avoid this danger and not to fear mens enmity for preaching Gods Truth 4. Pleasure in unrighteousness makes this Doctrine not rightly preached and not rightly believed 5. The Articles of faith not given to devour the Commandements therefore no sacrilegious or unjust person can be justified by faith in Christ 6. This Gospel-Truth to be embraced by Papists and not forsaken by Protestants though it hath been most abused of all others and was so from the first entrance of the Gospel whence the Catholick Epistles were written chiefly against the Solifidian Haereticks 7. The Doctrine of Justification delivered by St. Paul Rom 3. in two Propositions the one Negative That 't is not by works proved by 3. Arguments The other affirmative That 't is by â—…aith proved from all the causes of Justification viz. God the efficient Christ the meritorious Faith the instrumental remission of sins through the imputation of Christs obedience the formal cause And the declaration of Gods righteousness and mans glorying in God alone the two final causes thereof These 2. Propositions afterwards joyned together in one Dogmatical conclusion That a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law which is again repeated Gal. 3. and confirmed by Ten arguments 8. The best way of arguing in this heavenly Doctrine is by arguments that come from Heaven agreeing not only with the analogie of faith in the Doctrine they prove but also with the analogie of the Text in the manâ—…er of their proof 9. That Faith which is without works justifieth not gives not works a share in justifying 10. That Charity is greater then Faith gives it not a greater influence in Justification 11. This Text Not the hearers of the Law are just before God but the doers of the Law shall be justified for faith is not in hearing but in doing not in the ear but in the heart 12. St. James and St. Paul deliver one and the same doctrine concerning Justification That t is by Faith in Chtist not by works but St. Paul speaks of Faith more in relation to Christ its proper Object to teach the Jews the necessity of Faith St. James speaks of Faith more in relation to works its proper effect to teach unsanctified Christians the obedience of Faith 13. The doctrine of Justification by Faith without works is the whole scope both of the Law and of the Gospel as is particularly proved in the Epistle to the Hebrews 14. Good worke are necessary consequents of the Faith that justifieth not Causes of the Justification and are no further required of us by any of the Apostles or Prophets in the judgement of St. Austin St. Ambrose and St. Chrysostom Therefore Justification by Faith without works was then the judgement of the Catholick Church and indeed is now of the present Roman Church if we look upon her Devotions not her Disputes 15. To maintain Justification by mans righteousness is not only to forsake Christs Church but also to destroy it 16. Christs imputed righteousness blasphemously called a Fiction by Bellarmin piously acknowledged a Reality by Pererius hîs brother Jesuit But the Saints imputed righteousness is a meer fiction both in regard of the Imputation which hath no promise of Gods acceptance and in regard of the righteousness which cannot challenge it as being incompleat because of Original and Actual sin therfore not superfluous in the best of Gods Saints as 〈◊〉 proved by several Texts of Holy Scripture according to the exposition of the Catholick Church 17. All men being sinners no man can be justified by his own righteousness 18. To be justified by works is to be justified without if not against Grace Christ and Faith 19. T is madness and wickedness for man to set up his own against his Saviours righteousness yet self-Justiciaries are guilty of this madness and wickedness undervaluing both Christs death and the Redemption thereby purchased for true blievers The sixt Exception IBidem sect 3. pag. 196. Against Justification by works you alledge Being justified by Faith we have peace with God Rom. 5. 1. But what faith The same St. Paul Gal. 5. 5 6. saith thus ex fide spem Justitiae expectamus sed fides quae per Charitatem operatur Here are works required to Justification as well as faith which must proceed from charity which according to St. Paul 1 Cor. 13. 13. is greater then faith and must needs therefore have the greater influence in our justification For as he saith Rom. 2. 13. Not the hearers of the Law there is faith are just before God but the doers of the Law there are good works shall be justified The Answer 1. HE that walks on battlements had need take a special care of his footing because if he slip he must fall and if he fall he must be dashed to pieces And such is now the walk of all Orthodox Divines in the way of Gods Truth especially this of justification the main Gospel-Truth 't is as if they walked upon battlements every step is slippery and every slip threatens ruin not that God hath left his way either dangerous or slippery but that some men have made it so their debates have made it dangerous their devices have made it slippery For some men have turneth Devotion it self into Debate to make Gods way dangerous and Doctrine it self into Devices to make Gods way slippery And concerning such men it is the Apostle hath said Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses so do these also resist the Truth men of corrupt minds reprobate concerning the faith 2 Tim. 3. 8. They that use tricks and devices to elude the sense when they cannot evade the sentence of the Law Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are wâ—…itten in the book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. do like Jannes and Jambres withstand Moses by enchantments making themselves Aegyptians when God made them Israelites or making themselves Magicians when God made them Divines only they seldome cry out Digitus Dei This is the finger of God though they be shewed never so plainly his own very hand writing to convence them oÌ„f their resistance against the Truth For the same corrupt minds that make them resist the Truth do also make them reprobate or of no Judgement concerning the faith For who can be judicious in the Faith but from the Truth and therefore he that resists the Truth must needs be of no Judgement concerning the faith And since we find among all the multitudes of factious men so little Judgement concerning the Faith we cannot but feat that they have all more or less resisted the Truth I am the way and the Truth saith Christ So that if the Christian look directly and constantly on Him he shall not walk out of the right way nor erre from the saving Truth Surely then t is because we have not looked on our Saviour but on our selves on our own Interests that our strayings have been so many from this right
abominable unrighteousness For even immediately after the first clear preaching of Justification by Faith we find a strange generation of licentious and ungodly men who did boast of Faith in Christ without good works committing all manner of sin with greediness and without remorse This gave occasion to St. Peter St. John St. James and St. Jude who all writ after St. Paul to direct their stiles chiefly against such vain boasters of this empty Faith and their Epistles were afterwatds peculiarly called Catholick for this reason amongst others That they were all written in Vindication of the true Catholick Faith which did teach a man so to believe in Christ as to have his life answerable to his belief This account doth St. Peter give for himself saying I have written briefly exhorting and testifying That this is the true Grace of God wherein ye stand 1 Pet. 5. 12. As if he had said These two things I have chiefly proposed to my self in my writing 1. To testifie the doctrine of the Gospel concerning the Grace of God in Christ to be the onely doctrine to bring you to eternal Salvation 2. To Perswade you to stand fast and persevere in that doctrine by leading your lives answerable to your profession And this account may we give concerning the rest of the Authors of the Catholick Epistles for thus the whole Argument of St. Johns first Epistle consists of those two principal parts of the Christian Religion The Promises and the Precepts of the Gospel For to the Promises we must refer all that he speaks of Communion with God of the expiation of our sins by the blood of Christ and of the hope of eternal life To the Precepts we must refer all that he speaks of true Faith in Christ of living godly and righteously according to that Faith and of loving God sincerely or not loving the world that we may live godly and of loving our Bretheren sincerely not hypocritically That we may live righteously The like may we say for St. James and St. Jude that their Epistles are chiefly against the Solifidean Hereticks and are therefore filled with divers exhortations to several Christian Virtues which they had deserted and with Dehortations from the the contrary vices which they had committed And we may be Catholicks in this doctrine of Justification according to these Catholick Epistles and yet still deny Justification by works For it is only the Faith in Christ that is justified by its works but the man is still justified only by his Faith 7. You are as zealous for Justification by works as St. Paul is against it with what good Conscience I cannot say but sure upon no good ground yet you have appealed to St. Paul himself as the Judge of this controversie to decide on your side and accordingly to St. Paul you shall go who sure will very little befriend you by his decision For I pray what works can any man do which are not comprised under The works of the Law But it is St. Paul's most absolute Determination Therefore by the deeds or works of the Law there shall no flesh be justified Rom. 3. 20. He that looks upon the foregoing words setting forth the abominable sins that were in the best of men then living the Jews and in those times wherein they lived best even the times of David and Hezekiah for all the proofs here concerning their wickedness are taken out of the Psalms and the Prophesie of Isaiah will easily acknowledge that the words though particular in their occasion yet are universal in their Instruction and do set forth the general corruption of all men whatsoever whereby they are most grievous transgressours of the Law and most odious in the sight most obnoxious to the Justice of God for their transgressions This considered He must be led by the spirit of errour who will not see the evidence and by the spirit of contradiction who will gainsay the power of St. Paul's conclusion Therefore by the works of the Law there shal no flesh be justified for it followeth upon these Premises No Transgressour of the Law can be justified by the works of the Law But all men whatsoever are transgressours of the Law Therefore no man whatsoever can be justified by the works of the Law which is as much as to say That no man whatsoever can be justified by works for all works whatsoever are reducible to the works of the Law as being done through obedience to its authority and not rightly done but through compliance with and conformity to its righteousness And to this Argument he adds another v. 27. which may be put into this Syllogism The Law of works doth not wholly exclude mans boasting in his Justification But God will have mans boasting wholly excluded in his Justification Therefore The Law of works doth not justifie The Major is further proved by Rom. 4. 2. For if Abraham were justified by works he hath wherof to glory The Minor by Eph. 2. 8 9. For by Grace ye are saved through Faith not of works lest any man should boast what remains then for the conclusion but that the Law of works doth not justify For if it justified not Abraham who had so good works as to be called the friend of God much less will it justify me who by my wicked deeds am become Gods enemy We have yet a third argument in this very place v. 29 30. which concludes thus If Justification were by the works of the Law then onely the Jews who alone had the Law written in tables could be justified and God should regard the salvation of no other people save of the Jews But these consequents are directly against the goodness of God and the whole scope or Tenor of his Word Therefore so is that Antecedent that Justification is by works of â—…e Law These are St. Paul's three arguments in this place for his Negative conclusion which is against Justification by works And he is not contented with this but he gives us also an affirmative conclusion which is for Justification by Faith v. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ which he fully explaineth and confirmeth from all the causes of our Justification The principal efficient cause is God of whom it is said v. 30. It is one God that shall justify by Faith and through Faith and this needs no other proof because no other could give us our blessed Jesus for a Saviour nor can give us Faith to be made partakers of his salvation The meritorious cause is Christ the Mediator betwixt God and man v. 25. Whom God hâ—…th set forth to be a propitiation The instrumental cause is Faith v. 22. The 〈◊〉 of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ upon all that beâ—…eve for there is no apprehending of Christ without 〈◊〉 as there is no righteousness and salvation without Christ and again v. 25. through Faith in his blood not excluding any other act of his Mediatorship
give am acquitted by your own Doctor from asking in vain But you asking from them that help which God alone doth give are not so easily acquitted by our blessed Saviour from asking in sin 3. If then there be no stedfastness in the Saints to stand before God how can they make me so stedfast as to stand before him Or If God put no trust in his servants to save themselves why should I put my trust in them to save me Both interpretations agree in sense though they differ in words He found no stedfastness in his servants or He put no trust in his servants The Hebrew word will bear both as Saint Hierom hath rendered it Ecce qui serviunt eâ—… non sunt stabiles so Pagnin hath rendered it Servis suis non credet The one saith He found no stedfastness in his servants The other saith He put no trust in his servants Nay more He will put no trust in his servants He hath he doth he will put no trust in his servants The Proposition is of eternal Truth not to be made 〈◊〉 in any Tence because not subject to Time Take it then of the Angels his first and best servants you must take this for the meaning of it He did put no truâ—…t in them whâ—…n he first made them he doth put no trust in them since he hath confirmed them he will put no trust in them when he shall glorifie them that of themselves or through their own stedfastness they should be able to stand either in nature or in grace or in glory For these words He put no trust in his servants are not to be understood in regard of other things as you strangely imagine but in regard of themselves God doth trust one creature with another the inferiour creature with the superiour Non propter defectum virtutis sed propter abundantiam bonitatis as Aquinas speaks not for the defect of his vertue but for the abundance of his goodness Ut dignitatem causalitatis creaturae communicet that he may communicate to the creature the honour of causality making one creature the instrumental or subordinate cause of good unto another whiles himself alone is the efficient and supreme cause of good to All But this partial or respective Trust is not here meant which is only in regard of some particular effects or operations but that absolute and universal Trust which no less concerns the very Being of the creature then its working In this sense God puts no trust in his servants that is he trusts them not with themselves he leaves them not to themselves for it he did they would soon lose themselves according to that of Saint Augustine Solus Deus immutabilis est quae autem fecit quia ex nihilo sunt mutabilia sunt God only is unchangeable but all things that he hath made are changeable because he hath made them out of nothing q. d. There was a change in their very making a change from nothing to what they are and therefore they must needs still be subject to change now they are made For whatsoever is made out of nothing would soon return to its first nothing did not the same hand which first made it still preserve and uphold it But because you have lately made your selves new Fathers from whom you had rather take your Divinity then from the Old I will alledge unto you one of those new Fathers and that is your Father Pineda who gives us this Paraphrase upon the Place Ecce qui serviunt ei non sunt stabiles Certè supremi ipsi spiritus Dei ministri quorum praestans atque praeclara natura constitutio est nihil ex se boni habent nullam vivendi nullam consistendi stabilitatem neque firmitatem nisi à Deo creatore bonorum omnium authore fulciantur confirmentur Surely those very supream spirits and Ministers of God who have a most excellent nature and constitution have no good of themselves no stedfastness of living or of subsisting from themselves but as they are upheld and confiâ—…med from God their maker the fountain of all goodness So in that other parallel place to this Job 15. 15. Iterum videtur repetere illam propositionem capitis quarti ecce qui serviunt ei non sunt stabiles argumento à majori probat hominem carneum luteum non posse merito Sanctitatis constantiam firmitatem sibi arrogare He again repeats the Proposition saith Pineda â—…rged in the fourth Chapter v. 18. and by an argument from the greater to the less proveth that man cannot arrogate to himself any stedfâ—…stness or constancy in righteousness You here divert me from Divinity and make me turn Grammarian for you say here our old repeaâ—…s He found no stedfastness in his Saints though our new He putteth no trust in his Saints If you are angry with our old translation for being constant to it self you are angry with it for a vertue for constancy is so If with our new for dissenting from our old you are angry with your own Pagnine for our new follows him as our old followed your old in its sense though not in its inconstancy For that saith Ecce qui serviunt ei non sunt stabiles cap. 4. v. 18. But Ecce inter Sanctos ejus nemo immutabilis cap. 15. v. 15. And yet the Hebrew Text is exactly the same in every point and Tittle in both places save that in the fourth Chapter t is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his servants in the 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Saints but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same in both places Though your old or Vulgar say Non sunt stabiles He found not stedfastness in the fourth Chapter and Nemo immutabilis none is unchangeable in the fifteenth But your new that is Pagnines translation saith in both places alike Non credet He put no trust whom our new had reason to follow not only because he more agreed with the Hebrew but also because he disagreed not from himself So that for your own translations sake you should have spared this fond cavil more then for ours 4. But I return to your Pineda who like a judicious Divine looks upon words as they are in their sense not in their sound and takes that for their sense which is not only positively true by Grammatical construction but also comparatively true by real connexion and illatively true by rational deduction which is the only way not to be mistaken in a Text that like this is liable to so many divers and different interpretations as himself asserteth Admodum varie hoc ab aliis vertitur Pagninus In Angelis suis ponet lumen Tygurina Angelis suis in did it vesaniam Vatablus nec in Angelis suis posuit lucem exactissimam Regia In Angelis suis ponet gloriationem Symmachus In Angelis suis reperit Vanitatem Sept. cum nostra Adversus Angelos suos pravum quid advertit quae