necessarily required that he might be meet to become our righteousnesse in his sufferings But this is frivolous because as I noted before he being perfect God as well as perfect man had beene in his sufferings an All-sufficient satisfaction for our sinnes though hee had never submitted himselfe to the obedience of the Law But the divine Nature of the Sonne of God and the dignity of his person as it made his sufferings all-sufficiently satisfactory for our sinnes to redeeme us from hell because they were the sufferings of God the blood of God c. so it made his obedience all-sufficiently meritorious to constitute and make us righteous and to make us Heires of Eternall life because it was the obedience or righteousnesse of God For the Sonne of God was made under the Law that he might not onely redeeme us who were under the Law by his sufferings but also that by his meritorious obedience we might receive the Adoption of sonnes But he proveth Christ to bee our righteousnesse onely in his passive obedience because it onely was both prefigured in the types and figures of the Law and also represented in the sacraments As touching the types and figures of the Law which prefigured Christ they were either figures of his person and office or they represented his benefits as namely and especially justification or â—…anctification And those which figured his benefit of justification either represented the remission of sinne by his sufferings or acceptation with God by his obedience or both The ceremony of changing their clothes when they were to come before God did import that those who desired to please God must be clothed with Christs righteousnesse which is also signified by the wedding garment and the holy attire wherein the Priests were to appeare before God The high Priests wearing of the golden plate with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord who is Iehovah our righteousnesse was to this end that the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts being taken away they might bee accepted before the Lord. The high Priests offering of incense upon the golden Altar resembled the pleasing obedience of Christ in his life and death and his intercession for us The Arke of the Covenant was a Type of Christ the Mediator the cover upon it of his propitiation the tables of Covenant within it of his fulfilling the Law for us The sanctification of the first fruits which were a type of Christ who is the first fruits of all that shall bee saved 1 Cor. 15. 23. was imputed to the whole increase or store Rom. 11. 16. So â—…aith Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the fulfilling of the Law performed by the first fruits so he calleth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe c. § XXIII But come we to the Sacraments which hee truely saith are the soules of that righteousnesse which is by Faith And yet saith he Baptisme signifieth onely the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ the Eucharist representeth onely his body broken and his blood shed for our sinnes Answ. Though some parts onely of the benefits of Christ are represented in the severall Sacraments yet the substance of each Sacrament is the participation of Christ wholly with all his merits and benefits Thus in Baptisme we are incorporated into Christ and in it we put on Christ who is our righteousnesse And it is the Sacrament not only of remission of sinne and of justification but also of regeneration and sanctification we being therein conformed to his death and resurrection Rom. 6. 3 4 5. In the Lords Supper we have communion with Christ being not only united to him as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh but also have communion with him both in his merits by imputation and in his graces by influence from him as our head Other arguments are used by the same authour but because in them he taketh two things for granted which hee cannot prove the one that justification consisteth onely in remission of sin the other that wee ascribe remission of sinne to Christs active obedience I will not trouble the Reader with them Onely let him call to minde the errours which the Authors of this opinion doe runne into for the defence thereof First that remission of sinnes is the matter of justification which is imputed to us Secondly that the Law is fully satisfied by bearing the penalty alone Thirdly that by one act of obedience we are made just as wee were by one act of disobedience made sinners Fourthly that neither by his disobedience Adâ—…m did transgresse the Law nor Christ by his obedience unto death obey it Fifthly that Christ obeyed the law not for us but for himselfe Sixthly that justification consisteth wholly and onely in remission of sinnes Which being for the most part consequents of this opinion doe prove the antecedent to be false CAP. V. That the formall cause of Iustification is the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse § I. YOu have heard the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter of justification now let us examine the unsound opinions of some others concerning the forme For as the former made remission of sins the matter which is imputed to justification so these make it the forme And as the former teach that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinne so doe these And yet the former hold it to bee but the matter and these but the forme Indeed if it were both the matter and the forme they might well say that justification doth wholly consist therein But being according to their owne conceipt but the one or the other and according to the truth neither of both but an effect of the true forme for by imputation of righteousnesse we have remission of sinne their opinion must needs be unsound But the thing wherein chiefely they erre is that with Socinuâ—… the heretike they deny the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse and consequently do hold that neither the active nor passive obedience of Christ is that which is imputed to us for righteousnesse What then forsooth the act of faith Of these mens errour I shall not need to say much in this place because besides that which hath already beene delivered in the third Chapter I have plentifully and fully proved in my whole fourth booke that the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter which is imputed to justification and in my whole fifth booke that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the forme of justification Only I will note their depravation of our Doctrine and point at their errours § II. As touching the former when we say that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of justification because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse God doth justifie us they will needs with the Papists make us hold that we are formally righteous by
justifications of the Saints then they justifie the Saints So may I say if the precepts of the Law be the justifications of the Lord then belike they justifie him but neither are fitly called justifications though the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may not unfitly be given both to the Law of God as the rule of justice and to the judgements of God as the acts of justice and to the good deeds of the Saints as workes of justice and also to the merits of Christ which notwithstanding doe not justifie him but us unlesse they meane that as by good workes the faithfull so by righteous commandements and just judgements God is declared and manifested to bee just And farther the law of Nature knowne to the Gentiles is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which notwithstanding doth not justifie either him or them and is by the Latine interpreter unfitly translated the justice of God And moreover Bellarmine himselfe as we have heard noteth that the Law is called justification because it teacheth righteousnesse and yet not that righteousnesse by which we are justified for that without the Law is manifested in the Gospell being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets even the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve But to conclude Bellarmine had no reason to make this the first signification of the word in the Scriptures for the Hebrew word which the vulgar Latine translateth sometimes iustificationes and sometimes ceremonias in the same sense doth signifie no such matter and the Greeke which twice at the most in the Scriptures signifieth justification doth usually signifie the Law of God and his statutes and ordinances but more especially those of the ceremoniall Law which if they be any where called justifications it is to bee imputed to the corrupt translation and not to the originall truth § III. So much of the first signification The two next whereof there is no example in the Scriptures hee hath coined to fit their new-found distinction of justification it selfe which they distinguish into the first and the second The first when a man of a sinner is made just by infusion of habituall righteousnesse The second when a just man is made more just by practise of good workes Accordingly justification saith Bellarmine in the second place signifieth acquisition of righteousnesse viz. inherent which is their first justification and in the third place incrementum justitiae the encrease of justice which is their second justification which distinction if it were applied to sanctification were not to be rejected For that which they call their first justification is the first act of our sanctification which the Scriptures call â—…eration in which the holy Ghost doth ingenerate in the soule of the Elect the grace of faith and with it and by it other sanctifying graces wherein their justification which is habituall consisteth And that which they call their second justification being actuall is our new obedience by which our sanctification is continued and encreased But to justification it cannot truly be applyed for first justification is an action of God for it is God that doth justifie Their second justification is their owne act whereby they being just already make themselves more just Secondly justification as hath been said is an action of God without us not implying a reall mutation in us but relative such as is wrought by the sentence of a Iudge and is opposed to condemnation Thirdly because it is the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified which is a perfect righteousnesse whereunto nothing can bee added Therefore of justification it selfe there are no degrees though of the assurance thereof there are degrees according to the measure of our faith § IV. But let us see how Bellarmine proveth his second signification To that purpose he alledgeth three testimonies of Scripture which prove nothing else but that the Papists have no sound proofe for their erronious conceit The first is taken out of 1 Cor. 6. 11. And such were you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified Where indeed the word is used but in a sense distinguished from sanctification The scope and intendment the Apostle is to exhort the Corinthians being now Christians to abstaine from those sinnes whereunto they were addicted whiles they lived in Gentilisme Such you were then saith the Apostle but now since you gave your names to Christ you were baptized into his Name and in your Baptisme were washed from those sinnes being sanctified from the corruption of them by the Spirit of God and iustified from the guilt of them in the Name of Iesus Christ that is by faith in his Name Thus therefore these three words are to bee distinguished The washing of the soule which is represented by the washing of the body is the generall word whereby the purging of the soule from sinne is generally signified Act. 22. 16. But as in sinne there are two things from which we had need to be purged that is the guilt of sinne and the corruption thereof so this ablution or washing of the soule hath two parts ablution from the guilt of sinne which is our justification ablution from the corruption of sinne which is our sanctification Both which are represented and sealed in the Sacrament of Baptisme wherein as the outward washing of the body doth represent the inward washing of the soule both from the guilt and corruption of sinne so the Element of water whereby the body is washed or sprinckled is a signe of the water and blood which issued out of Christs side whereby the soule is washed that is to say the blood of redemption and the water of sanctification for by the blood that is the merits of Christ wee are freed from the guilt of sinne and by the water that is the Spirit of sanctification wee are freed in some measure from the corruption And both these as I said are signified in Baptisme For wee are baptized into the remission of sinnes Act. 2. 38. Mar. 1. 4. Our soules being washed with the blood of Christ according to that in the Nicene Creed I beleeve one Baptisme for the remission of sinnes and wee are baptized unto the mortification of sinne and rising unto holinesse of life Rom. 6. 3 4. our soules being washed by the water of the holy Ghost For wee are baptized into the death of Christ and similitude of his resurrection that as Christ dyed and rose againe so wee that are baptized should dye unto sinne and rise to newnesse of life for which cause Baptisme also is called the Laver of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. This then is the summe and effect of the Apostles exhortation that seeing they having given their names unto Christ had been baptized into his Name and were therefore Sacramentally at the least washed and consequently both in their owne profession and opinion of others judging
we say it doth The exclusive particle used by some of our Divines doth exclude infusion not imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth For wee doe hold though all perhaps have not so plainely expressed their meaning and some few have delivered their private opinions that remission of sinne is but a part of justification and that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we are both absolved from our sinnes and also accepted as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life But Bellarmine howsoever he would seeme to acknowledge the concurrence of remission of sinne unto justification yet indeed excludeth it For by remission of sinne concurring to justification hee doth not understand the not imputing or forgiving of sinne but the extinction and abolition thereof wrought by the infusion of habituall righteousnesse which expelleth its contrary as heat doth cold and light darkenesse And howsoever there bee duo termini two termes in this motion or mutation as he conceiveth of justification as being a passage b or change from sinne to righteousnesse yet there be not two causes nor yet two distinct actions but the onely cause is justice infused and the action is but one and the same the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne Even as in creation which is transitâ—…s à non esse ad esse in illumination which is transitâ—…s à tenebris ad lâ—…cem in calefaction which is a passage from cold to heat But if this be all that is required in the Popish justification as undoubtedly it is the whole and onely forme thereof being infused of righteousnesse or as they love rather to speake righteousnesse infused their justification also not differing from that which the Scriptures call sanctification saving that they dreame of a totall mortification or deletion of sinne and of a perfect renovation then what is become of the absolving of â—…â—…tom the guilt of sinne by which wee are freed from hell and the acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by we are intitled to the kingdome of heaven Both which are wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in which true justification doth consist For infused righteousnesse though it were perfect could not discharge us from our former debts and being unperfect as their owne consciences cannot but tell them it cannot entitle them to the kingdome of heaven Wherefore if they will be saved they must of necessity flee to the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ who hath fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty by his sufferings and also in regard of the commandement by his obedience which obedience and sufferings being transient and gone so long since can no otherwise bee communicated unto them but by imputation Now if they can be content to acknowledge the imputation of Christs satisfaction which sometimes they doe and must doe if they will bee saved for there is no other meanes either to escape hell or to come to heaven then let them according to the Scriptures acknowledge this imputation of Christs satisfaction by which they are to bee acquitted and freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also accepted as righteous in Christ and heires of eternall life to be their justification As for the mortification of sinne and the renovation of us according to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse both which are but in part and by degrees wrought in us by the Spirit of regeneration let them bee acknowledged to bee the two parts of our sanctification § II. But Bellarmine will needs have our renovation to be the righteousnesse of justification And this he indevoureth to prove by Testimonies of Scripture by the authority of Saint Augustine and by reason The texts of Scripture which he citeth are six The first Rom. 4. 25. who was delivered up for our sinâ—…es and rose for our justification From whence Bellarmine argueth thus to what the Apostle giveth the name of justification in that justification consisteth rather than in that unto which hee doth not give the name But to renovation in this place the Apostle doth give the name of justification and not to remission of sinne Therefore justification consisteth rather in renovation than in remission of sinne Before I answere I thinke good to advertise the reader againe that Bellarmine here by remission of sinne doth not understand the not imputing of sinne or as we in plaine English call it forgivenesse of sinne but the utter deletion the extinction the totall mortification of sinne And that hee doth foure times at the least signifie in this one passage Now I answer by denying his assumption because the Apostle in this place doth give the name of justification neither to remission nor yet to renovation which is not mentioned so much as once in all the Chapter Indeed in some other places the Apostle and his Disciple Saint Luke doe give the name to remission of sinnes that is to the not imputing of sinne or to the absolving and acquitting from sinne Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 〈◊〉 13. 38 39. but never to renovation § III. His assumption Bellarmine proveth because it cannot be doubtâ—…d but that the Apostles meaning was that Christ his death was a samplar or patterne of the death of sin that is saith he of remission or deletion of sins and that his resurrection was a samplar or patterne of our renovation and inward regeneration by which we walke in newnesse of life And is this the meaning of the Apostle Then be like wee are justified by imitation and not by imputation of Christs death and by imitation of his resurrection and then also by the same reason we are made sinners by imitation and not imputation of Adams transgression But indeed in this place the Apostle doth not propound by way of exhortation the death and resurrection of Christ as an example to bee followed in dying to sinne and rising to righteousnesse represented in Baptisme as hee doth in the sixth to the Romans where he exhorteth to sanctification as an inseparable consequent and companion of justification but by way of Doctrine hee speaketh of the death and resurrection of Christ as the cause of our justification of which he had spoken in the whole Chapter and even in the verses next going before that righteousnesse shall bee imputed to us as well as to Abraham if wee beleeve in him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead who was given by his father and by himselfe to us and for us that by the obedience of his life untill death but especially at his death he might satisfie for our sinnes and was raised from the dead that we might be justified and saved by his life which he liveth after his death Christ by his death and obedience did satisfie for our sinnes paying a full ransome for them and so did justifie us meritoriously and in that sense we are said to bee justified by his bloud and by his obedience both as the
matter and merit of our justification But neither his death nor obedience had beene effectuall to our justification if he had not risen from the dead As the Apostle sheweth 1 Cor. 15 17. If Christ bee not raised your faith is vaine yee are yet in your sinnes For if Christ had not risen againe it had beene an evidâ—…nce that he was not the Sonne of God and then could not his obedience or sufferings have beene meritorious for us But by his resurrection hee was mightily declared to be the Sonne of God in regard whereof it was said Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee and being God his obedience and sufferings are of infinite and all sufficient merit and value vertue and efficacie for the justification and salvation of all that beleeve in him And againe what benefits Christ merited for us by his obedience even untill death the same being risen he applyeth and giveth to those that beleeve God having raised him and exalted him with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance to Israel and remission of sinnes Christ therefore was given unto death that hee might by his sufferings satisfie for our sinnes the penalty thereunto belonging and he did rise againe that by application of his merits we might bee justified Righteousnesse therefore shall be imputed to those that beleeve in the resurrection of Christ or rather in Christ raised againe who as he gave himselfe to bee a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome for our sinnes so he did arise againe that by effectuall application of his merits we might bee justified So that whom by his death and obedience he redeemed meritoriously then he doth effectually justifie and save by his life and the severall actions thereof viz. his resurrection ascension sitting at the right hand of his Father as our King and Priest his comming againe to judgement who therefore shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children it is God that justifieth who is hee that condemneth It is Christ that dyed yea rather that is risen againe who is even at the right hand of God who also maketh intorcession for us § IV. In the words following Bellarmine answeareth a secret objection if remission of sinnes be ascribed to Christs death and renovation to his resurrection then belike remission and renovation be two severall actions proceeding from divers causes contrary to that which hath beene delivered For prevention whereof he saith It is to be noted that the death of Christ which is the price of our redemption was not onely the cause of the remission of sinne but also of internall renovation And the like as he saith afterwards may bee said of the reâ—…urrection For according to the doctrine of the Catholike Church these two cannot bee severed fâ—…rasmuch as one and the same grace viz. charity being through the merit of Christ infused and inherent in us doth both blot out or extinguish our sinnes and also adorneth the soule with righteousnesse wherefore though the Apostle might have ascribed both remission and renovation either to Christs death or to his resurrection yet he chose rather distinctly to attribute remission to his death and renovation to his resurrection propter similitudinem because of the likenesse which the extinction of sinne hath with the death of the body and spirituall renovation with the resurrection of the body whereunto I answer briefly first that though the death and resurrection of Christ in respect of their efficacie though remission and renovation alwayes goission and renovation then in justification there are two actions proceeding from two causes secondly that these foure distinct benefits remission of sinne and acceptation of us as righteous in Christ which are the parts of justification wrought both of them by imputation of Christs righteousnesse which is the one and onely forme of justification likewise the dying unto sinne or mortification and the rising of the Sonle from the grave of sinne which is our first resurrection or vivification which are the two parts of sanctification those foure actions I say proceed from two causes and that in twofold respects For remission of sinne is procured by the merit of Christs death and dying unto sinne is ascribed to the vertue of his death the imputation of Christs merits whereby wee are both absolved from sinne and accepted as righteous is ascribed to his resurrection whereby his merits are applyed unto us for our justification and the grace of rising from the grave of sinne to the vertue of his resurrection for by the same power whereby Christ did rise againe are wee raised from sinne to newnesse of life § V. His second allegation is Rom. 5. 21. That as sinne reigned unto death so grace may reign by justice to life everlasting through Iesus Christ our Lord where by justice opposed to sin he saith is meant inward renovation Ans. 1. We deny not but that in all the faithful there is a two fold righteousnesse the one imputed which is the righteousnesse of justification the other infused and inherent which is the righteousnesse of sanctification which he calleth renovation If therfore the Apostle did speake here of righteousnesse inherent yet this place would make nothing against us For we confesse that as sin reigneth in the children of disobedience by producing the workes of iniquity so the grace of God or the Spirit of grace doth reigne in the faithful by bringing forth the fruits of righteousnes But this is not the righteousnesse of justification but that wherein our sanctification doth consist But indeed the Apostle here doth not speake either only or chiefly if at all of inherent righteousnesse Neither doth hee in this place make an opposition or antithesis betweene sinne and righteonsnesse to which supposition Bellarmines argument is grounded but betweene the kingdome of sinne reigning unto death and the kingdome of grace reigning by righteousnesse unto everlasting life through Iesns Christ our Lord. Now the righteousnesse wherein the kingdome of grace especially consisteth is the righteousnesse of justification by faith whereupon followeth peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. compared with Rom. 5. 1. 2. which being not our righteousnesse as all inherent justice is but the righteousnesse of God is chiefly yea in the cause of justification is onely to bee sought after Phil. 3. 8 9. Rom. 10. 3. Secondly as in all the chapter from the twelfth verse to the end the opposition which is made is of Adams sinne to Christs obedience so in this place as the sinne of Adam was the cause of death so Christs obedience of life the opposition is not of inherent righteousnesse to inherent sinne but of Christs righteousnesse to Adams sinne § VI. His third allegation is out of Rom. 6. 13. Doe not ye exhibit your members as instruments of iniquity unto sinne but exhibit your selves to God as of dead men alive and your members
him our Saviour fitteth his answere and first to confute his errour and to let him understand that no man living who is but a meere man can be justified by inherent righteousnesse he telleth him that no man is good that is purely and perfectly just and therefore reproveth him for that hee thinking our Saviour to bee but a meere man as others were did call him good But in the second place to answere his question hee telleth him that if by his owne workes hee did hope to bee saved hee must doe those workes which God himselfe had commanded and so referreth him to the Coâ—…mandements of the Law of which God himselfe had said doe this and thou shall live which is the legall promise Levit. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Thus our Saviour fiâ—…teth according to the Law his answere to the disposition of the party who was a justitiary But otâ—…erwise when our Saviour and his Apostles were a ked the like qâ—…estion they made answere according to he doctrine of the Goâ—…pell For our â—…aviour being asked Ioh. 6. 28. what shall wee doe that we may doe the workes of God answered vers 29. This is the worke of God that which he esteemeth in stead of all workes that ye beleeâ—…e in him whom hee hath sent for he that beleeveth hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the â—…nd of the Law to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. And the Apostle Paul being demanded of the Iaylour what must I doe to bee saved answereth beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt bee saved Act. 16. 30 31. § XVI In the third place he alleageth testimonies out of the doctrine of the Apostles viz. Rom. 8. 13 17. 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. Iam. 2. 8. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 9. Apoc. 3 21. Answ. The place cited out of S. Iames is no promise but a commendation if you fulfill the royall law ye doe well Of Rom. 8. 13 17 and 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. I spake before But concerning them and all others that are or may be alleaged there is a distinction of conditions to be held that either they import the cause of the thing promised which is salâ—…ation or happinesse or the proper markes and cognizances of such as shall be saved or are happy which doe not shew propter quid 〈◊〉 sunt vel servandi sed qualâ—…s beats sunt quales servandi Christ our alone Saviour is the onely cause of salvation and the onely foundation of our happinesse He is eternall life and whosoever hath him hath life eternall Faith is the only instrument whereby we receive Christ and therfore to it also is salvation ascribed in respect of the object which it doth receive As when it is said thy faith hath saved thee it is to be understood as if it were said Christ received by faith hath saved thee A condition therfore of receiving Christ by faith or of Christ received by faith betokeneth the cause but all other coâ—…ditions either of graces or of works doe not signifie the cause of salvation but the proper markes and cognizances of those which shall be saved And therfore prove that the markes aâ—…e or may be necessary by the necessity of presâ—…nce but not by necessity of efficiencie § XVII And this also may seâ—…ve to answere his fouâ—…th and fifth arguments His fourth is fetched from the Doctrine of the Prophets Ezek. â—…8 21 If the wicked shall turne from all his sins that he hath committed and shall keepe all my statutes and doe that which is lawfull and right he shall surely live That is if he shall turne from the wrong way into the right and goe on therein as sinne is an aberration and the errour of his way hee shall come to the end of his way which is salvation So that this condition is not the cause but the way Yea but saith Bellarmine in the same place to turne from righteousnesse and to breake the Commandements of God is a condition upon which dependeth the commination of death for if a righteous man turne from his righteousnesse and commit iniquity he shall surely die Therefore as the turning from righteousnesse unto sinne is the cause of death â—…o the turning from sinne to righteousnesse is the cause of life I answere that there is not par ratio there is no equality be tweene the sinne of the wicked and the righteousnesse of the godly Death is the due wages of sinne and sinne is the meritorious cause of death But eternall life is the free gift of God and not merited by our righteousnesse Sinne is of infinite demerit and so deserveth death eternall But not the obedience of any man but onely of Christ if it did merit at all â—…s or can be of infinite merit to deserve eternall life The sinnes of â—…he wicked are purely and perfectly evill but the righteousnesse of the reâ—…enerate is not purely and perfectly good The sinnes of the wicked are their owne workes wholly proceeding from themselves and to themselves the wages thereof is wholly and properly to be ascribed and imputed the good workes of the regenerate proceed from Gods free grace and therefore when they are rewarded God crowneth his owne graces in them and not their merits That which he babbleth concerning promises absolute and conditionall as if we held all the promises of the Gospell to bee absolute is a shamlesse and senselesse cavill Wee are so farre from saying that they be all aâ—…solute as if indifferently and without condition they promised salvation to all that we rather say they are all conditionall But we distinguish of conditions that some are from the cause as where the condition of faith is interposed and such conditions wee doe hold to bee necessary necessitate efficientiae some from other arguments and such are necessary onely necessitate presentiae § XVIII His fifth argument is taken from the condition of faith which we doe not deny to bee contained in the Evangelicall promise Now saith he by what words the Scripture requireth the condition of faith by the same or more cleare it teacheth the condition of fulfilling the Law to be required Answ. The condition of fulfilling the Law is required no where but in legall promises and is a condition by reason of the flesh impossible But in all these promises which hee citeth excepting that Matth. 19. 17. not the condition of fulfilling the whole Law is required but of some speciall duties betweene which and the condition of faith is great odds For faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith saveth alone it alone entituleth us and giveth us right to salvation Aske of any particular duty to which salvation is promised will invocâ—…tion Rom. 10. 13 will suffering Rom. 8. 17 will any other duty or grace save a man or entitle him to salvation No one part of righteousnesse though it may be a proper marke of them that shall be saved can save a man
servant doing or rather but endeavouring to doe his duety is rewarded In these two the arguments are not the same A servant that doth not his duety deserveth punishment and his disobedience is the meritorious cause of his punishment But by doing his duety especially if it bee done unperfectly which is alwayes our case he doth not deserve reward and therefore if hee bee rewarded it is to be ascribed to his masters bounty and not to his desert Such an Antithesis the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne and of godlinesse Rom. 6. 23. Death is the due wages of sinne but eternall life which is the reward of godlinesse is the free gift of God And further as I said before when I formerly answered this allegation In this and many other such conditionall speeches the antecedent is not the cause but a signe token or presage of the consequent If God have given you grace to mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident token that you shall live If God hath adorned you with his grace it is to be presumed that he will crowne his owne grace with glory § IX And such is his seventh testimony p as before I have shewed Rom. 8. 17 18. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires with Christ if we suffer with him that wee may also bee glorified with him where is no relation at all of efficiency betwixt our sufferings and glory But Bellarmine will prove it first by the conditionall particle of which I spake in answere to the last argument which doth not as hee saith point out the cause but the evidence by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that wee are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him namely if we suffer with him Secondly from the reason which is added concerning the excesse of glory to our sufferings which to my understanding doth plainly confute it For if the sufferings of this life be not condigne as the Vulgar readeth it to the glory that is to come how should they merit it ex condigno as they arrogantly speake But the scope of the Apostle in this place is to encourage the faithfull to suffer for Christ which he doth by two arguments the one from the happy event which is assurance of glorification testified by the holy Spirit who testifieth unto us that if we have grace from God to suffer with Christ that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him Not that ouâ—… sufferings doe make us the sonnes and heires of God c. but that they are the signes and evidences by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that we are so The other from the disproportion betweene our sufferings from him and the glory which we shall have with him For the Aposâ—…le having weighed both resolveth for so hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all the sufferings of this life are not comparable to that glory but of this place more hereafter § X. His eighth testimony Rom. 10. 10. with the heart wee beleeve unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation We see here saith he that faith sufficeth not to salvation because it is not true and entire in the heart unlesse thereto be added externall confession And it seemeth that the Apostle alludeth to that speech of our Saviour Matth. 12. 32 33. Him that confesseth me before men will I confesse before my Father and him that denyeth me before men will I deny before my Father that is in heaven Answ. All this we confesse that besides faith confession and many other graces and duties are necessary to salvation not as causes but as causae sine quibus non as I have often said which are no causes § XI His ninth testimony Matth. 25. 34 35. Come yee blessed of my Father possesse the kingdom prepared for you before the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee to eate c. Surely saith hee the reason which is rendred doth plainely shew that good workes are aliquo modo some way causes of salvation and that for them the kingdome of heaven is given Answ. Of this place I have spoken before when I shewed that the causes of salvation were noted vers 34. Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world And the reason which is rendred is taken from good workes not as the cause for which salvation is given but as the evidence according to which our Saviour judgeth § XII His tenth testimony is out of the Epistle of Saint Iames and it is twofold the former Iam. 1. 25. He that is not a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the worke this man shall bee blessed in his deed the latter Iam. 2. 14. what will it profit my brethren if a man say that he hath faith and have not workes will faith save him But how saith hee out of the former is a man blessed in his deed if his deeds have no relation to happinâ—…sse but affoâ—…diheir idle presence Answ. Wee confesse that good works have relation to happinesse as they are necessary unto it as the way as the causa sine qua non Neither doe I conceive how good works can be idle where they are present though they doe not merit that which infinitely exceedeth their worth And as touching the other place Iam. 2. We confesse also that that faith which is in profession onely and is void of good workes doth not save a man because it is an idle and dead faith This therefore proveth good workes to be necessary necessitate praesentiae but for necessity efficioncie there is no shew nor colour § XIII After those severall testimonies he appealeth to the whole Epistles of Peter Iohn Iames and Iude whose chiefe intention was to prove that to justified men good workes are necessary to salvation and that faith alone doth not suffice as some in these times out of the Epistles of Paul not well understood began to preach I answere that as the Apostles whom he nameth urge the necessity of good workes so doe all true preachers of the Gospell at this day yea Paul himselfe did urge it as much as any of them if not more But the necessity of efficiencie he may as soone prove out of our sermons as out of the writings of the Apostles § XIV To the Scriptures hee addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who as they censured for heretickes those which denyed workes to bee necessary unto salvation so themselves taught that they bee necessary To which both censure and doctrine of the Fathers wee doe most willingly subscribe And wee should greatly wonder how this great Master of Controversies could bee so idle so impertinent so frivolous a disputant but that as I said before these his discourses proving
say they Christs righteousnesse and merits whereby hee redeemeth and saveth men should bee imputed unto us then should we thereby become Saviours and redeemers of others but this latter is false therefore the former Answere I deny the consequence of the proposition for first when we say that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse our meaning is this that the Lord accepteth for us and in our behalfe the obedience and mâ—…rits of Christ as if we had performed the same for our selves in our owne persons For as the merit of Christ is the common price of redemption sufficient for the salvation of all universally so it is the price for every particular and so is applyed to every particular not as the common price redeeming all but as the price of those soules in particular to whom it is particularly applyed Secondly the efficacie or effect of imputation dependeth upon the will of the imputer and therefore the force of it cannot be extended further than he extendeth it which is the justification of the parties to whom it is imputed but no further Thirdly the consequence of the proposition doth no more follow than if I should argue thus If by imputation of Adams transgression others are made guilty of sinne and damnation then they to whom Adams transgression is imputed are made the cause and fountaine of sinne and damnation in all others but of the first and second Adam we should conceive not as of private men but the first Adam is to be considered as the root of mankind in whom when he fell all sinned The second as the head of all that shall be saâ—…ed in whom as the head communicating his merits to his members all the faithfull have as his members fulfilled the Law and satisfied the justice of God for themselves The head and the body saith Thomas Aquinas are as it were one mysticall person and therefore the satisfaction of Christ belongeth to all the faithfull as to his members the Lord accepting in their behalfe the obedience and Merits of Christ as if they had performed the same in their owne persons not for others but for themselves And therefore by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they are not redeemers but redeemed For though Christ who is the Saviour of his body communicate to his members his obedience yet not his Headship nor his Mediatorship in respect whereof hee was and is both God and man Man to doe and suffer God to give infinite value and worth to that which his Person did or suffered for the justification and salvation of all those to whom his righteousnesse should bee communicated and imputed but not to make them redeemers and Saviours of others The righteousnesse of the head is of sufficient vertue to justifie and redeeme all the members to whom it is imputed but being imputed the merit thereof extendeth no further than to what end it is imputed that is to save the member not to make it a Saviour nor to confound the members with the head nor to take away the proportion that is and ought bee betweene the head and the members Fourthly to the Papists who confesse Christs satisfaction to be imputed unto us I returne the like argument If Christs satisfaction whereby he redeemed mankind bee imputed unto us then are we also redeemers of mankind But they will not not cannot inferre that therefore we are redeemers but that wee among others are redeemed § X. But that we are justified onely by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse I shall by the helpe of God fully prove hereafter in my whole fifth booke Here onely for a tast I will but point at two argumenss the former out of Rom. 4. 5. 6. 11. the basis or ground whereof is this that whom the Lord justifieth to them he imputeth righteousnesse Now this righteousnesse is either the parties owne or of another Not their owne for they are sinners and being sinners they cannot bee justified by righteousnesse inherent but righteousnesse is imputed to them without workes that is without respect of any obedience performed by themselves Therefore it is the righteousnesse of another That other is no other nor can be any other but Christ onely therefore by imputation of his righteousnesse we are justified The second shall bee out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. As Christ was made sinne for us so are wee made the righteousnesse of God in him By imputation of our sinne to him Christ who knew no sinne was made sinne and a sinner for us therefore by imputation of his righteousnesse which here is called the righteousnesse of God we who are sinners in our selves are made righteous not in our selves but in him CAP. IV. Whether wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ only § I. NOw I come to the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter and some of our justification For some as touching the matter doe hold that we are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely Of these men some doe not hold the matter of justification to bee the passive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse morte Christi partuÌ„ purchased by the death of Christ as the meritorious cause thereof viz. remission of sinnes which they not without absurdity say is imputed to us For what is remission of sinne but the not imputing of it If therefore wee bee justified by imputation of the remission of sinne then are we justified by the imputation of the not imputing of sinne Againe the authors of this opinion confound justice with justification for they say that remission of sinne is our justice and that justification is nothing also but remission when indeed neither the one nor the other is justice but an action of God imputing righteousnesse and not imputing sinne unto us Others hold that by the passive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe meaning thereby his death and passion we are justified as by the onely matter of justification imputed to us But that wee are not justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ alone it may appeare by these reasons § II. By what alone the Law is fully satisfied by that we are justified and by what alone the Law is not fully satisfied by that alone wee are not justified By the whole righteousnesse of Christ that is to say the righteousnesse of his person that is his holinesse or habituall righteousnesse the righteousnesse of his life which was his obedience or actuall righteousnesse the righteousnesse of his death and passion which is obedientia crucis or his passive righteousnesse the Law was fully satisfied or fulfilled but by the passive obedience alone of Christ the Law was not fulfilled therefore by the whole righteousnesse of Christ and not by the passive onely we are justified The proposition is thus proved there is no justification before God without perfect and compleat righteousnesse for without that no man can stand in judgement before God and to imagine that
Law and the same was taught by Calvin not to mention all the rest of our Divines Christum sc. nos reconciliasse Deo justitiam acquisivisse toto obedientiae suae cursu § X. But against this assumption divers things are objected first they feare not to say which I feare to relate that Christ obeyed the Law not for us but for himselfe for they say that Christ as he was man was bound to obey the Law for himselfe which assertion detracteth from the merit of his obedience from the bounty of his Grace from the dignity of his person From his merit for if his obedience were of duety then were it not meritorious as himselfe teacheth Luk. 17. 10. for Debitum non est meritum And if this be true that Christs obedience is not meritorious than have we no title to heaven From his bounty if what he did indeed for us and not for himselfe hee should be thought to have done for himselfe and not for us From the dignity of his peâ—…son as if either he needed to obey for himselfe or by his obedience hee were any way bettered in himselfe or improved But these men shold have remembred that the person who as both of us confesse did obey the Law was and is not onely man but God also and therefore as his bloud was Gods bloud so his obedience was the obedience of God and consequently was performed not of duty nor for himselfe For if of duty then had God been a debtor to the Law Neither needed the humane nature being by personall union united to the divine to obey or to merit for it selfe seeing from the first moment of the conception thereof it was personally united to the Deity of the Sonne of God in whose person it subsisting was from the beginning of the being thereof most happy and enjoying the beatificall vision being at that time as the Schoolemen speake both viator comprehensor Neither did the humane nature which doth not subsist by it selfe work any thing by it selfe in the worke of our redemption but God manifested in the flesh did in and by it both obey and suffer for us And as the eternall Son of God being God coequall with the Father assumed the humane nature and became man not for himselfe for his incarnation was an abasing of himselfe as it were to nothing for man compared to God is as nothing if not as lesse than nothing but for us men and for our salvation so being man whatsoever he did or suffered in obedience to God was not for himselfe for it was a further debasing of himselfe but for us and as for us he sanctified himselfe Iohn 17. 17. so for us he performed all righteousnesse Matth. 3. 15. and fulfilled the Law for us Matth. 5. 17. that whatsoever the Law requireth to justification might bee fulfilled in it Rom. 8. 4. § XI But here the Papists object that our Saviour Christ by his humiliation did merit his exaltation because the Apostle saith that therefore God exalted him Phil. 2. 9. Answere In every aetiologie the reason which is rendred is in a large sense called the cause though it may be any other argument which is not the cause of the Consequent but of the consequence as here humiliation was not the cause but the way to exaltation and exaltation not the effect but the consequent as it is said Luk. 24. 26. ought not Christ to suffer these things and so to enter to his glory And this appeareth by the scope of the Apostle in that place which is to exhort us to the imitation of our Saviour Christ his charity and humility Of his charity in that hee being God for our sakes became man and being man humbled himselfe further and became obedient untill his death even the death of the crosse Of his humility in that it was the way to his glory For before honour is humility and he that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted But humiliation is so farre from being the cause of exaltation that it is the contrary to it even as corruption to generation and losse to recovery yet because recovery presupposeth losse and the generation of one the corruption of another and the exaltation of the Sonne of God his foregoing humiliation therefore each of these may be said to be causa sine qua non as all necessary forerunners may though they be no causes Even as Fabius when Livius Salinator bad him remember that by his meanes hee had recovered 〈◊〉 Why should I not remember it saith he I had never recovered it unlesse thou haddâ—…st lost it Cic. 2. de Oratore And further I adde that the exaltation of Christ whereof the Apostle speaketh was not the exaltation of him to be the Sonne of God for that hee was from all eternity but the manifestation thereof For although in respect of Christs resurrection especially it be said Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee yet was not Christ then first begotten whose generation is eternall but then he was mightily declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection Rom. 1. 4. and this was that name above all names which God did give unto him after his humiliation his manifesting and declaring him by his resurrection to be the Sonne of God So the Apostle saith Heb. 1. 4 5. that Christ hath obtained a more excellent name than the Angels For unto which of the Angells said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day I have begotten thee This exaltation was a necessary consequent of his humiliation and that in two respects first for avoyding the scandall of the crosse for having taken upon him the forme of a servant and therein having humbled himselfe to become obedient untill death and to the death of the crosse it was necessary lest men should take offence at his great humiliation and refuse to beleeve in a man that had beene crucified that he should mightily be declared to bee the Sonne of God by his resurrection ascension and sitting at the right hand of his Father secondly this declaration of Christ to bee the Sonne of God was to follow his humiliation as a necessary stay of our faith in Christ for if Christ had not risen againe then had our faith beene vaine and wee had remained in our sinnes But by his resurrection and exaltation whereby he was powerfully declared to be the eternall Sonne of God wee understand that the obedience which he had performed and the suffering which hee sustained for us were not the obedience and sufferings of mâ—…re a man but of him that is God for which cause Saint Peter saith that God did raise him and give him glory that our faith and hope might be in God § XII If they will needs with the Arrians understand the place of Christs exaltation it selfe which is his filiation and not of the declaration thereof thereupon
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.
confesse our selves to be sinners But the pharisaicall Papist if he be once justified as by their doctrine all are for a time at the least who either are baptized or absolved hee must thinke that in him there is no sinne nothing that God can justly hate And therefore farre bee it from him to make such a confession as this or to cry out with the Apostle Wretched man that I am who shal deliver me from this body of death Rom. 7. 24. § IX His second reason to prove this allegation to bee imperitnent is this Because although Esay should speake of all that is of that whole people yet hee doth not speake of all at all times but onely of the people of the Iewes at that time who for their extreme wickednesse were delivered into captivity as appeareth by the words following verse 10. Zion is a wildernesse Ierusalem a desolation the Temple burnt c. Answ. These words doe prove that the Prophet in this place doth not speake in the person of the wicked Iewes that lived in his time before the desolation of Ierusalem but of the remnant of the faithfull and penitent Iewes who being in captivity bewaile their sinnes and lament the desolation of the Temple and City And therefore what is said of them may be extended to the faithfull in all times being as these were humbled before God for their sinnes as penitent suppliants § X. His third reason because the Prophet speaking onely of the wicked of that time meaneth not all their workes as though all were sinnes for then Bellarmine must confesse that the best workes of the unregenerate are but splendida peccata but such as they accounted to bee their righteousnesse as their sacrifice and new-moones and other ceremoniall observatious wherein they placed their righteousnesse which because they were not 〈◊〉 with a good intention nor as they ought are worthily compared but not by them to a menstruous cloth and are rejected by God Esa. 1. 11. Answ. Here Bellarmine taketh for granted that the Prophet speaketh of the workes of the wicked onely of that time which I have disproved Or if hee had spoken of the wicked it were more probable either that they should place their righteousnesse in morall workes if they had any rather than in ceremoniall or if they placed the top of their righteousnesse as hypocrites many times doe in ceremoniall observations that they would compare those things which they so highly esteemed to menstruous clouts But hee speaketh of all the persons All wee and therefore including the righteous if there were any at all among them as some there were both before the captivity and in it and of all their righteousnesses and therefore not of their ceremonials onely but also of their morals Neither might they performe the chiefe of their ceremonials during their captivity being in a forraine land § XI Secondly that the good workes of the faithfull in this life are not purely and perfectly good I prove because in all our best actions there is a mixture of evill either by the absence or defect of some good thing which ought to bee therein or by the presence of some fault or corruption which ought not to be in them And this I prove first out of Exod. 28. 36. 38. where the high Priest who was the figure of Christ is appointed to weare on his forehead a plate of pure gold which is also called an holy coronet Exod. 29. 6. Levit. 8. 9. engraven with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord and so the 72. translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lord that is of Christ who is the Lord our righteousnesse The end wherefore he was to weare it was that Aaron might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts And it was alwaies to be on his forehead that they the holy gifts might be accepted before the Lord where we are plainly taught that in all our best actions and holy services which wee performe to God there is iniquity which must bee taken away by the holinesse and righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us otherwise they cannot in themselves be accepted of God § XII Secondly out of Eccl. 7. 20. There is not a just man upon the earth that doth good and sinneth not that is who in doing good sinneth not For if the meaning were onely thus as Bellarmine would have it that none are so just but that sometimes they sinne according to that 1 King 8. 46. those words that doth good were superfluous for there is no just man that doth not good But his meaning is that there is no just man upon earth who doing good sinneth not that is which doth good so purely and perfectly as that hee doth not sinne therein For to the perfecting of a good worke many things must concur the want of any whereof is a sinne The truth of this doth best appeare in the particulars Prayer is a good worke and so is the hearing of the word c. but there is no man doth so pray or so heare the word but that when hee hath done he hath just cause to pray unto God to forgive his defects and defaults both in the one and the other And in this sense Luther did truly hold that justus in omni opere bono peccat that a just man sinneth in every good worke Not that the worke in respect of its kind or per se is a sinne as if wee said that prayer c. is a sinne but per accidens because in that good worke there happeneth a defect which defect is a sinne not mortall to them who are in Christ but veniall And thus Augustine also seemeth to understand this place For speaking of the imperfection of charity in this life hee saith that so long as it may be increased profectò illud quod minus est quà m debet ex vitio est ex quo vitio non est justus in terra qui faciat bonum non peccet assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to be is out of vice by reason of which vice there is not a just man upon earth who doth good and sinneth not by reason of which vice no living man shall bee justified before God and in another place more plainely hee saith peccatum est cum charitas minor est quà m esse debet it is a sinne when charity is lesse than it ought to bee § XIII Thirdly such as is the tree such is the fruit The tree is corrupt in part For even in the best there is the Old man and the New the flesh and the Spirit betwixt which there is a perpetuall conflict so that wee cannot doe the things wee would and much lesse as we would but all even our best actions are stained with the flesh which is such a law in us that when wee would doe good evill is present with us
performed as well as we can because commanded knowing that God will accept of our upright though weake indevour § XXI The sixth and the last who seeth not that these words good workes are mortall sinnes imply a contradiction for they shall be good and not good c. Answ. We doe not affirme that good workes are mortall sinnes neither doe we deny them to be truly good Onely we deny them to bee purely and perfectly good And we acknowledge the impurity and imperfection concurring with them to bee a sinne and consequently that the good workes of the faithfull are good per se as being commanded as being the fruits of the Spirit and of faith working by love but sinfull per accidens as being stained with the flesh yea but saith Bellarmine Bonum non existit nisi ex integra causa malum verò ex quolibet vitio that is that is not to bee accounted a good worke whereunto all things doe not concurre which are requisite but that is evill wherein there is any defect therefore if there be any defect or imperfection to bee found in any worke that worke is not to be accounted good but evill Answ. that rule of Diony sius is true according to the rigour of the Law which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from which our Saviour hath delivered us but it is not true according to the covenant of grace wherein the Lord accepteth the sincere and upright indevours of his children though defective and unperfect for perfect performance their wants being not imputed unto them but covered with the robe of Christs perfect righteousnesse As therefore their persons though in themselves sinners are in Christ accepted as righteous so their actions though in themselves defective are acceptable in Christ. Here therefore wee may justly retort both the accusation it selfe and all these absurdities upon the Papists who be necessary consequence are proved to hold that all the workes of the righteous are simply evill and so absolutely to be called sinnes Those works wherein is found any defect or imperfection are not good but absolutely they are to bee called sinnes as the Papists teach But in all even the best works of the righteous there is to be found some defect imperfection or blemish as being stained with the flesh This assumption is plainely taught in the holy Scriptures as I have proved heretofore Therefore all even the best actions of the righteous are absolutely to be called sinnes as the Papists teach Here then let all men againe take notice of the Popish pharisaisme or pharisaicall hypocrisie of Papists with whom no man is just or justified in whom is any sinne no action good but simply evill in which is any defect and yet their persons are just and their actions not onely good but also meritorious and that ex condigno and that ratione operis of eternall life CHAP. V. Our fourth Argument that the righteousnesse by which wee are justified satisfieth the Law so doth Christs righteousnesse so doth not that which is inherent in us § I. NOw I returne to our owne proofes The fourth argument therefore to prove joyntly that we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by ours may be this By that righteousnesse alone and by no other we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousnesse of Christ alone the Law is fully satisfied and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone and not by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us For the proofe of the proposition three things are to be acknowledged first that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousnesse for as I have shewed heretofore to thinke that a man should be justified without justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without apparell secondly that all true righteousnesse is a conformity to the law of God which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse insomuch as what is not conformable to the Law is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is iniquity and sinne thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled either by our selves or by another for us For our Saviour when he came to justifie us and save us protested that hee came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it and professeth that not one jot or tittle of the Law should passe unfulfilled Matth. 5. 17 18. Saint Paul likewise avoucheth that by the doctrine of justification by faith the Law is not made void but established Rom. 3. 31. The proposition therefore is undenyable The assumption hath two parts the former affirmative that by the righteousnesse of Christ the Law is fully satisfied the other negative that by any righteousnesse inherent in us or performed by us the Law neither is nor can be fully satisfied For the clearing of the assumption in both the parts wee are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are required the one in respect of the penalty unto the suffering whereof sinne hath made us debtours the other in respect of the precept to the doing wherof the Law doth bind us The former to free us from hell and damnation the other to entitle us to heaven and salvation according to the sanction of the Law If thou dost not that which is commanded thou art accursed if thoudoest it thou shalt be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath oncetransgressed it but by eternal punishment or that which is equivalent in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a totall perfect and perpetuall obedience § II. Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly beleeve in him in both respects For hee hath superabundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and by his death and he hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all righteousnesse in obeying his Father in all things even unto death and by them both he hath justified us freeing us from hell by his sufferings and entituling of us unto heaven by his obedience And therefore the holy Ghost affirmeth that wee are justified by his bloud Rom. 5. 9. and by his obedience verse 19. For his sufferings were the sufferings of God in which respect they who put him to death are said to have killed the Author of life Act. 3. 15. and to have crucified the Lord of glory 1 Cor. 2. 8 and for the same cause the bloud by which we are redeemed is called the bloud of God Act. 20. 28. or which is all one the bloud of the Sonne of God 1 Iohn 17. His obedience likewise was the obedience of God For Iesus Christ the word that is the second person in Trinity being in the forme of God God coequall with his Father for our sakes
according to the perfection of it and as it is in it selfe considered in the abstract Otherwise we acknowledge degrees of assurance And if any of our Divines have held the speciall faith to be the onely justifying faith they are to be understood as speaking of justification in the court of conscience and as judging them onely to be justified and to have remission of sinnes who are in their owne consciences perswaded and in some measure assured thereof But besides and before the speciall faith whereby wee are justified in our owne conscience applying the promise of the Gospell to our selves a formall degree of faith is to bee acknowledged being the condition of the Evangelicall promises by which we aprehend receive and embrace Christ as hath been shewed and by which we are justified before God This degree of faith in order of nature goeth before repentance though in time repentance seemeth to goe before faith as being sooner discerned But in order of nature as well as of time repentance goeth before speciall faith Because no man can be assured of Gods favour in remitting his sinnes who hath not repented thereof CAP. XII Of foure other dispositions viz. love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament the purpose of a new life § I. HIs fourth disposition is Love for so soone as a man doth hope for a benefit from another as namely justificacation from God hee beginneth to love him from whom hee doth expect it In which words there is some shew that hope disposeth to love but that love doth dispose to justification not so much as a shew But that some love goeth before justification and disposeth thereto he endeavoureth to prove which if he could performe were to little purpose â—…or so long as this love doth not justifie his assertion doth not disprove justification by faith alone but indeed he proveth it not though to that purpose hee produceth besides foure testimonies of Scripture the authority of the Councell of Aurenge His first testimony is a supposititious senrence of an Apocryphall Booke For neither is the sentence in the originall Greeke nor the Booke canonicall neither is the sentence it selfe to the purpose Yee that feare the Lord love him and your hearts shall be he doth not say justified but enlightened that is as Iansenius expoundeth comforted For they that feare God and love him are already justified by faith from which both feare and love doe spring § II. His second testimony Luk. 7. 47. Many sinnes are forgiven her because she loved much therefore love is the cause of forgivenesse I answer by denying the consequence For here in the Papists are many times grossely mistaken who thinke that in every aetiologie the reason which is rendred is a cause so properly called when as indeed it may be any other argument or reason as well as the cause For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cause in a large sense doth not onely fignifie that which causeth the effect which properly is called the cause of a thing or action but also any reason which proveth the thing propounded which is a cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of the action or thing it selfe but of the reasoning or conclusion or as wee use to say consâ—…quentiae non consequentis of the consequence not of the consequent Thus it is called the fallacie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non causa pro causa when that is brought for any argument which it is not So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is traÌ„slated redditio causae is the rendring of any reason from any argument whatsoever For in any syllogism that which is the medium though it bee the effect of the thing is the cause of the conclusion because it is the reason which proveth it and in this sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which cause and wherefore is all one Thus the Papists prove Christs humiliation to have beene the cause of his exaltation as wee heard before because â—…he Apostle saith therefore God exalted him c thus they prove the workes of mercie to bee the cause of salvation because our Saiour saith for I was hungry c so here that love is the cause of forgivenesse because it is said for she loved much when indeed our Saviour argueth not from the cause to the effect but from the effect to the cause as is most evident First by the parable of a creditour who having two debtors whereof the one owed him five hundred pence the other fiftie and neither of them having any thing to pay he freely forgave them both their debt Our Saviour therâ—…fore demanding of the Pharisee who had invited him which of these debtours would love the creditour most the Pharisee truely answered I suppose he to whom he forgave most which answer approved by our Saviour plainely proveth that love was not the cause of forgivenesse but forgivenesse of love and the forgiveing of more the cause of greater love and the forgivenesse of lesse the cause of lesse love and consequently that the greater love was not the cause of greater forgivenesse but the effect of it This parable our Saviour applying to the Pharisee that invited him as the lesse debtour and to the woman which had been a notorious sinner as the greater debtor to both which he had forgiven their debts they having nothing to pay sheweth that her greaâ—…er love was an evidence of her greater debt forgiven Secondly by the antithesis in the same verse but to whom little is forgiven hee loveth but a little It is therefore plaine that the forgivenesse is the cause of love and the forgiving of more of more love and the forgiving of lesse of lesse love And as lesse love is a token of the lesse debt forgiven so greater love of more forgiven hee speaketh therefore of her love not as the cause going before but as the effect following after justification § III. And such is Bellarmines argument out of 1 Ioh. 3. 14. we are translated from death to life that is we are justified because we love the brethren therefore the love of the brethren is the cause of justification I deny the consequence the love of the brethren is not the cause but the fruit of our justification whereby it may be knowne And this appeareth manifestly out of these words which Bellarmine hath fraudulently omitted Nos scimus quia translati sumus c. wee know that wee are translated from death to life because wee love the brethren Our loue then is not the cause of justification but a manifest signe and evidence whereby it is knowne that we are already justified for so he saith speaking in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we are already passed or translated from death to life And to the like effect our Saviour speaketh Luk. 7. 47. as if hee had said hereby it appeareth that many sinnes are forgiven her because shee loved much But that it was not her love
grave of sinne § VII And here I am to mention two things both for the comfort of true though weake Christians and also for the detestation of popery These beginnings of faith of hope of love of amendment of life the Papists doe not acknowledge to be graces infused but the fruits of nature assisted with Gods special helpe by which they being holpen of God doe prepare and dispose themselves to the grace of justification which is given to man according to their owne preparative dispositions But forasmuch as these beginnings of faith and other vertues are not the fruits of nature for in our flesh there is no good thing and that which is borne of the flesh is flesh the very disposition of our nature being enmity against God but of the regenerating spirit the weake Christians therefore though the graces of God in them are weake and small even as a graine of Mustard-seed yet if they bee true and unfained they are to be perswaded that the Lord who in his children accepteth the will for the deed will accept of them as the fruits of his spirit seeing hee professeth that hee will not quench the smoaking flaxe nor breake the bruised reed And surely if the Spirit of God bee the author of no charity but that which is perfect then is he author of none in this life wherein wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit 2. The Papists doe not hold themselves to bee justified untill perfect charity bee infused into them by infusion whereof all sinne is expelled So that in any one of them being justified no sinne remaineth And therefore whiles sinne remaineth in them as it doth alwayes even in the best during this life they are not justified No marvell then that Papists cannot be assured of their justification seeing they may bee assured that they are never justified because they never attaine to perfect righteousnesse in this life and because sinne doth alwayes remaine in them § VIII Our third argument I propound thus None that is a child of wrath and an enemy to God can love God whiles he continueth in that estate But untill their reconciliation and justification all men are children of wrath and enemies to God Therefore before reconciliation and justification no man can love God Bellarmine answereth that a man may love God though God be angry with him which is in respect of Gods children who are justified and reconciled unto him but the question is whether those that are not yet reconciled and justified can love God wee know that Gods anger may stand with reconciliation For God is angry with his dearest Children when they sinne against him and in his anger hee doth also correct them with whom notwithstanding he is reconciled for he doth correct them in love and for their good Gods children therefore may love God where they know him to be justly angry with them but they that are enemies as all are untill they be reconciled doe not love God but the very disposition of their corrupt nature is enmity against God § IX His fifth disposition is Penitencie which as he saith is a sorow for sinne and a detestation of it which I deny not ordinarily to be a disposition in the children of God to repentance But this is to be understood of the godly sorrow which some call contrition which is not to be found in naturall men which is a sorrow conceived not so much for the punishment deserved as for the offence of God whom they have displeased and dishonoured being so gracious a God unto them This proceedeth from faith and from love Of this it is said 2 Cor. 7. 10. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 godly sorrow worketh repentance never to be repented of As for that sorrow which is conceived not for the offence of God but for the shame and punishment which follow sinne which some call attrition it is of the same nature with servile fearâ—… which though in it owne nature it rather driveth from God than draweth to him as we see in Iudas yet God is pleased sometimes to use it as a meanes to draw his elect unto him But though contrition dispose men to repentance and attrition be used sometimes as a preparative to faith because humiliation is the way to exaltation yet neither of both justifie and therefore for all them faith alone doth justifie § X. But let us examine his proofes wherein though his premisses be very weake yet his conclusion as allwayes is very confident His proofes are these Act. 11. 18. Therefore God hath given to the Gentiles penance unto life 2 Cor. 7. 10. The sorrow which is according unto God worketh penance to salvation that is stable Ezek. 18. 27. when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall quicken his soule What can be more cleare if penance be given of God unto life that is to obtaine life if sorrow for sinne undertaken for God worke penance to salvation if he which doth penance doth quicken his owne soule how doth faith alone justifie or how doth penance not justifie Answ. When I consider your arguments I wonder at your confidence The word which in the vulgar latine is in the two first places translated poenitentia and by the Rhemists penance in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not sorrow for sin but repentance it selfe which importeth a change of a mans mind and disposition and is not a forerunner but a consequent of justification before God which in the first place is called repentance unto life because though it bee no cause but a consequent of justification yet it is the way to life and a necessary forerunner to glorification The godly sorrow in the second place is commended as an excellent disposition to the renewing ofrepentance in the faithfull not to bee repented of The third Bellarmine readeth thus when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall make alive his soule as if a wicked man could either turne himselfe from his wickednesse or quicken his owne soule or as if a dead man could restore himselfe to life But then is the wicked turned when God doth turne him and then is his soule quickned when God doth quicken him The words are when the wicked turneth from his wickednesse hee shall preserve his soule from death that is as it is expounded in the next verse he shall live Howsoever this place speaketh not of any foregoing disposition but of repentance it selfe which in order of nature never goeth before justification though many times it be discerned before it as the cause many times is knowne by the effect But not whatsoever is necessary to salvation doth justifie All the graces of sanctification and namely repentance have their necessary use But justification is ascribed onely to faith because it is the onely instrument ordained of God to receive Christ who onely is our righteousnesse § XI His sixth
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
according to charity sanctified from the corruption of sinne and justified from the guilt of the same therefore they should take heed lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified or made guilty of those crimes from which they were justified § V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified Answ. The Context doth shew that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed that whom the Lord calleth hee doth justifie and whom he doth justifie them also hee doth glorifie from thence hee inferreth this consolation who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth as was said verse 30. who shall condemne c. Where justifying most plainely is used as a judiciall word signifying by sentence to justifie as Chrysostome and Oâ—…cumenius on this place doe note as opposed to accusing and condemning and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word infusion of righteousnesse But heere it may bee objected that in this place where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation sanctification is either included in justification or left our Answ. It is left out for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of salvation in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter left out sanctification as being no cause of salvation but the way unto it and the cognizance of them that are saved And these degrees are so set downe Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed first Vocation that men should bee called and thereby brought to beleeve secondly Iustification that by faith they may receive remission of sinnes thirdly Glorification that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified where sanctification is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved Againe sanctification is left out because it is included in respect of the beginning thereof which is our conversion or regeneration in vocation and in respect of the consummation in glorification for as sanctification is gloria inchoata so glorification is gratia consummata § VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him who justifieth the ungodly Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence his faith is imputed for righteousnesse which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit that it plainely confutes it first it is called the justification of the ungodly that is of one who is a sinner in himselfe for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne and so remaineth cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent secondly because to him that beleeveth in Christ faith relatively understood that is the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse thirdly because in this place justification is expressed by these termes not imputing sinne remitting or covering of sinne imputing righteousnesse without workes imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not that is that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse but beleeveth in him that justifieth a sinner CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justification assigned by Bellarmine § I. THirdly saith Bellarmine justification is taken for increase of justice for even as he is said to be heated not only who of cold is mà de hot but also who of hot is made hotter even so he is said to be justified who not onely of a sinner is made just but also of just is made more just Ans. In this comparison of like there is a great unlikenesse for calefaction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot but in justification the change is not reall but relative as before hath beene shewed Bellarmine therefore must prove that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteousnesse inherent before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of inherent justice But if the former cannot be proved much lesse the latter But yet he bringeth three proofes such as they be § II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justificari quâ—…niam merces Domini manet in aeternum feare not to be justified untill death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever Answ. To omit that the booke is Apocryphall which ought not to bee alleaged in controversies of faith the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved The words in the Originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is stay not untill death to be justified or as their own interlinear translation readeth it ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari wait not untill death to be justified where it is evident that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion which he would not have differred untill the time of death and not of the continuance or increase of it for then the sentence would beare a contrary and indeed an ungodly sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abide not or continue not to be justified or to be just untill thy death And the words untill death are not to be joyned with the last word justified but with the first stay not untill death And their translation of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether as Bellarmine here readeth ne verearis or as some editions have ne vetéris hath no affinity with the Originall But our interpretation as it agreeth with the words of the Text so it is confirmed by the context Vse Physike before thou bee sicke before judgement prepare thy selfe humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke and in the time of sinnes that is whiles thou mai'st yet sinne shew thy conversion let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season and deferre not untill death to be justified or to become just § III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and proceeding in justice and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are as much as cease not And this he would prove by that which goeth before be not hindred to pray alwayes where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continuall prayer and also by that which immediately followeth because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked but indulgence Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted when it shal be proved first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to cease secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwaies fourthly that those words but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth stay not or waite not and not cease not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render the vow and not to pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉