TWO SERMONS One on the Subject of Justification The Other on The Imputed Righteousness and Imputation of Faith to Righteousness by which we are Justified Preached Occasionally at the Merchants-Lecture in Pin-makers-Hall in Broad-street And Printed at their Desire By Walter Cross M. A. LONDON Printed by and for John Astwood at his Printing-House behind St. Christophers-Church in Thred-needle-street the back-side of the Royal Exchange 1695. SERMON I. ROM IV. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly THese words are to be consider'd both relatively and absolutely that we may in order comprehend their full sense and importance The relation they bear to the Apostle's scope and design is that of a proof and confirmation of the grand Doctrine of the Gospel which is That no man is nor can be justified by his own Works or Righteousness the only way of being justified is by the Righteousness of God The Apostle on very good ground supposes such an opposition and disjunction between them two as admits no medium for we cannot be justified without a Righteousness and that Righteousness must be either our own or anothers God's or Man's It is the Negative branch of the Doctrine the Apostle doth earnestly contend for in this 4th Chap. without any appearance of Carnality but disputes with strenuous dint of Argument and closely connected Topics with the terms of his proposed Doctrine whereof this in the Text is one either an immediate Argument thus He that worketh not or is ungodly cannot be justified by his own Works but he who is justified by Grace is one that worketh not or is ungodly Erg. Or rather a Confirmation of an immediate Argument before brought thus Maj. He that is justifi'd by Faith is not justifi'd by Works Min. But Abraham was justified by Faith Erg. Abraham was not justified by Works The Assumption being confirm'd from Scriptures Testimony Gen. 15. he proceeds to prove the grand Proposition thus Maj. He to whom righteousness is imputed of Grace cannot be justified by Works Min. But to him that is justified by Faith righteousness is imputed of Grace Erg. He that is justified by Faith cannot be justified by Works The assumption is frequently asserted in Scripture v. 16. It is of Faith that it might be by Grace The grand Proposition he supposes evident from the opposition between Grace and Debt in v. 4. for when a person is dealt with on the account of Works i. e. any thing in him or done by him it is debt his due I mean the reward but when a Man is dealt with of Grace the reward is proportion'd to the Favour and Good-will of the Donor or Judge the Goodness of the Judge on the Bench and the arraigned Person at the Bar are very opposite therefore to be treated according to this opposite goodness must be an opposite treatment This opposition or repugnancy in v. 5. he illustrates and confirms thus Maj. Where the subjects causes effects or manner of efficiency are opposite there the things themselves are opposite Min. But in Justification by Works and Faith of grace and of due the subjects causes c. are opposite Erg. The Nature of the Justifications are opposite The grand Proposition is a Maxim in Logic or Natural Light taken for granted The assumption is illustrated and confirmed in these four Verses 1. The Subjects to wit a godly and an ungodly Man a righteous and an unrighteous a Worker and a Non-worker 2. The Causes the grace favour and good-will of the Governour and the merit labour obedience and righteousness of the Subject 3. The immediate effect of this Free-grace or way of its efficiency which differs from the Method of Justice measuring its distribution by Law for the former imputes a Righteousness or as in Ch. 5. gives a Righteousness viz. in a way of accompt and reckoning that by virtue thereof and its satisfaction to the Government it may consist with governing goodness to bless the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputes righteousness without works The latter finds an inherent righteousness in the person and therefore his Justification is only an Authoritative declaration of what he is a surrender of the Honour that is his due and he proves this by David's Testimony asserting the former Justification to be a Pardon or Forgiveness As if he had said It 's call'd a Justification because that Pardon is the effect of an Imputed Righteousness Free-grace first gives by way of Account an Interest in Christ's Righteousness and conveys the Right or Interest thorough Faith Secondly Pardons on the account of that Righteousness which gives just ground for the denomination of Justification and this Name is entertain'd as the proper Name for our Pardon in the Gospel that it may be a constant Memorial of our Obligation to Christ for our Pardon and of the difficulty that there was to render a Pardon consistent with the Law and Honour of the Law-maker and Governour One chief end of this added Testimony of David's to the Example and Pattern of Abraham is to prove that we are not justified by Works from the Nature of Gospel-Justification viz. David says it 's a Pardon tho' it 's a Justification in respect to Christ's Righteousness it 's a Forgiveness with respect to our own Unrighteousness This proves the Subject also of Gospel Justification to be ungodly for we need and receive a Pardon not as righteous or godly but ungodly And the reason why the Apostle gives the sense of David's words to be the Imputing of a Righteousness is because it was inconsistent with a necessary just Law and a just Governour and Judge who cannot do violence to a righteous Law to pardon or not to impute sin until there be first a Righteousness imputed and by showing this to be the sense of it he thereby proves that our Justification is of Grace because Free grace is the only cause of the Imputation of that Righteousness It is not for Christ's sake that his righteousness is imputed for that were to say that the same thing was for the sake of it self his Merit for his Merits-sake and Righteousness for his Righteousness-sake But as Christ is the Free-grace of God's Gift so is his Righteousness without any interveening Merits and that has made me think the influence of Christ's Merit to use the accustom'd Phrase terminates on the Law or Legal constitution not on the Divine Nature God is the God Author and Owner of all Grace nothing has chang'd his mind into a more gracious temper and hence the Imputation of righteousness is only ascrib'd to Grace but Justification is ascrib'd to Grace not immediately as imputation is but at second hand Justified by his Grace thorough the Redemption Ch. 3.24 Hence something may be said for an Imputation of Righteousness from Eternity tho' not for Justification from Eternity and may be this is the reason why another Phrase is made use of for the transitory temporary Act viz. Faith
are more likely sences when David said Blessed is he whose sin is forgiven to mean blessed is he who has an interest in Christ and his satisfaction than to mean blessed is he who repents Nay the Prophet adds that as another thing Blessed is he in whose spirit there is no guile i. e. Blessed is the pardon'd man and the sincere man 3ly He is ungodly when forgiven therefore his righteousness is not the condition of it 4ly C. 3. v. 25. To declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past why should we think the Terms connexed other than what before he unites as cause and effect this is to unite what the Apostle separates our Works and Justification and separate what he unites Christ righteousness and remission 2. It is not supposable to think that Christ's righteousness or satisfaction should be no where mention'd in this dispute about the causes of Justification when it s confest that that is the grand and only meriting cause It is strange that he should dispute about the cause of pardon and yet never mention the true cause but instead of it always a little petty requisite without any causality at all and the more strange that he should so frequently mention that cause under the name of Christ's blood and his being deliver'd for our offences the matter of his righteousness in the context and seldom ever the effect without it but when he calls it by the name of righteousness the proper name by which it saves us for his blood saves us as it is a righteousness a conformity to the law of Redemption that wherein the Law obtain'd its end then it should not be esteem'd his but our own 3. We may learn whose righteousness it is that is mention'd in the dispute by what was propos'd in the These or Doctrine to be disputed which he proposes both negatively and affirmatively viz. Justified not by our righteousness or works but God's we are justified by Gods righteousness this he proposes Rom. 1.17 as the grand end of the Gospel Therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith surely God's Righteousness and Faith by which it s receiv'd are distinct things from thence to v. 21. c. 3. he proves that all our own righteousness is entirely rejected from any interest in this affair and again v. 21. proposes thus the righteousness of God to be that which he now undertakes to prove to be the only righteousness we are justified by But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested and that by God he means Christ Rom. 10.3 4. may be easily learn'd from his words Vnto the righteousness of God for Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness and that it is not call'd the righteousness of God because his gift we may learn from Rom. 1.8 Your faith is spoken of thoroughout the world Faith is a work this is the work of God to believe on his name and faith is a righteousness for there is a conformity to the Law in it but it is ours your faith faith differs from this righteousness as the act and object Righteousness of God reveal'd from faith to faith What unprejudic'd man would call that righteousness and faith the same faith differs from it as the effect from the cause 2 Pet. 1.1 Have obtain'd the like precious faith with us thorough the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Who would wish for a plainer expression to prove that the gift of Faith is the fruit of Christ's merit and therefore this righteousness must be imputed to us before that gift be possess'd by us 4. The Epithets of this righteousness speaks it to be Christs Rom. 3.21 22 24. 1. It s the righteousness of God God was Author Owner Contriver Acter Giver Subject of this righteousness it deserves the name by way of Eminence who could contrive it but his Wisdom give it but his Grace bear it but his Patience work it but his Power possess it but his Fulness 2. Without the Law on two accounts both as to the person and as to the righteousness 1. The person Gal. 4. Was made under the law he came under it by his own voluntary choice not natural necessity as we are hence without the Law 2. The Righteousness was that no precept of the Law requir'd to dye or suffer that was none of its duties or righteousness it was its penalty in case of Unrighteousness 3. It s a righteousness now manifested faith and repentance has shin'd in the practice of the Patriarchs and Prophets ever since Adam Heb. 11. Abel Noah Enoch believ'd indeed Christ's was a new kind the World never saw before 4. It was witness'd by the Law and the Prophets if we take the Law for the books of Moses they bear witness to it Abraham believ'd and it was imputed to him for righteousness the bruising his heel Gen. 3. witnesses his suffering the principal matter of his righteousness If we take it for the Typical Law that witnessed to it for all the sacrifices were Types and Types are visible Prophecies and all the Language is the Messias was to suffer in the room of others to obey a Law for others and the Prophets witness Isa 45. Surely shall one say in the Lord have I righteousness Jer. 23.6 The Lord our righteousness Dan. 9. To bring in everlasting righteousness There are the Testimonies of three Prophets To him gave all the Prophets witness 5. It was a righteousness convey'd thorough faith put on them that believe v. 22. which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe 6. A righteousness that consist in a conformity to a Law which to us is a Law of Faith not Works We are bound to believe his Obedience to all the Law in the Covenant of Redemption but not to work one bit of it Hence we being justified by that righteousness our boasting is excluded v. 27. 7. A faith that consists in shedding of blood in suffering v. 25. These two are to the same effect Thorough faith in his blood and righteousness by faith 8. A righteousness whose fruit is remission of sin v. 24. To declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are pass'd the same Coherence that is in the Text between imputation of righteousness and pardon 9 Rom. 9.4 A righteousness wherein the Law attain'd its full end the Subject Life and Happiness and the Law-giver honour and glory 10. A righteousness the gift whereof glorifies grace to the uttermost the righteousness of an Angel is not such a gift as this is 5. It s a righteousness that is made ours As Adam's first offence or unrighteousness was made ours that never inher'd in us but death came on us by it then it has some relation to us and we to it this is at large in C. 5. where the Author of this righteousness is plainly call'd the second Adam and if that be not plain enough v. 21. he is call'd
forgiven thee Having removed these Limitations with the grounds of them I shall establish the Doctrine more positively And 1. By Testimony Sclater on this Verse reconciles it with Prov. 17.15 where it 's said He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just even they both are abomination to the Lord It were an abomination to justifie a wicked Man without a satisfaction but not where a satisfaction to the Government is given which is the Case of the ungodly Man in the Text. Who 's justified thro' the righteousness of Christ and this he quotes out of Pareus on the place Wilson another English Commentator with great plainness gives it thus At their justification he findeth them ungodly and maketh them godly and he doth it both by taking away the guilt and filth of their sin The Righteousness of Christ is reckoned the Righteousness of that Person who doth by Faith embrace him Pitcairn says Ungodly here is taken in the same sense as when God raiseth the dead and calls that which is not to be it being the term of alienation from which they are remov'd from whence he bids farewell to all antecedent Causes which some call inferiour others in some manner or measure others administrating others sine quo non others Causes of possession tho' not of right for all Holiness comes in as a way to the Kingdom not as Causes of Rule Diest thus Justifying Grace finds him so in himself but leaves him not so For whom he justifies them he sanctifies God Justifies us not as Holy in our selves but as wanting righteousness he imputes a righteousness to us The Anger of Abraham Gen. 15. for want of Children wanted a Pardon even then before this declaration about him that his Faith was imputed to him for righteousness Theodore Szuingerus whom Hottinger commends and notwithout reason as the best Commentator on this Epistle compares the Text with 1 Kings 8.2 condemning the wicked to bring his way on his Head and justifying the righteous to give him according to his righteousness and solves the difficulty these two ways 1. That the one is a Justification of a man's Cause and the other a Justification of his Person which is that in the Text. 2. This Justification of the Ungodly is not against a Law but according to a Law not without a righteousness but without his own only Besides says he Tho' it finds him ungodly it leaves him not in his ungodliness Bucer thus If God should not justifie the Wicked none should be justified for the Lord find us all wicked before we are justified Greneus Tho' Man may not justifie the ungodly God may who has Power to forgive above Law Pareus Tho' they are justified who are wicked in themselves yet not without Cause and against Rule since there is a satisfaction in Christ Marlorat's Ecclesiastick Exposition is thus The first Blessing of Salvation is Pardon and our Pardon being a Justification it must be a justification of the Ungodly What can they say to this that are Slaves to their Belly and yet brag of their Works are they better than Abraham who left his Countrey redeem'd his Brother and offered his Son and Hop'd in his God against all Hope but God in justifying leaves us not ungodly Such therefore ought rather to fear they are not justify'd because they want the fruits of Justification than brag they have the Causes of it in themselves Calvin thus It 's observable the Discourse is not about the way of living but about the Causes of Salvation He argues from contraries and as Bucer says not from words but sentences This Sentence is full of Energy Believeth on him that justifies the ungodly wherein both the Nature of Faith and Righteousness are contain'd In short no body can come to the Righteousness of Faith but who is in himself Ungodly for Faith adorns us with anothers Righteousness which it beggs of God hence God is said to justifie when he freely forgives and vouchsafes to love them with whom he may be justly angry Ver. 6. without Works they meerly cavil who think all Works are not excluded for he says not Works of the Law but simply and without restriction Works of all kinds Beda venerabilis Anno 700. says on this Text What can he be but ungodly until he be justified by Grace for what Grace gives it gives freely I dare not determine which of the two is the greater work to make a just man or to justifie an ungodly man both require equal power but the latter greater grace or mercy Boast not of thy works before faith for faith found thee a sinner Man works not righteousness until he be justified and that begins with Faith Tho. Aquinas 1260. on this Text To believe is the first act of Righteousness which God works in us by this man doth not merit righteousness but subject himself to God's justification and so thereby receives its effect This says he the Apostle proves 1. From David's sense v. 6. He is a blessed man to whom God gives a righteousness without forgoing works 2. From David's words proving he had no righteousness for he needed for Orignal Actual and Venial sin for the guilt of the Offence Fact and Penalty of sin Ambranat a late Papist 1665. Paris The Apostle before acted an Orator by interrogations and frequent Questions but now a Philosopher with clouds of Arguments before he oppos'd Gift and Works now he opposes a Believer and Worker a believer in him that endues the ungodly with his own righteousness Patiatur ergo si non operatur when he is not a doer he is made a receiver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erasmus says Ungodly here comprehends all kind of Unrighteousness there is no kind that is excepted But there is no end of humane testimonies for within my Cognizance I can reckon an hundred Interpreters of this Epistle I shall add two more of greatest Authority in England 1. The Westminster Assembly I shall not quote the Annotations bearing their Name but as I am inform'd on far less ground than Anthony Burgess his book of Justification which was examin'd and approv'd by them one of his Titles is That gracious works are not so much as the condition or cause sine qua non of justification and on this Text p. 288. God doth account him as righteous though a sinner in himself p. 290. While looking into our selves we see nothing but matter of death and condemnation and he has another Sermon to prove that the Act of Faith is not imputed to justification which the Assemblies Catachism expresly mentions A Second Authority is the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England But Dr. Wallis has done that in a Sermon ex preposito I shall conclude with these two noted Fathers Ambrose and Augustine the former defines a worker to be not a transgressor of the Law and a Non-worker a Transgressor the latter in his Propositions on this Epistle Tom. 4. p. 1193. Qui justificat