God the formall cause in the word Grace the meritorious cause in the word redemption the disposing cause in the word faith all of them almost depraved or misapplyed by Bellarmine For neither is the true efficient cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he calleth vocabulo nimis diluto Gods liberality signified by the word gratis but the false 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or meritorious cause is by this word excluded and the true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the merit of Christ included in the word redemption As if he had said we are justified gratâ—…s in respect of us that is without any cause or desert in us without any worthinesse of ours but not gratis in respect of Christ by whose pretious death and merits we are justified Neither by Grace is meant iustice given and infused of God which hee saith is the formall cause of justification but the grace of God as I have shewed signifieth the gracious favour of God which is not the formall cause of justification but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficient or moving cause Neither is redemption passively understood the meritorious cause of our justification for that as well as reconciliation or justification it selfe is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fruit and effect of Christ his death and obedience which as they are the matter and meritorious cause of our justification so also the price and merit of our redemption How then are we said to be justified through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus either by a metonymy of the effect for the cause redemption being put for Christs satisfaction or paying of a price of ransome for us by which we were redeemed or else we are said to be justified by his redemption as we may be said to be justified by remission of sinnes For by Christ wee have redemption that is remission of sinnes Col. 1. 7. Ephes. 1. 14. and so Occumenius expoundeth these words by the redemption c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But how is he justified by the forgivenesse of sinnes which wee obtaine in Christ Iesu. Neither is faith the disposing cause as he saith for then a man might have a true lively justifying faith and not bee actually justified which is contrary to the Scriptures Act. 13. 39. Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. but the instrumentall cause which is therefore said to justifie because the object which it receiveth doth justifie in which sense the same benefits which wee receive from Christ are ascribed to faith Now the object of faith being the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him it is evident that when wee are said to bee justified by faith it is meant that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inherent but by that righteousnesse which faith doth apprehend § II. Yea but Bellarmine will prove by divers arguments that Grace in this place doth not signifie the gracious favour of God first because the favour of God was sufficiently signified by the word gratis For hee that justifieth freely doth it out of good will and liberality therefore that addition by grace doth not signifie the favour it selfe but some thing else that is to say the effect of that favour I answere that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Hebrew Chinnam is a particle exclusive of any cause price worth or desert in us which may be shewed by many examples Where it signifieth first without cause or desert As where it is said they hated me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is without any cause in me or desert of mine Ioh. 15. 25. ex Psalm 35. 19. and vers 7. where Symmachus readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psalm 69. 4. So Ezech. 14. 23. 1 Sam. 19. 5. 25. 31. 1 King 2. 32. Psalm 109. 3. 119. 161. Lam. 3. 52. Secondly freely without paying any price as Exod. 21. 11. Numb 11. 5. 2 Sam. 24. 24. Esai 52. 3. 5. Mat. 10. 8. Apoc. 21. 6. 22. 17. So that this exclusive particle was inserted not to set downe the true cause of justification but to exclude the false that we are justified freely without any cause in us or desert of ours or price paid by us meerely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Iesus Christ. And thus is the word expounded by all Writers almost both Old and New and those as well Papists as Protestants Ambrose as you heard gratis saith he quia nihil operantes nec vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei freely because working nothing nor making any recompence they are justified through faith alone by the gift of God Augustin Prorsus gratis das gratis salvas qui nihil invenis unde salves multum invenis unde damnes Altogether freely thou givest and freely thou savest because thou findest nothing for which thou shouldest save and thou findest much for which thou maist condemne Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely that is without any good deeds of thine thou art saved and againe as bringing nothing else but faith and after because all have sinned therefore all that beleeve in Christ are justified freely bringing onely faith to their justification Hugo Cardinalis glossa interlin gratis i. sine meritis So Thomas Aguinas and other Popish Writers yea Bellarmine himselfe to bee justified freely is to bee justified without merit without workes This particle therefore sheweth not by or for what wee are justified but by or for what wee are not justified § III. His second reason because the preposition per when it is said per gratiam being not a note as hee saith of the efficient cause is not rightly applied to the favour or good will of God which is the efficient cause but either to the formall cause or to the meritorious cause or to the instrument For wee could not well say that God doth justifie us per favorem aut per suam benevolentiam by his favour or by his good will but wee say well by grace inherent though not very well by his grace inherent for that which is inherent is ours though from him by the merit of his sonne by faith by the sacraments First I answere that the preposition is not in the originall text where the Apostle doth not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as noting in Bellarmines conceit the formall cause but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as noting the antecedent or moving cause which is principium actionis as is usuall in the like actions which the efficients working per se are done naturâ arte consilio or voluntate c. in which wee doe not say per naturam per artem c. And therefore this objection is very frivolous Secondly I answer that per in Latine and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke are very often applyed to the efficient cause whereof even in the New Testament there are as I suppose more examples than there bee leaves whereof some are attributed to God as Rom. 11. 36.
able to fulfill the Law of God CAP. VI. Our fiftâ—… argument containing foure branches By that wâ—…e are justified by which we are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved § I. THe fifth argument By what righteousnesse wee are justified by it wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities reconciled unto God and for it we shall bee saved And againe by what righteousnesse wee are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved by it we are justified By that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves wee are not absolved from our sinnes nor redeemed from our iniquities nor reconciled unto God nor for it shall bee saved But by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities c. Therefore we are not justified by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves but by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ. The proposition in both the parts thereof containeth foure branches The first by what righteousnesse we are justified wee are by it absolved from our sinnes and a converso by what righteousnesse we are absolved from our sinnes by that we are justified This is proved from the signification of the word justifie as being a judiciall word opposed to condemnation which I have at large proved before For this doth invincibly demonstrate that by what wee are justified by that wee are acquitted and absolved and by what wee are absolved by that we are justified But more specially it may bee proved out of Act. 13. 38 39. where as I have shewed before not onely the word justification and remission of sinnes are promiscuously used but the phrase also of being justified from sinne signifieth plainely to be absolved from sinne where also the maine question itselfe is concluded Bee it knowne unto you saith S. Paul to his brethren the Iewes who feared God that through Iesus Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes And by him all that beleeve are justified from all those things meaning sinnes from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses From our sinnes therefore we are justified or absolved by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith from which we could out be acquitted by any obedience which we could performe to the Law § II. But of this place we are further to speake in defence of Calvins allegation thereof against Bellarmines cavils Calvin prooving that God doth justifie us when hee absolveth us from our sinnes and accepteth of us in Christ alleageth this place Through this man that is Christ is preached unto you remission of sinnes and by him all that beleeve are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses You see saith Calvin that justification is here set after remission of sinnes by way of interpretation r you see plainely that it is taken for absolution you see that it is denied to the workes of the Law you see it is meerely the benefit of Christ you see that it is received by faith and finally you see that there is a satisfaction interposed where hee saith that through Christ wee are justified from our sinnes Bellarmine pretending to answere this argument relateth it thus as if Calvin had said First By this man that is by Christ we are justified and not by any vertues or qualities of ours Secondly is preached that signifyeth that the very preaching or declaring of the promise if it bee apprehended by faith doth justifie for so the Apostle presently expoundeth himselfe by him every one that beleeveth is justified Thirdly forgivenesse of sinnes that signifieth that justification consisteth in nothing else but in remission of sinnes wherefore tâ—…e inward renovation is not the other part of justication for that renovation is not so much justificaâ—…ion as an effect thereof And lastly these words from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses doe signifie that justification doth not consist in the observation of the Law but onely as hath beene said in remission of sinnes for or through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed Thus as you see hee maketh Calvin speake what hee pleaseth But because the things which he inforceth in Calvins name upon this place be for the most part our assertions it shall not bee amisse to weigh the answeres which he maketh to them And first where it is said per hunc by this man hee saith this doth not exclude our vertues or qualities infused of God For by Christ wee are justified as the efficient which is signified by the preposition per by vertues and qualities infused as the formall cause Now if Christ or his righteousnesse bee the efficient cause then it cannot be the formall cause for the forme is the effect of the efficient nor can the same thing be the cause and effect of the same thing Neither may they say as they are wont that this is a mystery of faith that reason cannot attaine unto For mysteries though they surmount reason yet are notrepugnant to reason Neither ought we to faine mysteries as the Papists use to doe where the Scriptures have an easie and perspicuous meaning Râ—…ply This were a good caveat to the papists As for us we faineno such mysteries neither doe we say that Christ or his righteousnesse is both the efficient and formall cause of our justification But this we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of our justification and also the merit both of our justification and salvation and that Christ himselfe as he is Mediatour is the secondary efficient of our justification affording unto it both the matter thereof and the merit § IV. That word is preached doth not signifie saith hee that by the onely preaching of Scriptures apprehended by faith men are justified For then Peter would not have said Act. 2. 38. Doe peâ—…ance and bee every one of you baptized for remission of sinnes But it signifieth that remission of sinnes is preached to all that beleeve in Christ as they ought that is in doing whatsoever he commaâ—…deth to be done according to that Mat. 28. 20. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you In this sence every one that bâ—…leeveth is justified that is whosoever beleeveth as he ought namely by fulfilling all things which faith doth declare ought to be fulfilled For not he that beleeveth a Physician though he be never so skilfull and one that infallibly curâ—…th is healed unlesse he receive such medicines as hee doth appoint Reply Wee doe not say that preaching alone apprehended by faith doth justifie but wee say that a true and a lively faith which is begotten by the preaching of the Word doth justifie a man before God and that wicked is that aphorisine collected out of Bellarmine that by the preaching of the Word of God faith is stirred up and so sinnes are forgiven is a
the person or of the whole man who is Adopted to be the sonne of God Neither doth the Apostle speake of the adoption of the soule nor yet of the adoption of the body but of the redemption of the body from the servitude of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sonnes of God which is not the adoption of the body but the fruite of the adoption of the whole man which here by a Metonymy is called adoption The former he proveth by the latter not to be imputative but inherent The adoption of sonnes which we expect in the redemption of the body shall be most true and inherent in the body it selfe that is to say immortality and impassibility not putative but true therefore the adoption which now we have in the spirit by justification is also true not putative but inherent Ans. In this similitude he should rather have said that as the adoption of sonnes which we doe expect at the redemption of our bodies that is at the resurrection is the everlasting inheritance whereunto wee were adopted as sonnes which a true and glorious inheritance though not inherent in the body but enjoyed by the whole man as adherent unto him so the adoption which we now have in the Spirit by justification which is the entituling of us to this inheritance is a true adoption though not inherent but wrought by imputation of Christs merits unto us But suppose the adoption of the body as hee calleth it were inherent how doth it follow that the adoption of the soule as hee calleth it should also be inherent he saith it must bee so Otherwise saith he as wee expect the redemption of the body so also we should expect the redemption of the soule which the Papists had neede to doe whose soules shall bee in purgatory at the last day but from thence to be delivered at that day by a gaole-delivery but I say it followeth not for the adoption which is imputative is a most true adoption and wee need no other but the accomplishment thereof which is our full redemption As for that adoption which he supposeth to bee inherent it is a meere fancie § XXI Now let us see what may from that proposition which was agreed upon betweene us be truly inferred on our part Such as is our adoption such is our justification but our Adoption is imputative and not by inherencie For as I have shewed heretofore these foure benefits reconciliation redemption justification and adoption doe not import any reall mutation in the subject but relative and imputative for when God imputing to a beleever the merits of his Sonne forgiveth his sinnes which made him an enemy to God a bondslave of sinne and Satan guilty of sinne and damnation the childe of the Devill and receiveth him into his favour maketh him Christs freeman accepteth of his as righteous admitteth him to bee his sonne he is said to reconcile to redeeme to justifie and to adopt him not by working any reall or positive change in the party but relative or in respect of relation To be a father and to be a sonne are relatives when a man therefore hath first a sonne hee becommeth a father which hee was not before not by any reall change in himselfe but by a new relation which before he had not When a man is adopted he becommeth the sonne of another man whose sonne he was not before not by any reall mutation but onely in regard of relation For if the party adopted by God should by adoption bee really changed then God who adopteth should also seeme to bee really changed which is impossible because he is immutable For as he which is adopted becommeth the sonne of God which hee was not before so God when he first adopteth any man becommeth his father which hee was not before Here therefore seemeth to bee a change as well in God adopting as in the party adopted not reall for that is not possible but relative onely which is a manifest evidence that as our Adoption so our justification is not any reall change wrought in us by infusion of any inherent quality but a relative change wrought without us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse CAP. XI Bellarmines arguments proving obliquè or indirectly justification by inherent righteousnesse and first because faith is not the integrall and onely formall cause of justification § I. ANd these were all the arguments which Bellarmine hath produced to proove diâ—…ectly his assertion concerning justification by inherent righteousnesse now follow two other ranks of proofes whereby he doth obliquè indirectly and by consequence prove the same by disproving two assertions which it pleaseth him to father upon us The one that faith is the onely formall cause of justification the other that justification consisteth onely in remission of sinnes For if faith be not the integrall cause formall of our justification but that with it charity and other graces doe concurre by which as well as by faith we are justified formally then it followeth that wee are justified by inherent and habituall righteousnesse which consisteth in the habits of faith aud charity and other graces And if justification doth consist not onely in remission of sins by which our soules are cleansed from sinne but also in the renewing of us according to Gods image by infusion of righteousnesse by which our soules are not onely purged from sinne but also adorned and beautified with grace then it followeth that we are justified by inherent righteousnesse The former question he disputeth lib. 2. de justif c. 4. the title whereof is fidem non esse integram formalem caussam justificationis that faith is not the whole formall cause of justification This opinion hee confesseth none of us doe now hold though falsly hee would lay it upon Luther and Melancthon for we deny faith to bee the formall cause of justification at all and yet this is it which he and all of his side evermore object unto us to make us odious to the world as though wee required nothing to make us formally and inherently righteous but onely faith And for this cause though wee hold not this assertion yet hee thinkes good to confute it as if we held it § II. Of his proofes onely the first serveth to prove that with faith charity doth concurre unto justification It is taken out of Gal. 5. 5. 6. the fifth verse containing the latter part of the Antithesis between justitiaries who were apostates from the doctrine of grace and the true prosessours of the Gospell For the former looked to bee justified by the Law that is by obedience performed to the Law and so were fallen from grace but the latter looked not to be justified by the Law but by faith that is by Christs righteousnesse apprehended by faith Of this Antithesis the latter part agreeth to us the former to the Papists And therefore I marvell to what purpose he alleaged the fifth verse unlesse it were to
of charity for the mater is that which is formed and as it were animated by the forme but the consequent is absurd therefore the antecedent And againe howsoever faith worketh those acts which I called mediate or imperatos by meanes of other graces which acts doe tend to sanctification for which cause faith doth not sanctifie alone yet the actus eliciti or immediate acts of faith which are to believe in Christ and by beleeving to receive and by receiving him who is our righteousnesse to justifie faith worketh neiby charity nor by any other grace and therefore it justifieth alone § VI. Yea but without charity faith is informis with it it is formata Answ. This distinction of faith that it is either formata or informis in a right sence may bee admitted as namely if by forme bee understood the integrity or inward efficacie and if that be called formata which is sound unfained lively and effectuall and that informis which iâ—… uneffectuall dead and counterfeit For that distinction is intimated by the Apostle when he speaketh either of faith unfained or contrariwise of a dead faith for in the former it is implyed that there is also a fained and a counterfeit faith and in the latter that there is also a lively faith And so wee admit this distinction that faith is either Formata which is lively and unfained Informis which is dead and counterfeit But in the popish sence it is to be rejected and that in three respects First because they propound this distinction as agreeing to a true justifying faith as if a true faith might be without forme when as that which is without forme is dead and counterfeit and no more to bee called a true justifying faith than the carcase or counterfeit of a man is to be called a man For howsoever such a faith may perhaps be true in respect of the object because it is of the truth yet it is not true in respect of the integrity efficacy and soundnesse thereof and that which is not truely faith is not faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or indeed Hee that saith either that he beleeveth that there is a God and in deeds doth deny him and that he is just and feareth not to offend him or good and doth not love him or omniprâ—…sent and omniscient and feareth not to play the hypocrite before him c. such a one doth not indeed and in truth beleeve that which he proâ—…esseth himselfe to beleeve He that saith he knoweth Christ that is beleeveth in him and hath not a desire and care to keep his Commandements hee is a lyar and the truth is not in him That faith which is dead and counterfeit cannot justifie or save a man as Saint Iames sheweth For howsoever faith alone doth justifie yet that faith which is alone doth not justifie neither alone nor at al becauseit is not a true and lively but a dead and counterfeit faith Neithercan that be a true justifying faith which is common to the wicked both men and Angels Neither may wee omit Bellarmines confession in this place Here saith hee the Apostle to prevent occasion of errour explaineth what manner of faith that is that justifieth non quaecunque fides sed quae per dilectionem operatur not every faith but that which worketh by love § VII Secondly this distinction is to bee rejected being understood in the popish sense wherein it is implyed that charity is the forme and as it were the soule of faith which opinion I have already confuted Neither can they ground it upon Iames 2. 26. As the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead For if the habit of charity cannot bee the forme of faith as I have shewed then much lesse can good workes which are the outward fruits both of faith and of charity bee the soule of faith it selfe Of the profession indeed of faith a godly life is as it were the soule and without which it is dead but of faith it selfe it is not anima the soule but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the breath as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to breath doth properly fignifie in which sense it is often used being called the Spirit of the mouth the spirit of the nostrils And in this sense it may be said that as the body without breathing is judged to bee dead so faith without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is also judged to be dead not because it ever had lived but because it wanteth life § VIII Thirdly this distinction is to bee rejected because as Bellarmine saith it is to be understood of one and the same faith which being informis may become formata and being formata may become informis againe remayning still the same But fides informis is not of the same kinde with that which is formata or justifying faith as things which be without life are not of the same kinde with those that are living or as counterfeits are not of the same kinde with those things which they doe resemble Besides justifying faith is divine the informis is humane that infusa infused and supernaturall this acquisita required by the strength of nature in the use of meanes that a grace of regeneration proper to the Elect this a gift of illumination onely common to the reprobate that is vera being truely that whereof it beareth the name this simulata not being that truly which it is called but aequivocè that doth so beleeve in Christ that it doth imbrace him and willeth and desireth at the least to apply him to the beleever this so beleeveth Christ that either it is joyned with horrour as in the Devils and desperate sinners or is severed from any will or desire of application this is without fruit and root and therefore is temporary that hath both root and fruit and never faileth And howsoever that which is informis may by Gods grace bee changed into formatam yet that which is formata can never be informis No more than hee who is once borne of God can be unborne againe The rest of his arguments serve to prove that faith is not the whole formall cause of justification that is as wee speake according to the Scriptures of sanctification which we deny not for wee doe acknowledge a concurrence of many graces with faith unto sanctification As for justification we deny faith either in whole or in part to bee the formall cause thereof Neither doth any other of his arguments prove that either charity or any other grace doth with faith concurre unto justification CAP. XII That justification doth nâ—…t câ—…nsist in renâ—…vation § I. HIs second ranke of arguments proving indirectly justification by righteousnesse inherent is propounded in his sixt Chapter the title whereof is this That oâ—…r justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone Neither doe we
the Colliars faith so much commended by Cardinall Hosius and others for he being examined by a learned man what he beleeved answered I beleeve that which the Church beleeveth and being asked what the Church beleiveth answered againe that which I beleeve and so in a round that he beleeved what the Church beleeved and that the Church beleeved as he beleeved but also that it is the safest for all even for those that are learned to rest in this faith Especially when they are assaulted by Satan with whom they say it is not safe to contend by Scriptures but rather to oppose that onely article against him As the said learned man who had opposed the Collyar found by experience For he being afterwards assaulted by Satan when he was deadly sicke and being not able to defend himselfe by Scriptures he was faine to bâ—…ake himselfe to the Colliars faith which no doubt is the readiest way for them who professe a faith not conformable to the Scriptures to put the Devil to silence who will rest well content with such an answer whereas if they should stand to the Scriptures the Devill would be able to confute them As he did Luther whiles hee was a Papist in the question concerning the private Masse which he did not to teach him the truth but by true accusations to bring him to despaire § IV. This doctrine of the Papists concerning implicite faith is both absurdly false and notoriously wicked False in diverse respects First in that they say justifying faith may be without knowledge when as first of all faith it selfe is a kind of knowledge yea a kind of certaine knowledge yea of all others the most certaine knowledge as I have already shewed proving that it is that knowledge which we have by Divine relation or report grounded on the authority of God speaking in his word Secondly because faith oftentimes in the scriptures is called knowledge or acknowledgment as Ioh. 17. 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent Now we know God in the life to come by vision in this life by faith as their owne writers testifie Maldonat on that place what is the cause saith he that he seemeth to place eternall life in knowledge alone that is in faith onely And Ianseniâ—…s vita aeterna inchoativè imperfectè hic habetur cognoscendo Deum per fidem habetur autem in 〈◊〉 perfectè cognoscendo Deum per visionem Esai 53. 11. My righteous servant by his knowledge or acknowledgement that is by faith in him shall justifie many So 2 Pet. 1. 2 3. Eph. 1. 17. Col. 1. 10. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 2. 4. 2 Tim. 2. 25. 3. 7. Tit. 1. 1. where by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the knowledge or acknowledgement of Christ and his truth is meant nothing else but faith 1 Ioh. 2. 3 4. hereby we doe know that we doe know him that is beleeve in him if we doe keepe his Commandements he that saith he knoweth him namely by faith and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar and the truth is not in him Heb. 11. 3. By faith we understand or know that the worlds were formed by the Word of God where the act of faith is expressed by this term of understanding that which we beleeve 2 Cor. 5. 1. we know that is we beleeve for otherwise it cannot be known but by faith that after the dissolution of our earthly tabemacle we have an eternall habitation in heaven Thirdly because in the Scriptures faith and knowledge are so linked together that what we acknowledg we beleeve what we beleeve we know Ioh. 6. 69. we beleeve and know that thou art that Christ Ioh. 10. 38. that you may know and beleeve that the Father is in me and I in him Ioh. 17. 8. they have knowen surely that I came out from thee saith Christ unto his Father and they have beleeved that thou didst send me Eph. 4. 13. till we all come into the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God 1 Tim. 4. 3. to bee received with thankesgiving of them which beleeve and know the truth 1 Ioh. 4. 16. we have knowne and beleeved the love that God hath to us Fourthly it is not possible that a man should beleeve acknowledge or assent firmely to that which he doth not know so much as by relation or hearesay how can they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and by hearing knowen Rom. 10. 14. And who knoweth not that the assent of faith determineth the judgement to that particular which is beleeved As for example if I beleeve the resurrection my judgement actually assenteth to that particular But if I never have so much as heard or understood that God hath revealed such a thing that there shall be a resurrection how can I possibly beleeve it or actually assent unto it And therefore implicite faith is so farre from being a justifying faith that it is not so good as the bare historicall faith which not onely wicked men but the Devils themselves have For historicall faith hath in it an actuall assent and implyeth a knowledge at least by relation of that which is beleeved But implicite faith hath neither Fifthly to the implicite faith the definition offaith Heb. 11. 1. doth in no sort agree for as it is so farre from being the substance of things hoped for that it doth not so much as know what are the things hoped for so it is further from being an evidence of things not seene which implyeth a certaine knowledge of things by relation which are not seen or knowne by sence or reason Sixthly that which implyeth a contradiction is false and absurd but the profession of the implicite faith made by a simple man viz. that hee beleeveth whatsoever the Catholicke Church beleeveth implyeth a contradiction not onely because hee doth not beleeve every yea scarce any particular but also through his ignorance sometimes doth actually beleeve that which the Church doth not beleeve or doth deny credit to that which the Church beleeveth But here now is the speciall priviledge of implicite faith that although a man beleeve an errour as that God the Father is greater than the Sonne or ancienter than he or that the persons of the Trinity are divided by locall distance one from another it is no offence so long as he thinketh the Church beleeveth so and so saith Gabriel himselfe If any man doe beleeve thinking that the Church doth so beleeve though it bee erroneous he sinneth not so that hee doe not obstinately adhere to his errour as was said before notab 2. Yea saith hee that which is more this faith is meritorious for such an one should not onely not sinne but also by so beleeving that which is false hee should merit Thus not onely hee is said to beleeve who indeed doth not beleeve nor give assent to the truth but also he
who dissenteth from the truth even from that which the Church doth hold § V Secondly they are absurd in saying that faith may better be defined by ignorance than by knowledge For notitia knowledge is the genus both of faith and of science whereas ignorance is a privation of knowledge It were therefore very strange if faith which is an habit of the mind should be defined by a privation and namely of that habit which is the genus of it Yea but saith Bellarmine faith is opposed to science and therefore better to be defined by ignorance than by knowledge I answere it is opposed to science not as a privation that it should bee defined by ignorance but as a species of the same kind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contra divided for notitia as the genus is divided into science and faith the former being a knowledge of things either manifest in themselves which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or made manifest by discourse of reason which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the latter being a knowledge of things neither manifest to sence nor reason but knowne onely by relation from God where by the way you are to observe that the knowledge required in faith is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the cause such as is in science but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to beleeve the relation to be true and that whatsoever God revealeth is infallibly true And therfore by faith our judgements are captivated to yeeld assent to divine revelations though either they may be above reason or may seeme to be against sence or reason For though sence and reason may bee deceived yet the ground of our faith which is the authority of God cannot be deceived nec fidei falsum subesse potest neither can the subject of faith be false As for example the mysteries of the Trinity and of the incarnation of our Saviour bee above our reason the articles of the creation of all things from nothing and of the resurrection of the body seeme contrary to reason the article of eternall life contayneth such things as never eye did see nor eare heare neither did they ever enter into the heart of man and so of other articles of Christian religion which notwithstanding we doe firmely beleeve and undoubtedly know to be true as God hath revealed the same grounding this our faith and knowledge on the authority of God speaking in his Word This distinction of knowledge being acknowledged that the knowledge of faith is neither the certaine intelligence of things in themselves manifest to sense or reason nor that science which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the causes or attained by discourse of reason but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the things revealed by God are infallibly true by reason of his authority who is Truth it selfe might serve as a sufficient answer to so many of Bellarmines arguments and allegations as seeme worth the answering But I will briefly examine his proofes which are allegation of Scriptures reason and testimonies of Fathers § VI. As for his allegation of Scripture the first place alleadged out of Esa. 7. 9. is not as Bellarmine alleageth it unlesse you beleeve you shall not understand but if you beleeve not you shall not be established or as the vulgar Latine which Bellarmine ought to stand to non permâ—…nebitis as contrariwise 2 Chron. 20. 20. if you beleeve in the Lord you shall be established or as the Latine securieritis Neither doth it follow that faith is not knowledge because without faith we cannot come to the certaine intelligence of that which we beleeve For as knowledge of the thing revealed goeth before faith so faith goeth before the exact understanding and comprehension In the two next places 1 Cor. 13. 2. 12. 9. where faith as he saith is distinguished as a severall gift from knowledge by faith is not meant justifying faith but the faith of miracles as I have else where shewed Neither doe wee deny but that knowledge may be a distinct gift from faith As that knowledge which is either principiorum or conclusionum which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is knowledge alwayes joyned with acknowledgement which is faith though acknowledgement implyeth knowledge alwayes Knowledge therefore may be without faith but faith cannot be without knowledge To the fourth out of 2 Cor. 10. 5. that where knowledge is there needs no captivating of the understanding I answere that faith being onely notitia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and giving firme assent to that whereof it knoweth no reason yea though perhaps it seeme above or against reason subjecteth or captivateth the understanding to the authority of God The last is from those places wherein the obedience of faith is mentioned For saith he obedience in beleeving were not needfull if by faith knowledge were given to men I answere that in those places faith doth signifie the doctrine of faith that is the Gospell the truth which men are then said to obey Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 3. 1. Act. 6. 7. when they beleeve and professe it As contrariwise those who doe not beleeve are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to disobey and that in opposition to beleefe Ioh. 3. 36. Act. 14. 2. 17. 5. 19. 9. Rom. 11. 30 31 32. 15. 31. Heb. 3. 18 19. 1 Pet. 2. 7. Neither should it seeme strange to Bellarmine that by faith men attaine to knowledge I meane to greater knowledge when he urging even now that place Esai 7. 9. said faith is a degree and way to knowledge § VII To the Testimony of Irenaeus if it were entirely cited I would subscribe For speaking of those words 1 Cor. 8. Scientia inflat dilectio autem adificat and having thereupon inferred that it were better to know but a little and to love God than in a conceit of great knowledge to bee found blasphemous against God hee repeateth the same againe Melius itáque est sicuti predixi nihil omnio scientem quempiaâ—… ne quidem unam causam cujusllbet eorum quae facta sunt cur factum credere Deo persever are in ejus dilectione quae honorem vivificat nec aliud inquirere adscientiam nisi Iâ—…SVM Christum filium Dei qui pro nobis crucifixâ—…s est quà m per quaestionum subtilitates multiloquium in impietatem cadere Where first observe that the knowledge whereof he speaketh is that whereby the causes or reasons of things are knowne And wee doe confesse that a man may and ought simply to beleeve God without such knowledge and secondly that he speaketh by way of comparison that it is better for a man to content himselfe with the knowledge of Christ alone joyned with love which is not to be accounted implicite faith for the Apostle himselfe determined to know nothing among the Corinthians but Christ and him crucified than affecting the knowledge of subtile and curious questions to fall into
doth not justifie alone first because it doth not dispose alone to justification there being seven dispositions whereof faith is but one and namely the first § I. NOw let us see what arguments Bellarmine doth bring to prove that we are not justified by faith alone Which question in his opinion may bee disputed three wayes either with relation to the time going before justification or to the time of justification or to the time following our justification In respect of the first the question which he maketh is whether faith doth justifie alone by way of disposing unto justification In respect of the second whether faith be the onely formall cause of our justification In respect of the third whether for the retaining and preserving of righteousnesse good workes be not required but faith onely sufficeth The first he disputeth De justif l. 1. c. 12. and in the twelve chapters following to the end of that booke The second that faith is not the onely and entire formall cause of justification he disputeth in the second booke The third he disputeth in the fourth booke Chap. 18. 19. where he endevoureth to prove that good workes doe justifie But in mine opinion hee should rather have disputed this question whether faith doth justifie at all or not For whereas they make two justifications the first habituall whereby of a sinner a man is made just the second actuall whereby a man of just is made more just by their doctrine faith doth not justifie as a part either of the one or the other but is required as a necessary companion and as it were causa sine qua non which is no cause For they make the formall cause of their first justification which they say truely is but one to be charity and the meritorious cause of the second to be good workes Onely that charity and those good workes must not be without faith All which they ascribe to faith is that they make it the beginning of justification and a disposition to it Neither doe we deny but that true faith is the beginning and the root of sanctification and of all inherent righteousnesse insomuch that from it both charity it selfe 1 Tim. 1. 5. and all other both internall graces and externall obedience doe spring but the act of justification neither in the first nor second doe they ascribe to faith Onely unto the first justification they require it as a preparative disposition for the habit of grace to bee infused which doth not differ from Charity and when it is infused to be a companion thereof And to the second as causa sine qua non without which workes doe not justifie § II. But to come to Bellarmines large discourse the greatest part thereof seemeth to bee impertinent and besides the purpose But to make all seeme pertinent he maliciously calumniateth us as if we held all those assertions which hee with such eagernesse doth confute But if we doe hold that faith doth not justifie by way of disposing either alone or at all and that it is not the formall cause of justification either alone as the entire cause or at all as any part thereof and that it is not a consequent of justification at all as works indeed are to what end doth all this dispute serve unlesse it be to make their seduced Catholiks who never are permitted to read any of our writings to beleeve that he hath doughtily confuted us § III. And that faith doth not justifie alone by way of disposing he endeavoureth to prove by five sorts of arguments The first from those seven dispositions required by the Councell of Trent to justification among which he reckoneth faith for one Whereunto in generall I answere that this whole discourse besides that it is impertinent for wee doe not hold as I have said that faith doth justifie by way of disposition either alone or at all it is also an idle speculation disagreeing from their practicke theologie and that in two respects First to their speculative justification they require foregoing preparations and dispositions but to the obtayning of justification in deed and in practise no such things are required For the efficacie of justifying a sinner they ascribe to their Sacraments which they say doe conferre gratiam gratum facientem that is justifie ex opere operato requiring as I conceive no preceding preparation or disposition in the party to be justified so hee doe not interpose the obstacle of any mortall sinne For if foregoing dispositions were required before the Sacraments then they should not justifie as I have said before ex opere operato but ex opere operantis Secondly they doe teach that in their first justification Charity and with it Faith and Hope are infused whereby a man that before was a sinner is made righteous And that therefore a man is first justified when these are infused and that these are first infused when a man is justified and yet they tell us of a true Faith true Hope true Love going before justification Which by their doctrine though they goe together I meane Faith Hope and Charity accompanied with other good dispositions are neither graces nor gifts of grace infused For before or without the Sacrament there is no justification which they have tyed to the Sacrament and before justification as themselves say there is no grace For if they were graces indeed as no doubt but they are where they are true and goe together accompanied with other good dispositions then men might be justified before the receit of the Sacrament as Abraham was and then the Sacrament to men so qualified should not conserre grace but seale it Thus to mainetaine their pernicious errour concerning the efficacie of the Sacraments justifying ex opere operato whereby they have turned religion into an outward formality that Faith that Hope that Charity which goe before the Sacrament as namely in Cornelius before his baptisme should be no true graces because all true justifying and saving grace is insused in the administration of the Sacrament and this infusion of grace is that which they call justification By their doctrine therefore justifying faith is that which in the very act of justification is infused and being infused doth justifie not by way of disposing but formally it selfe being informed by Charity And therefore according to their owne doctrine that faith which disposeth to justification is not justifying Faith And consequently all this discourse concerning six other preparative dispositions concurring with faith to prove that we are not justified by faith alone is besides the purpose For that faith which they make their first preparative disposition is not justisying faith neither doth justifie otherwise by Bellarmines owne confession than its next companion viz servile feare doth But wee when we say that faith alone doth justifie speake not of a bare and naked assent which is common to the wicked which cannot justifie either alone or at all but of a true
to three heads The first is the authority of Gods word For if the Scriptures any where expresly say that faith alone doth justifie it must he beleeved though no other cause could be rendred The second is the will of God justifying namely because it hath pleased God to grant justification upon the onely condition of faith The third is the nature of faith it selfe because it is the properâ—…y of faith alone to apprehend justification and to apply it unto us and to make it ours Besides these I have rendred other causes the chiefe and principall whereof is this because we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which being out of us in him is imputed onely to them that beleeve and is received onely by faith § II. But these three causes or reasons which he mentioneth will not easily be remov'd the first the authority of the Scriptures this being the maine doctrine of the Gospell Yea but saith Bellarmine it is no where said in expresse termes that faith alone doth justifie when we saith he have expresse termes that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely Iam. 2. 24. Answ. To the place in the Epistle of Iames I shall answere fully in his due place Onely here I say thus much That Saint Iameâ—… speaketh not of the justification of a sinner before God by which he is made or constituted just of which our question is but of that whereby a just man already justified before God may be approved declared and knowne both to himselfe and others to be just And that the Apostle Iames speaketh not either of workes as causes but as signes of justification or of the habit of true faith but of the profession of faith or faith professed onely and concludeth that a man is justified that is knowne and approved to be just not onely by the profession of the true faith but by workes also a godly conversation being as it were the life and soule of the profession and without which it is dead But though in expresse tearmes it be not said in so many words and Syllables that faith doth justifie alone yet this doctrine is by most necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures And what may by necessary consequence be deducted out of the Scriptures that is contained in the scriptures as all confesse Wherunto may be added that the Fathers so conceived of the doctrine of the scriptures who with one consent as you have heard have taught according to the scriptures that by faith we are justified alone And the Papists must remember that by oath they are bound to expound the scriptures according to the coÌ„sent of the fathers § III. Now that this doctrine is contained in the Scriptures I have plentifully proved before and something here shall bee added There are but two righteousnesses onely mentioned in the Scriptures by which wee can bee justified either that which is prescribed in the Law which is a righteousnesse inherent in our selves and performed by our selves or that which is taught in the Gospell which is the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in him and performed for us The former is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes the latter is the righteousnesse of faith A third righteousnesse by which wee should bee justified cannot be named And betweene these two there is such an opposition made in the Scriptures that if wee bee justified by the one we cannot by the other If therefore the Scriptures teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes it is all one as if they said that wee are justified by faith alone If it bee all one to say by faith and not by the workes of the Law or by faith alone then saith Bellarmine I demand whether all workes and every Law be excluded or not For if all workes be excluded then faith it selfe which Ioh. 6. 29. is the worke of God and if every Law then the Law of faith and consequently faith it selfe and so to be iustified by faith shal be nothing else but to be justified without faith Answ. it is plaine that by the Law is meant the Law of workes and by the workes of the Law all that obedience which is prescribed in the Law Now in the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed Then saith Bellarmine faith it selfe and the act of faith is excluded from the act of justification I answere first in this question the Apostle opposeth faith to workes and therefore faith is not included under workes Secondly faith as it is either an habit or an act and so part of inherent righteousnesse doth not justifie but as hath beene said relatively in respect of the object which being received by faith doth justifie as it was the brâ—…sen serpent apprehended by the eye which did heale and not the eye properly § IV. Againe the Scriptures teach that we are justified gratis gratiâ per sanguinem Christi per fidem Gratis that is freely without respect of any good workes done by us no not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done Tit. 3. 5. but by his meere grace and favour when we had deserved the contrary through the bloud and alone satisfaction of Christ received onely by faith To the word gratis Bellarmine answereth that it excludeth our owne merits which indeed can be none but not the free gifts of God as love and penitencie and the like for then faith also should be excluded That followeth not for when wee are justified by faith onely we are justified gratis gratis saith the Apostle freely by his grace through the merits of Christ by faith bringing onely faith to justification as the Fathers have taught and that not to bee any essentiall cause of our justification but onely to be the instrument and hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnes and therfore it is the condition required on our part in the covenant of grace The rest as love and hope and repentance c. being not the conditions of the covenant but the things by covenant promised to them that beleeve Vpon the condition of faith which is also the free gift of God the Lord promiseth remission of sins and justification and to those who are redeemed and justified by faith he doth by oath promise the graces of sanctification So that faith only on our part is required to the act of justification besides which we bring nothing else thereunto but love and the rest of the graces as Augustine saith of workes non precedunt justificandum sequuntur justificatum and therefore wee are justified by faith alone § V. And by this the second head is also proved namely that it is the good pleasure of God to grant justification upon the condition of faith alone If ye looke into all the promises of the Gospell ye shall find that they interpose only the
renounceth speciall faith For canst thou love Christ and rejoyce in him as thy Saviour if thou be not by speciall faith perswaded that thou shalt be saved by him Seeing then unto our justification before God we are to receive Christ as hath beene said by a true and lively assent and unto justification in the court of our owne conscience by a plerophory or assured perswasion we are to apply the promises to our selves which are the peculiar acts of faith and cannot be attributed to any other grace it followeth therefore from the proper nature of faith that by it alone we are justified § VIII His second cavill is taken from the Sacraments which by our confession as he saith doe apply the promises and justification it selfe to the receiver therefore saith he faith doth not justifie alone after the manner of an instrument applying In this argument he greatly pleaseth himselfe but without cause For first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we meane that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification with faith but without us we acknowledge many things to justifie Secondly faith justifieth alone ut manus accipientis the Sacraments ut manus dantis Thirdly faith doth actually justifie before God the Sacraments doe not justifie before God but serve to seale our justification to our owne consciences neither doe they actually conferre grace but confirme it as the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith When as therefore the termes of washing cleansing sanctifying saving are attributed to Sacraments these phrases are to be understood Sacramentally And this is our answere as for those which Bellarmine frameth for us hee hath good leave to make or to marre them at his pleasure CHAP. XV. Bellarmines fourth principall argument taken from the manner how faith doth justifie and the fifth from the formall cause of justification § I IF Faith saith hee doth justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit of justification then faith doth not justifie alone for love and penance and other good acts doe the like but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent I deny first the consequence of the proposition and the proofe thereof For neither love or penance nor other good acts doe either cause begin or merit justification And therefore though faith did justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit whereby justification is obtained it might for all them justifie alone This were sufficient to overthrow his whole Dispute But all his care is to prove the assumption which hee endeavoureth in all the parts thereof And first that faith is a cause of justificatition which we doe not deny yea we affirme that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as a cause thereof but faith onely But you will aske what cause We say the instrumentall onely If Bellarmine meane any other cause as no doubt but he doth he should have done well to have named it and to have proved it § II. He proveth faith to be a cause by the prepositions ex and per by and through attributed to faith whereto I answere that these particles sometimes are used to signifie the instrumentall cause As namely when we are said to be justified or saved through or by the word or the Sacraments Rom. 6. 4. Tit. 3. 5. Ioh. 17. 20. 1 Cor. 1. 21. 15. 2. Faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 17. Preachers are Ministers by whom you doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Ephes. 3. 6. And first for those plà ces wherein it is said that we are justified by faith or saved by faith Rom. 3. 28. 30. 5. 1. Ephes. 2. 8. In these and the like places saith he the preposition by or through doth signifie a true cause But he should have done well to have set downe what cause for an instrumentall cause is also a true cause The preposition per saith Bâ—…llarmine in another place is not fitly accommodated to the favour of God which is the efficient cause of justification but either to the formal as per gratiam or meritorious as permeritum filii or instrumentall cause as per fidem Sacramenta where you see by Bellarmines confession per is attributed to faith as to the instrumentall cause It is also attributed to the matter and merit as Rom. 5. 10 19. When as therefore it is also attributed to faith it cannot be attributed in the same sense as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of speech but of necessity it is to bee understood by a metonymy faith being put for the object of faith which is Christs righteousnesse And this manifestly appeareth when justification by the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as Rom. 3. 24. 25. wee are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the redemption which is in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in his blood by Christ we have accesse to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in him Eph. 3. 12. By the name of Christ we have remission of sinnes by faith in his name Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. As it is said of the cure of the creeple Act. 3. 16. that the name of Christ by faith in his name had healed him Thus I have shewed before that the same benefits of justification and salvation which properly we receive from the death and obedience of Christ are attributed to faith not properly but relatively and metonymically Not that faith it selfe worketh them but the object which it as the instrument apprehendeth § III. But Bellarmine will prove that in these and such like places the prepositions by and through doe signifie a true cause first by the contrary For when the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. Gal. 2. 3. and elsewhere doth prove that a man is not justified by workes nor by the Law without doubt he excludeth the force and efficacie of workes and of the Law in justifying and not a relative apprehension alone For no man could doubt but that the Law and works did not justifie by apprehending righteousnes relatively And therfore the saying of the Apostle had been very foolish if his meaning had beene that justice is apprehended by faith and not by the Law or workes Even as a man should speake foolishly who should say that the almes is received by the hand and not by the heele Neither did they whom the Apostle confuteth looke to be justified by their workes relatively but by the merit of them And therefore that which the Apostle denyeth to works he ascribeth to faith Answ. This manifestly proveth that the question of justification by faith or by workes is thus to bee understood whether wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith which is the righteousnesse of the Gospell the righteousnesse of faith or by a righteousnesse inherent in our selves which is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes For if the question should bee understood of faith
it selfe there would be no more opposition betweene faith and workes than is betweene the first and second justification of the Papists which are so farre from opposition that they are sub-alternall the one proving the other For if we be justified by righteousnesse inherent wee must bee justified both by habituall and actuall righteousnesse neither of them alone sufficing in adultis and therefore if by the one then by the other also Againe Faith being but one grace among many cannot as it is an habit inherent in us by it owne worthinesse or merit justifie or sanctifie alone but there must be a concurrence of charity and of other graces neither can the habits of grace suffice to the sanctification of one come to yeares unlesse they bring forth the fruits of obedience neither are the fruits of obedience called good works of any account before God unlesse they proceed from the inward habits of faith and love But faith considered relatively as the instrument apprehending Christs righteousnesse it self alone sufficeth to justification as the Fathers before have testified This is the worke of God which with God is in stead of all workes that wee beleeve on his Sonne For hee that truely beleeveth is reputed as if he had fulfilled the whole Law Christ being the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he therefore saith the Apostle that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the Law because Christ hath fulfilled it for him Christs obedience being imputed to him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if hee had performed the same in his owne person § IV. Secondly Bellarmine by other places where the preposition is used indevoureth to prove that faith is deciphered as a true cause For if saith he in all other places the preposition by or through doth signifie a cause why should it not betoken a cause when a man is said to be iustified by or through faith I answer first that the preposition is often used to signifie no cause at all as where it is attributed to wayes and meanes occasions and times waies as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2. 12. by another way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 12. 1. through the corne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through dry places vers 43. so through windowes Gen. 26. 8. 2 Cor. 11. 33. dores Mat. 7. 13. Ioh. 10. 1. walls as Act. 9. 25. tiles Luk. 5. 19. Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1. afflictions Act. 14. 22. meanes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by word Act. 15. 27. 32. by parable Luk. 8. 4. by vision Act. 18. 9. through a glasse 1 Cor. 13. 12. by Epistle 2 Thâ—…s 2. 15. by faith and not by sight 2 Cor. 5. 7. Occasion as our corruption by the Law worketh sinne Rom. 7. 5 13. for so it is said verse 8 11. it tooke occasion by the Commandement c. infirmity laid upon Lazarus that by it the Sonne of God might be glorified Ioh. 11. 4. Time whether all time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. 10. 2. 25. Or set times as three dayes Mat. 26. 61. fortie dayes Act. 1. 3. by night Luk. 5. 5. Mat. 5. 19. Secondly that the preposition is often used to signifie the instrumentall cause as in that Hebrew phrase by the hand of his servants Gen. 32 16. as God commanded by the hand of Moses Exod. 9. 35. 35. 29. Levit. 8. 36. 10. 11. 26. 45. Numb 4. 37 45 c. By the hand of Moses and Aaron Psal. 77. 20. 1 Sam. 16. 20. Iesse sent by the hand of his sonne David So God speaketh by the hand of his Prophets 1 Sam. 28. 15. 2 Sam. 12. 25. 2 Chr. 29. 25. By the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1. 70. So by his Prophets viz. as his instruments Mat. 1. 22. 2. 15. Thus God wrought miracles by the hands of Paul Act. 19. 11. or as himselfe speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his ministery Act. 21. 19. Rom. 15. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by me Thirdly that faith is no such cause of justification as is usually meant by the preposition joyned either with other causes of justification or with faith upon other occasions And first to mention those which Bellarmine saith he will here omit as that we are justified by Christ by his blood by his death by his obedience it may not be thought that when it is said that wee are justified by or through Christ and by or through faith or by or through the bloud the death the obedience of Christ and by or through faith that faith though the same preposition be prefixed before it should signifie the same kind of cause When the Apostle saith Rom. 3. 24. that we are justified by the grace of God there Bellar. noteth the formall cause of our justification confounding Gods grace and our charity freely that is saith he by the bounty of God noting the efficient by the redemption wrought by Christ Iesus which noteth the meritorious cause by faith in his blood we must needs conceive that faith is a distinct cause from the rest For neither is it the formall for there is but one and that one is charity as they teach nor the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that is Gods bounty and justice nor the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the meritorious cause for thath onely is the merit of Christ. It remaineth then that it is the instrumentall which is plainely signified when it is said that we are justified through the redemption or satisfaction of Ghrist by faith or when the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as I noted before § 2. § V. Bellarmine saith that in that place Rom. 3. 24. faith is there noted to be the dispositive cause which I have allready disproved The truth is that for all this flourish which Bellarmine here maketh hee maketh faith to be no cause at all of justification but a remote disposition which disposeth to justification no otherwise thâ—…n servile feare doth which is farre enough from being a cause of justification If it bee said that he maketh it a part of the formall cause of justification I answer that according to the Councell of Trent they constantly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is charity which being lost justification is lost though faith remaineth The habit of faith infused â—…s indeed a chiefe part of our sanctification as a mother grace and root of the rest but of justification it is no part but an instrument For justification consisteth wholly upon imputation of Christs righteousnesse which faith as the hand doth receive § VI. For the better understanding the manner how faith doth justifie wee are to distinguish the acts of faith both in justifying and sanctifying The act of faith in justifying is the elicite and immediate act of faith which is credere credendo Christum recipere amplecti to beleeve
of sinnes and his obedience for the acceptation unto life of us who receiving him by faith desire to be made partakers of his merits to our justification For as in our mindes we receive Christ by a lively assent or beleefe as hath beene shewed so in our hearts we receive him by an earnest desire expressed in our prayers to be made partakers of him and his merits Neither doth it follow that if by faith we impâ—…trate or obtaine remission of sinnes that therefore faith is the meritorious cause of justification unlesse it bee understood relatively in respect of Christ who is the onely meritorious cause both of our justification and salvation whom faith as the instrument doth apprehend § XV. His fifth and last reason is out of Heb. 11. Where the Apostle by many examples teacheth that by faith men doe please God and consequently that faith is of great price and merit with God Answ. That faith doth please God and is of high account with God I meane a true lively justifying faith not the faith of Papists hypocrites and Devils wee freely acknowledge to the honour of God the giver of it and to the shame of the Papists who for all their saire pretences here doe much vilifie it Howbeit merit wee ascribe none to it unlesse it be relatively by apprehending Christs merits to our justification and salvation That Abel Henoch and others mentioned Heb. 11. did please God by faith doth not disprove our justification relatively but proves it For God is pleased with none but in Christ in whom he is well pleased He is pleased with none in Christ but with them only that by faith receive him § XVI To these places of Scripture Bellarmine addeth tenne testimonies out of Augustine nine whereof doe testifie that by faith righteousnesse is impetrated that is by request obtayned and the righteousnesse which hee speaketh of is not the righteousnesse of justification but of sanctification Neither doe they prove any thing in this point but what wee confesse that by faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love wee obtaine for that Augustine meaneth by merits both the graces that is the habits and the fruits that is the acts of sanctification which we call good workes The testimonies are these fides inchoat meritum ut per munus Dei bene operâ—…tur where by merit he understandeth the grace of living well that faith doth merit that is obtaine the grace of working well Lex adducit ad fidem fides impetrat Spiritum largiorem diffundit Spiritus charitatem charitas implet legem Quod factorum lex minando imperat hoc fidei lex credendo impetrat Per legem cognitio peccati per fidem impetratio gratiae contra peccatum per gratiam sanatio animae Violentia fidei Spiritus sanctus impetratur per quem diffusa charitate in cordibus nostris lex non timore poenae sed justitiae a more completur In novâ—… testamento fides impetrat charitatem Ex fide ideo dicit Apostolus justificari hominem non ex operibus quia ipsa prima datur ex qua impetrentur caetera quae proprie opera nuncupantur in quibus justè vivitur Fidès non potita conceditur ut ei potenti alia concedantur His tenth testimony which in order is the second Nec ipsa remissio peccatorum sine aliquo merito est si fides hanc impetrat neither is the remission of sinnes it selfe without any merit if faith doe obtaine it Neither is there no merit of faith by which faith hee said O God bee mercifull to mee a sinner and worthily did that faithfull man being humbled goe home justified because hee that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted Where Augustine abusively useth as other Latine Fathers often doe the word merit in the sence of obtaining and that by request and that appeareth by Bellarmines owne confession that Augustine doth use to call merit any good worke in respect whereof we obtaine some other thing and by the place it selfe In which sence hee saith the Publican by his humble and faithfull prayer having obtained remission of sinnes went home justified For if merit properly so called did goe before remission of siune then men should merit before they bee in state of grace which Bellarmine denyeth then should wee not bee justified either gratis that is as all even Bellarmine himselfe expound it sine meritis or by the grace that is the gracious and undeserved favour of God when wee deserved the contrary Againe beâ—…ore remission of sinnes and justification all men bee sinners and unjust Now as Augustine saith in the very next words going before quid habere boni meriti possunt peccatores What good merit can sinners have and a little before that meritis impii non grattam sed poena debetur To the merits of a wicked man not grace but punishment is due Finally the Papists themselves ordinarily confesse that their first justification cannot be merited which is grace onely and not reward Though some of them sometimes doe talke of merits of congruity which properly are no merits or if they be Pelagius his maine errour must take place gratiam secundum merita dari that grace is given according to merits Bellarmine here saith that hee hath proved elsewhere that faith and contrition and other dispositions doe merit the grace of justification which the Councill of Trent expressely denieth § XVII His fifth principall argument to prove that faith alone doth not justifie consisteth of two arguments drawne from two principles which he will but point at now but hereafter demonstrate The one is from the formall cause of justification the other from the necessity of good workes unto salvation For if the formall cause of our justification bee a righteonsnessâ—… infused and really inherent in us and not the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith then faith alone doth not justifie but the former is true therefore the latter The consequence of the proposition we grant for unto sanctification faith alone doth not suffice but there must be a concurrence not onely of other habituall graces thereunto but also of actuall obedience But justification is not to be confounded with sanctification Neither doe we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is the formall cause of justification but the matter by imputation whereof we are justified The assumption namely that we are justified by a righteousnesse infused and really inherent in us he saith hee will fully prove in the next booke But all his proofes I have already fully answered and confuted in the third and fourth controversies concerning the matter and forme of justification and have by necessary arguments both disproved the negative to wit that wee are not justified by any righteousnesse inherent in us or infused into us and proved the affirmative viz. that we are justified onely by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us
true â—…aith may bee severed from charity lib. 6. cap. 3. The first oâ—…t of Ioh. 12. 42 43. § 1. The second out of 1 Cor. 13. 2. § 2 3. 4. The third out of Iam. 2. 14. § 5. The fourth because in the Church there are both good and bad § 6. The fifth from the â—…ature of faith and charity § 7 8 9. The sixth from an absurdity § 10. The seventh Testimonies of Fathers § 11. Whether iustifying faith may be without speciall apprehension of Christ. lib. 6. c. 4. No iustifying faith but that which laieth hold on Christ. § 1. To beleâ—…ve in Christ is to receive and embrace him § 2. Two degrees of faith the former specially apprehending the other actually applying Christ. § 3. Of the former degree § 4. Of the latter § 5. The necessity of this speciall apprehension to iustifioâ—…tion § 6 7. The Popish obiections against speciall faith lib. 6. cap. 4. § 8. Their obiections concerning fiducia affiance § 9. By alively assent men beleeve in Christ. § 10. That affiance is not faith § 11. The subiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 5. vid. subiect The obiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 6. vid. obiect Of the actor effect of faith which is to iustifie First whether indeed it dâ—…th iustifie or only dispose to iustification lib. 6. cap. 7. § 1 2. Secondly whether faith doth iustifie formally § 3. The Papists cavill that we debase faith § 4. which themselves have 〈◊〉 § 5. Thirdly whether faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 8. the state of the â—…troversie § 1. The explanation of the three termes Fides ibid. Iustificat § 2. Sola § 3 4 5. Our proofes § 6. Testimonies of Scripture § 7. Reasons § 8 9. 10 11. Testimonies of Fathers and other â—…ters in all ages lib. 6. cap. 9. Bellarmines arguments that faith dâ—…th not iustifie aloue lib. 6. cap. 10. This question he disputeth three waies ail which are impertinent § 1 2. The first that it doth not iustifie alone by way of disposing which bee proveth by five principall arguments the first because there are seven dispositions whereof faith is one which discourse of the seven dispositions is idle and impertinent lib. 6. cap. 10. § 3. VVhether any preparative dispositions be indeed required § 4. Of the first disposition which is faith lib. 6. cap. 10. § 5. His argument because it but beginneth iustification and therefore dâ—…th not instâ—…fie alone § 6. His first proofe Heb. 11. 6. § 7. His second Rom. 10. 13 14 § 8. His third Ioh. 1. 12. § 9. Testimonies oâ—… Fathers that faith is the beginning § 10. His reasons § 11. Of feare the second disposition lib. 6. cap. 11. § 1 2. ad 6. Of hope the third disposition lib. c. 11. § 6. c. Of love the fourth lib. 6. cap. 12. 1 2. c. ad 9. Of 〈◊〉 the fifth lib. 5. cap. 12. § 9. 10. The sixth disposition a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament lib. 6. c. 12. § 11. The seventh a purpose of a new life lib. 6. cap. 12. § 12. His second principall argument because faith being alone and severed from charity and other graces cannot 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 13. His third principall argument from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the causes which may bee given why faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 14. which are â—…hree First authority of Scriptures § â—… 3 4. Secondly â—…he will and pleasure of God § 5. Thirdly because it is the property of faith alone to receive Christ. § 6. that is to 〈◊〉 and to apply him § 7. 8. His â—…ourth principall 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith dâ—…th 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 15. I. Because it iustifieth as a causâ—… â—… â—… c. ad 7. II. As the beginning of righteousnesse § 7 8 9. III. As the merit § 10. c. ad finem capitis His fifth principall argument from two principles viz. first from the formall cause of iustification Lib. 6. cap. 15. § 17. Secondly from the â—…ecessity oâ—… good workes for if faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would 〈◊〉 alone lib. 7. 〈◊〉 5. § 1 2. That good workes are necessary by way of efficiency § 3. VVhether faith doth save alone lib. 7. cap 5. § 15. Bellarmines reasons to the contrary § 16. Feare The second disposition iâ—… iustification according to the councell of Trent lib. 6. cap. 11. The finall cause of iustification see End Forme The formall cause of iustification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse l. 1. cap. 3. § 1. 7. lib. 5. per totum Private opinions of some Divines concerning the forme of iustification lib. 1. cap. 5. Their depravation of our assertion as if wee held that wee are formally iust by Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 5. § 2. Their errours § 3. The private opinioâ—…s concerning the matter and the forme of iustification very dangerous lib. 1. cap. 5. § 13 14. G God The principall cause of iustification lib. 1. cap. 2. § 1. c. The righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified is the maine doctrine of the Gospell lib. 1. cap. 1. § 1. It is called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of Christ who is God lib. 4. cap. 2 3 4. Gospell The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell lib. 7. cap. 4. § 3. The acceptions of the words Law and Gospell either more large or more stâ—…ict § 3 4. Bellarmines disproofe of the difference by uâ—… given § 5. Because in the Gospell is contained the Doctrine of good workes ibid. Whether the promise of salvation made to our obedience doth prove the merit of good workes Eternalll life promised in three respects First as a free gift lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. Secondly as our inheritance § 7. Thirdly as a free reward § 8. The Example of Gods dealing with Abraham § 9. Though eternall life bee the reward of our obedience yet it is not merited by it § 10. Some places of Scriptures which the Papists understand of causes are to bee understood as notes § 11. Or evidences § 12. Three other answeres § 13. Testimonies wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised in the Gospell alleaged by Bellarmine § 14. The I. Matth. 5. 20. lib. 7. cap. 4. § 14. II. Matth. 19. 17. § 15. III. Testimonies out of the Apostles § 16. IV. Out of the Prophets Ezec. 18. 21. § 17. V. From the condition of faith § 18. Bellarmines second argument from the differences betweene the Law and the Gospell § 19. Eight differences betweene the Law and the Gospell assigned by Bellarmine § 19. 20. Grace The moving cause of iustification l. 1. cap. 2. § 2. VVhat is meant by the word Grace lib. 3. The Papists by the grace of God by which we are iustified understand the habit of grace inherent in us lib. 3. cap. 1. § 1. The divers acceptions of the word Grace § 3. The distinction of Grace § 3. The state of the question concerning Grace
that righteousnesse which is not in us but out of us in Christ which is absurd for as themselves expound the phrase Formall justice consisteth either in the qualities of the soule or in good actions that is it is either habituall or actuall so that it cannot stand in imputation by which wee can no more be just formally than wife rich alive by imputation of wisedome riches and life Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd as to conceive so absurdly of us But wee teach that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall by which he was formally just is the matter and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification And so those very Authors upon whom they would father this assertion in expresse termes doe teach affirming that Christs obedience or fulfilling of the Law is the materiall cause of justification and the application or imputation thereof is the formall cause of justification We say then that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justification or that by which we are formally just but the imputation of it it selfe being the matter of justification that is to say that thing which unto justification is imputed Wherefore I shall not need to answere in defence of our assertion the arguments either of those Veteratores the Papists or these Novatores who both agree in this calumniation against us all tending to prove that wee are not formally juâ—… by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him which we doe not hold For the righteousnesse whereby a man is formaâ—…ly just is inherent in himselfe for what is more intrinsecall than the forme But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us no more than our sinne was inherent in him And yet as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes not formally God forbid but by imputation so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse not formally as we are justified or in our selves but in him viz. by imputation And againe as by Adams actuall transgrâ—…ssion which was transient and now hath no being we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience so likewise by Christs obedience which hee performed in the daies of his flesh and was proper to his owne person we are justified that is not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also constituted just and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And yet we deny not but that as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed are also by sinne inherent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners so they to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justification are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ and infused by his spirit in their spirituall regeneration § III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satisfaction for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others First that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification Secondly that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne Thirdly that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne no not the righteousnesse of Christ otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne Fourthly that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is not the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ viz. remission of sinne Fifthly that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive but the merit therof Sixthly that not the righteousnesse of Christ but the act of faith is imputed for righteousnesse All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise § IV. For as touching the two first and the maine errour it selfe I have proved both in the third Chapter of this booke briefly and in the whole fifth booke at large that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which we are both absolved from our sinnes and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous and consequently that these two are the essentiall parts of justification viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his blood that is freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and the imputation of Christs obedience by which wee are made or constituted righteous and are entituled to the kingdome of Heaven So that remission of sinne is not the forme and much lesse the entire forme of justification considered as an action of God but an effect of the forme because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we have remission of sinne Neither is it the whole benefit of justification but a part thereof For although many of our Divines as hath beene said have taught that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required yet their assertion as hath also beene shewed is to be understood as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin as spoken in opposition to the Papists who say that to justification concurre not onely remission of sinnes but also inward renovation or sanctification To contradict them our Divines have said that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne wherewith alwayes concurreth imputation of righteousnesse and not by renovation or sanctification Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely was to exclude not imputation of righteousnesse which unseparably accompanieth the not imputing of sinne as Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation § V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confuted Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion who teach with us that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience for remission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood which cleanseth us from all our sinnes and not to his active obedience And justification is nothing as they say but remission of sinne whereupon it would follow that we are justified onely by Chriâ—…ts passive obedience which I have already disproved § VI. The fourth denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse I have fully confuted in the fourth booke besides that which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ is the same with that which I confuted Chap. 4. § 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne but that by which wee have remission not justification it selfe but that by which wee are justified For remission of sinne as well as justification it selfe is an action of God not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse
formall causes of justification Bellarmine answereth thus the Councell of Trent in expresse termes said that there is but one onely formall cause of justification Yea but say wee the Councell seemeth to make two viz. remission of sinnes and renovation But saith he when the Councell maketh mention severally of remission of sin and of infusion of grace it did it not to signifie that there is a twofold formall cause of justification but to declare that there are two termes of that motion which is called justification or two effects of the same cause For there cannot bee that mutation or translation which the Councell noteth to bee in justification unlesse by remission of sinne a man cease to bee wicked and by infusion of justice begin to be godly But saith hee as the aire when it is enlightened of the Sunne by the same light which it receiveth ceaseth to bee darke and beginneth to be lightsome So a man by the same justice given and infused by the Sunne of righteousnesse ceaseth to bee unjust the light of grace expelling the darknesse of sinne and beginneth to bee just the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne And as in calefaction which similitude hee useth elsewhere the accesse of heat expelleth cold so in justification the infusion of justice expelleth sinne This then is the doctrine of the new Church of Rome that in this mutation called justification which they define to bee a passage from sinne to righteousnesse though there be as in all other motions duo termini viz. sinne which is terminus à quo and righteousnesse which is terminus ad quem yet there are not two distinct actions concurring viz. remission or expulsion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of justice expelling sinne even as in calefaction though there bee two termes cold and hot yet there are not two actions for the same action of fire which bringeth in heat expelleth cold and so in illumination there are two termes darkenesse and light but not two actions for one and the same act of the Sunne which bringeth light driveth away darkenesse Whereby it is evident that by remission of sinne the Papists doe not understand as all men from the beginning of the world have understood pardoning forgiving not imputing sinne but the utter deletion expulsion abolition of it which Bellarmine calleth veram remissionem true remission as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true remission but this true remission they hold to bee such that in a man who is justified and hath remission of sinne there is no sinne remaining and hee onely is to bee held a just man in whom there is no sinne Thus then remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from justification and that brought in the roome of it which belongeth to that perfection of sanctification whereunto none attaine in this life § III. Now that the Papists grossely erre in making remission of sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righteousnesse may appeare by these arguments First whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered the guilt and the corruption or Anomy thereof it is evident that the guilt of sinnes past is taken away by remission wholly and at once the corruption is taken away by mortification thereof not wholly in this life and at once but by degrees we being day by day renewed in the inner man The latter is the worke of Gods Spirit within us The former is an action of God without us such as is that of the Creditor in remitting or forgiving a debt And so the Scriptures conceive of remission For our sinnes are debts in respect of the guilt binding us over to punishment which wee owe for them When as God therefore remitteth the debt releaseth this obligation forgiveth the punishment hee is said to remit our sinnes This our Saviour taught by the parables of the creditors and debtors Matth. 18. 23. Luk. 7. 41. And thus he hath taught us to pray Matth. 6. 12. Forgive us our debts as wee forgive our debtors How doe wee forgive By not revenging the offence but laying aside all desire and purpose of revenge by passing by it and as it were forgetting it by covering it with charity by not imputing it by being reconciled unto the party who hath offended us not by a reall taking away of the sinne from the offender but a wiping of it out of our remembrance not by expelling the offence out of the offender but out of our thoughts § IV. Thus in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish and extinguish the sinne it selfe but to absolve from the guilt of sinne to pardon and to forgive the debt and to remit the punishment to cover a mans sinne and not to impute it And this plainely appeareth by these manifold phrases which are used in the Scriptures to signifie remission of sinne all which import the taking away of the guilt but none the utter abolishing of the corruption As first the Hebrew Salach Exod. 34. 9. Numb 14. 19 20. 30. 6. Deut. 29. 19. Psal. 103. 3. Esay 55. 7. Ier. 31. 34. Dan. 9. 20. signifieth parcere remittere ignoscere condonare propitium esse Kasah to hide to spare to forgive Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 32. 1. 85. 2. Ioel 2. 17. Deut. 13. 8. Kaphar also is to cover to pardon to be propitious Deut. 21. 8. Psal. 65. 4. 78. 38. 79. 9. Esay 22. 14. Nasa to spare to forgive to take away the guilt Gen. 18. 24 26. 50. 17. Exod. 32. 32. Numb 14. 19. Psalm 32. 1. cum Rom. 4. 7. Esay 33. 24. Psalm 25. 18. Habar to passe by an offence Mic. 7. 18. and Hehebir to cause it to passe 2 Sam. 12. 13. 24. 10. Zech. 3. 4. Machah to wipe or to blot out of remembrance the sinnes of men as it were out of a booke to blot them out from before his face Nehem. 4. 5. Psalm 51. 9. Ier. 18. 23. Hesir to remove Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute Psal. 32. 2. In like manner the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to remit or forgive Mat. 6. 12 14 15. 18. 27 32. whence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remission that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgivenesse as Hesychiiâ—…s expoundeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condonare to forgive Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to impute Rom. 4. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 19. So the Latine remittere dimittere ignoscere condonare donare veniam dare parcere propitium esse and the English to remit to pardon to forgive § V. For the farther clearing of this point let us consider these three things first what that is which is remitted Secondly where it remaineth untill it bee remitted Thirdly by what act of God it is remitted The thing remitted is our
fiction of the hereticks of our time Nay we say more that by the preaching of the Word faith is not onely excited where it was before but that it is first wrought ordinarily and begotten by the ministry of the Gospell The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments and the stirring of it up to the Word As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word But the Scripture teacheth us that faith commeth by hearing the Word that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve that without a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 4. 15. that therefore preachers are their Fathers in the faith that they justifie men Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them whereby they are justified Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached to repent and to be baptized I answer that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life in Lydia Act. 16. 14 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized even as Abraham was before he was circumcised Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience and much more that they might be saved many other things as repentance and a godly life with the use of the Sacraments and of all other good meanes are required besides that faith whereby alone they are justified before God And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized not that Baptisme properly doth justifie and much lesse that it begetteth â—…aith for in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized not onely at the time of Baptisme but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve And whereas he saith that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought I confesse it is true that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith but to the true lively and effectuall faith which in some measure purifieth the heart and worketh by love causing a man though not to fulfill all things that are commanded as Bellarmine speaketh yet to will to desire and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded according to the measure of grace received But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe § V. As for his similitude of the Physitian I answer the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules which are our sinnes by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ is to beleeve in him and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes on our part to apply them is faith For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that which was but a figure of Christ be healed even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse that whosoever being stung as we all are by the old Serpent and made subject to eâ—…all death shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith shall bee saved To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience when the Iaylour Act. 16. 30 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling and falling downe before Paul and Silas demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saved And this remedy â—…in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. § VI. Thirdly where the Apostle in this place nameth onely remission of sinnes hee saith it hindreth not but that justâ—…fication may bee understood to consist in remission of sinnes and infusion of righteousnesse For as we have not once shewed saith hee remission of sinnes is not onely the pardâ—…ning of the punishment but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice comming in the place which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice Reply Not once but very oft hath hee said that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse because by infusion of justice sinne is expelled as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment that he hath utterly excluded from justification For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse which as hee teacheth is the onely act of justification whereof there is but one formall cause which is righteousnesse insuâ—…ed as the Councel of Trent hath defined but by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused as Bellarmine hath confessed doth not or cannot satisfie for our sinnes Now if there bee but one formall cause of justification as indeed there is but one and that one be not the imputation but the infusion of justice or as they rather use to speake the justice infused which expelleth sinne which expulsion or deletion they call the remission yea the true remission of sinne then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justification But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment be the not imputing of sinne which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth and the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes when hee imputeth not sinne then it will necessarily follow that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justification whereby we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne is another thing which the Scriptures call Sanctification And this I take to be a manifest truth which being granted we have obtained the whole cause § VII Fourthly againe saith he although there were mention made in this place of justification only from sinnes yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification of cleansing of washing and renewing which shew
fifth Capitall errour of the Papists in the Article of justification is concerning justifying faith which hath many branches 1. Concerning the nature of it viz. what it is and therein also they erre diversly 2. Concerning the subject of it both â—… and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the parties whose it is and the parts of the man wherein it is 3. Concerning the object of Faith 4. Concerning the act or effect of it which is to justifie where are three questions the first concerning the act it selfe whether it doth indeed justifie or onely dispose to justification the other two concerning the manner how it justifieth the former whether instrumentally as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse or formally as part of inherent righteousnesse The other whether faith doth justifie alone § II. As touching the first what faith is they hold justifying faith to be but a bare assent to all or any truth revealed by God which as it is in their opinion without speciall apprehension of Christ so it may be void of knowledge and severed from charity as they teach That faith in generall is an assent and that it may be defined to bee a firme and willing assent to every truth revealed by God grounded on the authority of God revealing it we willingly agree For hereby faith is distinguished from all other acts or habits of our minde And first from doubting in that it is an assent for in doubting the assent is withheld which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from whence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as contrariwise to assent is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And that faith is assent it is evident because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith is a perswasion derived from the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to bee perswaded or to beleeve and a man is said to assent unto or to beleeve that of the truth whereof he is perswaded hence it is that the act of faith which is to beleeve is expressed sometimes by the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 17. 4. 27. 11. Heb. 11. 13. but most plainely Act. 28. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some beleeved the things which are spoken but some beleeved not Secondly from opinion in that faith is a firme assent or as Basil speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an undoubted assent for he that beleeveth the truth of God hath as it were put his seale unto it But opinion is the judgement of things contingent which may happen to bee false Sed fidei falsum subesse non potest but the subject of faith cannot be false Thirdly in that it is a willing assent from the forced beliefe of Devils and some desperate wicked men who beleeve that which they abhorre or as Saint Iames speaketh beleeve and tremble Iam. 2. 19. Mat. 8. 29. Fourthly from all other knowledge in that it is an assent to truth revealed or related by God and grounded upon the authority of God speaking in his Word for faith commeth by the hearing of the word So saith Saint Basil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith therefore is an undoubted assent of things heard in the assured perswasion of things preached by the grace of God And that is it which Bellarmine citeth out of Augustine quòd intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quòd autem credimus authoritati that we understand any thing we owe to reason but that wee beleeve to authority All other firme assent is given to things either in themselves evident to sense or reason or to such as are manifested by discourse But the object of faith is not discerned by sence nor sounded by reason such as is the mystery of the holy Trinity and of the incarnation of Christ c. neither is faith of things seene Eye hath not seene nor Eare heard neither have entred into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him And wheras the certainty of all other knowledge is grounded upon sence or experience and reason the certainty of this knowledge is grounded upon the authority of God speaking in his word For which cause the certainty of faith is greater than of any other knowledge For howsoever sense and reason may be deceived yet the ground of faith is unfallible which is the authority of God who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that cannot lye a God of truth yea truth it selfe whereupon Clemens Alexandrinus saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore it selfe is a firme demonstration because truth accompanieth Faith those things which are delivered God and Basill what is the property of faith an undoubted plerophorie or full perswasion of the truth of the words inspired of God which is not shaken with any reasoning either induced from naturall necessity or formed to piety And such is the certainety of faith that the Apostle defineth it that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the subsistence which giveth a being to things which now have not a being which is nothing but an assured beleefe as the word is used 2 Cor. 9. 4. 11. 17. Heb. 3. 14. and the evidence of things not appearing or not seene which the Greeke Sholiast in mine opinion very well explaneth Faith it selfe is the subsistence or substance of things hoped for For because those things which are in hope are without subsistence as yet not extant faith becommeth the substance and subsistence of them making them after a sort to exist and to be present because it doth beleeve they are Faith also is the evidence and demonstration of things not seene And faith sheweth things to be visible which are not seene How in the minde and in hope beholding things which doe not appeare § III. But howsoever faith is an assent and is in generall so to be defined as I have said yet justifying faith is not a bare assent either destitute of knowledge or severed from charity or without speciall apprehension and application for these are three errors of the Papists now in order to be confuted As touching the first The Papists doe not onely hold that justifying faith may be without knowledge but that also it may better bee defined by ignorance than by knowledge This faith which is without knowledge they call implicite faith because they beleeving some one common principle as namely I beleeve the bâ—…ly Catholicke Church doe thereby beleeve implicitè whatsoever is to be beleeved that is whatsoever the Catholicke Church beleeveth and propoundeth to bee beleeved And therefore this they call also an entire faith because thereby a man doth not onely beleeve the written word but also unwritten verities which are the traditions of the Church of Rome and both of them not for themselves but for the authority of the Church propounding them to bee beleeved Now they teach that not only for Lay men it is sufficient to beleeve as the Church beleeveth which was
and by beleeving to receive and embrace Christ. The acts of faith in sanctifying and producing morall dueties are immediate acts or imperati which faith produceth by meanes of other virtues commanded by faith such are sperare confidere amare timere obedire pati c Of justification the man indued with faith is not the efficient but the subject and the patient who receiving by faith which is his onely act the righteousnesse of Christ is thereby justified God imputing to the beleever the righteousnesse of his Sonne and therefore though to beleeve bee his owne act yet hee is not said in the active to justifie himselfe by faith but in the passive to bee justified by faith Rom. 3. 24. 28. 5. 1. But in the duties of sanctification and in all morall duties the faithfull man is the efficient of them and his faith as it is said of arts other habits is the principium agendi the principle wherby he worketh and of them faith under God is the prime cause and as some call that which is principium agendi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such actions are the most of those which Heb. 11. are so highly commended which though they were the fruits of justifying faith yet were the acts of faith not as it justifieth but as it sanctifieth fortifieth or otherwise qualifieth them who are endued with it and this efficiencie of faith in Greeke and Latine is oftner signified without the prepositions than with As Heb. 11. though the sence be the same Of justification therefore faith is but the instrumentall cause justifying relatively that is in respect of the object which it doth receive being the onely instrument to receive that object which alone doth justifie But of the dueties of sanctification and other morall actions such as for the most part are mentioned Heb. 11. whereof the faithfull man is the efficient justifying faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love and other virtues as affiance c. is the prime cause working them not relatively by apprehending the object but effectually producing them as principium agendi wherby Bellarmines dispute out of Heb. 11. is confuted For there it is said saith hee that by faith the Saints overcame Kingdomes wrought righteousnesse obtained the promises stopped the mouths of Lyons c. Where the particle by doth not signifie apprehension but the true cause For faith was the cause of Abels religious offering of Noahs preparing the Arke of Abrahams obedience c. All this I confesse but that which he would inferre therupon that faith therefore doth not justifie relatively by way of apprehending the object I have already answered for that which hee spake before of apprehending relatively was idle and frivolus § VII The second part of his assumption was that saith is the beginning of justice and consequently the inchoated formall cause of justification So that now belike the seven dispositions shall be the inchoated formes of justification the entire forme being but one viz. charity and consequently the disposing faith and the disposing feare and so of the rest shall be inchoated charity which is ridiculous Bellarmine in this argument as allwayes by justification understandeth sanctification whereof and of all inherent righteousnesse wee acknowledge faith to bee the beginning and consequently the beginning of that righteousnesse by which we are formally just But of justification not the beginning only but the accomplishment and perfection is to be attributed unto faith because no sooner doe we by faith lay hold upon the righteousnesse of Christ which is most perfect but wee are perfectly justified thereby And therefore the Fathers as you heard before â—… acknowledge faith alone to suffice unto justification So Origen in Rom. 3. lib. 3. Hierome and Sedulius in Rom. 10. 10. in Gal. 3. 6. Chrysost. in Gal. 3. 6. in Tit. 1. 13. Augustin de tempore Serm. 68. Chrysâ—…log serâ—… 34. Primasius in Gal. 2. Oecumen in Col. 2. Theophylact in Gal. 3. Anselm in Rom. 4. If faith alone sufficeth unto justification then doth it not onely begin but also perfect and accomplish it For Rom. 5. 1. Being justified by faith wee have peace with God But Bellarmine endeavoureth to prove his assertion by authority of Scriptures and testimonies of Fathers His first testimony out of the Scriptures is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Where saith he faith it selfe is counted righteousnesse and consequently faith doth not apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ but faith in Christ is it selfe justice And if it be lively and perfected by Charity it shall be perfect justice if not it shall at the least be unperfect and inchoated justice Answ. If the question were concerning the approbation or justification of the act of faith or the habit I would acknowledge that the Lord doth accept the same though unperfect in it selfe as righteous As the zealous act of Phinehas was counted unto him for righteousnesse throughout all generations But the Apostle speaketh of the justification of the person who cannot by one habit and much lesse by one act of faith be formally just But forasmuch as by faith in Christ the beleever receiveth the perfect righteousnesse of Christ this faith in respect of the object doth fully justifie the beleever and is therefore counted to him for righteousnesse not that it selfe is his righteousnesse nor that he is righteous in himselfe who still in himselfe remaineth a sinner but in Christ. And such was the faith of Abraham and of all the faithfull that not in themselves but in the promised seed all that beleeve in him should be blessed that is justified The Greeke word used sometimes by the Septuagint as Gen. 18. 18. 28. 14. and retained by the Apostle Gal. 3. 8. is very significant viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie that not in themselves but in the promised seed they should be justified and blessed for so the Apostle Rom. 4. 5 6 7. useth these words promiscuously as also Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith preached before the Gospell unto Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed This blessednesse therefore this justification is obtained by faith and therefore is faith counted righteousnesse because it receiveth it As for faith it selfe absolutely considered without relation to its object we according to the Popish doctrine are justified by it neither in the act of justification nor before Not before for untill it be as they speake formed with Charity it cannot justifie nor in the act for charity alone is the formall cause of justification and then only are we formally justified when Charity is infused or else there are more formall causes of justification than one which Bellarmine according to the doctrine of the Councill of Trent doth utterly deny § VIII His second testimony 1 Corinthians 3. 11. another foundation can
without the Law is revealed in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith But all men without exception both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore seeing all have sinned and are fallen short of the glory of God that is excluded from eternall glory they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law but they are justified by a righteousnesse which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel to wit the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith And that is it which is said in this text that those who have sinned and are fallen short of Gods glory and from their title to heaven are justified that is acquitted from their sinnes and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven freely without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves by the meere gracious favor of God when they had deserved the contrary through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse c. To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare § III. Secondly it is proved by the words of the text alleaged the first wherof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being justified Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have proved heretofore doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse and therfore here it is not meant that wee are justified by grace infused Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject but relative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath beene shewed And wee must remember that as it is called so it is justificatio impii the justification of a sinner not onely because before justification men are sinners but also because being justified they still remaine sinners in themselves though in Christ they are made righteous And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation to our glorification whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner as righteous in Christ not onely at his first conversion but also afterwards whiles hee beleeveth in Christ though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us that the merit of his obedience may beâ—… continually imputed unto us As for the Papists they being in their owne conceit justified as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie or absolved when they come to yeares they are no sinners neither is there any thing in them which God hateth or which may properly bee called sinne But justification being of sinners and they being no sinners but â—…aying they have no sinne and avouching that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne hereby it appeareth that neither are they justified neither is there any truth in them § IV. The next word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an exclusive particle excluding the false causes of justification and signifying that wee are justified without any desert or worthinesse in our selves without works without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us which directly overthroweth the assertion of the Papists for proofe whereof this place was alleaged § V. The third word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his grace that is by the gracious favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him as hath beene proved that is by his love of us and not by our love of him Neither is there any shew of reason why it should in this place above all others signifie as it never doth an habit of justifying grace inherent in us especially if that bee true which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate that wee are not justified by that which is inherent And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words gratia Dei gratis justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei they are justified freely because neither working before their justification nor rendring any recompence after their justification they are by faith onely justified by the grace that is as he expoundeth it the gift of God And on those words by the redemption which is in Christ Iesu he testifieth saith hee that the grace of God is in Christ but not in us because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit The name of Grace saith he when it is here said justified freely by his grace though it may signifie that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man and inherent therein yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei bâ—…nitatem benignitatem erga hominem the free or gracious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man Grace therefore doth not signifie either the matter or the forme but the efficient cause of our justification § VI. The fourth word is through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law both in respect of the precept and of the penalty by which being as the Papists themselves confesse imputed unto us we are redeemed and justified as being the matter and merit of justification § VII The fifth word is by faith whereby is noted the instrument by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified which is indeed out of us in him but imputed to those that beleeve The righteousnesse therefore by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of faith that is the righteousnesse of God or of Christ apprehended by faith § VIII The sixth and last is the end why God did give his Sonne to be a propitiation for our sinnes to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes and that hee might bee just and the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For in the worke of our redemption and justification Gods justice is declared to be such that he forgiveth no sinnes but those onely for which his justice is satisfied by Christ neither doth he justifie any but those whom by communication of Christs righteousnesse unto them he maketh just But how should the satisfaction of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings being transient and so long agoe performed bee communicated unto us for our justification otherwise but by imputation And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse then not by inherent grace or infused righteousnesse CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted § I. NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon this place Here saith he all the causes almost of justification are set forth together The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis freely importing the liberality of
respect of the almes which it doth receive And yet I doe not conceive that therefore the hand and the almes be relatives But we confesse that justifying faith is not without his object yet that object by apprehenâ—…ing wherof it 〈◊〉 justifie relâ—…tively is not righteousnesse inherent as here Bellarmine against his owne conscience doth suggest but the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified betweene which and faith there is such a relation that as justifying faith is called the faith of Christ or faith in Christ faith in his bloud so the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified is called the righteousnesse of faith And further I confesse that whosoever is justified by righteousnesse imputed is also in some measure just by righteousnesse inherent though he be not justified before God thereby But whereas he saith that wee will easily admit this argument that where faith is there is also inherent justice and consequently that justifying faith cannot be severed from other virtues because wee teach that by every sinne faith is lost I doe much marvell at his impudency for though he and his consorts doe wickedly teach that by every act of infidelity faith is lost yet wee are so farre from granting that faith is lost by every sinne that we confidently hold that true justifying faith is never totally or finally lost by any sinne whatsoever that is incident to the faithfull and regenerate man Some indeed have taught that by hainous offences which doe vastare conscientiam waste the conscience faith is lost yet that is farre from saying it is lost by every sinne Secondly againe saith he if faith doth justifie relatively then it cannot be in a mans minde but justice also must be there and without love there is no justice Answ. Without love there is no justice inherent but that is not it to which faith when it justifieth hath relation but that which faith having justified us bringeth forth in us as a consequent of justification Thirdly moreover saith he if faith severed from all other virtues doe justifie alone then it may also justifie being accompanied with those vices which are contrary to those virtues But this cannot be imagined that a man should be justified and yet remaine a wicked man Answ. If by vices he understand certaine vicious dispositions which though they doe not reigne in the faithfull yet remaine in them as their infirmities I confesse that justifying faith may and doth stand with such But if he meane the contrary habits of sinne which reigne in the hearts of the wicked and impenitent sinners I professe that justifying faith cannot stand with such For where these doe reigne the man is wholly unregenerate and where regeneration is not there faith which by regeneration is wrought cannot be It is therefore against the nature and being of a true justifying faith to harbour in a soule unregenerate § IV. To this argument he saith we answere that they assume that which is impossible viz. that faith may be alone which I beleeve not to have beene the answere of any of our Doctors for a man arguing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may suppose that which is impossible and yet the argument be of no lesse force But our assertion that faith cannot be alone which before I have made good in the second Chapter of this booke and defended against Bellarmines objections Chap. 3. hee laboureth here to take away by three reasons first by cavilling with Luther and Calvin First Luther saith that faith justifieth both before and without Charity I rejoyne it justifieth before because in order of nature it goeth before without because though Charity be present with it yet it justifieth without it even as the eye though the eare be with it yet seeth without it Secondly Calvin saith that the seed of faith remaineth in the greatest falles of the faithfull and therefore without Charity I rejoyne Calvin saith no more than S. Iohn doth that the seed of God doth alwaies remaine in those that are borne of God which seed of God is as well the seed of Charity as of Faith and both the one and the other remaine in the greatest fals of Gods children as wee see in Peter in whom though he fell most grievously in denying and sorswearing his Lord yet the seeds yea the habits of faith and love did remaine as I have proved elsewhere Secondly saith he because our argument assumeth not that faith may be alone but that if faith did justifie alone it would doe so though it were alonâ—… this reason doth not confute our assertion that faith cannot be alone but taketh away that answere which he falsely I thinke assigneth to us But this consequence of his I have denied and disproved His third reason which is but the second to disprove our assertions if it bee true saith he that true faith is never alone then it is because faith begetteth those other graces even as a good Tree bringeth forth good fruit And if this were so then faith should goe before love and other graces if not in time yet in nature But faith cannot be conceived to be in nature before justification or justice infused or those graces wherein justification consisteth because these are relatives as they say God justifying and faith receiving justification for relatives are simulnatura c. Answ. The relatives that we meane are Christs righteousnesse imputed of God and faith apprehending or receiving it which though they bee simul natura in respect of the one to the other yet both of them are before the other graces in order of nature But if justifying faith be before charity and there be no righteousnesse without charity then saith he the same man may be just and not just at the same time Answ. It followeth not For though in order of nature faith be before love 1 Tim. 1. 5. yet in time they goe together Neither is that such an absurdity as he imagineth that the same man at the same time should be a sinner in himselfe and righteous in Christ a sinner according to the Law because he hath broken it but righteous according to the Gâ—…spell because in Christ he hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the end of the Law to every one that beleeveth Insomuch that every one that beleeveth in Christ is reputed as if he had fulfilled the Law Lastly because saith he it is false which they hold that faith cannot be severed from Charity and other virtues and this he taketh upon him to prove in the next Chapter unto which I have fully answered in the second question concerning the nature of faith CHAP. XIV Bellarmines third principall argument from the removall of those causes which may be given why faith doth justifie alone § I. HHis third principall argument is taken from the removall of those causes he meaneth reasons which may be given why faith alone doth justifie All which as he saith may be reduced