Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n good_a justification_n justify_v 3,020 5 8.4033 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A45156 The righteousness of God revealed in Gospel, or, An impartial enquiry into the genuine doctrine of St. Paul in the great, but much controverted article of justification / by Mr. John Humfrey. Humfrey, John, 1621-1719. 1697 (1697) Wing H3708; ESTC R16470 70,839 75

There are 6 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

obey the Gospel For what Reason If not that thereby they might actually partake of these general Benefits which arise from that Reconciliation Christ hath made by his Death Which can suppose no Conditions in us being the immediate Effects of Christ's Propitiation and must be distinguished from what follows Reconciliation on our Parts But as to the Particular Effects belonging to some Persons as distinguished from others the Question arises Whether God out of his infinite Goodness do bestow them on those whom he designs for Happiness without regard to any Act of theirs Or whether by the Gospel be hath limited the Conveyance of them to the Performance of certain Conditions There is no Question but that if nothing but Freeness of Grace be to be look'd at that is much freer which requires no Conditions nor expects any But if they be expected whether out of Gratitude or otherwise they are real Conditions as to the End But we are to look not only to the Freeness of God's Grace which no doubt was the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace but to the Author and to the Terms of it The Author of it is God himself who out of his Infinite Goodness hath sent his Son to be a Propitiation for our Sins and we cannot suppose any Covenant made by him to be repugnant to the Perfections of the Divine Nature Now Holiness and Righteousness are essential Attributes of God and any such Covenant which in the Consequence of it overthrows the Rules of Righteousness and Holiness must be look's on as contrary to the Pure and Holy Nature of God But such a Covenant as consists only in absolute Promises if it can be called a Covenant must supersede any Obligation on Man's Part to any Duty as a Condition of enjoying the Benefit of those Promises and consequently overthrow the Rules of Righteousness Psal 11.7 But the Righteous Lord loveth Righteousness And he that doth Righteousness is Righteous 1 John 3.7 even as he is Righteous How is it then possible to conceive that God should make such a Covenant of Grace with Mankind as should have no regard to the Practise of real Righteousness And this Supposition must lessen our esteem of the Divine Nature and Perfections overthrow the Design of Religion and make God a Respecter of Persons by taking no Notice of their inward Qualities and Dispositions Which are things of such dangerous Consequence that I can hardly believe that any who pretend to love the Lord Jesus Christ in Sincerity should entertain such Principles from whence they do too naturally follow For if any Person should make it his Business to render Christianity suspected as a Design to Promote Libertinism under a Pretence of advancing Free Grace he could not make use of any Hypothesis more effectual than this That God requires no Conditions in order to the Benefit of his Promises But to suppose that God is so Gracious as to forgive the Sins of truly humble and penitent Sinners who resolve by the Grace of God to depart from Iniquity and to live as becomes the Gospel is so far from any Incongruity to the Divine Nature that it tends more to advance our Apprehensions of God's Goodness joyned with his Wisdom and Holiness and so brings Mankind to a due Love of God and a Hatred of Sin As to the Terms of this Covenant I think it not possible for any unprejudiced Person to read the New Testament and not to see that it still supposes Conditions on our parts to make us Partakers of the Benefit of Christ's Sufferings But it is possible for Men to be so fond of a particular Opinion which they have before taken up that they may accommodate all places to that darling Notion I mean as to the absolute freeness of God's Grace Which if it be pursued must everthrow as well the Satisfaction of Christ as the Conditions on our Part. But here lies the great Difficulty How can we be justified without a perfect righteousness And our own Performances at the best make but an imperfect Righteousness and therefore the perfect Righteousness of Christ must be imputed to us And if a perfect Righteousness to be joined for our Justification This is the Force of all the Reasoning I have met with about this Matter to which I shall give a plain and dictinct Answer 1. I am far from disowning the Righteousness of Christ to have been a perfect Righteousness or that it is the only meritorious Cause of our Justification Or to speak plainer I do freely own the Satisfaction of Christ to be the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace by Vertue whereof we are justified 2. That to be justified is to be put into a State of Grace and Favour with God I do not mean that we are justified by Inherent Righteousness i. e. that God justifies when he gives Grace but that upon our sincere performance of the Conditions on our part God receives us into a State of Favour or Grace And so deals with us as with righteous Persons and not meerly declares us to be such For although the Word Justifying be often used as a Forensick Word or a Law Term and so is opposed to Condemning yet that Use is not to be pressed too far because it will inclose us in many Difficulties about the Tribunal the Law the Plea the judicial Act and the several Causes Material and Formal c. all which I think tend more to darken than to clear this Point of Justification which ought to be kept out of School Terms and Logical Niceties as much as possible since St. Paul did not speak according to them in this Matter For so Adoption is Originally a Law Term used likewise by St. Paul and it would be hard straining to bring Adoption to all the Formalities of the Roman Law If we look into the Design of St. Paul we shall find it was to state the true Ground of our Acceptance with God which he shews could not be from any thing Mankind were able of themselves to perform in obedience to the Law because they were under guilt and could never clear themselves from it But God hath set forth his Son to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood Rom. 325 26. to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of Sins c. To declare at this time his Righteousness that he might be Just and the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus So that here we have the Foundation or Meritorious Cause the Propitiation of Christ the Goodness of God in accepting this Propitiation in order to Remission and Justification and the way we come to partake of it by Faith in Christ as it imbraces these Offers and carries along with it those sincere Endeavours obeying the Gospel which God accepts as our Evangelical Righteousness But to be Justified in St. Paul's Sense is to be admitted into the Grace and Favour of God on those Terms and so it doth not lie barely in Remission of Sins
Jew in the Second yet hath he such a Faith as belongs to the first such as the Ancients before Abraham had and so long as that Faith he hath does work by Love or by sincere Obedience to God according to his Light it will justifie him as well as that which is now farther required of us under the Gospel So my Book call'd The Axe laid to the Root of Separation p. 4. From Faith or Trust in God ' Goodness Grace or Mercy which any in every Nation that feared God and wrought Righteousness had thus to be accepted and pardoned before they knew this Ground or Foundation upon which the Righteousness thereof does stand to that Faith we have now who do know it From that Faith they had in God to save them of his Free Grace before the knowledge or our clearer knowledge of Christ and our Redemption by him to that Faith we have now to save us by the same Free Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Ye believe in God says Christ believe also in me where is a Faith and a Faith Consequently from Faith that is a believing in God to a Faith which is a believing in him through Christ the Foundation of our Faith upon the Revelation of the Gospel Even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ to wit since he is revealed Upon these words Mr. Rutherford supposing the Righteousness of Christ to be the formal Righteousness that justifies us thus opposes If our Righteousness and inherent Obedience may be of Grace esteemed formal Righteousness before God by a free Evangelick Paction and an Act of God's Free Will there is no need of Christ's Satisfaction Cou. Op. p. 172 173. I answer This Learned Man hath I account here understandingly exprest the very thing as it is and that he gives for the Reason of his denial is the very Ground upon which this Righteousness as I have explained it is made good If it were not for this Satisfaction of Christ there could be no such Righteousness on God's part or on Ours God should deal with us in his strict Justice and no Man be found righteous accounted or dealt with as so in the Earth But seeing upon this Satisfaction of Christ God may be righteous and abate the Terms as they were in one Covenant and impute them however for Righteousness by another we see how our Evangelick Obedience is indeed the Formal when Christ's Righteousness is the Meritorious Cause of our Justification Our Justification I must say passively taken that is the Formal Cause or Formal Reason or Form itself of that Righteousness whereby we are justified That which we do our selves through Grace or the Spirit acting us is this our Formal Righteousness and that is the Condition of our Justification actively taken and so of the Impunity and Life that follow as the Fruits of it That we may not stray here but keep our Middle-Way between the Extreams of Papist and Protestant we must distinguish Remission and Justification The Papists say Justification is Remission and Regeneration the Protestants say it is Remission and the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness When both then make Remission to be but part of Justification and Totum and Pars may be distinguished these may But I go farther That which goes before and that which comes after Justification must be distinguished from it but such is Remission Remission therefore is Two-fold Universal and Conditional the one Particular and Absolute the other Universal Conditional Remission goes before Justification Particular Absolute follows as its Effect and so Neither must be made the Formal Reason of it He hath given us the World of Reconciliation to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing their Trespasses And we are his Embassadors beseeching you in Christ's stead to be reconciled unto God 2 Cor 5.18 19 20. Here we see a Reconciliation of God to us obtained for the World so that a Non-imputation of Trespasses belongs to all which yet precedes our being Reconciled to him and consequently our actual Believing and Justification The Reconciliation of the World to God by the Non-imputation of Sin in this Text is indeed no other but what the Apostle otherwhere calls Redemption In whom we have Redemption through his Blood even the Forgiveness of Sins Eph. 1.7 Col. 1.14 Now that Redemption does precede Justification both in the Nature of the Thing and Intent of the Apostle is manifest Rom. 3.24 Being justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption that is in Christ Jesus Redemption is the Ground we see of our Justification and the Ground is necessarily first to be supposed before that which is built upon it And what is Redemption Redemption is Christ's procuring or purchase of Man's delivery from Wrath due to us according to the Law for Sin or of our discharge from the Penalty called sometimes Freedom from the Law sometimes Forgiveness of Sins by the Price of his Blood or Satisfaction in our behalf but to be given out to us no otherwise than as God and Christ please and that is upon the Terms of the Gospel Of this Remission which preceding Justification must be Universal for where it is Particular the Man is justified and Conditional for if it were Absolute all must be saved no Man must conceive me to imagine our Righteousness the Formal Cause or any Cause nay or Condition Nevertheless this General Remission being given out I say to particular Persons by a new Law or Covenant which requires of us to the participating thereof that we believe repent and walk sincerely before God this Evangelical Righteousness upon that Account is the Thing that Formally justifies us Upon our Faith God does account us Believers or Performers of this Law or Covenant that is righteous by the Righteousness of Faith the Forma per quam we are made so and then this Remission before Conditional becomes Absolute or Actual Remission so commonly called as the Effect together with a Right to Heaven of this Justification Now when the Protestants ordinarily that distinguish not Remission from Justification are vehement here in reference to Grace and Works and say that no Man does or can do any thing in order to the Remission of his Sin That there is nothing and can be nothing in the whole World interposed between our Sins and God's Wrath to stave that off us but Christ's Satisfaction which was made by him and accepted of God for us while we are Sinners Enemies and have no other Qualification so that therefore our Righteousness is so far from being any Cause Efficient Material or Formal that it is not so much as a Condition of it I say it is all true it is all granted The Absolute Free Grace of God and our Redeemer is to be received with the utmost Humility of our Hearts and Thankfulness Only one thing is necessary which is that it be understood aright It must be understood of
of Life by his Law of Grace or the Gospel and is our Formal Righteousness according to that Law being made so by that Act of Imputation which may be attributed to God or his Law when he imputes it to us for Righteousness as I have had it already By the Evangelical Law this is our Righteousness we are made righteous that is not guilty of the Non-performance of the Condition according to Mr. Baxter To this purpose aforesaid I will note that when in that remarkable Text Rom. 3.30 Predestination Calling Justification and Glorification are linked without mentioning Sanctification we must suppose that intended either in Calling or Justification and I have always received it under Calling that is Effectual Calling or Conversion Now a Man is converted and he believes and repents but this being no Righteousness according to the Law there comes after Calling Justification and it is that makes this imperfect Believing Repenting New Obedience to become our Righteousness by Imputation God's imputing it to us for Righteousness making it by that Act Et Juris Judicis to serve us in the room of such a Righteousness as is perfect rewarding it for Christ's sake as he would the other The having Faith Repentance New Obedience is one thing the having it accepted for Righteousness is another The one is Regeneration or Sanctification the other Justification and without the one there cannot be the other Fides inquiunt justitia nostra formalis esse non potest Concedo upon his Opinion he must say so not I tho' in the Popish Sence I say Concedo too At potest à Deo justitiae loco haberi ut preater ipsam nihil amplius à nobis flagitet ad justitiam consequendum says Mr. Wotton As for this Righteousness of God now in his imputing to the Believer his Faith or the Performance of the Evangelick Condition for Righteousness we must not conceive as Dr. Owen objects that here is an Imputation only of that which is ours so that accounting it an imperfect Righteousness God cannot deal with us but only according to an imperfect one When he does certainly deal with us according to a perfect one and we understand so by this Imputation Dr. Owen who never gave the Matter its due Consideration not perhaps Mr. Baxter neither Philosophizes thus There is an Imputation to us of a thing that is Ours and that is judging it Ours and dealing with us accordingly Or of a thing which is not Ours and that is by a Donation of it on some just Ground and dealing with us according to it made Ours Of this he makes the Application that our Righteousness cannot but Christ's must be that which is imputed to our Justification But I will Philosophize otherwise and so may any that * When ever we read of Imputing or Accounting to a Man a thing that is good it is an Act of Grace and Law-acceptilation and signifies something which is not Truman's Endeavour p. 222. please As there is therefore an imputing to a Person that which is His or that which is not His So is there an imputing also to a Person that which is partly His and partly not His but that which in the Effect may become His too by the Imputation Such is the Case here but never sunk in the Doctor 's Mind There are two things in the matter I have said before from Luther Our Faith and God's Imputation Our Faith or the Evangelick Condition performed which is Ours and God's Imputation which brings with it in the Effect I say that which was not Ours that is the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ his Satisfaction for Pardoning the Failings and his Merit for accepting that which is done though imperfect to the accounting us righteous and dealing with us no otherwise than if we were perfect A Man that has not a legal sinless Perfection for that is meant by the Ungodly Rom. 4.5 his Faith is accounted for Righteousness that is his Faith shall avail him as much to all intents and stand him in as much stead as a perfect sinless Righteousness would do says Sir Charles Wolesley in his Book of Evangelical Justification This is most certain that there is no Grace vouchsafed to a Sinner from God in order to Life but upon the Account of Christ's Satisfaction and Merit against the Socinian When this exceeding Grace and Favour therefore that an imperfect Righteousness is accepted in the room of a perfect one as is intended in this express Scripture that says Our Faith is imputed for Righteousness the Satisfaction and Merits of Christ must be supposed as its Foundation And consequently they are imputed to our Faith for its Acceptation as we say they are imputed to us for Ours That Christ's Righteousness is imputed to us we assume without Scripture but this is express that Righteousness is imputed and that our Faith is imputed for Righteousness and it will be strange if any shall question an Imputation of Christ's Merit to our Duty when it is accepted and accepted only through him Our Dissenting Brethren in their Printed Agreement Dec. 1692. have these Words God looking on the Good Works of Believers in his Son is pleased to accept and reward that which is sincere though accompanied with many Weaknesses and Imperfections I quote these Words not as rare but as the common Judgment to shew that an Imputation of Christ's Merit to our Duty is undeniable Here are the Believers Works and that is our imperfect inchoate Obedience and this accepted and it is accepted in Christ that must be through his Satisfaction and Merit and is rewarded too upon his Account What is there more in the accepting our Persons in Justification Our maimed Righteousness is accepted to Salvation as if it were perfect says one Dr. Owen cites for that it should be so Christ hath merited by his most perfect Righteousness When this unnamed Author says As if it were perfect he accounts it it is not so Legally or In se but Evangelically or quoad Effectum that is it stands us in the stead of a perfect one through the Merits of Christ And unto this saying of his whosoever he be does that Elder in the Revelations well accord who tells St. John that the Robes of the Saints which are their inherent Grace their Good Works or Holy Life are made white that is rewardable with Glory by their washing them in the Blood of the Lamb. We are accepted in the Beloved that is in Christ We are accepted in Christ no otherwise than our Duty is accepted that is as the Meritorious Cause of that Acceptance The Satisfaction and Merit of Christ is that upon the Account whereof God does justifie us But if Christ's Righteousness it self be imputed to us it is not Meritoriè upon the Account thereof but Formaliter that we are justified by it Before I yet quite leave Mr. Wotton there are two Texts most commonly urged by those that define Justification only by Remission
of it which I have been careful to keep to in my last Sheets Nay tho' I say farther that when the Satisfaction of another is imputed to the Justification of a Man the Trespasses of that other after a sort must be said imputed to him and yet neither is that Satisfaction Formaliter made his that is justified nor that Trespass Formaliter made his that makes the Satisfaction but Effective or Meritorie only in the one's bearing the Punishment and the other obtaining the Benefit of it This being understood when our Divines do account that we are justified by Christ's Satisfaction so as to be made just by it and accordingly to be made righteous by the Righteousness of another which is being made just by Imputation Such Words I count ought to be a little changed and the Sence verified It should not be said by but through Christ's Satisfaction through his Righteousness through the Imputation of it and then that Truth which is in it is this that through Christ's Satisfaction or Righteousness or Imputation of it as the Meritorious Cause which we know is an external Cause moving the Efficient to act we are indeed justified but by no means must we understand them so as that it is the Formal Cause of our Justification But the truth is here that our former Polemical Divines even the chief in opposition to a Man's being justified by any Works Merits or Righteousness of his own maintain'd against the Papists that it is by Christ's Righteousness Sub genere causae formalis that we are justified or that Christ's Righteousness is so made ours by Faith as to be the Formal Reason of our Justification Our excellent Dr. Davenant undertook this Task whosoever in those times did not but where the Scripture is for us we are to trust no Mortal against it The Question as he proposes it is Quae qualis illa justitia sit quae coram Deo hominem justificat hoc est cujus intuitu ipse Deus hominem à peccato poena peccati liberum pronunciet atque favore suo vita aeterna dignum reputet Let us define the Thing by its Form and speak this Hoc est in short Cujus intuitu hominem credentem justum reputat Now Cujus intuitu all know is all one with Id propter quod that is the Meritorious Cause only when he would maintain that Christ's Righteousness is the Causa formalis that is Causa per quam we are justified He therefore being put to it is forced to affirm thus In Justificatione talis formalis causa ponenda est quae simul meritoria esse possit His Reason for it is out of the same Quiver that is more Words for the bearing out an absurd Affirmation by putting some Face upon it I am sufficiently assured he hath shot beyond the Mark and I will not go after his Arrow By the way there are two places I remember where we are said to be justified by Christ's Blood but it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and should be translated through his Blood and must be interpreted no otherwise than Cujus intuitu that is as the Meritorious Cause I say not as by Faith in his Blood which is the Formal Cause of our Justification When we speak therefore and allow our Divines to speak of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as they ordinarily do we must understand them so as never to make our selves the Proprietors of that righteousness Legally or any way else impossible or that Faith so makes it ours as to be our Formal Righteousness which when we see such great Divines have held no wonder if the lesser Fry do swallow but that it is the Cause for which as I have said before not the Cause by which we are justified And here I will give Mr. Williams Notice that this is the Reason why the very Righteousness of Christ cannot be imputed to us but in the Effects because I say that if it were imputed to us In se it must according to our opposite Brethren be then our Formal Righteousness which he and I are to deny I must confess I think Mr. Williams might not have so fully digested this before as likewise myself as he may now and that the Expression of his which I have exagitated in my Book with that which follows in his that Christ's Righteousness is pleadable by the Believer as if himself had done and suffered what Christ did as also To impute to one what is suffered by another is to esteem the one undertaken for in the Sufferings of the other and to deal with him as if himself had suffered are shot too high For if a Man had made Satisfaction himself or God did impute Christ's Satisfaction to him so as if himself had made it then were this his Formal Righteousness and there were no need of that of Faith this alone being that which must immediately justifie him If therefore there be such a thing to be expected ever from Mr. Williams as any Vestigia retrorsum I will be ready to look for the Prints thereof made in the Words I have quoted as well as his Brethren may in any others But the Difficulty concerning the Point of the Concurrence of Christ's Righteousness and Ours in the matter of Justification is not yet off our hands For there is a Sermon of Mr. Gibbons that Mr. Baxter often commended which I think fit to mention This Gentleman hath treated the Doctrine of Justification as I. Righteousness says he is a Conformity to the Law A Man is actually justified when he is constituted righteous The New Law runs thus He that believes shall not perish The Believer keeps or fulfils this Law Faith therefore is imputed to him for Righteousness The Law-Giver by his very making the Law constitutes him righteous and the Judge must pronounce him so The Gospel then justifies Qua lex Lata Faith justifies Vi Legis latae As the King's Stamp gives the Value to the Money I set this together and quote it for the clearness of it and my approbation to it Nevertheless he tells us also That it is Christ's Satisfaction in respect to the Law of Works that is our proper Legal Righteousness and I call it says he Our Righteousness because it becomes imputed to us upon believing These are Words that in appearance are Ambidextrous holding with the Hound and running with the Hare as the Proverb is unless we put an Understanding upon them which I am not sure that very ingenuous but young Man did As likewise such Words or Sence as Mr. Williams hath somewhere concerning this double Righteousness Christ's and Ours accounting the one the Principal and the other Subordinate to it Now if Mr. Gibbons or Mr. Williams hitherto should have conceived our Righteousness we call Evangelical to be Subordinate to Christ's which was His but not Our Legal Righteousness Sub ratione ejusdem causae they are Mired But when thus much is forelaid that Christ's Righteousness
Son that an Evangelical only may be accepted from Man A perfect one offered for us to God that our inchoate and imperfect one may be imputed to us for Righteousness through him and that is to make it serve the turn as that a perfect one would have done if we could have performed it Faith is really says Mr. Baxter the Condition of the Covenant of Grace which who so performeth he is righteous against the Charge of Non-performance of that Condition And supposing Christ's Merits and our Redemption by him this Gospel Righteousness is all that is required of us on our parts instead of all that perfect Obedience which the Law of Innocency required Let Mr. Williams therefore be here perswaded that there is no making Christ's Righteousness Ours any otherwise than in the Effects Yet let him believe too that Christ's Righteousness is made Ours in the Effects for the Effects are Ours And this is one Effect wherein it is made Ours that our Faith is imputed to us for Righteousness and also that consequently there needs no perfect one In se to be imputed because this imperfect one is instead of one or as good to us as one by that Imputation But if Christ's Righteousness was Legally Ours or imputed to us otherwise than in the Effects then could not our Faith be imputed to us for Righteousness that is instead of a perfect one because a perfect one were imputed to us already in Christ That there are two Righteousnesses concur in our Justification I am satisfied with Mr. Baxter but when he speaks of one to be subordinate to the other or subservient I cannot but hear Dr. Owen objecting That upon this Supposition Christ's Righteousness is made to serve Ours which else could not be imputed for Righteousness and therefore Ours is not subservient to That It is necessary therefore for us to keep in our Minds that our Righteousness and Christ's concur in our Justification but not on the same Account not under the reason of the same but diverse Causes and therefore if they be held Co-ordinate I see no hurt so long as they are not Co-equal the one being of infinite Value and giving Virtue to the other If as there are two Righteousnesses we conceive with Mr. Gibbons two Bars two Justifications that is that Christ's Righteousness is our Legal Righteousness and the Formal Cause of our Legal Justification and our Faith or Evangelick Righteousness the Formal Cause of our Evangelical Justification there were no question in making one Righteousness and Justification subordinate or subservient to the other Righteousness and Justification But if Mr. Williams when he says The very Righteousness of Christ is imputed to a Believer besides the Effects and Mr. Gibbons apprehended the Matter so we are to know Mr. Baxter must not apprehend with them who teaches that the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed In se and consequently is never to be allowed our Formal Righteousness in regard to the Law or Gospel It is something hard therefore for me to set this right only thus much we know and say with Mr. Baxter that Christ by his Obedience and Sufferings hath obtained a Grant of Impunity and Life for Sinners which he gives upon Terms we performing those Terms have a Right to those Benefits And so a Righteousness by that Right Hereof Christ's Righteousness being the meritorious procuring Cause his Righteousness is said to be Ours in regard to that Effect But there being other Effects of Christ's Righteousness besides these and this one more especially that Our Faith or the Evangelick Condition is upon that Account imputed for Righteousness which else were none how is it that our Evangelical Personal Righteousness can be said subordinate subservient to or required in order for the obtaining of the Righteousness of Christ when we have it already as to that Effect or in that Imputation It appears to me therefore not unfit to say here that the Righteousness of Christ and the Performance of the Evangelick Condition do concur to our Justification as to the Form of is which is the imputing to us that Evangelick Condition performed for Righteousness in a Co-ordination of diverse Causes as to that Effect but in a Subordination as to the Effects or Benefits both of Christ's Righteousness and Justification that follow The Fourth PART I Know in this Discourse of the Righteousness of God I do assert that which our Protestants hitherto have denied but scarce taken into their Thoughts to examine with the Bereans whether it be so or no to wit that Faith which is a living working Faith is our Formal Righteousness the reason of their denial having been much because they have confounded the Causa per quam and Propter quam and spoken of them as one as appears by Davenant before quoted and others their meaning in the Main being only that it is not our Righteousness but Christ's which is Id propter quod or Cujus merito we are justified unto which we all agree But it is time if they have understood otherwise to set the Matter right now By Faith says the Scripture again and again we are justified By is Id per quod the Causa formalis and I avert accordingly that it is Formaliter or Per modum Causae formalis that by Faith we are justified And why should I not stick to that the Scripture does so expresly warrant Davenant that here is quite opposite and holds that it is Christ's Righteousness which does Formaliter justifie us does yet acknowledge that we are in Scripture still denominated or accounted righteous by God in regard to our Evangelical Righteousness and never in regard to Christ's Now Justificari is Justum esse censeri Justi autem censemur according to him à justitia inchoata and yet Ab inchoata justitia non justificamur but à justitia Christi imputata Justi censemur says he à justitia inchoata Justificati dicimur à justitia perfectissima Christi imputata What is this but Apparent Conviction and Authoritative Tergiversasation There are two Reasons I find move our Protestants One is they are startled by a Word the Word Cause they will not have our Works nor Faith as a Work to justifie because that makes it a Cause of our Justification which to Avoid they will call it a Condition only Now a Condition being Cause sine qua non does make our Evangelick Righteousness as necessary so as we cannot be justified without it as the making it a Cause does And I find it no regret in my Mind to call it a Cause as well as a Condition for it is both only we must consider what Cause we make it If we made our Works or Faith as a Work to justifie us Sub genere Causae Efficientis it must be that which is Procatarctick and so the Meritorious Cause thereof which were to bring our Works or Faith into the Office of Christ's Righteousness and to derogate from Grace a thing we
this Comfort here tho' none else in the World for this alone is worth a World that we may must ought to trust lean cast our selves upon the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ for pardoning all our Failings and accepting our poor Mite and if the Soul remains in doubt it must quiet itself upon him If with the Pharisee I justifie myself God may condemn me If I condemn myself with the Publican he may acquit me And what must I do in this Case Behold O Lord I am at thy Bar and I commit my Cause unto my Judge Thy Bar is a Bar or Throne of Grace I cast myself on thy Grace And the Lord send me a good Deliverance at the Great Day As for Actual Pardon and Life that follows Justification the Merit is to be attributed to that which procured Justification on that Condition There is nothing of Merit but Christ's throughout It is Christ's Satisfaction runs through all I must still say as the Meritorious Cause when Performance of the Condition becomes thereby the Formal Cause of our Justification I know how hardly this is like to be received by many when Dr. Owen will allow nothing of any Personal Righteousness or any Works Legal or Evangelical but excludes them all from our Justification supposing that if it be of Works any way it is not of Grace at all when it is therefore of Faith or upon the Evangelick Condition that it may be of Grace Dr. Owen is a Person whose Name I honour for his Worth Learning Comprehensive Parts and one in whom was more of a Gentleman as to his Deportment than in any Divine I knew ever among us Yet is he more Authorative sometimes in his Book than he needs which being liable to hurt the humbly Inquisitive I will speak the more positively in this matter that the Doctor is out as I believe and never came to the plain true knowledge of what Paul means by the Works he opposes to Faith in this Point of Justification Which Works are such as would justifie a Man in the Apostles Account if he had them but that no Man is justified by Works because he has them not This I am past doubt is Paul's meaning and in this particular the Learned and Honoured Sir Charles Wolesley before quoted is rather to be attended A Man says Sir Charles that has not a Legal Sinless Perfection is that Paul means by the Ungodly Rom. 4.5 In my first Papers I wrote I had this Sence of the place and I have it before and in my Pacification I say the like of that Text * For solving this Matter Austin and from him the Schools distinguish of Opera Naturae and Opera Gratiae We are not saved by Works or according to Works done in our own Strength but by Works done by Grace But is this the Apostle's meaning No I have shewn in my Book of Just that One Thing of Three wherein Austin was out and hath misled the Schools is this Notion of Grace By Grace he understands still this inherent Grace or Operation of God's Spirit in us when Paul understands it of that without his Favour or Condescension to us Not of Works but of Grace is all one as not of Desert but of Favour only Grace is Mercy without or contrary to Merit Now when the Papist receives the Solution mentioned the Protestants generally will have all Works tho of the Regenerate to be but Rags and Christ's Righteousness alone to save us But they are both out for Paul's meaning it plainer than they think Not by Works of Righteousness we have done The Righteousness which the Jew hath done is living according to the Law of Moses The Righteousness which the Gentile hath done is his living according to the Law of Nature There is neither one or the other that fulfil that Righteousness which answers God's Law so as it should be able to save him and therefore it is of Grace or Mercy that Any are saved Pacif. p. 29. Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us Which Words have put so many to the inventing Distinctions when the right understanding is to make none the meaning being only Not by the Works of Righteousness we have done because we have not done them and it must be of Mercy therefore and in another way we are saved or not at all See the Quotation above The Works then I have said there and here and must still say which Paul means are such as would justifie us such as would make the Reward of Debt if we had them that is perfect Works Such says the Judicious Le Blanc as the Law requires to Justification And as for that the Doctor hath in answer to this that it is a wild Imagination that the perfect Works of the Law will not justifie us but imperfect Works which answer not the Law will do so it does confirm what I judge of the Doctor 's Conceptions that certainly he never understood the Apostle as to this Matter who I say excludes not Works of the Law from Justification as if they would not justifie us if we had them but because none have them to be justified by them It is therefore the Righteousness of God the Righteousness of the Evangelick Condition that he in his Mercy through Christ's Merits hath instituted in the room of Works to justifie the Christian And as for the Doctor 's quoting Socinus saying this to prejudice the Reader against it I must needs say I like this excellent Doctor 's Judgment the meaner and seeing I took the Notion from Scripture and am sure I am no Socinian myself Socinus was a Man of Reason and it is to be lik'd the better for that It is a thing whether so proposed or not more worth the Thoughts of a serious Man how the Doctrine of Justification as formerly it hath been taught and is maintained by the Doctor can be made to lodge with the Doctrine of Sanctification or Regeneration in the same Scripture or be preached together in the same Gospel The Papists are so careful to have these agree that they make them one The Protestants are so careful to keep them asunder that they will not have any Works of ours not Faith itself as a Work or the Fruits of it Repentance and a Good Life to be brought into our Justification least by going to establish our own Righteousness we submit not to the Righteousness of God and perish Let the Works be wrought in us says the Doctor Of Just p. 524. if they be also wrought by us I fear their Introduction into our Justification doth include beasting This he adds is a dangerous Point even like to make us lose all the Benefit we might otherwise expect by the Grace of God I cannot but remember since I was young holy Mr. Shepherd's Book The Sincere Convert and do reflect sometimes on that Terror the Reading that and the like Books hath wrought in