that will not love him But because of some difficulties it may so happen that a Man may be more discouraged with the present Labour than mov'd by future Advantages Love is therefore required with Faith as a Condition annex'd to the Divine Promise that by the fulfilling it we may attain Salvation but it 's no wonder that they who define Faith by our apprehending and applying Christ's Merit do exclude Love Slicht in 1 Cor. 13. v. 13. and in Heb. 11.6 and every other Good VVork from the Causes of our Salvation To speak accurately Faith is not the Instrumental Cause of our Justification and yet it is an Efficient not a Principal but the Causa sine quâ non of it whence it is that we are said to be Justified by Faith But this Faith under the New Testament is not as Frantzius dreams an Application of Christ's Merit but a Trust in God thro Christ whose nature is in hope of the Eternal Life promised by Jesus Christ to Obey him Disp 4. p. 103. Socin Synop. 2. Justisic So Smalcius against Erantzius As we must take heed lest we as many at this time do make Holiness of Life the Effect of our Justification in the fight of God So we must look to it that we believe not this Holiness to be our Justification Or that it is an Efficient or Impulsive Cause but only a Causa sine quâ non Our Good Works that is the Obedience we render unto Christ tho' they are not the Efficient Socin This de Justific or Meritorious Cause yet are they a Causa sine quâ non of our Justification before God and of our Eternal Salvation So far Socinus But tho' they make Justification by Faith to be the same with that by Good Works yet that they may reconcile this their Doctrine with what hath been delivered by the Apostle Paul who denieth Justification by Works they find it necessary to assert That we are in this Gospel-day under two Laws the one called the Law of Obedience or the Rule of Duty the other the Law of Reward or Punishment LEGES quae ad quodvis bene constitutum Regimen requiruntur sunt diplicis generis Primò sunt LEGES quibus praescribuntur subditis OFFICIA quomodo se quisque in suis actionibus gerere debeat seu quid cuique â—aciendum vel VVolzogenâ—us is full in delivering the Socinian sense on this Point In every well constituted Government saith he there are Laws of two sorts The first are such as shew the Subject's Duty what he must do and what he must not Omittendum sit Quae LEGES ad distinctionem caetirarum PRAECEPTA INTERDICTA vocantur Deind sunt LEGES quibus propo nuntur sidis ac morigeris sub ditis PRAEMIA pro ipsorun Obedientià ac malisivis merit paeâ—ae Haec duo LEGUN genera reperiuntur etiam iâ— Regno Christi Wolzog. In struct ad Lect. lib. N.T.c. â— These Laws to distinguish them from the other are called Praecepts and Prohibitions Then there are Laws by which Rewards are proposed to good Subjects for the Encouragement of their Obedience and Punishments threatned against the Disobedient Both these sorts of Laws or Rules are in the Kingdom of Christ Answerable to these two Laws or Rules of Duty and the Promise there is a twofold Obedience By the Rule of the Precept the highest most absolutely Perfect Obedience is injoyned By the Law of the Promise or Rule of the Reward Faith and Repentance with a certain purpose of Amendment is what entitles to the Reward Duplex dat Obedienti Prâ—eceptis Divinis prâ—standa ita duple Perfectionis consiratio Aâ—ra est utmo nunquâ— quicquam coâ—â—â—itta adversus Praecepta Dei altera est at in nullo ullius Peccati habitu haer Islam priorem c. Smalc contr Frantz Disp 12. p. 427. There is saith Salmâ—cius a two-fold Obedience and a double consideration of Perfection The first is that we never transgress or deviate from God's Commands The other is that no one Habit of Sin remain in us The first sort of Obedience we do not think necessary to Salvation it being sufficient if there be always a Tendency towards it The other is necessary to Salvation and its observance possible That God in distributing Rewards observes another Rule than that of the Praecept even that of the Promise which contains a Grant of the Reward to him who is upright in heart VVolzogenius doth in the plainest Terms affirm Christ saith he is our King but so that as all other Kings ought to be he is at the same time our Father and Faithful Pastor His Promises are limited by certain Conditions and yet these Conditions are not over Rigidly insisted on in those cases where somewhat of Ignorance or other Infirmity intervenes The Promise of Eternal Life Requires an Observation of his Commands but he knowing our Frailties will not impute to us our daily sins if so be there remains in us an Vpright Heart and True Repentance Walzog Instr ad util Lect. lib. N.T. c. 6. and a certain Purpose of Amendment By this Distinction they endeavour to Reconcile Paul and James Tho' Paul saith Socinus affirms That we are justified by Faith and not by the VVorks of the Law and James That we are not justified by Faith alone but by VVorks yet on an explication of the words Faith and Works the Agreement between them will be made manifest For Paul doth mean by Faith such a Trust in God through Christ as necessarily begets Obedience to his Commandments an Obedience that is as the Form and Substance of Faith and by Works he understands a Perfect Obserservance of the Divine Law and all its Praecepts By which because of the weakness of our Flesh none can be justified James by Faith means such an Assent as is imperfect and without Good Works and by Works not the most perfect but that Obedience only which is necessarily required of us that we may appear Just before him And accordingly Paul declares that we are not justified by those VVorks which are in all respects conform to the Law but by a Faith informed by Obedience James we are not justified by a Faith void of Good VVorks but by VVorks which tho' they are not most perfect yet are such as may be justly denominated Obedience or Good VVorks To this Effect Socinus doth oft express himself Lect. Sacr. Fragment de Justif. which compared with what I have taken out of VVolzogenius and Smalcius is as if it had been said That we must distinguish between the Law of Pracepts or the Rule of Duty and the Law of Rewards or Rule of the Promise That by the Law as it is the Rule of Duty Perfection in the strictest sense as exclusive of the least Dissonancy from the Command is required But by the Law of the Rewaerd or Rule of the Promise that Obedience which is with a sincere and upright heart answering the
non which leaves us at as great an Uncertainty as to the Nature and Efficacy of this Condition as we were before Nor is the true sense of things at all Illustrated but rather darkned by such Notions Conditio in the best Latine Writers is variously used answering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek That is Status Fortuna Dignitas Causa Pactum initum In which of their Significations it is here to be understood is not easie to be determined In common use among us it sometimes denotes the State and Quality of Men that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sometimes a valuable Consideration of what is to be done that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But herein it is applied unto things in great variety sometimes the Principal-Procuring-Purchasing-Cause is so expressed As the Condition whereon a Man lends another an Hundred Pound is that he be Paid it again with Interest The Condition whereon a Man conveyeth his Land unto another is that he Receive so much Money for it And sometimes it signifies such things as are added to the Principal Cause whereon its Operation is suspended As a man bequeaths an Hundred Pound unto another on Condition that he come or go to such a Place and Demand it This is no valuable Consideration yet is the Effect of the Principal Cause or the Will of the Testator suspended thereon And as unto degrees of Respect unto that whereof any thing is a Condition as to Purchase Procurement Valuable Consideration necessary Presence the Variety is Endless We therefore cannot obtain a determinate sense of this word Condition but from a particular Declaration of what is intended by it wherever it is used And although this be not sufficient to exclude the use of it from the Declaration of the way and manner how we are justified by Faith yet it is so to exclude the Imposition of any Precise signification of it any other than is given it by the Matter treated of Without this every thing is left Ambiguous and uncertain whereunto it is Applied For Instance It is commonly said That Faith and New Obedience are the Condition of the New Covenant But yet because of the Ambiguous signification and various use of that Tern Condition we cannot certainly understand what is intended in the Assertion If no more be intended but that God in and by the New Covenant doth Indispensably require these things of us that is the Restipulation of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Christ from the Dead in order unto his own Glory and our full Enjoyment of all he Benefits of it it is Unquestionably true But if it be intended that they are such a Condition of the Covenant as to be by us perform'd antecedently unto the Participation of any Grace Mercy or Priviledge of it so as that they should be the Consideration and Procuring Causes of them that they should be all of them as some speak the Reward of our Faith and Obedience it is most false and not only contrary to express Testimonies of Scripture but Destructive of the Nature of the Covenant it self If it be intended that these things tho' promised in the Covenant and wrought in by the Grace of God are yet Duties Required of us in order unto the Participation and Enjoyment of the full End of the Covenant in Glory it is the Truth which is asserted But if it be said that Faith and New Obedience that is Works of Righteousness which we do are so the Condition of the Covenant as that whatever the one is ordained of God as the means of and in order to such or such an End as Justification that the other is likewise ordained unto the same End with the same kind of Efficiency Dr. O. Of. Justific or with the same Respect unto the Effect it is expresly contrary to the whole Scope and Express Design of the Apostle on that Subject But notwithstanding the various senses the word Condition is Capable of and how mischievous soever the Popish Arminian and Socinian Usages of it are there is a Sound Sense in which the Word may be used Relativa Quis Qui Quae Quod Juncta verbo futuri temporis faciunt suum Antecedens ' Conditionale Ot. Phil. Zepper Cynos Legal That Faith is a Condition if we may in our Interpreting of Scripture observe the Rules of the Juncts is as certain as if it had been expresly mention'd in the Holy Scriptures These words He that believes shall be saved Import a Condition For Relativum junctum Verbo futuri temporis conditionem facit which our Modern Divines who Reject the above-mentioned Errors do yet approve but in what Sense is our Business at this time to Explain Condition then may be Distributed into Legall and Gospel or Testamentary A Legall Condition is Obedience to the Preceptive Part of a Law giving Right to the Reward such was that of the Covenant of Works made with Adam and of this sort are the Popish Arminian and Socinian Conditions A Gospel Condition is of the same Kind with what Peculiarly belongs to Testamentary Disposition It is say the Civilians Lex Negotio apposita unde Ipsius Eventus pendet Or Lex addita negotio quae donec praestetur suspendit Eventum Which says Dr. Owen signifies such things as are added to the Principal Cause whereon its Operation is suspended As a man bequeaths an Hundred Pound unto another on Condition that he come or go to such a Place and Demand it This is no Valuable Consideration yet is the Effect of the Principal Cause or the Will of the Testator suspended thereupon To understand this Testamentary Condition we must consider that there is a Principal Cause whose Operation is suspended till a Rule added thereunto be observed There is the Promise or Donation of a Legacy which must be given according to the last Will of the Testator But to this Promise or Donation there is added a Rule that must be Regarded viz. That this Legacy be given either in such a time or Place or in such a way or manner This is the Lex addita Negotio that must be observed before the Legacy be actually given It is the Condition which till Perform'd suspends the Event namely the giving of the Legacy And as the Learned Mr. Baxter explains it 't is only the Modus Promissionis Donationis Cath. Thiol lib. 2. p. 248. vel Contractus where the fulfilling of the Promise is as Really suspended until this Modus be observed as if it had Resulted from the Observation of it Dispositio enim facta sub Conditione vel modo nibil valet nisi Conditio Nodus adimpleatur Nunquam â—nim actio in Essictu competit nisiprius oblat â praeslit â Cautione de made adimplendo quia alias locum habet Exceptio doli Mode deficiente extinguatur debitum perinde ac si deficeret Conditio Or. Phil. Zepper Cynos Legal A Disposition made on Condition or
jubeat de gratia Dei vita Aeterna dubitarâ— atque hane blasphemam ut aiunt Doctrinam inter praecipuas Causas poâ—unt cur ab ea Discedendum sibi putent blaming us for insinuating as if they taught the People to doubt of the Grace of God and of their Salvation and then make it a Reason of the Separation In the Enchiridion of Christian Religion Published by the Provincial Council at Cologne A. D. 1536. it is saith Cassander expresly granted That to our Justification it 's Required not only to believe in general that Sins are forgiven all that Repent but that my sins in Particular through Christ by Faith are forgiven me That this very Explication of Faith is in the Emperor's Book drawn up at Ratisbone and Approv'd where 't is thus It is sound Doctrine to hold that a Sinner is Justified by a lively Efficacious Faith By a Lively Faith we mean a Motion of the Holy Ghost Firma sana Doctrina est per fidem vivam efficacem Justificari peccatorem Vocamus autem sidem vivam motum Spiritus Sancti quo vere poeâ—itentes veteris vitae eriguntur ad Deum verè apprehendunt miserecordiam in Christo promissam ut jam verè sentiant quod Remissiorem Peccatorum Reconcitiationem propter meritum Christi gratuita Dei bonitate acceperunt c. Cassand Consult Art 4. whereby they who Repent of their past Life are turn'd towards God and do truly apprehend the Grace Promised in Christ so as that they do Really perceive they have Obtain'd the Pardon of their Sins and Reconciliation through the Merit of Christ However Alfonsus de Castro will have it that not many of their Church were of this Opinion that the Enchiridion of Christian Religion was not much to be regarded because Hermannus the Archbishop of Cologne who called the Provincial Council by which 't was Published was an Heretick But Binius Consiliam Coloniense Provinciale Auctoritate Hermanni Archiepiscopi qui POSTEA in Haeresin lapsus est pro Reformatione c. in the Title prefixed to this Council saith 't was after this that the Archbishop fell into Heresie And yet nevertheless it must be yielded That 't was greatly Controverted between Papist and Protestant Whether Faith was a Fiducia and lay in a firm Perswasion of our being Pardoned Or only a General Assent And as the Reformed Defended this Notion about Faith in Opposition to the Papists so they did it also against the Arminian and Socinian Bodecherus Bodecher Socin Rem 6.11 p. 79 80. in his Sociniano-Remonstrantismus doth out of the Remonstrants Confession and Writings of Socinus show an Agreement between the Socinian and Arminian in their Denying this Fiducia or Perswasion to be Saving Faith Johannes Peltius in his Harmony out of Arminius Episcopius Arnoldus the Remonstrants Conference at the Hague their Confession and Apology c. as also out of Ostorodius and Socinus puts it out of all Doubt that the Arminians and Socinians concur in their oppugning Faiths being such a firm Perswasion And out of the Belgick Confession and Catechism and the National Synod at Dort He makes it manifest that the Reformed held Faith to be a Perswasion that our Sins are Pardoned Polyander Rivet Walaeus and Thysius in their Censure of the Remonstrants Confession having shown the Parallel between the Arminians and Socinians are Positive that the very Hinge of the Controversie between them Nobiscum Remonstrantes consentiunt quod fides salâ—ifica FIDUCIA dicatur sit quam etiam Sociniani ut vidianes VERAM FIDUCIAM esse dicunt Sed in quo talis Fiducia consistat quodnam sit ejus Objectum proprium in eo totius Controversiae quam nunc omnibus Ecclessâ—s Reformatis movent vertitur CARDO Cersa c. 11. p. 158. and the Reformed Churches Turn on this Point That Saving Faith is a Fiducia or full Perswasion the Socinians themselves as these Great men Express it do Confess But the Enquiry is What is the Proper Object of this Fiducia or Perswasion Whether it be the Special Mercy of God through the Merit of Christ which he who Believes doth by this Fiducia Apply unto himself or what To this these Authors of the Censure in Opposition unto the Papist Arminian and Socinian do give it as the sense of the Reformed that the Remission of Sin de praesenti is the Proper Object of this Fiducia or Perswasion and that Justifying Faith lyeth in such a Perswasion as that by which we Believe our Sins in praesenti are Forgiven us Against this Doctrine Bellarmine Socinus and the Remonstrants raise several Objections Exposing the Notion and all that Defended it to the utmost Reproach and Contempt as if hereby the Pardon of Sin was made a Necessary Antecedent unto Justifying Faith and none could have Faith but they who had a Comfortable Assurance and that whoever could but Confidently Perswade himself his Sins were Pardoned how wickedly soever he lived had Saving Faith and was Justified Besides amongst Protestants themselves there have been of late years too many who not searching diligently enough into the Writings of the First Reformers have too hastily condemn'd them and given too much Countenance to the Unrighteous Accusations of Papists Arminians and Socinians and Encouraged the Antimonians to go on the more boldly in their Error as if they had Luther Calvin and all their Followers to Abet it whereas on a fair and equal Tryal these Charges will appear to be Groundless and Unreasonable which with much clearness may be evinced if we consider How the First Reformers held That Iustification is not before Faith That many Fears and Doubtings are consistent with it And That none who continued to live under the Reigning Power of their Lusts had or whilst so could have Saving Faith These things for the Readers greater Satisfaction I will with all the Plainness I can particularly Prove To the First That Iustification is not before Faith 1. Thus much necessarily flows from their Asserting Faith to be the Instrumental Cause of Justification If Faith be a Cause tho' but a less Principal One of Justification Justification can't be before it 'T would be the Greatest Injustice Imaginable to Insinuate that the first Reformers affirmed That Justification was before Faith and yet Faith any Cause of Justification They could not be so grosly Ignorant as to think the Effect had an Existence before its Cause That they insisted on Faiths being the Instrumental Cause of Justification is so much the Burden of their Writings that whoever consults them can't find room for the Least Doubt concerning it De Reconcil Par. 1. lib. 2. c. 11. Our Learned Wotton instances in Calvin Vrsin Hannius Bastingius Chemnitius Bucanus Willet and Perkins as Asserters of it And he might have added Paraeus Beza Peter Martyr Zanchy and many others Quenstedius Theol. Didact Polem Par. 3. c. 8. § 2. q. 6. a Lutheran mentions Gerhardus Battus Dorscheus Kester the