true â—…aith may bee severed from charity lib. 6. cap. 3. The first oâ—…t of Ioh. 12. 42 43. § 1. The second out of 1 Cor. 13. 2. § 2 3. 4. The third out of Iam. 2. 14. § 5. The fourth because in the Church there are both good and bad § 6. The fifth from the â—…ature of faith and charity § 7 8 9. The sixth from an absurdity § 10. The seventh Testimonies of Fathers § 11. Whether iustifying faith may be without speciall apprehension of Christ. lib. 6. c. 4. No iustifying faith but that which laieth hold on Christ. § 1. To beleâ—…ve in Christ is to receive and embrace him § 2. Two degrees of faith the former specially apprehending the other actually applying Christ. § 3. Of the former degree § 4. Of the latter § 5. The necessity of this speciall apprehension to iustifioâ—…tion § 6 7. The Popish obiections against speciall faith lib. 6. cap. 4. § 8. Their obiections concerning fiducia affiance § 9. By alively assent men beleeve in Christ. § 10. That affiance is not faith § 11. The subiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 5. vid. subiect The obiect of faith lib. 6. cap. 6. vid. obiect Of the actor effect of faith which is to iustifie First whether indeed it dâ—…th iustifie or only dispose to iustification lib. 6. cap. 7. § 1 2. Secondly whether faith doth iustifie formally § 3. The Papists cavill that we debase faith § 4. which themselves have 〈◊〉 § 5. Thirdly whether faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 8. the state of the â—…troversie § 1. The explanation of the three termes Fides ibid. Iustificat § 2. Sola § 3 4 5. Our proofes § 6. Testimonies of Scripture § 7. Reasons § 8 9. 10 11. Testimonies of Fathers and other â—…ters in all ages lib. 6. cap. 9. Bellarmines arguments that faith dâ—…th not iustifie aloue lib. 6. cap. 10. This question he disputeth three waies ail which are impertinent § 1 2. The first that it doth not iustifie alone by way of disposing which bee proveth by five principall arguments the first because there are seven dispositions whereof faith is one which discourse of the seven dispositions is idle and impertinent lib. 6. cap. 10. § 3. VVhether any preparative dispositions be indeed required § 4. Of the first disposition which is faith lib. 6. cap. 10. § 5. His argument because it but beginneth iustification and therefore dâ—…th not instâ—…fie alone § 6. His first proofe Heb. 11. 6. § 7. His second Rom. 10. 13 14 § 8. His third Ioh. 1. 12. § 9. Testimonies oâ—… Fathers that faith is the beginning § 10. His reasons § 11. Of feare the second disposition lib. 6. cap. 11. § 1 2. ad 6. Of hope the third disposition lib. c. 11. § 6. c. Of love the fourth lib. 6. cap. 12. 1 2. c. ad 9. Of 〈◊〉 the fifth lib. 5. cap. 12. § 9. 10. The sixth disposition a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament lib. 6. c. 12. § 11. The seventh a purpose of a new life lib. 6. cap. 12. § 12. His second principall argument because faith being alone and severed from charity and other graces cannot 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 13. His third principall argument from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the causes which may bee given why faith doth iustifie alone lib. 6. cap. 14. which are â—…hree First authority of Scriptures § â—… 3 4. Secondly â—…he will and pleasure of God § 5. Thirdly because it is the property of faith alone to receive Christ. § 6. that is to 〈◊〉 and to apply him § 7. 8. His â—…ourth principall 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith dâ—…th 〈◊〉 lib. 6. cap. 15. I. Because it iustifieth as a causâ—… â—… â—… c. ad 7. II. As the beginning of righteousnesse § 7 8 9. III. As the merit § 10. c. ad finem capitis His fifth principall argument from two principles viz. first from the formall cause of iustification Lib. 6. cap. 15. § 17. Secondly from the â—…ecessity oâ—… good workes for if faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would 〈◊〉 alone lib. 7. 〈◊〉 5. § 1 2. That good workes are necessary by way of efficiency § 3. VVhether faith doth save alone lib. 7. cap 5. § 15. Bellarmines reasons to the contrary § 16. Feare The second disposition iâ—… iustification according to the councell of Trent lib. 6. cap. 11. The finall cause of iustification see End Forme The formall cause of iustification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse l. 1. cap. 3. § 1. 7. lib. 5. per totum Private opinions of some Divines concerning the forme of iustification lib. 1. cap. 5. Their depravation of our assertion as if wee held that wee are formally iust by Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 5. § 2. Their errours § 3. The private opinioâ—…s concerning the matter and the forme of iustification very dangerous lib. 1. cap. 5. § 13 14. G God The principall cause of iustification lib. 1. cap. 2. § 1. c. The righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified is the maine doctrine of the Gospell lib. 1. cap. 1. § 1. It is called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of Christ who is God lib. 4. cap. 2 3 4. Gospell The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell lib. 7. cap. 4. § 3. The acceptions of the words Law and Gospell either more large or more stâ—…ict § 3 4. Bellarmines disproofe of the difference by uâ—… given § 5. Because in the Gospell is contained the Doctrine of good workes ibid. Whether the promise of salvation made to our obedience doth prove the merit of good workes Eternalll life promised in three respects First as a free gift lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. Secondly as our inheritance § 7. Thirdly as a free reward § 8. The Example of Gods dealing with Abraham § 9. Though eternall life bee the reward of our obedience yet it is not merited by it § 10. Some places of Scriptures which the Papists understand of causes are to bee understood as notes § 11. Or evidences § 12. Three other answeres § 13. Testimonies wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised in the Gospell alleaged by Bellarmine § 14. The I. Matth. 5. 20. lib. 7. cap. 4. § 14. II. Matth. 19. 17. § 15. III. Testimonies out of the Apostles § 16. IV. Out of the Prophets Ezec. 18. 21. § 17. V. From the condition of faith § 18. Bellarmines second argument from the differences betweene the Law and the Gospell § 19. Eight differences betweene the Law and the Gospell assigned by Bellarmine § 19. 20. Grace The moving cause of iustification l. 1. cap. 2. § 2. VVhat is meant by the word Grace lib. 3. The Papists by the grace of God by which we are iustified understand the habit of grace inherent in us lib. 3. cap. 1. § 1. The divers acceptions of the word Grace § 3. The distinction of Grace § 3. The state of the question concerning Grace
bee our righteousnesse Secondly because of his owne free grace he hath given us those meanes whereby the righteousnesse of Christ might bee communicated unto us as namely the Ministery of the Word and of the Sacraments Thirdly because of his grace hee blesseth those meanes unto us working and encreasing in us the grace of faith by which we are justified and lasâ—…ly when we doe by faith which is his gift bâ—…leeve hee freely imputâ—…th unto us the righteousnesse of Christ accepteth of us in him and in him adopteth us to be his sonnes and heires of eternall life § III. But as the Lord is gracious in justifying a beleeving sinner so hee is also righteous Rom. 3. 25 26. For thâ—…refore hath the Lord set forth his sonne and our Saviour to bee a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse through the remission of sinnes that are past by the forbearance of God to declare I say at this time his righteousnesse that he might be just and the Iustifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For such is the righteousnesse of God that hee forgiveth no mans sinne for which his Iustice is not fully satisfied by Christ neither doth hee accept of any as just but such as by imputation of Christs righteousnesse are made just in him The consideration of this justice of God in forgiving sinnes doth afford singular comfort to the faithfull For seeing the Lord forgiveth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied and seeing our Saviour hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him from hence we may be assured that as there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus so no punishment properly so called that is such a penalty as is inflicted in ordine justitiae and by way of vengeance because it cannot stand with the justice of God to punish the second time those sinnes in us for which his justice is already fully satisfied in Christ. § IV. But the actions of God the principall efficient of justification are to bee distinguished according to the distinction of the three Persons For God the Father justifieth as the primary Cause and Authour the Sonne as the meritorious cause the holy Ghost as the cause applicatory that is to say God the Father through the Sonne doth justifie us by the holy Ghost The Father I say as primary cause and that in two respects first in that hee gave his onely begotten Sonne for us and set him forth to be a 〈◊〉 through fâ—…ith in his blood that all who beleeve in him should bee iustified Rom. 3. 25. Ioh. 3. 16. Secondly as the Iudge in absolving those that beleeve and pronouncing them just in Christ. The Sonne as the Mediatour and meritorious cause and that also in two respects First as he is our Surety who paid our debt and our Redeemer who laid downe the price of our redemption for us Esay 53. 11. affording unto us the matter and merit of our justification Secondly as hee is our Intercessour and Advocate to plead for us that his merits may be imputed to us Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. God the Father therefore justifieth as the primary cause per authoritatem as the Schoolemen speake the Sonne as the secondary cause per ministerium For so it is said Esa. 53. 11. My righteous servant shall justifie many The Father as the Iudge the Sonne as the Mediator and Advocate The Father as the Creditour accepting Christs satisfaction for us the Sonne as the Surety paying our debt for us But howsoever God the Father hath given his Soâ—…ne and the Sonne hath given himselfe for us and hath paid that price and performed that obedience which is sufficient for our justification notwithstanding none are actually justified by the merits of Christ but they onely to whom they are applyed For although the sufferings of Christ be a precious salve to cure our soules yet they will not heale us unlesse they bee applyed And although his righteousnesse bee as a wedding garment to cover our nakednesse yet it will not cover us unlesse it bee put on In the third place therefore the holy Ghost may also be said to justifie us because hee doth apply unto us Christs merits unto our justification both as he is the Spirit of regeneration working in us the grace of faith by which we receive Christ unto our justification in foro coelesti and also as hee is the Spirit of adoption confirming our faith and working in us the assurance of our justification by which wee are justified in foro Conscientiae § V. Now the meanes of this application are instrumentall causes of our justification and doe justifie instrumentally And these are of two sorts viz. on Gods part and on ours For to effect this application there must bee manus Dei offerentis the hand of God offering and manus accipientis the hand of the receiver The instruments on Gods part are the ministery of the Word and Sacraments whereby the holy Ghost doth beget and confirme faith in us In respect whereof Ministers are said to justifie men Dan. 12. 3. For as touching the ministery of the Gospell first in it the benefit of the Messias as namely reconciliation adoption and justification c. is revealed and offered to all that shall beleeve and by it wee are stirred up to receive and embrace it In which respect the preaching of the Gospell is called the ministery of reconciliation and the Ministers are Gods Embassadours sent to entreat men in Gods name and in Christs stead that they would be reconciled unto God 2 Cor. 5. 18 20. Secondly the holy Ghost having thus by the ministery of the Gospell knocked at the doore of mens hearts in his good time maketh it effectuall opening their hearts to give a lively and effectuall assent to the Gospell whereby they receiving Christ and beleeving in him are justified Thus faith commeth by hearing the Word And in this respect Preachers of the Gospell are said to be the Ministers by whom men doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Thirdly in the preaching of the Gospell seconded and made powerfull by the operation of the holy Ghost the sentence of justification and remission of finnes and consequently of salvation is pronounced and concluded in the conscience of the faithfull when as out of the generall promise of the Gospell Whosoever truely belâ—…eveth in Christ hath remission of sinnes being by the Minister conditionally applyed to the hearer and absolutely assumed by the beleever after this manner If thou saith the Minister doest truely beleeve in Christ thou hast remission of sinnes and thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 9. But I saith the faithfull hearer doe truely beleeve in Christ my conscience bearing mee witnesse in the holy Ghost this conclusion is inferred as the verdict of the holy Ghost testifying with the
to be made partakers of him and in our wils by resolving both to acknowledge him to be our Saviour and also to rest upon him for salvation Having this lively assent which is the condition of the promise we are to apply the promise to our selves as belonging to us By the former degree we are justified before God in foro coelesti by the latter we are justified in foro conscientiae in the court of our owne conscience By the former we are justified properly by the latter we are not properly justified but are in some measure assured of our justification By the former I doe effectually beleeve that Iesus is the Saviour by the latter I doe truely beleeve that hee is my Saviour That faith therefore which doth justifie doth specially apprehend and apply Christ and the proper object of faith as it justifieth is Christ or the promise of salvation by Christ and therefore is often called faith in Christ or the faith of Christ. For although by that faith which justifieth I beleeve all the articles of Christian religion and every truth revealed by God in his word yet I am not justified properly by beleeving any other truth but onely by beleeving the truth neither is the promise of justification and salvation made to any other beleefe but onely to faith in Christ. § IX Thirdly by this faith apprehending and receiving Christ we are not prepared onely and disposed to justification as the Papists absurdly teach affirming that faith doth justifie even as servile feare doth by preparing onely and disposing for then a man indued with justifying faith might be as farre from justification as he that is possessed with servile feare But how can these two assertions be reconciled that faith doth justifie by disposing onely as a preparative diâ—…position and yet that it justifieth formally as an habit infused and as a part of inherent â—…ustice But the truth is that by a true justifying faith we are not prepared onely but wee are actually justified For no sooner doth a man beleeve by a true justifying faith but he is justified and entitled unto the kingdome of heaven As soone as he doth beleeve he is translated from death to life yea so soone he hath eternall life that is hee hath jus right unto the heavenly kingdome § X. Fourthly when wee say that faith doth justifie wee doe not meane that it justifieth absolutely or in respect of its owne worth and dignity and much lesse that it doth merit justification either as it is an habit or as it is an act but relatively in respect of the object which it doth apprehend that is Christ who is our righteousnesse For seeing faith doth receive Christ and make us partakers of him therefore all those benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed in the holy Scriptures to Faith as to justifie to save c. not that these effects are to bee ascribed to the vertue of faith absolutely but relatively in respect of the object So when it was said to the woman thy faith hath saved thee the meaning is Christ received by faith hath saved thee Thus by the faith of Peter and Iohn the Creeple was cured Act. 3. 6. yet not by any power or holinesse of theirs vers 12. But the name of Christ that is Christ himselfe by faith in his name as the instrument did cure him vers 16. so the name of Christ by faith in his name doth justifie and save Act. 10. 43. Iohn 20. 31. And that faith doth not justifie in respect of its owne worth appeareth by this evidence because the faith of divers men though unequall in degrees doth justifie alike and therefore is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of equall value as Saint Peter speaketh of all the faithfull to whom he writeth 2 Pet. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as the Latine interpreter translateth to them that have obtained coequall faith with us in the righteousnesse of our God and Saviour Iesus Christ. For it is not faith properly which doth justifie but the righteousnesse of Christ received by faith The almes received by a weake hand releeveth the party as well as that which is received by a strong hand because it is not the hand properly which releeveth but the almes And for the same cause the righteousnesse of justification is equall in all that are justified neither doth it in the same persons admit of degrees For it is the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ to which considered as created and finite nothing can bee added § XI Fifthly from hence we learne the true meaning of that question whether we be justified by faith or by workes not as opposing the inward grace of faith to the outward acts of obedience which indeed are the fruits of faith but as opposing the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith to that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves and performed by our selves § XII Sixthly when we say that faith doth justifie alone two things are implyed First that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith and not by any righteousnesse in herent in us Secondly that this righteousnesse of Christ by which alone wee are justified is apprehended by faith onely Not that justifying faith is or can bee alone but because there being many graces in the faithfull which all have their severall commendations yet none of them serveth to apprehend Christs righteousnesse but faith onely and yet that faith which is alone severed from all other inward graces and outward obedience doth not justifie either alone or at all because it is not a true and â—… lively but a counterfeit and a dead faith For even as the eye among all the parts of the body which all have their severall uses hath onely the faculty of seeing and yet that eye which is separated from the rest of the parts doth see neither alone nor at all because it is but the carcase of an eye So among all the graces of the soule it is the office of faith alone as the eye of the soule to looke upon him that was figured by the brazen Serpent yet if it should bee severed from the rest it were dead For as Saint Iames saith that faith which is alone and by it selfe is dead And as the eye in respect of being is not alone yet in respect of seeing it is alone so faith which is not alone doth justifie alone § XIII Seventhly and lastly when we say that faith doth justifie alone wee were never so absurd as the Papists absurdly charge us as if wee meant that faith alone doth sanctifie For although nothing in us doth conferre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof in which sense wee say it justifieth alone yet in the subject that is the party justified many graces doe concurre with faith as the necessary fruits thereof wherein as also in
our obedience our sanctification standeth wherefore faith which justifieth alone is but one of those many graces wherein besides our obedience our sanctification doth consist CAP. III. Of the Essentiall causes of Iustification viz. The matter and the forme § I. BUt let us come to the essentiall causes of justification that is to say the matter and the forme The matter of justification considered as it is an action of God is that which the Lord imputeth unto us for righteousnesse and accepteth as our righteousnesse and that is the righteousnesse of Christ which I noted in the definition when I said imputing to a beleeving sinner the righteousnesse of Christ. The Papists confounding not onely justice and justification but also the matter which is the materiall cause and the subject say that the matter of justification is the soule of man or at the least the will of man because that is the seat of justice whereas indeed of justification though passively understood not the soule or the will is the subject but the person or the whole man For justification is totius suppositi of the person and not of any part or faculty of man But for the better clearing of this point let us briefly consider other not unlike actions First when Rebecca arrayed or clothed her sonne Iacob with the raiment of Esau her elder sonne the matter of this action was that which being applyed unto him did clothe him viz. Esau's garment the forme of that action was the applying of it to him which was the indution or putting it on For she clothed him by putting upon him Esau's garment So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us our eldest brothers righteousnesse which is our wedding garment Which similitude is used not only by Saint Ambrose but also by Pighius himselfe as heereafter shall bee shewed The matter therefore of justification is Christs righteousnesse the forme is the imputing thereof Secondly the actions of redemption reconciliation and justification in substance are the same As therefore the Lord redeemeth us and reconcileth us by applying unto us and accepting for us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome and as the propitiation for God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe 2 Cor. 5. 19. so hee justifieth us by applying unto us and accepting for us the same righteousnesse and merits of Christ as our righteousnesse As the matter therefore of our redemption is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome which Christ payed for us the matter of reconciliation is the propitiatory sacrifice which Christ offered for us the matter of justification is Christs righteousnesse which hee had and performed for us so the forme of redemption as it is Gods action is the applying unto us the price of ransome which Christ payed and the accepting of it in our behalfe the forme of reconciliation the applying unto us the propitiation made by Christ and accepting of it in our behalfe the forme of justification the applying or imputing of Christs righteousnesse unto us and accepting it in our behalfe In like manner the Papists if they would consider Iustification as an action of God should according to their owne doctrine conceive that of their first justification whereby as they teach a sinner is made righteous by infusion of righteousnesse the matter is the righteousnesse infused or inherent the forme the infusion thereof because according to their doctrine the Lord in the first justification maketh a man righteous by infusion of righteousnesse The Papists confesse after a sort the righteousnesse of Christ to bee the merit of justification but they deny it to be the matter thereof whereas indeed it is both the matter as justification is the act of God imputing it the merit as justification is passively understood because for it wee are justified the matter I say of Gods justifying us the merit of our being justified And this may appeare by the contrary For justification as hath beene said and shall bee proved is opposed to condemnation As therefore sinne is not onely the matter of condemnation which is the imputation of sinne but also the merit both of the sentence and of the punishment by the sentence awarded so the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of justification as being that which God imputeth to us and also the merit both of the sentence of absolution and of eternall life unto which we are accepted § II. But of the matter and forme of justification whereof I am hereafter to treat at large of the matter in the whole fourth booke of the forme in the fifth I will here onely set downe briefly the orthodox doctrine of the reformed Churches and maintaine it against the private opinions of some protestant Divines who are not sound in these points The matter of justification is that righteousnesse wherein wee stand perfectly righteous before God This in many places is called the righteousnesse of God As Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. 2 Cor. 5. 21. 2 Pet. 1. 1. And is therefore called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of that person who is God and therefore is not our righteousnesse but his not infused into us but inherent in his person and imputed to us being without us in him Heare then wee are to consider whether this righteousnesse of God be the righteousnesse of Christ as hee is God or as hee is mediator betwixt God and man the man Christ Iesus The righteousnesse of Christ as he is God is the essentiall righteousnesse of the Godhead By which dwelling in man Osiander supposed them to be justified But this being the essentiall and uncreated righteousnesse of God which is his essence and therefore himselfe cannot be the righteousnesse of any who is not God and therefore if we should be justified thereby we should also bee deified Againe the essentiall righteousnesse of God being the essence of God and the very Godhead cannot be communicated to any creature much lesse can it become the accidentall righteousnesse of a creature And farther it being the righteousnesse of the Godhead is the common righteousnesse of the whole Trinity the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost And therefore if we should be justified thereby we should be justified by the righteousnesse of the Father and of the holy Ghost as well as by the righteousnesse oâ—… the Sonne § III. It is not therefore the righteousnesse of the Godhead Is it then the righteousnesse of the Manhood I answer it is the righteousnesse of Christ our Mediator who is both God and man which he in his humanity had and performed in the dayes of his flesh for us And this is to bee understood not of a part but of the whole righteousnesse of Christ which was either inherent in the man Christ or performed by him whether to fulfill the Commandements or to satisfie the Curse of the Law for
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
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.
accepted of him and rewarded by him but wee deny that any man is justified by it This question therefore is concerning the matter of justification For whereas justification considered as an action of God is his making or constituting a man righteous either by Christs righteousnesse imputed as wee teach according to the Scriptures or by righteousnesse infused as the Papists hold It is therefore apparent that as according to our Doctrine the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter and the imputation thereof the forme of justification so according to their doctrine inherent righteousnesse should be the matter of justification and the infusion of it the forme But howsoever wee differ in respect of logicall termes in setting downe the state of this controversie because they against reason make inherent righteousnesse the forme of justification yet the true state of the controversie betweene them and us is this whether wee bee justified before God by Christs righteousnesse which is out of us in him imputed to us or by that righteousnesse which being infused of God is inherent in us whether it bee the righteousnesse of God as the Apostle calleth it that is of Christ who is God inherent in him or a righteousnesse from God inherent in us we hold the former the Papists the latter § II. Now this is the principall point of difference betweene them and us in this whole controversie and that in two respects First because the righteousnesse of God whereby wee are justified is the principall matter contained or revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 16 17. For which cause wee who maintaine justification by that righteousnesse of God which is taught in the Gospell which the Pápists oppugne are worthily called the professours of the Gospell whereof the Papists are professed enemies Secondly because upon this all the other points of difference doe depend For if wee were justified by righteousnesse inherent then it would follow First that to justifie were to make just by infusion of righteousnesse inherent Secondly that wee are justified by the grace of God or rather graces inherent in us Thirdly that the forme of justification were infusion of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth justifie as a part of inherent and habituall righteousnesse and therefore also that it doth not justifie alone Fifthly that workes justifie as our actuall righteousnesse But on the contrary if wee bee justified by that righteousnesse which is not inherent in us but out of us in Christ then it followeth first that to justifie doth not signifie making righteous by justice inherent Secondly that we are not justified by inherent grace but by the gracious favour of God accepting us in Christ. Thirdly that wee are not justified by infusion but by imputation of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth not justifie as a part of inherent righteousnesse but as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Fifthly that workes doe not justifie as causes to worke but as fruits and signes to declare and manifest our justification § III. And as the proofe of this inferreth the rest so the rest being proved are so many proofes of this For first if to justifie doe never in the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse then wee are not justified by inherent righteousnesse neither is justification by inherent righteousnesse that justification which the Scriptures teach Secondly if wee bee not justified by grace inherent then not by habituall or inherent righteousnesse if by the gracious favour of God freely without respect of any cause of justification in us then not by workes or inherent righteousnesse Thirdly if by imputà tion of Christs righteousnesse then not by infusion of inherent justice Fourthly if by faith as it is the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse then not by righteousnesse inherent Fifthly if not by workes as any cause then not by inherent righteousnesse But the two first I have fully and clearely proved already the first in the second booke and the second in the third And the rest I shall by the grace of God demonstrate in their due place § IV. That which hath already beene said both here and heretofore together with that which shall hereafter bee produced to prove the other three points remaining to bee proved might bee a sufficient demonstration of this point But because the proofe of this point being the principall doth prove all the rest as I have shewed therefore I will not onely bring a supply of divers arguments by disproving the popish assertion and proving our owne but also answere the cavills and objections of the Papists And first I will prove our assertion and disprove theirs joyntly and together and then severally I will disprove their assertion viz. that wee are justified by righteousnesse inherent in ourselves and prove ours to wit that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him CHAP. II. That we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by that which is inherent in us proved joyntly by three arguments § I. FIrst therefore That righteousnesse whereby we are justied is Gods righteousnesse and not ours The righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him is Gods righteousnesse that which is inherent in us is ours Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by that which is inherent in our selves The former part of the proposition is proved out of Rom. 1. 17. and 3. 21. Thus The righteousnesse which there is said to be revealed in the Gospell is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified This proposition is confessed of all The righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse which is revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 17. In the Gospell is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just by faith shall live Rom. 3. 21. The righteousnesse of God is without the Law manifested viz. in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve Therefore the righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified The whole proposition in both the parts is proved out of Rom. 10. 3. where it is not onely signified that wee are justified by Gods righteousnesse and not by our owne but there is also such an opposition made betwixt Gods righteousnesse and ours in the point of justification that whosoever seeke to be justified by their owne rigâ—…teousnesse cannot be justified by the righteousnesse of God Wherefore Paul in the question of his owne justification renounceth his owne righteousnesse desiring to bee found in Christ not having his owne righteousnesse which is of the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith Phil. 3. 9. § 2. The assumption in respect of the former part viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse is easily proved first
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
matter of charity for the mater is that which is formed and as it were animated by the forme but the consequent is absurd therefore the antecedent And againe howsoever faith worketh those acts which I called mediate or imperatos by meanes of other graces which acts doe tend to sanctification for which cause faith doth not sanctifie alone yet the actus eliciti or immediate acts of faith which are to believe in Christ and by beleeving to receive and by receiving him who is our righteousnesse to justifie faith worketh neiby charity nor by any other grace and therefore it justifieth alone § VI. Yea but without charity faith is informis with it it is formata Answ. This distinction of faith that it is either formata or informis in a right sence may bee admitted as namely if by forme bee understood the integrity or inward efficacie and if that be called formata which is sound unfained lively and effectuall and that informis which iâ—… uneffectuall dead and counterfeit For that distinction is intimated by the Apostle when he speaketh either of faith unfained or contrariwise of a dead faith for in the former it is implyed that there is also a fained and a counterfeit faith and in the latter that there is also a lively faith And so wee admit this distinction that faith is either Formata which is lively and unfained Informis which is dead and counterfeit But in the popish sence it is to be rejected and that in three respects First because they propound this distinction as agreeing to a true justifying faith as if a true faith might be without forme when as that which is without forme is dead and counterfeit and no more to bee called a true justifying faith than the carcase or counterfeit of a man is to be called a man For howsoever such a faith may perhaps be true in respect of the object because it is of the truth yet it is not true in respect of the integrity efficacy and soundnesse thereof and that which is not truely faith is not faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or indeed Hee that saith either that he beleeveth that there is a God and in deeds doth deny him and that he is just and feareth not to offend him or good and doth not love him or omniprâ—…sent and omniscient and feareth not to play the hypocrite before him c. such a one doth not indeed and in truth beleeve that which he proâ—…esseth himselfe to beleeve He that saith he knoweth Christ that is beleeveth in him and hath not a desire and care to keep his Commandements hee is a lyar and the truth is not in him That faith which is dead and counterfeit cannot justifie or save a man as Saint Iames sheweth For howsoever faith alone doth justifie yet that faith which is alone doth not justifie neither alone nor at al becauseit is not a true and lively but a dead and counterfeit faith Neithercan that be a true justifying faith which is common to the wicked both men and Angels Neither may wee omit Bellarmines confession in this place Here saith hee the Apostle to prevent occasion of errour explaineth what manner of faith that is that justifieth non quaecunque fides sed quae per dilectionem operatur not every faith but that which worketh by love § VII Secondly this distinction is to bee rejected being understood in the popish sense wherein it is implyed that charity is the forme and as it were the soule of faith which opinion I have already confuted Neither can they ground it upon Iames 2. 26. As the body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead For if the habit of charity cannot bee the forme of faith as I have shewed then much lesse can good workes which are the outward fruits both of faith and of charity bee the soule of faith it selfe Of the profession indeed of faith a godly life is as it were the soule and without which it is dead but of faith it selfe it is not anima the soule but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the breath as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to breath doth properly fignifie in which sense it is often used being called the Spirit of the mouth the spirit of the nostrils And in this sense it may be said that as the body without breathing is judged to bee dead so faith without workes which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith is also judged to be dead not because it ever had lived but because it wanteth life § VIII Thirdly this distinction is to bee rejected because as Bellarmine saith it is to be understood of one and the same faith which being informis may become formata and being formata may become informis againe remayning still the same But fides informis is not of the same kinde with that which is formata or justifying faith as things which be without life are not of the same kinde with those that are living or as counterfeits are not of the same kinde with those things which they doe resemble Besides justifying faith is divine the informis is humane that infusa infused and supernaturall this acquisita required by the strength of nature in the use of meanes that a grace of regeneration proper to the Elect this a gift of illumination onely common to the reprobate that is vera being truely that whereof it beareth the name this simulata not being that truly which it is called but aequivocè that doth so beleeve in Christ that it doth imbrace him and willeth and desireth at the least to apply him to the beleever this so beleeveth Christ that either it is joyned with horrour as in the Devils and desperate sinners or is severed from any will or desire of application this is without fruit and root and therefore is temporary that hath both root and fruit and never faileth And howsoever that which is informis may by Gods grace bee changed into formatam yet that which is formata can never be informis No more than hee who is once borne of God can be unborne againe The rest of his arguments serve to prove that faith is not the whole formall cause of justification that is as wee speake according to the Scriptures of sanctification which we deny not for wee doe acknowledge a concurrence of many graces with faith unto sanctification As for justification we deny faith either in whole or in part to bee the formall cause thereof Neither doth any other of his arguments prove that either charity or any other grace doth with faith concurre unto justification CAP. XII That justification doth nâ—…t câ—…nsist in renâ—…vation § I. HIs second ranke of arguments proving indirectly justification by righteousnesse inherent is propounded in his sixt Chapter the title whereof is this That oâ—…r justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone Neither doe
faith of all the faithfull though unequall in degrees in some greater in some lesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a-like precious in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ 2 Pet. 1. 1. which is an evidence that faith doth not justifie in respect of its owne dignity or worthinesse but in respect of the object which it doth receive which being the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ unto which nothing can be added is one and the same to all that receive it Of this see more lib. 1. cap. 2. § 10. § IV. Here now the Papists because wee deny faith to justifie in respect of its owne worthinesse and merit take occasion to inveigh against us as if we made it Titulum sine re and as it were a matter of nothing Which is a malicious and yet but a frivolous cavill For first in respect of justification we acknowledge it to bee the onely instrument or hand to receive Christ to be the condition of the Covenant of Grace to which the Promises of remission of sinnes and of Salvation are made without which the promises of the Gospell doe not appertaine unto us and without which our blessed Saviour doth not save us Secondly in respect of Sanctification wee attribute all that and more which the Papists ascribe unto it in respect of their imaginary justification That it is the beginning the foundation and root of all inherent righteousnesse the mother of all other sanctifying Graces which purifieth the heart and worketh by love without which it is impossible to please God without which whatsoever is done is sinne § V. But howsoever here the Papists would seeme to plead for faith yet the truth is that as they have abolished the benefit of justification as it is taught in the holy Scriptures so with it they have taken away the justifying faith For though they retaine the name yet in their doctrine there is no such thing For first to faith they doe not ascribe the power to justifie but only to be a disposition one among seven even such a one as servile feare is of a man unto inherent righteousnesse or to the grace of Sanctification it selfe being not as yet a justifying or sanctifying grace Secondly that faith being infused becommeth the beginning and a part of formall inherent righteousnesse But so small a part they assigne unto it that they say that the habit of formall righteousnesse differeth not from the habit of charity so that in justification it hath no use at all and in sanctification charity is all in all which is a manifest evidence that the Church of Rome is fallen away from the ancient doctrine of the faith For both Scriptures and Fathers every where ascribe justification to faith and not to Charitie to faith and not to workes but the Papists ascribe the first justification to charitie which they make to be the onely formall cause of justification which as themselves teach is but one and the second justification they assigne to workes CHAP. VIII Whether we be justified by Faith alone The state of the Controversie and some reasons on our part § I. NOw I come to the third question which is the principall concerning faith whether we be justified by faith alone as wee with all antiquity doe hold or not by faith alone but also by other habits of grace as charitie and the rest and by the workes of grace which the Papists hold to concur in us to the act of justification as the causes thereof Where first we are to explaine our assertion and afterwards both to prove and to maintaine it And great reason there is that wee should explaine it because the Papists most wickedly against their owne knowledge calumniate our doctrine in this point I will therefore explaine all the three termes Fides justificat sola Faith doth justifie alone for by Faith wee doe not understand as I have shewed before neither the profession of faith or faith onely professed which S. Iames doth deny to justifie nor that faith which is a bare assent which is the faith of Papists and is common to them with the Divels and with other hypocrites and wicked men for such a faith we deny to justifie either alone or at all but a true lively and effectuall beleefe in Christ being a speciall apprehension or receiving and embracing of Christ and of the promises of the Gospell joyned with application or at least with a true desire will and endevour thereof The which faith also wee deny to be true if in some measure it doe not purifie the heart if it doe not worke by love if it cannot be demonstrated by good workes § II. Now for the word justifie shall I need to tell you that by justifying we doe not meane sanctifying And yet such is the blinded malice of the papists as that because they wickedly confound justification and sanctification which we carefully according to the Scriptures distinguish they beare the world in hand that our assertion is this in effect that faith alone doth sanctifie and that nothing concurreth to sanctification but faith onely and consequently that wee teach the people so they can perswade themselves that they have faith they need not take care either for other graces or for a godly life But howsoever we hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee doe not hold that it doth sanctifie alone but that our sanctification is partly habituall unto which with faith concurre the habits of other sanctifying graces as hope charity c. and partly actuall which is our new obedience in the practice of good workes § III. But the word sela alone doth most displease the Papists who will needs part stakes with Christ in their justification This therefore is to be explaned And first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we doe not meane fidem solitariam that faith which is alone neither doe we in construction joyne sola with fides the subject but with justificat the predicate meaning that true faith though it bee not alone yet it doth justifie alone Even as the eye though in respect of being it is not alone or if it be it is not a true and a living but a dead eie which seeth neither alone nor at all yet in respect of seeing unto which no other member doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of that faculty it is truely said to see alone so faith though in respect of the being thereof it is not alone or if it bee it is not a true and lively but a counterfeit and dead faith yet in respect of justifying unto which act no other grace doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of apprehending and receiving Christ it is truely said to justifie alone wherefore as the brazen Serpent which was a figure of Christ was life up and set on high in the wildernesse that whosoever was bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking onely
the holy Ghost perpetually making such an opposition betweene them as that they cannot stand together If therefore we be not justified by the righteousnesse of workes prescribed in the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is then we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith alone Or thus The righteousnesse whereby wee are justified is either inherent in our selves and performed by our selves which the Scriptures call the righteousnesse of workes or that which being out of us is inherent in Christ and by him performed for us which is the righteousnesse of faith A third cannot be named and by both wee cannot be justified If therefore we be not justified by the former which I have sufficiently or rather abundantly proved heretofore then are we justified by the latter alone For if of two and no more but two you take away one you leave the other alone So is it in all dis-junctions consisting of two opposites sine medio The one being removed the other only remaineth § IX That by which alone the promise of justification by which alone justification by which alone Christ himselfe who is our righteousnesse is received that alone justifieth By faith alone the promise by it alone justification by it alone Christ himselfe is received For that is the proper office of faith For if faith receive the Promise and justification and Christ himselfe which no other grace in us can doe then it is the proper office of faith But faith receiveth the promise wherein justification is offered Gal. 3. 22. it receiveth remission of sinnes or justification Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. 13. 39. it receiveth Christ himselfe Ioh. 1. 12. which no other grace can doe as it is evident therefore faith alone doth justifie § X. That which is the onely condition of the Covenant of Grace by that alone we are justified because to that alone justification is promised Faith is the onely condition of the Covenant of grace which is therefore called lex fidei therefore by faith alone we are justified If against the assumption it be objected that charity and obedience and other virtues are also required I answere that these are not the conditions of the Covenant but the things by Covenant promised to them that beleeve If we beleeve God hath promised to justifie us and being justified or redeemed to sanctifie and to save us See Luk. 1. 73 74 75. Ier. 31. 33 34. Heb. 8. 10 11 12. Gal. 3. 9. 14. 22. Charity obedience c. are the conditions of the Covenant of workes Doe this and thou shalt live but the condition of the Covenant of grace is Beleeve and thou shalt bee inabled to walke in the obedience of the law thou shalt receive the gift of the Spirit and finally thou shalt bee saved For being by faith freed from sinne and become Servants to God you have your fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life Rom. 6. 22. § XI The holy Scriptures wheresoever they speake of that by which wee are justified mention nothing in us but faith not workes nor other graces unlesse it bee to exclude them from the act of justification Which is a plaine evidence that faith doth justifie alone Bellarmine answereth that it doth not follow that because faith onely is mentioned therefore it justifieth alone For sometimes other things as not only other virtues but the Sacraments also are mentioned which notwithstanding doe not justifie alone Whereunto I answere first that in the point of justification faith is mentioned alone and no other grace with it even where the holy Ghost treateth ex professo of justification and of the causes thereof Secondly that to no other grace mentioned either alone or with others is justification any where ascribed Neither are the Papists able to produce any testimony out of the holy Scriptures to prove it As for those which Bellarmine alleageth out of Tit. 3. 5. Ephes. 5. 26. they are not to the purpose as speaking of the outward meanes which we deny not to concurre with faith That out of Luk. 7. 47. hath already beene cleared that love there noteth not the cause but the signe of forgivenesse That out of Rom. 8. 24. sheweth that in this life we are not saved re but spe not in fruition but in expectation Which hope or expectation as it is termed vers 23. is no cause either of justification or of salvation Thirdly that the justification attributed to Sacraments doth not hinder justification by faith alone For when wee say that faith doth justifie alone we meane that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely as hath beene shewed As for the Sacraments we acknowledge them to be externall meanes and as it were manus offerentis as faith is manus recipientis And that the Sacraments bee so farre srom hindering justification by faith alone as that they doe confirme it as being the sealâ—…s of that righteousnesse which is by faith CHAP. IX Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers and of others in all ages for justification by faith alone § I. NOw that this Doctrine is no novelty but that which in all ages hath been the received Doctrine of the Christian Churches I will prove by the Testimony of the Christian Writers in all ages but chiefly of the ancient Fathers I. Iustin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To see God it is granted men by faith alone And by what alone wee see God by that alone wee are justified Againe what other thing could cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse In whom could we being sinners and impious bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God By the righteousnesse therefore of Christ onely which is received and put on by faith onely are our sinnes covered In Christ alone those that are sinners in themselves are justified therefore not by righteousnesse inherent but onely by the righteousnesse of faith II. Irenaeus whom I finde cited and approved by Augustine Men can no otherwise be saved from the stroke of the old serpent but by beleeving in Christ Even as the Israelites who were bitten by the fiery serpents could no otherwise be healed but by looking on the brasen serpent III. Clemens Alex. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith alone is the Catholike salvation of mankinde Againe the power of God alone without demonstrations is able to save 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith alone IV. Origen more plainely The Apostle saith that the justification which is by faith alone is sufficient so that a man beleeving only is justified and instanceth in the examples of the penitent theefe Luk. 23. and of the penitent woman Luk. 7. both which were justified by faith alone And in that place as hath beene observed by others Origen useth the exclusive particle sola seven times Bellarmine answereth that Origen only excludeth externall workes when power and occasion is wanting as in the
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
grave of sinne § VII And here I am to mention two things both for the comfort of true though weake Christians and also for the detestation of popery These beginnings of faith of hope of love of amendment of life the Papists doe not acknowledge to be graces infused but the fruits of nature assisted with Gods special helpe by which they being holpen of God doe prepare and dispose themselves to the grace of justification which is given to man according to their owne preparative dispositions But forasmuch as these beginnings of faith and other vertues are not the fruits of nature for in our flesh there is no good thing and that which is borne of the flesh is flesh the very disposition of our nature being enmity against God but of the regenerating spirit the weake Christians therefore though the graces of God in them are weake and small even as a graine of Mustard-seed yet if they bee true and unfained they are to be perswaded that the Lord who in his children accepteth the will for the deed will accept of them as the fruits of his spirit seeing hee professeth that hee will not quench the smoaking flaxe nor breake the bruised reed And surely if the Spirit of God bee the author of no charity but that which is perfect then is he author of none in this life wherein wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit 2. The Papists doe not hold themselves to bee justified untill perfect charity bee infused into them by infusion whereof all sinne is expelled So that in any one of them being justified no sinne remaineth And therefore whiles sinne remaineth in them as it doth alwayes even in the best during this life they are not justified No marvell then that Papists cannot be assured of their justification seeing they may bee assured that they are never justified because they never attaine to perfect righteousnesse in this life and because sinne doth alwayes remaine in them § VIII Our third argument I propound thus None that is a child of wrath and an enemy to God can love God whiles he continueth in that estate But untill their reconciliation and justification all men are children of wrath and enemies to God Therefore before reconciliation and justification no man can love God Bellarmine answereth that a man may love God though God be angry with him which is in respect of Gods children who are justified and reconciled unto him but the question is whether those that are not yet reconciled and justified can love God wee know that Gods anger may stand with reconciliation For God is angry with his dearest Children when they sinne against him and in his anger hee doth also correct them with whom notwithstanding he is reconciled for he doth correct them in love and for their good Gods children therefore may love God where they know him to be justly angry with them but they that are enemies as all are untill they be reconciled doe not love God but the very disposition of their corrupt nature is enmity against God § IX His fifth disposition is Penitencie which as he saith is a sorow for sinne and a detestation of it which I deny not ordinarily to be a disposition in the children of God to repentance But this is to be understood of the godly sorrow which some call contrition which is not to be found in naturall men which is a sorrow conceived not so much for the punishment deserved as for the offence of God whom they have displeased and dishonoured being so gracious a God unto them This proceedeth from faith and from love Of this it is said 2 Cor. 7. 10. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 godly sorrow worketh repentance never to be repented of As for that sorrow which is conceived not for the offence of God but for the shame and punishment which follow sinne which some call attrition it is of the same nature with servile fearâ—… which though in it owne nature it rather driveth from God than draweth to him as we see in Iudas yet God is pleased sometimes to use it as a meanes to draw his elect unto him But though contrition dispose men to repentance and attrition be used sometimes as a preparative to faith because humiliation is the way to exaltation yet neither of both justifie and therefore for all them faith alone doth justifie § X. But let us examine his proofes wherein though his premisses be very weake yet his conclusion as allwayes is very confident His proofes are these Act. 11. 18. Therefore God hath given to the Gentiles penance unto life 2 Cor. 7. 10. The sorrow which is according unto God worketh penance to salvation that is stable Ezek. 18. 27. when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall quicken his soule What can be more cleare if penance be given of God unto life that is to obtaine life if sorrow for sinne undertaken for God worke penance to salvation if he which doth penance doth quicken his owne soule how doth faith alone justifie or how doth penance not justifie Answ. When I consider your arguments I wonder at your confidence The word which in the vulgar latine is in the two first places translated poenitentia and by the Rhemists penance in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not sorrow for sin but repentance it selfe which importeth a change of a mans mind and disposition and is not a forerunner but a consequent of justification before God which in the first place is called repentance unto life because though it bee no cause but a consequent of justification yet it is the way to life and a necessary forerunner to glorification The godly sorrow in the second place is commended as an excellent disposition to the renewing ofrepentance in the faithfull not to bee repented of The third Bellarmine readeth thus when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall make alive his soule as if a wicked man could either turne himselfe from his wickednesse or quicken his owne soule or as if a dead man could restore himselfe to life But then is the wicked turned when God doth turne him and then is his soule quickned when God doth quicken him The words are when the wicked turneth from his wickednesse hee shall preserve his soule from death that is as it is expounded in the next verse he shall live Howsoever this place speaketh not of any foregoing disposition but of repentance it selfe which in order of nature never goeth before justification though many times it be discerned before it as the cause many times is knowne by the effect But not whatsoever is necessary to salvation doth justifie All the graces of sanctification and namely repentance have their necessary use But justification is ascribed onely to faith because it is the onely instrument ordained of God to receive Christ who onely is our righteousnesse § XI His sixth
disposition is a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament by which as he conceiveth justification is conferd Answ. If we did hold with them as we doe not that the Sacraments doe conferre grace ex opere operato and that without them no man could be justified and therefore also that they who would be justified ought to desire and purpose to be made pertakers of the Sacrament yet what would this hinder the justification by faith alone which if Bellarmine disprove not all that hee saith is impertinent How much more if neither the Sacraments doe conferre grace according to the Popish conceit nor the desire of the Sacrament be a disposition to justification All that in this case can truely be said is that forasmuch as God in his great mercy hath ordained the Sacraments as effectuall meanes to confirme our faith and to seale unto us our justification that it is a signe of a prophane and unsanctified heart to neglect or to despise such holy ordinances of God § XII His seventh disposition is the purpose of a new life and of observing all the commandements of God without which wee ought not to be made pertakers of the Sacraments Answ. This purpose of a new life is that which the Scriptures call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentance which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification Seeing therefore those adulti which come to the Sacraments ought to bring with them this purpose it followeth that they ought first to be justified before God by faith as Abraham was and then to receive the Sacrament as a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith So that this purpose though it be necessary to salvation yet neither doth justifie nor dispose to justification The place which hee citeth out of Ezek. 18. 31. is an exhortation to both the parts of sanctification viz. mortification in those words cast from you all your transgressions vivification in those and make you a new heart and a new spirit But of justification he speaketh not Neither are we any where exhorted thereto or to the parts thereof which are not our acts but the actions of God himselfe who onely remitteth our sinnes and accepteth of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his righteousnesse Thus much of his first principall argument taken from the seven dispositions CHAP. XIII Bellarmines second principall argument that faith doth not justifie alone because being severed from Love c. it cannot justifie § I. BELLARMINâ—… second principall argument is this If Faith be severed from Hope and Love and other virtues without doubt it cannot justifie therefore faith alone doth not justifie Answ. If the meaning of his consequent be this therefore that faith which is alone doth not justifie I grant the whole for though faith doe justifie alone yet that which is alone sâ—…vered from Charity and other graces doth not justifie as heretofore hath beene shewed But though true justifying faith be never alone but is alwayes accompanied with other graces yet it justifieth alone though it never be without other graces yet it justifieth without them c. his consequence therefore I deny which hee laboureth to prove thus If the whole force of justifying were in faith alone insomuch that other virtues though present conferre nothing to justification then faith might justifie as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest but that it cannot doe therefore the force of justifying is not wholly in faith but partly in it and partly in the rest Answ. This consequence also I doe deny and doe referre you to the similitude of the eye heretofore propounded which though it be not alone yet doth see alone and though whiles it liveth it cannot be severed from the other parts of the body yet it seeth without them against which similitude Bellarmine might as well argue after this manner If the whole force of seeing were in the eye alone insomuch that the rest of the members being present conferre nothing to the act of sight then the eye might see as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest But every body knoweth the inconsequence of this proposition For though to the act of seeing other members doe not concurre with the eye as any causes thereof yet to the true being of the eye their presence is necessary for it cannot be a true living organicall eye and instrument of sight that hath not union with the other parts and is not animated by the same soule Even so I answere concerning faith that although to the act of justifying other graces doe not concurre with faith as any causes thereof yet to the true being of faith their presence is necessary For it cannot be a true lively justifying faith which is severed from all other graces of Sanctification and is not wrought and made effectuall by the Spirit of regeneration § II. Now he commeth to prove the antecedent of his argument viz. that conditionall proposition if faith may be separated from hope and love and the other virtues withoâ—…t doubt it cannot justifie But he unskilfully troubleth both himselfe and his reader with his conditionall proposition which as it is not fitly made the antecedent of an Enthymeme so is it not easily concluded An Enthymeme is an unperfect Syllogisme which is to be made up or perfected by adding that part of the Syllogisme which is wanting In this Enthymeme though the antecedent be a conditionall proposition yet the proposition or Major of the Syllogisme which also is conditionall is wanting and ought thus to be supplyed If faith alone doth justifie then it may justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues But it cannot justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues Therefore faith doth not justifie alone In stead of this simple or categoricall assumption he assumeth hypothetically if faith be severed from hope and love and other virtues then without doubt it cannot justifie This assumption he endevoureth to prove by three arguments but to no purpose For though wâ—…e doe constantly hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee deny that faith being alone and severed from all other virtues doth justifie either alone or â—…t all and therefore to that faith which is alone we attribute lesse than the Papists themselves But he will needs prove it first because faith according to our doctrine doth justifie relatively and consequently faith and justice are relatives ther fore where faith is there must needs bâ—… jâ—…stice he mâ—…neth justice inherent for one relative cannot be withoâ—…t the other This saith he oâ—…r adversaries will admit willingly who teach that by every sinâ—… faith is lost § III. Answ. We doe indeed teach that faith doth not justifie as it is an habit or gift inherent in us or in respect of its owne worthinesse but relatively or in respect of the object which it doth receive As the hand which receiveth the almes releeveth the poore man in
to three heads The first is the authority of Gods word For if the Scriptures any where expresly say that faith alone doth justifie it must he beleeved though no other cause could be rendred The second is the will of God justifying namely because it hath pleased God to grant justification upon the onely condition of faith The third is the nature of faith it selfe because it is the properâ—…y of faith alone to apprehend justification and to apply it unto us and to make it ours Besides these I have rendred other causes the chiefe and principall whereof is this because we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which being out of us in him is imputed onely to them that beleeve and is received onely by faith § II. But these three causes or reasons which he mentioneth will not easily be remov'd the first the authority of the Scriptures this being the maine doctrine of the Gospell Yea but saith Bellarmine it is no where said in expresse termes that faith alone doth justifie when we saith he have expresse termes that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely Iam. 2. 24. Answ. To the place in the Epistle of Iames I shall answere fully in his due place Onely here I say thus much That Saint Iameâ—… speaketh not of the justification of a sinner before God by which he is made or constituted just of which our question is but of that whereby a just man already justified before God may be approved declared and knowne both to himselfe and others to be just And that the Apostle Iames speaketh not either of workes as causes but as signes of justification or of the habit of true faith but of the profession of faith or faith professed onely and concludeth that a man is justified that is knowne and approved to be just not onely by the profession of the true faith but by workes also a godly conversation being as it were the life and soule of the profession and without which it is dead But though in expresse tearmes it be not said in so many words and Syllables that faith doth justifie alone yet this doctrine is by most necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures And what may by necessary consequence be deducted out of the Scriptures that is contained in the scriptures as all confesse Wherunto may be added that the Fathers so conceived of the doctrine of the scriptures who with one consent as you have heard have taught according to the scriptures that by faith we are justified alone And the Papists must remember that by oath they are bound to expound the scriptures according to the coÌ„sent of the fathers § III. Now that this doctrine is contained in the Scriptures I have plentifully proved before and something here shall bee added There are but two righteousnesses onely mentioned in the Scriptures by which wee can bee justified either that which is prescribed in the Law which is a righteousnesse inherent in our selves and performed by our selves or that which is taught in the Gospell which is the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in him and performed for us The former is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes the latter is the righteousnesse of faith A third righteousnesse by which wee should bee justified cannot be named And betweene these two there is such an opposition made in the Scriptures that if wee bee justified by the one we cannot by the other If therefore the Scriptures teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes it is all one as if they said that wee are justified by faith alone If it bee all one to say by faith and not by the workes of the Law or by faith alone then saith Bellarmine I demand whether all workes and every Law be excluded or not For if all workes be excluded then faith it selfe which Ioh. 6. 29. is the worke of God and if every Law then the Law of faith and consequently faith it selfe and so to be iustified by faith shal be nothing else but to be justified without faith Answ. it is plaine that by the Law is meant the Law of workes and by the workes of the Law all that obedience which is prescribed in the Law Now in the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed Then saith Bellarmine faith it selfe and the act of faith is excluded from the act of justification I answere first in this question the Apostle opposeth faith to workes and therefore faith is not included under workes Secondly faith as it is either an habit or an act and so part of inherent righteousnesse doth not justifie but as hath beene said relatively in respect of the object which being received by faith doth justifie as it was the brâ—…sen serpent apprehended by the eye which did heale and not the eye properly § IV. Againe the Scriptures teach that we are justified gratis gratiâ per sanguinem Christi per fidem Gratis that is freely without respect of any good workes done by us no not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done Tit. 3. 5. but by his meere grace and favour when we had deserved the contrary through the bloud and alone satisfaction of Christ received onely by faith To the word gratis Bellarmine answereth that it excludeth our owne merits which indeed can be none but not the free gifts of God as love and penitencie and the like for then faith also should be excluded That followeth not for when wee are justified by faith onely we are justified gratis gratis saith the Apostle freely by his grace through the merits of Christ by faith bringing onely faith to justification as the Fathers have taught and that not to bee any essentiall cause of our justification but onely to be the instrument and hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnes and therfore it is the condition required on our part in the covenant of grace The rest as love and hope and repentance c. being not the conditions of the covenant but the things by covenant promised to them that beleeve Vpon the condition of faith which is also the free gift of God the Lord promiseth remission of sins and justification and to those who are redeemed and justified by faith he doth by oath promise the graces of sanctification So that faith only on our part is required to the act of justification besides which we bring nothing else thereunto but love and the rest of the graces as Augustine saith of workes non precedunt justificandum sequuntur justificatum and therefore wee are justified by faith alone § V. And by this the second head is also proved namely that it is the good pleasure of God to grant justification upon the condition of faith alone If ye looke into all the promises of the Gospell ye shall find that they interpose only the
renounceth speciall faith For canst thou love Christ and rejoyce in him as thy Saviour if thou be not by speciall faith perswaded that thou shalt be saved by him Seeing then unto our justification before God we are to receive Christ as hath beene said by a true and lively assent and unto justification in the court of our owne conscience by a plerophory or assured perswasion we are to apply the promises to our selves which are the peculiar acts of faith and cannot be attributed to any other grace it followeth therefore from the proper nature of faith that by it alone we are justified § VIII His second cavill is taken from the Sacraments which by our confession as he saith doe apply the promises and justification it selfe to the receiver therefore saith he faith doth not justifie alone after the manner of an instrument applying In this argument he greatly pleaseth himselfe but without cause For first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we meane that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification with faith but without us we acknowledge many things to justifie Secondly faith justifieth alone ut manus accipientis the Sacraments ut manus dantis Thirdly faith doth actually justifie before God the Sacraments doe not justifie before God but serve to seale our justification to our owne consciences neither doe they actually conferre grace but confirme it as the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith When as therefore the termes of washing cleansing sanctifying saving are attributed to Sacraments these phrases are to be understood Sacramentally And this is our answere as for those which Bellarmine frameth for us hee hath good leave to make or to marre them at his pleasure CHAP. XV. Bellarmines fourth principall argument taken from the manner how faith doth justifie and the fifth from the formall cause of justification § I IF Faith saith hee doth justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit of justification then faith doth not justifie alone for love and penance and other good acts doe the like but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent I deny first the consequence of the proposition and the proofe thereof For neither love or penance nor other good acts doe either cause begin or merit justification And therefore though faith did justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit whereby justification is obtained it might for all them justifie alone This were sufficient to overthrow his whole Dispute But all his care is to prove the assumption which hee endeavoureth in all the parts thereof And first that faith is a cause of justificatition which we doe not deny yea we affirme that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as a cause thereof but faith onely But you will aske what cause We say the instrumentall onely If Bellarmine meane any other cause as no doubt but he doth he should have done well to have named it and to have proved it § II. He proveth faith to be a cause by the prepositions ex and per by and through attributed to faith whereto I answere that these particles sometimes are used to signifie the instrumentall cause As namely when we are said to be justified or saved through or by the word or the Sacraments Rom. 6. 4. Tit. 3. 5. Ioh. 17. 20. 1 Cor. 1. 21. 15. 2. Faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 17. Preachers are Ministers by whom you doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Ephes. 3. 6. And first for those plà ces wherein it is said that we are justified by faith or saved by faith Rom. 3. 28. 30. 5. 1. Ephes. 2. 8. In these and the like places saith he the preposition by or through doth signifie a true cause But he should have done well to have set downe what cause for an instrumentall cause is also a true cause The preposition per saith Bâ—…llarmine in another place is not fitly accommodated to the favour of God which is the efficient cause of justification but either to the formal as per gratiam or meritorious as permeritum filii or instrumentall cause as per fidem Sacramenta where you see by Bellarmines confession per is attributed to faith as to the instrumentall cause It is also attributed to the matter and merit as Rom. 5. 10 19. When as therefore it is also attributed to faith it cannot be attributed in the same sense as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of speech but of necessity it is to bee understood by a metonymy faith being put for the object of faith which is Christs righteousnesse And this manifestly appeareth when justification by the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as Rom. 3. 24. 25. wee are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the redemption which is in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in his blood by Christ we have accesse to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in him Eph. 3. 12. By the name of Christ we have remission of sinnes by faith in his name Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. As it is said of the cure of the creeple Act. 3. 16. that the name of Christ by faith in his name had healed him Thus I have shewed before that the same benefits of justification and salvation which properly we receive from the death and obedience of Christ are attributed to faith not properly but relatively and metonymically Not that faith it selfe worketh them but the object which it as the instrument apprehendeth § III. But Bellarmine will prove that in these and such like places the prepositions by and through doe signifie a true cause first by the contrary For when the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. Gal. 2. 3. and elsewhere doth prove that a man is not justified by workes nor by the Law without doubt he excludeth the force and efficacie of workes and of the Law in justifying and not a relative apprehension alone For no man could doubt but that the Law and works did not justifie by apprehending righteousnes relatively And therfore the saying of the Apostle had been very foolish if his meaning had beene that justice is apprehended by faith and not by the Law or workes Even as a man should speake foolishly who should say that the almes is received by the hand and not by the heele Neither did they whom the Apostle confuteth looke to be justified by their workes relatively but by the merit of them And therefore that which the Apostle denyeth to works he ascribeth to faith Answ. This manifestly proveth that the question of justification by faith or by workes is thus to bee understood whether wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith which is the righteousnesse of the Gospell the righteousnesse of faith or by a righteousnesse inherent in our selves which is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes For if the question should bee understood of faith
it selfe there would be no more opposition betweene faith and workes than is betweene the first and second justification of the Papists which are so farre from opposition that they are sub-alternall the one proving the other For if we be justified by righteousnesse inherent wee must bee justified both by habituall and actuall righteousnesse neither of them alone sufficing in adultis and therefore if by the one then by the other also Againe Faith being but one grace among many cannot as it is an habit inherent in us by it owne worthinesse or merit justifie or sanctifie alone but there must be a concurrence of charity and of other graces neither can the habits of grace suffice to the sanctification of one come to yeares unlesse they bring forth the fruits of obedience neither are the fruits of obedience called good works of any account before God unlesse they proceed from the inward habits of faith and love But faith considered relatively as the instrument apprehending Christs righteousnesse it self alone sufficeth to justification as the Fathers before have testified This is the worke of God which with God is in stead of all workes that wee beleeve on his Sonne For hee that truely beleeveth is reputed as if he had fulfilled the whole Law Christ being the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he therefore saith the Apostle that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the Law because Christ hath fulfilled it for him Christs obedience being imputed to him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if hee had performed the same in his owne person § IV. Secondly Bellarmine by other places where the preposition is used indevoureth to prove that faith is deciphered as a true cause For if saith he in all other places the preposition by or through doth signifie a cause why should it not betoken a cause when a man is said to be iustified by or through faith I answer first that the preposition is often used to signifie no cause at all as where it is attributed to wayes and meanes occasions and times waies as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2. 12. by another way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 12. 1. through the corne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through dry places vers 43. so through windowes Gen. 26. 8. 2 Cor. 11. 33. dores Mat. 7. 13. Ioh. 10. 1. walls as Act. 9. 25. tiles Luk. 5. 19. Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1. afflictions Act. 14. 22. meanes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by word Act. 15. 27. 32. by parable Luk. 8. 4. by vision Act. 18. 9. through a glasse 1 Cor. 13. 12. by Epistle 2 Thâ—…s 2. 15. by faith and not by sight 2 Cor. 5. 7. Occasion as our corruption by the Law worketh sinne Rom. 7. 5 13. for so it is said verse 8 11. it tooke occasion by the Commandement c. infirmity laid upon Lazarus that by it the Sonne of God might be glorified Ioh. 11. 4. Time whether all time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. 10. 2. 25. Or set times as three dayes Mat. 26. 61. fortie dayes Act. 1. 3. by night Luk. 5. 5. Mat. 5. 19. Secondly that the preposition is often used to signifie the instrumentall cause as in that Hebrew phrase by the hand of his servants Gen. 32 16. as God commanded by the hand of Moses Exod. 9. 35. 35. 29. Levit. 8. 36. 10. 11. 26. 45. Numb 4. 37 45 c. By the hand of Moses and Aaron Psal. 77. 20. 1 Sam. 16. 20. Iesse sent by the hand of his sonne David So God speaketh by the hand of his Prophets 1 Sam. 28. 15. 2 Sam. 12. 25. 2 Chr. 29. 25. By the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1. 70. So by his Prophets viz. as his instruments Mat. 1. 22. 2. 15. Thus God wrought miracles by the hands of Paul Act. 19. 11. or as himselfe speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his ministery Act. 21. 19. Rom. 15. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by me Thirdly that faith is no such cause of justification as is usually meant by the preposition joyned either with other causes of justification or with faith upon other occasions And first to mention those which Bellarmine saith he will here omit as that we are justified by Christ by his blood by his death by his obedience it may not be thought that when it is said that wee are justified by or through Christ and by or through faith or by or through the bloud the death the obedience of Christ and by or through faith that faith though the same preposition be prefixed before it should signifie the same kind of cause When the Apostle saith Rom. 3. 24. that we are justified by the grace of God there Bellar. noteth the formall cause of our justification confounding Gods grace and our charity freely that is saith he by the bounty of God noting the efficient by the redemption wrought by Christ Iesus which noteth the meritorious cause by faith in his blood we must needs conceive that faith is a distinct cause from the rest For neither is it the formall for there is but one and that one is charity as they teach nor the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that is Gods bounty and justice nor the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the meritorious cause for thath onely is the merit of Christ. It remaineth then that it is the instrumentall which is plainely signified when it is said that we are justified through the redemption or satisfaction of Ghrist by faith or when the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as I noted before § 2. § V. Bellarmine saith that in that place Rom. 3. 24. faith is there noted to be the dispositive cause which I have allready disproved The truth is that for all this flourish which Bellarmine here maketh hee maketh faith to be no cause at all of justification but a remote disposition which disposeth to justification no otherwise thâ—…n servile feare doth which is farre enough from being a cause of justification If it bee said that he maketh it a part of the formall cause of justification I answer that according to the Councell of Trent they constantly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is charity which being lost justification is lost though faith remaineth The habit of faith infused â—…s indeed a chiefe part of our sanctification as a mother grace and root of the rest but of justification it is no part but an instrument For justification consisteth wholly upon imputation of Christs righteousnesse which faith as the hand doth receive § VI. For the better understanding the manner how faith doth justifie wee are to distinguish the acts of faith both in justifying and sanctifying The act of faith in justifying is the elicite and immediate act of faith which is credere credendo Christum recipere amplecti to beleeve
that the eye of the body did cure those who were stung but the brasen Serpent which was a figure of Christ beheld with the eye Nor the eye of the soule which is faith doth absolutely and by it selfe justifie or save but relatively in respect of the object which it doth behold that is to say the Lord Iesus whom God hath propounded to be a Saviour to all that see him and receive him by faith § XII His second proofe is from the speech of Christ to the woman of Canaan who had earnestly prayed unto him and would take no repulse Matth. 15. 28. O woman great is thy faith and Mar. 7. 29. for this saying goe thy way the Devill is gone out of thy daughter for here plainely saith he the efficacie of obtayning health is attributed to faith Neither may it be answered that it is one thing to speake of justification and another to speake of the cure of a bodily disease For our Lord in the very same words attributeth to faith both the one and the other For as hee said to the woman which was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so in like manner to the woman whom hee cured of a bloudy issue Matth. 9. 2â—… and to the blind man whom hee restored to sight Mark 10. 52. Answer Though the woman of Canaan and the blind man by prayer obtained their desires yet it was the prayer of faith as Saint Iames calleth it which was effectuall and prevailed with Christ Iam. 5. 16. and therefore to faith I confesse the efficacie is to be ascribed And although it may well be thought that our Saviour when hee used the same words thy faith hath saved thee to the woman which had the issue of bloud and to the blind man which hee used to the sinner whose sins he had forgiven that he being the Physitian of the soule used them in the same sence to assure them of a greater blessing than the bodily cure Matth. 9. 2. yet I doe not deny but that by faith and by the prayer of faith the health both of the body and soule is obtained for as by beleeving or apprehending by faith the righteousnesse of Christ which hee had and performed for us wee are justified so by beleeving the divine power and goodnesse of Christ many were cured of their bodily diseases And yet as it was not their faith apprehending the power and goodnes of Christ which did heale them but the power and goodnesse of Christ which by faith they apprehended as it is said Act. 3. 16. his Name by faith in his name hath made this man strong so is it not our faith absolutely whereby wee apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie us but the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith And whereas Bellarmine will have the like efficacie to be ascribed in justifying unto faith as in obtaining bodily health I take him at his word for hereby it is evidently proved that faith alone doth justifie for our Saviour for the obtaining of bodily health required faith onely Luk. 8. 50. Mar. 5. 36. Bee not affraid Only beleeve and the like may bee gathered out of Matth. 9. 28 29. Mark 9. 23. Iohn 11. 40. § XIII His third proofe is from the example of Abraham Rom. 4. 20 21 22. In the promise also of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God most fully knowing or being fully perswaded that whatsoever he promiâ—…ed he also is able to performe therefore it was also reputed to him for righteousnesse Here saith Bellarmine the Apostle rendreth tâ—…e cause why faith was reputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because by beleeving he gave glory to God Therefore that faith pleased God by which he was glorified and therefore by the mâ—…rit of that faith which notwithstanding was the gift and grace of God hee justified Abraham His reason may thus be framed Whatsoever pleaseth God meriteth justification Abrahams faith pleased God because he was glorified thereby Therefore Abrahams faith merited justification The proposition is to bee denyed for before men can please God they must bee reconciled unto him and justified by faith therefore our pleasing of God is not a cause but a fruit of our justification and it is evident that before that promise was either made to him by God or beleeved by him Abraham was justified and therefore not by the merit of that beleefe Againe where men or their actions doe please God not in and for themselves but in and for Christ in whom alone hee is well pleased there mercie is to bee ascribed unto God but not merit to them Yea but the Apostle inferreth therefore it was reputed to him for righteousnesse That argueth Gods acceptation not his merit Howbeit that place may bee understood as that Iam. 2. 23. that this was an evidence of the true faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnesse not that Abraham did then first beleeve or was then first justified and much lesse that he merited by that act of faith his justification which he had long before § XIV His fourth proofe is out of Rom. 10. 13 14. to which I answered before the thing which here hee would but doth not prove though indeed it needs no proofe is that faith by invocation obtaineth justification Howbeit the Apostle doth not there set downe the order of our justification but the series and order of the degrees of salvation beginning at our vocation unto which three degrees are referred viz. hearing of the word which presupposeth preaching and that sending upon which followeth faith and justification thereby faith bringeth forth the dueties of â—…anctification and namely invocation which sometimes and namely in that place of Ioel is put for the whole worship of God which is the forerunner of salvation but here is no snch thing either mentioned or meant that by invocation faith obtaineth justification and therefore little reason had he from thence to inferre that therfore faith doth not justifie relatively by receiving for sooth justification offered but by seeking knocking asâ—…ing and finally by invocating and impeâ—…rating it doth justifie but passing by the weakenesse of his argument I answere to that which hee inferreth that faith beggeth justification no otherwise but with relation to Christ and his merits by it received For as God forgiveth no sinnes for which Christ hath not satisfied nor accepteth any man to life for whom Christ hath not merited it so are not we to beg justification at the hands of God but in the name and mediation of Christ beseeching God for Christ his sake that forasmuch as Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him and hath merited salvation and all spirituall blessings in heavenly things for them that it would therefore please God to accept of Christs satisfaction and merits in our behalfe imputing unto us both his sufferings for the remission
of sinnes and his obedience for the acceptation unto life of us who receiving him by faith desire to be made partakers of his merits to our justification For as in our mindes we receive Christ by a lively assent or beleefe as hath beene shewed so in our hearts we receive him by an earnest desire expressed in our prayers to be made partakers of him and his merits Neither doth it follow that if by faith we impâ—…trate or obtaine remission of sinnes that therefore faith is the meritorious cause of justification unlesse it bee understood relatively in respect of Christ who is the onely meritorious cause both of our justification and salvation whom faith as the instrument doth apprehend § XV. His fifth and last reason is out of Heb. 11. Where the Apostle by many examples teacheth that by faith men doe please God and consequently that faith is of great price and merit with God Answ. That faith doth please God and is of high account with God I meane a true lively justifying faith not the faith of Papists hypocrites and Devils wee freely acknowledge to the honour of God the giver of it and to the shame of the Papists who for all their saire pretences here doe much vilifie it Howbeit merit wee ascribe none to it unlesse it be relatively by apprehending Christs merits to our justification and salvation That Abel Henoch and others mentioned Heb. 11. did please God by faith doth not disprove our justification relatively but proves it For God is pleased with none but in Christ in whom he is well pleased He is pleased with none in Christ but with them only that by faith receive him § XVI To these places of Scripture Bellarmine addeth tenne testimonies out of Augustine nine whereof doe testifie that by faith righteousnesse is impetrated that is by request obtayned and the righteousnesse which hee speaketh of is not the righteousnesse of justification but of sanctification Neither doe they prove any thing in this point but what wee confesse that by faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love wee obtaine for that Augustine meaneth by merits both the graces that is the habits and the fruits that is the acts of sanctification which we call good workes The testimonies are these fides inchoat meritum ut per munus Dei bene operâ—…tur where by merit he understandeth the grace of living well that faith doth merit that is obtaine the grace of working well Lex adducit ad fidem fides impetrat Spiritum largiorem diffundit Spiritus charitatem charitas implet legem Quod factorum lex minando imperat hoc fidei lex credendo impetrat Per legem cognitio peccati per fidem impetratio gratiae contra peccatum per gratiam sanatio animae Violentia fidei Spiritus sanctus impetratur per quem diffusa charitate in cordibus nostris lex non timore poenae sed justitiae a more completur In novâ—… testamento fides impetrat charitatem Ex fide ideo dicit Apostolus justificari hominem non ex operibus quia ipsa prima datur ex qua impetrentur caetera quae proprie opera nuncupantur in quibus justè vivitur Fidès non potita conceditur ut ei potenti alia concedantur His tenth testimony which in order is the second Nec ipsa remissio peccatorum sine aliquo merito est si fides hanc impetrat neither is the remission of sinnes it selfe without any merit if faith doe obtaine it Neither is there no merit of faith by which faith hee said O God bee mercifull to mee a sinner and worthily did that faithfull man being humbled goe home justified because hee that humbleth himselfe shall be exalted Where Augustine abusively useth as other Latine Fathers often doe the word merit in the sence of obtaining and that by request and that appeareth by Bellarmines owne confession that Augustine doth use to call merit any good worke in respect whereof we obtaine some other thing and by the place it selfe In which sence hee saith the Publican by his humble and faithfull prayer having obtained remission of sinnes went home justified For if merit properly so called did goe before remission of siune then men should merit before they bee in state of grace which Bellarmine denyeth then should wee not bee justified either gratis that is as all even Bellarmine himselfe expound it sine meritis or by the grace that is the gracious and undeserved favour of God when wee deserved the contrary Againe beâ—…ore remission of sinnes and justification all men bee sinners and unjust Now as Augustine saith in the very next words going before quid habere boni meriti possunt peccatores What good merit can sinners have and a little before that meritis impii non grattam sed poena debetur To the merits of a wicked man not grace but punishment is due Finally the Papists themselves ordinarily confesse that their first justification cannot be merited which is grace onely and not reward Though some of them sometimes doe talke of merits of congruity which properly are no merits or if they be Pelagius his maine errour must take place gratiam secundum merita dari that grace is given according to merits Bellarmine here saith that hee hath proved elsewhere that faith and contrition and other dispositions doe merit the grace of justification which the Councill of Trent expressely denieth § XVII His fifth principall argument to prove that faith alone doth not justifie consisteth of two arguments drawne from two principles which he will but point at now but hereafter demonstrate The one is from the formall cause of justification the other from the necessity of good workes unto salvation For if the formall cause of our justification bee a righteonsnessâ—… infused and really inherent in us and not the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith then faith alone doth not justifie but the former is true therefore the latter The consequence of the proposition we grant for unto sanctification faith alone doth not suffice but there must be a concurrence not onely of other habituall graces thereunto but also of actuall obedience But justification is not to be confounded with sanctification Neither doe we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is the formall cause of justification but the matter by imputation whereof we are justified The assumption namely that we are justified by a righteousnesse infused and really inherent in us he saith hee will fully prove in the next booke But all his proofes I have already fully answered and confuted in the third and fourth controversies concerning the matter and forme of justification and have by necessary arguments both disproved the negative to wit that wee are not justified by any righteousnesse inherent in us or infused into us and proved the affirmative viz. that we are justified onely by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us
which we shall be judged at the last day at which time God will judge men according to their workes For wee must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ that wee may receive according to those things which we have done in the body whether it bee good or evill Those that have done good shall goe into everlasting life and they that have done evill into everlasting punishment For good workes though wee are not justified by them nor saved for them yet they are the evidence according to which our Saviour will pronounce the sentence of salvation Matth. 25. 34 35. According to that Psal. 62. 12. And to thee Lord mercie for thou rewardest a man meaning the godly man according to his workes § IX Lastly they are necessary necessitate medij and as that which though it be no cause is called causa sine qua nâ—…n And thus they are necessary first as the way which leadeth to life eternall via qua nos perducturus est ad finem itsum quem promisit the way by which hee will bring us unto that end which he hath promised saith Augustine For those that are justified and by justification entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are to goe in the way of sanctification towards their glorification Eâ—…h 2. 10. good workes therefore though they bee not the cause of raigning yet they are the way to the Kingdome And so saith Bellarminâ—… himselâ—…e that although God in predestination hath determined to give the Kingdome of heaven to certaine men whom he loved without any prevision of workes notwithstanding hee did withall ordaine that in respect of the execution the way to come to his Kingdome should be good workes I say then with the Prophet Esay this is the way let us walke in it Secondly as necessary fruits of our election for wee are elected to that end that we should bee holy Ephes. 1. 4. as necessary fruits of faith without which it is judged to bee dead â—…am 2. 26. as unseparable consequents of our redemption and justification Luk. 1. 74. And as they are necessary consequents of our justification so they are necessary forerunners of salvation by which wee are fitted for Gods Kingdome because no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of heaven Apoc. 21. 27. and finally so necessary is a godly life that without it no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. I conclude with Bernard that good workes are occulia predestinationis jndicia futurâ—… fâ—…licitatis presagia via regni non caâ—…saregnandi tokens of our secret predestination presages of our future happinesse the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of our obtaining that Kingdome For howsoever good workes are necessary in many respects as I have shewed necessitate presentiae yet they are not necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes of our justification § X. Secondly the Papists calumniate us as if wee taught that good workes are not necessary to sanctification which slander as all the rest ariseth from their willfull and pernicious errour in consounding justificâ—…tion and sanctification In the question of justification we hold according to the Scriptures that if our owne workes or righteousnesse should bee obtruded unto the Lord as the matter or merit thereof whereby wee should bee both acquitted from our sinnes and so delivered from hell and also entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are not onely to bee rejected but also detested as menstruous clouts as dung as losse But in the question of sanctification where they are considered both as fruits of faith and the Spirit as consequents of justification whereby wee testifie our thankefulnesse to God gather testimonies to our selves of our justification benefit and edifie our brethrenâ—… and also as necessary forerunners of glorification whereby we are fitted and prepared for Gods Kingdome unto which by justification wee are entituled and as the way wherein we are to walke towards our heavenly countrey and as the evidences according to which our Saviour will judge us at the last day c. wee doe acknowledge they are highly to be esteemed of as those things wherein our sanctification doth in good part consist For wee doe teach that our sanctification is partly habituall consisting in the habits of sanctifying graces faith hope charity humility the feare of God c. which is the first justification of the Papists and partly actuall consisting in our new obedience or which is all one in good workes which is their second justification This then is that which we doe hold that although good works doe not concurre with faith unto the act of justification as any cause thereof yet of necessity they must concurre in the subject that is the party justified as necessary fruits of faith as necessary consequents of justification as necessary antecedents of salvation And this is that which not only we but Bellarmine himselfe often citeth out of Augustine Bona opera accedunt justificato non praecedunt justificandum or thus bona opera non praecedunt justificandum sed sequantur justificatum good workes doe not goe before but follow after justification which is a pregnant proofe that they are no causes thereof CAP. II. That we are not justified by Workes § I. HAving thus avoided the calumniations of the Papists wee are now to dispute the question which is to bee understood not of justification before men whereby we are declared or knowne to bee just but of our justification before God whereby hee maketh us just nor of workes as fruits and consequents but as of causes of justification For we doe confesse that men are justified declarativè that is declared and knowne to be just to themselves or others by good works as the proper fruits of faith and undoubted consequents of justification but wee deny that we are justified before God by good works as any causes therof And this our assertion we will first prove by necessary arguments and then defend the same against the objections of the Papists § II. And first I prove it by all the arguments which I used before to prove the five severall points already handled For first if justification is not to be confounded with sanctification as if it consisted in a righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves then are we not justified before God by workes But the former hath beene clearely proved therefore the latter is to be confessed .2 If wee bee justified by the meere grace of God and that freely without respect of any workes done by us then are we not justified before God by works For the holy Ghost maketh such an opposition betweene grace and workes that if we be justified by the one we cannot be justified by the other But the antecedent hath beene formerly proved therefore the consequent cannot be denyed 3. If we be not justified before God by righteousnesse inherent in or performed by our selves but onely by the righteousnesse
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
to forbeare swearing in ordinary talke not to give a mans goods to the poore and to follow Christ when hee is thereunto required Mat. 19. 23. Mar. 10. 23. These things are so manifest that Bellarmine in the end of the next Chapter doth confesse them viz that our Saviour doth not say except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets but of the Scribes and Pharisees to signisie that his meaning was not so much he should say not at all to adde to the burden of the precepts as to take away the corruptions of the Scribes Pharisees And again those things which seem to be most heavie in the new Law are to be found in the old as the loving of our enemyes the restrayning of concupiscence such like For proofe wherof he quotes Augustine lib. contr Adimant cap. 3. lib. 19. contr Faustum c. 28. In the former place Augustine saith Nulla in Evangelica atque Apostolica disciplina reperiuntur quamvis ardua divina precepta promissa quae illis etiam libris veterib desint In the latter Vel omnia vel penè omnia quia monuit sâ—…u praecepit Christus ubi adjungebat Ego a. dici vobis inveniuntur in illis veterib libris And so much of the first difference § XXI The second difference is that the Law commeth alone but the Gospell is accompanied with grace Which is not a difference of the doctrine and letter of the Gospell from the Law but of the covenant of grace from the covenant of works For in the covenant of grace as justification is promised to them that being called doe beleeve so sanctification to them that are justifyed Which as it proveth the concurrence of Good workes with faith in the party justified as consequents thereof so it excludeth them from being any causes of justification But as touching this second difference two popish errours are to bee avoided First in respect of the covenant of workes For though that covenant doth not promise nor afford the grace of sanctification wherby a man should be enabled to performe the covenant which grace is promised in the covenant of grace and given to them that beleeve yet wee are not so to conceive that they who lived in the time of the law were void of grace nor all that live under the Gospell are endued with grace For the covenant of grace hath alwayes bene in force from the beginning so that to the faithfull who beleeved in the Messias which was to come the grace of sanctification was given according to the covenant of grace so that in the old Testament even under the Law there were as excellent examples of holynesse as have bene in the time of the new under the Gospell So also the Law hath its use even among those that live under the Gospell insomuch that untill men doe beleeve they are under the Law and not under grace Secondly in respect of the grace of the new Testament that it is not promised in such perfection in this life where wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit as that wee may expect to be justified by it or saved for it § XXII From these two difference the rest as hee saith arise viz. from the first arise the third the fourth and the fifth The third is this that the Law of Moses was given to one Nation the Law of Christ to all Nations The fourth that the Law of Moses for the most part contayned shadowes and figures of things to come the Gospell exhibiteth the body and truth The fifth that the Law of Moses because it was not perfect was to be changed by the Law of Christ but the Law of Christ was not to be changed by any succeeding Law These three differences of the Law doe not agree to the Law Morall which belongeth to all nations which did not consist of shadowes and figures which was not to be changed no not by addition because it was and is a perfect immutable and perpetuall rule of righteousnesse The other three viz. the sixth seventh and eigth arise as hee saith from the second The sixth that the Law of Moses had no power to justifie neither was it given that it might justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirre up men to seeke the physitian But the Law of Christ that is the Gospell hath power to justifie and was given to that end For as hee alleageth out of Rom. 1. 16. it is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleeveth he doth not say that worketh For therein is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just man shall live by faith This is a true difference of the Law of faith from the Law of workes but agreeth not to Bellarmines new Law which is a Law of workes as well as the old conteyning the very same morall precepts with the morall Law in the observation whereof not our justification but our sanctification consisteth prescribing also the same righteousnesse viz Charity which is the summe of the Law The seventh that the Law of Moses is a Law of fearefullnesse and bondage but the Gospell the Law of love and of liberty which is true For the obedience of men who are under the Law is forced by the terrour and coaction of the Law working servile feare in them But the obedience of men who are under grace that is of men justified is voluntary and cheerfull proceeding from faith and from some measure of assurance of Gods love and favour to them in Christ. Therfore this voluntary obedience is no cause but a consequent of justification not onely before God but also in the court of our owne conscience that is not onely of justification it selfe but also of the assurance thereof in some measure Of the eigth which confuteth the first I have already spoken § XXIII So much of the first thing which Bellarmine undertooke to demonstrate for the proofe of the necessity of good workes which we hold as well and urge as much as he Now followeth the second which is to prove that the justare not free from the observation of the Law of God For hee saith that we place Christian liberty in this that we are not subject in our conscience and before God to any Law and that the decalogue it selfe doth not belong unto us Which is a most devillish slander We professe that we so many as truly beleeve are by Christ freed from the curse of the Law from the rigour and exaction of the Law requiring perfect righteousnesse in us unto justification from the terrour and coaction of the Law from the irritation of the Law as I have shewed in my treatise of Christian liberty but not from the obedience of it For freedome from obedience is the servitude of sinne But wee being freed from sinne become the servants of righteousnesse And we doe
freely professe that by how much wee have received the greater favours from God in redeeming us and bringing us into the liberty of his children in freeing us from sinne and from the yoake of the Law by so much the more are we bound to obedience not to be justified or saved by it but to testifie our thankefulnesse and to glorifie God who hath beene so gracious unto us c. Much more might be said concerning Christian liberty but this is as much as is pertinent to the question in hand If any desire to bee better informed in this point I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty which I published many yeaâ—…es agoe CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie § I. ALL this while Bellarmine as we have seene hath wandred from the question but now he saith he will come neerer unto it For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes not onely by way of presence but by wâ—…y of efficacie But to what will he prove them necéssary to justification no such matter But yet that is the question which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone that good workes doe concurre to justification as causes thereof For though they were as they are not causes of Salvation yet it is manifest that they are consequents and therefore no causes of justification So that Bellarmine though hee be come neerer the question yet he is not come home to it But perhaps it will be said that Bellarmine prevented this objection when he first propounded this as his fifth principall argument to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because good workes are necessary to Salvation His argument may thus be frarned If faith did justifie alone then it would save alone but faith doth not save alone without good workes which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justificatis even to them that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save Answ. The proposition is denied first by Bellarmine himselfe who teacheth though falsely that not all who are justified shall bee saved when notwithstanding the Apostle saith â—…hom the Lord hath justified he also hath glorified And further he holdeth that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification though they lose not their faith and farther that they may also lose their faith which as he absurdly teacheth is lost by any act of infidelity and consequently both their justification and Salvation Yea but saith Bellarmine their justice cannot be lost nor their Salvation whiles they have faith if they be justified by faith onely But Bellarmine himselfe saith though falsely that the faith of them who are justified may be lost and with it their Salvation and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith and yet not be saved by it Secondly it is denied by some of the Fathers who though they teach that faith alone sufficeth to justification as you have heard yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation because some other things as namely good workes are thereunto required To the assumption that saith alone doth not save If such a faith be meant as is alone severed from Charity and void of workes I doe confesse that it neither saveth nor yet justifieth I doe not say alone but not at all But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ which purifieth the heart and worketh by love of which onely we speake and understand it relatively as we doe then I constantly affirme that faith in Christ alone that is Christ alone received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation and that neither workes nor any other graces are causes of salvation unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non which are no causes § II. But for the further proofe of his consequences Bellarmine saith that we cannot deny them because Luther teacheth that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation unlesse he will not beleeve and that the Lâ—…therans affirme that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone Answ. Wee can deny what either Luther or those that are called Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word therefore this was but a slender proofe Howbeit we doe not deny that assertion of Luther nor the like which though full of true comfort yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit so that they can say they have faith Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne assuring them that although their sinnes bee many and great yet they ought not to despaire if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true For though our sinnes be many the mercies of God are more though great yet the merrits of Christ are greater And though the Lutherans doe say that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence but a flat deniall of his assumption which it behoveth him to prove Upon these things thus premised Bellarmine inferreth that all the testimonies which afterwards namely in his fourth Booke he was to alleage out of Scriptures and Fathers to prove that good workes are so necessary to salvation even to men that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save them doe also prove that faith alone doth not justifie which is the thing saith hee which wee have undertaken to prove which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny protesting against this inference of Bellâ—…mine and affirming that although good workes be so necessary to salvation as that that faith which is without them doth not save a man yet that doth not hinder our assertion that faith doth justifie alone because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all and much lesse as the causes thereof for they follow justification though ordinarily they goe before salvation and howsoever that faith which is alone severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie as I have shewed heretofore nor save yet notwithstanding faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith doth save alone § III. But to returne to his fourth Booke though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency as causes thereof hee useth three kindes of proofes testimonies of Scriptures sentences of Fathers and reason Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies besides some whole Epistles The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you that doing the will of God ye may receive the promise Here first saith he wee have the terme necessary and
the necessity of good workes though they bee impertinent to the maine Question because they prove not that which is in controversie betwixt us yet are not impertinent to his purpose which was to calumniate us and to beare the world in hand that wee are such as deny the necessity of good workes But if the question were tryed by voices of the Fathers innumerable testimonies might bee produced out of their writings wherein they teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes yea in direct termes affirming that which is the question betweene us that we are justified by faith alone But that workes are necessary as causes either to salvation or which is the question to justification not any one pregnant testimony out of the ancient Fathers is or as I suppose can bee produced But to prove the necessity of good workes by way of presence I shall not need to recite the severall testimonies seeing I have my selfe delivered more to prove and to urge the necessity of good workes than can be gathered out of all these testimonies put together § XV. In the third and last place he bringeth a reason like to that which he framed l. 1. cap. 14. that faith alone doth not justifie But doth he not dispute the same question here did he not propound five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone the fifth and last wherof was from the necessity of good works the handling whereof hee put off to this place Should he not then from the necessity of good workes prove that faith doth not justifie alone But in stead of proving that hee endevoureth to prove that faith doth not save alone Thus craftily hee glydeth from one question to another for his owne advantage because hee knew that more is required to salvation than was required to justification For sanctification commeth betwixt justification and salvation And although we are justified without works going before justification yet we are not saved without workes going before salvation they being the way which God hath prepared for them that are justified to walke in towards their glorification I might therefore according to the Lawes of disputation hold him to the question or refuse to give him answere But he is so farre from proving that faith doth not justifie alone that hee is not able to prove that it doth not save alone disputing in that sence according to which we doe hold that faith doth justifie alone Now for the understanding of our sence and meaning certaine distinctions heretofore propounded must for avoiding of calumniations bee here repeated First that wee doe not meane that faith is the onely grace which doth sanctifie as the Papists will needes misunderstand us but that to sanctification not only other graces doe concurre with faith but good workes also And consequently that besides faith the said graces and good workes be forerunners of our salvation Secondly when wee say faith alone wee doe not meane that faith which is alone being a solitary an idle a counterfeit and dead faith severed from charity and other graces and destitute of goodworks but we meane a true and lively â—…aith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love which cannot be severed from charity and other graces as I have heretofore proved And therefore wee hold that although in respect of the act of justifying or saving it alone yet in respect of the being thereof it never is nor if it be a true justifying and savingfaith can be alone Thirdly when we doe say that faith alone justifieth and saveth wee speake with relation to the object or relatively meaning that the object which faith alone receiveth doth justifie and save us when wee say therefore that we are justified or saved by faith alone our meaning is that we are justified only by the righteousnesse of Christ which is apprehended by faith alone and not by our owne righteousnesse and that wee are saved by the merits of Christ alone received by faith and not by our owne workes or merits and consequently that Christ received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our salvation § XVI Now let us heare Bellarmines dispute Iffaith alone did save and that workes were not otherwise â—…ecessary than in respect of presence as the fruits and signes of faith then it would follow that faith could save though it wanted all maner of good workes and were joyned with all maner of vices and sinnes but the consequent is false therfore saith hee faith alone doth not save and good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some efficiencie To the proposition I answere first that it is senselesse and implyeth a contradiction For if good workes must necessarily be present with saving faith which hee confesseth wee doe hold how can it be supposed without implying a contradiction that it can save being not onely destitute of all good workes but also accompanied with all maner of sinne this is sufficient to overthrowe his whole dispute Secondly I deny the consequence of his proposition For justifieing and saving faith though it justifie and save alone yet it never is nor can be alone Even as the eye in respect of his being cannot if it be a true living eye be alone severed from other parts of the body yet in respect of the act of seeing unto which no other part doth concurre it seeth alone Even so faith which is the spirituall eye of the soule in respect of its being cannot if it be a true lively faith be alone severed from the other graces which are with it fellow members of sanctification but yet in respect of the Act of justifying and saving unto which no other graces concurre with it as any causes therof it justifyeth and saveth alone because it alone and no other grace doth receive Christ unto justification and salvation Thirdly we do not say that the presence of good workes is necessary to salvation onely as they are the fruits and signes of faith but also as necessary forerunners as causa sine qua non as the way to salvation and as the evidence according to which the sentence shall be pronounced Which consideration disproveth the proofe of his consequence which is that according to our doctrine good workes are required to the act of saving onely by accident whose presence addeth nothing to the virtue of faith in justifying and saving and so their absence detracteth nothing from it and therefore being taken away faith never the lesse saveth Answ. Things whose presence is necessary cannot be said to bee present by accident For such may be present or absent but that which is necessary cannot be otherwise the thing being safe But we hold the presence of workes not to be contingent but necessary both in respect of salvation as the way to it and as Causa sine qua non and of faith as the unseparable fruits of it without which it is said to be dead
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
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
§ 4. That by â—…ustifying grace is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ. lib. 3. cap. 2. Our proofes I. from the use of the word in the Scriptures lib. 3. cap. 2 § 1. II. Because it is Gratia gratum saciens § 2. By it the faithfull are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and chasidim § 3. III. By the gracious favour of God in Christ wee were elected called c. § 4. Obiect 1. The grace of election is eternall the rest temporary § 5. Obiect 2. By inherent grace wâ—… 〈◊〉 sanctified § 6. Obiect 3. Faith a grace inherent § 7. IV. Gratia gratum faciens expressed in the Scriptures by other words which betoken savour § 8. V. Because grace is opposed to works § 9. VI. Charity is not the iâ—…stifying Grace § 10. VII Plaine testimonies of Scripture that grace signifieth favour § 11. Confessiâ—…n of Papists § 12. Bellarmines first allegation of Rom. 3. 24. for inherent grace proved to makâ—… against it lib. 3. cap. 3. His prâ—…ofes from thence disproved l. 3. cap. 4. I. From the word Gratis lib. 3. cap. 4. § 2. II. From the praposition per. § 3. III. Because the favour of God is not in vaine § 4. IV. From the Attributes given to grace As first that it is a gift § 5. Secondly a gift which wee receive § 6. Thirdly a gift given by Christ. â—… 7. yâ—…a made by Christ. § 8. Fourthly that it is given by measure from Christ. § 9. Fifthly it is compared to essence § 10. Sixthly It is compared to light â—… 11. His second allegation out of Rom. 5. 5. answered lib. 3. cap. 5. How the word Grace is used in the Fathers and how in the latter writers lib. 3. cap. 6. H Hebrew The Hebrew word hitsdiq which is to iustifie never signifieth to iustifie by inherent righteousnesse lib. 2. cap. 1. § 4. c. Hope Bellarmines third disposition to justification lib. 6. cap. 11. § 6. Hope whether perfect lib. 5. cap. 6. § 7. I Image of Christ. How borne by the faithfull and whether in respect of iâ—…ification l. 4. cap. 10. § 13 14 15 16. Implicite Faith Confuted and condemned lib. 6. cap. 1. § 3. c. ad finem capitis Imputation of Christs righteousnesse The formall cause of iâ—…stification l. 1. cap. 3. § 7. Impâ—…tation of Christs satisfaction confessed by Papists § 8. Imputation of Christs righteeusnesse denyed by some others bâ—…sides Papists § 9. Their reason that then we are Redeemers ibid. Imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved obiter by two reasons § 10. The private opinion of some concerning imputation lib. 1. cap. 5. That Christs righteoâ—…snesse it selse is imputed lib. 1. cap. 5. § 7. Whether we fulfilled the Law in Christ. § 8 9 10 11. The necessity of imputation lib. 1. c. 5. § 13 14. The full discourse concerning imputation of Christs righteousnesse lib. 5. per totum That wee are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved by five arguments lib. 5. cap. 1. Proved by eight arguments cap. 2. By two other arguments cap. 3. By testimonies of writers both old and new lib. 5. cap. 4. The objections of the Papists against imputation lib. 5. cap. 5. I. Against the name that it is new § 1. II. That it is putatitia § 2. III. That it is no whore to be found § 3. IV. That it it is needlesse § 4. Both because remission is an utter deletion of sinne § 5. and also because the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 is perfect lib. 5. cap. 6. 7. V. That wee are not formally iust by it lib. 5. cap. 8. § 1. Bellarmines confession that if wee did not hold that wee are formally iustified by it our doctrine were true § 2. VI. That we should be as righteous as Christ. § 3. VII That we did not loose in Adam imputed righteousnesse § 4. that if by imputation we are iust then Christ a sinner § 5. but as Christ notwithstanding the imputation of our sinne was iust so wee sinners § 6. That after iustification wee are called iust and how § 7. IX The Spouse of Christ beautifull in her selfe § 8 9. X. Because the heart must bee pure before we can see God and because Christ redeemed 〈◊〉 that wee might be sanctified § 10. Instrumentali causes of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 5. Justice The iustice of God a moving cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 3. The iustice of God distinguished l. 8. c. 5. § 19. Justifie To iustifie what it is lib. 1. cap. 1. § 2. To iustifie is not to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent Lib. 2. cap. 1. § 3. The signification of the Hebrew word § 4. c. cap. 5. § 5. Of the Gre 〈◊〉 l. 2. â—… 2. The same provâ—…d first by other termes § 7. Secondly because the whole processe of justification is iudiciall § 8. Iustifying oppâ—…sed to condemning l. 2. c. 5. § 2. cap. 6. § 1. Justification The excellency of this argument l. 1. c. 1. § 1. The definition of iustification lib. 1. c. 1. § 2. The signification of the word ibid. Iustification considered as an action of God § 3. As an action of God without us § 4. But accompanied with those that are wrought within us § 5. It is an act continued § 6. Whether it bâ—…e wrought but once and at once § 7. The Papists confuted who deny it either to be an action of God or without us or continued § 8. The causes of iustification the efficients l. 1. c. 2. The essentiall causes viz. the matter and forme lib. 1. c. 3. the matter Christs righteousnesse § 2 3 4 5. Private opinions concerning the matter l. 1. c. 4. vid. Materiall The forme the imputation of Christs righteousnesse c. 3. § 6. c. Private opinions concerning the forme cap. 5. The end l. 1. c. 6. § 1 2 3 4. The parts absolution from sinne and acceptation as righteous in Christ. â—…ib 1. cap. 6. § 5. Redemption reconciliation and adoption comprised under iustification § 6. The consequents and sruits of iustification § 7. The heads of the controversie concerning iustification l. 2. c. 1. § 1. The first concerning the name whether iustification and sanctification are to bee confounded The Papists confounding them ground their errour upon the Latine word § 2 3. The Hebrew word signifying to instifie never importeth making righteous by infusion of righteousnesse lib. 2. cap. 1. § 4. c ad finem capitis The use of the Greeke words signifying to iustifie or iustification never importing righteousnesse inherent lib. 2. cap. 2. Foure significations of the word iustification alleaged by Bellarmine I. That it signifieth the Law lib. 2. cap. 3. § 1. 2. II. Acquisition of righteousnesse § 3. 4 5 6. III. Increase of iustice lib. 2. cap. 4. § 1. 2 3 4 5. IV. Declaration of iustice l. 2. c. 4. § 6. Bellarmines proofes that iustification signifieth making righteous by inherent righteonsnesse lib. 2. cap. 5. Foure
justifie not onely peâ—…petuall in the Scriptures but also ordinary in the speeches and writings of men Wherein God is said to justifie men and man is said to justifie God and one man is said to justifie another and one and the same man to justifie himselfe without any signification of infusing righteousnesse into him but by cleering him and pronouncing him just Secondly that there is no further respect to be had in this controversie to the notation of the Latine or English word than as it is a true translation of the Hebrew word in the old Testament and of the Greek in the new now I shall make it evident that the Hebrew hitsdiq and so the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Verbum forensâ—… a judiciall word taken from the courts of justice which being attributed to the Iudge is opposed to condemning and signifieth to absolve or to give sentence with the party questioned § III. In the definition we consider justification as an action of God whose alone worke it is and so the Scriptures consider it in many places as Rom. 8. 33. It is God that doth justifie for it is he only that forgiveth sinnes Esa. 43. 25. It is he onely that can by making us righteous in Christ give us right and title to the kingdome of heaven It is no action therefore of our owne or of any creature neither is it wrought by our owne preparations and dispositions For although every man is bound to use all meanes to attaine to justification yet it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy For if God bee the agent in justifying us then are wee the patients And for that cause we are never in the Scriptures exhorted to justification or to the parts thereof which are not our Officia or duties but Gods Beneficia as wee are to the duties of sanctification whereunto we being already justified and regenerated doe cooperate with the Spirâ—…t of grace § IIII. Secondly when we say it is an action of God Imputing the righteousnesse of Christ and absolving the beleeving sinner and accepting him c. wee consider it not as an action of God within us working a positive or reall change as in sanctification but as an action of God without us For it is a judiciall act of God as the Iudge oppoâ—…ed to condemning And therefore as by his sentence hee doth condemne that is make wicked so by his sentence hee doth justifie that is of guilty he maketh not guilty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his sentence God doth justifie as Chrysostome and Oecumenius note upon Rom. 8. 33. where a judiciall proceeding in the businesse of justification is plainely described For there is mention of the accuser of Gods elect there is God that justifieth and none to condemne there is the advocate and intercessor to plead for us And as in condemning though the hebrew word Hirshiah opposed to justifying signifieth to make wicked for as Tsady is to be just and Hitsdiq to make just that is to justifie so Rashah to be wicked and Hirshiah to make wicked that is to condemne yet God by condemning doth not make a reall or positive change by infusion of wickednesse into the party whom by his sentence hee maketh wicked that is condemneth so in justifying though the word doe signifie to make righteous yet the Lord doth not Quatenus justificat as he justifieth worke a reall or positive mutation in the party whom by his sentence he maketh just that is justifieth in respect of any inward dispositions or qualities but onely a relative change or mutation in respect of his estate and condition before God and in respect of some relations to him It is true â—…hat in our justification we are of sinners made righteous but the righteousnesse which we have by justification standeth in remission of sinne and acceptation or constitution of us as righteous not in our selves but in Christ both which are wrought by imputation of his righteousnesse It is true also that whom God doth justifie he doth also sanctifie But in justification he doth not worke a reall change in the party as he doth in sanctification And this 〈◊〉 in the like actions of God viz. adoption redemption and reconciliation which three in substance differ not from justification For all agree in the not imputing of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse but are diversified by certaine relations all which concurre in justification that men having their sinnes forgiven whereby they had beene either the children of the devill by adoption are made the sonnes of God or the vassals and bondslaves of sinne and Satan are by redemption made the servants of God or enemies to God by their reconciliation become his favourites or guilty of sinne and damnation in their justification they are accepted as righteous in Christ and consequently become Gods servants Gods favourites Gods sonnes and if sonnes then also heires of eternall life As therefore in adoption redemption reconciliation there is no reall change made in the party but onely a new relation acquired of being a sonne and hâ—…ire to the adoptour a servant to the redeemer a favourite to the reconciler which before he was not so neither in justification is there a reall or positive change as the Papists would have it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relative or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in relation in respect of those relations even now mentioned and in respect of his estatâ—… and condition before God being in his justification translated from the estate of damnation unto the state of salvation Even as the councell of Trent it selfe defineth justification to be a translation from that state wherein a man is borne the sonne of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption of Gods sonnes through the second Adam Iesus Christ our Saviour which is done without any reall change wrought in the party as hee is justified For who before was guilty of sinne and damnation the same man remaining a sinner in himselfe and in himselfe worthy of damnation is in his justification absolved from the guilt of sinne and accepted as râ—…teous in Christ in whom also hee is made a servant a favourite a sonne of God and consequently as I said in the definition an heire of eternall life § V. And yet we deny not but that those whom God reconcileth unto himselfe receiving them into his grace and â—…avour in Christ them also he endueth in some measure with the graces of his Spirit whom he adopteth to be his sonnes in Christ them also he regenerateth by his holy Spirit whom he redeemeth from the guilt of sinne he also freeth from the dominion of sinne and whom he justifieth by faith he also sanctifieth by his Spirit that is whom he maketh just by imputation them also he maketh just by infusion of righteousnesse to whom he imputeth the merit of Christ his death and
For all they who have true faith are borne of God 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. And those who are once borne of God are never unborne againe but being made sonnes by faith as all the faithfull are Gal. 3. 26. they are also made heires of God and coheires with Christ Rom. 8. 17. As faith therefore is never utterly lost no more is justification For so long as wee have faith so long wee are justified But the habit of faith wee never lose though perhaps some act of faith may sometimes bee interrupted Therefore our justification is but one continued act and in that sense we are justified but once § VIII Now whereas we have defined and defended according to the Scriptures that justification is an action of God and such an action as is without us and a continued act hence we may conclude against the Papists first that neither their first nor second justification is that justification which is taught in the Scriptures Not the second for that is not Gods action but their owne who being justified before by habituall righteousnesse infused from God doe themselves as they â—…each by practising of good workes increase their righteousnesse that is justifie themselves by actuall righteousnesse as the merit of their second justification Not that wee deny that inherent righteousnesse is by practise of good workes increased but that wee hold that justification is not our owne act neither that we are justified by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves nor that the righteousnesse of justification which is indeed the righteousnesse of Christ can be increased and therefore no degrees of justification Not the first which they make to bee an action of God within us working in us a reall change or positive mutation by infusion of the habits of grace and specially of charitie and confound it with habituall sanctification from which notwithstanding it is necessarily to be distinguished Secondly justification being an action of God is not to bee confounded with justification passively understood and much lesse with justice it selfe But the Papists not onely understand it passively but also confound it with inherent Iustice. Thirdly they doe not hold justification to bee one continued act from our vocation to our glorification But such an act as may not onely be interrupted ostentimes and lost for a time as they say it is by every mortall sinne and againe be renewed so oft as they goe to shrift but also that it may totally and finally bee lost Which error I have confuted at large in my Treatise of perseverance CAP. II. The efficient causes of Iustification § I. BUt in this definition besides the Genus not onely all the causes of Iustification but also the essentiall parts thereof are briefly comprised which I will now distinctly propound The causes because in the knowledge of them standeth the science of every thing the essentiall parts because in them justification it selfe consisteth The causes of justification as of all other things are foure The Efficient the Matter the Forme the End The Efficieâ—…t causes are of two sorts either principall or instrumentall The principall is God which I noted in the definition when I said it is an action of God For it is God that justifieth as the Scriptures in many places doe testifie as namely Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. God I say the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost For it being an outward action of God or as the Schoolemen speake ad extra respecting the Creatures it is the common action of the whole Trinity And thus God alone as the Iudge doth justifie For he alone is the Lawgiver who hath power over our soules against whom wee sinne and by our sinne become his debtours when we transgresse his law And therefore he alone properly forgiveth sinnes as himselfe professeth Esay 43. 25. and as the Scribes and Pharisees confesse as a received truth Luk. 5. 21. For who may take upon him to remit those debts which wee owe to God It is he who reconcileth us unto himselfe in Christ not imputing our sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and accepting of us in his beloved Ephes. 1. 6. It is he alone that forgiving our sinnes freeth us from hell and giveth us right to his heaveâ—…ly kingdome Which doctrine serveth first for our direction and instruction where to seeke and to sue for justification and remission of sinnes Not to any creature but to God alone in the name and mediation of Christ to whom alone our Saviour directeth us to sue for pardon Secondly it ministreth strong consolation to all the faithfull For seeing it is God that justifieth them who shall lay any thing to their charge Who shall condemne c Thirdly it sâ—…rveth for the confutation or rather condemnation of the Pope and all popish priests who take upon them power not as Ministers of the Gospell to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes but as Iudges to remit them it being a proper attribute of God Exod. 34. 7. which he appropriateth to himselfe Esay 43. 25. and which no meere man can without blasphemy arrogate to himselfe Mark 2. 7. § II. With the principall cause we are to joyne the consideration of the motives or moving causes both without God which of some are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also within himselfe which are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are indeed principia agendi The former are mans misery which though it be not properly a cause but the object of mercy yet is said to bee a motive and is used as a reason to move to mercy and thence misericordia hath its name and Christs merits which properly are the procatarcticke cause of our justification besides which there is no other merit The moving causes within God are his Mercy and his Iustice which I signified in the definition when I said that justification is a most grâ—…cious and rightâ—… action os God For as in many if not in all the workes of God his mercy and justice meet together so especially in the worke of our Iustification and redemption which Cardinall Câ—…jetan e well observed The holy Scripture saith he doth not say that we are justified by grace alone but by grace and justice together but both of God that is by the grace of God and by the justice of God and not by the righteousnesse of men By grace I understand the gracious love and favour of God in Christ vouchsafed unto us in him before all secular times 2 Tim. 1. 9. in which he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved by which as we are elected and called and shall be saved so by the same we are justified and that freely without any cause in us Rom. 3. 24. Now the Lord is said to justifie us by his grace first because of his free-grace hee gave his owne Sonne to
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
motive in God the principium or primary cause which some call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our justification he saith that we are justified by the grace of God Rom. 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. that wee are saved by his grace Ephes. 2. 8. meaning thereby the gracious favour of God in Christ whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath graciously accepted and embraced us in his beloved They most absurdly and wickedly that they may place the matter of their justification and merit of their salvation in themselves doe by grace understand the gifts of grace and namely and especially that of Charity habitually inherent in us For so they teach justifying grace to bee a divine quality inherent in the soule per modum habitus a supernaturall habit infused of God and that not really distinct from Charity And in like manner what in this kind is said of the Love of God they understand it commonly not of Gods Love whereby hee loveth us but of our love whereby wee love God § II. For the better understanding of this point we are to distinguish the divers acceptions of Gods grace For either it signifieth the favour of God in himselfe or the gifts of grace in us The former is the proper signification for the grace of God properly understood is one of Gods attributes whereby he is signified to be gracious and is referred to his goodnesse Exod. 33. 19. cum 34. 6. unto which also his love and mercy are referred but with this distinction For Gods goodnesse is considered either as hee is good in himselfe yea goodnesse it selfe or as hee is good to his creatures which is his bounty which being referred to his creatures either as having goodnesse communicated to them is his love or as being in misery is his mercy or as having deserved no good thing at the hands of God but the contrary is his Grace The latter signification is unproper and metonymicall the word Grace being taken for the effects of his grace viz. his free and undeserved gifts and benefits proceeding from his grace and favour which are not properly called the grace and favour of God but his graces and favours not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace Rom. 11. 28. 1 Cor. 1. 7. 12. 4. 31. And in both senses it is either more largely taken for any favour or favours of God though common as both his favour and love in creating preserving and governing his creatures and also the fruits thereof which are his common favours as the gifts of nature in which sense Pelagius did call bonum naturae and namely free-will the grace of God and the gifts dispensed by his providence as his temporall blessings which he graciously bestoweth upon both good and bad Matth. 5. 45. In which respect hee is not onely said to be channun gracious Exod. 22. 27. and graciously to bestow such gifts Gen. 33. 5. 11. Esai â—…6 10. but also to bee the Saviour of all men 1 Tim. 4. 10. yea to save both man and beast Psalm 36. 6. Or else it is used more specially to signifie the peculiar favour and favours of God vouchsafed to his peculiar people viz. the Church tending to the salvation of it and of the members thereof which is the usuall acception of the word in the Scripture § III. This by the Schoolemen is very unfitly distinguished into gratia gratum faciens gratia gratis daâ—…a for first out of this distinction that which chiefly and properly is to be called grace viz. the gracious love and favour of God in Christ is left out Secondly whereas by gratia gratum faciens the justifying and saving grace they meane grace infused and namely the habit of Charity they oppose it to gratia gratis data to grace freely given as if the grace infused were not also freely given But they might have learned either from their Master a better distinction of Grace though he doe but lightly touch upon it that Grace is either gratia gratis Dans gratia gratis Data or a better exposition of that distinction which they have propounded according to the Scriptures that by Gratia gratum faciens is meant the gracious favour of God in himselfe whereby he graciously accepteth us in his Beloved and by gratia gratis data the gifts of grace freely bestowed upon us for so the Apostle seemeth to distinguish Rom. 5. 15. that it is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God in himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as he speaketh Ephes. 3. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift of grace in us Or as elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace The former is the gracious favour of God and is in God the giver of all good gifts as the fountaine of all graces the latter are the gifts of grace and are in the receivers as streames derived from that fountaine Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or gifts of grace are either sanctifying graces tending to the salvation of him who is indued with them as faith hope charity the feare of God c. or edifying graces which are given for the salvation of others and those either ordinary as the gifts of the ministery or extraordinary as the gifts of prophecie of tongues of working miracles which the Schoolemen called gratias gratis datas § IV. These 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these gifts of grace whether you understand those edifying or those sanctifying graces may every one of them by a metonymy be caled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace or by special relatioÌ„ to some peculiar grace vouchsafed to some particular person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that grace that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that giâ—…t of grace yet none of them can absolutely and properly be called the grace of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the saving grace of God or gratia gratum faciens of which this question is understood to wit whether this justifying and saving grace of God be inâ—…erent in us as a quality or habit or be out of us in God as being one of his attributes The Papists say it is inherent in us per modum habitus after the manner of an habit infused into us and so is the matter of justification considered as an action of God as we conceive of justification or the forme as they say speaking of justification passively and confounding it with sanctification But we though we doe confesse that in the gifts of saving grace as faith hope charity c. concurring in us our inward or habituall sanctification doth consist yet we deny them or any one of them to be either the matter or forme of justification But contrariwise we constantly affirme that the justifying and saving grace of God or as they speake gratia gratum faciens is the gracious
favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him concurring to our justification neither as the matter nor forme but as the efficient cause thereof Against which assertion the accursed Councell of Trent hath denounced Anathema If any man shall say that the grace by which we are justified is onely the favour of God let him be accursed But first I will produce our proofes and then answere their objections CAP. II. Our proofes that by the Grace of God by which we are justified is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ. § I. THe Papists for all their cursing are not able to produce any one pregnant testimony to prove that the grace whereby wee are justified is inherent in us But that Grace doth signifie that favour of God wee are able out of the New Testament to alleage above fifty testimonies whereof some shall hereafter be cited And as for the Old Testament it is evident that the Hebrew words which signifie the grace of God and are to be translated by the word grace doe alwaies signifie favour and never grace inherent As if I have found grace in thy sight Gen. 18. 3. Ex. 33. 13. 17. God gave Ioseph grace in the sight of the keeper Gen. 39. 21. and the people of Israel grace in the sight of the Egyptians Exod. 3. 21. In which sense the blessed Virgin is said to have found grace with God Luk. 1. 30. and our Saviour to have increased in grace with God and man Luk. 2. 52. § II. Secondly that grace whereby the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gratos fecit made us gracious or graciously accepted us in his beloved is gratia gratum faciens that is the justifying and saving grace By the gracions love and favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath made us gratious or gratiously accepted us in his beloved and not by any gift of grace inherent in us Therefore the gratious love and favour of God in Christ is gratia gratum faciens that is the justifying and saving grace and not any gift of grace inherent in us The proposition is in it solfe evident The assumption is proved out of Eph. 1. Blessed be God who hath blessed us in Christ with all spirituall blessings according as he hath elected us in him before the foundation of the world having predestinated us unto the adoption of children to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein or whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est gratos fecit hee hath made us accepted in his beloved in whom wee have redemption through his blood even forgivenesse of sinnes according to the riches of his grace verse 3 4 5 6. 7. For by or in that grace to the glorious praise whereof the Lord elected us before the foundation of the world and according to the riches whereof wee are redeemed by Christ the Lord hath gratiously accepted us in his beloved But it were very absurd to say that God hath elected us to the praise of the glory of our Charity or that wee are redeemed according to the riches of our charity But we were elected to the praise of the glory of his grace that is of his gracious love and bounty in Christ which grace was given unto us in Christ before all secular times and according to the riches of this grace he hath redeemed us by Christ. Wherefore gratia gratum faciens the grace by which wee are justified is not any gift of grace inherent in us but the eternall grace and favour of God vouchsafed unto us in Christ before the foundation of the world and before all secular times § III. In respect of this grace whereby the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graciously accepted the blessed Virgin she is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 1. 28. graciously accepted or graced or as it is expounded verse 30. that she had found grace and favour with God And so may all the elect and faithfull children of God be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in many places of the Old Testament they are in the very same sense called chasidim passively understood Especially where that word is read with the Affix or Pronoune betokening God to signifie his chasidim the favorites of God and thus it is read with the Affix of thâ—… first Person when God is the speaker calling them Chasidai my favourits or of the second whenthe speech is directed unto God and then they are called in the plurall Chasideica thy favorits Psal. 52. 9. 79. 2. 132. 9. 145. 10. and in the singular Chasideca thy favourite Deut. 33. 8. Psal. 16. 10. 89. 19. or of the third person in the singular Chasido his favourite or Chasidso Psal. 4. 3. and in the plurall Chasidain his favourites Psal. 31. 24. 85. 9. 97. 10. 116. 15. 149. 9. that is as not onely Tremellius and Iunius but also Vatablus interpret it quos benignitate prosequitur those whom God doth specially favour those who have found grace with God which commonly are translated Saints and so are all the faithfull usually called even in the New Testament as the translation of the Hebrew chasidim sanctity not being the cause of Gods favour which is eternall but the proper badge and cognizance of those who are the favorites of God by which they are knowne And further out of the same place Eph. 1. 6. where it is said that by this grace hee hath made us gracious in his beloved it is plainely proved that by it is meant the gracious favour of God towards us in Christ in which respect it is also called the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ. Act. 15. 11. So Rom. 16. 20. 1 Cor. 16. 23. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Gal. 1. 6. 6. 18. Phi. 4. 23. 1 Thess. 5. 28. 2 Thess. 3. 18. Philem. 25. Apoc. 22. 21. and to the same effect it is called the love of Christ Rom. 8. 35. that is as it is expressed vers 39. the love of God which is in Christ. Which places cannot without absurdity bee understood of that grace of God or of that love of God which is in us that is to say of our love of God § IV. Thirdly by what grace of God wee are elected called redeemed reconciled adopted saved by the same wee are justified But by the gracious favour of God by which hee hath gratiously accepted of us in his beloved and not by any thing in us we were elected according to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace Eph. 1. 5 6 for which cause our election unto life is called the election of grace Rom. 11. 5. By grace wee are effectually called according to his purpose For God hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose of grace which grace was given us in Christ Iesus
before all secular times but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour 2 Tim. 1. 9. By his gracious favour in Christ God hath redeemed us reconciled us unto himselfe adopted us and not by our charity or any thing in us And finally by his gracious favor we are saved through faith and not of works or of any grace or righteousnesse iuherent in us that he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ Eph. 2. 7 8. Therefore by the gracious favour of God in Christ and not by any grace inherent in us the Lord doth justifie us and therfore the sacred fathers of Trent must take home to themselves according to the censure of the Apostle Gal. 1. 8. 9. that Anathema which they denounce against those who say that the grace whereby wee are justified is onely the gracions favour of God in Christ. § V. Against the proposition if it bee objected that the grace of election is eternall but the benefit of vocation and the rest is temporall and therefore not the same I answer that although the benefit of vocation and of the rest be given us in time yet the grace by which we are called justified and saved is eternall 2 Tim. 1. 9. And therefore Bellarmines distinction of grace into eternall by which wee were elected and temporary by which wee are called and justified is idle and to no purpose § VI. If againe it be objected that by what grace we are sanctified by the same we are justified by inherent grace we are sanctified therefore by inherent grace we are justified I answer by distinction of the phrase by grace for if therby be meant the efficient cause then I confesse the proposition to wit that by what grace we are sanctified we are also justified For the same gracious favor of God is the efficient cause as wel of our sanctification as of our justification and I deny the assumption But if by that phrase be meant the essentiall câ—…use that is the matter or the forme of our sanctification then I confesse the assumption and deny the proposition For by the inherent graces wherin our habitual sanctification consisteth we are sanctified but we are justified not by any grace inherent but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ as I have shewed before and hereafter shall fully prove in its due place For wee are justified by the grace that is the gracious favour of God in Christ gratis in respect of us that is without any cause or desert in us through the redemption which is in Christ without the works of the Law that is without respect of any obedience performed by us or righteousnesse inherent in us that is prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse § VII If in the third place it be objected that faith is a grace inherent but we are justified by faith Or thus faith doth justifie faith is a grace inherent therefore some grace inherent doth justifie I answer againe by distinction that faith doth not justifie as it is a grace or quality inherent or as it is a part of our inherent righteousnesse but relatively as it is the instrument as hath beene said before to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse neither doth faith properly but the object thereof which it apprehendeth justifie As it is the almes properly which releeveth the poore man not the hand which receiveth it For when we say that a man is justified by faith without workes or by faith alone our meaning is that we are justified by the righteousnes of Christ alone which is apprehended by faith onely without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us or obedieuce performed by us § VIII Fourthly the justifying and saving grace is expressed many times by other words of like signification to the gracious favour of God which cannot be drawne to signifie our charity or any grace inherent in us As appeareth both by such synonyma as are joyned with it in the same places as grace and love 2 Cor. 13. 14. Grace and mercie 1 Tim. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 2. Tit. 1. 4. 2 Iohn 3. and also by parallelling other places as where it is said Tit. 2. 11. When the grace of God appeared the same is expressed thus chap. 3. 4. When the kindnesse of God and his love towards man appeared And where in some places it is said that wee are justified or saved by his grace or according to his grace in others it is said according to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his good will and pleasure Eph. 1. 5. 9. Phil. 2. 13. according to his mercy Tit. 3. in which place these foure words are used as Synonyma signifying the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kindnes or bounty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 love of mankind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mercy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 grace This grace of God is notably expressed Eph. 2. 4. 5. 7. 8. by divers words of the like signification God who is rich in mercie for his great love wherewith he loved us hath when wee were dead in our sinnes quickened us together with Christ by grace you are saved that in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ for by grace yee are saved through faith c. here is the riches of his mercie the exceeding riches of his grace his greatlove wherewith hee loved us his bounty towards us in Christ and all to set forth his saving grace So in the Old Testament mercie and grace are used as words of the like signification Exo. 33. 19. I will bee gracious to whom I will bee gracious and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy which text the Apostle rendreth thus Rom. 9. 15. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercie and I will have compassion of whom I will have compassion Exod. 34. 6. where the Lord proclaiming his goodnesse or bounty before Moses as hee had promised chap. 33. 19. expresseth it in these termes The Lord the Lord God mercifull and gracious slow to anger abundant in chesed ve emeth in bounty and truth which in the New Testament are translated grace and truth keeping mercie for thousands forgiving iniquity c. So Psal. 86. 15. Thou O Lord art a God full of compassion and gracious long suffering and plenteous in mercie and truth Likewise Psal. 130. 8. 2 King 13. 3. So also Psal. 145. 8 9. the Lord is gracious and full of compassion slow to anger and of great mercy the Lord is good to all and his mercies are over all his workes And in like manner Nehem. 9. 17. thou art a God of condonations that is ready to pardon gracious and mercifull slâ—…w to anger and of great bounty § IX Fifthly if justifying grace were inherent there would be no such opposition as the Apostle
confute himselfe Now in the sixt verse the Apostle sheweth what manner of faith that is which justifieth viz. not a dead or a counterfeit but a lively and effectuall faith a faith which is effectuall or effectually worketh by love a faith which as Saint Iames saith is not without workes but is demonstrable by good workes § III. But these words Bellarmine doth wilfully deprave For in other places hee readeth and understandeth the wordes as wee doe following the vulgar Latine translation unto which hee is tyed by the decree of the Councell of Trent reading fides quae per charitatem operatur faith that worketh by charity as our English Rhemists also translate the words And to seeke no further in the very beginning of the next chapter where hee confuteth the erroneous opinion of Osiander who held that the righteousnesse of Christ whereby wee are justified is the essentiall righteousnesse of the Deity dwelling in us saith that this errour is manifestly refuted by the Apostle Rom. 4. proving the righteousnesse by which wee are justified to bee faith vivam viz. per dilectionem operantem to wit a lively faith and working by love and likewise Gal. 5. 5 6. we by faith expect the hope of righteousnesse for in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love Whereupon hee inferreth quòd si fides per dilectionem operans c. but if faith working by charity be that righteousnesse c. But here for a poore shift and to serve his present turne hee interpreteth the Greeke Participle of the middle voice as if it were passive fides quae agitur faith which is acted moved formed and as it were animated by love And therupon inferreth that charity isthe forme of faith and that faith justifieth formally as it is formed by charity and not otherwise and consequently that charity justifieth much more and hereupon also he buildeth afterwards that distinction of faith that it is either formata when it is acted by charity or informis when it is severed from it where also to helpe out the matter hee saith that the Latine word operatur is passively understood whereof as I suppose no example can bee given thereby making the translation barbarous and understanding it as never any before him understood iâ—… § IV. But to begin with the last it were a strange speech if a man signifie that the matter is acted by the form or that the body is acted by the soule should say corpus per animam operatur And no doubt if the old interpreter had meant so he would have said agitur and not operatur As for the Gâ—…eeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifieth effectuall or effectually working and so both the Verbe and the Participle which are used nine times at the least in the new Testament are or ought to be effectuall namely in it selfe or effectuall to worke according to the twofold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or act whereof the Philosophers and Schoolemen use to speake to wit the first and the second c. which distinction may be applied to habits of grace or gracious habits The first act which is the forme of faith or of any other grace is that Tushijah that essence or entity whereof Salomon speaketh wherby any grace is that which it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed and in truth which is the integrity of it and so saith Thomas actus primus est forma integritas rei in respect whereof faith and so every other grace is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unfained This is that principium agendi that inward act or efficacie whereby faith or any other grace is effectuall in it selfe lively active operative apt to produce operations according to their severall kinds without which faith or any other grace is dead and counterfeit and not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeede and in truth whereof it beareth the name but aequivocè even as the counterfeit of any man is called by his name The second act of faith or of any other grace is the actuall working thereof actus secundus saith Thomas est operatio And these acts are either immediate and eliciti as the Schoolemen speak or mediate and imperati As for example the immediate or elicite acts of justifying faith are first to beleeve truly and effectually and by a lively assent that Iesus the Sonne of the blessed Virgin is the eternall Sonne of God the Messias and the Saviour of all that beleeve in him Secondly because I so beleeve in Christ to beleeve that hee is my Saviour Thirdly by these acts faith receiving Christ who is our righteousnesse doth justifie The mediate acts which are called imperati are these acts which the immediate acts doe produce mediantibus aliis virtutibus by the mediation of other vertues For if I beleeve that Iesus is the Sonne of God and the Saviour of all that beleeve in him and consequently that hee is my Saviour hereupon I shall be moved to trust in him as my Saviour which is the act of affiance but commanded by faith and to expect salvation from him which is the act of hope but commanded by faith and likewise to love him and by love to obey him which are the acts of charity but commanded by faith as here it is said faith working by love § V. Now those graces by which faith worketh as namely charity have not the respect of the formall cause unto faith but rather of the instrumentall Neither doth faith worke by them as its forme but as its instruments as the soule by the body and the members thereof But that charity is not indeed the forme of faith whereby it is acted and formed it may appeare evidently by these reasons First because those which hold it to be the forme of faith deny it to bee the inward and intrinsecall forme whereby faith is that which it is which onely is the formall cause and as it were the soule of faith but extrinsecall whereby as they imagine the acts of faith are informed and so they make it by a strange kinde of Logicke the forme of all vertues as well as of faith Secondly because one habit disparated from another as the three Theologicall vertues faith hope and charity being also as themselves say seated in diverse subjects as the seat of faith is the mind of love the heart cannot possibly be the forme of the other Thirdly that habit which proceedeth from another as the fruit and effect thereof cannot bee the forme of that other But charity which is the fulfilling of the Law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. For therefore doe wee love God and our neighbour for his sake because by faith wee are peâ—…swaded of his love towards us and therefore doe wee love him because hee loved us first 1 Ioh. 4. 19 Fourthly if charity be the forme of faith then faith is the
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
theefe upon the crosse Repl. But it evident that as S. Paul so also Origen speaketh of workes in generall and that in the penitent theese and in that penitent woman good workes were not wanting For the theeâ—…e reproâ—…eth his fellow confesseth his sinne acknowledgeth Christs innocencie professeth Christ in his most despicable eâ—…ate when his owne Disciples â—…ed prayeth unto Christ to remember him when he should come to his Kingdome The woman brought an Alabaster box of ointment stood behinde Christ weeping washed his feeâ—… with her teares wiped them with the haires of her head kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment by which actions shee tâ—…tified her faith in Christ her repentance for her â—…innes her love to her Saviour acknowledged by Christ himselfe to have beene great Yet not by these good workes but onely by their faith were those two persons justified And no marvell For even Abraham himselfe though he abounded with good workes yet he was not justified by them but by faith onely Yea but saith Bellarmine Origen doth not exclude love and repenâ—…nce Repl. No mâ—…re doe we from the subject that is the partie justified but from the act of justification For although they doe not concurre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof yet they must eoncurre in the subject that is the partie justified as necessary fruits of faith and unseparable companions of justification V. Cyprian Fidem tantùm prodesse or as Pamelius will have it iâ—… 〈◊〉 faith onely or whâ—…lly profitetâ—… VI. Eusebius Casariensis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore that faith doth suffice us to salvation which maketh us to know God the Father Almighty and to subscribe or assent that his onely begotten Sonne is the Saviour VII Hilariâ—… it 〈◊〉 the Scribes that sinne should be forgiven by a man for they saw no more in Christ but a man and that to bee remitted by him which the law could not release for faith onely justifieth And againe Qâ—…ia 〈◊〉 sola justificat and yet againe Hac sola fides confessâ—… Christum Dei filium omnium beatitudinâ—…m glâ—…riam merâ—…it in Petrâ—… This faith alone confessed that Christ is the Sonne of God obtained in Peter the glory of all blessednesse To the first Bâ—…llarmine answereth that the particle alone excludeth onely the law which 〈◊〉 hath no place in the other two But if the law be excluded which iâ—… the rule of all inherent righteousnesse it proveth justification only by faith For if men be justified either by the legall righteousnesse or by thâ—… Evangelicall and a third cannot be named then it followeth that if men have not nor can have remission of sinnes and justification by the law that is by inherent righteousnesse which is prescribed in the law thâ—…n they must have it according to the Gospell that is by the righteousnesse of Christ received by faith onely but the former is true Act. 13. 38 39. therefore the latter VIII S. â—…asill This is perfect and entire glorying in God when a mâ—…n being not lifted up for his ownâ—… righteousnesse knoweth indeed himselfe to want true justice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to bee justified by faith alonâ—… in Christ. 〈◊〉 answereth that Basil excludeth onely workes done without faith or the grace of God Reply But Basill mentioneth not workes going before Grace but speaketh of a man already justified who then doth intirely glory in God when being not lifted up with a conceit of that righteousnesse which is in himselfe but being conscious to himselfe of his defectivenesse in respect of inherent righteousnesse acknowledgeth himselfe to be justified onely by faith in Christ. IX Gregory Nazianzene speaking of those words Rom. 10. 9. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is righteousnesse to beleeve onely X. Saint Ambrose or whosoever else as ancient as he was the Authour of the Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul whom the Papists use to cite under the name of Saint Ambrose and of Bishop Ambrâ—…se when they meet with any thing that seemeth to make for them Sixâ—…us Senensis doth not only acknowledge them to be Ambrose his Commentaries but also commendeth them as being breves quidem in verbis sed sententiarum pondere graves He in very many places ascribeth justification to faith alone â—…ellarmine saith he excludeth the workes of the ceremâ—…niall Law or the necessity of externall workes which may serve perhaps for a poore shift to avoid some few places but not the most As first in Rom. 3. 24. They are justified saith he gratis that is freely because nihil operantes neque vicem redentes sola fide justificati sunt donâ—… Dei that is without workes either going before or following after they are through the gift of God justified by faith only Secondly In Rom. 4. how can the Iewes who looke to be justified by the workes of the Law thinke that they are justified with the justification of Abraham cum videant Abraham non ex operibus legis sed sola fide justificatum when they see Abraham to have beene justified not by the workes of the Law but onely by faith Non ergâ—…â—…pus est lege quando impius per solam fidem justificatur apud Deum There is no need therefore of the Law seeing a sinner is justified before God by faith alone Thirdly and on those words of thâ—… fifth 〈◊〉 according to the Latine secundum propositum 〈◊〉 sic decâ—…etum dicit à Deo ut cessante lege solam fidem 〈◊〉 Dei pâ—…sceret ad salâ—…tem Fourthly He pronounceth them blessed whom God hath ordained that without any labour or observation solâ—… fide justificantur apud Deâ—… they should be justified before God by faith alone Fifthly There being nothing required of them but onely that thâ—…y beleeve Sixthly In Rom. 9. Sola fides posita est ad salutem Seventhly in Rom. 10. Nullum opus dicit legis sed solam fidem 〈◊〉 in causa Chrâ—…sti Eighthly In 1 Cor. 1 this is ordained of God that whosoever beleeveth in Christ be safe or saved sine operâ—… solâ—… fide gratis recipiens remissionem peccatorum without worke receiving freely remission of sins by faith alone Ninthly In 2 Cor. 3. hac lex scil spiritus dâ—…t libertatem solam fidem poscens the Law of the Spirit which is the covenant of grace giveth â—…liberty requiring faith onely Tenthly In Gal. 3. 18. he noteth the improvident presumption of the Iewes who thought that men cannot be justified without the workes of the Law cum sciant Abraham qui forma ejus rei est sine operibus legis per solam fidem justificatum when themselves know that Abraham who is the patterne or samplar of that matter to have been justified by faith alone without the workes of the Law Eleventhly In Gal. 3. 22. that hee comming who was promised to Abraham fidem solam ab ijs posceret should require of them faith
Photius apud Occumenium in Rom. 4. 1. speaking of Abraham you see that he hath not so much as any footstep of works unto so great gifts from God whence then was he vouchsafed them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore by faith alone they are able to obtaine the promises XXVIII Smaragdus In Gal. 3. Necesse est sola fide Christi salvari credentes XXIX Oecumenius in Gal. 3. 11. Because the righteous shall live by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there is but one way saith hee to justifie and that is by faith 2. In Col. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is fufficient saith he to beleeve onely XXX Theophylact in Rom. 4. 5. Doth he that is to be justified bring any thing Faith onely 2. In Rom. 9. ult Fides itaque sola est faith therefore is alone and not workes with it it worketh all things and it justifyeth 3. In Gal. 3. 11. Now hee doth plainely demonstrate that faith it selfe alone hath in it the power of justifying Bellarmine answereth for this is the third place which hee would seeme to afford us out of his owne store that his meaning is that without faith nothing doth justâ—…fie But the meaning is plaine not that other things cannot justifie without faith but that faith alone without the helpe of other things is able to justifie 4. In 2 Thes. 2. 17. that God pro sola fide for faith alone will give yea those eternall good things XXXI Anselmus Cantuariensis in Rom. 4. 5. but to him that doth not the workes of the Law but without any precedent worke doth come to faith sufficit ipsa fides adjustitiam faith it selfe sufficeth unto righteousnesse 2. In 1 Cor. 1. 4. For grace is given in Christ because this is ordained of God that he which beleeveth in Christ should be saved without worke sola fide gratis by faith alone and freely receiving remission of sinnes XXXII Rupertus Tuitiensis lib. 2. in libros Regum cap. 39. The obstinate Iew persisteth in contention and contemning the faith of Christ qua sola justificare potest which alone can justifie arrogateth to himselfe numerous justice out of his workes XXXIII Bernard out of whom Bellarmine in the fourth place produceth a twofold testimony in our behalfe the former in Canticles serm 22. Whosoever hauing compunction for his sinnes doth hunger and thirst after righteousnesse let him beleeve in Thee who dost justifie the sinner solam justificatus per fidem and being justified by faith alone he shall have peace with thee 2. The other Epist. 77. speaking of Mark. 16. 16. Courteously he did not repeate but he that is not baptized shall bee condemned but onely he that beleeveth not intimating that faith sometimes alone is sufficient to salvation but without it nothing doth suffice To the former hee answereth that Bernard speaketh de viva fide of a lively faith c. as though we spake of any other If hee confesse that a lively faith doth justifie alone it is all that wee seeke For as for the dead faith wee confesse that it justifieth neither alone nor at all And therfore attribute lesse unto it than the Papists themselves To the other hee answereth that the word solam excludeth onely the necessity of Baptisme in the case of necessity Reply if sometimes it doth suffice alone to salvation then much more to justification and if baptisme which is manus dantis bee excluded then by the like reason all other things which are in us are excluded from the act of justification XXXIV Thomas Aquinas in 1 Tim. 1. lect 3. there is not therefore any hope in the morall precepts sed in sola fide but in faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 26. Sola fides faith alone maketh men the adoptive sons of God Now that which alone maketh men the sonnes of God by adoption that alone doth justifie them XXXV Boâ—…aventure in 4. Sent. dist 15. part 1. q. 1. because man could not satisfie for so great offence therefore God gave unto him a Mediatour who should satisfie for the offenee whereupon in sola fide in the only faith of his passion all fault is remitted and without faith therof none is justified XXXVI Nicholas Gorrham in Rom. 4. If hee beleeve onely in Christ though he doe not worke his faith alone is reputed for sufficient justice XXXVII Couradus Clingius loc commun lib. 5. cap. 42. Deuâ—… justos nos reputat propter solum fidem in Christum and in the old edition cap. 117. sola fides bene sufficit adjustificationem XXXVIII The judgement of Cardinall Contarenus we heard before that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to those that beleeve whereupon it necessarily followeth that in us nothing is required unto justification before God but onely faith Thus in all ages of the Church justification by faith alone was a received Doctrine untill the accursed Councell of Trent which denounceth a curse against all those who shall say that a man is justified by faith alone And yet even since that Councell the force of this truth hath expressed from the professed enemies of the Gospell a confession thereof Ben. Iustinianus in his paraphrase on Gal. 2. 16. hee rendreth it thus And yet wee are not ignorant that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law sed per unum Iesu Christi fidem but by the only faith in Christ and in his explanation he giveth this sence because we who are by nature Iewes cannot be justified by the Law sed per solam fidem but by faith alone it followeth that no mortall man can obtaine righteousnesse by the workes of the Law sed solâ—…m ex Iesu Christi fide but only by the faith of Iesus Christ. Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith that to us the merits of Christ are applyed by the Sacraments Hebrâ—…is per solum fidem to the Hebrewes by faith alone But the faithfull among the Hebrewes were justified no otherwise than Abraham was justified And as Abraham the Father of all the faithfull who was the forme and samplar of this thing was justified so are wee But Abraham was justified by faith alone therefore wee also are justified by faith onely Neither is the justification by Sacraments repugnant to justification by faith alone the meaning of our assertion being this that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely For being justified by faith alone as Abraham was the Sacraments are added as circumcision was to him as seales of that righteousnesse which we have by faith So that faith onely justifieth before God as the hand of the receiver but the Sacraments serve to justifie the faithfull in the court of their Conscience by sealing and assuring unto them their justification CHAP. X. Bellarmines arguments that
faith doth not justifie alone first because it doth not dispose alone to justification there being seven dispositions whereof faith is but one and namely the first § I. NOw let us see what arguments Bellarmine doth bring to prove that we are not justified by faith alone Which question in his opinion may bee disputed three wayes either with relation to the time going before justification or to the time of justification or to the time following our justification In respect of the first the question which he maketh is whether faith doth justifie alone by way of disposing unto justification In respect of the second whether faith be the onely formall cause of our justification In respect of the third whether for the retaining and preserving of righteousnesse good workes be not required but faith onely sufficeth The first he disputeth De justif l. 1. c. 12. and in the twelve chapters following to the end of that booke The second that faith is not the onely and entire formall cause of justification he disputeth in the second booke The third he disputeth in the fourth booke Chap. 18. 19. where he endevoureth to prove that good workes doe justifie But in mine opinion hee should rather have disputed this question whether faith doth justifie at all or not For whereas they make two justifications the first habituall whereby of a sinner a man is made just the second actuall whereby a man of just is made more just by their doctrine faith doth not justifie as a part either of the one or the other but is required as a necessary companion and as it were causa sine qua non which is no cause For they make the formall cause of their first justification which they say truely is but one to be charity and the meritorious cause of the second to be good workes Onely that charity and those good workes must not be without faith All which they ascribe to faith is that they make it the beginning of justification and a disposition to it Neither doe we deny but that true faith is the beginning and the root of sanctification and of all inherent righteousnesse insomuch that from it both charity it selfe 1 Tim. 1. 5. and all other both internall graces and externall obedience doe spring but the act of justification neither in the first nor second doe they ascribe to faith Onely unto the first justification they require it as a preparative disposition for the habit of grace to bee infused which doth not differ from Charity and when it is infused to be a companion thereof And to the second as causa sine qua non without which workes doe not justifie § II. But to come to Bellarmines large discourse the greatest part thereof seemeth to bee impertinent and besides the purpose But to make all seeme pertinent he maliciously calumniateth us as if we held all those assertions which hee with such eagernesse doth confute But if we doe hold that faith doth not justifie by way of disposing either alone or at all and that it is not the formall cause of justification either alone as the entire cause or at all as any part thereof and that it is not a consequent of justification at all as works indeed are to what end doth all this dispute serve unlesse it be to make their seduced Catholiks who never are permitted to read any of our writings to beleeve that he hath doughtily confuted us § III. And that faith doth not justifie alone by way of disposing he endeavoureth to prove by five sorts of arguments The first from those seven dispositions required by the Councell of Trent to justification among which he reckoneth faith for one Whereunto in generall I answere that this whole discourse besides that it is impertinent for wee doe not hold as I have said that faith doth justifie by way of disposition either alone or at all it is also an idle speculation disagreeing from their practicke theologie and that in two respects First to their speculative justification they require foregoing preparations and dispositions but to the obtayning of justification in deed and in practise no such things are required For the efficacie of justifying a sinner they ascribe to their Sacraments which they say doe conferre gratiam gratum facientem that is justifie ex opere operato requiring as I conceive no preceding preparation or disposition in the party to be justified so hee doe not interpose the obstacle of any mortall sinne For if foregoing dispositions were required before the Sacraments then they should not justifie as I have said before ex opere operato but ex opere operantis Secondly they doe teach that in their first justification Charity and with it Faith and Hope are infused whereby a man that before was a sinner is made righteous And that therefore a man is first justified when these are infused and that these are first infused when a man is justified and yet they tell us of a true Faith true Hope true Love going before justification Which by their doctrine though they goe together I meane Faith Hope and Charity accompanied with other good dispositions are neither graces nor gifts of grace infused For before or without the Sacrament there is no justification which they have tyed to the Sacrament and before justification as themselves say there is no grace For if they were graces indeed as no doubt but they are where they are true and goe together accompanied with other good dispositions then men might be justified before the receit of the Sacrament as Abraham was and then the Sacrament to men so qualified should not conserre grace but seale it Thus to mainetaine their pernicious errour concerning the efficacie of the Sacraments justifying ex opere operato whereby they have turned religion into an outward formality that Faith that Hope that Charity which goe before the Sacrament as namely in Cornelius before his baptisme should be no true graces because all true justifying and saving grace is insused in the administration of the Sacrament and this infusion of grace is that which they call justification By their doctrine therefore justifying faith is that which in the very act of justification is infused and being infused doth justifie not by way of disposing but formally it selfe being informed by Charity And therefore according to their owne doctrine that faith which disposeth to justification is not justifying Faith And consequently all this discourse concerning six other preparative dispositions concurring with faith to prove that we are not justified by faith alone is besides the purpose For that faith which they make their first preparative disposition is not justisying faith neither doth justifie otherwise by Bellarmines owne confession than its next companion viz servile feare doth But wee when we say that faith alone doth justifie speake not of a bare and naked assent which is common to the wicked which cannot justifie either alone or at all but of a true
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
respect of the almes which it doth receive And yet I doe not conceive that therefore the hand and the almes be relatives But we confesse that justifying faith is not without his object yet that object by apprehenâ—…ing wherof it 〈◊〉 justifie relâ—…tively is not righteousnesse inherent as here Bellarmine against his owne conscience doth suggest but the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified betweene which and faith there is such a relation that as justifying faith is called the faith of Christ or faith in Christ faith in his bloud so the righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified is called the righteousnesse of faith And further I confesse that whosoever is justified by righteousnesse imputed is also in some measure just by righteousnesse inherent though he be not justified before God thereby But whereas he saith that wee will easily admit this argument that where faith is there is also inherent justice and consequently that justifying faith cannot be severed from other virtues because wee teach that by every sinne faith is lost I doe much marvell at his impudency for though he and his consorts doe wickedly teach that by every act of infidelity faith is lost yet wee are so farre from granting that faith is lost by every sinne that we confidently hold that true justifying faith is never totally or finally lost by any sinne whatsoever that is incident to the faithfull and regenerate man Some indeed have taught that by hainous offences which doe vastare conscientiam waste the conscience faith is lost yet that is farre from saying it is lost by every sinne Secondly againe saith he if faith doth justifie relatively then it cannot be in a mans minde but justice also must be there and without love there is no justice Answ. Without love there is no justice inherent but that is not it to which faith when it justifieth hath relation but that which faith having justified us bringeth forth in us as a consequent of justification Thirdly moreover saith he if faith severed from all other virtues doe justifie alone then it may also justifie being accompanied with those vices which are contrary to those virtues But this cannot be imagined that a man should be justified and yet remaine a wicked man Answ. If by vices he understand certaine vicious dispositions which though they doe not reigne in the faithfull yet remaine in them as their infirmities I confesse that justifying faith may and doth stand with such But if he meane the contrary habits of sinne which reigne in the hearts of the wicked and impenitent sinners I professe that justifying faith cannot stand with such For where these doe reigne the man is wholly unregenerate and where regeneration is not there faith which by regeneration is wrought cannot be It is therefore against the nature and being of a true justifying faith to harbour in a soule unregenerate § IV. To this argument he saith we answere that they assume that which is impossible viz. that faith may be alone which I beleeve not to have beene the answere of any of our Doctors for a man arguing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may suppose that which is impossible and yet the argument be of no lesse force But our assertion that faith cannot be alone which before I have made good in the second Chapter of this booke and defended against Bellarmines objections Chap. 3. hee laboureth here to take away by three reasons first by cavilling with Luther and Calvin First Luther saith that faith justifieth both before and without Charity I rejoyne it justifieth before because in order of nature it goeth before without because though Charity be present with it yet it justifieth without it even as the eye though the eare be with it yet seeth without it Secondly Calvin saith that the seed of faith remaineth in the greatest falles of the faithfull and therefore without Charity I rejoyne Calvin saith no more than S. Iohn doth that the seed of God doth alwaies remaine in those that are borne of God which seed of God is as well the seed of Charity as of Faith and both the one and the other remaine in the greatest fals of Gods children as wee see in Peter in whom though he fell most grievously in denying and sorswearing his Lord yet the seeds yea the habits of faith and love did remaine as I have proved elsewhere Secondly saith he because our argument assumeth not that faith may be alone but that if faith did justifie alone it would doe so though it were alonâ—… this reason doth not confute our assertion that faith cannot be alone but taketh away that answere which he falsely I thinke assigneth to us But this consequence of his I have denied and disproved His third reason which is but the second to disprove our assertions if it bee true saith he that true faith is never alone then it is because faith begetteth those other graces even as a good Tree bringeth forth good fruit And if this were so then faith should goe before love and other graces if not in time yet in nature But faith cannot be conceived to be in nature before justification or justice infused or those graces wherein justification consisteth because these are relatives as they say God justifying and faith receiving justification for relatives are simulnatura c. Answ. The relatives that we meane are Christs righteousnesse imputed of God and faith apprehending or receiving it which though they bee simul natura in respect of the one to the other yet both of them are before the other graces in order of nature But if justifying faith be before charity and there be no righteousnesse without charity then saith he the same man may be just and not just at the same time Answ. It followeth not For though in order of nature faith be before love 1 Tim. 1. 5. yet in time they goe together Neither is that such an absurdity as he imagineth that the same man at the same time should be a sinner in himselfe and righteous in Christ a sinner according to the Law because he hath broken it but righteous according to the Gâ—…spell because in Christ he hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the end of the Law to every one that beleeveth Insomuch that every one that beleeveth in Christ is reputed as if he had fulfilled the Law Lastly because saith he it is false which they hold that faith cannot be severed from Charity and other virtues and this he taketh upon him to prove in the next Chapter unto which I have fully answered in the second question concerning the nature of faith CHAP. XIV Bellarmines third principall argument from the removall of those causes which may be given why faith doth justifie alone § I. HHis third principall argument is taken from the removall of those causes he meaneth reasons which may be given why faith alone doth justifie All which as he saith may be reduced
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
and by beleeving to receive and embrace Christ. The acts of faith in sanctifying and producing morall dueties are immediate acts or imperati which faith produceth by meanes of other virtues commanded by faith such are sperare confidere amare timere obedire pati c Of justification the man indued with faith is not the efficient but the subject and the patient who receiving by faith which is his onely act the righteousnesse of Christ is thereby justified God imputing to the beleever the righteousnesse of his Sonne and therefore though to beleeve bee his owne act yet hee is not said in the active to justifie himselfe by faith but in the passive to bee justified by faith Rom. 3. 24. 28. 5. 1. But in the duties of sanctification and in all morall duties the faithfull man is the efficient of them and his faith as it is said of arts other habits is the principium agendi the principle wherby he worketh and of them faith under God is the prime cause and as some call that which is principium agendi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such actions are the most of those which Heb. 11. are so highly commended which though they were the fruits of justifying faith yet were the acts of faith not as it justifieth but as it sanctifieth fortifieth or otherwise qualifieth them who are endued with it and this efficiencie of faith in Greeke and Latine is oftner signified without the prepositions than with As Heb. 11. though the sence be the same Of justification therefore faith is but the instrumentall cause justifying relatively that is in respect of the object which it doth receive being the onely instrument to receive that object which alone doth justifie But of the dueties of sanctification and other morall actions such as for the most part are mentioned Heb. 11. whereof the faithfull man is the efficient justifying faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love and other virtues as affiance c. is the prime cause working them not relatively by apprehending the object but effectually producing them as principium agendi wherby Bellarmines dispute out of Heb. 11. is confuted For there it is said saith hee that by faith the Saints overcame Kingdomes wrought righteousnesse obtained the promises stopped the mouths of Lyons c. Where the particle by doth not signifie apprehension but the true cause For faith was the cause of Abels religious offering of Noahs preparing the Arke of Abrahams obedience c. All this I confesse but that which he would inferre therupon that faith therefore doth not justifie relatively by way of apprehending the object I have already answered for that which hee spake before of apprehending relatively was idle and frivolus § VII The second part of his assumption was that saith is the beginning of justice and consequently the inchoated formall cause of justification So that now belike the seven dispositions shall be the inchoated formes of justification the entire forme being but one viz. charity and consequently the disposing faith and the disposing feare and so of the rest shall be inchoated charity which is ridiculous Bellarmine in this argument as allwayes by justification understandeth sanctification whereof and of all inherent righteousnesse wee acknowledge faith to bee the beginning and consequently the beginning of that righteousnesse by which we are formally just But of justification not the beginning only but the accomplishment and perfection is to be attributed unto faith because no sooner doe we by faith lay hold upon the righteousnesse of Christ which is most perfect but wee are perfectly justified thereby And therefore the Fathers as you heard before â—… acknowledge faith alone to suffice unto justification So Origen in Rom. 3. lib. 3. Hierome and Sedulius in Rom. 10. 10. in Gal. 3. 6. Chrysost. in Gal. 3. 6. in Tit. 1. 13. Augustin de tempore Serm. 68. Chrysâ—…log serâ—… 34. Primasius in Gal. 2. Oecumen in Col. 2. Theophylact in Gal. 3. Anselm in Rom. 4. If faith alone sufficeth unto justification then doth it not onely begin but also perfect and accomplish it For Rom. 5. 1. Being justified by faith wee have peace with God But Bellarmine endeavoureth to prove his assertion by authority of Scriptures and testimonies of Fathers His first testimony out of the Scriptures is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Where saith he faith it selfe is counted righteousnesse and consequently faith doth not apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ but faith in Christ is it selfe justice And if it be lively and perfected by Charity it shall be perfect justice if not it shall at the least be unperfect and inchoated justice Answ. If the question were concerning the approbation or justification of the act of faith or the habit I would acknowledge that the Lord doth accept the same though unperfect in it selfe as righteous As the zealous act of Phinehas was counted unto him for righteousnesse throughout all generations But the Apostle speaketh of the justification of the person who cannot by one habit and much lesse by one act of faith be formally just But forasmuch as by faith in Christ the beleever receiveth the perfect righteousnesse of Christ this faith in respect of the object doth fully justifie the beleever and is therefore counted to him for righteousnesse not that it selfe is his righteousnesse nor that he is righteous in himselfe who still in himselfe remaineth a sinner but in Christ. And such was the faith of Abraham and of all the faithfull that not in themselves but in the promised seed all that beleeve in him should be blessed that is justified The Greeke word used sometimes by the Septuagint as Gen. 18. 18. 28. 14. and retained by the Apostle Gal. 3. 8. is very significant viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie that not in themselves but in the promised seed they should be justified and blessed for so the Apostle Rom. 4. 5 6 7. useth these words promiscuously as also Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith preached before the Gospell unto Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed This blessednesse therefore this justification is obtained by faith and therefore is faith counted righteousnesse because it receiveth it As for faith it selfe absolutely considered without relation to its object we according to the Popish doctrine are justified by it neither in the act of justification nor before Not before for untill it be as they speake formed with Charity it cannot justifie nor in the act for charity alone is the formall cause of justification and then only are we formally justified when Charity is infused or else there are more formall causes of justification than one which Bellarmine according to the doctrine of the Councill of Trent doth utterly deny § VIII His second testimony 1 Corinthians 3. 11. another foundation can
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
man could performe justitiam legis considered in the abstract as it is described in the doctrine of the Law and as Bellarmine himselfe De justif lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it would justifie him because it is perfect yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse which men attaine unto in or by the Law doth not justifie because it is unperfect And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law which the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onely two of the places cited viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8 9. both which distinctions being rightly understood make against himselfe as I have shewed § IX Now he commeth to the third thing viz. what is meant by workes For saith he our adversaries by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification understand all works whether done before or after faith yea faith it selfe considered as a work which opinion to be most absurd and proceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures Augustine saith hee teacheth Men not understanding what the Apostle saith we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law have thought that hee had said that faith is sufficient to a man though he live wickedly and have no good workes which be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke And farre bee it also from us so to thinke But although faith alone doth not suffice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved yet it alone sufficeth unto justification wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers And although to the act of justifying nothing in us concurreth with faith but it alone sufficeth yet in the party justified there must concur with faith both inward graces and also outward works But here the Papists are divided among themselves Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law are excluded not the workes of the morall but of the ceremoniall Law others that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded not all but such as goe before faith such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith I answere first to both joyntly that not onely the workes of the Law are expressely excluded but all workes whatsoever indefinitely Rom. 4. 2 6. 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate that they should walke in them Ephes. 2. 9 10. Againe in him that is said not to worke workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded but hee that is justified by faiâ—…h is said not to worke Rom. 4. 4 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded § X. To the former severally I answere first that when the holy Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely he meaneth either the whole Law which is called Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge containing three branches the morall the ceremoniall and the judicial Law or the chiefe part which is the morall Law And that the Apostle meaneth it especially because he speaketh of that Law by which commeth the knowledge of sinne and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles unto which the whole world was subject Rom. 3. 19 20. whatsoever the Law saith it saith to them who are under the Law that every mouth may bee stopped and all the world may become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh that is neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne Moreover it is evident that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law which forbiddeth morall offences mentioned from the tenth verse to the ninteenth and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin ver 9. 19. Secondly it is unreasonable to be thought that any man who was a transgressour of the morall Law should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was but a by-law being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table And further the Apostle professeth that whosoever would be circumcised was bound to the performance of the whole Law Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law could not be justified without the observation of the morall law Thirdly this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians is rejected by Bellarmine and the greater part of learned Papists who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers doe confesse that by the workes of the law which the Apostle excludeth from justification are meant the workes of the morall law as well as of the rest § XI But then say I all good workes whatsoever are excluded For in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse all good workes are prescribed and therefore those which proceed from faith For if charity which is the fulfilling of the law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth proceed from faith also or else they are not such as the law requireth And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists who by the workes of the law excluded from justification underâ—…tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature not workes proceeding from faith or workes of grace The absurdity of whâ—…ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand may further appeare 1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof then much more those workes which follow justification for causes doe not use to follow after but to goe before their effects at least in order of nature 2. The question concerning justification by workes must of necessity be understood of good workes for of those which are not good no question ought to be made But workes done before or without faith are not good For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne and without faith it is impossible to please God Neither can the fruit be good whiles the Tree is bad Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee justified by the workes of the law going before faith unlesse it bee presupposed that a man without faith and before grace is able to fulfill the law For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it and hee that transgresseth it is cursed not justified by it 3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification the workes of the Law the word Law is added not by way of extenuation as
from faith secondly hee perverteth the question as if the Apostle disputed that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith or not proceeding from the grace of faith as they forsooth thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not or as if the justitiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength when the Pharisee himselfe Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength when they knew that God did chuse Abraham and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans where they served other gods Thirdly hee doth againe contradict the Apostle in saying that Abraham had glory with God which the Apostle plainely denieth the word in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth not glory but glorying or boasting If Abraham saith the Apostle was justified by works then had he wherof to glory or to boast but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God Fourthly his contradicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace hee had more cause to glory and that before God than if his workes proceeded from grace For in that case it might have beene said to him what hast thou which thou hast not received And if thou hast received it why dost thou glory or boast as if thou hadst not received it wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth that Abraham had whereof to glory before God he is to be understood as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace by which if Abraham had beene justified he had whereof to glory but not before God But being justified by faith without workes all matter of glorying was taken away By what Law of workes No but by the Law of Faith Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved not by workes lest any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8 9. And that this contradiction maketh against himselfe appeareth further by that which himselfe saith in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Whence he proveth that by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification he meaneth such workes whereto not grace is given but wages rendred And such are onely those saith hee which are wrought by the onely strength of free-will For to the workes which are wrought by grace that which is rendred is not simply merces wages but it is also grace yea grace rather than wages If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will and not by grace hee might have gloried that he had made God a debtour unto him But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt For to him that worketh that is fulfilleth the Law of God the wages is not reckoned of grace but of debt as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant Doe this and thou shalt live But to him that worketh not that is that fulfilleth not the Law which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. § VII And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concerning the merit of good workes proceeding from grace unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt but onely to such as are wrought by strength of nature But he and his fellowes when they treat of merit ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice not onely in respect of Gods promise or covenant but even in respect of the workes themselves For every good worke proceeding from charity absolutely deserveth as they teach eternall life insomuch that heaven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull than hell to the sinnes of the wicked § VIII As to the example of Abraham so to these three places Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are generally excluded from the act of justification Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onely are excluded which are done before faith But we will speake of them severally And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith that in that Epistle there are two questions handled the former speciall whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians so that without them they cannot be saved The other generall whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. Vnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively And afterwards he saith that the state of the Question in that Epistle is whether workes doe justifie without faith Whereunto I reply that no such question is mentioned in that Epistle nor the contrary concluded as being altogether heterogeneous and besides the purpose of the Apostle which was to reclaime the Galathians from their errour who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification For both the false teachers who seduced them were Christians who lest they should suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ perswaded them to bee circumcised Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves who were seduced did not cease to bee Christians neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ but were made to beleeve that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law that by them both they might be justified Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly proving that a man is justified by faith and not by the workes of the Law But if he had disputed against the other that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie without faith in Christ his disputation had beene to no purpose For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have answered that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ God forbid but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law desiring as the Papists now doe to bee justified not by faith alone but both by faith and workes together And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes so here the question is not whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ which asserâ—…ion never any Christian held but whether by faith without workes which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justification To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place
but the question is of justification Now many things are required to salvation which doe not concurre to justification as namely confession holinesse of life patience perseverance c. which though they goe before salvation yet they follow after justification and therefore cannot be causes thereof In all this discourse therefore Bellarmine is farre from concluding the point in question Notwithstanding it will not be unprofitable if I shall make a short excursion to follow him in his discourse but not to answere every particular which is not worth the answering That therefore he may confute our most pernicious errour as he calleth it he saith he will prove three things first that in the Gospell is contained the doctrine of workes and divers Lawes and that the promises thereof require the condition of fulfilling the Law Secondly that the just are not free from the observation of the Law of God Thirdly that good workes are simply necessary to Salvation § III. His intent in the first is to disprove that difference which we make betweene the Law and the Gospell from whence he had collected in the former Chapter that we deny the necessity of good works The difference was this That the Law propoundeth justification and salvation upon the condition of our fulfilling the whole Law But the Gospell promiseth justification and salvation upon the condition of faith only excluding works as the causes by which we are justified or for which we be saved which difference if it be true as it is most true plainely proveth justification by faith only and disproveth justification by workes For the better understanding whereof wee are to distinguish the termes both of the Law and Gospell which are used sometimes more largely sometimes more strictly and properly More largely Thorah the Law signifieth the whole doctrine of the old Testament whether written and contained in the bookes of Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes or Preached Written thus it is said to have beene written in the Law Ioh. 10. 34. which is written Psalm 82. 6. so Ioh. 12. 34. which is written Psalm 110. 4. so Ioh. 15. 25. which is written Psalm 35. 19. The Law saith those things Rom. 3. 19. which are cited out of the Psalmes and out of the Prophet Esay vers 10 11 12. Thus 1 Cor 14. 21. out of Esai 28. 11. thus Gal. 4. 21. out of Gen. 21. 10. And thus by the Law in many places is understood the whole doctrine of God contained in the Scriptures of the old testament and is often used in the same sense promiscuously g with Gods word insomuch that the Septuagints sometime translate Dabar which signifieth the word by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preached as Esai 30. 9 10. Psalm 78. 1. Ier. 18. 18. Prov. 28. 9. 29. 18. In this large sense the Evangelicall promises made in the old testament are contained in the Law though properly belonging to the Gospell as Bellarmine confesseth the promises of remission of sinnes though they be in the Prophets they doe not belong to the Law but to the Gospell And so the covenant of grace it selfe which the Lord made with Abraham in making whereof he is said Gal. 3. 8. to have preached before the Gospell to Abraham Of the Doctrine of the Gospell which was to begin at Ierusalem Luk. 24. 47. it is said Esai 2. 3. Mic. 4. 2. out of Sion the Law shall goe foorth So more largely the Gospell is taken for the whole Doctrine of the new Testament whether written by the Apostles and Evangelists or preached Mark. 13. 10. Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 2. 5 14. Ephes. 6. 19. Col. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 27. 2 Thes. 1. 8. Thus the histories of the life and death of CHRIST are called Gospels Mark 1. 1. Mat. 26. 13. Preached Rom. 2. 16. 16. 25. 1 Cor. 4. 15. 9. 18. Gal. 2. 7. 1 Thes. 1. 5. 2. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 8. In respect of this large sense it is truely said that the Precepts Promises and Comminations of the Law are contained in the Gospell § IV More strictly and properly the Law signifieth the Covenant of workes which is also called the Law of workes Rom. 3. 27. which upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience promiseth justification and salvation to the observers thereof Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Levit 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11. Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 20 28. Likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gospell which importeth good tydings signifieth more strictly and properly the Covenant of Grace which is also called the Law of faith Rom. 3. 27. and the word of faith Rom. 10. 8. which freely promiseth justification and right of salvation to all that beleeve in Christ Ioh. 3. 15 16 36. 6. 47. 11. 25. 20. 31. Act. 16. 31. Rom. 3. 24. 10. 6 9. Eph. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. 1 Ioh. 5 13. This doctrine of God concerning Salvation by Christ through faith which properly is the Gospell Luk. 4. 18. Matth. 11. 5. Rom. 1. 16 17. Act. 15. 7. Gal. 1. 6. 3. 8. Act. 10. 36. is called the Gospell of grace Act. 20. 24. the word of reconciliation 2 Cor. 5. 18. the Gospell of peace Ephes. 6. 15. the Gospell of salvation Ephes. 1. 13. the Gospell of glory 1 Tim. 1. 11. the Gospell of the glory of Christ that is the glorious Gospell of Christ 2 Cor. 4. 4. the Gospell of the Kingdome Matth. 4. 13. 24. 13. This doctrine teacheth us that our gracious God out of his meere grace having elected his children in Christ before all times did in the fulnesse of time send downe his Sonne to save us and that the benefit of the Messias might be applyed unto us vouchsafeth unto us the Gospell of grace by which according to the purpose of his grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times he calleth us working in us the grace of faith being endued with faith hee imputeth unto us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ making us partakers of redemption reconciliation justification and adoption and so freeing us from hell and from all the enemies of our salvation hee entituleth us unto the kingdome of heaven And that wee may be fitted and prepared for his Kingdome into which no unholy thing may enter Apoc. 21. 27. hee hath promised to them that beleeve that being redeemed reconciled justified adopted and so entituled to the kingdome of heaven hee will give them grace to worship him without feare in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of our life that is in the voluntary upright and constant obedience of his Law Luk. 1. 73 74 75. It is true that the things which God in this Covenant of grace hath promised to give as namely faith and new obedience are also required of us Deo dante quod jubet God giving to us what he requireth of us the one as the antecedent condition
Spirit it selfe beareth witnesse with our Spirit that we are the Children of God and if Children Heires of God and coheires with Christ who shall be glorified with Christ if hee hath given us grace not onely to beleeve but also to suffer with him and for him he doth not say that our suffering doth make us sonnes and heires of God who shall be glorified with him but the Spirit beareth witnesse that if we suffer with him we are the sonnes and heires of God who shall be glorified with him So 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. If we suffer wee shall reigne with him if we patiently suffer it is not a cause but a signe that we shall reigne with him Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus But how shall we know who they are that shall be saved by Christ that walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit where walking after the Spirit is not the cause of salvation but a signe of their being in Christ which is the cause Christ is the foundation and cause of all our happinesse and faith is the only instrument whereby wee receiving Christ are united unto him all other graces and duties unto which happinesse any where is ascribed as it is to many Matth. 5. 3. c. Psalm 112. 1. c. are but notes of our being in Christ by faith and presages of our future happinesse Thus in the same chapter Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee doe mortifie the deeds of the body that is of the flesh as the vulgar Latine rendreth it and as Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 9. 27. Ye shall live So Rom. 10. 13. Whosoever calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved that is whosoever hath this grace given him unto him truly to worship God it is an evident signe and assurance unto him that he shall be saved and so of the like Ambrose this is the signe of justification in a man that by that which dwelleth in him he that is justified may appeare to be the Sonne of God § XII As evidences according to which the Lord will judge For so it is often said that God will judge men acccording to their workes Thus Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father inherit the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world for when I was hungry you gave me meat c. this rationall particle for though it be called causall and the sentence where it is used is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rendring of the cause doth not imply a cause properly so called but any argument or reason as I have shewed heretofore as here it implyeth an argument from the fruits as signes and evidences of their bleessednesse in Christ by faith The causes of this sentence of salvation are set downe vers 34. First because they are blessed of God that is justified Secondly because elected for whom God in his eternall purpose hath provided this kingdome Thirdly in that it is called the inheritance purchased for them that truely beleeve in Christ who as soone as they beleeve are by justification blessed as being entitled or having right to this Heavenly inheritance and this is implyed in the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inherit shewing that they come to that kingdome by right of inheritance Salvation therefore is given as a freâ—… gift of God depending upon election and justification and as an inheritance purchased by Christ for all true beleevers and therefore not merited by them that are saved But because God hath promised salvation to all that have true faith in Christ which is a secret and inward grace and many men deceive themselves with a vaine opinion and profession of it therefore the Lord will judge of men according to the fruits thereof when as men therefore professing the true faith doe demouâ—…trate their faith by good workes and namely by the workes of charity and mercie they give good proofe of their election whereby this kingdome was prepared for them and of their redemption by which Christ purchased this inheritance for them and of their justification whereby they are entituled to this kingdome and so are blessed of God And therefore according to these fruits Christ pronounceth the sentence of salvation § XIII Wherefore to proceed in my answeres to the afore said objection for by that which hath beene said it appeareth Fifthly that eternall life is not deserved by our obedience because it is the free gift of God depending upon Gods free election Sixthly because we come to it as to an inheritance purchased by Christs merits and not by ours Seventhly though it be a reward yet it presupposeth no merit of ours because it is a free and undeserved reward whereby the Lord out of his meere bounty doth crowne his owne gifts Ea enim est Dei bonitas saith learned Casaubon ut beneficia gratuitò in suos collata aliâ—… beneficiis coronet atque hoc mercedem appellet such is the goodnesse of God that such benefits as he hath freely bestowed upon his children he crowneth with other benefits and this hee calleth reward nihil tamen saith Calvin quasi debitum solvens sed mercedis titulum imponens suis beneficiis not as rendring any debt but imposing the name of reward on his owne benefits § XIV Now let us examine the testimonies which Bellar. alleageth wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised The first is Matth. 5. 20. unlesse your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnes of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven which words containe directly a threatning and not a promise for hee doth not say if your righteousnesse doe exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees which was but externall and in outward shew yee shall enter into the Kingdome of heaven but if it doe not which argueth that internall righteousnesse is necessary to salvation necessitate 〈◊〉 as causa sine qua non but doth not prove it to be so necessitate efficientiae And so doe other threatnings Heb. 12. 14. Luk. 13. 3. Matth. 25. 42. 1 Cor. 6. 9. Gal. 5. 21. § XV. The second testimony is Mat. 19. 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Where a rich man being a justitiray as many of the Iewes were quia omnis spes salâ—…tis apud Iudaeos in operibus erat non in fide taking it for granted that by his workes he must bee saved but not satisfied as justitiaries never are but ever remaine doubtfull and uncertaine of their justification as wee see in the Papists I say not satisfied with all that obedience which he had performed from his youth up but finding that something still was lacking hee commeth to our Saviour to know what good works those were by doing whereof he might bee saved Good Master saith hee what good thing shall I doe that I may inherit eternall life To
him our Saviour fitteth his answere and first to confute his errour and to let him understand that no man living who is but a meere man can be justified by inherent righteousnesse he telleth him that no man is good that is purely and perfectly just and therefore reproveth him for that hee thinking our Saviour to bee but a meere man as others were did call him good But in the second place to answere his question hee telleth him that if by his owne workes hee did hope to bee saved hee must doe those workes which God himselfe had commanded and so referreth him to the Coâ—…mandements of the Law of which God himselfe had said doe this and thou shall live which is the legall promise Levit. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Thus our Saviour fiâ—…teth according to the Law his answere to the disposition of the party who was a justitiary But otâ—…erwise when our Saviour and his Apostles were a ked the like qâ—…estion they made answere according to he doctrine of the Goâ—…pell For our â—…aviour being asked Ioh. 6. 28. what shall wee doe that we may doe the workes of God answered vers 29. This is the worke of God that which he esteemeth in stead of all workes that ye beleeâ—…e in him whom hee hath sent for he that beleeveth hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the â—…nd of the Law to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. And the Apostle Paul being demanded of the Iaylour what must I doe to bee saved answereth beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt bee saved Act. 16. 30 31. § XVI In the third place he alleageth testimonies out of the doctrine of the Apostles viz. Rom. 8. 13 17. 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. Iam. 2. 8. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 9. Apoc. 3 21. Answ. The place cited out of S. Iames is no promise but a commendation if you fulfill the royall law ye doe well Of Rom. 8. 13 17 and 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. I spake before But concerning them and all others that are or may be alleaged there is a distinction of conditions to be held that either they import the cause of the thing promised which is salâ—…ation or happinesse or the proper markes and cognizances of such as shall be saved or are happy which doe not shew propter quid 〈◊〉 sunt vel servandi sed qualâ—…s beats sunt quales servandi Christ our alone Saviour is the onely cause of salvation and the onely foundation of our happinesse He is eternall life and whosoever hath him hath life eternall Faith is the only instrument whereby we receive Christ and therfore to it also is salvation ascribed in respect of the object which it doth receive As when it is said thy faith hath saved thee it is to be understood as if it were said Christ received by faith hath saved thee A condition therfore of receiving Christ by faith or of Christ received by faith betokeneth the cause but all other coâ—…ditions either of graces or of works doe not signifie the cause of salvation but the proper markes and cognizances of those which shall be saved And therfore prove that the markes aâ—…e or may be necessary by the necessity of presâ—…nce but not by necessity of efficiencie § XVII And this also may seâ—…ve to answere his fouâ—…th and fifth arguments His fourth is fetched from the Doctrine of the Prophets Ezek. â—…8 21 If the wicked shall turne from all his sins that he hath committed and shall keepe all my statutes and doe that which is lawfull and right he shall surely live That is if he shall turne from the wrong way into the right and goe on therein as sinne is an aberration and the errour of his way hee shall come to the end of his way which is salvation So that this condition is not the cause but the way Yea but saith Bellarmine in the same place to turne from righteousnesse and to breake the Commandements of God is a condition upon which dependeth the commination of death for if a righteous man turne from his righteousnesse and commit iniquity he shall surely die Therefore as the turning from righteousnesse unto sinne is the cause of death â—…o the turning from sinne to righteousnesse is the cause of life I answere that there is not par ratio there is no equality be tweene the sinne of the wicked and the righteousnesse of the godly Death is the due wages of sinne and sinne is the meritorious cause of death But eternall life is the free gift of God and not merited by our righteousnesse Sinne is of infinite demerit and so deserveth death eternall But not the obedience of any man but onely of Christ if it did merit at all â—…s or can be of infinite merit to deserve eternall life The sinnes of â—…he wicked are purely and perfectly evill but the righteousnesse of the reâ—…enerate is not purely and perfectly good The sinnes of the wicked are their owne workes wholly proceeding from themselves and to themselves the wages thereof is wholly and properly to be ascribed and imputed the good workes of the regenerate proceed from Gods free grace and therefore when they are rewarded God crowneth his owne graces in them and not their merits That which he babbleth concerning promises absolute and conditionall as if we held all the promises of the Gospell to bee absolute is a shamlesse and senselesse cavill Wee are so farre from saying that they be all aâ—…solute as if indifferently and without condition they promised salvation to all that we rather say they are all conditionall But we distinguish of conditions that some are from the cause as where the condition of faith is interposed and such conditions wee doe hold to bee necessary necessitate efficientiae some from other arguments and such are necessary onely necessitate presentiae § XVIII His fifth argument is taken from the condition of faith which we doe not deny to bee contained in the Evangelicall promise Now saith he by what words the Scripture requireth the condition of faith by the same or more cleare it teacheth the condition of fulfilling the Law to be required Answ. The condition of fulfilling the Law is required no where but in legall promises and is a condition by reason of the flesh impossible But in all these promises which hee citeth excepting that Matth. 19. 17. not the condition of fulfilling the whole Law is required but of some speciall duties betweene which and the condition of faith is great odds For faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith saveth alone it alone entituleth us and giveth us right to salvation Aske of any particular duty to which salvation is promised will invocâ—…tion Rom. 10. 13 will suffering Rom. 8. 17 will any other duty or grace save a man or entitle him to salvation No one part of righteousnesse though it may be a proper marke of them that shall be saved can save a man
servant doing or rather but endeavouring to doe his duety is rewarded In these two the arguments are not the same A servant that doth not his duety deserveth punishment and his disobedience is the meritorious cause of his punishment But by doing his duety especially if it bee done unperfectly which is alwayes our case he doth not deserve reward and therefore if hee bee rewarded it is to be ascribed to his masters bounty and not to his desert Such an Antithesis the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne and of godlinesse Rom. 6. 23. Death is the due wages of sinne but eternall life which is the reward of godlinesse is the free gift of God And further as I said before when I formerly answered this allegation In this and many other such conditionall speeches the antecedent is not the cause but a signe token or presage of the consequent If God have given you grace to mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident token that you shall live If God hath adorned you with his grace it is to be presumed that he will crowne his owne grace with glory § IX And such is his seventh testimony p as before I have shewed Rom. 8. 17 18. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires with Christ if we suffer with him that wee may also bee glorified with him where is no relation at all of efficiency betwixt our sufferings and glory But Bellarmine will prove it first by the conditionall particle of which I spake in answere to the last argument which doth not as hee saith point out the cause but the evidence by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that wee are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him namely if we suffer with him Secondly from the reason which is added concerning the excesse of glory to our sufferings which to my understanding doth plainly confute it For if the sufferings of this life be not condigne as the Vulgar readeth it to the glory that is to come how should they merit it ex condigno as they arrogantly speake But the scope of the Apostle in this place is to encourage the faithfull to suffer for Christ which he doth by two arguments the one from the happy event which is assurance of glorification testified by the holy Spirit who testifieth unto us that if we have grace from God to suffer with Christ that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him Not that ouâ—… sufferings doe make us the sonnes and heires of God c. but that they are the signes and evidences by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that we are so The other from the disproportion betweene our sufferings from him and the glory which we shall have with him For the Aposâ—…le having weighed both resolveth for so hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all the sufferings of this life are not comparable to that glory but of this place more hereafter § X. His eighth testimony Rom. 10. 10. with the heart wee beleeve unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation We see here saith he that faith sufficeth not to salvation because it is not true and entire in the heart unlesse thereto be added externall confession And it seemeth that the Apostle alludeth to that speech of our Saviour Matth. 12. 32 33. Him that confesseth me before men will I confesse before my Father and him that denyeth me before men will I deny before my Father that is in heaven Answ. All this we confesse that besides faith confession and many other graces and duties are necessary to salvation not as causes but as causae sine quibus non as I have often said which are no causes § XI His ninth testimony Matth. 25. 34 35. Come yee blessed of my Father possesse the kingdom prepared for you before the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee to eate c. Surely saith hee the reason which is rendred doth plainely shew that good workes are aliquo modo some way causes of salvation and that for them the kingdome of heaven is given Answ. Of this place I have spoken before when I shewed that the causes of salvation were noted vers 34. Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world And the reason which is rendred is taken from good workes not as the cause for which salvation is given but as the evidence according to which our Saviour judgeth § XII His tenth testimony is out of the Epistle of Saint Iames and it is twofold the former Iam. 1. 25. He that is not a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the worke this man shall bee blessed in his deed the latter Iam. 2. 14. what will it profit my brethren if a man say that he hath faith and have not workes will faith save him But how saith hee out of the former is a man blessed in his deed if his deeds have no relation to happinâ—…sse but affoâ—…diheir idle presence Answ. Wee confesse that good works have relation to happinesse as they are necessary unto it as the way as the causa sine qua non Neither doe I conceive how good works can be idle where they are present though they doe not merit that which infinitely exceedeth their worth And as touching the other place Iam. 2. We confesse also that that faith which is in profession onely and is void of good workes doth not save a man because it is an idle and dead faith This therefore proveth good workes to be necessary necessitate praesentiae but for necessity efficioncie there is no shew nor colour § XIII After those severall testimonies he appealeth to the whole Epistles of Peter Iohn Iames and Iude whose chiefe intention was to prove that to justified men good workes are necessary to salvation and that faith alone doth not suffice as some in these times out of the Epistles of Paul not well understood began to preach I answere that as the Apostles whom he nameth urge the necessity of good workes so doe all true preachers of the Gospell at this day yea Paul himselfe did urge it as much as any of them if not more But the necessity of efficiencie he may as soone prove out of our sermons as out of the writings of the Apostles § XIV To the Scriptures hee addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who as they censured for heretickes those which denyed workes to bee necessary unto salvation so themselves taught that they bee necessary To which both censure and doctrine of the Fathers wee doe most willingly subscribe And wee should greatly wonder how this great Master of Controversies could bee so idle so impertinent so frivolous a disputant but that as I said before these his discourses proving
For what will it profit a man saith St. Iames if hee shall say that hee hath faith and hath not workes will that faith save him For as the body without the Spirit is dead so that faith which is in profession onely and is without workes is dead § XVII But this reason of his hee doth illustrate by two unlike similitudes For saith hee even as fire because by its heat alone it heateth if from the fire were taken away all other qualityes which are by accident joyned with heat it would still without doubt heat And as a father because by the onely relation of paternity hee hath reference to his sonne if from him who is a father all other attributes were removed as knowledgen â—…bility power health beauty and in stead os them there should succeed ignorance basenesse weaknes sicknes deformity and among all these attributes paternity should remaine yet still that father should have relation to his sonne Even so because a Christian apprehendeth salvation by faith alone and unto it is referred by our adversaryes surely it followeth that faith remayning hee may be saved although hee have no good workes and have many ill Answ. In the former similitude hee compareth a Christian man to fire faith to heat and other graces and good workes to such other qualityes as in fire by accident concurre with heat In which similitude nothing is like For neither doth a Christian man justifie or save others by faith as fire by his heat doth heat other things neither is hee justified or saved by his faith as it is a quality inherent but as it is the hand to receive Christâ—… neither are other graces or duetyes of sanctification which wee call good workes to be compared with I know not what accidentall qualityes concurring with heat but to those unseparable qualityes of fire viz light and drynes For even in the fire that is inflamed there doe concurre necessarily with heat drynesse and light neither were it a true fire without them and yet the act of heating is to be ascribed to the heat of the fire properly and not to the light or drynesse of the element so in a true Christian that is justified there doth concurre necessarily with faith both other sanctifying graces answerable to the drynesse of the fire and also the light of a Christian conversation without which hee is not to be held a true Christian or truely justified and yet the act of justifying or saving is not to be ascribed either to other graces or to good workes but onely to faith receiving Christ or rather to Christ onely received by faith In the other similitude he compareth the reference which faith hath to salvation unto that relation with is betweene father and sonne But faith and salvation are no such relatives Neither are the graces of the sanctification or good workes to be compared to those accidentall adjuncts attributed to a father which may come and goe as being not necessary to the being of a father but rather to those properties of the humane nature as reason will understanding wit c. For although a man cannot become a father without these yet his being a father is not not to be ascribed to these § XVIII And whereas hee would seeme to take away the answeare of his adversaties who alleage that his supposition is impossible both because in his first booke he had proved that saith may truely and indeed be severed from charity and good workes and also because at least in conceit it may be severed from them which he saith is sufficient for the confirmation of an hypotheticall prâ—…position neither can his adversaries deny it who teach thah faith and workes have that relation which is betweene the cause and the effect Hereunto I reply First that I have formerly not onely answered his arguments which hee produced to this purpose but also proved by unanswereable arguments that true justifying faith cannot be severed from charity and good workes Secondly as I said even nowe his supposition implyeth a contradiction and therefore is impossible Impossible I say that workes being supposed to bee present necessitate presentiae should in the same speech be truely supposed to be absent Thirdly If Bellarmine can conceive that true justifying and saving faith may be without charity and good workes then hee may also conceive that that faith may save which is severed from charity and destitute of good workes His assumption I grant for wee teach according to the Scriptures that that faith which is alone severed from charity and good works doth justify or save neither alone nor at all and doe ascribe lesse to such a faith than the Papists themselves doe But his conclusion is faulty as contayning more than can be inferred upon the premisses that good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some Efficiencie which was not so much as mentioned in the antecedent of the proposition which the conclusion should gainsay and say no more Thus much of the necessity of good workes CHAP. VI. Of the verity of the justice of works and of the possibilitie of fulfilling the Law § I. NOw Bellarmine will discourse of the truth of the justice of workes or of actuall righteousnesse And in this dispute he spendeth eigth Chapters But to what end for I feare hee wandreth still Hee had in the first booke propounded five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone The Fifth and last was that good workes also doe justifie and therefore not faith alone This assertion hee laboureth to prove by divers arguments The first from the necessity of good workes which I have answeared The second from the verity of the justice of workes namely that the good workes of the faithfull and regenerate are truely good which wee doe not deny wee say indeed that the seeming good workes of men unregenerate are not truely good because an evill tree cannot bring forth good fruit But the good workes of the regenerate being the workes of grace and the fruits of the Spirit wee acknowledge to be truely good But will it hereupon followe that therfore they are or may be justified by workes Nothing lesse Hee must prove that the workes of the regenerate are not onely truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that but that they are also perpetually and universally good For if they faile in any one particular as in many things we saith Iames the just offend all they cannot be justified by their obedience For hee that offendeâ—…h in one is guilty of the breach of the whole Law and is so farre from being justified by his obedience that by the sentence of the Law hee is accursed because he hath not continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them unlesse therfore he can prove that not onely some but all the workes of the faithfull are not onely truely but
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
by faith without works If therefore St. Iames doe affirme that men are justified in the same sence that Paul denyeth the same and that Abraham was justified by his workes which Paul denyeth he is made to contradict the Apostle Paul § VI. But as the Popish doctrine is repugnant to the doctrine of the Apostle Paul so neither can it bee grounded upon this text which may appeare by a briefe Analysis thereof Where first you are to consider the occasion of this discourse and thereupon the scope of the Apostle therein The occasion was the dissolute life of many Christians who as Iude speaketh vers 4. did turne the grace of God into wantonnes vaine men as St. Iames calleth them vers 20. who when they had learned that a man is justified by faith without workes hereby tooke occasion to cast of all care of good workes As if it were sufficient for them howsoever they lived to professe them selves to believe The scope therfore and intendement of the Apostle is not to confute the doctrine of Paul concerning justification by faith alone but according to Pauls direction Tit. 3. 8. to perswade all those who professe themselves to believe to be studious of good workes And that hee doth by this argument because howsoever faith doth justifie alone yet the profession of faith alone without good workes will not justifie nor save a man but is altogether vaine and unprofitable The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or state of the question which hee propoundeth to argue manifestly appeareth by the proposition wherein the question is propounded and by the conclusion wherein the question is concluded the proposition vers 14. What profit my brethren if a man say hee hath faith and hath not workes will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that faith save him Marke the wordes if a man shall say hee hath faith that is if a man shall professe himself to believe and hath not works that is a conversation answerable in some measure to his profession will that faith which is in profession onely justifie or save him this interrogation implyeth a most Emphaticall negation wherein hee doth not onely deny that faith which is onely in profession and doth not worke by love doth justifie or save a man but also for the truth of his deniall hee doth appeale as it were to their conscience sor so much is meant by the interrogation The question then is not whether true faith doe justifie alone as Bellarmine would have it but whether that faith which is alone and by it selfe vers 17. without workes without a Christian conversation be a true justifying or saving saith This the Apostle denieth and so doe wee In the rest of the discourse hee proveth this negative assertion by an argument from the contrary namely that this fruitlesse faith is not a true faith because it is dead Where the Apostle argueth to this effect That faith which is dead doth not iustifie or save a man The faith which is profession onely and is alone without workes is dead Therefore that faith which is in profession onely and is alone without workes doth not iustifie or save a man The assumption hee proveth in this whole discourse where the conâ—…lusion is alwayes this that the faith which is alone and without workes is dead and therefore that is the question wich is disputed and concluded § VII Now that the faith which is alone and without workes is dead hee proveth by five arguments 1. The first à parâ—… That charity which is onely in word and not in deed is vaine and unprofitable vers 15. 16. Even so pariratione that faith which is in profession only having no works to accompany it is dead vers 17. 2. The second argument is taken from the effects For a true lively faith may bee demonstrated by good workes and that which cannot be demonstrated by good workes is but a dead faith And this hee proveth vers 18. against the carnall Gospeller as it were by the partyes owne testimony or forced confession provoking him to make experience which kind of proofe is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou professest the faith having no workes I also professe the faith and have workes come now to the tryall hee that hath a true faith may approve it by the fruits shewe then they faith if thou canst by thy workes which thou knowest thou canst not doe and I by my workes will approve my faith 3. The third argument is from the subject For a true justifying faith is not common to all men 2. Thes. 3. 2. and much lesse to Devils but is proper to the Elect Tit. 1. 1. But that faith which men professe without charity and without good workes is common to Devils vers 19. Thou professest that thou believest that there is one God thou doest well but if this thy beliefe be not accompanied with charity and good workes know this that the devils themselves who hate God doe though with horrour knowe and perforce believe the same 4. The fourth argument to prove that faith onely professed or which is in profession onely is not a true and a lively but a conterfeit and a dead faith is a twofold example of Abraham and of Rahab who were justified that is declared and knowne to be just by their workes For in this sence as the word is often used in the Scriptures as Mâ—…t 11. 19. Luk 7. 29. Râ—… 3. 4. 1. Tim. 3. 16 so of necessity it must bee taken in this place For by good workes which alwaies followe and never goe before justification wee are not made just but being already justified wee are by them declared and knowne to be just For hee is a righteous man that worketh righteousnesse And this the Schoolmen themselves doe teach that works doâ—… justifiâ—… â—…clarativè Thâ—…s Aquinas saith Opera nâ—…n sunt caâ—…sa quòd aliquiâ—… sit iâ—…tus apud Deum c. workes are not the cause why any man is just before God but rather they are the executions and manifestations of iustice Nam nullus per opera iustificatur apud Deum sed per habitum fidei For no man is iustified before God by workes but by the habit of faith And whereas it might bee obiected out of Iam. 2. that Abraham was iustified by workes hee answeareth the word to be iustified many be taken two wayes whereof the one is quantum ad executionem iustitiae manifestationem inrespect of execution and manifestation of iustice hoc mâ—…do iustificatur homo i. iustus ostenditur ex operib operatis and thus a man is iustified that is declared be iust by the workes which hee hath done And thus the ordinary glosse expoundeth the word in this place But let us come to the words vers 20. § VIII But wilt thou know O vaine man that faith that is that faith professed or in profession onely without workes is dead or that the faith which is without workes is knowne to be dead
For the life of faith it self doth not depend upon workes as the cause but is thereby knowne as by the effects You see againe what the question is which hee will conclude namely that the faith which is without workes or which is in profession onely without workes is not a lively but a dead faith and consequently not a justifying faith For a justifying faith is like the faith of Abraham and of Rahab but that faith which is in profession onely and wanteth workes is not like the faith of Abraham and of Rabaâ—… For though Abraham was iustified by faith without workes as the Apostle Paul proveth yea by faith alone as the Papists themselves confesse yet the faith by which hee was justified was not alone but was fruitfull of good workes by which both hee and his faith were justified that is knowne to be just and upright § IX Vers. 21. was not Abraham our Father saith hee justified by workes when hee had offered his sonne Isaack upon the Altar Of which wordes the meaning is not that Abraham by that worke was justified before God or made just for long before the holy Ghost gave him this testimony Gen. 15. Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousnesse not that then hee first believed or was then first justified for when hee first left his countrey which hee left by faith Heb. 11. 8. hee had believed and his faith no doubt was imputed to him for righteousnesse but that by that speciall worke after hee was proved hee was approved and knowne to be a righteous man For upon Abrahams approbation of his faith and obedience when he was tryed the Lord gave him this testimony Gen. 22. 12. Now I know that thou fearest God c. Did not God know it before Yea no doubt but hee speaketh after the maner of men He had tempted Abraham that is by a commandement of tryall hee had proved his faith and obedience not that hee did not know but that he would make it knowne to Abraham and others As on the contray God is said 2. Chron. 32. 31. to have left Ezechias to try him that hee might know that is that hee might make knowne all that was in his heart when as therefore Abraham being tryed had by that act of offering his sonne approved his faith and obedience the Lord saith Now I know that is now by this tryall it is made knowne that thou art a just man and one that feareth God And in this sence as it is most manifest hee is said by his workes to have been justified that is knowne declared approved to be a just man § X. Hereupon St. Iames inferreth vers 22. Doe you not see how faith did co-operate to or with his workes The verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be understood two wayes either that faith with other graces did co-operate to the bringing forth of this worke as namely with the feare of God and love of God Gen. 22. 12. though faith was the principall Heb. 11. 17. Or else that faith did co-operate with his workes not to justifie him before God but to manifest declare and approve his righteousnes In which sence we must understand the word Faith as in the proposition vers 24. for faith professed or the profession of faith which doth concurre together with workes to make a man truely justified to bee knowne And in this sence faith doth co-operate with works and may be said to justifie by declaring a man to be just though Bellarmine holdeth the contrary For that a man may bee acknowledged to be a man truely justified before God by faith two things must concurre the profession of the true faith and a Christian conversation neither of which alone is sufficient It followeth in the same verse and by workes was faith made perfect Which words saith Bellarmine cannot signifie any other but that his righteousnesse which was begunne by faith was perfected by good works Answ. But Iames doth not say that his righteousnesse but his faith was perfected and whereas hee saith the words cannot signifie otherwise I say they may be understood two other wayes First that faith by workes is perfected because by workes it is manifested and perfectly knowne in which sence Gods strength is perfected in our weakenesse 2. Cor. 12. 9. Secondly because workes bring the fruits and effects of faith to be perfected when it bringeth forth good fruits according to his kind For when any thing hath attayned to the end as it hath when it doth effectually produce those uses or fruits for which it was ordayned it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be perfect Now the end of our justification by faith is our sanctification For when faith was wrought in us that is to say in our regeneration we were the workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath preordayned that wee should walke in them Eph. 2. 10. Faith therefore may then bee said to be perfected when it doth effectually bring forth the fruit of good workes whereby a man is not made but declared to be just § XI Vers. 23. And this appeareth yet more plainely by that which followeth And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse This Scripture was fulfilled Gen. 15. 6. above 30. yeares before his offering of Isaake and here againe it is said to have been fulfilled in this act that is the truth of that testimony which was given him so long before was then manifested when by this worke hee evidently declared that hee was indued with a true lively iustifying faith And to the like purpose the same sentence might as Bellarmine confesseth be applyed to Abraham in respect of any other notable fruit of his faith that then also that sentence was verified Abraham believed God c. For then it was declared and manifested that hee was indued with a true iustifying faith As for that conceipt of Bellarmine that if the Hebrew word be well scanned it will appeare that the meaning of the words is that Abrahams believing God was a â—…ust worke it is but a poore shift For Paul understandeth it of Abrahams person and maketh that text his principall ground of the iustification of the faithfull by imputation of righteousnesse without workes And Iames likewise understandeth it of Abrahams person shewing that by this act of offering his sonne the truth of that testimony was manifested that hee was indued with a true faith by which hee was iustified It followeth in the same verse and hee was called the friend of God 2. Chron. 20. 7. Esai 41. 8. that is by this act hee approved himselfe to bee such a one § XII Hereupon Saint Iames Verse 24. inferreth this consectary or conclusion you see then by this example of Abraham that a man who is justified before God by faith alone as Abraham was and that by imputation of righteousnesse without workes is also justified by workes
as 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
sinne he hath deserved And how then can he by the sufferings of this life wherby he is not able to â—…atisfie for his sinne deserve eternall life The third out of Bernard we doe know saith he that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to the future glory nec si unas omnis sustineat No that they are not though one man should sustayne them all which though it be a very great yet is a very true amplification that if one man should beare all the afflictions of all men in this world yet his afflictions of this time would not be worthy of the glory that shall be revealed Such amplifications are used no lesse truely by Chrysostome and Anselm Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If we should dye ten thousand deaths and if wee should shew forth al virtue yet could wee not recompence the least part of those honours that God hath already bestowed upon us And if wee cannot by all such meanes be answearable to God for his favours â—…ouchsafed in this world by what meanes might we hope to merit eternall life in the world to come If a man should serve God most devoutly a thousand yeares yet he should not condignely merit to bee in the kingdome of heaven halfe a day saith Anselme § XXII In the sixth place Bellarmine alleageth three testimonies as objected by us viz. Phil. 3. 7 8 9. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5 7. The first we doe not use to produce against merit of salvation but against justification by inherent righteousnesse and was the sixth Testimony of ours which Bellarmine endevoured to answere as hee doth here See Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 15. The second was the fourth Testimony which he tooke upon him to answer See my reply Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 13. The third was the fifth Testimonie of which see Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 14. But though we doe not alleage the first against merit of workes yet by by consequent it doth disprove it For if workes doe not concurre to justification as the matter therof then can they not be the merit of salvation as hath beene said Secondly if in the question of justification which concerneth our title to Salvation they are to be accounted as things of no worth yea as losse then are they not meritorious of eternall life And whereas Bellarmine challengeth us to alleage any one Father that understandeth Paul to speake of workes done after grace I alleaged before Saint Chrysostome upon the place who understandeth the Apostle as speaking of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said all both old and new both past and present and that I confirmed by reason And when he saith that Augustine calleth the righteousnesse of the faithfull Eminentissimam it is apparant that he speaketh not of that which wee have by our obedience performed to the Law but of that most eminent righteousnesse which wee have by faith The other two places exclude workes from being any causes as well of Salvation as of justification And it is plaine that the Apostle speaketh of salvation and of all the degrees thereof that it is wholly to bee ascribed to the grace of God and not our worthinesse His words in the former By grace you are saved through faith noâ—… of workes The latter not by workes of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercie he saved us Whence ariseth this argument If by our merits we are saved then by workes but not by our workes therefore not by merits Or thus If not by workes we are saved because we are saved by grace then much lesse are we saved by our owne merits CAP. III. A new supply of reasons produced against merits and maintayned against Bellarmines cavills § I. OVr first reason The true Doctrine of justification and Salvation taketh from us all cause of boasting in our selves that he which glorieth may glory in the Lord and contrariwise that which doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves is not the true Doctrine The Doctrine of justification by faith without workes and of salvation by Gods free grace without our merit taketh from us all cause of our boasting in our selves but the Doctrine of justification by workes and of salvation by our owne merits doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves Both proved Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Ephes. 2. 8 9. The effect of Bellarmines answere is that they who plead their owne merits as proceeding from grace doâ—… not glory iâ—… themselves but in the Lord. Reply First so long as they bee ours though given of God as all other good things are we are apt to glory in them as appeareth by the Pharisee who boasteth of his merits though he acknowledgeth that hee received them from God and therefore rendreth thankes for them Secondly the pleading of merit is it selfe a proud boasting Matth. 20. 12. Thirdly the Papists plead merit as proceeding from their owne free will which they require as a necessary condition of merit Fourthly If the good worke proceed meerely from Gods grace then can we not by it merit any thing of God But the Papists teach that by it they merit of God and consequently deny it so farre forth as it meriteth to proceed fâ—…om the grace of God and therefore when they plead merit they glory in themselves rather than in the Lord. § II. Our second reason That doctrine which derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ is to bee renounced as false and Antichristian The Popish doctrine of merits viz. that we are to be saved by our owne merits and that the faithfull by their owne workes doe truely and condignely merit eternall life derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ. Therefore it is false and Antichristian The assumption they deny yea though indeed they doe derogate from the merit of Christ yet they denounce anathema against them that shall say so But we not only say it but prove it For first If Christ hath already most sufficiently and fully merited heaven for us then our merits are needlesse or if our merits bee needfull as they teach then are not Christs sufficient for us which is no better than blasphemie Secondly they who teach that Christ hath not merited for all that beleeve and as soone as they truely beleeve the right of eternall life doe greatly derogate from the merit of Christ. For the Scriptures doe teach that Christ hath so merited the right of eternall life to all the faithfull that by him they have alreadie eternall life being alreadie translated from death to life But they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good Workes doe in effect teach that CHRIST hath not merited it to the faithfull Therefore they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good workes doe greatly derogate
the 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
c. 1. l De catechiz rudil c. 4. m Rom. 10. 14. 17. n De lapsis serm 5. Love the fourth disposition His first Testimony Eccles. 2. 10. juxta lati nameditionem a 2 Tim. 1. 6. 12. 〈◊〉 13. Heb. 2 11. b Lib. 1. Cap. 4. §. 11. 1 Ioh. 3. 14. Concil Arausican Caâ—…ult Bèllarmines answeres to our arguments The first 1 Ioh. 4. 19. Our second argument c Eph. 2. 1 5. Joh. 5. 25. Col. 2. 13. Rom. 8. 6 Whether the beginnings of grace be graces d Mat. 12. 20. c Rom. 8. 23. Our third argument f Esai 64. 5. 2 Sam. 11. 27. c. 12. 10 14. g Rom. 8. 7. His fifth disposition is Petencie h Mat. 27. 3 5. Bellarmines proofes His sixth disposition a desire and purpose to receive the Sacrament His seventh disposition a purpose of a new life De justis lib. 1. cap. 14. Faith being alone doth not justifie ergo it doth not justifie alone Our answere Bellarmines proofes that faith may bee alone a De iustif l. 1. c. 14 § sed haec responsio b In Gal. 2. c Antidot ad conc trid sess 6. can 28. d 1 Ioh. â—…â—… e De persever c. 10. §. 7. f Rom. 10. 4. g De justif l. 1. cap. 15. h Lib. 6. cap. 2. 3. De iustif l. â—… cap. 16. Three causes The first cause authority of Scriptures a Lib. 7. c. 8. b Supr cap. 9. Our first argument c Supr cap. 8. Bellarm. obiect d Ro. 3. 28. 4. 5 Out second argument e Lâ—… 1. 73 74 75. Heb 8. 10. Ier. 31. 33 34. The second cause the will of God * Esa. 53. 11. Bellarmines objections that other conditions are required f Ioh. 5. 12. 20. Ioh. 6. â—…7 g Rom. 10 14. The third cause because it is the property of faith onely to receive Christ. Bellarmines first cavill What it is to apprehend Christ. h Ioh. 6. 54. His second cavill from the Sacraments i Rom. 4 11. De iustif l. 1. cap. 17. Bellarmines first reason because faith is a cause His first reason that faith is a cause because the prepositions ex and per are attributed unto it a De justif l. 2. c. 3. §. deinde praepositio His first instance from the contrary b Joh. 6. 29. c Rom. 10. 4. d Photius apud Oecumen in Rom. 10 4. What cause Bellarmine maketh faith to be e Bellarm. de gratiâ—… lib. arb l. 1. c. 6. The difference of the acts of faith justifying and sanctifying f Arist. Physic. l. 2. c. 3. His second reason because faith is the beginning of Iustice. Bellarmines first proofe out of Rom. 4. 5. h Psal. 106. 30 31. His second proofe out of 1 Cor. 3. 11. i Esai 28. 16. Ephes. 2. 20. k De fide operibus c. 16. l Heb. 6. 1. His third testimony Act. 15. 9. His third reason because faith doth obtaine and after a sort merit iustification l Sess. 6. cap. 8. m Act. 10 43 Act. 13. 38 39. n De boâ—…is opeâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. â—… c. 9. § sciendum o 1. â—… 2. ae q. 114. art 9. His first proofe Luk. 7. 50. p Ioh. 3. i4 15. q Ioh. 6. 40. His second proofe out of Mat. 15. 28. Mark 7. 29. His third proofe from the example of Abraham r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His fourth proofe out of Rom. 10. 1â—… 14. s Cap. 10. §. 8. t Ioel 2. 32. His fifth proofe out of Heb. 11. Ten testimonies out of Augustine 1 Retract l. 1. c. 33 2 Epist. 106. ad Paulinum 3 Epist. 144. ad Anastasium 4 De Spiritu litera c. 13. 5 Ibid. â—… 30. 6 De fide operibus c. â—…1 7 Deprâ—…destin ss c. 7. 8 De gratiâ—… lib. arbitr c. 14. 9 Epist. 105. ad Sixtum u Luk. 18. 13. * Bellar. degâ—…atia lib. arbitr lib. 1. cap. 14. §. hanc esse Solet Augustinus meritum appellare quemlibet actum bo num ratione cu ius aliquid aliud accipimus x De poenit l. 2. c. 12. y Joss 6. cap. 8. De justis l. â—… cap. 18. z De justif l. 2. * Lib. 4. 5. The first calumniation that we deny the necessity of good workes a Tit. 3. 8 14. b Iude 4. c 1 Tim. 6. 6. d Matth. 7. 21. 25. 46. God works necessary first by a privative necessity e Jam. 2. 14. 20. 26. f Esai 61. 3. g Matth. 3. 10. h Luk. 13. 6. i Mat. 21. 19. k Heb. 6. 8. l Mat. 25. 3 12. m Mat. 3. 12. n Mat. 25. 32 33. o Iohn 8. 34. p Gal. 4. 30. q 2 Tim. 3. 5. r Mat. 24. 51. Necessary by a positive necessity and so of infallibility first in respect of Gods decree s Ephes. 1. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 13. t Rom 8. 29. u 1 Iohn 3. 3. * Deut. 29. 29. x Rom. 8. 30. y 1 Cor. 6. 9 10. Gal. 5. 21. Ephes. 5. 5 6. Secondly in respect of Gods Word a 2 Cor. 5. 17. b Rom. 8. 1. c Gal. 5. 24. d 1 Cor. â—… 30. e 1 Ioh. 5. 6. Ioh. 19. 34 35. f Eph. 3. 17. g Rom. 8. 9. h Ioh 3. 3. Thirdly in respect of Gods Oath i Heb. 6. 18. k Luk. 1. 73 74 75. l Ioh. 8. 34. m vers 36. n Rom. 6. 18. o 1 Cor. 6. 19. Servi quia servati Secondly by necessity of precept or of duety p Rom. 12. 1 2. 2 Cor. 5. 9. Heb. 12. 28. That we may shew our selves thankefull first by loving him q 1 Ioh. 4. 19. r Rom. 5. 5. s 1 Ioh. 5. 3. Ioh. 14. 15. t 1 Thess 4. 3. u Rom 6. 22. * Eph. 1. 4. x 1 Cor. 10. 31. Esa 61. 3. Towards our Neighbour y Heâ—… 12. 13. z Rom. 12. 17. a Act. 24. 16. b Heb. 10. 24. 2â—… Cor. 9. 2. c Tit. 2. 8. Rom. 2. 24. 2 Sam. 12. 14. 1 Pet. 2. 12. d Gal. 6. 10. e Mic. 6. 8. Towards our selves f Deu. 28. 15 c. Psal 84. 11. Luk. 1â—… 28. Thirdly by necessity of the signe g Jam. 2. 18. h 2 Pet. 1. 10. i Rom. 8 30. k Psal. 15. Psal. 24. 3 4. l Act. 26. 8. 20. 32. m 1 Pet. 1. 17. Mat. 16. 27. Rom. 2. 6. Apoc. 22. 12. n 2 Cor. 5. 10. o Mat. 25. 46. Ioh. 5. 29. Fourthly necessitate medis p Aug. in Psal. 109. q De gratia lib. arbitr lib. 2. cap. 13. r Esa. 30. 21. s De gratia lib. arbitr in sineâ—… The second calumniation t Esa. 64. 6. u Phil 3 8 9. In what sense we deny works to justifie Proved first from all the five articles before handled a Rom. 11. 6. Ephes. 2. 8 9. b Rom. 4. 5 â—… Foure other reasons Our sifth argument c Lib. 4. d De justif li. cap. 19 Rom 3. 27 28. Rom. 9. 20. Rom. 3. 2 5 6. Gal. 2. 16. Gal. 3. 10 1â—… Eph. 2. 8. 9. Phil. 3. 8. 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 〈◊〉
we should yet remaine in our sinnes But seeing Iesus Christ who is of God made unto us righteousnesse is God even Iehovah our righteousnesse hence wee learne that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of God and consequently of infinite price and merit For although the Godhead of Christ neither obeyed nor suffered any thing for us yet seeing the person which obeyed and suffered was and is not onely man but also God therefore the Godhead affordeth such dâ—…gnity vertue efficacy and merit to the obedience and sufferings of his Manhood as that his sufferings are an all-sufficient price of ransome and satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole world as being the sufferings of God and therefore of infinite value and his holinesse and obedience being the righteousnesse of God and therefore of infinite merit and farre surpassing the righteousnesse of all men and Angels maketh all those to whom it is imputed most perfectly righteous before God in Christ. Wherefore they who are clothed with this royall robe of Christs righteousnesse as all the faithfull are may with boldnesse appeare before the judgement seat of God because they stand just before him not in their owne righteousnesse which is unperfect but in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ against which no just exception can be taken After this righteousnesse therefore of Christ wee ought to hunger and thirst after this righteousnesse of God wee ought principally to seeke to obtaine this most precious peâ—…rle we are to forgoe all that we have esteemimg our owne righteousnesse in the question of justification if it should be obtruded as the matter thereof and whatsoever else of ours might seeme to bee an advantage unto us or praise-worthy among men as polluted clouts as dung and the opinion of our owne worthinesse and righteousnesse as losse so we may obtaine that pearle and that wee gaining Christ may bee found in him not as having our owne righteousnesse which is that which is prescribed in the â—…aw but that which is by the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith that is the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed of God being apprehended by faith Now that this righteousnesse of God is the matter of our justification before God and not any righteousnesse inherâ—…nt in us or performed by us I shall prove at large in my fourth and seventh Bookes Here onely I alleage the plaine testimonies of the holy Ghost that Christ is made unto us of God our righteousnesse 1 Cor. 1. 30 that hee is Iehovah our righteousnesse and that by his blood wee are justified and absolved from our sinnes Rom 5. 9. and by his obedience opposite to Adams disobedience wee are made or constituted just Rom. 5. 19. § VII The formall cause of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie which â—… expressed in the definition And this necessarily followeth upon that which hath beene said of the matter For it cannot bee imagined how we should be justified by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him otherwise than by imputation For even as wee were made sinners by Adams personall disobâ—…dience so wee aâ—…e made righteous by the obedience of Châ—…ist But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience or justified by the obedience of Christ whether active or passive unlesse they were communicated unto us How could they possibly bee communicated unto us being both transient and having now no being For true is that saying of a learned Philosopher Motus non est nisi dum fit postquam factus est non est A motion whether it be action or passion hath no beiâ—…g but whiles it is in doing or suffering after it is done it hath no being Adams tranl gression was transient and is past and gone so many thousand yeeres past the active obedience of Christ was transient and so was his passive obedience which had a being in rerum natura no longer than they were in doing and in susâ—…ring How then can either Adams disobedience or Christs obedience be communicated unto us I answer in respect of both as Bellarmine answereth in respect of the former Communicatur eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transâ—…it nimirum per imputationem It is communicated after that manner whereby that may be communicated which is transient and gone to wit by imputation § VIII The same Bellarmine with other Papists doth confesse that the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us but the imputation of his righteousnesse they deny when as indeed the imputation of Christs â—…atisfaction is the imputation of his righteousnesse for what is Christs satisfaction but that whereby hee â—…ully satisfied the Law and consequently the justice of God for us which he did both in respect of the penalty which he fully satisfied by bearing our iniquities and also of the commandements by fulfilling them the former is the obedience of the crosse or his passive righteousnesse the latter is his conformity to the Law which is both his habituall and actuall righteousnesse By the former he freeth us from hell by the latter he doth entitle us to the kingdome of heaven But the meaning of the Papists is that Christ by his satisfaction doth free us from hell but as for heaven we must attaine to it by our owne merits as if there needed not so great a price to purchase heaven as to redeeme from hell But it is certaine that there is required as infinite merit to purchase heaven as there is required infinite satisfaction to redeeme from hell In respect of both God accepteth of no righteousnesse to our justification that is either to free us from hell or to entitle us unto the Kingdome of Heaven but that which is of infinite value because the offence of sinne for which satisfaction is to be made is infinite and because the reward which is to be merited is of infinite worth But that righteousnesse may bee of infinite value it is not necessary as Bellarmine himselfe teacheth that it should be infinite in it selfe but it is sufficient that it bee the righteousnesse of an infinite person And such is the righteousnesse of Christ as being the righteousnesse of him that is God such is not the righteousnesse of any meere creature which is an invincible argument as hereafter shall bee shewed to prove that wee are justified not by any righteousnesse in our selves but onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § IX And yet this imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which there can be no salvation is denied not onely by the Papists but by some others hereafter to be mentioned in the fifth chapter of this booke who seeme to have beene drawne to this opinion by this argument of the Papists which I will therefore in this place answer for their satisfaction If
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
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
because the hebrew word which signifieth to justifie doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse § I. HAving thus briefely set downe the true Doctrine of Iustification according to the Word of God we are now to confute the erroneous doctrine of of the Papists There are six maine and capitall errours which the Papists most obstinately hold and maintaine concerning justification and consequently so many principall heads of controversie betweene us whereunto divers other particular questions are to be reduced The first concerning the name whether justification and sanctification are to bee confounded The second concerning the moving cause which is the justifying and saving Grace of God which they call gratia gratum faciens The third concerning the matter of justification The fourth concerning the forme The fifth concerning the instrumentall cause which is Faith The sixth concerning the fruits of faith and consequents of justification which are good workes concerning which are two maine questions First whether they doe justifie a man before God Secondly whether they doe merit Eternall Life § II. The first capitall errour of the Papists is that they confound justification and sanctification and by confounding of them and of two benefits making but one they utterly abolish as shall be shewed the benefit of justification which notwithstanding is the principall benefit which we have by Christ in this life by which wee are freed from hell and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And this they doe in two respects for first they hold that to justifie in this question signifieth to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent or by infusion of righteousnesse that is to sanctifie Secondly they make remission of sinne not to be the pardoning and forgiving of sinne but the utter deletion or expulsion of sinne by infusion of righteousnèsse Thus they make justification wholly to consist in the parts of sanctification For whereas Sanctification is partly privative which is the taking away of sinne which we according to the Scriptures call mortification and partly positive which we call vivification and is partly inward or habituall consisting in the habits of Grace infused and partly actuall which is our new obedience and practice of good workes all these and onely these they make to concurre to justification which with them is partly privative which they call remission of sinne whereby they understand the utter deletion or extinction of sinne wrought by infusion of perfect righteousnesse which is an higher degree of mortification than we can attaine unto in this life and partly positive and that either habituall which they call their first justification wherein a man of a sinner is made righteous by infusion of the habits of Grace which is indeed regeneration and partly actuall which they call their second justification wherein a righteous man is made more just by the practice of good works whereby they merit not onely the increase of righteousnesse but also the Crowne of Eternall Life § III. Of this first controversie therefore are two questions First whether to justifie doth signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse which is to sanctifie Secondly whether remission of sinne be the utter deletion and abolition of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse In both the Papists hold the affirmative The former which is a most pernicious errour they ground upon the like notation of the Latine words to justifie and to sanctifie That as to sanctifie is to make holy by holinesse inherent so to justifie is to make just by infusion of righteousnesse But though the notation of the Latine words were to be respected yet no more could be inforced from thence but that to justifie is to make just And that is all which Bellarmine goeth about to prove Now God maketh men just two wayes by imputation as he justifieth by infusion as he sanctifieth them For if a man may bee made just not only inwardly by obtaining righteousnesse but also outwardly by declaration as Bellarmine himselfe saith then much more by imputation even as we were made sinners by Adams actuall transgression and as Christ was made sinne that is a sinner for us For even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation his transgression being imputed to us so are wee made just by the obedience of Christ imputed to us And as Christ who knew no sinne was made a sinner by imputation of our sinnes to him so we are made the righteousnesse of God in him that is righteous in him by the imputation of his righteousnesse who is God unto us But indeed the force of the Latine words is to be respected no further than as they are the true translation of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New § IV. The Hebrew root Tsadaq from whence those verbs do spring which signifie to justifie is by the Septuagint translated sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just blamelesse or pure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just as Iob 9. 2. 15. 20. 10. 15. 15. 14. 25. 4. 33. 12. 34. 5. 35. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be blamelesse as Iob 22. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be pure as Iob 4. 17. sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense to be just as being a translation not of a passive but of a Neuter as Gen. 38. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thamar is more just than I. So Psal. 19. 10. jâ—…dicia Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 51. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Rom. 3. 4. Psal. 143. 2. Esai 43. 9. cum 41. 26. Ezek. 16. 52. In Ecclus. 18. 1. Deus solus justificabitur the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be reputed just as Iob 11. 2. 13. 18. 40. 3. Sometimes to be justified and absolved from sinne to bee pronounced and accepted as righteous as Esai 43. â—…6 Let us plead together declare thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first thine iniquities that thou maist bee justified Esai 45. 25. in the Lord all the seed of Israel shall be justified The passive is onely once used Dan. 8. 14. where it is said that the sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified that is expiated or purged In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie but not as the word is used in the doctrine of justification but as it signifieth either to arrogate righteousnesse to a mans selfe as Iob 32. 2. or to attribute or ascribe it to others as Iobâ—…3 â—…3 32. or to shew himselfe or others righteous as Ier. 3. 11. Ezek. 16. 51 52. In the third conjugation it signifieth to justifie in that sense that the question of justification And it is verbum forense a judiciall word used in Courts of judgement which usually is opposed to condemning And it signifieth to absolve and to acquit from guilt and accepting a man as righteous to pronounce him just
writing in Greeke but also the holy Apostles and Evangelists have received the same And therefore these words are no otherwise to be understood than as the translations of the said Hebrew words signifying no other thing than what the Hebrew words import which as I have shewed doe never signifie to make or to be made righteous by inherent righteousnesse § II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used by the Apostle and by the Evangelist Luke sometimes as the translation of Tsiddiq in Piel as Luk. 7. 29. the people and Publicans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justified God The Lawyer Luk. 10. 29. willing to justifie himselfe The Pharisies Luk. 16. 15. justified themselves before men And so is the word used sometimes by the sonne of Sirach as Ecclus. 10. 29. who will justifie him that sinneth against his owne soule Cap. 13. 26. alias 22. A rich man speaketh things not to be spoken and yet men justifie him Sometimes the Apostle useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the translation of Hitsdiq as alwaies he doth in the question of justification and alwayes as the action of God as Rom. 3. 26. who justifieth him that beleeveth in Iesus how vers 24. gratis without any cause or desert of justification in the party without workes that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him or performed by him vers 28. who justifieth the Circumcision and uncircumcision that is both Iewes and Gentiles not of workes or by inherent justice but by and through faith vers 30. who justifieth the ungodly that is the beleeving sinner that worketh not Rom. 4. 5. and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse how then by imputing righteousnesse without workes vers 6. who Rom. 8. 30. whom he calleth he justifieth namely by faith and whom he justifieth hee also glorifieth using the word in the same sense vers 33. who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect it is God that justifieth who shall condemne where most manifestly the word is used as a judiciall word opposed to accusing and condemning Neither can any colour of reason be alleaged why the word in these places should signifie contrary to the perpetuall use both of it selfe and of the Hâ—…brew word whereof it is a translation to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent § III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used sometimes as the translation not of the passive verbe but as of the Neuter in Cal as I have shewed before out of the Greeke translation of the 〈◊〉 So Ecclus. 7. 5. bee not just before God not wise before the king or as it is usually translated doe not justifie thy selfe before God So also in the new Testament Rom. 3. 4. cited out of Psalm 51. 6. where the Hebrew word is not a passive but a neuter And so Apoc. 22. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him that is just be just still As the translation of the passive it is often used But as it never signifieth to be made just by inherent justice as I will shew when I come to answere the objections of the Papists so it alwayes signifieth either to be declared or pronounced just or to bee absolved and made jusâ—… by imputation In the former sense wisedome is said to bee justified of her Children Luk. 7. 37. who vers 29. justified God Christ who is God was manifested in the flesh justified in the Spirit 1 Tim. 3. 16. Thus by our words we shall bee justiâ—…ed not made just formally or by inherent righteousnesse but in the sense opposed to condemnation For as by thy words thou shalt bee justified so by thy words thou shalt be condemned Matth. 12. 37. Thus not the hearers alone but the doers of the Law shall bee justified that is pronounced just Rom. 2. 13. and in this sense the faithfull are justified by workes that is declared approved and knowne to bee just Iames 2. 21 23. 24 25. cum Genes 22. 12. â—…n the latter sense Ecclesiast 1. 28. alias 22. the famous man Chap. 31. 5. The lover of Gold Chap. 23. 14. alias 11. The rash swearer shall not bee justified that is as it is in the Commination of the third Commandement shall not bee held guitlesse but most plainely Chap. 26. the last verse the huckster shall not bee justified from sinne that is not absolved from sinne nor accepted as righteous So Act. 13. 38 39. where most plainely to be â—…ustified from sinne doth signifie to be absolved or freed from the guilt of sinne and is used promiscuously with remission of sinne And this sense oâ—… freedome from the guilt is â—…ometimes extended to signifie a totall freedome as Rom. 6. 7. He that is dead is justified that iâ—… as Chrysostome and Oâ—…umenius expound it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is freed from sinne As these places are plainely repugnant to the Popish sense so none of the rest where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used doth favour it For either they import remission of sinnes and acceptation as righteoâ—…s as Luk. 18. 14. The Publican who had humbled himselfe and craved pardon went home justified that is obtained pardon and was accepted as righteous rather than the Pharisee who had justified himselfe or distinguish betweene justification and sanctification as 1 Cor. 6. 11. or exclude justification by inherent righteousnesse as Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 5. 4. Or imply imputation as where we are said to be justified either by his blood as Rom. 5. 9. Or by faith as Rom. 5. 1. Gal. 3. 24. Or by grace as Tiâ—… 3. 7 Or both exclude the one and imply the other as Rom. 3. 24. 28. Gal. 2. 16 17. 3. 11. § IV. There remaine these two words which I mentioned before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used onely in two placâ—…s Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18. In the former it is said that Christ was delivered to death for our sinnes and was raised againe for our justificâ—…tion to whom as it is in the precedent verse righteousnesse shall bee imputed if wee beleeve on him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead for as our Saviour by his death and obedience untâ—…ll death merited for us remission of sinnes and the right to eternall life so by the acts of Christ restored to life as namely by his resurrection his merits are effectually applied and imputed to our justification For if Christ had not risen againe wee had beene still in our sinnes 1 Cor. 15. 17. In the latter place justification is in direct termes opposed to condemnation For as by the offence or transgression of one viz. the first Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the guilt which is to be supplied out of the sixteenth verse came upon all men the offspring of the first Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto condemnation so by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
which without the Law is revealed in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith But all men without exception both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore seeing all have sinned and are fallen short of the glory of God that is excluded from eternall glory they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law but they are justified by a righteousnesse which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel to wit the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith And that is it which is said in this text that those who have sinned and are fallen short of Gods glory and from their title to heaven are justified that is acquitted from their sinnes and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven freely without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves by the meere gracious favor of God when they had deserved the contrary through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse c. To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare § III. Secondly it is proved by the words of the text alleaged the first wherof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being justified Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have proved heretofore doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse and therfore here it is not meant that wee are justified by grace infused Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject but relative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath beene shewed And wee must remember that as it is called so it is justificatio impii the justification of a sinner not onely because before justification men are sinners but also because being justified they still remaine sinners in themselves though in Christ they are made righteous And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation to our glorification whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner as righteous in Christ not onely at his first conversion but also afterwards whiles hee beleeveth in Christ though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us that the merit of his obedience may beâ—… continually imputed unto us As for the Papists they being in their owne conceit justified as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie or absolved when they come to yeares they are no sinners neither is there any thing in them which God hateth or which may properly bee called sinne But justification being of sinners and they being no sinners but â—…aying they have no sinne and avouching that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne hereby it appeareth that neither are they justified neither is there any truth in them § IV. The next word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an exclusive particle excluding the false causes of justification and signifying that wee are justified without any desert or worthinesse in our selves without works without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us which directly overthroweth the assertion of the Papists for proofe whereof this place was alleaged § V. The third word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his grace that is by the gracious favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him as hath beene proved that is by his love of us and not by our love of him Neither is there any shew of reason why it should in this place above all others signifie as it never doth an habit of justifying grace inherent in us especially if that bee true which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate that wee are not justified by that which is inherent And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words gratia Dei gratis justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei they are justified freely because neither working before their justification nor rendring any recompence after their justification they are by faith onely justified by the grace that is as he expoundeth it the gift of God And on those words by the redemption which is in Christ Iesu he testifieth saith hee that the grace of God is in Christ but not in us because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit The name of Grace saith he when it is here said justified freely by his grace though it may signifie that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man and inherent therein yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei bâ—…nitatem benignitatem erga hominem the free or gracious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man Grace therefore doth not signifie either the matter or the forme but the efficient cause of our justification § VI. The fourth word is through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law both in respect of the precept and of the penalty by which being as the Papists themselves confesse imputed unto us we are redeemed and justified as being the matter and merit of justification § VII The fifth word is by faith whereby is noted the instrument by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified which is indeed out of us in him but imputed to those that beleeve The righteousnesse therefore by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of faith that is the righteousnesse of God or of Christ apprehended by faith § VIII The sixth and last is the end why God did give his Sonne to be a propitiation for our sinnes to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes and that hee might bee just and the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For in the worke of our redemption and justification Gods justice is declared to be such that he forgiveth no sinnes but those onely for which his justice is satisfied by Christ neither doth he justifie any but those whom by communication of Christs righteousnesse unto them he maketh just But how should the satisfaction of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings being transient and so long agoe performed bee communicated unto us for our justification otherwise but by imputation And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse then not by inherent grace or infused righteousnesse CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted § I. NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon this place Here saith he all the causes almost of justification are set forth together The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis freely importing the liberality of
is true God This righteousnesse of Christ which is called the righteousnesse of God by which we are justified the Papists even Bellarmine himselfe sometimes confesse to be a plenary satisfaction to God and by him imputed to them that beleeve and that this righteousnesse of Christ is the meritorious cause of our justification and that by the merit of Christs righteousnesse we are justified and yet they cannot abide to heare that it is the matter of justification when as wee by the matter of justification understand nothing but that righteonsnesse which is imputed to justification Now it is certaine that the righteousnesse of Christ neither active nor passive which were transient nor the merit thereof can otherwise be communicated to us but by imputation Even as the actuall transgression of Adam and the guilt thereof were by imputation communicated to us Neither could inherent righteousnesse bee merited for us unto our sanctification unlesse his righteousnesse it selfe and the merit thereof were first imputed to us unto justification no more than the actuall sinne of Adam could have infected us with originall corruption if his sinne and the guilt thereof had not first beene imputed to us § V. The fecond part of the assumption was that the righteousnesse inherent in us is our righteousnesse which one would thinke should need no proofe For though we receive it from God as wee doe all other good things which wee have yet it as well as all other good things even our daily bread which we have received from God is to be called ours All good things which we have are Gods gifts and yet they are not called his but ours As our bodies our soules our life our liberty our learning our wisedome our charity our temperance our piety c. and so our righteousnesse The Papists and some others doe teach that that righteousnesse is called Gods righteousnesse which wee shall have from God and that ours which wee have from our selves and by the strength of nature whereto I answer first there can bee no righteousnesse which is not the gift of God from whom all gifts doe come Neither is it credible that the Iewes who were instructed in Gods word should ever looke to bee justified by a righteousnesse not received from God The Pharisee himselfe who trusted unto his owne righteousnesse and thought as the Apostle speaketh of the Iewes to be justified by his owne righteousnesse acknowledged it to be the gift of God and therefore thanked him for it And hereunto Bellarmine elsewhere accordeth endeavouring by the example of the Pharisee who trusted in himselfe as being righteous to prove that men are not justified by speciall faith or by affiance in Gods speciall mercie And lest any should object that hee trusted to a righteousnesse which he had of himselfe hee addeth Neither can it bee said that the Pharisee had faith or affiance of Gods benevolence by reason of his owne merits as though hee â—…eleeved that he had his righteousnesse from himselfe Nam agebat gratias Deo de sua justitia proinde à Deo eam se habere credebat for he gave God thankes for his righteousnesse and therefore beleeved that he had it from God Secondly the righteousnesse of God by which wee are justified is without the Law revealed in the Gospell but all that righteousnesse which is from God within us is fully and perfectly described in the Law § VI. Thirdly as the severall parts of inherent righteousnesse though received from God as being his gifts of grace are notwithstanding called ours as our faith Matth. 9. 2 22. Rom. 1. 8. Hab. 2. 4. â—…am 1. 3. Our charity 2 Cor. 8. 8 24. 1 Cor. 16. 24. Philem. 1. and 7. Our hope Phil. 1. 20. 1 Thess. 2. 19. Our good workes Mat. 5. 16. Apoc. 2. 2. Our patience Luk. 21. 19. 2 Thess. 1. 4. Apoc. 2. 2. 3. 10. 13. 10. So righteousnesse inherent is in very many places of Scripture called ours whereof I will quote some Gen. 30. 33. 1 Sam. 26. 23. 2 Sam. 22. 21 25. 1 King 8. 32. Iob 33. 26. Psalm 7. 8. 18. 20 24. 35. 27. 112. 3 9. Prov. 11. 5 6. Eccl. 7. 16. Esa. 5. 23. 64. 6. Ezech. in his 3. 4. 18. and 33. chapters foureteene times Matth. 5. 20. and 6. 1. according to the Latine 2 Cor. 9. 9 10. but there are two which are most remarkeable Psalm 4. 1. where David thus calleth upon the Lord O God of my righteousnesse that is saith Bellarmine à quo est omnis meâ—… justitia acknowledging all his righteousnesse to bee from God and yet calleth it his owne righteousnes Esa. 54. 17. their righteousnesse is from me saith the Lord from God but yet theirs If it bee objected out of Augustine that it is called the righteousnesse of God non qua justus est sed qua nos justos facit not whereby hee is just but whereby hee maketh us just I answer that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall both active and passive is such for it is not that whereby God that is the Godhead is just but that whereby hee maketh us just Fourthly whereas the Papists will needes have the righteousnesse of God by which wee are justified and which is the principall matter taught in the Gospell to be inherent in us though from God they confound Gods righ teousnes and ours and thereby confound the Law and the Gospell and by confounding them abolish the righteousnes of God as before by confounding justification with sanctification they abolished the benefit of justification and evacuate the Gospell or at least with the false Apostles Gal. 1. teach another Gospell whiles they teach another righteousnesse whereby to bee justified than the righteousnes of God which whosoever doth though hee were an Apostle though an Angel from heaven he ought to be held accursed § VII Our second argument That is the matter of our justification besore God by which wee being sinners in our selves for that justification which the Scriptures teach is the justification of a sinner doe stand righteous before God which wee being sinners may oppose to the judgement of God why he should not condemne us which wee being sinners may interpose betwixt Gods justice and us and which we may plead as a full satisfaction to God for us Such is the righteousnes of Christ for being sinners in our selves yet beleeving in Christ we are in him accepted and constituted righteous The righteousnesse of Christ is that which we being sinners in our selves may oppose to Gods judgement or interpose betwixt Gods justice and us which wee may plead as a full satisfaction made in our behalfe For though by our sins wee have deserved to bee condemned and to be excluded from heaven yet if wee beleeve in Christ his sufferings are accepted in our behalfe to free us from hell and his obedience to entitle us unto heaven In him we have borne the penalty in him
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 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
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
by some inherent gift The proposition which no man denieth he laboreth to prove by three arguments which he might very well have spared but that he would have the world to thinke that we deny sanctification to be inherent The assumption which do we deny he proveth by his own authority alleaging that in the fifth and the sixth verses The Apostle describeth justification which indeed he doth not to be regeneration and renâ—…vation wroughâ—… in us out of the bounty of God by the laver of Baptisme and effusion of the holy Ghost This we deny first because the word justifie never in the whole Scriptures is used in that sense secondly here the Apostle in plaine termes saith that we are justified and saved not by works of righteousnesse whereby is excluded all justice inherent but by Gods grace How then doth he prove it because in these words vers 7 that being justified by his grace wee might bee heires in hope of eternall life the Apostle rendreth a reason why God by the laver and by the Holy Ghost did regenerate and renew us and saith the cause was that being justified that is saith he that being by that regeneration and renovation justified we might deserve to be made heires of the kingdome and of life everlasting Answ. This glosse maketh the Apostle not like himselfe but like a popish merit-monger corrupteth the text which indeed doth paralell that 1 Cor. 6. 11. shewing how men converted from Gentilisme to Christianity shuld be exhorted to the performance of Christian duties For howsoever whiles they were Gentiles they were addicted to many vices and sinnes yet after they were called which the Apostle expresseth thus after that the bounty and humanity of God was manifested viz. by the preaching of the Gospel God not out of any desert of theirs but out of his meere mercy saved them by Baptisme as Saint Peter also speaketh that is justified them for that is the salvation we have here to bee intitled to salvation or saved in hope that being justified by his grace that is as he said before by his undeserved mercy they should be made heires according to hope of eternall life that is they might be saved in hope Of this sentence therefore stripped of its amplifications as it were its garments the naked substance is this But after we were called God by Baptisme justified us that being justified by his grace we might be saved in hope The amplifications which are added are to set forth and describe Baptisme unto us which as hee had noted to be the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith when he saith that God justified or saved us by it so he calleth it the laver of regeneration and of the renovation wrought by the Spirit which God hath plentifully bestowed upon us So that these words are not a description of justification as Bellarmine dreameth waking but of Baptisme And they are added according to the purpose of the Apostle in this place as arguments to move men to Christian duties Why Because Baptisme as it was a seale unto them of their justification so also a Sacrament of their regeneration and renovation of the Spirit which Spirit God hath poured forth plentifully upon the faithfull which he speaketh to this end that the faithfull which are Baptized should make this use of their Baptisme not onely as of a seale to assure them of their justification and salvation but also to be a Sacrament token memoriall of their regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit plentifully poured upon them To which purpose the Apostle telleth the Romans that so many as were baptized into Christ were baptized into the similitude of Christs death and resurrection whereupon the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers 8. this is a faithfull saying and these things I will thou shouldest affirme and confirme that they which have beleeved in God ought to bee carefull precedents of good workes The Aposâ—…le therefore doth not say as Bellarmine maketh him speake that we are justified or saved or made heires of salvation by regeneration or renovation and much lesse that thereby we merit our inheritance but that God hath justified or saved us Sacramentally by Baptisme which as it is the seale of our justification and salvation so it is also the laver of regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit that being justified by his grace we might according to hope bee made heires of eternall life For howsoever we are neither justified nor saved nor made heires of eternall life by our Sanctification yet Sanctification is both the way wherein from our justification wee are to walke unto glorification For God hath chosen us to salvation through the sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thes. 2. 13. and therefore sanctification as it is a necessary consequent of our justification so it is a necessary fore-runner of glorification a necessary marke and cognizance of all that are justified and to be saved And therefore ouâ—… Saviour saith that by faith in him wee receive remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified and so the Apostle also Act. 20. 32. § IX His fifth testimony is Heb. 11. and some other places of the Scripture which doe give testimony to some men that they were truly and perfectly just and that not by an imputative justice but inherent his reason is because the Scriptures would not call them absolutely just if they were not absolutely just Answ. To omit that it is one thing to be absolutely called just and another to be just absolutely and perfectly I answere that the faithfull who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous were righteous by a twofold justice both imputative and inherent The former being the righteousnesse of justification the latter of sanctification the former absolute and perfect the latter inchoated and unperfect By the former they were justified before God in respect of the latter though they were also called just yet they were not justified thereby that is they were neither absolved thereby from their sinnes past nor intitled to the kingdome of heaven as may appeare by all those Arguments which before I produced against justification by inherent righteousnesse As for those examples which hee alleageth out of Heb. 11. which is the Chapter of saith namely of Abel vers 4. and Noah vers 7. c. it is evident that they were justified by the righteousnesse which is of faith as is expresly said of Noah vers 7. that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and imputed to them that beleeve for the righteousnefse which is of faith is imputative Rom. 4. 5. And when it is said that without faith they could not possibly have pleased God it is plainely intimated that by faith they pleased God and that they being besore justified by faith brought forth the fruits of faith acceptable unto God by which their faith was approved But as they were just by imputation that
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
is For they professe that by inherent righteousnesse no man living can be justified in Gods sight as I have shewed in this third controversie and in the fifth and sixth CAP. XIII An appendice to this third controversie concerning the parity of justice § I. VPon this controversie concerning the matter of justification dependeth another which is scarce worth the mentioning but onely to shew the blinded malice of the Papists in propounding it and to vindicate our selves from their calumniations Bellarmine therefore de justif l. 3. c. 16. propoundeth the question de paritate justitia of the parity or equality of justice whether all just men be in justice equall among themselves For faine would hee have the world to thinke that we are like to Iovinian or the Stoiks calumniating us against the light of his owne conscience For he cannot be ignorant but that wee doe acknowledge degrees of righteousnesse inherent and of the graces of sanctification not onely in divers men according to the measure of grace bestowed upon them some being incipients some proficients and some growne men but also in the same men every man being bound to labour that they may grow in grace and proceed from Faith to Faith untill hee come to a perfect man in Christ. § II. Indeed if the question bee concerning righteousnesse imputed we doe teach that in respect thereof all the faithfull are equally just Because as they are justified they stand just before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ by which the weake Christian is justified as well as the strong And in this regard the faith of Gods children though unequall in degrees in some weaker in some stronger in some more and in some lesse is said by the Apostle Peter to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a like pretious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ that is in that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified And as the merit of Christ is equally imputed to all that beleeve so the reward in respect of the substance which is eternall life shall be equally given to all that beleeve yet I doubt not but that whom God in this life hath adomed with greater graces he will in them crowne his greater graces with greater glory And therefore as Saint Ambrose faith he giveth â—…qualem mercedem vitae â—…on gloriae the equall reward of life but not of glory and 〈◊〉 unus denarius non est unum prâ—…mium sed una vita una de gâ—…enna liberâ—…tio and Gregory there be many mansions with the father and yet unequall labourers receive the same peny because unto all there shall bee one equall blesseduesse of joyfulnesse though the sublimity of life be not one and the same to all § III. But Bellarmine though he confesseth that we doe not hold that either vertues or sinnes are equall and that we doe not deny but that both the same men may and ought to increase in faith hope and charity and in other vertues and that also divers men may bee more just than others in respect of such vertues as be in them but that wee hold that men being not justified before God by these vertues but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith wee are in respect of this righteousnesse by which wee are justified equally just Yet all his proofes are to prove the inequality and degrees of sanctity or inherent righteousnesse as though we denyed the same or held that paradox which may in respect of habituall righteousnesse more justly be imputed to the Papists For if incipients in Religion yea infants in age be justified or made just as they teach with perfect righteousnesse infused what difference shall there bee betwixt Baptized infants and the greatest Proficients among them who dreame of perfection in regard of habituall righteousnesse saving that the infants justice may seeme to bee more pure from actuall concupiscences But of this question more hath beene said than enough A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE FIFTH BOOKE Concerning the formall cause of justification CAP. I. Containing five proofes that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § I. THE fourth grand errour of the Papists in the article of justification is concerning that which wee call the forme thereof For they denying and deriding the imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which notwithstanding no man can bee saved doe hold that men are justified by infusion and not by imputation of righteousnesse we on the contrary doe hold according to the Scriptures that we are justified before God onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and not by infusion And our meaning when wee say that God imputeth Christs righteousnesse unto us is nothing else but this that hee graciously accepteth for us and in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ both active that is his obedience which in the dayes of his flesh hee performed for us and passive that is his sufferings which he sustained for us as if we had in our owne persons both performed and suffered the same for our selves Howbeit we confesse that the Lord doth infuse righteousnesse into the faithfull yet not as he justifieth but as hee sanctifieth them and consequently wee acknowledge that in all the faithfull there is true righteousnesse inherent but we deny that they are justified by it How I am first to prove our assertion and to maintaine our proofs against the exceptions and cavils of the Papists And then will I answer their allegations § II. My three first proofes shall bee taken from those things which have already beene proved And first those reasons which before I alleaged to prove the formall cause of our justification to bee the imputation of Christs righteousnesse Secondly If to justifie in the Scriptures doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse or to make a man righteous formally by inherent righteousnesse then it is evident that the justification which the Scriptures teach is not by infusion of righteousnesse And if not by infusion then by imputation for a third thing cannot be named But the former I have most evidently proved therefore the latter cannot be denyed Thirdly If we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by any righteousnesse infused or inherent in us then it is evident that we are justified not by infusion of righteousnesse but by imputation But the former I have fully demonstrated therefore the latter must be confessed For wee are justified either by inherent righteousnesse or imputed not by inherent as hath beene shewed therefore by righteousnesse imputed § III. My fourth proofe shall be taken from the confession of our Adversaries who doe confesse that Christ his satisfaction is imputed unto us which they understand but of the one halfe of his satisfaction and not all that viz. in respect onely of the everlasting
the punishment thereof be inflicted upon us which is both our originall corruption and death it selfe besides many other calamityes then is it to be presupposed that the sin it selfe is imputed to us For if the sin it selfe had not been imputed then as Bellarmine himselfe somewhere argues neither the guilt nor the corruption had belong'd unto us Again things that are transient when they are once past and gone cannot bee communicated otherwise than by imputation That transgression of Adam as all other actions was transient and therefore if it be demanded how it being so long past and gone can bee communicated to us Bellarmine truly answeareth it is communicated unto us by generation eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit nimirâ—…m per imputationem in that manner according to which that may be communicated which is transient and gone to wit by imputation If it be objected which was Bellarmiâ—…es prime argument for inherent righteousnesse that through the disobedience of the first Adam wee were made sinners by inherent unjustice and therefore by the like reason through the obedience of the second Adam wee are made just by righteousnesse inherent I answere that from Christ we have both justification and sanctification the former answering to the guilt of Adams transgression imputed the latter answerable to the originall corruption by generation derived but though wee have them both from Christ yet not after one manner the former wee have by imputation the latter by infusion But of this place I have spoken heretofore at large § II. Our seventh argument Whosoever is a sinner in himselfe and so continueth whiles he remaineth in this life cannot bee justified otherwise than by imputation This I take to bee a most certaine and undeniable truth But every many whatsoever Christ onely excepted is in himselfe a sinner and so continueth whiles hee remaineth in this life Therefore no man whatsoever can othervise bee justified but by imputation Or thus The justification of a sinner is imputative for to a sinner the Lord when hee justifieth him imputing not sinne imputeth righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4. 6. 8. The justification of every Christian is the justification of a sinner and so is called of all writers boâ—…h old and new both Protestants and Papists Therefore the justification of every Christian is imputative The assumption of the former syllogisme is denyed by the Papists but against the testimony of their owne Conscience and against the common experience of all men in all times and places But this I prove it briefly All that sometimes doe sinne or have sinne abiding in them are sinners all men sometimes do sinne and have sinne remaining in them therefore all men are sinners the assumption is proved by Iames the just and by the holy beloved Apostle including themselves in many things wee offend all of us and if wee say wee have no sinne wee deceive our selves and there is no truth in us But that all mortall men are sinners I have sufficiently proved before Vnlesse therefore the Papists will say they are no sinners and that in them there is no sinne which if they doe say wee may bee bold to tell them that there is no truth in them they must confesse justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § III. Our eigth argument To whom faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes hee is not justified by workes that is by righteousnesse inherent but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse To Abraham and all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes Therefore they are not justified by workes but by imputation of Christs righteousnesse The former part of the proposition is proved by opposition of faith to workes in the question of justificâ—…tion and by the testimony of the the Apostle Rom. 4. 3 4 5 6 7 8. The latter part is proved by the former for if not by inherent righteousnesse then by imputed and if by faith and yet not by inherent righteousnesse then not by faith in respect oâ—… it selfe as it is an habit inherent in us but in respect of the object which it apprehendeth Of which that is verified properly which by a trope viz. a Metonimy is ascribed to faith namely that it justifieth and saveth that by it wee have remission of sinne and the inheritance c. that is Christ received by faith doth justifie and save c. The assumption in expâ—…esse termes is delivered Rom. 4. 3. 5 6. 22 23 Here Bellarmine confesseth that faith indeed is imputed unto righteousnesse and that is our righteousnesse which confession doth not well agree with his assertions elsewhere that faith doth but dispose unto justification and that our formall righteousnesse is our charity that faith is an habit of the Vnderstanding but justice is an habit of the Will But our glosse hee doth not allow when wee say by faith that is by Christs righteousnesse apprehended by faith because it is repugnant to the Apostle for two causes For first hee doth not say Christs righteousnesse but faith is imputed Now faith is not Christs righteousnesse but ours by Gods gift Which notwithstanding is the maine doctrine of the Gospell revealing the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God from faith to faith the righteousnesse of God by faith that is which is apprehended by faith For faith it selfe is not the righteousnesse of God which doth justifie or save us but the instrument to receive Gods righteousnesse and therefore doth not justifie or save properly but relatively in respect of the object which it doth receive that is to say the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie and save those which receive it by faith and therefore when it is said in the Gospell more than once thy faith hath saved thee the meaning is that Christ received by faith hath saved those which did beleeve in him Act. 3. 16 it is said that faith in Christ had cured the lame man but it is thus to be understood that the name of Christ by faith in his name did cure him For we are justified and saved by a perfect righteousnes which is of infinite value and merit which is not faith nor any other grace or graces inherent but onely the righteousnesse of Christ. And yet because by faith wee are united to Christ and by it are made partakers of his benefits therefore all the benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed to faith as elsewhere I have shewed To faith metonimically but properly to Christ himself His second reason because the word imputare in this place doth not signifie a bare reputing but a reputing unto which the truth is answer able in the thing it selfe as is plaine by these words Ei qui operatur merces imputatur c. for it is certaine that to him that worketh not onely in opinion and conceipt but truely and indeed the reward is due Answ. This reason doth not
that most miserable had beene our estate if God had not most mercifully fuccoured us in his Son nostrâ justitiâ vacuos ejus involvisset justitia and being void of our owne righteousnesse had inwrapped us in his righteousnesse and a little after nisi ipse sua impartiretur justitia qui nostra planè destituimur quae nostram iniquitatem injustitiam tegeret David doth not say the man is blessed who hath not committed sinne nor done iniquity but blessed are they whose iniquities are mercifully forgiven of God whose sinnes he doth cover and hide with his justice Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne which he can scarcely be without or at least never is without and againe In illo c. in Christ therefore wee are justified before God not in ourselves not with our righteousnesse but with his which now is imputed to us having communion with him wanting righteousnesse in our selves we are taught extra nos in illo justitiam quaerere to seeke for righteousnesse out of ourselves in him Now saith he that our righteousnesse standeth in Christs obedience hence it is because wee being incorporated into him it is accepted of God in our behalfe as if it were ours insomuch that by it selfe we are held just And even as Iacob when not being the first borne but hiding himselfe under the habit of his brother and clothed with his garment which sent forth a fragrant smell obtayned the blessing from his Father so we that we may obtaine the blessing of righteousnesse from our heavenly Father it behoveth us to lye hid under the pretious purity of our eldest Brother to smell sweet with his odour and to have our sinnes covered with his perfection And finally he saith that if wee speake formally and properly wee are justified neither by faith nor charity but by the onely righteousnesse of God in Christ by the onely righteousnesse of Christ communicated to us and by the onely mercie of God forgiving our sinnes which saith he I have before made evident 11. Conradus Clingius maketh justification to be either imputative which we call justification or active which we call sanctification the righteousnesse of the former being wholly in Christ of the latter in us so that he differeth but in termes from us 12. The Auâ—…hors of the Booke called Antididagm Coloniens say that the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to us is the principall and châ—…efe cause of our justification upon which chiefly we ought to rely and trust 13. To these we may adde the confession of our adversaries who cannot deny but that Christ his satisfaction is imputed to all that are justified or shall be saved as I have shewed before Yeâ—… this is the confession of all Christians who professe Christ to be our Saviour that the Lord accepteth the merits of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings in their behalfe as if they had performed the same in their owne persons And what is this but to impute the obedience of Christ and his sufferings unto us Doth not God accept Christs righteousnes for us or did hee not thereby satisfie for us To what end then as Bellarmine well inferreth did Christ take upon him our nature to what end and purpose did he humble himselfe to doe and to suffer so great things for us For this confession I argue thus What righteousnesse and obedience of another the Lord accepteth for us that hee imputeth to us for righteousnesse for by imputation we meane nothing else But the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ the Lord accepteth for us otherwise he could not have been our Saviour Therefore the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ is imputed to us for righteousnesse CHAP. V. The objections of the Papists against imputation § I. FIrst they cavill at the word and that in divers respects for first they say it is new Secondly they deride it calliug it justitiam putatitiam an imaginary justice Thirdly they say this assertion that wee are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is no where to bee found To the first concerning novelty I answere that the word is used tenne times Rom. 4. and in the same sence that wee doe use it for accepting a man as righteous who in himselfe is a sinner verse 5. or imputing to a man righteousnesse that worketh not vers 5. or without workes vers 6. that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him or performed by him besides other places of the Scriptures both in the Old Testament and in the New where the Hebrew Chashab is read with Lamed or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a dative of the person whether in the Greeke translation of the Old Testament or in the Greeke Text of the New Examples of the Old Testament both in the Hebrew text and in the Greeke translation may bee these Gen. 15. 6. Levit. 7. 18. 17. 4. Nâ—…m 18. 27. 30. 2 Sam. 19. 19. Hebr. Psal. 32. 2. 105. 31. Prov. 17. 28. Graec. Examples of the New Testament besides those in the Epistle to the Romanes 2 Cor. 5. 19. Gal. 3 6. 2 Tim. 4. 16. Iam. 2. 23. In the Latine vulgar translation not onely the Verbe imputare and imputari are used in the same sense as 2 Chron. 30. 19. Iob 42. 8. Psalm 32. 2. Sap. 12. 1â—… Eâ—…ek 33. 16. Rom. 4. 4. 8. 5. 13. 2 Tim. 4. 16. Philem. 18. but also reputure and râ—…putari construed with a dative as Gen. 15. 6. Numb 18. 27. 30. Deut. 21. 8. â—…bsque dativo Deut. 23. 21. 24. 15. Iud. 4. 9. 2 Sam. 19. 19. 1 Chron. 21. 3. Psal. 106. 31. 1 Mac. 2. 52. Rom. 4. 3. 5. 9. 10. 11. 22. 24. Galath 3. 6. Iam. 2. 23. But say they the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a simple Verbe and the Hebrew chashab doth signifie pâ—…rare not imputarâ—… to thinke esteeme or account not to impute I answer when the Hebrew Verbe is read with Lamed or the Greeke with the dative of the person it signifieth properly to impute as in the places even now quoted and is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word also is used by the Apostle Rom. 5. 13. Phile. 18. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Variâ—…us doth expound it producing this example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sinnes of the children of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Fathers that is imputeth or layeth them to their charge and so the vulgar Latine translateth the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Latine imputare as Rom. 4 4. 8. or reputare with a dative as Rom. 4. 3. 5 c. or accepta ferre as Rom 4. 6. which are all one even in the opinion of that Latine interpeter Neither should this act of imputation seeme strange seeing the practise thereof is usuall among men For as when the debtour being not able to make payment if the surety shall pay the whole summe or satisfie for the
debt the sureties payment or satisfaction is imputed to the debtour and accepted in his behalfe as if himselfe had discharged the debt Even so wee being debtours to God both in respect of the penalty due for our sinnes past and also of obedience which we owe for the time to come and being altogether unable either to satisfie the one or performe the other Christ as our surety fatisfieth both these debts for us and his satisfaction is imputed unto us and accepted in our behalfe as if we in our owne persons had discharged our debt § II. Whereas in the second place they deride imputed justice calling it putatitiam as if it were an imaginary righteousnes only which also they say doth both derogate from the glory of God to whom it were more honourable to make a man truely righteous than to repute him righteous who in himselfe is wicked and also detract from the honour of Christs Spouse who is onely arraied with her Husbands righteousnesse as it were a Garment being in herselfe deformed I answere first whomâ—… the Lord doth justifie hee doth indeed and in truth constitute and make them righteous by imputing unto them the righteousnesse of Christ no lesse truely and really than either Adams sinne was imputed to us or our sinnes to Christ for which hee really suffered Secondly whom God justifieth or maketh righteous by imputation them also he sanctifieth or maketh righteous by infusion of a righteousnesse begun in this life and to bee perfected when this mortall life is ended And further that it is much more for the glory both of Gods justice and of his mercie when hee justifieth sinners both to make them peâ—…fectly righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and also having freed them from hell by the perfect sâ—…tisfaction of his Sonne and entitled them to the Kingdome of Heaven by his perfect obedience to prepare and to fit them for his owne Kingdome by beginning a righteousnesse inherent in them which by degrees groweth towards perfection in this life and shall bee fully perfected so soone as this life is ended rather than to justifie or to speake more properly to sanctifie them onely by a righteousnesse which is unperfect and but begun which in justice can neither satisfie for their sinnes nor merit eternall life And as for the Spouse of Christ as it is most honourable for her to stand righteous before God not in her owne unperfect righteousnesse but in the most perfect and absolute righteousnesse of Christ the eternal Son of God which far surpasseth the righteousnes of al men and Angels so it is both profitable to her and honorable to God whiles shee is to continue heâ—… warfare and pilgrimage in this world to bee subject to insirmities and imperfections whereby shee being humbled in her selfe is taught to rely upon the power and goodnesse of God whose grace is sufficient for her and whose power is seene in her weakenesse especially considering that though her obedience bee unperfect yet it being upright it is not only accepted in Christ by whose perfect obedience imputed her wants are covered but also graciously rewarded and also considering that the remainders of sinne are left ad agonem that having maintained a spirituall warfare against them and the other enemies of her salvation and having overcome them she may receive the Crowne promised to them which overcome § III. As touching the third which is Bellarmines first objection in this place that it is no where read that Christs righteousnesse is imputed unto us or that wee are justified by Christs righteousnesse imputed I answer that as in many other controversies the assertion of neither part is in so many words and syllables expressed in the Scriptures so neither in this For where doe the Papists read either in Scriptures or Fathers that our righteousnesse inherent is the formall cause of our justification before God The contrary whereof in substance is so often read as it is said that wee are not justified by our workes or by our owne righteousnesse nor in our selves nor by a righteousnesse prescribed in the Law in which all inherent righteousnesse is fully and perfectly described But the substance of our assertion is often read as namely First that when God doth justifie a finner hee imputeth righteousnesse unto him without workes that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in or performed by himselfe Rom. 4. 4 5 6. Secondly that hee justifieth him not by the parties owne righteousnesse or by making him righteous in himselfe but by the righteoufnesse of another viz. Christ in whom hee is made righteous Thirdly that we are justified by the bloud and by the e obedience that is the personall righteousnesse of Christ which neither it selfe nor yet the merit thereof without communication wherof no man can be saved is or can be communicated unto us otherwise than by imputation From whence wee may argue thus The righteoufneffe whereby wee are justified is imputed for when God doth justifie a man hee imputeth righteousnesse unto him By the righteousnesse of Christ wee are justified Rom. 5. 9. 19. Therefore the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed unto us Fourthly that as by the disobedience of Adam wee were made â—…inners namely by the imputation thereof unto us for neither the guilt nor the corruption nor the punishment which is death had belonged to us if the sinne it selfe had not beene imputed unto us so by the obedience of Christ wee are justified which if it were not imputed to us we could by it neither be freed from hell nor entitled to heaven nor made inherently just by it Fifthly that wee are so made the righteousnesse of God in Christ as hee was made sinne for us that is by imputation Sixthly and lastly to omit other proofes when the Papists doe confesse that Christs satisfaction is imputed unto us they confesse as much as wee teach if it bee rightly understood For his satisfaction for us is either in respect of the penalty of the Law to free us from hell or in respect of the Commandement to entitle us to heaven The penalty hee hath satisfied by his sufferings which is obedientia crucis his obedience of the Crosse the Commandement by the perfect fulfilling therof which is obedientia Legis his obedience of the Law Now Bellarmine as I have heretofore shewed teacheth in his fifth chapter of his second booke that God accepteth in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ whereby he satisfied for us And in the tenth chapter that not ouâ—… righteousnesse doth satisfie for our sinnes but the righteousnesse of Christ which is imputed to us and to that purpose citeth Bernard For if one faith he dyed for all then all were dead that the satisfaction of that one might bee imputed to all as hee bare the sinnes of all § IV. Bellarmine his second and third argument both tend to prove that for the justification of a sinner there is no need
the Colliars faith so much commended by Cardinall Hosius and others for he being examined by a learned man what he beleeved answered I beleeve that which the Church beleeveth and being asked what the Church beleiveth answered againe that which I beleeve and so in a round that he beleeved what the Church beleeved and that the Church beleeved as he beleeved but also that it is the safest for all even for those that are learned to rest in this faith Especially when they are assaulted by Satan with whom they say it is not safe to contend by Scriptures but rather to oppose that onely article against him As the said learned man who had opposed the Collyar found by experience For he being afterwards assaulted by Satan when he was deadly sicke and being not able to defend himselfe by Scriptures he was faine to bâ—…ake himselfe to the Colliars faith which no doubt is the readiest way for them who professe a faith not conformable to the Scriptures to put the Devil to silence who will rest well content with such an answer whereas if they should stand to the Scriptures the Devill would be able to confute them As he did Luther whiles hee was a Papist in the question concerning the private Masse which he did not to teach him the truth but by true accusations to bring him to despaire § IV. This doctrine of the Papists concerning implicite faith is both absurdly false and notoriously wicked False in diverse respects First in that they say justifying faith may be without knowledge when as first of all faith it selfe is a kind of knowledge yea a kind of certaine knowledge yea of all others the most certaine knowledge as I have already shewed proving that it is that knowledge which we have by Divine relation or report grounded on the authority of God speaking in his word Secondly because faith oftentimes in the scriptures is called knowledge or acknowledgment as Ioh. 17. 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent Now we know God in the life to come by vision in this life by faith as their owne writers testifie Maldonat on that place what is the cause saith he that he seemeth to place eternall life in knowledge alone that is in faith onely And Ianseniâ—…s vita aeterna inchoativè imperfectè hic habetur cognoscendo Deum per fidem habetur autem in 〈◊〉 perfectè cognoscendo Deum per visionem Esai 53. 11. My righteous servant by his knowledge or acknowledgement that is by faith in him shall justifie many So 2 Pet. 1. 2 3. Eph. 1. 17. Col. 1. 10. 2. 2. 1 Tim. 2. 4. 2 Tim. 2. 25. 3. 7. Tit. 1. 1. where by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the knowledge or acknowledgement of Christ and his truth is meant nothing else but faith 1 Ioh. 2. 3 4. hereby we doe know that we doe know him that is beleeve in him if we doe keepe his Commandements he that saith he knoweth him namely by faith and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar and the truth is not in him Heb. 11. 3. By faith we understand or know that the worlds were formed by the Word of God where the act of faith is expressed by this term of understanding that which we beleeve 2 Cor. 5. 1. we know that is we beleeve for otherwise it cannot be known but by faith that after the dissolution of our earthly tabemacle we have an eternall habitation in heaven Thirdly because in the Scriptures faith and knowledge are so linked together that what we acknowledg we beleeve what we beleeve we know Ioh. 6. 69. we beleeve and know that thou art that Christ Ioh. 10. 38. that you may know and beleeve that the Father is in me and I in him Ioh. 17. 8. they have knowen surely that I came out from thee saith Christ unto his Father and they have beleeved that thou didst send me Eph. 4. 13. till we all come into the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God 1 Tim. 4. 3. to bee received with thankesgiving of them which beleeve and know the truth 1 Ioh. 4. 16. we have knowne and beleeved the love that God hath to us Fourthly it is not possible that a man should beleeve acknowledge or assent firmely to that which he doth not know so much as by relation or hearesay how can they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and by hearing knowen Rom. 10. 14. And who knoweth not that the assent of faith determineth the judgement to that particular which is beleeved As for example if I beleeve the resurrection my judgement actually assenteth to that particular But if I never have so much as heard or understood that God hath revealed such a thing that there shall be a resurrection how can I possibly beleeve it or actually assent unto it And therefore implicite faith is so farre from being a justifying faith that it is not so good as the bare historicall faith which not onely wicked men but the Devils themselves have For historicall faith hath in it an actuall assent and implyeth a knowledge at least by relation of that which is beleeved But implicite faith hath neither Fifthly to the implicite faith the definition offaith Heb. 11. 1. doth in no sort agree for as it is so farre from being the substance of things hoped for that it doth not so much as know what are the things hoped for so it is further from being an evidence of things not seene which implyeth a certaine knowledge of things by relation which are not seen or knowne by sence or reason Sixthly that which implyeth a contradiction is false and absurd but the profession of the implicite faith made by a simple man viz. that hee beleeveth whatsoever the Catholicke Church beleeveth implyeth a contradiction not onely because hee doth not beleeve every yea scarce any particular but also through his ignorance sometimes doth actually beleeve that which the Church doth not beleeve or doth deny credit to that which the Church beleeveth But here now is the speciall priviledge of implicite faith that although a man beleeve an errour as that God the Father is greater than the Sonne or ancienter than he or that the persons of the Trinity are divided by locall distance one from another it is no offence so long as he thinketh the Church beleeveth so and so saith Gabriel himselfe If any man doe beleeve thinking that the Church doth so beleeve though it bee erroneous he sinneth not so that hee doe not obstinately adhere to his errour as was said before notab 2. Yea saith hee that which is more this faith is meritorious for such an one should not onely not sinne but also by so beleeving that which is false hee should merit Thus not onely hee is said to beleeve who indeed doth not beleeve nor give assent to the truth but also he
who dissenteth from the truth even from that which the Church doth hold § V Secondly they are absurd in saying that faith may better be defined by ignorance than by knowledge For notitia knowledge is the genus both of faith and of science whereas ignorance is a privation of knowledge It were therefore very strange if faith which is an habit of the mind should be defined by a privation and namely of that habit which is the genus of it Yea but saith Bellarmine faith is opposed to science and therefore better to be defined by ignorance than by knowledge I answere it is opposed to science not as a privation that it should bee defined by ignorance but as a species of the same kind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contra divided for notitia as the genus is divided into science and faith the former being a knowledge of things either manifest in themselves which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or made manifest by discourse of reason which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the latter being a knowledge of things neither manifest to sence nor reason but knowne onely by relation from God where by the way you are to observe that the knowledge required in faith is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the cause such as is in science but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to beleeve the relation to be true and that whatsoever God revealeth is infallibly true And therfore by faith our judgements are captivated to yeeld assent to divine revelations though either they may be above reason or may seeme to be against sence or reason For though sence and reason may bee deceived yet the ground of our faith which is the authority of God cannot be deceived nec fidei falsum subesse potest neither can the subject of faith be false As for example the mysteries of the Trinity and of the incarnation of our Saviour bee above our reason the articles of the creation of all things from nothing and of the resurrection of the body seeme contrary to reason the article of eternall life contayneth such things as never eye did see nor eare heare neither did they ever enter into the heart of man and so of other articles of Christian religion which notwithstanding we doe firmely beleeve and undoubtedly know to be true as God hath revealed the same grounding this our faith and knowledge on the authority of God speaking in his Word This distinction of knowledge being acknowledged that the knowledge of faith is neither the certaine intelligence of things in themselves manifest to sense or reason nor that science which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the causes or attained by discourse of reason but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the things revealed by God are infallibly true by reason of his authority who is Truth it selfe might serve as a sufficient answer to so many of Bellarmines arguments and allegations as seeme worth the answering But I will briefly examine his proofes which are allegation of Scriptures reason and testimonies of Fathers § VI. As for his allegation of Scripture the first place alleadged out of Esa. 7. 9. is not as Bellarmine alleageth it unlesse you beleeve you shall not understand but if you beleeve not you shall not be established or as the vulgar Latine which Bellarmine ought to stand to non permâ—…nebitis as contrariwise 2 Chron. 20. 20. if you beleeve in the Lord you shall be established or as the Latine securieritis Neither doth it follow that faith is not knowledge because without faith we cannot come to the certaine intelligence of that which we beleeve For as knowledge of the thing revealed goeth before faith so faith goeth before the exact understanding and comprehension In the two next places 1 Cor. 13. 2. 12. 9. where faith as he saith is distinguished as a severall gift from knowledge by faith is not meant justifying faith but the faith of miracles as I have else where shewed Neither doe wee deny but that knowledge may be a distinct gift from faith As that knowledge which is either principiorum or conclusionum which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is knowledge alwayes joyned with acknowledgement which is faith though acknowledgement implyeth knowledge alwayes Knowledge therefore may be without faith but faith cannot be without knowledge To the fourth out of 2 Cor. 10. 5. that where knowledge is there needs no captivating of the understanding I answere that faith being onely notitia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and giving firme assent to that whereof it knoweth no reason yea though perhaps it seeme above or against reason subjecteth or captivateth the understanding to the authority of God The last is from those places wherein the obedience of faith is mentioned For saith he obedience in beleeving were not needfull if by faith knowledge were given to men I answere that in those places faith doth signifie the doctrine of faith that is the Gospell the truth which men are then said to obey Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 3. 1. Act. 6. 7. when they beleeve and professe it As contrariwise those who doe not beleeve are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to disobey and that in opposition to beleefe Ioh. 3. 36. Act. 14. 2. 17. 5. 19. 9. Rom. 11. 30 31 32. 15. 31. Heb. 3. 18 19. 1 Pet. 2. 7. Neither should it seeme strange to Bellarmine that by faith men attaine to knowledge I meane to greater knowledge when he urging even now that place Esai 7. 9. said faith is a degree and way to knowledge § VII To the Testimony of Irenaeus if it were entirely cited I would subscribe For speaking of those words 1 Cor. 8. Scientia inflat dilectio autem adificat and having thereupon inferred that it were better to know but a little and to love God than in a conceit of great knowledge to bee found blasphemous against God hee repeateth the same againe Melius itáque est sicuti predixi nihil omnio scientem quempiaâ—… ne quidem unam causam cujusllbet eorum quae facta sunt cur factum credere Deo persever are in ejus dilectione quae honorem vivificat nec aliud inquirere adscientiam nisi Iâ—…SVM Christum filium Dei qui pro nobis crucifixâ—…s est quà m per quaestionum subtilitates multiloquium in impietatem cadere Where first observe that the knowledge whereof he speaketh is that whereby the causes or reasons of things are knowne And wee doe confesse that a man may and ought simply to beleeve God without such knowledge and secondly that he speaketh by way of comparison that it is better for a man to content himselfe with the knowledge of Christ alone joyned with love which is not to be accounted implicite faith for the Apostle himselfe determined to know nothing among the Corinthians but Christ and him crucified than affecting the knowledge of subtile and curious questions to fall into
those who have not Charity have not faith who as the same Apostle saith professe themselves to know God but in deeds deny him which also is against himselfe for how saith Chrysostome can such a man be said to beleeve that denieth God Therefore saith he the wicked deny the faith not in heart or mouth but indeed and of them saith he writeth Saint Gregory whose testimony he alleageth directly against himselfe Eos non veraciter credere non habere veram fidem quinon bene operantur that they doe not truely beleeve nor have a true faith who doe not worke well And therefore those that worke ill as those doe who are without Charity and namely those who provide not for their domesticks shew that they have no true faith But this he salveth with another testimony of the same Gregory that many enter into the Church because they have faith and yet want the wedding garment because they have not Charity Where by faith we are to understand the profession of faith which many make who have not Charity But by the wedding garment we are according to the Scriptures to understand rather Christ and his righteousnesse as I have shewed heretofore put on by a true and lively faith for he that was without the wedding garment wanted faith as well as charity The Authour of the unfinished Worke in Chrysostome faith Nuptiale vestimentum est fides vera quae est per Iesum Christum justitiam ejus the wedding garment is the true faith which is by Iesus Christ and his righteousnesse But will you heare one of their owne Writers upon Matth. 22. what is saith he that wedding garment to wit that whereof Paul speaketh when he saith put on the Lord Iesus Christ. This garment is inwardly put on by faith when thou puttest on Christs righteousnesse to cover thy sinnes c. § VII The second out of Ioh. 6. 64. Iudas though he professed the faith is yet said not to have beleeved because he wanted Charity and therefore they who want Charity want faith Bellarmine answereth that he is said not to beleeve because at that time he had lost his faith I reply Iudas though he professed the faith yet he never had true faith and therefore never lost it For from the beginning Iesus knew who they were that beleeved not and who should betray him for this cause saith he in the next verse I said unto you that no man can come to me that is beleeve in me vers 35. and 64. unlesse it be given unto him of my Father which hee insinuateth had not been given to Iudas whom from the beginning he knew to be no beleever § VIII Hee that saith hee knoweth God namely by faith and keepeth not his commandements is a lyar Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh of the knowledge of familiarity and friendship of which the Lord speaketh to the wicked Matth. 7. 25. I know you not whereunto I reply that if he speake of such knowledge it is the knowledge of faith and cannot be had but by faith and so the argument standeth in force Howbeit unfitly doth he alleage the Lords not knowing of the wicked to prove the meaning of our knowing of him If he speake not of the knowledge of faith the argument is the stronger for if he be a lyar that only saith that he knoweth God and keepeth not his commandements then much more is hee a lyar that saith hee knoweth God by faith and keepeth not his commandements Beda indeed expoundeth this knowledge of God of the love of God which is a fruit and consequent of our faith hocest Deum nosse quod amare but others of faith as Gregory speaking of this place notitia quippâ—… Dei ad fideâ—… pertinet Oecumenius maketh this verse to bee of the same signification with the sixth verse of the first Chapter If we say that we have fellowship with him and walke in darkenesse we are lyars and that which Saint Iohn there calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communion here hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commixtion or conjunction Thus therefore hee saith Saint Iohn having said before that those which beleeve in the Lord have communion or fellowship with him here hee setteth downe evidences of our communion with him In this wee know that wee know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that which hee had said before that wee have conjunction or communion with him if wee keepe his Commandements And this saith hee hee more fully sheweth by the contrary but hee that saith I know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or I have communion with him and keepeth not his Commandements he is a lyar This then is â—…is meaning he that saith I know God that is I have Communion with him by faith and doth not keepe his Commandements hee is a lyar But whether wee understand the words of communion by faith or of faith according to the usuall pâ—…rase of the Scriptures puting knowledge for faith as I noted before or of knowledge it selfe the argument is unanswerable For if wee cannot truely bee said to know Christ that is to beleeve in him unlesse wee keepe his Commandements then it is evident that true faith cannot be severed from Charity For this is love if we keep his Commandements 1 Ioh. 5. 3. againe if hee that saith hee knoweth God and keepeth not his Commandemenes bee a lyar much more he that saith hee beleeveth in God and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar as I said before To this adde Tit. 1. â—…6 which Bellarmine cited against himselfe those that professe themselves to know God but in workes deny him they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unbeleevers Ioh. 3. 36. or as the vulgar Latine incredibiles or as Thomas Aquinas non apti ad credendum § IX Fourthly 1 Ioh. 5. 1. Every one that bâ—…leeveth that Iesus is the Christ is borne of God and therefore undoubtedly hath charity Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh de fide formata as Saint Augustine expoundeth and so doe wee for whosoever truely beleeveth hath fidem formatam For the Apostle no doubt speaketh of a true lively saith and such there is none but that which the Papists call formatam which worketh by love And therefore the argument holdeth that whosoever hath a true lively iustifying faith is borne of God or regenerated by the Spirit of sanctification and therefore is undoubtedly endued with charity § Fifthly Iam. 2. That faith which iâ—… without workes is dead A true lively justifying faith is not dead Therefore â—… true livâ—…ly â—…ustifying faith is not without works Bellarmine saith he hath explaned this in his third argument that faith is said to be dead not as a mâ—… is said to bee dead who after death is not but as a body is said to bee dead which after death is but liveth not For saith he Life is not of the
Now to beleeve in Christ is to receive him Ioh. 1. 12. and not to receive him is not to beleeve in him vers 11. For to receive Christ being so farre removed from us is a spirituall action of the soule that is to say of the mind and of the heart whereby we first apprehend and after apply Christ unto our selves If therefore it bee asked quâ—…modo tenebo absentem quomodo in coelâ—…m manum mittam ut ibi sedentem teneam how should I lay hold upon him that is absent how should I send up my hand into heaven to lay hold on him sitting there Augustine answereth fidem mitte tenuisti Send up thy faith and thou hast laid hold on him But first wee receive Christ in our minde and judgement by assent which if it bee a bareâ—… and as it were a literall and uneffectuall assent wee receive him at the most as the Saviour of the World but not as our Saviour which is the faith of hypocrites yea and of Devils and is all that thâ—… Papists require as necessary to true faith But if it bee a spirituall lively and effectuall assent it worketh upon the heart that is both the affections and the will so that hee which in his judgement truely and effectually assenteth to the truth of the Gospell that Iesus the Sonne of the Blessed Virgin is the eternall Sonne of God the Messias and Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him doth also in his heart embrace him heartily desiring to bee made partaker of him and in his will unfainedly purposing and resolving to acknowledge him to bee our Lord and Saviour and to rest upon him alone for salvation By the former which is onely a bare assent we doe after a sort credere Christum acknowledging him to bee the Saviour of those that beleeve in him by the latter which is the lively and effectuall assent working upon the heart we doe credere in Christum and receive him to bee our Saviour whereupon necessarily followeth affiance in Christ and love of him as our Saviour Thus then by a true belief we receive and embrace Christ in our judgements by a lively assent in our hearts desiring earnestly to be partakers of him which desire wee expresse by hearty prayer and in our willâ—… resolving to acknowledge and professe him to be our only Saviour and to rest upon him alone for salvation So that a true lively and effectuâ—…ll faith is the worke of the whole soule that is to say as well of the heart as of the minde for which cause the Apostle saith corde creditur adjustitiam with the heart man beleeveth to righteousnesse Rom. 10. 10. and Saint Luke that the Lord opened the heart of Lydia to assent to the Gospell Act. 16. 14. And Philip requireth the Eunuch to beleeve with his whole heart Act. 8. 37. The former is common to the wicked yea to the Devils the later is proper to the children of God For those who so beleeve are born of God Ioh. â—… 12 13. 1 Ioh. 5. 1. The former is a literall a dead a counterfeit a not justifying faith the latter is a lively true and justifying faith This distinction Augustine maketh betweene Saint Peters faith and that of the Devils though their confessions were alike Thou art the Sonne of the living God Hoc dicebat Petrus ut Christum amplecteretur hoc dicebant Daemones ut Christus ab eis recederet This said Peter that hee might embrace Christ this spake the Devils that Christ might depart from them Oecumenius endeavouring to reconcile the seeming differences betweene the two Apostles Paul and Iames saith there are two significations of the word Faith the one as it signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a simple and bare assent in which sence the Devils are said to beleeve that there is one God the other as it importeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the accompanying of the disposition or affection with the firme assent Of the former Saint Iames speaketh and saith that the simple and bare assent is a dead faith but Paul of the latter which is not destitute of good workes which after hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is faith indeed § III. Of this faith whereby wee receive Christ to bee our Saviour there are two degrees the former of speciall apprehension whereby wee receive and embrace Christ consisting in a lively and effectuall beleefe whereby we truly receive Christ in our judgement by a willing assent in our affections by an earnest desire to bee made partakers of him and of his merits which is the desire of application in our will by a setled resolution to acknowledge him to bee our Saviour and to rest upon him for salvation which is the unfained purpose and endeavour of application So that in this first degree though we are not able actually to apply the promise of the Gospell unto our selves yet that application is both desired and intended The other is of actuall and speciall application of the promise to our selves as having the condition of the promise The former is fides principiorum being grounded on the expresse Word of God whosoever beleeveth in Christ shall bee saved The other is fides conclusionum necessarily deduced from the Word by application in a practicall syllogisme after this manner whosoever beleeveth in Christ shall be saved which generall is true in every particular as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 10. 9. 〈◊〉 therefore thou doest beleeve in Christ thou shalt bee saved but I saith the faithfull man doe beleeve in Christ therefore I shall be saved which conclusion cannot be false the premisses being true To the former all men are necessarily tied under paine of damnation Iohn 3. 18. Mark 16. 16. to the latter none are tied but they onely who have the former For the former is the condition of the promise which whosoever hath not he ought not to apply the promise to himselfe unlesse hee will perniciously deceive himselfe By the former wee are justified before God in the court of Heaven which is properly called justification by the latter we are justified in the court of our conscience which is not properly justification but the assurance of it The former goeth before remission of sinne the latter followes after The former is the worke of Gods Spirit as he doth regenerate us in our first effectuall calling the latter as hee is the spirit of adoption sealing us after wee have beleeved The former is ordinarily wrought by the hearing of the Word the holy Ghost opening the heart of the hearer to assent thereto and not by the ministry of the Sacraments which being the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith were ordained to this purpose to confirme our faith in the application of the promise in particularunto our selves and in the particular assurance of our justification and salvation by Christ that those who have the first degree offaith may proceed to the
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
God grounded upon the infallible authoritie of God the relator and finally not being ignorant that we hold the proper object of faith to be the truth But we hold that it is seated both in the understanding and in the will and my reason brieâ—…ely is this because it is a voluntary assent and is so defined not onely by some of the ancient Fathers but also by the ancient Philosophers who as Thcodoreâ—… reporteth doe define it to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a willing assent of the soule Thâ—…refore to beleeve is an act both of the understanding and of the will Of the understanding as it is an assent of the will as it is voluntary Even as liberum â—…rbitrium as it is arbitrium belongeth to the understanding and as it is liberum to the will not that we seate it in two divers parts of the soule but onely in the mind that is the reasonable or intellectuall part though it worketh upon the affections also For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that when the holy Ghost is pleased to worke the grace of faith in the soules of any of the elect which ordinarily he doth by the ministery of the Gospell he openeth their hearts as he did the heart of Lydia to assent to the Gospell which he doth first by illuminating their understanding and opening the eyes of their minde that they may rightly conceive and judge of the doctrine of salvation and secondly by opening as it were the eares of the mind and enclining the will to affect and embrace what the understanding hath judged and approved to be true and good The understanding therefore approving and the Will which is intellectus extensus and ordinarily followeth the judgement of the practick understanding embracing the doctrine of the Gospell which promiseth salvation by Christ to all that beleeve the mind which containeth both these faculties being thus opened by the holy Ghost doth williugly assent to the doctrinâ—… of the Gospell concerning salvation by Christ. Faith therefore is a voluntary assent of the mind to the promise of the Gospell unto which the acts of both the faculties of the mind concurre of the understanding to judge that the thing propounded to be beleeved is true and good I meane that the promise is true and the thing promised good of the Will to accept and to embrace that for true and good which the understanding hath judged to be such Out of both which ariseth the voluntary assent of the minde which wee call faith This faith thus wrought by the holy Ghost the Spirit of regeneration being lively and effectuall worketh upon the heart and affections which also being renewed by the holy Ghost readily follow the willing assent of the minde both to affect Christ to desire to bee made partakers of him to love him and torest upon him for salvation and also to dis-affect and to detest those things which are repugnant to the Doctrine of the Gospel the chiefe whereof is Sinne. § III. Now that the act of the will doth concurre to faith and that faith which is an habit of the minde is seated as well in the will as in the understanding is a thing testified by the Fathers and confessed by the Schoole-men and by the Moderne Doctors of the Romane Church And first for the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus saith that faith it the willing assent of the soule and so Theodoret doth define it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ambrose Fides non necessitatis sed voluntatis res est Faith is a matter of will and not of necessity therefore the Apostle saith not that wee domineere over your faith for dominion is cause of necessity and againe â—… to beleeve or not to beleeve it is an act of the Will Augustine Grace therfore preventeth or goeth before faith otherwise if faith prevent it then also the will prevenâ—…eth it quia fides sine voluâ—…late â—…on potest esse because faith cannot be without Will Againe what is it to beleeve but to consent that the thing is true which is said consensio autemutique volentis est and consenting undoubtedly is of him that is willing Every man when he willeth beleeveth cum credit volens credit and when he doth beleeve hee doth willingly beleeve Voluntate utique credimus verily we beleeve with our will Fides in credentium voluntate consistit faith standeth in the will of the beleevers And writing upon Ioh. 6. 44. What say we here brethren if we be drawne unto Christ then wee beleeve against our wills No saith hee A man may enter into the Church nolens against his will hee may come to the Altar nilling hee may receive the Sacrament nilling credere non potest nisi volens hee cannot beleeve unlesse hee bee willing And lastly in the elect the will is prepared of the Lord that therefore belongeth to faith quâ—… in voluntate est which is in the will § IV. Bonaventure it were not virtuovs to beleeve if it were not voluntary ipsum velle credere est essentiale ipsi fidei to beleeve willingly is essentiall to faith it selfe Vnto the being of the vertue of faith with the act of reason or understanding concurreth the act of the Will Faith never should be a vertue though it did enlighten the understanding never so much if it did not also rectifie the will Thomas Aquinas writing on Rom. 10. 10. Signanter autem dicit corde creditur id est voluntate he â—…peaketh remarkeably men beleeve with the hearr that is with the Will For all other things which appertaine to the outward worship of God 〈◊〉 potest a man may doe them nilling sed credere non potest nisi volens but none can beleeve that is not willing for the understanding of him that beleeveth is not determined to assent unto the truth by necessity of reason as of him that hath science but by the Will Againe Intellectus credâ—…ntis determinatur ad unum non per rationeâ—… sed per voluntatem Credere est actus intellectus assentientis veritati divinae ex imperio voluntatis à Deo motae per gratiam Credere est actus intellectus secùndum quod movetur a voluntate ad assentiendum procedit autem hujâ—…smodi actus à voluntate ab intellectu Actus fidei dicitur consistere in credentium voluntate in quantum ex imperio voluntatis intellectus credibilibus assentit Gabriel Biel the act of faith is to beleeve which is an act of the understanding assenting to the truth proceeding from the command of the will quiâ—… nullus credit nisi volens because no man beleeveth that is not willing as Saint Augustâ—…e teacheth § V. Cardin all Contarenus actus fidei quam vis sit elicitus ab intellectu est tamen imperatus à 〈◊〉 Salmeron Paul saith men beleeve with the heart to exclude fayning
Exposition Ioh. 17. 17. so Ioh. 18. 37. Rom. 2. 8. â—…al 3. 1. 5. 7. Eph. 4. 21. 2 Thess. 2. 10 12. 1 Tim. 2. 4. 4. 3. 2 Tim. 2. 18. cum 1 Tim. 1. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 8. Heb. 10. 26 1 Pet. 1. 22. 1 Ioh. 2. 21. 2 Iob. 1. 2. Sometimes the word of Truth or of the truth Eph. 1. 13. 2 Tim. 2. 15. Iam. 1. 18. sometimes the truth of the Gospell Gal. 2. 5. 14. or the word of the truth of the Gospell Col. 1. 5. The 〈◊〉 whereof is Christ crucified 1 Cor. 1. 23. 2. 2. For this cause justifying faith is called oftentimes the faith of Christ because he is the proper Object thereof as Rom. 3. 22 26. Gal. 2. 16. 20. 3. 22. Phil. 3. 9. and faith in Christ as Act. 20. 21. 24. 24. 26. 18. Gal. 3. 26. Faith in the blood of Christ Rom. 3. 25. that faith which is in Christ Iesus 2 Tiâ—… 3. 15. sometimes the faith of the Gospell Phil. 1. 27. and which is all one the faith of the truth 2 Thess. 2. 13. Thus therfore I reason That to the beliâ—…e whereof alone and not of other things remission of sinnes justification and salvation is promised that I say is the proper object of justifying faith But to the beliefe in Christ or in the Doctrine and promises of the Gospell concerning salvation by Christ remission of sins justification and salvation is promised and not to the beliefe of other things Therefore that is the proper object of justifying faith That the Promise is made to beliefe in Christ and in the Gospell the Scriptures every whâ—…re â—…each as Ioh. 3. 15 16. 18. 36. 8. 24. 11. 25 26. â—…2 46. 20. 31. Act. 10. 43. 13. 38 39. 16 31. 26. 18. Rom. 10. 9 11. c. But not to the beliefe of other things is the promise made as of the Law or of the story of the Bible or of predictions excepting those stories and propheâ—…ies which concerne Christ. For howsoever a man cannot have a justifying faith who denieth credit to any of those other things which he findeth to be revealed by God yet not by beleeving of them but by beleeving in Christ â—…hee is justified § III. But here it may be objected that the faith whereby Abraham was justified had no relation to the promise of salvation by Christ but to the promises of God concerning his seed Whereunto I answere First that Abraham and all the rest of the faithfull before Christ beleeved in the promised seed which was the Messias to come and by that faith as the Papists themselves confesse were justifyed Secondly the promises which concerned his seed were either the same with the promise of the Gospell or it was implyed in them The maine promise was that in Abraham that is in his seed all Nations that is the faithfull in all Nations should be blessed For Abraham did not conceive that in himselfe all Nations should be blessed as if himselfe should be the foundation of Happinesse unto All but in his seed And so the Lord himselfe explaneth in Gen. 22. 18. and in thy seed that is in Christ all the nations of the Earth shall be blessed And so Zacharie Luk. 1. 68. 69 73. and Peter Act. 3. 25. This promise made to Abraham is the very same with the promise of the Gospell For as the Apostle saith the Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preached before the Gospell to Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed Which promise as it had beene formerly made to our first parents concerning the promised seed so was it after renewed to Isaac Gen. 26. 4. and to Iacob Gen. 28. 14. and in effect to David whose sonne according to the flesh Messias was to be who is therefore called the sonne of David and the branch of David In this promised seed Abraham and all other the faithfull beleeved and by beleeving in Him were justified § IV. The other promises concerning his seed are two The former concerning the multiplication of his seed that hee should bee Father of a multitude of Nations namely in Christ and that hee would be a God to him and his seed hee doth not say to seeds as of many but as of one and to thy seed which is Christ Gal. 3. 16. that is Christ mysticall 1 Cor. 12. 12. containing the multitude of the faithfull in all Nations both Iewes and Gentiles This promise therefore implyeth the former that in Christ the promised seed Abraham himselfe and his seed that is the faithfull of all nations should be blessed and in confirmation of this promise he was called Abraham because he was to be a Father of many nations that is of the faithfull of all nations for none but they are accounted Abrahams seed Rom. 9. 7 8. Gal. 3. 7. 29. and for the same cause hee received the Sacrament of Circumcision as a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith Rom. 4. 11. And that in this promise of the multiplication of his seed the promise of the Gospell was included appeareth because his faith in this promise was imputed to him for righteousnesse not for the the approbation or justifying of that act as it happened in the zealous act of Phineas Psal. 106. 30. but for the justification of his person which could not be justified but by faith in Christ. Which the Papists themselves cannot denie The chiefe thing which Abraham apprehended in the promise concerning his seed was that although he were an hundred yeere old and Sarah past child-bearing yet he should have seed by her and in that seed himselfe and all the faithfull of all Nations should be blessed § V. The latter is that they should possesse the land of promise by which as by a type was signified the heavenly Canaan under which to all the faithfull was promised the Kingdome of heaven which was the Countrey which they professing themselves Pilgrimes did seeke Heb. 11. 13 14 15 16. and into which eternall rest Iesus was to bring them who beleâ—…ve even as Ioshua the type of Christ who also is called Iesus brought the Israelites after their peregrinations into that land of rest So that in the latter Promises concerning his seed and the land of promise the former was implyed concerning the promised seed and blessednesse by him as the principall object of Abrahams faith for which chiefly hee did so much affect and desire seed Insomuch that when the Lord had promised him to bee his buckler and his exceeding great reward Abraham replied Lord God what wilt thou give mee seeing I goe childlesse As Abraham therefore who rejoyced to see our Saviour Christs day and as he and the rest of the faithfull having not received the promises concerning the promised seed but having seene them a farre off were perswaded of them
most worthy to be urged and beat upon as being that thing which above all other things in this world is to be desired and laboured for according to the â—…xhortation of the Apostle Peter Give diligence to make your calling and election sure But this speciall faith the Papists above all things deridâ—… and detesâ—… â—…thereby discovering themselves to bee as I have elsewhere shewed voide of all truth and power of Religion It being as I have said and proved a thing most profitable most comfortable most necessary without which no Christian can have any true pâ—…ce or sound comforâ—… or ougâ—… to have contentment in his present estate untill â—…e have â—…tained unto it in some measure And when hee 〈◊〉 attained to some measure he must endevour more and moâ—…e to increase it But hereof I have treated in another place wherâ—…unto I referre the Christian Reader CAP. VII Of the acts or effects of faith and first whether faith doth justifie or only dispose to justification Secondly whether it doth justifie formally § I. THe next controversie is concerning that act or effect of justifying faith in respect whereof it is called justifying faith Of this there are three Questions the first whether Faith doth indeed justifie or onely dispose a man to justification Secondly whether it justifie formally as part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousâ—…esse Thirdly whether it justifie alone The assertions of the Papists in the two former questions doe not seeme to â—…ang well together For if faith goe before justification disposing a man thereto how doth it justifie formally as part of that righteousnesse whereby a man is as they speake formally just And if no dispositions bâ—…e required to justification to what purpose doe they tell us that a man must be disposed and prepared by faith and other virtues For howsoever in their speculations they require preparative dispositions to justification yet in their practise they seeme to require 〈◊〉 For their justification which is in fact and in deed is restrained to their Sacraments as namely to Bapâ—… And their Sacraments justifie ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore without necessity of any foregoing dispositions For if any virtuous or good disposition were required then should their Sacraments justifie not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Onely they require that he who is by the Sacrament to be justified doe not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…lis 〈◊〉 that is interpose the obstacls of some mortall sinne And what be these dispositions which must goe before justification § II. Forsooth there are seven which according to the decree of the Councell of Trent Bellarmine reckoneth De justif lib. 1. ca. 13. to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because the other sixe also doe dispose men thereunto The seven are faith feare hope love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament a purpose of amendment of life All which doe but prepare and dispose a man But it is the Sacrament as namely of Baptisme that doth actually justifie and without which no man is justified But I would gladly know whether these seven preparatives be fruits of grace or works of nature Not of grace for as they teach no man hath grace before Iustification What then they are the fruits of nature holpen I wot not by what grace which if it were true would not onely prove the maine assertion of the Pelagians Gratiam secundùm merita dari or as in other words it is expressed in the Councell of Trent Secundùm propriam cajusque dispositionem operationem For though according to their doctrine these preparations are not merits of condignity as they say yet they bee of congruity but also disprove the doctrine of the Apostle that we are justified freely by his grace But this seemeth to me absurd that men should have one justifying faith and so one hope and one love c. going before justification and another infused in our justification and that by the one justifying faith going before we should be prepared to justification and by the other infused in our justification we should in part be formally justified But this is certaine that that faith which in order of time goeth before justification is no true justifying faith For that which goeth before justification goeth also before regeneration and what goeth before regeneration is of nature and not of Grace But faith in order of time goeth not before justification though in order of nature it doth for so soone as a man beleeveth he is justified as Hierome saith Talis est ille qui in Christum credidit die qua credidit qualis ille qui universam legem implevit Such a one is hee that beleeveth in Christ the very day that hee beleeveth as hee that hath fulfilled the whole Law nor in order of nature before regeneration for in our regeneration it is wrought As therefore no man hath faith who is not regenerated so no man hath faith who is not thereby justified The Scripture is plaine that in Christ whosoever beleeveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is justified Act. 13. 39. He that beleeveth in Christ is passed from death to life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 54. which passage from death to life is justification whereby as themselves teach a man is translated from the state of death and damnation into a state of Grace and Salvation Faith therefore actually justifieth and not disposeth onely to justification § III. The other question is whether faith doth justifie formally as they speake as being a part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally only as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse The Romane Catholikes hold â—…he former the true Catholikes the latter But the former I have sufficiently disproved before and proved the latter For if we be not justified by any grace or righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves which I have before by many undeniable arguments demonstrated then it followeth necessarily that we are not justified by faith as it is a gift or grace an act or habit or quality inherent in us or performed by us And if we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which being out of us in him is imputed to those who receive it by faith which also before I invincibly proved then also it followeth by necessary consequence that wee are justified by faith onely as it is the instrument or hand to apprehend or receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Wherefore where faith is said to justifie or to bee imputed to righteousnesse it must of necessity be understood relatively and in respect of the object to which purpose both justification and all other benefits which we receive by Christ are attributed to faith as I have shewed before Not that faith it selfe worketh these things but because by it wee receive Christ and with him all his merits and benefits And for the same cause the
and of the true worship of God Sometimes it signifieth affiance in God Psal. 9. 10. Esa. 11. 10. compared with Rom. 15. 12. Psal. 69. 6 And so faith is the cause of affiance for by faith wee have affiance Eph. 3. 12. Sometimes it signifieth invocation and calling upon the name of God So David sought God 2 Sam. 12. 16. that is besought him So Esa. 55. 6. Psal. 34. 4. Matth. 7. 7 8. Ier. 29. 12 13. Zach. 8. 21. 22. 2 Chron. 2. 3 4. and thus faith is the cause of prayer which if it bee effectuall is called the prayer of faith Iam. 5. 16. And this is â—…ignified in § VIII The next place which Bellarmine alleageth viz. Rom. 10. 13. 14. whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall bee saved How then shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved and how shall they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and how should they heare without a preacher and how shall they preach except they be sent Where Bellarmine observeth this order of justification he should have said of salvation First sending of Preachers Secondly preaching Thirdly faith Fourthly invocations Fisthly salvation that is saith he justification which is as he saith the healing of the soule from the disease of sinne Of these saith he sending and preaching are without us therfore the first beginning of justification within us is faith which invocation doth follow and the rest in their order I answere first that the Apostle setteth downe in order the degrees not of justification but of salvation Whereof the first after election is vocation unto which three of these degrees are referred First sending of Preachers Secondly Preaching Thirdly hearing by which faith commeth The second is justification by faith Thirdly sanctification whereof one principall duety is mentioned viz. invocation which seemeth to bee put as sometimes it is for the whole worship of God or religion Fourthly salvation Secondly in reckoning these degrees he omiâ—…teth one in favour of their implicite faith For where the Apostle saith how shall they callupon him in whom they have not beleeved how shall they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and consequently by hearing knowne this degree he leaveth out which proveth that men cannot beleeve in God who have not heard of him nor by hearing knowne him Thirdly his inference is of no force at all For by this place it is not proved that faith is the first beginning of justification but this is proved that as the word begetteth faith which doth justifie or as the Apostle speaketh in other words Rom. 8. 30 whom the Lord doth call them he doth justifie so faith begetteth invocation and all other dueties of sanctification for whom God doth justifie hee doth sanctifie Now sanctification is the beginning of glorification in this life for by it the Lord beginneth in us a spirituall and eternall life and as glory is gratia consummata so grace is gloria inchoata So that from this place compared with Rom. 8. 30. and 2 Thess. 2. 13 14. wee may be bold to set dowue the degrees of salvation in this order Election Vocation Iustification Glorification and that either begun in this life which is sanctification or consummate in the life to come which is our eternall salvation § IX His third testimony is Ioh. 1. 12. So many as received him to them hee gave power to be made the sonnes of God to them which beleeve in his name Where saith he Saint Iohn plainly teacheth that these who receive Christ by faith are not yet the Sonnes of God but may bee made the Sonnes of God if they goe on further so that they begin also to hope and to love for love properly maketh men the Sonnes of God Answ. The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where Bellarmine by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the vulgar Latine readeth potestatem understandeth possibility as if he had said potentiam and the Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the aorist hee understandeth as if it were the future as if the meaning were that those who receive Christ by faith are in a good possibility to become hereafter the Sonnes of God if to their faith they shall adde hope and love for it is love properly saith he and not faith that maketh men Gods children But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 never signifieth possibility but as in other places it is translated power or authority so here as also 1 Cor. 8. 9. 9. 12. right or priviledge or as Iansenius interpreteth authoritatem dignitatâ—…m jus And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie not that they may be made hereafter but that so soone as men beleeve they are already the Sonnes of God hee gave them this right or priviledge this prerogative dignity or preheminence to bee the Sonnes of God And so Iansenius the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bee rendred not onely fieri to bee made but also esse to be that is now saith hee may bee the sense hee gave them that authority right and dignity ut sint Dei filii that they are the Sonnes of God not onely after but when they doe receive him For of them that receive Christ even by the first degree of faith it is said that they are borne of God 1 Ioh. 5. 1. Whosoever beleeveth that Iesus is Christ is borne of God hee doth not say is in possibility to bee hereafter but hee speaketh in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee is already borne of God and in this very place Ioh. 1. 12 13. they that beleeve in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are borne of God For indeed regeneration in order of nature though not in time goeth before faith which the Spirit when hee doth regenerate us worketh in us Iansenius well observeth that the parts of this text understood according to Bellarmines sence cannot well stand together that those who are said to have received Christ should have power given them wherby they may be made the Sonnes of God For if they have received him they are already the Sonnes of God and need not to bee made Sonnes of God And on the contrary if they are in possibility to be made Sons then now they are not and if they be not Sonnes then they have not yet received him And further he observeth that of them who are here said to have power given them to be the Sons of God in the next verse it is said that they are born of God Besides those who have not yet received Christ by faith are notwithstanding in possibility to be made the Sons of God whiles they are capable of faith and are in possibility to beleeve The place to which he referreth us is 1 Ioh. 2. 19. Ye know that hee who worketh righteousnesse is borne of God from whence this may be gathered that working of righteousnesse is an evident signe or marke of him that is borne of
have thereby not onely remission of sinnes but also the inheritance or at least the right and title to it in respect whereof it is said in the Scriptures of so many as truely beleeve that wee are saved Ephes. 3. 5 8. that we are passed from death to life and that we now have eternall life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 47. 1 Ioh. 5. 12 13. And in this respect eternall life is our inheritance which Christ hath purchased â—…or us And according to this tenure Christ will put us in possession thereof at the last Day when hee shall say unto us Come yee blessed of my Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world Matth. 25. 34. for you I say who before the beginning of the world were in Christ elected to be heires of this kingdome which is not to he attained unto by any purchase or merits of ours but shall bee given us as an inheritance intended from the beginning and prepared for the elect for whom Christ by his merits hath purchased it § VIII Now to those who by Gods speciall grace doe beleeve in Christ and by faith receive him by whom so received they are justified and adopted and by their justification and adoption are in such â—…ort entituled to this kingdome as heires apparent thereof that they are allready said to bee saved and to be set in heavenly places with Christ to these I say that they might be fitted and prepared for this inheritance unto which no uncleane thing can come hâ—…e hath in the covenant of grace freely and out of his undeserved mercie promised the grace of sanctification by his holy Spirit whereby wee are enabled according to the measure of grace received to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him And to the end that we might be moved to performe the dueties of sanctification hee doth not onely in his word seconded and made effectuall by his Spirit invite by exhortations and precepts to these dueties but also that hee might encourage us thereunto in his redoubled and multiplied mercies he hath promised not only the blessings of this life unto us but also eternall life it selfe as a gracious reward of our piety and obedience Here therefore in admiration of Gods bounty towards us we have just cause to exclaime with Augustine O the great goodnesse of God to whom when in respect of our condition we ought to render unto him the duties of obedience as servants to our Lord and God as subjects to the Almighty as captives saved to our redeemer he doth promise unto us the rewards of friendship that hee might draw from us the dueties of service which wee doe owe unto him It was of Gods free grace that hee elected any of us that being elected hee called us that being called and endued with faith hee justifieth and adoptetâ—… us and thereby giveth us right to his kingdome it was also of his free grace that to them whom hee redeemeth and justifieth hee hath promised to bestow his graces upon them whereby they are enabled to serve him in holinesse and righteousnesse and are fitted for his owne kingdome But this is a multiplication of his grace upon us that to encourage us to the Practice of Piety whereby wee are fitted for the kingdome of heaven he doth promise to reward our good works with everlasting happinesse and in the end doth crowne his owne blessings with blessednesse which though hee bee pleased for our encouragement to call a reward yet is it not deserved by us but freely bestowed by him as his free gift granted unto us in Christ before all times as our inheritance purchased by Christ as his bountifull reward of his owne gifts which as hee freely promiseth so in his good time hee freely bestoweth as his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is free gift § IX To this purpose let us consider the Lords dealing with Abraham to whom the Lord at his first comming towards the Land of promise made divers gracious promises which afterwards hee often repeated But when upon that Commandement of tryall to offer up his onely sonne Abraham had by Gods speciall grace notably approved his faith and obedience hereupon the Lord doth sweare that he will bestow upon him the things which before hee had promised as the reward of that his obedience for so hee saith because thou hast done this thing and againe because thou hâ—…st obeyed my voice Can any man hereupon inferre that Abraham by his obedience had deserved these promises which God long before had made unto him and oftentimes repeated Nothing lesse so God in his eternall Counsell hath to the Elect designed eternall life as his free gift by Christ Christ by his merits hath purchased it to bee our inheritance God hath graciously promised to bestow freely this inheritance on them that beleeve in Christ when as therefore God doth promise to reward our piety with eternall life wee may not thinke that by our piety it is deserved which God long before had decreed and promised and Christ our Saviour had purchased for us But though it bee a reward yet it is a most free and undeserved reward § X. When the Papists therefore object that if eternall life be the reward of our obedience then our obedience doth deserve it I answere first thou canst deserve nothing at Gods hand by that which he hath freely given and much lesse that which hee freely bestoweth on thee Secondly if thou shouldest doe all that is required of thee thou couldest deserve nothing thereby for where is debt and duty there is no merit Luk. 17. 10. Thirdly we doe not all that is commanded but come short of our duty and that which we doe is unperfect and defective in respect of manner and measure and therefore in justice deserveth punishment rather than reward and consequently the reward when it is given is to bee ascribed to Gods undeserved mercie and not to our merit Fourthly Sanctification and the duties thereof are not causes of Salvation and therefore in serie causarum in the chaine of the causes of Salvation Rom. 8. 30. they are left out and where they are mentioned they are inserted not as a cause of Salvation but either as the way unto it Ephes. 2. 10. or as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved or as the evidences according to which God will judge As marks I say for they are occulta praedestinationis indicia futurae faelicitatis praesagia as Bernard speaketh Our Saviour setting downe the end of the ministery of the Gospell saith that a man being thereby called may by faith obtaine remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified Act. 26. 18. so also Act. 20. 32. § XI And thus are wee to expound many Testimonies of Scripture as speaking of notes which the Papists expound as speaking of causes Thus Rom. 8. 16 17. The
that unto salvation contrary to the Lutherans who deny good workes to be necessary to salvation and againe we have that patience is necessary not onely in respect of presence but also of relation to salvation that they may receive the promise Answ. Hee hath not here the terme Necessary but in the vulgar translation the phrase in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opus habetis you have need of patience which phrase is often used in the Scriptures to signifie things usefull or needfull without any shew or colour of signification implying the necessity of efficiency as Matth. 6. 8. Your father knoweth whereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you have need the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath need of the Asse and her colt Matth. 21. 3. Buy those things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof we have need against the feast Ioh. 13. 29. c. But wee grant that patience is a necessary vertue and that also to salvation yea but It is necessary saith he with relation to salvation for so he saith that you may receive the promise Ridiculous for how can it bee necessary to salvation without some relation to it But every relation is not causall or importing a cause as in those examples which he alleageth Meate is necessary that we may be nourished c. But many times the relation is of other arguments as of meanes and helpes and such other things without which the thing desired cannot well be had as the Asse and her colt were needfull for Christ going to Ierusalem Shooes or bootes are needfull for him that travaileth And such is the relation of the way to the journies end Hee therefore that would goe to heaven had need to goe the way which leadeth to it that is the way of good workes which God hath prepared for us to walke in them And that is the meaning of this place yee have need of patience as of a necessary fruit of faith that having by faith runne the race that is set before you viz. Of patience you may come to the end of your faith which is the salvation of your soules § IV. His second testimony 1 Tim. 2. 14 15. The woman being deceived was in the transgression But shee shall be saved by bearing of children if shee continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety Where saith hee perseverance not onely in faith but in faith love sanctification and sobriety is put as necessary to salvation and as a certaine condition without which the woman cannot bee saved Answ. All this we grant but Conditio sine qua non is no cause nor doth import any efficiency If hee would have taken hold of any thing in this Text as implying efficiencie hee should rather have urged the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per filiorum generationem by childe-bearing as it is better translated than by bearing of children to avoid ambiguity because it is said in the words following if they shall continue which is not to bee understood of the children but of the woman that is to say the sexe which being a word collective signifying a multitude is per synthesin joyned to a verbe of the plurall as turbaruunt As if childe-bearing were a cause or had some relation of efficiency to salvation which notwithstanding is so farre from being in it selfe a cause of salvation that it was inflicted upon that sexe as a curse Howbeit to the faithfull the nature of it as of all other afflictions which in themselves be evill is changed and they sanctified to them as the strait way or as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a way of affliction by which they are to come to heaven In such places therefore though the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which many times importeth a cause bee used yet not the cause but sometimes the way is signified and sometimes the estate The way as Acts 14. 22. Paul and Barnabas confirming the soules of the Disciples and exhorting them to continue in the faith affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through many aflictions wee must enter into the Kingdome of God Not that afflictions or the patient bearing of them is the cause of salvation as the Papists would collect out of some other places but that afflictions patiently borne are the way to it The estate as Rom. 4. 11. Abraham the father of all that beleeve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being in uncircumcision So in this place as Beza hath well observed where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And him doth Bellarmine follow This is to bee noted saith hee that per by the bearing of children is put for in For it was not the Apostles meaning that procreation of children is a cause of salvation but that a woman in the state of marriage or in the state of childebearing shall bee saved if shee abide in the faith c. § V. His third Testimony Phil. 2. 12. With feare and trembling worke your salvation Surely saith hee if good actions worke salvation they are necessary not onely by way of presence but also of efficiency Answ. Very true But where doth the Apostle say that good actions doe worke salvation Hee exhorteth indeed the Philippians that they should worke or rather worke out their salvation not that they are the Authours or Workers of it for salvation and every degree thereof is the worke of God We are his workemanship even in respect of our spirituall life He hath made us and not we our selves He worketh all our workes in us wee are not able to thinke a good thought as of our selves but as it followeth in the next words God worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure And we are to observe that this exhortation is directed to the Saints at Philippi in whom God had begun this good worke As therefore God himselfe having begun this worke would as the Apostle saith finish it or bring it to perfection so the Apostle exhorteth them who had entred into the course of salvation that they should goe on in the same course cooperating with God and accomplishing their sanctification in the feare of God as the Apostle elsewhere speaketh § VI. His fourth Testimony 2 Cor. 7. 10. For the sorrow that is according to God worketh penance unto salvation that is stable Here also wee see saith hee the respect of efficiency For sorrow worketh penance penance worketh stable salvation For sorrow doth truly worke in a man penance that is detestation of sinne and a purpose to avoid sinne Therefore penance also it selfe dâ—…th truly worke stable salvation and is therefore necessary not oneâ—… in regard of presence but as a cause Answ. It is true that godly sorrow or the Spirit of God by it worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentance never to be repented of even repentance unto salvation But it is not said that
as the servants of sinne in whom sin reigneth yet they are penitent and beleeving sinners in whom sinne remainteh who often sinne through humane frailty There is no man that sinneth not saith Salomon yea there is not a righteous man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not in many things we saith Iames the just doe offend all If we say that wee have not sinned or that wee have no sinne saith the most holy Apostle Saint Iohn wee deceive our selves we make him a lyer and there is no truth in us And therefore desperate againe is Bellarmines assertion that whosoever is justified or regenerated sinneth not that is never sinneth and on the other side whosoever sinneth is not a man regenerate nor justified which is to exclude all men from Iustification and consequently from Salvation § XVI And thus have I answered Bellarmines arguments concerning the possibility of the Law Now it may be expected that I should propound and mainetaine ours But this taske I have already performed in handling the third question of this controversie concerning the matter of our justification where among many other arguments proving that we are not justified by any righteousnes inherent in us or performed by us but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him we used this for one By what righteousnesse we are justified the Law is satisfied By Christs righteousnesse alone the Law is satisfied and not by that which is inherent in us or performed by us And this assumption wee prove because wee are not able to sati fie the Law neither in respect of the Commandement it being by reason of the flesh impossible unto us nor in respect of the penalty which cannot be satisfied by us but with endlesse torment So that as I said before all this discourse of the possibilitie of the Law is nothing but a defence against a piece of one of our arguments Now I should follow him to the second point which hee propounded to prove that the workes of the righteous are simply and absolutely just and after their manner perfect Which may also seeme to be an answere to another piece of our argument For that righteousnesse by which wee are justified is perfect such onely is the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him such is not that which is inherent in us as the habituall or performed by us as the actuall Bellarmine therefore in opposition to that breach concerning perfect actuall righteousnesse propounded the proofe of this point But that our best righteousnesse is unperfect and stained with the flesh I have fully proved before and have answered all the arguments which Bellarmine produceth here in my fourth Booke whereunto I referre the reader Here onely I signifie againe that Bellarmine falleth very short in his proofes for where he should prove that the workes of the faithfull are simply and absolutely just and perfect as hee propounded the question hee now seemeth to prove this that the good workes of the righteous are truely good which we deny not § XVII Yes but you Protestants will they say doe teach that the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes c. Ans. We doe not say that their good workes as namely their prayer or their almes c. are sinnes but that in them they being otherwise good there are some imperfections and staines which are sinnes in respect whereof the faithfull man in doing that which is good sinneth according to that Eccl. 7. 20. We doe confesse that the duties which the faithfull performe are good workes and so called in the Scriptures though not purely and perfectly good but having their imperfections and being stained with the flesh Even as we call a man regenerated a just or a good man though he be not perfectly just being partly flesh and partly spirit Thus a vessell wherein there is wax mixed with hony before it be clarified is truly called a vessell of hony though not sinceri mellis of pure or sincere honey A cup of wine wherein is a mixture of some water with wine is truely called a cup of wine though not vini meraci of pure wine In like manner a wedge of gold wherein there is some drosse is truely called a wedge of gold though not of pure gold An heape of corne in the floore wherein there is perhaps as much chaffe as wheat is truly called an heape of wheat A field wherein are tares and other weeds as well as corne is notwithstanding called a corne field the denomination being taken from the better part Verily whiles we live in this world we are as gold wherein there is much drosse and never are fully refined untill wee are to bee translated into the celestiall house of God Whiles we are in the Church militant as it were in Gods floore we are mingled with much chaffe and are never perfectly cleansed from the chaffe of our corruptions untill we are to be translated into the Lords Granaries And such as wee are such also are our actions such as the tree is such is the fruit But if hee will prove that men are justified by their workes hee must prove not onely that they are truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that some of their workes are truely and purely good but that all their workes are truely and perfectly and not that onely but also perpetually good For if any of his workes bee sinnes he cannot be justified by his workes But this can never be proved Neither doth hee goe about to prove that all the actions of justified men are good but some onely and these not purely and perfectly but truely good To which purpose he spendeth three whole Chapters which I have fully answered in my fourth Booke CHAP. VIII Whether good Workes doe justifie Bellarmines proofe but especially that Testimony of Saint Iames Chapter 2. fully discussed and clared § I. AFter so many wandrings Bellarmine at length commeth to make good his fifth Argument which he propounded to prove that faith alone doth not justifie because good workes doe also justifie though here as I have noted this Argument is brought in to prove the truth of actuall righteousnesse The Title of this Chapter is that good workes are not onely just but that also they doe justifie In stead whereof he presently propoundeth this assertion to be proved that by good workes a just man is more justified and made more just But this is not the Question For we doe confesse that a man already justified before God by the practise of good works increaseth in righteousnesse inherent and is made more holy and just The thing which we deny is this that good workes doe not concurre with faith unto the act of iustification before God as any cause thereof Against this assertion he ought to have disputed if he would seeme to contradict us But he hath altered the question because he is not able to
causa siâ—…e qâ—… nâ—…n For as the Apostle saith without holinesse no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. And for this cause we seriously exhâ—…rtall men who professe themselves to beleeve and to be iustified by faith to be careful that they may be precedents of good works for these are good and profitable and necessary as I shewed before when I propounded those arguments which wee doe use to move men unto good workes So much of his first testimony § XIX To that place of Saint Iames he addeth sixe other testimonies to which a short answer will suffice To the first out of Eccles. 18. 21 I have fully answered in the first controversie 2. His second testimony is Rom. 6. 19. As you have exhibited your members to serve uncleannessâ—… and iniquity unto iniquity so now exhibit your members to serve justice unto sanctification Where unto sanctification doth not signifie to get the first holinesse sor he speaketh to them who were holy and just but to increase sanctification But that by sanctification is meant justification and by sanctity justice it is plaine by the antithesis for he opposeth sanctification to iniquity His argument is thus framed Sanctification may and must bee increased by good workes which is proved by this text and not denyed by us Iustification is sanctification And that he proveth because what is opposed to iniquity is justification sanctification is here opposed to iniquity Therefore here sanctification signifieth justification Ans. That justification and sanctification are by no means to be confounded I proved at large in the first question for this is the source of all their errours in the doctrine of justification The Apostle doth carefully distinguish them For having in the former chapters treated of justification by faith without works that men should not abuse that doctrine to licentiousnesse of life in this and the next chapter he treateth of sanctification shewing in this chapter that sanctification is a necessary companion of justification And therefore exhorteth those that are justifiâ—… to the dueties of sanctification The abuse he preventeth vers 1. and 15. for wheras he had taught in the doctrine of justification that where sinne abounded grace did superabound he maketh this objection what then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound God forbid So againe by Iustification we are freed from the curse of the Law and from the rigour and terrour or dominion it what then shall we sin because wee are not under the Law but under Grace God forbid The unseparable conjunction of these two benefits is shewed by the Sacrament of Baptisme for as it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith unto us being baptized into the remission of sins so it is the laver of regeneration wherin as the Apostle saith we are baptized into Christs death and resurrection that as he dyed so we should dye unto sin and as he rose againe never to dye any more so wee should arise from the grave of sinne never to dye any more for how should they that are dead to sinne live any more therein And hereupon followeth his exhortation that we should not let sinne reigne in us nor give our members as instruments of unrighteousnes unto sin c. And as he doth dehort us from suffering sinne to relgne in us so he assureth the faithfull that sinne shall no more haue dominion over them because they are not under the Law but under grace and having prevented the abuse of that doctrine vers 15. he reneweth both his dehortation from suffering sinne to reigne in them because if it did reigne in them they must needes be the servants of it when as in their redemption they were freed from the bondage of sinne that they might become the servants of righteousnesse and also his exhortation vers 19. that they would yeeld their members as seruants to holinesse c. To his reason that by sanctification here is meant justification because it is opposed to iniquity I answere that both justification and sanctification are opposed to sinne and iniquity but with this difference In sin there are two things the guilt and the corruption or pollution By justification which is opposed to accusing and condemning Rom. 8. 33. wee are freed from the guilt of sin and damnation by our sanctification which is opposed to pollution wee are freed in some measure from the corruption that it is to say from the dominion of sinne § XX. His third testimony is 2 Cor. 7. 1. where the Apostle exhorteth that having these promises of our justification and adoption chap. 6. 16 28 wee should cleanse our selves from all pollution of the flesh and spirit perfecting or accomplishing our sanctification in the feare of God The Apostle doth not exhort us unto justification for that is never done in all the Scriptures but being justified and adopted wee are exhorted with our justification and adoption to joyne the dueties of sanctification and therein to grow and increase untill wee come to a perfect man in Christ. § XXI His fourth testimony 2 Cor. 9. 10. he will multiply your seed and will augment the increases of the fruits of our justice Where we are taught saith he that by almâ—…s-giving our wealth is diminished but our jâ—…stice is increased Answ. We answere that by the Christian practice of vertues our justice but not our justification is increased Howbeit the Apostle doth not speake of justice it selfe to be increased but of the fruites of justice by justice in this place meaning as vers 9. and Matth. 6. 1. liberalitie in almes-giving and by the fruites of righteousnesse almes Unto which that they might bee more and more enabled the Apostle prayeth that their seed may be multiplyed meaning thereby their store which in the faithfull is as it were the seed of almes that having alwayes all sufficiency in all things they might abound to every good worke being enriched in every thing to all bountifulnesse veâ—…s 8 11. so farre is the Apostle from signifying that by their almes-giving their wealth should be diminished § XXII His fifth testimony Ioh. 14. 23. If any love me hee will keepe my word and my Father will love him This new living after the fulfilling of the Commandements what is it sath he but the increase of love and thereby of righteousnesse which by observing the Law of God is required Answ. Wee confessè that by the observance of the Law of God our love of God is exercised and our righteousnesse increased though it be not proved out of this place For this love after the keeping of Christs word here mentioned is Gods love to us not ours to him § XXIII His sixth testimony is Apoc. 22. 11. hee that is just let him be justified yet Answ. The word yet or still doth not signifie increase but continuance or if increase were meant it could not bee understood of the righteousnesse of justification but of
from the merit of Christ. This assumption may thus bee demonstrated That which a man hath already he needeth not to merit For to merit is to obtaine by desert that right which a man hath not yet Nullus meretâ—…r saith Thomas quod â—…am habet and againe meritum non est nisi ejus quod nondâ—…m habetur Therefore the faithfull if they have already right to Gods kingdome they need not merit it or if they must merit then have they not as yet that right by Christ but must purchase it by their owne deserts which is greatly to derogate from the merits of Christ. But the faithfull before they produce any good works have right to Gods kingdome Nâ—…m hoc ipsâ—… saith Bellarmine quòd incipiâ—… esse filiâ—… Dei 〈◊〉 jus habere ad hareditatem falicitatis â—…ternae Rom. 8. 17. Gâ—…l 4. 7. 〈◊〉 â—…utem esse filii Dei â—…ntequam incipiâ—…mus benè operari Igitur jus habemuâ—… ad aternam bareditatem per gratiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 benè operari For in that very respect that wee bâ—…ginne to bee the sonnes of God wee beginne to have right to the inheritance of the eternà ll feliciâ—…y Rom. 8. Gâ—…l 4. Now wee beginne to bee the sonnes of God before wee beginne to bring forth good workes Merâ—…it igitur Christus saith hee Christ therefore merited the inheritance it selfe whiles he merited the grace of adoption and againe unto him who is the Sonne of God by grace the inheritance is due by the right of adoption before all workes In which place Bellarmine teacheth another point of doctrine whereby is excluded the merit of good workes Ex eo quod aliquis saith hee est filius Dei per gratiam meretur ex condigno haereditatem vitae aeternae sine alio pacto sed merito personae non merito operis By this that any man is the sonne of God by grace hee doth merit condignely the inheritance of everlasting life without any other covenant for if sonnes then heires but hee doth merit it by the merit of his person not by the merit of his worke what needeth then the childe of God bring forth good workes with purpose to merit heaven by them seeing before hee produceth any good workes hee hath right unto the kingdome of heaven by the merit of his person in that hee is the Sonne of God Why forsoooth as it is an inheritance hee meriteth it by the merit of his person but as it is a mercenary reward or stipend or wages hee must earne it by the merit of his workes which is absurd for if it bee a free gift intended in our election without any relation to our desert a free inheritance purchased for us by Christ and freely promised to all that beleeve and free reward of our obedience which is therefore by Augustine and others called Gratia because it is freely given it cannot without absurdity be made the mercenary reward or wages of hired servants Thirdly to attribute that honour to every member of the body which is peculiar to Christ alone the Head is to derogate from the honour of Christ our Head But to merit eternall life is an honour peculiar to Christ alone our Head For eternall life in heaven being of infinite worth as being the eternall fruition of God who is infinite cannot be condignely merited but by that which is of infinite value and price Such are the merits of Christ and of him alone such neither ours nor any meere creatures are or can be For the infinite merit of eternall life dependeth on the infinitenesse of the person who meriteth it such an one is Christ such are none of his members Therefore to Christ alone it belongeth to merit heaven for his members and not to his members who are not to merit but by faith to apprehend the merit of their Head Fourthly that which taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of salvation doth greaâ—…ly detract from the al-sufficiency of Christs merits The Popish doctrine concerning the merit of workes taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of our salvation Therefore it doth greatly derogate from the al-sufficient merit of Christ. Fifthly they who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne good workes and to salve the matter doe faine that Christ hath merited for their good workes that they may condignely merit heaven doe indeed robbe Christ of the honour of meriting for us eternall life and doe arrogate it unto themselves Thus doe the Papists who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne works and to bleare the eyes of the simple they faine that Christ merited for our workes that they might be meritorious of eternall life for neither by the Scriptures nor Fathers nor any sound reason doe they so much as goe about to prove this fiction this novelty Christ did not save us to make us our owne Saviours but in his owne person and as the Apostle speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by himselfe he performed the worke of our redemption and the merit of our salvation Object 1. But you will say did Christ merit for us that we should be idle I answere wee are the Workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath preordained that we should walke in them not to merit by them but to glorifie God by them to testifie our thankefulnesse and to make our calling and elâ—…ction sure and for many other reasons which I delivered when I proved the necessity of good workes Object 2. It is not fit that Christs merits should bee applyed to men without workes Answ. The merits of Christ are applyed to us that is wee are justified by them without workes as the Apostle teacheth howbeit in them that are justified good workes doe follow but not as causes of justification or as merits of salvation Object 3. But it is necessary we should be like unto Christ. Answ. Wee must bee like to him in the graces of sanctification which we receive from his fulnesse even grace for grace Rom. 8. 29. 1 Ioâ—…n 3. 3. 1 Pet. 1. 16. But wee cannot bee like unto him in office of Mediation or in the power of meriting which is proper to the Head § III. This argument that the doctrine of merits is derogatory to the al-sufficient merits of our onely Saviour is worthy to bee insisted upon and defended against all exceptions and cavils of the Papists which indeed are many but may be reduced to these three heads for either they serve to shew that their doctrine doth not derogate from Christs merits or that their doctrine setteth forth the glory of Christs merit no lesse than ours or that wee by denying their doctrine doe extenuate such is their impudency the merit of Christ. To the first purpose Bellarmine hath foure evasions The first that The merits of just men are not opposite to the merits of Christ but spring from them And what commendation soever our
worke but to give them what to him should seeme just according to the Covenant of grace which promiseth the reward of keeping the whole Law to them that truely beleeve who expecting reward not according to their owne merit but according to the grace and good pleasure of God in whom they â—…trusted were of the last made the first So farre is this parable from proving thatet ernall life is given to men according to the merit of their workes that it proveth that the reward which is given is freely given and that those who seeke â—…o obtayne eternall life by their owne desert doe misse of it § VIII But here Bellarmine cavilleth with the answeres of Melancthon and Calvin who as is it seemeth understanding as the most doe by the day-pennie the equall reward of eternall life doe answere First that it may be called merces a reward in regard of the promise which it selfe is free of that which is freely given and therefore is a reward of grace and not of merit Secondly because it is the reward of the inheritance which though given in Gods purpose before all times to those whom hee hath elected in Christ without respect of workes yet to draw us unto obedience and to fit us for our inheritance he hath promised it as a free reward of our faith and obedience To the first Bellarmine replyeth that the reward is given to the workes which is the condition of the promise and not to the promise it selfe I rejoyne that it is given to the works according to the promise that is as a free reward To the second hee saith that eternall is more properly called reward than inheritance c. I answere primarily it is the inheritance intended before all time in Christ without respect of workes and in the fulnesse of time purchased by Christ and so promised to all the faithfull and yet in a secondary respect that we might be allured to obedience and to good workes by which we might be fitted for that heavenly inheritance into which no uncleane thing can enter it is also promised as a gracious reward freely given of God not merited by us Even as a father having adopted a sonne thereby intending to him and indeed entitling him to his inheritance should upon his obedience either already performed or to be performed promise to make him his heire In this case who seeeth not that although the sonne come to his fathers patrimonie both as his inheritaâ—…ce and as a reward Yet the prime title is the right of inheritâ—…nce the second is the title of free donation But of merit though the sonne behave himselfe never so well no title at all Neither is that the more honourable title as Bellarmine here absurdly avoucheth unlesse that we rre to thinke that the mercenary title of an hired servant is more honourable than the hereditary title of a sonne For this is all the honour which by their doctrine accrueth to the children of God that they turne the adopted sonnes of God into mercenary servants and the inheritance of sonnes into the wages of servants But of this heretofore § IX Others perceiving that the equality of reward rendred to labours so unequall as of twelve houres and of one cannot stand with justice if rendred as in justice due for it is just where the reward is of duety that the greater labour should receive the greater reward howbeit as you heard out of Ferus where all is of grace no wrong is done for may I not doe with mine what pleaseth mee saith the Master of the vineyard have sought out another evasion That they who were called at the eleventh houre and so wrought but one houre laboured as much as the first who laboured all the day which is not worth the confuting For if in one houre they laboured as much as the other in twelve then deserved they as great a reward at the least Why then did their fellow labourers expect a greater reward Why did they murmure at their Lords unequall dealing And why did not the Lord himselfe plead that equall reward was to bee given to equall labours â—… Why did he plead his right to doe with his owne what he pleaseth â—… but that he would have it understood that the reward by him given was not of duety but of grace not rendred as a debt out of duety but given as a free reward out of his owne bounty and as Bellarmine himselfe saith non ex justitia sed ex liberalitate This fiction therefore never heard of before was by Maldonate devised for a poore shift in a desperate cause § X. Bellarmines second argument is taken from those places wherein it is taught that the heavenly reward is given to men according to the measure and proportion of their workes and labour His argument is thus to be framed What is given according to the measure and proportion of workes that the workes doe merit Eternall life is given according to the measure and proportion of workes therefore workes doe merit eternall life The proposition he proveth because if the reward be given according to the proportion of workes then there is regard had in giving that reward not onely of the promise or of the bounty of the rewarder but also of the dignity of the workes The assumption he confirmâ—…th by divers texts of Scripture as Psalm 62. 12. thou shalt render to every man according to his workes Mat. 16. 27. The sonne of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his Angels and then he shall render to every one according to their workes Luk. 6. 38. with the same measure that you mete it shall be measured to you againe Rom. 2. 6. who will render to every man according to his workes 1 Cor. 3. 8. every man shall receive his reward according to his owne labour Gal. 6. 7. what things a man shall sâ—…w those also he shall reape Apoc. 22. 12. Behold I come quickly and my reward is with me to render to every man according to his workes § XI Before I apply mine answer to the parts of his Syllogisme I am to propound a twofold distinction concerning the reward of our inheritance First that it may bee considered either as our inheritance or as our reward Secondly that it may be considered in respect either of the substance of it as it is eternall life or of the degrees of glory therein As it is our inheritance as it is eternall life it is one and the same equally given to all that aâ—…e saved and not given unequally according to the proportion of our virtues or workes It is one and the same first in respect of the same meritorious cause which is the merit of Christ. For as by his righteousnesse we are equally justified so by his merits we are equally saved equally made partakers of that inheritance which by the same price of his mâ—…rits is equally purchased for all that
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
Christ will judge And thus his reasoâ—… standeth those who are blessed of God that is justified for whom this kingdome waâ—… prepared and this iâ—…heritance purchased they are to inheriâ—… this kingdome But you are such as appeareth by the fruits for your excercising the workes of charity and mercy towards my poore members and that for my sake is a plaine evidence of your election justification and redemption and accordiâ—…g to this evidence I judge of you come therefore inherit the kingdome c. But to this allegation I have answered twice before The second place is out of the same Chapter Verse 21. In which there is no causall particle eâ—…pressed in the originall neither is it any desert but duety of the servant to be faithfull neither any debt or duety of his Lord but his houâ—…y and largesse in rewarding of his fidelity in few things with making him ruler over many things The third place is Apoc. 7. 14. Thesâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…hey who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are 〈◊〉 the Throne of God In alleaging whereof Bellarmine leaveth out that which is most maâ—…riall that they had washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lambe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore they are before the Throne of God which sheweth that they stood before the Throne of God not in their owne merits but in the merits of Christ by which they were justified That which is said of their tribulation doth not insinuate their desert as though thereby they had deserved to bee before the Throne of God but the order of their afflictions going before their glorification and the consecution of eternall life following thereupon for as it is said of our Saviour Phil. 2. that hee having humbled himselfe unto death the Lord did therefore exalt him Verse 9. and Luke 24. 26. that hee was first to suffer those things and so to enter into his glory so of the faithfull it is likewise said that through much tribulation they must enter into the kingdome of God Act. 14. 22. And this is the answere which Calvin giveth to some of these places that they signifie ordinem consequentiae magis quam causam For whom God haâ—…h appointed to salvation for them he hath prepared the way of obâ—…dience and patience that therein they make walke towards their Countrey which is â—…eaven good workes therefore and afflictions are not the cause of salvation but the way to it § XVI But saith Bellarmine Christ could not more plaiâ—…ely have expressed that good workes are the causâ—…s of salvation than when hee said for when I was hungry you did c. especiâ—…lly seeing hee â—…seth the same forme of fpeech against the wicked for I was hungry and you did not c. In which the cause of damnation is noted I answere that our Saviour if hee had meant that good workes are the meriâ—…orious cause of salvation hee was able to have expressed it in as plaine termes as Bellarmine dothBut his intent in these reasons which hee giveth was not to set downe the causes of salvation or damnation but the notes and markes of them who are to bee saved or condemned as the evidence according to which hee pronounceth sentence Yea but Bellarmine will prove that the particles for and because are truely causall By what reason Forsooth by a circular augmentation becâ—…se good workes are causes And how did hee prove good workes to be causes Because these particles are causall To prove that workes be causes meaning meritorious causes he alleageth three Texts of Scripture 2 Cor. 4. 17. Gal. 6. 8. Phil. 2. 12. Two whereof I discussed before in their due place where he endevoured to prove that good workes aâ—…e necessary necessitate efficiâ—…tiae as causes of salvation viz. 2 Cor. 4. 17. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 7. and of this eighth booke cap. 2. § 21. and Phil. 2. 12. lib. 7. cap. 5. §5 That of Gal. 6. 8. he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape life everlasting maketh against him rathâ—… than for him For as in the naturall harvest the increase is not to be ascribed to the ploughing and sowing but to the blessing of God so much more in the spirituall § XVII But that these particles are not alwaies truely and properly causall Calvin sheweth by a notable instance God had promised Abraham when hee first called him out of Vr that in him that is in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed This promise the Lord often renewed as appeareth in his story which againe hee confirmeth by oath Gen. 22. 16. 18. When Abraham had upon tryall in an excellent manner and measure approved both his faith and obedience unto God By my selfe have I sworne saith the Lord that because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thy sonne thine onely sonne in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed becausâ—… thou hast obeyed my voice Here both in the beginning of the oath and in the end the causall particle is used shall wee therefore say that Abrahâ—…ms obedience did merit that all the nations of the earth that is Abraham himselfe and all the faithfull in all nations should bee blessed in the promised seed God had long before made this gracious promise to Abraham without respect of this or any other his workes and had this act of obedience never beene the promise of the promised seed in his posterity would have beene performed so that the grace and love of God was the onely cause why hee promised to send his owne Sonne who should take on him the seed of Abraham and not Abrahams obedience All that can truely bee said is that upon this obedience God tooke occasion to renew his promise and to confirme it by oath for the further confirmation of Abrahams faith So that his obedience was so farre from being the cause of the thing promised as it was but the occasion of renewing the promise But Bellarmine in this example mentioneth onely that inferiour promise concerning the multiplication of Abrahams seed and saith that as God did promise it so he would have him to merit it by his good workes even so the Lord having predestinated all the Elect unto Glory yet his pleasure is that they should attaine unto it by their owne merits Which cleane overthroweth the grace of election which which was without respect of workes and also of salvation For if our election or salvation be of workes or merits then is it not of grace And if this answere of Bellarmine be good then may it in like manner bee applyed to that part of the Oath concerning the promised seed namely that Abraham by his obedience had merited that in the promised seede the faithfull of all nations should bee blessed which is no better than blasphemy It is true that God hath elected us that wee might bee holy and that by the
5 9 19. p Joâ—… 14. 2. q Ephes. 4. 8. r Ioh. 14 3. s Ephes. 1. 14. Luk. 21. 28. Bellâ—…rmines second cause why Christ is said to be our righteousnesse because he satisfied for us t Epist. 190. Bellarmines confession overthroweth the popish doctrine of iustification Arg. 4. because we are iustified by the bloud of Christ and by his obedience Arg. 5. because by Christs righteouinesse out sinnes are covered u ad Diognâ—…m * De iustif l. 2. cap. 11. Bellarmines first answere His second answere Reply to Bellarmines answere Conclusion a De iustif lib. 2. cap. 3. Bellarmines first allegation out of Rom. 5. 17. 18 19. b Lib. 2. c. 5. §. 1. c Ibid. §. â—… 3 c d Non in iustitia Adaminobis imputata e In locum Whether Adams sinne bee imputed e Controv. a. de orig peâ—…cat f In Râ—…m 5. in opuse de lapsu â—…ominis orig peccat c. 6. g De amiss gratiae stat pec l. 5. c. 16. h 2 Senâ—… dist 30. i De amiss gratiae 〈◊〉 peccaâ—… l. 5. c. 17. k Ibid. §. itaque l Ibid. c. 18. Reatus cum sit relatio consequens actionem qua ratione fieri potest ut existat in eo qui non est particeps actionis 〈◊〉 sio babitualis nisi precesserit actualiâ—… ne inâ—…elligi quâ—…dem potest m De amissi gratiae sâ—…atu peccat l. 4. c. 10. n Serm. de Dominica 1. poâ—…t octavas Epiphaâ—…iae o De 〈◊〉 st at pecl 4. c. 12. § est alia â—…x Anselm de conceptu c. 7. Virg. 10. ex â—…h in 1. 2. q. 81. art 1. ex Scotâ—… Durando c. in 2. sent dist 51. p Ibid. §. porro vere Whether originall corruptâ—…on be traduced from Adam q De amiss gra statu pec l. 5. c. 17. 〈◊〉 the transgrâ—…ssion be after the same mannâ—…r communicated r De iustif l. 2. c 9 §. Quartum Comparison betwixt thâ—… first and second Adam s Heb. 2. 13. This place alleaged by Bellarmine maketh not for him but most strongly against him Lib. â—… c. 2. § 1. Testimome 2. Rom. 3. 24. t Lib. 2. c. 3. §. 3. Testimonie 3. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Testimony 4. Tit. 3. 5 6 7. u Esfici mereamur * 1 Pet. 3. 21. x Rom. 4. 11. y Rom. 6. 4. 6. z Ephes. 2. 10. a Heb. 12. 14. b Act. 26. 18. Testimonie 5. Heb. 11. c. where some men have been absolutely called iust c Heb. 11. 6. d Act. 15. 9. e Gal. 5. 6. f Iaâ—… 2. 18. Bellarmines obiect that some men have been perfect g 2 Chron. 19. 7. 10. 1â—… h Luk. 1. 20. 62. Bellarmine proveth that they who are said to have been iust were endued with inherent righteousnesse i 1 Iob. 3. 7. k 1 King 3. 6. l Psal. 143. 2. m Rom. 7. 14. 23 Testim 6. Rom. 8. 29. 1 Cor. 15. 49 from whence three reasons are collected The first reason Answ. 1. to the proofe of the proposition n 1 Cor. 15. 49 Answer to the proposition it selfe o 1 Cor. 11. 32. p Deut. 8. 16. q Phil. 1. 29. r 2 Sam. 12. 14. s 2 Cor. 5 17. We doe not bearâ—…the image of Christ in râ—…spect of the righteousnesse of iustification His second reason t Rom. 16. 15. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Phil. 1. 1. 4. 22. 1 Tim. 5. 10. His third reason Bellarmines seventh allegation Rom. 6. 4. 6. u Lib. 2. * Lib. 2. c. 2. §. â—… Bellarmines eighth allegation Such as is our adoption â—… sâ—…ch is our iustification x Lib. 3. c. 5. §. 5. 6. Bellarmines two adoptions As adoption is imputative so iustification y Lib. â—… c. 1. and lib. 2. c. 6. De iustif l. 2. c. 4. Bellarmines arguments proving iudirectly iustification by inherent iustice a Luther onely saith that faith that is Christ apprehended by faith is our righteousnesse â—…nd in the same sence 〈◊〉 that faith is inâ—…puted unto righteousnesse Bellarmines allegation of Gal. 5. 5 6. answered b Iam. 2. 14 â—… His wilfull depraving of Gal. 5. 6. c De iustif l 2. c. 5 Bellarmines corrupt interpretation refuted d Rom. 7. 5. 2 Cor. 1. 6 4. 12. Gal. 5 6. Eph 3. 20. Col 1. 29. 1 Thess. 2. 13. 2 Thess. â—… 7. Iam. â—… â—…6 e Prov. 3. 21. f Summi 1. q. 48. art 5. g â—…â—…im 1. 5. 2 Tim. 1. 5. Rom. 21. 9. Iam. 3 17. h Th ibid. Charity not the forme of faith Of the distinction of faith into 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 In the popish sence it is to be reiected for three reasons i Tit. 1. 16. k 1 Iohn 1. 4 l Iam. 2 14. The second Reason The third Reason De iustif lib. c. 6. Iustificationem nostram non constare sola remissione peccatâ—…rum a â—…ib 2. c. 1. §. Ioan Calvin Transitus à peccaâ—…o ad iustitiam c Bellarm. de iustif l. 2. c. 7. §. quar to c. 10. Deinde c. 5. §. quar to §. quòd verâ—… Bellarmines proofe that iustification con sisteth in renovation The first Rom. 4. 25. He proveth his assumption * This is denied by Cardinall Tolet in Rom. 4. annot 25 Christ. non est traditus propter deâ—…icta tanquam examplar sed tanquam vera satisfactio igitur nec resurrexisse proâ—… ter iustifi cationem dicitur tanquam exemplar sed propter ipsum iustificationem quem non essâ—…mus consecaâ—… nisi surrexisset d Rom. 5. 9. 19. e Rom. 1. 4. f Psal. 2. 7. Heb. 1. 5. Act. 13. 33. g Act. 5. 3. 31. h Rom. 5. 10. i Rom. 8 33 34. Whether renâ—…ssion and renovation be two distinct actions k Phil. 3. 9. Testimonie 2. Rom. 5. 21. l Mat. 6. 33. Testim 3. Rom. 6. 13 Testim 4. Rom. 8. 10. Testim 5. Gal. 3. 21. m Rom. 8 3 4. Testim 6. Eph. 4. 23 24. The testimony of Augustine n Lib. 6. cap. 9. o See to this purpose divers testimonies of Augustine citedby Gratian. Dist. 9. Bellarmines reasons The first His second reason p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 q Rom. 8. 30. r in Psal. 100. s Degratiam lib. arb u Rom. 5. 26. His third reason Testimonies of Fathers * Lib. 2. c. 6. 8 x Lib. 4. cap. 3 §. 5. 16. x Lib. 6. c. 9. z Lib. 7. c. 6 De paritate justitiâ—… Bellarm. de iustif l. 3. c. 16. The calumniation of the Papists All the faithfull equall in righteousnesse iâ—…puted a 2 Pet. 1. 1. b Ambr. lib. 7. in Luc. c. 15. nam undecima conducis bora eqnalem dignaris mercedem solvere â—…qualem mercedem vita groriâ—… c Adv. Jovin lib. 2. d Moral l. 4. c. 42. quia una cunctis erit beatitudo laetitiae quamvis non una sit omnibus sublimitas vitâ—… Bellarmines proofe impertinent The state of the controversie The three first proofes The first a Lib. 1. c. 3. §. 7
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
lively effectuall faith which worketh by love and therefore I say againe this whole dispute of the seven dispositions is meerely impertinent § IV. But some will say doe you require no preparative dispositions going before justification I answer that in adult is we doe but that no way hindereth the truth of our assertion concerning justification by faith alone wee doe confesse that to the begetting of justifying faith preparative dispositions are ordinarily required in adultis in those who be of yeares wrought partly by private education and use of other private meanes as reading meditation conference c. and partly by the publicke ministery both of the Law and of the Gospell by which first our minds are illuminated to know God and our selves and what wee shall bee in Christ if wee beleeve in him Secondly hee mollifieth our hearts and humbleth our soules ordinarily by the ministery of the Law and extraordinarily by afflictions either outward or inward which are the terrours of a distressed conscience by which when the Word will not serve the Lord draweth men as it were with a strong hand that being thus humbled we may become fit auditours of the Gospell In which the Lord to the humbled and prepared soule revealeth his unspeakeable mercies in Christ stirreth us up by the ministers of reconciliation to accept of his mercie in Christ intreating and perswading us in the name of God and in Christs stead that wee would be reconciled unto God The holy Ghost having thus knocked at the doore of our hearts at length in his good time he himselfe openeth our hearts to receive Christ by faith working in our judgments a lively assent to the doctrine of salvation by Christ and by it both an earnest desire in our hearts to be made partakers of Christ which is the desire of application and also in our wils a setled resolution to acknowledge him to be our Saviour and to rest upon him alone for salvation which is the will and purpose of application Having thus received and embraced Christ by a lively assent or beliefe and so having the condition of the promise which is faith in the next place wee proceed to actuall application by speciall faith which is farther to be confirmed by the Sacraments which are the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith and by the practise of piety or leading of a godly life whereby wee are to make as our election and calling so also our justification sure unto us § V. But come we to his argument drawne from the seven preparative dispositions And first for faith he saith he shall not need to prove that it doth justifie because we confesse it but that it doth not justifie alone Answ. That justifying saith which is a grace infused in our regeneration we deny to justifie by way of disposing that faith which goeth before regeneration and is not infused we deny to justifie at all And such is that faith whereof he speaketh and therefore hee reckoneth without his host From our assertion he should rather have concluded thus That which is but a preparative disposition to justification doth not justifie at all that faith which goeth before regeneration is but a preparative disposition to justification as Bellarmine teacheth therefore that faith which goeth before regeneration doth not justifie at all Or thus a preparative disposition to justification doth not justifie but faith as all confesse doth justifie therefore it is not a preparative disposition to justification § VI. Yea but he will prove by authority of Scriptures by testimonies of Fathers and by reason that faith doth not justifie alone because it is but the beginning of justification and therefore other things must accompany and follow it to perfect our justification Answ. That it is the beginning of sanctification and the root of all sanctifying graces I have already confessed But the concurrence both of other inward graces and of outward obedience unto sanctification doth not hinder but that faith doth justifie alone Neither doth faith justifie as the beginning of justification only first because there are no degrees of justification before God for in the first act it is perfect and to that act continued throughout this life faith as I shewed before out of divers of the Fathers sufficeth I say sufficeth to justification and therefore is not the beginning onely but also the continuance and consummation thereof for as in the first act it justifieth so also in the continuance of justification for by it we stand and by it we live and so long as we have faith it is imputed unto us for righteousnesse even from faith to faith as it was to Abraham after he had long continued in the faith § VII His first proofe is Heb. 11. 6. Hee that commeth to God must beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Therefore faith is the first motion of comming to God which wee willingly confesse But he should have done well to have told us what is meant by comming unto God For to come unto Christ is to beleeve in him Ioh. 6. 35 37 44 65. And if that bee the meaning of the holy Ghost in this place then to come unto God is to beleeve in him by speciall faith otherwise the Apostle should enunciate idem per idem And then the meaning is this hee that would beleeve that God is his God and that he will be gracious unto him must first beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Or thus wouldest thou beleeve that Christ is thy Saviour then must thou first beleeve that hee is the Saviour of all that truely beleeve in him Or it may be that the word come in this place is to bee expounded by the word seeking He that will come unto God that is hee that will seeke God must beleeve that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him For these words comming returning seeking which properly betoken the actions of the body are by a Metaphore translated to the actions of the soule whereby is meant sometimes our conversion and turning unto God Deut. 4. 29. 30. 2 Chron. 15. 4. Esa. 9. 13. Hos. 3. 5. 5. 15. cum 6. 1. 7. 10. And if that bee the meaning of this place then nothing else can bee gathered from it but that faith is the beginning of our repentance and turning unto God Sometimes the whole study of piety whereby wee endevour to know God and to serve him 1 Chro. 28. 9. If thou seeke him that is if thou endevour to know and to serve him with an upright heart and with a willing mind 2 Chron. 14. 4. 15. 12. 17. 4. Act. 17. 27. Psal. 119. 2 3. whereupon godly and religious men are said to bee seekers of the Lord Psal. 22. 26. 24. 6. 40. 16. Esa. 51. 1. And thus faith is the beginning of all piety