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
and perfect love expelleth this feare 1 Iohn 4. 18. But though without the true feare of God we cannot please him yet that doth not prove that feare doth justifie For the like may be said of the obedience of the Law of humility of charity of repentance of perseverance Heb. 10. 38. and of the like Neither doth faith justifie because without it no man can please God but because by it alone wee receive Christ in whom God is well pleased and reconciled unto us that is because by it alone wee are justified Secondly because as faith is the beginning of justice so seare is the beginning of wisedome Answ. of this comparison neither part is to be understood of justification but of sanctification or righteousnesse inherent For as faith is the mother of grace of all both internall graces and also of externall obedience so the true sonne-like feare of God is a principall part of true piety But what doth this make for servile feare which is found in them who have no grace Thirdly because as faith doth justifie by making us seeke God and to come unto him so also feare Answ. If by seeking of God be meant the worship of God then that which causeth it is the cause of sanctification But servile feare in it selfe serveth rather to drive men from God though in the gracious dispensation of Gods providence it be made sometimes a meanes to draw them to him And this he proveth by Psal. 78. 34. when he he slew them they sought him and Psalm 83. 16. fill their faces with shame and they shall seeke thy name and Ion. 3. 5. from the example of the Ninivitâ—…s The thing I consesse that by servile feare men are often times forced to seeke God how beit that which is forced many times is fained as we see in the example of the Israelites Psal. 78. 36. who though by the judgements of God were brought to make semblance of repentance yet they did but dissemble for their hart was not upright with God neither were they stedfast in his covenant vers 37. But his proofes I allow not For the first place speaketh of Gods judgments the second of shame the third of the faith of the Ninivites none of feare Fourthly because as by faith Christ is formed in us so by feare the protasis he proveth because Paul saith Gal. 4. 19. my little children of whom I travell in birth againe untill Christ be formed in you But Christ is not formed in us by justification but by regeneration whereby we are renewed according to his image the apâ—…dosis because Esay saith C. 26. 18. according to the Septuagint from thy feare we have conceived and have brought forth the Spirit of Salvation But why doth hee flee from the Latine translation unto which hee is bound which maketh no mention of feare but onely saith we have conceived and have brought forth the Spirit of health as some editions read which last words are not read together in the Greeke nor in the true editions of the Latine but divided by a note of distinction peperimus Spiritum salutes non fecimns Thus Bellarmine for his owne advantage eiteth the fomer part out of the Septuagint and the later out of the vulgar Latine and that corrupted when neither of both agreeth with the originall From which if Bellarmine would argue he should make himselfe very ridiculous The words are we have conceived we have travailed we have as it were brought forth wind so Pagninus Vatablus Tremellius c. Salutes non fecimus in terra no salvations have we wrought on the earth which words being a complaint cannot import that they had from the feare of God which is not here mentioned brought forth the Spirit of salvation So farre is this place from proving that Christ by feare is formed in us Fifthly as faith doth justifie because the just man shall live by his faith Hab. 2. 4. so of feare it is written that the feare of the Lord is the fountaine of life Prov. 14. 27. Answ. The former place speaketh both of the life of grace which is our vivification and the life of glory to which wee are intitled by faith The latter as I have shewed speaketh of sonne-like feare which as all other habits of grace may bee called fountaines of living well which all arise from one common spring which is faith and are all not causes and much lesse preparations but fruits of faith and consequents of justification Sixthly as faith doth justifie by purging of sinnes so feare Answ. To the proposition Faith doth justifie by absolving from sins Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 25. and removing the guilt And it purgeth also from the corruptions by sanctifying and purifying the heart Act. 15. 9. To the reddiction that feare which expelleth sinne Eccles. 1. is as I have shewed the feare of sonnes and not of slaves neither doth it concurre to justification but to sanctification § V. To the testimonies of the Fathers affirming some of them that feare serveth to prepare and to dispose men to sanctification and likewise to his reason that it is the nature osfeare to flee from evill and to seeke remedies whereby evill may be avoided I willingly subscribe But though feare be one meanes among many to dispose or prepare men for sanctification or yet for justification yet neither it nor any of the rest doth justifie and therefore doth not disprove justification by faith alone Legall faith working feare is a preparative to the Evangelicall justifying faith but is so farre it selfe from justifying that it pronounceth accursed those that are endued therewith § VI. His third disposition is Hope which he saith ariseth of faith no otherwise than feare doth But yet by his leave with this difference that servile feare is the fruit of a legall faith applying the threatnings of the Law to a mans selfe but hope of salvation is the fruit of Evangelicall faith apprehending the promises of the Gospell and is therefore called the hope of the Gospell Col. 1. 23. Neither can there be any sound hope of eternall life untill a man doth truely beleeve that the promise of salvation doth belong unto him and that he cannot beleeve untill he have the condition of the promise which is justifying faith and therefore of necessity justifying goeth before hope As for that hope which goeth before justifying faith it is evident that it doth not justifie neither is it an habit of grace infused but a naturall affection such as is in all men who attempt any thing As the Apostle saith he that ploweth ploweth in hope and hee that thresheth thresheth in hope Although therefore this hope doe dispose men to justification and sanctification as after a sort it doth in animating of men to use the meanes of grace and salvation in hope that their labour shall not bee in vaine yet for all this hope which doth not justifie at all faith doth justifie alone § VII But let us examine his proofes
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
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
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
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
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
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
law of God Therefore all evill concupiscence whatsoever in whomsoever remaining is a sinne § IX Yea but concupiscence is no sinne unlesse the Will consent unto it Then say I not a sinne in infants not baptized But the Law doth not say non consenties concupiscentiis sed omninò non concupisces thou shalt not consent to concupiscences but thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence at all And it is most evident that the concupiscence forbidden in the tenth Commandement is such as goeth before the consent of will For it is such as Saint Paul himselfe had not knowne to be sinne if the Law had not said Non concupisces thou shalt not covet But such concupiscences as have the consent of the will the very Heathen knew to bee sinnes And the Papists themselves must acknowledge them to be forbidden in the former Commandements unlesse they will deny the Law of God to be spirituall and preferre the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corrupt interpretations of the Elders of the Iewes before the exposition of the Lawgiver himselfe Matth. 5. True therefore is that which some Writers cite out of Augustine that Originall sinne is remitted in Baptisme not that it be not but that it be not imputed unto sin Here Bellarmine takes on and saith that Luther first falsified this testimony of Augustine and that all who have followed him have continued the same fault though they have beene told of it A great accusation if true Augustines words in answere to an objection which the Papists cannot answer how can originall sinne bee transmitted from regenerate parents if in Baptisme it be wholly taken from them are these I answer saith he dimitti concupiscentiam in baptismo non ut non sit sed ut in peccatum non imputetur Where Augustine speaking of the traduction of originall sinne calleth it as his manner is Concupiscence in stead whereof some of our Writers have said sinne both Augustine and they meaning nothing else but originall Now that Augustine by that which he calleth Concupiscence meant sinne hereby appeareth first he saith it is remitted in Baptisme and remission is of debts onely and of sinnes as debts secondly because he saith it is remitted not that it should not bee any longer but that though it be a sinne yet it should not be imputed unto sinne for nothing is wont to be imputed unto sin by God but that which is sinne Where by the way wee may observe that in Augustines judgement remission of sinne is not the utter deletion of it that it bee no more but the not imputing of it For whereas the Papists for a poore shift and evasion say that Concupiscence is called sinne not because it is a sinne sed quia expeccato est ad peccatum inclinat this hindereth not its being a sinne but rather setteth forth the greatnesse of this evill as having all the respects of evill in it being both a sinne and a punishment of sinne and the cause of all other sinnes aâ—… Augustine saith Concupiscentia carnis adversus quam bonus concupiscit Spiritus sc. in renatis peccatum est poena peccati causa peccaâ—…i § X. But howsoever Bellarmine letteth passe as well he might his other arguments alleaged in his Booke of Baptisme as impertinent to this present question yet one of them hee hath thought good not to omit as being in his conceit unanswerable which notwithstanding I have not onely answered elsewhere but also have used it as an invincible argument to prove justification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse viz. the argument taken from the antithesis of Adam to Christ Rom. 5. 19. which Bellarmine here straineth beyond the extent of the antithesis made by the Apostle In other places Bellarmine hath thus argued As through Adams disobedience we were made sinners so through Christs obedience wee are made righteous but through Adams disobedience we were made truely sinners namely by unrighteousnesse inherent and not onely by imputation Therefore through the obedience of Christ we are made truly righteous namely by righteousnesse inherent But here to serve his present turne he altereth both the assumption and the conclusion The assumption for where before he said not onely by imputation here he saith not by imputation The conclusion for first in stead of concluding that wee are by the obedience of Christ made inherently just which we confesse though not intended by the Apostle in that place he concludeth that the obedience of Christ hath truly taken away and wiped out or abolished all our sinnes And secondly that he hath taken away our sinnes non imputaâ—…ivè sed verè not by imputation but truly His former argument I retorted after this manner As through Adams disobedience wee were made sinners that is guilty of death and damnation so by Christs obedience wee are made just that is absolved from that guilt and accepted as righteous unto eternall life But by imputation of Adams disobedience we were made sinners Therefore by imputation of Christs obedience wee are made righteous The assumption that we were made sinners by imputation of Adams disobedience I proved as by other arguments so by Bellarmines owne confession in other places Secondly I have acknowledged it to bee true that as we are made truely sinners through Adams disobedience not onely by imputation of Adams sinne but also by transfusion of both that privative and positive corruption which by that disobedi ence he contracted so we are made truly just through the obedience of Christ not onely by imputation of his obedience but also by infusion of righteousnesse from him But though we be truly made just by righteousnesse inherent yet it followeth not that we are in this life made perfectly just Neither doth it follow that because Christ doth free us from the dominion of sin we are therfore freed wholly from the being of sinne in us neither that if we be freed from sinne by imputation we are not freed truly For the Apostle useth these termes promiscuously remitting of sinne and not imputing of sinne justifying and imputing righteousnesse And as Christ was truly and really made a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe so wee are truly and indeed made the righteousnesse of God in him Thus have I proved that neither remission of sinne is the abolishing of sinne nor justification all one with sanctification and that the Papists by confounding justification and sanctification and of these two making but one have utterly taken away and abolished out of their Divinity that great benefit of our justification A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE THIRD BOOKE Concerning Justification or saving Grace CAP. I. What is meant by the word Grace in the Question of Iustification § I. THE second Capitall errour of the Papists in the Article of justification is concerning justifying and saving grace For when as the holy Ghost would note unto us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first moving cause or
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.
remission of sinnes vouchsafing unto you righteousnesse and he made you holy and delivered from the tyranny of the Devill All these foure benefits are the fruits of Christs office of mediation as he is our Prophet our Priest and our King For as our Prophet in whom are all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge he calleth us by the Gospell his doctrine being our wisedome and making us wise unto salvation as our holy Priest hee justifieth us his sacrifice and his obedience being our righteousnesse as our gracious and glorious King being ascended on high to prepare a place for us he giveth the graces of his holy Spirit to his members whereby they being sanctified are fitted and prepared for his kingdome and being gone to prepare a place for us and us for it hee will come againe to bring us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the redemption of possession or our full redemption which is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thes. 5. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Thes. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 39. the obtaining of salvation the obtaining of glory and the saving of the Soule and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the redemption of the body Rom. 8. 23. Christ therefore is of God made unto us wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption or salvation because his wisedome is communicated unto us by instruction in our vocation his righteousnes is communicated unto us by imputation in our justification his sanctifying graces by infusion in our sanctification his glory by possession or fruition in our glorification § VI. In rendring the second cause he confesseth the truth whereof I desire the Reader to take speciall notice That Christ is called our righteousnesse because he satisfied his Father for us which his satisfaction he doth so give and communicate unto us when he doth justifie us that it may bee called our satisfaction and our righteousnesse For although by justice inherent in us we bee truly called and are righteous notwithstanding we doe not by it satisfie God for our faults and for eternall punishment And thus saith he it were not absurd to say that Christs righteousnesse and merits are imputed unto us when they are given and applied as if we our selves had satisfied God And to that purpose he citeth Bernard who saith that Christ died for all ut viz. satisfactio unius omnibus imputetur that the satisfaction of one may be imputed to all but addeth this needlesse caution modo non negetur saith Bellarmine esse in nobis preterea justitium inherentem â—…ámque veram so it be not denied that there is in us besides a justice inherent and that true which if Bellarmine would stay there we would yeeld unto For we doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse inherent in those that are justified and that also a true though not a pure a perfect and absolute righteousnesse onely wee deny that we are thereby justified Wee are indeed just but by Christs righteousnesse as Bernard saith in the same place justum me dixerim sed illius justitiâ § VII This confession of Bellarmine dissolveth the very frame of his owne doctrine of justification whereunto he hath taught that nothing concurreth but deletion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse And these not as two acts but as one act viz. the infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne As for imputation of Christs righteousnesse hee and his fellowes deride and scorne it But here hee confesseth which needs must be confessed that in justification the satisfaction of Christ is imputed unto us and accepted of God in our behalfe as if we our selves had satisfied God and that for that cause hee is truly called our righteousnesse And this imputation he acknowledgeth to be necessary because by righteousnesse inherent we doe not satisfie for our sinnes and eternall punishment We say the same onely wee adde that this satisfaction made by Christ in our behalfe is not onely his death and sufferings whereby he satisfied the penalty of the Law and delivered us from the curse himselfe being made a curse for us but also the holinesse of his person and the obedience of his life whereby he perfectly satisfied the justice of God infulfilling the commandements Now Gods acceptation of Christs satisfaction in our behalfe whereby he absolveth us from the guilt of sin and damnation by imputation of Christs sufferings and his acceptation of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his most perfect righteousnesse and obedience is that very thing which wee according to the Scriptures doe call justification which distinct benefit of Christ not to be confounded with sanctification the Papists must learne to acknowledge if they would bee saved § VIII To these I adde other as plaine testimonies where it is said that wee are justified by the bloud of Christ and his obedience From whence I argue thus If we be justifiâ—…d by the bloud and obedience of Christ that is by his passive and active righteousnesse then are we justified by the personall righteousnesse of Christ which being proper to his person is out of us in him But we are justified by the bloud and by the obedience of Christ Rom. 5. 9. 19. therefore by his personall righteousnesse § IX Our fifth argument By what righteousnesse our sinnes are covered as with a garment and by which we being indued therewith appeare righteous before God that is the matter of our justification For he is justified whose sinnes are covered Psal. 32. 1. By the righteousnesse of Christ as a most pretious robe of righteousnesse and as our wedding garment our sinnes are covered For as Iustin Martyr truly saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for what other thing was able to cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse and wee being clothed therewith appeare righteous before God Therefore by the righteousnesse of Christ we are justified Bellarmine having as it were in our name objected to himselfe Eph. 4. 22. 24. which none of us that I know of doe object for wee acknowledge the place to be understood of sanctification which consisteâ—…h in the putting off the old man and putting on the new hee saith that wee argue from the similitude of a garment as more fitly resembling imputed justice than inherent and that we confirme it by the example of Iacob who being clothed with the rayment of his elder brother obtained the blessing § X. To this Bellarmine shapeth two answers First that the similitude of a garment may fitly agree to inherent righteousnesse which I wil not deny for in the Scriptures theterme of clothing or putting on is of a large extent so that he will confesse that the Hebrew Labash and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifying to cloth or to put on apparrell which is not inherent in the body but adherent is more fitly by a metaphore applyed to signifie outward than inward
by some inherent gift The proposition which no man denieth he laboreth to prove by three arguments which he might very well have spared but that he would have the world to thinke that we deny sanctification to be inherent The assumption which do we deny he proveth by his own authority alleaging that in the fifth and the sixth verses The Apostle describeth justification which indeed he doth not to be regeneration and renâ—…vation wroughâ—… in us out of the bounty of God by the laver of Baptisme and effusion of the holy Ghost This we deny first because the word justifie never in the whole Scriptures is used in that sense secondly here the Apostle in plaine termes saith that we are justified and saved not by works of righteousnesse whereby is excluded all justice inherent but by Gods grace How then doth he prove it because in these words vers 7 that being justified by his grace wee might bee heires in hope of eternall life the Apostle rendreth a reason why God by the laver and by the Holy Ghost did regenerate and renew us and saith the cause was that being justified that is saith he that being by that regeneration and renovation justified we might deserve to be made heires of the kingdome and of life everlasting Answ. This glosse maketh the Apostle not like himselfe but like a popish merit-monger corrupteth the text which indeed doth paralell that 1 Cor. 6. 11. shewing how men converted from Gentilisme to Christianity shuld be exhorted to the performance of Christian duties For howsoever whiles they were Gentiles they were addicted to many vices and sinnes yet after they were called which the Apostle expresseth thus after that the bounty and humanity of God was manifested viz. by the preaching of the Gospel God not out of any desert of theirs but out of his meere mercy saved them by Baptisme as Saint Peter also speaketh that is justified them for that is the salvation we have here to bee intitled to salvation or saved in hope that being justified by his grace that is as he said before by his undeserved mercy they should be made heires according to hope of eternall life that is they might be saved in hope Of this sentence therefore stripped of its amplifications as it were its garments the naked substance is this But after we were called God by Baptisme justified us that being justified by his grace we might be saved in hope The amplifications which are added are to set forth and describe Baptisme unto us which as hee had noted to be the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith when he saith that God justified or saved us by it so he calleth it the laver of regeneration and of the renovation wrought by the Spirit which God hath plentifully bestowed upon us So that these words are not a description of justification as Bellarmine dreameth waking but of Baptisme And they are added according to the purpose of the Apostle in this place as arguments to move men to Christian duties Why Because Baptisme as it was a seale unto them of their justification so also a Sacrament of their regeneration and renovation of the Spirit which Spirit God hath poured forth plentifully upon the faithfull which he speaketh to this end that the faithfull which are Baptized should make this use of their Baptisme not onely as of a seale to assure them of their justification and salvation but also to be a Sacrament token memoriall of their regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit plentifully poured upon them To which purpose the Apostle telleth the Romans that so many as were baptized into Christ were baptized into the similitude of Christs death and resurrection whereupon the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers 8. this is a faithfull saying and these things I will thou shouldest affirme and confirme that they which have beleeved in God ought to bee carefull precedents of good workes The Aposâ—…le therefore doth not say as Bellarmine maketh him speake that we are justified or saved or made heires of salvation by regeneration or renovation and much lesse that thereby we merit our inheritance but that God hath justified or saved us Sacramentally by Baptisme which as it is the seale of our justification and salvation so it is also the laver of regeneration and renovation wrought by the Spirit that being justified by his grace we might according to hope bee made heires of eternall life For howsoever we are neither justified nor saved nor made heires of eternall life by our Sanctification yet Sanctification is both the way wherein from our justification wee are to walke unto glorification For God hath chosen us to salvation through the sanctification of the Spirit 2 Thes. 2. 13. and therefore sanctification as it is a necessary consequent of our justification so it is a necessary fore-runner of glorification a necessary marke and cognizance of all that are justified and to be saved And therefore ouâ—… Saviour saith that by faith in him wee receive remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified and so the Apostle also Act. 20. 32. § IX His fifth testimony is Heb. 11. and some other places of the Scripture which doe give testimony to some men that they were truly and perfectly just and that not by an imputative justice but inherent his reason is because the Scriptures would not call them absolutely just if they were not absolutely just Answ. To omit that it is one thing to be absolutely called just and another to be just absolutely and perfectly I answere that the faithfull who are commended in the Scriptures for righteous were righteous by a twofold justice both imputative and inherent The former being the righteousnesse of justification the latter of sanctification the former absolute and perfect the latter inchoated and unperfect By the former they were justified before God in respect of the latter though they were also called just yet they were not justified thereby that is they were neither absolved thereby from their sinnes past nor intitled to the kingdome of heaven as may appeare by all those Arguments which before I produced against justification by inherent righteousnesse As for those examples which hee alleageth out of Heb. 11. which is the Chapter of saith namely of Abel vers 4. and Noah vers 7. c. it is evident that they were justified by the righteousnesse which is of faith as is expresly said of Noah vers 7. that is by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith and imputed to them that beleeve for the righteousnefse which is of faith is imputative Rom. 4. 5. And when it is said that without faith they could not possibly have pleased God it is plainely intimated that by faith they pleased God and that they being besore justified by faith brought forth the fruits of faith acceptable unto God by which their faith was approved But as they were just by imputation that
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 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
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
than of the Pope alone It is the Pope therefore alone that cannot erre who hath an heavenly and infallible judgement who is the supreame Iudge in all controversies the chiefe and onely authenticall interpreter of the Scriptures so that no point of religion is to be held for truth but what he determineth no text of Scripture to be held the word of God in any other sense than hee holdeth yea that a text of Scripture urged against them in another sense than he holdeth is not the word of God but rather of the devill By which meanes the Pope is stept into the roome of Christ and and is undoubtedly become Antichrist So that the implicite faith of the Papists whereby they professe themselves to beleeve what is propounded by the Church meaning especially the See of Rome that is to say the Pope to be beleeved and consequently whereby they professe themselves to beleeve in the Pope as the principall rule principle and foundation of their faith is the very character and marke of the Beast whereby men are branded to destruction § XVIII The which doth also prove the other point viz. how pernicious the doctrine of implicite faith is as tending to the perdition of the seduced people which I will also prove by other reasons For under the name of implicite faith they commend unto the Laity damnable ignorance that having blindfolded them they may lead them as it were by the nose whither it pleaseth them To them it is sufficient to beleeve what the Church beleeveth though they know little or nothing of the Churches beleefe If one of them be called before the Commissioners hee shall say enough and defend himselfe sufficiently when he answereth that he is a Catholike and that he will live and dye in that faith which the Catholike Church doth teach and that this Church can give them a reason of all those things which they demand And thus according to Christs promise Luk. 12. 12. the holy Ghost for sooth teacheth every unlearned Catholike to give sufficient reason of his faith But it is evident that those who live in ignorance doe live in a state of damnation or as the Scripture speaketh doe sit in darkenesse and in the shadow of death First because they live without God as it were Atheists in this world For they that know not God have not God Secondly because they are void of all grace whereby they might hope to be saved For knowledge being the first of all graces where that is wanting all the rest are absent Againe without faith there is no saving grace for faith is the mother and roote of all other graces and without knowledge there is no faith as I have already shewed For how can t they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard and by hearing knowne Knowledge is as it were the first step towards faith and all other graces and therefore he that hath not that in some measure hath not made one steppe in the way that leadeth to eternall life Thirdly because they are not Christs sheepe nor Gods children For I saith our Saviour know mine and I am knowne of mine Ioh. 10. 14. They shall know me every one of them saith the Lord from the greatest to the least of them Ier. 31. 34. All Gods children shall be taught of God Esai 54. 13. Ioh. 6. 45. every one therefore that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to mee saith our Saviour and none else All Gods children have the unction from the holy One and they know all needfull things 1 Ioh. 2. 20. 27. Ioh. 16. 13. Fourthly because it hath all the respects of evill in it For it is not one ly a sinne but the cause of all sinne and errour a punishment and the cause of punishment both in this life and in the world to come A sinne repâ—…oved and condemned Ier. 4. 22. 9. 3. Hos. 4. 1. â—… Cor. 15. 34. For it a sacrifice was ordained Levit. 4. 2. yea all the sinnes for which sacrifices were offered were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—… that is ignorances Heb. 9. 7. The cause of sinne Errant qui operantur mulum They erre that sinne and none erre but by ignorance as Augustine saith Non erratur nisi per ignorantiam whence sinners are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as are ignorant and doe erre Heb. 5. 3. Ignorance is the mother of all errours Regnum ignorantiae saith Augustine regnum erroris Ignorance also is a fearefull punishmentâ—… when God doth punish men with blindenesse of heart Esai 6. 9 10. and sendeth upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the efficacy of errour 2 Thâ—…s 2. 11. It is also the cause of punishment for the people that understandeth not shall bee punished Hos. 4. 14. as of captivityâ—… Esai 5. 13. of destruction Hos. 4. 6. it maketh men subject to the curse of God Psal. 79. 6. Ier. 10. 25. and to eternall damnation 2. Thes. 1. 8. If our Gospell bee hid saith the Apostle it is hid to them that perish 2 Cor. 4. 3. For if it bee eternall life to know God and Christ our Saviour then not to know God and our Saviour is to misse of eternall life Qui ea quâ—… sunt Domini nesciunt a Domino nesciuntur saith Gregory Paulo attestante qui ait si quis autem ignorat ignorabitur The Councell of Rhemes denyeth that they can bee saved who doe not understand the Creed and the Lords Prayer And againe no man can bee saved without faith and no man can beleeve that which he doth not know nor hath heard Augustine ipsa ignorantia in ets qui intelligere noluerunt sine dubitatione peâ—…catum â—…st in eis autem qui non potuerunt pâ—…na pecâ—…ati Ergo in utrisque non â—…st justa excusatio sed justa damnatio Hierome Ignoratio Scripturarum ignoratio Christi Origen â—…aith the Devills possesse all those that live in ignorance § XIX All this notwithstanding the popish Impostors detaine the people in ignorance they have taken away the Key of knowledge and shut up the Kingdome of Heaven against their followers for neither they goe in themselves neither suffer them that faine would enter to goe in They forbid them to reade the Scriptures which are able to make them wise to salvation 2 Tim. 3. 15. which our Saviour therefore commandeth them to search Ioh. 5. 39. They suffer them not to heare them nor yet the divine service otherwise than in an unknowen tongue contrary to the rule of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. and wherefore all this partly that their errours and abominations should not be seene for he that evill doeth hateth the light and as theeves by night wish the light of Gods Word to bee put out or at least to bee hid under a Bushell and partly that they may bee Lords over the peoples faith and may make them beleeve what they list
either godly sorrow or repentance doth worke salvation But the Apostle saith that godly sorrow worketh repentance even such repentance as is a forerunner unto salvation or as the faithfull speake Act. 11. 18. That God had given the Gentiles repentance unto life and therefore such a repentance as was not to bee repented of For the Apostle seemeth to have relation unto his owne words verse 8. that he had repented that hee had made them sorry But when hee understood that their sorrow had brought forth in them repentance he did not repent thereof Repentance therefore which is unto salvation is indeed a necessary and undoubted forerunner of salvation and salvation a certaice consequent of repentance necessary I say because without it a sinner cannot bee saved Luke 13. 3. Undoubted because to whom God hath given grace truely to repent it is an infallible token that such an one shall be saved Acts 11. 18. but a cause of salvation it is not neither can bee unlesse hee meane Causa sine qua non § VII His fifth Testimony 2 Cor. 4. 17. For that our tribulation which presently is momentany and light worketh above measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in us What could bee spoken more plainely If patience in tribulation doth worke a weight of eternall glory who can deny but that there is some relation betweene patience and salvation Vnlesse perhaps to worke salvation be not to worke something or that upon the working there followeth no relation Answ. If the Apostle had said that patience in affliction doth worke an eternall weight of glory hee might from thence have had some colour that patience hath a relation of efficiency to salvation and yet but a colour But when the Apostle doth not once mention patience how could hee bee so confident as to aske what could bee spoken more plainely The Apostle speaketh of affliction both light and momentany and saith that it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh unto us an eternall weight of glory Here then wee are to consider in what sence affliction which in it selfe is evill and miserable should worke glory and happinesse being light should worke that which is most ponderous being momentany should worke that which is eternall whether as a cause properly and in it owne nature causing or working or as an occasion which besides or rather contrary to it owne nature which is evill is to us sanctified of God to be a meanes and occasion of our so great good And to this purpose let us consult with other places of holy Scripture as Rom. 5. 3 4. and Iam. 1. 12. In the former place the Apostle saith wee rejoyce in afflictions knowing that affliction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh patience and so Saint Iames 1. 3. Not that affliction in it selfe worketh patience but rather the contrary as appeareth in men unregenerate whom it maketh to murmure and sometimes to blaspheme God which the Divell by experience well knew when hee moved God to â—…fflict Iob Chap. 1. 11. 2. 5. Doe but touch all that he hath saith he and againe touch his bone and his flesh and hee will curse thee to thy face But afflictions are said to worke patience in the faithfull because the holy Ghost sanctifieth their afflictions to them and excercising them thereby worketh in them patience and what followeth Patience worketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 probation that is as I have formerly expounded it maketh him that by affliction is tryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not that patience maketh him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that by patient bearing of affliction hee is found and knowne to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a sound approved and upright Christian. For therefore God sendeth tryals of all sorts that those who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bee knowne Now when men have beene by patient bearing of afflictions found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they are crowned with eternall life as Saint Iames saith Chap. 1. 12. Blessed is the man who patiently beareth temptation that is affliction for when hee shall bee found to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee shall receive the Crowne of life which the Lord hath promised to them that love him The meaning therefore of this place is neither that affliction causeth patience nor patience salvation but that when the godly are afflicted the holy Ghost by affliction where with they are exercised worketh patience in them and patience worketh probation because by patience when they are tryed they are knowne to bee sound and approved and probation worketh hope of salvation For when upon try all men are found to bee approved they shall receive the Crowne of life which God hath freely promised to give them And it is to be observed that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is translated to worke is given not onely to causes but also to occasions And therefore in such places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie it occasioneth as when it it said Rom. 4. 15. the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh anger § VIII His sixth Testimony Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee mortifie the deeds of the flesh you shall live whence hee would prove That the mortification of carnall concâ—…piscence is necessary to salvation as a condition and cause and therefore hath relation to salvation from the conditionall particle If and from the antithesis of the words going before if you live according to the flesh you shall die Answ. The conditionall particle used in conditionall or connexive propositions alwayes pretendeth a necessity of consequence insomuch that the connexion if it bee not necessary is not absolutely true but the necessity of efficiency it implyeth none And as for the necessity of consequence that ariseth not onely from causes but from all other arguments And whereas from the Antithesis hee would prove that as to live according to the flesh causeth death so to mortifie the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit causeth life I answere that in both the parts the connexion or consequence is equally that is necessarily true for if it were not necessary it were not absolutely true but it is absolutely true because of the authority of the Scriptures which are infallible which is sufficient to make good the Antithesis But hence it followeth not that the condition of either part should be taken from the same arguments seeing it may bee taken from any other This sufficeth for the Antithesis that if by the Spiriâ—… ye mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall live but if you live according to the flesh it is an evident argument that you shall dye therefore though the condition of the latter part bee the cause of the consequent yet it is not so in the former for sinne is the meritorious cause of damnation but our obedience being a duety and yet but unperfect cannot merit salvation A servant not doing his duety but the contrary is punished A
Master of the vineyard though he gave the day-penny to them that wrought but one houre which was as much as he gave them that wrought twelve houres yet was not unjust therin For in that which is free and meerely of grace there is no injustice nor acception of persons Indeed where the wages or hire is to bee rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as deserved and earned by the workemens labours it is to bee distributed according to distributive justice But where the reward is free and of grace the rewarder may doe with his owne what pleaseth him GOD especially to whom in all things whatsoever hee doth his will is the rule of justice § XXIV To these hereticall premisses Bellarmine addeth a sutable corollary wherein there is more malice than might Therefore saith hee Augustine saith well If there bee no merits how shall God judge this world wherefore the heresie of our adversaries which taketh away merits doth also take away the article of faith concerning the future judgemâ—…nt Answ. Augustine by merits understandeth workes which are to bee rewarded both the good workes of the godly proceeding from grace sanctifying and helping the Will which he though unproperly calleth their merits and also the evill workes of the wicked proceeding from their free will not freeed by grace which also hee calleth and that properly their merits For whereas there were two sorts of men living in the Monastery of Adrumetium whereof Valentinus was to whom hee writeth who ran into contrary extremes the one so holding free-will that they denied grace the other so holding grace that they denied free-will and which was worse said that at the day of judgement God is not to render to every man according to his works Augustine writeth against both Si non est Dei gratia quomodo salvat mundum et si non est liberum arbitrium quomodo judicat mundum If Gods grace bee not how doth he save the world and if there bee no free-will how doth hee judge the world and afterwards in the place which Bellarmine citeth having denyed against the Pelagians that grace is given according to merits hee addeth these words Non quiâ—… nullum est meritum vel bonum piorum vel malum impiorum aliâ—…quin quomodo judicabit Deus mundum not because there is no merit either good of the godly or bad of the wicked otherwise how shall God judge the world That is if there bee no workes to bee rewarded neither good with blisse nor bad with punishment how shall God judge the world But wee acknowledge that God will render to every man according to his workes rewarding the good workes of the godly which are unproperly called merits both themselves and their reward being the free gifts of God with eternall life and the evill workes of the wicked which properly are called their merits with everlasting death So farre are wee through Gods grace from denying that article of the future judgement whereof the Pope and the Papists seâ—…me to make but a mockery hee granting and they accepting or defending his grant of indulgences and pardons for many thousands of yeeres whereby is presupposed that the day of judgement may perhaps bee so long differred For at the day of judgement when all shall bee adjudged to eternall either life or death purgatory shall bee at an end as themselves teach and together with Purgatory the use of pardons endeth CAP. VI. The Testimonies of the Fathers alleaged by Bellarmine answered § I. NOw I come to his allegation of the Fathers But before I examine the particular testimonies I am to admonish the Reader that hee have an eye to the point in question For that the Latine Fathers doe often use the termes of merit or meriting we doe acknowledge but without any advantage to the Papist For the Papist useth the words in the proper sense for deserving and desert But merits with the Fathers signifie no more but good workes or at the most good works which God will reward that is either simply good workes or with relation to reward And the Verbe tâ—… merit besides the generall sense of obtaining or finding favour which is very frequent they use it more particularly for doing workes of grace which God will graciously reward In which senses the use of the words though unproper were not to bee misliked in the Fathers were it not that the after-writers have taken occasion thereby to use the words properly for deservnig and desert and that in justice for the workes sake as well in good workes as in bad I meane that good workes doe as truely and as properly deserve eternall life as evill workes deserve everlasting death which was not the meaning of the Fathers who meant not that a man doth deserve those good things at the hands of God which by them hee is said to have merited If therefore his allegation bee of merits and meriting used by the Fathers in the former that is the unproper senses as indeed they are hee shall proove nothing but that the Fathers doe not dissent from us And if they serve not to prove either that the works of grace in themselves doe merit that is deserve eternall life as the meritorious causes thereof or that Christ hath by his merits made them meritorious then doe they not at all make foâ—… the Papists against us But I am confident that they are not able to produce any one pregnant testimony of the ancient Fathers affirming either that our good workes doe truely and properly that is condignely merit eternall life or that Christ hath merited for our workes that they might bee meritorious of everlasting life § II. Hee beginneth with the Greeke Fathers of whom hee citeth eight The first is Ignatius Sinite me ut bestiarum esca sim per quam possim Deum promereri Here Bellarmine for a poore shift is faine to make use of a corrupt Latine Translation as it were a puddle leaving the fountaine and the purer streames The originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suffer me that I may become the food of wild beasts by whom I may obtaine God And so their owne Vairlemius translateth Sinâ—…e me ferarum escam fieri per quas licebit Deum adipisci But the same Latine Translatour doating as it seemeth upon his Helena of merit more than once or twice in that Epistle useth the word merear that I may merit where the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that I may finde enjoy obtaine and in the first sentence of the Epistle twice Deprecans Deum obtinui ut videre merear dignos vultus vestros sicut plurimum optabam promereri The Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Vairlemius rendreth thus Deprecatus Deum obtinui ut viderem divinas vestras facies quas plurimum expetebam And in the third sentence for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Si modo graâ—…iam consequar the Latine Translatour whom Bellarmine followeth readeth Si quidem
a harsh speech that God should bee said to bee a debtour to any crâ—…ature yet as Augustine saith hee may bee said to be a debtour as hee is a promiser and because it is a just thing to keepe promise hee may be said to owe the performance of that which hee hath promised But as his promise was not de debito but de gratuitâ—… so what hee freely promised he freely giveth 7. Out of Augustine he citeth three testimonies two out of his Epistle to Sixtus out of which Epistle I have before produced divers pregnant testimonies against merits so properlycalled His first allegation is this nullane sunt merita justorâ—…m sunt planè quia â—…usti sunt sed ut justi fierent merita non fuerunt In which testimony there is nothing for the merit of condignity but onely the name of merit which notwithstanding â—…ignifieth nothing but the good workes of the just which God will reward As if hee had said have the just no good workes which God will reward They have no doubt because they are just For as Saint Iohn saith he thâ—…t worketh righteousnesse is righteous 1 Iâ—…h 3. 7. But as the former words doe not prove the merit of condignity so the later words plainely disprove merits of congruity that they might become righteous saith hee they had no merits for as in the same Epistle Augustine teacheth against bothsorts of merits Sicut ab initio fidei misericordiam consequuti sumus non quia fideles eramus sed ut essemus sic in fine quod eâ—…it in vita aeterna coronabit nos sicut scriptum est in miseratione misericâ—…rdia Secondly as touching the other Augustine indeed saith that as the Apostle calleth death the stipend of sinne so he might truly have called eternall life the stipend of righteousnesse But yet hee could not say that it was debitum stipendium Because the Apostle by way of opposition saith that death is the stipend meaning the due and deserved stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Nay he saith the contrary that it is not to be demanded tanquam debitum stipendium And elsewhere as we heard before though the Apostle might have said that eternall life is the stipend of righteousnesse yet he would rather say that it is the grace of God that hereby we might understand that God doth not bring us to eternall life by our merits but by his mercie And in the same hundred and fifth Epistle The stipend of sinne is death and worthily it is called a stipend because it is due c. Deinde ne justitia de humano se extolleret bono sicut humanum meritum malum non dubitatur esse peccatum non à contrario retulit dicens stipendium justitiâ—… vita aeterna sed gratia inquit Dei vita aeterna tanquam diceret audito quòd stipendium peccati est mors quid te disponis extollere contrariam mâ—…rti vitam aeternam tanquam debitum stipendium flagitare But of this point I have spoken more than sufficiently when I urged our fourth testimony out of Rom. 6. 23. But the third testimony Bellarmine chiefly urgeth Vita aeterna est tâ—…tum praemium cujus promissione gaudemus Eternall life is the whole reward in the promise whereof we doe rejoyce nor can this reward come before merits be had neither may it be given to a man before he be worthy For what more unjust than this and what more just than God We must not therefore demand the reward before wee merit to receive it Answ. Augustine as himselfe testifieth wrote this booke when he was newly baptised and as yet not accustomed or well versed in the Scriptures and therefore if he should have written any thing therein contrary to that which I have heretofore proved out of him it ought not to prejudge those manifold pregnant Testimonies by mee cited before which he wrought when he was of more mature judgement and of riper yeares Notwithstanding out of this testimony such as it is Bellarminâ—… collecteth five conclusions against us First that a man he meaneth â—…o doubt a righteous man hath the merits of eternall life that is as Bellarmine acknowledgeth Augustine to use the terme that he hath good workes which God will reward with eternall life and that we confesse Secondly that eternall life is one and all our reward But Augustine doth not say unâ—…m neither is it true For temporall Blessings are also rewards though but petty rewards in comparison of eternall life neither doth he say simply totum but tâ—…tum cujus promissione gaudemus For temporall benefits we are to use but not to set our hearts upon them but spirituall blessings are those wherein we are to rejoyce them we use these we are to enjoy for those are utenda but these are sruenda Thirdly that the reward of eternall life is given in justice that we should not say that it is given of meere liberality But Augustine every where else teacheth that it is given of grace and that it is called grace non ob aliud nisi quia gratis datur for no other cause but because it is freâ—…ly given and that it is not grace si non sit omni modo gratuita Neither doth it hinder it to be of Gods free grace that it is given in justice For these two in the workes of God especially in the worke of justification and salvation doe meet together Grace and mercie in respect of us in that he doth justifie and save us gratis by his grace justice not in respect of our merits which in justice can merit nothing at the hands of God but punishment but partly in reâ—…pect of Christs merits unto which eternall life is due and partly in respect of his promise made in Christ to all that truely beleeve which promise he is faithfull and just to performe Fourthly that the reward is not given before they be found worthy of it that shall have it lest wee should fay there is no dignity in workes I answere that our dignity standeth in Gods dignation or acceptation in Christ which dignity he vouchsafeth to all that truely beleeve in Christ. For to them Christ is the end and complement of the Law insomuch that whosoever beleeve in Christ they are esteemed to have fulfilled the Law Wee acknowledge the dignitie of good workes as being the fruits of the Spirit and as being good profitable and necessary but no dignity of merit doe we ascribe to them And yet the faithfull are not therefore unworthy nor destitute of merits so long as they are accepted in Christ and made partakers of his merits by faith Unto which faith Augustine useth to ascribe merit For indeed faith is that worke of God which hee requireth instead of all our merits because by it wee are partakers of the merits of Christ which whosoever hath is not without merits nor unworthy of the Kingdome
the Lord who freelygiveth what he had freely promised Thirdly when a superaboundant reward is promised to a small worke and the party to whom it is promised is no way able either to doe or so much as to will the performance of it but receiveth wholly his will and ability to performe it from his Lord the thing promised cannot be ascribed to his merit but to the gracious bounty of his Lord. § V. The seventh and last condition is that a meritorious work must proceed from charity which we acknowledg to be required in every good worke But in the proofe hereof he falleth into a nice dispute proving against Guihielmus 〈◊〉 that the vertue of meriting is to be ascribed more principally to Charity than to faith And although this bee but an idle dispute seeing neither faith nor charity doth truely and properly merit yet I durst be bold to affirme that if to either merit were to be ascribed that it were rather to bee attributed to faith For by faith the merits of Christ are applyed unto us and not by charity By faith we are entitled to Gods Kingdome by 〈◊〉 wee are not By faith wee obtaine the inheritance which by charity we doe not By faith we are saved and not by charity Faith is the condition of the covenant of grace upon which and no other grace salvaâ—…ion is promised Those that truly love are also saved it being the proper cognizance and as Basiâ—… speaketh the character of the faithfull and none are saved without it but yet they are not saved by it nor for it but onely by the merits of Christ which are apprehended by faith alone Salvation which is purchased by the merits of Christ is promised to faith as that whereby we are made partakers of Christs merits and are therefore said to be justified and saved by faith alone but charity and the fruits thereof are the evidence according to which God will save us Christ is the foundation of our happinesse yea he is eternall life Faith is the onely instrument wherby wee are made partakers of Christ all other graces are but notes and signes of our union which we have with Christ and of happinesse by him By faith we have this inheritance but it is had among those that are sanctified When it is said happy is shee that beleeved there the cause of happinesse is noted but when it is said happy is he that loved orfeared not the cause of happinesse is signified but a note or signe of it Both faith and charity must concurre to every good act for as a worke without charity is not good so without faith it is sin But if you compare the graces together it is certaine that charity proceedeth from faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. and according to the measure of our faith such is the measure of our love for faith is the Mother-grace from which charity and all other graces as from the root and fountaine doe spring and flow It may seeme indeed that sanctification and inherent righteousnesse doth more principally consist in love because charity is the fulfilling of the Law yet sanctification it selfe doth flow from faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love But as for the grace of justification whereunto merit if wee had any ought to bee referred for justification is the entitling of us to the kingdome of heaven neither charity nor any other grace in us doth concurre unto it but faith is all in all I will not follow him in his idle dispute I confesse the point that to every rewardable or as he calleth it meritorious worke charity is required § VI. Now let us recapitulate his seven conditions And because he shall not finde me refractary I doe confesse that all and every of these conditions are required to every rewardable worke For first it must be good Secondly it must be done in obeysance to God Thirdly it must be done by men in this world Fourthly it must bee voluntary and not forced Fifthly it must bee performed by a man who is in the state of grace Sixthly the expectation of the reward is to bee grounded on Gods promise And lastly it must proceed from charity But now say I that not any one of these conditions nor all of them put together can make a worke meritorious of eternall life before God They are common notes and markes of all good workes whatsoever but the proper notes of merits are such as I set downe in the beginning of this discourse concerning merits For workes are not therefore meritorious because they are materially good nor because they are in obeysance to God for that is our duty and debt which wee owe to God nor for that they are performed by such as are viatores and pilgrims in this world nor because they are wrought by men in state of grace nor because the expectation of the reward is grounded on Gods promise which is of a free reward and not of wages merited by us nor lastly because they proceed from charity For our charity by reason of the imperfection thereof cannot stand in judgement to satisfie the justice of God and much lesse to merit And whatsoever or how great soever it is it is not only a duety which we owe to God but the onely debt which wee owe or ought to owe to our brethren and that for Gods sake to omit that we receive it as a free gift from God and therefore by it we cannot merit of him CHAP. IX Bellarmines dispute that good workes are meritorious ex condigno not onely ratione pacti but also ratione operis examined § I. IN the fourth place Bellarmine discourfeth how farre forth good workes are either meritorious or are rewarded Meritorious whether ex condigno and if so whether ratione pacti solum or ratione operis also That good workes are meritorious ex condigno which is the matter that hitherto hee hath proved hee now maintaineth against Durandus affirming that his Assertion as it is refuted by the common consent of all almost Divines so also by all the arguments which formerly hee hath used against us to prove that the workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious which I desire the Reader to take notice of because some draw-backs who notwithstanding would seeme stiffe defenders of merits doe beare the simple in hand that it is but a Schoole-point to say that workes are meritorious either ex condigno or ex congruo When as in very trueth it is the received Doctrine of that Church that the good workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious of everlasting life Now it is evident that meritum ex congruo is not truely and properly meritorious § II. In the next place Bellarmiâ—…e now taking it for granted that good workes are meritorious ex condigno hee disputeth whether they bee so ratione pacti tantum or ratione operis tantum or ratione utriusque whereunto I answere
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
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.
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
say they Christs righteousnesse and merits whereby hee redeemeth and saveth men should bee imputed unto us then should we thereby become Saviours and redeemers of others but this latter is false therefore the former Answere I deny the consequence of the proposition for first when we say that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse our meaning is this that the Lord accepteth for us and in our behalfe the obedience and mâ—…rits of Christ as if we had performed the same for our selves in our owne persons For as the merit of Christ is the common price of redemption sufficient for the salvation of all universally so it is the price for every particular and so is applyed to every particular not as the common price redeeming all but as the price of those soules in particular to whom it is particularly applyed Secondly the efficacie or effect of imputation dependeth upon the will of the imputer and therefore the force of it cannot be extended further than he extendeth it which is the justification of the parties to whom it is imputed but no further Thirdly the consequence of the proposition doth no more follow than if I should argue thus If by imputation of Adams transgression others are made guilty of sinne and damnation then they to whom Adams transgression is imputed are made the cause and fountaine of sinne and damnation in all others but of the first and second Adam we should conceive not as of private men but the first Adam is to be considered as the root of mankind in whom when he fell all sinned The second as the head of all that shall be saâ—…ed in whom as the head communicating his merits to his members all the faithfull have as his members fulfilled the Law and satisfied the justice of God for themselves The head and the body saith Thomas Aquinas are as it were one mysticall person and therefore the satisfaction of Christ belongeth to all the faithfull as to his members the Lord accepting in their behalfe the obedience and Merits of Christ as if they had performed the same in their owne persons not for others but for themselves And therefore by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they are not redeemers but redeemed For though Christ who is the Saviour of his body communicate to his members his obedience yet not his Headship nor his Mediatorship in respect whereof hee was and is both God and man Man to doe and suffer God to give infinite value and worth to that which his Person did or suffered for the justification and salvation of all those to whom his righteousnesse should bee communicated and imputed but not to make them redeemers and Saviours of others The righteousnesse of the head is of sufficient vertue to justifie and redeeme all the members to whom it is imputed but being imputed the merit thereof extendeth no further than to what end it is imputed that is to save the member not to make it a Saviour nor to confound the members with the head nor to take away the proportion that is and ought bee betweene the head and the members Fourthly to the Papists who confesse Christs satisfaction to be imputed unto us I returne the like argument If Christs satisfaction whereby he redeemed mankind bee imputed unto us then are we also redeemers of mankind But they will not not cannot inferre that therefore we are redeemers but that wee among others are redeemed § X. But that we are justified onely by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse I shall by the helpe of God fully prove hereafter in my whole fifth booke Here onely for a tast I will but point at two argumenss the former out of Rom. 4. 5. 6. 11. the basis or ground whereof is this that whom the Lord justifieth to them he imputeth righteousnesse Now this righteousnesse is either the parties owne or of another Not their owne for they are sinners and being sinners they cannot bee justified by righteousnesse inherent but righteousnesse is imputed to them without workes that is without respect of any obedience performed by themselves Therefore it is the righteousnesse of another That other is no other nor can be any other but Christ onely therefore by imputation of his righteousnesse we are justified The second shall bee out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. As Christ was made sinne for us so are wee made the righteousnesse of God in him By imputation of our sinne to him Christ who knew no sinne was made sinne and a sinner for us therefore by imputation of his righteousnesse which here is called the righteousnesse of God we who are sinners in our selves are made righteous not in our selves but in him CAP. IV. Whether wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ only § I. NOw I come to the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter and some of our justification For some as touching the matter doe hold that we are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely Of these men some doe not hold the matter of justification to bee the passive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse morte Christi partuÌ„ purchased by the death of Christ as the meritorious cause thereof viz. remission of sinnes which they not without absurdity say is imputed to us For what is remission of sinne but the not imputing of it If therefore wee bee justified by imputation of the remission of sinne then are we justified by the imputation of the not imputing of sinne Againe the authors of this opinion confound justice with justification for they say that remission of sinne is our justice and that justification is nothing also but remission when indeed neither the one nor the other is justice but an action of God imputing righteousnesse and not imputing sinne unto us Others hold that by the passive righteousnesse of Christ it selfe meaning thereby his death and passion we are justified as by the onely matter of justification imputed to us But that wee are not justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ alone it may appeare by these reasons § II. By what alone the Law is fully satisfied by that we are justified and by what alone the Law is not fully satisfied by that alone wee are not justified By the whole righteousnesse of Christ that is to say the righteousnesse of his person that is his holinesse or habituall righteousnesse the righteousnesse of his life which was his obedience or actuall righteousnesse the righteousnesse of his death and passion which is obedientia crucis or his passive righteousnesse the Law was fully satisfied or fulfilled but by the passive obedience alone of Christ the Law was not fulfilled therefore by the whole righteousnesse of Christ and not by the passive onely we are justified The proposition is thus proved there is no justification before God without perfect and compleat righteousnesse for without that no man can stand in judgement before God and to imagine that
necessarily required that he might be meet to become our righteousnesse in his sufferings But this is frivolous because as I noted before he being perfect God as well as perfect man had beene in his sufferings an All-sufficient satisfaction for our sinnes though hee had never submitted himselfe to the obedience of the Law But the divine Nature of the Sonne of God and the dignity of his person as it made his sufferings all-sufficiently satisfactory for our sinnes to redeeme us from hell because they were the sufferings of God the blood of God c. so it made his obedience all-sufficiently meritorious to constitute and make us righteous and to make us Heires of Eternall life because it was the obedience or righteousnesse of God For the Sonne of God was made under the Law that he might not onely redeeme us who were under the Law by his sufferings but also that by his meritorious obedience we might receive the Adoption of sonnes But he proveth Christ to bee our righteousnesse onely in his passive obedience because it onely was both prefigured in the types and figures of the Law and also represented in the sacraments As touching the types and figures of the Law which prefigured Christ they were either figures of his person and office or they represented his benefits as namely and especially justification or â—…anctification And those which figured his benefit of justification either represented the remission of sinne by his sufferings or acceptation with God by his obedience or both The ceremony of changing their clothes when they were to come before God did import that those who desired to please God must be clothed with Christs righteousnesse which is also signified by the wedding garment and the holy attire wherein the Priests were to appeare before God The high Priests wearing of the golden plate with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord who is Iehovah our righteousnesse was to this end that the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts being taken away they might bee accepted before the Lord. The high Priests offering of incense upon the golden Altar resembled the pleasing obedience of Christ in his life and death and his intercession for us The Arke of the Covenant was a Type of Christ the Mediator the cover upon it of his propitiation the tables of Covenant within it of his fulfilling the Law for us The sanctification of the first fruits which were a type of Christ who is the first fruits of all that shall bee saved 1 Cor. 15. 23. was imputed to the whole increase or store Rom. 11. 16. So â—…aith Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the fulfilling of the Law performed by the first fruits so he calleth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe c. § XXIII But come we to the Sacraments which hee truely saith are the soules of that righteousnesse which is by Faith And yet saith he Baptisme signifieth onely the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ the Eucharist representeth onely his body broken and his blood shed for our sinnes Answ. Though some parts onely of the benefits of Christ are represented in the severall Sacraments yet the substance of each Sacrament is the participation of Christ wholly with all his merits and benefits Thus in Baptisme we are incorporated into Christ and in it we put on Christ who is our righteousnesse And it is the Sacrament not only of remission of sinne and of justification but also of regeneration and sanctification we being therein conformed to his death and resurrection Rom. 6. 3 4 5. In the Lords Supper we have communion with Christ being not only united to him as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh but also have communion with him both in his merits by imputation and in his graces by influence from him as our head Other arguments are used by the same authour but because in them he taketh two things for granted which hee cannot prove the one that justification consisteth onely in remission of sin the other that wee ascribe remission of sinne to Christs active obedience I will not trouble the Reader with them Onely let him call to minde the errours which the Authors of this opinion doe runne into for the defence thereof First that remission of sinnes is the matter of justification which is imputed to us Secondly that the Law is fully satisfied by bearing the penalty alone Thirdly that by one act of obedience we are made just as wee were by one act of disobedience made sinners Fourthly that neither by his disobedience Adâ—…m did transgresse the Law nor Christ by his obedience unto death obey it Fifthly that Christ obeyed the law not for us but for himselfe Sixthly that justification consisteth wholly and onely in remission of sinnes Which being for the most part consequents of this opinion doe prove the antecedent to be false CAP. V. That the formall cause of Iustification is the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse § I. YOu have heard the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter of justification now let us examine the unsound opinions of some others concerning the forme For as the former made remission of sins the matter which is imputed to justification so these make it the forme And as the former teach that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinne so doe these And yet the former hold it to bee but the matter and these but the forme Indeed if it were both the matter and the forme they might well say that justification doth wholly consist therein But being according to their owne conceipt but the one or the other and according to the truth neither of both but an effect of the true forme for by imputation of righteousnesse we have remission of sinne their opinion must needs be unsound But the thing wherein chiefely they erre is that with Socinuâ—… the heretike they deny the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse and consequently do hold that neither the active nor passive obedience of Christ is that which is imputed to us for righteousnesse What then forsooth the act of faith Of these mens errour I shall not need to say much in this place because besides that which hath already beene delivered in the third Chapter I have plentifully and fully proved in my whole fourth booke that the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter which is imputed to justification and in my whole fifth booke that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the forme of justification Only I will note their depravation of our Doctrine and point at their errours § II. As touching the former when we say that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of justification because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse God doth justifie us they will needs with the Papists make us hold that we are formally righteous by
that righteousnesse which is not in us but out of us in Christ which is absurd for as themselves expound the phrase Formall justice consisteth either in the qualities of the soule or in good actions that is it is either habituall or actuall so that it cannot stand in imputation by which wee can no more be just formally than wife rich alive by imputation of wisedome riches and life Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd as to conceive so absurdly of us But wee teach that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall by which he was formally just is the matter and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification And so those very Authors upon whom they would father this assertion in expresse termes doe teach affirming that Christs obedience or fulfilling of the Law is the materiall cause of justification and the application or imputation thereof is the formall cause of justification We say then that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justification or that by which we are formally just but the imputation of it it selfe being the matter of justification that is to say that thing which unto justification is imputed Wherefore I shall not need to answere in defence of our assertion the arguments either of those Veteratores the Papists or these Novatores who both agree in this calumniation against us all tending to prove that wee are not formally juâ—… by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him which we doe not hold For the righteousnesse whereby a man is formaâ—…ly just is inherent in himselfe for what is more intrinsecall than the forme But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us no more than our sinne was inherent in him And yet as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes not formally God forbid but by imputation so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse not formally as we are justified or in our selves but in him viz. by imputation And againe as by Adams actuall transgrâ—…ssion which was transient and now hath no being we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience so likewise by Christs obedience which hee performed in the daies of his flesh and was proper to his owne person we are justified that is not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also constituted just and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And yet we deny not but that as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed are also by sinne inherent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners so they to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justification are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ and infused by his spirit in their spirituall regeneration § III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satisfaction for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others First that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification Secondly that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne Thirdly that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne no not the righteousnesse of Christ otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne Fourthly that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is not the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ viz. remission of sinne Fifthly that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive but the merit therof Sixthly that not the righteousnesse of Christ but the act of faith is imputed for righteousnesse All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise § IV. For as touching the two first and the maine errour it selfe I have proved both in the third Chapter of this booke briefly and in the whole fifth booke at large that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which we are both absolved from our sinnes and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous and consequently that these two are the essentiall parts of justification viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his blood that is freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and the imputation of Christs obedience by which wee are made or constituted righteous and are entituled to the kingdome of Heaven So that remission of sinne is not the forme and much lesse the entire forme of justification considered as an action of God but an effect of the forme because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we have remission of sinne Neither is it the whole benefit of justification but a part thereof For although many of our Divines as hath beene said have taught that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required yet their assertion as hath also beene shewed is to be understood as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin as spoken in opposition to the Papists who say that to justification concurre not onely remission of sinnes but also inward renovation or sanctification To contradict them our Divines have said that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne wherewith alwayes concurreth imputation of righteousnesse and not by renovation or sanctification Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely was to exclude not imputation of righteousnesse which unseparably accompanieth the not imputing of sinne as Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation § V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confuted Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion who teach with us that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience for remission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood which cleanseth us from all our sinnes and not to his active obedience And justification is nothing as they say but remission of sinne whereupon it would follow that we are justified onely by Chriâ—…ts passive obedience which I have already disproved § VI. The fourth denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse I have fully confuted in the fourth booke besides that which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ is the same with that which I confuted Chap. 4. § 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne but that by which wee have remission not justification it selfe but that by which wee are justified For remission of sinne as well as justification it selfe is an action of God not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse
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
because the hebrew word which signifieth to justifie doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse § I. HAving thus briefely set downe the true Doctrine of Iustification according to the Word of God we are now to confute the erroneous doctrine of of the Papists There are six maine and capitall errours which the Papists most obstinately hold and maintaine concerning justification and consequently so many principall heads of controversie betweene us whereunto divers other particular questions are to be reduced The first concerning the name whether justification and sanctification are to bee confounded The second concerning the moving cause which is the justifying and saving Grace of God which they call gratia gratum faciens The third concerning the matter of justification The fourth concerning the forme The fifth concerning the instrumentall cause which is Faith The sixth concerning the fruits of faith and consequents of justification which are good workes concerning which are two maine questions First whether they doe justifie a man before God Secondly whether they doe merit Eternall Life § II. The first capitall errour of the Papists is that they confound justification and sanctification and by confounding of them and of two benefits making but one they utterly abolish as shall be shewed the benefit of justification which notwithstanding is the principall benefit which we have by Christ in this life by which wee are freed from hell and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And this they doe in two respects for first they hold that to justifie in this question signifieth to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent or by infusion of righteousnesse that is to sanctifie Secondly they make remission of sinne not to be the pardoning and forgiving of sinne but the utter deletion or expulsion of sinne by infusion of righteousnèsse Thus they make justification wholly to consist in the parts of sanctification For whereas Sanctification is partly privative which is the taking away of sinne which we according to the Scriptures call mortification and partly positive which we call vivification and is partly inward or habituall consisting in the habits of Grace infused and partly actuall which is our new obedience and practice of good workes all these and onely these they make to concurre to justification which with them is partly privative which they call remission of sinne whereby they understand the utter deletion or extinction of sinne wrought by infusion of perfect righteousnesse which is an higher degree of mortification than we can attaine unto in this life and partly positive and that either habituall which they call their first justification wherein a man of a sinner is made righteous by infusion of the habits of Grace which is indeed regeneration and partly actuall which they call their second justification wherein a righteous man is made more just by the practice of good works whereby they merit not onely the increase of righteousnesse but also the Crowne of Eternall Life § III. Of this first controversie therefore are two questions First whether to justifie doth signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse which is to sanctifie Secondly whether remission of sinne be the utter deletion and abolition of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse In both the Papists hold the affirmative The former which is a most pernicious errour they ground upon the like notation of the Latine words to justifie and to sanctifie That as to sanctifie is to make holy by holinesse inherent so to justifie is to make just by infusion of righteousnesse But though the notation of the Latine words were to be respected yet no more could be inforced from thence but that to justifie is to make just And that is all which Bellarmine goeth about to prove Now God maketh men just two wayes by imputation as he justifieth by infusion as he sanctifieth them For if a man may bee made just not only inwardly by obtaining righteousnesse but also outwardly by declaration as Bellarmine himselfe saith then much more by imputation even as we were made sinners by Adams actuall transgression and as Christ was made sinne that is a sinner for us For even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation his transgression being imputed to us so are wee made just by the obedience of Christ imputed to us And as Christ who knew no sinne was made a sinner by imputation of our sinnes to him so we are made the righteousnesse of God in him that is righteous in him by the imputation of his righteousnesse who is God unto us But indeed the force of the Latine words is to be respected no further than as they are the true translation of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New § IV. The Hebrew root Tsadaq from whence those verbs do spring which signifie to justifie is by the Septuagint translated sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just blamelesse or pure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just as Iob 9. 2. 15. 20. 10. 15. 15. 14. 25. 4. 33. 12. 34. 5. 35. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be blamelesse as Iob 22. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be pure as Iob 4. 17. sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense to be just as being a translation not of a passive but of a Neuter as Gen. 38. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thamar is more just than I. So Psal. 19. 10. jâ—…dicia Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 51. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Rom. 3. 4. Psal. 143. 2. Esai 43. 9. cum 41. 26. Ezek. 16. 52. In Ecclus. 18. 1. Deus solus justificabitur the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be reputed just as Iob 11. 2. 13. 18. 40. 3. Sometimes to be justified and absolved from sinne to bee pronounced and accepted as righteous as Esai 43. â—…6 Let us plead together declare thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first thine iniquities that thou maist bee justified Esai 45. 25. in the Lord all the seed of Israel shall be justified The passive is onely once used Dan. 8. 14. where it is said that the sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified that is expiated or purged In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie but not as the word is used in the doctrine of justification but as it signifieth either to arrogate righteousnesse to a mans selfe as Iob 32. 2. or to attribute or ascribe it to others as Iobâ—…3 â—…3 32. or to shew himselfe or others righteous as Ier. 3. 11. Ezek. 16. 51 52. In the third conjugation it signifieth to justifie in that sense that the question of justification And it is verbum forense a judiciall word used in Courts of judgement which usually is opposed to condemning And it signifieth to absolve and to acquit from guilt and accepting a man as righteous to pronounce him just
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
favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him concurring to our justification neither as the matter nor forme but as the efficient cause thereof Against which assertion the accursed Councell of Trent hath denounced Anathema If any man shall say that the grace by which we are justified is onely the favour of God let him be accursed But first I will produce our proofes and then answere their objections CAP. II. Our proofes that by the Grace of God by which we are justified is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ. § I. THe Papists for all their cursing are not able to produce any one pregnant testimony to prove that the grace whereby wee are justified is inherent in us But that Grace doth signifie that favour of God wee are able out of the New Testament to alleage above fifty testimonies whereof some shall hereafter be cited And as for the Old Testament it is evident that the Hebrew words which signifie the grace of God and are to be translated by the word grace doe alwaies signifie favour and never grace inherent As if I have found grace in thy sight Gen. 18. 3. Ex. 33. 13. 17. God gave Ioseph grace in the sight of the keeper Gen. 39. 21. and the people of Israel grace in the sight of the Egyptians Exod. 3. 21. In which sense the blessed Virgin is said to have found grace with God Luk. 1. 30. and our Saviour to have increased in grace with God and man Luk. 2. 52. § II. Secondly that grace whereby the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gratos fecit made us gracious or graciously accepted us in his beloved is gratia gratum faciens that is the justifying and saving grace By the gracions love and favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath made us gratious or gratiously accepted us in his beloved and not by any gift of grace inherent in us Therefore the gratious love and favour of God in Christ is gratia gratum faciens that is the justifying and saving grace and not any gift of grace inherent in us The proposition is in it solfe evident The assumption is proved out of Eph. 1. Blessed be God who hath blessed us in Christ with all spirituall blessings according as he hath elected us in him before the foundation of the world having predestinated us unto the adoption of children to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein or whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est gratos fecit hee hath made us accepted in his beloved in whom wee have redemption through his blood even forgivenesse of sinnes according to the riches of his grace verse 3 4 5 6. 7. For by or in that grace to the glorious praise whereof the Lord elected us before the foundation of the world and according to the riches whereof wee are redeemed by Christ the Lord hath gratiously accepted us in his beloved But it were very absurd to say that God hath elected us to the praise of the glory of our Charity or that wee are redeemed according to the riches of our charity But we were elected to the praise of the glory of his grace that is of his gracious love and bounty in Christ which grace was given unto us in Christ before all secular times and according to the riches of this grace he hath redeemed us by Christ. Wherefore gratia gratum faciens the grace by which wee are justified is not any gift of grace inherent in us but the eternall grace and favour of God vouchsafed unto us in Christ before the foundation of the world and before all secular times § III. In respect of this grace whereby the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graciously accepted the blessed Virgin she is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 1. 28. graciously accepted or graced or as it is expounded verse 30. that she had found grace and favour with God And so may all the elect and faithfull children of God be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in many places of the Old Testament they are in the very same sense called chasidim passively understood Especially where that word is read with the Affix or Pronoune betokening God to signifie his chasidim the favorites of God and thus it is read with the Affix of thâ—… first Person when God is the speaker calling them Chasidai my favourits or of the second whenthe speech is directed unto God and then they are called in the plurall Chasideica thy favorits Psal. 52. 9. 79. 2. 132. 9. 145. 10. and in the singular Chasideca thy favourite Deut. 33. 8. Psal. 16. 10. 89. 19. or of the third person in the singular Chasido his favourite or Chasidso Psal. 4. 3. and in the plurall Chasidain his favourites Psal. 31. 24. 85. 9. 97. 10. 116. 15. 149. 9. that is as not onely Tremellius and Iunius but also Vatablus interpret it quos benignitate prosequitur those whom God doth specially favour those who have found grace with God which commonly are translated Saints and so are all the faithfull usually called even in the New Testament as the translation of the Hebrew chasidim sanctity not being the cause of Gods favour which is eternall but the proper badge and cognizance of those who are the favorites of God by which they are knowne And further out of the same place Eph. 1. 6. where it is said that by this grace hee hath made us gracious in his beloved it is plainely proved that by it is meant the gracious favour of God towards us in Christ in which respect it is also called the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ. Act. 15. 11. So Rom. 16. 20. 1 Cor. 16. 23. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Gal. 1. 6. 6. 18. Phi. 4. 23. 1 Thess. 5. 28. 2 Thess. 3. 18. Philem. 25. Apoc. 22. 21. and to the same effect it is called the love of Christ Rom. 8. 35. that is as it is expressed vers 39. the love of God which is in Christ. Which places cannot without absurdity bee understood of that grace of God or of that love of God which is in us that is to say of our love of God § IV. Thirdly by what grace of God wee are elected called redeemed reconciled adopted saved by the same wee are justified But by the gracious favour of God by which hee hath gratiously accepted of us in his beloved and not by any thing in us we were elected according to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace Eph. 1. 5 6 for which cause our election unto life is called the election of grace Rom. 11. 5. By grace wee are effectually called according to his purpose For God hath called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose of grace which grace was given us in Christ Iesus
before all secular times but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour 2 Tim. 1. 9. By his gracious favour in Christ God hath redeemed us reconciled us unto himselfe adopted us and not by our charity or any thing in us And finally by his gracious favor we are saved through faith and not of works or of any grace or righteousnesse iuherent in us that he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ Eph. 2. 7 8. Therefore by the gracious favour of God in Christ and not by any grace inherent in us the Lord doth justifie us and therfore the sacred fathers of Trent must take home to themselves according to the censure of the Apostle Gal. 1. 8. 9. that Anathema which they denounce against those who say that the grace whereby wee are justified is onely the gracions favour of God in Christ. § V. Against the proposition if it bee objected that the grace of election is eternall but the benefit of vocation and the rest is temporall and therefore not the same I answer that although the benefit of vocation and of the rest be given us in time yet the grace by which we are called justified and saved is eternall 2 Tim. 1. 9. And therefore Bellarmines distinction of grace into eternall by which wee were elected and temporary by which wee are called and justified is idle and to no purpose § VI. If againe it be objected that by what grace we are sanctified by the same we are justified by inherent grace we are sanctified therefore by inherent grace we are justified I answer by distinction of the phrase by grace for if therby be meant the efficient cause then I confesse the proposition to wit that by what grace we are sanctified we are also justified For the same gracious favor of God is the efficient cause as wel of our sanctification as of our justification and I deny the assumption But if by that phrase be meant the essentiall câ—…use that is the matter or the forme of our sanctification then I confesse the assumption and deny the proposition For by the inherent graces wherin our habitual sanctification consisteth we are sanctified but we are justified not by any grace inherent but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ as I have shewed before and hereafter shall fully prove in its due place For wee are justified by the grace that is the gracious favour of God in Christ gratis in respect of us that is without any cause or desert in us through the redemption which is in Christ without the works of the Law that is without respect of any obedience performed by us or righteousnesse inherent in us that is prescribed in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse § VII If in the third place it be objected that faith is a grace inherent but we are justified by faith Or thus faith doth justifie faith is a grace inherent therefore some grace inherent doth justifie I answer againe by distinction that faith doth not justifie as it is a grace or quality inherent or as it is a part of our inherent righteousnesse but relatively as it is the instrument as hath beene said before to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse neither doth faith properly but the object thereof which it apprehendeth justifie As it is the almes properly which releeveth the poore man not the hand which receiveth it For when we say that a man is justified by faith without workes or by faith alone our meaning is that we are justified by the righteousnes of Christ alone which is apprehended by faith onely without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us or obedieuce performed by us § VIII Fourthly the justifying and saving grace is expressed many times by other words of like signification to the gracious favour of God which cannot be drawne to signifie our charity or any grace inherent in us As appeareth both by such synonyma as are joyned with it in the same places as grace and love 2 Cor. 13. 14. Grace and mercie 1 Tim. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 2. Tit. 1. 4. 2 Iohn 3. and also by parallelling other places as where it is said Tit. 2. 11. When the grace of God appeared the same is expressed thus chap. 3. 4. When the kindnesse of God and his love towards man appeared And where in some places it is said that wee are justified or saved by his grace or according to his grace in others it is said according to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his good will and pleasure Eph. 1. 5. 9. Phil. 2. 13. according to his mercy Tit. 3. in which place these foure words are used as Synonyma signifying the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 kindnes or bounty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 love of mankind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mercy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 grace This grace of God is notably expressed Eph. 2. 4. 5. 7. 8. by divers words of the like signification God who is rich in mercie for his great love wherewith he loved us hath when wee were dead in our sinnes quickened us together with Christ by grace you are saved that in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards us through Iesus Christ for by grace yee are saved through faith c. here is the riches of his mercie the exceeding riches of his grace his greatlove wherewith hee loved us his bounty towards us in Christ and all to set forth his saving grace So in the Old Testament mercie and grace are used as words of the like signification Exo. 33. 19. I will bee gracious to whom I will bee gracious and I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy which text the Apostle rendreth thus Rom. 9. 15. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercie and I will have compassion of whom I will have compassion Exod. 34. 6. where the Lord proclaiming his goodnesse or bounty before Moses as hee had promised chap. 33. 19. expresseth it in these termes The Lord the Lord God mercifull and gracious slow to anger abundant in chesed ve emeth in bounty and truth which in the New Testament are translated grace and truth keeping mercie for thousands forgiving iniquity c. So Psal. 86. 15. Thou O Lord art a God full of compassion and gracious long suffering and plenteous in mercie and truth Likewise Psal. 130. 8. 2 King 13. 3. So also Psal. 145. 8 9. the Lord is gracious and full of compassion slow to anger and of great mercy the Lord is good to all and his mercies are over all his workes And in like manner Nehem. 9. 17. thou art a God of condonations that is ready to pardon gracious and mercifull slâ—…w to anger and of great bounty § IX Fifthly if justifying grace were inherent there would be no such opposition as the Apostle
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
Gal. 1. 1. Heb. 7. 21. to the Sonne Ioh. 1. 3. Col. 1. 16. Heb. 1. 6 c. to the holy Ghost Rom. 5. 5. 1 Cor. 12. 8 9. And to omit other examples which are innumerable to the attributes of God which are the prime motive causes of all his actions as by the will of God 1 Cor. 1. 1. Eph. 1. 1. Col. 1. 1. Rom. 5. 32. 2 Cor. 8. 5. by the grace of Iesus Christ wee shall bee saved Act. 15. 11. who beleeved by Grace Act. 18. 27. called by his grace Galath 1. 15. by the tender mercies of our God Luk. 1. 78. Thirdly to Bellarmine in this place denying the preposition per to be rightly applied to the efficient cause I oppose Bellarmine in the twelfth chapter of the same booke affirming that the particle per doth signifie the cause efficient as Pro. 8. per me Reges regnant c. His third argument The good will of God cannot bee in vaine but alwayes performeth and worketh that good which hee willeth to any For whatsoever he willeth that he doth Psal. 115. 3 c. Answ. All this is true in respect of his will decreeing any thing which is absolute and is called voluntas beneplaciti but not in respect of his will prescribing or requiring any thing which is conditionall and is called voluntas signi of which will the Apostle speaketh in the place cited by Bellarmine 1 Th. 4. 3. This is the wil of God even your sanctification Otherwise by Bellarmines argument all men should bee holy because as hee saith God would have them truely just and holy Therfore saith he if justifying grace be the favour and goodwill of God and God doth not favour nor wish well in vaine but maketh us holy and blamelesse such as he would have us to bee then it followeth that to be justified by grace is not onely to bee reputed just and not to bee so but to be truly just holy and blamelesse Answ. This argument doth not prove the particular point for which it is brought namely that by grace is meant grace inherent and not the gracious favour of God But if it were ought worth it would serve to prove the maine question that although grace did signifie the favour of God when it is said that wee are justified by his grace yet this place would prove that wee are also made just by grace inherent For whom the Lord favoureth and wisheth well unto his benevolence is not in vaine to him but to whom hee willeth good hee worketh it making them truely just and holy whom by his grace hee justifieth For hee hath elected us that wee might bee holy Eph. 1. 4. and this is his will our â—…anctification All this wee freely confesse that whom God justifieth he maketh just first by imputation and truly and perfectly as hee justifieth secondly by infusion as hee sanctifieth But the Papists must at length learne to distinguish betwixt justification and sanctification For as wee have said before wee are justified by grace as it signifieth the gracious favour of God onely but wee are sanctified not onely by his gracious favour as the efficient but also by his graces infused and inherent in us as the matter § V. His fourth argument consisteth of sixe slender proofes put together which are scarce worth the answering That justifying grace â—…aith hee is not onely the favour of God but a gift inherent in the soule it may bee understood by the divers attributes and names thereof As first that it is called a gift a gift which wee receive a gift given by Christ a gift given by measure Secondly that it is compared to essence Thirdly that it is compared to light To the first I answere that the gracious love and favour of God is said in the scriptures to bee given that is vouchsafed unto us even the grace whereby wee were elected and predestinated to the adoption of children according to the good pleasure of his will by which wee are called justified and saved 2 Tim. 1. 9. God hath saved and called us with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his owne purpose and grace which grace was given us in Christ Iesus before secular times having thereby graciously accepted us in his beloved Eph. 1. 6. Behold saith Saint Iohn how great love the Father hath given us that wee should be called the children of God 1 Ioh. 3. 1. For to so many as received Christ hee gave power to bee the sonnes of God even to them that beleeve in his name Ioh. 1. 12. § VI. Yea but it is such a gift as wee doe receive Very like for giving and receiving are relatives and therefore what God giveth us we doe receive namely as hee giveth it but hee doth not give all things by infusion and therefore hereof it doth not follow that what we receive in inherent but that onely which hee giveth by way of infusion Now hee hath vouchsafed us his grace whereby hee elected redeemed adopted justified us not by infusion but by acceptation in Christ which grace wee receive by the hand of faith and whom hee hath graciously accepted in his beloved they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made partakers of that grace which notwithstanding is in God and not in them But let us consider his proofe Rom. 5. 11. receiving the abundance of grace and of the gift os righteousnesse Answ. By grace here is meant gracious favor neither doth the Apostle here say the gift of grace but the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnesse For where these two are joyned together grace and gift grace signifieth gracious favour the gift of grace the fruit and effect of that favour being some benefit bestowed whether reall or relative The former is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God the latter is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is prooved out of the 15. verse where is mention both of the grace of God and of the gift by grace and that which is here called the abundance of grace and vers 15. the abounding grace is elsewhere called the superabundant riches of his grace Ephes. 2. 7. that is of his gracious favour which in the same Chapter to the Romans vers 20. is said to have superabounded where sinne did abound which without great absurdity cannot bee understood of grace inherent Neither is the gift of grace or of righteousnesse here mentioned inherent but this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which came upon us to justification is opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guilt which came upon all men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto condemnation that is to say the merit of Christs obedience opposed to the guilt of Adams fall as the whole context doth prove But as wee were made sinners by Adams fall the guilt thereof being imputed unto us so we are made righteous by Christs obedience the merit thereof being imputed unto us §
and the gifts of grace bestowed on them for the good of others Deâ—…t 33. 8. 2 Chron. 6. 41. Psal. 4 4. 132. 6. 16. To which purpose 〈◊〉 saith wel God loveth all things which he hath made and among them he loveth more the reasonable creatures and among them hee loveth more amply those who are the members of his onely begotten Sonne and much more his onely begotten himselfe the sonne of his love And generally by how much the better any man is than others it is an evidence that hee is so much graced and favoured of God the grace and favour of God being the cause of their goodnesse and consequently the greater favour of greater goodnesse § X. Fifthly it is saith he compared to essence which is given by creation hence it is that we are said to be created in Christ Eph. 2. 10. and to be a new creature Gal. 6. 15. But that by which we are called creatures is inward and inherent in us Answ. That whereby wee are created anew according to the image of God in true holinesse and righteousnesse is the grace not of justification for wee are created to good workes which in the same place are opposed to grace and are excluded from justification but of regeneration and sanctification which we acknowledge to be inwardly wrought by the holy Spirit in those that are justified by the gracious favour of God through faith But who would thinke that the Papists were so blinded with malice as either to perswade themselves or to goe about to perswade others that wee deny the graces of sanctification to bee inherent and affirme that wee are sanctified by such a righteousnesse or holinesse as is without us § XI Finally saith he it is compared to light 2 Cor. 6. 14. What followship hath light with darkenesse Eph. 5. 8. Ye were sometimes darkenesse but now you are light in the Lord. 1 Ioh. 2. 9. He that saith that hee is in the light and hateth his brother is in darkenesse But light doth not make a body lucidum unlesse it be inherent neither doth it suffer darkenesse with it How then 〈◊〉 a justified man bee said not onely to be â—…ucidus lightsome but also light in the Lord whereas before he was darke if still the darkenesse of sinne be inherent iâ—… him and the light of grace abide without Answ. Wee are called light in the abstract by a metonymie either because we are in the light which is not inherent in us being either God or the favor of God which is the state of grace or because of that light which is in us which is the grace not of justification but of regeneration and is compared to light both in respect of the inward illumination of the soule and also of the externall sanctification of the life shining forth to others of which our Saviour speaketh Mat. 5. 16. Let your light viz. of your godly conversation so shine before men that they seeing your good workes may glorifie your Father that is in heaven But where he saith there can be no darkenesse in him that is light it is as much as if hee should say that there can be no sinne in him that is sanctified But he should remember that God alone is light in whom there is no darkenesse 1 Ioh. 1. 5. and that in the best of us there is darkenesse that is the flesh even a body of sin and of death as well as light that is the Spirit Gal. 5. 17. Rom. 7. 14 17 20 23 24 25. and that hee who saith hee hath no sinne which is the case of all justified yea of all baptized and of all absolved and absolute Papists he is a Iyar and there is no truth in him 1 Ioh. 1. 8. And this was his fourth argument containing sixe petite proofes CHAP. V. His fifth argument from Rom. 5. 5. answered § I. FOr having no more places where grace is named to proove justifying grace to bee inherent hee flyeth to Rom. 5. 5. where not grace but the love of God is mentioned That grace saith he wherby the Apostle saith wee are justified is said also to be charity diffused in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is given unto us The words are because the love of God or Gods love is effused or powred forth c. But here now the question is first whether by the love of God in this place is meant the love whereby God loveth us or that love whereby wee love God And secondly if that love of God whereby wee love him should be meant how is it proved that that love of ours is Gods justifying grace For this latter though wee constantly deny it Bellarmine goeth not about to prove but taketh for granted it being the maine point in question which cannot be proved out of this or any other place As touching the former our Divines doe hold that by Gods love in this place is meant that love whereby God loveth us and not that whereby wee love God The Papists hold the contrary which Bellarmine endeavoreth to proove by the testimony of Augustine and two weake proofes out of Rom. 8. § II. The testimony of Augustine hee urgeth very sophistically as if wee had no better proofe to oppose to the testimony of Saint Augustine than the authority of our owne writers or as if we might not differ from Augustine in expounding some place of Scriptures unlesse we will preferre our selves before him when notwithstanding the Popish writers in expounding the Scriptures differ from Augustine as oft as wee But to the Testimony of Augustine who saith that the love which is said to bee shed in our hearts is not that love whereby God loveth us but that whereby we love God we oppose first the authority of those Writers who understand this place of the love of God both actively wherewith he loveth us which is the same with his saving grace and also passively whereby he is loved of us which is a notable fruit of his saving grace or of either of them both indifferently as Origâ—…n Sedulius Haymo Anselmus Remigius Bruno Thomas Aquinas Dominicus à Soto Pererius Disput. 2. in Rom. 5. Cornelius à Lapide Secondly the authority of those who understand this love to be that wherewith God loveth us As of Ambrose who saith wee have the pledge of Gods love in us by the holy Ghost given unto us for that the promise is faithfull the holy Ghost given to the Apostles and to us doth prove and doth confirme our hope and that he might commend the love of God in us that because it is impossible that those who are beloved should be deceived he might make us secure concerning the promise because both it is God who hath promised and they are deare to him to whom he hath promised Of Chrysostome who saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom Theophylact followeth from that love which God sherved towards us Of Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
by offering his sonne Isaac and Rahab by her entertaining and delivering of the Espies but no man can bee justified before God by his works who is guilty of any sinne For if Paul who was not conscious to himselfe of any sinne was not thereby justified how can he that is guilty of any or rather many sinnes be justified For whosoever is justified before God is blessed but cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them § IV. But if it shall evidently appeare that none of the workes of the faithfull are purely and perfectly good how farre then are the Papists from proving justification by workes And this I will prove by divers arguments which I will also maintaine against the cavils of the Papists And first out of Esa. 64. 6. We are all as an uncleane person or thing all our righteousnesses are as a menstruous cloth Where the Church doth freely confesse her selfe and all her members to bee uncleane and all their righteousnesses that is all their most righteous workes to bee as polluted clouts which though it be a most pregnant testimony wherein wee have just cause to triumph yet Bellarmine saith it is impertinent and that for three reasons First because without doubt the Prophet speaketh not of just men but of notorious sinners for whose sinnes the City of Ierusalem and people of the Iewes was to be delivered into the hands of the King of Babylon And that the prophet speaketh in the person of such wicked men he endeavoureth also to prove by three arguments First because he a little before had said because thou art angry and wee have sinned that is as Cyrill expoundeth it because thou art angry thou hast forsaken us But neither is God angry with the just neither doth hee forsake them I answere no lesse confidently but upon better grounds that without doubt the prophet speaketh in the person of the Church and namely of the faithfull who living after the desolation of Ierusalem in the captivity of Babylon should bewaile their owne sinnes and of the whole people of the Iewes which had drawne upon them those fearefull judgements For these words are part of that prayer of the Church of the Iewes which from the seventh verse of the 63. chapter is continued to the end of the 64. And in token of this continuation the latter part of the last verse of the former chapter in the hebrew is the beginning of this chapter in the Greeke Latine and other translations Now in the former chapter the same persons which here confesse their sinnes after they had magnified Gods mercies towards them verse 7. c. doe say unto God verse 16. doubtlesse thou art our Father though Abraham be ignorant of us and Israel know us not thou O Lord art our Father and our Redeemer And in this chapter as they bewaile in this verse their sinnefulnesse with aggravation so they desire the Lord whom they call their Father not to remember their iniquities because they are his people verse 8. 9. professing their hope of salvation verse 5. which is not the manner of notorious and impenitent sinners but of those that are penitent and faithfull And further that which Esay here foretelleth is accordingly performed First by Daniel chap. 9. from the fourth verse to the twentieth who in like manner in the name and behalfe of the desolate Church of the Iewes prayeth unto God confessing his owne sinnes and of the people of Israel as he speaketh verse 20. Secondly by the Church in captivity which send the like prayer written by Baruch to the priest and people who then were at Ierusalem Baruch 1. from the 15. verse of the first chapter to the end of the third § V. This then is the confession of the Church which according to Tertullians rule is to bee extended unto the faithfull in all times and so it is understood by Origen who saith that no man may glory of his owne righteousnesse seeing here it is said that all our righteousnesse is as the cloth of a menstruous woman by Hierome wee shall bee saved onely by thy mercie who of our selves are uncleane And what righteousnesse soever wee seeme to have is compared to a cloth of a menstruous woman By Augustine all our righteousnesse compared with divine justice is accounted like the cloth of a menstruous woman as the Prophet Esay saith c. and again whatsoever an uncleane person toucheth shall bee uncleane but all wee are as the cloth of a menstruous woman comming from a corrupt masse and uncleane we beare in our foreheads the spot of our uncleannesse which wee cannot conceale at least from thee who seest all things By Bernard in divers places First for our humble righteousnesse if wee have any is perhaps right but not pure unlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to be better than our forefathers who no lesse truely than humbly said all our righteousnesse is like the cloth of a menstruous woman for how can there be pure justice where as yet fault cannot bee wanting And againe what can all our righteousnesse bee before God shall it not according to the Prophet be reputed as the cloth of a menstruous woman and all our righteousnesse if it bee straitly judged will it not be found unjust and defective What then will become of our sinnes seeing our righteousnesse cannot answere for it selfe wherefore crying earnestly with the Prophet Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord let us in all humility have recourse to mercie which alone can save our soules Thirdly if I shall bee just I will not lift up my head for all my righteousnesses before him are as the cloth of a menstruous woman Fourthly it is perfect and secure glorying when wee feare all our workes as blessed Iob testifieth of himselfe and when wee acknowledge with the prophet Esay that all our righteousnesses are to bee reputed no other than the cloth of a menstruous woman Fifthly surely if all our righteousnesses being viewed at the light of truth shall bee found like a menstruous cloth what then shall our unrighteousnesses bee found to bee And to the like purpose I might alleage Dionys. Carthus in Psal. 142. Gerson tom 3. de Consolat lib. 4. pros 1. tom 4. tr de sign Cajetan in 2 Cor. 5. 21. Iacob Clict in Canonem apud Cassandrum consult art 6. Stella in Luk. 17. Ferus in Matth. lib. 3. cap. â—…0 Andreas Vega opusc de justif qu. 1. propos 4. Adrianus de Traject afterwards Pope in quartum sentent Quasi pannus menstruatâ—… sunt omnes justitiae nostrae jugiter igitur super pannum bonae vitae quem justitiae operibus teximus stillamus saniem diversorum criminum all our righteousnesses are like the cloath of a menstruous woman wherefore continually upon the cloth of a good life which
est si divinitùs districtè 〈◊〉 and in the conclusion of his worke lib. 35. cap. 26. wherein as hee professeth that hee sought chiefly to please God so hee confesseth that this intention was accompanied with other worse intentions and sinister respects as seeking to please men and affecting their praise whereupon hee inferreth Si autem de his divinitùs districtè discutimur quis inter ista remanet salutis locus quando mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos 〈◊〉 crediâ—…s pura bona esse nequaquam possunt the evill things saith he which we have are purely and meerely evill but the good things which we suppose our selves to have are not nor can in any wise be purely good and so said Bernard Nostra siquâ—… est humilis justitia recta forsan sed non pura whence it followeth necessarily that none of the workes of the faithfull are pure and consequently that their very best workes are impure This which hath been said may suffice to a conscience not cauterized neither shall I need to say any more in this needlesse argument For though it should bee granted that some of the works of the faithfull were purely good as they are not yet so long as any of their works are sinfull as in many things we faile all insomuch that the righteous as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite the place doth fall seven times a day they cannot be justified by their workes but are by the sentence of the Law in themselves accursed because they doe not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them and because the breach of any one commandement maketh them guilty of all I conclude against the Papists as Epiphâ—…ius did censure the Catharists these men professing themselves pure by this supposition make themselves unpure for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure therein he doth utterly condemne himselfe to be impure CAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments answered § I. THis was our third argument taken from the imperfection of our obedience and righteousnesse which I have defended against Bellarmines cavils before I proceed to the fourth I hold it needfull to answere his arguments in propounding whereof hee falleth short of his projects as I noted before for hee that would prove that men are justified by their workes had need to prove that all the workes of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good which is impossible to bee proved but hee neither concludeth of all works nor of all the faithfull And yet it is most certaine that if the faithfull be justified by their works then all the works of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good His proofes are of three sorts authority of Scriptures Testimonies of Fathers and other reasons Out of the Scripture he citeth eight testimonies The first out of Iob 1. 22. In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips And that we may not answere with some of the Rabbins that though he sinned not with his lips yet hee might sinne in his heart hee telleth us that in the next Chapter God giveth him this testimonie that still he retained his innocency and therefore sinned neither in his tongue nor in his heart Againe whereas Satan sought by so many temptations to bring Iob to sinne and God on the other side permitted all those temptations that the patience and vertue of that holy man should bee manifested if Iob should have sinned God should after a sort have beene over come by the devill wherfore it is certaine that that worke of Iobs patience was not stained with any sinne and that the Lutherans which say the contrary take part with the devill against God § II. Answ. Those temptations were permitted by God as tyrals of Iob not perfection but integrity For that is Gods end that they who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound and upright may be knowne 1 Cor. 11. 19. and this end was atchieved Cap. 2. vers 3. for still Iob retained his integrity But Satans intention was to prove him to be an hypocrite and to move him not onely to fall but to fall away from God and to blaspheme him to his face and so much hee undertooke both Cap. 1. 11. and Cap. 2. 5. howbeit hee failed in his enterprize And so much is signified in both the places alleaged by Bellarmine that Iob was so farre either from blaspheming God to his face which Satan undertooke he should that he offended not with his lippes nor charged God foolishly or from being discovered to be an hypocrite that by Gods owne testimony he retained his integrity as that word signifieth which Bellarmine according to the vulgar Latine calleth innocencie But Iob though hee were upright and sincere yet he was not perfect nor without sinne as appeareth by his manifold imperfections which afterwards he discovered Cap. 3. c. and also by his free confession of his sinfulnesse Cap. 9. 20. 33. and lastly by his feare and jelousie which hee had over his best actions lest he had sinned in them for as Gregory writing on those words of Iob Verebar omnia opera mea understandeth it to be an humble confession as if he had said quae apertè egerim video sed quid in his latenter pertulerim ignoro what overtly I performed I see but what covertly I suffered therein I know not But here may be objected which Bellarmine in the next Chapter alleageth out of the said Gregory Bonarum mentium est ibi etiam aliquo modo culpam agnoscere ubi culpa non est it is the property of good minds even there to acknowledge a fault where nofault is wherto I answere that Gregory speaketh in regard of humane infirmities which were laid upon man after his fall and namely of the monthly infirmity of women which though they bee not inflicted upon a man for his personall offences yet it is the property of good minds to esteeme them as laid upon them for their sinnes Thus Iob though his afflictions were not inflicted upon him as corrections for his sinnes but as tryals of his vertue yet he imputeth them to his sinnes Iob 13. 26. § III. In the second place he allegeth diverse testimonies out of the Psalmes wherein David pleadeth his owne innocencie and appealeth unto God to be judged according to his owne righteousnesse Psalm 7. 4. 9. 16. 1 2 3. 18. 2. 1. 26. 1. 119. 121. Answ. In some of these places David pleadeth the justice of his particular cause against his adversaries not the absolute innocencie of his person The rest are to be understood of his uprighttnesse and integrity For otherwise no man was more forward to confesse and to deplore his manifold sinnes than David was none more ready to implore Gods mercy none more fearefull that God should enter into strict judgement with him § IV. His third testimony is Matth. 6. 22. If thine eye be single the
Flesh and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit So that though Will be present with us that wee cannot doe what we would and much lesse after what manner wee would that is with our whole soules with our whole mind heart and affections For what good wee minde or will as wee are Spirit the same wee will as wee are Flesh. This concupiscence the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne had not the Law said non concupisces that is thou shalt have none evill concupiscence neither habituall nor actuall Neither is it onely a sinne as the Apostle oftentimes doth cal it but also it is the mother-sinne Iam. 1. 13 Rom. 7. 17. which taking occasion by the Law to produce ill concupiscences therein forbidden is convinced not onely to bee a sinne but exceedingly sinnefull Rom. 7. 13. But of this I have spoken before and proved by the testimony of Augustine that concupiscence against which the good Spirit lusteth viz. in the regenerate for in the unregenerate the Spirit is not is both a sinne and the cause of sin and a punishment sinne § XIII And as touching the second the summe of the Law is that we should love God with all our heart and with all our soule c. but where is any defect of love there God is not loved with all the heart c. it being legally understood and therefore every defect is an aberration from the Law and consequently a sinne I have also proved out of Augustine that it is a fault where love is lesse than it ought to bee from which fault it is that there is not a righteous man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not For which also though wee bee never so good proficients wee must of necessity say forgive us our debts Therefore every defect is a debt that is a sinne whereunto wee may adde that of the same Augustine It is a sinne either when there is not charity where it ought to bee or is lesse than it ought to bee whether this may or may not bee avoided by the Will § XIV And as to the third If those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee not contrary to the Law then they are not forbidden in the Law and without doubt they are not commanded therein Now if neither they bee commanded nor forbidden then they are things indifferent but that is absurd yea but saith hee veniall sinnes hinder not justice And the Scripture absolutely calleth some men just and perfect notwithstanding their veniall sinnes I answere they hinder not imputative justice nor evangelicall perfection which is uprightenesse for to them that beleeve and repent they are not imputed Neither can it be denied but that the most upright men have their imperfections infirmities and slippes which though in themselves and according to the Law are mortall sinnes for if they should not bee forgiven they would as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth exclude men from heaven yet to them that are in Christ Iesus thâ—…y become veniall by the mercie of God through the merits and intercession of Christ. § XV. His second reason is taken from divers absurdities which hee conceiveth doe follow upon our assertion when as indeed they follow not upon our doctrine but upon his malicious misconceiving and misreport thereof as if wee held that all even the best workes of the righteous are mortall sinnes But wee acknowledge that the good workes of men regenerate are truly good and so to bee called notwithstanding the imperfection thereof Onely wee deny them to be purely good wherin we have the consent of holy Scriptures and of the ancient Fathers some whereof I before alleaged to whom I added Gregory and Bernard Gregory in the conclâ—…sion of his Moralls saith thus Mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse uequaquaÌ„ possunt Our evill things are purely evill and the good things which we suppose our selves to have can by no meanes bee purely good Bernard t Our lowly justice if we have any is perhaps true but not pure Vnlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to bee better than our fore-fathers who said no lesse truely than humbly all our righteousnesses are as it were the cloth of a menstruous woman wee doe not say that the good workes of the faithfull are sins and much lesse mortall sins For we hold that the sins of the faithful become to them venial But this we say with Salomon that there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not which in effect is the same with that assertion of Luther Iustus in omni opere bono peccat § XVI Now let us examine the absurdities which hee absurdly upon his owne malitious misconceit objecteth against us In all which it is supposed that wee call the good workes of the righteous sinnes yea mortall sinnes The first if all the workes of the faithfull bee sinnes then the worke of faith whereby we are justified and that prayer whereby we begge remission of sinne should be sinnes Answ. The worke of faith and the act of prayer are good but not purely and perfectly good Neither are we justified by the worthinesse or by the worke of our faith but by the Object which it doth receive nor obtaine our desires by the merit of our prayer but by the mediation and intercession of Christ our Saviour Our faith is such that wee have need alwayes to pray Lord increase our faith Lord I beleeve help mine unbeleefe and our prayer such that when wee have performed it in the best manner we can wee have neede to pray that the wants and imperfections of our prayer may bee forgiven us § XVII The second If all the works of the righteous be sinnes with what face could the Apostle say that hâ—… knew nothing by himselfe And what boldnesse was that for his good workes that is for his mortall sinnes to expect a Crowne of righteousnesse Answ. Though the Apostle had no doubt sometimes offended after his conversion yet he was not conscious to himselfe in particular of any actuall sinne or crime committed by him for as the Psalmist saith who can understand his errors No man saith Basil is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free from sinne but God for of those many things wherein we offend the most wee understand not for which cause the Apostle saith I know nothing by my selfe but in that I am not justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in many things I offend and doc not perceive whence also the Prophet saith who understandeth his trespasses But though hee was not conscious to himselfe of his slippes and oversights yet hee was not ignorent of his owne corruptious and infirmities against which when hee had prayed to God hee received this answere My grace is sufficient for thee and in weakenesse my power is made perfect Neither did the Apostle expect the reward for
the merit of his works but for the truth and fidelity of God who is just in keeping his promise made to the upright though unperfect indeavers of his servants And therefore the reward whereby God doth crowne his owne gifts in us is called a crowne of righteousnesse not of ours but of Gods righteousnesse as Bernard saith § XVIII The third If all the works of the righteous were mortall sinnes then God himselfe should sinne mortally because it is God that worketh in us when we doe any good works Phil. 1. and 2. Answ. If all good workes were absolutely sinnes yea mortall sinnes as they malitiously charge us to hold then indeed God who is the author of them might perhaps bee said though not to sinne and much lesse to sinne mortally for he is not subject to the precept of the Law and much lesse to the curse of it yet to be the author of sinne But wee hold that the good works of the faithfull are truly good though not purely good and that what goodnesse is in them is the worke of God and what impurity is in them it is from the flesh which staineth the workes of grace in us Neither are the defects of the secondary causes to be imputed to the first cause That which God worketh in us no doubt is good but this good worke hee hath but begun in us as in the place by him quoted Philippians 1. 6. for our in regeneration wee are not wholly renewed and at once for then wee should bee wholy spirit and no flesh Neither doth the leaven of grace season the whole lumpe at once but the inward man is renewed day by day And what is not yet renued is a remainer of the old man and what is not Spirit is flesh Now betweene these two there is a perpetuall conflict the spirit lusting against the flesh and the flesh lusting against the Spirit So that a man regenerate cannot with full consent of will doe either good or evill there being a reluctation of the Spirit against the evill which the flesh affecteth and a rēluctation of the flesh against that good which is willed by the Spirit By reason of this conflict it comes to passe that as the sinnes of the faithfull are sinnes of infirmity more or lesse and not wilfull sinnes committed of meere malice so the good works of the faithfull are not purely good but stained with the flesh § XIX The 4. that our assertion is greatly injurious to our Redeemer who as the Apostle saith gave himselfe for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity might purge unto himselfe an acceptable people zealous of goodworks For neither should he truly have redemed us from any iniquity nor truly cleansed his people nor made them zealous of works truly good but of mortall sinnes namely if all their good works be mortall sinnes which we utterly deny But I answere Our Saviour Christ gave himselfe for us both that he might justifie us by redeeming us from all iniquity and also that hee might sanctifie or as the Apostle speaketh that hee might purifie unto himselfe a peculiar people zelous or studious of good works The iniquity from which he redeemeth us is not onely of those transgressions which are absolutely sinnes but also of those unperfect and defective workes which wee indevour to performe in obedience to God And herein as I have said the high Priest was a notable type of our Saviour Christ who did weare in the forefront of his Miter a plate of gold in which was ingraven this inscription Holinesse of the Lord meaning of Iehovah our righteousnesse which he was appointed to weare that he might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the Children of Israell should hallow in all their holy gifts that notwithstanding the iniquity of them they might be accepted before the Lord by imputation of his holinesse who is Iehovah our righteousnesse And the like is to be said of the incense of the Saints upon earth that is of their prayers and all other their good works which have need to bee perfumed with the odours of Christs sacrifice that so being defective in themselves they may be accepted of God in Christ. As for our sanctification it is true that Christ gave himselfe to sanctifie us But this sanctification is but begun and in part in this life and is to be perfected in the life to come So saith the Apostle Ephcs. 5. that Christ loved his Church and gave himselfe for it that hee might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word that he might present it to himselfe viz. at the mariage of the Lambe a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing but that it should be holy and without blemish which last words as I have shewed out of Augustine are to bee understood not of the Church militant on earth but of the Church triumphant in heaven The workes which we are to be studious of are workes not onely truly but also as much as is possible purely good For though wee cannot in this life attaine to full purity and perfection yet we must aspire towards it affecting and desiring to performe good works in a better manner and measure than wee can indeed attaine unto Howbeit we must say with the Apostle to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not for the good that I would I doe not but the evill which I would not that I doe and lest it should bee said that the Apostle speaketh all these things in the perof a carnall man he concludeth thus so then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even I my selfe with the minde that is the Spirit serve the Law of God but with the flesh the Law of sinne § XX. The fifth If all good workes are mortall sinnes then some mortall sinnes are good works and then we may conclude thus All good works are to be done some mortall sinnes are good works therefore some mortall sinnes are to be done Againe no mortall sinne is to bee done all good workes are mortall sinnes therefore no good worke is to bee done Conclusions worthy of the Lutherans that some mortall sinnes are to bee done and that no good worke is to be done Answ. we deny good workes to bee mortall sinnes though in every good worke the most righteous doe sinne The worke it selfe is good though the defect or imperfection which goeth with it is evill The good worke therefore is to bee done the defect we are to strive and to pray against and to crave pardon for it To which deprecation we are to expect this answeare or the like My grace is sufficient for thee and in thy weakenesse my power is perfected Againe wee must distinguish betwixt workes which are sinnes absolutely and per se and those which are onely by accident For those which are good per se are to be
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
an heire of eternall life Christs sufferings and obedience being imputed unto him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if he had suffered and performed the same in his owne person But the doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse is as it were a racke to mens consciences For when a man being summoned to appeare before the judgement seat of God shall seriously consider with himselfe what he shall oppose to the accusations of Satan to the conviction of the Law to the Testimony of his owne Conscience confessing himselfe to be a most wretched sinner to the judgment of God the most righteous judge If he looke backe to his owne conversation as having nothing to trust to but his owne righteousnesse he shall finde sufficient matter of despaire He may say with Anselme Terret me vita mea c. my life doth terrifie me for being diligently examined my whole life almost appeareth either to bee sinne or barrennesse and if there seeme to bee any fruit therein it is either so counterfeit or unperfect or some way or other corrupted as that it can doe no other but either not please or displease God And summoning himselfe before the judgement seat of God hee findeth himselfe to bee in great straits On this side saith he will be accusing sinnes on that side terrifying justice under will lye open the horrible gulfe of hell above an angry Iudge within a burning conscience without a flaming world where shall I be hid how shall I appeare to be hid is impossible to appeare is untolerable To avoide these straits there is no way but to renounce the doctrine of justification by works or inherent righteousnes and to fly to the doctrine of the Gospell teaching justification by the grace of God freely without respect of works through the merits of Christ received by faith and to appeale from the tribunall of Gods justice to the throne of his mercy For whiles a man retaineth this opinion that he can bee no otherwise justified than by his owne good workes or inherent righteousnesse he can never be soundly perswaded that his righteousnesse is sufficient for that purpose but ever hath just caufe not onely of doubting but also of despaire And this is the cause of that Popish opinion that no man without speciall revelation can be assured of the remission of his sinnes or of salvation § VI. The eleventh and last argument shall be taken from experience For when men seriously considering of their justification before God as a judiciall act of God as the word it selfe importeth shall sincerely and in the feare of God set themselves before his judgement seat where they must receive the sentence either of absolution or condemnation and shall bethinke themselves what they being accused of Satan and convicted by the testimony of their owne Conscience have to oppose to the just judgement of God why sentence of condemnation should not passe against them they would utterly disclaime their owne righteousnesse For as Augustine and other of the Fathers observe as before I have noted out of the eight and nine verses of Prov. 20. joyned together cum Rex justus sederit in solio quis potest dicere mundum est cor meum when the righteous King shall sit upon his throne who can say my heart is cleane yea the best of the Papists when By deadly sicknesâ—…e as Gods messenger they have beene summoned to come before Gods judgement they have beene forced to leave their schoole-trickes and sophisticall distinctions and plainely renouncing their owne righteousnesse to rest wholly upon the mercies of God and the merits of Christ. Insomuch that many who have lived Papists have in this most weighty point died reformed Catholicks And to this purpose there is extant among them in divers Bookes a forme of visiting the sicke wherein both the Pastor is directed what to say and the sicke person is instructed what to answere The Pastor therefore having demanded these questions Brother dost thou rejoyce that thou shalt dye in the faith doest thou confesse that thou hast not lived so well as thou ought Doth it repent thee hast thou a will to amend if thou hadd'st space of life Dost thou beleeve that our Lord Iesus Christ dyed for thee doest thou beleeve that thou canst not bee saved but by his death and having received affirmative answers to every question he inferreth this exhortation that whiles his soule remaineth in him he should place his whole affiance in the death of Christ and in no other thing and that if God will judge him if hee shall say unto him thou art a sinner that thou hast deserved damnation that hee is angry with thee he should say O Lord I interpose the death of thy Sonne betweene me and thy judgement betweene my sinnes and thee betweene mee and my bad deserts betweene me and thine anger In the edition printed at Venice there are these two questions dost thou beleeve that thou shalt come to glory not by thine owne merits but by the vertue and merit of Christs passion And a little after dost thou beleeve that our Lord Iesus Christ died for our Salvation and that no man can bee saved by his owne merits or by any other meanes but by the merit of his passion unto both which an affirmative answere was made but both blotted out in the Index expurgatorius set forth by Cardinall Quiroga CAP. VIII The disproofe of the Popish assertion affirming that we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent § I. NOw we are severally to disprove the Popish assertion and to prove ours As touching the former that wee are not justified by righteousnesse inherent Our first argument may bee this That righteousnesse of God by which we are justified is not prescribed in the Law as before hath beene proved Rom. 3. 21. nor is that righteousnesse which is of the Law Phil. 3. 9. All inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law and is that which is of the Law Therefore inherent righteousnesse is not that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified That all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law it is manifest first because the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse whether habituall or actuall secondly because charity wherein they place their inherent righteousnesse even that charity whereby they are to love God withall their soules and their neighbour as themselves that charity which proceedeth from a pure heart from a good conscience and from faith unfained is prescribed in the Law as the summe and complement thereof Matth. 22. 37. 39 40. 1 Tim. 1. 5. § II. To avoid this most evident truth Bellarmine bringeth a frivolous distinction as he applieth it to wit that there is justitia legis and justitia in lege or exlege The justice of the Law the justice in the Law or of the Law The justice of the Law is that very justice which the Law prescribeth or that justice
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
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
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
of imputation of Christs righteousnesse where in mine opinion hee might as well have alleaged that there is no need of a Saviour For if there bee need of a Saviour it is to free us from the danger of damna ion and to entitle us to the Kingdome of heaven both which benefits are implyed in justification But how should we who are sinners and consequently by sinne obnoxious to damnation and excluded from heaven bee either acquitted from hell or made heires of heaven For neither by our selves nor by any other meanes in the world can we bee freed from hell or have right to heaven but onely by the death and merits of Christ our onely Saviour which is so cleare a truth that the Papists themselves cannot deny it But how can wee bee freed from hell by Christs sufferings or entitled to heaven by his obedience if the Lord doe not accept of his sufferings and obedience in our â—…ehalfe as if we had suffered and done the same in our owne persons If God doe not accept them in the behalfe of the faithfull for whose sake hee did obey and suffâ—…r then all that Christ did and suffered for us was in vaine and in vaine did he take our nature and our sinnes upon him If the Lord doe accept in our behalfe the fufferings and merits of Christ then doth he impute them unto us For by imputation as I haue said wee meane nothing else Neither can the sufferings and obedience of Christ being transient as I have also shewed before bee otherwise communicated unto us but by imputation § V. But come we to his second argument for if saith he imputation bee necessary it is chiefly for this cause because a man after remission of sinne remaineth still a sinner his sinne being covered and not abolished But when sinnes are remitted they are not onely covered but utterly abolished But here Bellarmine grossely mistaketh our assertion as if we held that sins are first forgiven and then after the forgivenesse of sinnes righteousnesse is imputed But wee hold that by imputation of Christs righteousnesse or satisfaction we have remission of sinne and not otherwise and therefore that to remission it â—…selfe imputation is absolutely necessary For God forgiveth no sinne nor remitteth the guilt of punishment for which his justice is not fully satisfied But wee are not able our selves to satisfie for our sinnes but by eternall punishment Therefore it is impossible salva Dei justitia that our sinnes should bee forgiven unlesse Christs satisfaction be imputed unto us § VI. And whereas still he harpeth on that string that remission of sinne is the utter deletion or abolition of it to wit by infusion of righteousnesse and that therefore imputation of Christs righteousnesse is needlesse I answere first that in sinne two things are considered the guilt and the corruption That in remission of sinne the guilt is fully taken away by imputation of Christs perfect righteousnesse but the corruption or pollution is not taken away by remission but by mortification and that not fully and at once but by degrees And howsoever these two benefits doe alwayes concurre remission of sinne and mortification of sinne for whosoever are freed from the guilt of sinne are also freed from the dominion of sinne and to whom the Lord granteth remission to them hee granteth repentance Gods forgiving and mans forgoing or forsaking of sinne going alwayes together notwithstanding they are by no meanes to be confounded I confesse that both of them are wrought by the bloud of Christ and by his death but in a divers respect For by the bloud of Christ is meant all that which issued out of his blessed side which was both bloud and water Ioh. 19. 34. which Saint Iohâ—… vers 35. noteth as a thing most remarkable and accordingly in his first Epistle Chapter 5. vers 6. urgeth it This is he that came by water and bloud even Christ Iesus not by water onely but by water and bloud The bloud of redemption to redeeme us from the guilt of sinne and the water of ablution to purge us from the pollution of sinne The death also of Christ may be considered either in respect of the merit thereof as it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a price or ransome apprehended by faith to redeeme us from the guilt of sinne or in respect of the vertue and efficacy as it is a medicine or plaister applyed by the Holy Ghost to cure us of the malady of sinne Both Christ worketh by his bloud and by his death but the former is done without us and in respect of sinnes past at once as when a debt is fully satisfied the later is wrought in us as when a disease is cured by degrees § VII Secondly if remission of sinne bee an utter deletion or a totall abolition of sinne then no mans sinne is forgiven in whom any sinne remaineth which is a most desperate doctrine as heretofore I have shewed for where is that mortall man in whom no sinne remaineth If the Papists say they have no sinne Saint Iohn will tell them that there is no truth in them Thirdly in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish it but to pardon and to forgive it or not to impute it And further God is said so to forgive our sinnes as wee forgive the offences of others which wee doe when by charity we cover them when we do not remember them with any desire or purpose to revenge them when we are reconciled to them that offended us The difference is that God forgiveth not onely in mercy but in justice also forgiving no sinnes but those for which his justice is fully satisfied He forgiveth therefore those sinnes for which Christ hath satisfied he remitteth the punishment to us which Christ hath borne for us he covereth them but with the robe of Christs righteousnesse hee is reconciled unto us but it is Christ for whose sake he doth forgive our sinnes Thus therefore I argue If remission of sinne bee not the deletion of the sinne it selfe by infusion of righteousnesse but the not imputing or covering of it the taking away of the guilt by imputation of Christs satisfaction then we are justified not by infusion but by imputation but the former is true therefore the later Yea but â—…aith Bellarmine the Scripture by remission of sinne understandeth the utter abolishing of sinne and to that purpose useth all manner of words which could be devised to expresse the utter deletion of sinne to which purpose he alleageth many testimonies all which I have answered heretofore § VIII Fourthly if there be a totall deletion of sin in our justification by the infusion of righteousnesse then that righteousnesse which in our justification is infused is perfect for the infusion of righteousnesse which is unperfect cannot cause a totall abolition of sinne Nay the imperfection it selfe is a sinne But it is absurd to imagine that the righteousnesse which is infused
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
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
the holy Ghost perpetually making such an opposition betweene them as that they cannot stand together If therefore we be not justified by the righteousnesse of workes prescribed in the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is then we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith alone Or thus The righteousnesse whereby wee are justified is either inherent in our selves and performed by our selves which the Scriptures call the righteousnesse of workes or that which being out of us is inherent in Christ and by him performed for us which is the righteousnesse of faith A third cannot be named and by both wee cannot be justified If therefore we be not justified by the former which I have sufficiently or rather abundantly proved heretofore then are we justified by the latter alone For if of two and no more but two you take away one you leave the other alone So is it in all dis-junctions consisting of two opposites sine medio The one being removed the other only remaineth § IX That by which alone the promise of justification by which alone justification by which alone Christ himselfe who is our righteousnesse is received that alone justifieth By faith alone the promise by it alone justification by it alone Christ himselfe is received For that is the proper office of faith For if faith receive the Promise and justification and Christ himselfe which no other grace in us can doe then it is the proper office of faith But faith receiveth the promise wherein justification is offered Gal. 3. 22. it receiveth remission of sinnes or justification Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. 13. 39. it receiveth Christ himselfe Ioh. 1. 12. which no other grace can doe as it is evident therefore faith alone doth justifie § X. That which is the onely condition of the Covenant of Grace by that alone we are justified because to that alone justification is promised Faith is the onely condition of the Covenant of grace which is therefore called lex fidei therefore by faith alone we are justified If against the assumption it be objected that charity and obedience and other virtues are also required I answere that these are not the conditions of the Covenant but the things by Covenant promised to them that beleeve If we beleeve God hath promised to justifie us and being justified or redeemed to sanctifie and to save us See Luk. 1. 73 74 75. Ier. 31. 33 34. Heb. 8. 10 11 12. Gal. 3. 9. 14. 22. Charity obedience c. are the conditions of the Covenant of workes Doe this and thou shalt live but the condition of the Covenant of grace is Beleeve and thou shalt bee inabled to walke in the obedience of the law thou shalt receive the gift of the Spirit and finally thou shalt bee saved For being by faith freed from sinne and become Servants to God you have your fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life Rom. 6. 22. § XI The holy Scriptures wheresoever they speake of that by which wee are justified mention nothing in us but faith not workes nor other graces unlesse it bee to exclude them from the act of justification Which is a plaine evidence that faith doth justifie alone Bellarmine answereth that it doth not follow that because faith onely is mentioned therefore it justifieth alone For sometimes other things as not only other virtues but the Sacraments also are mentioned which notwithstanding doe not justifie alone Whereunto I answere first that in the point of justification faith is mentioned alone and no other grace with it even where the holy Ghost treateth ex professo of justification and of the causes thereof Secondly that to no other grace mentioned either alone or with others is justification any where ascribed Neither are the Papists able to produce any testimony out of the holy Scriptures to prove it As for those which Bellarmine alleageth out of Tit. 3. 5. Ephes. 5. 26. they are not to the purpose as speaking of the outward meanes which we deny not to concurre with faith That out of Luk. 7. 47. hath already beene cleared that love there noteth not the cause but the signe of forgivenesse That out of Rom. 8. 24. sheweth that in this life we are not saved re but spe not in fruition but in expectation Which hope or expectation as it is termed vers 23. is no cause either of justification or of salvation Thirdly that the justification attributed to Sacraments doth not hinder justification by faith alone For when wee say that faith doth justifie alone we meane that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely as hath beene shewed As for the Sacraments we acknowledge them to be externall meanes and as it were manus offerentis as faith is manus recipientis And that the Sacraments bee so farre srom hindering justification by faith alone as that they doe confirme it as being the sealâ—…s of that righteousnesse which is by faith CHAP. IX Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers and of others in all ages for justification by faith alone § I. NOw that this Doctrine is no novelty but that which in all ages hath been the received Doctrine of the Christian Churches I will prove by the Testimony of the Christian Writers in all ages but chiefly of the ancient Fathers I. Iustin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To see God it is granted men by faith alone And by what alone wee see God by that alone wee are justified Againe what other thing could cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse In whom could we being sinners and impious bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God By the righteousnesse therefore of Christ onely which is received and put on by faith onely are our sinnes covered In Christ alone those that are sinners in themselves are justified therefore not by righteousnesse inherent but onely by the righteousnesse of faith II. Irenaeus whom I finde cited and approved by Augustine Men can no otherwise be saved from the stroke of the old serpent but by beleeving in Christ Even as the Israelites who were bitten by the fiery serpents could no otherwise be healed but by looking on the brasen serpent III. Clemens Alex. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith alone is the Catholike salvation of mankinde Againe the power of God alone without demonstrations is able to save 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith alone IV. Origen more plainely The Apostle saith that the justification which is by faith alone is sufficient so that a man beleeving only is justified and instanceth in the examples of the penitent theefe Luk. 23. and of the penitent woman Luk. 7. both which were justified by faith alone And in that place as hath beene observed by others Origen useth the exclusive particle sola seven times Bellarmine answereth that Origen only excludeth externall workes when power and occasion is wanting as in the
God not that working righteousnesse is the cause to make a man Gods child but an evidence to declare that hee is the child of God For he that is borne of God committeth not sinne 1 Ioh. 3. 9. as a servant of sinne Ioh. 8. 34. and hereby we doe know that we are passed from death to life that is that wee are justified because wee love the brethren 1 Ioh. 3. 14. Hereby the sonnes of God are manifest and the sonnes of the Devill hee that worketh not righteousnesse is not of God nor hee that loveth not his brother vers 10. Hereby saith our Saviour shall men know you to be my disciples if you love one another Ioh. 13. 35. I conclude with Saint Paul Gal. 3. 26. By faith in Iesus Christ hee doth not say by love but by faith yee are hee doth not say yee may bee but yee are all that beleeve the Sonnes of God upon which words as I noted before Thomas Aquinas observeth Faith alone maketh men the adoptive Sonnes of God § X. To these places of Scripture Bellarmine addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who if they speake as Bellarmine citeth them they say nothing but what wee willingly confesse to wit that faith is as Clemens Alexandrinus speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first propension or inclination to salvation that it is as it were the eye of the soule and the Lampe to finde the way to salvation as Cyrill of Hierusalem that it is the light of the soule the dore of life the foundation of salvation as Eâ—…sebius Emissemus that it is the beginning of righteousnesse inherent as Chrysostome that it is the gate and the way unto life as Cyrill of Alexandria that it is the first grace in a Christian as Ambrose that it is the beginning and originall of asâ—…iance and accesse to God as Ierome that wee are made the sonnes of Wisedome the faith of the Mediatour preparing and working it that it is first given and by it the rest that to a Christian the true beginning is to beleeve in Christ that by faith wee obtaine grace and by grace the health of the soule that the house of God whereby is meant the whole oeconomy of our salvation in this life is founded on faith raised by hope and perfected by charity as Augustine That faith is the foundation of righteousnesse which no good workes precede and from which all proceede that it is the foundation of all vertues as Prosper That if faith bee not first begotten in the heart the rest cannot bee good as Gregory All this and more wee affirme concerning faith But although many other graces besides faith are required unto sanctification as forerunners fitting us unto salvation yet none concurre with it to the act of justification And although it be the beginning of sanctification and of all other graces yet it is not onely the beginner but the continuer also of sanctification purifying still the heart and working by love by which we stand by which wee live being by the power of God through faith preserved unto salvation And although it be termed by some the beginning as it is of inherent righteousnesse yet it alone as I shewed before by diuers testimonies of the Fathers sufficeth to justification And therefore by it wee have not a partiall or inchoated but a perfect and plenary justification § XI To these testimonies saith he naturall reason may be added and well may hee call it naturall for there is little art in it and although it bee very simple yet it is double containing two slender proofes The former because faith is the foundation of hope and charity but neither hope nor charity is the foundation of faith For a man may beleeve that which hee neither hopeth for nor loveth but hee cannot hope for or love that which hee doth not beleeve And what then therfore faith is the beginning of other graces And what then therefore it followeth that it doth not sanctifie alone for it is but one among many but it doth not follow that therfore it doth not justifie alone And where hee saith that faith is the foundation of hope and that a man cannot hope for that which he doth not beleeve this overthroweth a maine Doctrine of the Church of Rome maintained by Bellarmine in other places that a man may hope well for the remission of his fins and for his salvation but without speciall revelation he may not beleeve it His second reason hath no soundnesse in it In bodily diseases saith hee the beginning of health is for a man to beleeve that hee is sicke and to beleeve the Physitian that taketh upon him to cure him and yet not that faith alone is entire health Where Bellarmine compareth justification to health recovered from sicknesse to which not justification may bee compared but sanctification For the disease of the soule as well as of the body is not onely a privation or absence of health but also an evill disposition or habit which is cured by the contrary disposition or habit for as the whole body of sinne is cured in some measure by the grace of regeneration or sanctification so the severall members thereof as infidelity by faith despaire by hope hatred by charity pride by humility uncleannesse by chastitie drunkennesse by sobriety c. Secondly he compareth the beleefe of a sicke man beleeving that the Physitian will cure him which is no health at all nor meanes of health but in conceit for many times it proveth otherwise the promise of the Physitian being deceiveable and the event uncertaine to the faith of an humbled sinner grounded on the infallible promises of God which are alwayes performed to them that beleeve CAP. XI Of Feare and Hope being his second and third dispositions § I. HIs second disposition is feare which he proveth to dispose unto justification and to concurre thereuntn in the same manner almost as faith doth But first this discourse is impertinent For we deny and our deniall we have made good that justâ—…ying faith doth not justifie by way of disposing And therefore if it be proved that feare doth dispose a man to justification yet that doth not disprove justification by faith alone For we have confessed that ordinarily in adultis there are preparative dispositions going before faith and justification whereof feare is one But these preparatives doe not justifie and therefore for all them faith may and indeed doth justifie alone Secondly you are to understand that this feare which goeth before grace is no grace neither is it that sonne-like feare which is the daughter of faith and love but the servile feare as he confesseth which is an effect and fruit of the Law working on those who are under the Law and keeping them in some order for feare of the whippe Neither is it properly timor Dei the feare of God but metus supplicii the object whereof
or the thing feared is not God but punishment or if it be of God it is not to feare him but to be affraid of him From which our Saviour hath redeemed those that beleeve that they may worship God in some measure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without this feare Neither doth it per se and in its owne nature tend to justification which is the exaltation of a sinner but rather to despaire which is the lowest dejection of a sinner Notwithstanding as the Law by working this feare is a Schoolemaster unto Christ for when 〈◊〉 by the paedagogie of the Law have learned to know their 〈◊〉 damnable estate in themselves for feare of damnation they are forced to seeke for salvation out of themselves so this feare which in it selfe tendeth to despaire and in it owne nature affrighteth men from God as we see in the example of our first parents Gen. 3. 10. is by God made a meanes to draw them unto him But to say that feare doth concurre unto justification in the same manner as faith doth is against reason and against common sence unlesse hee speaketh onely of the legall faith which as it is wrought by the Law so it worketh feare For feare driveth to the humiliation faith tendeth to the exaltation of the humbled soule and by it indeed the soule is exalted Therefore as humiliation goeth before exaltation so feare before faith Againe as feare goeth before faith so sinne goeth before feare For sinne maketh a man guilty the Conscience being by the Law convicted of guilt terrifieth the soule the soule terrified either sinketh in despaire being left to it selfe or prevented by God according to the purpose of his grace by which it was elected in Christ seeketh to God who is found of them that sought him not So that by this reason sinne it selfe may bee said to bee a necessary forerunner of justification disposing a man to â—…feare more than feare doth to justification for that is a cause this but an occasion § II. But as this discourse proving that feare is a disposition to justification is impertinent and affirming that feare concurreth to justification in the same manner that faith doth is false so are some of his allegations also impertinent Because they belong not to this servile feare which goeth before faith and and justification but to the Sonne-like feare which is a fruit both of faith and love and a consequent of justification As namely his first place iâ—… it were rightly alleaged Eccl. 1. 28. hee that is without feare cannot be justified or reputed just For the feare of God which the Sonne of Syrach in that chapter from the tenth verse to the end doth so highly extoll is not this servile feare but the filiall feare by which is meant true piety it selfe which as he calleth it there the beginning so also the Crowne and fulnesse of Wisedome But the place is not rightly translated in the Latine which Bellarmine doth follow For the Greeke text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wrathfull man cannot be justified or as some editions doe read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unjust wrath cannot be justified according to that of S. Iames the wrath of man doth not worke the righteousnesse of God And that the former part of the vers speaketh of wrath is proved by the latter which is the reason of the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the sway of his wrath is his ruine and by the words going before where the feare of the Lord is present it turneth away wrath and represseth anger § III. So his second Psal. 111. 10. and third Prov. 1. 7. where it is said that the feare of the Lord is the beginning of Wisedome and by Wisedome saith Bellarmine is meant perfect justification hee should say sanctification or godlinesse For as the wicked man is Salomons foole so the godly man is the onely wise man And in this sense Moses prayeth Psal. 90. 12. Teach us O Lord so to number our daies that wee may apply our hearts to Wisedome that is to true godlinesse and to the same purpose Iob speaketh c. 28. 28. the feare of the Lord it selfe is Wisedome and so Eccl. 1. 27. Now in these places the Hebrew word Reshith which is translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning may fitly as in many other places bee translated the head that is a chiefe or principall part or the top and the meaning is that the feare of God is a principall part of godlinesse and as you heard even now Eccl. 2. 18. the Crowne of Wisedome Otherwise I cannot conceive how feare which is a fruit both of faith and of love should truely be said to bee the beginning of godlinesse which by consent of all is the prerogative of faith And yet faith it selfe doth not justifie as it is the beginning of inherent righteousnesse and much lesse feare which concurreth with it not to justification but onely to sanctification Now that servile feare is not meant in these places it is evident not onely because such commendations are given unto it as belong not to servile feare but also because they that are indued with this feare are pronounced blessed Psalm 112. 1. 128. 1. Prov. 28. 14. whereas those who have the greatest measure of servile feare are accursed and contrariewise they are happy who are most freed from it The blessednesse promised to Abraham and all the faithfull in his seed is by Zachary expounded Luk. 1. 73 74 75. to be this that being redeemed from the hand of our enemies wee should worship the Lord without feare And Saint Iohn testifieth that there is no feare in love but perfect love casteth out feare 1 Iohn 4. 18. Fourthly the feare mentioned Prov. 14. 27. where it is said The feare of the Lord is a well-spring of life to avoid the snares of death is the sonne-like feare of which Salomon speaketh in the words next going before In the feare of the Lord there is strong confidence Fifthly the feare of the Lord mentioned Eccl. 1. 21. is the son-like feare which in that Chapter from the tenth verse is highly commended Of this feare it is said among other things that it is gladnesse and a crowne of rejoycing that it maketh a merry heart and giveth joy and gladnesse verse 11 12. which are things repugnant to servile feare § IV. But let us see how he proveth his unlike likenesse that servile feare doth in a manner justifie as faith doth viz. by Scriptures by Fathers by Reason First because as it is said of faith Heb. 11. 6. so without feare we cannot please God Answ. This is true of the sonne-like feare which is an unseparable companion of justification though Bellarmines allegation of Eccles. 1. 22. proveth it not as I have shewed But of the servile feare it may be truly said that they who please God most have the least of it For the greater a mans love is the lesse is his feare
which are a few testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers impertinentâ—…y alleaged His first testimony is Prov. 28. 25. qui sperat in Domino sanabitur The second Psal. 37. 40. Salvabit eos quia speraverunt in eo The third Psal. 91. 14. quoniam in me speravit liberabo eum Answ. None of these three places doe speake either of justification or preparation thereunto nor of hope otherwise than as it is included in affiance which as it hath reference to the future time is all one with hope nor of hope or affiance as it goeth before but as it followeth justifying faith what therefore could be more impertinently alleaged The first place according to the originall is but he that trusteth in the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be made fat The Latine in the next verse translateth the same words thus qui confidit and the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second Psalm 37. 40. the word chasah is translated sometimes confidere to trust sometimes and as I take it in that place onely sperare to hope in the same sense of affiance those that thus trust or hope in God he delivereth them from the wicked and saveth them But before they can either be saved or trust in God they must be justified by faith And therefore this hope or affâ—…ance is no forerunner of justification but a follower thereof The third Psalm 91. 14. the Hebrew chashak which by some is translated sperare by others valde or vehementer amare amore in aliquem propendere and might better have beene alleaged for love than for hope both which are consequents of justifying faith The words then are because he hath set his love upon me therefore I will deliver him he doth not say I will justifie him But let us heare Bellarmines commenting upon this place the Hebrew word saith he doth signifie to adhere to love to please therefore not every hope but that affiance which proceedeth out of a good conscience and out of Love and filiall adhering to God doth deliver a man c. § VIII His fourth testimony Matth. 9. 2. confide fili have a good heart sonne so the Rhemists translate thy sinnes are forgiven thee For our Lord faith Bellarmine did not as some falsely teach justifie the man who had the palsey before he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be of good courage my sonne but contrariwise as the Councell of Trent very learnedly signifieth first he saith be confident my sonne and when he saw him raised up in hope of health hee added thy sinnes remittuntur tibi are forgiven thee Whereby Bellarmine would signifie that by this hope or affiance the man was prepared for justification Answ. First the party and those that brought him had faith as all the three Evangelists note Matth. 9. 2. Mark 2. 5. Luk. 5. 20. and therefore was justified before God for if they who brought him had faith much more he who no doubt desired them to bring him and had already his sins forgiven Secondly the Verbe is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the time past and ought to be translated not as Bellarm. readeth remittuntur are now forgiven or in forgiving but remissasunt they are already forgiven And by that argument our Saviour putteth him in comfort that hee should be cured because his sinnes which were the meritorious cause of his sicknesse were forgiven By which glad tydings hee would have him to be assured by speciall saith of the remission of his sinnes and in that assurance to be confident So that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confident were uttered first yet the words following containe the cause of that confidence And therefore not onely remission of sinnes but assurance thereof by speciall revelation went before his confidence which therefore could be no preparative disposition thereunto And this is usuall in such consolations first to bid the party to be confident or not to feare and then to set downe the cause thereof as Genes 15. 1. Feare not Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Esai 43. 1. Feare not Israel for I have redeemed thee In the same ninth of Matthew verse 22. Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole Luk. 1. 30. Feare not Mary for thou hast found grace or favour with God Luk. 2. 10. Feare not for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy and so in other places And these were his testimonies of Scriptures in which he hath found no releefe § IX Let us see what helpe the Fathers will afford him No man saith Ambrose can well repent him of his sinnes who doth not hope for pardon Answ. Hope of pardon is a motive to repentance and to the use of other good meanes whereby wee may through Gods grace attaine both to justification and to sanctification Howbeit repentance belongeth to sanctification and not to justification Augustine whatsoever thou declarest so declare it that hee to whom thou speakest by hearing may beleeve by beleeving may hope by hoping may love From whence nothing can be gathered but that as faith by which we are justified commeth by the hearing of the word as the Apostle also teacheth so from faith proceedeth hope and from both faith and hope love So that here hope which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification is made a disposition not to justification but to love Cyprian to those who had fallen in time of persecution giveth this advice that they should acknowledge their grievous crime neither despairing of the Lords mercy nor as yet challenging pardon viz. untill they had truely repented thereof which was indeed wholesome counsell For no man can be assured of the pardon of any crime untill he have truly repented of it Vpon which words of Cyprian Bel. larmine though he can gather nothing out of them for his purpose but that those who desire pardon must not despaire of Gods mercy yet as a notable bragger he insulteth over us as if he had us at some advantage when God knoweth hee hath scarce brought any thing worth the answering By which words saith he our adversaries are plainely refuted who begin not to repent before they are fully assured that they are highly in Gods favour and are confident that they are to be ranked with the Cherubin and Seraphin which is an impudent and yet a witlesse slander as though wee were either so arrogant as the Papists who assume to themselves perfection which we doe not or so senselesse that we should teach that men are tyed to begin their repentance when they have attained to perfection and not till then If it be said that wee make repentance to be the fruit of faith which we define to be a full assurance of Gods favour c. I answere that that definition agreeth onely to speciall faith Not that all speciall faith is a full assurance but that every virtue is to be defined
disposition is a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament by which as he conceiveth justification is conferd Answ. If we did hold with them as we doe not that the Sacraments doe conferre grace ex opere operato and that without them no man could be justified and therefore also that they who would be justified ought to desire and purpose to be made pertakers of the Sacrament yet what would this hinder the justification by faith alone which if Bellarmine disprove not all that hee saith is impertinent How much more if neither the Sacraments doe conferre grace according to the Popish conceit nor the desire of the Sacrament be a disposition to justification All that in this case can truely be said is that forasmuch as God in his great mercy hath ordained the Sacraments as effectuall meanes to confirme our faith and to seale unto us our justification that it is a signe of a prophane and unsanctified heart to neglect or to despise such holy ordinances of God § XII His seventh disposition is the purpose of a new life and of observing all the commandements of God without which wee ought not to be made pertakers of the Sacraments Answ. This purpose of a new life is that which the Scriptures call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentance which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification Seeing therefore those adulti which come to the Sacraments ought to bring with them this purpose it followeth that they ought first to be justified before God by faith as Abraham was and then to receive the Sacrament as a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith So that this purpose though it be necessary to salvation yet neither doth justifie nor dispose to justification The place which hee citeth out of Ezek. 18. 31. is an exhortation to both the parts of sanctification viz. mortification in those words cast from you all your transgressions vivification in those and make you a new heart and a new spirit But of justification he speaketh not Neither are we any where exhorted thereto or to the parts thereof which are not our acts but the actions of God himselfe who onely remitteth our sinnes and accepteth of us as righteous in Christ by imputation of his righteousnesse Thus much of his first principall argument taken from the seven dispositions CHAP. XIII Bellarmines second principall argument that faith doth not justifie alone because being severed from Love c. it cannot justifie § I. BELLARMINâ—… second principall argument is this If Faith be severed from Hope and Love and other virtues without doubt it cannot justifie therefore faith alone doth not justifie Answ. If the meaning of his consequent be this therefore that faith which is alone doth not justifie I grant the whole for though faith doe justifie alone yet that which is alone sâ—…vered from Charity and other graces doth not justifie as heretofore hath beene shewed But though true justifying faith be never alone but is alwayes accompanied with other graces yet it justifieth alone though it never be without other graces yet it justifieth without them c. his consequence therefore I deny which hee laboureth to prove thus If the whole force of justifying were in faith alone insomuch that other virtues though present conferre nothing to justification then faith might justifie as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest but that it cannot doe therefore the force of justifying is not wholly in faith but partly in it and partly in the rest Answ. This consequence also I doe deny and doe referre you to the similitude of the eye heretofore propounded which though it be not alone yet doth see alone and though whiles it liveth it cannot be severed from the other parts of the body yet it seeth without them against which similitude Bellarmine might as well argue after this manner If the whole force of seeing were in the eye alone insomuch that the rest of the members being present conferre nothing to the act of sight then the eye might see as well in the absence as in the presence of the rest But every body knoweth the inconsequence of this proposition For though to the act of seeing other members doe not concurre with the eye as any causes thereof yet to the true being of the eye their presence is necessary for it cannot be a true living organicall eye and instrument of sight that hath not union with the other parts and is not animated by the same soule Even so I answere concerning faith that although to the act of justifying other graces doe not concurre with faith as any causes thereof yet to the true being of faith their presence is necessary For it cannot be a true lively justifying faith which is severed from all other graces of Sanctification and is not wrought and made effectuall by the Spirit of regeneration § II. Now he commeth to prove the antecedent of his argument viz. that conditionall proposition if faith may be separated from hope and love and the other virtues withoâ—…t doubt it cannot justifie But he unskilfully troubleth both himselfe and his reader with his conditionall proposition which as it is not fitly made the antecedent of an Enthymeme so is it not easily concluded An Enthymeme is an unperfect Syllogisme which is to be made up or perfected by adding that part of the Syllogisme which is wanting In this Enthymeme though the antecedent be a conditionall proposition yet the proposition or Major of the Syllogisme which also is conditionall is wanting and ought thus to be supplyed If faith alone doth justifie then it may justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues But it cannot justifie being severed from hope and love and other virtues Therefore faith doth not justifie alone In stead of this simple or categoricall assumption he assumeth hypothetically if faith be severed from hope and love and other virtues then without doubt it cannot justifie This assumption he endevoureth to prove by three arguments but to no purpose For though wâ—…e doe constantly hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee deny that faith being alone and severed from all other virtues doth justifie either alone or â—…t all and therefore to that faith which is alone we attribute lesse than the Papists themselves But he will needs prove it first because faith according to our doctrine doth justifie relatively and consequently faith and justice are relatives ther fore where faith is there must needs bâ—… jâ—…stice he mâ—…neth justice inherent for one relative cannot be withoâ—…t the other This saith he oâ—…r adversaries will admit willingly who teach that by every sinâ—… faith is lost § III. Answ. We doe indeed teach that faith doth not justifie as it is an habit or gift inherent in us or in respect of its owne worthinesse but relatively or in respect of the object which it doth receive As the hand which receiveth the almes releeveth the poore man in
to three heads The first is the authority of Gods word For if the Scriptures any where expresly say that faith alone doth justifie it must he beleeved though no other cause could be rendred The second is the will of God justifying namely because it hath pleased God to grant justification upon the onely condition of faith The third is the nature of faith it selfe because it is the properâ—…y of faith alone to apprehend justification and to apply it unto us and to make it ours Besides these I have rendred other causes the chiefe and principall whereof is this because we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which being out of us in him is imputed onely to them that beleeve and is received onely by faith § II. But these three causes or reasons which he mentioneth will not easily be remov'd the first the authority of the Scriptures this being the maine doctrine of the Gospell Yea but saith Bellarmine it is no where said in expresse termes that faith alone doth justifie when we saith he have expresse termes that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely Iam. 2. 24. Answ. To the place in the Epistle of Iames I shall answere fully in his due place Onely here I say thus much That Saint Iameâ—… speaketh not of the justification of a sinner before God by which he is made or constituted just of which our question is but of that whereby a just man already justified before God may be approved declared and knowne both to himselfe and others to be just And that the Apostle Iames speaketh not either of workes as causes but as signes of justification or of the habit of true faith but of the profession of faith or faith professed onely and concludeth that a man is justified that is knowne and approved to be just not onely by the profession of the true faith but by workes also a godly conversation being as it were the life and soule of the profession and without which it is dead But though in expresse tearmes it be not said in so many words and Syllables that faith doth justifie alone yet this doctrine is by most necessary consequence deduced from the Scriptures And what may by necessary consequence be deducted out of the Scriptures that is contained in the scriptures as all confesse Wherunto may be added that the Fathers so conceived of the doctrine of the scriptures who with one consent as you have heard have taught according to the scriptures that by faith we are justified alone And the Papists must remember that by oath they are bound to expound the scriptures according to the coÌ„sent of the fathers § III. Now that this doctrine is contained in the Scriptures I have plentifully proved before and something here shall bee added There are but two righteousnesses onely mentioned in the Scriptures by which wee can bee justified either that which is prescribed in the Law which is a righteousnesse inherent in our selves and performed by our selves or that which is taught in the Gospell which is the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in him and performed for us The former is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes the latter is the righteousnesse of faith A third righteousnesse by which wee should bee justified cannot be named And betweene these two there is such an opposition made in the Scriptures that if wee bee justified by the one we cannot by the other If therefore the Scriptures teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes it is all one as if they said that wee are justified by faith alone If it bee all one to say by faith and not by the workes of the Law or by faith alone then saith Bellarmine I demand whether all workes and every Law be excluded or not For if all workes be excluded then faith it selfe which Ioh. 6. 29. is the worke of God and if every Law then the Law of faith and consequently faith it selfe and so to be iustified by faith shal be nothing else but to be justified without faith Answ. it is plaine that by the Law is meant the Law of workes and by the workes of the Law all that obedience which is prescribed in the Law Now in the Law which is the perfect rule of righteousnesse all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed Then saith Bellarmine faith it selfe and the act of faith is excluded from the act of justification I answere first in this question the Apostle opposeth faith to workes and therefore faith is not included under workes Secondly faith as it is either an habit or an act and so part of inherent righteousnesse doth not justifie but as hath beene said relatively in respect of the object which being received by faith doth justifie as it was the brâ—…sen serpent apprehended by the eye which did heale and not the eye properly § IV. Againe the Scriptures teach that we are justified gratis gratiâ per sanguinem Christi per fidem Gratis that is freely without respect of any good workes done by us no not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done Tit. 3. 5. but by his meere grace and favour when we had deserved the contrary through the bloud and alone satisfaction of Christ received onely by faith To the word gratis Bellarmine answereth that it excludeth our owne merits which indeed can be none but not the free gifts of God as love and penitencie and the like for then faith also should be excluded That followeth not for when wee are justified by faith onely we are justified gratis gratis saith the Apostle freely by his grace through the merits of Christ by faith bringing onely faith to justification as the Fathers have taught and that not to bee any essentiall cause of our justification but onely to be the instrument and hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnes and therfore it is the condition required on our part in the covenant of grace The rest as love and hope and repentance c. being not the conditions of the covenant but the things by covenant promised to them that beleeve Vpon the condition of faith which is also the free gift of God the Lord promiseth remission of sins and justification and to those who are redeemed and justified by faith he doth by oath promise the graces of sanctification So that faith only on our part is required to the act of justification besides which we bring nothing else thereunto but love and the rest of the graces as Augustine saith of workes non precedunt justificandum sequuntur justificatum and therefore wee are justified by faith alone § V. And by this the second head is also proved namely that it is the good pleasure of God to grant justification upon the condition of faith alone If ye looke into all the promises of the Gospell ye shall find that they interpose only the
condition of faith See Act. 8. 37. 10. 43. 13. 38 39. Ro. 4. 5. Gal. 2. 16. and so every where Before the incarnation of Christ it was the good pleasure of God by faith onely to justifie the faithfull as Bellarmine himselfe hath confessed And doth he require any other condition of us are not we justified as they were By his knowledge that is by faith in him my righteous servant shall justifie many Yea but the Scriptures saith Bellarmine much more plainely exact the condition of Penance and of the Sacraments to justification than of faith as Ezek. 18. 27. The wicked if hee repent of his sinnes shall live Luk. 13. 4. unlesse yee repent ye shall likewise perish Ioh. 3. 5. unlesse a man be borne a-new of water and the holy Ghost he shall not enter into the Kingdome of God Answ. Many things are required to salvation which are not required to justification which as they be necessary forerunners of glorification so are they the fruits of faith and consequents of justification viz. repentance and newnesse of life which is the thing mentioned in these places Againe happinesse which consisteth partly in justification or remission of sinnes which is beatitudo viae and partly in eternall life which is beatitudo patriâ—… is oftentimes attributed to those things which are not the causes of happines but the notes and markes of them that be happy There is but one happinesse properly and that is to be in Christ who is eternall life whom whosoever hath hath eternall life Of this happinesse Christ alone is the foundation and the cause and faith the instrument of our union and communion with Christ. All other virtues and graces are but the fruits and consequently the signes and markes of faith or of our being in Christ by faith And therefore are not so many beatitudes though they are blessed that have them but so many notes of one and the same happinesse It is true that if we be sorry for our sinnes because by them we have displeased him who hath been so gracious a God unto us if we confesse them crave pardon for them and forsake them all which are duties of repentance the Lord hath promised to forgive them And yet these are not causes of our justification before God but fruits of faith by which we come to be justified in our owne conscience By faith we obtaine remission of sinnes and by these duties of repentance which are the fruits of justifying faith we attaine to the assurance of it That prayer which somuch prevaileth with God is the prayer of faith That repentance which is to life is caused by faith without which it is impossible to please God and therefore the Disciples when they understood that the Gentiles were brought to beleeve in Christ conclude that God had given them repentance unto life Act. 11. 18. As for the Sacraments the justification which is assigned to them doth not hinder justification by faith onely but serveth to seale and to assure it § VI. The third cause or reason proving that faith doth justifie alone is because it is the property of faith to apprehend and to apply the promise of justification to our selves For the clearing whereof I desire the reader to call to minde what hath beene said concerning the two degrees of justifying faith For by the former wee apprehend receive and embrace Christ who is our righteousnesse offered in the promises of the Gospell to our justification before God By the other wee apply the promises of the Gospell to our selves that we may be justified in our owne consciences Both which actions of receiving and applying the promises to our â—…elves cannot be ascribed to any other grace but are proper to faith onely To this argument Bellarmine shapeth two answeres the former whereof is a meere cavill at the word apprehension which wee make proper to faith as if by apprehending we did meane the first act of the understanding when it conceiveth the object But this point I cleared before in the first question concerning the nature of faith where I shewed that this apprehension whereof Bellarmine speaketh goeth before all judgement of the minde And that the understanding having first conceived and apprehended the object judgeth of it either by withholding the assent if it be doubtfull which is called doubting or by giving assent either weakely which is opinion or firmely which is knowledge this firme assent or knowledge is grounded either upon the evidence of the thing which is either manifest in it selfe and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cleare intelligence or manifested by discourse which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or science or else the thing being not evident either to sense or reason upon the infallible authority of God speaking in his word which is Faith By this beleefe we receive Christ not onely in our judgements by assent but also if this assent be lively and effectuall we receive embrace and lay hold upon him as our Saviour with all our soules acknowledging him in our judgements in our hearts desiring to bee made partakers of him in our wils resolving to professe him to bee our Saviour and to obey him as our Lord c. § VII This is the apprehension whereof we speake and which is peculiar to faiâ—… as it is evident Be it saith Bellarmine that justification after a sort is apprehended by faith Surely it is not so apprehended that indeed it is had and doth inhere but onely that it is in the minde after the manner of an object apprehended by an action of the understanding and will and so saith he love and joy apprehend In these things Bellarmine sheweth himselfe to be a diviner rather than a divine we doe not say that in our justification before God justification is apprehended by faith but the righteousnesse of Christ unto justification And that this righteousnesse of Christ though not inherent in us is as truely and really made ours by imputation as our sinnes though not inherent in him were made his when he truely and really suffered for them By this hand of faith we receive Christ Ioh. 1. 12. by it we receive and embrace the promises Heb. 11. 16. by it we receive remission of sinnes Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. By this mouth as it were of the soule we eate the body of Christ and drinke his bloud That which hee speaketh of justification being in the minde after the manner of an object apprehended by an action of the understanding and the will may in some sort be verified of the apprehension of speciall faith applying justification to the beleever But to say that after this manner love and joy apprehend it is against sense For faith apprehendeth it by a perswasion yea by a firme perswasion upon which follow love and joy not apprehending but loving and rejoycing at that which faith doth apprehend But these two are not incident unto a Papist who
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
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
From whence I have also demonstrated the truth of this assertion that we are justified by faith alone that is by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended onely by Faith A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE SEVENTH BOOKE Concerning good Workes CAHP. I. To avoid Popish calumniations it is shewed that we doe hold the necessity of good works and doe urge the same by better arguments than the Popish religion doth afford § I. AS touching his last argument which he bringeth to prove that faith doth not justifie alone drawne from the necessity of good works I am now to treat For this is the sixth capitall Errour of the Papists in the controversie of justification in that they stiffely hold that good workes are necessarily required unto justification as causes thereof and to salvation as the merit thereof But before I dispute the question I am to meet with some calumniations of the Papists The first that wee by denying the necessity of good workes as being neither causes of justification nor merits of Salvation doe disâ—…ourage the people from wel doing and by teaching that by saith alone we are justified and saved doe animate and encourage them to the practise of all sinne and iniquity I answere that we doe not deny the necessity of good workes and that wâ—… use better arguments to deter the people from sin and to encourage them to well doing than the Papists by their doctrine can doe For to teach men to do good works with an opinion either of satisfaction propitiation or of merits which are the three chiefe arguments of the Papists that they are satisfactory propitiatory and meritorious is to teach men to mar good works rather than to make them Because a good work undertaken with an opinion either of satisfaction or justification by them or of merit though otherwise it were good becomes abominable unto God as derâ—…gating from â—…he alone and al-sufficient merit and satisfaction of Christ. Neither can they encourage men to well doing by these arguments that by their good workes they are justified and for them shall be saved whiles tâ—…eir conscience must needs tell them that besides the guilt of their manifold sinnes their good workes are impure and that they can merit nothing at the hands of God but punishment These therefore who have just cause to doubt or rather to despaire of justification by their workes and of salvation by their merits cannot by these arguments receive true encouragement to well doing but rather discouragement there from But although wee deny good workes to be either causes of justification or merits of Salvation yet we affirme them to be not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good and profitable but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessary The which I will shew to prevent both the malitious slanders of the Papists and also the prophane abuse of carnall Gospellers who turne the grace of God into wantonnesse Good I say as being commended and commanded of God and therefore to be ensued Phil. 4. 8. Rom. 12. 17. Psalm 34. 13. Profitable as being rewaâ—…ded both beatitudine vice with the blessednesse of this life and beatitudine patriae with the blessednesse of the life to come 1 Tim. 4. 8. § II. Necessary though not necessitate efficientiae as causes yet necessitate presentiae as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary antecedents of glorification They are necessary I say by a necessity not onely privative if I may so speake but also positive Privative because without them the profession of faith is not onely vaine and unprofitable but also hurtfull and pernicious Vaine because such a â—…aith is dead and counterâ—…eit justifying neither alone nor at all Hurtfull because being planted in the vineyard of God that wee might become trees of righteousnesse if we bring not foorth good fruit wee must looke to be cut downe or stocked up or like the figtree which having greene leaves but no fruit Christ accursed Such professours are like the barren ground which receiving the raine often falling upon it and bringiâ—…g forth thornes and bryars is rejected and nigh unto cursing whose end is to be burned Like to the foolish Virgins who having a lampe of an externall profession but wanting the oyle of saving grace when the Bridegroome commeth are to be shut out Like the chaffe in the floore which is to be winnowed from the wheat Like goates in Christs flocke which are to bee separated from the sheepe Like bondservants in Gods house which are not there to abide but with the bondwoman and her sonne are to bee cast out who having a formall profession of religion but denying the power of it which is the faith of hypocrits must looke to have their portion with hypocrits where is weeping and gnashing of teeth § III. They are necessary also by a positive necessity and that manifold As first by the necessity of infallibility in respect of Gods Decree Word Oath In respect of of his decree For whom God hath predestinated to salvation hee hath predestinated unto sanctification that they may be conformable to the image of his Sonne And therefore whosoever doth hope to become like unto Christ in glory he must endeavour in some measure to resemble him in grace We exhort therefore our hearers that they doe not abase the doctrine of predestination with those who were called predestinatiani as to thinke that either because they suppose they are elected they shall be saved howsoever they live or because they thinke that they are not elected they cannot be saved though they should live never so godly as if godlinesse if they be elect were needlesse or if not bootlesse But forbearing to prye into Gods secret counsels which are to be adored and not searched into to have recourse to Gods word For the secret things belong unto the Lord our God but the revealed things to us that wee may doe them For there we shall finde these two things first that where God hath ordained the end hee hath also ordained the meanes And therefore as it is necessary that the end should be accomplished because decreed by God so it is as necessary in respect of the same decree that the end should be atchieved by the same meanes which God hath preordained Now whom God hath elected them he calleth whom he calleth according to his purpose them he justifieth by faith whom hee justifieth by faith them he sanctifieth by his Spirit whom hee calleth justifieth and sanctifieth them and no other he glorifieth Therefore as it is necessary in respect of Gods decree that those who are elected shall be saved so it is as necessâ—…ry in respect of the same decree that they should attaine to salvation by these degrees that is first they must be called and converted unto God they must bee justified by a true faith they must in some measure be sanctified by the holy Spirit
man could performe justitiam legis considered in the abstract as it is described in the doctrine of the Law and as Bellarmine himselfe De justif lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it would justifie him because it is perfect yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse which men attaine unto in or by the Law doth not justifie because it is unperfect And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law which the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onely two of the places cited viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8 9. both which distinctions being rightly understood make against himselfe as I have shewed § IX Now he commeth to the third thing viz. what is meant by workes For saith he our adversaries by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification understand all works whether done before or after faith yea faith it selfe considered as a work which opinion to be most absurd and proceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures Augustine saith hee teacheth Men not understanding what the Apostle saith we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law have thought that hee had said that faith is sufficient to a man though he live wickedly and have no good workes which be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke And farre bee it also from us so to thinke But although faith alone doth not suffice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved yet it alone sufficeth unto justification wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers And although to the act of justifying nothing in us concurreth with faith but it alone sufficeth yet in the party justified there must concur with faith both inward graces and also outward works But here the Papists are divided among themselves Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law are excluded not the workes of the morall but of the ceremoniall Law others that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded not all but such as goe before faith such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith I answere first to both joyntly that not onely the workes of the Law are expressely excluded but all workes whatsoever indefinitely Rom. 4. 2 6. 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate that they should walke in them Ephes. 2. 9 10. Againe in him that is said not to worke workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded but hee that is justified by faiâ—…h is said not to worke Rom. 4. 4 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded § X. To the former severally I answere first that when the holy Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely he meaneth either the whole Law which is called Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge containing three branches the morall the ceremoniall and the judicial Law or the chiefe part which is the morall Law And that the Apostle meaneth it especially because he speaketh of that Law by which commeth the knowledge of sinne and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles unto which the whole world was subject Rom. 3. 19 20. whatsoever the Law saith it saith to them who are under the Law that every mouth may bee stopped and all the world may become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh that is neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne Moreover it is evident that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law which forbiddeth morall offences mentioned from the tenth verse to the ninteenth and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin ver 9. 19. Secondly it is unreasonable to be thought that any man who was a transgressour of the morall Law should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was but a by-law being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table And further the Apostle professeth that whosoever would be circumcised was bound to the performance of the whole Law Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law could not be justified without the observation of the morall law Thirdly this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians is rejected by Bellarmine and the greater part of learned Papists who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers doe confesse that by the workes of the law which the Apostle excludeth from justification are meant the workes of the morall law as well as of the rest § XI But then say I all good workes whatsoever are excluded For in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse all good workes are prescribed and therefore those which proceed from faith For if charity which is the fulfilling of the law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth proceed from faith also or else they are not such as the law requireth And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists who by the workes of the law excluded from justification underâ—…tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature not workes proceeding from faith or workes of grace The absurdity of whâ—…ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand may further appeare 1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof then much more those workes which follow justification for causes doe not use to follow after but to goe before their effects at least in order of nature 2. The question concerning justification by workes must of necessity be understood of good workes for of those which are not good no question ought to be made But workes done before or without faith are not good For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne and without faith it is impossible to please God Neither can the fruit be good whiles the Tree is bad Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee justified by the workes of the law going before faith unlesse it bee presupposed that a man without faith and before grace is able to fulfill the law For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it and hee that transgresseth it is cursed not justified by it 3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification the workes of the Law the word Law is added not by way of extenuation as
from faith secondly hee perverteth the question as if the Apostle disputed that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith or not proceeding from the grace of faith as they forsooth thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not or as if the justitiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength when the Pharisee himselfe Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength when they knew that God did chuse Abraham and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans where they served other gods Thirdly hee doth againe contradict the Apostle in saying that Abraham had glory with God which the Apostle plainely denieth the word in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth not glory but glorying or boasting If Abraham saith the Apostle was justified by works then had he wherof to glory or to boast but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God Fourthly his contradicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace hee had more cause to glory and that before God than if his workes proceeded from grace For in that case it might have beene said to him what hast thou which thou hast not received And if thou hast received it why dost thou glory or boast as if thou hadst not received it wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth that Abraham had whereof to glory before God he is to be understood as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace by which if Abraham had beene justified he had whereof to glory but not before God But being justified by faith without workes all matter of glorying was taken away By what Law of workes No but by the Law of Faith Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved not by workes lest any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8 9. And that this contradiction maketh against himselfe appeareth further by that which himselfe saith in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Whence he proveth that by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification he meaneth such workes whereto not grace is given but wages rendred And such are onely those saith hee which are wrought by the onely strength of free-will For to the workes which are wrought by grace that which is rendred is not simply merces wages but it is also grace yea grace rather than wages If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will and not by grace hee might have gloried that he had made God a debtour unto him But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt For to him that worketh that is fulfilleth the Law of God the wages is not reckoned of grace but of debt as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant Doe this and thou shalt live But to him that worketh not that is that fulfilleth not the Law which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. § VII And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concerning the merit of good workes proceeding from grace unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt but onely to such as are wrought by strength of nature But he and his fellowes when they treat of merit ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice not onely in respect of Gods promise or covenant but even in respect of the workes themselves For every good worke proceeding from charity absolutely deserveth as they teach eternall life insomuch that heaven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull than hell to the sinnes of the wicked § VIII As to the example of Abraham so to these three places Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are generally excluded from the act of justification Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onely are excluded which are done before faith But we will speake of them severally And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith that in that Epistle there are two questions handled the former speciall whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians so that without them they cannot be saved The other generall whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. Vnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively And afterwards he saith that the state of the Question in that Epistle is whether workes doe justifie without faith Whereunto I reply that no such question is mentioned in that Epistle nor the contrary concluded as being altogether heterogeneous and besides the purpose of the Apostle which was to reclaime the Galathians from their errour who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification For both the false teachers who seduced them were Christians who lest they should suffer persecution for the Crosse of Christ perswaded them to bee circumcised Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves who were seduced did not cease to bee Christians neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ but were made to beleeve that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law that by them both they might be justified Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly proving that a man is justified by faith and not by the workes of the Law But if he had disputed against the other that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie without faith in Christ his disputation had beene to no purpose For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have answered that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ God forbid but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law desiring as the Papists now doe to bee justified not by faith alone but both by faith and workes together And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes so here the question is not whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ which asserâ—…ion never any Christian held but whether by faith without workes which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justification To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ—… it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good â—…orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriâ—…us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiâ—…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ—… in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righâ—…eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils â—…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
to forbeare swearing in ordinary talke not to give a mans goods to the poore and to follow Christ when hee is thereunto required Mat. 19. 23. Mar. 10. 23. These things are so manifest that Bellarmine in the end of the next Chapter doth confesse them viz that our Saviour doth not say except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets but of the Scribes and Pharisees to signisie that his meaning was not so much he should say not at all to adde to the burden of the precepts as to take away the corruptions of the Scribes Pharisees And again those things which seem to be most heavie in the new Law are to be found in the old as the loving of our enemyes the restrayning of concupiscence such like For proofe wherof he quotes Augustine lib. contr Adimant cap. 3. lib. 19. contr Faustum c. 28. In the former place Augustine saith Nulla in Evangelica atque Apostolica disciplina reperiuntur quamvis ardua divina precepta promissa quae illis etiam libris veterib desint In the latter Vel omnia vel penè omnia quia monuit sâ—…u praecepit Christus ubi adjungebat Ego a. dici vobis inveniuntur in illis veterib libris And so much of the first difference § XXI The second difference is that the Law commeth alone but the Gospell is accompanied with grace Which is not a difference of the doctrine and letter of the Gospell from the Law but of the covenant of grace from the covenant of works For in the covenant of grace as justification is promised to them that being called doe beleeve so sanctification to them that are justifyed Which as it proveth the concurrence of Good workes with faith in the party justified as consequents thereof so it excludeth them from being any causes of justification But as touching this second difference two popish errours are to bee avoided First in respect of the covenant of workes For though that covenant doth not promise nor afford the grace of sanctification wherby a man should be enabled to performe the covenant which grace is promised in the covenant of grace and given to them that beleeve yet wee are not so to conceive that they who lived in the time of the law were void of grace nor all that live under the Gospell are endued with grace For the covenant of grace hath alwayes bene in force from the beginning so that to the faithfull who beleeved in the Messias which was to come the grace of sanctification was given according to the covenant of grace so that in the old Testament even under the Law there were as excellent examples of holynesse as have bene in the time of the new under the Gospell So also the Law hath its use even among those that live under the Gospell insomuch that untill men doe beleeve they are under the Law and not under grace Secondly in respect of the grace of the new Testament that it is not promised in such perfection in this life where wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit as that wee may expect to be justified by it or saved for it § XXII From these two difference the rest as hee saith arise viz. from the first arise the third the fourth and the fifth The third is this that the Law of Moses was given to one Nation the Law of Christ to all Nations The fourth that the Law of Moses for the most part contayned shadowes and figures of things to come the Gospell exhibiteth the body and truth The fifth that the Law of Moses because it was not perfect was to be changed by the Law of Christ but the Law of Christ was not to be changed by any succeeding Law These three differences of the Law doe not agree to the Law Morall which belongeth to all nations which did not consist of shadowes and figures which was not to be changed no not by addition because it was and is a perfect immutable and perpetuall rule of righteousnesse The other three viz. the sixth seventh and eigth arise as hee saith from the second The sixth that the Law of Moses had no power to justifie neither was it given that it might justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirre up men to seeke the physitian But the Law of Christ that is the Gospell hath power to justifie and was given to that end For as hee alleageth out of Rom. 1. 16. it is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleeveth he doth not say that worketh For therein is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just man shall live by faith This is a true difference of the Law of faith from the Law of workes but agreeth not to Bellarmines new Law which is a Law of workes as well as the old conteyning the very same morall precepts with the morall Law in the observation whereof not our justification but our sanctification consisteth prescribing also the same righteousnesse viz Charity which is the summe of the Law The seventh that the Law of Moses is a Law of fearefullnesse and bondage but the Gospell the Law of love and of liberty which is true For the obedience of men who are under the Law is forced by the terrour and coaction of the Law working servile feare in them But the obedience of men who are under grace that is of men justified is voluntary and cheerfull proceeding from faith and from some measure of assurance of Gods love and favour to them in Christ. Therfore this voluntary obedience is no cause but a consequent of justification not onely before God but also in the court of our owne conscience that is not onely of justification it selfe but also of the assurance thereof in some measure Of the eigth which confuteth the first I have already spoken § XXIII So much of the first thing which Bellarmine undertooke to demonstrate for the proofe of the necessity of good workes which we hold as well and urge as much as he Now followeth the second which is to prove that the justare not free from the observation of the Law of God For hee saith that we place Christian liberty in this that we are not subject in our conscience and before God to any Law and that the decalogue it selfe doth not belong unto us Which is a most devillish slander We professe that we so many as truly beleeve are by Christ freed from the curse of the Law from the rigour and exaction of the Law requiring perfect righteousnesse in us unto justification from the terrour and coaction of the Law from the irritation of the Law as I have shewed in my treatise of Christian liberty but not from the obedience of it For freedome from obedience is the servitude of sinne But wee being freed from sinne become the servants of righteousnesse And we doe
freely professe that by how much wee have received the greater favours from God in redeeming us and bringing us into the liberty of his children in freeing us from sinne and from the yoake of the Law by so much the more are we bound to obedience not to be justified or saved by it but to testifie our thankefulnesse and to glorifie God who hath beene so gracious unto us c. Much more might be said concerning Christian liberty but this is as much as is pertinent to the question in hand If any desire to bee better informed in this point I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty which I published many yeaâ—…es agoe CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie § I. ALL this while Bellarmine as we have seene hath wandred from the question but now he saith he will come neerer unto it For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes not onely by way of presence but by wâ—…y of efficacie But to what will he prove them necéssary to justification no such matter But yet that is the question which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone that good workes doe concurre to justification as causes thereof For though they were as they are not causes of Salvation yet it is manifest that they are consequents and therefore no causes of justification So that Bellarmine though hee be come neerer the question yet he is not come home to it But perhaps it will be said that Bellarmine prevented this objection when he first propounded this as his fifth principall argument to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because good workes are necessary to Salvation His argument may thus be frarned If faith did justifie alone then it would save alone but faith doth not save alone without good workes which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justificatis even to them that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save Answ. The proposition is denied first by Bellarmine himselfe who teacheth though falsely that not all who are justified shall bee saved when notwithstanding the Apostle saith â—…hom the Lord hath justified he also hath glorified And further he holdeth that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification though they lose not their faith and farther that they may also lose their faith which as he absurdly teacheth is lost by any act of infidelity and consequently both their justification and Salvation Yea but saith Bellarmine their justice cannot be lost nor their Salvation whiles they have faith if they be justified by faith onely But Bellarmine himselfe saith though falsely that the faith of them who are justified may be lost and with it their Salvation and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith and yet not be saved by it Secondly it is denied by some of the Fathers who though they teach that faith alone sufficeth to justification as you have heard yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation because some other things as namely good workes are thereunto required To the assumption that saith alone doth not save If such a faith be meant as is alone severed from Charity and void of workes I doe confesse that it neither saveth nor yet justifieth I doe not say alone but not at all But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ which purifieth the heart and worketh by love of which onely we speake and understand it relatively as we doe then I constantly affirme that faith in Christ alone that is Christ alone received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation and that neither workes nor any other graces are causes of salvation unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non which are no causes § II. But for the further proofe of his consequences Bellarmine saith that we cannot deny them because Luther teacheth that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation unlesse he will not beleeve and that the Lâ—…therans affirme that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone Answ. Wee can deny what either Luther or those that are called Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word therefore this was but a slender proofe Howbeit we doe not deny that assertion of Luther nor the like which though full of true comfort yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit so that they can say they have faith Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne assuring them that although their sinnes bee many and great yet they ought not to despaire if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true For though our sinnes be many the mercies of God are more though great yet the merrits of Christ are greater And though the Lutherans doe say that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence but a flat deniall of his assumption which it behoveth him to prove Upon these things thus premised Bellarmine inferreth that all the testimonies which afterwards namely in his fourth Booke he was to alleage out of Scriptures and Fathers to prove that good workes are so necessary to salvation even to men that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save them doe also prove that faith alone doth not justifie which is the thing saith hee which wee have undertaken to prove which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny protesting against this inference of Bellâ—…mine and affirming that although good workes be so necessary to salvation as that that faith which is without them doth not save a man yet that doth not hinder our assertion that faith doth justifie alone because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all and much lesse as the causes thereof for they follow justification though ordinarily they goe before salvation and howsoever that faith which is alone severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie as I have shewed heretofore nor save yet notwithstanding faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith doth save alone § III. But to returne to his fourth Booke though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency as causes thereof hee useth three kindes of proofes testimonies of Scriptures sentences of Fathers and reason Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies besides some whole Epistles The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you that doing the will of God ye may receive the promise Here first saith he wee have the terme necessary and
servant doing or rather but endeavouring to doe his duety is rewarded In these two the arguments are not the same A servant that doth not his duety deserveth punishment and his disobedience is the meritorious cause of his punishment But by doing his duety especially if it bee done unperfectly which is alwayes our case he doth not deserve reward and therefore if hee bee rewarded it is to be ascribed to his masters bounty and not to his desert Such an Antithesis the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne and of godlinesse Rom. 6. 23. Death is the due wages of sinne but eternall life which is the reward of godlinesse is the free gift of God And further as I said before when I formerly answered this allegation In this and many other such conditionall speeches the antecedent is not the cause but a signe token or presage of the consequent If God have given you grace to mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident token that you shall live If God hath adorned you with his grace it is to be presumed that he will crowne his owne grace with glory § IX And such is his seventh testimony p as before I have shewed Rom. 8. 17 18. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires with Christ if we suffer with him that wee may also bee glorified with him where is no relation at all of efficiency betwixt our sufferings and glory But Bellarmine will prove it first by the conditionall particle of which I spake in answere to the last argument which doth not as hee saith point out the cause but the evidence by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that wee are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him namely if we suffer with him Secondly from the reason which is added concerning the excesse of glory to our sufferings which to my understanding doth plainly confute it For if the sufferings of this life be not condigne as the Vulgar readeth it to the glory that is to come how should they merit it ex condigno as they arrogantly speake But the scope of the Apostle in this place is to encourage the faithfull to suffer for Christ which he doth by two arguments the one from the happy event which is assurance of glorification testified by the holy Spirit who testifieth unto us that if we have grace from God to suffer with Christ that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him Not that ouâ—… sufferings doe make us the sonnes and heires of God c. but that they are the signes and evidences by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that we are so The other from the disproportion betweene our sufferings from him and the glory which we shall have with him For the Aposâ—…le having weighed both resolveth for so hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all the sufferings of this life are not comparable to that glory but of this place more hereafter § X. His eighth testimony Rom. 10. 10. with the heart wee beleeve unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation We see here saith he that faith sufficeth not to salvation because it is not true and entire in the heart unlesse thereto be added externall confession And it seemeth that the Apostle alludeth to that speech of our Saviour Matth. 12. 32 33. Him that confesseth me before men will I confesse before my Father and him that denyeth me before men will I deny before my Father that is in heaven Answ. All this we confesse that besides faith confession and many other graces and duties are necessary to salvation not as causes but as causae sine quibus non as I have often said which are no causes § XI His ninth testimony Matth. 25. 34 35. Come yee blessed of my Father possesse the kingdom prepared for you before the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee to eate c. Surely saith hee the reason which is rendred doth plainely shew that good workes are aliquo modo some way causes of salvation and that for them the kingdome of heaven is given Answ. Of this place I have spoken before when I shewed that the causes of salvation were noted vers 34. Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world And the reason which is rendred is taken from good workes not as the cause for which salvation is given but as the evidence according to which our Saviour judgeth § XII His tenth testimony is out of the Epistle of Saint Iames and it is twofold the former Iam. 1. 25. He that is not a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the worke this man shall bee blessed in his deed the latter Iam. 2. 14. what will it profit my brethren if a man say that he hath faith and have not workes will faith save him But how saith hee out of the former is a man blessed in his deed if his deeds have no relation to happinâ—…sse but affoâ—…diheir idle presence Answ. Wee confesse that good works have relation to happinesse as they are necessary unto it as the way as the causa sine qua non Neither doe I conceive how good works can be idle where they are present though they doe not merit that which infinitely exceedeth their worth And as touching the other place Iam. 2. We confesse also that that faith which is in profession onely and is void of good workes doth not save a man because it is an idle and dead faith This therefore proveth good workes to be necessary necessitate praesentiae but for necessity efficioncie there is no shew nor colour § XIII After those severall testimonies he appealeth to the whole Epistles of Peter Iohn Iames and Iude whose chiefe intention was to prove that to justified men good workes are necessary to salvation and that faith alone doth not suffice as some in these times out of the Epistles of Paul not well understood began to preach I answere that as the Apostles whom he nameth urge the necessity of good workes so doe all true preachers of the Gospell at this day yea Paul himselfe did urge it as much as any of them if not more But the necessity of efficiencie he may as soone prove out of our sermons as out of the writings of the Apostles § XIV To the Scriptures hee addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who as they censured for heretickes those which denyed workes to bee necessary unto salvation so themselves taught that they bee necessary To which both censure and doctrine of the Fathers wee doe most willingly subscribe And wee should greatly wonder how this great Master of Controversies could bee so idle so impertinent so frivolous a disputant but that as I said before these his discourses proving
the necessity of good workes though they bee impertinent to the maine Question because they prove not that which is in controversie betwixt us yet are not impertinent to his purpose which was to calumniate us and to beare the world in hand that wee are such as deny the necessity of good workes But if the question were tryed by voices of the Fathers innumerable testimonies might bee produced out of their writings wherein they teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes yea in direct termes affirming that which is the question betweene us that we are justified by faith alone But that workes are necessary as causes either to salvation or which is the question to justification not any one pregnant testimony out of the ancient Fathers is or as I suppose can bee produced But to prove the necessity of good workes by way of presence I shall not need to recite the severall testimonies seeing I have my selfe delivered more to prove and to urge the necessity of good workes than can be gathered out of all these testimonies put together § XV. In the third and last place he bringeth a reason like to that which he framed l. 1. cap. 14. that faith alone doth not justifie But doth he not dispute the same question here did he not propound five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone the fifth and last wherof was from the necessity of good works the handling whereof hee put off to this place Should he not then from the necessity of good workes prove that faith doth not justifie alone But in stead of proving that hee endevoureth to prove that faith doth not save alone Thus craftily hee glydeth from one question to another for his owne advantage because hee knew that more is required to salvation than was required to justification For sanctification commeth betwixt justification and salvation And although we are justified without works going before justification yet we are not saved without workes going before salvation they being the way which God hath prepared for them that are justified to walke in towards their glorification I might therefore according to the Lawes of disputation hold him to the question or refuse to give him answere But he is so farre from proving that faith doth not justifie alone that hee is not able to prove that it doth not save alone disputing in that sence according to which we doe hold that faith doth justifie alone Now for the understanding of our sence and meaning certaine distinctions heretofore propounded must for avoiding of calumniations bee here repeated First that wee doe not meane that faith is the onely grace which doth sanctifie as the Papists will needes misunderstand us but that to sanctification not only other graces doe concurre with faith but good workes also And consequently that besides faith the said graces and good workes be forerunners of our salvation Secondly when wee say faith alone wee doe not meane that faith which is alone being a solitary an idle a counterfeit and dead faith severed from charity and other graces and destitute of goodworks but we meane a true and lively â—…aith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love which cannot be severed from charity and other graces as I have heretofore proved And therefore wee hold that although in respect of the act of justifying or saving it alone yet in respect of the being thereof it never is nor if it be a true justifying and savingfaith can be alone Thirdly when we doe say that faith alone justifieth and saveth wee speake with relation to the object or relatively meaning that the object which faith alone receiveth doth justifie and save us when wee say therefore that we are justified or saved by faith alone our meaning is that we are justified only by the righteousnesse of Christ which is apprehended by faith alone and not by our owne righteousnesse and that wee are saved by the merits of Christ alone received by faith and not by our owne workes or merits and consequently that Christ received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our salvation § XVI Now let us heare Bellarmines dispute Iffaith alone did save and that workes were not otherwise â—…ecessary than in respect of presence as the fruits and signes of faith then it would follow that faith could save though it wanted all maner of good workes and were joyned with all maner of vices and sinnes but the consequent is false therfore saith hee faith alone doth not save and good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some efficiencie To the proposition I answere first that it is senselesse and implyeth a contradiction For if good workes must necessarily be present with saving faith which hee confesseth wee doe hold how can it be supposed without implying a contradiction that it can save being not onely destitute of all good workes but also accompanied with all maner of sinne this is sufficient to overthrowe his whole dispute Secondly I deny the consequence of his proposition For justifieing and saving faith though it justifie and save alone yet it never is nor can be alone Even as the eye in respect of his being cannot if it be a true living eye be alone severed from other parts of the body yet in respect of the act of seeing unto which no other part doth concurre it seeth alone Even so faith which is the spirituall eye of the soule in respect of its being cannot if it be a true lively faith be alone severed from the other graces which are with it fellow members of sanctification but yet in respect of the Act of justifying and saving unto which no other graces concurre with it as any causes therof it justifyeth and saveth alone because it alone and no other grace doth receive Christ unto justification and salvation Thirdly we do not say that the presence of good workes is necessary to salvation onely as they are the fruits and signes of faith but also as necessary forerunners as causa sine qua non as the way to salvation and as the evidence according to which the sentence shall be pronounced Which consideration disproveth the proofe of his consequence which is that according to our doctrine good workes are required to the act of saving onely by accident whose presence addeth nothing to the virtue of faith in justifying and saving and so their absence detracteth nothing from it and therefore being taken away faith never the lesse saveth Answ. Things whose presence is necessary cannot be said to bee present by accident For such may be present or absent but that which is necessary cannot be otherwise the thing being safe But we hold the presence of workes not to be contingent but necessary both in respect of salvation as the way to it and as Causa sine qua non and of faith as the unseparable fruits of it without which it is said to be dead
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
workes Saint Iames having to deale with carnall Gospellers vaine men turning the grace of God into wantonnesse who having heard that faith doth justifie without workes did cast off all care of good workes thinking it sufficient to professe themselves to beleeve though their life were dissolute Against these Saint Iames proveth that vaine is the profession of faith without good works â—… that the faith which is without works is not a true liuely justifying faith but a dead and counterfeit faith that whosoever is justified before God by faith must also be justified that is declared and approved to bee just not onely by profession of his faith but also by the practise of good workes Wherefore in this respect there is no more difference betweene the two Apostles Paul and Iames than betweene Lâ—…ther and us who are Preachers of the Gospell at this day For as Luther having to deale with Popish justitiaâ—…ies who taught justification by workes urgeth most zelously justification by faith alone and in the question of justification after the example of Saint Paul speaketh contemptuously of workes so we having to dâ—…le with Libertines and carnall gospellers insisting in the steppes of Saint Iames urge the necessity of good workes § XVII Secondly wee are to consider the divers acceptions of the words faith workes justifie in the writings of the two Apostles Paul speaking of a true lively faith which worketh by love saith in effect that faith alone doth justifie Iames speaking of the faith of hypocrits which is in profession only sâ—…vered from the grace of sanctification and destitute of good workes â—…aith that such a faith doth neither justifie alone nor at all as being not a true but a dead and counterfeit faith Paul speaking of the câ—…uses of justification before God denyeth workes to concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof Iames speaking of the effects and â—…ignes of justificatiâ—…n whereby it may beâ—… knowne affirmeth that workes must concurre in the parties justified that by them our faith may be demonstrated â—…nd our justification manifested Paul therefore rejecteth workes obtruded as causes of justification Iames urgeth thâ—…m as effects and signes thereof Paul speaking of Iustification in the proper sense as it signifieth that gracioâ—…s action of God whereby wee are made or constituted just affirmeth that wee are justified by faith without workes Iames speaking of thâ—…t justificâ—…tion whereby we are not mâ—…de just before God but declared and 〈◊〉 to God our 〈◊〉 and our conscience to bee just and indued with a true faith 〈◊〉 that we are so justified not onely by the profession of faith but also by good workes Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very well stand together For although it be most true which Saint Paul affirmeth that true faith doth just fie alone yet it is 〈◊〉 true which Saint Iames faith that the faith which is alone doth not justifie neither â—…lone nor at all because it is not 〈◊〉 true and a lively but a 〈◊〉 and dead faith For 〈◊〉 the living eye though it see alone yet is not alone so a liuely fâ—…ith though it justifie alone yet never iâ—… alone though it justifie without workes yet it is not without workâ—…s Though good workes doe not 〈◊〉 to the act of justification aâ—… any cause therâ—…of according to Saint Pauls doctrinâ—… yet they must concurre in the same subject that is the party justified as necessary fruitâ—… and 〈◊〉 of â—… true justifying â—…aith 〈◊〉 Saint Iaâ—…esâ—…cheth â—…cheth Though we be justified before God that is both absolved from our 〈◊〉 and accepted in Christ as righteous by faith alone without respect of workâ—… as Saint Paul teacheth yet according to the doctrine of â—…aint Iames weâ—… are to bee justified that is declared and approved to be just not onely by faith professed but also by good workes Finally though good workes nâ—…n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet 〈◊〉 justificaâ—… as Augustinâ—… useth to speake or as he also saith non prâ—…edunt iustifiâ—…andum sed justificatâ—… 〈◊〉 though they doe not goâ—… before justification as causâ—…s 〈◊〉 Pâ—…l teacheth yet they must follow in the parties justified as effects according to Saint Iames his doctrine § XVIII But the assertions of the 2. Apostles not only may wel stand togeâ—…her but also according to our doctrine they must necessarily goe together For if we shall be altogether conversant in setting forth the commendation of good works and in urging the necessity thereof not informing the people in the doctrine of justification by faith alone they will be ready to place the matter of their justification and the merit of their salvation in themselves as the Papists doe And so being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse they doe not submit themselves to the righteousnes of God But wee must so urge the necessity of good workes in the doctrine of sanctification that wee remember that in the question of justification they are of no value On the other side if wee shall be wholly taken up in the doctrine of justification by faith alone teaching that in the question of justification they are of no worth and doe not withall informe the people of the profit and necessity of good works in other respects how ready will they bee to cast off all care of good workes and content themselves with a bare profession of faith But wee joyne these assertions together after the doctrine and practise of the Apostles in their Epistles Wee teach that justification and sanctification are unseparable companions And theresore as they who are sanctified may bee assured of their justification so without sanctification none can bee assured of their justification It is true that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus but who are they that live not after the flesh but after the Spirit Râ—… 8. 1. that are new creatures 2 Cor. 5. 17. that crucifie the flesh with the lusts thereof Gal. 5. 24. It is true that a true lively faith doth justifie alone but what manner of saith is that that purifieth the heart Act. 15. 9. and worketh by love Gal. 5. 6. and may be demonstrated by good workes Iam. 2. 18. It is true that wee are not justified by our workes nor saved for them yet those are neither justified nor saved that are without them for as they are necessary consequents of justification so they are necessary antecedents of salvation For though they be not the cause of our salvation yet they are the way by which we are to come to salvation though they be not causa regâ—…andi as Bernard saith yet they are via regni Though they bee not the merit of salvation yet they are the evidence according to which God will judge us By faith wee have our inheritance and our title to Gods Kingdome but it is to be inherited among those that are sanctified A godly conversation though it be not properly a cause of our glorification yet it is
sinne he hath deserved And how then can he by the sufferings of this life wherby he is not able to â—…atisfie for his sinne deserve eternall life The third out of Bernard we doe know saith he that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to the future glory nec si unas omnis sustineat No that they are not though one man should sustayne them all which though it be a very great yet is a very true amplification that if one man should beare all the afflictions of all men in this world yet his afflictions of this time would not be worthy of the glory that shall be revealed Such amplifications are used no lesse truely by Chrysostome and Anselm Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. If we should dye ten thousand deaths and if wee should shew forth al virtue yet could wee not recompence the least part of those honours that God hath already bestowed upon us And if wee cannot by all such meanes be answearable to God for his favours â—…ouchsafed in this world by what meanes might we hope to merit eternall life in the world to come If a man should serve God most devoutly a thousand yeares yet he should not condignely merit to bee in the kingdome of heaven halfe a day saith Anselme § XXII In the sixth place Bellarmine alleageth three testimonies as objected by us viz. Phil. 3. 7 8 9. Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5 7. The first we doe not use to produce against merit of salvation but against justification by inherent righteousnesse and was the sixth Testimony of ours which Bellarmine endevoured to answere as hee doth here See Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 15. The second was the fourth Testimony which he tooke upon him to answer See my reply Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 13. The third was the fifth Testimonie of which see Lib. 7. Cap. 3. § 14. But though we doe not alleage the first against merit of workes yet by by consequent it doth disprove it For if workes doe not concurre to justification as the matter therof then can they not be the merit of salvation as hath beene said Secondly if in the question of justification which concerneth our title to Salvation they are to be accounted as things of no worth yea as losse then are they not meritorious of eternall life And whereas Bellarmine challengeth us to alleage any one Father that understandeth Paul to speake of workes done after grace I alleaged before Saint Chrysostome upon the place who understandeth the Apostle as speaking of all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said all both old and new both past and present and that I confirmed by reason And when he saith that Augustine calleth the righteousnesse of the faithfull Eminentissimam it is apparant that he speaketh not of that which wee have by our obedience performed to the Law but of that most eminent righteousnesse which wee have by faith The other two places exclude workes from being any causes as well of Salvation as of justification And it is plaine that the Apostle speaketh of salvation and of all the degrees thereof that it is wholly to bee ascribed to the grace of God and not our worthinesse His words in the former By grace you are saved through faith noâ—… of workes The latter not by workes of righteousnesse which we have done but according to his mercie he saved us Whence ariseth this argument If by our merits we are saved then by workes but not by our workes therefore not by merits Or thus If not by workes we are saved because we are saved by grace then much lesse are we saved by our owne merits CAP. III. A new supply of reasons produced against merits and maintayned against Bellarmines cavills § I. OVr first reason The true Doctrine of justification and Salvation taketh from us all cause of boasting in our selves that he which glorieth may glory in the Lord and contrariwise that which doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves is not the true Doctrine The Doctrine of justification by faith without workes and of salvation by Gods free grace without our merit taketh from us all cause of our boasting in our selves but the Doctrine of justification by workes and of salvation by our owne merits doth not take away all cause of boasting in our selves Both proved Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. Ephes. 2. 8 9. The effect of Bellarmines answere is that they who plead their owne merits as proceeding from grace doâ—… not glory iâ—… themselves but in the Lord. Reply First so long as they bee ours though given of God as all other good things are we are apt to glory in them as appeareth by the Pharisee who boasteth of his merits though he acknowledgeth that hee received them from God and therefore rendreth thankes for them Secondly the pleading of merit is it selfe a proud boasting Matth. 20. 12. Thirdly the Papists plead merit as proceeding from their owne free will which they require as a necessary condition of merit Fourthly If the good worke proceed meerely from Gods grace then can we not by it merit any thing of God But the Papists teach that by it they merit of God and consequently deny it so farre forth as it meriteth to proceed fâ—…om the grace of God and therefore when they plead merit they glory in themselves rather than in the Lord. § II. Our second reason That doctrine which derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ is to bee renounced as false and Antichristian The Popish doctrine of merits viz. that we are to be saved by our owne merits and that the faithfull by their owne workes doe truely and condignely merit eternall life derogateth from the infinite and all-sufficient merit of Christ. Therefore it is false and Antichristian The assumption they deny yea though indeed they doe derogate from the merit of Christ yet they denounce anathema against them that shall say so But we not only say it but prove it For first If Christ hath already most sufficiently and fully merited heaven for us then our merits are needlesse or if our merits bee needfull as they teach then are not Christs sufficient for us which is no better than blasphemie Secondly they who teach that Christ hath not merited for all that beleeve and as soone as they truely beleeve the right of eternall life doe greatly derogate from the merit of Christ. For the Scriptures doe teach that Christ hath so merited the right of eternall life to all the faithfull that by him they have alreadie eternall life being alreadie translated from death to life But they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good Workes doe in effect teach that CHRIST hath not merited it to the faithfull Therefore they who teach that the faithfull are to merit the right of eternall life by their owne good workes doe greatly derogate
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
reward of their labours who are Gods workemen vers 9. labouring for him and not for themselves is the blessing of increase which God giveth thereunto Even as the harvest is the reward of the earing not to be asscribed to the merit of earing but to the blessing of God And so it is here plainely said though the Planter and the Waterer shall have their owne rewards yet their reward is not to bee asscribed to the merit of their labour but to the blessing of God I have planted saith Paul and Apollâ—… hath watered but God gave the increase So then neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase Or if the place should generally be understood oâ—… all workes both good and bad the meaning would be that the reward would be answerable either good or bad That of the Psalmist Psal. 62. 12. To thee Lord mercie for thou rendrest to every man according to his worke is not generally to be understood of the workes of all men both good and bad for the bad works of the wicked hee doth not reward in mercie but judgement without mercie shall bee executed upon them but of the good workes of the godly onely which though they bee good and acceptable to God in Christ yet he rewardeth them not according to merit but according to his mercie The place Apâ—…c 22. 12. may be an exposition of the rest For whereas in the rest it is said that God will judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to their dâ—…eds here Christ saith he will render to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his worke shall be viz. good or bad But here the Papists would seeme to bring a reason à pari that as the wicked are damned prâ—…pter peccata for their evill workes so the godly are saved propter opera bona for their good workes And as â—…vill workes merit hell so good workes pari ratione merit heaven Answ. it is impar ratio there is no equality in the comparison For first the Scripture plainely teacheth that by and for their evill works men are condemned and as plainely denieth that by or for good workes men are saved Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. Secondly any one sinne meriteth death because it is a breach of the Law yea of the whole law Iam. 2. 10. but not any one good worke can merit heaven because it is not the fulfilling of the whole law for there must be a concurrence of all duties In so much that if a man should performe all the Commandements and faile in one the breach of that one maketh him guilty of all Thirdly evill workes are purely and perfectly evill and therefore absolutely deserve death but the good workes are not purely and perfectly good as I have heretofore prooved therefore death is the due stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Fourthly sinne is absolutely meritorious of damnation but so is not our obedience of Salvation For though we could performe all the commandements by a totall perpetuall and perfect obedience yet wee must acknowledge our selves unprofitable servants and much lesse could we merit thereby because we have done but our duety and where is no more but duety there can bee no merit Debitum non est meritum § XIIII His third argument is taken from those places which do so testifie eternall life to be rendred to good workes that they place the very reason why eternall life is given in good workes The places bee these Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared fâ—…r you from the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee meat c. and in the same chapter vers 21. because thou hast beene faithfull in few things c. Apoc. 7. 14. These are they who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are before the Throne of God In which places the particles enim quia ideo for because therfore are all causall His reason standeth thus To what things the causall particles are applied they are causes of that to which they have relation as namely of Salvation To workes of charity the causall particles are applied Therefore workes of charity are causes of Salvation To the proposition I answere that causall particles doe not alwaies nor for the most part signifie causes so properly called For that is a grosse erâ—…our of the Papists as I noted before The word cause sometimes is used properly to signifie that argument which hath relation onely to its effect by virtue whereof the effect hath its being either as from the efficient or as of the matter or as by the forme or as for the end Sometimes it is used generally to signifie any argument or reason whatsoever which is not the cause of the thing or of the being of that whereof it is said to bee a cause but of the consequence or conclusion and thus the rendring of any reason is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rendring of the cause though perhaps it bee from the effect or any other argument And forasmuch as persons are discerned and knowne by their effects for as our Saviour saith By their fruits you shall know them therefore it is usuall in the Scriptures from the effect to argue and declare the cause As thus God is mercifull for hee rewardeth the godly according to their workes God is just for hee rewardeth the wicked according to their sinnes This man is elect because he truely beleeveth and repenteth this man truely beleeveth because hee is fruitfull of good workes This is a good tree for it bringeth forth good fruite To the woman that was a sinner much was forgiven for shee loved much In those and infinite more examples the cause or reason which is rendred is from the effect Therefore the proposition is false § XV. Now let us consider the places of Scriptnre which hee alleageth and first Matth. 25. 35. for when I was hungry c. This reason which is alleaged is not from the cause as if good workes were the meritorious cause of our inheriting the kingdome of heaven but from the effect to prove the cause which is expressed Verse 34. as I have shewed before For for what cause are men to be saved First because they are blessed of the Father that is justified and therefore entituled to this kingdome Secondly because they are elected and therefore this kingdome was prepared for them from the beginning Thirdly because they arâ—… the heires of God for whom our Saviour purchased this inheritance noted in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iâ—…rit But how shall it appeare who they are that are blessed and justified for whom this kingdome is prepared for whom this inheritance is purchased By the fruits of justification election redemption and namely by the workes of mercy and chariâ—…y towards the poore members of Christ according to which as the evidence our Saviour
Christ will judge And thus his reasoâ—… standeth those who are blessed of God that is justified for whom this kingdome waâ—… prepared and this iâ—…heritance purchased they are to inheriâ—… this kingdome But you are such as appeareth by the fruits for your excercising the workes of charity and mercy towards my poore members and that for my sake is a plaine evidence of your election justification and redemption and accordiâ—…g to this evidence I judge of you come therefore inherit the kingdome c. But to this allegation I have answered twice before The second place is out of the same Chapter Verse 21. In which there is no causall particle eâ—…pressed in the originall neither is it any desert but duety of the servant to be faithfull neither any debt or duety of his Lord but his houâ—…y and largesse in rewarding of his fidelity in few things with making him ruler over many things The third place is Apoc. 7. 14. Thesâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…hey who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are 〈◊〉 the Throne of God In alleaging whereof Bellarmine leaveth out that which is most maâ—…riall that they had washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lambe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore they are before the Throne of God which sheweth that they stood before the Throne of God not in their owne merits but in the merits of Christ by which they were justified That which is said of their tribulation doth not insinuate their desert as though thereby they had deserved to bee before the Throne of God but the order of their afflictions going before their glorification and the consecution of eternall life following thereupon for as it is said of our Saviour Phil. 2. that hee having humbled himselfe unto death the Lord did therefore exalt him Verse 9. and Luke 24. 26. that hee was first to suffer those things and so to enter into his glory so of the faithfull it is likewise said that through much tribulation they must enter into the kingdome of God Act. 14. 22. And this is the answere which Calvin giveth to some of these places that they signifie ordinem consequentiae magis quam causam For whom God haâ—…h appointed to salvation for them he hath prepared the way of obâ—…dience and patience that therein they make walke towards their Countrey which is â—…eaven good workes therefore and afflictions are not the cause of salvation but the way to it § XVI But saith Bellarmine Christ could not more plaiâ—…ely have expressed that good workes are the causâ—…s of salvation than when hee said for when I was hungry you did c. especiâ—…lly seeing hee â—…seth the same forme of fpeech against the wicked for I was hungry and you did not c. In which the cause of damnation is noted I answere that our Saviour if hee had meant that good workes are the meriâ—…orious cause of salvation hee was able to have expressed it in as plaine termes as Bellarmine dothBut his intent in these reasons which hee giveth was not to set downe the causes of salvation or damnation but the notes and markes of them who are to bee saved or condemned as the evidence according to which hee pronounceth sentence Yea but Bellarmine will prove that the particles for and because are truely causall By what reason Forsooth by a circular augmentation becâ—…se good workes are causes And how did hee prove good workes to be causes Because these particles are causall To prove that workes be causes meaning meritorious causes he alleageth three Texts of Scripture 2 Cor. 4. 17. Gal. 6. 8. Phil. 2. 12. Two whereof I discussed before in their due place where he endevoured to prove that good workes aâ—…e necessary necessitate efficiâ—…tiae as causes of salvation viz. 2 Cor. 4. 17. lib. 7. cap. 5. § 7. and of this eighth booke cap. 2. § 21. and Phil. 2. 12. lib. 7. cap. 5. §5 That of Gal. 6. 8. he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape life everlasting maketh against him rathâ—… than for him For as in the naturall harvest the increase is not to be ascribed to the ploughing and sowing but to the blessing of God so much more in the spirituall § XVII But that these particles are not alwaies truely and properly causall Calvin sheweth by a notable instance God had promised Abraham when hee first called him out of Vr that in him that is in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed This promise the Lord often renewed as appeareth in his story which againe hee confirmeth by oath Gen. 22. 16. 18. When Abraham had upon tryall in an excellent manner and measure approved both his faith and obedience unto God By my selfe have I sworne saith the Lord that because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thy sonne thine onely sonne in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed becausâ—… thou hast obeyed my voice Here both in the beginning of the oath and in the end the causall particle is used shall wee therefore say that Abrahâ—…ms obedience did merit that all the nations of the earth that is Abraham himselfe and all the faithfull in all nations should bee blessed in the promised seed God had long before made this gracious promise to Abraham without respect of this or any other his workes and had this act of obedience never beene the promise of the promised seed in his posterity would have beene performed so that the grace and love of God was the onely cause why hee promised to send his owne Sonne who should take on him the seed of Abraham and not Abrahams obedience All that can truely bee said is that upon this obedience God tooke occasion to renew his promise and to confirme it by oath for the further confirmation of Abrahams faith So that his obedience was so farre from being the cause of the thing promised as it was but the occasion of renewing the promise But Bellarmine in this example mentioneth onely that inferiour promise concerning the multiplication of Abrahams seed and saith that as God did promise it so he would have him to merit it by his good workes even so the Lord having predestinated all the Elect unto Glory yet his pleasure is that they should attaine unto it by their owne merits Which cleane overthroweth the grace of election which which was without respect of workes and also of salvation For if our election or salvation be of workes or merits then is it not of grace And if this answere of Bellarmine be good then may it in like manner bee applyed to that part of the Oath concerning the promised seed namely that Abraham by his obedience had merited that in the promised seede the faithfull of all nations should bee blessed which is no better than blasphemy It is true that God hath elected us that wee might bee holy and that by the
a worke doth not onely make the thing promised a debt for he that promised is bound to stand to his promises but also causeth that hee who shall fulfill the worke may be said to have merited the thing promised and may by right require it as his reward His reason briefly is this Eternall life is promised upon condition of good workes therefore good workes are meritorious of eternall life I deny the consequence though eternall life bee promised upon condition of good workes yet good workes are not the meritorious cause thereof First The reasons of my deniall are these first because eternall life before we had a being was freely intended to all of us that shall be saved not according to our workes but according to Gods owne purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Iesus before all secular times 2 Tim. 1. 9. Secondly Because Christ hath merited it for all the elect and there is no other meritorious cause of salvation besides him Thirdly Because in Christ it is freely promised to all the faithfull as their inheritance purchased by Christ and therefore not to bee obtayned by their owne merit Fourthly As it was a reward freely promised so it is freely given as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the free gift of God Fifthly Because as it selfe is the free gift of God so the graces and good workes to which it is promised as a reward are the free gifts of God of which the more we have the more are we indebted to God so sarre are wee from meriting any thing at the hands of God by them Sixthly Because all our workes are debita debts or dutyes which we owe unto God and therefore when we have done all wee must say we are unprofitable servants Seventhly Because there can bee no merit of condignity where is not an equall proportion betweene the worke and the reward Eighthly Because our best workes are stained with the flesh Ninthly Because God is our absolute Lord and wee are his bond-servants to whom we owe our selves and whatsoever wee can doe Neither are we able to render unto him so much as is due and much lesse can we merit any thing from him Tenthly Because God to all his creatures giveth all good things but receiveth nothing from any and therefore cannot be made a debtour to any of his creatures Therefore though eternall life bee promised to good workes yet it is not merited by them Yea but saith Bellarmine the promise made with a condition of workes doth make the thing promised due Answ. First where the condition is fully performed there the thing promised is due But wee all faile in the fulfilling And therefore if reward bee given to such as come short of their duety as all doe it must be acknowledged to bee of Gods grace and not of our merit Secondly the thing promised is due not by merit but by promise not in â—…espect of the worke done which is a dutie and that not so perfectly performed but that it needeth pardon but onely in respect of the promise because hee who hath promised hath bound himselfe to keepe his promise But Gods promise was dâ—… gratuitâ—… non de debito I say his promise was freely to give eternall life and so according to his promise he freely bestoweth it Yea but saith he by performing the condition not onely the thing promised becommeth due but he also that hath performed may truely be said to have merited the reward promised But this say I should have beene proved and not taken for granted being denyed by us and disproved by all the tenne arguments even now produced § XXII His sixth argument is taken from those places wherein mention is made of dignity or worthinesse For as before hee had said in his second Chapter to be worthy of reward and to merit it is all one according to that saying of our Saviour Luk. 10. 7. the labourer is worthy of his hire The places are these Wisd. 3. 5. God proved them and found them worthy of himselfe 2 Thes. 1. 5. that you may be counted worthie of Gods kingdome for which allso ye suffer Luk. 20. 35. They that shall be accounted worthy of that world and the resurrection from the dead Apoc. 3. 4. they shall walke with me in whites because they are worthy His reason may thus bee framed whosoever are worthy of eternall life they doe merit or deserve it Those that doe good workes are worthy of eternall life Therefore they doe merit or deserve it I answere by distinction For there is difference betweene these two to be worthy and to be counted worthy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be worthy by a mans owne worth or merit or by acceptation and grace or favour vouchsafed by another to be esteemed worthy to be worthy in our selves or to be accepted as worthy in Christ. If the word be understood in the former sense I deny the assumption if in the latter I deny the proposition For to be worthy or rather to bee accounted worthy of eternall life by mercie and grace not dignitate sua sed dignatione divina not in themselves but in Christ which is the case of all the faithfull and yet to merit and to deserve it by a mans owne worth implyeth a contradiction Against the assumption I say that none of the faithfull though fruitfull of good workes is in himselfe or by his owne worth or merit worthy of eternall life This hath beene the confession of the faithfull in all ages as I partly noted before Iacob confesseth Gen. 32. 10. that hee was lesse than the least of Gods mercies that is unworthy of them though but temporall what would he have said of eternall David professeth himselfe unworthy of those temporall honours which God had vouchsafed unto him 2 Sam. 7. 18. 1 Chron. 29. 14. Iohn the Baptist confesseth that hee was not worthy to carry Christs shoes Mat. 3. 11. or to loose the latchet of them Luk. 3. 16. Iohn 1. 27. The Centurion whose faith is so highly commended professeth himselfe not to bee worthy that Christ should come under his roofe Mat. 8. 8. The afflictions of this life though one man did beare them all are not worthy of the future glory Roman 8. 18. Adde to these the confessions of the Fathers though cited many of them before Ambrose Quid pâ—…ssumus dignum pramiis facere coelestibus Hâ—…erome Nullum opus dignum Dei justitia reperietur Againe Rever a nihil posset 〈◊〉 condignum pati glâ—…ria coelesti etianisi talis esset illa qualis modò est vita 〈◊〉 No man sheweth forth such a conversation as to be worthy of the Kingdome of Heaven No though a man should die ten thousand deaths and should performe all virtuous actions The Author of the worke not finished upon Matthew what doe we in this world worthy that wee may deserve to bee
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
Iulian. lib. 5. cap. 3. Bellarmines unanswerable argument out of Rom. 5. 19. c De justif l. 2. c. 7. §. multa d Lib. 2. c. 5. §. 1. 2. l. 4. c. 9. §. 2 3 4. e Lib. 5. c. 2. §. 1. f Non â—…ola imputatione de bapâ—…is l. 1. c. 13. g â—… Cor. 5. 21 Papists by grace understand the habits of grace in us Rom. 3 24. Tit. 3. 7. Ephes. 2. 8. a Ephes. 1. 6. b Catech. Rom. § 38. Bâ—…llarm de gratia lib. arb l. 1. c. 3. 6. c Rom. 5. 5. 8. 35. The divers acceptions of the word Grâ—…ce Exo. 33. 19. 34. 6. d Exod. 34. 6. Psâ—…l 119. 68. e 〈◊〉 145. 7 8 9. f Psal. 111. 4. Iâ—…n 4. 2. The Schoolemens distinction of Grace g Lib. 2. dist 27. D. h Rom. 11. 28. i Rom. 12. 6. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Pet. 4. 10. Eph. 4. 7. 11. 12. k 1 Cor. 12. 8 9 10 28. The state of the Question l 2 Cor. 8. 6 7. Ephes. 3. 8. m Tit. 2. 11. n Numb 24. 9. o Sess. 6. can 11. Si quis dixerit gâ—…atiam qua ju stisicamuresse tantum savo rem Deianathema sit 1 The use of the word in the Scripture a Chen chani nsh Jer. 16. 13. Techinnah Ios. 11. 20. Chesed Psal. 40. 11. symmach Ps. 136. 1 c. 2 Sam. 16. 17. 2. It is gratia gratum faciens because by it God 〈◊〉 us gracious b 2 Tim. 1. 9. In respect of this grace the faithfull are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and chasidim c Psal. 50. 5. d So the 72. and the Latine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sanctum sâ—…um e Rom. 1. 7. 8. 27. 12. 13. 15. 25. 31. 10. 2. 15 1 Cor. 6. 1. 14. 33 c. The grace of Christ that is thegracious favour of God in Christ. Arg. 3 by the gracious favour of God wee are elected called c. f Rom. 8. 28. Object 1 that the grace of election is eternall g De gratia at lib arbitr lib. 1. cap. 2. Obiect 2. of the grace of sanctification h Rom. 3. 24. Object 3. from faith Gratia gratum facienâ—… expresssed by other termes which signific favour i Rom. 3. 24. Eph. 2. 8. Tic. 3. 7. 2 Tim. 1. 9. Tit. 3. 4. 5. 7. k Iohn 1. 14. 17 So Jon. 4. 2. The fift argument because it is opposed tâ—… workes l Psal. 143 2. Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. m Lib. 7. Arg 6 because charity is not the justifying grace Arg. 7. plaine testimonies where grace signifieth grace Arg. 8. the confession of Papists n De lib. arbitr The calumniation of the Papists that wee deny inherent graces and in herent iustice a Lib. 1. cap. 3. â—… b §. Alterum His allegation of Rom. 3. 24. The place Rom 3. 24 maketh wholly against the Papists Secondly it is proved by the words oâ—… thâ—… text c Rom. 4. 5. d 2 Cor. 5. 21. e Rom. 8. 30. f Concil Trid. sâ—…ss 5. de pecâ—…at orig In renatis nihil odit Deus h 1 Ioh. 1. 8. The second word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely The third word by his grace k Gratiam Dâ—…i iu Câ—…isto essè testatur Apostolus l Perer in Rom. 3. Disput. 15. The fourth word through the redemption that is in Christ. The fifth word by saith The sixth is the end Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. De Iustiâ—… lib. 2. cap. §. Alterum Bellarmines proofe that grace Rom. 3. 24. doth not signifie the favour of God First from the word gratis a In Rom. 3. b De verbis Apostoli Serm. 15. c In Rom. 3. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f Justificari gratis est justificari sine merito sine operibus De Iustif. lib. 1. cap. 21. His second reason from the preposition per. g De justif l. 2. cap. 3. h C. 12. §. Respondeo illud Particulam a. per significare causam efficientem perspicuum est His third reason not proving the point i Esa. 46. 10. His fourth reason from the attributes given to Grace The first be cause it is a gift k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Ioh. 3. 1. l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly a gift which we receive Thirdly a gift given by Christ. n Ephes. 1. 6. o Ephes. 1. 3. 6. Made by Christ. p Beza prâ—…stita est q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r Act. 20. 24 32. s Lib. 6. c. 6. §. 2. Fourthly a gift gâ—…ven by measure from Christ. t Ephes. 4 8. u Tit. 2. 11. * 2 Cor. 13. 14. x Sap. 11. 24. x Tit. 3. 4. z Aug. t. 9. in Ioan. Omnia diligâ—… Deus quae feciâ—… inter ea magis diligit creatures ratione de illis eas amplius qua sunt membra unlgenitum sui multo magis ipsum anigenitâ—…m suum 5. Grace compared to essence â—… Eph. 2. 8. 9. 6. Grace compared to light De justif l. 2. c. 3. § Preterea gratiam His fifth proofe from Rom. 5. 5. a De Spiritu litera c. 32. August testimony that here that love is meant wherby we love God opposed by many testimonies b In locum c In locum d In locum solidum spei fundamentum ex Dilectione Dei erga nos manifestat e Vnde patet quod primum fâ—…ndamentum spei explicat dilectionem Dei erga nos f â—…lucid in Rom. 5. 5. g In locum Reasons proving that Gods love to us Is meant First from the words of the Text. h Rom. 8. 15 16. Gal. 4. 6. i Ephes. 1. 13 14. 4. 30. 2 Cor. 1 21. 5 5. k 1 Ioh. 4. 10. l 1 Cor. 2 1â—… Secondly out of the words precedent m Iam. â—… 12. n Chrys. in locum Thirdly from the words that follow â—… Rom. 5 9 10. p Uid diatrib de Antiebristo part 2 ad demonstr 1. His former proofe out of Rom. 8. 15. q Lib. dist 17. r De gratiâ—… lib. arb l. 1. c. 8. His second proofe out of Rom. 8. 10. The true meaning of the place The word grace used most frequently for the grace of sanctification because that was oppugned by the Pelagians Foure degrees of the errour of the Pelagians a C. 3. b 1 Cor. 1. 30. c Ier. 31. 33 34. d Luk. 1. 73 74 75. e De consecr dist 4 c. 141. Nemo ex August depeccat merit remiss l. 1. cap. 23. f De consecr dist 4. c. 45 Gratia ex August De gratia lib. arb ad Valentin c. 14. The use of the word grace in the Schoolemen and latter writers August Epist. 105. The state of the Question a Iam. â—… 14. 24. This the principall point The other points prove this b Lib. 1. c. 3. 4. and lib. 2. 3. This point to be proved in the affirmative part and in the negative first joyntly and then severally Arg. 1. we are justified by Gods righteousnesse and
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
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
motive in God the principium or primary cause which some call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our justification he saith that we are justified by the grace of God Rom. 3. 24. Tit. 3. 7. that wee are saved by his grace Ephes. 2. 8. meaning thereby the gracious favour of God in Christ whereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath graciously accepted and embraced us in his beloved They most absurdly and wickedly that they may place the matter of their justification and merit of their salvation in themselves doe by grace understand the gifts of grace and namely and especially that of Charity habitually inherent in us For so they teach justifying grace to bee a divine quality inherent in the soule per modum habitus a supernaturall habit infused of God and that not really distinct from Charity And in like manner what in this kind is said of the Love of God they understand it commonly not of Gods Love whereby hee loveth us but of our love whereby wee love God § II. For the better understanding of this point we are to distinguish the divers acceptions of Gods grace For either it signifieth the favour of God in himselfe or the gifts of grace in us The former is the proper signification for the grace of God properly understood is one of Gods attributes whereby he is signified to be gracious and is referred to his goodnesse Exod. 33. 19. cum 34. 6. unto which also his love and mercy are referred but with this distinction For Gods goodnesse is considered either as hee is good in himselfe yea goodnesse it selfe or as hee is good to his creatures which is his bounty which being referred to his creatures either as having goodnesse communicated to them is his love or as being in misery is his mercy or as having deserved no good thing at the hands of God but the contrary is his Grace The latter signification is unproper and metonymicall the word Grace being taken for the effects of his grace viz. his free and undeserved gifts and benefits proceeding from his grace and favour which are not properly called the grace and favour of God but his graces and favours not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace Rom. 11. 28. 1 Cor. 1. 7. 12. 4. 31. And in both senses it is either more largely taken for any favour or favours of God though common as both his favour and love in creating preserving and governing his creatures and also the fruits thereof which are his common favours as the gifts of nature in which sense Pelagius did call bonum naturae and namely free-will the grace of God and the gifts dispensed by his providence as his temporall blessings which he graciously bestoweth upon both good and bad Matth. 5. 45. In which respect hee is not onely said to be channun gracious Exod. 22. 27. and graciously to bestow such gifts Gen. 33. 5. 11. Esai â—…6 10. but also to bee the Saviour of all men 1 Tim. 4. 10. yea to save both man and beast Psalm 36. 6. Or else it is used more specially to signifie the peculiar favour and favours of God vouchsafed to his peculiar people viz. the Church tending to the salvation of it and of the members thereof which is the usuall acception of the word in the Scripture § III. This by the Schoolemen is very unfitly distinguished into gratia gratum faciens gratia gratis daâ—…a for first out of this distinction that which chiefly and properly is to be called grace viz. the gracious love and favour of God in Christ is left out Secondly whereas by gratia gratum faciens the justifying and saving grace they meane grace infused and namely the habit of Charity they oppose it to gratia gratis data to grace freely given as if the grace infused were not also freely given But they might have learned either from their Master a better distinction of Grace though he doe but lightly touch upon it that Grace is either gratia gratis Dans gratia gratis Data or a better exposition of that distinction which they have propounded according to the Scriptures that by Gratia gratum faciens is meant the gracious favour of God in himselfe whereby he graciously accepteth us in his Beloved and by gratia gratis data the gifts of grace freely bestowed upon us for so the Apostle seemeth to distinguish Rom. 5. 15. that it is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God in himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as he speaketh Ephes. 3. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift of grace in us Or as elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gifts of grace The former is the gracious favour of God and is in God the giver of all good gifts as the fountaine of all graces the latter are the gifts of grace and are in the receivers as streames derived from that fountaine Now these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or gifts of grace are either sanctifying graces tending to the salvation of him who is indued with them as faith hope charity the feare of God c. or edifying graces which are given for the salvation of others and those either ordinary as the gifts of the ministery or extraordinary as the gifts of prophecie of tongues of working miracles which the Schoolemen called gratias gratis datas § IV. These 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these gifts of grace whether you understand those edifying or those sanctifying graces may every one of them by a metonymy be caled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace or by special relatioÌ„ to some peculiar grace vouchsafed to some particular person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that grace that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this or that giâ—…t of grace yet none of them can absolutely and properly be called the grace of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the saving grace of God or gratia gratum faciens of which this question is understood to wit whether this justifying and saving grace of God be inâ—…erent in us as a quality or habit or be out of us in God as being one of his attributes The Papists say it is inherent in us per modum habitus after the manner of an habit infused into us and so is the matter of justification considered as an action of God as we conceive of justification or the forme as they say speaking of justification passively and confounding it with sanctification But we though we doe confesse that in the gifts of saving grace as faith hope charity c. concurring in us our inward or habituall sanctification doth consist yet we deny them or any one of them to be either the matter or forme of justification But contrariwise we constantly affirme that the justifying and saving grace of God or as they speake gratia gratum faciens is the gracious
he call those workes which are mingled with sinnes good merits for that implyeth a contradiction but hee saith they doe not suffice to merit or obtaine the reward of blessednesse and therefore indeed denyeth the workes of righteousnesse to merit eternall life § II. The second is Basil Maneâ—… sempiternâ—… requies illos qui in hac vitalegitimè certaverunt non ob eorum merita factorum sed de munificentissimi Dei gratia in quem sperârunt which is a pregnant testimony But Bellarm taking advantage at the Printers fault in the old Edition of Basil leaving out the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which since hath bin supplyed answereththat Chemnitius did not rightly translate the words of Basil for in the Greeke neither the words Non ob eorum merita are found nor the word Gratiâ—… The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is propounded an eveâ—…lasting â—…est to them who lawfully strive in this life not rendred according to the debt or due of works but according to the grace of the most bountifull God in whom they have trusted where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it were not expressed is of necessity to be understood and the rather because he seemeth by allusion to invert the words of the Apostle Rom. 4 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For with Bellarmine in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to repeate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he had said according to the duety or debt of the most bountifull God or great giver it is absurd gift and debt being contrary And also by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debt or duâ—…ty to understand as hee doth measure which becommeth the bounty of God that is much greater than is due to the workes is no lesse absurd For neither doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siignifie measure neither is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repeated in the latter clause which signifieth rendred but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is exhibited which Bellarmine leaveth out Neither doth hee say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Bellarmine absurdly understandeth him to speake for there is no debt or duety of God Neither would it hinder our cause if the word rendred were repeated in the latter clause for what is promised is to bee rendred But in plaine termes Basil saith that eternall rest to them that live well is not rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the merit of their workes but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the grace of the munifiâ—…nt God exhibited But his second Evasion is more grosse that Basil speaketh of the reward as rendred not according to the merit of workes which men have done by their owne strength but such as are done by grace Repl Basil plainely speaketh of those who fought a good fight in this life and have trusted in God and saith that the eternall rest is laid up for them and that it is rendied not according to the merit of works but given according to the gâ—…ace of God the great Giver Neither doth he speake of naturall or gâ—…acelesse men of whom he never dreamed that the eternall rest is pâ—…epared for them but of godly men such as David was whose woâ—…ds Returne unto thy rest O my soule were the occasion of this speech Besides if the rewâ—…rd bee rendred as Bellarmine saith Supra condignum how is it merited â—…x condignâ—… Or if it be merâ—…ted ex condigno how is it supra condignum § III. The third is Saint Augustines out of whom hâ—… reciteth onely three places as â—…ited by us the firlâ—… 〈◊〉 sunt 〈◊〉 Dei sunt The sinnes are thine the merits are Gods Supplicium tibi debetur cum praemium vâ—…nerit â—…ua dona corâ—…abit non meriâ—…a 〈◊〉 Punishment is due to thee And when the reward shall come hee will crowne his owne gifts not thy merits 2. Pro nihilo salvos facies illos nihil invenies unde salves multum invenis vnde damnes thou wilt save them for nothing thou findest nothing for which to save and thou findest much for which to condemne 3. Maluit dicere gratia Dei vita â—…terna ut intelligeremus non pro meritis nostr is Deum nos ad aeternam vitam sed pro sua miseratione perducere he chose rather to say that life eternall is the grace of God that wee might understand that not for our merits but for his owne mercie hee doth bring us unto eternall life Which are most plaine and pregnant testimonies Bellarmine answereth in grosse wheresoever Augustine condemneth merits he speaketh of such merits as be in us from our selves that is to say without the grace of God And to this purpose he quoteth August Epist. 105. ad Sixtum in two places and his Book de gratia lib. arbitr c. 6. 7. 8. Reply Augustine by merits understandeth good workes which hee considereth either as going before grace wrought by the strength of our owne free will which against the Pelagians he denyeth tâ—… merit either grace or glory or he speaketh of them as proceeding from grace which he acknowledgeth to be rewarded with eternall life But these though he call them merits because they are to be rewarded yet every where he saith that the reward is given to them not as to our merits deserving it but as to the free gifts of God And therfore that the reward it selfe is called gratia both because it is freely given and because those workes to which it is given are wholly to bee ascribed to Gods grace and consequently that the Lord when he rewardeth our workes with eternall life doth not reward them as our merits but as his owne gifts Than which what can be spoken more effectually against the merits of condignity For if our good works be not our owne as from our selves how can â—…hey merit of him whose gifts they are If they were our owne and from our selves and were also perfect as they are not then perhaps it might be said that when God rewardeth them he rewardeth our merits but not being from our selves but meerely by his gift when he rewardeth them hee doth not reward our merits but crowne his owne gifts It is plaine therfore that whereas August considereth good works two wayes either as our merits or as Gods gifts he both constantly denyeth eternall life to be rendred unto them as to our merits and also affirmeth that it is given to them freely as to the free gifts of God And this is proved out of those very places which Bellarmine alleageth in the first place he saith Cùm Deuâ—… coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quam muner a sâ—…a When God doth crowne our merits so hee calleth good works he crowneth nothing else but his owne gifts and in another place Ergo coronat te quia dona sua coronat non merita tâ—…a and againe in the same epistle he saith that howsowever eternall life is rendred to our good workes which hee therefore