that wee are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall bee shewed they could not meane that wee are sanctified by faith alone Secondly remission of sinne which is the not imputing or forgiving of sinne is by Augustine included in the signification of the word which by Bellarmine is excluded who in stead of remission hath substituted the extinction and abolition of sinne So that although he retaine the name which hee confoundeth with sanctification yet the thing thereby signified which is the maine benefit which wee receive from Christ by which wee are both delivered from hell and entitled to heaven hee hath taken away as I have heretofore declared If this answere doe not content the Papists let them understand that when the use of any word in the Fathers borrowed from the Scriptures differeth from the perpetuall use thereof in the Scriptures wee are bound to follow the infallâ—…ble authority of Gods Word rather than the testimony of any man or men whatsoever And for this wee have Augustines owne warrant who challengeth liberty to reject in other mens writings though never so learned andholy what is not agreeable to the Scriptures Talis ego sum saith he in scriptis aliorum tales volo esse intellectorâ—…s meorum § X. I come to his reasons which are three The first in every motion or mutation there are two termini a quo and ad quem the name being taken from the latter as in illumination there is a change from darknesse to light in calesaction from cold to heate Iustistcation is a mutation or change Therefore in justification there are two termini a quo sc. peccatum ad quem justitia from which it hath his denomination and therefore besides remisston of sinne there must accrew righteousnesse I answer that mutations are either reall or relative If hee speake of reall mutations I deny the assumption for I have proved before that justification is no such mutation If hee speake of relative mutations I grant the syllogisme for even in such there are two termini as in liberation terminus a quo is bondage ad quem is freedome in marrying the change is from being a Batchelor to bee a Husband from being a Maid to bee a Wife so in Reconciliation Redemption Adoption and so also in justification there is a change from guilt of sinne to righteousnesse imputed from being guilty of sinne and damnation to bee accepted as righteous unto life from being the bondslave of sinne and Satan and obnoxious to hell and condemnation to bee not onely made a free-man but also a Citizen of Heaven In all these are great changes yet not reall or positive whereby any inherent forme either going before is abolished or new acquired but onely relative § XI His second reason may thus bee framed If justification bee given to us of God not onely that wee may escape the paines of hell but also that wee may obtaine the rewards of the heavenly life then justification doth not consist onely in the remission of sinnes which onely freeth from punishment but giveth not glory but the former is true therefore the latter Ans. All this wee freely confesse but first the thing principally intended that to justification besides remission of sinnes renovation concurreth hee doth not goe about to prove Onely hee proveth that justification doth not consist in remission onely in which wee agree with him though not in the other thing which is to bee added for wee adde making righteous by imputation hee by infusion or renovation Secondly the proofes of his assumption wee doe not approve The first Rom. 6. 22. yee have your fruit unto sanctification but the end everlasting life The whole verse is this But now being made free from sinne and become servants to God that is being redeemed or justified ye have your fruit unto holinesse that is the fruit of your justification is your sanctification and the end of both is glorification or everlasting life For this text doth neither prove that justification is not remission of sinne onely not that it is to bee confounded with sanctification which is here made the fruit of it nor that it conferreth everlasting life For if the holy Ghost speaking of justification had mentioned onely remission of sinne without mentioning any other thing concurring thereunto as sometimes hee doth Act. 13. 38 39. 26. 18. Rom. 4. 7 8. his meaning might be that being freed from sinne and mancipated to God that is redeemed for manu capti and servati are mancipia and servi and to bee redeemed is to have remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. yee have the fruit of your redemption unto sanctification according to that Luk. 1. 73 74 75. and the end both of your redemption and sanctification everlasting life his second proofe is Rom 8. 30 whom hee hath justified hee hath glorified for so might I say to whom hee hath given remission of sinnes to them hee giveth the inheritance Act. 26. 18. them he maketh blessed Psal. 32. 1. them hee justifieth Rom. 4. 6 7. Act. 13. 38 39. and them hee glorifieth And whereas hee saith that in that order of causes set downe in that place every latter is the effect of the former as glorification of justification justification of vocation vocation of predestination that may bee a reason why in that serie causarum sanctification is left out because it is not the cause but the way to glorification Eph. 2. 10. and the cognizance and character of them that shal be glorified Act. 20. 32. 26. 18. his third proofe out of 2 Tim. 4. 8. there is a Crown of righteousnesse laid up for me is nothing to the purpose For as Augustine saith donando delicta fecit se Coronae debitorem by pardoning offences hee oweth the Crowne and Bernard there is a Crowne of righteousnesse which Paul expecteth sed justitiae Dei non suae but of Gods righteousnesse not of his for it is just he should render what hee oweth and hee oweth what hee hath promised § XII But the assumption though not proved by him is approved and granted by us as agreeing with that justification which wee teach and disagreeing from that which is taught by the Papists For wee teach that in justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse wee are both freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also are in Christ accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And further wee teach that howsoever the parts of justification viz. remission of sinne and acceptation unto life in the faithfull and the causes thereof in Christ that is to say his bloud and his obedience doe alwayes concuâ—…re for whosoever hath remission of sinnes is also accepted unto life and contrariwise and our Saviour in his obeying suffered and in his sufferings obeyed yet the causes in Christ and effects unto the faithfull are to bee distinguished For by imputation of his sufferings properly wee are freed from punishment and
imputed as a full satisfaction for sinne the other by imputation of Christs perfect obedience as a sufficient merit of eternall life by the former we are freed from hell by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven Of them both the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. that we are justified that is absolved from our sinne by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified that is constituted just by his obedience vers 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent saying that there are no parts of justification but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes Indeed if it were the onely matter of justification as some of them teach and the entire formall cause of justification as others avouch of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter I say if both these opinions were true then I would confesse that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne but whiles it is either but the matter as some say or but the forme as others or neither of both as I avouch it is a manifest errour to say that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes Againe in every mutation though it be but relative we must of necessity acknowledge two termes tâ—…rminum à quo terminum ad quem the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice from which terme justification hath its name from a state of death and damnation to a state of life and Salvation But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne but no acceptation as righteous a freedome from hell but no title to heaven To this they answere that to whom sinne is not imputed righteousnesse is imputed and they who are freed from hell are admitted to heaven I doe grant that these things doe alwayes concurre but yet they are not to bee confounded for they differ in themselves and in their causes and in their effects in themselves for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne another thing to be made righteous as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors in their causes for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory sufferings the acceptation as righteous unto life to Christs meritorious obedience In their effects for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell and by imputation of Christs obedience we have right unto heaven § XVII If unto justification there be required besides remission of sinne Imputation of righteousnesse then there are two formall causes of justification Answ. It followeth not for although there bee two tâ—…rmini in this mutation yet there is but one action and this one action is the onely forme of justification viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse of which are two effects which also be the two parts of justification remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous as I said in the definition that justification is an action of God wherein hee imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner doth not onely absolve him from his sinnes but also accepteth of him as righteous and as an heire of eternall life § XVIII Notwithstanding this so evident truth some of the Divines of whom we spake when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely take this position for granted that justification is nothing but remission of sinne and hereupon inferre that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ we are justified by his bloud onely And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne to all which we readily subscribe But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes as entrance into heaven and salvation c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche putting the chieâ—…e and most eminent part of his obedience for the whole Others labour to prove this assertion that justification is nothing but remission of sinne by testimonies and by reasons and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines who against the Papists have maintained that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely But this assertion as hereafter I shall shew is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists who unto justification besides remission of sinnes require inward renovation or sanctification and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification not imputation of righteousnesse which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne and without which there can be no remission for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse we have both remission of sinnes and acceptation unto life but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis from the proper nature of justification as if they had said wee are not justified both by remission and renovation as the Papists teach but by remission without renovation that is in their meaning by remission onely and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe as hereafter shall bee shewed And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 6 7. therefore when it is said that we are justified by remission onely and not by renovation it is all one as if wee said that wee are justified by imputation onely and not by infusion of righteousnesse § XIX Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission As therefore he whose sinnes of commission are remitted is reputed as if hee had done nothing forbidden so whose sinnes of omission are remitted is reputed as if hee had left undone nothing that is commanded Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing forbidden nor left undone any thing that is commanded hee is reputed as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law I answer by distinction if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse as they must if they will make good their assertion then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission is freed from the guilt of both but not from the fault For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes he is a sinner as having both committed what is forbidden and also omitted what is commanded Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment and a râ—…atu poenae from the guilt binding over to punishment as if hee had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded Hee therefore that hâ—…th remission is reputed as having neither committed any evill nor omitted any good not simply
our justification and sanctification to both And therefore as we are first above all things to desire that God may bee glorified so that hee may bee glorified wee are first among those things which wee desire for our owne good to seeke his Kingdome and his righteousnesse that his Kingdome of glory and the Kingdome of Grace which consisteth in the righteousnesse of justification and the two companions thereof peace and joy in the holy Ghost may come upon us and next that his will may be done upon earth as it is in heaven by our new obedience for this is the will of God even our sanctification Salvation I say is the end both of our justification and sanctification for being made free from sinne and become servants to God we have our fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life The end of our faith by which we are justified is the salvation of our soules unto which by justification wee are entituled and saved in hope that being justified by his grace wee should bee made heires according to hope of eternall life for all that be justified shall be glorified And this also I noted in the definition when I said that those whom the Lord doth justifie by imputation of Christs righteousnesse he accepteth as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life for by faith we have remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified § III. But we are justified by faith not onely that in the end wee may be saved but also that in the meane time our salvation being of Grace might be certaine and sure and that being justified by faith we might have peace and joy in the holy Ghost Whereas if it depended upon our workes or worthinesse it would be uncertaine For the promise of this inheritance was not made to Abraham and his seed through the Law in respect of any righteousnesse therein prescribed but through the righteousnesse of Faith And therefore it is of faith that it might bee by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed Rom. 4. 13. 16. § IV. The other end which is subordinate not onely to Gods glory but also to our Salvation is our sanctification as being the way to eternall life for though we be saved by grace through faith and not of workes yet we are the workmanship of God created in Christ Iesus unto good workes which God hath before ordained that we should walke in them We are therefore justified First that God may be glorified Secondly that wee may bee saved in the life to come Thirdly that in this world we may lead a godly life See Luk. 1. 74 75. 1 Pet. 2. 24. Tit. 2. 11 12 13. So much of the causes § V. There remaine the essentiall parts of justification which I expressed in the definition when I said that God doth justifie a beleeving sinner when imputing unto him the righteousnesse of Christ he doth absolve him from his sinnes and accepteth of him in Christ as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life The parts therefore of justification are two absolution from sinne and acceptation as righteous in Christ both which the Lord granteth by imputation of the full and perfect satisfaction of Christ whereby he fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty which he satisfied by his sufferings and also in respect of the precept which he satisfied by his perfect righteousnesse both habituall and actuall As therefore there were two branches of the Law to be satisfied the commination and the Commandement and two parts of Christs satisfaction answerable thereunto so there are two parts of justification absolution from the curse of the Law by imputation of Christs sufferings wherein he became a curse for us and acceptation as righteous in Christ by imputation of Christs most perfect righteousnes both habituall actuall in respect of both which parts of his satisfaction Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes that is doth justifie all that truly beleeve in him § VI. And hereby it may appeare that those three benefits of Redemption Reconciliation and Adoption are all comprehended under this maine benefit of justification the two former being all one in substance with the former part for as touching the former In Christ wee have Redemption through his bloud even remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. And as touching the latter God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himselfe not imputing unto them or remitting their sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and therefore all three Remission of sinnes Redemption and Reconciliation are ascribed to the bloud and to the death of Christ. The third is all one in substance with the second part For what is it to be adopted but to be accepted of God in his beloved as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life and this is ascribed to the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ both in his life and death For therefore was the Sonne of God made under the Law namely to obey and to fulfill and to satisfie it that hee redeeming us from the yoke of the Law requiring perfect obedience in us to justification we might receive the Adoption of sonnes § VII Now follow the consequents and fruits of justification which are the Grace of Sanctification and the parts therof consisting partly in righteousnesse inherent and partly in outward obedience called good workes which I doe the rather mention in this place because the Papists though they cannot deny that they are the effects and fruits of justification which as they use to alleage out of Augustine Non praecedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum not goe before as causes but follow as effects yet notwithstanding most absurdly contend that they concurre with faith unto justification as the causes thereof wee acknowledge them to be necessary in the subject that is the party that is justified and to bee saved necessitate praesentiae as the necessary fruits and consequents of justification and as necessary antecedents to glorification but we deny their necessity of efficiencie as causes concurring to the act of justification or merit of salvation We acknowledge them as the necessary fruits of Redemption and Iustification as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved the necessary forerunners of glorification the onely true way to our heavenly countrey the evidence according to which wee shall be judged at the last day yet we are not justified by them nor saved for them as hereafter I shall plainely and plentifully prove but onely by and for the righteousnesse and merits of Christ apprehended by Faith A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE SECOND BOOKE That Justification and Sanctification are not to bee confounded CAP. I. Setting downe the heads of the Controversies the first whereof is that Iustification and Sanctification are not to be confounded The first proofe
formall causes of justification Bellarmine answereth thus the Councell of Trent in expresse termes said that there is but one onely formall cause of justification Yea but say wee the Councell seemeth to make two viz. remission of sinnes and renovation But saith he when the Councell maketh mention severally of remission of sin and of infusion of grace it did it not to signifie that there is a twofold formall cause of justification but to declare that there are two termes of that motion which is called justification or two effects of the same cause For there cannot bee that mutation or translation which the Councell noteth to bee in justification unlesse by remission of sinne a man cease to bee wicked and by infusion of justice begin to be godly But saith hee as the aire when it is enlightened of the Sunne by the same light which it receiveth ceaseth to bee darke and beginneth to be lightsome So a man by the same justice given and infused by the Sunne of righteousnesse ceaseth to bee unjust the light of grace expelling the darknesse of sinne and beginneth to bee just the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne And as in calefaction which similitude hee useth elsewhere the accesse of heat expelleth cold so in justification the infusion of justice expelleth sinne This then is the doctrine of the new Church of Rome that in this mutation called justification which they define to bee a passage from sinne to righteousnesse though there be as in all other motions duo termini viz. sinne which is terminus à quo and righteousnesse which is terminus ad quem yet there are not two distinct actions concurring viz. remission or expulsion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of justice expelling sinne even as in calefaction though there bee two termes cold and hot yet there are not two actions for the same action of fire which bringeth in heat expelleth cold and so in illumination there are two termes darkenesse and light but not two actions for one and the same act of the Sunne which bringeth light driveth away darkenesse Whereby it is evident that by remission of sinne the Papists doe not understand as all men from the beginning of the world have understood pardoning forgiving not imputing sinne but the utter deletion expulsion abolition of it which Bellarmine calleth veram remissionem true remission as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true remission but this true remission they hold to bee such that in a man who is justified and hath remission of sinne there is no sinne remaining and hee onely is to bee held a just man in whom there is no sinne Thus then remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from justification and that brought in the roome of it which belongeth to that perfection of sanctification whereunto none attaine in this life § III. Now that the Papists grossely erre in making remission of sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righteousnesse may appeare by these arguments First whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered the guilt and the corruption or Anomy thereof it is evident that the guilt of sinnes past is taken away by remission wholly and at once the corruption is taken away by mortification thereof not wholly in this life and at once but by degrees we being day by day renewed in the inner man The latter is the worke of Gods Spirit within us The former is an action of God without us such as is that of the Creditor in remitting or forgiving a debt And so the Scriptures conceive of remission For our sinnes are debts in respect of the guilt binding us over to punishment which wee owe for them When as God therefore remitteth the debt releaseth this obligation forgiveth the punishment hee is said to remit our sinnes This our Saviour taught by the parables of the creditors and debtors Matth. 18. 23. Luk. 7. 41. And thus he hath taught us to pray Matth. 6. 12. Forgive us our debts as wee forgive our debtors How doe wee forgive By not revenging the offence but laying aside all desire and purpose of revenge by passing by it and as it were forgetting it by covering it with charity by not imputing it by being reconciled unto the party who hath offended us not by a reall taking away of the sinne from the offender but a wiping of it out of our remembrance not by expelling the offence out of the offender but out of our thoughts § IV. Thus in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish and extinguish the sinne it selfe but to absolve from the guilt of sinne to pardon and to forgive the debt and to remit the punishment to cover a mans sinne and not to impute it And this plainely appeareth by these manifold phrases which are used in the Scriptures to signifie remission of sinne all which import the taking away of the guilt but none the utter abolishing of the corruption As first the Hebrew Salach Exod. 34. 9. Numb 14. 19 20. 30. 6. Deut. 29. 19. Psal. 103. 3. Esay 55. 7. Ier. 31. 34. Dan. 9. 20. signifieth parcere remittere ignoscere condonare propitium esse Kasah to hide to spare to forgive Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 32. 1. 85. 2. Ioel 2. 17. Deut. 13. 8. Kaphar also is to cover to pardon to be propitious Deut. 21. 8. Psal. 65. 4. 78. 38. 79. 9. Esay 22. 14. Nasa to spare to forgive to take away the guilt Gen. 18. 24 26. 50. 17. Exod. 32. 32. Numb 14. 19. Psalm 32. 1. cum Rom. 4. 7. Esay 33. 24. Psalm 25. 18. Habar to passe by an offence Mic. 7. 18. and Hehebir to cause it to passe 2 Sam. 12. 13. 24. 10. Zech. 3. 4. Machah to wipe or to blot out of remembrance the sinnes of men as it were out of a booke to blot them out from before his face Nehem. 4. 5. Psalm 51. 9. Ier. 18. 23. Hesir to remove Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute Psal. 32. 2. In like manner the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to remit or forgive Mat. 6. 12 14 15. 18. 27 32. whence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remission that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgivenesse as Hesychiiâ—…s expoundeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condonare to forgive Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to impute Rom. 4. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 19. So the Latine remittere dimittere ignoscere condonare donare veniam dare parcere propitium esse and the English to remit to pardon to forgive § V. For the farther clearing of this point let us consider these three things first what that is which is remitted Secondly where it remaineth untill it bee remitted Thirdly by what act of God it is remitted The thing remitted is our
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.
Flesh and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit So that though Will be present with us that wee cannot doe what we would and much lesse after what manner wee would that is with our whole soules with our whole mind heart and affections For what good wee minde or will as wee are Spirit the same wee will as wee are Flesh. This concupiscence the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne had not the Law said non concupisces that is thou shalt have none evill concupiscence neither habituall nor actuall Neither is it onely a sinne as the Apostle oftentimes doth cal it but also it is the mother-sinne Iam. 1. 13 Rom. 7. 17. which taking occasion by the Law to produce ill concupiscences therein forbidden is convinced not onely to bee a sinne but exceedingly sinnefull Rom. 7. 13. But of this I have spoken before and proved by the testimony of Augustine that concupiscence against which the good Spirit lusteth viz. in the regenerate for in the unregenerate the Spirit is not is both a sinne and the cause of sin and a punishment sinne § XIII And as touching the second the summe of the Law is that we should love God with all our heart and with all our soule c. but where is any defect of love there God is not loved with all the heart c. it being legally understood and therefore every defect is an aberration from the Law and consequently a sinne I have also proved out of Augustine that it is a fault where love is lesse than it ought to bee from which fault it is that there is not a righteous man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not For which also though wee bee never so good proficients wee must of necessity say forgive us our debts Therefore every defect is a debt that is a sinne whereunto wee may adde that of the same Augustine It is a sinne either when there is not charity where it ought to bee or is lesse than it ought to bee whether this may or may not bee avoided by the Will § XIV And as to the third If those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee not contrary to the Law then they are not forbidden in the Law and without doubt they are not commanded therein Now if neither they bee commanded nor forbidden then they are things indifferent but that is absurd yea but saith hee veniall sinnes hinder not justice And the Scripture absolutely calleth some men just and perfect notwithstanding their veniall sinnes I answere they hinder not imputative justice nor evangelicall perfection which is uprightenesse for to them that beleeve and repent they are not imputed Neither can it be denied but that the most upright men have their imperfections infirmities and slippes which though in themselves and according to the Law are mortall sinnes for if they should not bee forgiven they would as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth exclude men from heaven yet to them that are in Christ Iesus thâ—…y become veniall by the mercie of God through the merits and intercession of Christ. § XV. His second reason is taken from divers absurdities which hee conceiveth doe follow upon our assertion when as indeed they follow not upon our doctrine but upon his malicious misconceiving and misreport thereof as if wee held that all even the best workes of the righteous are mortall sinnes But wee acknowledge that the good workes of men regenerate are truly good and so to bee called notwithstanding the imperfection thereof Onely wee deny them to be purely good wherin we have the consent of holy Scriptures and of the ancient Fathers some whereof I before alleaged to whom I added Gregory and Bernard Gregory in the conclâ—…sion of his Moralls saith thus Mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse uequaquaÌ„ possunt Our evill things are purely evill and the good things which we suppose our selves to have can by no meanes bee purely good Bernard t Our lowly justice if we have any is perhaps true but not pure Vnlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to bee better than our fore-fathers who said no lesse truely than humbly all our righteousnesses are as it were the cloth of a menstruous woman wee doe not say that the good workes of the faithfull are sins and much lesse mortall sins For we hold that the sins of the faithful become to them venial But this we say with Salomon that there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not which in effect is the same with that assertion of Luther Iustus in omni opere bono peccat § XVI Now let us examine the absurdities which hee absurdly upon his owne malitious misconceit objecteth against us In all which it is supposed that wee call the good workes of the righteous sinnes yea mortall sinnes The first if all the workes of the faithfull bee sinnes then the worke of faith whereby we are justified and that prayer whereby we begge remission of sinne should be sinnes Answ. The worke of faith and the act of prayer are good but not purely and perfectly good Neither are we justified by the worthinesse or by the worke of our faith but by the Object which it doth receive nor obtaine our desires by the merit of our prayer but by the mediation and intercession of Christ our Saviour Our faith is such that wee have need alwayes to pray Lord increase our faith Lord I beleeve help mine unbeleefe and our prayer such that when wee have performed it in the best manner we can wee have neede to pray that the wants and imperfections of our prayer may bee forgiven us § XVII The second If all the works of the righteous be sinnes with what face could the Apostle say that hâ—… knew nothing by himselfe And what boldnesse was that for his good workes that is for his mortall sinnes to expect a Crowne of righteousnesse Answ. Though the Apostle had no doubt sometimes offended after his conversion yet he was not conscious to himselfe in particular of any actuall sinne or crime committed by him for as the Psalmist saith who can understand his errors No man saith Basil is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free from sinne but God for of those many things wherein we offend the most wee understand not for which cause the Apostle saith I know nothing by my selfe but in that I am not justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in many things I offend and doc not perceive whence also the Prophet saith who understandeth his trespasses But though hee was not conscious to himselfe of his slippes and oversights yet hee was not ignorent of his owne corruptious and infirmities against which when hee had prayed to God hee received this answere My grace is sufficient for thee and in weakenesse my power is made perfect Neither did the Apostle expect the reward for the
remission of sinnes vouchsafing unto you righteousnesse and he made you holy and delivered from the tyranny of the Devill All these foure benefits are the fruits of Christs office of mediation as he is our Prophet our Priest and our King For as our Prophet in whom are all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge he calleth us by the Gospell his doctrine being our wisedome and making us wise unto salvation as our holy Priest hee justifieth us his sacrifice and his obedience being our righteousnesse as our gracious and glorious King being ascended on high to prepare a place for us he giveth the graces of his holy Spirit to his members whereby they being sanctified are fitted and prepared for his kingdome and being gone to prepare a place for us and us for it hee will come againe to bring us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the redemption of possession or our full redemption which is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thes. 5. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thes. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 39. the obtaining of salvation the obtaining of glory and the saving of the Soule and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the redemption of the body Rom. 8. 23. Christ therefore is of God made unto us wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption or salvation because his wisedome is communicated unto us by instruction in our vocation his righteousnes is communicated unto us by imputation in our justification his sanctifying graces by infusion in our sanctification his glory by possession or fruition in our glorification § VI. In rendring the second cause he confesseth the truth whereof I desire the Reader to take speciall notice That Christ is called our righteousnesse because he satisfied his Father for us which his satisfaction he doth so give and communicate unto us when he doth justifie us that it may bee called our satisfaction and our righteousnesse For although by justice inherent in us we bee truly called and are righteous notwithstanding we doe not by it satisfie God for our faults and for eternall punishment And thus saith he it were not absurd to say that Christs righteousnesse and merits are imputed unto us when they are given and applied as if we our selves had satisfied God And to that purpose he citeth Bernard who saith that Christ died for all ut viz. satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur that the satisfaction of one may be imputed to all but addeth this needlesse caution modo non negetur saith Bellarmine esse in nobis preterea justitium inherentem â—…ámque veram so it be not denied that there is in us besides a justice inherent and that true which if Bellarmine would stay there we would yeeld unto For we doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse inherent in those that are justified and that also a true though not a pure a perfect and absolute righteousnesse onely wee deny that we are thereby justified Wee are indeed just but by Christs righteousnesse as Bernard saith in the same place justum me dixerim sed illius justitiâ § VII This confession of Bellarmine dissolveth the very frame of his owne doctrine of justification whereunto he hath taught that nothing concurreth but deletion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse And these not as two acts but as one act viz. the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne As for imputation of Christs righteousnesse hee and his fellowes deride and scorne it But here hee confesseth which needs must be confessed that in justification the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we our selves had satisfied God and that for that cause hee is truly called our righteousnesse And this imputation he acknowledgeth to be necessary because by righteousnesse inherent we doe not satisfie for our sinnes and eternall punishment We say the same onely wee adde that this satisfaction made by Christ in our behalfe is not onely his death and sufferings whereby he satisfied the penalty of the Law and delivered us from the curse himselfe being made a curse for us but also the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life whereby he perfectly satisfied the justice of God infulfilling the commandements Now Gods acceptation of Christs satisfaction in our behalfe whereby he absolveth us from the guilt of sin and damnation by imputation of Christs sufferings and his acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his most perfect righteousnesse and obedience is that very thing which wee according to the Scriptures doe call justification which distinct benefit of Christ not to be confounded with sanctification the Papists must learne to acknowledge if they would bee saved § VIII To these I adde other as plaine testimonies where it is said that wee are justified by the bloud of Christ and his obedience From whence I argue thus If we be justifiâ—…d by the bloud and obedience of Christ that is by his passive and active righteousnesse then are we justified by the personall righteousnesse of Christ which being proper to his person is out of us in him But we are justified by the bloud and by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5. 9. 19. therefore by his personall righteousnesse § IX Our fifth argument By what righteousnesse our sinnes are covered as with a garment and by which we being indued therewith appeare righteous before God that is the matter of our justification For he is justified whose sinnes are covered Psal. 32. 1. By the righteousnesse of Christ as a most pretious robe of righteousnesse and as our wedding garment our sinnes are covered For as Iustin Martyr truly saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for what other thing was able to cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse and wee being clothed therewith appeare righteous before God Therefore by the righteousnesse of Christ we are justified Bellarmine having as it were in our name objected to himselfe Eph. 4. 22. 24. which none of us that I know of doe object for wee acknowledge the place to be understood of sanctification which consisteâ—…h in the putting off the old man and putting on the new hee saith that wee argue from the similitude of a garment as more fitly resembling imputed justice than inherent and that we confirme it by the example of Iacob who being clothed with the rayment of his elder brother obtained the blessing § X. To this Bellarmine shapeth two answers First that the similitude of a garment may fitly agree to inherent righteousnesse which I wil not deny for in the Scriptures theterme of clothing or putting on is of a large extent so that he will confesse that the Hebrew Labash and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifying to cloth or to put on apparrell which is not inherent in the body but adherent is more fitly by a metaphore applyed to signifie outward than inward
than of the Pope alone It is the Pope therefore alone that cannot erre who hath an heavenly and infallible judgement who is the supreame Iudge in all controversies the chiefe and onely authenticall interpreter of the Scriptures so that no point of religion is to be held for truth but what he determineth no text of Scripture to be held the word of God in any other sense than hee holdeth yea that a text of Scripture urged against them in another sense than he holdeth is not the word of God but rather of the devill By which meanes the Pope is stept into the roome of Christ and and is undoubtedly become Antichrist So that the implicite faith of the Papists whereby they professe themselves to beleeve what is propounded by the Church meaning especially the See of Rome that is to say the Pope to be beleeved and consequently whereby they professe themselves to beleeve in the Pope as the principall rule principle and foundation of their faith is the very character and marke of the Beast whereby men are branded to destruction § XVIII The which doth also prove the other point viz. how pernicious the doctrine of implicite faith is as tending to the perdition of the seduced people which I will also prove by other reasons For under the name of implicite faith they commend unto the Laity damnable ignorance that having blindfolded them they may lead them as it were by the nose whither it pleaseth them To them it is sufficient to beleeve what the Church beleeveth though they know little or nothing of the Churches beleefe If one of them be called before the Commissioners hee shall say enough and defend himselfe sufficiently when he answereth that he is a Catholike and that he will live and dye in that faith which the Catholike Church doth teach and that this Church can give them a reason of all those things which they demand And thus according to Christs promise Luk. 12. 12. the holy Ghost for sooth teacheth every unlearned Catholike to give sufficient reason of his faith But it is evident that those who live in ignorance doe live in a state of damnation or as the Scripture speaketh doe sit in darkenesse and in the shadow of death First because they live without God as it were Atheists in this world For they that know not God have not God Secondly because they are void of all grace whereby they might hope to be saved For knowledge being the first of all graces where that is wanting all the rest are absent Againe without faith there is no saving grace for faith is the mother and roote of all other graces and without knowledge there is no faith as I have already shewed For how can t they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and by hearing knowne Knowledge is as it were the first step towards faith and all other graces and therefore he that hath not that in some measure hath not made one steppe in the way that leadeth to eternall life Thirdly because they are not Christs sheepe nor Gods children For I saith our Saviour know mine and I am knowne of mine Ioh. 10. 14. They shall know me every one of them saith the Lord from the greatest to the least of them Ier. 31. 34. All Gods children shall be taught of God Esai 54. 13. Ioh. 6. 45. every one therefore that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to mee saith our Saviour and none else All Gods children have the unction from the holy One and they know all needfull things 1 Ioh. 2. 20. 27. Ioh. 16. 13. Fourthly because it hath all the respects of evill in it For it is not one ly a sinne but the cause of all sinne and errour a punishment and the cause of punishment both in this life and in the world to come A sinne repâ—…oved and condemned Ier. 4. 22. 9. 3. Hos. 4. 1. â—… Cor. 15. 34. For it a sacrifice was ordained Levit. 4. 2. yea all the sinnes for which sacrifices were offered were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—… that is ignorances Heb. 9. 7. The cause of sinne Errant qui operantur mulum They erre that sinne and none erre but by ignorance as Augustine saith Non erratur nisi per ignorantiam whence sinners are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as are ignorant and doe erre Heb. 5. 3. Ignorance is the mother of all errours Regnum ignorantiae saith Augustine regnum erroris Ignorance also is a fearefull punishmentâ—… when God doth punish men with blindenesse of heart Esai 6. 9 10. and sendeth upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficacy of errour 2 Thâ—…s 2. 11. It is also the cause of punishment for the people that understandeth not shall bee punished Hos. 4. 14. as of captivityâ—… Esai 5. 13. of destruction Hos. 4. 6. it maketh men subject to the curse of God Psal. 79. 6. Ier. 10. 25. and to eternall damnation 2. Thes. 1. 8. If our Gospell bee hid saith the Apostle it is hid to them that perish 2 Cor. 4. 3. For if it bee eternall life to know God and Christ our Saviour then not to know God and our Saviour is to misse of eternall life Qui ea quâ—… sunt Domini nesciunt a Domino nesciuntur saith Gregory Paulo attestante qui ait si quis autem ignorat ignorabitur The Councell of Rhemes denyeth that they can bee saved who doe not understand the Creed and the Lords Prayer And againe no man can bee saved without faith and no man can beleeve that which he doth not know nor hath heard Augustine ipsa ignorantia in ets qui intelligere noluerunt sine dubitatione peâ—…catum â—…st in eis autem qui non potuerunt pâ—…na pecâ—…ati Ergo in utrisque non â—…st justa excusatio sed justa damnatio Hierome Ignoratio Scripturarum ignoratio Christi Origen â—…aith the Devills possesse all those that live in ignorance § XIX All this notwithstanding the popish Impostors detaine the people in ignorance they have taken away the Key of knowledge and shut up the Kingdome of Heaven against their followers for neither they goe in themselves neither suffer them that faine would enter to goe in They forbid them to reade the Scriptures which are able to make them wise to salvation 2 Tim. 3. 15. which our Saviour therefore commandeth them to search Ioh. 5. 39. They suffer them not to heare them nor yet the divine service otherwise than in an unknowen tongue contrary to the rule of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. and wherefore all this partly that their errours and abominations should not be seene for he that evill doeth hateth the light and as theeves by night wish the light of Gods Word to bee put out or at least to bee hid under a Bushell and partly that they may bee Lords over the peoples faith and may make them beleeve what they list
reward of their labours who are Gods workemen vers 9. labouring for him and not for themselves is the blessing of increase which God giveth thereunto Even as the harvest is the reward of the earing not to be asscribed to the merit of earing but to the blessing of God And so it is here plainely said though the Planter and the Waterer shall have their owne rewards yet their reward is not to bee asscribed to the merit of their labour but to the blessing of God I have planted saith Paul and Apollâ—… hath watered but God gave the increase So then neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase Or if the place should generally be understood oâ—… all workes both good and bad the meaning would be that the reward would be answerable either good or bad That of the Psalmist Psal. 62. 12. To thee Lord mercie for thou rendrest to every man according to his worke is not generally to be understood of the workes of all men both good and bad for the bad works of the wicked hee doth not reward in mercie but judgement without mercie shall bee executed upon them but of the good workes of the godly onely which though they bee good and acceptable to God in Christ yet he rewardeth them not according to merit but according to his mercie The place Apâ—…c 22. 12. may be an exposition of the rest For whereas in the rest it is said that God will judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to their dâ—…eds here Christ saith he will render to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his worke shall be viz. good or bad But here the Papists would seeme to bring a reason à pari that as the wicked are damned prâ—…pter peccata for their evill workes so the godly are saved propter opera bona for their good workes And as â—…vill workes merit hell so good workes pari ratione merit heaven Answ. it is impar ratio there is no equality in the comparison For first the Scripture plainely teacheth that by and for their evill works men are condemned and as plainely denieth that by or for good workes men are saved Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. Secondly any one sinne meriteth death because it is a breach of the Law yea of the whole law Iam. 2. 10. but not any one good worke can merit heaven because it is not the fulfilling of the whole law for there must be a concurrence of all duties In so much that if a man should performe all the Commandements and faile in one the breach of that one maketh him guilty of all Thirdly evill workes are purely and perfectly evill and therefore absolutely deserve death but the good workes are not purely and perfectly good as I have heretofore prooved therefore death is the due stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Fourthly sinne is absolutely meritorious of damnation but so is not our obedience of Salvation For though we could performe all the commandements by a totall perpetuall and perfect obedience yet wee must acknowledge our selves unprofitable servants and much lesse could we merit thereby because we have done but our duety and where is no more but duety there can bee no merit Debitum non est meritum § XIIII His third argument is taken from those places which do so testifie eternall life to be rendred to good workes that they place the very reason why eternall life is given in good workes The places bee these Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared fâ—…r you from the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee meat c. and in the same chapter vers 21. because thou hast beene faithfull in few things c. Apoc. 7. 14. These are they who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are before the Throne of God In which places the particles enim quia ideo for because therfore are all causall His reason standeth thus To what things the causall particles are applied they are causes of that to which they have relation as namely of Salvation To workes of charity the causall particles are applied Therefore workes of charity are causes of Salvation To the proposition I answere that causall particles doe not alwaies nor for the most part signifie causes so properly called For that is a grosse erâ—…our of the Papists as I noted before The word cause sometimes is used properly to signifie that argument which hath relation onely to its effect by virtue whereof the effect hath its being either as from the efficient or as of the matter or as by the forme or as for the end Sometimes it is used generally to signifie any argument or reason whatsoever which is not the cause of the thing or of the being of that whereof it is said to bee a cause but of the consequence or conclusion and thus the rendring of any reason is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rendring of the cause though perhaps it bee from the effect or any other argument And forasmuch as persons are discerned and knowne by their effects for as our Saviour saith By their fruits you shall know them therefore it is usuall in the Scriptures from the effect to argue and declare the cause As thus God is mercifull for hee rewardeth the godly according to their workes God is just for hee rewardeth the wicked according to their sinnes This man is elect because he truely beleeveth and repenteth this man truely beleeveth because hee is fruitfull of good workes This is a good tree for it bringeth forth good fruite To the woman that was a sinner much was forgiven for shee loved much In those and infinite more examples the cause or reason which is rendred is from the effect Therefore the proposition is false § XV. Now let us consider the places of Scriptnre which hee alleageth and first Matth. 25. 35. for when I was hungry c. This reason which is alleaged is not from the cause as if good workes were the meritorious cause of our inheriting the kingdome of heaven but from the effect to prove the cause which is expressed Verse 34. as I have shewed before For for what cause are men to be saved First because they are blessed of the Father that is justified and therefore entituled to this kingdome Secondly because they are elected and therefore this kingdome was prepared for them from the beginning Thirdly because they arâ—… the heires of God for whom our Saviour purchased this inheritance noted in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iâ—…rit But how shall it appeare who they are that are blessed and justified for whom this kingdome is prepared for whom this inheritance is purchased By the fruits of justification election redemption and namely by the workes of mercy and chariâ—…y towards the poore members of Christ according to which as the evidence our Saviour
2 3. â—… ad 8. As bee was justified so are we lib. 5. cap. 2. § 6. Adam Whether his sinne bee imputed lib. 4. cap. 10. § 1 2. Whether originall sinne bee traduced from â—…im l. 4. c. 10. § 3. Whether the transgression and the corruption bee communicated after the same manner ibid. § 4. The comparison betweene the first and the second Adam ibid. § 5. Adoption That it is true lib. 4. cap. 10. § 18. Such as is our adoption such is our justification ibid. § 19. Adoption according to Bellarmiâ—…es 〈◊〉 is twofold of the soulâ—… and of the body ibid. § 20. No reall change in adoption but it is relative and imputative ibid. § 21. Affiance Whether it be faith lib. 6. cap. 4. § 9. 11. Assent It being firâ—…e lively and effectuall is faith l. 6. c. 1. 2. § c. 4. § 10. B Bellarmine His contradictions l. 3. c. 4. § 3. â—… 3. l. 4. c. 2. § 5. ad literam o l. 4. c. 9. § 7. l. 4. c. 10. § 1 2. l 5. c. 6. § 7. l. 5 c. 8. § 2. in fine l. 6. c. 3. § 7. â—… 6. c. 8. § 7. â—… 4. l. 6. c 9. sub finem ad literam * l. 6. c. 10. § 11 l. 6. c. 15. § 10. l. 8. c. 2. § 11. l. 8. c. 9. § 3. â—… 2. § 4. C Causall particles Not alwayes nor for the most part notes of causes l. 8. c. 5. § 14. 16. 17. Cause The Causes of iustification l. 1. c. 2. The Causes efficient principall God l. 1. c. 2. § 1. The Father § 4. the Sonne the holy Ghost ibid. The moving Causes l. 1. c. 2. § 2. The instrumentall Causes lib. 1. c. 2. § 5. c. The essentiall Causes l. 1. c. 3. The matter lib. 1. cap. 3. 1 c. ad 7. l. 4. The forme lib. 1. cap. 3. § 7 c. l. 5. The finall cause lib. 1. cap. 6. § 1 2 3 4. Charity That it doth not justifie as well as faith l. 4. c. 11. § 2 c. That it is not the forme of â—…aith lib. 4. cap. 11. § 5. Whether perfect in this life l. 5. cap. 7. CHRIST The mericorious cause of justification l. 1. â—… 2. § 4. Whether hee obeyed the Law for himselfe or for us l. 1. c. 4. § 10. Whether he merited for himselfe lib. 1. c. 4. § 11. Christs exaltation Phil. 2. 9. was his declaration to be the Sonne of God lib. 1. c. 4. § 11. 12. How many wayes hee is said to justifie us lib. 2. c 5. § 8. The righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse l. 4. c. 2 § 2 3 4. Christs rightâ—…ousnesse the materiâ—…ll cause of justification l. 1. c. 3 4. vide Materiall and Matter Christs righteousnesse both the matter and merit of our iustification lib. 1. cap. 3. § 1. Concupiscence In the regenerate a sinne lib. 2. cap. 8. § 7 8. 9. lib. 4. cap. 4. § 12. lib. 7. cap. 6. § 14. Concupiscence going before consent a finnenne lib. 2. c. 8 9. Counsells The Counsell of voluntary poverty l. 7. c. 7. § 4. The counsell of single life lib. 7. cap. 7. § 5 6. D David Not iustified by inherent righteousnesse lib. 4. c. 8. § 15. Definition Of Iustification lib. 1. cap. 1. § 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 2. cap. 2. § 1 2. The signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 3. The signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 4. The signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 5. The signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 6. Dispositions Seven alleaged by Bellarmine to disprove justification by faith alone lib. 6. cap. 10 11 12. Whether any dispositioâ—…s bee indeed required by the Papists lib. 6. c. 10. § 4. Whether faith hope love as they bee dispositions bee graces lib. 6. cap. 12. § 6 7. E Efficient The efficient principall of justification God lib. 1. c. 2. § 1. The motives grace and iustice ib. § 2. The actions of the Father the Sonne the holy Ghost distinguâ—…shed ibid. § 4. End The end or fiâ—…ll cause of iustification both supreme the glory of God lib. 1. c. 6. § 1. and also subordinate viz. salvation § 2. certainety of salvation § 2. sanctification § 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How to be understood Gal. 5. 6. l. 4. c. 11. § 3. 4. F Faith The instrument on oâ—…r 〈◊〉 of iustification lib. 1. cap. 2. § 7. Concerning it seven things considered 1. Thâ—… it iustifieth not as it is an habit or act in us but as the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse ibid. lib. 1. cap. 5. § 12. 2. It must therefore be such a faith as doth specially apprehend Christ. lib. 1. cap. 2. § 8. 3. It doth not prepare onely and dispose to iustification but it doth actually iustifie § 9. l. 6. c. 7. § 1 2. 4. It doth not iustifiâ—… absolutely in respect of its ownâ—… worth but relatively in respect of the object § 10. 5. The meaning of the question whether we be justified by faith or by workes § 11. 6. How faith is said to iustifie alone § 12. 7. That faith doth not sanctifie alone § 12. Whether the act of faith properly be imputed â—…torighteousnesse l. 1. cap. 2. § 7. cap. 5. § 12. That charity is not the formâ—… of faith l. 4. cap. 11. § 5. Of the distinction of saith that it is either formata or informis § 6. That faith is perfect Bellarmine produceth sixe reasons which are answered l. 5. c. 6. The full discourse of faith l. 6. The Popish 〈◊〉 concerning faith l. 6. c. 1. § 1. What faith is cap. 1. § 2. That it is not without knowledge § 3. against implicite faith lib. 6. cap. 1. § 3. c. The doctrine of implicit faith both falsâ—… for many reasons § 4. and absurd in that they say it may better bee defined by ignorance than by knowledge § 5. Bellarm. allegations out of the Scriptures for implicite faith § 6 of Fathers § 7. Testimonies of Fathers against it § 13. Bellarmines reason § 14. The doctrine of implicite faith wicked as being an egregious coozâ—…nage § 15 16 17. and pernicious to the people § 18. True justifying â—…aith cannot be severed from charity lib. 6. cap. 2. Our reasons I. Because hee that hath true faith is regenerate § 1. II. Because hee hath the Spirit of Christ dwelling in him § 2. III. Because hee is sanctified â—… 3. IV. Because hee is the true Disciple of Christ. § 4. V. Because true faith worketh by charity ibid. VI. Because true faith is formata ibid. VII Because if it be without charity it doth not iustifie VIII Because they who love not know not God ibid. 7. Other arguments out of Iames 2. § 5. 6. Other arguments defended against Bellarmine § 6. c. Testimonies of Fathers lib. 6. cap. 2. § 12. Bellarmines proofes that
arguments of Calvin and Chemnitius defended against Bellarm. The first because iustifying is opposed to condemning lib. 2. cap. 5. § 2. 3 4. Secondly that as the hebrew so the greeke signifieth § 5. Bellarmines proofes that the hebrew word signifieth to make iust by infusion of righteousnesse inherent § 6. 7 8 9 10. The third and fourth concerning the latine word iustificare § II. The use of the latine word in the Fathers § 12. The manifold differences betwixt instification and sanctification Litb 2. cap. 6. Their confounding of iustification and sanctification is the ground both of the Papists calumniations against us lib. 2. cap. 6. § 19. and of their errours in the doctrine of iustification which are pernicious § 20. 21 22. The Papists from iustification exclude remission of sinne lib. 2. cap. 7. § 1. 2. vid. remission The popish distinction of iustification into the first and second lib. 1. cap. 1. § 8. lib. 3. cap. 6. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 4. 5. cap. 8. § 4. Men are said to be iustified either before God in foro coelesti which properly is iustification or in the court of their owne conscience which is the assurance of iustification lib. 1. cap. 1. § 7. lib. 2. c. 2. § 8. L Law Law of faith and the Law of workes lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6. 7. The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell See Gospell Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law lib. 7. cap. 6. § 3. The Law not possible by reason of the flesh lib. 4. cap. 5. § 3 c. ad finem capitis Bellarmines proofes that the Law is absolutely possible lib. 4. cap. 5. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. First by Sciptures testimonies of three sorts I. That the Law is easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. 7 6 7 8. II. That the law is kept by love lib. 7. cap. 6. § 9. 10 11 12. III. Examples of them that have fulfilled the law § 13. 14 15. iust that they kept the law with a perfect heart and with their whole heart § 15. 16. Secondly by fathers § 17. The difference betweene the Pelagians and Papists not great § 18. His testimonies examined § 19. 20 21. That the Fathers did not meane that the law is absolutely possible § 22. Bellarmines paradox that a man may fulfill the law though he cannot live without sinne § 23. Testimonies of Fathers that the fulfilling of the law is not possible to us § 24. Sixâ—… reasons to the same effect lib. 4. cap. 5. § 6 c. Bellarmines sixe reasons answered lib. 7. cap. 7. I. Because a man may doe more than is commanded § 1. 2 3 4 5 6. II. If the precepts were not possible they would binde no man lib. 7. cap. 7. § 7. 8. III. Then God should bee cruell c. § 9. IV. Then Christ â—…isseth of his end § 10. 11 12. V. They who have the Spirit fulfill the law § 13. VI. Because they sinne not § 14 15. Liberty Christian liberty lib. 7. cap. 4. § 23. Life eternall Life eternall considered by Bellarmine as an inheritance and so due to due to the person by right of adoption and as a reward and so due to workes lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Eternall life promised in three respects lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. 7 8. lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Love Bellarmines fourth disposition to justification lib. 6. cap. 12. M Matoriall The materiall cause of justification Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 3. Whether Christs passive righteousnesse onely lib. 1. cap. 4. Which is denyed I. Because by it alone the Law is not fulfilled § 2 3. and that is defended against divers exceptions 4. 5. 6 7. II. Because by Adams disobedience imputed to us we were made sinners § 8. III. Because Christs obedience is accepted for us § 9. that Christ obeyed the Law for us § 10. that he did not merit for himselfe § 11. Object If Christ obeyed the Law for us then wee need not § 13. Object 2. If we be justified by the obedience of Christ why needed hee to dye for us § 14. IV. To what end served Christs obedience if wee bee justified onely by his sufferings § 15. V. Because there are two distinct parts of justification § 16. Obiect Then two formall causes of iustification § 17. That instification doth not consist onely in remission of sinne § 18. Obiect Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission § 19. Obiect By it wee are made innocent § 20. Three arguments of I. P. § 21. the arguments of I. F. § 22. 23. Matter of iustification lib. 4. The state of the controversie betweene us and the Papists concerning it lib. 4. cap. 1. § 1. It is the principall question in the whole controversie of iustification wheron therest depend lib. 4. cap. 1. § 2. and is proved by the rest § 3. That we are iustified by Christs righteousnesse and not by inherent proved first ioyntly lib. 4. cap. 1. § 4. I. Because we are iustified by Gods righteousuesse and not by ours lib. 4. cap. 2 Christs righteousnesse is Gods righteousnesse § 2. 3. 4. inherent is ous § 5. the severall parts of inherent righteousnesse are called ours § 6. II. Because by Christs righteousnes we stand iust before God and not by ours § 7. III. Because Christs righteousnesse is perfect and so is not ours § 8. that the righteousnesse of all mortall men is unperfect because are at sinners proved by seven reasons § 9. The question concerning the imperfection of mans inherent righteousnesse further discussed cap. 3. 4. See righteousnesse inherent IV. VVe are iustified by that righteousnesse by which the Law is fully satisfied lib. 4. cap. 5. The righteousnesse of Christ hathfully satisfied the Law § 2. Our righteousnesse cannot satisfie the law § 3. 4. Bellarmines reasons that the law may be fulfilled § 5. V. Because by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by ours we are absolved redeemed reconciled and saved lib. 4. c. 6. VI. Because we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith and not of workes lib. 4. cap. 7. § 1. VII The righteousnesse by which we are iustified is not prescribed in the Law § 2. VIII The righteousnesse whereby wee are iustified satisfieth the iustice of God § 3. IX Because no man is iustified without remission of sinne § 4. X. The true doctrine of iustification ministreth comfort § 5. XI From experience lib. 4. cap. 7. § 6. Severally that we are not iustified by inherent righteousnesse proved by foureteene arguments I. Because it is prescribed in the Law lib. 4. cap. 8. § 1. 2 3 4. II. Because that doctrine confoundeth the Law and the Gospell and maketh void the covenaâ—…t of grace § 5. III. It depriveth men of the chiefe part of christian liberty § 6. IV. Because all men are sinners § 7. V. Because all meâ—… 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 Law aâ—…cursed § 8. VI. Because none doe fulfill the Law § 9.
Psalm 7. 4 9. c. § 3. III. Matth. 6. 22. § 4. IV. 1 Cor. 3. 12. § 5. V. Iam. 3. 2. § 6. VI. Psalm 4. 4. Esai 1. 16. Ioh. 5. 14. in which wee are exborted not to sinne § 7. VII From those places which teach that the workes of the faithfull doe please God § 8. VIII From these places which absolutely call them good § 9. Two Testimonies of Fathers § 10. Three Reasons I. If good workes are impure then either by reason of concupiscence l. 4. c. 4. § 12. or for want of charity § 13. or because of veniall sinnes concurring § 14. II. From six absurdities § 15 16. By righteousnesse inherent the Law is not fulfilled l. 4. c. 5. § 3. 4. 4. None are able to fulfill the Law first because all are transgressours § â—… Secondly because none can be iustified by it § 7. Thirdly because none can fulfill the first and the last Commandements § 8. Fourthly out of Act. 15. 10. § 9. Fiftly out of Rom. 7. 18. § 10. Sixthly Rom. 8. 3 § 11. By righteousnesse inherent we are not iustified proved by foureteene reasons l. 4. c. 8. vid. matter of iustification S Sacraments They are seales of iustification l. â—… c. 2. § 6. l. 6. c. 14. 8. Whether they iustifie ex opere operato l. 6. c. 10. § 3. The purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament Bellarmines sixâ—…h disposition to iustification l 6. c. 12. § 7. Satisfaction The imputation of Christs satisfaction acknowledged by the Papists l. 1. c. 3. § 8. Sanctification Not to be confounded with iustification l. 2. per totum How it is distinguished from iustification l. 2. c. 6. Sinners All men are sinners l. 4. c. 2. § 9. c. 8. § 7. l. 5. c. 2. § 2. Subject of faith Viz. the party to whom it belongeth lib. 6. c. 5. § 1. and the parts of the soule wherein it is sealed § 2. viz. the minde that is both the understanding and the will proved by Testimonies § 3. 4. 5. Whether the â—…nderstanding be commanded by the will to beleeve lib. 6. c. 5. § 6. T Truth The doctrine of iustification and Salvation by faith in Christ is called the Truth lib. 1 cap. 1. § 1. lib. 6. cap. 6. § 2. V Veniall Whether veniall sinnes doe contaminate the good works of the iust lib. 4. cap. 4. § 14. VVhether they doe â—…inder the fulfilling of the Law l. 7. c. 6. § 23. Whether they be onely besides the Law and not against it ibid. Vprightnesse It goeth under the name of perfection and upright men are called perfect lib. 4. c. 10. § 10. W. Word The word an instrumentall cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 5. Workes Good workâ—…s â—…re the fruites and effects not causes of 〈◊〉 l. 1. c. 6. § 7. The necessiâ—… of gâ—…od works urged of us by better 〈◊〉 than the Popish doctrine doth 〈◊〉 c. 1. In what 〈◊〉 we deny good workes to iustifie l. 7. c. â—… § 1. That good workes doe noâ—… iustifie men before God prove by all the five 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 7. â—… 2. § 2. by foure other reasons § 3. 〈◊〉 thâ—…se that are iustified by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by their owne obedience of the Law § 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is 〈◊〉 to the Scriptures § 5. Bellarmines preamble to his answere in which hee considereth three things first what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6 7. Secondly the differences betweene the iustice of the Law and in or by the Law § 8. Thirdly what is meant by workes which are excluded from iustification whether the workes of the Ceremoniall Law § 9. 10. or also of the morall and whether all or onely those which goe before faith § 11. Bellarmines proofes that those onely 〈◊〉 before or without faith are excluded l. 7. c. 2. § 13. Bellarmines dispute concerning the necessity of good workes l. 7. c. 4. his method § 1. He proveth them necessary not to iuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 2. His first proofe is from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell § 3. c. ad 19. Eight differences by hire propounded l. 7. c. 4. § 19 20 21 22. His second proofe from the doctrine of Christian liberty l. 7. c. 4. § 23. That good workes are necessary by way of efficacie Bellarmine proveth by three sorts of arguments first from Scriptures I. Testimoniâ—… Heb. 10. 36. lib. 7. c. 5. § 3. II. 1 Tim. 2. 14 15. l. 7. c. 5. § 4. III. Phil. 2. 12. § 5. IV. 2 Cor. 7. 10. § 6. V. 2 Cor. 4. 17. § 7. VI. Rom. 8. 13. § 8. VII Rom. 8. 16 17. § 9. VIII Rom. 10. 10. § 10. IX Matth. 25. 34 35. § 11. X. Iam. 1. 25. 2. 14. § 12. XI The Epistles of Peter Iames Iohn and Iude. l. 7. c. 5. § 13. Secondly from testimonies of Fathers § 14. Thirdly from reason § 19. because faith dâ—…th not save alone lib. 7. c. 5. § 16. 17. Of the verity of the â—…ustice of good workes l. 7. c. 6. § 1. VVhether they be sinnes l. 7. c. 7. § 17. That they be sinnes it followes upon the doctrine of the Papists lib. 4. c. 4. § 9. in fine 21. Bellarmines proofes that good workes doe iustifie l. 7. c. 8. The first Iam. 2. 24. lib. 7. c. 8. § 2. c. ad 19. Sixe other testimonies I. Eccl. 18. 21. § 19. vide l. 2. c. 4. § 2. 3. II. Rom. 6. 19. l. 7. c. 8. § 19. III. 2 Cor. 7. 1. l. 7. c. 8. § 20. IV. 2 Cor. 9. 10. § 21. V. Iohn 14. 23. § 22. VI. Apâ—…c 22. 11. § 23. The Papists high opinion of their works l. 8. c. 9. § 14. Our estimations of them § 15. Y Yoke Christs yoke easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4 5 6 7. FINIS Errata Page 2. line 20 even our juâ—…if p. 4. l. 9. â—…sadiq p. 6 â—… antepen speciall p. 9. marg l. 2. â—… 〈◊〉 2. 1. 2. l. 15. justificaâ—…i p. 13. l. a fin 19. VIII 〈◊〉 second p 15 l â—… 〈◊〉 6. concur l. penulâ—… standeth 〈◊〉 p. 16. marg l. 6. lib 1 cap. 2 p. 17. l. af 11. herâ—… l. 〈◊〉 7. men p. 18 l. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 28. 〈◊〉 is p. 19 l 1. breake l. 15 16. dele So the righteousnesse of our Meâ—…iator who is God p. 21 marg l 2. Ier 23 6. l af 5. dele sect p. 22. l. af 14. then he intendeth p 24. l. 6 〈◊〉 l. 11 partam l. 18. nothing else p. 26. l af 8 we are p. 27. l af 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no p. 28. l. 20 and sâ—…condly l. af 13. id eâ—…t compl p. 29. l. 1. receivâ—…d l. af 4. in us p. 31. l. 3. 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 l. af 12. yâ—…t we p. 32 l. 26. ad 〈◊〉 p. 38. l. 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 22. scales p. 43. l. antep upon Christ 〈◊〉
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
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
that righteousnesse which is not in us but out of us in Christ which is absurd for as themselves expound the phrase Formall justice consisteth either in the qualities of the soule or in good actions that is it is either habituall or actuall so that it cannot stand in imputation by which wee can no more be just formally than wife rich alive by imputation of wisedome riches and life Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd as to conceive so absurdly of us But wee teach that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall by which he was formally just is the matter and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification And so those very Authors upon whom they would father this assertion in expresse termes doe teach affirming that Christs obedience or fulfilling of the Law is the materiall cause of justification and the application or imputation thereof is the formall cause of justification We say then that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justification or that by which we are formally just but the imputation of it it selfe being the matter of justification that is to say that thing which unto justification is imputed Wherefore I shall not need to answere in defence of our assertion the arguments either of those Veteratores the Papists or these Novatores who both agree in this calumniation against us all tending to prove that wee are not formally juâ—… by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him which we doe not hold For the righteousnesse whereby a man is formaâ—…ly just is inherent in himselfe for what is more intrinsecall than the forme But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us no more than our sinne was inherent in him And yet as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes not formally God forbid but by imputation so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse not formally as we are justified or in our selves but in him viz. by imputation And againe as by Adams actuall transgrâ—…ssion which was transient and now hath no being we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience so likewise by Christs obedience which hee performed in the daies of his flesh and was proper to his owne person we are justified that is not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also constituted just and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And yet we deny not but that as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed are also by sinne inherent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners so they to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justification are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ and infused by his spirit in their spirituall regeneration § III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satisfaction for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others First that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification Secondly that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne Thirdly that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne no not the righteousnesse of Christ otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne Fourthly that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is not the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ viz. remission of sinne Fifthly that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive but the merit therof Sixthly that not the righteousnesse of Christ but the act of faith is imputed for righteousnesse All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise § IV. For as touching the two first and the maine errour it selfe I have proved both in the third Chapter of this booke briefly and in the whole fifth booke at large that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which we are both absolved from our sinnes and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous and consequently that these two are the essentiall parts of justification viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his blood that is freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and the imputation of Christs obedience by which wee are made or constituted righteous and are entituled to the kingdome of Heaven So that remission of sinne is not the forme and much lesse the entire forme of justification considered as an action of God but an effect of the forme because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we have remission of sinne Neither is it the whole benefit of justification but a part thereof For although many of our Divines as hath beene said have taught that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required yet their assertion as hath also beene shewed is to be understood as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin as spoken in opposition to the Papists who say that to justification concurre not onely remission of sinnes but also inward renovation or sanctification To contradict them our Divines have said that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne wherewith alwayes concurreth imputation of righteousnesse and not by renovation or sanctification Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely was to exclude not imputation of righteousnesse which unseparably accompanieth the not imputing of sinne as Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation § V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confuted Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion who teach with us that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience for remission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood which cleanseth us from all our sinnes and not to his active obedience And justification is nothing as they say but remission of sinne whereupon it would follow that we are justified onely by Chriâ—…ts passive obedience which I have already disproved § VI. The fourth denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse I have fully confuted in the fourth booke besides that which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ is the same with that which I confuted Chap. 4. § 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne but that by which wee have remission not justification it selfe but that by which wee are justified For remission of sinne as well as justification it selfe is an action of God not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse
a propitiation for our sinnes 1 Ioh. 2. 2. and that Christ who was just and knew no sinne was made sinne for us that wee might bee the righteousnesse of God in him as the Apostle speaketh 2 Cor. 5. 21. and Esai 53. 5 6 6. § X. The third word is my servant which signifieth that Christ did serve his Father in the worke of justification and consequently did justifie men not by judging but by ministring as himselfe saith Matth. 20. 28. and is therefore called the Minister of Circumcision that is of the Iewes The fourth word and he shall beare their iniquities which signifieth the manner how Christ by ministring doth justifie that is by bearing the burden of our sinnes upon his shoulders that is by suffering the punishment due for our sinnes Answ. The thing which hee indevoureth to prove viz. that Christ as he performed the office of Mediation in the dayes of his flesh did not justifie us aâ—…ter the manner of a Iudge is true But his reasons are not sufficient Not the former for he might bee Gods Minister or servant as all Kings or Iudges are and yet our Iudge Not the second for although he were our Priest to offer himselfe for us and by his obedience and sufferings to justifie us yet is he also our King and our Iudge who by his sentence will justifie us at the last day But although Christ did not justifie us after the manner of a Iudge yet it followeth not either that the word doth signifie infusion of justice to which purpose Andradius alleaged this place or that it is not a judiciall word For it is a judicial word as it is attributed not only to Iudges but also to sureties and advocates Christ as our Advocate justifieth by pleading for us as asurety by bearing the punishment judicially imposed upon us And whereas Bellarmine would prove out of 1 Pet. 2. 24. that inherent righteousnesse is an effect of Christs satisfaction or bearing our iniquities he proveth nothing but what we teach viz. that the fruits and end of our justification and redemption by Christ is our sanctification Luk. 1. 74 75. Rom. 6. 22. Tit. 2. 14. And consequently that our sanctification or inherent righteousnesse being the fruit and effect of our justification cannot bee the cause thereof no more than it is the cause of redemption For By what righteousnesse wee are redeemed by the same wee are justified for redemption and justification in substance differ not Rom. 4. 6. 7. 3. 24. 25. Col. 1. 14. Eph. 1. 7. By the righteousnesse of Christ wee are redeemed which is out of us in him and not by righteousnesse inherent Therefore By that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are justified and not by righteousnesse inherent His third place is Apoc. 22. 11. which I have fully answered before and is here impertinently recited to prove the signification of the Hebrew word being not sufficient to cleare the Greeke Seeing their owne best editions in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have shewed before § II. The third and fourth reason which Bellarmine alleageth out of Calvin and Chemnitius and answereth them together are concerning the signification and composition of the Latine word justificare which indeed are not used as arguments to prove the true signification of the word in this controversie but as just exceptions against the arguments of the Papists who rely too much upon the signification and composition of the Latine word wherein they were justly reprooved by Chemnitius first because the controversie being what is the use and signification of the word in the Scriptures it is not materiall what the Latine word doth signifie in other authors but what is the signification of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New whereof the Latine is meerely a Translation And therefore the Latine if it be a right Translation must in this controversie bee understood to signifie the selfe same thing with the Hebrew and the Greeke the use and signification whereof in the Scriptures is judiciall and is neuer used in the Popish sense wherefore though the use of the word in other authors did favour the Popish conceipt yet would it not disadvantage us secondly though the Latine words do signific to make just which is all that can be enforced from the signification and composition thereof and be so expounded by Augustine whom Bellarmine to that purpose alleageth yet this maketh nothing against us Not onely because Bellarmine hath confessed men may be made just either inwardly by obtaining of righteousnesse inherent or outwardly after a judiciall manner but also because we freely professe that whom God doth justifie he maketh righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse It is true indeed that some of our Divines deny the word to signifie making righteous but their deniall is to be understood according to the meaning of the Papists viz. by infusion thirdly the Latine word justificare and so the English as in the translation of the Scriptures it hath alwayes the judiciall signification and never signifieth to endue with righteousnesse inherent no more than the Hebrew and the Greeke whereof it is a translation so oftentimes in the Fathers and many times in the Popish writers and alwayes almost in the common use of speech it signifieth to cleare from guilt to free from imputation of fault to approve to declare or pronounce just Or if at any time it be used in the sense of induing with righteousnesse inherent it is contrary to the use of the Scriptures which in the doctrine of justification is to be retained § XII Yea but the Fathers interpret justifying to be making righteous whom to refuse in an ecclesiasticall question and to appeale to the judgement of the Latine authors as Tully and Terence is a great importunity saith Bellarmine especially seeing the Apostle hath taught that to be justified is to be constituted or made just according to the composition of the word Answ. That which is said of the Authors of the Latine tongue is a meere calumniation for in them the word is not used at all The interpretation of the Fathers according to the doctrine of Saint Paul wee approve acknowledging that whom God doth justifie hee maketh them just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse Yea but say they the Fathers meane by inherent justice Answ. Though some of the Latine Fathers who were ignorant of the Hebrew and not skilfull in the Greeke sometimes under the terme of justification include the benefit also of sanctification being led thereunto by the notation of the Latine word yet sometimes they exclude it as first when they place justification in remission of sinnes as many times they doe secondly when according to the Scriptures they oppose it to condemnation thirdly and especially when with one consent they plainely teach that we are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall be shewed
because with it concurre not onely all other inward graces but also our outward obedience § IX The righteousnesse by which wee are justified is not prescribed in the Law but without the Law is revealed in the Gospell the righteousnesse of God that is to say of Christ who is God apprehended by faith For the Law to justification requireth perfect and perpetuall obedience to bee performed by him in his owne person that should bee justified thereby which fince the fall of Adam hath beene and is by reason of the flesh impossible to all men who are descended from Adam by ordinary generation But the Gospell assureth justification without respect of workes to all that truely beleeve in Christ teaching that wee are justified by faith that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith without the workes of the Law that is without respect of any obedience prescribed in the Law and performed by us But the righteousnesse by which wee are sanctified is prescribed in the Law which is a most perfect rule of all righteousnesse inherent § X. Unto the act of justification our owne righteousnesse and obedience doe not concurre as any cause thereof but follow in the subject that is the party justified as necessary fruits of our redemption and justification Yea in the question of justification wherein is considered what that is by which wee are justified and saved in hope our owne righteousnesse and obedience if it should bee obtruded as the matter of our justification is to be esteemed as dung that we may bee found in Christ not having our owne righteousnesse which is prescribed in the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ. But in the question of sanctification that righteousnesse which is inherent in us and that obedience which is performed by us is all in all as being both that habituall and also actuall righteousnesse and holinesse wherein our sanctification doth consist § XI By our justification wee are entituled to Gods kingdome that is saved in hope by our sanctification we are fitted and prepared for Gods kingdome into which no uncleane thing can enter Iustification therefore is the right of Gods children to their inheritance Sanctification is the cognizance and marke of those that shall bee saved wherefore our Saviour saith that by faith wee have remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified § XII The righteousnesse by which we are justified is the meritorious cause of our salvation But the righteousnesse by which we are sanctified is a fruit of our justification but no cause of our salvation unlesse you will call it causam sine quâ non which is no cause for we are neither saved by it nor for it but onely by and for the merits of Christ apprehended by faith But though it bee not the cause by or for which wee are justified or saved yet it is the way wherein wee being once justified are to walke towards our countrey in heaven Ephes. 2. 10. as Bernard well saith via regni non causa regnandi the way which leadeth to the kingdome but not the cause of comming unto it § XIII By our justification wee have our right and title to the kingdome of heaven but according to the duties of sanctification as the evidence shall the sentence of salvation bee pronounced at the last day § XIV We are justified by the grace of God as it signifieth onely his gracious love and favour in Christ. But wee are sanctified by Gods grace not onely as it signifieth the favour of God in himselfe but also as it signifieth the graces or gifts of grace infused into us and inherent in us § XV. In justification and in the parts thereof wee are meerely patients but in the duties of sanctification wee are also agents who being acted by the holy Ghost doe cooperate with him For which cause the holy Ghost in the Scriptures doth never exhort us to justification or the parts thereof viz. remission of sinne and acceptation of the beleever as righteous unto life as being the actions of God but to sanctification and the parts thereof he useth to exhort as to mortification Col. 3. 5. to vivification Ephes. 4.23,24 to both Ezek. 18.31 § XVI The acts of faith are of two sorts some tending to justification some to sanctification The former are immediate which are called actus eliciti which it bringeth forth of it selfe without the mediation of any other grace that is to beleeve in Christ by beleeving to receive him and by receiving him to justifie the beleever and therefore faith doth justifie alone The other mediate which it bringeth forth by the meanes of other graces which are called actus imporati and are the fruits of faith working by love and other graces tending to sanctification Thus faith by love worketh obedience and therefore it dtoh not sanctifie alone § XVII Of justification the Apostle treateth in the five first chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes of sanctification in the sixth and seventh § XVIII Our Saviour Christ the blessed Angels Adam in his integrity were sanctified but not justified properly For justification onely is of sinners and consisteth partly in remission of sinnes § XIX Of this difference betweene justification and sanctification the Papists will by no meanes take notice though it bee manifold and manifest But will needs understand justification to be that which wee according to the Scriptures call sanctification And this is the very ground both of their malitious calumniations against us and also of their owne damnable errours concerning justification For as if we also did confound justification and sanctification they charge us as if wee taught that wee are sanctified by faith alone that wee are formally made just or sanctified by a righteousnesse which is without us c. But if wee did hold that justification were to bee confounded with sanctification we would acknowledge that the most things which the Papists affirme concerning justification are true because they are true of sanctification As namely that wee are not sanctified by faith alone that we are sanctified by a righteousnesse inherent in us and performed by us that it is partly habituall consisting in the habits of grace as faith hope charity c. and partly actuall which is our new obedience consisting in good workes which are the fruits and effects of our faith and charity and other inward graces That of sanctification there are degrees and that by exercise and practice of the duties of holinesse and righteousnesse our sanctification is encreased c. § XX. What then Is the difference betweene us and the Papists in this great controvefie onely in words Nothing lesse For as their confounding of justification and sanctification is the ground of their calumniations against us so of their owne errours For confounding justification and sanctification first they confound the Law and the
Gospell the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace as if the Gospell did unto justification require inherent and that a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law requireth And consequently with the false Apostles and teachers of the Galatians doe teach another Gospell than that which the Apostle taught which whosoever doth hee is accursed Whrefore the samethings which the Apostle objecteth against the Galatians who were seduced by their false Teachers are verified of the Papists who seekng to be justified by the workes of the Law are under the curse they are fallen from grace to them the promise is of no effect to them Christ dyed in vaine then Christ profiteth nothing as hereafter I shall shew For whosoever seeketh to bee justified by the workes of the Law hee is a debtour to the whole Law and to him who is a debtour to the whole Law that is to bee subject to the curse if he transgresse it and to be excluded from justification and salvation if he doe not perfectly fulfill it Christ profiteth nothing For whereas they distinguish the workes which they make the condition of both the Covenants that the one are the workes of Nature the other of grace it is evident that all good workes and all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law which is the most perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse Secondly that inherent righteousnesse is not the condition of the covenant of grace but is the thing promised to all that truely beleeve For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that the covenant of workes was made with all mankinde in Adam the Covenant of Grace with the heires of promise in Christ. The former promiseth justification to these who in their owne persons performe perfect obedience that perfect obedience being the condition of the Covenant The latter that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith the Lord will give grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him in which our new obedience consisteth which as I said is not the condition of the promise but the thing promised § XXI Secondly by confounding justification and sanctification they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in themselves For the matter of sanctification is inherent and that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation Againe that which is inherent is both prescribed in the Law and is also our owne though received from God which the Pharisie himselfe confessed when he thanked God for it But the holy Ghost doth teach us that wee are neither justified by the obedience or righteousnesse which is taught in the Law nor by that which is ours And in regard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us wee are not unworthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell and they the enemies thereof who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed which is that righteousnesse of God revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell that we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith § XXII By confounding justification and sanctification and so of two benefits making but one they doe abolish and take away that maine benefit of the Messias by which we are not onely freed from hell but also intituled unto the kingdome of heaven which the Scriptures distinctly call our justification without which there can bee no salvation For whom God doth justifie all them and onely them he doth glorifie And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justification it shall further appeare in handling the second question of this first controverfie whereof I am now to speake CAP. VII That the Papists exclude remission of sinne from Iustification and in stead thereof have put expulsion and extinction of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse and that they fouly erre therein § I. BVT heare it will be objected that so long as the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justification but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers who sometimes comprehending the benefit of sanctification under the name of justification seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification Whereunto I answere that indeed the Papists pretend so much For the Councell of Trent in expresse termes saith that justification is not remission of sins alone but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man and to the like purpose Bellarmine disputeth that justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone but also in inward renovation And yet all this is but a meere colourable pretence For as they exclude from justification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which onely wee have remission of sinne so they doe indeed and in truth exclude remission it selfe And as in stead of imputation of righteousnesse they have brought in infusion of justice so in stead of remission of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they have brought in the utter expulsion extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse And for this they have some shew of reason For if they should hold that justification consisteth partly in remission that is in the forgivenesse or not imputation of sinne and partly in renovation or sanctification then they must confesse that there are two formall causes of justification which Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist partly in remission and partly in renovation and consequently should bee forced to acknowledge two wayes of making men just by one and the same act of justification the one by imputation of that righteousnesse by which being without us we have remission of sinne the other by infusion of righteousnesse inherent by which sinne is expelled But the Councell of Trent doth stedfastly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is infusion of justice whereby sinne is expelled What then becometh of remission of sinne which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification I say of it as of justification the name is retained but the thing is taken away § II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things first that the Papists from justification exclude remission of sinne by putting into the roome thereof the expulsion and extinction of sinne which belongeth not to justification but to sanctification and consequently doe wholly abolish by their doctrine the benefit of justification Secondly that remission of sinne is not the utter extinction or deletion thereof As touching the former when Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent that it made two
law of God Therefore all evill concupiscence whatsoever in whomsoever remaining is a sinne § IX Yea but concupiscence is no sinne unlesse the Will consent unto it Then say I not a sinne in infants not baptized But the Law doth not say non consenties concupiscentiis sed omninò non concupisces thou shalt not consent to concupiscences but thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence at all And it is most evident that the concupiscence forbidden in the tenth Commandement is such as goeth before the consent of will For it is such as Saint Paul himselfe had not knowne to be sinne if the Law had not said Non concupisces thou shalt not covet But such concupiscences as have the consent of the will the very Heathen knew to bee sinnes And the Papists themselves must acknowledge them to be forbidden in the former Commandements unlesse they will deny the Law of God to be spirituall and preferre the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corrupt interpretations of the Elders of the Iewes before the exposition of the Lawgiver himselfe Matth. 5. True therefore is that which some Writers cite out of Augustine that Originall sinne is remitted in Baptisme not that it be not but that it be not imputed unto sin Here Bellarmine takes on and saith that Luther first falsified this testimony of Augustine and that all who have followed him have continued the same fault though they have beene told of it A great accusation if true Augustines words in answere to an objection which the Papists cannot answer how can originall sinne bee transmitted from regenerate parents if in Baptisme it be wholly taken from them are these I answer saith he dimitti concupiscentiam in baptismo non ut non sit sed ut in peccatum non imputetur Where Augustine speaking of the traduction of originall sinne calleth it as his manner is Concupiscence in stead whereof some of our Writers have said sinne both Augustine and they meaning nothing else but originall Now that Augustine by that which he calleth Concupiscence meant sinne hereby appeareth first he saith it is remitted in Baptisme and remission is of debts onely and of sinnes as debts secondly because he saith it is remitted not that it should not bee any longer but that though it be a sinne yet it should not be imputed unto sinne for nothing is wont to be imputed unto sin by God but that which is sinne Where by the way wee may observe that in Augustines judgement remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of it that it bee no more but the not imputing of it For whereas the Papists for a poore shift and evasion say that Concupiscence is called sinne not because it is a sinne sed quia expeccato est ad peccatum inclinat this hindereth not its being a sinne but rather setteth forth the greatnesse of this evill as having all the respects of evill in it being both a sinne and a punishment of sinne and the cause of all other sinnes aâ—… Augustine saith Concupiscentia carnis adversus quam bonus concupiscit Spiritus sc. in renatis peccatum est poena peccati causa peccaâ—…i § X. But howsoever Bellarmine letteth passe as well he might his other arguments alleaged in his Booke of Baptisme as impertinent to this present question yet one of them hee hath thought good not to omit as being in his conceit unanswerable which notwithstanding I have not onely answered elsewhere but also have used it as an invincible argument to prove justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse viz. the argument taken from the antithesis of Adam to Christ Rom. 5. 19. which Bellarmine here straineth beyond the extent of the antithesis made by the Apostle In other places Bellarmine hath thus argued As through Adams disobedience we were made sinners so through Christs obedience wee are made righteous but through Adams disobedience we were made truely sinners namely by unrighteousnesse inherent and not onely by imputation Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made truly righteous namely by righteousnesse inherent But here to serve his present turne he altereth both the assumption and the conclusion The assumption for where before he said not onely by imputation here he saith not by imputation The conclusion for first in stead of concluding that wee are by the obedience of Christ made inherently just which we confesse though not intended by the Apostle in that place he concludeth that the obedience of Christ hath truly taken away and wiped out or abolished all our sinnes And secondly that he hath taken away our sinnes non imputaâ—…ivè sed verè not by imputation but truly His former argument I retorted after this manner As through Adams disobedience wee were made sinners that is guilty of death and damnation so by Christs obedience wee are made just that is absolved from that guilt and accepted as righteous unto eternall life But by imputation of Adams disobedience we were made sinners Therefore by imputation of Christs obedience wee are made righteous The assumption that we were made sinners by imputation of Adams disobedience I proved as by other arguments so by Bellarmines owne confession in other places Secondly I have acknowledged it to bee true that as we are made truely sinners through Adams disobedience not onely by imputation of Adams sinne but also by transfusion of both that privative and positive corruption which by that disobedi ence he contracted so we are made truly just through the obedience of Christ not onely by imputation of his obedience but also by infusion of righteousnesse from him But though we be truly made just by righteousnesse inherent yet it followeth not that we are in this life made perfectly just Neither doth it follow that because Christ doth free us from the dominion of sin we are therfore freed wholly from the being of sinne in us neither that if we be freed from sinne by imputation we are not freed truly For the Apostle useth these termes promiscuously remitting of sinne and not imputing of sinne justifying and imputing righteousnesse And as Christ was truly and really made a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe so wee are truly and indeed made the righteousnesse of God in him Thus have I proved that neither remission of sinne is the abolishing of sinne nor justification all one with sanctification and that the Papists by confounding justification and sanctification and of these two making but one have utterly taken away and abolished out of their Divinity that great benefit of our justification A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE THIRD BOOKE Concerning Justification or saving Grace CAP. I. What is meant by the word Grace in the Question of Iustification § I. THE second Capitall errour of the Papists in the Article of justification is concerning justifying and saving grace For when as the holy Ghost would note unto us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first moving cause or motive
by offering his sonne Isaac and Rahab by her entertaining and delivering of the Espies but no man can bee justified before God by his works who is guilty of any sinne For if Paul who was not conscious to himselfe of any sinne was not thereby justified how can he that is guilty of any or rather many sinnes be justified For whosoever is justified before God is blessed but cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them § IV. But if it shall evidently appeare that none of the workes of the faithfull are purely and perfectly good how farre then are the Papists from proving justification by workes And this I will prove by divers arguments which I will also maintaine against the cavils of the Papists And first out of Esa. 64. 6. We are all as an uncleane person or thing all our righteousnesses are as a menstruous cloth Where the Church doth freely confesse her selfe and all her members to bee uncleane and all their righteousnesses that is all their most righteous workes to bee as polluted clouts which though it be a most pregnant testimony wherein wee have just cause to triumph yet Bellarmine saith it is impertinent and that for three reasons First because without doubt the Prophet speaketh not of just men but of notorious sinners for whose sinnes the City of Ierusalem and people of the Iewes was to be delivered into the hands of the King of Babylon And that the prophet speaketh in the person of such wicked men he endeavoureth also to prove by three arguments First because he a little before had said because thou art angry and wee have sinned that is as Cyrill expoundeth it because thou art angry thou hast forsaken us But neither is God angry with the just neither doth hee forsake them I answere no lesse confidently but upon better grounds that without doubt the prophet speaketh in the person of the Church and namely of the faithfull who living after the desolation of Ierusalem in the captivity of Babylon should bewaile their owne sinnes and of the whole people of the Iewes which had drawne upon them those fearefull judgements For these words are part of that prayer of the Church of the Iewes which from the seventh verse of the 63. chapter is continued to the end of the 64. And in token of this continuation the latter part of the last verse of the former chapter in the hebrew is the beginning of this chapter in the Greeke Latine and other translations Now in the former chapter the same persons which here confesse their sinnes after they had magnified Gods mercies towards them verse 7. c. doe say unto God verse 16. doubtlesse thou art our Father though Abraham be ignorant of us and Israel know us not thou O Lord art our Father and our Redeemer And in this chapter as they bewaile in this verse their sinnefulnesse with aggravation so they desire the Lord whom they call their Father not to remember their iniquities because they are his people verse 8. 9. professing their hope of salvation verse 5. which is not the manner of notorious and impenitent sinners but of those that are penitent and faithfull And further that which Esay here foretelleth is accordingly performed First by Daniel chap. 9. from the fourth verse to the twentieth who in like manner in the name and behalfe of the desolate Church of the Iewes prayeth unto God confessing his owne sinnes and of the people of Israel as he speaketh verse 20. Secondly by the Church in captivity which send the like prayer written by Baruch to the priest and people who then were at Ierusalem Baruch 1. from the 15. verse of the first chapter to the end of the third § V. This then is the confession of the Church which according to Tertullians rule is to bee extended unto the faithfull in all times and so it is understood by Origen who saith that no man may glory of his owne righteousnesse seeing here it is said that all our righteousnesse is as the cloth of a menstruous woman by Hierome wee shall bee saved onely by thy mercie who of our selves are uncleane And what righteousnesse soever wee seeme to have is compared to a cloth of a menstruous woman By Augustine all our righteousnesse compared with divine justice is accounted like the cloth of a menstruous woman as the Prophet Esay saith c. and again whatsoever an uncleane person toucheth shall bee uncleane but all wee are as the cloth of a menstruous woman comming from a corrupt masse and uncleane we beare in our foreheads the spot of our uncleannesse which wee cannot conceale at least from thee who seest all things By Bernard in divers places First for our humble righteousnesse if wee have any is perhaps right but not pure unlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to be better than our forefathers who no lesse truely than humbly said all our righteousnesse is like the cloth of a menstruous woman for how can there be pure justice where as yet fault cannot bee wanting And againe what can all our righteousnesse bee before God shall it not according to the Prophet be reputed as the cloth of a menstruous woman and all our righteousnesse if it bee straitly judged will it not be found unjust and defective What then will become of our sinnes seeing our righteousnesse cannot answere for it selfe wherefore crying earnestly with the Prophet Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord let us in all humility have recourse to mercie which alone can save our soules Thirdly if I shall bee just I will not lift up my head for all my righteousnesses before him are as the cloth of a menstruous woman Fourthly it is perfect and secure glorying when wee feare all our workes as blessed Iob testifieth of himselfe and when wee acknowledge with the prophet Esay that all our righteousnesses are to bee reputed no other than the cloth of a menstruous woman Fifthly surely if all our righteousnesses being viewed at the light of truth shall bee found like a menstruous cloth what then shall our unrighteousnesses bee found to bee And to the like purpose I might alleage Dionys. Carthus in Psal. 142. Gerson tom 3. de Consolat lib. 4. pros 1. tom 4. tr de sign Cajetan in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Iacob Clict in Canonem apud Cassandrum consult art 6. Stella in Luk. 17. Ferus in Matth. lib. 3. cap. â—…0 Andreas Vega opusc de justif qu. 1. propos 4. Adrianus de Traject afterwards Pope in quartum sentent Quasi pannus menstruatâ—… sunt omnes justitiae nostrae jugiter igitur super pannum bonae vitae quem justitiae operibus teximus stillamus saniem diversorum criminum all our righteousnesses are like the cloath of a menstruous woman wherefore continually upon the cloth of a good life which we
est si divinitùs districtè 〈◊〉 and in the conclusion of his worke lib. 35. cap. 26. wherein as hee professeth that hee sought chiefly to please God so hee confesseth that this intention was accompanied with other worse intentions and sinister respects as seeking to please men and affecting their praise whereupon hee inferreth Si autem de his divinitùs districtè discutimur quis inter ista remanet salutis locus quando mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos 〈◊〉 crediâ—…s pura bona esse nequaquam possunt the evill things saith he which we have are purely and meerely evill but the good things which we suppose our selves to have are not nor can in any wise be purely good and so said Bernard Nostra siquâ—… est humilis justitia recta forsan sed non pura whence it followeth necessarily that none of the workes of the faithfull are pure and consequently that their very best workes are impure This which hath been said may suffice to a conscience not cauterized neither shall I need to say any more in this needlesse argument For though it should bee granted that some of the works of the faithfull were purely good as they are not yet so long as any of their works are sinfull as in many things we faile all insomuch that the righteous as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite the place doth fall seven times a day they cannot be justified by their workes but are by the sentence of the Law in themselves accursed because they doe not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them and because the breach of any one commandement maketh them guilty of all I conclude against the Papists as Epiphâ—…ius did censure the Catharists these men professing themselves pure by this supposition make themselves unpure for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure therein he doth utterly condemne himselfe to be impure CAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments answered § I. THis was our third argument taken from the imperfection of our obedience and righteousnesse which I have defended against Bellarmines cavils before I proceed to the fourth I hold it needfull to answere his arguments in propounding whereof hee falleth short of his projects as I noted before for hee that would prove that men are justified by their workes had need to prove that all the workes of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good which is impossible to bee proved but hee neither concludeth of all works nor of all the faithfull And yet it is most certaine that if the faithfull be justified by their works then all the works of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good His proofes are of three sorts authority of Scriptures Testimonies of Fathers and other reasons Out of the Scripture he citeth eight testimonies The first out of Iob 1. 22. In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips And that we may not answere with some of the Rabbins that though he sinned not with his lips yet hee might sinne in his heart hee telleth us that in the next Chapter God giveth him this testimonie that still he retained his innocency and therefore sinned neither in his tongue nor in his heart Againe whereas Satan sought by so many temptations to bring Iob to sinne and God on the other side permitted all those temptations that the patience and vertue of that holy man should bee manifested if Iob should have sinned God should after a sort have beene over come by the devill wherfore it is certaine that that worke of Iobs patience was not stained with any sinne and that the Lutherans which say the contrary take part with the devill against God § II. Answ. Those temptations were permitted by God as tyrals of Iob not perfection but integrity For that is Gods end that they who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound and upright may be knowne 1 Cor. 11. 19. and this end was atchieved Cap. 2. vers 3. for still Iob retained his integrity But Satans intention was to prove him to be an hypocrite and to move him not onely to fall but to fall away from God and to blaspheme him to his face and so much hee undertooke both Cap. 1. 11. and Cap. 2. 5. howbeit hee failed in his enterprize And so much is signified in both the places alleaged by Bellarmine that Iob was so farre either from blaspheming God to his face which Satan undertooke he should that he offended not with his lippes nor charged God foolishly or from being discovered to be an hypocrite that by Gods owne testimony he retained his integrity as that word signifieth which Bellarmine according to the vulgar Latine calleth innocencie But Iob though hee were upright and sincere yet he was not perfect nor without sinne as appeareth by his manifold imperfections which afterwards he discovered Cap. 3. c. and also by his free confession of his sinfulnesse Cap. 9. 20. 33. and lastly by his feare and jelousie which hee had over his best actions lest he had sinned in them for as Gregory writing on those words of Iob Verebar omnia opera mea understandeth it to be an humble confession as if he had said quae apertè egerim video sed quid in his latenter pertulerim ignoro what overtly I performed I see but what covertly I suffered therein I know not But here may be objected which Bellarmine in the next Chapter alleageth out of the said Gregory Bonarum mentium est ibi etiam aliquo modo culpam agnoscere ubi culpa non est it is the property of good minds even there to acknowledge a fault where nofault is wherto I answere that Gregory speaketh in regard of humane infirmities which were laid upon man after his fall and namely of the monthly infirmity of women which though they bee not inflicted upon a man for his personall offences yet it is the property of good minds to esteeme them as laid upon them for their sinnes Thus Iob though his afflictions were not inflicted upon him as corrections for his sinnes but as tryals of his vertue yet he imputeth them to his sinnes Iob 13. 26. § III. In the second place he allegeth diverse testimonies out of the Psalmes wherein David pleadeth his owne innocencie and appealeth unto God to be judged according to his owne righteousnesse Psalm 7. 4. 9. 16. 1 2 3. 18. 2. 1. 26. 1. 119. 121. Answ. In some of these places David pleadeth the justice of his particular cause against his adversaries not the absolute innocencie of his person The rest are to be understood of his uprighttnesse and integrity For otherwise no man was more forward to confesse and to deplore his manifold sinnes than David was none more ready to implore Gods mercy none more fearefull that God should enter into strict judgement with him § IV. His third testimony is Matth. 6. 22. If thine eye be single the
able to fulfill the Law of God CAP. VI. Our fiftâ—… argument containing foure branches By that wâ—…e are justified by which we are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved § I. THe fifth argument By what righteousnesse wee are justified by it wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities reconciled unto God and for it we shall bee saved And againe by what righteousnesse wee are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved by it we are justified By that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves wee are not absolved from our sinnes nor redeemed from our iniquities nor reconciled unto God nor for it shall bee saved But by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities c. Therefore we are not justified by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves but by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ. The proposition in both the parts thereof containeth foure branches The first by what righteousnesse we are justified wee are by it absolved from our sinnes and a converso by what righteousnesse we are absolved from our sinnes by that we are justified This is proved from the signification of the word justifie as being a judiciall word opposed to condemnation which I have at large proved before For this doth invincibly demonstrate that by what wee are justified by that wee are acquitted and absolved and by what wee are absolved by that we are justified But more specially it may bee proved out of Act. 13. 38 39. where as I have shewed before not onely the word justification and remission of sinnes are promiscuously used but the phrase also of being justified from sinne signifieth plainely to be absolved from sinne where also the maine question itselfe is concluded Bee it knowne unto you saith S. Paul to his brethren the Iewes who feared God that through Iesus Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes And by him all that beleeve are justified from all those things meaning sinnes from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses From our sinnes therefore we are justified or absolved by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith from which we could out be acquitted by any obedience which we could performe to the Law § II. But of this place we are further to speake in defence of Calvins allegation thereof against Bellarmines cavils Calvin prooving that God doth justifie us when hee absolveth us from our sinnes and accepteth of us in Christ alleageth this place Through this man that is Christ is preached unto you remission of sinnes and by him all that beleeve are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses You see saith Calvin that justification is here set after remission of sinnes by way of interpretation r you see plainely that it is taken for absolution you see that it is denied to the workes of the Law you see it is meerely the benefit of Christ you see that it is received by faith and finally you see that there is a satisfaction interposed where hee saith that through Christ wee are justified from our sinnes Bellarmine pretending to answere this argument relateth it thus as if Calvin had said First By this man that is by Christ we are justified and not by any vertues or qualities of ours Secondly is preached that signifyeth that the very preaching or declaring of the promise if it bee apprehended by faith doth justifie for so the Apostle presently expoundeth himselfe by him every one that beleeveth is justified Thirdly forgivenesse of sinnes that signifieth that justification consisteth in nothing else but in remission of sinnes wherefore tâ—…e inward renovation is not the other part of justication for that renovation is not so much justificaâ—…ion as an effect thereof And lastly these words from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses doe signifie that justification doth not consist in the observation of the Law but onely as hath beene said in remission of sinnes for or through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed Thus as you see hee maketh Calvin speake what hee pleaseth But because the things which he inforceth in Calvins name upon this place be for the most part our assertions it shall not bee amisse to weigh the answeres which he maketh to them And first where it is said per hunc by this man hee saith this doth not exclude our vertues or qualities infused of God For by Christ wee are justified as the efficient which is signified by the preposition per by vertues and qualities infused as the formall cause Now if Christ or his righteousnesse bee the efficient cause then it cannot be the formall cause for the forme is the effect of the efficient nor can the same thing be the cause and effect of the same thing Neither may they say as they are wont that this is a mystery of faith that reason cannot attaine unto For mysteries though they surmount reason yet are notrepugnant to reason Neither ought we to faine mysteries as the Papists use to doe where the Scriptures have an easie and perspicuous meaning Râ—…ply This were a good caveat to the papists As for us we faineno such mysteries neither doe we say that Christ or his righteousnesse is both the efficient and formall cause of our justification But this we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of our justification and also the merit both of our justification and salvation and that Christ himselfe as he is Mediatour is the secondary efficient of our justification affording unto it both the matter thereof and the merit § IV. That word is preached doth not signifie saith hee that by the onely preaching of Scriptures apprehended by faith men are justified For then Peter would not have said Act. 2. 38. Doe peâ—…ance and bee every one of you baptized for remission of sinnes But it signifieth that remission of sinnes is preached to all that beleeve in Christ as they ought that is in doing whatsoever he commaâ—…deth to be done according to that Mat. 28. 20. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you In this sence every one that bâ—…leeveth is justified that is whosoever beleeveth as he ought namely by fulfilling all things which faith doth declare ought to be fulfilled For not he that beleeveth a Physician though he be never so skilfull and one that infallibly curâ—…th is healed unlesse he receive such medicines as hee doth appoint Reply Wee doe not say that preaching alone apprehended by faith doth justifie but wee say that a true and a lively faith which is begotten by the preaching of the Word doth justifie a man before God and that wicked is that aphorisine collected out of Bellarmine that by the preaching of the Word of God faith is stirred up and so sinnes are forgiven is a
fiction of the hereticks of our time Nay we say more that by the preaching of the Word faith is not onely excited where it was before but that it is first wrought ordinarily and begotten by the ministry of the Gospell The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments and the stirring of it up to the Word As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word But the Scripture teacheth us that faith commeth by hearing the Word that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve that without a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 4. 15. that therefore preachers are their Fathers in the faith that they justifie men Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them whereby they are justified Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached to repent and to be baptized I answer that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life in Lydia Act. 16. 14 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized even as Abraham was before he was circumcised Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience and much more that they might be saved many other things as repentance and a godly life with the use of the Sacraments and of all other good meanes are required besides that faith whereby alone they are justified before God And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized not that Baptisme properly doth justifie and much lesse that it begetteth â—…aith for in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized not onely at the time of Baptisme but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve And whereas he saith that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought I confesse it is true that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith but to the true lively and effectuall faith which in some measure purifieth the heart and worketh by love causing a man though not to fulfill all things that are commanded as Bellarmine speaketh yet to will to desire and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded according to the measure of grace received But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe § V. As for his similitude of the Physitian I answer the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules which are our sinnes by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ is to beleeve in him and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes on our part to apply them is faith For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that which was but a figure of Christ be healed even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse that whosoever being stung as we all are by the old Serpent and made subject to eâ—…all death shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith shall bee saved To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience when the Iaylour Act. 16. 30 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling and falling downe before Paul and Silas demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saved And this remedy â—…in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. § VI. Thirdly where the Apostle in this place nameth onely remission of sinnes hee saith it hindreth not but that justâ—…fication may bee understood to consist in remission of sinnes and infusion of righteousnesse For as we have not once shewed saith hee remission of sinnes is not onely the pardâ—…ning of the punishment but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice comming in the place which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice Reply Not once but very oft hath hee said that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse because by infusion of justice sinne is expelled as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment that he hath utterly excluded from justification For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse which as hee teacheth is the onely act of justification whereof there is but one formall cause which is righteousnesse insuâ—…ed as the Councel of Trent hath defined but by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused as Bellarmine hath confessed doth not or cannot satisfie for our sinnes Now if there bee but one formall cause of justification as indeed there is but one and that one be not the imputation but the infusion of justice or as they rather use to speake the justice infused which expelleth sinne which expulsion or deletion they call the remission yea the true remission of sinne then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justification But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment be the not imputing of sinne which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth and the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes when hee imputeth not sinne then it will necessarily follow that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justification whereby we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne is another thing which the Scriptures call Sanctification And this I take to be a manifest truth which being granted we have obtained the whole cause § VII Fourthly againe saith he although there were mention made in this place of justification only from sinnes yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification of cleansing of washing and renewing which shew
the other part of justification Reply we doubt not but the Scriptures make mention of both these benefits sometimes severally and sometimes joyntly which though in use and practice they alwayes goe together yet they must bee carefully distinguished And howsoever the Scriptures often make mention of Sanctification as well as of justification yet no where doe they make Sanctification a part of justification This Bellarmine should have proved and not have craved Neither is it to bee doubted but that if forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment concurre unto justification as a part thereof renovation or infusion of righteousnesse being the other part as Bellarmine here affirmeth theâ—…e are two actions and two formall causes of justification which themselves utterly deny And therefore they must bee forced to acknowledge these two actions having distinct formes to bee justification whose forme is imputation and sanctification whose forme is infusion of righteousnesse § VIII Finally saith he from which you could not be justified by the Law of Moses signifieth that the observation of the Law neither by the strength of nature nor by helpe of the Law alone presumed doth justifie not because the true observation of the Law is not righteousnesse but because before remission of sinne the Law cannot be kept Reply By the observation of Law is meant all obedience and righteousnesse inherent whatsoever prescribed in the Law whether it goe before faith and justification or follow after For before as Bellarmine truly saith the Law cannot be fulfilled neither can there be any true righteousnesse And that obedience which is performed after though it be a righteousnesse begun in us and be not onely accepted in Christ but also graciously rewarded yet it cannot satisfie for our former sinnes nor justifie us from them That which Bellarmine addeth I admit with some small qualification as making for us For God saith he when by the merits of Christ he reconcileth any man hee doth withall forgive his sinnes so saith the Apostle 2 Cor. 5. 19. which is all one as if Bellarmine had said when God justifieth a man not imputing his sinne and accepting of him as righteous in Christ then hee infuseth charity by which he may keepe the Law which is all one as if he had said when God hath justified a man he doth also Sanctifie him This saith he is that which Saint Augustine so often repeateth and wholly maketh for us opera non prâ—…cedere justificandum that workes goe not before as causes of justification sed sequi justificatum but follow after as effects and fruits thereof And this Augustine speaketh not of such workes as perfectly fulfill the Commandements for such there are none whiles they are stained with the flesh but of all good works which notwithstanding their defectivenesse are accepted of God in Christ that which he addeth out of Rom. 8. 4. I have discussed elsewhere § IX But to returne to the proofe of my proposition to that place of the Acts I adde for the further proofe of the first branch Rom. 4. vers 5 6 7 8. where the Apostle useth these words promiscuously justification and blessednesse and proveth out of Psal. 32. 1. that this blessednesse consisteth in remission of sin or as he also speaketh in the not imputing of sinne and imputation of righteousnesse without works from whence this is proved by what righteousnesse we have remission of sinne by that we are justified and by what wee are justified we have remission of sinne The second branch by what righteousnesse we are redeemed by that we are justified and è converso by what we are justified by that we are redeemed The benefit of redemption is explained by the Apostle Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. to bee remission of sinne and expressed by the phrase of redeeming from all iniquttie Tit. 2. 14. Psalm 133. 8. The third branch by what righteousnesse wee are reconciled to God by it we are justified and by what we are justified we are reconciled The Apostle Rom. 5. 9 10. useth these words promiscuously to bee justified by the bloud of Christ and to bee reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne and 2 Cor 5. 19. God is said to reconcile men unto him in Christ when hee doth not impute untio them their sinnes but imputeth unto them righteousnesse even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ that they only may be made the righteousnesse of God in him vers 21. The fourth branch for what righteousnesse wee are saved by that wee are justified and è converso that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation for which cause justification and to be justified is many times expressed by salvation or to bee saved for they that are justified are saved in hope and by what they are justified by that they are intituled to salvation and by what we receive remission of sinnes by that also we receive our inheritance Iustification may bee compared to the institution of a Minister unto a benefice which giveth jus ad rem glorification to induction which giveth possession and jus in re § X. I come to the assumption the first branch whereof is that we are absolved from our sinnes by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by any righteousnesse inherent in usâ—… both wich are plainely averred Act. 3. 38 39. The former also is every where testified that the bloud of Christ was shed for the remission of sinnes and that it doth cleanse us from all our sinnes that he is the propitiation for our sinnes c. The latter is also evident that we cannot be absolved from our sinnes by righteousnesse inherent first because it cannot satisfie for our sinnes secondly because it cannot stand in judgement If wee should plead it before God we could not be justified thereby Psal. 143. 2. Neither are we able to answere him one of a thousand Ioâ—… 9. 3. Thirdly because our obedience though it were totall as it is never in this life yet it were a debt and we cannot be absolved from one debt by the payment of another when ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to doe Luk. 17. 10. The second branch that we are redeemed by the merits of Christ and not by our owne righteousnesse needeth no proofe neither in respect of the affirmative that by his bloud we have redemption even the remission of our sinnes that he gave himselfe to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a full price of ransome to redeeme us from all iniquity Nor in respect of the Negative unlesse it may be thought that we who were held captives under sinne and Satan to doe his will could deliver our selves which God doth sweare to bee his gift Luk. 1. 73 74. Neither could we be delivered out of the hands of the strong man but by him that is stronger than he The third branch also
an heire of eternall life Christs sufferings and obedience being imputed unto him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if he had suffered and performed the same in his owne person But the doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse is as it were a racke to mens consciences For when a man being summoned to appeare before the judgement seat of God shall seriously consider with himselfe what he shall oppose to the accusations of Satan to the conviction of the Law to the Testimony of his owne Conscience confessing himselfe to be a most wretched sinner to the judgment of God the most righteous judge If he looke backe to his owne conversation as having nothing to trust to but his owne righteousnesse he shall finde sufficient matter of despaire He may say with Anselme Terret me vita mea c. my life doth terrifie me for being diligently examined my whole life almost appeareth either to bee sinne or barrennesse and if there seeme to bee any fruit therein it is either so counterfeit or unperfect or some way or other corrupted as that it can doe no other but either not please or displease God And summoning himselfe before the judgement seat of God hee findeth himselfe to bee in great straits On this side saith he will be accusing sinnes on that side terrifying justice under will lye open the horrible gulfe of hell above an angry Iudge within a burning conscience without a flaming world where shall I be hid how shall I appeare to be hid is impossible to appeare is untolerable To avoide these straits there is no way but to renounce the doctrine of justification by works or inherent righteousnes and to fly to the doctrine of the Gospell teaching justification by the grace of God freely without respect of works through the merits of Christ received by faith and to appeale from the tribunall of Gods justice to the throne of his mercy For whiles a man retaineth this opinion that he can bee no otherwise justified than by his owne good workes or inherent righteousnesse he can never be soundly perswaded that his righteousnesse is sufficient for that purpose but ever hath just caufe not onely of doubting but also of despaire And this is the cause of that Popish opinion that no man without speciall revelation can be assured of the remission of his sinnes or of salvation § VI. The eleventh and last argument shall be taken from experience For when men seriously considering of their justification before God as a judiciall act of God as the word it selfe importeth shall sincerely and in the feare of God set themselves before his judgement seat where they must receive the sentence either of absolution or condemnation and shall bethinke themselves what they being accused of Satan and convicted by the testimony of their owne Conscience have to oppose to the just judgement of God why sentence of condemnation should not passe against them they would utterly disclaime their owne righteousnesse For as Augustine and other of the Fathers observe as before I have noted out of the eight and nine verses of Prov. 20. joyned together cum Rex justus sederit in solio quis potest dicere mundum est cor meum when the righteous King shall sit upon his throne who can say my heart is cleane yea the best of the Papists when By deadly sicknesâ—…e as Gods messenger they have beene summoned to come before Gods judgement they have beene forced to leave their schoole-trickes and sophisticall distinctions and plainely renouncing their owne righteousnesse to rest wholly upon the mercies of God and the merits of Christ. Insomuch that many who have lived Papists have in this most weighty point died reformed Catholicks And to this purpose there is extant among them in divers Bookes a forme of visiting the sicke wherein both the Pastor is directed what to say and the sicke person is instructed what to answere The Pastor therefore having demanded these questions Brother dost thou rejoyce that thou shalt dye in the faith doest thou confesse that thou hast not lived so well as thou ought Doth it repent thee hast thou a will to amend if thou hadd'st space of life Dost thou beleeve that our Lord Iesus Christ dyed for thee doest thou beleeve that thou canst not bee saved but by his death and having received affirmative answers to every question he inferreth this exhortation that whiles his soule remaineth in him he should place his whole affiance in the death of Christ and in no other thing and that if God will judge him if hee shall say unto him thou art a sinner that thou hast deserved damnation that hee is angry with thee he should say O Lord I interpose the death of thy Sonne betweene me and thy judgement betweene my sinnes and thee betweene mee and my bad deserts betweene me and thine anger In the edition printed at Venice there are these two questions dost thou beleeve that thou shalt come to glory not by thine owne merits but by the vertue and merit of Christs passion And a little after dost thou beleeve that our Lord Iesus Christ died for our Salvation and that no man can bee saved by his owne merits or by any other meanes but by the merit of his passion unto both which an affirmative answere was made but both blotted out in the Index expurgatorius set forth by Cardinall Quiroga CAP. VIII The disproofe of the Popish assertion affirming that we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent § I. NOw we are severally to disprove the Popish assertion and to prove ours As touching the former that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inherent Our first argument may bee this That righteousnesse of God by which we are justified is not prescribed in the Law as before hath beene proved Rom. 3. 21. nor is that righteousnesse which is of the Law Phil. 3. 9. All inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law and is that which is of the Law Therefore inherent righteousnesse is not that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified That all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law it is manifest first because the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse whether habituall or actuall secondly because charity wherein they place their inherent righteousnesse even that charity whereby they are to love God withall their soules and their neighbour as themselves that charity which proceedeth from a pure heart from a good conscience and from faith unfained is prescribed in the Law as the summe and complement thereof Matth. 22. 37. 39 40. 1 Tim. 1. 5. § II. To avoid this most evident truth Bellarmine bringeth a frivolous distinction as he applieth it to wit that there is justitia legis and justitia in lege or exlege The justice of the Law the justice in the Law or of the Law The justice of the Law is that very justice which the Law prescribeth or that justice
the person or of the whole man who is Adopted to be the sonne of God Neither doth the Apostle speake of the adoption of the soule nor yet of the adoption of the body but of the redemption of the body from the servitude of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sonnes of God which is not the adoption of the body but the fruite of the adoption of the whole man which here by a Metonymy is called adoption The former he proveth by the latter not to be imputative but inherent The adoption of sonnes which we expect in the redemption of the body shall be most true and inherent in the body it selfe that is to say immortality and impassibility not putative but true therefore the adoption which now we have in the spirit by justification is also true not putative but inherent Ans. In this similitude he should rather have said that as the adoption of sonnes which we doe expect at the redemption of our bodies that is at the resurrection is the everlasting inheritance whereunto wee were adopted as sonnes which a true and glorious inheritance though not inherent in the body but enjoyed by the whole man as adherent unto him so the adoption which we now have in the Spirit by justification which is the entituling of us to this inheritance is a true adoption though not inherent but wrought by imputation of Christs merits unto us But suppose the adoption of the body as hee calleth it were inherent how doth it follow that the adoption of the soule as hee calleth it should also be inherent he saith it must bee so Otherwise saith he as wee expect the redemption of the body so also we should expect the redemption of the soule which the Papists had neede to doe whose soules shall bee in purgatory at the last day but from thence to be delivered at that day by a gaole-delivery but I say it followeth not for the adoption which is imputative is a most true adoption and wee need no other but the accomplishment thereof which is our full redemption As for that adoption which he supposeth to bee inherent it is a meere fancie § XXI Now let us see what may from that proposition which was agreed upon betweene us be truly inferred on our part Such as is our adoption such is our justification but our Adoption is imputative and not by inherencie For as I have shewed heretofore these foure benefits reconciliation redemption justification and adoption doe not import any reall mutation in the subject but relative and imputative for when God imputing to a beleever the merits of his Sonne forgiveth his sinnes which made him an enemy to God a bondslave of sinne and Satan guilty of sinne and damnation the childe of the Devill and receiveth him into his favour maketh him Christs freeman accepteth of his as righteous admitteth him to bee his sonne he is said to reconcile to redeeme to justifie and to adopt him not by working any reall or positive change in the party but relative or in respect of relation To be a father and to be a sonne are relatives when a man therefore hath first a sonne hee becommeth a father which hee was not before not by any reall change in himselfe but by a new relation which before he had not When a man is adopted he becommeth the sonne of another man whose sonne he was not before not by any reall mutation but onely in regard of relation For if the party adopted by God should by adoption bee really changed then God who adopteth should also seeme to bee really changed which is impossible because he is immutable For as he which is adopted becommeth the sonne of God which hee was not before so God when he first adopteth any man becommeth his father which hee was not before Here therefore seemeth to bee a change as well in God adopting as in the party adopted not reall for that is not possible but relative onely which is a manifest evidence that as our Adoption so our justification is not any reall change wrought in us by infusion of any inherent quality but a relative change wrought without us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse CAP. XI Bellarmines arguments proving obliquè or indirectly justification by inherent righteousnesse and first because faith is not the integrall and onely formall cause of justification § I. ANd these were all the arguments which Bellarmine hath produced to proove diâ—…ectly his assertion concerning justification by inherent righteousnesse now follow two other ranks of proofes whereby he doth obliquè indirectly and by consequence prove the same by disproving two assertions which it pleaseth him to father upon us The one that faith is the onely formall cause of justification the other that justification consisteth onely in remission of sinnes For if faith be not the integrall cause formall of our justification but that with it charity and other graces doe concurre by which as well as by faith we are justified formally then it followeth that wee are justified by inherent and habituall righteousnesse which consisteth in the habits of faith aud charity and other graces And if justification doth consist not onely in remission of sins by which our soules are cleansed from sinne but also in the renewing of us according to Gods image by infusion of righteousnesse by which our soules are not onely purged from sinne but also adorned and beautified with grace then it followeth that we are justified by inherent righteousnesse The former question he disputeth lib. 2. de justif c. 4. the title whereof is fidem non esse integram formalem caussam justificationis that faith is not the whole formall cause of justification This opinion hee confesseth none of us doe now hold though falsly hee would lay it upon Luther and Melancthon for we deny faith to bee the formall cause of justification at all and yet this is it which he and all of his side evermore object unto us to make us odious to the world as though wee required nothing to make us formally and inherently righteous but onely faith And for this cause though wee hold not this assertion yet hee thinkes good to confute it as if we held it § II. Of his proofes onely the first serveth to prove that with faith charity doth concurre unto justification It is taken out of Gal. 5. 5. 6. the fifth verse containing the latter part of the Antithesis between justitiaries who were apostates from the doctrine of grace and the true prosessours of the Gospell For the former looked to bee justified by the Law that is by obedience performed to the Law and so were fallen from grace but the latter looked not to be justified by the Law but by faith that is by Christs righteousnesse apprehended by faith Of this Antithesis the latter part agreeth to us the former to the Papists And therefore I marvell to what purpose he alleaged the fifth verse unlesse it were to
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 instruments
of imputation of Christs righteousnesse where in mine opinion hee might as well have alleaged that there is no need of a Saviour For if there bee need of a Saviour it is to free us from the danger of damna ion and to entitle us to the Kingdome of heaven both which benefits are implyed in justification But how should we who are sinners and consequently by sinne obnoxious to damnation and excluded from heaven bee either acquitted from hell or made heires of heaven For neither by our selves nor by any other meanes in the world can we bee freed from hell or have right to heaven but onely by the death and merits of Christ our onely Saviour which is so cleare a truth that the Papists themselves cannot deny it But how can wee bee freed from hell by Christs sufferings or entitled to heaven by his obedience if the Lord doe not accept of his sufferings and obedience in our â—…ehalfe as if we had suffered and done the same in our owne persons If God doe not accept them in the behalfe of the faithfull for whose sake hee did obey and suffâ—…r then all that Christ did and suffered for us was in vaine and in vaine did he take our nature and our sinnes upon him If the Lord doe accept in our behalfe the fufferings and merits of Christ then doth he impute them unto us For by imputation as I haue said wee meane nothing else Neither can the sufferings and obedience of Christ being transient as I have also shewed before bee otherwise communicated unto us but by imputation § V. But come we to his second argument for if saith he imputation bee necessary it is chiefly for this cause because a man after remission of sinne remaineth still a sinner his sinne being covered and not abolished But when sinnes are remitted they are not onely covered but utterly abolished But here Bellarmine grossely mistaketh our assertion as if we held that sins are first forgiven and then after the forgivenesse of sinnes righteousnesse is imputed But wee hold that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse or satisfaction we have remission of sinne and not otherwise and therefore that to remission it â—…selfe imputation is absolutely necessary For God forgiveth no sinne nor remitteth the guilt of punishment for which his justice is not fully satisfied But wee are not able our selves to satisfie for our sinnes but by eternall punishment Therefore it is impossible salva Dei justitia that our sinnes should bee forgiven unlesse Christs satisfaction be imputed unto us § VI. And whereas still he harpeth on that string that remission of sinne is the utter deletion or abolition of it to wit by infusion of righteousnesse and that therefore imputation of Christs righteousnesse is needlesse I answere first that in sinne two things are considered the guilt and the corruption That in remission of sinne the guilt is fully taken away by imputation of Christs perfect righteousnesse but the corruption or pollution is not taken away by remission but by mortification and that not fully and at once but by degrees And howsoever these two benefits doe alwayes concurre remission of sinne and mortification of sinne for whosoever are freed from the guilt of sinne are also freed from the dominion of sinne and to whom the Lord granteth remission to them hee granteth repentance Gods forgiving and mans forgoing or forsaking of sinne going alwayes together notwithstanding they are by no meanes to be confounded I confesse that both of them are wrought by the bloud of Christ and by his death but in a divers respect For by the bloud of Christ is meant all that which issued out of his blessed side which was both bloud and water Ioh. 19. 34. which Saint Iohâ—… vers 35. noteth as a thing most remarkable and accordingly in his first Epistle Chapter 5. vers 6. urgeth it This is he that came by water and bloud even Christ Iesus not by water onely but by water and bloud The bloud of redemption to redeeme us from the guilt of sinne and the water of ablution to purge us from the pollution of sinne The death also of Christ may be considered either in respect of the merit thereof as it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price or ransome apprehended by faith to redeeme us from the guilt of sinne or in respect of the vertue and efficacy as it is a medicine or plaister applyed by the Holy Ghost to cure us of the malady of sinne Both Christ worketh by his bloud and by his death but the former is done without us and in respect of sinnes past at once as when a debt is fully satisfied the later is wrought in us as when a disease is cured by degrees § VII Secondly if remission of sinne bee an utter deletion or a totall abolition of sinne then no mans sinne is forgiven in whom any sinne remaineth which is a most desperate doctrine as heretofore I have shewed for where is that mortall man in whom no sinne remaineth If the Papists say they have no sinne Saint Iohn will tell them that there is no truth in them Thirdly in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish it but to pardon and to forgive it or not to impute it And further God is said so to forgive our sinnes as wee forgive the offences of others which wee doe when by charity we cover them when we do not remember them with any desire or purpose to revenge them when we are reconciled to them that offended us The difference is that God forgiveth not onely in mercy but in justice also forgiving no sinnes but those for which his justice is fully satisfied He forgiveth therefore those sinnes for which Christ hath satisfied he remitteth the punishment to us which Christ hath borne for us he covereth them but with the robe of Christs righteousnesse hee is reconciled unto us but it is Christ for whose sake he doth forgive our sinnes Thus therefore I argue If remission of sinne bee not the deletion of the sinne it selfe by infusion of righteousnesse but the not imputing or covering of it the taking away of the guilt by imputation of Christs satisfaction then we are justified not by infusion but by imputation but the former is true therefore the later Yea but â—…aith Bellarmine the Scripture by remission of sinne understandeth the utter abolishing of sinne and to that purpose useth all manner of words which could be devised to expresse the utter deletion of sinne to which purpose he alleageth many testimonies all which I have answered heretofore § VIII Fourthly if there be a totall deletion of sin in our justification by the infusion of righteousnesse then that righteousnesse which in our justification is infused is perfect for the infusion of righteousnesse which is unperfect cannot cause a totall abolition of sinne Nay the imperfection it selfe is a sinne But it is absurd to imagine that the righteousnesse which is infused
that was their meaning As for affiance though it be not of the proper nature and essence of faith yet it is an unseparable fruit of speciall faith in so much that sometimes it seemeth to be implyed in the signification of beleeving in Christ For hee that doth beleeve in Christ doth first by a lively assent acknowledge him to bee the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him and secondly so beleeving hee is perswaded that he is a Saviour to him and thirdly beleeving Christ to be his Saviour doth therefore repose his affiance and trust in him for salvation But howsoever so much sometimes is implyed in the phrase of beleeving in Christ yet in the most ordinary and usuall acception of the Word in the Scriptures of the New Testament no more is signified than the lively assent and acknowledging of Christ yea sometimes the phrase is used of those who did not so much as give a lively assent or beleeved with their heart Howsoever being convicted by the evidence of truth sealed by miracles they assented to the truth and acknowledged Christ to be the Messias Such were those Ioh. 2. 23. who are said to have beleeved on his name when they saw the miracles which hee did to whom notwithstanding our Saviour would give no credit because hee knew what was in them Such a beleever was Simâ—… Magus who being convinced by the evidence of truth confirmed by miracles assented in his judgement but beleeved not with his heart for his heart was not right within him Act. 8. 13. 21. And such a one was Iudas Ioh. 6. 64. who though he beleeved as being a Disciple yea an Apostle of Christ yet beleeved not in deed and in truth § X. But that the phrase is used ordinarily of those which received Christ by a true and lively assent I could prove by multitude of testimonies divers whereof I have elsewhere mentioned But I will content my selfe with two instances of the Samaritanes and of the Eunuch Of the Samaritanes it is said Iohn 4. 39. That many of them beleeved in Christ for the saying of the woman who could beleeve no more than she had told them which at the most was that hee was Christ. And after when they professed that they beleeved because of his owne word all that they beleeved was this that he was indeed the Châ—…ist the Saviour of the world verse 41. 42. The Eunuch when Philip told him that hee might bee baptized if hee beleeved with his whole heart maketh this profession of his faith I beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God § XI Now that affiance is not faith I briefely shew thus First because it is a fruit and effect of faith For by faith wee have affiance Ephes. 3. 12. Faith therefore is the cause affiance the effect and the same thing cannot be both the cause and the effect For whereas some deny this consequence trusting to an unlike example for say they as naturall Philosophy is the science of naturall things and yet by it wee attaine to the science of naturall things so though affiance be faith and faith affiance yet by faith wee attaine to affiance I answere that there is an homonymie in the word science which in the former part of the example signifieth the art or doctrine which is a comprehension of precepts in the latter the habit of the knowledge of naturall things which by the doctrine holpen with the gifts of nature and confirmed by exercise we attaine unto Secondly because faith is an habit of the minde affiance an affection of the heart and so also differ in the subject For faith being a perswasion is seated in the minde though working upon the heart affiance or trust being an affection is seated in the heart though proceeding from the perswasion of the minde Thirdly because they differ not onely in the Subject but also in the Object The Object of faith is verum that which is true the Object of affiance is bonum that which is good Yea but say some the Promise is good and therefore the Object of â—…aith is good I answer the thâ—…ng promised is good and therefore I conceive affiance or hope which two in respect of the time to come differ not But be the thing promised never so good yet I beleeve not the promise unlesse I bee perswaded that it is true Faith therefore layeth hold on the Promise as being true affiance or hope expect the thing promised as being good Those therefore who hold that affiance properly so called is faith or faith affiance are not to bee defended Those which by affiance understand assurance and say that justifying faith is affiance doe speake the truth if they understand by faith not that by which we are justified before God but that by which we are justified that is assured of our justification in our own conscience Concerning which there needs not to be any other controversie betweene us and the Papists than this whether there bee any such certaintie or assurance to be had But that is a different question not pertinent to the poynt in hand which I have elsewhere cleared And so much of the nature of justifying faith CHAP. V. Of the Subject of justifying Faith § I. NOw I come to the Subject that is both the parties to whom it belongeth and the part of the Soule wherein it is As touching the parties in whom it is the Papists hold First that it is common to the godly with the wicked Secondly that it is common to the Elect with the reprobate The former is the same in substance with that which I have already handled whether true faith may be severed from charity and other graces the negative part of which question I have proved and consequently of this that justifying faith is not common to the godly with the wicked As touching the second whether it bee common to the Elect with the Reprobate Bellarmine propoundeth the Romish tenet to be this fidem justitiam non esse propriam electorâ—…m semel habitam amitti posse that faith and justice is not proper to the Elect and that it being once had it may be lost which is the very question of perseverance whereof I have written a full treatise against Bellarmine proving that true justifying faith is proper to the Elect and that being once had it is never lost either totally or finally § II. Now as touching the part of the soule wherein justifying faith is seated Bellarmine and many other Papistâ—… hold that it is seated in the understanding onely and of us they report that we hold it to be seated in the will onely which they doe report against their owne knowledge knowing that wee hold faith to bee a perswasion of the minde and an assent and finding fault with Calvin for defining faith to be a kinde of knowledge as it is indeed that kind of knowledge which we have by report or relation from
upon it be cured And although their eye could not properly bee said to cure them yet because it was the onely instrument to apprehend that object which God had ordained as the onely remedy to salve them it is truely said that by onely looking upon that object they were cured Even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse it is his owne similitude Ioh. 3. 14 15. that whosoever being stung by the old serpent doth but looke upon him with the eye of faith Ioh. 6. 40. may be justified and saved for although this eye of the of the soule which is faith cannot be said properly to justifie them who are sinners yet because it is â—…he onely instrument to apprehend that object which God hath ordained as the onely remedy and propitiation for our sinne it is truely said that by beleeving onely in Christ we are Iustified § IV Secondly whereas faith it selfe doth not justifie properly but the object which it doth apprehend which is Christ and his righteousnesse our meaning therefore when wee say that faith alone doth justifie can be no other but this that the righteousnesse of Christ alone which is onely apprehended by faith doth justifie us And forasmuch as this is a necessary disjunction that wee are justified either by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves or by that which is out of us in Christ for by some righteousnesse wee are justified and a third cannot be named it followeth therefore necessarily that if we be not justified by inherent righteousnesse then by Christs righteousnesse alone because a third righteousnesse by which we should bee justified cannot be named § V. Thirdly where wee say that Christs righteousnesse alone which is apprehended by faith alone doth justifie wee doe not meane absolutely that nothing else doth justifie but nothing in that kind viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is the only matter of our justification and faith the onely instrument on our part by which wee are justified For otherwise as hath before beene shewed wee confesse that many things else doe justifie viz. God as the Author and principall efficient of our justification who imputethunto us the righteousnesse of his Son The holy Ghost also doth justifie us by working in us the grace of faith hy which he applyeth Christs righteousnesse unto us The Ministers also doe justifie as the instruments of the holy Ghost both by the ministry of the Gospell by which faith is begotten in us and of the Sacraments whereby the promises of the Gospell are sealed unto us And lastly good workes doe justifie as the signes and evidences whereby our faith and justification is manifested But as the matter nothing doth justifie but Christs righteousnesse and as the instrument on our part nothing but faith And in this sense wee doe constantly affirme that by Christs righteousnesse alone apprehended by faith alone wee are justified § VI. For the demonstration of our assertion I shall not need to bring many new proofes seeing that all those arguments which before I have produced but especially those which concerne the matter and forme of justification doe invincibly prove that wee are justified by the righteousnes of Christ alone being apprehended by faith alone and imputed to them that beleeve For if we be justified by the imputed righteousnesse of Christ alone and if in us there bee nothing which receiveth or maketh us partakers of Christs righteousnesse but faith onely then there is nothing in us by which we are justified but onely faith But because the Papists object heresie and novelty against us in this point I will besides some few places of Scripture and some other reasons briefly propounded produce the testimonies of the Fathers and others who have in all ages lived in the Church before these times § VII First therefore Rom. 3. 24. the word gratis freely being an exclusive particle doth import that we are justified by the grace of God and merits of Christ through faith without righteousnesse in us and therefore by faith alone Secondly Gal. 2. 16. We know that by the workes of the Law that is the righteousnesse and obedience prescribed in the Law in which all inherent righteousnesse is fully and perfectly described a man is not iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no otherwise but by faith non nisi per fidem as Bishop Iustinian or by faith onely as Henry Steven who well understood the Greek translateth it sed tantùm per fidem Thirdly Rom. 4. 5. the exclusive is implyed To him that worketh nor but hath beleeved that is hath onely beleeved in him who justifieth sinners his faith is imputed unto righteousnesse and so the Syriack Paraphrast readeth but hath onely beleeved Fourthly Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. Onely beleeve To this Bellarmine answeareth That Christ speaketh of the miraculous raising of a dead body and not of the justification of a sinner for as for the obtaining of a miraculous cure he confesseth that faith doth suffice alone Thus Bellarmine in that place to serve his present tume But in the seventeenth Chapter of the same booke where hee would prove that faith doth justifie not relatively in respect of the Object but by its owne efficacie hee alleageth that the woman of Canaan procured her daughters health by the efficacie of her faith and rejecteth his owne answere in the other place Neither may it bee answered saith he that it is one thing to speake of justification and another of the curing of a bodily disease For our Lord by the very same words attributeth Vtramque sanitatem the health both of the body and the soule to faith For as he said to the woman who was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so to the woman which had the bloudy issue Mat. 9. 22. thy faith hath saved thee and to the blinde man whom he restored to sight Mar. 10. 52. thy faith hath saved thee And further it is to bee thought that our Saviour when he telleth them whom he cured that their faith had saved them that is himselfe through faith had saved them looked higher than to the cure of their bodies as Mat. 9. 2. sonne be of good cheere thy sinnes are forgiven thee for sinne being the cause of their maladies the Lord to cure them tooke away the cause thereof which was the guilt of sinne § VIII All those places which exclude workes from justification doe by necessary consequence teach justification by faith alone For that we are justified by some righteousnesse is confessed of all This righteousnesse is either the righteousnesse of faith or of workes that is either the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and that is the righteousnesse of God which without the Law is revealed in the Gospell or that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves prescribed in the Law For neither can a third righteousnesse bee named by which we should be justified neither can wee be justified by both
God not that working righteousnesse is the cause to make a man Gods child but an evidence to declare that hee is the child of God For he that is borne of God committeth not sinne 1 Ioh. 3. 9. as a servant of sinne Ioh. 8. 34. and hereby we doe know that we are passed from death to life that is that wee are justified because wee love the brethren 1 Ioh. 3. 14. Hereby the sonnes of God are manifest and the sonnes of the Devill hee that worketh not righteousnesse is not of God nor hee that loveth not his brother vers 10. Hereby saith our Saviour shall men know you to be my disciples if you love one another Ioh. 13. 35. I conclude with Saint Paul Gal. 3. 26. By faith in Iesus Christ hee doth not say by love but by faith yee are hee doth not say yee may bee but yee are all that beleeve the Sonnes of God upon which words as I noted before Thomas Aquinas observeth Faith alone maketh men the adoptive Sonnes of God § X. To these places of Scripture Bellarmine addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who if they speake as Bellarmine citeth them they say nothing but what wee willingly confesse to wit that faith is as Clemens Alexandrinus speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first propension or inclination to salvation that it is as it were the eye of the soule and the Lampe to finde the way to salvation as Cyrill of Hierusalem that it is the light of the soule the dore of life the foundation of salvation as Eâ—…sebius Emissemus that it is the beginning of righteousnesse inherent as Chrysostome that it is the gate and the way unto life as Cyrill of Alexandria that it is the first grace in a Christian as Ambrose that it is the beginning and originall of asâ—…iance and accesse to God as Ierome that wee are made the sonnes of Wisedome the faith of the Mediatour preparing and working it that it is first given and by it the rest that to a Christian the true beginning is to beleeve in Christ that by faith wee obtaine grace and by grace the health of the soule that the house of God whereby is meant the whole oeconomy of our salvation in this life is founded on faith raised by hope and perfected by charity as Augustine That faith is the foundation of righteousnesse which no good workes precede and from which all proceede that it is the foundation of all vertues as Prosper That if faith bee not first begotten in the heart the rest cannot bee good as Gregory All this and more wee affirme concerning faith But although many other graces besides faith are required unto sanctification as forerunners fitting us unto salvation yet none concurre with it to the act of justification And although it be the beginning of sanctification and of all other graces yet it is not onely the beginner but the continuer also of sanctification purifying still the heart and working by love by which we stand by which wee live being by the power of God through faith preserved unto salvation And although it be termed by some the beginning as it is of inherent righteousnesse yet it alone as I shewed before by diuers testimonies of the Fathers sufficeth to justification And therefore by it wee have not a partiall or inchoated but a perfect and plenary justification § XI To these testimonies saith he naturall reason may be added and well may hee call it naturall for there is little art in it and although it bee very simple yet it is double containing two slender proofes The former because faith is the foundation of hope and charity but neither hope nor charity is the foundation of faith For a man may beleeve that which hee neither hopeth for nor loveth but hee cannot hope for or love that which hee doth not beleeve And what then therfore faith is the beginning of other graces And what then therefore it followeth that it doth not sanctifie alone for it is but one among many but it doth not follow that therfore it doth not justifie alone And where hee saith that faith is the foundation of hope and that a man cannot hope for that which he doth not beleeve this overthroweth a maine Doctrine of the Church of Rome maintained by Bellarmine in other places that a man may hope well for the remission of his fins and for his salvation but without speciall revelation he may not beleeve it His second reason hath no soundnesse in it In bodily diseases saith hee the beginning of health is for a man to beleeve that hee is sicke and to beleeve the Physitian that taketh upon him to cure him and yet not that faith alone is entire health Where Bellarmine compareth justification to health recovered from sicknesse to which not justification may bee compared but sanctification For the disease of the soule as well as of the body is not onely a privation or absence of health but also an evill disposition or habit which is cured by the contrary disposition or habit for as the whole body of sinne is cured in some measure by the grace of regeneration or sanctification so the severall members thereof as infidelity by faith despaire by hope hatred by charity pride by humility uncleannesse by chastitie drunkennesse by sobriety c. Secondly he compareth the beleefe of a sicke man beleeving that the Physitian will cure him which is no health at all nor meanes of health but in conceit for many times it proveth otherwise the promise of the Physitian being deceiveable and the event uncertaine to the faith of an humbled sinner grounded on the infallible promises of God which are alwayes performed to them that beleeve CAP. XI Of Feare and Hope being his second and third dispositions § I. HIs second disposition is feare which he proveth to dispose unto justification and to concurre thereuntn in the same manner almost as faith doth But first this discourse is impertinent For we deny and our deniall we have made good that justâ—…ying faith doth not justifie by way of disposing And therefore if it be proved that feare doth dispose a man to justification yet that doth not disprove justification by faith alone For we have confessed that ordinarily in adultis there are preparative dispositions going before faith and justification whereof feare is one But these preparatives doe not justifie and therefore for all them faith may and indeed doth justifie alone Secondly you are to understand that this feare which goeth before grace is no grace neither is it that sonne-like feare which is the daughter of faith and love but the servile feare as he confesseth which is an effect and fruit of the Law working on those who are under the Law and keeping them in some order for feare of the whippe Neither is it properly timor Dei the feare of God but metus supplicii the object whereof
and perfect love expelleth this feare 1 Iohn 4. 18. But though without the true feare of God we cannot please him yet that doth not prove that feare doth justifie For the like may be said of the obedience of the Law of humility of charity of repentance of perseverance Heb. 10. 38. and of the like Neither doth faith justifie because without it no man can please God but because by it alone wee receive Christ in whom God is well pleased and reconciled unto us that is because by it alone wee are justified Secondly because as faith is the beginning of justice so seare is the beginning of wisedome Answ. of this comparison neither part is to be understood of justification but of sanctification or righteousnesse inherent For as faith is the mother of grace of all both internall graces and also of externall obedience so the true sonne-like feare of God is a principall part of true piety But what doth this make for servile feare which is found in them who have no grace Thirdly because as faith doth justifie by making us seeke God and to come unto him so also feare Answ. If by seeking of God be meant the worship of God then that which causeth it is the cause of sanctification But servile feare in it selfe serveth rather to drive men from God though in the gracious dispensation of Gods providence it be made sometimes a meanes to draw them to him And this he proveth by Psal. 78. 34. when he he slew them they sought him and Psalm 83. 16. fill their faces with shame and they shall seeke thy name and Ion. 3. 5. from the example of the Ninivitâ—…s The thing I consesse that by servile feare men are often times forced to seeke God how beit that which is forced many times is fained as we see in the example of the Israelites Psal. 78. 36. who though by the judgements of God were brought to make semblance of repentance yet they did but dissemble for their hart was not upright with God neither were they stedfast in his covenant vers 37. But his proofes I allow not For the first place speaketh of Gods judgments the second of shame the third of the faith of the Ninivites none of feare Fourthly because as by faith Christ is formed in us so by feare the protasis he proveth because Paul saith Gal. 4. 19. my little children of whom I travell in birth againe untill Christ be formed in you But Christ is not formed in us by justification but by regeneration whereby we are renewed according to his image the apâ—…dosis because Esay saith C. 26. 18. according to the Septuagint from thy feare we have conceived and have brought forth the Spirit of Salvation But why doth hee flee from the Latine translation unto which hee is bound which maketh no mention of feare but onely saith we have conceived and have brought forth the Spirit of health as some editions read which last words are not read together in the Greeke nor in the true editions of the Latine but divided by a note of distinction peperimus Spiritum salutes non fecimns Thus Bellarmine for his owne advantage eiteth the fomer part out of the Septuagint and the later out of the vulgar Latine and that corrupted when neither of both agreeth with the originall From which if Bellarmine would argue he should make himselfe very ridiculous The words are we have conceived we have travailed we have as it were brought forth wind so Pagninus Vatablus Tremellius c. Salutes non fecimus in terra no salvations have we wrought on the earth which words being a complaint cannot import that they had from the feare of God which is not here mentioned brought forth the Spirit of salvation So farre is this place from proving that Christ by feare is formed in us Fifthly as faith doth justifie because the just man shall live by his faith Hab. 2. 4. so of feare it is written that the feare of the Lord is the fountaine of life Prov. 14. 27. Answ. The former place speaketh both of the life of grace which is our vivification and the life of glory to which wee are intitled by faith The latter as I have shewed speaketh of sonne-like feare which as all other habits of grace may bee called fountaines of living well which all arise from one common spring which is faith and are all not causes and much lesse preparations but fruits of faith and consequents of justification Sixthly as faith doth justifie by purging of sinnes so feare Answ. To the proposition Faith doth justifie by absolving from sins Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 25. and removing the guilt And it purgeth also from the corruptions by sanctifying and purifying the heart Act. 15. 9. To the reddiction that feare which expelleth sinne Eccles. 1. is as I have shewed the feare of sonnes and not of slaves neither doth it concurre to justification but to sanctification § V. To the testimonies of the Fathers affirming some of them that feare serveth to prepare and to dispose men to sanctification and likewise to his reason that it is the nature osfeare to flee from evill and to seeke remedies whereby evill may be avoided I willingly subscribe But though feare be one meanes among many to dispose or prepare men for sanctification or yet for justification yet neither it nor any of the rest doth justifie and therefore doth not disprove justification by faith alone Legall faith working feare is a preparative to the Evangelicall justifying faith but is so farre it selfe from justifying that it pronounceth accursed those that are endued therewith § VI. His third disposition is Hope which he saith ariseth of faith no otherwise than feare doth But yet by his leave with this difference that servile feare is the fruit of a legall faith applying the threatnings of the Law to a mans selfe but hope of salvation is the fruit of Evangelicall faith apprehending the promises of the Gospell and is therefore called the hope of the Gospell Col. 1. 23. Neither can there be any sound hope of eternall life untill a man doth truely beleeve that the promise of salvation doth belong unto him and that he cannot beleeve untill he have the condition of the promise which is justifying faith and therefore of necessity justifying goeth before hope As for that hope which goeth before justifying faith it is evident that it doth not justifie neither is it an habit of grace infused but a naturall affection such as is in all men who attempt any thing As the Apostle saith he that ploweth ploweth in hope and hee that thresheth thresheth in hope Although therefore this hope doe dispose men to justification and sanctification as after a sort it doth in animating of men to use the meanes of grace and salvation in hope that their labour shall not bee in vaine yet for all this hope which doth not justifie at all faith doth justifie alone § VII But let us examine his proofes
which are a few testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers impertinentâ—…y alleaged His first testimony is Prov. 28. 25. qui sperat in Domino sanabitur The second Psal. 37. 40. Salvabit eos quia speraverunt in eo The third Psal. 91. 14. quoniam in me speravit liberabo eum Answ. None of these three places doe speake either of justification or preparation thereunto nor of hope otherwise than as it is included in affiance which as it hath reference to the future time is all one with hope nor of hope or affiance as it goeth before but as it followeth justifying faith what therefore could be more impertinently alleaged The first place according to the originall is but he that trusteth in the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be made fat The Latine in the next verse translateth the same words thus qui confidit and the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second Psalm 37. 40. the word chasah is translated sometimes confidere to trust sometimes and as I take it in that place onely sperare to hope in the same sense of affiance those that thus trust or hope in God he delivereth them from the wicked and saveth them But before they can either be saved or trust in God they must be justified by faith And therefore this hope or affâ—…ance is no forerunner of justification but a follower thereof The third Psalm 91. 14. the Hebrew chashak which by some is translated sperare by others valde or vehementer amare amore in aliquem propendere and might better have beene alleaged for love than for hope both which are consequents of justifying faith The words then are because he hath set his love upon me therefore I will deliver him he doth not say I will justifie him But let us heare Bellarmines commenting upon this place the Hebrew word saith he doth signifie to adhere to love to please therefore not every hope but that affiance which proceedeth out of a good conscience and out of Love and filiall adhering to God doth deliver a man c. § VIII His fourth testimony Matth. 9. 2. confide fili have a good heart sonne so the Rhemists translate thy sinnes are forgiven thee For our Lord faith Bellarmine did not as some falsely teach justifie the man who had the palsey before he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be of good courage my sonne but contrariwise as the Councell of Trent very learnedly signifieth first he saith be confident my sonne and when he saw him raised up in hope of health hee added thy sinnes remittuntur tibi are forgiven thee Whereby Bellarmine would signifie that by this hope or affiance the man was prepared for justification Answ. First the party and those that brought him had faith as all the three Evangelists note Matth. 9. 2. Mark 2. 5. Luk. 5. 20. and therefore was justified before God for if they who brought him had faith much more he who no doubt desired them to bring him and had already his sins forgiven Secondly the Verbe is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the time past and ought to be translated not as Bellarm. readeth remittuntur are now forgiven or in forgiving but remissasunt they are already forgiven And by that argument our Saviour putteth him in comfort that hee should be cured because his sinnes which were the meritorious cause of his sicknesse were forgiven By which glad tydings hee would have him to be assured by speciall saith of the remission of his sinnes and in that assurance to be confident So that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confident were uttered first yet the words following containe the cause of that confidence And therefore not onely remission of sinnes but assurance thereof by speciall revelation went before his confidence which therefore could be no preparative disposition thereunto And this is usuall in such consolations first to bid the party to be confident or not to feare and then to set downe the cause thereof as Genes 15. 1. Feare not Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Esai 43. 1. Feare not Israel for I have redeemed thee In the same ninth of Matthew verse 22. Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole Luk. 1. 30. Feare not Mary for thou hast found grace or favour with God Luk. 2. 10. Feare not for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy and so in other places And these were his testimonies of Scriptures in which he hath found no releefe § IX Let us see what helpe the Fathers will afford him No man saith Ambrose can well repent him of his sinnes who doth not hope for pardon Answ. Hope of pardon is a motive to repentance and to the use of other good meanes whereby wee may through Gods grace attaine both to justification and to sanctification Howbeit repentance belongeth to sanctification and not to justification Augustine whatsoever thou declarest so declare it that hee to whom thou speakest by hearing may beleeve by beleeving may hope by hoping may love From whence nothing can be gathered but that as faith by which we are justified commeth by the hearing of the word as the Apostle also teacheth so from faith proceedeth hope and from both faith and hope love So that here hope which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification is made a disposition not to justification but to love Cyprian to those who had fallen in time of persecution giveth this advice that they should acknowledge their grievous crime neither despairing of the Lords mercy nor as yet challenging pardon viz. untill they had truely repented thereof which was indeed wholesome counsell For no man can be assured of the pardon of any crime untill he have truly repented of it Vpon which words of Cyprian Bel. larmine though he can gather nothing out of them for his purpose but that those who desire pardon must not despaire of Gods mercy yet as a notable bragger he insulteth over us as if he had us at some advantage when God knoweth hee hath scarce brought any thing worth the answering By which words saith he our adversaries are plainely refuted who begin not to repent before they are fully assured that they are highly in Gods favour and are confident that they are to be ranked with the Cherubin and Seraphin which is an impudent and yet a witlesse slander as though wee were either so arrogant as the Papists who assume to themselves perfection which we doe not or so senselesse that we should teach that men are tyed to begin their repentance when they have attained to perfection and not till then If it be said that wee make repentance to be the fruit of faith which we define to be a full assurance of Gods favour c. I answere that that definition agreeth onely to speciall faith Not that all speciall faith is a full assurance but that every virtue is to be defined
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
condition of faith See Act. 8. 37. 10. 43. 13. 38 39. Ro. 4. 5. Gal. 2. 16. and so every where Before the incarnation of Christ it was the good pleasure of God by faith onely to justifie the faithfull as Bellarmine himselfe hath confessed And doth he require any other condition of us are not we justified as they were By his knowledge that is by faith in him my righteous servant shall justifie many Yea but the Scriptures saith Bellarmine much more plainely exact the condition of Penance and of the Sacraments to justification than of faith as Ezek. 18. 27. The wicked if hee repent of his sinnes shall live Luk. 13. 4. unlesse yee repent ye shall likewise perish Ioh. 3. 5. unlesse a man be borne a-new of water and the holy Ghost he shall not enter into the Kingdome of God Answ. Many things are required to salvation which are not required to justification which as they be necessary forerunners of glorification so are they the fruits of faith and consequents of justification viz. repentance and newnesse of life which is the thing mentioned in these places Againe happinesse which consisteth partly in justification or remission of sinnes which is beatitudo viae and partly in eternall life which is beatitudo patriâ—… is oftentimes attributed to those things which are not the causes of happines but the notes and markes of them that be happy There is but one happinesse properly and that is to be in Christ who is eternall life whom whosoever hath hath eternall life Of this happinesse Christ alone is the foundation and the cause and faith the instrument of our union and communion with Christ. All other virtues and graces are but the fruits and consequently the signes and markes of faith or of our being in Christ by faith And therefore are not so many beatitudes though they are blessed that have them but so many notes of one and the same happinesse It is true that if we be sorry for our sinnes because by them we have displeased him who hath been so gracious a God unto us if we confesse them crave pardon for them and forsake them all which are duties of repentance the Lord hath promised to forgive them And yet these are not causes of our justification before God but fruits of faith by which we come to be justified in our owne conscience By faith we obtaine remission of sinnes and by these duties of repentance which are the fruits of justifying faith we attaine to the assurance of it That prayer which somuch prevaileth with God is the prayer of faith That repentance which is to life is caused by faith without which it is impossible to please God and therefore the Disciples when they understood that the Gentiles were brought to beleeve in Christ conclude that God had given them repentance unto life Act. 11. 18. As for the Sacraments the justification which is assigned to them doth not hinder justification by faith onely but serveth to seale and to assure it § VI. The third cause or reason proving that faith doth justifie alone is because it is the property of faith to apprehend and to apply the promise of justification to our selves For the clearing whereof I desire the reader to call to minde what hath beene said concerning the two degrees of justifying faith For by the former wee apprehend receive and embrace Christ who is our righteousnesse offered in the promises of the Gospell to our justification before God By the other wee apply the promises of the Gospell to our selves that we may be justified in our owne consciences Both which actions of receiving and applying the promises to our â—…elves cannot be ascribed to any other grace but are proper to faith onely To this argument Bellarmine shapeth two answeres the former whereof is a meere cavill at the word apprehension which wee make proper to faith as if by apprehending we did meane the first act of the understanding when it conceiveth the object But this point I cleared before in the first question concerning the nature of faith where I shewed that this apprehension whereof Bellarmine speaketh goeth before all judgement of the minde And that the understanding having first conceived and apprehended the object judgeth of it either by withholding the assent if it be doubtfull which is called doubting or by giving assent either weakely which is opinion or firmely which is knowledge this firme assent or knowledge is grounded either upon the evidence of the thing which is either manifest in it selfe and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cleare intelligence or manifested by discourse which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or science or else the thing being not evident either to sense or reason upon the infallible authority of God speaking in his word which is Faith By this beleefe we receive Christ not onely in our judgements by assent but also if this assent be lively and effectuall we receive embrace and lay hold upon him as our Saviour with all our soules acknowledging him in our judgements in our hearts desiring to bee made partakers of him in our wils resolving to professe him to bee our Saviour and to obey him as our Lord c. § VII This is the apprehension whereof we speake and which is peculiar to faiâ—… as it is evident Be it saith Bellarmine that justification after a sort is apprehended by faith Surely it is not so apprehended that indeed it is had and doth inhere but onely that it is in the minde after the manner of an object apprehended by an action of the understanding and will and so saith he love and joy apprehend In these things Bellarmine sheweth himselfe to be a diviner rather than a divine we doe not say that in our justification before God justification is apprehended by faith but the righteousnesse of Christ unto justification And that this righteousnesse of Christ though not inherent in us is as truely and really made ours by imputation as our sinnes though not inherent in him were made his when he truely and really suffered for them By this hand of faith we receive Christ Ioh. 1. 12. by it we receive and embrace the promises Heb. 11. 16. by it we receive remission of sinnes Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. By this mouth as it were of the soule we eate the body of Christ and drinke his bloud That which hee speaketh of justification being in the minde after the manner of an object apprehended by an action of the understanding and the will may in some sort be verified of the apprehension of speciall faith applying justification to the beleever But to say that after this manner love and joy apprehend it is against sense For faith apprehendeth it by a perswasion yea by a firme perswasion upon which follow love and joy not apprehending but loving and rejoycing at that which faith doth apprehend But these two are not incident unto a Papist who
From whence I have also demonstrated the truth of this assertion that we are justified by faith alone that is by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended onely by Faith A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE SEVENTH BOOKE Concerning good Workes CAHP. I. To avoid Popish calumniations it is shewed that we doe hold the necessity of good works and doe urge the same by better arguments than the Popish religion doth afford § I. AS touching his last argument which he bringeth to prove that faith doth not justifie alone drawne from the necessity of good works I am now to treat For this is the sixth capitall Errour of the Papists in the controversie of justification in that they stiffely hold that good workes are necessarily required unto justification as causes thereof and to salvation as the merit thereof But before I dispute the question I am to meet with some calumniations of the Papists The first that wee by denying the necessity of good workes as being neither causes of justification nor merits of Salvation doe disâ—…ourage the people from wel doing and by teaching that by saith alone we are justified and saved doe animate and encourage them to the practise of all sinne and iniquity I answere that we doe not deny the necessity of good workes and that wâ—… use better arguments to deter the people from sin and to encourage them to well doing than the Papists by their doctrine can doe For to teach men to do good works with an opinion either of satisfaction propitiation or of merits which are the three chiefe arguments of the Papists that they are satisfactory propitiatory and meritorious is to teach men to mar good works rather than to make them Because a good work undertaken with an opinion either of satisfaction or justification by them or of merit though otherwise it were good becomes abominable unto God as derâ—…gating from â—…he alone and al-sufficient merit and satisfaction of Christ. Neither can they encourage men to well doing by these arguments that by their good workes they are justified and for them shall be saved whiles tâ—…eir conscience must needs tell them that besides the guilt of their manifold sinnes their good workes are impure and that they can merit nothing at the hands of God but punishment These therefore who have just cause to doubt or rather to despaire of justification by their workes and of salvation by their merits cannot by these arguments receive true encouragement to well doing but rather discouragement there from But although wee deny good workes to be either causes of justification or merits of Salvation yet we affirme them to be not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good and profitable but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessary The which I will shew to prevent both the malitious slanders of the Papists and also the prophane abuse of carnall Gospellers who turne the grace of God into wantonnesse Good I say as being commended and commanded of God and therefore to be ensued Phil. 4. 8. Rom. 12. 17. Psalm 34. 13. Profitable as being rewaâ—…ded both beatitudine vice with the blessednesse of this life and beatitudine patriae with the blessednesse of the life to come 1 Tim. 4. 8. § II. Necessary though not necessitate efficientiae as causes yet necessitate presentiae as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary antecedents of glorification They are necessary I say by a necessity not onely privative if I may so speake but also positive Privative because without them the profession of faith is not onely vaine and unprofitable but also hurtfull and pernicious Vaine because such a â—…aith is dead and counterâ—…eit justifying neither alone nor at all Hurtfull because being planted in the vineyard of God that wee might become trees of righteousnesse if we bring not foorth good fruit wee must looke to be cut downe or stocked up or like the figtree which having greene leaves but no fruit Christ accursed Such professours are like the barren ground which receiving the raine often falling upon it and bringiâ—…g forth thornes and bryars is rejected and nigh unto cursing whose end is to be burned Like to the foolish Virgins who having a lampe of an externall profession but wanting the oyle of saving grace when the Bridegroome commeth are to be shut out Like the chaffe in the floore which is to be winnowed from the wheat Like goates in Christs flocke which are to bee separated from the sheepe Like bondservants in Gods house which are not there to abide but with the bondwoman and her sonne are to bee cast out who having a formall profession of religion but denying the power of it which is the faith of hypocrits must looke to have their portion with hypocrits where is weeping and gnashing of teeth § III. They are necessary also by a positive necessity and that manifold As first by the necessity of infallibility in respect of Gods Decree Word Oath In respect of of his decree For whom God hath predestinated to salvation hee hath predestinated unto sanctification that they may be conformable to the image of his Sonne And therefore whosoever doth hope to become like unto Christ in glory he must endeavour in some measure to resemble him in grace We exhort therefore our hearers that they doe not abase the doctrine of predestination with those who were called predestinatiani as to thinke that either because they suppose they are elected they shall be saved howsoever they live or because they thinke that they are not elected they cannot be saved though they should live never so godly as if godlinesse if they be elect were needlesse or if not bootlesse But forbearing to prye into Gods secret counsels which are to be adored and not searched into to have recourse to Gods word For the secret things belong unto the Lord our God but the revealed things to us that wee may doe them For there we shall finde these two things first that where God hath ordained the end hee hath also ordained the meanes And therefore as it is necessary that the end should be accomplished because decreed by God so it is as necessary in respect of the same decree that the end should be atchieved by the same meanes which God hath preordained Now whom God hath elected them he calleth whom he calleth according to his purpose them he justifieth by faith whom hee justifieth by faith them he sanctifieth by his Spirit whom hee calleth justifieth and sanctifieth them and no other he glorifieth Therefore as it is necessary in respect of Gods decree that those who are elected shall be saved so it is as necessâ—…ry in respect of the same decree that they should attaine to salvation by these degrees that is first they must be called and converted unto God they must bee justified by a true faith they must in some measure be sanctified by the holy Spirit
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ—… it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good â—…orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriâ—…us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiâ—…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ—… in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righâ—…eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils â—…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
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
either godly sorrow or repentance doth worke salvation But the Apostle saith that godly sorrow worketh repentance even such repentance as is a forerunner unto salvation or as the faithfull speake Act. 11. 18. That God had given the Gentiles repentance unto life and therefore such a repentance as was not to bee repented of For the Apostle seemeth to have relation unto his owne words verse 8. that he had repented that hee had made them sorry But when hee understood that their sorrow had brought forth in them repentance he did not repent thereof Repentance therefore which is unto salvation is indeed a necessary and undoubted forerunner of salvation and salvation a certaice consequent of repentance necessary I say because without it a sinner cannot bee saved Luke 13. 3. Undoubted because to whom God hath given grace truely to repent it is an infallible token that such an one shall be saved Acts 11. 18. but a cause of salvation it is not neither can bee unlesse hee meane Causa sine qua non § VII His fifth Testimony 2 Cor. 4. 17. For that our tribulation which presently is momentany and light worketh above measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in us What could bee spoken more plainely If patience in tribulation doth worke a weight of eternall glory who can deny but that there is some relation betweene patience and salvation Vnlesse perhaps to worke salvation be not to worke something or that upon the working there followeth no relation Answ. If the Apostle had said that patience in affliction doth worke an eternall weight of glory hee might from thence have had some colour that patience hath a relation of efficiency to salvation and yet but a colour But when the Apostle doth not once mention patience how could hee bee so confident as to aske what could bee spoken more plainely The Apostle speaketh of affliction both light and momentany and saith that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh unto us an eternall weight of glory Here then wee are to consider in what sence affliction which in it selfe is evill and miserable should worke glory and happinesse being light should worke that which is most ponderous being momentany should worke that which is eternall whether as a cause properly and in it owne nature causing or working or as an occasion which besides or rather contrary to it owne nature which is evill is to us sanctified of God to be a meanes and occasion of our so great good And to this purpose let us consult with other places of holy Scripture as Rom. 5. 3 4. and Iam. 1. 12. In the former place the Apostle saith wee rejoyce in afflictions knowing that affliction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh patience and so Saint Iames 1. 3. Not that affliction in it selfe worketh patience but rather the contrary as appeareth in men unregenerate whom it maketh to murmure and sometimes to blaspheme God which the Divell by experience well knew when hee moved God to â—…fflict Iob Chap. 1. 11. 2. 5. Doe but touch all that he hath saith he and againe touch his bone and his flesh and hee will curse thee to thy face But afflictions are said to worke patience in the faithfull because the holy Ghost sanctifieth their afflictions to them and excercising them thereby worketh in them patience and what followeth Patience worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 probation that is as I have formerly expounded it maketh him that by affliction is tryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not that patience maketh him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that by patient bearing of affliction hee is found and knowne to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a sound approved and upright Christian. For therefore God sendeth tryals of all sorts that those who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bee knowne Now when men have beene by patient bearing of afflictions found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are crowned with eternall life as Saint Iames saith Chap. 1. 12. Blessed is the man who patiently beareth temptation that is affliction for when hee shall bee found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee shall receive the Crowne of life which the Lord hath promised to them that love him The meaning therefore of this place is neither that affliction causeth patience nor patience salvation but that when the godly are afflicted the holy Ghost by affliction where with they are exercised worketh patience in them and patience worketh probation because by patience when they are tryed they are knowne to bee sound and approved and probation worketh hope of salvation For when upon try all men are found to bee approved they shall receive the Crowne of life which God hath freely promised to give them And it is to be observed that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is translated to worke is given not onely to causes but also to occasions And therefore in such places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie it occasioneth as when it it said Rom. 4. 15. the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh anger § VIII His sixth Testimony Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall live whence hee would prove That the mortification of carnall concâ—…piscence is necessary to salvation as a condition and cause and therefore hath relation to salvation from the conditionall particle If and from the antithesis of the words going before if you live according to the flesh you shall die Answ. The conditionall particle used in conditionall or connexive propositions alwayes pretendeth a necessity of consequence insomuch that the connexion if it bee not necessary is not absolutely true but the necessity of efficiency it implyeth none And as for the necessity of consequence that ariseth not onely from causes but from all other arguments And whereas from the Antithesis hee would prove that as to live according to the flesh causeth death so to mortifie the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit causeth life I answere that in both the parts the connexion or consequence is equally that is necessarily true for if it were not necessary it were not absolutely true but it is absolutely true because of the authority of the Scriptures which are infallible which is sufficient to make good the Antithesis But hence it followeth not that the condition of either part should be taken from the same arguments seeing it may bee taken from any other This sufficeth for the Antithesis that if by the Spiriâ—… ye mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall live but if you live according to the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall dye therefore though the condition of the latter part bee the cause of the consequent yet it is not so in the former for sinne is the meritorious cause of damnation but our obedience being a duety and yet but unperfect cannot merit salvation A servant not doing his duety but the contrary is punished A
mainetaine the contradictory of our assertion and maketh the question to be this whether by good workes men are justified that is to say made more just viz. in respect of righteousnesse inherent But we deny that there are any degrees of justification or that a man may be more justified or that justification doth ever signifie increase of righteousnesse wee reject their new found distinction of justification into the first and second and acknowledge no other justification but that which in the Scriptures and Fathers is called the justification of a sinner and thereby wee understand a continued act of God who as when we being sinners did first beleeve did justifie us so remaining sinners in our selves he doth still justifie us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse acquitting us from our sinnes and accepting of us as righteous in Christ. And this justification which is onely acknowledged by the Scriptures and Fathers is every where ascribed to faith Whereas the first justification of the Papists is ascribed to charity as the onely forme the second to workes as to the merit thereof But all this ariseth from their erroneous and wilfull confounding of justification and sanctification For their first justification is that which the Scriptures call regeneration and is the first act of Sanctification by which we are habitually sanctified for they make it to be nothing else but the infusion of the habits of grace Their second justification is their actuall fanctification or exercise of good workes whereby their inherent righteousnesse or sanctification is increased But the question is not of sanctification but of justification which the Papists by their wicked doctrine confounding it with sanctification have wholly abolished it being the maine benefit of the Messias by which we are both freed from hell and entitled to heaven Neither is the question understood of justification before men but before God For before men we doe confessâ—… that by good workes men are justified that is declared and knownâ—… to be just as by the fruits effects consequents and signes of justification by faith but before God we are not justified that is made or constituted just by workâ—…s as any cause thereof for good workes goe not before justification but follow after which is a plaine evidence that they are no cause of it § II. But let us examine his proofes the first and principall is out of Iames 2. which being the onely place of Scripture whereupon with any shew of probability they ground their doctrine of justification by workes I will not content my selfe to answere Bellarmines cavils alone but I will endevour to stop the mouthes of all the Papists who use to vaunt of this place especially of the 24. verse where they bragge that their assertion is expressed and ours confuted in plaine termes yee see then that a man is justified by workes and not by saith onely Which words are a consectary or conclusion deduced from the example of Abraham who though he were justified by faith without works as Saint Paul teacheth yet was hee also justified by workes and not by faith onely as Saint Iames affirmeth A conclusion therefore in shew of words contradictory to that of the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. 28. wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law and Gal. 2. 16. we know that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is but onely by faith which no doubt was the Apostles meaning For as I have shewed heretofore if this be a good disjunction that we are justified either by faith or by works that is either by the righteousnes of Christ which is out of us in him apprehended by faith or by the works of the Law that is by righteousnes inherent in our selves all which is prescribed in the Law as undoubtedly it is for a third thing cannot be named whereby we might be justified and by both we cannot for if by faith then of grace and if of grace then not of works and contrary wise Rom. 4. 4 5. 11. 6. then it followeth necessarily that if we are not justified by workes we are justified by faith alone Hence ariseth this great controversie between the true Catholiks and the Papists we affirming that we are justified by faith without works or by faith alone The Papists contending that wee are justified by workes and not by faith only we alleaging the authority of Saint Paul in his Epistles to the â—…omanes Galatians Ephesians the Papists this Testimony of Saint Iames. § III. The way to determine this weighty Controversie is to reconcile the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles Some a when they were not able to untye this Gordian knot have sought with Alexander to cut it by questioning without just cause the authority of that Epistle of Saint Iames. But the Papists and wee are thus farre agreed First as they doe not deny those Epistles of S. Paul which were never questioned so we acknowledge this of Saint Iames though it hath beene questioned to bee canonicall Secondly that the two Apostles acted by the same Spirit of truth in penning their Epistles could not possibly deliver contrary assertions and consequently that they onely are to bee esteemed to hold the truth who fitly reconciling the seeming variance betweene the two Apostles doe teach that doctrine which is agreeable to both Here then I am to demonstrate both against the Papists and for our selves against the Papists three things First that the doctrine which they ground upon this place of Saint Iames is contrary to that of Saint Paul Secondly that their exposition of Saint Iames they make him contradict the Apostle Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot be grounded upon this Text. For our selves two things First that by our exposition the two Apostles are easily reconciled Secondly that the assertion of the two Apostles according to our doctrine not onely may well stand together but also of necessity must goe together For the first wee have the same controversie with the Papists as I have noted before which the Apostle maintayned against the justiciaryes of his time And their opposite doctrine to Saint Paul which they would gladly father upon Saint Iames standeth in those six maine errours which I have plainely and fully confuted in this treatise And namely in this particular they affirming that men are justified by workes which the Apostle every were constantly denyeth To the second whiles they understand the two Apostles to speake in the same sense of faith of workes of justifying as namely that both speake of a true justifying faith of workes as causes of justification of justifying as making just by righteousnesse inherent they make the one directly to contradict the other For if Paul affirme that men are justified by a true faith without workes and Iames deny it If Paul deny that we are justified by workes as the causes of justification and Iames affirme it If Paul deny that wee are
Abraham was that is by them as by fruites and effects hee is declared and approved to bee just and not by faith professed onely Hee doth not say a man is justified by workes as causes but as the effects For that and not the other is deduced from the example of Abraham § XIII The other example is of Rahab Verse 25. For though you may thinke that you need not compare with Abraham and yet have a true justifying faith yet you will bee ashamed to bee behinde Rahab the harlot who was no sooner justified before God by faith but she was also justifyed that is declared and knowne to bee just by her worke of charity towards the Espyes which shee wrought by faith Heb. 11. 31. Concerning this example of Rahab Bellarmine hath foure Assertions of which never an one agreeth with another First That Rahab was not declared to bee just because shee was an harlot which is false For though shee had beene an harlot yet now she beleeved and by her faith was justifyed before God and by her worke which shee wrought by faith was justified as Saint Iames saith that is declared to bee just Secondly That Iames briâ—…geth the example of Rahab to prove that by good workes a righteous person is made more righteous which also is false and contrary to his former Assertion Thirdly That by this worke of mercy shee was truely justified and of a sinner made just But Rahab as Bellarâ—…ine saith was an example of the first justification and therefore of a sinner not made just by her worke but by the habit of grace infused The trueth is by faith shee was justifyed before God and by her worke shee was declared to bee just before men Fourthly That by that worke as a disposition she was prepared unto justificaâ—…ion Which agreeth neither with his third where he said that by this worke shee was truely justifyed and of a sinner made just nor with Saint â—…mes whose meaning plainely is not that shee was prepared unto justification by this worke no more than Abraham was by his but that she was declared by this worke as a fruite of her faith and a consequent of her justification as Abraham was by his workes to be justifyed before God And thus much of the two examples § XIV There remaâ—…eth his fifth Argument which is a similitude Verse 26. For as the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes or that faith which is without workes is dead which words also may bee two wayes expounded For either the Apostle Iames speaketh of the habit of faith or of the profession of it If of the habit then the comparison standeth thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is without breath which is the prime signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to breathe in which sense it is called the spirit of the mouth and spirit of the nostrils I say as the body without breath is dead so that saith which is without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is judged to be dead For as Bernâ—…rd also saith As we discerne the life of this body by its motion so the life of faith by workes If therefore faith it selfe be here meant wee must by Spirit understand breath and not the soule For although the Papists absurdly make charity which is a fruite of faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. to be the forme of it yet me thinkes they cannot bee so absurd as to compare faith to the body and workes to the soule as though workes which are the fruites and effects both of faith and of charity were the forme and as it were the soule of faith If by faith we understand faith professed or the profession of faith as in this discouse hitherto it hath beene used and as it is used elsewhere as Act. 14. 22. Râ—…m 1. 8. then you may understand the similiâ—…de thus As the body of man without the Spirit that is the â—…oule is dead so the profession of faith without a godly life which is as it were the life and â—…oule of our profeâ—…on is also dead For hypocrites whose life is not conformable to their profession though they have a â—…ame that they live yet they are dead Apâ—…c 3. 1. Thus by five arguments Saint Iâ—…mes hath proved that the faith which is alone and without workes is not a true and a lively but a dead and counterfeit faith and yet 〈◊〉 both here and Lib. 1. dâ—… justif cap. 15. will needs have Saint â—…ames to speake of a true faith as if he supposed that a true faith might be without workes Therefore the Popish Doctrine of justification by workes as causes thereof cannot be grounded on this Tâ—…xt of Saint Iames. § XV. Yea but will some say the contradiction is not yet salved For Saint Paul affirmeth as you say that faith alone doth justify and Saint Iames in plaine termes denyeth that a man is justifyed by faith onely I answere when we say that faith onely doth justify we doe not meane absolutely that nothing doth justify but faith in no sense whatsoever For many things may truely bee said to justify aliâ—… atque aliâ—… sensu in divers senses as I have shewed heretofore God the Father as the prime efficient Christ as the meritorious cause God as the Iudge Christ as the Advocate God as the Creditour Christ as the Surety The grace of God as the moving cause the righteousnes of Christ as the matter the imputation thereof as the forme the holy Ghost as the applying cause the Word and Sacraments as the instruments of the holy Ghost Faith as the hand of the receiver works as testimonies and signes c. but our meaning is that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which is apprehended by faith alone and that in us nothing doth concurre to the act of justification but faith alone it being the onely instrument whereby wee receive Christ. And thus have you heard what is to be alleaged against the Papists First that their doctrine concerning justification by workes which they would build upon this Text is repugnant to the Scriptures Secondly that by their exposition they make Saint Iâ—…mes to contradict Saint Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot bee grounded on this Text. § XVI Now for our selves I will shew that by our exposition the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles is manifestly reconciled and that by our Doctrine their Assertions not oâ—…ely may well stand together but also must necessarily goe together The reconciliation is easily made if we consider two things first the diversity of the Parties with whom the two Apostles had to deale For the Apostle Paul having to deale with Pharisaicall Iustitiaries who sought to bee justified by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves and by an obedience performed by themselves proveth by invincible arguments that a man is justified by faith without
workes Saint Iames having to deale with carnall Gospellers vaine men turning the grace of God into wantonnesse who having heard that faith doth justifie without workes did cast off all care of good workes thinking it sufficient to professe themselves to beleeve though their life were dissolute Against these Saint Iames proveth that vaine is the profession of faith without good works â—… that the faith which is without works is not a true liuely justifying faith but a dead and counterfeit faith that whosoever is justified before God by faith must also be justified that is declared and approved to bee just not onely by profession of his faith but also by the practise of good workes Wherefore in this respect there is no more difference betweene the two Apostles Paul and Iames than betweene Lâ—…ther and us who are Preachers of the Gospell at this day For as Luther having to deale with Popish justitiaâ—…ies who taught justification by workes urgeth most zelously justification by faith alone and in the question of justification after the example of Saint Paul speaketh contemptuously of workes so we having to dâ—…le with Libertines and carnall gospellers insisting in the steppes of Saint Iames urge the necessity of good workes § XVII Secondly wee are to consider the divers acceptions of the words faith workes justifie in the writings of the two Apostles Paul speaking of a true lively faith which worketh by love saith in effect that faith alone doth justifie Iames speaking of the faith of hypocrits which is in profession only sâ—…vered from the grace of sanctification and destitute of good workes â—…aith that such a faith doth neither justifie alone nor at all as being not a true but a dead and counterfeit faith Paul speaking of the câ—…uses of justification before God denyeth workes to concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof Iames speaking of the effects and â—…ignes of justificatiâ—…n whereby it may beâ—… knowne affirmeth that workes must concurre in the parties justified that by them our faith may be demonstrated â—…nd our justification manifested Paul therefore rejecteth workes obtruded as causes of justification Iames urgeth thâ—…m as effects and signes thereof Paul speaking of Iustification in the proper sense as it signifieth that gracioâ—…s action of God whereby wee are made or constituted just affirmeth that wee are justified by faith without workes Iames speaking of thâ—…t justificâ—…tion whereby we are not mâ—…de just before God but declared and 〈◊〉 to God our 〈◊〉 and our conscience to bee just and indued with a true faith 〈◊〉 that we are so justified not onely by the profession of faith but also by good workes Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very well stand together For although it be most true which Saint Paul affirmeth that true faith doth just fie alone yet it is 〈◊〉 true which Saint Iames faith that the faith which is alone doth not justifie neither â—…lone nor at all because it is not 〈◊〉 true and a lively but a 〈◊〉 and dead faith For 〈◊〉 the living eye though it see alone yet is not alone so a liuely fâ—…ith though it justifie alone yet never iâ—… alone though it justifie without workes yet it is not without workâ—…s Though good workes doe not 〈◊〉 to the act of justification aâ—… any cause therâ—…of according to Saint Pauls doctrinâ—… yet they must concurre in the same subject that is the party justified as necessary fruitâ—… and 〈◊〉 of â—… true justifying â—…aith 〈◊〉 Saint Iaâ—…esâ—…cheth â—…cheth Though we be justified before God that is both absolved from our 〈◊〉 and accepted in Christ as righteous by faith alone without respect of workâ—… as Saint Paul teacheth yet according to the doctrine of â—…aint Iames weâ—… are to bee justified that is declared and approved to be just not onely by faith professed but also by good workes Finally though good workes nâ—…n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet 〈◊〉 justificaâ—… as Augustinâ—… useth to speake or as he also saith non prâ—…edunt iustifiâ—…andum sed justificatâ—… 〈◊〉 though they doe not goâ—… before justification as causâ—…s 〈◊〉 Pâ—…l teacheth yet they must follow in the parties justified as effects according to Saint Iames his doctrine § XVIII But the assertions of the 2. Apostles not only may wel stand togeâ—…her but also according to our doctrine they must necessarily goe together For if we shall be altogether conversant in setting forth the commendation of good works and in urging the necessity thereof not informing the people in the doctrine of justification by faith alone they will be ready to place the matter of their justification and the merit of their salvation in themselves as the Papists doe And so being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse they doe not submit themselves to the righteousnes of God But wee must so urge the necessity of good workes in the doctrine of sanctification that wee remember that in the question of justification they are of no value On the other side if wee shall be wholly taken up in the doctrine of justification by faith alone teaching that in the question of justification they are of no worth and doe not withall informe the people of the profit and necessity of good works in other respects how ready will they bee to cast off all care of good workes and content themselves with a bare profession of faith But wee joyne these assertions together after the doctrine and practise of the Apostles in their Epistles Wee teach that justification and sanctification are unseparable companions And theresore as they who are sanctified may bee assured of their justification so without sanctification none can bee assured of their justification It is true that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus but who are they that live not after the flesh but after the Spirit Râ—… 8. 1. that are new creatures 2 Cor. 5. 17. that crucifie the flesh with the lusts thereof Gal. 5. 24. It is true that a true lively faith doth justifie alone but what manner of saith is that that purifieth the heart Act. 15. 9. and worketh by love Gal. 5. 6. and may be demonstrated by good workes Iam. 2. 18. It is true that wee are not justified by our workes nor saved for them yet those are neither justified nor saved that are without them for as they are necessary consequents of justification so they are necessary antecedents of salvation For though they be not the cause of our salvation yet they are the way by which we are to come to salvation though they be not causa regâ—…andi as Bernard saith yet they are via regni Though they bee not the merit of salvation yet they are the evidence according to which God will judge us By faith wee have our inheritance and our title to Gods Kingdome but it is to be inherited among those that are sanctified A godly conversation though it be not properly a cause of our glorification yet it is causa
But to this allegation I have answered twice before To conclude in these six places wee have seene scarce any colour of proofe either of justification by workes or of increase of justification and yet these besides Iam. 2. are all the testimonies which he hath alleaged out of the Scriptures which being compared with those plentifull and pregnant Testimonies that plainely deny justification by workes doe manifestly shew the cause of the Papists to bee most desperate But it may bee you will say that although the Scriptures faile him yet hee hath store of testimonies of the Fathers and plenty of reasons Out of the Fathers he produceth not one testimony Neither doth he give any reason but such as have beene already confuted § XXIV To these testimonies saith he two reasons may be added out of those things which have been proved in the former Chapters concerning the possibility of the Law and the truth of actuall righteousnesse for saith he if a just man can fulfill the Law as before it hath beene demonstrated then â—…ay he also without doubt be justified by workes Againe If a just man can performe workes truly good which are polluted with no vice as we have shewed before then he may worke righteousnesse and consequently may by multiplying of just workes increase his justice Answ. He should say his justification But in both hee disputeth a posse ad esse it is possible for a man to fulfill the Law and consequently to be justified by workes it is possible that a righteous man may performe some workes truely and purely good by multiplying whereof he may increase his justice But the question is not whether some choise man one of a million can fulfill the Law and bring forth workes purely good but whether every one that is justified doth fulfill the Law that is doth continue in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them Whether the workes yea all the workes of every one that is justified be purely good For if he should transgresse in any one particular though it were but by omission he hath not fulfilled the Law If any of his workes were not truely and purely good or if all his workes be not pure then hee cannot be justified by workes But he is so farre from proving these things as it were the esse that he is not able to prove the posse that any one mortall man is able to fulfill the Law or that any one action of any one regenerate man is purely and perfectly good The contraries of both which I have plentifully proved before A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE EIGHTH BOOKE Concerning the Merit of good Workes CHAP. I. Setting downe the state of the Controversie and propounding our arguments against the merit of good Workes § I. THere remaineth the last though not the least errour of the Papists in this controversie which is concerning the efficacie of good workes For the Papists not contented to affirme that good works doe justifie doe also teach that at the hands of God they doe merit or deserve the reward of eternall life And this in effect is the same with that which Bellarmine laboured to prove when he disputed of the necessity of good workes unto salvation not onely necessitate praesentiae as the way to Gods kingdome which we confesse but also necessitate efficientiae as causes thereof For by the Efficiencie which they ascribe to workes they meane no other but morall which is as they say by way of meriting Howbeit the former assertion of the necessity of efficiencie seemeth to containe a further degree of damnable errour viz. that not onely good workes doe merit or deserve salvation but also that none can be saved without their owne merits for so much is implyed in the terme of the necessity of efficiencie § II. But first we are to set downe the state of the controversie in setting downe whereof the Papists are very sparing because in this point they differ much among themselves But yet in this they do agree that all the good works of the regenerate are truly meritorious of eternall life Now for the explacation of the termes by good works which they say are meritorious they meane all such works as are qualified according to those seven conditions which Bellarmine requireth First that they be materialâ—…y good or good in their kind Secondly that they be done in obedience to God Thirdly by such as are viatores way-faring men in this life Fourthly that they be free that is as they expound it voluntary proceeding from their freewill Fifthly persormed by men who are in the state of grace Sixthly having the promise of eternall reward Seventhly proceeding from the virtue of Charity Secondly by all such workes they doe not onely meane all joyntly but every one in particular affirming omne opus bonum that every good worke proceeding from Charity is meritorious of eternall life Thirdly by truely meritorious the word used by the Councill of Trent wee understand that which properly and absolutely and for it selfe deâ—…erveth the reward thereby excluding first merita ex congruo merits of congruity which indeed doe not deserve and therefore are not veri nominis merita truely and properly merits Notwithstanding Bellarmine and others retaine the name giving it chiefly to those dispositions and preparations going before justification according to which grace is given wherein they have rewarded the old assertion of Pelagius gratiam secundum merita dari For if those dispositions be merits and if according to them grace is given as the Councill of Trent in plaine termes defineth doe they not hold that grace is given to men according to their merits Secondly by this phrase truly and properly meritorious are excluded these workes which arâ—… said to merit onely ex pacto which ever happeneth when there is a great disproportion between the worke and the promised reward As if a man should for a daies labour which in commutative justice deserveth but denarium diurnum the day-penny promise an hundred pound this reward were due ex pacto but yet not deserved by the labourer The halfe of Herods Kingdome was due to the daughter of Herâ—…dias ex pacto if shee had asked so much but no way deserved by her By truely and properly meritorious therefore is meant that which is condigne merit or merit of condignity that which is absolutely meritorious and not onely ex pacto by reason of the promise which happeneth when there is an equall proportion betweene the worke and the promised reward sed ratione â—…peris ipsius for the workes sake and for the worthinesse thereof § III. This point is duely to bee observed For there are some tergiversators that dare not professedly take upon them the defence of condigne merit who notwithstanding would seem as stiffe defenders of merits as the best of them As for that qnestion whether works deserve heaven â—…x condâ—…gno or not and such
Lord who freelygiveth what he had freely promised Thirdly when a superaboundant reward is promised to a small worke and the party to whom it is promised is no way able either to doe or so much as to will the performance of it but receiveth wholly his will and ability to performe it from his Lord the thing promised cannot be ascribed to his merit but to the gracious bounty of his Lord. § V. The seventh and last condition is that a meritorious work must proceed from charity which we acknowledg to be required in every good worke But in the proofe hereof he falleth into a nice dispute proving against Guihielmus 〈◊〉 that the vertue of meriting is to be ascribed more principally to Charity than to faith And although this bee but an idle dispute seeing neither faith nor charity doth truely and properly merit yet I durst be bold to affirme that if to either merit were to be ascribed that it were rather to bee attributed to faith For by faith the merits of Christ are applyed unto us and not by charity By faith we are entitled to Gods Kingdome by 〈◊〉 wee are not By faith wee obtaine the inheritance which by charity we doe not By faith we are saved and not by charity Faith is the condition of the covenant of grace upon which and no other grace salvaâ—…ion is promised Those that truly love are also saved it being the proper cognizance and as Basiâ—… speaketh the character of the faithfull and none are saved without it but yet they are not saved by it nor for it but onely by the merits of Christ which are apprehended by faith alone Salvation which is purchased by the merits of Christ is promised to faith as that whereby we are made partakers of Christs merits and are therefore said to be justified and saved by faith alone but charity and the fruits thereof are the evidence according to which God will save us Christ is the foundation of our happinesse yea he is eternall life Faith is the onely instrument wherby wee are made partakers of Christ all other graces are but notes and signes of our union which we have with Christ and of happinesse by him By faith we have this inheritance but it is had among those that are sanctified When it is said happy is shee that beleeved there the cause of happinesse is noted but when it is said happy is he that loved orfeared not the cause of happinesse is signified but a note or signe of it Both faith and charity must concurre to every good act for as a worke without charity is not good so without faith it is sin But if you compare the graces together it is certaine that charity proceedeth from faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. and according to the measure of our faith such is the measure of our love for faith is the Mother-grace from which charity and all other graces as from the root and fountaine doe spring and flow It may seeme indeed that sanctification and inherent righteousnesse doth more principally consist in love because charity is the fulfilling of the Law yet sanctification it selfe doth flow from faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love But as for the grace of justification whereunto merit if wee had any ought to bee referred for justification is the entitling of us to the kingdome of heaven neither charity nor any other grace in us doth concurre unto it but faith is all in all I will not follow him in his idle dispute I confesse the point that to every rewardable or as he calleth it meritorious worke charity is required § VI. Now let us recapitulate his seven conditions And because he shall not finde me refractary I doe confesse that all and every of these conditions are required to every rewardable worke For first it must be good Secondly it must be done in obeysance to God Thirdly it must be done by men in this world Fourthly it must bee voluntary and not forced Fifthly it must bee performed by a man who is in the state of grace Sixthly the expectation of the reward is to bee grounded on Gods promise And lastly it must proceed from charity But now say I that not any one of these conditions nor all of them put together can make a worke meritorious of eternall life before God They are common notes and markes of all good workes whatsoever but the proper notes of merits are such as I set downe in the beginning of this discourse concerning merits For workes are not therefore meritorious because they are materially good nor because they are in obeysance to God for that is our duty and debt which wee owe to God nor for that they are performed by such as are viatores and pilgrims in this world nor because they are wrought by men in state of grace nor because the expectation of the reward is grounded on Gods promise which is of a free reward and not of wages merited by us nor lastly because they proceed from charity For our charity by reason of the imperfection thereof cannot stand in judgement to satisfie the justice of God and much lesse to merit And whatsoever or how great soever it is it is not only a duety which we owe to God but the onely debt which wee owe or ought to owe to our brethren and that for Gods sake to omit that we receive it as a free gift from God and therefore by it we cannot merit of him CHAP. IX Bellarmines dispute that good workes are meritorious ex condigno not onely ratione pacti but also ratione operis examined § I. IN the fourth place Bellarmine discourfeth how farre forth good workes are either meritorious or are rewarded Meritorious whether ex condigno and if so whether ratione pacti solum or ratione operis also That good workes are meritorious ex condigno which is the matter that hitherto hee hath proved hee now maintaineth against Durandus affirming that his Assertion as it is refuted by the common consent of all almost Divines so also by all the arguments which formerly hee hath used against us to prove that the workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious which I desire the Reader to take notice of because some draw-backs who notwithstanding would seeme stiffe defenders of merits doe beare the simple in hand that it is but a Schoole-point to say that workes are meritorious either ex condigno or ex congruo When as in very trueth it is the received Doctrine of that Church that the good workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious of everlasting life Now it is evident that meritum ex congruo is not truely and properly meritorious § II. In the next place Bellarmiâ—…e now taking it for granted that good workes are meritorious ex condigno hee disputeth whether they bee so ratione pacti tantum or ratione operis tantum or ratione utriusque whereunto I answere that
15. h Matth. 5. 17. i Rom. 8. 4. Ioh. 6. 63. Our fifth reason that there are two parts of justification Rom. 5. 9. 19. Object Then there be two formall causes of justification That justificati on doth not consist onâ—…ly in remission of sinnes Rom. 4 6 7. Their chiese argument because remission is as well of sinnes of omission as of commission m Psal. â—…43 2. Gal. 2. 16. Object By remission we are made innocent and therefore just Three arguments of I. P. 1 2 3 k De justis l. 2. c. 6 l De justis l. 2. c. 1 m Lib. 3. c. 11. sect 2. n Sect. 3. o De justif l. 2. c. 1. 6. The arguments of J. F. p Gal. 4. 4 5. q Gen. 35. 2. Zâ—…ch 3. 4. r Mat. 22. 11 12. s Exod. 28. 43. t Exod. 28. 36. 38 u Iâ—…r 23. 6. * Athanâ—…s tom 2 advers eos qui negant Christum â—…x natura noâ—…ra sâ—…mpsisse primitias Whether the passive obedience of Christ onely be represented in the Sacraments * Rom. 4. 11. x Gal. 3. 27. y Eph. 5. 30. Private opinions concerning the forme of justification * Disp. deâ—… Câ—…r 〈◊〉 4 part c. 4. Christi justitiam nobis imputari est mâ—…rum commentum Their depraving of our Doctrine Bellarm. de just l. 2. c. 7. §. quart * A. W. pag. 180. n. 4. b Centur. 1. li. 2. c. 4. col 240. lin 3 c Ib. col 241. lin 41. Scharp de justif controv 8. arg 2. controv 9. Their owne errors which besides the principall are six The two first of the sixe d Lib. 1. c. 3. §. 7. c. * Lib. 1. c. 4. §. 16. c. 6. §. e Rom. 5. 9. f Rom. 5. 19. Rom. 4. 6. 8. The third error g 1 Job 1. 7. The fourth error The fift error Rom. 10. 4. Obiect 1. h Rom. 5. 14. i 1 Cor. 15. 22. k Rom. 5. 19. l Rom. 5. 17 18. m Epist. 190. See infr lib. 5. chap. 4. Object 2. n 2 Pet. 1 4. o Epist. 190. Object 3. p Apoc. 13. 8. q Their afflictions were the reproch of Christ. Heb. 11. 26. viz. in his members r Act. 15. 11. s 1 Cor. 10. 3. 4. Obiect 4 t Rom. 3. 24. 15. The sixth error u Lib. 6. c. 4. sect 6. * Covenant of Grace cap. 8. page 94. n. 5. A Caveat for young Divines The necessity of imputation of Christs righteousnesse Object Act. 26. 18. The end Supreame Psal. 145. 17. a Rom. 3. 24. b Ephes. 1. 6. c Rom. 3. 25 26. d Psal. 119. 1. e Ephes. 2. 9. Rom. 4. 2. f 1 Cor. 1. 30 31. The subordinate end 1 Salvation g Mat. 6. 9 10 11. h Mat. 6. 33. i Rom. 14. 17. k 1 Thes. 4. 3. l Rom. 6. 22. m 1 Pet. 1. 9. n Rom. 8. 24. o Tit. 3. 7. p Rom. 8. 30. q Act 26. 18. 2. Certainety of Salvation r Rom. 5. 1 2. Rom. 4. 13 16. Sanctification s Eph. 2. 8 9 10. The parts of justification t Rom. 10. 4. Redemption reconciliation adoption comprised under Iustification u Ep 17. Col. 1. 14 * 2 Cor. 5. 19. x 1 〈◊〉 2. 7. Heb. 9. 22. y Col. 1. 14. 1 Pet. 1 19. z Rom. â—… 10. Col. 1. 20. a Eph. 1. 5 6. b Rom. 5. 19. c Gal. â—… 4 5. The fruits and consequents oâ—… Iustification The heads of Controversie The Papists confound justification and sanctification The Papists ground their â—…rrour upon the like notation of the Latine words a De justif lib. 2. cap. 9. b De iustif l. 2. c. 3. sâ—…ct Ad secundum Potest aliquis sieri iustus tum in tâ—…insecè per adoptionem iustitiae tum extrinsecè per declarationem c Rom. 5. 19. d 2 Cor. 5. 21. The Hebrew verbe in the first conjugation or in Cal. In Niphal Nitsdaq In Piel Tsiddeq In Hiphil Hitsdiq Deut. 25. 1. Prov. 17. 15. To justifie is a judiciall word translated from Courts of judgement Esai 50. 8. Rom. 8 33. Esai 53. 11. Dan. 12. 3. In Hithpael Hitstaddeq The Hebrew word never signifieth to make just by righteousnesse inherent e Prov. 17. 15. The like use in other words f Levit. 13. 3. 6. c. g Luk. 1. 46. h 1 Ioh. 5. 10. i 2 Thes. 2. 11. k Luk. 23. 1â—… l Luk. 7. 29. m Rom. 4. 6. The Greeke words first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 7. 29. Luk. 10 29. Luk. 16. 15. Ecclus. 10. 32. 13. 26. Rom. 3. 26. 24 28. 30. Rom. 4. 5 6. Rom. 8. 30 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclus. 7. 5. Rom. 3 4. Apoc. 22. 11. a Matth. 11. 19. Luk. 7. 37. Luk. 7. 29. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Matth. 12. 37 Jam. 2. 21 23. 24 25. Eccles. 1. 28 31. 5. 23. 14. Eccles 26. verâ—… uit Act. 13. 38 39. Rom. 6. 7. Luk 18. 14. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Rom 3 20. Rom. 4 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gâ—…l â—… 4. Râ—…m 5. 9. Gal 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. Rom. 3 24 28. Gal. 2. 16. 17. 3. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18. 1 Cor. 15. 17. Rom. 5. 18. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the purall number Psalm 119. 8. 12. Rom. 2. 26. d Luk 1. 6. e Gen. 26. 5. Zaâ—…h 3. 7. f â—…eut 5 3â—… 6. 1. Deut 8. 11. 11. 1. 1 King 2. 3. 8. 58. Nehem. 1. 7. Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8. Rom. 9. 4 Heb. 9. 1. 10. Apoc. 15. 4. Apoc. 19. 8. Matth. 22. 11 12. Gal 5. 27. Apoc. 3. 18. Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9. Matth. 5. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the singular number Psâ—… 19. 10. Rom. 1. 32. Rom. 5. 18. Rom. 8. 4. Rom. 5. 16. The first reason that the benefit of iustification is expressed in such terms as doe not imply insusion of iustice but imputation Rom. 4. 6 7 8. Rom. 5. 9 10. 2 Cor. 5. 19 21. Act. 26. 18. Ioh. 3. 18. Act. 13. 39. Rom. 3. 21 22. Act. 10. 43. The whole processe of justification is judiciall Rom. 8. 33 34. g Rom. 3. 19. h Act. 16. 14. i Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. Rom. 2. 13. Bellarmine relateth foure significations of the word justification a De justif l. 1. cap. 1. First that it signifieth the Law Psal 119. 8. 12. b Discovery of translations cap. 1. § 50. and cap. 8. c In Luk. 1. 6. and in Apoc. 19. 8. d Cap. 2. sect 5. Luk. 1. 6. e Rom 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. 3 11. Their Argument retorted f Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8. g Rom. 1. 32. h Rom. 3. â—…1 * Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8. fortè The second and third signification Lib. 1. Cap. 1. The second signification proved by three testimonies The first 1 Cor. 6. 11. Act 2. 38. Mark 1. 4. Rom. 6. 3 4. Tit. 3. 5. Bellarmines second testimony Rom. 8 30. verse 33. His third Testimonie Rom. 4. 5. His third
and therefore is not that righteousnesse which is imputed Thus therefore I argue By what we have remission of sinne by that wee are justified and by what we are justified that is our righteousnesse by the bloud of Christ we have remission of sinne and not by that righteousnesse which is purchased by his blood viz. remission of sinne for that to say were very ridiculous Wherefore by the blood of Christ we are justified and consequently that with the resâ—… of his obedience is our righteousnesse § VII To the fifth I answer that the meritorious obedience of Christ both active and passive are the merits of Christ. If therefore the merit of Christ be imputed then his meritorious obedience Neither can the merit of Christs obedience be imputed to us unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and by imputation accepted of God for us as performed by our selves For as the guilt of Adams transgression could not be imputed to us unlesse the transgression it selfe were first imputed and made ours by imputation whereof wee are made sinners that is guilty of his sinne unto condemnation so the merit of Christs obedience cannot bee imputed unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and made ours by imputation whereof we are freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and are accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And as it may truely be said of them to whom Adams disobedience is imputed that they sinned in Adam so of them to whom Christs obedience is imputed it may no lesse truely be said that in Christ they have satisfied the justice of God in Christ they have fulfilled the Law the Lord accepting of the obedience of Christ in their behalfe as if they had performed it in their owne persons For Christ is the end the perfection and complement of the Law to all that beleeve So that whosoever truely beleeveth in Christ hath in him fulfilled the Law as the Greeke expositors expound that place Rom. 10. 4. § VIII But say they we were not so in Christ when he obeied as we were in Adam when he sinned Neither are wee members of Christ untill we actually beleeve And therefore neither could we be said to have satisfied the justice of God for our sinnes nor to have fulfilled the Law in him as we are truely said to have sinned in Adam Or if it could be said that in Christ we satisfied Gods justice for our sinnes then should we need no pardon Neither can punishment and pardon stand together if wee have borne the punishment then are we not pardoned Aâ—…sw The first Adam was a type of the second and both were heads and roots of mankinde Adam of those that shall bee condemned Christ of those that shall be saved For as in Adam all dye that dye eternally so in Christ all live that live eternally And as in Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is all that shall be condemned were constituted sinners his disobedience being imputed to them because in him they sinned so in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that shall be saved shall be constituted just his obedience being imputed to them because in him as their head they have satisfied and fulfilled the Law Neither are wee more truely derived from Adam in respect of the life naturall than wee are from Christ in respect of the life spirituall Therefore if Adams disobedience were imputed to condemnation much more Christs obedience is imputed unto justification of life as the Apostle argueth Rom. 5. and from thence Bernard Cur non aliunde justitia cum aliunde reatus alius qui peccatorem constituit alius qui justificat à peccato Alter in semine alter in sanguine An peccatum in semine peccatoris non justitia in Christi sanguine § IX Yea but then say they when Christ obeyed we were not his members No more say I were we the branches of the first Adam when he disobeied Actually we are neither branches of the first Adam untill we partake the humane nature by generation nor members of the second Adam untill we be made partakers of the Divine nature by regeneration and yet it is most true which Bernard avoucheth in the place even now cited satisfecit ergo Caput pro membris c. the head therefore satisfied for his members c. § X. Yea but our faith relyeth upon Christ as having already redeemed us Ans. Christ is the Lambe of God slaine from the beginning of the world The vertue of whose obedience is extended not onely to them that come after Christ but also to all the faithfull that went before from the beginning of the world who were members of Christ as much as we are now And for them as well as for us Christ obeyed the Law and suffered death and to them so many as beleeved was the obedience of Christ imputed as well as to us They all did eate the same spirituall meat and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke For they dranke of that spirituall Rocke which followed and that Rocke was Christ. § XI But if in Christ say they we satisfied the punishment then we need no pardon Answ. When wee say that in Christ wee satisfied and fulfilled the Law our meaning is that his satisfaction and obedience is imputed to us that is it is accepted of God in our behalfe as if wee had performed the same in our owne persons Neither should it seeme strange that satisfaction and pardon may stand together seeing God pardoneth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied But it is Christ that satisfied bare the punishment and we are they who are pardoned by imputation of his satisfaction unto us Here therefore especially mercy and justice met together justice executed upon Christs mercy exhibited to us who are justified by the grace of God freely in respect of us through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and therfore not freely in respect of him who paid so great a price For him God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes c. But that the righteousnesse of Christ is the onely thing which properly is imputed to justification I have at large disputed Lib. 4. 5. § XII The sixth I have already refuted Lib. 1. Cap. 2. § 7. Whereunto I now adde that these men confessing the truth with us that faith is the instrumentall cause of justification confute themselves For if it be the instrument to receive that which is imputed then is it not the thing it selfe which is imputed properly though relatively it may in respect of the object which it as the instrument or hand doth receive to justification and that is the righteousnesse of Christ. And for this cause as hereafter shall bee declared the same benefits which wee have from Christ properly are attributed to faith not absolutely
in regard of it selfe but relatively in respect of that righteousnesse which it doth apprehend If it be said that faith as the instrument receiveth remission of sinne because by it we are assured thereof I answer that by faith receiving Christ we have remission of sinnes and justification before we can by speciall faith be assured of it And it is a great absurdity as elsewhere I have shewed to teach that men must beleeve and be assured of the remission of their sinnes to the end that they may be remitted § XIII I shall not need therefore to say any more in this place unlesse it be to give a Caveat to all young Divines that they give no credit to these Novelties which either affirme that wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely or deny that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ at all as the matter of our justification By Matter I understand that very thing which is imputed as our onely righteousnesse by which wee stand perfectly righteous before God by imputation whereof we are both freed from hell and also entituled to the kingdome of heaven And let all men take notice that these opinions howsoever to some they seeme matters of small importance are notwithstanding very dangerous if not pernicious seeing they concerne our very title to the kingdome of heaven and seeing alâ—…o I have proved in this Treatise that without imputation of Christs righteousnesse there can be no justification nor salvation For all will confesse that without Christs obedience and sufferings none can bee justified or saved and that they justifie or save none but them onely to whom they are communicated and applyed But they cannot be communicated otherwise than by imputation whereby God accepteth them in our behalfe as if we had in our owne persons performed them for our selves Againe these foure assertions I hold for undoubted truthes first that what Christ our blessed Saviour in the daies of his flesh did or suffered in obedience to God he did and suffered not for himselfe but for us secondly that whatsoever he did and suffered for us that beleeve that the Lord accepteth in the behalfe of all that beleeve thirdly that what he accepteth in our behalfe that he imputeth unto us for by imputation wee meane nothing else fourthly to say that what Christ did and suffered for us God doth not accept in our behalfe is both blasphemous against Christ the wisedome of his Father as if hee did and suffered those things which he did and suffered in vaine and also pernicious unto us for if Christs doings and sufferings for us bee in vaine as they are if they bee not imputed to us then is our faith vaine and wee remaine in our sinnes and in the wofull state of damnation § XIV But some will say it is sufficient to beleeve that by the merits of Christ we have remission of sinne and that having remission of sinnes we shall be saved by him Answ. Yea but God forgiveth no sinnes for which his justice is not fully satisfied For as he is mercifull so he is just in forgiving our sinnes But no such satisfaction can bee imagined but that of Christ. For we our selves are not able to satisfie for our sinnes but by eternall punishment And how shall we have remission by Christs satisfaction if it be not applyed and communicated unto us how can it be communicated and made ours but by imputation And that the very papists themselves are at length forced to confesse And where they say that having remission of sinnes they shall be saved I confesse it is true because with Gods remission of sinnes there doth alwayes concurre imputation of righteousnesse But the bare remission of sinne without imputation of righteousnesse which onely freeth a man from the guilt of sinne and damnation doth not entitle him or give him right to the kingdome of heaven It is one thing to have by faith remission of sinnes and another to have by faith inheritance among them that be sanctified Act. 26. 18. Eternall life is not to bee had without perfect fulfilling of the Law which is no where to bee found but onely in Christ. And therefore by the onely meritorious obedience of Christ by which he hath merited and purchased salvation for us wee are saved But how should we be saved by his obedience if it be not communicated unto us and made ours for our selves how can it bee made ours but by imputation wherefore no imputation of Christs obedience no salvation CAP. VI. The end or finall cause the essentiall parts the fruits and consequents of justification § I. THE finall cause or end for which God doth justifie a sinner by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is either supreme or subordinate The supreme is the manifestation of the glory both of his mercy and of his justice as is noted in the definition which as they doe concurre in all the worke of God Psalm 145. 17. so especially in the worke of redemption and justification For therein the mercy of God appeareth to be so great that rather than hee would suffer us most miserable sinners to perish in our sinnes he hath sent his owne and his only begotten Son that we might be justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein hee hath made us accepted in his beloved His justice also such that rather than hee would suffer the sinnes of his owne elect to goe unpunished or forgive them without due satisfaction hee hath punished them in his owne Sonne and exacted from him a full satisfaction for them having set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse through the forgivenesse of sinnes which are past by the sufferance of God to demonstrate I say his righteousnesse at this time that hee might be just and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus Not unto us therefore not unto us as if we were justified by our owne righteousnesse or worthinesse but to the name of God all glory is due for his mercy and for his righteousnesse sake who doth justifie us not of workes lest wee should glory in our selves but of his grace freely without any desert or cause in our selves through the redemption wrought by Christ who is of God made righteousnesse unto us that he which gloryeth may glory in the Lord. § II. The subordinate end is our salvation and the way unto it which is our new obedience or sanctification Salvation though it bee our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our particular supreme end and chiefe good unto which both justification and sanctification is referred yet it is subordinate to the glory of God as to the soveraigne and universall end For such is Gods goodnesse towards his elect that hee hath subordinated our salvation to his owne glory as he hath
by imputation of his obedience properly wee are entituled to the kingdome of heaven as I have shewed heretofore But in the popish justification there is neither remission of sinnes properly to free them from hell nor donation of such juâ—…tice as may entitle them to heaven For neither the abolition or extinction of sinne present by infusion of righteousnesse though it were compleate as it is not can satisfie for their former sinnes nor can their righteousnesse being unperfect give them right to heaven But it is the onely satisfaction of Christ by his righteousnesse and obedience both Passive and Active which being communicated unto beleevers by imputation doth both free them from hell and giveth them a Title and Right to the Heavenly Kingdome His proofe taken from the courts of men I admit as good against them who holding that wee are justified onely by the Passive righteousnesse of Christ doe make justification to bee nothing else but remission of sinnes For they whom being guilty in themselves as we all aâ—…e before God a judge doth justifie are freed indeed from punishment but they doe not thereby obtaine new rewards Howbeit there is a great dissimilitude betweene Gods justification of men and that of humane Iudges For a judge by his absolution though he doth free the guilty and indeed faulty parson from punishment and from the guilt binding him over to punishment and thereby perhaps bewrayeth his owne unjustice yet he doth not free him from the fault nor doth he make him righteous and much lesse doth hee indow him with new priviledges But when God doth justifie a beleeving sinner hee doth not onely free him from hell and from the guilt binding him over to condemnation by imputation of Christ sufferings but also by imputation of Christ obedience he maketh him righteous and an heire of eternall life And in thus justifying a beleeving sinner he is just because Christ by his sufferings hath fully satisfied for his sinnes and by his obedience hath merited for him eternall life § XIII His third reason justification of enemies maketh us Gods friends children beloved Citizens of Heaven the Domesticks of God heires of his kingdome as the Scriptures every where speake therefore it doth not stand onely in remission of sinnes Thus farre we agree with him But as it is a good argument against those who hold justification to bee nothing else but remission of sinne so it maketh not for him who holdeth justification by infusion of righteousnesse but against him For whereas the Scriptures testifie that God when he justifieth men hee doth of enemies make them his beloved friends and his children c. It is to be confessed that here is a very great change but is it reall or relative by infusion or by imputation Surely when God reconcileth men unto himselfe and of enemies maketh them his favourites when he adopteth men and of the children of the devill maketh them his owne children when justifying men hee doth of foes make them his beloved friends of bondslaves not onely freemen but also Citizens of heaven of alients his Domesticks of men obnoxious to damnation heires of his Kingdome hee doth not these things by infusion of any reall or positive qualities into them but these are externall favours which God vouchsafeth unto them when forgiving their sinnes and imputing unto them the righteousnesse of his Sonne hee doth in him accept them for such yea and in respect of his relation unto them maketh them such as before they were not And when he hath made men such by imputation he also maketh them such by infusion of such qualities and dispositions as are answerable to that which they are called as I shewed in the beginning whom God receiveth into his grace and favour them hee endueth with grace whom hee redeemeth from the servitude of sinne and Satan hee maketh them his faithfull servants they who are the sonnes of God by adoption are also his sonnes by regeneration and finally those whom God doth justifie them also he doth sanctifie § XIV And this is all which Bellarmine hath brought for the proofes of justification by inherent and infused righteousnesse either from the Scriptures or from naturall reason Afterwards indeed in his eighth Chapter hee produceth the testimonies of Augustine and some others which he calleh the tradition of the ancient Fathers as if they did agree with the doctrine of the present Church of Rome which they doe not For first though some of the Latine Fathers led by the notation of the Latine word which was not to be respected it being bnt the translation of the Hebrew and Greeke did under the name of justification include the benefit of sanctification whereof there is no example in the Scriptures yet they did not exclude that which the Scriptures call justification as â—…the Papists doe For they acknowledged that justification containeth remission of sinnes and that it standeth chiefly in remission of sinnes that being our happinesse and therefore implying besides the not imputing of sinne acceptation unto life The Papists also talke of remission but their remission is not that which the Scriptures and Fathers speake of for the Scriptures and Fathers and all ancient Writers whatsoever by remission understand veniam pardon condonation forgiving not imputing of sinne absolving from it which is a distinct action of God from infusion of righteousnesse that being a worke of God without us working no reall or positive change within us and herein wee have the consent of all antiquity The Papists by remission of sinne understand the expulsion or extinction the utter deletion or abolition of sinne which is not a distinct action as they teach from infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne And is an action of God not without us as the other but within us working in us a reall and possitive change And therefore remission of sinne in the Popish sense belongeth not to justification but to perfect sanctification as being a totall mortification of sinne which none attaine unto in this life but of this point I have already treated in the second question of the first controversie Secondly the fathers oftentimes use the word justification in the same sense that wee doe according to the Scriptures as implying the forgivenesse of sinnes and acceptation unto life by the satisfaction and merits of Christ communicated unto us As namely when they teach as very oft they doe that we are justified by faith alone which they could not have taught if by justifying they had meant sanctifying for we are not sanctified by faith alone as all confesse Thirdly the Fathers did not looke to bee justified before God by any righteousnesse inherent in themselves or performed by them but renounced it as being unperfect and stained with the flesh And therefore where they speake of justification by inherent righteousnesse they meant sanctification and not justification before God whereof our question