Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	death_n	law_n	sin_n	5,839	5	5.9889	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62378	An exposition vvith notes on the whole fourth chapter to the the Romanes wherein the grand question of justification by faith alone, without works, is controverted, stated, cleared, and fully resolved ... / by William Sclater, Doctor in Divinity, sometimes minister of Gods word at Pitminster, in Summerset ; now published by his son, William Sclater, Batchelar in Divinity, minister at Collompton in Devon.	Sclater, William, 1575-1626.; Sclater, William, 1609-1661.	1650 (1650)	Wing S918; ESTC R37207	141,740	211

an action best available for confidence in that respect to relye upon namely His raising of Jesus from the dead The like in sundry other places is observable Would they humble themselves for their sins they consider God as terrible and dreadfull in his judgments would they raise up themselves with comfort they consider him as a God that heepeth Covenant and promise as a father of mercies and God of all consolation would they stablish hope in expectation of things passing the course of nature they consider his endless power able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we can aske or think There is a confused apprehension of the deity for the most part liveless and ineffectuall when men ingross only and indistinctly mediate the Divine nature without reference to particulars concerning the present occasion And another as preposterous unseasonable and no less uncomfortable when men fit their faith with meditation of that that is most unseasonable for their present state God is merciful saith the presumer he is just saith the desperate distressed Both true he is just and mercifull saith the Psalmist but should not faith in wisdome contemplate what is fittest for the present necessity This wisdome pray we for The last thing in this period remains The Reason brought to assure us of like favour in like faith for better confirming the comfort unto us Vers 25 Who was delivered for our offences and was raised again for our justification The force of the argument thus conceive God the Father hath delivered his Son to death for expiation of our sins he hath raised him which was our surety to assure us of our justification doubt not therefore but he will justifie thee believing on him through Christ In the words the Apostle sends us to consider two things as pillars for faith to rest on for justification First is The cause meritorious Christ death Secondly The evidence of the value and worth of his humiliation His resurrection from the dead This text saith one is Brevis largus short in words large in sense Let us view the particulars In the first member are these 1. Who delivered 2. Who was delivered 3. Whereto 4. For what For the First Who delivered Pater filium Christus seipsum Iudas Dominum saith Austin The fact one the motives different which made Iudas his treason criminous Christs tradition of himself meritorious I point only at the heads Who was delivered Iesus our Lord A less price say some might have sufficed yea none at all had God been so pleased I think not considering the endless justice violated which God in our ransome intended to preserve and manifest Rom. 3. Delivered why saith he delivered rather then crucified To lead us by the hand to the first cause thereof the determinate councells of the Blessed Trinity Act. 4.27 28. I could command Legions of Angells for deliverance Mat. 26.35 saith our Saviour to Peter but how then should the Scripture be fulfilled how the Fathers purpose and councels accomplished VVhereto To death even the shamefull and cursed death of the cross Phil. 2.8 That so we might be delivered from the curse of the Law Gal. 3.13 Incomparable Benignity of the Father unmatcheable compassion and humility of our blessed Saviour For what For sins for our sins whether we conceive sin as the efficient cause procuring these things unto our Saviour or tropically intepret For sins that is for expiation of sins it is not greatly materiall This latter hath some Auncients approving it however Socinus laugh at the strangeness of it Theodoret He underwent his passion Theodoret. ad loc Vt nostrum debitum exsolveret not much unlike Ambrose And that of the Prophet cannot better be expounded Isai 53.10 His soul an offering for sin that is to expiate sin The senses are subordinate sins procured it by it sins were expiated and to expiated them Christ was delivered see Isai 53. 1 Pet. 2.24 For our sins Our in this case 2 Cor. 5.21 hath a threefold Antithesis 1. To Christ 2. To Angells 3. To Vnbelievers For ours not his own He was holy harmeless seperate from sinners knew not sin per experimentum as Augustine interprets see 1 Pet. 2.22 23 24. Heb. 7.26 Isai 53. Augustin de peccat Merit Remiss lib. 2. cap. 35. Sine peccato natus est in similitudine carnis peccati sine peceato vixit inter aliena peccata sine proccato mortuus est propter nostra peccata as Saint Augustine Ours not Angells Heb. 2.16 In no place he assumes the Angells but the seed of Abraham It may be there was something eminent in their sin that excludes them but let us take heed whiles we seek the reason of our preheminence in the quality of the sinners we forget the Lords 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the specialty of his love to man that only caused it Nunquid Angelo Bernard de Passione Domini sed ille non eguit Nunquid Diabolo sed ille non resurget as Bernard Ours that believe Ioh 3.16 Not for sins of unbelievers yes say some sufficiently for theirs that distinction I stand not to examine The question is this Whether intentionally for the sins of any but believers They shall never be able to prove that the intention is larger then the efficacy or that his death was not effectuall to procure remission for all unto whose benefit it was intended The heads of this first member we have seen let us with like brevity see to what use they serve us Vse First They direct us to a right estimate of our sins a point wherein alack how partially blind are the most of us The matter we think small wherein we offend the act and pleasure momentany transient in a moment should justice be so strict as for such triflles to load us with eternall cursing or rather should mans malice be so dissolute as for such trifles to violate the endless majesty that loadeth us daily with so many blessings Learn rather by consideration of the necessary remedy to esteem the quantity of thy perill whereout nothing could suffice to rid thee but the death of the Son of God Agnosce ô homo quàm gravia sunt vulnera Bern. in Natal Domin Ser. 3. pro quibus necesse est Dominum Christum vulnerari si non essent haec ad mortem mortem sempiternam nunquam pro eorum remedio dei filius moreretur saith Bernard sweetly Secondly As they teach us compunction so minister they unto us unspeakeable consolation sicut enim gravem agnosco morbum cuitanta apponitur medicina sic ex hoc ipso non incurabilem esse conjecto They know not the excellency of Christ person nor the worth of his bloud that question the availableness thereof to purchase redemption Let strictest justice ballance our sins with Christs satisfaction this shall be found infinitely to preponderate Some weakly perhaps will say of the valew he doubts not but of the avail for

by ourselves The righteousness of God is the righteousness which God in Christ performed fulfilling the Law for us called the Righteousness of Faith because we are by faith made partakers of it See Illyric Zanch. ad Phil. 3. If any shall demand what the difference between these two is I answer They differ not at all in the matter or substance of righteousness for the righteousness which by Christ we are made partakers of is that very righteousness which the Law prescribes namely perfect obedience to the Law but they differ efficiente our righteousness that we in our persons perform to the law And that it is no other righteousness then what the law prescribes for substance whereof in justification we are made partakers that one place Rom. 9.32 is clear where the Apostle giving a reason why the Jews that followed the law of righteousness attained not the law of righteousness that is as most interpret the righteousness which the law prescribes The reason was because they sought it not by faith but by the works of the law as if he had said Had they sought it by believing as they did by working they had attained the righteousness which the law prescribes to justification The righteousness of the law then we obtain by faith to justification It is therefore the righteousness which in justification we are made partakers of How then is it said to be righteousness without works I answer In respect of us without works In respect of Christ the performer not so Come we now to the means how it is imputed unto us and that is by Imputation Imputation Imputation of righteousness What it is in this case we may thus describe To be an act of God ascribing to us the righteousness of Christ and counting it ours no less then if we had in our own persons performed it Touching it it is enquired whether there be any such act of God in our justification Papists generally deny it and make the righteousness of Christ to avail to justification onely as a cause procuring to us remission of sins and the gifts of the holy Ghost That which our Divines hitherto have consented in is this That the righteousness of Christ is not onely the cause for which the Lord remits sins c. but the very thing whereby we are made righteous in the sight of God Their reasons are these 1. Because we are said to be made righteous by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5.19 shall we say as by a procuring cause nay rather formally For so are we made sinners by the transgression of Adam And the purpose of the Apostle in that comparison betwixt Adam and Christ seems to be this To shew that it is no absurd thing that we should be made righteous by the righteousness of Christ seeing we were made sinners by Adams disobedience Inst But Adams disobedience was not ours by imputation but we rather were actours therein by an implicite act sinning in Adam To say nothing that the whole stream of Interpreters judge otherwise Let it be granted that we were actours in Adams sinne being in his loins Why not also actours in Christs obedience being one mystically with him by bond of the spirit 2. It is no more absurd that we should be righteous by imputation of Christs Righteousness then that Christ should be a sinner by imputation of our sins but Christ was a sinner by imputation of our sins Inst Not a sinner but a sacrifice for sinne Answ The exposition is ancient but 1. The Antithesis bears it not and 2. How could God punish him in that extremity had he not taken upon him our sins 3. For to Papists methinks of all men Imputation should be no such ridiculous matter sith they are of opinion the overplus of some Saints righteousness may be applyed to others by indulgence to make up the defects of their obedience How I wonder except by imputation 4. Quid quod Their Bellarmine plainly confesseth Bellarm. de Amiss grat stat peccat lib. 4. c. 10. Bernard ser 1. de Dom. 1. post octavas Epiphaniae that Adams sin is imputed to all his posteritie so as if they had all committed the same and alledgeth to this purpose the testimonies of Augustine and Bernard Nostra est inquit Bernardus Adami culpa quia etsi in alio nos tamen peccavimus nobis justo Dei judicio imputabatur licèt occulto And why so absurd sith Adams sin is in this manner ours Christs righteousness should also in like sort become Ours that as the same Bernard speaks aliena lavet aqua quos culpa inquinaverat aliena And so wash as the other had defiled Against it these reasons are brought First that it hath no testimonie either in Scriptures or Fathers to avow it Answ What none neither expressed nor implyed we have above shewed that the Scripture testifieth as well what it implyeth as what it expresseth how say we now to this Scripture in hand God imputeth righteousness without works whose our own that stands in works Phil. 3.9 Anothers therefore and whose else I wonder except Christs who alone is mentioned to be the procurer of our righteousness Hear S. Bernard Domine Bern. ser in Cant. 61. memorabor justitiae tuae solius Ipsa est enim mea nempe factus es mihi Tujustitia à Deo nunquid mihi verendum ne non una ambobus sufficiat non est pallium breve quod secundum Prophetam non possit operire duos Justitia tua justitia in aeternum quid longius aeternitate te pariter me operiet largiter larga aeterna justitia Object 2. No necessitie of such imputation of Christs righteousness Answ Yes That we may be found at that great day having such perfection of righteousness as for which we may be accepted and pronounced righteous See Phil. 3.9 Inst But our inherent righteousness is perfect for faith hope charity c. are perfect Answ Hear Bernard Are we better then our Fathers They said with as much truth as humility All our righteousnesses are like the clothes of a menstruous woman Isa 64.6 and again Quomodo pura justitia ubi non potest culpa deesse Augustine August epist 29. ad Hieron Charitas in aliis major in aliis minor in aliis nulla plenissima verò quae jam non potest augeri quamdiu hic homo vivit in nemine est quamdiu autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quàm debet Bern. in Cant. ser 174. ex vitio est And again Charitatis effectualis initium quidem profectúmque vitam quoque praesentem experiri divinâ posse gratiâ non negamus sed plane consummationem defendimus futurae felicitati And if any shall ask why it is commanded when it cannot be fulfilled Bernard answers Judicavit utilius ex hoc ipso suae illos insufficiontiae admoneri ut scirent sane ad quem justitiae finem

niti pro viribus oporteret Object 3. By this means we shall be denominated just of a Justice without us as if a man should be wise by wisdome of another Answ Though that in Physicks and morall Philosophy be absurd yet in Divinitie it is no absurditie Object 4. Then shall we be as just as Christ Ans That follows not for Christ besides the Justice he had by obedience to the Law had also Divine justice as second Person of the Trinity 2. Yea even in Legal Justice a preheminence there is left unto Christ because he had it by his own performance we have it onely by imputation And what great absurdity is it to say save onely that the comparison is somewhat odious that we have not lesse Legal justice then Christ had whiles it is acknowledged we have it not as Christ had it by our own performance but by imputation and as I may say aestimativè because it is given us to be ours Obiect 5. Justification stands in restoring what in Adam we lost Now in Adam we lost not imputed righteousness Ergò Answ To let pass that description of Justification Ad minorem We lost righteousness though not the impatation thereof quà Justice though not quà imputata and he doth ill confound the thing with the manner of applying and hear a like reason Justification stands in restoring what we lost in Adam now in Adam we lost not remission of sins Ergò Hear Bernard Si unus pro omnibus mortuus est ergò Bernard Epist ad Innocent 190. omnes mortui funt ut videlicet satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur sicut omnium peccata Vnus ille portavit mox Justum me dixerim sed illius justisiâ quaenam ipsa Finis Legis Christus adjustitiam omni credenti Denique qui factus est nobis inquit iustitia à Deo Patre quae ergò mihi iustitia facta est mea non est Si mea traducta culpa cur non mea indulta iustitia sanè mihi tutior donata quàm innata c. Bellarmine himself thus Dicitur Christus iustitia nostra quoniam satis fecit Patri pro nobis eam satisfactionem ità nobis donat communicat cùm nos iustificat ut nostra satisfactio iustitia dici possit Nam etiamsi per iustitiam nobis inhaerentem verè insti nominemur simus tamen non per eam satisfacimus Deo proculpis nostris poenâ aeternâ c. Et hoc modo non esset absurdum si quis diceret nobis imputari Christi iustitiam merita cùm nobis donentur applicentur ac si nos ipsi Deo satisfecissemus c. VERS 7 8. There followeth in these verses proof of the Minor in the former syllogisme David appropriates blessedness to the man that hath righteousness imputed without works for he appropriates it to him whose sinns are remitted Cajetane Paraeus Piscator How follows the argument Some thus conceive it The Apostle say they thus collects the argument from David because in this speech of David there is no mention made of any of our works but onely of Gods actions in remitting covering not imputing sinne some gather it from equipollence of the phrases for it is all one not to impute sin and to impute righteousness because that he that by not imputation of sin is made non peccator is thereby made iustus there being no medium betwixt a non-sinner and a righteous man betwixt absence of all sin and having of righteousness Against that opinion I mean not to dispute yet I would have the Reader remember that betwixt imputation of Christs righteousness and remitting of sins a difference there must needs be such I mean as is betwixt the cause and the effect the thing destinied to the end and the end it self for remission of sins presupposeth imputation of righteousness and he that hath his sins remitted hath first Christs righteousness imputed that he may have sins forgiven May I have leave to interpose my sentence What if the consecution stand thus The iustified man by Davids opinion hath quá talis remission of sins therefore he hath imputation of righteousness without works forasmuch as where sins are remitted there can be no iustice but imputative every transgression of the Law depriving of that iustice which stands in works forasmuch as the Law to righteousness requires observance of every particular duty therein prescribed abstinence from every particular sin therein forbidden sith therefore Whosoever is iustified hath sinnes remitted it follows that his blessedness ariseth from imputation of righteousness without works Judicent Docti The coherence we see Let us now view the sense of the words What difference may some say betwixt remitting covering and not imputing sinn Answ Cajetane thus conceives a difference In sinne we are to consider three things 1. The offence and displeasure of God 2. The turpitude it leaves either in the action or person 3. The punishment Now sin is in respect of the offence remitted in respect of the turpitude covered in respect of the punishment not imputed such like niceties many I could recite out of interpreters But it may be it is true that Ambrose hath Remittere tegere non imputare Ambrose ad loc una ratio unus est sensus and again Vnius significationis surt verba quia cùm tegit remittit cùm remittit non imputat And the heap of words serves onely to amplifie the grace of God in this blessing yet Cajetane errs not much in his explanation The things here to be treated are First Rimission of sins wherein it consisteth What this remission of sins is which David so much magnifies as that he pronounceth him blessed that is partaker of it To this Papists make this answer True remission of sins is not only the removall of Gods displeasure and the absolving of us from the guilt and punishment of them but an utter abolishment of them in respect of being Consil Trident seff 5. Bellarm. de sacrament baptism lib. 1. cap. 3. de justific lib. 2. cap. 7. and 9. Bellarm. in Psal 32. In Baptismate tollitur totum id quod veram propriam rationem peccati habet As Bellarmine speaking of the communicating of this blessing in Baptisme likewise defines Baptismo reipsâ tolli omnia peccata it a ut non solum non imputetur sed nec sit quod imputari posset ad culpam And generally thus hold they of remission of sins that it is the abolishment of them in respect of being And what is it to have sins covered Dicuntur peccata tegi hoc loco non quod sint non videantur sed quòd abolita sint eorum loco justitia successerit What the not imputing peccatum non imputari non significat peccatum manere sed non puniri sed significat nihil esse in homine justificato quod in peccatum reputari possit That we

proportion to us that is the fulfilling of the whole Law Gal. 5.3 our Saviour to such a boaster asking What he must do to inherit salvation suits answer to his proud humour Thou knowest the Commandments if doing be the means thou seekest to inherit by Keep the Commandments this do if thou wilt needs be doing and thou shalt live fail in the least apex the Curse is upon thee Gal 3.10 Now dares any arrogate power of fulfilling the Law it is strange yet what will not Popish pride assume Anathema to them saith the Trent Council whosoever shall say Dei praecepta homini etiam justificato sub gratia constituto esse ad observandum impossibilia of that question hereafter 2. Add unto this that other reason of the Apostle Christ becomes of no effect to such as by the Law seek to be justified or saved Gal. 5.4 3. They are fallen from Grace not which they had but which they might have had had they not renounced it by cleaving to their works Shal I need now to exhort in the Apostles terms Gal. 1.6 to hold Anathema all such as teach us by works to seek salvation they deprive us of the promised salvation exclude from fellowship in Christs merits the sole pillar of hope deprive us of Gods grace which alone is made the fountain of salvation I say not but other errors in the foundation obstinately holden deprive of salvation I say not but all heresies in their kind are so many blasphemies against God Neither blame I the rigour of Magistrates that with extraordinary severity labour to bring Hereticks and their heresies into ashes But surely an errour more pernicious to the souls of Gods people more derogatory to the glory of Gods grace and the validity of Christs merits I know none then this of Justitiaries and can but wonder How the severity of Laws against Popish Seminaries hath gotten relaxation that it should now no longer be holden Capitall so dangerously to seduce Gods people to evacuate the virtue of Christs death and to plunge so many souls bought with the precious bloud of Christ into eternal perdition Amongst Jews no recompense might be taken for bloud but the bloud of the slayer the bloud of souls how cries it lowder then the bloud of Abel And yet the Murtherer hath benefit of sanctuary More I add not save this onely He loves not his own salvation that hates not the enemies of the grace of God VERS 15. Proceed we in the Text Because the law worketh wratht for where no Law is there is no transgression The Scope THis verse tends to confirmation of the Apostles Consequence If they which are of the Law be Heirs then is the promise of none effect that is salvation promised can never be obtained How follows the argument The Apostle shews us by sending us to consider the effect or work of the Law such as it hath in all men since the fall The Law causeth wrath Ergò it frustrates the promise to all that cleave thereto for justification And this Antecedent hath proof from another effect of the Law betwixt which and wrath the connexion is inseparable to wit transgression it causeth transgression Ergò wrath This the context Sense For the sense view we a little the particulars they are principally two 1. The effect of the Law 2. The manner how it produceth his effect The effect of the Law is wrath whether Gods or mans Man 's saith Sasbout alledging to that purpose the judgement of Augustin neither dissent some of our own Divines Illyricus And if any ask How They answer by urging things upon the conscience as duties from which our vitious nature is most abhorrent as also by shewing how odious all a mans best actions yea his whole nature is and adjudging him to hel for his sins against those acts of the Law how doth mans vitious and proud nature storm that not without cause have learned interpreters thus expounded But fitlier to the Apostles purpose it is expounded of the wrath of God that is of the punishments which for transgression God is in his wrath ready to execute Now if any demand How the Law should have this effect Not of it self as if it were originally destined to subject man to punishment but by accident and occasionally onely in respect of our disobedience which sith it is by means of corrupt nature inevitable as inevitably doth the Law adjudge us to punishment as our vitious nature forceth us to rebellion This is the sense of the first clause It also hath its proof The Law causeth wrath for it causeth trangression betwixt which and Gods wrath the connexion is inseparable How we shall hear by and by if we shall first view the manner of the Apostles reasoning It is thus as most conceive A contrario sensu Where is no Law there is no transgression therefore where the Law is there is transgression But what if we conceive the Apostle to reason à signis Where is no Law there is no transgression an apparent signe that is that by means of the Law transgression followeth take away the Law there is no transgression therefore apparent that by putting the Law we put transgression See we how how comes it that the Law draws with it so unavoidably transgression sith it forbids and threatens disobedience enjoyns and crowns obedience Answ Not of it self but by accident through the corruption of nature ut suprâ In man corrupted the Law hath a double advantage to further transgression 1. Because by it corruption is provoked to be the more sinfull as in men unregenerate Rom. 7.5 13. 2. Through impotencie and weakness that remains in nature even reformed to perform that obedience which the Law requires in that manner it requires it Rom. 8.3 Some other explanations might be annexed as this Every sin is therefore sin because it violates some Law take away all Law thou takest away all sin for sin essentially presupposeth some prescription of Law violated Had not God by his Commandment forbidden Adam the eating of the fruit it had been no sin in him to eat it This is a truth but not all t●● Apostle here intends whose purpose is to shew not s● much the necessity of a Law to the being of sin as the necessary sequel and exsistence of sin in man since the fall by occasion of the Law Observ The point then observable is this That the law is so far from restoring us to Gods favour that it occasioneth his wrath so far from justifying that it condemns so far from being means of righteousness that it occasioneth transgression Hence called the Ministry of condemnation and death 2 Cor. 3.7 and the very strength and vigour of sin 1 Cor. 15 56. That not without cause said Luther though therefore traduced by Papists the law alwayes accuseth terrifieth condemneth The severall branches will be evident if we shall clear the last only and shew how inevitably it draws after it transgression in

life How many incredulous yea opposites to faith hath he by his word brought to the obedience of the faith His hand is not shortned it is ever true of him He can quicken the dead and still by his word give being to things that erst had no subsistence This may serve to direct us in use of these marvellous effects of Gods power for stablishing of faith And of the first member of this Chapter thus far The second followeth from the 18th verse to the 23. VERS 18. Who against hope believed in hope that he might become the father of many nations according to that which was spoken so shall thy seed be IN this verse and the four that follow the Apostle digresseth a little from his principall conclusion to a commendation of Abrahams faith The scope whereof seems this To prescribe us a form of Believing and to direct us a course for the establishing of our faith required of us to justification both which we may learn from the example of Abraham the father and pattern of Believers The specialties commendable in Abrahams faith expressed in this verse are two 1. His courage 2. His prudence in Believing His courage in that against hope he believed in hope Sense Against hope in hope How reconcile we Against hope which naturall course could afford In hope by meditation of Gods power and truth conceived He had promise to be father not of children onely but of whole nations the course of nature contradicted it His body dead and unfit for generation with Sarah besides her wonted barrenness it ceased to be after the manner of women so that in respect of means naturall causes there were many of despairing none of hope yet believed he the promise in the largest extent knowing that Gods power transcends nature Observ From whose example we learn in the midst of despair still to hope where we have Gods promise for our warrant Besides Abrahams example we have like practice in Job a mirrour not of patience onely but of faith Who would rest on him for life whom he feels wounding even to Death Yet Though he kill me saith Job I will trust in him Job 13.15 To their practice let us add the consideration of defects in this kind severely punished in Moses Num. 11.13 20 21 22. The incredulous Prince 2 King 7.1 2 17. Zachary Luke 1.18 20 22. In a word In Believing there are four degrees one more excellent then another 1. That which is exercised in sufficiency of means 2. Where the means are weak and improportionate to the promise 3. In the want of means 4. Where are means strongly opposing the accomplishment of the promise this the highest degree of faith so commendable in Abraham Vse Brethren we all profess our selves the sonnes and daughters of Abraham Gal. 3.29 His children we are if we walk in the steps of his faith Iohn 8.39 and labour therein to resemble Let us be exhorted not onely in believing but in the very measure of faith to hold correspondence above hope yea against hope to believe in hope above sense yea against sense to believe what the Lord hath promised There fall out times with Gods children when if we shall make sense or naturall causes the measure of faith a thousand to one but we are swallowed up of despair The Lord sometimes writes bitter things against us and makes us possess the sinnes of our youth seems to surcharge Conscience with imputation of those sinnes the pardon whereof he commands us to believe What shall a poor soul do in this case to keep it self to the task of faith Surely what thou feelest God to impute believe he will pardon to thy repentance for so runs the promise There are times when we may feel decayes of grace and declinings in obedience yet sith it is his promise to give perseverence without interruption believe thou shalt stand even while thou thinkest thou art falling c. Helps to stablish faith in this kind are these 1. To rest on the naked promise of God 2. Consideration of the transcendency of Gods power able to work without above yea against nature Ephes 3.20 to do as * Paul speaks exceeding abundantly above all that we can ask or think 3. Observation of the Lords dealing with others or our selves accomplishing his promises beyond all expectation The second commendable specialty in Abrahams faith here mentioned is his prudence in believing according to that which was spoken Observ Whence learn we That the rule and measure of a wise mans faith is the word of God so that all the Lord speaks must be believed onely what he speaks must be believed And in this generall we and Papists accord The rule and object of Christian faith is Veritas prima and the adaequatum objectum of faith is the Word of God But that word say they is of two sorts Scriptum Traditum Written and Traditionary Both these together make us a perfect rule of faith Scripture without Tradition is regula but partialis Bellarm. de verb. Dei non scripto lib. 4. cap. 12. That which is taught for Gods truth in our Church is this That the Scripture contains doctrine and direction all-sufficient for faith and practice necessary to salvation so that there is no more to be believed or done upon pain of damnation then what is contained in the written word of God For explanation the contents of Scripture we conceive to be not only what is here immediately and in express terms taught but all whatsoever may thence be diduced by just and necessary consequence out of generalls causes equalls c. Our arguments are these 2 Tim. 3.14.15 The Scriptures saith Paul to Timothy are able to make thee wise to salvation to make the man of God perfect throughly furnished unto every good work Afford they us wisdome sufficient to salvation Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 11. ubi supra therefore they contain doctrine sufficient for faith and practice And that there may be no place for that idle evasion of our adversaries limitting the sufficiency of written doctrine to what is necessary for Laiques Both Timothy was a Bishop and him they they were able to make wise to salvation and generally saith the Apostle they completely furnish the man of God that is the Minister to every good work of his calling Our Second argument is this The written rule of practice we are sure is perfect both for that the Lord gives so strait charge to add nothing thereto Deut. 4.2 Prov. 30.6 Rev. 22.18 and because there cannot the duty be named which the Law of God prescribeth not nor the sin thought of which it forbids not May we think to evade this testimony with that Nicety of Bellarmine add not by depraving the sense nay as appears by the Lords own often reproof of doctrins of men in matter of his worship Isai 29.13 and his heavy judgments on those that altered but circumstances of his prescripts Levit. 10. additions as well

perseverâsse quod acceperat ut nasceretur Isaac Observ The difficulties thus rid let us now see what we may observe for our further profit Where first offers it self that distinction of faith according to the divers degrees and measures thereof in believers There is weak faith and strong faith there are men of no faith as infidels men of weak faith as novices men strong in faith as was Abraham Matt. 14.31 O thou of little faith saith Christ to Peter Matth. 15.28 O woman great is thy faith saith our Saviour to the Canaanitish woman Christ found not so great faith in Israel as in the Centurion some in Israel not so great as in an alien The greatness or smalness of faith is three wayes considered 1. In respect of the things to be believed so it is more or less according as things believed are more or lesse in number 2. According as things believed are more or less distinctly conceived the more implicite faith is the less it is the more explicite the greater 3. According as the assent to things believed is more or less firm more or less free from doubting and in this last sense we must conceive the Apostle Abraham strong in faith because he doubts not of the promise Questions here offering themselves are these First whether weak faith have in it justifying virtue or Whether a man weakly believing have title to justification according to the Covenant Answ Weak faith if true gives title to justification our Saviour speaking of faith miraculous saith The least degree of it even the grain of mustard seed Luke 17.6 is available to miracles even of greatest nature it holds proportionally of faith justifying to the uses whereto it serves the least measure is of force to justification 2. Add hereunto that it is not the greatness of faith that justifieth Faith as it is a virtue or gift in us hath not justifying virtue but as it apprehends the righteousness of Christ whereby we are justified which apprehension may be as true in him that believes weakly as in him whose faith is more firm 3. It is not to be forgotten that as the defects of other gifts and parts of obedience are covered with Christs perfection so that they hinder not justification so is also the imperfection of faith Secondly it may be demanded How we may discern our faith to be true while it is weak Answ It is true if 1. It strive against doubting and infidelitie 2. If it be carefull to get strength by means that God hath sanctified Luc. 17.5 Mar. 9.24 3. If that weak perswasion we have of Gods love and pardon of our sins breed care to purifie our hearts and to please God Act. 15.9 The next point in the text is the signes of strength in Abrahams faith two in number First this That he considered not the opposition in course of nature made against the promise 2. That he doubted not of the promise nor debated the matter how it could have accomplishment For the first Whether we consider it as a signe or as a means of Abrahams firmness in believing is not much materiall It is no small signe of stable faith to passe by notice of things that oppose Gods promise and a great means to stablish faith the withdrawing of our minds from beholding the things that may hinder the accomplishment of Gods promise This once is clear that the first step to incredulity is the loosing of our thoughts to rove towards things opposing Gods promise and demitting our minds to behold the impediments of second causes Thus fell Zachary incredulously to question the promise of God whiles he considered his own and his wife 's old age disabled as he thought for procreation Luc. 1.18 Thus Sarah in like sort Gen. 18.12 thus Moses Num. 11.21 Thus Gods children at this day Their sins great therefore not capable of pardon Corruptions strong and settled by evil custome therefore not possible to be mortified Grace small temptations many and violent therefore perseverance impossible Vse It is our wisdome and will be our comfort in this particular to hold semblance with Abraham where we have Gods promise seem it never so incredible rest in it and that thou mayest so do beware how thou give way to flesh and bloud drawing down thy thoughts to the course of nature To many yea most of the promises made to us in Christ gainsaying we shall find in nature reasons of believing onely in the power truth and goodness of God and in the merit and obedience of Christ the ratifier of the promises 2. Cor. 1.20 The second signe of Abrahams strength in faith is That he doubted not of the promise where also the generall cause of doubting is expressed that is unbelief Touching the sense see the former explanation The points we have here observable 1. A difference betwixt faithlesness and doubtfulness such as is betwixt the Cause and the Effect Not every one that doubts is faithless though doubting argue some measure of unbelief A man merely faithless denies all assent to truth propounded in doubtfulness is some assent though not without fear that the contrary may be true I observe it the rather respecting the weakness of some amongst Gods Children that perplexed with doubtings pass censure of meer faithlesness upon themselves Saith our Saviour to Peter doubting * Mat. 14.31 oh thou of little faith wherefore didst thou doubt Doubtings argues weakness of faith not a nullity of believing A Second point observable is the fountain of doubtfulness and that is unbelief doubting is a fruit of unbelief so far as we are doubtfull so far are we faithless from faith proceeds nothing but certainty wavering therefore issues from want of faith If any demand whether such as doubt may be presumed to have faith Answ Doubtfulness though it agree not to the nature of faith yet may meet with faith in the same subject Why not as well as other corruption with grace Flesh with spirit knowledg with ignorance rebellion with obedience hard-heartedness with remorsefulness c. So hath God tempted all gifts of the spirit in us that their contraries are abated not abolished Whence issue in Gods Children acts not of grace only but of corruption also yea in the same act of Gods Saints a spice of corruption as well as a rellish of grace see Rom. 7.23 Gal. 5.17 And as the argument is ill there is some rebellion therefore no inclination to obedience some corruption therefore no grace so as ill followes it there is some doubtfulnes therefore no faith But though this be true yet doubtfulness hath no other fountain then unbelief And it serves first to shew the vain contentment and self-pleasing many through misprision conceive from their doubtings even hence concluding the sincerity of faith from the sense of doubtings Their errour I would gladly reform and it springs from hence We say truly it is presumption not faith that 's never encountred with doubtings and they have no faith