permeritum filii or instrumentall cause as per fidem Sacramenta where you see by Bellarmines confession per is attributed to faith as to the instrumentall cause It is also attributed to the matter and merit as Rom. 5. 10 19. When as therefore it is also attributed to faith it cannot be attributed in the same sense as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of speech but of necessity it is to bee understood by a metonymy faith being put for the object of faith which is Christs righteousnesse And this manifestly appeareth when justification by the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as Rom. 3. 24. 25. wee are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the redemption which is in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in his blood by Christ we have accesse to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in him Eph. 3. 12. By the name of Christ we have remission of sinnes by faith in his name Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. As it is said of the cure of the creeple Act. 3. 16. that the name of Christ by faith in his name had healed him Thus I have shewed before that the same benefits of justification and salvation which properly we receive from the death and obedience of Christ are attributed to faith not properly but relatively and metonymically Not that faith it selfe worketh them but the object which it as the instrument apprehendeth § III. But Bellarmine will prove that in these and such like places the prepositions by and through doe signifie a true cause first by the contrary For when the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. Gal. 2. 3. and elsewhere doth prove that a man is not justified by workes nor by the Law without doubt he excludeth the force and efficacie of workes and of the Law in justifying and not a relative apprehension alone For no man could doubt but that the Law and works did not justifie by apprehending righteousnes relatively And therfore the saying of the Apostle had been very foolish if his meaning had beene that justice is apprehended by faith and not by the Law or workes Even as a man should speake foolishly who should say that the almes is received by the hand and not by the heele Neither did they whom the Apostle confuteth looke to be justified by their workes relatively but by the merit of them And therefore that which the Apostle denyeth to works he ascribeth to faith Answ. This manifestly proveth that the question of justification by faith or by workes is thus to bee understood whether wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith which is the righteousnesse of the Gospell the righteousnesse of faith or by a righteousnesse inherent in our selves which is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes For if the question should bee understood of faith
it selfe there would be no more opposition betweene faith and workes than is betweene the first and second justification of the Papists which are so farre from opposition that they are sub-alternall the one proving the other For if we be justified by righteousnesse inherent wee must bee justified both by habituall and actuall righteousnesse neither of them alone sufficing in adultis and therefore if by the one then by the other also Againe Faith being but one grace among many cannot as it is an habit inherent in us by it owne worthinesse or merit justifie or sanctifie alone but there must be a concurrence of charity and of other graces neither can the habits of grace suffice to the sanctification of one come to yeares unlesse they bring forth the fruits of obedience neither are the fruits of obedience called good works of any account before God unlesse they proceed from the inward habits of faith and love But faith considered relatively as the instrument apprehending Christs righteousnesse it self alone sufficeth to justification as the Fathers before have testified This is the worke of God which with God is in stead of all workes that wee beleeve on his Sonne For hee that truely beleeveth is reputed as if he had fulfilled the whole Law Christ being the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he therefore saith the Apostle that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the Law because Christ hath fulfilled it for him Christs obedience being imputed to him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if hee had performed the same in his owne person § IV. Secondly Bellarmine by other places where the preposition is used indevoureth to prove that faith is deciphered as a true cause For if saith he in all other places the preposition by or through doth signifie a cause why should it not betoken a cause when a man is said to be iustified by or through faith I answer first that the preposition is often used to signifie no cause at all as where it is attributed to wayes and meanes occasions and times waies as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2. 12. by another way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 12. 1. through the corne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through dry places vers 43. so through windowes Gen. 26. 8. 2 Cor. 11. 33. dores Mat. 7. 13. Ioh. 10. 1. walls as Act. 9. 25. tiles Luk. 5. 19. Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1. afflictions Act. 14. 22. meanes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by word Act. 15. 27. 32. by parable Luk. 8. 4. by vision Act. 18. 9. through a glasse 1 Cor. 13. 12. by Epistle 2 Thâ—…s 2. 15. by faith and not by sight 2 Cor. 5. 7. Occasion as our corruption by the Law worketh sinne Rom. 7. 5 13. for so it is said verse 8 11. it tooke occasion by the Commandement c. infirmity laid upon Lazarus that by it the Sonne of God might be glorified Ioh. 11. 4. Time whether all time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. 10. 2. 25. Or set times as three dayes Mat. 26. 61. fortie dayes Act. 1. 3. by night Luk. 5. 5. Mat. 5. 19. Secondly that the preposition is often used to signifie the instrumentall cause as in that Hebrew phrase by the hand of his servants Gen. 32 16. as God commanded by the hand of Moses Exod. 9. 35. 35. 29. Levit. 8. 36. 10. 11. 26. 45. Numb 4. 37 45 c. By the hand of Moses and Aaron Psal. 77. 20. 1 Sam. 16. 20. Iesse sent by the hand of his sonne David So God speaketh by the hand of his Prophets 1 Sam. 28. 15. 2 Sam. 12. 25. 2 Chr. 29. 25. By the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1. 70. So by his Prophets viz. as his instruments Mat. 1. 22. 2. 15. Thus God wrought miracles by the hands of Paul Act. 19. 11. or as himselfe speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his ministery Act. 21. 19. Rom. 15. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by me Thirdly that faith is no such cause of justification as is usually meant by the preposition joyned either with other causes of justification or with faith upon other occasions And first to mention those which Bellarmine saith he will here omit as that we are justified by Christ by his blood by his death by his obedience it may not be thought that when it is said that wee are justified by or through Christ and by or through faith or by or through the bloud the death the obedience of Christ and by or through faith that faith though the same preposition be prefixed before it should signifie the same kind of cause When the Apostle saith Rom. 3. 24. that we are justified by the grace of God there Bellar. noteth the formall cause of our justification confounding Gods grace and our charity freely that is saith he by the bounty of God noting the efficient by the redemption wrought by Christ Iesus which noteth the meritorious cause by faith in his blood we must needs conceive that faith is a distinct cause from the rest For neither is it the formall for there is but one and that one is charity as they teach nor the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that is Gods bounty and justice nor the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the meritorious cause for thath onely is the merit of Christ. It remaineth then that it is the instrumentall which is plainely signified when it is said that we are justified through the redemption or satisfaction of Ghrist by faith or when the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as I noted before § 2. § V. Bellarmine saith that in that place Rom. 3. 24. faith is there noted to be the dispositive cause which I have allready disproved The truth is that for all this flourish which Bellarmine here maketh hee maketh faith to be no cause at all of justification but a remote disposition which disposeth to justification no otherwise thâ—…n servile feare doth which is farre enough from being a cause of justification If it bee said that he maketh it a part of the formall cause of justification I answer that according to the Councell of Trent they constantly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is charity which being lost justification is lost though faith remaineth The habit of faith infused â—…s indeed a chiefe part of our sanctification as a mother grace and root of the rest but of justification it is no part but an instrument For justification consisteth wholly upon imputation of Christs righteousnesse which faith as the hand doth receive § VI. For the better understanding the manner how faith doth justifie wee are to distinguish the acts of faith both in justifying and sanctifying The act of faith in justifying is the elicite and immediate act of faith which is credere credendo Christum recipere amplecti to beleeve
that the eye of the body did cure those who were stung but the brasen Serpent which was a figure of Christ beheld with the eye Nor the eye of the soule which is faith doth absolutely and by it selfe justifie or save but relatively in respect of the object which it doth behold that is to say the Lord Iesus whom God hath propounded to be a Saviour to all that see him and receive him by faith § XII His second proofe is from the speech of Christ to the woman of Canaan who had earnestly prayed unto him and would take no repulse Matth. 15. 28. O woman great is thy faith and Mar. 7. 29. for this saying goe thy way the Devill is gone out of thy daughter for here plainely saith he the efficacie of obtayning health is attributed to faith Neither may it be answered that it is one thing to speake of justification and another to speake of the cure of a bodily disease For our Lord in the very same words attributeth to faith both the one and the other For as hee said to the woman which was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so in like manner to the woman whom hee cured of a bloudy issue Matth. 9. 2â—… and to the blind man whom hee restored to sight Mark 10. 52. Answer Though the woman of Canaan and the blind man by prayer obtained their desires yet it was the prayer of faith as Saint Iames calleth it which was effectuall and prevailed with Christ Iam. 5. 16. and therefore to faith I confesse the efficacie is to be ascribed And although it may well be thought that our Saviour when hee used the same words thy faith hath saved thee to the woman which had the issue of bloud and to the blind man which hee used to the sinner whose sins he had forgiven that he being the Physitian of the soule used them in the same sence to assure them of a greater blessing than the bodily cure Matth. 9. 2. yet I doe not deny but that by faith and by the prayer of faith the health both of the body and soule is obtained for as by beleeving or apprehending by faith the righteousnesse of Christ which hee had and performed for us wee are justified so by beleeving the divine power and goodnesse of Christ many were cured of their bodily diseases And yet as it was not their faith apprehending the power and goodnes of Christ which did heale them but the power and goodnesse of Christ which by faith they apprehended as it is said Act. 3. 16. his Name by faith in his name hath made this man strong so is it not our faith absolutely whereby wee apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie us but the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith And whereas Bellarmine will have the like efficacie to be ascribed in justifying unto faith as in obtaining bodily health I take him at his word for hereby it is evidently proved that faith alone doth justifie for our Saviour for the obtaining of bodily health required faith onely Luk. 8. 50. Mar. 5. 36. Bee not affraid Only beleeve and the like may bee gathered out of Matth. 9. 28 29. Mark 9. 23. Iohn 11. 40. § XIII His third proofe is from the example of Abraham Rom. 4. 20 21 22. In the promise also of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God most fully knowing or being fully perswaded that whatsoever he promiâ—…ed he also is able to performe therefore it was also reputed to him for righteousnesse Here saith Bellarmine the Apostle rendreth tâ—…e cause why faith was reputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because by beleeving he gave glory to God Therefore that faith pleased God by which he was glorified and therefore by the mâ—…rit of that faith which notwithstanding was the gift and grace of God hee justified Abraham His reason may thus be framed Whatsoever pleaseth God meriteth justification Abrahams faith pleased God because he was glorified thereby Therefore Abrahams faith merited justification The proposition is to bee denyed for before men can please God they must bee reconciled unto him and justified by faith therefore our pleasing of God is not a cause but a fruit of our justification and it is evident that before that promise was either made to him by God or beleeved by him Abraham was justified and therefore not by the merit of that beleefe Againe where men or their actions doe please God not in and for themselves but in and for Christ in whom alone hee is well pleased there mercie is to bee ascribed unto God but not merit to them Yea but the Apostle inferreth therefore it was reputed to him for righteousnesse That argueth Gods acceptation not his merit Howbeit that place may bee understood as that Iam. 2. 23. that this was an evidence of the true faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnesse not that Abraham did then first beleeve or was then first justified and much lesse that he merited by that act of faith his justification which he had long before § XIV His fourth proofe is out of Rom. 10. 13 14. to which I answered before the thing which here hee would but doth not prove though indeed it needs no proofe is that faith by invocation obtaineth justification Howbeit the Apostle doth not there set downe the order of our justification but the series and order of the degrees of salvation beginning at our vocation unto which three degrees are referred viz. hearing of the word which presupposeth preaching and that sending upon which followeth faith and justification thereby faith bringeth forth the dueties of â—…anctification and namely invocation which sometimes and namely in that place of Ioel is put for the whole worship of God which is the forerunner of salvation but here is no snch thing either mentioned or meant that by invocation faith obtaineth justification and therefore little reason had he from thence to inferre that therfore faith doth not justifie relatively by receiving for sooth justification offered but by seeking knocking asâ—…ing and finally by invocating and impeâ—…rating it doth justifie but passing by the weakenesse of his argument I answere to that which hee inferreth that faith beggeth justification no otherwise but with relation to Christ and his merits by it received For as God forgiveth no sinnes for which Christ hath not satisfied nor accepteth any man to life for whom Christ hath not merited it so are not we to beg justification at the hands of God but in the name and mediation of Christ beseeching God for Christ his sake that forasmuch as Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him and hath merited salvation and all spirituall blessings in heavenly things for them that it would therefore please God to accept of Christs satisfaction and merits in our behalfe imputing unto us both his sufferings for the remission
from faith secondly hee perverteth the question as if the Apostle disputed that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith or not proceeding from the grace of faith as they forsooth thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not or as if the justitiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength when the Pharisee himselfe Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength when they knew that God did chuse Abraham and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans where they served other gods Thirdly hee doth againe contradict the Apostle in saying that Abraham had glory with God which the Apostle plainely denieth the word in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth not glory but glorying or boasting If Abraham saith the Apostle was justified by works then had he wherof to glory or to boast but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God Fourthly his contradicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace hee had more cause to glory and that before God than if his workes proceeded from grace For in that case it might have beene said to him what hast thou which thou hast not received And if thou hast received it why dost thou glory or boast as if thou hadst not received it wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth that Abraham had whereof to glory before God he is to be understood as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace by which if Abraham had beene justified he had whereof to glory but not before God But being justified by faith without workes all matter of glorying was taken away By what Law of workes No but by the Law of Faith Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved not by workes lest any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8 9. And that this contradiction maketh against himselfe appeareth further by that which himselfe saith in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Whence he proveth that by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification he meaneth such workes whereto not grace is given but wages rendred And such are onely those saith hee which are wrought by the onely strength of free-will For to the workes which are wrought by grace that which is rendred is not simply merces wages but it is also grace yea grace rather than wages If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will and not by grace hee might have gloried that he had made God a debtour unto him But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt For to him that worketh that is fulfilleth the Law of God the wages is not reckoned of grace but of debt as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant Doe this and thou shalt live But to him that worketh not that is that fulfilleth not the Law which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. § VII And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concerning the merit of good workes proceeding from grace unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt but onely to such as are wrought by strength of nature But he and his fellowes when they treat of merit ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice not onely in respect of Gods promise or covenant but even in respect of the workes themselves For every good worke proceeding from charity absolutely deserveth as they teach eternall life insomuch that heaven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull than hell to the sinnes of the wicked § VIII As to the example of Abraham so to these three places Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are generally excluded from the act of justification Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onely are excluded which are done before faith But we will speake of them severally And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith that in that Epistle there are two questions handled the former speciall whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians so that without them they cannot be saved The other generall whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. Vnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively And afterwards he saith that the state of the Question in that Epistle is whether workes doe justifie without faith Whereunto I reply that no such question is mentioned in that Epistle nor the contrary concluded as being altogether heterogeneous and besides the purpose of the Apostle which was to reclaime the Galathians from their errour who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification For both the false teachers who seduced them were Christians who lest they should suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ perswaded them to bee circumcised Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves who were seduced did not cease to bee Christians neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ but were made to beleeve that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law that by them both they might be justified Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly proving that a man is justified by faith and not by the workes of the Law But if he had disputed against the other that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie without faith in Christ his disputation had beene to no purpose For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have answered that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ God forbid but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law desiring as the Papists now doe to bee justified not by faith alone but both by faith and workes together And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes so here the question is not whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ which asserâ—…ion never any Christian held but whether by faith without workes which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justification To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place
either godly sorrow or repentance doth worke salvation But the Apostle saith that godly sorrow worketh repentance even such repentance as is a forerunner unto salvation or as the faithfull speake Act. 11. 18. That God had given the Gentiles repentance unto life and therefore such a repentance as was not to bee repented of For the Apostle seemeth to have relation unto his owne words verse 8. that he had repented that hee had made them sorry But when hee understood that their sorrow had brought forth in them repentance he did not repent thereof Repentance therefore which is unto salvation is indeed a necessary and undoubted forerunner of salvation and salvation a certaice consequent of repentance necessary I say because without it a sinner cannot bee saved Luke 13. 3. Undoubted because to whom God hath given grace truely to repent it is an infallible token that such an one shall be saved Acts 11. 18. but a cause of salvation it is not neither can bee unlesse hee meane Causa sine qua non § VII His fifth Testimony 2 Cor. 4. 17. For that our tribulation which presently is momentany and light worketh above measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in us What could bee spoken more plainely If patience in tribulation doth worke a weight of eternall glory who can deny but that there is some relation betweene patience and salvation Vnlesse perhaps to worke salvation be not to worke something or that upon the working there followeth no relation Answ. If the Apostle had said that patience in affliction doth worke an eternall weight of glory hee might from thence have had some colour that patience hath a relation of efficiency to salvation and yet but a colour But when the Apostle doth not once mention patience how could hee bee so confident as to aske what could bee spoken more plainely The Apostle speaketh of affliction both light and momentany and saith that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh unto us an eternall weight of glory Here then wee are to consider in what sence affliction which in it selfe is evill and miserable should worke glory and happinesse being light should worke that which is most ponderous being momentany should worke that which is eternall whether as a cause properly and in it owne nature causing or working or as an occasion which besides or rather contrary to it owne nature which is evill is to us sanctified of God to be a meanes and occasion of our so great good And to this purpose let us consult with other places of holy Scripture as Rom. 5. 3 4. and Iam. 1. 12. In the former place the Apostle saith wee rejoyce in afflictions knowing that affliction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh patience and so Saint Iames 1. 3. Not that affliction in it selfe worketh patience but rather the contrary as appeareth in men unregenerate whom it maketh to murmure and sometimes to blaspheme God which the Divell by experience well knew when hee moved God to â—…fflict Iob Chap. 1. 11. 2. 5. Doe but touch all that he hath saith he and againe touch his bone and his flesh and hee will curse thee to thy face But afflictions are said to worke patience in the faithfull because the holy Ghost sanctifieth their afflictions to them and excercising them thereby worketh in them patience and what followeth Patience worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 probation that is as I have formerly expounded it maketh him that by affliction is tryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not that patience maketh him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that by patient bearing of affliction hee is found and knowne to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a sound approved and upright Christian. For therefore God sendeth tryals of all sorts that those who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bee knowne Now when men have beene by patient bearing of afflictions found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are crowned with eternall life as Saint Iames saith Chap. 1. 12. Blessed is the man who patiently beareth temptation that is affliction for when hee shall bee found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee shall receive the Crowne of life which the Lord hath promised to them that love him The meaning therefore of this place is neither that affliction causeth patience nor patience salvation but that when the godly are afflicted the holy Ghost by affliction where with they are exercised worketh patience in them and patience worketh probation because by patience when they are tryed they are knowne to bee sound and approved and probation worketh hope of salvation For when upon try all men are found to bee approved they shall receive the Crowne of life which God hath freely promised to give them And it is to be observed that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is translated to worke is given not onely to causes but also to occasions And therefore in such places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie it occasioneth as when it it said Rom. 4. 15. the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh anger § VIII His sixth Testimony Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall live whence hee would prove That the mortification of carnall concâ—…piscence is necessary to salvation as a condition and cause and therefore hath relation to salvation from the conditionall particle If and from the antithesis of the words going before if you live according to the flesh you shall die Answ. The conditionall particle used in conditionall or connexive propositions alwayes pretendeth a necessity of consequence insomuch that the connexion if it bee not necessary is not absolutely true but the necessity of efficiency it implyeth none And as for the necessity of consequence that ariseth not onely from causes but from all other arguments And whereas from the Antithesis hee would prove that as to live according to the flesh causeth death so to mortifie the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit causeth life I answere that in both the parts the connexion or consequence is equally that is necessarily true for if it were not necessary it were not absolutely true but it is absolutely true because of the authority of the Scriptures which are infallible which is sufficient to make good the Antithesis But hence it followeth not that the condition of either part should be taken from the same arguments seeing it may bee taken from any other This sufficeth for the Antithesis that if by the Spiriâ—… ye mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall live but if you live according to the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall dye therefore though the condition of the latter part bee the cause of the consequent yet it is not so in the former for sinne is the meritorious cause of damnation but our obedience being a duety and yet but unperfect cannot merit salvation A servant not doing his duety but the contrary is punished A
Abraham was that is by them as by fruites and effects hee is declared and approved to bee just and not by faith professed onely Hee doth not say a man is justified by workes as causes but as the effects For that and not the other is deduced from the example of Abraham § XIII The other example is of Rahab Verse 25. For though you may thinke that you need not compare with Abraham and yet have a true justifying faith yet you will bee ashamed to bee behinde Rahab the harlot who was no sooner justified before God by faith but she was also justifyed that is declared and knowne to bee just by her worke of charity towards the Espyes which shee wrought by faith Heb. 11. 31. Concerning this example of Rahab Bellarmine hath foure Assertions of which never an one agreeth with another First That Rahab was not declared to bee just because shee was an harlot which is false For though shee had beene an harlot yet now she beleeved and by her faith was justifyed before God and by her worke which shee wrought by faith was justified as Saint Iames saith that is declared to bee just Secondly That Iames briâ—…geth the example of Rahab to prove that by good workes a righteous person is made more righteous which also is false and contrary to his former Assertion Thirdly That by this worke of mercy shee was truely justified and of a sinner made just But Rahab as Bellarâ—…ine saith was an example of the first justification and therefore of a sinner not made just by her worke but by the habit of grace infused The trueth is by faith shee was justifyed before God and by her worke shee was declared to bee just before men Fourthly That by that worke as a disposition she was prepared unto justificaâ—…ion Which agreeth neither with his third where he said that by this worke shee was truely justifyed and of a sinner made just nor with Saint â—…mes whose meaning plainely is not that shee was prepared unto justification by this worke no more than Abraham was by his but that she was declared by this worke as a fruite of her faith and a consequent of her justification as Abraham was by his workes to be justifyed before God And thus much of the two examples § XIV There remaâ—…eth his fifth Argument which is a similitude Verse 26. For as the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes or that faith which is without workes is dead which words also may bee two wayes expounded For either the Apostle Iames speaketh of the habit of faith or of the profession of it If of the habit then the comparison standeth thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is without breath which is the prime signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to breathe in which sense it is called the spirit of the mouth and spirit of the nostrils I say as the body without breath is dead so that saith which is without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is judged to be dead For as Bernâ—…rd also saith As we discerne the life of this body by its motion so the life of faith by workes If therefore faith it selfe be here meant wee must by Spirit understand breath and not the soule For although the Papists absurdly make charity which is a fruite of faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. to be the forme of it yet me thinkes they cannot bee so absurd as to compare faith to the body and workes to the soule as though workes which are the fruites and effects both of faith and of charity were the forme and as it were the soule of faith If by faith we understand faith professed or the profession of faith as in this discouse hitherto it hath beene used and as it is used elsewhere as Act. 14. 22. Râ—…m 1. 8. then you may understand the similiâ—…de thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is the â—…oule is dead so the profession of faith without a godly life which is as it were the life and â—…oule of our profeâ—…on is also dead For hypocrites whose life is not conformable to their profession though they have a â—…ame that they live yet they are dead Apâ—…c 3. 1. Thus by five arguments Saint Iâ—…mes hath proved that the faith which is alone and without workes is not a true and a lively but a dead and counterfeit faith and yet 〈◊〉 both here and Lib. 1. dâ—… justif cap. 15. will needs have Saint â—…ames to speake of a true faith as if he supposed that a true faith might be without workes Therefore the Popish Doctrine of justification by workes as causes thereof cannot be grounded on this Tâ—…xt of Saint Iames. § XV. Yea but will some say the contradiction is not yet salved For Saint Paul affirmeth as you say that faith alone doth justify and Saint Iames in plaine termes denyeth that a man is justifyed by faith onely I answere when we say that faith onely doth justify we doe not meane absolutely that nothing doth justify but faith in no sense whatsoever For many things may truely bee said to justify aliâ—… atque aliâ—… sensu in divers senses as I have shewed heretofore God the Father as the prime efficient Christ as the meritorious cause God as the Iudge Christ as the Advocate God as the Creditour Christ as the Surety The grace of God as the moving cause the righteousnes of Christ as the matter the imputation thereof as the forme the holy Ghost as the applying cause the Word and Sacraments as the instruments of the holy Ghost Faith as the hand of the receiver works as testimonies and signes c. but our meaning is that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which is apprehended by faith alone and that in us nothing doth concurre to the act of justification but faith alone it being the onely instrument whereby wee receive Christ. And thus have you heard what is to be alleaged against the Papists First that their doctrine concerning justification by workes which they would build upon this Text is repugnant to the Scriptures Secondly that by their exposition they make Saint Iâ—…mes to contradict Saint Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot bee grounded on this Text. § XVI Now for our selves I will shew that by our exposition the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles is manifestly reconciled and that by our Doctrine their Assertions not oâ—…ely may well stand together but also must necessarily goe together The reconciliation is easily made if we consider two things first the diversity of the Parties with whom the two Apostles had to deale For the Apostle Paul having to deale with Pharisaicall Iustitiaries who sought to bee justified by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves and by an obedience performed by themselves proveth by invincible arguments that a man is justified by faith without
siâ—…e qâ—… nâ—…n For as the Apostle saith without holinesse no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. And for this cause we seriously exhâ—…rtall men who professe themselves to beleeve and to be iustified by faith to be careful that they may be precedents of good works for these are good and profitable and necessary as I shewed before when I propounded those arguments which wee doe use to move men unto good workes So much of his first testimony § XIX To that place of Saint Iames he addeth sixe other testimonies to which a short answer will suffice To the first out of Eccles. 18. 21 I have fully answered in the first controversie 2. His second testimony is Rom. 6. 19. As you have exhibited your members to serve uncleannessâ—… and iniquity unto iniquity so now exhibit your members to serve justice unto sanctification Where unto sanctification doth not signifie to get the first holinesse sor he speaketh to them who were holy and just but to increase sanctification But that by sanctification is meant justification and by sanctity justice it is plaine by the antithesis for he opposeth sanctification to iniquity His argument is thus framed Sanctification may and must bee increased by good workes which is proved by this text and not denyed by us Iustification is sanctification And that he proveth because what is opposed to iniquity is justification sanctification is here opposed to iniquity Therefore here sanctification signifieth justification Ans. That justification and sanctification are by no means to be confounded I proved at large in the first question for this is the source of all their errours in the doctrine of justification The Apostle doth carefully distinguish them For having in the former chapters treated of justification by faith without works that men should not abuse that doctrine to licentiousnesse of life in this and the next chapter he treateth of sanctification shewing in this chapter that sanctification is a necessary companion of justification And therefore exhorteth those that are justifiâ—… to the dueties of sanctification The abuse he preventeth vers 1. and 15. for wheras he had taught in the doctrine of justification that where sinne abounded grace did superabound he maketh this objection what then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound God forbid So againe by Iustification we are freed from the curse of the Law and from the rigour and terrour or dominion it what then shall we sin because wee are not under the Law but under Grace God forbid The unseparable conjunction of these two benefits is shewed by the Sacrament of Baptisme for as it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith unto us being baptized into the remission of sins so it is the laver of regeneration wherin as the Apostle saith we are baptized into Christs death and resurrection that as he dyed so we should dye unto sin and as he rose againe never to dye any more so wee should arise from the grave of sinne never to dye any more for how should they that are dead to sinne live any more therein And hereupon followeth his exhortation that we should not let sinne reigne in us nor give our members as instruments of unrighteousnes unto sin c. And as he doth dehort us from suffering sinne to relgne in us so he assureth the faithfull that sinne shall no more haue dominion over them because they are not under the Law but under grace and having prevented the abuse of that doctrine vers 15. he reneweth both his dehortation from suffering sinne to reigne in them because if it did reigne in them they must needes be the servants of it when as in their redemption they were freed from the bondage of sinne that they might become the servants of righteousnesse and also his exhortation vers 19. that they would yeeld their members as seruants to holinesse c. To his reason that by sanctification here is meant justification because it is opposed to iniquity I answere that both justification and sanctification are opposed to sinne and iniquity but with this difference In sin there are two things the guilt and the corruption or pollution By justification which is opposed to accusing and condemning Rom. 8. 33. wee are freed from the guilt of sin and damnation by our sanctification which is opposed to pollution wee are freed in some measure from the corruption that it is to say from the dominion of sinne § XX. His third testimony is 2 Cor. 7. 1. where the Apostle exhorteth that having these promises of our justification and adoption chap. 6. 16 28 wee should cleanse our selves from all pollution of the flesh and spirit perfecting or accomplishing our sanctification in the feare of God The Apostle doth not exhort us unto justification for that is never done in all the Scriptures but being justified and adopted wee are exhorted with our justification and adoption to joyne the dueties of sanctification and therein to grow and increase untill wee come to a perfect man in Christ. § XXI His fourth testimony 2 Cor. 9. 10. he will multiply your seed and will augment the increases of the fruits of our justice Where we are taught saith he that by almâ—…s-giving our wealth is diminished but our jâ—…stice is increased Answ. We answere that by the Christian practice of vertues our justice but not our justification is increased Howbeit the Apostle doth not speake of justice it selfe to be increased but of the fruites of justice by justice in this place meaning as vers 9. and Matth. 6. 1. liberalitie in almes-giving and by the fruites of righteousnesse almes Unto which that they might bee more and more enabled the Apostle prayeth that their seed may be multiplyed meaning thereby their store which in the faithfull is as it were the seed of almes that having alwayes all sufficiency in all things they might abound to every good worke being enriched in every thing to all bountifulnesse veâ—…s 8 11. so farre is the Apostle from signifying that by their almes-giving their wealth should be diminished § XXII His fifth testimony Ioh. 14. 23. If any love me hee will keepe my word and my Father will love him This new living after the fulfilling of the Commandements what is it sath he but the increase of love and thereby of righteousnesse which by observing the Law of God is required Answ. Wee confessè that by the observance of the Law of God our love of God is exercised and our righteousnesse increased though it be not proved out of this place For this love after the keeping of Christs word here mentioned is Gods love to us not ours to him § XXIII His sixth testimony is Apoc. 22. 11. hee that is just let him be justified yet Answ. The word yet or still doth not signifie increase but continuance or if increase were meant it could not bee understood of the righteousnesse of justification but of sanctification
the merit of Christ. This assumption may thus bee demonstrated That which a man hath already he needeth not to merit For to merit is to obtaine by desert that right which a man hath not yet Nullus meretâ—…r saith Thomas quod â—…am habet and againe meritum non est nisi ejus quod nondâ—…m habetur Therefore the faithfull if they have already right to Gods kingdome they need not merit it or if they must merit then have they not as yet that right by Christ but must purchase it by their owne deserts which is greatly to derogate from the merits of Christ. But the faithfull before they produce any good works have right to Gods kingdome Nâ—…m hoc ipsâ—… saith Bellarmine quòd incipiâ—… esse filiâ—… Dei 〈◊〉 jus habere ad hareditatem falicitatis â—…ternae Rom. 8. 17. Gâ—…l 4. 7. 〈◊〉 â—…utem esse filii Dei â—…ntequam incipiâ—…mus benè operari Igitur jus habemuâ—… ad aternam bareditatem per gratiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 benè operari For in that very respect that wee bâ—…ginne to bee the sonnes of God wee beginne to have right to the inheritance of the eternà ll feliciâ—…y Rom. 8. Gâ—…l 4. Now wee beginne to bee the sonnes of God before wee beginne to bring forth good workes Merâ—…it igitur Christus saith hee Christ therefore merited the inheritance it selfe whiles he merited the grace of adoption and againe unto him who is the Sonne of God by grace the inheritance is due by the right of adoption before all workes In which place Bellarmine teacheth another point of doctrine whereby is excluded the merit of good workes Ex eo quod aliquis saith hee est filius Dei per gratiam meretur ex condigno haereditatem vitae aeternae sine alio pacto sed merito personae non merito operis By this that any man is the sonne of God by grace hee doth merit condignely the inheritance of everlasting life without any other covenant for if sonnes then heires but hee doth merit it by the merit of his person not by the merit of his worke what needeth then the childe of God bring forth good workes with purpose to merit heaven by them seeing before hee produceth any good workes hee hath right unto the kingdome of heaven by the merit of his person in that hee is the Sonne of God Why forsoooth as it is an inheritance hee meriteth it by the merit of his person but as it is a mercenary reward or stipend or wages hee must earne it by the merit of his workes which is absurd for if it bee a free gift intended in our election without any relation to our desert a free inheritance purchased for us by Christ and freely promised to all that beleeve and free reward of our obedience which is therefore by Augustine and others called Gratia because it is freely given it cannot without absurdity be made the mercenary reward or wages of hired servants Thirdly to attribute that honour to every member of the body which is peculiar to Christ alone the Head is to derogate from the honour of Christ our Head But to merit eternall life is an honour peculiar to Christ alone our Head For eternall life in heaven being of infinite worth as being the eternall fruition of God who is infinite cannot be condignely merited but by that which is of infinite value and price Such are the merits of Christ and of him alone such neither ours nor any meere creatures are or can be For the infinite merit of eternall life dependeth on the infinitenesse of the person who meriteth it such an one is Christ such are none of his members Therefore to Christ alone it belongeth to merit heaven for his members and not to his members who are not to merit but by faith to apprehend the merit of their Head Fourthly that which taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of salvation doth greaâ—…ly detract from the al-sufficiency of Christs merits The Popish doctrine concerning the merit of workes taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of our salvation Therefore it doth greatly derogate from the al-sufficient merit of Christ. Fifthly they who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne good workes and to salve the matter doe faine that Christ hath merited for their good workes that they may condignely merit heaven doe indeed robbe Christ of the honour of meriting for us eternall life and doe arrogate it unto themselves Thus doe the Papists who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne works and to bleare the eyes of the simple they faine that Christ merited for our workes that they might be meritorious of eternall life for neither by the Scriptures nor Fathers nor any sound reason doe they so much as goe about to prove this fiction this novelty Christ did not save us to make us our owne Saviours but in his owne person and as the Apostle speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by himselfe he performed the worke of our redemption and the merit of our salvation Object 1. But you will say did Christ merit for us that we should be idle I answere wee are the Workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath preordained that we should walke in them not to merit by them but to glorifie God by them to testifie our thankefulnesse and to make our calling and elâ—…ction sure and for many other reasons which I delivered when I proved the necessity of good workes Object 2. It is not fit that Christs merits should bee applyed to men without workes Answ. The merits of Christ are applyed to us that is wee are justified by them without workes as the Apostle teacheth howbeit in them that are justified good workes doe follow but not as causes of justification or as merits of salvation Object 3. But it is necessary we should be like unto Christ. Answ. Wee must bee like to him in the graces of sanctification which we receive from his fulnesse even grace for grace Rom. 8. 29. 1 Ioâ—…n 3. 3. 1 Pet. 1. 16. But wee cannot bee like unto him in office of Mediation or in the power of meriting which is proper to the Head § III. This argument that the doctrine of merits is derogatory to the al-sufficient merits of our onely Saviour is worthy to bee insisted upon and defended against all exceptions and cavils of the Papists which indeed are many but may be reduced to these three heads for either they serve to shew that their doctrine doth not derogate from Christs merits or that their doctrine setteth forth the glory of Christs merit no lesse than ours or that wee by denying their doctrine doe extenuate such is their impudency the merit of Christ. To the first purpose Bellarmine hath foure evasions The first that The merits of just men are not opposite to the merits of Christ but spring from them And what commendation soever our
call those workes which are mingled with sinnes good merits for that implyeth a contradiction but hee saith they doe not suffice to merit or obtaine the reward of blessednesse and therefore indeed denyeth the workes of righteousnesse to merit eternall life § II. The second is Basil Maneâ—… sempiternâ—… requies illos qui in hac vitalegitimè certaverunt non ob eorum merita factorum sed de munificentissimi Dei gratia in quem sperârunt which is a pregnant testimony But Bellarm taking advantage at the Printers fault in the old Edition of Basil leaving out the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which since hath bin supplyed answereththat Chemnitius did not rightly translate the words of Basil for in the Greeke neither the words Non ob eorum merita are found nor the word Gratiâ—… The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is propounded an eveâ—…lasting â—…est to them who lawfully strive in this life not rendred according to the debt or due of works but according to the grace of the most bountifull God in whom they have trusted where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it were not expressed is of necessity to be understood and the rather because he seemeth by allusion to invert the words of the Apostle Rom. 4 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For with Bellarmine in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to repeate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he had said according to the duety or debt of the most bountifull God or great giver it is absurd gift and debt being contrary And also by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debt or duâ—…ty to understand as hee doth measure which becommeth the bounty of God that is much greater than is due to the workes is no lesse absurd For neither doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siignifie measure neither is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repeated in the latter clause which signifieth rendred but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is exhibited which Bellarmine leaveth out Neither doth hee say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Bellarmine absurdly understandeth him to speake for there is no debt or duety of God Neither would it hinder our cause if the word rendred were repeated in the latter clause for what is promised is to bee rendred But in plaine termes Basil saith that eternall rest to them that live well is not rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the merit of their workes but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the grace of the munifiâ—…nt God exhibited But his second Evasion is more grosse that Basil speaketh of the reward as rendred not according to the merit of workes which men have done by their owne strength but such as are done by grace Repl Basil plainely speaketh of those who fought a good fight in this life and have trusted in God and saith that the eternall rest is laid up for them and that it is rendied not according to the merit of works but given according to the gâ—…ace of God the great Giver Neither doth he speake of naturall or gâ—…acelesse men of whom he never dreamed that the eternall rest is pâ—…epared for them but of godly men such as David was whose woâ—…ds Returne unto thy rest O my soule were the occasion of this speech Besides if the rewâ—…rd bee rendred as Bellarmine saith Supra condignum how is it merited â—…x condignâ—… Or if it be merâ—…ted ex condigno how is it supra condignum § III. The third is Saint Augustines out of whom hâ—… reciteth onely three places as â—…ited by us the firlâ—… 〈◊〉 sunt 〈◊〉 Dei sunt The sinnes are thine the merits are Gods Supplicium tibi debetur cum praemium vâ—…nerit â—…ua dona corâ—…abit non meriâ—…a 〈◊〉 Punishment is due to thee And when the reward shall come hee will crowne his owne gifts not thy merits 2. Pro nihilo salvos facies illos nihil invenies unde salves multum invenis vnde damnes thou wilt save them for nothing thou findest nothing for which to save and thou findest much for which to condemne 3. Maluit dicere gratia Dei vita â—…terna ut intelligeremus non pro meritis nostr is Deum nos ad aeternam vitam sed pro sua miseratione perducere he chose rather to say that life eternall is the grace of God that wee might understand that not for our merits but for his owne mercie hee doth bring us unto eternall life Which are most plaine and pregnant testimonies Bellarmine answereth in grosse wheresoever Augustine condemneth merits he speaketh of such merits as be in us from our selves that is to say without the grace of God And to this purpose he quoteth August Epist. 105. ad Sixtum in two places and his Book de gratia lib. arbitr c. 6. 7. 8. Reply Augustine by merits understandeth good workes which hee considereth either as going before grace wrought by the strength of our owne free will which against the Pelagians he denyeth tâ—… merit either grace or glory or he speaketh of them as proceeding from grace which he acknowledgeth to be rewarded with eternall life But these though he call them merits because they are to be rewarded yet every where he saith that the reward is given to them not as to our merits deserving it but as to the free gifts of God And therfore that the reward it selfe is called gratia both because it is freely given and because those workes to which it is given are wholly to bee ascribed to Gods grace and consequently that the Lord when he rewardeth our workes with eternall life doth not reward them as our merits but as his owne gifts Than which what can be spoken more effectually against the merits of condignity For if our good works be not our owne as from our selves how can â—…hey merit of him whose gifts they are If they were our owne and from our selves and were also perfect as they are not then perhaps it might be said that when God rewardeth them he rewardeth our merits but not being from our selves but meerely by his gift when he rewardeth them hee doth not reward our merits but crowne his owne gifts It is plaine therfore that whereas August considereth good works two wayes either as our merits or as Gods gifts he both constantly denyeth eternall life to be rendred unto them as to our merits and also affirmeth that it is given to them freely as to the free gifts of God And this is proved out of those very places which Bellarmine alleageth in the first place he saith Cùm Deuâ—… coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quam muner a sâ—…a When God doth crowne our merits so hee calleth good works he crowneth nothing else but his owne gifts and in another place Ergo coronat te quia dona sua coronat non merita tâ—…a and againe in the same epistle he saith that howsowever eternall life is rendred to our good workes which hee therefore
virtue yet to life I am enabled not by merits but by pardon To this Bellarmine giveth the same answere which he did to Aâ—…gustine and Prosper which is that one and the same bush whereby he seâ—…keth to stoppe all gapps that he speaketh of such merits as wee have from our selves which neither are nor can be any But to this place this answere cannot be applyed seeing Gregory speaketh those words in the person of Iob whose workes proceeded from grace he being the most gracious man that was then upon the earth The same Gregory writing on the seventh Penitentiall Psalme speaketh to this effect If that felicitie of Saints be mercie and is not acquired by merits which hee had noted before out of the Psalme what then shall become of that which is written and thou rendrest to every man according to his workes if it be rendred according to works how shall it be esteemed mercie But it is one thing saith he to render according to workes another to render for the workes themselves For in that it is said according to workes the quality of works is meant that whose workes shall appeare to bee good his reward may be glorious For to that blessed life wherein we live with God and by God no labour may be matched no workes compared especially seeing the Apostle saith The passions of this time are not condigne to the future glory Where he teacheth these three things First that eternall life is not gotten by merits no not of Saints Secondly That it is not given for our workes as the meritorious cause though according to our workes Thirdly that our workes are not worthy of it and therefore cannot condigneâ—…y merit it § VI. The sixt and last is Bernard out of whom he citeth as objected by us foure Testimonies The first de annunciat serm 1. where is an excellent passage against merits out of which Bellarmine citeth for us one onely sentence But I will recite the whole place Now as touching life eternall we know that the passions of this time are not condigne to the future glory though one man should sustaine them all Neither are the merits of men such that eternall life should bee due to them by right or that God should doe some injury if hee did not give it For to omit that all our merits are Gods gifts and so for them man is more a debtour to God than God to man what are all merits to so great glory Finally who is better than the Prophet who held it necessary to say unto God Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord and a little after when hee had commended speciall faith whiâ—…h the Papists cannot abide he â—…aith ipse peccata condonat ipse donat merita pramia nihilominus ispe redonat hee forgiveth our sinnes he giveth us merits or good workes and he neverthelesse giveth us the rewards In which words are contayned six good arguments against merit of condignity The first If the passions of this life even martyrdome it selfe are not condigne or worthy to the future glory though one did beare them all then much lesse are our actions or good workes But the passions of this time though one man should sustayne them all are not condigne or worthy to the future glory therefore much lesse are our good workes worthy of that glory Secondly Condigne merits are such that eternall life is due unto them by right insomuch as God should seeme to doe wrong if he did not bestow it as the Papists most presumptuously teach But our good workes are not such as Bernard here plainely testifieth therefore our good workes are not condigne merits of eternall life Thirdly Those things which bee the gifts of God doe not merit of God yea they are so farre from meriting at the hands of God that they make men who have them debtours to God and not God to them But our good workes which some call merits are all of them the gifts of God Fourthly Betweene merits of condignity and the reward there is an equall proportion But what are all our good workes which they call merits to so great glory Fifthly They who have condigne merits may boldly appeare before the judgement of God and challenge their due reward but the holiest man that liveth ought to say with David enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord for no man living shall be justified in thy sight if thou enter into judgement with him Sixthly If God doth give unto us both our good works or merits and also the reward then our good workes doe not condignely merit everlasting life but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent Of these six Bellarmine citeth onely the second and that onely he answereth viz. that Bernard teacheth that eternall life is not due to merits by right absolutely because they presuppose both the grace and the promise of God but grace and promise being presupposed eternall life is due by right which he would prove out of 2 Tim. 4. 7. and Heb. 6. Reply Bernard speaketh with presupposall both of Gods grace and promise and teacheth that good workes though proceeding from grace though having the promise of reward yet to them eternall life is not due by right neither doe they merit it condignely as is proved by the six reasons whereof Bellarmine answeareth never a one For in thâ—… first reason he speaketh of the sufferings according to the Apostles meaning of the sonnes and heires of God which they suffer for or with Christ having this promise that if they suffer with Christ they shall be glorified with him yet these though one man should sustaine them all are not condigne to the future glory As for the second which he would seeme to answere instead of explaining it he plainely contradicteth it saying that our merits are such as eternall life is due to them by right In the third argument Bernard doth not onely presuppose that the good works or merits where of he speaketh doe proceed from grace but from thence proveth that because they are Gods gifts they cannot merit of God but the more a man hath of them the more he is indebted to God In the fourth he sheweth that betweene all our workes though never so much proceeding from grace and the future glory which is promised to them there is no proportion In the fifth he speaketh of them that are most godly who have both grace and promise of glory that they are so farre from condigne merit that if God should enter into judgement with them none of them could be justified in his sight In the sixth he setteth downe the degrees of grace freely bestowed upon us that hee doth condonare peccata donare merita redonare praemia Of his grace hee forgiveth our sinnes of his grace he giveth us good workes which hee calleth merits of his grace redoubled upon us he graciously giveth the reward which hee hath freely promised as for his proofes out of 2
reward of their labours who are Gods workemen vers 9. labouring for him and not for themselves is the blessing of increase which God giveth thereunto Even as the harvest is the reward of the earing not to be asscribed to the merit of earing but to the blessing of God And so it is here plainely said though the Planter and the Waterer shall have their owne rewards yet their reward is not to bee asscribed to the merit of their labour but to the blessing of God I have planted saith Paul and Apollâ—… hath watered but God gave the increase So then neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase Or if the place should generally be understood oâ—… all workes both good and bad the meaning would be that the reward would be answerable either good or bad That of the Psalmist Psal. 62. 12. To thee Lord mercie for thou rendrest to every man according to his worke is not generally to be understood of the workes of all men both good and bad for the bad works of the wicked hee doth not reward in mercie but judgement without mercie shall bee executed upon them but of the good workes of the godly onely which though they bee good and acceptable to God in Christ yet he rewardeth them not according to merit but according to his mercie The place Apâ—…c 22. 12. may be an exposition of the rest For whereas in the rest it is said that God will judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to their dâ—…eds here Christ saith he will render to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his worke shall be viz. good or bad But here the Papists would seeme to bring a reason à pari that as the wicked are damned prâ—…pter peccata for their evill workes so the godly are saved propter opera bona for their good workes And as â—…vill workes merit hell so good workes pari ratione merit heaven Answ. it is impar ratio there is no equality in the comparison For first the Scripture plainely teacheth that by and for their evill works men are condemned and as plainely denieth that by or for good workes men are saved Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. Secondly any one sinne meriteth death because it is a breach of the Law yea of the whole law Iam. 2. 10. but not any one good worke can merit heaven because it is not the fulfilling of the whole law for there must be a concurrence of all duties In so much that if a man should performe all the Commandements and faile in one the breach of that one maketh him guilty of all Thirdly evill workes are purely and perfectly evill and therefore absolutely deserve death but the good workes are not purely and perfectly good as I have heretofore prooved therefore death is the due stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Fourthly sinne is absolutely meritorious of damnation but so is not our obedience of Salvation For though we could performe all the commandements by a totall perpetuall and perfect obedience yet wee must acknowledge our selves unprofitable servants and much lesse could we merit thereby because we have done but our duety and where is no more but duety there can bee no merit Debitum non est meritum § XIIII His third argument is taken from those places which do so testifie eternall life to be rendred to good workes that they place the very reason why eternall life is given in good workes The places bee these Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared fâ—…r you from the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee meat c. and in the same chapter vers 21. because thou hast beene faithfull in few things c. Apoc. 7. 14. These are they who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are before the Throne of God In which places the particles enim quia ideo for because therfore are all causall His reason standeth thus To what things the causall particles are applied they are causes of that to which they have relation as namely of Salvation To workes of charity the causall particles are applied Therefore workes of charity are causes of Salvation To the proposition I answere that causall particles doe not alwaies nor for the most part signifie causes so properly called For that is a grosse erâ—…our of the Papists as I noted before The word cause sometimes is used properly to signifie that argument which hath relation onely to its effect by virtue whereof the effect hath its being either as from the efficient or as of the matter or as by the forme or as for the end Sometimes it is used generally to signifie any argument or reason whatsoever which is not the cause of the thing or of the being of that whereof it is said to bee a cause but of the consequence or conclusion and thus the rendring of any reason is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rendring of the cause though perhaps it bee from the effect or any other argument And forasmuch as persons are discerned and knowne by their effects for as our Saviour saith By their fruits you shall know them therefore it is usuall in the Scriptures from the effect to argue and declare the cause As thus God is mercifull for hee rewardeth the godly according to their workes God is just for hee rewardeth the wicked according to their sinnes This man is elect because he truely beleeveth and repenteth this man truely beleeveth because hee is fruitfull of good workes This is a good tree for it bringeth forth good fruite To the woman that was a sinner much was forgiven for shee loved much In those and infinite more examples the cause or reason which is rendred is from the effect Therefore the proposition is false § XV. Now let us consider the places of Scriptnre which hee alleageth and first Matth. 25. 35. for when I was hungry c. This reason which is alleaged is not from the cause as if good workes were the meritorious cause of our inheriting the kingdome of heaven but from the effect to prove the cause which is expressed Verse 34. as I have shewed before For for what cause are men to be saved First because they are blessed of the Father that is justified and therefore entituled to this kingdome Secondly because they are elected and therefore this kingdome was prepared for them from the beginning Thirdly because they arâ—… the heires of God for whom our Saviour purchased this inheritance noted in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iâ—…rit But how shall it appeare who they are that are blessed and justified for whom this kingdome is prepared for whom this inheritance is purchased By the fruits of justification election redemption and namely by the workes of mercy and chariâ—…y towards the poore members of Christ according to which as the evidence our Saviour
the other that which is given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. 4. for debitum non est gratuitum If eternall life bee gratia gratis data si gratis datur then is not due by desert And if the good worke also be grace how can it deserve a reward and so great a reward from him that gave it For Bellarmine hath taught us in the beginning of this seventeenth Chapter that if the worke bee much lesse than the promised reward it should not be a merit of condignity in respect of the worke If saith hee the Master of the vineyard should promise to a labourer for his dayes worke not the day-peny but an hundred crownes and yet the heavenly reward given to a good worke doth incomparably surpasse the unequall proportion that is betweene an hundred crownes and a daies worke § VI. In his second argument he trifleth egregiously He saith there is a proportion betweene the fountaine and the river running from it Grace is the fountaine Ioh. 4. 14. and eternall life is the river which maketh glad the City of God Psal. 46. 5. where according to the Latine it is thus read Fluminis impetus laetificat Civitateâ—… Dei which Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth thus Fluminis impetus laetificat Civiâ—…taem Dei i. Non timebit populus Dei quando turbabitur terra ergo c. Literally the place is understood of the Brooke Kidron and of the city of Ierusalem But if it must bee allegorized then as by the fountaine grace is to be understood according to that of Ioh. 4. 14. so by the river should be understood perseverance and increase of grace running to eternall life as the sea wherein the course of all rivers endeth And therefore such as is the proportion of the fountaine to the sea such is of grace or of a gracious worke to eternall life This was his first analogy the second is no lesse ridiculous Moreover saith he there is a proportion betweene the ascent and descent of water for it doth ascend as high as it doth descend and therefore the grace of the Spirit which descended from heaven will ascend as high No doubt if it be conveyed in a close conduit pipe § VII His third Reason Eternall life is the day-peny of those that labour in the vineyard Matth. 20. But the day-peny is the just hire of the dayes labour So is eternall life The day-peny which was given to those that wrought but one houre doth signifie eternall life which is thereby proved not to bee an hire rendred as due to equall labour but as a free reward bestowed by the bounty of the Lord who â—… may doe with his owne what he pleaseth For if it were the just wages for the whole dayes labour then he that wrought but one houre should have had but one twelfe part of the wages His fourth Reason Seed in vertue physicall is equall to that thing wherof it is the seed and containeth it Grace is the seed and eternall life that whereof it is the seed therefore iâ—… vertue morall Grace is equall to glory Answ. This argument is grounded upon a similitude of grace and seed which are not like in those things for which this comparison is brought For neither is seede the meritorious cause of that whereof it is the seed as hee supposeth grace to bee nor grace the seminall cause of eternall life for seed is the materiale principium But grace meaning grace inherent is neither the materiale principium nor the meritorious cause nor any other cause of salvation unles it be 〈◊〉 sine qua non which is no cause Yea but gracâ—… saith he is called the seed of GOD 1 Ioh. 3. 9. Answ. The seede of God properly is Gods word sowne in our hearts as the seede of our new and spiriâ—…uall life in this world This seede conceived by the power of the Spirit is the grace of regeneration as the materiale principium of our spirituall life meant in that place of S. Iohn which alwaies abideth in the childe of God who being once borne of God is never unborne againe The fruits in respect whereof it is called seed are the fruits of a godly life For the seed of Gods Word being sowne in our hearts and there conceived and taking root fructifieth and bringeth forth increase in some thirty in some sixty in some aâ—… hundred fold The grace of regeneration therefore is called seed in respect of the fruit of good works which it bringeth forth in this life And further the doing of good workes is compared to sowing of seede which hath relation to the great harvest as also the committing of the dead bodies of the faithfull to the earth For even as he that casteth his seed into the ground doth it in hope of increase at the next harvest or as hee that committeth the dead body to the earth as seede doth it in hope of increase at the great harvest so hee which soweth in righteousnesse to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape everlasting life And as the seed cast into the ground is not cast away but is recompenced with increase at the harvest And as the body though sowne in corruption doth not perish but riseth in incorruption at the great harvest so he that soweth the seed of good workes though hee may seeme to cast them upon the waters as Salomon speaketh hee shall not lose thereby but hee shall bee rewarded an hundred-fold and at the great harvest hee shall inherit everlasting life But as the increase in harvest is not to bee asscribed to the merit of the sower but to the blessing of God and as the raising of the dead body to incorruption at the last day is not to bee attributed to the merit of committing it as seed to the earth but to the merit and power of CHRIST in whom wee are made alive againe so the reaping of everlasting life at the great harvest is not to bee asscribed to our merit but to the merit of Christ who hath purchased it for us and to the undeserved mercie of God who crowneth his owne graces in us So if wee sowe to our selves in righteousnesse wee shall reape in mercie as the Prophet speaketh § IX His fifth argument concludeth nothing to the purpose Eternall life saith hee is a certaine supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles bâ—…th efficient and formall But merit which consisteth in love is also a supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles both efficient and formall therefore they have aproportion betweene themselves and the one leadeth to the other as the right way to the end Answ. I grant that the grace of sanctification is the right way to glorification but no meritorious cause thereof That there is a proportion of likenesse in the respects mentioned but no proportion of equality And that
respect of the almes which it doth receive And yet I doe not conceive that therefore the hand and the almes be relatives But we confesse that justifying faith is not without his object yet that object by apprehenâ—…ing wherof it 〈◊〉 justifie relâ—…tively is not righteousnesse inherent as here Bellarmine against his owne conscience doth suggest but the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified betweene which and faith there is such a relation that as justifying faith is called the faith of Christ or faith in Christ faith in his bloud so the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified is called the righteousnesse of faith And further I confesse that whosoever is justified by righteousnesse imputed is also in some measure just by righteousnesse inherent though he be not justified before God thereby But whereas he saith that wee will easily admit this argument that where faith is there is also inherent justice and consequently that justifying faith cannot be severed from other virtues because wee teach that by every sinne faith is lost I doe much marvell at his impudency for though he and his consorts doe wickedly teach that by every act of infidelity faith is lost yet wee are so farre from granting that faith is lost by every sinne that we confidently hold that true justifying faith is never totally or finally lost by any sinne whatsoever that is incident to the faithfull and regenerate man Some indeed have taught that by hainous offences which doe vastare conscientiam waste the conscience faith is lost yet that is farre from saying it is lost by every sinne Secondly againe saith he if faith doth justifie relatively then it cannot be in a mans minde but justice also must be there and without love there is no justice Answ. Without love there is no justice inherent but that is not it to which faith when it justifieth hath relation but that which faith having justified us bringeth forth in us as a consequent of justification Thirdly moreover saith he if faith severed from all other virtues doe justifie alone then it may also justifie being accompanied with those vices which are contrary to those virtues But this cannot be imagined that a man should be justified and yet remaine a wicked man Answ. If by vices he understand certaine vicious dispositions which though they doe not reigne in the faithfull yet remaine in them as their infirmities I confesse that justifying faith may and doth stand with such But if he meane the contrary habits of sinne which reigne in the hearts of the wicked and impenitent sinners I professe that justifying faith cannot stand with such For where these doe reigne the man is wholly unregenerate and where regeneration is not there faith which by regeneration is wrought cannot be It is therefore against the nature and being of a true justifying faith to harbour in a soule unregenerate § IV. To this argument he saith we answere that they assume that which is impossible viz. that faith may be alone which I beleeve not to have beene the answere of any of our Doctors for a man arguing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may suppose that which is impossible and yet the argument be of no lesse force But our assertion that faith cannot be alone which before I have made good in the second Chapter of this booke and defended against Bellarmines objections Chap. 3. hee laboureth here to take away by three reasons first by cavilling with Luther and Calvin First Luther saith that faith justifieth both before and without Charity I rejoyne it justifieth before because in order of nature it goeth before without because though Charity be present with it yet it justifieth without it even as the eye though the eare be with it yet seeth without it Secondly Calvin saith that the seed of faith remaineth in the greatest falles of the faithfull and therefore without Charity I rejoyne Calvin saith no more than S. Iohn doth that the seed of God doth alwaies remaine in those that are borne of God which seed of God is as well the seed of Charity as of Faith and both the one and the other remaine in the greatest fals of Gods children as wee see in Peter in whom though he fell most grievously in denying and sorswearing his Lord yet the seeds yea the habits of faith and love did remaine as I have proved elsewhere Secondly saith he because our argument assumeth not that faith may be alone but that if faith did justifie alone it would doe so though it were alonâ—… this reason doth not confute our assertion that faith cannot be alone but taketh away that answere which he falsely I thinke assigneth to us But this consequence of his I have denied and disproved His third reason which is but the second to disprove our assertions if it bee true saith he that true faith is never alone then it is because faith begetteth those other graces even as a good Tree bringeth forth good fruit And if this were so then faith should goe before love and other graces if not in time yet in nature But faith cannot be conceived to be in nature before justification or justice infused or those graces wherein justification consisteth because these are relatives as they say God justifying and faith receiving justification for relatives are simulnatura c. Answ. The relatives that we meane are Christs righteousnesse imputed of God and faith apprehending or receiving it which though they bee simul natura in respect of the one to the other yet both of them are before the other graces in order of nature But if justifying faith be before charity and there be no righteousnesse without charity then saith he the same man may be just and not just at the same time Answ. It followeth not For though in order of nature faith be before love 1 Tim. 1. 5. yet in time they goe together Neither is that such an absurdity as he imagineth that the same man at the same time should be a sinner in himselfe and righteous in Christ a sinner according to the Law because he hath broken it but righteous according to the Gâ—…spell because in Christ he hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the end of the Law to every one that beleeveth Insomuch that every one that beleeveth in Christ is reputed as if he had fulfilled the Law Lastly because saith he it is false which they hold that faith cannot be severed from Charity and other virtues and this he taketh upon him to prove in the next Chapter unto which I have fully answered in the second question concerning the nature of faith CHAP. XIV Bellarmines third principall argument from the removall of those causes which may be given why faith doth justifie alone § I. HHis third principall argument is taken from the removall of those causes he meaneth reasons which may be given why faith alone doth justifie All which as he saith may be reduced