JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH OR A CONFUTATION Of that ANTINOMIAN ERROR That Justification is before Faith BEING The SUM SUBSTANCE Of a SERMON Preached at SARUM By Benjamin Woodbridge Minister of Newberry in BARKSHIRE May 26. 1652. Imprimatur Edmund Calamy GAL. 3. 16. We have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be justified by the Faith of Christ London Printed by John Field for Edmund Paxton and are to be sold at his Shop in Pauls-Chain over against the Castle-Tavern near to the Doctors Commons 1652. Christian Reader THe Doctrine of the Gospel concerning the Justification of a believing Sinner because it exceedingly illustrates the glorious riches of Gods free Grace and magnifies his Justice because it is the onely support of comfort to a wounded conscience and takes away from man the cause of boastings and is so much above the invention and credulity of reason is most plainly delivered and often inculcated by the holy Ghost in Scripture in that we learn all the causes of Justification The efficient Rom. 3. 24 25. 26. God The inwardly movings his rich mercy great love The meritorious Jesus Christ The material the obedience of Christ The formal the imputation of Righteousness without Works The instrumental by which it is received Faith The final the glory of the grace of God and the salvation of the believing sinner This Doctrine hath in all ages been opposed obscured sometimes by manifest enemies and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 professedly sometimes by professed friends and such as would be accounted the great pleaders for free Grace What errors Papists Socinians Arminians erre in this weighty Doctrine I relate not This short and learned discourse which thou art presented with deals not with these but with Antinomian Error It is a true observation of godly Mr. Shepheard Mark Sound believer p. 96. those men that deny the use of the Law to lead unto Christ if they do not fall in time to oppose some main point of the Gospel For it is a righteous thing but a heavy plague for the Lord to suffer such men to obscure the Gospel that in their judgements zealously dislike the use of the Law This thing these men have done asserting That all the elect before their Conversion and Faith stand actually reconciled to God and justified before him A strange Assertion as reverend Dr. Downam rightly terms it to be uttered by a godly man Covenant of Grace p. 292. This is the Opinion in this Treatise confuted and proved contradictory to Scripture fit onely 1. To sew pillows under the elbows of prophane men 2. To overthrow the comfort of Believers destroying the ground nature use and end of Faith Curcellaeus judges the differences amongst Christians Prefat in op Episcopij in this Point of Justification of so small concernment as that they ought not to breed a controversie But Reader When the glory of God and comfort of thy soul lies at stake as in these matters do not thou think either that men wrangle about a Goats wool or that the matter doth not concern thee Thou art beholding to the learned Author for the penning of this Tract but for the publishing of it to another into whose hands it came That thou mayest read it and weigh it without prejudice and profit by it is the Prayer of James Cranford Justification by Faith Worthy Sir ACcording to your desire and my own promise I here send you the Copy of the Sermon which I Preached lately at Salisbury against the Opinion so much prevailing amongst you of Justification before Faith I have made several additions to several Arguments and annexed a large Answer to the two Arguments which Mr. Eyre made use of against me after the Sermon was ended The Introduction to the Text and the Applicatory part of the Sermon I shall not trouble you with but onely with that which is Doctrinal and Controversal HAving then read those words in Rom. 5. 1. The Point observed was this That we are justified by Faith To write down all the places that give evidence to this truth were to Transcribe almost the whole New Testament Gal. 2. 16. We have believed in Jesus Christ that we may be justified by the Faith of Christ where Justification is expresly made a consequent of Faith And as Glory follows Justification so doth Justification follow Vocation unto Faith Rom. 8. 30. and Righteousness saith the Apostle shall be imputed unto us if we believe Rom. 4. 24. so Acts 10. 43. and 13. 39. and 26. 18. with multitudes of other places The onely Answer which is given to these and the like Texts is this That by Justification we are to understand a Justification in the Court of Conscience or the Evidence and Declaration of a Justification already past before God so that Faith is said to justifie us not because it doth justifie us before God but because it doth declare to our Consciences that we are justified Against which Gloss I have several things to oppose 1. That it is a contradiction of the Holy Ghost It is well known that the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans and to the Galatians sets himself on purpose to assert the Doctrine of Justification by Faith in opposition to Works The question between him and the Jews was not Whether we were declared to be justified by Faith or Works but Whether we were justified by Faith or Works in the sight of God or before God and he concludes that it is by Faith and not by Works Thus Rom. 3. 20 21. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested c. The righteousness of God without the Law is the righteousness of Faith and by this we are Justified in the sight of God and not by the deeds of the Law Again Gal. 3. 11. But that no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident For the just shall live by Faith where the Argument is clearly this If we are justified by Faith in the sight of God then we are not justified by Works in the sight of God But we are justified by Faith in the sight of God For the Just shall live by Faith Ergo not by Works From which places we may safely infer that where else the Apostle speaks of Justification by Faith in opposition to Justification by Works he is to be understood of Justification before God or in the sight of God and not onely of Justification in our own Consciences 2. It is also a most unsound assertion that Faith doth Evidence our Justification before Faith The word Evidence may be taken improperly as signifying no more then an Argument and so Faith may be said to Evidence Justification as an effect doth argue the cause As laughing and crying may be said to evidence reason in a childe not that it is necessary they should evidence it to the childe it self
the effects of Election In the mean time what a miserable circle is the poor restless doubting soul conjured into through the want of its Evidence and knows not where to finde it his Faith must first evidence his Justification by his Election and then it must evidence his Election by his Justification till in the issue this new Gospel leave him without all Evidence of Eternal Life 2. But the very truth is it is not Faith which doth evidence Syllogistically and it is most absurd to say we are justified by Faith because Faith doth evidence our Justification Syllogistically let the Argument be this If we are said to be justified by Faith because Faith doth evidence Justification Syllogistically then we may be said to be justified by sense and reason as well as by Faith which is absurd The reason is because sense reason concur with Faith in a Syllogistical evidence for clearing of which let us again set before us the former Syllogism He that believeth is justified But I believe Therefore I am justified The major onely is the assent or act of Faith The Assumption an act of sense or spiritual Experience The Conclusion an act of Reason That he that believes is justified this Faith doth evidence That I believe is evidenced to me by mine own Spiritual Experience That therefore I am justified is the evidence of reason inferring the Conclusion out of the premises wherefore Faith must be said to justifie in some other respect then that it doth evidence Justification or else we cannot be said to be justified by Faith at all A third Argument to prove that the Justification by Faith is not meerly a Justification in our Consciences is this That Interpretation of the Phrase which makes us at least concurrent causes with God in the formal act of our own Justification is not true The reason is because our Justification by Faith in regard of the formal act of pronouncing us just is in Scripture attributed wholly unto God It is God that justifieth Rom. 8. 33. that imputeth Righteousness Rom. 4. 6 8. We do no more justifie our selves then we glorifie our selves It is God alone doth both and we are passive in both Rom. 8. 30. But to interpret our justification by Faith meerly for a justification in our own Conscienes is to make us at least concurrent causes with God in the formal act of our own Justification This is so clear that it needs no proof For us to be justified in our own Consciences what is it but for our own Consciences to pronounce us just and what is this but for our selves to justifie our selves And so our Justification by Faith is not Gods act onely but our own also in part It is true that the Spirit of God doth justifie us in our own Consciences but not without the concurrent testimony and justification of our Consciences The Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beareth witness not to our Spirits but with our Spirits verily if our hearts condemn us we can have no evidence nor assurance before God 1 John 3. 19 20 21. You know what was here excepted viz. That if we were altogether passive in being justified then we are justified before we believe An Exception so childish That if all Error were not a piece of witchery I should wonder it should proceed out of that mouth To believe is indeed a formal vital act of the soul in genere physico but the use of it in Justification is to qualifie us passively that we may be morally and orderly capable of being justified by another even by God the great Judge of life and death Will any sober man impute to us that because we maintain Justification by Faith in this sense therefore we set up our selves as Judges together with God of our own souls or that we have therefore a joynt concurrence with him in making that gracious Law by and according to which we are justified or in pronouncing a sentence of Absolution upon our selves He would be thought more worthy to be derided then disputed with that should infer Because some Offenders against our Laws are not capable of Pardon unless they can read the Book therefore he that reads must needs be one of the State in making that Law or a Judge with his Judge in absolving himself according to that Law If a Magistrate grant a pardon to an Offender upon condition that he accept it his acceptance is indeed his own act yet in a Moral consideration 't is onely a passive condition making him capable of being pardoned according to the Magistrates will though a man have in himself more ability to read and accept of a Pardon then a sinner hath to believe and no man I trow will say that by his acceptance he is a concurrent cause in the formal act of his own Absolution In like maner we say we are not social causes with God either in making the law of Grace or in pronouncing our selves just according to that law and therefore Justification by Faith cannot be onely justification in Conscience yet Faith is required on our part which though Physically it be an act yet morally it is but a passive condition by which we are made capable of being justified according to the order and constitution of God It is God that glorifies us and not we our selves yet surely God doth not glorifie us before we believe I shall adde but one thing more which I wish may be seriously considered If justification by Faith must be understood of justification in our Consciences then is not the word Justification taken properly for a justification before God in all the Scriptures from the beginning to the end We read of no justification in Scripture but by Faith or Works when the Scriptures speak of justification by Works Mr. Eyre says it must be understood of a justification before men when it speaks of justification by Faith he says in like maner it must be understood of a justification before our own Consciences and neither of these the justification before God and verily neither of them of much worth in the Apostles judgement 1 Cor. 4. 3. And yet of any other justification before God which is neither of these two we do not read in all the Scripture The Antinomians may read their eyes out before they produce us one Text for it And what a most incredible thing is it that a word so often used should never be read in its most natural and true signification and that so glorious a Blessing as Justification before God should never be mentioned by its own name in all the Bible yea verily the whole comfort of this inestimable Blessing will be utterly taken from us for if the Scripture doth not say that any man is justified before God then no mans Faith can evidence to him that he is justified before God And if justification by Faith be not justification before God then is there no justification before God for any man living
or to any body else but because they are Arguments affected to prove that Reason must be where they are If Mr. Eyre will say that Faith doth evidence Justification after this maner then 1. Justification by Faith is not necessarily so much as a Justification in Conscience for as a childe may laugh and cry actions that will argue reason in the subject where they are and yet not have the evidence or clear knowledge that himself hath reason so may it be supposed that a Christian may have Faith which will argue Justification and yet not have the evidence that himself is justified We know by daily experience that many Christians have that in them which if it were rightly understood would prove that they are justified whiles yet they want the evidence of this Justification within themselves their consciences for long time together accusing and condemning them whiles there is ground and reason that they should excuse and absolve them 2. If Faith evidence Justification as an effect of it then may we as truly be Faithed by our Justification as to be justified by our Faith and we must invert the order of the Gospel and instead of saying Believe and thou shalt be justified we must say henceforward Thou art justified therefore believe 3. It will unavoidably follow that we are justified by Works as well as by Faith forasmuch as our Adversaries themselves I think will not deny that works are an effect of their supposed Justification as well as Faith I am sure Christ redeemed us that we should be Zealous of good Works Tit. 2. 14. And whether these works be the first effect or the second and by consequence the first evidence or the second is not at all material in this case because the Apostle when he denys Justification by Works he excludes Works altogether Ro. 3. 28. 4. 5. But I suppose this is not Mr. Eyre's meaning the word Evidence therefore may be taken more properly and so Faith may be said to evidence our Justification either Immediately and Axiomatically or Remotely and Syllogistically Faith doth evidence Exiomatically as it is an assent to the truth of a Divine Testimony concerning such or such a thing Thus the Apostle saith that Faith doth evidence to us That the world was framed by the word of God Heb. 11. 1 3. to wit as it is a firm assent to the Divine Testimony of Scripture That God made the Heavens and the Earth And thus Faith must be said to evidence Justification Axiomatically as it is an assent to this Proposition I am justified But thus Faith cannot evidence Justification For first There is no such thing written Ergo it cannot be evidenced by Faith immediately Where doth the Scripture say Thou Paul or thou Peter or thou Thomas art justified And where there is no Divine Testimony there can be neither Object nor Evidence of Divine Faith It is the carnal presumptuous damning Faith of the world to believe that they are justified by an Axiomatical assent though they do not come within the compass of any general Truth or Promise from which they may infer such a particular conclusion 2. The Faith by which we are justified is the Faith which the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospel are to preach to the whole world and to press upon their Consciences Acts 20. 21. and 13. 38 39. But we cannot press it upon every man in the world to believe that he is justified and that if he doth not believe this he shall be damned unless we should press men to believe a lie of all men Mr. Eyre cannot do it unless he would perswade men to believe himself to have Preached falshoods in all the Sermons which he hath formerly made against the avouchers of Universal Redemption Ergo Faith doth not evidence Justification Axiomatically Nor yet can it evidence our Justification Syllogistically Such a Syllogistical Evidence is the Evidence of a particular Conclusion drawn out of some general Proposition by the discourse of Conscience in which way a Believer doth evidence his justification by the discourse of his Conscience after this or the like maner He that believeth is justified But saith the Conscience I believe Therefore saith the same Conscience I am justified The two first Propositions of which Syllogism which they call the major and minor must first be evidenced before Faith can bring in the main Evidence which lays in the conclusion I affirm then That it is impossible for a man by Faith to evidence Syllogistically that he is justified before Faith because there cannot be found out a Medium before Faith it self that will agree with both parts of the Question and so there will be always wanting a major or minor and the conclusion in which lies the strength of the Evidence cannot follow For all particular Conclusions of personal Justification must be drawn out of some general Promise or Proposition which Faith doth first assent to and evidence before it can bring in the Conclusion which universal Proposition must contain that sort or kinde of persons of whom Justification may be affirmed But there is no sort or kinde of persons of whom Justification may be affirmed Universally but onely such as do believe which I prove thus All the world is distributed into Believers and Unbelievers Mark 16. 15 16. John 3. 17 18. But Justification cannot be affirmed of Unbelievers universally Would it not be accounted a mad evidencing of Justification by Faith to argue thus All Unbelievers are justified But I am an Unbeliever Ergo I am justified where the major is false confestly and the minor also must needs be false because he is supposed to be a Believer that makes the Syllogism and therefore the conclusion must run mad And if Faith can onely evidence that he that believes is justified then can it not evidence any Justification before Believing Peradventure it may be said which onely can be said That Faith may evidence Justification Syllogistically thus All the elect are justified But saith a Believers Conscience I am elect Ergo saith the same Conscience I am justified To which I might answer That the major is utterly false but because that is the Question I meddle not with it To the minor I answer by denying it Because we speak not now of what is true in it self in which sense I acknowledge it to be true that he that believes is elected but of what is truly evidenced by Faith and Faith cannot truly evidence Election before it hath evidenced Justification For I renew the same Argument thus Faith doth evidence Election Axiomatically or Syllogistically not Axiomatically for the Scriptures no where speak to particular persons Thou Peter or Thomas c. art Elected If Syllogistically then either by something before Election or by the consequences and effects of it Before Election there is nothing to evidence it by and if Faith must evidence it by its effects then it evidenceth Justification before Election because Justification is one of
are justified in Christ then we are justified before we believe But we are justified in Christ Ergo. Answ We may conceive of a Threefold Justification 1. a Justification purposed in the decree of God Gal. 3. 8. The Scriptures foreseeing that God would justifie the Gentiles through Faith 2. A Justification purchased and impetrated in the death of Christ who by his death hath obtained eternal Redemption for us Heb. 9. 12. which Redemption is the Remission of sins Eph 1. 7. 3. There it also a Justification exemplified in the resurrection of Christ who himself was justified in his own resurrection and thereby became the exemplary cause of Justification to believers by vertue of which themselves shall also be justified in such time and upon such terms as shall be agreed upon between the Father and Christ I use the term of an exemplary cause rather then of a common person because a common person may be the effect of those whom he represents as the Parliament of the Commonwealth but Christ is such a common person as that he is the cause of those whom he represents in every thing in which he represents them so that when we say We are justified in Christ the meaning is no more but this That Christ is made the cause and patern according to which Justication shall certainly follow on them that believe But what is this to our deliverance from condemnation or what benefit do we receive by it before we believe Should a man argue thus in any other benefits we receive by Christ and from Christ as the exemplary cause he would make himself deservedly ridiculous For example We are said to be risen with Christ Christ himself being risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept 1 Cor. 15. 20. So that Christ in his resurrection is the exemplary cause of our resurrection in which we are therefore said to bear the image of the heavenly Adam verse 49. Would any sober man infer Therefore our own personal resurrection is past already to wit before our selves are dead or that we are not to be raised at all because we are risen already in Christ Yet no man living can shew any reason of difference why we may not as justly infer that our resurrection is passed already because we are risen in Christ as that our Justification is past before we believe because we are justified in Christ No doubt but most men would account the just contrary a necessary consequence Again We are sanctified in Christ as well as justified in Christ Our old man is crucified with him Rom. 6. 6. and he is said to be made Sanctification to us as well as Righteousness 1 Cor. 1. 30. And why then may we not inveigh against Regeneration and personal Sanctification as well as against personal Justification for if we are sanctified in Christ then we are sanctified before Faith and we need not mortifie sin and dye to the world c. all this is done already in Christ in whom we are sanctified before Faith we need onely to have it declared to us that we are sanctified To draw up the Answer more close Justification is either causal and virtual or actual and formal The former is no other then a Justification of Christ himself with a connotation of others who by virtue of this Justification of his are themselves to be justified in due time as our resurrection in Christ is nothing else but Christ himself risen as the first fruits of them that slept and so become the exemplary cause of a resurrection afterwards to follow us but as the resurrection of Christ makes no real change in us till our selves be risen so neither doth the justification of Christ make any moral change in us from death to life till our selves be justified Actual and formal justification is when we are acquitted from the guilt of sin by the gracious sentence of the Gospel He that believes shall not enter into condemnation Now then if we speak of Justification formal then I deny that we are justified in Christ which is the opponents Assumption And if we speak of Justification causal then I do utterly deny the Proposition viz. That if we are justified in Christ then we are justified before we believe the Reason is because to be justified in Christ is not to be justified simply no more then to be risen in Christ is to be risen simply or to be glorified in Christ is to be glorified simply and therefore the inference is a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter They are credulous souls I 'le assure you that will be drawn by such Decoys as these into Schism and Faction to the hardening and discomforting of more hearts in one hour then the Opinion it self should it obtain will do good to while the world stands Object 3. The last and great Argument succeeds and that is this If we are in Covenant before we believe then we are justified before we believe But we are in Covenant before we believe Ergo. Answ Were it supposed that we were in Covenant before Faith yet would the Proposition be faulty The Reason because the Blessings of the Covenant have an order and dependance one upon another and are enjoyed successively one after another God in his Covenant promises Holiness and Glory as well as Justification yet he would argue most absurdly that should say We are sanctified and glorified before Faith because we are in Covenant bfore Faith But I am unwilling to multiply quarrels If the great difference lay here it were an easie matter to be reconciled 2. I do utterly deny the Assumption viz. That we are in Covenant with God before we believe if at least the Phrase of being in Covenant be understood properly for such an interest in the Covenant as gives a man right and title to the Blessings of the Covenant That in this sense we are not in Covenant before we believe is that which I shall prove by and by But first I shall give Mr. Eyre a fair hearing though he would not give it me and I believe is resolved to give it to no body else whiles the judgement of the cause must be left to the people The proof of the Assumption stands thus If the Spirit be given us before we believe then we are in Covenant before we believe But the Spirit is given us before we believe Ergo the proof of the minor is from the tenor of the New Covenant Heb. 8. 10 11. I will put my laws into their minde and they shall all know me which is a promise of giving the Spirit to work Faith Answ The Explication of the terms of this Argument is a sufficient refutation of it God is said to give in Scripture sometimes when no receiving follows and thus the Word Give signifies no more then the will of God constituting and appointing Thus God gave his Son unto death that is constituted and appointed that he should die There is
compare them with other places of Scripture we shall finde three things of distinct consideration the conclusion of which is the only support of this feeble Argument 1. There is the matter and blessings of the Covenant on Gods part I will be their God and they shall be my people In which words as many blessings temporal and eternal are promised so peculiarly pardon of sin mentioned in the words next following for which the Covenant on Mount Sinai to which this opposed made no provision and therefore when the Apostle mentioneth this Covenant again he leaves out those words I will be their God c. and takes notice of the great blessing contained in them namely Pardon of sin Heb. 10. 17. 2. There is expressed the bond and condition of it on our part and that is Faith which is confessedly signified in those words of putting Gods Laws in our mindes and writing them in our hearts In these two things is the tenor and formality of the New Covenant They that believe the Lord will be their God and they shall be his people and this is the Covenant so long before promised but most expresly Enacted in the days of the New Testament But thirdly There is also a Promise and Declaration that God will work this condition by which men shall have an interest in this Covenant and a right and title to the blessings thereof I will put my laws into their mindes that is I will give them Faith which Faith is not promised as an effect of the Covenant already made but as the means by which we are brought into Covenant and thereby invested in a right to all the blessings of it So that the words are in this sense This is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel when I shall write my Laws in their hearts I will be their God c. I do not herein give the Grammatical Translation of the words though if a man should read the words thus This is the Covenant which I will make saith the Lord that giveth his Laws into their mindes and writeth them in their heart c. he would be so far from offering violence either to the Greek Translation of the LXX which the Apostle follows or to the Hebrew Text in the Prophet as that he might justifie it by many examples But the matter is of no consequence at all to either side You see the sense which I give of the words And that this is the true sense of the place is most evident if we compare it with other Scriptures where this Covenant is mentioned For example Jer. 24. 7. I will give them an heart to know me that I am the Lord and they shall be my people and I will be their God for or when they shall return unto me with their whole heart where we have the very same Arguments as here viz. The blessings promised I will be their God The condition on the peoples part which is their returning with their whole heart and the cause of this return I will give them an heart The Apostle is yet more distinct Heb. 10. 14 15 16 17. He proves that Christ hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified whereof saith he the holy Ghost is a witness to us for after that he had said before This is the Covenant that I will make with them I will put my laws into their heart And their sins and their iniquities I will remember no more Before which last words must be repeated these Then he saith or Then it followeth and so the whole sentence runneth thus For after he had said before I will put my laws into their hearts then he saith Their sins and their iniquities I wil remember no more which clause as is already observed is one of the special and noble blessings contained in that general promise I will be their God and they shall be my people from which distribution of the words of the Covenant we may as before observe 1. Where begins the grand promise of the Covenant to wit in those words I will be their God and they shall be my people 2. The Qualification of the persons to whom this promise is made They are such in whose hearts Gods Laws are written that is such as believe 3. The efficient cause of this their Faith and that is God himself I will write my laws in their hearts The same Covenant is delivered in other terms in Scripture in all which the giving of the first Grace is promised not as a part of the Covenant but as the means and qualification on mans part for his entrance into Covenant as Ezek. 11. 19 20. I will put a new spirit within them that they may walk in my statutes and do them and they shall be my people and I will be their God which is the sum of the Covenant on Gods part so in Ezek. 36. 25 26 27 28. Again the Lord promiseth That he will cleanse and purifie them and so they shall be his people and he will be their God Ezek. 37. 23. which is the grand promise of the New Testament as the context makes it manifest And after he had promised that they should walk in his judgements and observe in his statutes it follows Moreover I will make a Covenant of peace with them it shall be an everlasting Covenant which in sum is this I will be their God and they shall be my people verse 24. 26 27. The premises being considered it is an easie matter to take the elevation of all the strength which our opponents can gather out of this Text If they will argue rightly they must cast their Argument into some such form as this They concerning whom God hath promised that he will give them Faith they are in Covenant before they believe But concerning the elect God hath promised that he will give them Faith Ergo. Here the major is utterly untrue for the promise of Faith which in reference to us is rather a Declaration de futuro of what God will do then a promise is the promise of the condition by which we are brought into Covenant and therefore though God hath declared that he will give Faith it will by no means follow that we are in Covenant before Faith But let them frame their Argument how they please it concerns not me to be solicitous about that I shall advance one Argument against them from this their place of refuge and pass on If God be not the God of any nor they his people before they believe then none are in Covenant with God before they believe But God is not the God of any before they believe Ergo. For the proposition he is destitute of common sense that shall deny it The being of the Covenant consists in that properly which God hath in us and we in him The Assumption is proved thus If God promise to give Faith that we may be his people and he our God then till that Faith