empty On the contrary the Publican who emptied himself and took care to bring an empty vessel received the more plentiful grace By these things I suppose it is sufficiently evident what this Righteousness is and of what sort which makes us righteous before God whether it is Christs or ours If it is Christs it is not ours How then of works of our righteousness If it is ours it is not Christs how is a man of wicked made righteous If of wicked he is made righteous that I may speak in the words of Augustine what are the works of wicked men Let the wicked man now boast of his works I give to the Poor I take nothing away from any man c. then thou art in this thy boast wicked and thy works are none These things said he therefore it is a false Opinion which men plead for to wit that a man cannot be called righteous by an external righteousness Neither is it less Ass-like which those Balqamites do bray who say that it is the same thing for a man to be thus Righteous as if a man should say an Ass with the form of an Ass is a Mon for by Faith we are called faithful and by righteousness weare called righteous c. Be it so indeed that no Man should rightly be called righteous but upon the account of Righteousness what then seeing Christ is our righteousness is there not sufficient cause upon that account why we should be called righteous should any man require a better righteousness than that which is Christs And what form of expressing though external can hinder but that the righteousness which is peculiar to Christ may also be called ours and may be common both to him and us especially seeing he is wholly ours with his merits vertues benefits and all his goods which qualities though they are not properly in our selves yet being received from him they pass likewise into our possession As the Bodies of the Stars and Planets though dark of themselves yet they shine and are made bright not with their own but anothers light to wit being inlightned with the light of the Sun just so it comes to pass to us that we are made Righteous Kings Priests Sons and Heirs of God not by any property of our nature or condition of works but because the Son and Heir himself is said to be made Sin and a Curse for us not for any sin inherent in him but imputed to him Argument But here again and again those impure Sophisters object that this was never heard from Aristotle and that it is not agreeable to reason that he should be called learned that hath no learning or righteous that is not endued with righteousness And perhaps that may seem true in moral vertue Now seeing there is a twofold righteousness as I have said one which they call Ethick another which is Theological that consists in manners this in faith we must judge far otherwise of this than of that For the righteousness of which Aristotle treats as it is a moral vertue distinguished from prudence courage and temperance thus it is referred to the habits of the mind and internal qualities according to which men are denominated of what sort they are by Philosophers And though we confess this to be true in some respect it doth not at all hurt our cause nor discourage our enterprize in clearing this point For all this Controversie undertaken by us drives at this that we should search for a righteousness which is no moral humane vertue but which is a Spiritual Grace and gift of God which is not ours but which is proper to Christ whence he only is called holy and just and we are called justified in him not upon the account of works but faith which God imputes for righteousness unto them that believe in his name And hence it is rightly called the righteousness of faith and therefore faith it self is righteousness whereby we are accounted righteous before God being endued not with that external righteousness about which those men Philosophize but being beautified and adorned with a peculiar and most internal righteousness which being so who sees not that it is false and sophistical which those men take out of Aristotle that we are justified by works or should upon no account be called just why so because no man can be called just but upon the account of the righteousness which every man possesses for his own in himself For thus do those sharp-witted Men argue who cannot endure the free justification of Faith To whom that I may make answer let us hear this first from them Whether faith whereby we believe in Christ seems to them a vertue or not If they judge so I ask whether it is a moral vertue or a theological And then whether it is internal and inherent being inwardly placed or whether it should be called external If faith is an internal thing and the same is our righteousness in the fight of God Why then should not this seem an allowable form of arguing against the Iesuites who deny that we are otherwise justified than by internal and inherent righteousness Argument Ma. Our Faith is Righteousness before God Mi. Our Faith is an internal and inherent vertue Concl. Therefore we are made righteous before God by an internal and inherent vertue But here again the Adversaries object that they do not at all deny but that Faith is an internal vertue in us which nevertheless makes us faithful but makes us not just Why so because we are said to be faithful from faith but we are said to be righteous only from righteousness O sweet and understanding men as if those who are faithful in Christ Iesus were not also just before our God or as if these things should only be looked upon in their names and needed not to be considered rather in their causes and effects And what will they then say to these words of Paul being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ What if the cause being granted the effect also must necessarily be granted and faith is a justifying cause as the Apostle witnesseth how can it be that those who receive the name of faithful from faith should not also upon the same account receive the cause of righteousnes whence they are not only called righteous but made so also in reality And these things we have said by the by against the objections of the Iesuits who seeing they so strictly examine the Divine Theorems of our Religion according to the Logical forms of arguing it is reasonable that we also should keep them entangled and expedite our selves out of their nets as much as may be Here therefore seeing they require of us Arguments conformed unto the modes of Aristotle let them so receive them Argument Ma. Men from Righteousness are rightly and formally called Righteous Mi. The Faith of Christ is Righteousness imputed to us by God
I am so far from slighting that I desire they may remain most firmly fixed in the minds of men for as nothing appears in the most holy manners of Christ which is not very worthy of imitation so no part of duty seems more agreeable to every Christian than that all of us should endeavour with all our might to resemble the image proposed unto us especially seeing Paul so gravely and that in more places than one calls us hereunto who making a Comparison of both Fathers Adam and Christ declares what we received of both By Man saith he came death and by Man came the Resurrection from the dead And presently after proceeding on that matter the first Man was of the earth earthly the second Man is the Lord from Heaven And afterwards concluding with words to the same purpose and exhorting us to imitate the example of his obedience he subjoyns as we have born saith he the image of the earthly let us bear also the image of the heavenly And the Apostle Peter not differing much from Paul proposes Christ for an Example of all long suffering for saith he Christ also suffered for us giving us an Example that ye should follow his footsteps who did no sin who when he was reviled reviled not again when he suffered he threatned not but committed all judgment to his Father c. Therefore that you contend so earnestly with the Blessed Apostles for following the footsteps of Christ herein we do very willingly both hear you and assent unto you But that you place all the dignity of our Salvation in this that you refer all the promises of God to this one head as if there were no cause of Salvation but that which is placed only in precepts and instructions of Life herein your discourse seems to pass far beyond the bounds of sound and Apostolick Doctrine For though it is a thing of very great concernment that we should frame all the endeavours and Offices of Life to the imitation of him yet Salvation is not therefore promised because our actions agree to this rule of Righteousness neither is the title of Righteousness given us because we live vertuously but because he was made Righteousness for us For we do not become just before God by imitation but by Regeneration As of Old not through our fault but Adams not by Imitation but by Birth and Propagation the pollution of his Sin was imputed to us unto Condemnation So by vertue of the Second Adam not by any power of our own by being born again not by imitating is Righteousness imputed to us unto the Iustification of Life Neither doth it therefore follow that the examples of Christ are not proposed to us for Imitation It is one thing to reason from causes to effects another thing to reason from effects to causes What if the cause is enquired into that makes us righteous before God Paul will answer That Christ is the external cause who was made Sin for us that we might be made the Righteousness of God through him But the Internal is our Faith in Christ which is imputed to them that believe forRighteousness But if you ask what are the the effects of this cause Who knows not that they are the Fruits of Pious Works and this very imitation of Christ which you so greatly yea and so deservedly cry up and extol For who can rightly call himself a Christian as you say very well who doth not apply his mind as much as he can to separate himself from all society of the Earthly Father and frame and conform himself wholly to the example of the Heavenly I grant this to be very true as indeed it is For I do not disallow of that which you do rightly assume but I confute that which you would falsly gather from hence For thus you conclude To wit that the whole Magazine of our Salvation is placed in this that by our Pious Labour and Industry we should purchase the Kingdom of God for our selves That they who affirm Faith only is sufficient for Salvation are mad and singularly serviceable to the Old Serpent and that every action we undertake is wholly unprofitable if Faith only is sufficient This is the summ of the Epilogue of this whole debate of yours In which what do you else but by an unskilful huddle of things and without order in disputing turn causes into effects and again effects into causes What when the Apostle Admonishes that Wives should be subject to their Husbands and acknowledge their Authority as the Church is subject to Christ her Husband shall she therefore that is by a Lawful Covenant Married to her Husband not be a Wife before there is added a testimony of due obedience So Children born of Creditable Parents use to resemble them not only in the Lineaments of their Bodies but also in the likeness of their Manners of whom they are begotten What if in some part their resemblance fails What if their manners are dissolute What if they have such a Son as the parable of the Gospel represents to us Who leaving his Father doth no part of his duty shall he therefore cease to be a Son Or shall any Man by the merits of his Life attain to be a Son who is by nature a Servant You may say to what purpose are these things That by these examples you may understand that effects depend on causes and causes are not governed by effects An honest Matron carries with that subjection to her Husband that becomes her and he on the otherside performs his duty in cherishing his Wife These things follow the Conjugal bond but they do not make it just so it is in the Spiritual descent which like another nature regenerates us to Christ and transforms us as new Creatures into the Sons of God Of which thing if the cause be enquired not Works not Hope not Charity but only Faith in Christ Not any Imitation but Baptism being the Sacrament of Faith performs it Concerning which let us hear Paul testifying in very evident Words All of you saith he are the Sons of God through Faith in Christ Iesus Whosoever of you are Baptized in Christ have put on Christ. He that walks being Cloathed with Christ What can be wanting to him unto all Glory and Beauty of Righteousness What can any Man desire more for the security of Eternal Life What is more boundless than Sublimity What is more Sublime than Nobility of Birth What is more excellent than the dignity of high degree Than to be received not only for Servants or Dependents of the Mighty God who comprehends all things by his Power but also as Sons yea and Heirs But if you design to be taught how these so many and so great good things come to us Paul makes Answer By Faith saith he ye are all Sons If Sons then Heirs according to promise And if you ask when that comes to pass whether after the
you may say That is true indeed and therefore this proves that Faith only doth not justifie I answer and also request the Adversaries that laying aside the desire of vain jangling they would examine the matter according to Scripture and right Reason Though the manifest Testimony of the Apostle Paul and the Examples of the Saints make it an undoubted Truth that only Faith in Christ the Son of God hath the power of justifying without Works Yet it cannot open this power upon all but only those in whom a fitness is found for receiving the displayings of Divine Grace Of the Repentance of those that are Iustified by Faith BUT None are found more fit than those that seem to themselves most unworthy and none less fit than those that are most highly conceited of their own worthiness Seeing we are all Sinners by Nature nothing can be more reasonable than that we should acknowledge the filthiness of our own abominations and cast our selves down at the Feet of Almighty God And there is nothing that God more requires than this Whose Nature or rather Mercy is such that he delights not in any thing more than in a humble Heart and a broken Spirit as the Psalmist declares He saveth such as are of a contrite Spirit And in the Prophet Isaiah God testifies of himself that he is the high and lofty one that inhabiteth Eternity and dwells in the high and Holy place and also with him that is humble and of a contrite Spirit to comfort the humble Spirit and to revive the Heart of the contrite ones And for that cause he calls aloud in the Gospel and offers his kind invitations chiefly to such as labour and are heavy laden that they may come unto him and be eased What is coming to Christ but believing What is it to be eased or refreshed but to be justified Though indeed he calls all and despises none that come to him Yet so it comes to pass for the most part that none come to Christ as they ought unless they be pressed and burdened under the sense of their Sin and Misery And again that Heavenly Physician is seldom sent unto any others but such As the Prophet bears witness who making a particular description of those to whom Christ was to be sent he sets before us the meek the broken in Heart the Captives the Prisoners the Mourners in Sion them that are walking in Darkness and sitting in the shadow of Death c. And the Psalmist speaks much to the same purpose Ps. 107. describing the Mercy of God on this manner He filleth the hungry Soul with goodness and such as sit in darkness and in the shadow of Death being bound in Affliction and Iron Though he being sent by the Father is given to all yet he is not entertained by all with the like Affection The Lord himself shews the cause thereof For what need have the whole of the Physician Therefore as a skilful Physician doth not Administer his Medicines but when sickness requires it so Faith cleanses none but those whom Repentance also amends neither doth the Gospel heal any but those whom first the Law hath slain and Conscience hath wounded And as that is most true which we Preach by the Authority of Paul the Apostle that Men are justified by Faith only without Works so on the other side it is false which the adversaries assert that by this Doctrine of Faith it comes to pass that all care of good Works is cast off and the reins are let loose to all manner of wickedness Howbeit if they speak of such impenitent persons as go on resolutely in their Sins we acknowledge that such as they are not justified by Faith and yet we assert that this is no way prejudicial to the cause that we plead But if they speak of such as join Repentance with Evangelical Faith and therefore stand in need of consolation if they deny that those are justified by the Faith of Christ only they discover themselves to be utter Enemies of the Gospel and adversaries to Christ. And again if they assert that such penitent believers become worse by this Doctrine they do therein err exceedingly and lye abominably Wherefore that the Mouth of Malice and Slander may be stopped I admonish these professours of Divinity who condem 〈◊〉 this Doctrine of Paul as Heretical that they would take our proposition not by halves but whole and join the legitimate predicate of the proposition with the subject that when Faith is said to justifie they should reckon that is not enough unless they understand aright whom this Faith justifies To wit none of those that continue stubborn and impenitent in their wicked courses but only such as acknowledge their Sins with grief of Heart and being weary of their former abominations fly to Christ by Faith for resuge But here they take another occasion to cavil 〈◊〉 For if Faith justifies none but them that repent then as they say Faith only doth not justifie but together with Faith a Godly Sorrow and Mourning for Sin Iustifie also I Answer It is true indeed that Faith is joyned with Repentance in him that is justified from his Sins And yet Repentance is no cause of Iustification As those that are afficted with a painful Disease Their pain makes them desirous of a cure but yet there is no healing vertue in this desire So Faith and Conversion are joyntly united in the person that is justified But as touching the cause of Iustifying Repentance indeed prepares a Soul for the reception of Iustification but the cause of justifying lyes altogether in Faith and not at all in Repentance For the just Iudge doth not absolve him who hath violated his Iustice because he is grieved upon that account but because he believes in Christ who hath satisfied Iustice and for whose sake Pardon is promised to such as Repent for in him are all the springs of our Iustification But lest this Discourse should grow too Ample for if every thing were treated of particularly it might be enlarged beyond all bounds Let us come close to the Adversary and Fight Hand to Hand that in a Summary Representation it may the more easily appear to the Reader with what Arguments they defend themselves what Arguments they defend themselves what Scriptures they quote what force and what fallacy is in their Arguments THE Third Book A Confutation of the Arguments Whereby the Adversaries defend their Inherent Righteousness against the Righteousness of Faith An Argument taken out of St. Iames. No Dead thing Iustifies All Faith without Works is Dead Therefore No Faith Iustifies without Works Answer First the manner of arguing is captious and transgresses the right Laws of Logick For the terms therein exceed the due number For there is a redundancy in the conclusion by this addition without Works For this should have been the conclusion Therefore no Faith that is without Works justifies And that may be well granted
promulgation of the Law I would ask him What the Law is which if it is nothing but the Rule of Righteousness how can any man be just where there is no Law But what man was there ever in the World but he carried about with him the Law of God if not written in Tables yet written on his heart and engraven on his conscience But the Decalogue was not yet engraven on Tables of Stone But what was contained in the Moral Decalogue which that holy man did not already comprehend within his own heart both of loving God and his Neighbour of not Murthering of not committing Adultery or honouring Parents c. 3. As touching the scope of this Epistle how greatly is campian mistaken For who is so void of sense that he doth not clearly perceive that the drift of the Apostle is not that which those Iesuits dream of to attribute our Salvation or Iustification to any Works either going before or following after Neither was this Office of an Ambassadour committed unto him that he might contend with the Iews about Ceremonies or with the Gentiles about Moral Duties but as Peter was entrusted with the Apostleship of the Circumcision so also the Preaching of the Gospel to the Uncircumcision was committed unto Paul not that he should Preach the Law but the Faith which before he opposed Not that he might declare the Righteousness of Works in which there is no Salvation but that God by him might reveal his Son amongst the Gentiles and might manifest unto the World that heavenly Trophy and glad Tydings of Peace and Victory obtained in Heaven by Christ and spread abroad far and wide through the Churches the boundless riches of Divine Grace which he had experienced in himself For he was called for this purpose to the Apostleship that the infinitely gracious Lord and Redeemer Christ Iesus might first exercise his Mercy towards him and afterwards by him declare his great Mercy towards Sinners not only by hisExample but also by his Ministry For thus he bears witness of himself that the Ministry of Reconciliation was committed to him for which he was appointed to be a Preacher and Apostle and Teacher of the Gentiles in Faith and Truth that he being an Ambassadour in Christ's stead might invite all men yea and beg of them that they would be reconciled unto God And this seems to be the principal scope that Paul aims at not only in the Epistle to the Romans but also in all his Doctrine to proclaim amongst the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ and that he might set before the view of all men what is the Communion of the Mystery that was hidden with God in former Ages c. But now in the Righteousness of Works no such Mystery lay hidden with God from former Ages Therefore it is false and abominable which Campian the Iesuit and such like Sophisters assert concerning the scope and sense of Paul's Epistle to the Romans For by the Law which Paul excludes from Iustification they understand that part thereof which comprehends Ceremonial and Iudicial Works wherein the Iews gloried or Works purely Moral performed before Faith on which the Gentiles relied Yea on the contrary when Paul removes the Law from Iustification he doth not only exclude it upon the account of Iewish Ceremonies or Moral Works performed before Faith but also upon the account of its weakness through the flesh both in Iews and Gentiles both in the regenerate and the unregenerate so that it cannot make sufficient satisfaction to the Iustice of God And Paul affirms That for this cause God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh What did God do but what flesh could not do For sin he condemned sin in the flesh In what flesh ours or his own Sons Who of all the Regenerate though endued with great habitual Faith and Grace hath so led his life walking not according to the flesh but according to the spirit but he always carries about with him flesh that is weak in many respects and vicious and subject to sin Concerning which every one may complain with the Apostle I know that in me that is in my flesh dwells no good thing And again I find a Law that when I would do good evil is present with me c. For what they speak of Works following Faith and Grace how little that helps their cause appears not more evident by any Argument than by the Lives of those that maintain this Controversie if they be strictly enquired into If that be true which Campian with his Iesuits pleads for That Righteousness is not obtained in men come to years but by Works that follow after Faith Let us behold then what excellent Works this Faith of the Mother Church of Rome brings forth seeing they so much glory in the Title of Catholick Faith and Preach so many things about Charity which is the fulfilling of the Law Let us look into the Life and Works of the Roman Popes Cardinals and Bishops and the whole Crew of the Monks and Iesuits Where can you find more of the flesh or less of true holiness than in those false-hearted and painted Hypocrites whose whole profession of Religion consists in Purple Gowns high topped Mitres Purple Caps Rings adorned with Iewels solemn Vows Ceremonies which in reality are rather Stage-playes than Exercises of Piety This appears to be too true by the unhappy Tumults raised in the World the Wars and Persecutions that are stirred up by none more than by those very men that call themselves Spiritual and Catholick whom it should become to be the chiefest encouragers of Concord and Messengers of Peace But having so much enlarged upon this sort of men with their Works and Merits let us return to the Examples of those of whom we spake before who were freely admitted unto Baptism and received into favour by Faith without any commendation of Merits at all yea without mention of any Works except such perhaps as were evil Amongst which number those Iews may be reckoned of whom three thousand at one time were Baptized by Peter Likewise also the Eunuch whom Faith only without Works made not only meet for Baptism but also an Heir of the Heavenly Kingdom And the Iaylor whom Paul Baptized Moreover Paul himself and all the Apostles and Publicans the family of Cornelius Zacehaeus Mary Magdalen and the Thief on the Cross If Faith without Works was sufficient to them for the Grace of Baptism why not also for the obtaining of Iustification and Life Eternal Vega and those of his Association answers after his usual manner that in all these Repentance was joyned with Faith and other things also belonging to good Manners and a godly Life But it easily appears how vain and insignificant this Answer of Vega is He says Repentance and other Vertues are joyned with Faith Which tho' I confess to be in some sense true in the lives and persons of
Concl. Therefore from Faith men are rightly and formally called righteous before God Again Ma. They that do justly should be called just before God Mi. They that believe in the Son of God do most justly Concl. Therefore they that believe in the Son of God are deservedly called just For what can any man do more justly or more holily than to believe in the only begotten Son of God and to embrace him with all his faith as the Gospel bears witness This is the work of God that ye should believe in him whom he hath sent And what Doctrine is more excellent than to know Christ the Son of God aright and the power of his Death and Resurrection Which knowledge how much it is valued by God above all other disciplines and arts it may appear by this which is foretold unto us of Christ by the Divine Prophet and my Righteous Servant saith he by his Knowledge shall justifie many What if our Iustification is placed only in the knowledge of the Son of God and the Faith of the Son is nothing else but knowledge Divinely Inspired what credit then should be given to those Iesuitical Sophisters who neither admit of any external cause of justifying nor acknowledge any other but this which they themselves place in Works And now what will they answer to this Argument of Augustin Ma. Whence we are saved thence we are just Mi. By Faith we are saved and reconciled to God and become Conquerors according to that saying of the Gospel This is the Victory which overcomes the World our Faith Conclu Therefore by Faith the name of Righteousness is rightly given to us according to the Testimony of Augustin But those Praters will not yet hold their Peace neither do they endure any either Internal or External Righteousness but this only which they describe in Works and the observance of the Law And they endeavour to prove it by this caption First then as touching Faith though that is an internal Vertue yet they plead that it doth not otherways justifie but upon the account of Charity But thus they dispute concerning the righteousness of Christ Because it is not our own but is peculiar to Christ. There is no cause why a Man should take upon him the Name of Righteous from that Righteousness which is anothers to wit according to the Law of Aristotle Which how frivolous it is and contrary to the Faith of the Gospel it will not be difficult to demonstrate by very clear words of Scripture for to what purpose is the Divine Love Preached in the Gospel and in the Prophets to have given Christ his only begotten Son unto the World Unless he had been willing to make us partakers together with him of all his Wealth Vertues Merits and whatsoever good things belong to him Whence Paul He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all how shall he not with him freely give us all things What if Christ was given to us byhis Father poured forth exposed and is wholly made ours with all his goods and gifts is there any thing in him whether Wisdom or Iustice or Sanctification or Life or Victory or Death or any other thing besides which we may not by a due right lay claim to as our own If it is ours upon what account then do those Gymnosophists Preach that it belongs not to us Of which thing we may reason thus Ma. Whatsoever Christ did for us is esteemed ours just as if it had been done by our selves Mi. Christ fulfilled all Righteousness for us Conclu Therefore all the Righteousness of Christ is ours by Faith just as if it had been fulfilled by us It is 〈◊〉 by the Example of Adam that Christ's Righteousness is ours PErhaps the thing will appear more evident by Example Let us look upon Adam and in him let us behold the publick calamity of our Nature And also let us contemplate Salvation restored again by the second Adam from the ruine received by the first For if the Doctrine and Force of contraries be the same according to Philosophers it will be more easie by that means from the Evil of the one to judge of the advantages of the other Then let us compare both Adams with one another The first Earthly of the Earth with this second Heavenly from Heaven Who though in their whole Nature they are most different one from another Yet by the singular Wisdom of God it so comes to pass that there is a wonderful resemblance between things that differ very much and the reason of our Salvation being restored agrees most aptly with the reason of the ruine received First in this that both were Originally Princes and Authors of our Propagation one of the Earthly and the other of the Heavenly And then afterwards there was added another thing in which he was a wonderful Type and Image of Christ who was to come a long time after How that came to pass we shall very well learn of Paul himself As saith he by the Disobedience of one Man many were made Sinners So by the Obedience of one many shall be made Righteous and doubling the same again and again in many words As faith he by one Man Sin entred into the World and by Sin Death came upon all Men in that all have Sinned c. And presently If therefore by the Sin of one Man Death came upon all Men to Condemnation in like manner by the Iustification of one Man good is propagated unto all Men to the Iustification of Life What is more clear than these words of the Apostle The whole force and summ of the Argument drives at this that the true Nature of our Righteousness is not due to our Vertues but we must be beholden for it to the merit of another Setting before us such a sense as this by Argument Argument Ma. In what manner Unrighteousness is propagated in the World in the same manner also Righteousness comes Mi. Unrighteousness is propagated by the Sin of one Man Only Conclu Therefore also Righteousness by the merit of one only is derived unto all that are allied to Christ by Faith Otherways Ma. As the matter is between Adam and us after the same manner is the matter between us and Christ. Mi. The sin of one Adam is imputed to all his Posterity yea all those who transgressed not with him Conclu Therefore The Righteousness of one Christ is imputed to all his Posterity to wit that believe in him though they did not obey with him Which things seeing they are of themselves clear and conspicuous the Point calls us to return to you O most excellent Osorius who seem either not to head carefully enough or else perniciously to deny that which Paul Discourses of Imputation so copiously and weightily Wherefore again and again beseeching you I appeal to this sacred Righteousness whereof you write and also to the equity of your own humanity that having
condemnation due to Sinners I speak of those Sinners who being turned from their sins by serious Repentance fly to Christ by Faith But methinks I do already hear what your Divinity in this case will mutter against us you will not deny that Christ died for us and that our righteousness is placed in him but yet so that these benefits of his and rewards of justice come not to us by Faith nor by imputation but by the study of Works and Holiness which being given to the Merits of Christ we receive in this Life by the free gift of God Therefore that we who were of old shut up in darkness And even extinct by the strength of death now we do escape the tyranny of Death that we do now recover the gifts of divine righteousness formerly lost and slipt out of our hands and that we obtain the reward of life proposed to vertue all that consists in this that we should wholly abdicate and forsake whatsoever we have from our first Father and transfer our selves wholly to the similitude and imitation of our second Father and so it will come to pass that we shall purchase immortal and divine riches and eternal glory and true righteousness with everlasting praise not by our merits but only by the vertue of Christ Who works all these things in us Therefore according to this sort of Divinity the merits of Christ do nothing else in Heaven but that they obtain unto us Divine Grace whereby we may by way of imitation more easily resemble the most holy footsteps and similitude of Christ our second Father and lead our lives well in this World according to his Laws But now what if we cannot exactly follow the footsteps of his holiness What if imitation falter sometimes and stagger What if the servency of charity and the care of our most holy Religion and the observance of Iustice becomes too remiss Yea what if somewhere a defilement of sin creeps in as infirmity may occasion Or what if that I may use the words of Hierom he that rows a Boat against the stream slacken his hands a little doth he not presently slide back and is carried by the stream whither he would not and who is not remiss sometimes Seeing Paul also confesses that he is sometimes drawn thither whither he would not And then where is the righteousness which was hoped for by Works where is the immortality proposed to vertue Verily unless the greater mercy of our most gracious Father had so taken care for us that our whole Salvation should be laid up in the righteousness of his Son and if faith and imputation did not help us more than imitation of life our condition had stood on a miserable enough and too broken foundation But eternal thanks be to Almighty God the Father of all mercies who according to his unspeakable Wisdom which reaches from end to end strongly and disposes all things sweetly hath not settled our estate by any law of works but by faith that according to Grace the Promise may be sure to all the Seed that though we our selves are weak and void of all righteousness yet it is sufficient that there is one in our Nature which hath fulfilled all righteousness and that he only is righteous for all How say you for all Why not as well as the unrighteousness of one Adam of old was sufficient to bring ruine upon all Therefore let us behold Christ in Adam and compare the one with the other Who though they are very unlike to one another yet agree in this that both being First Fathers of Propagation by an equal similitude something came from both as Progenitors which hath spread abroad upon all Men. To wit Death and Life Sin and justice Therefore one Man destroyed all Men And in like manner one Man saves all Men neither do you your self deny this But let us see how the one destroys and how the other saves those that are destroyed Through his fault say you not our own we contracted the pollution of Sin in our Birth these are your very words Which as I entertain willingly so if they are true and if he in this respect was a Type of Christ which is shewed out of Paul what hinders but that we also in like manner in Regeneration may obtain the reward of Righteousness not for our own Obedience but his The one sinned and by his wickedness ruinated all Men the other obeyed and by his righteousness saves all You say it is true if so be we lead our Life well according to the Imitation and Example of him And where then is the agreement of similitude between Christ and Adam if the one destroyed us in our being Born as you your self confess but Christ cannot save us in our Regeneration except Imitation be joyned And where now is the Grace of Imputation and the Imputation of Faith unto Righteousness so oft repeated in the Scriptures taught by the Apostles testified by the most Ancient Fathers received and delivered by the Church Shall it be sufficient cause to inflict Death upon thy Body that thou wast propagated from Adam and shall it not have cause enough for the justification of thy Soul that thou art born again in Christ What say you Do none dye but they that Sin after the Example of Adam Are none saved but those that by a due imitation attain unto the most Holy Vertues of Christ And what then doth Baptism the Sacrament of Faith in Regeneration if Salvation is purchased by no other thing but by treading in the Footsteps of Christ The Objection of Osorius is Answered where the Imitation of Christ is discoursed of at large BUT you will say what is it not an excellent thing is it not a Pious thing is it not very necessary for every Man who counts his Life and Salvation dear to him who looks for Immortal Glory who seeks stable and eternal pleasures that he separate himself as much as he can from theImitation of the Earthly Father and frame himself wholly to the imitation of the Heavenly Who denies or is Ignorant of that O Osorius Who is so void of all Religion and Sense but is ready of his own accord and with his whole Heart to confess that very thing to you which that you may persuade you do not only explain but also draw forth all the force and efficacy of Speech that you can upon it with so much earnestness and vehemency First who is so Ignorant but knows what we received from both our Parents of which you dispute so prolixly The thing it self and the experience of all things does abundantly make it evident into what deceits and straits into what a gulf of miseries the former hath brought us into So on the contrary how many and how great good things have proceeded from the other Father I think it is unknown to no Man Whose acts for us if we consider what is more excellent If the
and being now reconciled to God as it cannot be destitute of the favour of God so being stirred up by his holy breathings begins now to be a Law to it self whereby it fears God and according to its power honours him with due Reverence cleaves unto him with all its might refers its actions and counsels to him calls on him by prayers adheres to him in adversity celebrates his benefits with a thankful remembrance lays its hope and confidence and its whole self upon him and also for his sake loves and cherishes all the Brethren And as there is no Man that denies these Offices of necessary Obedience performed by the help of the Spirit of God are fruits of a well-instructed Faith So there is no controversie between us and you in that matter especially seeing you your self also together with us confess That these are not works of the Law but of Faith and that they should not be referred so much to the Law as to the holy Spirit and Faith relying upon his help as you say But the greatest difference that is between us consists in this that whereas we assert That the Obedience of Man born again by the Divine Power is but begun and imperfect in this mortal infirm state You on the contrary dream of I know not what perfection of obedience in works the Spirit of God so working in us that whosoever is qualified therewith needs nothing that belongs to compleat perfection of righteousness for all your debate about this matter seems to drive at this as being concluded with this one Syllogism Argument Ma. Whosoever walk in the Precepts of the Lord and perform them should be called perfect who can easily live without sin Mi. All the Faithful according to the promise of God walk in his precepts and perform them because God promises nothing but what he can and will perform Concl. Therefore according to the promise of God nothing hinders but Believers may be perfect here who are capacitated to live without sin That I may answer the Argument it is a Sophistical Argument from secundum quid to simpliciter because in the Major those are called perfect who walk in the Precepts of the Lord and frame their life according to them it is true in them who simply and perfectly perform all those things which are commanded in the Law according to that perfection which is requisite According to which Rule if the major be understood that which is assumed in the minor must be upon this account deny'd For though God hath promised to his Saints that the Assisting grace of his Spirit shall not be wanting which may help forward pious attempts in his Elect and stir up their endeavours after more holy obedience but where hath he at any time promised or on whom hath he bestowed that happiness in walking which turns no where to the right hand nor to the left which stumbles not through the whole life which in all kind of vertues by a constant perseverance so conforms the course of life to compleat innocency that it never fails in any thing The Adversaries use for the defence of their own cause to catch at the words that were just now cited out of Ierem. chap. 31. and Ezek. chap. 26. I will cause you to walk in my Precepts and keep my Iudgments c. And then out of Deut. chap. 30. I will Circumcise saith the Lord the fore-skin of your heart that ye may love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul. I know indeed that in these words there is a glorious promise contained of the gift of the Holy Ghost and the restoring of new obedience but because there is a twofold perfection and a twofold righteousness according to Hierom. one which is suited to the vertues of God another which is agreeable to our frailty And again seeing according to the Authority of Augustine there is a twofold kind of Obedience one that is seen in this Life being but begun and imperfect Another that is perfect which is compleated in the life to come It is not difficult to discern in what sense the perfection of Renovation should be understood in the Scriptures To wit not simply and absolutely but according to the measure and capacity of this Life Therefore Augustine says well that a Man is sometimes called perfect because he hath profited in a great degree And the same again But whereas Men are called Saints sometimes and perfect in the Scriptures I say to this that it is a certain manner of perfection whereby Holy Men acknowledge their own imperfection They are also called perfect who in any respect imitate the perfection of the Heavenly Father who rains on the Iust and Unjust c. And again the same Augustine writing to Boniface The Vertue saith he which is now in a Righteous Man is called perfect upon this account because it belongs to his perfection both to acknowledge in Truth and confess in Humility his own Imperfection Moreover Hierom not much differing from him answered wittily To whom when that place of St. Paul was objected Whosoever of us are perfect we understand this To this Hierom says What then do we understand yea what ought we to understand that we who are perfect should acknowledge our selves to be unperfect and that they have not yet comprehended nor yet attained unto perfection This is saith he the Wisdom of Man to know himself to be imperfect and that I may so speak the perfection of all Righteous Men in the Flesh is imperfect c. And afterwards again in the same Book Therefore we are Righteous then when we confess our selves to be Sinners For our Righteousness consists not of our own merit but of the mercy of God as the Scripture says The Righteous Man is an accuser of himself in the beginning of his Speech And again to Ctesiphon This is Mens only perfection saith he if they know themselves to be imperfect c. Moreover the Adversaries set upon us with another Argument also which they produce out of the words of Deut. 30. To defend the perfection of their own Righteousness after this manner Ma. In these two commands thou shalt love thy God with all thy Soul and thy Neighbour as thy self is contained the summ of all perfection Mi. They that are regenerate can love God with all their Heart and all their Soul and their Neighbours as themselves according to the promise of God Deut. 30. Concl. Hence then it follows that the Regenerate by the help of the Spirit of God can fulfil all Righteousness by the Works of the Law This reasoning as it differs not much from the former so there is implied in it a certain kind of fallacy not unlike it Which of what sort it is if I may with your allowance Osorius I will declare For there lurks under the words of Scripture not rightly understood a fallacy or venom wholly Pelagian But
good Work Not that the Work it self being appointed by the Law of God is a sin but because according to the saying of Augustin whatsoever is less than it ought to be is faulty From whence it appears evidently that in this Life there is no Work so perfect but something is wanting in it that is there is Sin in it if it be judged according to the strict rigour of the Law Concerning the Grace of God how it is defined by Osorius with a confutation of his Definition ARguments increase because here mention falls in of the Grace of the regenerate It is shewed though against the Rules of Logick that the Grace of God is nothing else but Iustice and Vertue upon this account because it being that chiefly which makes us acceptable to God and nothing can be acceptable to God which is not like unto him be thinks he prevails sufficiently by this conclusion That because nothing 〈◊〉 us like God but Righrecusness and Vertue Therefore Grace is nothing if it is not Vertue and Iustice. Why do I use many words on this matter If that Grace be understood by Osorius which St. Paul so often commends to us in all his Epistles both are false which here the Bishop assumes against the Apostle For Grace is not rightly defined after this manner that it is nothing else but Vertue and Iustice and first that it is a Vertue Thomas did flatly deny in his sum of Theology Part. 12. Quest. 110. Artic. 3. where disputing of the Grace of God though he denies not that it may be reduced to the first species of quality yet he wholly denies and confutes its being a Vertue concludeing at length after this manner that it is a certain habitude presupposed to infused Vertues as the Principle and Root of them c. Moreover in Sentent lib. 2. dist 26. Art 4. proving concerning the same thing that Grace and Vertue are not the same If Vertue saith he should hold from the same both that it was a Vertue and that it rendred a Man acceptable to God it would follow that all Vertue would do the like And so seeing some Vertues are acquired by acts and not by infusion it would follow according to the Pelagian heresie that a Man should be made acceptable to God by his free will But if it holds from another and not from the same from one that it is a Vertue and another that it renders acceptable to God it must needs be that Grace and Vertue are not the same in reality For so divers principles necessarily are suitable to divers effects that are found in division from another Now if so be Grace is denied to be a Vertue verily upon the same account also it cannot be called Iustice seeing Iustice is necessarily comprehended under the general name of Vertue and what wonder is it in the interim that this Antagonist of ours is so ill agreed with the Lutherans who is not well enough agreed with the Angelical Doctors and Leaders of his own Sect in such evident Heads of Divinity But now let us consider his Reasonings and the Confirmations of his Arguments of what sort they are Argument Ma. That reconciles us and makes us acceptable to God which makes us like unto him Mi. It is only Righteousness which makes us like unto God Con. Therefore Righteousness only reconciles us and makes us acceptable There follows also another consequence of these things being first pre-supposed built upon the same foundation Argument Ma. Grace makes acceptable to God and unites unto him Mi. Righteousness makes us acceptable to God and unites us to him Con. Therefore Iustice is either Grace and a Vertue or it is nothing First Both these Arguments are equally lyable to the same reprehension Because contrary to the Lawful Rules of Reasoning they conclude Affirmatively in the second figure as they are placed by Osorius lib. 5. but let us help the defect of the worthy Mans Logick For if I am not mistaken he would rather gather thus from the definition of Grace Argument Ma. To whatsoever the definition agrees the thing defined well agrees unto the same Mi. The definition of Grace doth very well agree to Righteousness Con. Therefore the thing defined agrees to Righteousness I answer to the minor by denying for that which is the proper definition of Grace doth not agree to Righteousness seeing the things themselves do very much differ from one another both as to their Effects and as to their Causes For if we believe Thomas Grace is the Principle and Cause of Iustice and of all Vertues Iustice is not the cause of Grace but rather an effect thereof Yea Albertus Ratisponensis does not much differ from the opinion of Thomas who commenting upon the same sentence in the same Dist. Ar. 4. saith thus Grace is a habit of Life universally well ordered not according to the degrees of things ordered but as it is called a Relation of the whole Life to the obtaining of the End But Iustice doth not this nor Vertue for Iustice doth not necessarily make worthy of Eternal Life upon the account that it is Iustice or Vertue c. What if the proper and true cause which reconciles us to the love of God and makes us worthy of Eternal Life should be searched for We shall find that it lyes not in the Works of Iustice but that it proceeds from another cause And what that cause is Christ himself the best Master will teach you in the Gospel Whom I request and beseech you not only to hearken unto but to believe For these are his words in the Gospel For the Father himself loveth you because ye have loved me and have believed that I came from the Father By which you see that it comes to pass not for the sake of our Iustice or Vertue but for the sake of his own dearly beloved Son that God the Father cares for us and loves us What then say you doth not Iustice make Men that live holily and justly in this World acceptable to God Which if it is so it cannot be judged to be any other thing but Grace For whatsoever renders us acceptable to God is justly esteemed to be Grace Iustice makes us acceptable to God therefore it is Grace As touching the minor I deny not that Iustice as it is very acceptable to God so it renders acceptable to God if it is perfect and agreeable to the Divine perfection which not being given to us in this Life another altar must be sought there is need of other helps Therefore if we would find any favour in the sight of God we must betake our selves to Christ and embrace him by Faith Though I am not Ignorant what this good Disputant drives at and what Masters he follows and on what foundation he builds For he builds upon that old and stale distinction of the Schoolmen as much used as it is light and frivolous and
Companions of your Society who being all instructed in the same School seem to make a Conspiracy about this one thing as it were giving notice by a watch-word viz. to overthrow all the efficacy of Evangelical Grace to destroy the assurance of Faith to oveturn all For what place is there for Grace I beseech you if Heaven is given not by the free gift of the bestower but to the Merits of holy men as you say And what will you answer Paul the Apostle who denies that grace is any more grace if men deal with God by Works whence that may be brought not without just cause against you and yours which Augustine of old brought in his contending with the Antient Pelagians of his time For thus you plead That Heaven is justly and deservedly given to the Merits of holy men On the contrary Augustine being taught by Apostolick Authority If it is given saith he to any Merits it is not then given freely but is render'd as due and by this means it is not by a true name called grace where the reward as the Apostle speaks is not imputed according to grace but according to debt But that it may be true grace that is free it finds nothing in Man to whom it should be due otherways according to the mind of the Apostle grace would not be grace c. And now with what fair colours cast on them will those things being contrary to one another be made to agree Augustine with St. Paul affirms that grace finds nothing in Man to which it should be due That it may be free On the contrary the Papists contend that Heaven is given as a due debt to the Merits of the Saints What is more contrary Grace saith he doth not only help the righteous man but also justifies the ungodly in which there appears a twofold effect and fruit of Divine Grace both in helping the righteous and justifying the ungodly With the one of which you being contented ye either unworthily pass by the other or which is more abominable ye oppose it wickedly whilst ye admit no grace of justifying but that which seems to be joyned with Vertue and the Iustice of Merits And yet after all these things whereas nothing more contrary to grace can be spoken this sweet Oratour would perswade us with his flourished speeches that they are no such men as overturn the Grace of God as some ignorant men say but that they celebrate with due praise the wonderful effect of grace and teach that all the Merits of the Saints should be referred to the Grace of God Now we acknowledge this to be most certain that there is not any thing but what should be referred to the Grace of God whence Hierom accounts it for Sacrilege if any man thinks he can abstain from sinning without grace But here there is need to explain what the word grace signifies according to the caution of the Gospel For grace in the holy Scriptures is not only understood concerning the help of the Holy Spirit but it comprehends both free Imputation which is by Christ which the Papists cannot endure and the help of the Holy Spirit in performing the Offices of Vertues How the Papists and Protestants agree and differ in understanding the word Grace Now whereas both Papists and Protestants seem to attribute Man's Iustifaication to grace herein they both agree But they say this after their manner of speaking we after ours For this is the difference between these and the Protestants that the Papists by the name of grace understand only gifts that are conferr'd upon those that are justified to wit habits which they call infused and excellent Endowments of lovely Vertues and other things of that kind wherewith the Elect are adorned by the free gift of God But the contrary party being otherways taught by the Scriptures and confirmed by the sayings of the Fathers perceiving these very gifts of the Spirit of God as long as they live in this flesh are imperfect through our default they deny that men can be justified by these because Divine Iustice cannot at all be satisfied by these And therefore it is that they attribute Iustification only to the grace and mercy of God which consists not of any remuneration of Vertues but rather imputation of Righteousness and forgiveness of sins For we do not find fault with this in them that they do rightly affirm that all our good works should be referred to the grace of God which neither the Iews themselves nor the Turks will deny But we justly disapprove that they do not define this grace according to Scripture For whereas grace is so defined by this sort of men that it is nothing else but a habit infused by God like his own goodness and love whereby he that hath it is rendered acceptable to God and it makes Works acceptable to him and meritorious It is easily demonstrated both by Scriptures and Reason how faulty this definition is because the thing defined is of a larger extent than the definition For the grace whereby God loved Iacob and hated Esau before they did either good or evil was grace which yeâ—â—as not any Habit either begotten in them by the power of Nature or infused by grace whereby Iacob that had it that I may use their words was render'd acceptable to God After the like manner the grace which in the midst of his persecution of Saints changed Paul into an Instrument in the hand of Electing grace was not an infused Habit but went before an infused Habit and first made him a man acceptable to Christ before the Habit making acceptable was infused The same should be said of the Thief the Publican the Leper and many others in the History of the Gospel who were not saved by an infused Habit but only by an infused Faith for otherways what did that word so often repeated in the Gospel signifie Thy Faith hath saved thee Which word if it be true then either Faith is Righteousness or else Righteousness can by no means save us And the same reason is to be given of the Conversion of the Gentiles whom of old the grace of God brought from impure Paganism to the Communion of the Gospel not for any Inherent Righteousness but for his great Love wherewith he loved the unworthy and the wretched sinners Moreover what shall be said of the Apostles themselves whom Christ verily chose not being just as Augustine speaks but to be justified when he said I chose you out of the World What if Christ chose them out of the World that they might be just then they were first unjust in the World whom he chose out of the World that they might be just If they were first just and not sinners of the World whom Christ chose out of the World then they first chose Christ that they being just might be chosen by him But it was not so for he himself says to them
which every man must endeavour according to his power to attain by industry and diligent labours and the merits of the greatest Vertues And when the former Pelagians affirmed that we could do that by the strength of Nature there were not wanting others at the same time who valiantly opposing the help of the Grace of God to Free-will successfully rejected and exploded this wicked Opinion by the Scriptures After this came another kind of Divines who having followed Augustine disputed thus against the Pelagians that we cannot so much as will good by Free-will without Grace or merit Eternal Life by any means without Grace And that is true indeed But that those same men joyning Grace again deny not that we can merit Life by Works and that ex condigno according to their worth I do not see what difference is between these and the Pelagians in that except that in the manner of working they somewhat differ for those work without grace these no otherways but by grace but both do equally err from the scope of true Iustification For as untrue as that is that it is in our power to perform any thing aright without the Grace of God It is again as false that this grace of working was not given by God for any other purpose but to produce meritorious works whereby we may be justified Though I deny not that by any means that the Divine grace of the Spirit is both fruitful and abounding with the greatest Vertues which can never be idle but it doth not therefore follow by sufficient strength of Reason that the reward of Eternal Salvation is due to the merits of these Vertues as the generality of Sophisters chatter with a great noise in Schools For thus Thomas the Prince of this Faction and the others that are partakers of his Discipline discourse of grace and in their Summularies do define this grace as if it were nothing else but a certain habitual infusion of the heavenly gift in the essence of the Soul because as they suppose it is a principle of meritorious works for so Thomas defines it And Guillermus not much differing from him calls this grace a form freely given to us by God without merits which makes him that hath it acceptable and makes his work good and meritorious Of these then is a vulgar definition made up and it thus defines grace unto us that it is a gift of good will freely given making its possessor acceptable and rendring his work good And Albert shews the manner how it makes a man good in as much as by infused Vertues as he says it perfects the will of man for act c. By these things I suppose it appears evident enough what Opinion hitherto hath been usual amongst those men in the Popish School In which neither their Divines themselves are well enough agreed with one another for some place this habitual gift of influencing grace in the essence of the Soul subjectively that I may speak in their own Dialect amongst whom is Thomas and Bonaventure Others chose rather to refer it not to the essence but the powers of the Soul as its proper subject of whom is Scotus and the Allies of that Order Again There are those who think grace is nothing else but a Vertue which is the thing that Osorius strongly defends in his Books But Thomas confutes this Heresie with much greater strength and bears it down with suitable Reasons But the summ of all their summs drives at this that Faith only may be excluded from Iustification and that they may not acknowledge any other Iustification but what consists in exercising of Works Neither do they think this grace to be given to us upon any other account but for this end to fulfil as they say the Commands of God according to the due manner without which the fulfilling of them cannot otherways be meritorious The Errour of the Tridentines in defining Grace is examined I Have explained the sayings of some Divines which differ several ways from one another yet they are all wonderfully agreed in this one thing as it were by a common Conspiracy that they may take away from sinners that saving Grace which only justifies us Let us joyn also unto these if you please the Sophisters of later times and especially the Nobles of Trent and the Hereticks of that Council whose Writings Opinions and Decrees when they are read what do they declare I will say in a word and truly nothing that is sound nothing that is not full of Errour nothing that does not disagree with the genuine verity of the Word But what that Errour is lest we should seem to accuse them without cause let us explain in a few words but true to wit seeing there is a twofold Testimony of the Grace of the Father towards us in the Scriptures the one whereby in a free gift he bestowed his Son upon us 〈◊〉 the other whereby he bestowed his Spirit The Son to die for us the Spirit to 〈◊〉 our Life there is not any man but should confess that they are both great gifts He gave his Son than whom nothing was dearer to him he bestows his Spirit than which nothing is higher in Heaven But for what purpose doth he bestow both how does he give them for our advantage for what end with what fruit what did he design in so doing by what Reason was he persuaded by what necessity by what mercy was the most gracious Father and maker of the World moved I would very willingly ask this first either of Thomas Aquinas or rather of those Tridentine fellow-Priests for if Free-will being helped by the grace of the Sprit of God as they say could do so much by meriting through the infused Vertues even as much as was sufficient for obtaining Salvation what cause then was there why all this charge should be put upon Christ the Son of God What need was there of his blood Why did not the most gracious Father spare his Life But if so be that all other helps of grace could afford no help to expedite the business of our Redemption Then it remains to be asked of those men what they affirm of Christ whether they acknowledge him the only Saviour or not And indeed I know that they will not deny that Christ is the only Saviour But in the mean while it remains that they should answer me this after what manner this only Saviour saves his own whether only by his Innocency and Death or by adding other helps besides Now if they judge that other securities are necessarily required it must be known what sort of Securities these are Aquinas with his Associates answers that those are gifts procured by the Holy Spirit and habitual Infusions of Charity and the like faculties of exercising Righteousness which helps unless they are added the Death of Christ according to his Opinion is not of such efficacy that it should be able
believed in Christ therefore she loved much Now if that be called the formal cause by Philosophers which furnishes matter with Life and Soul and if Divines account this the life whereby we live to God what then will they say to the Prophetical Scripture whereby the Iust is said to live not by Charity but by faith What also will they answer to the Words of Christ in which he teaches that life Eternal consists in this that we should know the Father the true God and Iesus Christ whom he hath sent And again where in very evident Speech he Attributes life to faith only and not to Charity He that believeth in the Son faith he hath Eternal Life Concerning the Meritorious cause of Iustification BUT in the mean while because these things have been already largely discoursed of there follows after this that which is next in this Series of causes that we should now examine with the like briefness the Meritorious cause of Iustification which those Men by the Authority of Trent comprehend only and wholly in Christ. And now what then will those Scribes and Disputers of this World answer here What do the Works of the Iust Merit nothing in the sight of God Do they help nothing towards the obtaining of Righteousness And where then is that Merit de Gongruo and condigno Where are the Works of Supererogation that are above due Where is that grace which the Sacraments confer upon us ex opere oper ato By what Argument now will Andrew Vega defend this Axiom of his Faith says he and other good Works whereby we are disposed unto grace that makes us acceptable and whereby we are formally justified and made acceptable to God are Meritorious by the way of agreeableness of such grace and of our Iustification c. Whence it is evident that either Christ is not the only Meritorious cause of such grace or that all the other helps of Merits are of no value Though in the mean while I do not deny that the death of Christ is truly Meritorious but let the adversaries consider diligently what it hath merited That the spiritual help say they of Divine Grace and Charity to perform the Law might be diffused into us What then Dyed Christ for no other cause but that he might obtain the gift of Charity for Mortal Men to perform the Law Did he not rather dye upon this account that he might blot out the Hand writing which was against us in the Law having nailed it to his 〈◊〉 that he might take away the Enmity and might destroy Death for ever might dispossess the Devil of his Kingdom that there might be food and sustenance for our hunger that he might make Principalities and Powers subject to his Triumpham Dominion that he might take possession of all Power in Heaven and in Earth What if the power of Charity to perform the Law is so great as they preach could not this Charity otherways get entrance unless the Son of God dyed Yea were not the Patriarchs Prophets and many others of the Saints adorned with the same supernatural gifts Moreover since the Death of Christ is there so great an influence of Grace present with any man that he is able to fulfil all Righteousness Because the Merit of Christ is perfect it is necessary that those things also should be perfect which he hath merited for us by his most perfect price But on the contrary my Opinion is that I think Christ to be indeed the meritorious cause of our Iustification and that he is not so much the meritorious as the efficient cause of our Renovation seeing it is he that baptizes with the Holy Spirit and with Fire Suppose we grant that this Charity flows in upon us by the Merit of Christ yet I do not therefore call this same infusion of Grace a cause of meriting Iustification nor any part of a cause thereof but it seems rather fit to be reckoned amongst the effects and fruits of Iustification which follow from thence neither doth it follow because the works of Grace and Charity come to us by the Merit of Christ that therefore the same do merit Iustification before God for it relies upon no condition of works at all but only the promise and that a free one also and so free that it implies no condition except one only And because in this place we enquire what is that only and peculiar condition the Doctrine of the Gospel will easily teach us if so be we are more willing to hearken to the Gospel than to the Opinions of Trent On what condition properly doth the Promise of Iustification rely BUT the condition whereby we are properly justified is this That we should believe in Christ and adhere to him by a constant confession In which Faith in the mean while a diligent Caution should be observed that this Faith should be directed unto a proper and legitimate Object which I wonder that it hath not yet been taken notice of by those School Doctors hitherto Of whom some place the Object of Faith in the first Truth Others take for its Object all things that are written in the holy Scriptures Others do esteem for the Object of Faith all things that are laid before us to be believed by the Authority of the Catholick Church And they say not amiss for I deny not that all these things are both truly and necessarily to be believed by every man For he that believes the whole Architecture of this World was framed by the handy-work of God in the space of six days he is indeed led by a right Faith as all Truths are to be believed with a most sure Faith whatsoever are mentioned in the Books of the Scripture which Faith of every particular Truth as I suppose doth not therefore justifie a man For the sense of our question is not what is truly believed by us but what Faith that is which justifies the wicked before God from his sins and that we should search by the Gospel what is the proper Object of this Faith In the mean while that is a very ridiculous thing and too barbarous that the Pope in his Decretals reduces the Object of Faith to the Keys and Succession of the Roman Chair and that as necessary to Salvation but away with this Deceiver and his Cheats Concerning Faith and Assurance and what is the proper Object of Faith NOW let us discourse of others who reasoning with more sound Iudgment about Faith do not fetch the proper and genuine Object of Faith whereby we are justified so far off from the very first Truth as Thomas nor reduce it to every particular Truth of Scripture as the Colonienses nor define it by the Decrees of the Church as the Duacene Doctor and Iesuits of that Place and Order nor place it in the Infallible Authority of the Roman Chair as Boniface but coming much nearer to Evangelical Truth do
As if this Assurance and full Perswasion which we maintain did rely on any Dignity of ours and did not wholly depend upon the certainty of the promise of God I come to their other Calumny no less absurd whereby they most unjustly slander us as if we referred the whole cause of our Iustification to nothing else but only an opinionative assurance so that to obtain the Remission of sins we taught that no other thing is necessary but that every Man should by a special faith be perswaded in his own mind that his sins are forgiven him which is most false as there is almost nothing true in the Books of Hosius For though we confess this to be most sure that nothing is more sure than our Iustification by Christ yet if the cause be enquired for which properly justifies us from our sins we answer It is faith not whereby we believe that we are Iustified as Hosius chatters but whereby we believe in Christ the Son of God who only is a propitiation for our sin Concerning the Word Iustification what it signifies in the Scriptures Whether it consists of Remission of Sins only or not And by what ways and means Iustification is obtained NOW ye Papists ye have our Opinion of Iustifying Faith and the true Nature thereof explained unto you what its power is and what its object Moreover ye understand how this Faith is distinguished from Hope and Assurance And wherein the true and next cause of Iustification is taken up whereof if ye enquire for the Internal cause it is faith only whereby we belleve in Christ If ye enquire for the External Matter thereof it is Christ only whom we embrace by Faith But because ye do by no means allow thereof that we should be Iustified by Faith only that we may confute your Calumnies in this matter or amend your errour I see there remain two things to be unfolded by me and to be considered by you First What the Scripture properly understands by the word Iustification And then Who and what manner of persons they are who are Iustified by Faith As touching Iustification they of Trent deny that it consists only in the Remission of sins unless there is joyned therewith a voluntary receiving of grace and some other things go before by which as preparatories Men are disposed to receive Iustification But Pious Reader If you have not yet heard what this Preparatory Disposition is and by what degrees it arises and into what order it is digested by these Men it is worth while to take notice of it For Men are disposed unto Righteousness whilst being helped by the preventing grace of Divine Vocation without any Merits of Works going before they receive Faith by hearing Now what this Faith is it hath been shewed above for according to the opinion of the Papists it is a firm assent unto those things that are revealed and discovered by God And yet they plead that a Man is not presently Iustified by this naked assent or faith But it behoves that other Dispositions be added by Divine grace whereby men are prepared for Iustification Faith Fear Hope Love Repentance Hatred and Detestation of Sin Love of Righteousness Prayer and the like so that indeed the beginning of Iustification is the free calling of God Whence Faith comes by hearing Whereby Men believe those things to be true that are revealed by God Whether they be such things as belong to the free mercy of God towards sinners through the Redemption which is in Christ Iesus Or whether they be such things as belong to the fear of Divine Iustice from which Faith by consideration of the Divine Iudgment fear ariseth whereby Men are terrified to their advantage that they may forsake and detest their sins And afterwards from the same faith through consideration of free Mercy purchased fo penitent sinners by Christ assurance proceeds whereby they are perswaded that God will be gracious to them for Christ's sake And thus by this consideration of so great goodness they begin to call upon God as the Fountain of all Righteousness and to love him and to cast away sin and to endeavour after newness of life and to keep the Commandments And by this means we obtain a perfect disposition or preparation to Righteousness whereby we are commanded to prepare our Hearts to the Lord. And afterwards Iustification follows this preparation which is not only the Remission of sins but also Sanctification and Renovation of the inner Man by a voluntary accepting of grace and gifts whence a Man of unjust is made just and of an Enemy a Friend that he may be an Heir according to the hope of Eternal Life c. But now from what part of the Apostolick or Prophetick Scripture have they taken this Doctrine From none neither is there need of any The Tridentine Oracle is sufficient for Scripture Amongst the Doctors Canisius endeavours a valiant defence of this Decree but he gains nothing at all For tho' we acknowledge with Augustin and the Doctors that which cannot be deny'd that we are Debtors to the grace of God for all we receive both for those things which belong to the forgiveness of sins and also those things which belong to new Obedience Yet what makes this for the matter we are now treating of For the Subject matter at present is not what the efficacious power of Divine grace performs in us without which Augustin justly pleads against the Pelagians that all our strength is wholly ineffectual but what that is which justifies a wicked Man before God What that 〈◊〉 wherein this our Iustification whereof I speak consists in the Remission of sins only or in the possession of Vertues Moreover what that is which is properly signified in the Scriptures by the word Iustification Though in this also the Adversaries are not very well agreed with one another but in this one thing they are wonderfully agreed to oppose Saint Paul with all their might First they of Trent as I have said do thus divide their opinion that they make two parts of Iustification The one in Remission which they attribute to Faith The other in new Obedience and Works meritorious of increase as they speak by which the Righteouness of Faith is perfected of which opinion Tilet an is the Author Again there are Others who are so far from explaining what is signified by the word Iustification that referring all to the Righteousness of Works they think that Iustification is not worthy to be mentioned in Books Of whom and the chief amongst many is this Osorius of ours Thomas Aquinas discoursing of many things about Iustification as also about many other things seems to have described it after this manner To wit according to the nature of Motion which is made in Man from one contrary to another So that it is a kind of Transmutation from a State of unrighteousness to a State of Righteousness And he explains the
perfect to day whilest he always endeavours after better things the morrow he finds it imperfect These things said Hierom. Therefore if Paul being in perpetual motion could find no ftate of Righteousness in which he could rest It follows by consequence from hence that either there is no Iustification of a Christian in this Life or that surely it is not defined by its right terms by Thomas or the Thomists whence a just connexion is framed on this manner Argument Ma. Where there is a perpetual Race there is no station nor term of motion Mi. There is a perpetual Race in this Life towards obtaining Life Con. Therefore there is no station of attaining to Righteousness in this Life and end of notion which Thomas sets down By these things I think it is sufficiently evidenced what is the Iustification of a Wicked Man in the Scriptures and in what thing it chiefly consists not in a transmutation of inherent qualities by a voluntary receiving of Grace as they of Trent would have it but in the judiciary absolution of the Iudge whereby he that is guilty is sent away free and indemnity is given to him Whence Iustification seems to be defined not amiss by some That it is an action of God whereby he absolves the condemned Sinner from the Law in his free mercy for the sake of Christ justifies him from his Sins and glorifies him being justified Though in the mean while it is not denied that it is a matter of great concernment how every Man leads his Life and amends it But yet it is one thing to speak of Righteousness and another thing to speak of Iustification And again it is one thing to be exercised in the common use of Life and another thing to be exercised in judicatories There the amendment of Life hath praise but in judicatories no regard uses to be of what you are to do but of what you have done not what new qualities better Grace hath brought but by what remedy former Sins may be done away And now I pray you what then must be said and looked for in that most strict Iudgment of the most high God where the scene and sink of the wholeLife comes to be brought forth from its lurking places to the light where impurity of Life Deceits Injuries Filthiness of Lusts the Defilement of Conscience and Concupiscence the Wickedness of Words Works Counsels and Thoughts the Ambition of a pust up Mind the stubborness of Hatred Love Envy and the other Affections Rebelling against Reason the Love of the World Earthly Desires the Contempt and Ignorance of God The neglect of Duty Moreover the whole sink of things formerly done will be all at once laid open What will the miserable Sinner say here What will he bring To what will he fly Will he fly to his secret Confessions and Expiatory Penances and Satisfactions that will not be sufficient These things may declare thee to be a Sinner and a Penitent but not at all Righteous What then you will say hath not God promised to the Penitent the pardon of their Sins Be it so but where then is the Tridentine Iustification which is denied to consist of Remission only whereas you bring nothing into Iudgement but Confessions Penances and Deprecatory Tears For what need is there of any Satisfaction or Repentance when you have committed no Sin But if otherways Where then is your Righteousness whereof you boast To wit say you Remission of Sins being once received by Repentance together with Remission it self flows in Sanctification and the Renovation of the inner Man and the other gifts of Grace by the Holy Spirit whence Man of Unjust becomes Iust and of an Enemy a Friend c. What and dare you trusting in this Righteousness of yours enter the lists with the Majesty of so great a Iudgment And think you that your Vertues are such that they will overcome at this Iudgment Seat when they are Iudged Not by the Righteousness say you of my Vertues but by those works which the efficacious Grace of God works in me Which Righteousness is not mine but God's Not of my own Free will but of Grace acting in me Now then wherein will this Righteousness of yours differ from that Pharisee in the Parable of the Gospel Whose Life if you look into you see it is honest enough and unblamable if you look upon Grace he seems no less to acknowledge it and to attribute all his Vertues to it Otherways why did he with so much reverence and so carefully give thanks to God that he was not like other Men unless he had thought that whatsoever good Works he had were received of his gift and bounty For his Prayer doth sufficiently declare that wherein he seems not so much to Glory in his own good deeds as in the grace of God which he had received to which he ascribes all these things which he had done Therefore if it be true that these Roman Catholicks define That true Iustification consists in no other thing but in Works of Righteousness done by the grace of God what then doth hinder but this Catholick Pharisee according to their Catholick Opinion should be sent away to his House justified Which not being so it remains therefore that another manner of Iustification should be sought for by us than in VVorks of Righteousness which inheres and is planted in us by the grace of God But here the Roman Legions fight with all vehemency for their Catholick Righteousness as for their Camp First by Natural Reason that it is contrary to Nature for any Man to receive the Name or Essence of Righteousness from the Righteousness of another Moreover that it is much less reasonable for God who is the highest perfection of Righteousness and the Eternal Verity to will or be able to pronounce Men Iust that are impure and defiled with wickedness and Evil deeds and who are not truly righteous That I may answer these men two things offer themselves to be considered one which belongs to the cause of Iustification and another which belongs to the explication of the word In both of which the Adversaries are greatly mistaken First in this that treating of the cause of Iustification they seem to place it in no other thing next and immediately but in every man 's own Righteousness not which is imputed being received from another but which every one hath within himself trusting to this foundation That because every thing receives its name and essence only from the form that is inherent hence they gather that none should be accounted just but those only whom their own life and not another's makes righteous If they understand it of Formal Righteousness only and not Iudicial it hath no absurdity and may without any inconvenience be granted to them But what then what is this so much to the purpose for this is not the matter of debate what we are or are not formally in our selves
the cause of blessedness this manner of arguing will appear to be more forcible by an evident Testimony of Scripture Argument Ma. That which is the cause of blessedness the same is the cause of Iustification Mi. Remission of Sins is the cause of blessedness and Salvation Con. Theresore Remission of Sins is the cause of Iustification But you may say What must then be answered to the Words of Christ who seems to promise the blessedness of the Kingdom as a reward of Works You may find an answer to this objection in the Book of Iacobus Cartusiensis who hath written on this manner Men do accept and love the persons of others for their Works that are acceptable and profitable to them but God accepts the Works for the sake of the person c. Therefore here there is need of a distinction between the Work and the person of the Worker But you may say Are not Works that are performed in Charity for the relief of the Poor pleasing and acceptable to God We deny not that our selves But we enquire into the cause wherefore they become acceptable Which that it may appear the more evidently let us examine these words of Scripture I was an hungred said Christ and ye gave me Meat I was thristy and ye gave me Drink c. I ask in the first place who is it here that was an hungred You will say Christ either himself in his own Body or in a Member of his Body Did you then feed Christ when he was an hungred That was Piously done indeed Therefore I see and commend what you have done But I ask what was it that stirred you up to do it Whether was it Charity setting Faith a work or was it not rather Faith setting Charity a work But what if some other that was no Member of Christ whether Heathen or Turk had need of your Meat Would you in your Charity have fed him I doubt of that But suppose you your self had not believed in Christ but had been an Enemy to him if you had seen one that belonged to Christ almost ready to perish for hunger would you have relieved him I do not believe so Why Because it is only believers that feed Christ but Infidels persecute him The Lord was thirsty on the Cross and he had Vinegar given him for drink which was a Hellish wickedness But why did they give him Vinegar Was it want of Love or was it not rather want of Faith in those unbelieving Pharisees Who if they had not wanted Faith they would not have wanted Charity to administer help and Charity would not have been unrewarded But let us proceed Suppose one that is not a believers whether Turk or Heathen should refresh a hungry Christian by giving him of his Meat as old Simon the Pharisee entertained Christ with a Dinner And many of the Heathens have been Eminent in offices of kindness and Love Can the giving of Meat and Drink by any such without Faith merit Eternal Life Surely not But if a believer gives his Christian Brother so much as a Cup of cold Water in his necessity shall he lack his Reward Christ himself says he shall not Hereby you may see whence it is that our Vertues and good deeds are acceptable to God and dignified with Rewards not for themselves but for the Faith of him that works them which first justifies the person before all works And after the person is justified his performances are accepted and though they are of small value in themselves yet they are looked upon as great and rewarded plentifully Wherefore we deny not that sometimes in the Scriptures the name of Reward is joyned with Eternal Life and that the works of Brotherly Charity may in some sense be called meritorious if so be these works are performed by persons who are already justified and received into favour by remission of sins and have obtained a right unto the promise of Eternal Life Not that their works are of such value that they should make satisfaction to the Law of God or merit any thing with God ex congruo or condigne as they phrase it either by congruity or worthiness But they are imputed as Merit by Grace Not that Eternal Life is due to the works themselves but because there are consolations laid up in Heaven for Saints and persons in a justified state to support them in their afflictions Eternal Life not being due to them for their works but by right of the promise just as a Son and Heir to whom his Father's Inheritance is due doth not merit the right of Sonship by any duties that he performs but he being born a Son his duties upon that account are meritorious so that he wants not a due reward and recompence Therefore in this Popish Argument there is a fallacy Another Argument taken from the words of Christ Matth. 25. Da. HE that doth the will of the Father shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Ti. It is the will of the Father that we should do good works that are commanded in his Law Si. Therefore an entrance into Heaven is obtained by the works of the Law Answer Suppose we grant all contained in this Argument what will these Roman Iusticiaries infer from thence Therefore as Vega speaks Faith is not sufficient to Salvation without the keeping of the Commandments It is easie to answer him in a word Let him keep the Commandments according to the exact Rule of the Divine Will and he shall be saved But neither he nor any other man can perfectly keep the Commands of God in this Life From whence we infer this by necessary consequence That either there is no hope of obtaining the Kingdom or else that it lies not in the works of the Law Now if it be so what remains but that finding this is not the way to Heaven we should seek for another way and because there is no door of Salvation opened to sinners in the Law of Commandments therefore we must flie to another Refuge But what that Refuge is appearing to us from Heaven it self the Divine Will declares unto us which is not set forth in the Old Law but in the New Testament of the Gospel And this is his Will that every one who believeth in the Son should not perish but have Eternal Life For whereas the Law was weak because of the flesh God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us that walk not after the flesh but after the spirit Objection But here some may object Will the Faith of Christ justifie us in such a manner that there may be a Legality and Impunity for us to disobey the Will of his Father God forbid The Liberty of the Gospel allows not that for it openly affirms That they who are justified by the Faith of Christ walk not after the flesh but
in so many dangers and compassed about with so many troubles and snares yet it continues firm notwithstanding all this opposition in spite of the very Gates of Hell Wherefore is it thus Is it for its own merits or should we account the Grace and Power of Christ to be the only procuring cause thereof and no strength nor merit of ours Now it is evident to every reasonable man that the same thing which is the cause of Preservation is also the cause of Salvation to the Church which consists not in our Works but only in the Faith of Christ and his free Bounty An Argument out of St. Iames. Not the hearers of the Law but the doers shall be justified Not the hearer of the Law but the doer shall be blessed Iames 1. Mat. He that heareth my words and doth them c. Therefore not Faith only but Deeds do justifie I answer The Argument may be granted if the Minor be rightly added with the Inference which we shall set down here that the Argument may appear in its perfect form He is righteous that by deeds fulfils the Law No man by deeds fulfils the Law in this life Therefore no man is justified by deeds in this life The Minor is evident by the Authority of the same Apostle Iames Whosoever shall keep the whole Law and offend in one thing is guilty of all There is none in the Land of the Living but fails in some thing Iames 2. Yea there is no man that offends not in many things Therefore no man in this life fulfils the Law of God no not Iames himself Let us now consider the words of Christ that are cited out of the Gospel He that heareth my words and doeth them c. Who doth not clearly apprehend the mind of Christ in these words for it is manifest that his design was to rebuke the counterfeit pretences of Hypocrites and thereby to stir up the minds of his own Disciples to the power of Godliness and sincerity in their profession which he doth in more than one place and not without weighty reasons For as nothing is more detestable so nothing is more usual than for false Hypocrites to be covered with a Vizard of Holiness who having no experimental knowledge of the things which they profess nor drawn unto God by Effectual Calling nor taught by his Spirit being ignorant of God and strangers to the practice of Holiness do make a great shew amongst all men outwardly pretending to that which they are not indeed but would seem to be who take little or no care at all to be any way instrumental for the Glory of God But their chief endeavours are to encrease their gain and satisfie their ambitious desires that they may be great in this World and get applause and renown amongst men Such a frame of spirit is in most Hypocrites But the great searcher of hearts who looks into every dark corner of the Soul and discerns all the most hidden imaginations is not unacquainted with their Hypocrisie and there is nothing more abominable unto him Therefore our Lord in giving Instructions of Piety to his Disciples strictly commands that such as take upon them the profession of Faith in his Name should not only make shew of it in words or account it enough to encline their Ears to his Doctrine but also practise it in their Lives and endeavour as much as in them lies to walk suitable to their profession By what I have said it may evidently appear that these words do not express the way how we are justified but they only declare what manner of men they ought to be who are Iustified and have obtained a right to the Heavenly Inheritance by Faith and free Grace Another Argument The Foolish Virgins were shut out of Heaven not because they wanted Faith but because they neglected taking Oyl in their Vessels Mat. 25. The same appears in the slothful Servant Therefore The Kingdom of Heaven is due to good Works and not to Faith Answer The Consequence must be denied For this is the true consequence thereof Therefore Men are justly shut out of Heaven for Evil deeds and Impiety For though a slothful and lazy Servant ought to be shut out of the House yet it doth not therefore follow that the Inheritance must needs be due to him that faithfully and diligently performs his duty The Kingdom of Heaven is given to faith not to duties by way of gift not by way of bargain not for merits but freely And though faith in the mean while is not idle but diligently exercises it self in the ways of Holiness yet the possession of this great benefit should not therefore be attributed unto Works suppose an adopted Son in managing well his Father's Goods shews himself a faithful Steward in his Father's House is not his Father's Inheritance bestowed upon him of free gift notwithstanding all this care and industry Moreover that is not true which is denied in the Antecedent that the foolish Virgins were not shut out for want of Faith For had they had true Faith they would not have wanted provision of Oyl For Faith that is lively cannot be slothful Therefore in Scripture these Epithets are given to Faith 1. That it is true and not feigned 2. It is sure and not wavering 3. One and not diverse 4. Lively and not dead 5. Great 6. Fervent and not luke warm 7. Laborious and not Idle 8. Strong 9. Couragious and not fearful 10. Stable and not unconstant Another Objection taken out of Iohn 5. They that have done good shall come forth unto the Resurrection of Life and they that have done evil unto the Resurrection of Damnation and again Rom. 2. Every Man shall be rewarded according to his Works The Argument of the Adversaries taken out of Ioh. 5. Rom. 2. Therefore the Salvation or Destruction of Men depend on their Works and not Faith only If any Man desires to see this Argument in a Syllogistical term he may take it thus There is no Iustification without Works where there is a reward given according to Works The Iudgment of God rewards according to VVorks Therefore there is no Iustification in the Iudgment of God without VVorks Answer As there is nothing more sure than the Words of Peter in which he affirms that Christ is appointed Iudge of the Living and the Dead so also that is a truth which is asserted by Paul That we must all appear before his Iudgment Seat who will render to every Man according to that which he hath done whether Good or Evil. Therefore you say Not Faith but Works do justifie which are the procuring cause either of Salvation or Destruction But this is not the consequence of the Words of the Apostle nor the sense of that Scripture But if we Reason according to the mind of the Holy Ghost in these places of Scripture we must rather draw
Works which ye intrude from having a share with Faith in justifying a Sinner what hurt is it to sound Doctrine if the Word only is not expressed when you read such Scriptures as these being justified freely by his Grace Rom. 3. By the Works of the Law no Flesh shall be justified The Righteousness of God is manifested without the Law Rom. 3. a Man is not justified by the Works of the Law but by the Faith of Christ Gal. 3. Not of Works Rom. 11. Without Works Rom. 4. Not of Works Tit. 3. Not of Works Eph. 2. Not according to Works 2 Tim. 1. Without Works Rom. 9. What is the Signification of such Expressions but that all Works being excluded it should be understood that Faith only is the procuring cause of Iustification for what else is Faith without Works and without the Law but Faith only Therefore by the necessary Law of Consequence we may argue thus we are justified by Faith and are not justified by any other thing inherent in us according to the Scriptures Therefore we are justified by Faith only Or we may Confute the Adversaries with this Argument Argument That from which all other things are excluded must of necessity remain alone The Scripture excludes all other things in Man from Faith Therefore of Necessity it is Faith only that justifies But whereas they deny that this exclusive Word is found in the Scripture let them read Mark 5. and Luke 8. where the Lord says Only believe and thou shalt be saved I come now to the Greek and Latin Doctors of the Primitive Church Basilins Nazianzen Hilarius Ambrose Augustin Hierom Chrysostom Theophylact Oecumenius Photius Bernard to whom if you please you may add Thomas Aquin. who all Commenting on the same Words of Christ and Paul do not only agree with us in the same Opinion but also in the same exclusive Word as hath been evidently proved in our former Answer to Osorius Thought it be manifest that we assert nothing here which the Orthodox Divines of the Primitive Church have not confirmed unanimously and in the same Words yet nevertheless these things so evident in themselves do not satisfie those perverse Sophisters who when they cannot deny the very Words of learned Men yet they take occasion to contend with us about the Sense of the Words in which they pretend that we do greatly err for they have found out a curiously contrived Distinction Saying That by Faith only is understood the first Iustification but not the second Thus these cunning Artificers of Words have turned one Iustification into two one that is obtained by the first Grace as they call it before all Works as in Infants when they are Beptized And another which is in Persons come to Years by the practice of good Works That I may Answer this frivolous Distinction First I object this saying of Augustin good Works that follow him that is justified do not go before him that is to be justified which if it be true what remains but that they should either Confess that there is no such thing as this second Iustification which they have devised or else that good Works go before him that is to be justified contrary to the Doctrine of Augustin Moreover if they think there is sufficient cause why Faith only should not be admitted because it is not expresly mentioned in the Holy Scriptures why should not also this Distinction of theirs about a second Iustification by the practice of good Works be rejected upon the same account which is no where expressed in the sacred Oracles But by a manifest Contradiction is opposice to Heavenly Truth It is an Ancient and Famous Rule of Lawyers That there is no occasion of distinguishing where the Law makes no Distinction In what place of Scripture can those Sophisters find this Distinction between a first and second Iustification whereby Infants Baptized are otherways justified than they that are come to years for both were alike dead in their Sins and they are both alike regenerated and live by Faith in Christ the Son of God That we may briefly Consute this Sophistry whereas neither the Holy Scriptures nor the Godly Doctors of the Primitive Church ackonwledge any manner of justifying but one only How comes it to pass that those men have devised a twofold Iustification making two of that which is but one So that the first Iustification consists of Faith only and the second is made up of Works But it is easie to withstand this absurd device by the Authority of sufficient witnesses amongst whom Ambrose comes first into Mind who hath expressed himself thus Because there is one God of all he hath justified all after the same manner and what that manner is he shews in these Words He justifies them no otherways but as they are Believers And presently after he excludes all Merit of Works For nothing saith he is the cause of Dignity and Merit but Faith only And again Seeing that a Man is not justified before God but by Faith only c. Therefore let us inferr from these Words of Ambrose if there is one manner of justifying as there is one God Then no Distinction can make two Iustifications of that which is one only As no Distinction can make the one only God that justifies to be two Again if Believers are no otherways justified before God but by Faith according to the Testimony of Ambrose and there is no other Dignity nor Merit that God regards but only Faith what place is there for a second Iustification made up of the Merits of Works Hereunto let us add the Testimony of Gregory which is very seasonable to confute the Forgery of those vain Sophisters concerning their second Iustification These are the Author's Words Grace begot me being naked in the first Faith and the same Grace will save me being naked at my Reception Thus Gregory spake of Nakedness And what Nakedness is that but the want of Vertue and good Works as he himself Interprets which is the Condition of every gracious Soul not only of Men come to Years but also of Infants when they are Baptized in their first Regeneration If we are found Naked in our Reception into Glory where then is that second Iustification made up of good Works but if it is not so where is that Nakedness whereof Gregory speaks How can these things so much disagreeing consist together that we should both be Naked and void of good Works and also cloathed with good Works and thereby Merit a second Iustification In the mean while this should not be omitted which the same Gregory mentions of Grace which he divides not into a first and second as the Papists do now adays but he shews that it is one and the same Grace which both first regenerates us and also afterwards receives us into the Kingdom of Glory By which it is evident that there is but one manner of justifying which
for Mercy and cast himself wholly upon Christ what would the Apostle Iames say in such a case Will not Faith only without Works justifie such a man as this The penitent Malefactor is an evident proof of the truth of this who had no other thing but Faith only to commend him to Christ and so to be admitted into Paradise Like unto which there are many Examples daily of them that die on Gibbets so that the Iudgments of God are very wonderful who hath mercy on whom he will have mercy But now let us return to what we were saying of Abraham If we look upon his Faith what was more sincere If we consider his Works what was more glorious and wonderful Therefore upon both accounts he was certainly an admirable man Now let us compare his Faith with his Works And because it is evident that he was justified before God let us enquire whether he was justified by Faith 〈◊〉 Works because he could not be justified upon both accounts as the Apostle witnesseth If it is of Faith then it is not of Works but if it is of Works then it is not of Faith What shall we say then to these things let the Scripture answer Abraham believed God when he promised and it was accounted to him for Righteousness And the same Abraham obeyed God when he commanded and why doth not the Scripture in like manner add That this was imputed to him for Righteousness Let us hear what the Apostle answers The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Gentiles by Faith he first told the glad tydings to Abraham and what glad tydings was this That he and his Seed should be Heirs of the World A great Promise indeed But how did he obtain this Promise by Faith or by Works There is an answer ready made to our hand by the Apostle The Promise came not by the Law to Abraham or to his Seed that he should be Heir of the World but by the Righteousness of Faith Why so Paul why not by the Law and why by the Righteousness of Faith That he might be the Father of all the faithful who walking in the footsteps of the Faith which was in the Uncircumcision of our Father Abraham shall have Faith in like manner imputed unto them But here St. Iames is represented as fighting with all his might against this Doctrine For the Adversaries say thus Did not the Apostle Iames assert with great Authority That Abraham was justified by Works and will ye deny it God forbid that any man should undervalue the Authority of that holy Apostle And yet I suppose St. Iames would not have us to disbelieve the Scripture which teaches us far otherways attributing the Iustification of Abraham not to Works but to Faith For Abraham believed God and we read it was imputed unto him for Righteousness But God hath not said in his Word concerning Abraham's going to sacrifice his Son That it was imputed to him for Righteousness Or let us grant the assertion of St. Iames That Abraham was justified by Works But where and how was he thus justified before God St. Iames says not so Then it is before men And Paul himself denies not that So that there is no real disagreement between Paul and Iames. But this doth not satisfie some Sophisters who account it is not enough that the holy Patriarch is justified by Works before men as Paul teaches unless he be also thereby justified before God For though he was first justified by Faith as they say yet nothing hinders but that afterwards he might be yet more justified by Works and this they call a second Iustification But Reason shews that to be an utter impossibility for it implies a manifest contradiction for it is a contradiction not to be justified by Works and again to be justified by Works And seeing one of those is denied by the Apostle How can they maintain and plead for the other But hereunto may be added another Reason If there is a twofold Iustification one by Faith and another by Works it would follow that there is a twofold manner of Iustifying But there is one and the same manner of Iustifying as there is one God as hath been proved out of Ambrose Therefore it appears that there is not a twofold Iustification A third Reason is this seeing Iustification consists of the Remission of Sins and God forgives no Man his Sins to whom he doth not perfectly forgive them Therefore it follows that the Iustification of those that are justified is compleat and perfect and cannot be made more perfect than it is already Now in the next place let them prepare to answer this Argument of Paul Whosoever is justified by Works hath whereof he may Glory before God Rom. 4. Abraham hath not any thing whereof he may Glory before God Therefore Abraham is not justified by Works before God By these things which we have quoted out of Paul and other sacred writings I suppose it appears evident enough what we should judge of the Works of Abraham Which though they were excellent and worthy to be admired before men yet they found no place for glorying before God according to the Testimony and Interpretation of the Apostle We need not be at any great trouble to find out the cause thereof Tiletan and other Iesuits produce a cause thereof out of Augustin Because the Works of Abraham were not of the Law but of Faith not of the Flesh but of Grace which because they were not done by the Power of Free-will only but in the Faith and expectation of Christ therefore all Praise and Glory was due to Christ and none to them which Invention of theirs though it savours more of Wit than Solidity yet though we grant all this to them there is no inconvenience in it seeing both of us acknowledge with Paul that the Patriarch Abraham found neither matter of glorying nor Iustification before God by Works and therefore that he had no cause of glorying because he was not justified by Works for otherways if he had been justified by Works he should have had wherein to Glory as the Apostle Paul speaks But now he hath not any thing wherein he may Glory before God therefore he was not justified by Works And thus hitherto we have treated of the Arguments of the Adversaries as much as may suffice not only to discover but also confute their Sophistical Wiles and captious Deceits who fight with so great eagerness for their inherent Righteousness against the Testimony of the Holy Scripture and the Sacred Gospel of Iesus Christ and the bright shining Light of Grace yea and against their own Salvation It remains in the next place that we should hear what those Men on the other side answer and oppose to the Arguments and most approved Reasons manag'd not only by us but by St. Paul and with what Cavillings and fraudulent Devices they darken and baffle the clear meaning of the
thereof is not placed in the works of men but it depends upon the free favour of God and the like we may say of Iustification for those whom he justifies he justifies in Christ but if you ask why doth he justifie in Christ the cause appears evident which cannot be found in our VVorks but before all VVorks in the favour of God only But you may say Those things are not well compared with one another which disagree in Nature for Election and Vocation and Glorification are such things as being once determined of God cannot be disannulled But the Case is otherways in Iustification which may sometimes be lost and sometimes retained according as it is hindered or not hindered by the Grace of God For thus spake Vega and Scotus and others That I may Answer such Men I confess indeed if the manner of our Iustification were such as those Men feign to wit if its chief reliance were upon Works and the increase of Vertues it would be true which they assert concerning the uncertainty of losing or keeping Iustification But seeing all the stability of our Iustification depends not at all upon our Works but upon the Merits of Christ by Faith and the Remission of Sins by his Righteousness therefore it is that as there is one Election and Vocation and that sure and firm so also Iustification is not twofold but one and the same and such an one as endures for ever I call it one because there remains always one and the same cause and manner of Iustifying which relies not on the Merits of Works but consists of Faith and the Remission of Sins And though the Sins from which we are justified are not all of the same kind but are distinguished by times and variety of Actions yet nevertheless Iustification that is the Remission of Sins in respect of the form and manner is not divers but one Not twofold but simple as Faith also which is the procuring cause of Iustification is not which though it is daily increased yet it remains always one and the same Moreover as this Iustification which increases together with Faith is only one so also the same being firm and stable no less than the Promise of God on which it relies undergoes no change but continues firm and constant and the cause thereof is because it relies not on Works but Faith only whence the Apostle said It is therefore by Faith that according to Grace the Promise may be sure to all the Seed On the contrary they who make a twofold Iustification and assign divers causes of both of which the one confists of Faith only without Works going before which they call the first and the other which they call the second is increased by Works of Grace as they speak I see not what they can find in the Scriptures for the defence of their Opinion for Paul writing to so many Churches acknowledges no cause of Iustification but one which he professes to be Faith in Christ and that without Works What need is there of better evidence Can you not be perswaded to believe the Truth which hath been so often and so perspicuously demonstrated by so great a Master as Paul But to what purpose hath Christ appointed him to be a Teacher to us Gentiles if we despise his Instructions and chuse to our selves other Masters that teach another Gospel And what else do those Men who reject the Apostle's Doctrine and hearken to such as teach contrary thereunto Paul says Without Works Man is justified Will you then dare to plead for Iustification by Works in Opposition to the Apostle Dare you deny what he affirms But you say I detract nothing from Works in opposition unto Paul but I add Grace from whence they receive the power of Meriting and Iustifying Then according to your Opinion Works being assisted by Grace do justifie but without Grace they avail nothing But what will you answer to St. Paul who without making any Distinction of Works says not of such or such Works only but indefinitely and in the general of all Works It is of Faith and not of Works lest any should boast And again to the Romans If by Grace then it is not of Works and elsewhere To him that worketh not c. And how often doth he in all his Epistles Attribute all Power of Iustifying to Faith shutting out not only such or such Works but all Works of what kind soever concerning which Paul speaking indefinitely and absolutely utterly excludes them from any concernment in Iustification Which would be false if any Works whether performed by Grace and in Faith or without Grace were conducible to Iustification And hence this Argument arises An Argument against inherent Righteousness We are justified without Works by Faith as Paul testifies VVorks of Charity infused by Grace are VVorks Therefore without these Works also that consist of Grace we are justified The Adversaries Answer to the Major Paul asserts that we are justified without Works but with this Exception unless they be planted in us by Faith and the influence of Grace for the Apostle excludes not such kind of Works because they please God and procure Iustification Contrarily those VVorks only are excluded that are of the Law or of Nature without which we are said to be justified But this Answer doth not satisfie the VVords of Paul who without making any such Exception or Distinction of VVorks teaches simply and indefinitely that we are justified without Works By what Logick then have these Sophisters learned to make a definite and particular Proposition of that which is Indefinite and Universal Or what Reason have they to confine that unto a particular Case which Paul speaks of Works in the general Let us consider the Words of the Apostle Who if he had believed that Works of Charity infused procure Iustification in the sight of God it cannot be doubted but he would have expresly said so much Now he says expresly without any Exception By Works shall no Flesh be justified Whence we may form this Argument If Works performed by Grace and in Faith were meritorious of Iustification then some flesh would be justified by Works seeing there are many Believers that Work by Grace But no flesh at all shall be justified by Works as Paul bears witness Therefore it is false that good Works performed by Grace have any Power of justifying Let us confirm the saying of Paul by Scriptural Examples That which Paul here preaches of free Salvation without Works the same Isaiah foretells will come to pass though in other Words yet to the same purpose under the Symbols of Wine and Milk All ye that thirst saith he come without Money and without Price and buy Wine and Milk What is signified here by Wine and Milk but the glorious Mystery of our Iustification and what is the signification of these Words wherein we are commanded to eat without Money and without Price but that
them that are justified but these things have no union with Faith in the concernment of Iustification And first as touching Repentance abundance hath been said before for seeing Repentance is nothing but a mourning for sins committed it may indeed of it self afflict the guilty person and fit him for receiving of Grace but it cannot obtain a pardon for the sins committed before a Secular Iudge and much less before the Iudgment Seat of God For that is the Office of Faith which as it only obtains a pardon so it obtains it for none but them that are afflicted and repent and believe in Christ. For for their sakes chiefly Christ was sent by his Father into this World that he may help all them that being in distress flie to him by Faith In which three things are to be considered and placed each of them in their own bounds and territories First that we may see what the Mediatour does what Faith performs what sorrow for sin produces All our Salvation flows from the Mediatour as from a Spring and Fountain But if you ask how or for what cause he saves I answer by Faith And if you ask whom he saves I answer those that repent of their wickedness or whom he draws unto himself by an inward Call Doth the Lord then save those for their Repentance No verily Suppose a man is greatly grieved at the remembrance of his by-past life but yet comes not to Christ will grief for his sins save him No surely Yea who can come to Christ unless he first hear and understand who he is from whom Salvation must be sought Now it is Faith and not Repentance that does this For it is not the grief and sorrow of a broken hearted sinner but Faith that discovers a Saviour to us and guides us to him and obtains Salvation from him Yea which is Salvation to them that are in distress for thus it is written This is the will of God That every one that seeth and believeth in him should have Eternal Life By which it is evident enough what should be attributed unto Repentance and what to Faith in the case of Iustification for sin is not therefore pardoned because he that sinned hath repented but because he that sinned not at all hath died for sin therefore the sinner is forgiven not for his Repentance but for Faith whereby he believes in him that died for our sins rose again for our Iustification Where Faith is joyned with Works and where it is not joyned AND hitherto we have been speaking of Repentance But as touching the Reformation of the Life in other respects though I know that nothing is more convenient than that Faith which is rightly instructed in Christ should have Charity and other Offices of Piety suitable to the Christian Profession joyned with it Yet it must be considered what manner of Union this is and of how large an extent for Faith and Charity have that wherein they are of necessity united And they have that also wherein they must of necessity be separated Where we deal with God about Salvation Iustification and the Expiation of sins here Faith only without Works is powerful and overcomes But in dealings with men in the Lives of the Iustified in popular duties in the exercise of Vertue there is a very near Union between Faith and Vertue of which the one cannot consist without the other Therefore these things should be measured by their own bounds that we may attribute unto Faith its due and to Works their due and unto both that which is meet For as that poisonous Errour of Eunomius should be abhorred who is reported to have been so great an Enemy to godly works that he thought it was not a matter of any concernment how any man led his life So also great care should be taken lest in shunning the Soylla of Eunomius we fall upon the other Carybdis of the Papists which is no less pernicious being mis-led by the Popish Doctors who make such a confused Union between Faith and Works that neither Faith without Works nor Works without Faith procure Iustification But this Union is easily confuted by the Authority of Scripture For if Faith only doth not bring Believers into a state of Salvation unless it be joyned with great Holiness of life why did not Christ joyn these together when he said simply He that believeth in me hath Eternal Life Why did not Peter joyn them together when according to the Testimonies of the Prophets he proclaimed remission of sins to all that believed in his Name Why did not Paul joyn them together when instructing the Iaylor in the Faith he said unto him Believe in the Lord Iesus and thou shalt be saved and thy house Many other such like things may be mentioned The History of the Galatians is well known who being led aside by the false Apostles did not wholly cast off Christ nor excluded Faith in Christ but they would have had the good Works of Believers joyned with Faith in the Article of Iustification before God unto Eternal Life for which cause how angry the Apostle was at them his Epistle bears witness But here again a place of St. Paul out of the same Epistle is objected where writing to the Galatians he speaks of Faith that works by Charity From hence the Tridentine Divines infer a necessary connexion between Faith and Charity so that Faith without Charity like matter without form avails nothing to the perfection of Righteousness And they say of Charity which they call Righteousness inherent in us That it is so impossible that it should be separated from Faith in the concernment of Iustification that they assert it only to be the formal cause of our Iustification But it is not difficult to answer to this place of Paul For in that Epistle the Apostle endeavours with great diligence to call back his Galatians to the Righteousness of Faith from which they had swerved In the mean while lest they should be seduced by a counterfeit Faith by these words he intimates what Faith it is that he speaks of Not such a Faith as is idle and dead without Works but which worketh by Love And in this sense we deny not that Faith is not alone But what consequence is that Lively Faith is not alone without Charity It is a lively Faith that justifies Therefore in Iustifying Faith is not alone without Charity This Argument is disproved in the Schools of Logicians for it is a Sophism a non causa ut causa Therefore I answer to the Major The Faith that is lively is not alone without Charity That is true in working but not in justifying Therefore as touching the Cause and Office of Iustifying this is not the consequence thereof Therefore in Iustifying Faith is not alone without Charity But as for the the Minor though Faith that justifies is called lively in respect of good Works yet it doth not justifie in respect
Tentatione Christi August de vera salsa poenitentia Osor. de Iust. l. 5. p. 128. Lib 2. pag. 49. Lib. 6. p. 148. Ibidem Osor. de Iust. lib. 9. p. 131 132. Aug. cont Iulian Pelagia l. 4. c. 3. A hidden counsel of God in commanding those things which cannot be done by us De just lib. 9. pag. 231. A Sophistical Distinction Rom. 7. It is not enquired what grace can do but what it doth Hierom to Ctesiphom Hieron contra Pelag. Dial. I. I Cor. 13. Hieron ad Osor. de just lib. 8. page 197. Page 168. Argument of Osorius The end and Scope of the Promulgatioon of the Law Rom. 7. A fallacy from that which is not a cause as if it were a cause Oson de just lib. 8. pag. 8. The Hypocrisie or Fiction of Osorius An Answer to the Fiction proposed Anargument taken from the words of Osorius A fallacy of the Accident An Answer to the Major August lib. de perfect Iustitiae Osor. de Iust. lib. 2. p. 34. A Dilemma of Osorius Ibidem Ibidem The connexion of the Argument An answer to the Major Iames 2. Hieron contraI Pelag. Dial. 3. Psalm 32. Proverbs 24. Proverbs 28. My strength is perfected in weakness 2 Cor. 12. 1 Cor. 12. Aug. cte spiritu litera cap. 36. God can do the things that he willeth but he wills not all things that he can For it is not the fault of the Commander but the frailty of the Hearer that all the world should become subject to God Hier. Dial. 2. Hierom. Dial. 1. Aâ— Answer to the minor Osor. de just lib. 2. Osor. lib. 40. pag. 89. De just lib. 6. A confirmation of the Osorian Assertion Osor. de just lib. 2. pag. 34. Os. lib. 2. p. 35. Ps. 103. Ps. 51. Isa. 61. Ierem. 50. Ezek. 36. Micah 7. Ioh. 1. Augustin Sins are done away by Christ after what manner Dan. 6. August August lib. de perfect just Phil. 3. Aug. de Spiritu litera August de perfect justitiae Therefore fits also after the same manner is taken away by Christ. Hosea 13. 1 Cor. 15. The Land of Promise the figure of our inheritance What and how great benefits the grace of Christ confers upon us in the present life The grace of Christ is never idle in his own Rom. 8. The life of the Saints in this World is not so much life of the flesh as of saith it is not so much discerned in justice as in justification Osorius by no means receives the word justification Osor. de just lib. 4. pag. 96. Proverbs 24. 1 Iames 3. Iob. 3. Rom. 5. Gin. 47. Osor. de just lib. 9. Nu. 96. lib. 8. nu 20. There is nothing that so much allures unto Friendship as simili tude whereby it comes to pass that good Men love good Men. Cicero in Lelius The like always cleaves to the like Plat. of Love Roffens cont Luther Articul 38. Aug. de tempore Sermone 49. Another Calumny of Osorius against Luther Romans 1. A Confutation of the Cavil All Iudgment is committed to the Son Iob. 3. Luke 10. Sin is one thing and a man that is a sinner is another thing in the sight of God Aug. Tract 41. in Iobannem Sin is diminished in this life but not taken away August of true and false Repeniance c. 5. Why did the Lord wash the seet of Peter but because there was a daily sinning it behoved that there should be a daily remission c. Cyprian But if no man can be without sin whosoever saith that he is unblameable is either proud or a fool Hier. contra Pelag. Dial. 1. But to be perpetually without sin is only in the power of God Therefore either give an example of one that was always without sin or if you cannot confess your weakness and do not set your mouth against Heaven to deceive the Ears of fools by that which really is and that which can be Osor. de Iust. lib. 2. p. 35. 36. How the works of the Regenerate are good and how they are sins Aug. in primo quinqua Psal. 31. Believe in him that justifies the ungodly that your good works may be good for I should not call them good as long as they come not from a good Root wherein consists the state of the Controversie Aug. de Civiate lib. 19. cap. 17. Our righteousness it self is so great in this life that it consists more in the remission of sins than in the perfection of Vertues Hieron in Ezek. lib. 14. cap. 46. It is evident that every man though he had come to perfection needs the Mercy of God c. Aug. Epistola 31. ad Hieron Charity whereby we love that which ought to be loved This is more in some and less in others and in others none at all but the fullest that cannot now be increased as long as a man lives here is in no mau but as long as it can be increased that which is less thau it ought to be is faulty c. Idem in Psal. 142. No man hath at any time done a good work with as much Charity as he could and ought Osor. de Iust. lib. 5. Nu. 127 128. A definition of Grace according to Osorius Tho. 12. quest 110. Grace is not the same thing with Vertue but only a Principle of Vertue Osorius Confuted by Thomas Aqui. That Grace and Iustice are not the same An Answer to the Argument Albertus magnus in Sentent lib. 2. Dist. 16. Ar. 4. Ioh. 16. The Argument of Osorius whereby Iustice is proved to be nothing but Grace A various distinction of Grace amongst the School-men Lombardus Sentent lib. 2. dist 16. Gratia operans praeveniens incipiens liberans Gratia co-operans subsequens proficiens adjuvans What the word Grace fignifies in the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles Against Lombard Thomas Scotus and their followers Romans 5. Three things to be regarded in good Works Osor. lib. 5. pag. 119. Aug. de Civit. Dei l. 19. c. 27. All Iustification is comprehended in the Grace of God only Osor. de Iust. lib. 6. nu 151. The Papist would seem to refer all things to the Bounty and Grace of God though they do nothing less in reality Aug. lib. depatienti 1 cap. 20. Romans 4. An Antitliesis between Grace and Merit Aug. de patientia cap. 20. Osor. lib. 6. The word Grace is distinguished What the Papists what the Protestants understand by the word Grace After what manner and in what sense the Grace of God justifics us A definition of Grace according to the Schoolmen An infused Habit. The refutation of the definition Iacob Esau. The Examples of the Thief Publican the Leper c. Romans 11. There was a remnant according tothe Election of Grace c. Osor. lib. 5. p. 127 128. Aug. Epistola 10. ad Alipin It is grace whereby the unjust are justified of which it is unlawful for us to doubt There pardon is free where vengeance might be just
Nazianzen de moderatione Our Righteousness is Faith only Bernard our Righteousness is no other thing but the Indulgence of God Thom. Aquin. in 1 Tim. 1. Therefore there is no hope of Iustification but in Faith only A twofold Iustification 〈◊〉 to the Papists The second Iustification of Papisis overturned A Rule of Law Ambrose in Cap. 3. ad Rom. It is proved out of Ambrose that a twofold manner of Iustificatoin is impossible Gregor 2. lib. Moral Cap. 40. Gregor ibid. There is a twofold consideration both of good and Evil Works An Answer by way of Instance Every Union of things doth not confound their Offices Erasmus censurus Parisiensium Tit. 7. They of Paris argue that Faith can be without Charity 1 Cor. 13. Chrysostom A cavilling about the Word all An Argument out of a place of 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 13. Mat. 11. In the Kingdom of Heaven Faith is greater than Charity 1 Cor. 13. The Offices of Charity Charity commended from its duration How great things Faith doth in Heaven How Charity is greater than Faith and how Faith is greater than Charity Iustification before God Iustification before men What the Iustification is whereof Iames speaks Human Iustification which consists in the shewing of good works An outward appearance is often deceitful Gen. 15. Gal. 3. Romans 3. Reason 1. Reason 2. Reason 3. Reason Tiletan Free Iustification by Faith is proved by the Words of Paul Andr. Vega de just pag. 751. Rom. 4. The Distinction of the Papists is idle and Impertinent Rom. 1. Eph. 1. Colos. 2. Wherein the difference between the Law and Grace consists A Similitude The Distinction of Hosius 2. Arg. out of Paul Rom. 3. Andraeas Vega Isa. 1. Aug. de perfect just But when the highest Lord shall sit on the Throne who will boast that he hath a clean Heart And who will boast that he is pure from his Sin Unless it be those that Glory in their own Righteousness and not in the Mercy of the Iudge What manner of Gospel Paul preached Rom. 3. The popish comment about the universal Sign is overturned Aug. de praedest Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 8. Hab. No Man denies Works to be necessary Basil. in Psal. 32. Nazian 3 Argum. St. Paul Rom. 4. 4 Argum. Rom. 10. 5 Argum. Acts 13. 6 Argum. Acts 10. 7 Argum. 1 Cor. 3. 8 Argum. Arguments out of S. Paul Rom. 4. Rom. 10. Romans 4. Acts 13. 1 Cor. 3. An argument taken from Examples Acts 2. Acts 8. Acts 16. Luke 7. Luke 18. Luke 23. Luke 18. Inherent Righteousness Rom. 10. Gal. 3. Rom. 10. A Sophistical Pretence A Sophistical Objection How Grace justifies according to the Opinion of the Papists Works considered in a twofold respect as they are either of grace or of nature Aug. de spirttu litera cap. 30. What is righteousness by the Law The righteousness of the Law righteousness by the Law or in the Law A Rule of Lawyers Aug. de fid oper c. 15. The cause why we are chosen and justified in Christ only Vega de fide operibus q. 2. pa. 754. It is sufficient that we by believing only be justified unless we do otherways hinder the Grace of God by our Sins One manner of justifying and that perpetual The Distinction of a first and second Iustification is confuted The cause of Iustification is not twofold but one Eph. 2. Rom. 11. The Caviling of the Papists An indefinite Proposition Rom. 3. Isa. 55. A frivolous Trick of the Sophisters Isa. 52. The VVords of Paul wrested by the Papists Tarrianus Iesuit pro epist. pent lib. 4. An Answer to the first Objection An Answer to the Objection An Answer to the third Objection 1 Tim. 1. 1 Tim. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 2 Cor. 5. Ephes. 3. The blind Errour of the Papists about the sense and scope of Pauls Epistles Romans 7. Vega de Iustificat p. 771. Iohn 3. Romans 4. Aug. de Haeres Haeres 54. Iohn 6. Acts 10. Acts 16. Gal. 5. Tridentine Counc 1. Sess. 6. cap. 7. Objection from the words of Paul Answer Why Faith is alone in Iustifying How Faith Charity and other vertues are joyned together What where how Faith works by Love Trid. Concil cap. 11. If any say that a man is justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness only or by the remission of sins only excluding Grace and Charity which is spread abroad in the hearts and inheres in them Or if any say that the Grace whereby we are justified is only the favour of God let him be accursed If any say that Iustifying Faith is nothing else but a fiducial relyance on the Mercy of God forgiving sins for Christ's sake or that this fiducial relyance is the only thing whereby we are justified let him be accursed Sess. 6. cap. 2. Rom. 4. 11. Rom. 3. Rom. 4. Testimonies out of the Prophets Ierem. 23. Ezek. 34. Isa. 41. Isa. 43. Isa. 44. Zeph. 2. The necessity of Pious Works Apoc. 3.