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
§ 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
arguments of Calvin and Chemnitius defended against Bellarm. The first because iustifying is opposed to condemning lib. 2. cap. 5. § 2. 3 4. Secondly that as the hebrew so the greeke signifieth § 5. Bellarmines proofes that the hebrew word signifieth to make iust by infusion of righteousnesse inherent § 6. 7 8 9 10. The third and fourth concerning the latine word iustificare § II. The use of the latine word in the Fathers § 12. The manifold differences betwixt instification and sanctification Litb 2. cap. 6. Their confounding of iustification and sanctification is the ground both of the Papists calumniations against us lib. 2. cap. 6. § 19. and of their errours in the doctrine of iustification which are pernicious § 20. 21 22. The Papists from iustification exclude remission of sinne lib. 2. cap. 7. § 1. 2. vid. remission The popish distinction of iustification into the first and second lib. 1. cap. 1. § 8. lib. 3. cap. 6. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 3. § 4. 5. cap. 8. § 4. Men are said to be iustified either before God in foro coelesti which properly is iustification or in the court of their owne conscience which is the assurance of iustification lib. 1. cap. 1. § 7. lib. 2. c. 2. § 8. L Law Law of faith and the Law of workes lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6. 7. The difference betweene the Law and the Gospell See Gospell Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law lib. 7. cap. 6. § 3. The Law not possible by reason of the flesh lib. 4. cap. 5. § 3 c. ad finem capitis Bellarmines proofes that the Law is absolutely possible lib. 4. cap. 5. § 5. lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. First by Sciptures testimonies of three sorts I. That the Law is easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4. 7 6 7 8. II. That the law is kept by love lib. 7. cap. 6. § 9. 10 11 12. III. Examples of them that have fulfilled the law § 13. 14 15. iust that they kept the law with a perfect heart and with their whole heart § 15. 16. Secondly by fathers § 17. The difference betweene the Pelagians and Papists not great § 18. His testimonies examined § 19. 20 21. That the Fathers did not meane that the law is absolutely possible § 22. Bellarmines paradox that a man may fulfill the law though he cannot live without sinne § 23. Testimonies of Fathers that the fulfilling of the law is not possible to us § 24. Sixâ—… reasons to the same effect lib. 4. cap. 5. § 6 c. Bellarmines sixe reasons answered lib. 7. cap. 7. I. Because a man may doe more than is commanded § 1. 2 3 4 5 6. II. If the precepts were not possible they would binde no man lib. 7. cap. 7. § 7. 8. III. Then God should bee cruell c. § 9. IV. Then Christ â—…isseth of his end § 10. 11 12. V. They who have the Spirit fulfill the law § 13. VI. Because they sinne not § 14 15. Liberty Christian liberty lib. 7. cap. 4. § 23. Life eternall Life eternall considered by Bellarmine as an inheritance and so due to due to the person by right of adoption and as a reward and so due to workes lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Eternall life promised in three respects lib. 7. cap. 4. § 6. 7 8. lib. 8. cap. 9. § 3. Love Bellarmines fourth disposition to justification lib. 6. cap. 12. M Matoriall The materiall cause of justification Christs righteousnesse lib. 1. cap. 3. Whether Christs passive righteousnesse onely lib. 1. cap. 4. Which is denyed I. Because by it alone the Law is not fulfilled § 2 3. and that is defended against divers exceptions 4. 5. 6 7. II. Because by Adams disobedience imputed to us we were made sinners § 8. III. Because Christs obedience is accepted for us § 9. that Christ obeyed the Law for us § 10. that he did not merit for himselfe § 11. Object If Christ obeyed the Law for us then wee need not § 13. Object 2. If we be justified by the obedience of Christ why needed hee to dye for us § 14. IV. To what end served Christs obedience if wee bee justified onely by his sufferings § 15. V. Because there are two distinct parts of justification § 16. Obiect Then two formall causes of iustification § 17. That instification doth not consist onely in remission of sinne § 18. Obiect Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission § 19. Obiect By it wee are made innocent § 20. Three arguments of I. P. § 21. the arguments of I. F. § 22. 23. Matter of iustification lib. 4. The state of the controversie betweene us and the Papists concerning it lib. 4. cap. 1. § 1. It is the principall question in the whole controversie of iustification wheron therest depend lib. 4. cap. 1. § 2. and is proved by the rest § 3. That we are iustified by Christs righteousnesse and not by inherent proved first ioyntly lib. 4. cap. 1. § 4. I. Because we are iustified by Gods righteousuesse and not by ours lib. 4. cap. 2 Christs righteousnesse is Gods righteousnesse § 2. 3. 4. inherent is ous § 5. the severall parts of inherent righteousnesse are called ours § 6. II. Because by Christs righteousnes we stand iust before God and not by ours § 7. III. Because Christs righteousnesse is perfect and so is not ours § 8. that the righteousnesse of all mortall men is unperfect because are at sinners proved by seven reasons § 9. The question concerning the imperfection of mans inherent righteousnesse further discussed cap. 3. 4. See righteousnesse inherent IV. VVe are iustified by that righteousnesse by which the Law is fully satisfied lib. 4. cap. 5. The righteousnesse of Christ hathfully satisfied the Law § 2. Our righteousnesse cannot satisfie the law § 3. 4. Bellarmines reasons that the law may be fulfilled § 5. V. Because by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by ours we are absolved redeemed reconciled and saved lib. 4. c. 6. VI. Because we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith and not of workes lib. 4. cap. 7. § 1. VII The righteousnesse by which we are iustified is not prescribed in the Law § 2. VIII The righteousnesse whereby wee are iustified satisfieth the iustice of God § 3. IX Because no man is iustified without remission of sinne § 4. X. The true doctrine of iustification ministreth comfort § 5. XI From experience lib. 4. cap. 7. § 6. Severally that we are not iustified by inherent righteousnesse proved by foureteene arguments I. Because it is prescribed in the Law lib. 4. cap. 8. § 1. 2 3 4. II. Because that doctrine confoundeth the Law and the Gospell and maketh void the covenaâ—…t of grace § 5. III. It depriveth men of the chiefe part of christian liberty § 6. IV. Because all men are sinners § 7. V. Because all meâ—… 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 Law aâ—…cursed § 8. VI. Because none doe fulfill the Law § 9.
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
imputed as a full satisfaction for sinne the other by imputation of Christs perfect obedience as a sufficient merit of eternall life by the former we are freed from hell by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven Of them both the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. that we are justified that is absolved from our sinne by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified that is constituted just by his obedience vers 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent saying that there are no parts of justification but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes Indeed if it were the onely matter of justification as some of them teach and the entire formall cause of justification as others avouch of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter I say if both these opinions were true then I would confesse that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne but whiles it is either but the matter as some say or but the forme as others or neither of both as I avouch it is a manifest errour to say that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes Againe in every mutation though it be but relative we must of necessity acknowledge two termes tâ—…rminum à quo terminum ad quem the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice from which terme justification hath its name from a state of death and damnation to a state of life and Salvation But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne but no acceptation as righteous a freedome from hell but no title to heaven To this they answere that to whom sinne is not imputed righteousnesse is imputed and they who are freed from hell are admitted to heaven I doe grant that these things doe alwayes concurre but yet they are not to bee confounded for they differ in themselves and in their causes and in their effects in themselves for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne another thing to be made righteous as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors in their causes for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory sufferings the acceptation as righteous unto life to Christs meritorious obedience In their effects for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell and by imputation of Christs obedience we have right unto heaven § XVII If unto justification there be required besides remission of sinne Imputation of righteousnesse then there are two formall causes of justification Answ. It followeth not for although there bee two tâ—…rmini in this mutation yet there is but one action and this one action is the onely forme of justification viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse of which are two effects which also be the two parts of justification remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous as I said in the definition that justification is an action of God wherein hee imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner doth not onely absolve him from his sinnes but also accepteth of him as righteous and as an heire of eternall life § XVIII Notwithstanding this so evident truth some of the Divines of whom we spake when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely take this position for granted that justification is nothing but remission of sinne and hereupon inferre that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ we are justified by his bloud onely And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne to all which we readily subscribe But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes as entrance into heaven and salvation c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche putting the chieâ—…e and most eminent part of his obedience for the whole Others labour to prove this assertion that justification is nothing but remission of sinne by testimonies and by reasons and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines who against the Papists have maintained that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely But this assertion as hereafter I shall shew is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists who unto justification besides remission of sinnes require inward renovation or sanctification and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification not imputation of righteousnesse which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne and without which there can be no remission for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse we have both remission of sinnes and acceptation unto life but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis from the proper nature of justification as if they had said wee are not justified both by remission and renovation as the Papists teach but by remission without renovation that is in their meaning by remission onely and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe as hereafter shall bee shewed And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 6 7. therefore when it is said that we are justified by remission onely and not by renovation it is all one as if wee said that wee are justified by imputation onely and not by infusion of righteousnesse § XIX Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission As therefore he whose sinnes of commission are remitted is reputed as if hee had done nothing forbidden so whose sinnes of omission are remitted is reputed as if hee had left undone nothing that is commanded Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing forbidden nor left undone any thing that is commanded hee is reputed as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law I answer by distinction if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse as they must if they will make good their assertion then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission is freed from the guilt of both but not from the fault For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes he is a sinner as having both committed what is forbidden and also omitted what is commanded Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment and a râ—…atu poenae from the guilt binding over to punishment as if hee had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded Hee therefore that hâ—…th remission is reputed as having neither committed any evill nor omitted any good not simply
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
Gospell the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace as if the Gospell did unto justification require inherent and that a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law requireth And consequently with the false Apostles and teachers of the Galatians doe teach another Gospell than that which the Apostle taught which whosoever doth hee is accursed Whrefore the samethings which the Apostle objecteth against the Galatians who were seduced by their false Teachers are verified of the Papists who seekng to be justified by the workes of the Law are under the curse they are fallen from grace to them the promise is of no effect to them Christ dyed in vaine then Christ profiteth nothing as hereafter I shall shew For whosoever seeketh to bee justified by the workes of the Law hee is a debtour to the whole Law and to him who is a debtour to the whole Law that is to bee subject to the curse if he transgresse it and to be excluded from justification and salvation if he doe not perfectly fulfill it Christ profiteth nothing For whereas they distinguish the workes which they make the condition of both the Covenants that the one are the workes of Nature the other of grace it is evident that all good workes and all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law which is the most perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse Secondly that inherent righteousnesse is not the condition of the covenant of grace but is the thing promised to all that truely beleeve For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that the covenant of workes was made with all mankinde in Adam the Covenant of Grace with the heires of promise in Christ. The former promiseth justification to these who in their owne persons performe perfect obedience that perfect obedience being the condition of the Covenant The latter that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith the Lord will give grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him in which our new obedience consisteth which as I said is not the condition of the promise but the thing promised § XXI Secondly by confounding justification and sanctification they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in themselves For the matter of sanctification is inherent and that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation Againe that which is inherent is both prescribed in the Law and is also our owne though received from God which the Pharisie himselfe confessed when he thanked God for it But the holy Ghost doth teach us that wee are neither justified by the obedience or righteousnesse which is taught in the Law nor by that which is ours And in regard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us wee are not unworthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell and they the enemies thereof who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed which is that righteousnesse of God revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell that we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith § XXII By confounding justification and sanctification and so of two benefits making but one they doe abolish and take away that maine benefit of the Messias by which we are not onely freed from hell but also intituled unto the kingdome of heaven which the Scriptures distinctly call our justification without which there can bee no salvation For whom God doth justifie all them and onely them he doth glorifie And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justification it shall further appeare in handling the second question of this first controverfie whereof I am now to speake CAP. VII That the Papists exclude remission of sinne from Iustification and in stead thereof have put expulsion and extinction of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse and that they fouly erre therein § I. BVT heare it will be objected that so long as the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justification but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers who sometimes comprehending the benefit of sanctification under the name of justification seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification Whereunto I answere that indeed the Papists pretend so much For the Councell of Trent in expresse termes saith that justification is not remission of sins alone but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man and to the like purpose Bellarmine disputeth that justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone but also in inward renovation And yet all this is but a meere colourable pretence For as they exclude from justification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which onely wee have remission of sinne so they doe indeed and in truth exclude remission it selfe And as in stead of imputation of righteousnesse they have brought in infusion of justice so in stead of remission of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they have brought in the utter expulsion extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse And for this they have some shew of reason For if they should hold that justification consisteth partly in remission that is in the forgivenesse or not imputation of sinne and partly in renovation or sanctification then they must confesse that there are two formall causes of justification which Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist partly in remission and partly in renovation and consequently should bee forced to acknowledge two wayes of making men just by one and the same act of justification the one by imputation of that righteousnesse by which being without us we have remission of sinne the other by infusion of righteousnesse inherent by which sinne is expelled But the Councell of Trent doth stedfastly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is infusion of justice whereby sinne is expelled What then becometh of remission of sinne which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification I say of it as of justification the name is retained but the thing is taken away § II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things first that the Papists from justification exclude remission of sinne by putting into the roome thereof the expulsion and extinction of sinne which belongeth not to justification but to sanctification and consequently doe wholly abolish by their doctrine the benefit of justification Secondly that remission of sinne is not the utter extinction or deletion thereof As touching the former when Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent that it made two
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.
able to fulfill the Law of God CAP. VI. Our fiftâ—… argument containing foure branches By that wâ—…e are justified by which we are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved § I. THe fifth argument By what righteousnesse wee are justified by it wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities reconciled unto God and for it we shall bee saved And againe by what righteousnesse wee are absolved redeemed reconciled and for which wee shall be saved by it we are justified By that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves wee are not absolved from our sinnes nor redeemed from our iniquities nor reconciled unto God nor for it shall bee saved But by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are absolved from our sinnes redeemed from our iniquities c. Therefore we are not justified by that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves but by that righteousnesse which is out of us in Christ. The proposition in both the parts thereof containeth foure branches The first by what righteousnesse we are justified wee are by it absolved from our sinnes and a converso by what righteousnesse we are absolved from our sinnes by that we are justified This is proved from the signification of the word justifie as being a judiciall word opposed to condemnation which I have at large proved before For this doth invincibly demonstrate that by what wee are justified by that wee are acquitted and absolved and by what wee are absolved by that we are justified But more specially it may bee proved out of Act. 13. 38 39. where as I have shewed before not onely the word justification and remission of sinnes are promiscuously used but the phrase also of being justified from sinne signifieth plainely to be absolved from sinne where also the maine question itselfe is concluded Bee it knowne unto you saith S. Paul to his brethren the Iewes who feared God that through Iesus Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes And by him all that beleeve are justified from all those things meaning sinnes from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses From our sinnes therefore we are justified or absolved by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith from which we could out be acquitted by any obedience which we could performe to the Law § II. But of this place we are further to speake in defence of Calvins allegation thereof against Bellarmines cavils Calvin prooving that God doth justifie us when hee absolveth us from our sinnes and accepteth of us in Christ alleageth this place Through this man that is Christ is preached unto you remission of sinnes and by him all that beleeve are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses You see saith Calvin that justification is here set after remission of sinnes by way of interpretation r you see plainely that it is taken for absolution you see that it is denied to the workes of the Law you see it is meerely the benefit of Christ you see that it is received by faith and finally you see that there is a satisfaction interposed where hee saith that through Christ wee are justified from our sinnes Bellarmine pretending to answere this argument relateth it thus as if Calvin had said First By this man that is by Christ we are justified and not by any vertues or qualities of ours Secondly is preached that signifyeth that the very preaching or declaring of the promise if it bee apprehended by faith doth justifie for so the Apostle presently expoundeth himselfe by him every one that beleeveth is justified Thirdly forgivenesse of sinnes that signifieth that justification consisteth in nothing else but in remission of sinnes wherefore tâ—…e inward renovation is not the other part of justication for that renovation is not so much justificaâ—…ion as an effect thereof And lastly these words from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses doe signifie that justification doth not consist in the observation of the Law but onely as hath beene said in remission of sinnes for or through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed Thus as you see hee maketh Calvin speake what hee pleaseth But because the things which he inforceth in Calvins name upon this place be for the most part our assertions it shall not bee amisse to weigh the answeres which he maketh to them And first where it is said per hunc by this man hee saith this doth not exclude our vertues or qualities infused of God For by Christ wee are justified as the efficient which is signified by the preposition per by vertues and qualities infused as the formall cause Now if Christ or his righteousnesse bee the efficient cause then it cannot be the formall cause for the forme is the effect of the efficient nor can the same thing be the cause and effect of the same thing Neither may they say as they are wont that this is a mystery of faith that reason cannot attaine unto For mysteries though they surmount reason yet are notrepugnant to reason Neither ought we to faine mysteries as the Papists use to doe where the Scriptures have an easie and perspicuous meaning Râ—…ply This were a good caveat to the papists As for us we faineno such mysteries neither doe we say that Christ or his righteousnesse is both the efficient and formall cause of our justification But this we say that the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of our justification and also the merit both of our justification and salvation and that Christ himselfe as he is Mediatour is the secondary efficient of our justification affording unto it both the matter thereof and the merit § IV. That word is preached doth not signifie saith hee that by the onely preaching of Scriptures apprehended by faith men are justified For then Peter would not have said Act. 2. 38. Doe peâ—…ance and bee every one of you baptized for remission of sinnes But it signifieth that remission of sinnes is preached to all that beleeve in Christ as they ought that is in doing whatsoever he commaâ—…deth to be done according to that Mat. 28. 20. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you In this sence every one that bâ—…leeveth is justified that is whosoever beleeveth as he ought namely by fulfilling all things which faith doth declare ought to be fulfilled For not he that beleeveth a Physician though he be never so skilfull and one that infallibly curâ—…th is healed unlesse he receive such medicines as hee doth appoint Reply Wee doe not say that preaching alone apprehended by faith doth justifie but wee say that a true and a lively faith which is begotten by the preaching of the Word doth justifie a man before God and that wicked is that aphorisine collected out of Bellarmine that by the preaching of the Word of God faith is stirred up and so sinnes are forgiven is a
fiction of the hereticks of our time Nay we say more that by the preaching of the Word faith is not onely excited where it was before but that it is first wrought ordinarily and begotten by the ministry of the Gospell The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments and the stirring of it up to the Word As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word But the Scripture teacheth us that faith commeth by hearing the Word that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve that without a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 4. 15. that therefore preachers are their Fathers in the faith that they justifie men Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them whereby they are justified Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached to repent and to be baptized I answer that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life in Lydia Act. 16. 14 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized even as Abraham was before he was circumcised Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience and much more that they might be saved many other things as repentance and a godly life with the use of the Sacraments and of all other good meanes are required besides that faith whereby alone they are justified before God And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized not that Baptisme properly doth justifie and much lesse that it begetteth â—…aith for in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized not onely at the time of Baptisme but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve And whereas he saith that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought I confesse it is true that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith but to the true lively and effectuall faith which in some measure purifieth the heart and worketh by love causing a man though not to fulfill all things that are commanded as Bellarmine speaketh yet to will to desire and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded according to the measure of grace received But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe § V. As for his similitude of the Physitian I answer the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules which are our sinnes by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ is to beleeve in him and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes on our part to apply them is faith For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that which was but a figure of Christ be healed even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse that whosoever being stung as we all are by the old Serpent and made subject to eâ—…all death shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith shall bee saved To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience when the Iaylour Act. 16. 30 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling and falling downe before Paul and Silas demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saved And this remedy â—…in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. § VI. Thirdly where the Apostle in this place nameth onely remission of sinnes hee saith it hindreth not but that justâ—…fication may bee understood to consist in remission of sinnes and infusion of righteousnesse For as we have not once shewed saith hee remission of sinnes is not onely the pardâ—…ning of the punishment but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice comming in the place which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice Reply Not once but very oft hath hee said that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse because by infusion of justice sinne is expelled as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment that he hath utterly excluded from justification For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse which as hee teacheth is the onely act of justification whereof there is but one formall cause which is righteousnesse insuâ—…ed as the Councel of Trent hath defined but by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused as Bellarmine hath confessed doth not or cannot satisfie for our sinnes Now if there bee but one formall cause of justification as indeed there is but one and that one be not the imputation but the infusion of justice or as they rather use to speake the justice infused which expelleth sinne which expulsion or deletion they call the remission yea the true remission of sinne then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justification But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment be the not imputing of sinne which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth and the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes when hee imputeth not sinne then it will necessarily follow that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justification whereby we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne is another thing which the Scriptures call Sanctification And this I take to be a manifest truth which being granted we have obtained the whole cause § VII Fourthly againe saith he although there were mention made in this place of justification only from sinnes yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification of cleansing of washing and renewing which shew
the other part of justification Reply we doubt not but the Scriptures make mention of both these benefits sometimes severally and sometimes joyntly which though in use and practice they alwayes goe together yet they must bee carefully distinguished And howsoever the Scriptures often make mention of Sanctification as well as of justification yet no where doe they make Sanctification a part of justification This Bellarmine should have proved and not have craved Neither is it to bee doubted but that if forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment concurre unto justification as a part thereof renovation or infusion of righteousnesse being the other part as Bellarmine here affirmeth theâ—…e are two actions and two formall causes of justification which themselves utterly deny And therefore they must bee forced to acknowledge these two actions having distinct formes to bee justification whose forme is imputation and sanctification whose forme is infusion of righteousnesse § VIII Finally saith he from which you could not be justified by the Law of Moses signifieth that the observation of the Law neither by the strength of nature nor by helpe of the Law alone presumed doth justifie not because the true observation of the Law is not righteousnesse but because before remission of sinne the Law cannot be kept Reply By the observation of Law is meant all obedience and righteousnesse inherent whatsoever prescribed in the Law whether it goe before faith and justification or follow after For before as Bellarmine truly saith the Law cannot be fulfilled neither can there be any true righteousnesse And that obedience which is performed after though it be a righteousnesse begun in us and be not onely accepted in Christ but also graciously rewarded yet it cannot satisfie for our former sinnes nor justifie us from them That which Bellarmine addeth I admit with some small qualification as making for us For God saith he when by the merits of Christ he reconcileth any man hee doth withall forgive his sinnes so saith the Apostle 2 Cor. 5. 19. which is all one as if Bellarmine had said when God justifieth a man not imputing his sinne and accepting of him as righteous in Christ then hee infuseth charity by which he may keepe the Law which is all one as if he had said when God hath justified a man he doth also Sanctifie him This saith he is that which Saint Augustine so often repeateth and wholly maketh for us opera non prâ—…cedere justificandum that workes goe not before as causes of justification sed sequi justificatum but follow after as effects and fruits thereof And this Augustine speaketh not of such workes as perfectly fulfill the Commandements for such there are none whiles they are stained with the flesh but of all good works which notwithstanding their defectivenesse are accepted of God in Christ that which he addeth out of Rom. 8. 4. I have discussed elsewhere § IX But to returne to the proofe of my proposition to that place of the Acts I adde for the further proofe of the first branch Rom. 4. vers 5 6 7 8. where the Apostle useth these words promiscuously justification and blessednesse and proveth out of Psal. 32. 1. that this blessednesse consisteth in remission of sin or as he also speaketh in the not imputing of sinne and imputation of righteousnesse without works from whence this is proved by what righteousnesse we have remission of sinne by that we are justified and by what wee are justified we have remission of sinne The second branch by what righteousnesse we are redeemed by that we are justified and è converso by what we are justified by that we are redeemed The benefit of redemption is explained by the Apostle Ephes. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. to bee remission of sinne and expressed by the phrase of redeeming from all iniquttie Tit. 2. 14. Psalm 133. 8. The third branch by what righteousnesse wee are reconciled to God by it we are justified and by what we are justified we are reconciled The Apostle Rom. 5. 9 10. useth these words promiscuously to bee justified by the bloud of Christ and to bee reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne and 2 Cor 5. 19. God is said to reconcile men unto him in Christ when hee doth not impute untio them their sinnes but imputeth unto them righteousnesse even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ that they only may be made the righteousnesse of God in him vers 21. The fourth branch for what righteousnesse wee are saved by that wee are justified and è converso that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation for which cause justification and to be justified is many times expressed by salvation or to bee saved for they that are justified are saved in hope and by what they are justified by that they are intituled to salvation and by what we receive remission of sinnes by that also we receive our inheritance Iustification may bee compared to the institution of a Minister unto a benefice which giveth jus ad rem glorification to induction which giveth possession and jus in re § X. I come to the assumption the first branch whereof is that we are absolved from our sinnes by the righteousnesse of Christ and not by any righteousnesse inherent in usâ—… both wich are plainely averred Act. 3. 38 39. The former also is every where testified that the bloud of Christ was shed for the remission of sinnes and that it doth cleanse us from all our sinnes that he is the propitiation for our sinnes c. The latter is also evident that we cannot be absolved from our sinnes by righteousnesse inherent first because it cannot satisfie for our sinnes secondly because it cannot stand in judgement If wee should plead it before God we could not be justified thereby Psal. 143. 2. Neither are we able to answere him one of a thousand Ioâ—… 9. 3. Thirdly because our obedience though it were totall as it is never in this life yet it were a debt and we cannot be absolved from one debt by the payment of another when ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to doe Luk. 17. 10. The second branch that we are redeemed by the merits of Christ and not by our owne righteousnesse needeth no proofe neither in respect of the affirmative that by his bloud we have redemption even the remission of our sinnes that he gave himselfe to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a full price of ransome to redeeme us from all iniquity Nor in respect of the Negative unlesse it may be thought that we who were held captives under sinne and Satan to doe his will could deliver our selves which God doth sweare to bee his gift Luk. 1. 73 74. Neither could we be delivered out of the hands of the strong man but by him that is stronger than he The third branch also
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Greeke Fathers § 2. and eleven of the Latine Fathers § 3. The authority of foure Councils § 4. Bellarmines reasons to prove merits § 5. Other questions concerning merits discussed l. 8. c. 7. whether trust is to bee reposed in merit § 2. De intuitu mercedis § 3 4 whether it bee lawfull to doe a good worke with intent to merit thereby lib. 8. cap. 7. § 5. The seven conditions required in merit l. 8. c. 8. whereof three are not contrâ—…verted § 1. The fourth that it bee liberum § 2. Fifthly that it be the worke of a man in state of grace § 3. Sixthly that it have the promise of God § 4. Seventhly that it proceed from charity § 5. All these conditions concurring doe not make a worke meritorious lib. 8. c. 8. § 6. Bellarmines dispute that good workes are condignely meritorious non solum ratione pacti but also ratione operis examined l. 8. c. 9. His seven arguments to prove condigne merits ratione operis l. 8. c. 9. § 5. c. What things may be merited l. 8. c. 9. § 13. N Necessity of good workes urged by us l. 7. c. 1. By Bellarmine c. 4. O Obiect of Faith Lib. 6. cap. 6. The proper obiect of iustifying faith is CHRIST § 2. The obiect of Abrahams faith § 3 4 5. Christ the proper obiect of faith in two respects § 6. Bellarmines dispute first that the obiect of faith is not speciall § 7. By virtue of the iustifying faith all other articles may become the obiect of speciall faith l. 6. c. 6. § 7. Whether every man is bound to beleeve that he is elected c. § 8. Secondly whether a man may be iustified without speciall faith § 9. Thirdly whether a man is iustified by speciall faith l. 6. c. 6. § 10. Osiander His errour that the righteousnesse of God by which we are iustified is the righteousnesse of the Godhead dwelling in us l. 1. c. 3. § 2. P Papists They take away iustification l. 1. c. 1. § 1. l. 2. c. 6. § 22. From iustification they exclude remission or forgivenesse of sinnes lib. 2. cap. 7. § 2. They confound the Law and the Gospell and make void the covenant of grace l. 4. c. 8. § 5. They deprive Christians of the chiefe part of their christian liberty § 6. They are fallen from grace lib. 7. c. 3. § 9 10 11 12. Their maine errours in the article of iustification l. 2. c. 1. § 1. Paritie Parity of righteousnesse l. 4. c. 13. Parts of iustification Lib. 1. c. 4. § 16 17. c. 6. § 5. Passive righteousnesse of Christ. Whether we be iustified by it onely l. 1. cap. 4. Paul Not iustified by inherent righteousnesse l. 4. c. 8. § 15. Pelagians Their errours concerning grace lib. 3. cap. 6. § 2. Perfect Whether any such lib. 4. c. 10. § 10 11. l. 7. c. 6. § 15. 16. Penitencie Bellarmines fifth disposition to iustification l. 6. c. 12. § 9 10. Purpose to receive the Sacrament Bellarmines sixth disposition to iustification l. 6. c. 12. § 11. Purpose of a new life Bellar. 7th disposition l. 6. c. 12. § 12. R. Remission of sinne is not that onely thing wherein iustification consisteth lib. 1. cap. 4. § 16. 17. 18 21. n. 3. Obiect It is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission lib. 1. cap. 4. § 19. Obiect 2. By it men are made innocent therefore iust § 20. Three arguments of I. P. § 21. of I. F. § 22. 23. Some make remission the entire forme of iustification lib. 1. cap. 5. § 1. 4. It is not that righteousnesse which is imputed lib. 1. cap. 4. § 1. cap. 5. § 5. 6. Remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous the two parts of iustification lib. 1. cap. 6. § 5. Remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from iustification lib. 2. cap. 7. § 1. 2. Remission of sinne is not the utter extinction of it lib. 2. cap. 7. § 3. It is as the forgiving of a debt § 4. What it signifieth in the Scriptures ibid. Three questions I. What that is which is remitted § 5. whether the Macula § 6. 7. II. The bookes out of which God doth wipe or blot our sinnes § 8. III. By what act of God are our sins remitted § 9. The utter deletion or extinction not granted in this life § 10. The guilt and punishment not taken away by infusion of righteousnesse § 11. Remission doth not worke a reall change § 12. Absurdities which follow this assertion that remission is the utter extinction of sinne § 13. and are necessary consequents of their doctrine of iustification by inherent righteousnesse § 14. lib. 5. cap. 5. § 6. 7 8. Bellarmines proofes out of the Scripture that remission of sin is the utter abolition of it lib. 2. cap. 8. those places of Scripture mention either the taking away of sinne § 2. or the blotting out of sinne § 3. or the purging of sinne § 4. or the not being of it § 5. or the perfection of righteousnesse § 6. Other arguments from the efficacie of Baptisme § 7. 8. his unanswereable argument out of Rom. 5. 19. answered lib. 2. c. 8. § 10. See more of this question lib. 5. cap. 5. § 6 7 8. Reward Reward merces is either gratuita free or debita due l. 8. c. 5. § 3. 4. 5. The reward of eternall life equall but not of glory l 4. c. 13. § 2. How farre foorth good workes are rewarded l. 8. c. 9. § 12. VVhether good workes may bee done with an eye to the reward l. 8. c. 7. § 3. 4. VVhether they may bee done with intent to merit § 5. Righteousnesse The righteousnesse of God a moving cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 2 3. Righteousnesse of Christians twofold l. 1. c. 1. § 2. Bellarmines distinction of righteousnesse of the Law and in or by it l. 4. c. 8. § 2. 3 4. l 7. c. 2. § 8. The righteousnesse of God is the matter of iustification not the righteousnesse of the Godhead lib. 1. c. 3. § 2. But the righteousnesse of the Mediator the man CHRIST IESVS § 3. His whole righteousnâ—…sse both negative and also possitive § 3 4. Which is truely called the righteousnesse of God § 5. The comfort arising out of this doctrine § 6. Righteousnesse inherent Not perfect l. 4. c. 2. § 8 c. and c. 3. Reasons proving the works of the faithfull not to be purely and perfectly good I. Out of Esai 64. 6. Lib. 4. cap. 3. § 4 c. ad 11. II. Because there is a mixture in them of sinne out of Exod. 28. 36 38. § 11. Eccles. 7. 20. § 12. III. The fruâ—…t is as the tree § 13. IV. Actions purely good may stand in iudgâ—…ment § 14. an instance in prayer § 15. Testimonies of Fathers § 16. Bellarmines proofes I. Allegation of Scriptures And I. Iob 1. 22. l. 4. c. 4. § 1 2. II.
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
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
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
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
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
formall causes of justification Bellarmine answereth thus the Councell of Trent in expresse termes said that there is but one onely formall cause of justification Yea but say wee the Councell seemeth to make two viz. remission of sinnes and renovation But saith he when the Councell maketh mention severally of remission of sin and of infusion of grace it did it not to signifie that there is a twofold formall cause of justification but to declare that there are two termes of that motion which is called justification or two effects of the same cause For there cannot bee that mutation or translation which the Councell noteth to bee in justification unlesse by remission of sinne a man cease to bee wicked and by infusion of justice begin to be godly But saith hee as the aire when it is enlightened of the Sunne by the same light which it receiveth ceaseth to bee darke and beginneth to be lightsome So a man by the same justice given and infused by the Sunne of righteousnesse ceaseth to bee unjust the light of grace expelling the darknesse of sinne and beginneth to bee just the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne And as in calefaction which similitude hee useth elsewhere the accesse of heat expelleth cold so in justification the infusion of justice expelleth sinne This then is the doctrine of the new Church of Rome that in this mutation called justification which they define to bee a passage from sinne to righteousnesse though there be as in all other motions duo termini viz. sinne which is terminus à quo and righteousnesse which is terminus ad quem yet there are not two distinct actions concurring viz. remission or expulsion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of justice expelling sinne even as in calefaction though there bee two termes cold and hot yet there are not two actions for the same action of fire which bringeth in heat expelleth cold and so in illumination there are two termes darkenesse and light but not two actions for one and the same act of the Sunne which bringeth light driveth away darkenesse Whereby it is evident that by remission of sinne the Papists doe not understand as all men from the beginning of the world have understood pardoning forgiving not imputing sinne but the utter deletion expulsion abolition of it which Bellarmine calleth veram remissionem true remission as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true remission but this true remission they hold to bee such that in a man who is justified and hath remission of sinne there is no sinne remaining and hee onely is to bee held a just man in whom there is no sinne Thus then remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from justification and that brought in the roome of it which belongeth to that perfection of sanctification whereunto none attaine in this life § III. Now that the Papists grossely erre in making remission of sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righteousnesse may appeare by these arguments First whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered the guilt and the corruption or Anomy thereof it is evident that the guilt of sinnes past is taken away by remission wholly and at once the corruption is taken away by mortification thereof not wholly in this life and at once but by degrees we being day by day renewed in the inner man The latter is the worke of Gods Spirit within us The former is an action of God without us such as is that of the Creditor in remitting or forgiving a debt And so the Scriptures conceive of remission For our sinnes are debts in respect of the guilt binding us over to punishment which wee owe for them When as God therefore remitteth the debt releaseth this obligation forgiveth the punishment hee is said to remit our sinnes This our Saviour taught by the parables of the creditors and debtors Matth. 18. 23. Luk. 7. 41. And thus he hath taught us to pray Matth. 6. 12. Forgive us our debts as wee forgive our debtors How doe wee forgive By not revenging the offence but laying aside all desire and purpose of revenge by passing by it and as it were forgetting it by covering it with charity by not imputing it by being reconciled unto the party who hath offended us not by a reall taking away of the sinne from the offender but a wiping of it out of our remembrance not by expelling the offence out of the offender but out of our thoughts § IV. Thus in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish and extinguish the sinne it selfe but to absolve from the guilt of sinne to pardon and to forgive the debt and to remit the punishment to cover a mans sinne and not to impute it And this plainely appeareth by these manifold phrases which are used in the Scriptures to signifie remission of sinne all which import the taking away of the guilt but none the utter abolishing of the corruption As first the Hebrew Salach Exod. 34. 9. Numb 14. 19 20. 30. 6. Deut. 29. 19. Psal. 103. 3. Esay 55. 7. Ier. 31. 34. Dan. 9. 20. signifieth parcere remittere ignoscere condonare propitium esse Kasah to hide to spare to forgive Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 32. 1. 85. 2. Ioel 2. 17. Deut. 13. 8. Kaphar also is to cover to pardon to be propitious Deut. 21. 8. Psal. 65. 4. 78. 38. 79. 9. Esay 22. 14. Nasa to spare to forgive to take away the guilt Gen. 18. 24 26. 50. 17. Exod. 32. 32. Numb 14. 19. Psalm 32. 1. cum Rom. 4. 7. Esay 33. 24. Psalm 25. 18. Habar to passe by an offence Mic. 7. 18. and Hehebir to cause it to passe 2 Sam. 12. 13. 24. 10. Zech. 3. 4. Machah to wipe or to blot out of remembrance the sinnes of men as it were out of a booke to blot them out from before his face Nehem. 4. 5. Psalm 51. 9. Ier. 18. 23. Hesir to remove Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute Psal. 32. 2. In like manner the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to remit or forgive Mat. 6. 12 14 15. 18. 27 32. whence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remission that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgivenesse as Hesychiiâ—…s expoundeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condonare to forgive Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to impute Rom. 4. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 19. So the Latine remittere dimittere ignoscere condonare donare veniam dare parcere propitium esse and the English to remit to pardon to forgive § V. For the farther clearing of this point let us consider these three things first what that is which is remitted Secondly where it remaineth untill it bee remitted Thirdly by what act of God it is remitted The thing remitted is our
maketh in the question of justification betweene grace and workes as that if wee bee justified by the one wee cannot be justified by the other but they might as well stand together as the first justification of the Papists which is habituall consisting in the habits of grace infused with the second which is actuall consisting in works or rather the one would infer the other because we cannot be justified by the one I speak of adulti without the other for if wee bee justified by inherent righteousnesse that righteousnesse must be totall and perfect and therfore both habituall and actuall and both must concur unto justification for neither without the other is perfect Object Yea but the Apostle when hee saith that faith doth justifie without workes hee speaketh of the first juâ—…ification unto which works doe not concurre and when hee opposeth grace to workes hee meaneth the works of the Law done before faith without grace by the power of nature Answ. This is all that the Papists have to excuse themselves that they doe not openly contradict the Apostle who so often and so peremptorily concludeth that wee are justified by grace and not by workes by faith without the workes of the Law But it is evident that by the workes of the Law is meant all that obedience and righteousnesse that is prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse And therefore when the workes of the Law are rejected all inherent righteousnesse is excluded from justification It is also manifest that the holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men whether in the state of nature or in the state of grace and of all workes whether going before or following after faith insomuch that the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit 3. 5. are excluded yea the workes of faithfull Abraham are denied to have justified him before God And therefore those who have both faith and works are justified by faith without workes But these objectiots I shall fully satisfie in their due place § X. Sixthly whereas the Papists say that justifying grace is the same with charity I argue thus Charity is the fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons But wee are not justified by our fulfilling of the Law in our owne persons Gal. 2. 16. 3. 10 11. Therefore we are not justified by our charity and consequently not by grace inherent § XI Seventhly that the Apostle by grace in the articles of justification and salvation understood the gracious favour of God in Christ and not inherent grace appeareth both by his assention Rom. 5. 20. that where sinne abounded Gods grace did much more abound and by his question Rom. 6. 1. shall wee continue in sinne that grace may abound for it were a strange conceit that where sinne aboundeth inherent righteousnesse should abound so much the more And to these we may adde those places which speake of going to the throne of grace that we may obtaine mercie and find grace Heb. 4. 16. of the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ for by grace we are saved Eph. 2. 7. 8. of the grace of God and the gift of grace distinguished one from the other Rom. 5. 15. of those that beleeve by the grace of God Act. 18. 27. of commending men to the grace of God Act. 14. 26. 15. 40. of the word of his grace Act. 14. 3. 20. 32. of the Gospell of his grace Act. 20. 24. of the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ who being rich became poore for us 2 Cor. 8. 9. of our predestination to the praise of the glory of his grace Eph. 1. 5 6. of the election of grace Rom. 11. 5. of the appearing of the grace of God which bringeth salvation Tit. 2. 11. of Christ his tasting of death for us by the grace of God Heb. 2. 9. of the reward not imputed of grace to him that worketh Rom. 4. 4. of turning the grace of God into wantonnesse Iud. 4. c. § XII Lastly so cleare is this truth which wee deliver according to the scriptures concerning justifying grace that Albertus Pighius a famous divine among the Papists doth confesse that what the Schoolemen teach concerning justifying grace that it is a quality in our soules infused of God and there remaining after the manner of an habit and that it is the same in substance with the habit of charity c. are meere devises of men having no warrant in the Scriptures Thomas Aquinas also writing on Tit. 2. 11. it is to bee knowne saith he that grace signifieth mercie and mercie alwayes was in God yet in respect of men in times past it lay hid but when Christ the Sonne of God appeared grace appeared and it may be said that in the Nativity of Christ grace appeared two wayes the former because by the greatest grace of God he was given unto us and upon this grace in the second place followed the instruction of mankind wherupon he saith teachingus c. Whereunto we may adde that those few places which Bellarmine alleageth for inherent grace are by some of their owne writers understood of the gracious favour of God as we shall shew in the particulars which now we are to examine CHAP. III. Bellarmines allegation for grace inherent out of Rom. 3. 24. proved to make against himselfe § I. BVt before I propound them I am to advertise the Reader that we do not deny that there are divers graces of sanctification and those also necessary to salvation as faith hope charity the feare of God c. inherent in the soules of the faithfull as divine qualities residing there per modum habitus So that Bellarmine in his booke de gratia lib. arbitr might well have spared his labour whereby he endeavoreth to prove such grace or graces to bee inherent in the soule which never any of us denyed But wee deny that gratia gratum faciens or justifying grace is inherent in us This therefore Bellarmine laboureth to prove lib. 2. de justif cap. 3. unto which in the other place hee doth referre us alleaging Rom. 3. 24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Iesus c. Answ. It cannot bee denyed but that the popish cause in this particular is very desperate when for the defence thereof they are able to alleage one onely place where grace is mentioned and that such a one as is a most pregnant testimony to prove free justification by faith onely without respect of any righteousnesse or grace inherent in us § II. And this is proved first by the context or coherence of these words with those which goe before For thus the Apostle reasoneth Those that bee in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God are not justified by righteousnesse inherent all which is prescribed in the Law but of necessity must be justified by a righteousnesse
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
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
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
we say it doth The exclusive particle used by some of our Divines doth exclude infusion not imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth For wee doe hold though all perhaps have not so plainely expressed their meaning and some few have delivered their private opinions that remission of sinne is but a part of justification and that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we are both absolved from our sinnes and also accepted as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life But Bellarmine howsoever he would seeme to acknowledge the concurrence of remission of sinne unto justification yet indeed excludeth it For by remission of sinne concurring to justification hee doth not understand the not imputing or forgiving of sinne but the extinction and abolition thereof wrought by the infusion of habituall righteousnesse which expelleth its contrary as heat doth cold and light darkenesse And howsoever there bee duo termini two termes in this motion or mutation as he conceiveth of justification as being a passage b or change from sinne to righteousnesse yet there be not two causes nor yet two distinct actions but the onely cause is justice infused and the action is but one and the same the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne Even as in creation which is transitâ—…s à non esse ad esse in illumination which is transitâ—…s à tenebris ad lâ—…cem in calefaction which is a passage from cold to heat But if this be all that is required in the Popish justification as undoubtedly it is the whole and onely forme thereof being infused of righteousnesse or as they love rather to speake righteousnesse infused their justification also not differing from that which the Scriptures call sanctification saving that they dreame of a totall mortification or deletion of sinne and of a perfect renovation then what is become of the absolving of â—…â—…tom the guilt of sinne by which wee are freed from hell and the acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by we are intitled to the kingdome of heaven Both which are wrought by imputation of Christs righteousnesse in which true justification doth consist For infused righteousnesse though it were perfect could not discharge us from our former debts and being unperfect as their owne consciences cannot but tell them it cannot entitle them to the kingdome of heaven Wherefore if they will be saved they must of necessity flee to the righteousnesse or satisfaction of Christ who hath fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty by his sufferings and also in regard of the commandement by his obedience which obedience and sufferings being transient and gone so long since can no otherwise bee communicated unto them but by imputation Now if they can be content to acknowledge the imputation of Christs satisfaction which sometimes they doe and must doe if they will bee saved for there is no other meanes either to escape hell or to come to heaven then let them according to the Scriptures acknowledge this imputation of Christs satisfaction by which they are to bee acquitted and freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also accepted as righteous in Christ and heires of eternall life to be their justification As for the mortification of sinne and the renovation of us according to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse both which are but in part and by degrees wrought in us by the Spirit of regeneration let them bee acknowledged to bee the two parts of our sanctification § II. But Bellarmine will needs have our renovation to be the righteousnesse of justification And this he indevoureth to prove by Testimonies of Scripture by the authority of Saint Augustine and by reason The texts of Scripture which he citeth are six The first Rom. 4. 25. who was delivered up for our sinâ—…es and rose for our justification From whence Bellarmine argueth thus to what the Apostle giveth the name of justification in that justification consisteth rather than in that unto which hee doth not give the name But to renovation in this place the Apostle doth give the name of justification and not to remission of sinne Therefore justification consisteth rather in renovation than in remission of sinne Before I answere I thinke good to advertise the reader againe that Bellarmine here by remission of sinne doth not understand the not imputing of sinne or as we in plaine English call it forgivenesse of sinne but the utter deletion the extinction the totall mortification of sinne And that hee doth foure times at the least signifie in this one passage Now I answer by denying his assumption because the Apostle in this place doth give the name of justification neither to remission nor yet to renovation which is not mentioned so much as once in all the Chapter Indeed in some other places the Apostle and his Disciple Saint Luke doe give the name to remission of sinnes that is to the not imputing of sinne or to the absolving and acquitting from sinne Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 〈◊〉 13. 38 39. but never to renovation § III. His assumption Bellarmine proveth because it cannot be doubtâ—…d but that the Apostles meaning was that Christ his death was a samplar or patterne of the death of sin that is saith he of remission or deletion of sins and that his resurrection was a samplar or patterne of our renovation and inward regeneration by which we walke in newnesse of life And is this the meaning of the Apostle Then be like wee are justified by imitation and not by imputation of Christs death and by imitation of his resurrection and then also by the same reason we are made sinners by imitation and not imputation of Adams transgression But indeed in this place the Apostle doth not propound by way of exhortation the death and resurrection of Christ as an example to bee followed in dying to sinne and rising to righteousnesse represented in Baptisme as hee doth in the sixth to the Romans where he exhorteth to sanctification as an inseparable consequent and companion of justification but by way of Doctrine hee speaketh of the death and resurrection of Christ as the cause of our justification of which he had spoken in the whole Chapter and even in the verses next going before that righteousnesse shall bee imputed to us as well as to Abraham if wee beleeve in him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead who was given by his father and by himselfe to us and for us that by the obedience of his life untill death but especially at his death he might satisfie for our sinnes and was raised from the dead that we might be justified and saved by his life which he liveth after his death Christ by his death and obedience did satisfie for our sinnes paying a full ransome for them and so did justifie us meritoriously and in that sense we are said to bee justified by his bloud and by his obedience both as the
matter and merit of our justification But neither his death nor obedience had beene effectuall to our justification if he had not risen from the dead As the Apostle sheweth 1 Cor. 15 17. If Christ bee not raised your faith is vaine yee are yet in your sinnes For if Christ had not risen againe it had beene an evidâ—…nce that he was not the Sonne of God and then could not his obedience or sufferings have beene meritorious for us But by his resurrection hee was mightily declared to be the Sonne of God in regard whereof it was said Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee and being God his obedience and sufferings are of infinite and all sufficient merit and value vertue and efficacie for the justification and salvation of all that beleeve in him And againe what benefits Christ merited for us by his obedience even untill death the same being risen he applyeth and giveth to those that beleeve God having raised him and exalted him with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance to Israel and remission of sinnes Christ therefore was given unto death that hee might by his sufferings satisfie for our sinnes the penalty thereunto belonging and he did rise againe that by application of his merits we might bee justified Righteousnesse therefore shall be imputed to those that beleeve in the resurrection of Christ or rather in Christ raised againe who as he gave himselfe to bee a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome for our sinnes so he did arise againe that by effectuall application of his merits we might bee justified So that whom by his death and obedience he redeemed meritoriously then he doth effectually justifie and save by his life and the severall actions thereof viz. his resurrection ascension sitting at the right hand of his Father as our King and Priest his comming againe to judgement who therefore shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children it is God that justifieth who is hee that condemneth It is Christ that dyed yea rather that is risen againe who is even at the right hand of God who also maketh intorcession for us § IV. In the words following Bellarmine answeareth a secret objection if remission of sinnes be ascribed to Christs death and renovation to his resurrection then belike remission and renovation be two severall actions proceeding from divers causes contrary to that which hath beene delivered For prevention whereof he saith It is to be noted that the death of Christ which is the price of our redemption was not onely the cause of the remission of sinne but also of internall renovation And the like as he saith afterwards may bee said of the reâ—…urrection For according to the doctrine of the Catholike Church these two cannot bee severed fâ—…rasmuch as one and the same grace viz. charity being through the merit of Christ infused and inherent in us doth both blot out or extinguish our sinnes and also adorneth the soule with righteousnesse wherefore though the Apostle might have ascribed both remission and renovation either to Christs death or to his resurrection yet he chose rather distinctly to attribute remission to his death and renovation to his resurrection propter similitudinem because of the likenesse which the extinction of sinne hath with the death of the body and spirituall renovation with the resurrection of the body whereunto I answer briefly first that though the death and resurrection of Christ in respect of their efficacie though remission and renovation alwayes goission and renovation then in justification there are two actions proceeding from two causes secondly that these foure distinct benefits remission of sinne and acceptation of us as righteous in Christ which are the parts of justification wrought both of them by imputation of Christs righteousnesse which is the one and onely forme of justification likewise the dying unto sinne or mortification and the rising of the Sonle from the grave of sinne which is our first resurrection or vivification which are the two parts of sanctification those foure actions I say proceed from two causes and that in twofold respects For remission of sinne is procured by the merit of Christs death and dying unto sinne is ascribed to the vertue of his death the imputation of Christs merits whereby wee are both absolved from sinne and accepted as righteous is ascribed to his resurrection whereby his merits are applyed unto us for our justification and the grace of rising from the grave of sinne to the vertue of his resurrection for by the same power whereby Christ did rise againe are wee raised from sinne to newnesse of life § V. His second allegation is Rom. 5. 21. That as sinne reigned unto death so grace may reign by justice to life everlasting through Iesus Christ our Lord where by justice opposed to sin he saith is meant inward renovation Ans. 1. We deny not but that in all the faithful there is a two fold righteousnesse the one imputed which is the righteousnesse of justification the other infused and inherent which is the righteousnesse of sanctification which he calleth renovation If therfore the Apostle did speake here of righteousnesse inherent yet this place would make nothing against us For we confesse that as sin reigneth in the children of disobedience by producing the workes of iniquity so the grace of God or the Spirit of grace doth reigne in the faithful by bringing forth the fruits of righteousnes But this is not the righteousnesse of justification but that wherein our sanctification doth consist But indeed the Apostle here doth not speake either only or chiefly if at all of inherent righteousnesse Neither doth hee in this place make an opposition or antithesis betweene sinne and righteonsnesse to which supposition Bellarmines argument is grounded but betweene the kingdome of sinne reigning unto death and the kingdome of grace reigning by righteousnesse unto everlasting life through Iesns Christ our Lord. Now the righteousnesse wherein the kingdome of grace especially consisteth is the righteousnesse of justification by faith whereupon followeth peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. compared with Rom. 5. 1. 2. which being not our righteousnesse as all inherent justice is but the righteousnesse of God is chiefly yea in the cause of justification is onely to bee sought after Phil. 3. 8 9. Rom. 10. 3. Secondly as in all the chapter from the twelfth verse to the end the opposition which is made is of Adams sinne to Christs obedience so in this place as the sinne of Adam was the cause of death so Christs obedience of life the opposition is not of inherent righteousnesse to inherent sinne but of Christs righteousnesse to Adams sinne § VI. His third allegation is out of Rom. 6. 13. Doe not ye exhibit your members as instruments of iniquity unto sinne but exhibit your selves to God as of dead men alive and your members
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
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
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
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
7. 25. 9. 24. Esay 53. 11. The holy Ghâ—…st Instrumentall causes The Ministerie of the Gospell 2 Cor. 5. 18 20. h Acts 16. 14. i Rom. 10. 14 17 1 Cor. 3. 5. Rom. 10. 9. Iohn 20. 23. Sacraments Rom. 4. 11. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Faith the instrument to receive 1. Faith justisieth not as it is an habit or gift in us but as it is the hand â—…o receive Christ. g De Justif. l. 1. cap. 17. h Lib. 4. i Rom. 4. 5. k Lib. 4. 7. * Rom. 10. 5. Secòndly it must be such a faith à s doth specially apprehend and embrace Christ. l Of this see moâ—…e Lib 6. c. 4. m See Lib. 6. c. 6. §. 2. n Ioh. 3. 16. Act. 16. 30 31. Fat h do h not dispose to justificatioâ—… but it do h actually justifie o Bellarm. de justificat lib. 1. ca 13. §. Secun da dispositio p Act. 13. 39. q Ioh. 5. 24. r Ioh. 6. 47. Faith doth not justifie absolutely in respect of its owne worth but relatively in respect of the object s See Lib. 6. cap. 4. §. 6. t Luk. 7. 50. Act. 3. 6. 12. â—…6 Act. 10. 43. Ioh. 20. 31. 2 Pet. 1. 1. The meaning of the question whether by faith or by workes How faith is said to justifie alone u Iaâ—… 2. 17. Faith doth not sanctifie alone The matter and forme of justification what they are a Bellarm. de justifi lib. cap. 2. b De Jacob. vitabeat l. 2. cap. 6. * Lib. 5. cap. 4. sect 4. c Matth. 12. 37. Rom 8. 33. 1 King 8. 32. Of the matter and forme distinctly The matter is that which is called the righteousnesse of God d See Lib. 4. c. 2. §. 2. Whether this righteousnesse of God be the righteousnesse of the Godhead e 1 Timâ—… 5. Whether it be the righteousnesse of the Manhood The innocencie of Christ. Iohn 8. 46. 1 Pet. 1. 19. 1 Pet. 1. 19. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Pet. 2. 22 23. f 2 Cor 5. 21. Heb. 4. 15. Christs positive righteousnesse Rom. 8. 2. The holinesse of his Nature Matth. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 35. Iohn 3. 34. Psal. 45. 7. Esai 11. 2. Ioh. 1. 14. Iohn 1. 16. Ephes. 4. 7. The holinesse of his lise Matth. 5. 1â—… Matth. 3. 15. Ioh. 8. 29. Rom. 8. 4. Esay 53. 11. Act 4. 27. Heb. 7. 26. 1 Ioh. 2. 20. Apoc. 3. 7. Act 3. 14. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Act. 2. 27. Dan. 9. 24. His passive righteousnesse Phil. 2. 8. Gal. 3. 13. g 2 Cor. 8 9. h Heb. 12. 2. i Esay 53. 3. The righteousnesse of Christ by which wee are justified is the righteousnesse of God Ier. 23. 6. Rom. 9. 5. Act. 3. 15. k Luk. 1. 43. 1 Cor. 2. 8. Act. 2â—… 28. 1 Ioh. 1. 7. 3. 16. Rom. 5. 10. Rom. 5. 19. Phil. 2. 6 8. Gal. 4. 4 5. The consort arising from this doctrine * Heb. 9. 14. l 1 Pet. 1. 21. m Rom. 1. 4. n 1 Cor. 15 14. 17. o 1 Cor. 1. 30. p Ier. 23. 6. q Matth. 5. 6. r Matth. 6. 33. s Matth. 13. 46. t Esay 64. 6. u Phil. 3. 7 8. 9. u Phil. 3. 7 8. 9. 1 Cor. 1. 30. * Ier. 23. 26. Rom. 5. 9. 19. The formall cause Imputation of Christs righteousnesse * Rom. 5. 19. x â—…ul Scaliger de suâ—…til y De amiss gratia statu pecc lib. 5. cap. 17. § Itaque z De Justif. l. 2. sect cap 7. sect Quarto c. 10. sect Deinde a Esai 53. 11. b De justificat lib. 2. cap. 5. in fine Imputation of Christs righteousnesse denied not onely by Papists but also by some others The reason of their deniaâ—… confuted c Sum. 3. p. q. 48. art 2. q 49. arÌ„t 1. Caput membrum sunt quasi una perso na mystica ideo satisfactio Christi ad omnes fideles pertinet sicut ad â—…ua membra Rom. 4. 5. 6. 11. 2 Cor. 5. 21. The private opinions of some Divines concerning the matter of justification The first reason because there is no justification without the fulfilling of the Law a Psal. 132. 9. b Gal. 3. 27. c Matth. 22. 11. d Apoc. 19. 8. e Matth. 5. 18. f Lev. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal 3. 12. g Rom. 3. 31. By the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely the Law is not fulfilled h Gal. 3. 13. i Rom. 10. 5. And that is defended against divers excepâ—…ons First that the Law is satisfied by bearing the penalty k De justis lib. 2. cap. 10. Scct. Deinde Secondly that those who are freed from hell are admitted untobeaven Thirdly that God may justifie by the passive righteousnesse onely if bee will l Rom. 3. 25 26. m Rom. 2. 2. n Rom. 5. 9. 19. o 2 Cor. 5. 21. p Rom. 5. 10. q Rom. 4. 25. 1 Cor. 1. 30. Dan. 9. 24. If by Christs fulfilling of the Law then by a legall righteousnesse r Gal. 4 5. s Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. The second reason out of Rom. 5. 19. t Rom. 5. 19. u Heb. 9. 10. * Iam. 2. 10. x Gal. 3. 10. y Rom. 5. 18. z Rom. 8. 4. a Deut. 12. 32. b 1 Ioh. 3. 4. Thirdly because Christ bis obedience is accepted for uâ—… Matth. 5. 17. 3. 15. Ioh. 8. 29. c Rom. 5. 18. 8. 4. d Phil. 2. 8. e Phil. 2. 7. f Ioh. 17. 15. g Gal. 4. 5. h Phil. 2. 8. Rom. 10. 4. Chrysost. in Rom. 10. 4. i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n Perfectionem habet Legis qui credit in Christum o Homil. of salvation part 1. p Iâ—…st lib. 2. cap. 16. §. 5. Object 1. That Christ obeyed the Law not for us but for himseâ—…fe Luk. 17. 10. q Act. â—…0 28. r Phil. 2. 6 8. s 1 Tim. 3. 16. t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. 2. 7. u Esay 40. 17. * Phil. 2. 8. Object 2. Of the Papists x Râ—…mists in Phil. 2. Sect. 1. That Christ merited for himselfe Phil. 2. 9. Luk. 24. 26. y Phil. 2. 3 4. 5. z ver 6 7 8. vers 9. a Prov. 15. 33. 18. 12. Luk. 18. 14. b Phil. 2. 9. c Act 13 33. Psal. 2. 7. Heb. 1. 5. Rom. 1. 4. Heb. 1. 4 5. * 1 Cor. 15. 14. 17. d 1 Pet. 1. 21. * See Cyril Thesaur lib. 3. cap. 2. Christs â—…xaltation was bis manifestation to be the Sonne of God Ioh. 17. 5. Esay 45. 22. Apoc. 5. 12. Heb. 2. 9. e See D. Fulke in his answer to the Rhemists Heb. 2. 9. Object 3. If Christ obeyed the Law for us then we need not to obâ—…y it 2 Pet. 1. 10. Object 4. If we bee justified by the obedience of his life what needed hee to die for us Our fourth rea son to what end served the obe dience Christ iâ—… we bâ—… justified onely by his susserings f â—…oh 8. 29. g Matth.
3. 15. h Matth. 5. 17. i Rom. 8. 4. Ioh. 6. 63. Our fifth reason that there are two parts of justification Rom. 5. 9. 19. Object Then there be two formall causes of justification That justificati on doth not consist onâ—…ly in remission of sinnes Rom. 4 6 7. Their chiese argument because remission is as well of sinnes of omission as of commission m Psal. â—…43 2. Gal. 2. 16. Object By remission we are made innocent and therefore just Three arguments of I. P. 1 2 3 k De justis l. 2. c. 6 l De justis l. 2. c. 1 m Lib. 3. c. 11. sect 2. n Sect. 3. o De justif l. 2. c. 1. 6. The arguments of J. F. p Gal. 4. 4 5. q Gen. 35. 2. Zâ—…ch 3. 4. r Mat. 22. 11 12. s Exod. 28. 43. t Exod. 28. 36. 38 u Iâ—…r 23. 6. * Athanâ—…s tom 2 advers eos qui negant Christum â—…x natura noâ—…ra sâ—…mpsisse primitias Whether the passive obedience of Christ onely be represented in the Sacraments * Rom. 4. 11. x Gal. 3. 27. y Eph. 5. 30. Private opinions concerning the forme of justification * Disp. deâ—… Câ—…r 〈◊〉 4 part c. 4. Christi justitiam nobis imputari est mâ—…rum commentum Their depraving of our Doctrine Bellarm. de just l. 2. c. 7. §. quart * A. W. pag. 180. n. 4. b Centur. 1. li. 2. c. 4. col 240. lin 3 c Ib. col 241. lin 41. Scharp de justif controv 8. arg 2. controv 9. Their owne errors which besides the principall are six The two first of the sixe d Lib. 1. c. 3. §. 7. c. * Lib. 1. c. 4. §. 16. c. 6. §. e Rom. 5. 9. f Rom. 5. 19. Rom. 4. 6. 8. The third error g 1 Job 1. 7. The fourth error The fift error Rom. 10. 4. Obiect 1. h Rom. 5. 14. i 1 Cor. 15. 22. k Rom. 5. 19. l Rom. 5. 17 18. m Epist. 190. See infr lib. 5. chap. 4. Object 2. n 2 Pet. 1 4. o Epist. 190. Object 3. p Apoc. 13. 8. q Their afflictions were the reproch of Christ. Heb. 11. 26. viz. in his members r Act. 15. 11. s 1 Cor. 10. 3. 4. Obiect 4 t Rom. 3. 24. 15. The sixth error u Lib. 6. c. 4. sect 6. * Covenant of Grace cap. 8. page 94. n. 5. A Caveat for young Divines The necessity of imputation of Christs righteousnesse Object Act. 26. 18. The end Supreame Psal. 145. 17. a Rom. 3. 24. b Ephes. 1. 6. c Rom. 3. 25 26. d Psal. 119. 1. e Ephes. 2. 9. Rom. 4. 2. f 1 Cor. 1. 30 31. The subordinate end 1 Salvation g Mat. 6. 9 10 11. h Mat. 6. 33. i Rom. 14. 17. k 1 Thes. 4. 3. l Rom. 6. 22. m 1 Pet. 1. 9. n Rom. 8. 24. o Tit. 3. 7. p Rom. 8. 30. q Act 26. 18. 2. Certainety of Salvation r Rom. 5. 1 2. Rom. 4. 13 16. Sanctification s Eph. 2. 8 9 10. The parts of justification t Rom. 10. 4. Redemption reconciliation adoption comprised under Iustification u Ep 17. Col. 1. 14 * 2 Cor. 5. 19. x 1 〈◊〉 2. 7. Heb. 9. 22. y Col. 1. 14. 1 Pet. 1 19. z Rom. â—… 10. Col. 1. 20. a Eph. 1. 5 6. b Rom. 5. 19. c Gal. â—… 4 5. The fruits and consequents oâ—… Iustification The heads of Controversie The Papists confound justification and sanctification The Papists ground their â—…rrour upon the like notation of the Latine words a De justif lib. 2. cap. 9. b De iustif l. 2. c. 3. sâ—…ct Ad secundum Potest aliquis sieri iustus tum in tâ—…insecè per adoptionem iustitiae tum extrinsecè per declarationem c Rom. 5. 19. d 2 Cor. 5. 21. The Hebrew verbe in the first conjugation or in Cal. In Niphal Nitsdaq In Piel Tsiddeq In Hiphil Hitsdiq Deut. 25. 1. Prov. 17. 15. To justifie is a judiciall word translated from Courts of judgement Esai 50. 8. Rom. 8 33. Esai 53. 11. Dan. 12. 3. In Hithpael Hitstaddeq The Hebrew word never signifieth to make just by righteousnesse inherent e Prov. 17. 15. The like use in other words f Levit. 13. 3. 6. c. g Luk. 1. 46. h 1 Ioh. 5. 10. i 2 Thes. 2. 11. k Luk. 23. 1â—… l Luk. 7. 29. m Rom. 4. 6. The Greeke words first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 7. 29. Luk. 10 29. Luk. 16. 15. Ecclus. 10. 32. 13. 26. Rom. 3. 26. 24 28. 30. Rom. 4. 5 6. Rom. 8. 30 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclus. 7. 5. Rom. 3 4. Apoc. 22. 11. a Matth. 11. 19. Luk. 7. 37. Luk. 7. 29. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Matth. 12. 37 Jam. 2. 21 23. 24 25. Eccles. 1. 28 31. 5. 23. 14. Eccles 26. verâ—… uit Act. 13. 38 39. Rom. 6. 7. Luk 18. 14. 1 Cor. 6. 11. Rom 3 20. Rom. 4 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gâ—…l â—… 4. Râ—…m 5. 9. Gal 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. Rom. 3 24 28. Gal. 2. 16. 17. 3. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18. 1 Cor. 15. 17. Rom. 5. 18. c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the purall number Psalm 119. 8. 12. Rom. 2. 26. d Luk 1. 6. e Gen. 26. 5. Zaâ—…h 3. 7. f â—…eut 5 3â—… 6. 1. Deut 8. 11. 11. 1. 1 King 2. 3. 8. 58. Nehem. 1. 7. Gen. 26. 5. Deut. 4. 8. Rom. 9. 4 Heb. 9. 1. 10. Apoc. 15. 4. Apoc. 19. 8. Matth. 22. 11 12. Gal 5. 27. Apoc. 3. 18. Apoc. 3. 4. 6. 11. 7. 9. Matth. 5. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the singular number Psâ—… 19. 10. Rom. 1. 32. Rom. 5. 18. Rom. 8. 4. Rom. 5. 16. The first reason that the benefit of iustification is expressed in such terms as doe not imply insusion of iustice but imputation Rom. 4. 6 7 8. Rom. 5. 9 10. 2 Cor. 5. 19 21. Act. 26. 18. Ioh. 3. 18. Act. 13. 39. Rom. 3. 21 22. Act. 10. 43. The whole processe of justification is judiciall Rom. 8. 33 34. g Rom. 3. 19. h Act. 16. 14. i Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. Rom. 2. 13. Bellarmine relateth foure significations of the word justification a De justif l. 1. cap. 1. First that it signifieth the Law Psal 119. 8. 12. b Discovery of translations cap. 1. § 50. and cap. 8. c In Luk. 1. 6. and in Apoc. 19. 8. d Cap. 2. sect 5. Luk. 1. 6. e Rom 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. 3 11. Their Argument retorted f Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8. g Rom. 1. 32. h Rom. 3. â—…1 * Rom. 5. 18. Apoc. 19. 8. fortè The second and third signification Lib. 1. Cap. 1. The second signification proved by three testimonies The first 1 Cor. 6. 11. Act 2. 38. Mark 1. 4. Rom. 6. 3 4. Tit. 3. 5. Bellarmines second testimony Rom. 8 30. verse 33. His third Testimonie Rom. 4. 5. His
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
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
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
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
that wee are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall bee shewed they could not meane that wee are sanctified by faith alone Secondly remission of sinne which is the not imputing or forgiving of sinne is by Augustine included in the signification of the word which by Bellarmine is excluded who in stead of remission hath substituted the extinction and abolition of sinne So that although he retaine the name which hee confoundeth with sanctification yet the thing thereby signified which is the maine benefit which wee receive from Christ by which wee are both delivered from hell and entitled to heaven hee hath taken away as I have heretofore declared If this answere doe not content the Papists let them understand that when the use of any word in the Fathers borrowed from the Scriptures differeth from the perpetuall use thereof in the Scriptures wee are bound to follow the infallâ—…ble authority of Gods Word rather than the testimony of any man or men whatsoever And for this wee have Augustines owne warrant who challengeth liberty to reject in other mens writings though never so learned andholy what is not agreeable to the Scriptures Talis ego sum saith he in scriptis aliorum tales volo esse intellectorâ—…s meorum § X. I come to his reasons which are three The first in every motion or mutation there are two termini a quo and ad quem the name being taken from the latter as in illumination there is a change from darknesse to light in calesaction from cold to heate Iustistcation is a mutation or change Therefore in justification there are two termini a quo sc. peccatum ad quem justitia from which it hath his denomination and therefore besides remisston of sinne there must accrew righteousnesse I answer that mutations are either reall or relative If hee speake of reall mutations I deny the assumption for I have proved before that justification is no such mutation If hee speake of relative mutations I grant the syllogisme for even in such there are two termini as in liberation terminus a quo is bondage ad quem is freedome in marrying the change is from being a Batchelor to bee a Husband from being a Maid to bee a Wife so in Reconciliation Redemption Adoption and so also in justification there is a change from guilt of sinne to righteousnesse imputed from being guilty of sinne and damnation to bee accepted as righteous unto life from being the bondslave of sinne and Satan and obnoxious to hell and condemnation to bee not onely made a free-man but also a Citizen of Heaven In all these are great changes yet not reall or positive whereby any inherent forme either going before is abolished or new acquired but onely relative § XI His second reason may thus bee framed If justification bee given to us of God not onely that wee may escape the paines of hell but also that wee may obtaine the rewards of the heavenly life then justification doth not consist onely in the remission of sinnes which onely freeth from punishment but giveth not glory but the former is true therefore the latter Ans. All this wee freely confesse but first the thing principally intended that to justification besides remission of sinnes renovation concurreth hee doth not goe about to prove Onely hee proveth that justification doth not consist in remission onely in which wee agree with him though not in the other thing which is to bee added for wee adde making righteous by imputation hee by infusion or renovation Secondly the proofes of his assumption wee doe not approve The first Rom. 6. 22. yee have your fruit unto sanctification but the end everlasting life The whole verse is this But now being made free from sinne and become servants to God that is being redeemed or justified ye have your fruit unto holinesse that is the fruit of your justification is your sanctification and the end of both is glorification or everlasting life For this text doth neither prove that justification is not remission of sinne onely not that it is to bee confounded with sanctification which is here made the fruit of it nor that it conferreth everlasting life For if the holy Ghost speaking of justification had mentioned onely remission of sinne without mentioning any other thing concurring thereunto as sometimes hee doth Act. 13. 38 39. 26. 18. Rom. 4. 7 8. his meaning might be that being freed from sinne and mancipated to God that is redeemed for manu capti and servati are mancipia and servi and to bee redeemed is to have remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. yee have the fruit of your redemption unto sanctification according to that Luk. 1. 73 74 75. and the end both of your redemption and sanctification everlasting life his second proofe is Rom 8. 30 whom hee hath justified hee hath glorified for so might I say to whom hee hath given remission of sinnes to them hee giveth the inheritance Act. 26. 18. them he maketh blessed Psal. 32. 1. them hee justifieth Rom. 4. 6 7. Act. 13. 38 39. and them hee glorifieth And whereas hee saith that in that order of causes set downe in that place every latter is the effect of the former as glorification of justification justification of vocation vocation of predestination that may bee a reason why in that serie causarum sanctification is left out because it is not the cause but the way to glorification Eph. 2. 10. and the cognizance and character of them that shal be glorified Act. 20. 32. 26. 18. his third proofe out of 2 Tim. 4. 8. there is a Crown of righteousnesse laid up for me is nothing to the purpose For as Augustine saith donando delicta fecit se Coronae debitorem by pardoning offences hee oweth the Crowne and Bernard there is a Crowne of righteousnesse which Paul expecteth sed justitiae Dei non suae but of Gods righteousnesse not of his for it is just he should render what hee oweth and hee oweth what hee hath promised § XII But the assumption though not proved by him is approved and granted by us as agreeing with that justification which wee teach and disagreeing from that which is taught by the Papists For wee teach that in justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse wee are both freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and also are in Christ accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And further wee teach that howsoever the parts of justification viz. remission of sinne and acceptation unto life in the faithfull and the causes thereof in Christ that is to say his bloud and his obedience doe alwayes concuâ—…re for whosoever hath remission of sinnes is also accepted unto life and contrariwise and our Saviour in his obeying suffered and in his sufferings obeyed yet the causes in Christ and effects unto the faithfull are to bee distinguished For by imputation of his sufferings properly wee are freed from punishment
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
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
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
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
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
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
purpose to give us wherewith to merit then would he have infused most perfect righteousnesse into us which should not have beene stained with any sinfulnesse neither should need remission or indulgence But we are so farre from having this power to merit heaven that the best of us had need to pray with David as being not more just than he Enter not into judgement with thy servants O Lord c. for if thou shouldest marke what is amisse who should stand and with the Apostles as being not more holy than they forgive us our trespasses c. our chiefe righteousnesse in this life consisting as Augustine truely saith in remission of sinnes rather than in perfection of virtues Now whiles we are sinners in our selves as all are wee cannot merit any thing but punishment at the hands of God and whiles wee deserve hell how can we possibly merit heaven § X. These were the arguments which Bellarmine tooke upon him to answere but could not satisfie Now wee are to adde some others Our third reason therefore is this If we cannot merit so much as temporall blessings at the hands of God then much lesse eternall But wee cannot merit so much as temporall blessings at Gods hands and therfore much lesse eternall 1. The assumption I prove thus first by the confession of Iacob Gen. 32. 10. that he was lesse than the least of Gods mercies Of David concerning mankinde in generall Psal. 8. 4. and concerning himselfe in particular 2 Sam. 7. 18. Secondly if by all our labours and endevours wee are not able to merit of God so mâ—…ch as a piece of bread but must beg it at Gods hands then can wee not merit eternall life of him But the former is true for therefore our Saviour hath taught us to make this daily praier that God would give us day by day our daily bread To this purpose Saint Hierome saith well that a man could not suffer any thing worthy the heavenly glory though it were such as this present life is But Chrysâ—…stome goeth further if we should dye ten thousand times c. as he was before Anastasius for what good things soever we doe we are not answerable to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the aire alone which we breathe Basill Those which are esteemed retributions are granted to men onely for the Lords bounty sake for all the righteousnesse of mortall men doe not match the gifts already vouchfafed much lesse those which are to come which exceed our thought But most agreeable to our doctrine is that assertion of Gregâ—…rius Ariminensis quòd â—…dum aeâ—…erna vita c. that no act of man though proceeding from never so great charity doth condignely merit with God not onely eternall life but not so much as any other reward whether eternall or temporall § XI Our fourth reason That which we attaine unto by right of adoption as our inheritance purchased by Christ and prepared for us from the beginning of the world without any respect to our merits that we doe not obtaine by our merits Vnto eternall life we doe attaine by right of adoption as our inheritance purchased by Christ and prepared for us from the beginning of the world and that without any respect of our merits Therefore we doe not attaine to eternall life by our merits The assumption is manifest for therefore in many places of Scripture the Kingdome of heaven is called our inheritance Act. 20. 32. 26. 18. Gal. 3. 18. Ephes. 1. 14. 18. 5. 5. Col. 3. 24. and that an eternall and incorruptible inheritance Heb. 9. 15. 1 Pet. 1. 4. And of this kingdome the faithfull are heires Iam. â—… 5. For therefore are we adopted the sons of God that we may be heires heires of God and fellow heires of Christ Rom. 8. 17. Gal. 4. 7. and to the same end are we justified by his grace that we might according to hope bee made heires of eternall life Tit. 3. 7. Bellarmine himselfe hath taught as we have heard that we are entituled to the Kingdome of heaven jure adoptionis And in that we begin to be the sons of God wee begin â—…o have right to the inheritance of the eternall â—…elicity now we begin to be the sonnes of God before wee begin to bring forth good workes And hereby appeareth the truth of the proposition for we have our right of adoption not by merit but by the free grace of God who hath predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Iesus Christ to himselfe according to the good pleasure of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved And this inheritance was prepared for us from the beginning of the world Mat. 25 34. If it be objected that as it is called an inheritance so also a reward and reward presupposeth merit for so the Councill of Trent teacheth that eternall life is to be propounded to the godly both as grace that is a free gift promised by Christ and as a reward duely to be rendred to their merits according to Gods promise I answere that eternall life is no such reward as presupposeth merit for it is a free reward freely promised freely given Neither can those things stand together which the Councill of Trent hath conjoyned that eternall life should both bee gratia a free gift graciously promised and freely bestowed and also a due wages to be rendred to desert neither if it be the reward of inheritance as it is called Col. 3. 24. which is freely bestowed on the sonnes of God it cannot be a mercenary wages which is due to hired servants § XII Our fifth reason If good workes doâ—… merit eternall life then are they causes of it for merits be the causes of that which is merited But good workes are not the cause of eternall life therefore they doe not merit it The assumption I prove first from that received testimony of Bernard that good workes are via regni non causa regnandi Quid autem hac conclusione firmius saith Cassander who also saith that Thomas Bradwardin and divers other Schoolemen deny good workes to bee the cause of the eternall reward and that some who call them causes doe meane Causam sine qua non which properly is no cause Secondly true causes of salvation may bee trusted in for the obtaining of salvation Our good workes are not to be trusted in for the obtaining of salvation Therefore they are not true causes thereof The proposition is Bellarmines Licet confidere in omni vera causa The assumption also in effect is his For if it be most safe as he truly saith by reason of the uncertainty of our owne righteousnesse which none of them can be certaine of without speciall revelation and danger of vaine glory not to trust in our owne merits but to repose â—…ur whole affiance in the only mercy and
calleth merits yet because these good works or merits unto which it is rendred are not from our selves but from grace it selfe therefore is called grace non ob aliud nisi quia gratis datur for no other cause but because it is freely given nor for that it is not given to merits or good works but because they themselves are given to which it is given And againe that eternall life is the reward of true righteousnesse to which righteousnes if it were from our selves and were to bee found in us the reward should be due as the stipend thereof but being not from our selves but from the grace of God therefore to us eternall life is grace as being the free reward of grace to which as it is freely promised so it is freely given And the like is to be said of the other places some wherof I have before alleaged as being pregnant to our purpose Wherein as in innumerable other places Augustine doth not speake of the workes of naturall men but of the workes of the faithfull and regenerate proceeding from grace to which not as to merits but as to the free gifts of God eternall life is freely given And it is apparent that he speaketh of the faithfull who are in the state of salvation even then when they are to be saved ut intelligeremus non pro meritis nostris Deum nos ad eternam vitam sed pro sua miseratione perducere And againe cum pr aemium venerit sua dona coronabit non merita tua And againe pro nihilo salvos facies illos nihil invenis unde salves multum invenis unde damnes To these three I will out of very many places which might be alleaged out of Augustine against the condigne merit of our workes adde a few more 4. For writing on those words Psal. 142 Propter nomen tuum Domine vivificabis me in justitia tua spoken in the future tence of a faithful and regenerate man viz. the Authour of that Psalme in â—…ua justitia saith he non in mea non quia egâ—… merui sed quia tu miser eris nam si meum ostenderem meritum nihil abs te mererer nisi supplicium In thy righteousnesse not in mine not because I have merited but because thou hast mercie For if I should shew my merit I should deserve of thee nothing but punishment 5. Againe writing on those words of the 62. Psalme Melior est misericordia tua super viâ—…as he saith multa sunt vitâ—… humana sed Deus unicam vitam 〈◊〉 noâ—… illam dat nobâ—… qâ—…asi propter merita nostrâ—… sed propter misericordiam suam 6. Si vellet pro meritis agerâ—… non inveniret nisi quos damnaret 7. Promisit enim bâ—…minibus divinitatem mortalibus immortalitatem peccatoribâ—…s 〈◊〉 abjectis glorificationem quicquid promisit indignis 〈◊〉 â—…t non quasi operibâ—…s merces promitteretur sed gratia à nomine sâ—…o gratis 〈◊〉 quta hoc ip sum quòd justè vivit in quantum â—…mo potest justè vivâ—…re non meriti â—…ani sed beneficii est divini 8. Meâ—…itis suis niâ—…il tribunt justâ—… non tribuerat â—…tum nisi misericordia 〈◊〉 O Deâ—…s 9. Noâ—… pro merito quidem accipies vitam aterâ—…am sed tantum pro gratia 10. Debita redditur poena damnato indebita gratia liberato ut nec ille se indigâ—… quer atur nec dignum se iste glorietur Si autem gratia utique nullis meritis reddita sed gratuita bonitate donata 12. And againe Gratia evacuatur si non gratis donatur sed meritis redditur § IV. In the fourth place he citeth for us Prosper by the halves or not so much for in the beginning of that Chapter which Bellarminâ—… citeth he speaketh of those who having lived in wickednesse are converted a little before their end and saith this happeneth ut indubitanter agnoscas gratuita esse Dei munera â—…icut nulla sunt tam detestanda faeinora quae possunt gratiae arcere donum ita nulla posse tam praeclara opera existere quibus hoc quòd gratis tribuitur per retributiâ—…nis judicium debeatur Therefore no debt due to us from God no merit in us afterwards he saith that those who were sent into the vineyard at the eleventh houre did represent those who are called in the end of their life and that the Lord did make them who came at the eleventh houre equall with those who wrought all day non lâ—…bori pretium solvens sed divitias bonitatis suae in eâ—…s quos sine operibus elegit â—…ffundens ut etiam hi qui in multo labore sudarunt nil amplius quà m novissmi acceperunâ—… intelligant donum se gratiae non operum accepisse mercedem not paying an hiâ—…e to the labour but powring forth the riches of his bounty on them whom hee chose without workes that they also who tooke great paines and received no more than the last should understand that they received a gift of grace and not the wages of their worke By the day-peny the equality of eternall life is signified as Prosper teacheth as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth And therefore it is not rendred as an hire or wages to mens labours for then the reward should have beene proportionable to the labour but as a gift of grace which the Lord bestoweth according to his good pleasure Matth. 20. 15. Heâ—…e Bellarmines threed-bare answere that Prosper denieth eternall life to be the wages of such workes or merits as goe before grace but granteth it to be wages of those which proceed from grace is not worth the refuting for the workes to which the day-penney was given were the workes of the labourers which they performed after their calling Unto which notwithstanding it was given not as the price or hire of the labour but as a gift of grace for if the reward was not the deserved wages of their workes but the free gift of their Lord then their workes were not merits of their reward But that Prosper did not deny true merits which proceed from grace Bellarmine saith it is plaine by the same place where he saith Bona merita sequi in homine post adeptam gratiam non autem praecedere I answere If hee had said so his meaning had beene the same with that which he learned of Augustine that good workes doe not goe before but follow grace But indeed there is no such saying of Prosper in that place § V. The fifth is Gregory the great On those words of Iob Si habuerâ—… quippiam justum non 〈◊〉 sed meum judicem depreâ—…abor which it selfe is an excellent testimony against merits commenteth thus Velut si apertius fateaâ—…ur dicens si ad â—…pus virtutis excrâ—…'vero ad vitam non ex meritis sed ex venia convalesco as if he should more plainely confesse and say though I grow up to the worke
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
one to the other that which is given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. 4. for debitum non est gratuitum If eternall life bee gratia gratis data si gratis datur then is not due by desert And if the good worke also be grace how can it deserve a reward and so great a reward from him that gave it For Bellarmine hath taught us in the beginning of this seventeenth Chapter that if the worke bee much lesse than the promised reward it should not be a merit of condignity in respect of the worke If saith hee the Master of the vineyard should promise to a labourer for his dayes worke not the day-peny but an hundred crownes and yet the heavenly reward given to a good worke doth incomparably surpasse the unequall proportion that is betweene an hundred crownes and a daies worke § VI. In his second argument he trifleth egregiously He saith there is a proportion betweene the fountaine and the river running from it Grace is the fountaine Ioh. 4. 14. and eternall life is the river which maketh glad the City of God Psal. 46. 5. where according to the Latine it is thus read Fluminis impetus laetificat Civitateâ—… Dei which Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth thus Fluminis impetus laetificat Civiâ—…taem Dei i. Non timebit populus Dei quando turbabitur terra ergo c. Literally the place is understood of the Brooke Kidron and of the city of Ierusalem But if it must bee allegorized then as by the fountaine grace is to be understood according to that of Ioh. 4. 14. so by the river should be understood perseverance and increase of grace running to eternall life as the sea wherein the course of all rivers endeth And therefore such as is the proportion of the fountaine to the sea such is of grace or of a gracious worke to eternall life This was his first analogy the second is no lesse ridiculous Moreover saith he there is a proportion betweene the ascent and descent of water for it doth ascend as high as it doth descend and therefore the grace of the Spirit which descended from heaven will ascend as high No doubt if it be conveyed in a close conduit pipe § VII His third Reason Eternall life is the day-peny of those that labour in the vineyard Matth. 20. But the day-peny is the just hire of the dayes labour So is eternall life The day-peny which was given to those that wrought but one houre doth signifie eternall life which is thereby proved not to bee an hire rendred as due to equall labour but as a free reward bestowed by the bounty of the Lord who â—… may doe with his owne what he pleaseth For if it were the just wages for the whole dayes labour then he that wrought but one houre should have had but one twelfe part of the wages His fourth Reason Seed in vertue physicall is equall to that thing wherof it is the seed and containeth it Grace is the seed and eternall life that whereof it is the seed therefore iâ—… vertue morall Grace is equall to glory Answ. This argument is grounded upon a similitude of grace and seed which are not like in those things for which this comparison is brought For neither is seede the meritorious cause of that whereof it is the seed as hee supposeth grace to bee nor grace the seminall cause of eternall life for seed is the materiale principium But grace meaning grace inherent is neither the materiale principium nor the meritorious cause nor any other cause of salvation unles it be 〈◊〉 sine qua non which is no cause Yea but gracâ—… saith he is called the seed of GOD 1 Ioh. 3. 9. Answ. The seede of God properly is Gods word sowne in our hearts as the seede of our new and spiriâ—…uall life in this world This seede conceived by the power of the Spirit is the grace of regeneration as the materiale principium of our spirituall life meant in that place of S. Iohn which alwaies abideth in the childe of God who being once borne of God is never unborne againe The fruits in respect whereof it is called seed are the fruits of a godly life For the seed of Gods Word being sowne in our hearts and there conceived and taking root fructifieth and bringeth forth increase in some thirty in some sixty in some aâ—… hundred fold The grace of regeneration therefore is called seed in respect of the fruit of good works which it bringeth forth in this life And further the doing of good workes is compared to sowing of seede which hath relation to the great harvest as also the committing of the dead bodies of the faithfull to the earth For even as he that casteth his seed into the ground doth it in hope of increase at the next harvest or as hee that committeth the dead body to the earth as seede doth it in hope of increase at the great harvest so hee which soweth in righteousnesse to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape everlasting life And as the seed cast into the ground is not cast away but is recompenced with increase at the harvest And as the body though sowne in corruption doth not perish but riseth in incorruption at the great harvest so he that soweth the seed of good workes though hee may seeme to cast them upon the waters as Salomon speaketh hee shall not lose thereby but hee shall bee rewarded an hundred-fold and at the great harvest hee shall inherit everlasting life But as the increase in harvest is not to bee asscribed to the merit of the sower but to the blessing of God and as the raising of the dead body to incorruption at the last day is not to bee attributed to the merit of committing it as seed to the earth but to the merit and power of CHRIST in whom wee are made alive againe so the reaping of everlasting life at the great harvest is not to bee asscribed to our merit but to the merit of Christ who hath purchased it for us and to the undeserved mercie of God who crowneth his owne graces in us So if wee sowe to our selves in righteousnesse wee shall reape in mercie as the Prophet speaketh § IX His fifth argument concludeth nothing to the purpose Eternall life saith hee is a certaine supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles bâ—…th efficient and formall But merit which consisteth in love is also a supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles both efficient and formall therefore they have aproportion betweene themselves and the one leadeth to the other as the right way to the end Answ. I grant that the grace of sanctification is the right way to glorification but no meritorious cause thereof That there is a proportion of likenesse in the respects mentioned but no proportion of equality 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
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
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