bee our righteousnesse Secondly because of his owne free grace he hath given us those meanes whereby the righteousnesse of Christ might bee communicated unto us as namely the Ministery of the Word and of the Sacraments Thirdly because of his grace hee blesseth those meanes unto us working and encreasing in us the grace of faith by which we are justified and lasâ—…ly when we doe by faith which is his gift bâ—…leeve hee freely imputâ—…th unto us the righteousnesse of Christ accepteth of us in him and in him adopteth us to be his sonnes and heires of eternall life § III. But as the Lord is gracious in justifying a beleeving sinner so hee is also righteous Rom. 3. 25 26. For thâ—…refore hath the Lord set forth his sonne and our Saviour to bee a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse through the remission of sinnes that are past by the forbearance of God to declare I say at this time his righteousnesse that he might be just and the Iustifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For such is the righteousnesse of God that hee forgiveth no mans sinne for which his Iustice is not fully satisfied by Christ neither doth hee accept of any as just but such as by imputation of Christs righteousnesse are made just in him The consideration of this justice of God in forgiving sinnes doth afford singular comfort to the faithfull For seeing the Lord forgiveth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied and seeing our Saviour hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him from hence we may be assured that as there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus so no punishment properly so called that is such a penalty as is inflicted in ordine justitiae and by way of vengeance because it cannot stand with the justice of God to punish the second time those sinnes in us for which his justice is already fully satisfied in Christ. § IV. But the actions of God the principall efficient of justification are to bee distinguished according to the distinction of the three Persons For God the Father justifieth as the primary Cause and Authour the Sonne as the meritorious cause the holy Ghost as the cause applicatory that is to say God the Father through the Sonne doth justifie us by the holy Ghost The Father I say as primary cause and that in two respects first in that hee gave his onely begotten Sonne for us and set him forth to be a 〈◊〉 through fâ—…ith in his blood that all who beleeve in him should bee iustified Rom. 3. 25. Ioh. 3. 16. Secondly as the Iudge in absolving those that beleeve and pronouncing them just in Christ. The Sonne as the Mediatour and meritorious cause and that also in two respects First as he is our Surety who paid our debt and our Redeemer who laid downe the price of our redemption for us Esay 53. 11. affording unto us the matter and merit of our justification Secondly as hee is our Intercessour and Advocate to plead for us that his merits may be imputed to us Rom. 8. 34. 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Heb. 7. 25. 9. 24. God the Father therefore justifieth as the primary cause per authoritatem as the Schoolemen speake the Sonne as the secondary cause per ministerium For so it is said Esa. 53. 11. My righteous servant shall justifie many The Father as the Iudge the Sonne as the Mediator and Advocate The Father as the Creditour accepting Christs satisfaction for us the Sonne as the Surety paying our debt for us But howsoever God the Father hath given his Soâ—…ne and the Sonne hath given himselfe for us and hath paid that price and performed that obedience which is sufficient for our justification notwithstanding none are actually justified by the merits of Christ but they onely to whom they are applyed For although the sufferings of Christ be a precious salve to cure our soules yet they will not heale us unlesse they bee applyed And although his righteousnesse bee as a wedding garment to cover our nakednesse yet it will not cover us unlesse it bee put on In the third place therefore the holy Ghost may also be said to justifie us because hee doth apply unto us Christs merits unto our justification both as he is the Spirit of regeneration working in us the grace of faith by which we receive Christ unto our justification in foro coelesti and also as hee is the Spirit of adoption confirming our faith and working in us the assurance of our justification by which wee are justified in foro Conscientiae § V. Now the meanes of this application are instrumentall causes of our justification and doe justifie instrumentally And these are of two sorts viz. on Gods part and on ours For to effect this application there must bee manus Dei offerentis the hand of God offering and manus accipientis the hand of the receiver The instruments on Gods part are the ministery of the Word and Sacraments whereby the holy Ghost doth beget and confirme faith in us In respect whereof Ministers are said to justifie men Dan. 12. 3. For as touching the ministery of the Gospell first in it the benefit of the Messias as namely reconciliation adoption and justification c. is revealed and offered to all that shall beleeve and by it wee are stirred up to receive and embrace it In which respect the preaching of the Gospell is called the ministery of reconciliation and the Ministers are Gods Embassadours sent to entreat men in Gods name and in Christs stead that they would be reconciled unto God 2 Cor. 5. 18 20. Secondly the holy Ghost having thus by the ministery of the Gospell knocked at the doore of mens hearts in his good time maketh it effectuall opening their hearts to give a lively and effectuall assent to the Gospell whereby they receiving Christ and beleeving in him are justified Thus faith commeth by hearing the Word And in this respect Preachers of the Gospell are said to be the Ministers by whom men doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Thirdly in the preaching of the Gospell seconded and made powerfull by the operation of the holy Ghost the sentence of justification and remission of finnes and consequently of salvation is pronounced and concluded in the conscience of the faithfull when as out of the generall promise of the Gospell Whosoever truely belâ—…eveth in Christ hath remission of sinnes being by the Minister conditionally applyed to the hearer and absolutely assumed by the beleever after this manner If thou saith the Minister doest truely beleeve in Christ thou hast remission of sinnes and thou shalt be saved Rom. 10. 9. But I saith the faithfull hearer doe truely beleeve in Christ my conscience bearing mee witnesse in the holy Ghost this conclusion is inferred as the verdict of the holy Ghost testifying with the
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
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.
doth not justifie alone first because it doth not dispose alone to justification there being seven dispositions whereof faith is but one and namely the first § I. NOw let us see what arguments Bellarmine doth bring to prove that we are not justified by faith alone Which question in his opinion may bee disputed three wayes either with relation to the time going before justification or to the time of justification or to the time following our justification In respect of the first the question which he maketh is whether faith doth justifie alone by way of disposing unto justification In respect of the second whether faith be the onely formall cause of our justification In respect of the third whether for the retaining and preserving of righteousnesse good workes be not required but faith onely sufficeth The first he disputeth De justif l. 1. c. 12. and in the twelve chapters following to the end of that booke The second that faith is not the onely and entire formall cause of justification he disputeth in the second booke The third he disputeth in the fourth booke Chap. 18. 19. where he endevoureth to prove that good workes doe justifie But in mine opinion hee should rather have disputed this question whether faith doth justifie at all or not For whereas they make two justifications the first habituall whereby of a sinner a man is made just the second actuall whereby a man of just is made more just by their doctrine faith doth not justifie as a part either of the one or the other but is required as a necessary companion and as it were causa sine qua non which is no cause For they make the formall cause of their first justification which they say truely is but one to be charity and the meritorious cause of the second to be good workes Onely that charity and those good workes must not be without faith All which they ascribe to faith is that they make it the beginning of justification and a disposition to it Neither doe we deny but that true faith is the beginning and the root of sanctification and of all inherent righteousnesse insomuch that from it both charity it selfe 1 Tim. 1. 5. and all other both internall graces and externall obedience doe spring but the act of justification neither in the first nor second doe they ascribe to faith Onely unto the first justification they require it as a preparative disposition for the habit of grace to bee infused which doth not differ from Charity and when it is infused to be a companion thereof And to the second as causa sine qua non without which workes doe not justifie § II. But to come to Bellarmines large discourse the greatest part thereof seemeth to bee impertinent and besides the purpose But to make all seeme pertinent he maliciously calumniateth us as if we held all those assertions which hee with such eagernesse doth confute But if we doe hold that faith doth not justifie by way of disposing either alone or at all and that it is not the formall cause of justification either alone as the entire cause or at all as any part thereof and that it is not a consequent of justification at all as works indeed are to what end doth all this dispute serve unlesse it be to make their seduced Catholiks who never are permitted to read any of our writings to beleeve that he hath doughtily confuted us § III. And that faith doth not justifie alone by way of disposing he endeavoureth to prove by five sorts of arguments The first from those seven dispositions required by the Councell of Trent to justification among which he reckoneth faith for one Whereunto in generall I answere that this whole discourse besides that it is impertinent for wee doe not hold as I have said that faith doth justifie by way of disposition either alone or at all it is also an idle speculation disagreeing from their practicke theologie and that in two respects First to their speculative justification they require foregoing preparations and dispositions but to the obtayning of justification in deed and in practise no such things are required For the efficacie of justifying a sinner they ascribe to their Sacraments which they say doe conferre gratiam gratum facientem that is justifie ex opere operato requiring as I conceive no preceding preparation or disposition in the party to be justified so hee doe not interpose the obstacle of any mortall sinne For if foregoing dispositions were required before the Sacraments then they should not justifie as I have said before ex opere operato but ex opere operantis Secondly they doe teach that in their first justification Charity and with it Faith and Hope are infused whereby a man that before was a sinner is made righteous And that therefore a man is first justified when these are infused and that these are first infused when a man is justified and yet they tell us of a true Faith true Hope true Love going before justification Which by their doctrine though they goe together I meane Faith Hope and Charity accompanied with other good dispositions are neither graces nor gifts of grace infused For before or without the Sacrament there is no justification which they have tyed to the Sacrament and before justification as themselves say there is no grace For if they were graces indeed as no doubt but they are where they are true and goe together accompanied with other good dispositions then men might be justified before the receit of the Sacrament as Abraham was and then the Sacrament to men so qualified should not conserre grace but seale it Thus to mainetaine their pernicious errour concerning the efficacie of the Sacraments justifying ex opere operato whereby they have turned religion into an outward formality that Faith that Hope that Charity which goe before the Sacrament as namely in Cornelius before his baptisme should be no true graces because all true justifying and saving grace is insused in the administration of the Sacrament and this infusion of grace is that which they call justification By their doctrine therefore justifying faith is that which in the very act of justification is infused and being infused doth justifie not by way of disposing but formally it selfe being informed by Charity And therefore according to their owne doctrine that faith which disposeth to justification is not justifying Faith And consequently all this discourse concerning six other preparative dispositions concurring with faith to prove that we are not justified by faith alone is besides the purpose For that faith which they make their first preparative disposition is not justisying faith neither doth justifie otherwise by Bellarmines owne confession than its next companion viz servile feare doth But wee when we say that faith alone doth justifie speake not of a bare and naked assent which is common to the wicked which cannot justifie either alone or at all but of a true
renounceth speciall faith For canst thou love Christ and rejoyce in him as thy Saviour if thou be not by speciall faith perswaded that thou shalt be saved by him Seeing then unto our justification before God we are to receive Christ as hath beene said by a true and lively assent and unto justification in the court of our owne conscience by a plerophory or assured perswasion we are to apply the promises to our selves which are the peculiar acts of faith and cannot be attributed to any other grace it followeth therefore from the proper nature of faith that by it alone we are justified § VIII His second cavill is taken from the Sacraments which by our confession as he saith doe apply the promises and justification it selfe to the receiver therefore saith he faith doth not justifie alone after the manner of an instrument applying In this argument he greatly pleaseth himselfe but without cause For first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we meane that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification with faith but without us we acknowledge many things to justifie Secondly faith justifieth alone ut manus accipientis the Sacraments ut manus dantis Thirdly faith doth actually justifie before God the Sacraments doe not justifie before God but serve to seale our justification to our owne consciences neither doe they actually conferre grace but confirme it as the seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith When as therefore the termes of washing cleansing sanctifying saving are attributed to Sacraments these phrases are to be understood Sacramentally And this is our answere as for those which Bellarmine frameth for us hee hath good leave to make or to marre them at his pleasure CHAP. XV. Bellarmines fourth principall argument taken from the manner how faith doth justifie and the fifth from the formall cause of justification § I IF Faith saith hee doth justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit of justification then faith doth not justifie alone for love and penance and other good acts doe the like but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent I deny first the consequence of the proposition and the proofe thereof For neither love or penance nor other good acts doe either cause begin or merit justification And therefore though faith did justifie as a cause as the beginning as the merit whereby justification is obtained it might for all them justifie alone This were sufficient to overthrow his whole Dispute But all his care is to prove the assumption which hee endeavoureth in all the parts thereof And first that faith is a cause of justificatition which we doe not deny yea we affirme that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as a cause thereof but faith onely But you will aske what cause We say the instrumentall onely If Bellarmine meane any other cause as no doubt but he doth he should have done well to have named it and to have proved it § II. He proveth faith to be a cause by the prepositions ex and per by and through attributed to faith whereto I answere that these particles sometimes are used to signifie the instrumentall cause As namely when we are said to be justified or saved through or by the word or the Sacraments Rom. 6. 4. Tit. 3. 5. Ioh. 17. 20. 1 Cor. 1. 21. 15. 2. Faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 17. Preachers are Ministers by whom you doe beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Ephes. 3. 6. And first for those plà ces wherein it is said that we are justified by faith or saved by faith Rom. 3. 28. 30. 5. 1. Ephes. 2. 8. In these and the like places saith he the preposition by or through doth signifie a true cause But he should have done well to have set downe what cause for an instrumentall cause is also a true cause The preposition per saith Bâ—…llarmine in another place is not fitly accommodated to the favour of God which is the efficient cause of justification but either to the formal as per gratiam or meritorious as permeritum filii or instrumentall cause as per fidem Sacramenta where you see by Bellarmines confession per is attributed to faith as to the instrumentall cause It is also attributed to the matter and merit as Rom. 5. 10 19. When as therefore it is also attributed to faith it cannot be attributed in the same sense as to the death and obedience of Christ in propriety of speech but of necessity it is to bee understood by a metonymy faith being put for the object of faith which is Christs righteousnesse And this manifestly appeareth when justification by the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as Rom. 3. 24. 25. wee are justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the redemption which is in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in his blood by Christ we have accesse to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith in him Eph. 3. 12. By the name of Christ we have remission of sinnes by faith in his name Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. As it is said of the cure of the creeple Act. 3. 16. that the name of Christ by faith in his name had healed him Thus I have shewed before that the same benefits of justification and salvation which properly we receive from the death and obedience of Christ are attributed to faith not properly but relatively and metonymically Not that faith it selfe worketh them but the object which it as the instrument apprehendeth § III. But Bellarmine will prove that in these and such like places the prepositions by and through doe signifie a true cause first by the contrary For when the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. Gal. 2. 3. and elsewhere doth prove that a man is not justified by workes nor by the Law without doubt he excludeth the force and efficacie of workes and of the Law in justifying and not a relative apprehension alone For no man could doubt but that the Law and works did not justifie by apprehending righteousnes relatively And therfore the saying of the Apostle had been very foolish if his meaning had beene that justice is apprehended by faith and not by the Law or workes Even as a man should speake foolishly who should say that the almes is received by the hand and not by the heele Neither did they whom the Apostle confuteth looke to be justified by their workes relatively but by the merit of them And therefore that which the Apostle denyeth to works he ascribeth to faith Answ. This manifestly proveth that the question of justification by faith or by workes is thus to bee understood whether wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith which is the righteousnesse of the Gospell the righteousnesse of faith or by a righteousnesse inherent in our selves which is the righteousnesse of the Law or of workes For if the question should bee understood of faith
it selfe there would be no more opposition betweene faith and workes than is betweene the first and second justification of the Papists which are so farre from opposition that they are sub-alternall the one proving the other For if we be justified by righteousnesse inherent wee must bee justified both by habituall and actuall righteousnesse neither of them alone sufficing in adultis and therefore if by the one then by the other also Againe Faith being but one grace among many cannot as it is an habit inherent in us by it owne worthinesse or merit justifie or sanctifie alone but there must be a concurrence of charity and of other graces neither can the habits of grace suffice to the sanctification of one come to yeares unlesse they bring forth the fruits of obedience neither are the fruits of obedience called good works of any account before God unlesse they proceed from the inward habits of faith and love But faith considered relatively as the instrument apprehending Christs righteousnesse it self alone sufficeth to justification as the Fathers before have testified This is the worke of God which with God is in stead of all workes that wee beleeve on his Sonne For hee that truely beleeveth is reputed as if he had fulfilled the whole Law Christ being the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he therefore saith the Apostle that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the Law because Christ hath fulfilled it for him Christs obedience being imputed to him and accepted of God in his behalfe as if hee had performed the same in his owne person § IV. Secondly Bellarmine by other places where the preposition is used indevoureth to prove that faith is deciphered as a true cause For if saith he in all other places the preposition by or through doth signifie a cause why should it not betoken a cause when a man is said to be iustified by or through faith I answer first that the preposition is often used to signifie no cause at all as where it is attributed to wayes and meanes occasions and times waies as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 2. 12. by another way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 12. 1. through the corne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through dry places vers 43. so through windowes Gen. 26. 8. 2 Cor. 11. 33. dores Mat. 7. 13. Ioh. 10. 1. walls as Act. 9. 25. tiles Luk. 5. 19. Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1. afflictions Act. 14. 22. meanes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by word Act. 15. 27. 32. by parable Luk. 8. 4. by vision Act. 18. 9. through a glasse 1 Cor. 13. 12. by Epistle 2 Thâ—…s 2. 15. by faith and not by sight 2 Cor. 5. 7. Occasion as our corruption by the Law worketh sinne Rom. 7. 5 13. for so it is said verse 8 11. it tooke occasion by the Commandement c. infirmity laid upon Lazarus that by it the Sonne of God might be glorified Ioh. 11. 4. Time whether all time as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 18. 10. 2. 25. Or set times as three dayes Mat. 26. 61. fortie dayes Act. 1. 3. by night Luk. 5. 5. Mat. 5. 19. Secondly that the preposition is often used to signifie the instrumentall cause as in that Hebrew phrase by the hand of his servants Gen. 32 16. as God commanded by the hand of Moses Exod. 9. 35. 35. 29. Levit. 8. 36. 10. 11. 26. 45. Numb 4. 37 45 c. By the hand of Moses and Aaron Psal. 77. 20. 1 Sam. 16. 20. Iesse sent by the hand of his sonne David So God speaketh by the hand of his Prophets 1 Sam. 28. 15. 2 Sam. 12. 25. 2 Chr. 29. 25. By the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1. 70. So by his Prophets viz. as his instruments Mat. 1. 22. 2. 15. Thus God wrought miracles by the hands of Paul Act. 19. 11. or as himselfe speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his ministery Act. 21. 19. Rom. 15. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by me Thirdly that faith is no such cause of justification as is usually meant by the preposition joyned either with other causes of justification or with faith upon other occasions And first to mention those which Bellarmine saith he will here omit as that we are justified by Christ by his blood by his death by his obedience it may not be thought that when it is said that wee are justified by or through Christ and by or through faith or by or through the bloud the death the obedience of Christ and by or through faith that faith though the same preposition be prefixed before it should signifie the same kind of cause When the Apostle saith Rom. 3. 24. that we are justified by the grace of God there Bellar. noteth the formall cause of our justification confounding Gods grace and our charity freely that is saith he by the bounty of God noting the efficient by the redemption wrought by Christ Iesus which noteth the meritorious cause by faith in his blood we must needs conceive that faith is a distinct cause from the rest For neither is it the formall for there is but one and that one is charity as they teach nor the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that is Gods bounty and justice nor the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the meritorious cause for thath onely is the merit of Christ. It remaineth then that it is the instrumentall which is plainely signified when it is said that we are justified through the redemption or satisfaction of Ghrist by faith or when the preposition is attributed both to Christ and to faith as I noted before § 2. § V. Bellarmine saith that in that place Rom. 3. 24. faith is there noted to be the dispositive cause which I have allready disproved The truth is that for all this flourish which Bellarmine here maketh hee maketh faith to be no cause at all of justification but a remote disposition which disposeth to justification no otherwise thâ—…n servile feare doth which is farre enough from being a cause of justification If it bee said that he maketh it a part of the formall cause of justification I answer that according to the Councell of Trent they constantly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is charity which being lost justification is lost though faith remaineth The habit of faith infused â—…s indeed a chiefe part of our sanctification as a mother grace and root of the rest but of justification it is no part but an instrument For justification consisteth wholly upon imputation of Christs righteousnesse which faith as the hand doth receive § VI. For the better understanding the manner how faith doth justifie wee are to distinguish the acts of faith both in justifying and sanctifying The act of faith in justifying is the elicite and immediate act of faith which is credere credendo Christum recipere amplecti to beleeve
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
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.
justifie not onely peâ—…petuall in the Scriptures but also ordinary in the speeches and writings of men Wherein God is said to justifie men and man is said to justifie God and one man is said to justifie another and one and the same man to justifie himselfe without any signification of infusing righteousnesse into him but by cleering him and pronouncing him just Secondly that there is no further respect to be had in this controversie to the notation of the Latine or English word than as it is a true translation of the Hebrew word in the old Testament and of the Greek in the new now I shall make it evident that the Hebrew hitsdiq and so the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Verbum forensâ—… a judiciall word taken from the courts of justice which being attributed to the Iudge is opposed to condemning and signifieth to absolve or to give sentence with the party questioned § III. In the definition we consider justification as an action of God whose alone worke it is and so the Scriptures consider it in many places as Rom. 8. 33. It is God that doth justifie for it is he only that forgiveth sinnes Esa. 43. 25. It is he onely that can by making us righteous in Christ give us right and title to the kingdome of heaven It is no action therefore of our owne or of any creature neither is it wrought by our owne preparations and dispositions For although every man is bound to use all meanes to attaine to justification yet it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy For if God bee the agent in justifying us then are wee the patients And for that cause we are never in the Scriptures exhorted to justification or to the parts thereof which are not our Officia or duties but Gods Beneficia as wee are to the duties of sanctification whereunto we being already justified and regenerated doe cooperate with the Spirâ—…t of grace § IIII. Secondly when we say it is an action of God Imputing the righteousnesse of Christ and absolving the beleeving sinner and accepting him c. wee consider it not as an action of God within us working a positive or reall change as in sanctification but as an action of God without us For it is a judiciall act of God as the Iudge oppoâ—…ed to condemning And therefore as by his sentence hee doth condemne that is make wicked so by his sentence hee doth justifie that is of guilty he maketh not guilty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his sentence God doth justifie as Chrysostome and Oecumenius note upon Rom. 8. 33. where a judiciall proceeding in the businesse of justification is plainely described For there is mention of the accuser of Gods elect there is God that justifieth and none to condemne there is the advocate and intercessor to plead for us And as in condemning though the hebrew word Hirshiah opposed to justifying signifieth to make wicked for as Tsady is to be just and Hitsdiq to make just that is to justifie so Rashah to be wicked and Hirshiah to make wicked that is to condemne yet God by condemning doth not make a reall or positive change by infusion of wickednesse into the party whom by his sentence hee maketh wicked that is condemneth so in justifying though the word doe signifie to make righteous yet the Lord doth not Quatenus justificat as he justifieth worke a reall or positive mutation in the party whom by his sentence he maketh just that is justifieth in respect of any inward dispositions or qualities but onely a relative change or mutation in respect of his estate and condition before God and in respect of some relations to him It is true â—…hat in our justification we are of sinners made righteous but the righteousnesse which we have by justification standeth in remission of sinne and acceptation or constitution of us as righteous not in our selves but in Christ both which are wrought by imputation of his righteousnesse It is true also that whom God doth justifie he doth also sanctifie But in justification he doth not worke a reall change in the party as he doth in sanctification And this 〈◊〉 in the like actions of God viz. adoption redemption and reconciliation which three in substance differ not from justification For all agree in the not imputing of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse but are diversified by certaine relations all which concurre in justification that men having their sinnes forgiven whereby they had beene either the children of the devill by adoption are made the sonnes of God or the vassals and bondslaves of sinne and Satan are by redemption made the servants of God or enemies to God by their reconciliation become his favourites or guilty of sinne and damnation in their justification they are accepted as righteous in Christ and consequently become Gods servants Gods favourites Gods sonnes and if sonnes then also heires of eternall life As therefore in adoption redemption reconciliation there is no reall change made in the party but onely a new relation acquired of being a sonne and hâ—…ire to the adoptour a servant to the redeemer a favourite to the reconciler which before he was not so neither in justification is there a reall or positive change as the Papists would have it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relative or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in relation in respect of those relations even now mentioned and in respect of his estatâ—… and condition before God being in his justification translated from the estate of damnation unto the state of salvation Even as the councell of Trent it selfe defineth justification to be a translation from that state wherein a man is borne the sonne of the first Adam into a state of grace and adoption of Gods sonnes through the second Adam Iesus Christ our Saviour which is done without any reall change wrought in the party as hee is justified For who before was guilty of sinne and damnation the same man remaining a sinner in himselfe and in himselfe worthy of damnation is in his justification absolved from the guilt of sinne and accepted as râ—…teous in Christ in whom also hee is made a servant a favourite a sonne of God and consequently as I said in the definition an heire of eternall life § V. And yet we deny not but that those whom God reconcileth unto himselfe receiving them into his grace and â—…avour in Christ them also he endueth in some measure with the graces of his Spirit whom he adopteth to be his sonnes in Christ them also he regenerateth by his holy Spirit whom he redeemeth from the guilt of sinne he also freeth from the dominion of sinne and whom he justifieth by faith he also sanctifieth by his Spirit that is whom he maketh just by imputation them also he maketh just by infusion of righteousnesse to whom he imputeth the merit of Christ his death and
to be made partakers of him and in our wils by resolving both to acknowledge him to be our Saviour and also to rest upon him for salvation Having this lively assent which is the condition of the promise we are to apply the promise to our selves as belonging to us By the former degree we are justified before God in foro coelesti by the latter we are justified in foro conscientiae in the court of our owne conscience By the former we are justified properly by the latter we are not properly justified but are in some measure assured of our justification By the former I doe effectually beleeve that Iesus is the Saviour by the latter I doe truely beleeve that hee is my Saviour That faith therefore which doth justifie doth specially apprehend and apply Christ and the proper object of faith as it justifieth is Christ or the promise of salvation by Christ and therefore is often called faith in Christ or the faith of Christ. For although by that faith which justifieth I beleeve all the articles of Christian religion and every truth revealed by God in his word yet I am not justified properly by beleeving any other truth but onely by beleeving the truth neither is the promise of justification and salvation made to any other beleefe but onely to faith in Christ. § IX Thirdly by this faith apprehending and receiving Christ we are not prepared onely and disposed to justification as the Papists absurdly teach affirming that faith doth justifie even as servile feare doth by preparing onely and disposing for then a man indued with justifying faith might be as farre from justification as he that is possessed with servile feare But how can these two assertions be reconciled that faith doth justifie by disposing onely as a preparative diâ—…position and yet that it justifieth formally as an habit infused and as a part of inherent â—…ustice But the truth is that by a true justifying faith we are not prepared onely but wee are actually justified For no sooner doth a man beleeve by a true justifying faith but he is justified and entitled unto the kingdome of heaven As soone as he doth beleeve he is translated from death to life yea so soone he hath eternall life that is hee hath jus right unto the heavenly kingdome § X. Fourthly when wee say that faith doth justifie wee doe not meane that it justifieth absolutely or in respect of its owne worth and dignity and much lesse that it doth merit justification either as it is an habit or as it is an act but relatively in respect of the object which it doth apprehend that is Christ who is our righteousnesse For seeing faith doth receive Christ and make us partakers of him therefore all those benefits which wee receive from Christ are attributed in the holy Scriptures to Faith as to justifie to save c. not that these effects are to bee ascribed to the vertue of faith absolutely but relatively in respect of the object So when it was said to the woman thy faith hath saved thee the meaning is Christ received by faith hath saved thee Thus by the faith of Peter and Iohn the Creeple was cured Act. 3. 6. yet not by any power or holinesse of theirs vers 12. But the name of Christ that is Christ himselfe by faith in his name as the instrument did cure him vers 16. so the name of Christ by faith in his name doth justifie and save Act. 10. 43. Iohn 20. 31. And that faith doth not justifie in respect of its owne worth appeareth by this evidence because the faith of divers men though unequall in degrees doth justifie alike and therefore is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of equall value as Saint Peter speaketh of all the faithfull to whom he writeth 2 Pet. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is as the Latine interpreter translateth to them that have obtained coequall faith with us in the righteousnesse of our God and Saviour Iesus Christ. For it is not faith properly which doth justifie but the righteousnesse of Christ received by faith The almes received by a weake hand releeveth the party as well as that which is received by a strong hand because it is not the hand properly which releeveth but the almes And for the same cause the righteousnesse of justification is equall in all that are justified neither doth it in the same persons admit of degrees For it is the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ to which considered as created and finite nothing can bee added § XI Fifthly from hence we learne the true meaning of that question whether we be justified by faith or by workes not as opposing the inward grace of faith to the outward acts of obedience which indeed are the fruits of faith but as opposing the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith to that righteousnesse which is inherent in our selves and performed by our selves § XII Sixthly when we say that faith doth justifie alone two things are implyed First that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith and not by any righteousnesse in herent in us Secondly that this righteousnesse of Christ by which alone wee are justified is apprehended by faith onely Not that justifying faith is or can bee alone but because there being many graces in the faithfull which all have their severall commendations yet none of them serveth to apprehend Christs righteousnesse but faith onely and yet that faith which is alone severed from all other inward graces and outward obedience doth not justifie either alone or at all because it is not a true and â—… lively but a counterfeit and a dead faith For even as the eye among all the parts of the body which all have their severall uses hath onely the faculty of seeing and yet that eye which is separated from the rest of the parts doth see neither alone nor at all because it is but the carcase of an eye So among all the graces of the soule it is the office of faith alone as the eye of the soule to looke upon him that was figured by the brazen Serpent yet if it should bee severed from the rest it were dead For as Saint Iames saith that faith which is alone and by it selfe is dead And as the eye in respect of being is not alone yet in respect of seeing it is alone so faith which is not alone doth justifie alone § XIII Seventhly and lastly when we say that faith doth justifie alone wee were never so absurd as the Papists absurdly charge us as if wee meant that faith alone doth sanctifie For although nothing in us doth conferre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof in which sense wee say it justifieth alone yet in the subject that is the party justified many graces doe concurre with faith as the necessary fruits thereof wherein as also in
our obedience our sanctification standeth wherefore faith which justifieth alone is but one of those many graces wherein besides our obedience our sanctification doth consist CAP. III. Of the Essentiall causes of Iustification viz. The matter and the forme § I. BUt let us come to the essentiall causes of justification that is to say the matter and the forme The matter of justification considered as it is an action of God is that which the Lord imputeth unto us for righteousnesse and accepteth as our righteousnesse and that is the righteousnesse of Christ which I noted in the definition when I said imputing to a beleeving sinner the righteousnesse of Christ. The Papists confounding not onely justice and justification but also the matter which is the materiall cause and the subject say that the matter of justification is the soule of man or at the least the will of man because that is the seat of justice whereas indeed of justification though passively understood not the soule or the will is the subject but the person or the whole man For justification is totius suppositi of the person and not of any part or faculty of man But for the better clearing of this point let us briefly consider other not unlike actions First when Rebecca arrayed or clothed her sonne Iacob with the raiment of Esau her elder sonne the matter of this action was that which being applyed unto him did clothe him viz. Esau's garment the forme of that action was the applying of it to him which was the indution or putting it on For she clothed him by putting upon him Esau's garment So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us our eldest brothers righteousnesse which is our wedding garment Which similitude is used not only by Saint Ambrose but also by Pighius himselfe as heereafter shall bee shewed The matter therefore of justification is Christs righteousnesse the forme is the imputing thereof Secondly the actions of redemption reconciliation and justification in substance are the same As therefore the Lord redeemeth us and reconcileth us by applying unto us and accepting for us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome and as the propitiation for God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe 2 Cor. 5. 19. so hee justifieth us by applying unto us and accepting for us the same righteousnesse and merits of Christ as our righteousnesse As the matter therefore of our redemption is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome which Christ payed for us the matter of reconciliation is the propitiatory sacrifice which Christ offered for us the matter of justification is Christs righteousnesse which hee had and performed for us so the forme of redemption as it is Gods action is the applying unto us the price of ransome which Christ payed and the accepting of it in our behalfe the forme of reconciliation the applying unto us the propitiation made by Christ and accepting of it in our behalfe the forme of justification the applying or imputing of Christs righteousnesse unto us and accepting it in our behalfe In like manner the Papists if they would consider Iustification as an action of God should according to their owne doctrine conceive that of their first justification whereby as they teach a sinner is made righteous by infusion of righteousnesse the matter is the righteousnesse infused or inherent the forme the infusion thereof because according to their doctrine the Lord in the first justification maketh a man righteous by infusion of righteousnesse The Papists confesse after a sort the righteousnesse of Christ to bee the merit of justification but they deny it to be the matter thereof whereas indeed it is both the matter as justification is the act of God imputing it the merit as justification is passively understood because for it wee are justified the matter I say of Gods justifying us the merit of our being justified And this may appeare by the contrary For justification as hath beene said and shall bee proved is opposed to condemnation As therefore sinne is not onely the matter of condemnation which is the imputation of sinne but also the merit both of the sentence and of the punishment by the sentence awarded so the righteousnesse of Christ is both the matter of justification as being that which God imputeth to us and also the merit both of the sentence of absolution and of eternall life unto which we are accepted § II. But of the matter and forme of justification whereof I am hereafter to treat at large of the matter in the whole fourth booke of the forme in the fifth I will here onely set downe briefly the orthodox doctrine of the reformed Churches and maintaine it against the private opinions of some protestant Divines who are not sound in these points The matter of justification is that righteousnesse wherein wee stand perfectly righteous before God This in many places is called the righteousnesse of God As Rom. 1. 17. 3. 21. 10. 3. 2 Cor. 5. 21. 2 Pet. 1. 1. And is therefore called the righteousnesse of God because it is the righteousnesse of that person who is God and therefore is not our righteousnesse but his not infused into us but inherent in his person and imputed to us being without us in him Heare then wee are to consider whether this righteousnesse of God be the righteousnesse of Christ as hee is God or as hee is mediator betwixt God and man the man Christ Iesus The righteousnesse of Christ as he is God is the essentiall righteousnesse of the Godhead By which dwelling in man Osiander supposed them to be justified But this being the essentiall and uncreated righteousnesse of God which is his essence and therefore himselfe cannot be the righteousnesse of any who is not God and therefore if we should be justified thereby we should also bee deified Againe the essentiall righteousnesse of God being the essence of God and the very Godhead cannot be communicated to any creature much lesse can it become the accidentall righteousnesse of a creature And farther it being the righteousnesse of the Godhead is the common righteousnesse of the whole Trinity the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost And therefore if we should be justified thereby we should be justified by the righteousnesse of the Father and of the holy Ghost as well as by the righteousnesse oâ—… the Sonne § III. It is not therefore the righteousnesse of the Godhead Is it then the righteousnesse of the Manhood I answer it is the righteousnesse of Christ our Mediator who is both God and man which he in his humanity had and performed in the dayes of his flesh for us And this is to bee understood not of a part but of the whole righteousnesse of Christ which was either inherent in the man Christ or performed by him whether to fulfill the Commandements or to satisfie the Curse of the Law for
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
our justification and sanctification to both And therefore as we are first above all things to desire that God may bee glorified so that hee may bee glorified wee are first among those things which wee desire for our owne good to seeke his Kingdome and his righteousnesse that his Kingdome of glory and the Kingdome of Grace which consisteth in the righteousnesse of justification and the two companions thereof peace and joy in the holy Ghost may come upon us and next that his will may be done upon earth as it is in heaven by our new obedience for this is the will of God even our sanctification Salvation I say is the end both of our justification and sanctification for being made free from sinne and become servants to God we have our fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life The end of our faith by which we are justified is the salvation of our soules unto which by justification wee are entituled and saved in hope that being justified by his grace wee should bee made heires according to hope of eternall life for all that be justified shall be glorified And this also I noted in the definition when I said that those whom the Lord doth justifie by imputation of Christs righteousnesse he accepteth as righteous in Christ and as heires of eternall life for by faith we have remission of sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified § III. But we are justified by faith not onely that in the end wee may be saved but also that in the meane time our salvation being of Grace might be certaine and sure and that being justified by faith we might have peace and joy in the holy Ghost Whereas if it depended upon our workes or worthinesse it would be uncertaine For the promise of this inheritance was not made to Abraham and his seed through the Law in respect of any righteousnesse therein prescribed but through the righteousnesse of Faith And therefore it is of faith that it might bee by grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed Rom. 4. 13. 16. § IV. The other end which is subordinate not onely to Gods glory but also to our Salvation is our sanctification as being the way to eternall life for though we be saved by grace through faith and not of workes yet we are the workmanship of God created in Christ Iesus unto good workes which God hath before ordained that we should walke in them We are therefore justified First that God may be glorified Secondly that wee may bee saved in the life to come Thirdly that in this world we may lead a godly life See Luk. 1. 74 75. 1 Pet. 2. 24. Tit. 2. 11 12 13. So much of the causes § V. There remaine the essentiall parts of justification which I expressed in the definition when I said that God doth justifie a beleeving sinner when imputing unto him the righteousnesse of Christ he doth absolve him from his sinnes and accepteth of him in Christ as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life The parts therefore of justification are two absolution from sinne and acceptation as righteous in Christ both which the Lord granteth by imputation of the full and perfect satisfaction of Christ whereby he fully satisfied the Law both in respect of the penalty which he satisfied by his sufferings and also in respect of the precept which he satisfied by his perfect righteousnesse both habituall and actuall As therefore there were two branches of the Law to be satisfied the commination and the Commandement and two parts of Christs satisfaction answerable thereunto so there are two parts of justification absolution from the curse of the Law by imputation of Christs sufferings wherein he became a curse for us and acceptation as righteous in Christ by imputation of Christs most perfect righteousnes both habituall actuall in respect of both which parts of his satisfaction Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes that is doth justifie all that truly beleeve in him § VI. And hereby it may appeare that those three benefits of Redemption Reconciliation and Adoption are all comprehended under this maine benefit of justification the two former being all one in substance with the former part for as touching the former In Christ wee have Redemption through his bloud even remission of sinnes Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. And as touching the latter God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himselfe not imputing unto them or remitting their sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and therefore all three Remission of sinnes Redemption and Reconciliation are ascribed to the bloud and to the death of Christ. The third is all one in substance with the second part For what is it to be adopted but to be accepted of God in his beloved as righteous and as an Heire of Eternall Life and this is ascribed to the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ both in his life and death For therefore was the Sonne of God made under the Law namely to obey and to fulfill and to satisfie it that hee redeeming us from the yoke of the Law requiring perfect obedience in us to justification we might receive the Adoption of sonnes § VII Now follow the consequents and fruits of justification which are the Grace of Sanctification and the parts therof consisting partly in righteousnesse inherent and partly in outward obedience called good workes which I doe the rather mention in this place because the Papists though they cannot deny that they are the effects and fruits of justification which as they use to alleage out of Augustine Non praecedunt justificandum sed sequuntur justificatum not goe before as causes but follow as effects yet notwithstanding most absurdly contend that they concurre with faith unto justification as the causes thereof wee acknowledge them to be necessary in the subject that is the party that is justified and to bee saved necessitate praesentiae as the necessary fruits and consequents of justification and as necessary antecedents to glorification but we deny their necessity of efficiencie as causes concurring to the act of justification or merit of salvation We acknowledge them as the necessary fruits of Redemption and Iustification as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved the necessary forerunners of glorification the onely true way to our heavenly countrey the evidence according to which wee shall be judged at the last day yet we are not justified by them nor saved for them as hereafter I shall plainely and plentifully prove but onely by and for the righteousnesse and merits of Christ apprehended by Faith A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE SECOND BOOKE That Justification and Sanctification are not to bee confounded CAP. I. Setting downe the heads of the Controversies the first whereof is that Iustification and Sanctification are not to be confounded The first proofe
writing in Greeke but also the holy Apostles and Evangelists have received the same And therefore these words are no otherwise to be understood than as the translations of the said Hebrew words signifying no other thing than what the Hebrew words import which as I have shewed doe never signifie to make or to be made righteous by inherent righteousnesse § II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used by the Apostle and by the Evangelist Luke sometimes as the translation of Tsiddiq in Piel as Luk. 7. 29. the people and Publicans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 justified God The Lawyer Luk. 10. 29. willing to justifie himselfe The Pharisies Luk. 16. 15. justified themselves before men And so is the word used sometimes by the sonne of Sirach as Ecclus. 10. 29. who will justifie him that sinneth against his owne soule Cap. 13. 26. alias 22. A rich man speaketh things not to be spoken and yet men justifie him Sometimes the Apostle useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the translation of Hitsdiq as alwaies he doth in the question of justification and alwayes as the action of God as Rom. 3. 26. who justifieth him that beleeveth in Iesus how vers 24. gratis without any cause or desert of justification in the party without workes that is without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in him or performed by him vers 28. who justifieth the Circumcision and uncircumcision that is both Iewes and Gentiles not of workes or by inherent justice but by and through faith vers 30. who justifieth the ungodly that is the beleeving sinner that worketh not Rom. 4. 5. and therefore not by inherent righteousnesse how then by imputing righteousnesse without workes vers 6. who Rom. 8. 30. whom he calleth he justifieth namely by faith and whom he justifieth hee also glorifieth using the word in the same sense vers 33. who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect it is God that justifieth who shall condemne where most manifestly the word is used as a judiciall word opposed to accusing and condemning Neither can any colour of reason be alleaged why the word in these places should signifie contrary to the perpetuall use both of it selfe and of the Hâ—…brew word whereof it is a translation to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent § III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used sometimes as the translation not of the passive verbe but as of the Neuter in Cal as I have shewed before out of the Greeke translation of the 〈◊〉 So Ecclus. 7. 5. bee not just before God not wise before the king or as it is usually translated doe not justifie thy selfe before God So also in the new Testament Rom. 3. 4. cited out of Psalm 51. 6. where the Hebrew word is not a passive but a neuter And so Apoc. 22. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him that is just be just still As the translation of the passive it is often used But as it never signifieth to be made just by inherent justice as I will shew when I come to answere the objections of the Papists so it alwayes signifieth either to be declared or pronounced just or to bee absolved and made jusâ—… by imputation In the former sense wisedome is said to bee justified of her Children Luk. 7. 37. who vers 29. justified God Christ who is God was manifested in the flesh justified in the Spirit 1 Tim. 3. 16. Thus by our words we shall bee justiâ—…ed not made just formally or by inherent righteousnesse but in the sense opposed to condemnation For as by thy words thou shalt bee justified so by thy words thou shalt be condemned Matth. 12. 37. Thus not the hearers alone but the doers of the Law shall bee justified that is pronounced just Rom. 2. 13. and in this sense the faithfull are justified by workes that is declared approved and knowne to bee just Iames 2. 21 23. 24 25. cum Genes 22. 12. â—…n the latter sense Ecclesiast 1. 28. alias 22. the famous man Chap. 31. 5. The lover of Gold Chap. 23. 14. alias 11. The rash swearer shall not bee justified that is as it is in the Commination of the third Commandement shall not bee held guitlesse but most plainely Chap. 26. the last verse the huckster shall not bee justified from sinne that is not absolved from sinne nor accepted as righteous So Act. 13. 38 39. where most plainely to be â—…ustified from sinne doth signifie to be absolved or freed from the guilt of sinne and is used promiscuously with remission of sinne And this sense oâ—… freedome from the guilt is â—…ometimes extended to signifie a totall freedome as Rom. 6. 7. He that is dead is justified that iâ—… as Chrysostome and Oâ—…umenius expound it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is freed from sinne As these places are plainely repugnant to the Popish sense so none of the rest where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used doth favour it For either they import remission of sinnes and acceptation as righteoâ—…s as Luk. 18. 14. The Publican who had humbled himselfe and craved pardon went home justified that is obtained pardon and was accepted as righteous rather than the Pharisee who had justified himselfe or distinguish betweene justification and sanctification as 1 Cor. 6. 11. or exclude justification by inherent righteousnesse as Rom. 3. 20. Rom. 4. 2. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 5. 4. Or imply imputation as where we are said to be justified either by his blood as Rom. 5. 9. Or by faith as Rom. 5. 1. Gal. 3. 24. Or by grace as Tiâ—… 3. 7 Or both exclude the one and imply the other as Rom. 3. 24. 28. Gal. 2. 16 17. 3. 11. § IV. There remaine these two words which I mentioned before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used onely in two placâ—…s Rom. 4. 25. 5. 18. In the former it is said that Christ was delivered to death for our sinnes and was raised againe for our justificâ—…tion to whom as it is in the precedent verse righteousnesse shall bee imputed if wee beleeve on him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead for as our Saviour by his death and obedience untâ—…ll death merited for us remission of sinnes and the right to eternall life so by the acts of Christ restored to life as namely by his resurrection his merits are effectually applied and imputed to our justification For if Christ had not risen againe wee had beene still in our sinnes 1 Cor. 15. 17. In the latter place justification is in direct termes opposed to condemnation For as by the offence or transgression of one viz. the first Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the guilt which is to be supplied out of the sixteenth verse came upon all men the offspring of the first Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto condemnation so by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
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 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
without the Law is revealed in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith But all men without exception both Iewes and Gentiles are in themselves sinners and by their sinne obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore seeing all have sinned and are fallen short of the glory of God that is excluded from eternall glory they are not justified by righteousnesse inherent which is prescribed in the Law but they are justified by a righteousnesse which without the Law is revealed in the Gospel to wit the righteousnesse of God that is of Christ who is God apprehended by faith And that is it which is said in this text that those who have sinned and are fallen short of Gods glory and from their title to heaven are justified that is acquitted from their sinnes and entituled unto the Kingdome of heaven freely without respect of any grace or righteousnesse in themselves by the meere gracious favor of God when they had deserved the contrary through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whom God hath set forth to bee a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse c. To the same purpose the Apostle disputeth Gal. 3. as hereafter wee shall heare § III. Secondly it is proved by the words of the text alleaged the first wherof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being justified Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have proved heretofore doth never in al the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse and therfore here it is not meant that wee are justified by grace infused Neither doth justification import a reall or positive change in the subject but relative and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hath beene shewed And wee must remember that as it is called so it is justificatio impii the justification of a sinner not onely because before justification men are sinners but also because being justified they still remaine sinners in themselves though in Christ they are made righteous And we are to conceive of justification as a continued act of God from our vocation to our glorification whereby hee doth accept of a beleeving sinner as righteous in Christ not onely at his first conversion but also afterwards whiles hee beleeveth in Christ though still in himselfe hee bee a sinner And to that end doth our Saviour make continuall intercession for us that the merit of his obedience may beâ—… continually imputed unto us As for the Papists they being in their owne conceit justified as they all are after they have beene either baptized in their infancie or absolved when they come to yeares they are no sinners neither is there any thing in them which God hateth or which may properly bee called sinne But justification being of sinners and they being no sinners but â—…aying they have no sinne and avouching that hee onely is a just man in whom there is no sinne hereby it appeareth that neither are they justified neither is there any truth in them § IV. The next word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is an exclusive particle excluding the false causes of justification and signifying that wee are justified without any desert or worthinesse in our selves without works without respect of any righteousnesse inherent in us which directly overthroweth the assertion of the Papists for proofe whereof this place was alleaged § V. The third word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by his grace that is by the gracious favour of God in Christ which is out of us in him as hath beene proved that is by his love of us and not by our love of him Neither is there any shew of reason why it should in this place above all others signifie as it never doth an habit of justifying grace inherent in us especially if that bee true which hereafter I shall plainely demonstrate that wee are not justified by that which is inherent And thus Saint Ambrose expoundeth these words gratia Dei gratis justificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei they are justified freely because neither working before their justification nor rendring any recompence after their justification they are by faith onely justified by the grace that is as he expoundeth it the gift of God And on those words by the redemption which is in Christ Iesu he testifieth saith hee that the grace of God is in Christ but not in us because by the will of God we were redeemed by Christ. Pererius likewise a learned Iesuit The name of Grace saith he when it is here said justified freely by his grace though it may signifie that supernaturall and divine quality infused into the soule of man and inherent therein yet rather it seemeth in this place to signifie gratuitam Dei bâ—…nitatem benignitatem erga hominem the free or gracious goodnesse and bounty of God towards man Grace therefore doth not signifie either the matter or the forme but the efficient cause of our justification § VI. The fourth word is through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus whereby is meant Christs whole satisfaction made to the Law both in respect of the precept and of the penalty by which being as the Papists themselves confesse imputed unto us we are redeemed and justified as being the matter and merit of justification § VII The fifth word is by faith whereby is noted the instrument by which we apprehend and receive that satisfaction or righteousnesse of Christ by which we are justified which is indeed out of us in him but imputed to those that beleeve The righteousnesse therefore by which we are justified is the righteousnesse of faith that is the righteousnesse of God or of Christ apprehended by faith § VIII The sixth and last is the end why God did give his Sonne to be a propitiation for our sinnes to shew forth his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes and that hee might bee just and the justifier of him which beleeveth in Iesus For in the worke of our redemption and justification Gods justice is declared to be such that he forgiveth no sinnes but those onely for which his justice is satisfied by Christ neither doth he justifie any but those whom by communication of Christs righteousnesse unto them he maketh just But how should the satisfaction of Christ that is his obedience and sufferings being transient and so long agoe performed bee communicated unto us for our justification otherwise but by imputation And if wee bee justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse then not by inherent grace or infused righteousnesse CAP. IV. Bellarmines dispute out of Rom. 3. 24. refuted § I. NOw let us see what Bellarmine inferreth upon this place Here saith he all the causes almost of justification are set forth together The efficient cause is noted in the word gratis freely importing the liberality of
accepted of him and rewarded by him but wee deny that any man is justified by it This question therefore is concerning the matter of justification For whereas justification considered as an action of God is his making or constituting a man righteous either by Christs righteousnesse imputed as wee teach according to the Scriptures or by righteousnesse infused as the Papists hold It is therefore apparent that as according to our Doctrine the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter and the imputation thereof the forme of justification so according to their doctrine inherent righteousnesse should be the matter of justification and the infusion of it the forme But howsoever wee differ in respect of logicall termes in setting downe the state of this controversie because they against reason make inherent righteousnesse the forme of justification yet the true state of the controversie betweene them and us is this whether wee bee justified before God by Christs righteousnesse which is out of us in him imputed to us or by that righteousnesse which being infused of God is inherent in us whether it bee the righteousnesse of God as the Apostle calleth it that is of Christ who is God inherent in him or a righteousnesse from God inherent in us we hold the former the Papists the latter § II. Now this is the principall point of difference betweene them and us in this whole controversie and that in two respects First because the righteousnesse of God whereby wee are justified is the principall matter contained or revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 16 17. For which cause wee who maintaine justification by that righteousnesse of God which is taught in the Gospell which the Pápists oppugne are worthily called the professours of the Gospell whereof the Papists are professed enemies Secondly because upon this all the other points of difference doe depend For if wee were justified by righteousnesse inherent then it would follow First that to justifie were to make just by infusion of righteousnesse inherent Secondly that wee are justified by the grace of God or rather graces inherent in us Thirdly that the forme of justification were infusion of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth justifie as a part of inherent and habituall righteousnesse and therefore also that it doth not justifie alone Fifthly that workes justifie as our actuall righteousnesse But on the contrary if wee bee justified by that righteousnesse which is not inherent in us but out of us in Christ then it followeth first that to justifie doth not signifie making righteous by justice inherent Secondly that we are not justified by inherent grace but by the gracious favour of God accepting us in Christ. Thirdly that wee are not justified by infusion but by imputation of righteousnesse Fourthly that faith doth not justifie as a part of inherent righteousnesse but as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Fifthly that workes doe not justifie as causes to worke but as fruits and signes to declare and manifest our justification § III. And as the proofe of this inferreth the rest so the rest being proved are so many proofes of this For first if to justifie doe never in the Scriptures signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse then wee are not justified by inherent righteousnesse neither is justification by inherent righteousnesse that justification which the Scriptures teach Secondly if wee bee not justified by grace inherent then not by habituall or inherent righteousnesse if by the gracious favour of God freely without respect of any cause of justification in us then not by workes or inherent righteousnesse Thirdly if by imputà tion of Christs righteousnesse then not by infusion of inherent justice Fourthly if by faith as it is the hand to receive Christs righteousnesse then not by righteousnesse inherent Fifthly if not by workes as any cause then not by inherent righteousnesse But the two first I have fully and clearely proved already the first in the second booke and the second in the third And the rest I shall by the grace of God demonstrate in their due place § IV. That which hath already beene said both here and heretofore together with that which shall hereafter bee produced to prove the other three points remaining to bee proved might bee a sufficient demonstration of this point But because the proofe of this point being the principall doth prove all the rest as I have shewed therefore I will not onely bring a supply of divers arguments by disproving the popish assertion and proving our owne but also answere the cavills and objections of the Papists And first I will prove our assertion and disprove theirs joyntly and together and then severally I will disprove their assertion viz. that wee are justified by righteousnesse inherent in ourselves and prove ours to wit that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him CHAP. II. That we are justified by Christs righteousnesse and not by that which is inherent in us proved joyntly by three arguments § I. FIrst therefore That righteousnesse whereby we are justied is Gods righteousnesse and not ours The righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him is Gods righteousnesse that which is inherent in us is ours Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by that which is inherent in our selves The former part of the proposition is proved out of Rom. 1. 17. and 3. 21. Thus The righteousnesse which there is said to be revealed in the Gospell is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified This proposition is confessed of all The righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse which is revealed in the Gospell Rom. 1. 17. In the Gospell is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just by faith shall live Rom. 3. 21. The righteousnesse of God is without the Law manifested viz. in the Gospell even the righteousnesse of God which is by faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all that beleeve Therefore the righteousnesse of God is that righteousnesse by which wee are justified The whole proposition in both the parts is proved out of Rom. 10. 3. where it is not onely signified that wee are justified by Gods righteousnesse and not by our owne but there is also such an opposition made betwixt Gods righteousnesse and ours in the point of justification that whosoever seeke to be justified by their owne rigâ—…teousnesse cannot be justified by the righteousnesse of God Wherefore Paul in the question of his owne justification renounceth his owne righteousnesse desiring to bee found in Christ not having his owne righteousnesse which is of the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith Phil. 3. 9. § 2. The assumption in respect of the former part viz. that the righteousnesse of Christ is Gods righteousnesse is easily proved first
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
wee doe not receive by Christ Adam lost inherent righteousnesse and not imputed Therefore by Christ wee receive inherent righteousnesse and not imputed Then would I deny the latter part of the proposition for wee doe receive by Christ more than we lost â—…n Adam Adam was mutable and the graces which he had were not without repentance But Christ maketh the faithfull inseparabiles id est usque in finem perseverantes and the saving graces which wee receive by him are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est saith Augustine sine mutatione stabiliter fixa Adam lost an earthly Paradise but by Christ we receive an inheritance in heaven Adam stood righteous before God in his owne righteoâ—…snesse but wee stand righteous before God in the righteousnesse of Christ which farre surpasseth the righteousnesse of Adam c. § V. Hâ—…s seventh argument If by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us we may truly be said to be just and the sonnes of God then by our sinne imputed to Christ hee may in like manner bee trâ—…ly called a sinner and which is horrible to thinke the sonne of the devill but the latter is blasphemous therefore the former Answ. The proposition containeth a double consequence which is to be distinguished The first if by the righteousnesse of Châ—…ist imputed to us wee may truly bee said to bee righteous then Christ by imputation of our sinne may truly though not formally bee called a sinner but the consequent is falâ—…e therefore the antecedent This proposition I grant as being firmely grounded on 2 Cor. 5. 21. and I doe confesse that Christ was so made sinne that is a sinner for us as wee are made in him the righteousnesse of God that is righteous by the righteousnesse of him who is God that is to say by imputation But the assumption I doe deny For it is most trâ—…e and no dishonour to Christ our Blessed Saviour but that which wonderfully setteth forth his unspeakable goodnesse and love towards us that hee which knew no sinne but was in himselfe most holy and righteous and blessed for evermore by taking upon him our sinne and by undertaking as our surety our debt was content to bee reputed and by imputation made a sinner that is guilty of sinne and accursed and accordingly punished as a sinner that we might be made righteous and happy in him Thus the Hebrewes call them that are punished sinners 1 King 1. 21. and that those are freed from punishment innocent Gen. 44. 10. But the other part of the consequence if we by imputation of Christs righteousnesse become the sonnes God then which I abhorre to speake Christ by imputation of our sinnes should bee made the Sonne of the devill I utterly deny For though to bee made the childe of God is a consequent of being made righteous by imputation adoption going alwayes with justification yet to become the childe of the devill is no consequent of being made a sinner by imputation in respect of him who is most righteous and holy in himselfe For to undertake the burden of others mens sinnes and to bee willing to have them imputed to him being himselfe most righteous is the property of the immaculate Lambe of God who tooke upon him the sin of the world and for that cause is most worthy to be accounted just and to bee acknowledged the Sonne of God For hee that satisfieth for others is most just saith Bellarmine § VI. Vpon this Syllogisme Bellarmine inferreth another If therfore Christ saith he because in himselfe hee was holy was called not a sinner but just though our sinne was imputed to him then by the like reason we iâ—… after our justification we were indeed sinners and uncleane in our selves should not be called just but unjust though Christs righteousnesse be imputed to us But the Scriptures after the lâ—…ver of regeneratiâ—…n hee might better have said after regeneration it selfe calleth us righteous and holy and the sonnâ—…s of God as appeareth by many places These are the premisses The conclusion should be this Therfore after our justification we are not indeed sinners and uncleane in our selves But in stead of that Pharisaicall conclusion he concludeth thus therefore we are not justified by imputation of Christs rightâ—…ousnesse but by that righteousnesse it selfe which is inherent and abiding in us which conclusion is neither it selfe deduced from these premisses neither is it a consectary of that which ought to have beene the conclusion For although after our justification wee be as before we were not righteous and that by righteousnesse inherent as Abraham was and all the faithfull are yet it doth not follow that wee are justified thereby For our inherent righteousnesse is a consequent of our justification and not a cause thereof not going before justificandos but following justificatos But to this Syllogisme first I returne the like If Christ though most righteous in himselfe was not onely accounted but really punished as a sinner yea made a sinner and a curse for us by taking upon him our sinne which as our debt was laid upon him as our surety and imputed to him then by the like reason wee though sinners in our selves are by imputation of his righteousnesse made righteous before God in him as before hath evidently beene proved out of 2 Cor. 5. 21. § VII Secondly as Christ though ouâ—… sinnes were imputed to him was called holy and just because hee was so in himselfe So wee though Adams transgression was imputed unto us and the corruption which hee contracted was derived unto us and ever dwelleth in our mortall bodies yet being once justified by Christ are notwithstanding that habituall sinne inhabiting in us and these actuall transgâ—…essions which through humane frailty we daily commit in regard whereof we are by the verdict of the Law sinners we are I say termed just and that in two respects first and principally in respect of our justification wherâ—…in we were made just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse secondly in respect of our regeneration whereby inherent righteousnesse is begun in us And howsoever in the regenerate man there is both the flesh and the Spirit the Old man and the New in regard whereof he may in divers respects be termed either a sinner in respect of the flesh and the fruits thereof according to the sentence of the Law or a righteous man in respect of the Spirit and the fruits thereof according to the doctrine of the Gospell yet the denomination is taken from the better part as an heape of wheat and chaffe wherein perhaps is more chaffe than wheat is called an heape of wheat and a wedge of gold wherein perhaps there is more drosse than pure mettall is called a wedge of gold as I have said And whereas upon his premisses this conclusion is inferr'd therfore after the laver of regeneration we are not verè and indeed sinners nor uncleane in our selves you may see
faith of all the faithfull though unequall in degrees in some greater in some lesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a-like precious in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ 2 Pet. 1. 1. which is an evidence that faith doth not justifie in respect of its owne dignity or worthinesse but in respect of the object which it doth receive which being the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ unto which nothing can be added is one and the same to all that receive it Of this see more lib. 1. cap. 2. § 10. § IV. Here now the Papists because wee deny faith to justifie in respect of its owne worthinesse and merit take occasion to inveigh against us as if we made it Titulum sine re and as it were a matter of nothing Which is a malicious and yet but a frivolous cavill For first in respect of justification we acknowledge it to bee the onely instrument or hand to receive Christ to be the condition of the Covenant of Grace to which the Promises of remission of sinnes and of Salvation are made without which the promises of the Gospell doe not appertaine unto us and without which our blessed Saviour doth not save us Secondly in respect of Sanctification wee attribute all that and more which the Papists ascribe unto it in respect of their imaginary justification That it is the beginning the foundation and root of all inherent righteousnesse the mother of all other sanctifying Graces which purifieth the heart and worketh by love without which it is impossible to please God without which whatsoever is done is sinne § V. But howsoever here the Papists would seeme to plead for faith yet the truth is that as they have abolished the benefit of justification as it is taught in the holy Scriptures so with it they have taken away the justifying faith For though they retaine the name yet in their doctrine there is no such thing For first to faith they doe not ascribe the power to justifie but only to be a disposition one among seven even such a one as servile feare is of a man unto inherent righteousnesse or to the grace of Sanctification it selfe being not as yet a justifying or sanctifying grace Secondly that faith being infused becommeth the beginning and a part of formall inherent righteousnesse But so small a part they assigne unto it that they say that the habit of formall righteousnesse differeth not from the habit of charity so that in justification it hath no use at all and in sanctification charity is all in all which is a manifest evidence that the Church of Rome is fallen away from the ancient doctrine of the faith For both Scriptures and Fathers every where ascribe justification to faith and not to Charitie to faith and not to workes but the Papists ascribe the first justification to charitie which they make to be the onely formall cause of justification which as themselves teach is but one and the second justification they assigne to workes CHAP. VIII Whether we be justified by Faith alone The state of the Controversie and some reasons on our part § I. NOw I come to the third question which is the principall concerning faith whether we be justified by faith alone as wee with all antiquity doe hold or not by faith alone but also by other habits of grace as charitie and the rest and by the workes of grace which the Papists hold to concur in us to the act of justification as the causes thereof Where first we are to explaine our assertion and afterwards both to prove and to maintaine it And great reason there is that wee should explaine it because the Papists most wickedly against their owne knowledge calumniate our doctrine in this point I will therefore explaine all the three termes Fides justificat sola Faith doth justifie alone for by Faith wee doe not understand as I have shewed before neither the profession of faith or faith onely professed which S. Iames doth deny to justifie nor that faith which is a bare assent which is the faith of Papists and is common to them with the Divels and with other hypocrites and wicked men for such a faith we deny to justifie either alone or at all but a true lively and effectuall beleefe in Christ being a speciall apprehension or receiving and embracing of Christ and of the promises of the Gospell joyned with application or at least with a true desire will and endevour thereof The which faith also wee deny to be true if in some measure it doe not purifie the heart if it doe not worke by love if it cannot be demonstrated by good workes § II. Now for the word justifie shall I need to tell you that by justifying we doe not meane sanctifying And yet such is the blinded malice of the papists as that because they wickedly confound justification and sanctification which we carefully according to the Scriptures distinguish they beare the world in hand that our assertion is this in effect that faith alone doth sanctifie and that nothing concurreth to sanctification but faith onely and consequently that wee teach the people so they can perswade themselves that they have faith they need not take care either for other graces or for a godly life But howsoever we hold that faith doth justifie alone yet wee doe not hold that it doth sanctifie alone but that our sanctification is partly habituall unto which with faith concurre the habits of other sanctifying graces as hope charity c. and partly actuall which is our new obedience in the practice of good workes § III. But the word sela alone doth most displease the Papists who will needs part stakes with Christ in their justification This therefore is to be explaned And first when we say that faith alone doth justifie we doe not meane fidem solitariam that faith which is alone neither doe we in construction joyne sola with fides the subject but with justificat the predicate meaning that true faith though it bee not alone yet it doth justifie alone Even as the eye though in respect of being it is not alone or if it be it is not a true and a living but a dead eie which seeth neither alone nor at all yet in respect of seeing unto which no other member doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of that faculty it is truely said to see alone so faith though in respect of the being thereof it is not alone or if it bee it is not a true and lively but a counterfeit and dead faith yet in respect of justifying unto which act no other grace doth concurre with it it being the onely instrument of apprehending and receiving Christ it is truely said to justifie alone wherefore as the brazen Serpent which was a figure of Christ was life up and set on high in the wildernesse that whosoever was bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking onely
the holy Ghost perpetually making such an opposition betweene them as that they cannot stand together If therefore we be not justified by the righteousnesse of workes prescribed in the Law as all inherent righteousnesse is then we are justified by the righteousnesse of faith alone Or thus The righteousnesse whereby wee are justified is either inherent in our selves and performed by our selves which the Scriptures call the righteousnesse of workes or that which being out of us is inherent in Christ and by him performed for us which is the righteousnesse of faith A third cannot be named and by both wee cannot be justified If therefore we be not justified by the former which I have sufficiently or rather abundantly proved heretofore then are we justified by the latter alone For if of two and no more but two you take away one you leave the other alone So is it in all dis-junctions consisting of two opposites sine medio The one being removed the other only remaineth § IX That by which alone the promise of justification by which alone justification by which alone Christ himselfe who is our righteousnesse is received that alone justifieth By faith alone the promise by it alone justification by it alone Christ himselfe is received For that is the proper office of faith For if faith receive the Promise and justification and Christ himselfe which no other grace in us can doe then it is the proper office of faith But faith receiveth the promise wherein justification is offered Gal. 3. 22. it receiveth remission of sinnes or justification Act. 10. 43. 26. 18. 13. 39. it receiveth Christ himselfe Ioh. 1. 12. which no other grace can doe as it is evident therefore faith alone doth justifie § X. That which is the onely condition of the Covenant of Grace by that alone we are justified because to that alone justification is promised Faith is the onely condition of the Covenant of grace which is therefore called lex fidei therefore by faith alone we are justified If against the assumption it be objected that charity and obedience and other virtues are also required I answere that these are not the conditions of the Covenant but the things by Covenant promised to them that beleeve If we beleeve God hath promised to justifie us and being justified or redeemed to sanctifie and to save us See Luk. 1. 73 74 75. Ier. 31. 33 34. Heb. 8. 10 11 12. Gal. 3. 9. 14. 22. Charity obedience c. are the conditions of the Covenant of workes Doe this and thou shalt live but the condition of the Covenant of grace is Beleeve and thou shalt bee inabled to walke in the obedience of the law thou shalt receive the gift of the Spirit and finally thou shalt bee saved For being by faith freed from sinne and become Servants to God you have your fruit unto holinesse and the end everlasting life Rom. 6. 22. § XI The holy Scriptures wheresoever they speake of that by which wee are justified mention nothing in us but faith not workes nor other graces unlesse it bee to exclude them from the act of justification Which is a plaine evidence that faith doth justifie alone Bellarmine answereth that it doth not follow that because faith onely is mentioned therefore it justifieth alone For sometimes other things as not only other virtues but the Sacraments also are mentioned which notwithstanding doe not justifie alone Whereunto I answere first that in the point of justification faith is mentioned alone and no other grace with it even where the holy Ghost treateth ex professo of justification and of the causes thereof Secondly that to no other grace mentioned either alone or with others is justification any where ascribed Neither are the Papists able to produce any testimony out of the holy Scriptures to prove it As for those which Bellarmine alleageth out of Tit. 3. 5. Ephes. 5. 26. they are not to the purpose as speaking of the outward meanes which we deny not to concurre with faith That out of Luk. 7. 47. hath already beene cleared that love there noteth not the cause but the signe of forgivenesse That out of Rom. 8. 24. sheweth that in this life we are not saved re but spe not in fruition but in expectation Which hope or expectation as it is termed vers 23. is no cause either of justification or of salvation Thirdly that the justification attributed to Sacraments doth not hinder justification by faith alone For when wee say that faith doth justifie alone we meane that nothing in us doth concurre to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely as hath beene shewed As for the Sacraments we acknowledge them to be externall meanes and as it were manus offerentis as faith is manus recipientis And that the Sacraments bee so farre srom hindering justification by faith alone as that they doe confirme it as being the sealâ—…s of that righteousnesse which is by faith CHAP. IX Testimonies of the Ancient Fathers and of others in all ages for justification by faith alone § I. NOw that this Doctrine is no novelty but that which in all ages hath been the received Doctrine of the Christian Churches I will prove by the Testimony of the Christian Writers in all ages but chiefly of the ancient Fathers I. Iustin Martyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To see God it is granted men by faith alone And by what alone wee see God by that alone wee are justified Againe what other thing could cover our sinnes but his righteousnesse In whom could we being sinners and impious bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God By the righteousnesse therefore of Christ onely which is received and put on by faith onely are our sinnes covered In Christ alone those that are sinners in themselves are justified therefore not by righteousnesse inherent but onely by the righteousnesse of faith II. Irenaeus whom I finde cited and approved by Augustine Men can no otherwise be saved from the stroke of the old serpent but by beleeving in Christ Even as the Israelites who were bitten by the fiery serpents could no otherwise be healed but by looking on the brasen serpent III. Clemens Alex. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith alone is the Catholike salvation of mankinde Againe the power of God alone without demonstrations is able to save 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by faith alone IV. Origen more plainely The Apostle saith that the justification which is by faith alone is sufficient so that a man beleeving only is justified and instanceth in the examples of the penitent theefe Luk. 23. and of the penitent woman Luk. 7. both which were justified by faith alone And in that place as hath beene observed by others Origen useth the exclusive particle sola seven times Bellarmine answereth that Origen only excludeth externall workes when power and occasion is wanting as in the
theefe upon the crosse Repl. But it evident that as S. Paul so also Origen speaketh of workes in generall and that in the penitent theese and in that penitent woman good workes were not wanting For the theeâ—…e reproâ—…eth his fellow confesseth his sinne acknowledgeth Christs innocencie professeth Christ in his most despicable eâ—…ate when his owne Disciples â—…ed prayeth unto Christ to remember him when he should come to his Kingdome The woman brought an Alabaster box of ointment stood behinde Christ weeping washed his feeâ—… with her teares wiped them with the haires of her head kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment by which actions shee tâ—…tified her faith in Christ her repentance for her â—…innes her love to her Saviour acknowledged by Christ himselfe to have beene great Yet not by these good workes but onely by their faith were those two persons justified And no marvell For even Abraham himselfe though he abounded with good workes yet he was not justified by them but by faith onely Yea but saith Bellarmine Origen doth not exclude love and repenâ—…nce Repl. No mâ—…re doe we from the subject that is the partie justified but from the act of justification For although they doe not concurre with faith to the act of justification as any cause thereof yet they must eoncurre in the subject that is the partie justified as necessary fruits of faith and unseparable companions of justification V. Cyprian Fidem tantùm prodesse or as Pamelius will have it iâ—… 〈◊〉 faith onely or whâ—…lly profitetâ—… VI. Eusebius Casariensis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore that faith doth suffice us to salvation which maketh us to know God the Father Almighty and to subscribe or assent that his onely begotten Sonne is the Saviour VII Hilariâ—… it 〈◊〉 the Scribes that sinne should be forgiven by a man for they saw no more in Christ but a man and that to bee remitted by him which the law could not release for faith onely justifieth And againe Qâ—…ia 〈◊〉 sola justificat and yet againe Hac sola fides confessâ—… Christum Dei filium omnium beatitudinâ—…m glâ—…riam merâ—…it in Petrâ—… This faith alone confessed that Christ is the Sonne of God obtained in Peter the glory of all blessednesse To the first Bâ—…llarmine answereth that the particle alone excludeth onely the law which 〈◊〉 hath no place in the other two But if the law be excluded which iâ—… the rule of all inherent righteousnesse it proveth justification only by faith For if men be justified either by the legall righteousnesse or by thâ—… Evangelicall and a third cannot be named then it followeth that if men have not nor can have remission of sinnes and justification by the law that is by inherent righteousnesse which is prescribed in the law thâ—…n they must have it according to the Gospell that is by the righteousnesse of Christ received by faith onely but the former is true Act. 13. 38 39. therefore the latter VIII S. â—…asill This is perfect and entire glorying in God when a mâ—…n being not lifted up for his ownâ—… righteousnesse knoweth indeed himselfe to want true justice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to bee justified by faith alonâ—… in Christ. 〈◊〉 answereth that Basil excludeth onely workes done without faith or the grace of God Reply But Basill mentioneth not workes going before Grace but speaketh of a man already justified who then doth intirely glory in God when being not lifted up with a conceit of that righteousnesse which is in himselfe but being conscious to himselfe of his defectivenesse in respect of inherent righteousnesse acknowledgeth himselfe to be justified onely by faith in Christ. IX Gregory Nazianzene speaking of those words Rom. 10. 9. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is righteousnesse to beleeve onely X. Saint Ambrose or whosoever else as ancient as he was the Authour of the Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul whom the Papists use to cite under the name of Saint Ambrose and of Bishop Ambrâ—…se when they meet with any thing that seemeth to make for them Sixâ—…us Senensis doth not only acknowledge them to be Ambrose his Commentaries but also commendeth them as being breves quidem in verbis sed sententiarum pondere graves He in very many places ascribeth justification to faith alone â—…ellarmine saith he excludeth the workes of the ceremâ—…niall Law or the necessity of externall workes which may serve perhaps for a poore shift to avoid some few places but not the most As first in Rom. 3. 24. They are justified saith he gratis that is freely because nihil operantes neque vicem redentes sola fide justificati sunt donâ—… Dei that is without workes either going before or following after they are through the gift of God justified by faith only Secondly In Rom. 4. how can the Iewes who looke to be justified by the workes of the Law thinke that they are justified with the justification of Abraham cum videant Abraham non ex operibus legis sed sola fide justificatum when they see Abraham to have beene justified not by the workes of the Law but onely by faith Non ergâ—…â—…pus est lege quando impius per solam fidem justificatur apud Deum There is no need therefore of the Law seeing a sinner is justified before God by faith alone Thirdly and on those words of thâ—… fifth 〈◊〉 according to the Latine secundum propositum 〈◊〉 sic decâ—…etum dicit à Deo ut cessante lege solam fidem 〈◊〉 Dei pâ—…sceret ad salâ—…tem Fourthly He pronounceth them blessed whom God hath ordained that without any labour or observation solâ—… fide justificantur apud Deâ—… they should be justified before God by faith alone Fifthly There being nothing required of them but onely that thâ—…y beleeve Sixthly In Rom. 9. Sola fides posita est ad salutem Seventhly in Rom. 10. Nullum opus dicit legis sed solam fidem 〈◊〉 in causa Chrâ—…sti Eighthly In 1 Cor. 1 this is ordained of God that whosoever beleeveth in Christ be safe or saved sine operâ—… solâ—… fide gratis recipiens remissionem peccatorum without worke receiving freely remission of sins by faith alone Ninthly In 2 Cor. 3. hac lex scil spiritus dâ—…t libertatem solam fidem poscens the Law of the Spirit which is the covenant of grace giveth â—…liberty requiring faith onely Tenthly In Gal. 3. 18. he noteth the improvident presumption of the Iewes who thought that men cannot be justified without the workes of the Law cum sciant Abraham qui forma ejus rei est sine operibus legis per solam fidem justificatum when themselves know that Abraham who is the patterne or samplar of that matter to have been justified by faith alone without the workes of the Law Eleventhly In Gal. 3. 22. that hee comming who was promised to Abraham fidem solam ab ijs posceret should require of them faith onely
Photius apud Occumenium in Rom. 4. 1. speaking of Abraham you see that he hath not so much as any footstep of works unto so great gifts from God whence then was he vouchsafed them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore by faith alone they are able to obtaine the promises XXVIII Smaragdus In Gal. 3. Necesse est sola fide Christi salvari credentes XXIX Oecumenius in Gal. 3. 11. Because the righteous shall live by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there is but one way saith hee to justifie and that is by faith 2. In Col. 2. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is fufficient saith he to beleeve onely XXX Theophylact in Rom. 4. 5. Doth he that is to be justified bring any thing Faith onely 2. In Rom. 9. ult Fides itaque sola est faith therefore is alone and not workes with it it worketh all things and it justifyeth 3. In Gal. 3. 11. Now hee doth plainely demonstrate that faith it selfe alone hath in it the power of justifying Bellarmine answereth for this is the third place which hee would seeme to afford us out of his owne store that his meaning is that without faith nothing doth justâ—…fie But the meaning is plaine not that other things cannot justifie without faith but that faith alone without the helpe of other things is able to justifie 4. In 2 Thes. 2. 17. that God pro sola fide for faith alone will give yea those eternall good things XXXI Anselmus Cantuariensis in Rom. 4. 5. but to him that doth not the workes of the Law but without any precedent worke doth come to faith sufficit ipsa fides adjustitiam faith it selfe sufficeth unto righteousnesse 2. In 1 Cor. 1. 4. For grace is given in Christ because this is ordained of God that he which beleeveth in Christ should be saved without worke sola fide gratis by faith alone and freely receiving remission of sinnes XXXII Rupertus Tuitiensis lib. 2. in libros Regum cap. 39. The obstinate Iew persisteth in contention and contemning the faith of Christ qua sola justificare potest which alone can justifie arrogateth to himselfe numerous justice out of his workes XXXIII Bernard out of whom Bellarmine in the fourth place produceth a twofold testimony in our behalfe the former in Canticles serm 22. Whosoever hauing compunction for his sinnes doth hunger and thirst after righteousnesse let him beleeve in Thee who dost justifie the sinner solam justificatus per fidem and being justified by faith alone he shall have peace with thee 2. The other Epist. 77. speaking of Mark. 16. 16. Courteously he did not repeate but he that is not baptized shall bee condemned but onely he that beleeveth not intimating that faith sometimes alone is sufficient to salvation but without it nothing doth suffice To the former hee answereth that Bernard speaketh de viva fide of a lively faith c. as though we spake of any other If hee confesse that a lively faith doth justifie alone it is all that wee seeke For as for the dead faith wee confesse that it justifieth neither alone nor at all And therfore attribute lesse unto it than the Papists themselves To the other hee answereth that the word solam excludeth onely the necessity of Baptisme in the case of necessity Reply if sometimes it doth suffice alone to salvation then much more to justification and if baptisme which is manus dantis bee excluded then by the like reason all other things which are in us are excluded from the act of justification XXXIV Thomas Aquinas in 1 Tim. 1. lect 3. there is not therefore any hope in the morall precepts sed in sola fide but in faith alone 2. In Gal. 3. 26. Sola fides faith alone maketh men the adoptive sons of God Now that which alone maketh men the sonnes of God by adoption that alone doth justifie them XXXV Boâ—…aventure in 4. Sent. dist 15. part 1. q. 1. because man could not satisfie for so great offence therefore God gave unto him a Mediatour who should satisfie for the offenee whereupon in sola fide in the only faith of his passion all fault is remitted and without faith therof none is justified XXXVI Nicholas Gorrham in Rom. 4. If hee beleeve onely in Christ though he doe not worke his faith alone is reputed for sufficient justice XXXVII Couradus Clingius loc commun lib. 5. cap. 42. Deuâ—… justos nos reputat propter solum fidem in Christum and in the old edition cap. 117. sola fides bene sufficit adjustificationem XXXVIII The judgement of Cardinall Contarenus we heard before that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to those that beleeve whereupon it necessarily followeth that in us nothing is required unto justification before God but onely faith Thus in all ages of the Church justification by faith alone was a received Doctrine untill the accursed Councell of Trent which denounceth a curse against all those who shall say that a man is justified by faith alone And yet even since that Councell the force of this truth hath expressed from the professed enemies of the Gospell a confession thereof Ben. Iustinianus in his paraphrase on Gal. 2. 16. hee rendreth it thus And yet wee are not ignorant that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law sed per unum Iesu Christi fidem but by the only faith in Christ and in his explanation he giveth this sence because we who are by nature Iewes cannot be justified by the Law sed per solam fidem but by faith alone it followeth that no mortall man can obtaine righteousnesse by the workes of the Law sed solâ—…m ex Iesu Christi fide but only by the faith of Iesus Christ. Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith that to us the merits of Christ are applyed by the Sacraments Hebrâ—…is per solum fidem to the Hebrewes by faith alone But the faithfull among the Hebrewes were justified no otherwise than Abraham was justified And as Abraham the Father of all the faithfull who was the forme and samplar of this thing was justified so are wee But Abraham was justified by faith alone therefore wee also are justified by faith onely Neither is the justification by Sacraments repugnant to justification by faith alone the meaning of our assertion being this that in us nothing concurreth to the act of justification as any cause thereof but faith onely For being justified by faith alone as Abraham was the Sacraments are added as circumcision was to him as seales of that righteousnesse which we have by faith So that faith onely justifieth before God as the hand of the receiver but the Sacraments serve to justifie the faithfull in the court of their Conscience by sealing and assuring unto them their justification CHAP. X. Bellarmines arguments that faith
according to the perfection of it and as it is in it selfe considered in the abstract Otherwise we acknowledge degrees of assurance And if any of our Divines have held the speciall faith to be the onely justifying faith they are to be understood as speaking of justification in the court of conscience and as judging them onely to be justified and to have remission of sinnes who are in their owne consciences perswaded and in some measure assured thereof But besides and before the speciall faith whereby wee are justified in our owne conscience applying the promise of the Gospell to our selves a formall degree of faith is to bee acknowledged being the condition of the Evangelicall promises by which we aprehend receive and embrace Christ as hath been shewed and by which we are justified before God This degree of faith in order of nature goeth before repentance though in time repentance seemeth to goe before faith as being sooner discerned But in order of nature as well as of time repentance goeth before speciall faith Because no man can be assured of Gods favour in remitting his sinnes who hath not repented thereof CAP. XII Of foure other dispositions viz. love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament the purpose of a new life § I. HIs fourth disposition is Love for so soone as a man doth hope for a benefit from another as namely justificacation from God hee beginneth to love him from whom hee doth expect it In which words there is some shew that hope disposeth to love but that love doth dispose to justification not so much as a shew But that some love goeth before justification and disposeth thereto he endeavoureth to prove which if he could performe were to little purpose â—…or so long as this love doth not justifie his assertion doth not disprove justification by faith alone but indeed he proveth it not though to that purpose hee produceth besides foure testimonies of Scripture the authority of the Councell of Aurenge His first testimony is a supposititious senrence of an Apocryphall Booke For neither is the sentence in the originall Greeke nor the Booke canonicall neither is the sentence it selfe to the purpose Yee that feare the Lord love him and your hearts shall be he doth not say justified but enlightened that is as Iansenius expoundeth comforted For they that feare God and love him are already justified by faith from which both feare and love doe spring § II. His second testimony Luk. 7. 47. Many sinnes are forgiven her because she loved much therefore love is the cause of forgivenesse I answer by denying the consequence For here in the Papists are many times grossely mistaken who thinke that in every aetiologie the reason which is rendred is a cause so properly called when as indeed it may be any other argument or reason as well as the cause For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cause in a large sense doth not onely fignifie that which causeth the effect which properly is called the cause of a thing or action but also any reason which proveth the thing propounded which is a cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not of the action or thing it selfe but of the reasoning or conclusion or as wee use to say consâ—…quentiae non consequentis of the consequence not of the consequent Thus it is called the fallacie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non causa pro causa when that is brought for any argument which it is not So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is traÌ„slated redditio causae is the rendring of any reason from any argument whatsoever For in any syllogism that which is the medium though it bee the effect of the thing is the cause of the conclusion because it is the reason which proveth it and in this sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which cause and wherefore is all one Thus the Papists prove Christs humiliation to have beene the cause of his exaltation as wee heard before because â—…he Apostle saith therefore God exalted him c thus they prove the workes of mercie to bee the cause of salvation because our Saiour saith for I was hungry c so here that love is the cause of forgivenesse because it is said for she loved much when indeed our Saviour argueth not from the cause to the effect but from the effect to the cause as is most evident First by the parable of a creditour who having two debtors whereof the one owed him five hundred pence the other fiftie and neither of them having any thing to pay he freely forgave them both their debt Our Saviour therâ—…fore demanding of the Pharisee who had invited him which of these debtours would love the creditour most the Pharisee truely answered I suppose he to whom he forgave most which answer approved by our Saviour plainely proveth that love was not the cause of forgivenesse but forgivenesse of love and the forgiveing of more the cause of greater love and the forgivenesse of lesse the cause of lesse love and consequently that the greater love was not the cause of greater forgivenesse but the effect of it This parable our Saviour applying to the Pharisee that invited him as the lesse debtour and to the woman which had been a notorious sinner as the greater debtor to both which he had forgiven their debts they having nothing to pay sheweth that her greaâ—…er love was an evidence of her greater debt forgiven Secondly by the antithesis in the same verse but to whom little is forgiven hee loveth but a little It is therefore plaine that the forgivenesse is the cause of love and the forgiving of more of more love and the forgiving of lesse of lesse love And as lesse love is a token of the lesse debt forgiven so greater love of more forgiven hee speaketh therefore of her love not as the cause going before but as the effect following after justification § III. And such is Bellarmines argument out of 1 Ioh. 3. 14. we are translated from death to life that is we are justified because we love the brethren therefore the love of the brethren is the cause of justification I deny the consequence the love of the brethren is not the cause but the fruit of our justification whereby it may be knowne And this appeareth manifestly out of these words which Bellarmine hath fraudulently omitted Nos scimus quia translati sumus c. wee know that wee are translated from death to life because wee love the brethren Our loue then is not the cause of justification but a manifest signe and evidence whereby it is knowne that we are already justified for so he saith speaking in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we are already passed or translated from death to life And to the like effect our Saviour speaketh Luk. 7. 47. as if hee had said hereby it appeareth that many sinnes are forgiven her because shee loved much But that it was not her love
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
and by beleeving to receive and embrace Christ. The acts of faith in sanctifying and producing morall dueties are immediate acts or imperati which faith produceth by meanes of other virtues commanded by faith such are sperare confidere amare timere obedire pati c Of justification the man indued with faith is not the efficient but the subject and the patient who receiving by faith which is his onely act the righteousnesse of Christ is thereby justified God imputing to the beleever the righteousnesse of his Sonne and therefore though to beleeve bee his owne act yet hee is not said in the active to justifie himselfe by faith but in the passive to bee justified by faith Rom. 3. 24. 28. 5. 1. But in the duties of sanctification and in all morall duties the faithfull man is the efficient of them and his faith as it is said of arts other habits is the principium agendi the principle wherby he worketh and of them faith under God is the prime cause and as some call that which is principium agendi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Such actions are the most of those which Heb. 11. are so highly commended which though they were the fruits of justifying faith yet were the acts of faith not as it justifieth but as it sanctifieth fortifieth or otherwise qualifieth them who are endued with it and this efficiencie of faith in Greeke and Latine is oftner signified without the prepositions than with As Heb. 11. though the sence be the same Of justification therefore faith is but the instrumentall cause justifying relatively that is in respect of the object which it doth receive being the onely instrument to receive that object which alone doth justifie But of the dueties of sanctification and other morall actions such as for the most part are mentioned Heb. 11. whereof the faithfull man is the efficient justifying faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love and other virtues as affiance c. is the prime cause working them not relatively by apprehending the object but effectually producing them as principium agendi wherby Bellarmines dispute out of Heb. 11. is confuted For there it is said saith hee that by faith the Saints overcame Kingdomes wrought righteousnesse obtained the promises stopped the mouths of Lyons c. Where the particle by doth not signifie apprehension but the true cause For faith was the cause of Abels religious offering of Noahs preparing the Arke of Abrahams obedience c. All this I confesse but that which he would inferre therupon that faith therefore doth not justifie relatively by way of apprehending the object I have already answered for that which hee spake before of apprehending relatively was idle and frivolus § VII The second part of his assumption was that saith is the beginning of justice and consequently the inchoated formall cause of justification So that now belike the seven dispositions shall be the inchoated formes of justification the entire forme being but one viz. charity and consequently the disposing faith and the disposing feare and so of the rest shall be inchoated charity which is ridiculous Bellarmine in this argument as allwayes by justification understandeth sanctification whereof and of all inherent righteousnesse wee acknowledge faith to bee the beginning and consequently the beginning of that righteousnesse by which we are formally just But of justification not the beginning only but the accomplishment and perfection is to be attributed unto faith because no sooner doe we by faith lay hold upon the righteousnesse of Christ which is most perfect but wee are perfectly justified thereby And therefore the Fathers as you heard before â—… acknowledge faith alone to suffice unto justification So Origen in Rom. 3. lib. 3. Hierome and Sedulius in Rom. 10. 10. in Gal. 3. 6. Chrysost. in Gal. 3. 6. in Tit. 1. 13. Augustin de tempore Serm. 68. Chrysâ—…log serâ—… 34. Primasius in Gal. 2. Oecumen in Col. 2. Theophylact in Gal. 3. Anselm in Rom. 4. If faith alone sufficeth unto justification then doth it not onely begin but also perfect and accomplish it For Rom. 5. 1. Being justified by faith wee have peace with God But Bellarmine endeavoureth to prove his assertion by authority of Scriptures and testimonies of Fathers His first testimony out of the Scriptures is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Where saith he faith it selfe is counted righteousnesse and consequently faith doth not apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ but faith in Christ is it selfe justice And if it be lively and perfected by Charity it shall be perfect justice if not it shall at the least be unperfect and inchoated justice Answ. If the question were concerning the approbation or justification of the act of faith or the habit I would acknowledge that the Lord doth accept the same though unperfect in it selfe as righteous As the zealous act of Phinehas was counted unto him for righteousnesse throughout all generations But the Apostle speaketh of the justification of the person who cannot by one habit and much lesse by one act of faith be formally just But forasmuch as by faith in Christ the beleever receiveth the perfect righteousnesse of Christ this faith in respect of the object doth fully justifie the beleever and is therefore counted to him for righteousnesse not that it selfe is his righteousnesse nor that he is righteous in himselfe who still in himselfe remaineth a sinner but in Christ. And such was the faith of Abraham and of all the faithfull that not in themselves but in the promised seed all that beleeve in him should be blessed that is justified The Greeke word used sometimes by the Septuagint as Gen. 18. 18. 28. 14. and retained by the Apostle Gal. 3. 8. is very significant viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie that not in themselves but in the promised seed they should be justified and blessed for so the Apostle Rom. 4. 5 6 7. useth these words promiscuously as also Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith preached before the Gospell unto Abraham saying in thee that is in thy seed shall all nations be blessed This blessednesse therefore this justification is obtained by faith and therefore is faith counted righteousnesse because it receiveth it As for faith it selfe absolutely considered without relation to its object we according to the Popish doctrine are justified by it neither in the act of justification nor before Not before for untill it be as they speake formed with Charity it cannot justifie nor in the act for charity alone is the formall cause of justification and then only are we formally justified when Charity is infused or else there are more formall causes of justification than one which Bellarmine according to the doctrine of the Councill of Trent doth utterly deny § VIII His second testimony 1 Corinthians 3. 11. another foundation can
that the eye of the body did cure those who were stung but the brasen Serpent which was a figure of Christ beheld with the eye Nor the eye of the soule which is faith doth absolutely and by it selfe justifie or save but relatively in respect of the object which it doth behold that is to say the Lord Iesus whom God hath propounded to be a Saviour to all that see him and receive him by faith § XII His second proofe is from the speech of Christ to the woman of Canaan who had earnestly prayed unto him and would take no repulse Matth. 15. 28. O woman great is thy faith and Mar. 7. 29. for this saying goe thy way the Devill is gone out of thy daughter for here plainely saith he the efficacie of obtayning health is attributed to faith Neither may it be answered that it is one thing to speake of justification and another to speake of the cure of a bodily disease For our Lord in the very same words attributeth to faith both the one and the other For as hee said to the woman which was a sinner Luk. 7. 50. thy faith hath saved thee so in like manner to the woman whom hee cured of a bloudy issue Matth. 9. 2â—… and to the blind man whom hee restored to sight Mark 10. 52. Answer Though the woman of Canaan and the blind man by prayer obtained their desires yet it was the prayer of faith as Saint Iames calleth it which was effectuall and prevailed with Christ Iam. 5. 16. and therefore to faith I confesse the efficacie is to be ascribed And although it may well be thought that our Saviour when hee used the same words thy faith hath saved thee to the woman which had the issue of bloud and to the blind man which hee used to the sinner whose sins he had forgiven that he being the Physitian of the soule used them in the same sence to assure them of a greater blessing than the bodily cure Matth. 9. 2. yet I doe not deny but that by faith and by the prayer of faith the health both of the body and soule is obtained for as by beleeving or apprehending by faith the righteousnesse of Christ which hee had and performed for us wee are justified so by beleeving the divine power and goodnesse of Christ many were cured of their bodily diseases And yet as it was not their faith apprehending the power and goodnes of Christ which did heale them but the power and goodnesse of Christ which by faith they apprehended as it is said Act. 3. 16. his Name by faith in his name hath made this man strong so is it not our faith absolutely whereby wee apprehend the righteousnesse of Christ which doth justifie us but the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith And whereas Bellarmine will have the like efficacie to be ascribed in justifying unto faith as in obtaining bodily health I take him at his word for hereby it is evidently proved that faith alone doth justifie for our Saviour for the obtaining of bodily health required faith onely Luk. 8. 50. Mar. 5. 36. Bee not affraid Only beleeve and the like may bee gathered out of Matth. 9. 28 29. Mark 9. 23. Iohn 11. 40. § XIII His third proofe is from the example of Abraham Rom. 4. 20 21 22. In the promise also of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God most fully knowing or being fully perswaded that whatsoever he promiâ—…ed he also is able to performe therefore it was also reputed to him for righteousnesse Here saith Bellarmine the Apostle rendreth tâ—…e cause why faith was reputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because by beleeving he gave glory to God Therefore that faith pleased God by which he was glorified and therefore by the mâ—…rit of that faith which notwithstanding was the gift and grace of God hee justified Abraham His reason may thus be framed Whatsoever pleaseth God meriteth justification Abrahams faith pleased God because he was glorified thereby Therefore Abrahams faith merited justification The proposition is to bee denyed for before men can please God they must bee reconciled unto him and justified by faith therefore our pleasing of God is not a cause but a fruit of our justification and it is evident that before that promise was either made to him by God or beleeved by him Abraham was justified and therefore not by the merit of that beleefe Againe where men or their actions doe please God not in and for themselves but in and for Christ in whom alone hee is well pleased there mercie is to bee ascribed unto God but not merit to them Yea but the Apostle inferreth therefore it was reputed to him for righteousnesse That argueth Gods acceptation not his merit Howbeit that place may bee understood as that Iam. 2. 23. that this was an evidence of the true faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnesse not that Abraham did then first beleeve or was then first justified and much lesse that he merited by that act of faith his justification which he had long before § XIV His fourth proofe is out of Rom. 10. 13 14. to which I answered before the thing which here hee would but doth not prove though indeed it needs no proofe is that faith by invocation obtaineth justification Howbeit the Apostle doth not there set downe the order of our justification but the series and order of the degrees of salvation beginning at our vocation unto which three degrees are referred viz. hearing of the word which presupposeth preaching and that sending upon which followeth faith and justification thereby faith bringeth forth the dueties of â—…anctification and namely invocation which sometimes and namely in that place of Ioel is put for the whole worship of God which is the forerunner of salvation but here is no snch thing either mentioned or meant that by invocation faith obtaineth justification and therefore little reason had he from thence to inferre that therfore faith doth not justifie relatively by receiving for sooth justification offered but by seeking knocking asâ—…ing and finally by invocating and impeâ—…rating it doth justifie but passing by the weakenesse of his argument I answere to that which hee inferreth that faith beggeth justification no otherwise but with relation to Christ and his merits by it received For as God forgiveth no sinnes for which Christ hath not satisfied nor accepteth any man to life for whom Christ hath not merited it so are not we to beg justification at the hands of God but in the name and mediation of Christ beseeching God for Christ his sake that forasmuch as Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for the sinnes of all that beleeve in him and hath merited salvation and all spirituall blessings in heavenly things for them that it would therefore please God to accept of Christs satisfaction and merits in our behalfe imputing unto us both his sufferings for the remission
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
which we shall be judged at the last day at which time God will judge men according to their workes For wee must all appeare before the judgement seat of Christ that wee may receive according to those things which we have done in the body whether it bee good or evill Those that have done good shall goe into everlasting life and they that have done evill into everlasting punishment For good workes though wee are not justified by them nor saved for them yet they are the evidence according to which our Saviour will pronounce the sentence of salvation Matth. 25. 34 35. According to that Psal. 62. 12. And to thee Lord mercie for thou rewardest a man meaning the godly man according to his workes § IX Lastly they are necessary necessitate medij and as that which though it be no cause is called causa sine qua nâ—…n And thus they are necessary first as the way which leadeth to life eternall via qua nos perducturus est ad finem itsum quem promisit the way by which hee will bring us unto that end which he hath promised saith Augustine For those that are justified and by justification entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are to goe in the way of sanctification towards their glorification Eâ—…h 2. 10. good workes therefore though they bee not the cause of raigning yet they are the way to the Kingdome And so saith Bellarminâ—… himselâ—…e that although God in predestination hath determined to give the Kingdome of heaven to certaine men whom he loved without any prevision of workes notwithstanding hee did withall ordaine that in respect of the execution the way to come to his Kingdome should be good workes I say then with the Prophet Esay this is the way let us walke in it Secondly as necessary fruits of our election for wee are elected to that end that we should bee holy Ephes. 1. 4. as necessary fruits of faith without which it is judged to bee dead â—…am 2. 26. as unseparable consequents of our redemption and justification Luk. 1. 74. And as they are necessary consequents of our justification so they are necessary forerunners of salvation by which wee are fitted for Gods Kingdome because no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of heaven Apoc. 21. 27. and finally so necessary is a godly life that without it no man shall see God Heb. 12. 14. I conclude with Bernard that good workes are occulia predestinationis jndicia futurâ—… fâ—…licitatis presagia via regni non caâ—…saregnandi tokens of our secret predestination presages of our future happinesse the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of our obtaining that Kingdome For howsoever good workes are necessary in many respects as I have shewed necessitate presentiae yet they are not necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes of our justification § X. Secondly the Papists calumniate us as if wee taught that good workes are not necessary to sanctification which slander as all the rest ariseth from their willfull and pernicious errour in consounding justificâ—…tion and sanctification In the question of justification we hold according to the Scriptures that if our owne workes or righteousnesse should bee obtruded unto the Lord as the matter or merit thereof whereby wee should bee both acquitted from our sinnes and so delivered from hell and also entituled to the Kingdome of heaven they are not onely to bee rejected but also detested as menstruous clouts as dung as losse But in the question of sanctification where they are considered both as fruits of faith and the Spirit as consequents of justification whereby wee testifie our thankefulnesse to God gather testimonies to our selves of our justification benefit and edifie our brethrenâ—… and also as necessary forerunners of glorification whereby we are fitted and prepared for Gods Kingdome unto which by justification wee are entituled and as the way wherein we are to walke towards our heavenly countrey and as the evidences according to which our Saviour will judge us at the last day c. wee doe acknowledge they are highly to be esteemed of as those things wherein our sanctification doth in good part consist For wee doe teach that our sanctification is partly habituall consisting in the habits of sanctifying graces faith hope charity humility the feare of God c. which is the first justification of the Papists and partly actuall consisting in our new obedience or which is all one in good workes which is their second justification This then is that which we doe hold that although good works doe not concurre with faith unto the act of justification as any cause thereof yet of necessity they must concurre in the subject that is the party justified as necessary fruits of faith as necessary consequents of justification as necessary antecedents of salvation And this is that which not only we but Bellarmine himselfe often citeth out of Augustine Bona opera accedunt justificato non praecedunt justificandum or thus bona opera non praecedunt justificandum sed sequantur justificatum good workes doe not goe before but follow after justification which is a pregnant proofe that they are no causes thereof CAP. II. That we are not justified by Workes § I. HAving thus avoided the calumniations of the Papists wee are now to dispute the question which is to bee understood not of justification before men whereby we are declared or knowne to bee just but of our justification before God whereby hee maketh us just nor of workes as fruits and consequents but as of causes of justification For we doe confesse that men are justified declarativè that is declared and knowne to be just to themselves or others by good works as the proper fruits of faith and undoubted consequents of justification but wee deny that we are justified before God by good works as any causes therof And this our assertion we will first prove by necessary arguments and then defend the same against the objections of the Papists § II. And first I prove it by all the arguments which I used before to prove the five severall points already handled For first if justification is not to be confounded with sanctification as if it consisted in a righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves then are we not justified before God by workes But the former hath beene clearely proved therefore the latter is to be confessed .2 If wee bee justified by the meere grace of God and that freely without respect of any workes done by us then are we not justified before God by works For the holy Ghost maketh such an opposition betweene grace and workes that if we be justified by the one we cannot be justified by the other But the antecedent hath beene formerly proved therefore the consequent cannot be denyed 3. If we be not justified before God by righteousnesse inherent in or performed by our selves but onely by the righteousnesse
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ—… it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good â—…orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriâ—…us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiâ—…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ—… in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righâ—…eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils â—…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
forbeare swearing in ordinary talke not to give a mans goods to the poore and to follow Christ when hee is thereunto required Mat. 19. 23. Mar. 10. 23. These things are so manifest that Bellarmine in the end of the next Chapter doth confesse them viz that our Saviour doth not say except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets but of the Scribes and Pharisees to signisie that his meaning was not so much he should say not at all to adde to the burden of the precepts as to take away the corruptions of the Scribes Pharisees And again those things which seem to be most heavie in the new Law are to be found in the old as the loving of our enemyes the restrayning of concupiscence such like For proofe wherof he quotes Augustine lib. contr Adimant cap. 3. lib. 19. contr Faustum c. 28. In the former place Augustine saith Nulla in Evangelica atque Apostolica disciplina reperiuntur quamvis ardua divina precepta promissa quae illis etiam libris veterib desint In the latter Vel omnia vel penè omnia quia monuit sâ—…u praecepit Christus ubi adjungebat Ego a. dici vobis inveniuntur in illis veterib libris And so much of the first difference § XXI The second difference is that the Law commeth alone but the Gospell is accompanied with grace Which is not a difference of the doctrine and letter of the Gospell from the Law but of the covenant of grace from the covenant of works For in the covenant of grace as justification is promised to them that being called doe beleeve so sanctification to them that are justifyed Which as it proveth the concurrence of Good workes with faith in the party justified as consequents thereof so it excludeth them from being any causes of justification But as touching this second difference two popish errours are to bee avoided First in respect of the covenant of workes For though that covenant doth not promise nor afford the grace of sanctification wherby a man should be enabled to performe the covenant which grace is promised in the covenant of grace and given to them that beleeve yet wee are not so to conceive that they who lived in the time of the law were void of grace nor all that live under the Gospell are endued with grace For the covenant of grace hath alwayes bene in force from the beginning so that to the faithfull who beleeved in the Messias which was to come the grace of sanctification was given according to the covenant of grace so that in the old Testament even under the Law there were as excellent examples of holynesse as have bene in the time of the new under the Gospell So also the Law hath its use even among those that live under the Gospell insomuch that untill men doe beleeve they are under the Law and not under grace Secondly in respect of the grace of the new Testament that it is not promised in such perfection in this life where wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit as that wee may expect to be justified by it or saved for it § XXII From these two difference the rest as hee saith arise viz. from the first arise the third the fourth and the fifth The third is this that the Law of Moses was given to one Nation the Law of Christ to all Nations The fourth that the Law of Moses for the most part contayned shadowes and figures of things to come the Gospell exhibiteth the body and truth The fifth that the Law of Moses because it was not perfect was to be changed by the Law of Christ but the Law of Christ was not to be changed by any succeeding Law These three differences of the Law doe not agree to the Law Morall which belongeth to all nations which did not consist of shadowes and figures which was not to be changed no not by addition because it was and is a perfect immutable and perpetuall rule of righteousnesse The other three viz. the sixth seventh and eigth arise as hee saith from the second The sixth that the Law of Moses had no power to justifie neither was it given that it might justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirre up men to seeke the physitian But the Law of Christ that is the Gospell hath power to justifie and was given to that end For as hee alleageth out of Rom. 1. 16. it is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleeveth he doth not say that worketh For therein is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith as it is written the just man shall live by faith This is a true difference of the Law of faith from the Law of workes but agreeth not to Bellarmines new Law which is a Law of workes as well as the old conteyning the very same morall precepts with the morall Law in the observation whereof not our justification but our sanctification consisteth prescribing also the same righteousnesse viz Charity which is the summe of the Law The seventh that the Law of Moses is a Law of fearefullnesse and bondage but the Gospell the Law of love and of liberty which is true For the obedience of men who are under the Law is forced by the terrour and coaction of the Law working servile feare in them But the obedience of men who are under grace that is of men justified is voluntary and cheerfull proceeding from faith and from some measure of assurance of Gods love and favour to them in Christ. Therfore this voluntary obedience is no cause but a consequent of justification not onely before God but also in the court of our owne conscience that is not onely of justification it selfe but also of the assurance thereof in some measure Of the eigth which confuteth the first I have already spoken § XXIII So much of the first thing which Bellarmine undertooke to demonstrate for the proofe of the necessity of good workes which we hold as well and urge as much as he Now followeth the second which is to prove that the justare not free from the observation of the Law of God For hee saith that we place Christian liberty in this that we are not subject in our conscience and before God to any Law and that the decalogue it selfe doth not belong unto us Which is a most devillish slander We professe that we so many as truly beleeve are by Christ freed from the curse of the Law from the rigour and exaction of the Law requiring perfect righteousnesse in us unto justification from the terrour and coaction of the Law from the irritation of the Law as I have shewed in my treatise of Christian liberty but not from the obedience of it For freedome from obedience is the servitude of sinne But wee being freed from sinne become the servants of righteousnesse And we doe
freely professe that by how much wee have received the greater favours from God in redeeming us and bringing us into the liberty of his children in freeing us from sinne and from the yoake of the Law by so much the more are we bound to obedience not to be justified or saved by it but to testifie our thankefulnesse and to glorifie God who hath beene so gracious unto us c. Much more might be said concerning Christian liberty but this is as much as is pertinent to the question in hand If any desire to bee better informed in this point I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty which I published many yeaâ—…es agoe CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie § I. ALL this while Bellarmine as we have seene hath wandred from the question but now he saith he will come neerer unto it For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes not onely by way of presence but by wâ—…y of efficacie But to what will he prove them necéssary to justification no such matter But yet that is the question which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone that good workes doe concurre to justification as causes thereof For though they were as they are not causes of Salvation yet it is manifest that they are consequents and therefore no causes of justification So that Bellarmine though hee be come neerer the question yet he is not come home to it But perhaps it will be said that Bellarmine prevented this objection when he first propounded this as his fifth principall argument to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because good workes are necessary to Salvation His argument may thus be frarned If faith did justifie alone then it would save alone but faith doth not save alone without good workes which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justificatis even to them that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save Answ. The proposition is denied first by Bellarmine himselfe who teacheth though falsely that not all who are justified shall bee saved when notwithstanding the Apostle saith â—…hom the Lord hath justified he also hath glorified And further he holdeth that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification though they lose not their faith and farther that they may also lose their faith which as he absurdly teacheth is lost by any act of infidelity and consequently both their justification and Salvation Yea but saith Bellarmine their justice cannot be lost nor their Salvation whiles they have faith if they be justified by faith onely But Bellarmine himselfe saith though falsely that the faith of them who are justified may be lost and with it their Salvation and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith and yet not be saved by it Secondly it is denied by some of the Fathers who though they teach that faith alone sufficeth to justification as you have heard yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation because some other things as namely good workes are thereunto required To the assumption that saith alone doth not save If such a faith be meant as is alone severed from Charity and void of workes I doe confesse that it neither saveth nor yet justifieth I doe not say alone but not at all But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ which purifieth the heart and worketh by love of which onely we speake and understand it relatively as we doe then I constantly affirme that faith in Christ alone that is Christ alone received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation and that neither workes nor any other graces are causes of salvation unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non which are no causes § II. But for the further proofe of his consequences Bellarmine saith that we cannot deny them because Luther teacheth that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation unlesse he will not beleeve and that the Lâ—…therans affirme that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone Answ. Wee can deny what either Luther or those that are called Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word therefore this was but a slender proofe Howbeit we doe not deny that assertion of Luther nor the like which though full of true comfort yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit so that they can say they have faith Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne assuring them that although their sinnes bee many and great yet they ought not to despaire if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true For though our sinnes be many the mercies of God are more though great yet the merrits of Christ are greater And though the Lutherans doe say that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence but a flat deniall of his assumption which it behoveth him to prove Upon these things thus premised Bellarmine inferreth that all the testimonies which afterwards namely in his fourth Booke he was to alleage out of Scriptures and Fathers to prove that good workes are so necessary to salvation even to men that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save them doe also prove that faith alone doth not justifie which is the thing saith hee which wee have undertaken to prove which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny protesting against this inference of Bellâ—…mine and affirming that although good workes be so necessary to salvation as that that faith which is without them doth not save a man yet that doth not hinder our assertion that faith doth justifie alone because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all and much lesse as the causes thereof for they follow justification though ordinarily they goe before salvation and howsoever that faith which is alone severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie as I have shewed heretofore nor save yet notwithstanding faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith doth save alone § III. But to returne to his fourth Booke though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency as causes thereof hee useth three kindes of proofes testimonies of Scriptures sentences of Fathers and reason Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies besides some whole Epistles The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you that doing the will of God ye may receive the promise Here first saith he wee have the terme necessary and
the servants of sinne in whom sin reigneth yet they are penitent and beleeving sinners in whom sinne remainteh who often sinne through humane frailty There is no man that sinneth not saith Salomon yea there is not a righteous man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not in many things we saith Iames the just doe offend all If we say that wee have not sinned or that wee have no sinne saith the most holy Apostle Saint Iohn wee deceive our selves we make him a lyer and there is no truth in us And therefore desperate againe is Bellarmines assertion that whosoever is justified or regenerated sinneth not that is never sinneth and on the other side whosoever sinneth is not a man regenerate nor justified which is to exclude all men from Iustification and consequently from Salvation § XVI And thus have I answered Bellarmines arguments concerning the possibility of the Law Now it may be expected that I should propound and mainetaine ours But this taske I have already performed in handling the third question of this controversie concerning the matter of our justification where among many other arguments proving that we are not justified by any righteousnes inherent in us or performed by us but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him we used this for one By what righteousnesse we are justified the Law is satisfied By Christs righteousnesse alone the Law is satisfied and not by that which is inherent in us or performed by us And this assumption wee prove because wee are not able to sati fie the Law neither in respect of the Commandement it being by reason of the flesh impossible unto us nor in respect of the penalty which cannot be satisfied by us but with endlesse torment So that as I said before all this discourse of the possibilitie of the Law is nothing but a defence against a piece of one of our arguments Now I should follow him to the second point which hee propounded to prove that the workes of the righteous are simply and absolutely just and after their manner perfect Which may also seeme to be an answere to another piece of our argument For that righteousnesse by which wee are justified is perfect such onely is the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him such is not that which is inherent in us as the habituall or performed by us as the actuall Bellarmine therefore in opposition to that breach concerning perfect actuall righteousnesse propounded the proofe of this point But that our best righteousnesse is unperfect and stained with the flesh I have fully proved before and have answered all the arguments which Bellarmine produceth here in my fourth Booke whereunto I referre the reader Here onely I signifie againe that Bellarmine falleth very short in his proofes for where he should prove that the workes of the faithfull are simply and absolutely just and perfect as hee propounded the question hee now seemeth to prove this that the good workes of the righteous are truely good which we deny not § XVII Yes but you Protestants will they say doe teach that the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes c. Ans. We doe not say that their good workes as namely their prayer or their almes c. are sinnes but that in them they being otherwise good there are some imperfections and staines which are sinnes in respect whereof the faithfull man in doing that which is good sinneth according to that Eccl. 7. 20. We doe confesse that the duties which the faithfull performe are good workes and so called in the Scriptures though not purely and perfectly good but having their imperfections and being stained with the flesh Even as we call a man regenerated a just or a good man though he be not perfectly just being partly flesh and partly spirit Thus a vessell wherein there is wax mixed with hony before it be clarified is truly called a vessell of hony though not sinceri mellis of pure or sincere honey A cup of wine wherein is a mixture of some water with wine is truely called a cup of wine though not vini meraci of pure wine In like manner a wedge of gold wherein there is some drosse is truely called a wedge of gold though not of pure gold An heape of corne in the floore wherein there is perhaps as much chaffe as wheat is truly called an heape of wheat A field wherein are tares and other weeds as well as corne is notwithstanding called a corne field the denomination being taken from the better part Verily whiles we live in this world we are as gold wherein there is much drosse and never are fully refined untill wee are to bee translated into the celestiall house of God Whiles we are in the Church militant as it were in Gods floore we are mingled with much chaffe and are never perfectly cleansed from the chaffe of our corruptions untill we are to be translated into the Lords Granaries And such as wee are such also are our actions such as the tree is such is the fruit But if hee will prove that men are justified by their workes hee must prove not onely that they are truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that some of their workes are truely and purely good but that all their workes are truely and perfectly and not that onely but also perpetually good For if any of his workes bee sinnes he cannot be justified by his workes But this can never be proved Neither doth hee goe about to prove that all the actions of justified men are good but some onely and these not purely and perfectly but truely good To which purpose he spendeth three whole Chapters which I have fully answered in my fourth Booke CHAP. VIII Whether good Workes doe justifie Bellarmines proofe but especially that Testimony of Saint Iames Chapter 2. fully discussed and clared § I. AFter so many wandrings Bellarmine at length commeth to make good his fifth Argument which he propounded to prove that faith alone doth not justifie because good workes doe also justifie though here as I have noted this Argument is brought in to prove the truth of actuall righteousnesse The Title of this Chapter is that good workes are not onely just but that also they doe justifie In stead whereof he presently propoundeth this assertion to be proved that by good workes a just man is more justified and made more just But this is not the Question For we doe confesse that a man already justified before God by the practise of good works increaseth in righteousnesse inherent and is made more holy and just The thing which we deny is this that good workes doe not concurre with faith unto the act of iustification before God as any cause thereof Against this assertion he ought to have disputed if he would seeme to contradict us But he hath altered the question because he is not able to
mainetaine the contradictory of our assertion and maketh the question to be this whether by good workes men are justified that is to say made more just viz. in respect of righteousnesse inherent But we deny that there are any degrees of justification or that a man may be more justified or that justification doth ever signifie increase of righteousnesse wee reject their new found distinction of justification into the first and second and acknowledge no other justification but that which in the Scriptures and Fathers is called the justification of a sinner and thereby wee understand a continued act of God who as when we being sinners did first beleeve did justifie us so remaining sinners in our selves he doth still justifie us by imputation of Christs righteousnesse acquitting us from our sinnes and accepting of us as righteous in Christ. And this justification which is onely acknowledged by the Scriptures and Fathers is every where ascribed to faith Whereas the first justification of the Papists is ascribed to charity as the onely forme the second to workes as to the merit thereof But all this ariseth from their erroneous and wilfull confounding of justification and sanctification For their first justification is that which the Scriptures call regeneration and is the first act of Sanctification by which we are habitually sanctified for they make it to be nothing else but the infusion of the habits of grace Their second justification is their actuall fanctification or exercise of good workes whereby their inherent righteousnesse or sanctification is increased But the question is not of sanctification but of justification which the Papists by their wicked doctrine confounding it with sanctification have wholly abolished it being the maine benefit of the Messias by which we are both freed from hell and entitled to heaven Neither is the question understood of justification before men but before God For before men we doe confessâ—… that by good workes men are justified that is declared and knownâ—… to be just as by the fruits effects consequents and signes of justification by faith but before God we are not justified that is made or constituted just by workâ—…s as any cause thereof for good workes goe not before justification but follow after which is a plaine evidence that they are no cause of it § II. But let us examine his proofes the first and principall is out of Iames 2. which being the onely place of Scripture whereupon with any shew of probability they ground their doctrine of justification by workes I will not content my selfe to answere Bellarmines cavils alone but I will endevour to stop the mouthes of all the Papists who use to vaunt of this place especially of the 24. verse where they bragge that their assertion is expressed and ours confuted in plaine termes yee see then that a man is justified by workes and not by saith onely Which words are a consectary or conclusion deduced from the example of Abraham who though he were justified by faith without works as Saint Paul teacheth yet was hee also justified by workes and not by faith onely as Saint Iames affirmeth A conclusion therefore in shew of words contradictory to that of the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. 28. wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law and Gal. 2. 16. we know that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is but onely by faith which no doubt was the Apostles meaning For as I have shewed heretofore if this be a good disjunction that we are justified either by faith or by works that is either by the righteousnes of Christ which is out of us in him apprehended by faith or by the works of the Law that is by righteousnes inherent in our selves all which is prescribed in the Law as undoubtedly it is for a third thing cannot be named whereby we might be justified and by both we cannot for if by faith then of grace and if of grace then not of works and contrary wise Rom. 4. 4 5. 11. 6. then it followeth necessarily that if we are not justified by workes we are justified by faith alone Hence ariseth this great controversie between the true Catholiks and the Papists we affirming that we are justified by faith without works or by faith alone The Papists contending that wee are justified by workes and not by faith only we alleaging the authority of Saint Paul in his Epistles to the â—…omanes Galatians Ephesians the Papists this Testimony of Saint Iames. § III. The way to determine this weighty Controversie is to reconcile the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles Some a when they were not able to untye this Gordian knot have sought with Alexander to cut it by questioning without just cause the authority of that Epistle of Saint Iames. But the Papists and wee are thus farre agreed First as they doe not deny those Epistles of S. Paul which were never questioned so we acknowledge this of Saint Iames though it hath beene questioned to bee canonicall Secondly that the two Apostles acted by the same Spirit of truth in penning their Epistles could not possibly deliver contrary assertions and consequently that they onely are to bee esteemed to hold the truth who fitly reconciling the seeming variance betweene the two Apostles doe teach that doctrine which is agreeable to both Here then I am to demonstrate both against the Papists and for our selves against the Papists three things First that the doctrine which they ground upon this place of Saint Iames is contrary to that of Saint Paul Secondly that their exposition of Saint Iames they make him contradict the Apostle Paul Thirdly that their doctrine cannot be grounded upon this Text. For our selves two things First that by our exposition the two Apostles are easily reconciled Secondly that the assertion of the two Apostles according to our doctrine not onely may well stand together but also of necessity must goe together For the first wee have the same controversie with the Papists as I have noted before which the Apostle maintayned against the justiciaryes of his time And their opposite doctrine to Saint Paul which they would gladly father upon Saint Iames standeth in those six maine errours which I have plainely and fully confuted in this treatise And namely in this particular they affirming that men are justified by workes which the Apostle every were constantly denyeth To the second whiles they understand the two Apostles to speake in the same sense of faith of workes of justifying as namely that both speake of a true justifying faith of workes as causes of justification of justifying as making just by righteousnesse inherent they make the one directly to contradict the other For if Paul affirme that men are justified by a true faith without workes and Iames deny it If Paul deny that we are justified by workes as the causes of justification and Iames affirme it If Paul deny that wee are
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 causa
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
§ 4. That by â—…ustifying grace is meant the gracious favour of God in Christ. lib. 3. cap. 2. Our proofes I. from the use of the word in the Scriptures lib. 3. cap. 2 § 1. II. Because it is Gratia gratum saciens § 2. By it the faithfull are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and chasidim § 3. III. By the gracious favour of God in Christ wee were elected called c. § 4. Obiect 1. The grace of election is eternall the rest temporary § 5. Obiect 2. By inherent grace wâ—… 〈◊〉 sanctified § 6. Obiect 3. Faith a grace inherent § 7. IV. Gratia gratum faciens expressed in the Scriptures by other words which betoken savour § 8. V. Because grace is opposed to works § 9. VI. Charity is not the iâ—…stifying Grace § 10. VII Plaine testimonies of Scripture that grace signifieth favour § 11. Confessiâ—…n of Papists § 12. Bellarmines first allegation of Rom. 3. 24. for inherent grace proved to makâ—… against it lib. 3. cap. 3. His prâ—…ofes from thence disproved l. 3. cap. 4. I. From the word Gratis lib. 3. cap. 4. § 2. II. From the praposition per. § 3. III. Because the favour of God is not in vaine § 4. IV. From the Attributes given to grace As first that it is a gift § 5. Secondly a gift which wee receive § 6. Thirdly a gift given by Christ. â—… 7. yâ—…a made by Christ. § 8. Fourthly that it is given by measure from Christ. § 9. Fifthly it is compared to essence § 10. Sixthly It is compared to light â—… 11. His second allegation out of Rom. 5. 5. answered lib. 3. cap. 5. How the word Grace is used in the Fathers and how in the latter writers lib. 3. cap. 6. H Hebrew The Hebrew word hitsdiq which is to iustifie never signifieth to iustifie by inherent righteousnesse lib. 2. cap. 1. § 4. c. Hope Bellarmines third disposition to justification lib. 6. cap. 11. § 6. Hope whether perfect lib. 5. cap. 6. § 7. I Image of Christ. How borne by the faithfull and whether in respect of iâ—…ification l. 4. cap. 10. § 13 14 15 16. Implicite Faith Confuted and condemned lib. 6. cap. 1. § 3. c. ad finem capitis Imputation of Christs righteousnesse The formall cause of iâ—…stification l. 1. cap. 3. § 7. Impâ—…tation of Christs satisfaction confessed by Papists § 8. Imputation of Christs righteeusnesse denyed by some others bâ—…sides Papists § 9. Their reason that then we are Redeemers ibid. Imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved obiter by two reasons § 10. The private opinion of some concerning imputation lib. 1. cap. 5. That Christs righteoâ—…snesse it selse is imputed lib. 1. cap. 5. § 7. Whether we fulfilled the Law in Christ. § 8 9 10 11. The necessity of imputation lib. 1. c. 5. § 13 14. The full discourse concerning imputation of Christs righteousnesse lib. 5. per totum That wee are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse proved by five arguments lib. 5. cap. 1. Proved by eight arguments cap. 2. By two other arguments cap. 3. By testimonies of writers both old and new lib. 5. cap. 4. The objections of the Papists against imputation lib. 5. cap. 5. I. Against the name that it is new § 1. II. That it is putatitia § 2. III. That it is no whore to be found § 3. IV. That it it is needlesse § 4. Both because remission is an utter deletion of sinne § 5. and also because the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 is perfect lib. 5. cap. 6. 7. V. That wee are not formally iust by it lib. 5. cap. 8. § 1. Bellarmines confession that if wee did not hold that wee are formally iustified by it our doctrine were true § 2. VI. That we should be as righteous as Christ. § 3. VII That we did not loose in Adam imputed righteousnesse § 4. that if by imputation we are iust then Christ a sinner § 5. but as Christ notwithstanding the imputation of our sinne was iust so wee sinners § 6. That after iustification wee are called iust and how § 7. IX The Spouse of Christ beautifull in her selfe § 8 9. X. Because the heart must bee pure before we can see God and because Christ redeemed 〈◊〉 that wee might be sanctified § 10. Instrumentali causes of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 5. Justice The iustice of God a moving cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 3. The iustice of God distinguished l. 8. c. 5. § 19. Justifie To iustifie what it is lib. 1. cap. 1. § 2. To iustifie is not to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent Lib. 2. cap. 1. § 3. The signification of the Hebrew word § 4. c. cap. 5. § 5. Of the Gre 〈◊〉 l. 2. â—… 2. The same provâ—…d first by other termes § 7. Secondly because the whole processe of justification is iudiciall § 8. Iustifying oppâ—…sed to condemning l. 2. c. 5. § 2. cap. 6. § 1. Justification The excellency of this argument l. 1. c. 1. § 1. The definition of iustification lib. 1. c. 1. § 2. The signification of the word ibid. Iustification considered as an action of God § 3. As an action of God without us § 4. But accompanied with those that are wrought within us § 5. It is an act continued § 6. Whether it bâ—…e wrought but once and at once § 7. The Papists confuted who deny it either to be an action of God or without us or continued § 8. The causes of iustification the efficients l. 1. c. 2. The essentiall causes viz. the matter and forme lib. 1. c. 3. the matter Christs righteousnesse § 2 3 4 5. Private opinions concerning the matter l. 1. c. 4. vid. Materiall The forme the imputation of Christs righteousnesse c. 3. § 6. c. Private opinions concerning the forme cap. 5. The end l. 1. c. 6. § 1 2 3 4. The parts absolution from sinne and acceptation as righteous in Christ. â—…ib 1. cap. 6. § 5. Redemption reconciliation and adoption comprised under iustification § 6. The consequents and sruits of iustification § 7. The heads of the controversie concerning iustification l. 2. c. 1. § 1. The first concerning the name whether iustification and sanctification are to bee confounded The Papists confounding them ground their errour upon the Latine word § 2 3. The Hebrew word signifying to instifie never importeth making righteous by infusion of righteousnesse lib. 2. cap. 1. § 4. c ad finem capitis The use of the Greeke words signifying to iustifie or iustification never importing righteousnesse inherent lib. 2. cap. 2. Foure significations of the word iustification alleaged by Bellarmine I. That it signifieth the Law lib. 2. cap. 3. § 1. 2. II. Acquisition of righteousnesse § 3. 4 5 6. III. Increase of iustice lib. 2. cap. 4. § 1. 2 3 4 5. IV. Declaration of iustice l. 2. c. 4. § 6. Bellarmines proofes that iustification signifieth making righteous by inherent righteonsnesse lib. 2. cap. 5. Foure
Psalm 7. 4 9. c. § 3. III. Matth. 6. 22. § 4. IV. 1 Cor. 3. 12. § 5. V. Iam. 3. 2. § 6. VI. Psalm 4. 4. Esai 1. 16. Ioh. 5. 14. in which wee are exborted not to sinne § 7. VII From those places which teach that the workes of the faithfull doe please God § 8. VIII From these places which absolutely call them good § 9. Two Testimonies of Fathers § 10. Three Reasons I. If good workes are impure then either by reason of concupiscence l. 4. c. 4. § 12. or for want of charity § 13. or because of veniall sinnes concurring § 14. II. From six absurdities § 15 16. By righteousnesse inherent the Law is not fulfilled l. 4. c. 5. § 3. 4. 4. None are able to fulfill the Law first because all are transgressours § â—… Secondly because none can be iustified by it § 7. Thirdly because none can fulfill the first and the last Commandements § 8. Fourthly out of Act. 15. 10. § 9. Fiftly out of Rom. 7. 18. § 10. Sixthly Rom. 8. 3 § 11. By righteousnesse inherent we are not iustified proved by foureteene reasons l. 4. c. 8. vid. matter of iustification S Sacraments They are seales of iustification l. â—… c. 2. § 6. l. 6. c. 14. 8. Whether they iustifie ex opere operato l. 6. c. 10. § 3. The purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament Bellarmines sixâ—…h disposition to iustification l 6. c. 12. § 7. Satisfaction The imputation of Christs satisfaction acknowledged by the Papists l. 1. c. 3. § 8. Sanctification Not to be confounded with iustification l. 2. per totum How it is distinguished from iustification l. 2. c. 6. Sinners All men are sinners l. 4. c. 2. § 9. c. 8. § 7. l. 5. c. 2. § 2. Subject of faith Viz. the party to whom it belongeth lib. 6. c. 5. § 1. and the parts of the soule wherein it is sealed § 2. viz. the minde that is both the understanding and the will proved by Testimonies § 3. 4. 5. Whether the â—…nderstanding be commanded by the will to beleeve lib. 6. c. 5. § 6. T Truth The doctrine of iustification and Salvation by faith in Christ is called the Truth lib. 1 cap. 1. § 1. lib. 6. cap. 6. § 2. V Veniall Whether veniall sinnes doe contaminate the good works of the iust lib. 4. cap. 4. § 14. VVhether they doe â—…inder the fulfilling of the Law l. 7. c. 6. § 23. Whether they be onely besides the Law and not against it ibid. Vprightnesse It goeth under the name of perfection and upright men are called perfect lib. 4. c. 10. § 10. W. Word The word an instrumentall cause of iustification l. 1. c. 2. § 5. Workes Good workâ—…s â—…re the fruites and effects not causes of 〈◊〉 l. 1. c. 6. § 7. The necessiâ—… of gâ—…od works urged of us by better 〈◊〉 than the Popish doctrine doth 〈◊〉 c. 1. In what 〈◊〉 we deny good workes to iustifie l. 7. c. â—… § 1. That good workes doe noâ—… iustifie men before God prove by all the five 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 7. â—… 2. § 2. by foure other reasons § 3. 〈◊〉 thâ—…se that are iustified by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by their owne obedience of the Law § 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is 〈◊〉 to the Scriptures § 5. Bellarmines preamble to his answere in which hee considereth three things first what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith lib. 7. cap. 2. § 6 7. Secondly the differences betweene the iustice of the Law and in or by the Law § 8. Thirdly what is meant by workes which are excluded from iustification whether the workes of the Ceremoniall Law § 9. 10. or also of the morall and whether all or onely those which goe before faith § 11. Bellarmines proofes that those onely 〈◊〉 before or without faith are excluded l. 7. c. 2. § 13. Bellarmines dispute concerning the necessity of good workes l. 7. c. 4. his method § 1. He proveth them necessary not to iuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § 2. His first proofe is from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell § 3. c. ad 19. Eight differences by hire propounded l. 7. c. 4. § 19 20 21 22. His second proofe from the doctrine of Christian liberty l. 7. c. 4. § 23. That good workes are necessary by way of efficacie Bellarmine proveth by three sorts of arguments first from Scriptures I. Testimoniâ—… Heb. 10. 36. lib. 7. c. 5. § 3. II. 1 Tim. 2. 14 15. l. 7. c. 5. § 4. III. Phil. 2. 12. § 5. IV. 2 Cor. 7. 10. § 6. V. 2 Cor. 4. 17. § 7. VI. Rom. 8. 13. § 8. VII Rom. 8. 16 17. § 9. VIII Rom. 10. 10. § 10. IX Matth. 25. 34 35. § 11. X. Iam. 1. 25. 2. 14. § 12. XI The Epistles of Peter Iames Iohn and Iude. l. 7. c. 5. § 13. Secondly from testimonies of Fathers § 14. Thirdly from reason § 19. because faith dâ—…th not save alone lib. 7. c. 5. § 16. 17. Of the verity of the â—…ustice of good workes l. 7. c. 6. § 1. VVhether they be sinnes l. 7. c. 7. § 17. That they be sinnes it followes upon the doctrine of the Papists lib. 4. c. 4. § 9. in fine 21. Bellarmines proofes that good workes doe iustifie l. 7. c. 8. The first Iam. 2. 24. lib. 7. c. 8. § 2. c. ad 19. Sixe other testimonies I. Eccl. 18. 21. § 19. vide l. 2. c. 4. § 2. 3. II. Rom. 6. 19. l. 7. c. 8. § 19. III. 2 Cor. 7. 1. l. 7. c. 8. § 20. IV. 2 Cor. 9. 10. § 21. V. Iohn 14. 23. § 22. VI. Apâ—…c 22. 11. § 23. The Papists high opinion of their works l. 8. c. 9. § 14. Our estimations of them § 15. Y Yoke Christs yoke easie lib. 7. cap. 6. § 4 5 6 7. FINIS Errata Page 2. line 20 even our juâ—…if p. 4. l. 9. â—…sadiq p. 6 â—… antepen speciall p. 9. marg l. 2. â—… 〈◊〉 2. 1. 2. l. 15. justificaâ—…i p. 13. l. a fin 19. VIII 〈◊〉 second p 15 l â—… 〈◊〉 6. concur l. penulâ—… standeth 〈◊〉 p. 16. marg l. 6. lib 1 cap. 2 p. 17. l. af 11. herâ—… l. 〈◊〉 7. men p. 18 l. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 28. 〈◊〉 is p. 19 l 1. breake l. 15 16. dele So the righteousnesse of our Meâ—…iator who is God p. 21 marg l 2. Ier 23 6. l af 5. dele sect p. 22. l. af 14. then he intendeth p 24. l. 6 〈◊〉 l. 11 partam l. 18. nothing else p. 26. l af 8 we are p. 27. l af 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no p. 28. l. 20 and sâ—…condly l. af 13. id eâ—…t compl p. 29. l. 1. receivâ—…d l. af 4. in us p. 31. l. 3. 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 l. af 12. yâ—…t we p. 32 l. 26. ad 〈◊〉 p. 38. l. 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 22. scales p. 43. l. antep upon Christ 〈◊〉
For all they who have true faith are borne of God 1 Iohn 5. 1. Iohn 1. 12 13. And those who are once borne of God are never unborne againe but being made sonnes by faith as all the faithfull are Gal. 3. 26. they are also made heires of God and coheires with Christ Rom. 8. 17. As faith therefore is never utterly lost no more is justification For so long as wee have faith so long wee are justified But the habit of faith wee never lose though perhaps some act of faith may sometimes bee interrupted Therefore our justification is but one continued act and in that sense we are justified but once § VIII Now whereas we have defined and defended according to the Scriptures that justification is an action of God and such an action as is without us and a continued act hence we may conclude against the Papists first that neither their first nor second justification is that justification which is taught in the Scriptures Not the second for that is not Gods action but their owne who being justified before by habituall righteousnesse infused from God doe themselves as they â—…each by practising of good workes increase their righteousnesse that is justifie themselves by actuall righteousnesse as the merit of their second justification Not that wee deny that inherent righteousnesse is by practise of good workes increased but that wee hold that justification is not our owne act neither that we are justified by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves nor that the righteousnesse of justification which is indeed the righteousnesse of Christ can be increased and therefore no degrees of justification Not the first which they make to bee an action of God within us working in us a reall change or positive mutation by infusion of the habits of grace and specially of charitie and confound it with habituall sanctification from which notwithstanding it is necessarily to be distinguished Secondly justification being an action of God is not to bee confounded with justification passively understood and much lesse with justice it selfe But the Papists not onely understand it passively but also confound it with inherent Iustice. Thirdly they doe not hold justification to bee one continued act from our vocation to our glorification But such an act as may not onely be interrupted ostentimes and lost for a time as they say it is by every mortall sinne and againe be renewed so oft as they goe to shrift but also that it may totally and finally bee lost Which error I have confuted at large in my Treatise of perseverance CAP. II. The efficient causes of Iustification § I. BUt in this definition besides the Genus not onely all the causes of Iustification but also the essentiall parts thereof are briefly comprised which I will now distinctly propound The causes because in the knowledge of them standeth the science of every thing the essentiall parts because in them justification it selfe consisteth The causes of justification as of all other things are foure The Efficient the Matter the Forme the End The Efficieâ—…t causes are of two sorts either principall or instrumentall The principall is God which I noted in the definition when I said it is an action of God For it is God that justifieth as the Scriptures in many places doe testifie as namely Rom. 3. 26 30. 4. 5 6. 8. 30 33. Gal. 3. 8. God I say the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost For it being an outward action of God or as the Schoolemen speake ad extra respecting the Creatures it is the common action of the whole Trinity And thus God alone as the Iudge doth justifie For he alone is the Lawgiver who hath power over our soules against whom wee sinne and by our sinne become his debtours when we transgresse his law And therefore he alone properly forgiveth sinnes as himselfe professeth Esay 43. 25. and as the Scribes and Pharisees confesse as a received truth Luk. 5. 21. For who may take upon him to remit those debts which wee owe to God It is he who reconcileth us unto himselfe in Christ not imputing our sinnes 2 Cor. 5. 19. and accepting of us in his beloved Ephes. 1. 6. It is he alone that forgiving our sinnes freeth us from hell and giveth us right to his heaveâ—…ly kingdome Which doctrine serveth first for our direction and instruction where to seeke and to sue for justification and remission of sinnes Not to any creature but to God alone in the name and mediation of Christ to whom alone our Saviour directeth us to sue for pardon Secondly it ministreth strong consolation to all the faithfull For seeing it is God that justifieth them who shall lay any thing to their charge Who shall condemne c Thirdly it sâ—…rveth for the confutation or rather condemnation of the Pope and all popish priests who take upon them power not as Ministers of the Gospell to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes but as Iudges to remit them it being a proper attribute of God Exod. 34. 7. which he appropriateth to himselfe Esay 43. 25. and which no meere man can without blasphemy arrogate to himselfe Mark 2. 7. § II. With the principall cause we are to joyne the consideration of the motives or moving causes both without God which of some are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also within himselfe which are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are indeed principia agendi The former are mans misery which though it be not properly a cause but the object of mercy yet is said to bee a motive and is used as a reason to move to mercy and thence misericordia hath its name and Christs merits which properly are the procatarcticke cause of our justification besides which there is no other merit The moving causes within God are his Mercy and his Iustice which I signified in the definition when I said that justification is a most grâ—…cious and rightâ—… action os God For as in many if not in all the workes of God his mercy and justice meet together so especially in the worke of our Iustification and redemption which Cardinall Câ—…jetan e well observed The holy Scripture saith he doth not say that we are justified by grace alone but by grace and justice together but both of God that is by the grace of God and by the justice of God and not by the righteousnesse of men By grace I understand the gracious love and favour of God in Christ vouchsafed unto us in him before all secular times 2 Tim. 1. 9. in which he hath graciously accepted us in his beloved by which as we are elected and called and shall be saved so by the same we are justified and that freely without any cause in us Rom. 3. 24. Now the Lord is said to justifie us by his grace first because of his free-grace hee gave his owne Sonne to
necessarily required that he might be meet to become our righteousnesse in his sufferings But this is frivolous because as I noted before he being perfect God as well as perfect man had beene in his sufferings an All-sufficient satisfaction for our sinnes though hee had never submitted himselfe to the obedience of the Law But the divine Nature of the Sonne of God and the dignity of his person as it made his sufferings all-sufficiently satisfactory for our sinnes to redeeme us from hell because they were the sufferings of God the blood of God c. so it made his obedience all-sufficiently meritorious to constitute and make us righteous and to make us Heires of Eternall life because it was the obedience or righteousnesse of God For the Sonne of God was made under the Law that he might not onely redeeme us who were under the Law by his sufferings but also that by his meritorious obedience we might receive the Adoption of sonnes But he proveth Christ to bee our righteousnesse onely in his passive obedience because it onely was both prefigured in the types and figures of the Law and also represented in the sacraments As touching the types and figures of the Law which prefigured Christ they were either figures of his person and office or they represented his benefits as namely and especially justification or â—…anctification And those which figured his benefit of justification either represented the remission of sinne by his sufferings or acceptation with God by his obedience or both The ceremony of changing their clothes when they were to come before God did import that those who desired to please God must be clothed with Christs righteousnesse which is also signified by the wedding garment and the holy attire wherein the Priests were to appeare before God The high Priests wearing of the golden plate with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord who is Iehovah our righteousnesse was to this end that the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts being taken away they might bee accepted before the Lord. The high Priests offering of incense upon the golden Altar resembled the pleasing obedience of Christ in his life and death and his intercession for us The Arke of the Covenant was a Type of Christ the Mediator the cover upon it of his propitiation the tables of Covenant within it of his fulfilling the Law for us The sanctification of the first fruits which were a type of Christ who is the first fruits of all that shall bee saved 1 Cor. 15. 23. was imputed to the whole increase or store Rom. 11. 16. So â—…aith Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the fulfilling of the Law performed by the first fruits so he calleth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe c. § XXIII But come we to the Sacraments which hee truely saith are the soules of that righteousnesse which is by Faith And yet saith he Baptisme signifieth onely the washing of the soule by the bloud of Christ the Eucharist representeth onely his body broken and his blood shed for our sinnes Answ. Though some parts onely of the benefits of Christ are represented in the severall Sacraments yet the substance of each Sacrament is the participation of Christ wholly with all his merits and benefits Thus in Baptisme we are incorporated into Christ and in it we put on Christ who is our righteousnesse And it is the Sacrament not only of remission of sinne and of justification but also of regeneration and sanctification we being therein conformed to his death and resurrection Rom. 6. 3 4 5. In the Lords Supper we have communion with Christ being not only united to him as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh but also have communion with him both in his merits by imputation and in his graces by influence from him as our head Other arguments are used by the same authour but because in them he taketh two things for granted which hee cannot prove the one that justification consisteth onely in remission of sin the other that wee ascribe remission of sinne to Christs active obedience I will not trouble the Reader with them Onely let him call to minde the errours which the Authors of this opinion doe runne into for the defence thereof First that remission of sinnes is the matter of justification which is imputed to us Secondly that the Law is fully satisfied by bearing the penalty alone Thirdly that by one act of obedience we are made just as wee were by one act of disobedience made sinners Fourthly that neither by his disobedience Adâ—…m did transgresse the Law nor Christ by his obedience unto death obey it Fifthly that Christ obeyed the law not for us but for himselfe Sixthly that justification consisteth wholly and onely in remission of sinnes Which being for the most part consequents of this opinion doe prove the antecedent to be false CAP. V. That the formall cause of Iustification is the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse § I. YOu have heard the private opinions of some of our Divines concerning the matter of justification now let us examine the unsound opinions of some others concerning the forme For as the former made remission of sins the matter which is imputed to justification so these make it the forme And as the former teach that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinne so doe these And yet the former hold it to bee but the matter and these but the forme Indeed if it were both the matter and the forme they might well say that justification doth wholly consist therein But being according to their owne conceipt but the one or the other and according to the truth neither of both but an effect of the true forme for by imputation of righteousnesse we have remission of sinne their opinion must needs be unsound But the thing wherein chiefely they erre is that with Socinuâ—… the heretike they deny the imputation of Christs Righteousnesse and consequently do hold that neither the active nor passive obedience of Christ is that which is imputed to us for righteousnesse What then forsooth the act of faith Of these mens errour I shall not need to say much in this place because besides that which hath already beene delivered in the third Chapter I have plentifully and fully proved in my whole fourth booke that the righteousnesse of Christ is the matter which is imputed to justification and in my whole fifth booke that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the forme of justification Only I will note their depravation of our Doctrine and point at their errours § II. As touching the former when we say that the imputation of Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of justification because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse God doth justifie us they will needs with the Papists make us hold that we are formally righteous by
that righteousnesse which is not in us but out of us in Christ which is absurd for as themselves expound the phrase Formall justice consisteth either in the qualities of the soule or in good actions that is it is either habituall or actuall so that it cannot stand in imputation by which wee can no more be just formally than wife rich alive by imputation of wisedome riches and life Wherefore I marvell how they could be so absurd as to conceive so absurdly of us But wee teach that Christs righteousnesse both habituall and actuall by which he was formally just is the matter and the imputation thereof is the forme of justification And so those very Authors upon whom they would father this assertion in expresse termes doe teach affirming that Christs obedience or fulfilling of the Law is the materiall cause of justification and the application or imputation thereof is the formall cause of justification We say then that the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe is not the formall cause of justification or that by which we are formally just but the imputation of it it selfe being the matter of justification that is to say that thing which unto justification is imputed Wherefore I shall not need to answere in defence of our assertion the arguments either of those Veteratores the Papists or these Novatores who both agree in this calumniation against us all tending to prove that wee are not formally juâ—… by that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him which we doe not hold For the righteousnesse whereby a man is formaâ—…ly just is inherent in himselfe for what is more intrinsecall than the forme But Christs righteousnesse is not inherent in us no more than our sinne was inherent in him And yet as he was made sinne or a sinner by our sinnes not formally God forbid but by imputation so wee are made righteous by his righteousnesse not formally as we are justified or in our selves but in him viz. by imputation And againe as by Adams actuall transgrâ—…ssion which was transient and now hath no being we are made sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation by imputation of his disobedience so likewise by Christs obedience which hee performed in the daies of his flesh and was proper to his owne person we are justified that is not onely freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation but also constituted just and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And yet we deny not but that as they to whom the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed are also by sinne inherent transfused from him by carnall generation formally made sinners so they to whom the obedience of Christ is imputed unto justification are also made formally just by an inchoated righteousnesse received by influence from Christ and infused by his spirit in their spirituall regeneration § III. In their opinion it selfe denying the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to justification they erre more dangerously than the Papists who are forced to confesse the imputation of Christs satisfaction for the maintenance of this maine errour they hold sixe others First that remission of sinne is the entire forme or formall cause of justification Secondly that justification is nothing else but remission of sinne Thirdly that no other righteousnesse concurreth to justification besides the remission of sinne no not the righteousnesse of Christ otherwise than it doth merit remission of sinne Fourthly that the righteousnesse by which we are justified is not the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe but a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ viz. remission of sinne Fifthly that not the obedience of Christ it selfe is imputed whether active or passive but the merit therof Sixthly that not the righteousnesse of Christ but the act of faith is imputed for righteousnesse All which before I saw the booke wherein these errours are broached I had plainely and fully confuted in this Treatise § IV. For as touching the two first and the maine errour it selfe I have proved both in the third Chapter of this booke briefly and in the whole fifth booke at large that the forme of justification is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which we are both absolved from our sinnes and also are in Christ accepted and made righteous and consequently that these two are the essentiall parts of justification viz. the not imputing or remission of sinne which God doth grant by imputation of Christs sufferings in respect whereof wee are said to be justified by his blood that is freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and the imputation of Christs obedience by which wee are made or constituted righteous and are entituled to the kingdome of Heaven So that remission of sinne is not the forme and much lesse the entire forme of justification considered as an action of God but an effect of the forme because by imputation of Christs righteousnesse we have remission of sinne Neither is it the whole benefit of justification but a part thereof For although many of our Divines as hath beene said have taught that unto justification remission of sinnes is onely required yet their assertion as hath also beene shewed is to be understood as Bellarmine himselfe understandeth Calvin as spoken in opposition to the Papists who say that to justification concurre not onely remission of sinnes but also inward renovation or sanctification To contradict them our Divines have said that wee are justified by remission onely or not imputing of sinne wherewith alwayes concurreth imputation of righteousnesse and not by renovation or sanctification Their meaning therefore by the exclusive particle onely was to exclude not imputation of righteousnesse which unseparably accompanieth the not imputing of sinne as Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. 6. 8. and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but infusion of righteousnesse or renovation § V. The third is the same in effect with that which I fully confuted Cap. 4. and contradicteth their owne assertion who teach with us that we are justified by the whole course of Christs obedience for remission of sin is properly ascribed to Christs sufferings or his blood which cleanseth us from all our sinnes and not to his active obedience And justification is nothing as they say but remission of sinne whereupon it would follow that we are justified onely by Chriâ—…ts passive obedience which I have already disproved § VI. The fourth denying the righteousnesse of Christ it selfe to be our righteousnesse I have fully confuted in the fourth booke besides that which hath already beene alledged in the third chapter of this book that which is added concerning a righteousnesse purchased by the death of Christ is the same with that which I confuted Chap. 4. § 1. for our righteousnesse is not remission of sinne but that by which wee have remission not justification it selfe but that by which wee are justified For remission of sinne as well as justification it selfe is an action of God not imputing sinne and imputing righteousnesse
and therefore is not that righteousnesse which is imputed Thus therefore I argue By what we have remission of sinne by that wee are justified and by what we are justified that is our righteousnesse by the bloud of Christ we have remission of sinne and not by that righteousnesse which is purchased by his blood viz. remission of sinne for that to say were very ridiculous Wherefore by the blood of Christ we are justified and consequently that with the resâ—… of his obedience is our righteousnesse § VII To the fifth I answer that the meritorious obedience of Christ both active and passive are the merits of Christ. If therefore the merit of Christ be imputed then his meritorious obedience Neither can the merit of Christs obedience be imputed to us unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and by imputation accepted of God for us as performed by our selves For as the guilt of Adams transgression could not be imputed to us unlesse the transgression it selfe were first imputed and made ours by imputation whereof wee are made sinners that is guilty of his sinne unto condemnation so the merit of Christs obedience cannot bee imputed unlesse the obedience it selfe be imputed and made ours by imputation whereof we are freed from the guilt of sinne and damnation and are accepted as righteous and as heires of eternall life And as it may truely be said of them to whom Adams disobedience is imputed that they sinned in Adam so of them to whom Christs obedience is imputed it may no lesse truely be said that in Christ they have satisfied the justice of God in Christ they have fulfilled the Law the Lord accepting of the obedience of Christ in their behalfe as if they had performed it in their owne persons For Christ is the end the perfection and complement of the Law to all that beleeve So that whosoever truely beleeveth in Christ hath in him fulfilled the Law as the Greeke expositors expound that place Rom. 10. 4. § VIII But say they we were not so in Christ when he obeied as we were in Adam when he sinned Neither are wee members of Christ untill we actually beleeve And therefore neither could we be said to have satisfied the justice of God for our sinnes nor to have fulfilled the Law in him as we are truely said to have sinned in Adam Or if it could be said that in Christ we satisfied Gods justice for our sinnes then should we need no pardon Neither can punishment and pardon stand together if wee have borne the punishment then are we not pardoned Aâ—…sw The first Adam was a type of the second and both were heads and roots of mankinde Adam of those that shall bee condemned Christ of those that shall be saved For as in Adam all dye that dye eternally so in Christ all live that live eternally And as in Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is all that shall be condemned were constituted sinners his disobedience being imputed to them because in him they sinned so in Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that shall be saved shall be constituted just his obedience being imputed to them because in him as their head they have satisfied and fulfilled the Law Neither are wee more truely derived from Adam in respect of the life naturall than wee are from Christ in respect of the life spirituall Therefore if Adams disobedience were imputed to condemnation much more Christs obedience is imputed unto justification of life as the Apostle argueth Rom. 5. and from thence Bernard Cur non aliunde justitia cum aliunde reatus alius qui peccatorem constituit alius qui justificat à peccato Alter in semine alter in sanguine An peccatum in semine peccatoris non justitia in Christi sanguine § IX Yea but then say they when Christ obeyed we were not his members No more say I were we the branches of the first Adam when he disobeied Actually we are neither branches of the first Adam untill we partake the humane nature by generation nor members of the second Adam untill we be made partakers of the Divine nature by regeneration and yet it is most true which Bernard avoucheth in the place even now cited satisfecit ergo Caput pro membris c. the head therefore satisfied for his members c. § X. Yea but our faith relyeth upon Christ as having already redeemed us Ans. Christ is the Lambe of God slaine from the beginning of the world The vertue of whose obedience is extended not onely to them that come after Christ but also to all the faithfull that went before from the beginning of the world who were members of Christ as much as we are now And for them as well as for us Christ obeyed the Law and suffered death and to them so many as beleeved was the obedience of Christ imputed as well as to us They all did eate the same spirituall meat and did all drinke the same spirituall drinke For they dranke of that spirituall Rocke which followed and that Rocke was Christ. § XI But if in Christ say they we satisfied the punishment then we need no pardon Answ. When wee say that in Christ wee satisfied and fulfilled the Law our meaning is that his satisfaction and obedience is imputed to us that is it is accepted of God in our behalfe as if wee had performed the same in our owne persons Neither should it seeme strange that satisfaction and pardon may stand together seeing God pardoneth no sinne for which his justice is not satisfied But it is Christ that satisfied bare the punishment and we are they who are pardoned by imputation of his satisfaction unto us Here therefore especially mercy and justice met together justice executed upon Christs mercy exhibited to us who are justified by the grace of God freely in respect of us through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and therfore not freely in respect of him who paid so great a price For him God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse for the remission of sinnes c. But that the righteousnesse of Christ is the onely thing which properly is imputed to justification I have at large disputed Lib. 4. 5. § XII The sixth I have already refuted Lib. 1. Cap. 2. § 7. Whereunto I now adde that these men confessing the truth with us that faith is the instrumentall cause of justification confute themselves For if it be the instrument to receive that which is imputed then is it not the thing it selfe which is imputed properly though relatively it may in respect of the object which it as the instrument or hand doth receive to justification and that is the righteousnesse of Christ. And for this cause as hereafter shall bee declared the same benefits which wee have from Christ properly are attributed to faith not absolutely
in regard of it selfe but relatively in respect of that righteousnesse which it doth apprehend If it be said that faith as the instrument receiveth remission of sinne because by it we are assured thereof I answer that by faith receiving Christ we have remission of sinnes and justification before we can by speciall faith be assured of it And it is a great absurdity as elsewhere I have shewed to teach that men must beleeve and be assured of the remission of their sinnes to the end that they may be remitted § XIII I shall not need therefore to say any more in this place unlesse it be to give a Caveat to all young Divines that they give no credit to these Novelties which either affirme that wee are justified by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely or deny that wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ at all as the matter of our justification By Matter I understand that very thing which is imputed as our onely righteousnesse by which wee stand perfectly righteous before God by imputation whereof we are both freed from hell and also entituled to the kingdome of heaven And let all men take notice that these opinions howsoever to some they seeme matters of small importance are notwithstanding very dangerous if not pernicious seeing they concerne our very title to the kingdome of heaven and seeing alâ—…o I have proved in this Treatise that without imputation of Christs righteousnesse there can be no justification nor salvation For all will confesse that without Christs obedience and sufferings none can bee justified or saved and that they justifie or save none but them onely to whom they are communicated and applyed But they cannot be communicated otherwise than by imputation whereby God accepteth them in our behalfe as if we had in our owne persons performed them for our selves Againe these foure assertions I hold for undoubted truthes first that what Christ our blessed Saviour in the daies of his flesh did or suffered in obedience to God he did and suffered not for himselfe but for us secondly that whatsoever he did and suffered for us that beleeve that the Lord accepteth in the behalfe of all that beleeve thirdly that what he accepteth in our behalfe that he imputeth unto us for by imputation wee meane nothing else fourthly to say that what Christ did and suffered for us God doth not accept in our behalfe is both blasphemous against Christ the wisedome of his Father as if hee did and suffered those things which he did and suffered in vaine and also pernicious unto us for if Christs doings and sufferings for us bee in vaine as they are if they bee not imputed to us then is our faith vaine and wee remaine in our sinnes and in the wofull state of damnation § XIV But some will say it is sufficient to beleeve that by the merits of Christ we have remission of sinne and that having remission of sinnes we shall be saved by him Answ. Yea but God forgiveth no sinnes for which his justice is not fully satisfied For as he is mercifull so he is just in forgiving our sinnes But no such satisfaction can bee imagined but that of Christ. For we our selves are not able to satisfie for our sinnes but by eternall punishment And how shall we have remission by Christs satisfaction if it be not applyed and communicated unto us how can it be communicated and made ours but by imputation And that the very papists themselves are at length forced to confesse And where they say that having remission of sinnes they shall be saved I confesse it is true because with Gods remission of sinnes there doth alwayes concurre imputation of righteousnesse But the bare remission of sinne without imputation of righteousnesse which onely freeth a man from the guilt of sinne and damnation doth not entitle him or give him right to the kingdome of heaven It is one thing to have by faith remission of sinnes and another to have by faith inheritance among them that be sanctified Act. 26. 18. Eternall life is not to bee had without perfect fulfilling of the Law which is no where to bee found but onely in Christ. And therefore by the onely meritorious obedience of Christ by which he hath merited and purchased salvation for us wee are saved But how should we be saved by his obedience if it be not communicated unto us and made ours for our selves how can it bee made ours but by imputation wherefore no imputation of Christs obedience no salvation CAP. VI. The end or finall cause the essentiall parts the fruits and consequents of justification § I. THE finall cause or end for which God doth justifie a sinner by imputation of Christs righteousnesse is either supreme or subordinate The supreme is the manifestation of the glory both of his mercy and of his justice as is noted in the definition which as they doe concurre in all the worke of God Psalm 145. 17. so especially in the worke of redemption and justification For therein the mercy of God appeareth to be so great that rather than hee would suffer us most miserable sinners to perish in our sinnes he hath sent his owne and his only begotten Son that we might be justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein hee hath made us accepted in his beloved His justice also such that rather than hee would suffer the sinnes of his owne elect to goe unpunished or forgive them without due satisfaction hee hath punished them in his owne Sonne and exacted from him a full satisfaction for them having set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse through the forgivenesse of sinnes which are past by the sufferance of God to demonstrate I say his righteousnesse at this time that hee might be just and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus Not unto us therefore not unto us as if we were justified by our owne righteousnesse or worthinesse but to the name of God all glory is due for his mercy and for his righteousnesse sake who doth justifie us not of workes lest wee should glory in our selves but of his grace freely without any desert or cause in our selves through the redemption wrought by Christ who is of God made righteousnesse unto us that he which gloryeth may glory in the Lord. § II. The subordinate end is our salvation and the way unto it which is our new obedience or sanctification Salvation though it bee our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our particular supreme end and chiefe good unto which both justification and sanctification is referred yet it is subordinate to the glory of God as to the soveraigne and universall end For such is Gods goodnesse towards his elect that hee hath subordinated our salvation to his owne glory as he hath
because the hebrew word which signifieth to justifie doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse § I. HAving thus briefely set downe the true Doctrine of Iustification according to the Word of God we are now to confute the erroneous doctrine of of the Papists There are six maine and capitall errours which the Papists most obstinately hold and maintaine concerning justification and consequently so many principall heads of controversie betweene us whereunto divers other particular questions are to be reduced The first concerning the name whether justification and sanctification are to bee confounded The second concerning the moving cause which is the justifying and saving Grace of God which they call gratia gratum faciens The third concerning the matter of justification The fourth concerning the forme The fifth concerning the instrumentall cause which is Faith The sixth concerning the fruits of faith and consequents of justification which are good workes concerning which are two maine questions First whether they doe justifie a man before God Secondly whether they doe merit Eternall Life § II. The first capitall errour of the Papists is that they confound justification and sanctification and by confounding of them and of two benefits making but one they utterly abolish as shall be shewed the benefit of justification which notwithstanding is the principall benefit which we have by Christ in this life by which wee are freed from hell and entituled to the Kingdome of Heaven And this they doe in two respects for first they hold that to justifie in this question signifieth to make righteous by righteousnesse inherent or by infusion of righteousnesse that is to sanctifie Secondly they make remission of sinne not to be the pardoning and forgiving of sinne but the utter deletion or expulsion of sinne by infusion of righteousnèsse Thus they make justification wholly to consist in the parts of sanctification For whereas Sanctification is partly privative which is the taking away of sinne which we according to the Scriptures call mortification and partly positive which we call vivification and is partly inward or habituall consisting in the habits of Grace infused and partly actuall which is our new obedience and practice of good workes all these and onely these they make to concurre to justification which with them is partly privative which they call remission of sinne whereby they understand the utter deletion or extinction of sinne wrought by infusion of perfect righteousnesse which is an higher degree of mortification than we can attaine unto in this life and partly positive and that either habituall which they call their first justification wherein a man of a sinner is made righteous by infusion of the habits of Grace which is indeed regeneration and partly actuall which they call their second justification wherein a righteous man is made more just by the practice of good works whereby they merit not onely the increase of righteousnesse but also the Crowne of Eternall Life § III. Of this first controversie therefore are two questions First whether to justifie doth signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse which is to sanctifie Secondly whether remission of sinne be the utter deletion and abolition of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse In both the Papists hold the affirmative The former which is a most pernicious errour they ground upon the like notation of the Latine words to justifie and to sanctifie That as to sanctifie is to make holy by holinesse inherent so to justifie is to make just by infusion of righteousnesse But though the notation of the Latine words were to be respected yet no more could be inforced from thence but that to justifie is to make just And that is all which Bellarmine goeth about to prove Now God maketh men just two wayes by imputation as he justifieth by infusion as he sanctifieth them For if a man may bee made just not only inwardly by obtaining righteousnesse but also outwardly by declaration as Bellarmine himselfe saith then much more by imputation even as we were made sinners by Adams actuall transgression and as Christ was made sinne that is a sinner for us For even as by Adams disobedience wee were made sinners and guilty of damnation his transgression being imputed to us so are wee made just by the obedience of Christ imputed to us And as Christ who knew no sinne was made a sinner by imputation of our sinnes to him so we are made the righteousnesse of God in him that is righteous in him by the imputation of his righteousnesse who is God unto us But indeed the force of the Latine words is to be respected no further than as they are the true translation of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New § IV. The Hebrew root Tsadaq from whence those verbs do spring which signifie to justifie is by the Septuagint translated sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just blamelesse or pure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be just as Iob 9. 2. 15. 20. 10. 15. 15. 14. 25. 4. 33. 12. 34. 5. 35. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be blamelesse as Iob 22. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be pure as Iob 4. 17. sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense to be just as being a translation not of a passive but of a Neuter as Gen. 38. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thamar is more just than I. So Psal. 19. 10. jâ—…dicia Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 51. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Rom. 3. 4. Psal. 143. 2. Esai 43. 9. cum 41. 26. Ezek. 16. 52. In Ecclus. 18. 1. Deus solus justificabitur the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be reputed just as Iob 11. 2. 13. 18. 40. 3. Sometimes to be justified and absolved from sinne to bee pronounced and accepted as righteous as Esai 43. â—…6 Let us plead together declare thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first thine iniquities that thou maist bee justified Esai 45. 25. in the Lord all the seed of Israel shall be justified The passive is onely once used Dan. 8. 14. where it is said that the sanctuary after 2300. dayes shall bee justified that is expiated or purged In the second conjugation it signifieth to justifie but not as the word is used in the doctrine of justification but as it signifieth either to arrogate righteousnesse to a mans selfe as Iob 32. 2. or to attribute or ascribe it to others as Iobâ—…3 â—…3 32. or to shew himselfe or others righteous as Ier. 3. 11. Ezek. 16. 51 52. In the third conjugation it signifieth to justifie in that sense that the question of justification And it is verbum forense a judiciall word used in Courts of judgement which usually is opposed to condemning And it signifieth to absolve and to acquit from guilt and accepting a man as righteous to pronounce him just
according to charity sanctified from the corruption of sinne and justified from the guilt of the same therefore they should take heed lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified or made guilty of those crimes from which they were justified § V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified Answ. The Context doth shew that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed that whom the Lord calleth hee doth justifie and whom he doth justifie them also hee doth glorifie from thence hee inferreth this consolation who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth as was said verse 30. who shall condemne c. Where justifying most plainely is used as a judiciall word signifying by sentence to justifie as Chrysostome and Oâ—…cumenius on this place doe note as opposed to accusing and condemning and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word infusion of righteousnesse But heere it may bee objected that in this place where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation sanctification is either included in justification or left our Answ. It is left out for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of salvation in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter left out sanctification as being no cause of salvation but the way unto it and the cognizance of them that are saved And these degrees are so set downe Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed first Vocation that men should bee called and thereby brought to beleeve secondly Iustification that by faith they may receive remission of sinnes thirdly Glorification that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified where sanctification is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved Againe sanctification is left out because it is included in respect of the beginning thereof which is our conversion or regeneration in vocation and in respect of the consummation in glorification for as sanctification is gloria inchoata so glorification is gratia consummata § VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him who justifieth the ungodly Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence his faith is imputed for righteousnesse which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit that it plainely confutes it first it is called the justification of the ungodly that is of one who is a sinner in himselfe for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne and so remaineth cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent secondly because to him that beleeveth in Christ faith relatively understood that is the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse thirdly because in this place justification is expressed by these termes not imputing sinne remitting or covering of sinne imputing righteousnesse without workes imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not that is that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse but beleeveth in him that justifieth a sinner CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justification assigned by Bellarmine § I. THirdly saith Bellarmine justification is taken for increase of justice for even as he is said to be heated not only who of cold is mà de hot but also who of hot is made hotter even so he is said to be justified who not onely of a sinner is made just but also of just is made more just Ans. In this comparison of like there is a great unlikenesse for calefaction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot but in justification the change is not reall but relative as before hath beene shewed Bellarmine therefore must prove that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteousnesse inherent before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of inherent justice But if the former cannot be proved much lesse the latter But yet he bringeth three proofes such as they be § II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justificari quâ—…niam merces Domini manet in aeternum feare not to be justified untill death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever Answ. To omit that the booke is Apocryphall which ought not to bee alleaged in controversies of faith the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved The words in the Originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is stay not untill death to be justified or as their own interlinear translation readeth it ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari wait not untill death to be justified where it is evident that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion which he would not have differred untill the time of death and not of the continuance or increase of it for then the sentence would beare a contrary and indeed an ungodly sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abide not or continue not to be justified or to be just untill thy death And the words untill death are not to be joyned with the last word justified but with the first stay not untill death And their translation of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether as Bellarmine here readeth ne verearis or as some editions have ne vetéris hath no affinity with the Originall But our interpretation as it agreeth with the words of the Text so it is confirmed by the context Vse Physike before thou bee sicke before judgement prepare thy selfe humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke and in the time of sinnes that is whiles thou mai'st yet sinne shew thy conversion let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season and deferre not untill death to be justified or to become just § III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and proceeding in justice and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are as much as cease not And this he would prove by that which goeth before be not hindred to pray alwayes where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continuall prayer and also by that which immediately followeth because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked but indulgence Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted when it shal be proved first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to cease secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwaies fourthly that those words but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth stay not or waite not and not cease not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render the vow and not to pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
a propitiation for our sinnes 1 Ioh. 2. 2. and that Christ who was just and knew no sinne was made sinne for us that wee might bee the righteousnesse of God in him as the Apostle speaketh 2 Cor. 5. 21. and Esai 53. 5 6 6. § X. The third word is my servant which signifieth that Christ did serve his Father in the worke of justification and consequently did justifie men not by judging but by ministring as himselfe saith Matth. 20. 28. and is therefore called the Minister of Circumcision that is of the Iewes The fourth word and he shall beare their iniquities which signifieth the manner how Christ by ministring doth justifie that is by bearing the burden of our sinnes upon his shoulders that is by suffering the punishment due for our sinnes Answ. The thing which hee indevoureth to prove viz. that Christ as he performed the office of Mediation in the dayes of his flesh did not justifie us aâ—…ter the manner of a Iudge is true But his reasons are not sufficient Not the former for he might bee Gods Minister or servant as all Kings or Iudges are and yet our Iudge Not the second for although he were our Priest to offer himselfe for us and by his obedience and sufferings to justifie us yet is he also our King and our Iudge who by his sentence will justifie us at the last day But although Christ did not justifie us after the manner of a Iudge yet it followeth not either that the word doth signifie infusion of justice to which purpose Andradius alleaged this place or that it is not a judiciall word For it is a judicial word as it is attributed not only to Iudges but also to sureties and advocates Christ as our Advocate justifieth by pleading for us as asurety by bearing the punishment judicially imposed upon us And whereas Bellarmine would prove out of 1 Pet. 2. 24. that inherent righteousnesse is an effect of Christs satisfaction or bearing our iniquities he proveth nothing but what we teach viz. that the fruits and end of our justification and redemption by Christ is our sanctification Luk. 1. 74 75. Rom. 6. 22. Tit. 2. 14. And consequently that our sanctification or inherent righteousnesse being the fruit and effect of our justification cannot bee the cause thereof no more than it is the cause of redemption For By what righteousnesse wee are redeemed by the same wee are justified for redemption and justification in substance differ not Rom. 4. 6. 7. 3. 24. 25. Col. 1. 14. Eph. 1. 7. By the righteousnesse of Christ wee are redeemed which is out of us in him and not by righteousnesse inherent Therefore By that righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him wee are justified and not by righteousnesse inherent His third place is Apoc. 22. 11. which I have fully answered before and is here impertinently recited to prove the signification of the Hebrew word being not sufficient to cleare the Greeke Seeing their owne best editions in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I have shewed before § II. The third and fourth reason which Bellarmine alleageth out of Calvin and Chemnitius and answereth them together are concerning the signification and composition of the Latine word justificare which indeed are not used as arguments to prove the true signification of the word in this controversie but as just exceptions against the arguments of the Papists who rely too much upon the signification and composition of the Latine word wherein they were justly reprooved by Chemnitius first because the controversie being what is the use and signification of the word in the Scriptures it is not materiall what the Latine word doth signifie in other authors but what is the signification of the Hebrew word in the Old Testament and of the Greeke in the New whereof the Latine is meerely a Translation And therefore the Latine if it be a right Translation must in this controversie bee understood to signifie the selfe same thing with the Hebrew and the Greeke the use and signification whereof in the Scriptures is judiciall and is neuer used in the Popish sense wherefore though the use of the word in other authors did favour the Popish conceipt yet would it not disadvantage us secondly though the Latine words do signific to make just which is all that can be enforced from the signification and composition thereof and be so expounded by Augustine whom Bellarmine to that purpose alleageth yet this maketh nothing against us Not onely because Bellarmine hath confessed men may be made just either inwardly by obtaining of righteousnesse inherent or outwardly after a judiciall manner but also because we freely professe that whom God doth justifie he maketh righteous by imputation of Christs righteousnesse It is true indeed that some of our Divines deny the word to signifie making righteous but their deniall is to be understood according to the meaning of the Papists viz. by infusion thirdly the Latine word justificare and so the English as in the translation of the Scriptures it hath alwayes the judiciall signification and never signifieth to endue with righteousnesse inherent no more than the Hebrew and the Greeke whereof it is a translation so oftentimes in the Fathers and many times in the Popish writers and alwayes almost in the common use of speech it signifieth to cleare from guilt to free from imputation of fault to approve to declare or pronounce just Or if at any time it be used in the sense of induing with righteousnesse inherent it is contrary to the use of the Scriptures which in the doctrine of justification is to be retained § XII Yea but the Fathers interpret justifying to be making righteous whom to refuse in an ecclesiasticall question and to appeale to the judgement of the Latine authors as Tully and Terence is a great importunity saith Bellarmine especially seeing the Apostle hath taught that to be justified is to be constituted or made just according to the composition of the word Answ. That which is said of the Authors of the Latine tongue is a meere calumniation for in them the word is not used at all The interpretation of the Fathers according to the doctrine of Saint Paul wee approve acknowledging that whom God doth justifie hee maketh them just by imputation of Christs righteousnesse Yea but say they the Fathers meane by inherent justice Answ. Though some of the Latine Fathers who were ignorant of the Hebrew and not skilfull in the Greeke sometimes under the terme of justification include the benefit also of sanctification being led thereunto by the notation of the Latine word yet sometimes they exclude it as first when they place justification in remission of sinnes as many times they doe secondly when according to the Scriptures they oppose it to condemnation thirdly and especially when with one consent they plainely teach that we are justified by faith alone as hereafter shall be shewed
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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 instruments
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 and
is For they professe that by inherent righteousnesse no man living can be justified in Gods sight as I have shewed in this third controversie and in the fifth and sixth CAP. XIII An appendice to this third controversie concerning the parity of justice § I. VPon this controversie concerning the matter of justification dependeth another which is scarce worth the mentioning but onely to shew the blinded malice of the Papists in propounding it and to vindicate our selves from their calumniations Bellarmine therefore de justif l. 3. c. 16. propoundeth the question de paritate justitia of the parity or equality of justice whether all just men be in justice equall among themselves For faine would hee have the world to thinke that we are like to Iovinian or the Stoiks calumniating us against the light of his owne conscience For he cannot be ignorant but that wee doe acknowledge degrees of righteousnesse inherent and of the graces of sanctification not onely in divers men according to the measure of grace bestowed upon them some being incipients some proficients and some growne men but also in the same men every man being bound to labour that they may grow in grace and proceed from Faith to Faith untill hee come to a perfect man in Christ. § II. Indeed if the question bee concerning righteousnesse imputed we doe teach that in respect thereof all the faithfull are equally just Because as they are justified they stand just before God in the most perfect righteousnesse of Christ by which the weake Christian is justified as well as the strong And in this regard the faith of Gods children though unequall in degrees in some weaker in some stronger in some more and in some lesse is said by the Apostle Peter to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a like pretious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the righteousnesse of God and our Saviour Iesus Christ that is in that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified And as the merit of Christ is equally imputed to all that beleeve so the reward in respect of the substance which is eternall life shall be equally given to all that beleeve yet I doubt not but that whom God in this life hath adomed with greater graces he will in them crowne his greater graces with greater glory And therefore as Saint Ambrose faith he giveth â—…qualem mercedem vitae â—…on gloriae the equall reward of life but not of glory and 〈◊〉 unus denarius non est unum prâ—…mium sed una vita una de gâ—…enna liberâ—…tio and Gregory there be many mansions with the father and yet unequall labourers receive the same peny because unto all there shall bee one equall blesseduesse of joyfulnesse though the sublimity of life be not one and the same to all § III. But Bellarmine though he confesseth that we doe not hold that either vertues or sinnes are equall and that we doe not deny but that both the same men may and ought to increase in faith hope and charity and in other vertues and that also divers men may bee more just than others in respect of such vertues as be in them but that wee hold that men being not justified before God by these vertues but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith wee are in respect of this righteousnesse by which wee are justified equally just Yet all his proofes are to prove the inequality and degrees of sanctity or inherent righteousnesse as though we denyed the same or held that paradox which may in respect of habituall righteousnesse more justly be imputed to the Papists For if incipients in Religion yea infants in age be justified or made just as they teach with perfect righteousnesse infused what difference shall there bee betwixt Baptized infants and the greatest Proficients among them who dreame of perfection in regard of habituall righteousnesse saving that the infants justice may seeme to bee more pure from actuall concupiscences But of this question more hath beene said than enough A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE FIFTH BOOKE Concerning the formall cause of justification CAP. I. Containing five proofes that we are justified by imputation of Christs righteousnesse § I. THE fourth grand errour of the Papists in the article of justification is concerning that which wee call the forme thereof For they denying and deriding the imputation of Christs righteousnesse without which notwithstanding no man can bee saved doe hold that men are justified by infusion and not by imputation of righteousnesse we on the contrary doe hold according to the Scriptures that we are justified before God onely by imputation of Christs righteousnesse and not by infusion And our meaning when wee say that God imputeth Christs righteousnesse unto us is nothing else but this that hee graciously accepteth for us and in our behalfe the righteousnesse of Christ both active that is his obedience which in the dayes of his flesh hee performed for us and passive that is his sufferings which he sustained for us as if we had in our owne persons both performed and suffered the same for our selves Howbeit we confesse that the Lord doth infuse righteousnesse into the faithfull yet not as he justifieth but as hee sanctifieth them and consequently wee acknowledge that in all the faithfull there is true righteousnesse inherent but we deny that they are justified by it How I am first to prove our assertion and to maintaine our proofs against the exceptions and cavils of the Papists And then will I answer their allegations § II. My three first proofes shall bee taken from those things which have already beene proved And first those reasons which before I alleaged to prove the formall cause of our justification to bee the imputation of Christs righteousnesse Secondly If to justifie in the Scriptures doth never signifie to make righteous by infusion of righteousnesse or to make a man righteous formally by inherent righteousnesse then it is evident that the justification which the Scriptures teach is not by infusion of righteousnesse And if not by infusion then by imputation for a third thing cannot be named But the former I have most evidently proved therefore the latter cannot be denyed Thirdly If we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by any righteousnesse infused or inherent in us then it is evident that we are justified not by infusion of righteousnesse but by imputation But the former I have fully demonstrated therefore the latter must be confessed For wee are justified either by inherent righteousnesse or imputed not by inherent as hath beene shewed therefore by righteousnesse imputed § III. My fourth proofe shall be taken from the confession of our Adversaries who doe confesse that Christ his satisfaction is imputed unto us which they understand but of the one halfe of his satisfaction and not all that viz. in respect onely of the everlasting
most worthy to be urged and beat upon as being that thing which above all other things in this world is to be desired and laboured for according to the â—…xhortation of the Apostle Peter Give diligence to make your calling and election sure But this speciall faith the Papists above all things deridâ—… and detesâ—… â—…thereby discovering themselves to bee as I have elsewhere shewed voide of all truth and power of Religion It being as I have said and proved a thing most profitable most comfortable most necessary without which no Christian can have any true pâ—…ce or sound comforâ—… or ougâ—… to have contentment in his present estate untill â—…e have â—…tained unto it in some measure And when hee 〈◊〉 attained to some measure he must endevour more and moâ—…e to increase it But hereof I have treated in another place wherâ—…unto I referre the Christian Reader CAP. VII Of the acts or effects of faith and first whether faith doth justifie or only dispose to justification Secondly whether it doth justifie formally § I. THe next controversie is concerning that act or effect of justifying faith in respect whereof it is called justifying faith Of this there are three Questions the first whether Faith doth indeed justifie or onely dispose a man to justification Secondly whether it justifie formally as part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousâ—…esse Thirdly whether it justifie alone The assertions of the Papists in the two former questions doe not seeme to â—…ang well together For if faith goe before justification disposing a man thereto how doth it justifie formally as part of that righteousnesse whereby a man is as they speake formally just And if no dispositions bâ—…e required to justification to what purpose doe they tell us that a man must be disposed and prepared by faith and other virtues For howsoever in their speculations they require preparative dispositions to justification yet in their practise they seeme to require 〈◊〉 For their justification which is in fact and in deed is restrained to their Sacraments as namely to Bapâ—… And their Sacraments justifie ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore without necessity of any foregoing dispositions For if any virtuous or good disposition were required then should their Sacraments justifie not ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Onely they require that he who is by the Sacrament to be justified doe not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…lis 〈◊〉 that is interpose the obstacls of some mortall sinne And what be these dispositions which must goe before justification § II. Forsooth there are seven which according to the decree of the Councell of Trent Bellarmine reckoneth De justif lib. 1. ca. 13. to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because the other sixe also doe dispose men thereunto The seven are faith feare hope love penitencie a purpose and desire to receive the Sacrament a purpose of amendment of life All which doe but prepare and dispose a man But it is the Sacrament as namely of Baptisme that doth actually justifie and without which no man is justified But I would gladly know whether these seven preparatives be fruits of grace or works of nature Not of grace for as they teach no man hath grace before Iustification What then they are the fruits of nature holpen I wot not by what grace which if it were true would not onely prove the maine assertion of the Pelagians Gratiam secundùm merita dari or as in other words it is expressed in the Councell of Trent Secundùm propriam cajusque dispositionem operationem For though according to their doctrine these preparations are not merits of condignity as they say yet they bee of congruity but also disprove the doctrine of the Apostle that we are justified freely by his grace But this seemeth to me absurd that men should have one justifying faith and so one hope and one love c. going before justification and another infused in our justification and that by the one justifying faith going before we should be prepared to justification and by the other infused in our justification we should in part be formally justified But this is certaine that that faith which in order of time goeth before justification is no true justifying faith For that which goeth before justification goeth also before regeneration and what goeth before regeneration is of nature and not of Grace But faith in order of time goeth not before justification though in order of nature it doth for so soone as a man beleeveth he is justified as Hierome saith Talis est ille qui in Christum credidit die qua credidit qualis ille qui universam legem implevit Such a one is hee that beleeveth in Christ the very day that hee beleeveth as hee that hath fulfilled the whole Law nor in order of nature before regeneration for in our regeneration it is wrought As therefore no man hath faith who is not regenerated so no man hath faith who is not thereby justified The Scripture is plaine that in Christ whosoever beleeveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is justified Act. 13. 39. He that beleeveth in Christ is passed from death to life Ioh. 5. 24. 6. 54. which passage from death to life is justification whereby as themselves teach a man is translated from the state of death and damnation into a state of Grace and Salvation Faith therefore actually justifieth and not disposeth onely to justification § III. The other question is whether faith doth justifie formally as they speake as being a part of inherent righteousnesse or instrumentally only as the hand to receive Christ who is our righteousnesse The Romane Catholikes hold â—…he former the true Catholikes the latter But the former I have sufficiently disproved before and proved the latter For if we be not justified by any grace or righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves which I have before by many undeniable arguments demonstrated then it followeth necessarily that we are not justified by faith as it is a gift or grace an act or habit or quality inherent in us or performed by us And if we be justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely which being out of us in him is imputed to those who receive it by faith which also before I invincibly proved then also it followeth by necessary consequence that wee are justified by faith onely as it is the instrument or hand to apprehend or receive Christ who is our righteousnesse Wherefore where faith is said to justifie or to bee imputed to righteousnesse it must of necessity be understood relatively and in respect of the object to which purpose both justification and all other benefits which we receive by Christ are attributed to faith as I have shewed before Not that faith it selfe worketh these things but because by it wee receive Christ and with him all his merits and benefits And for the same cause the
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
grave of sinne § VII And here I am to mention two things both for the comfort of true though weake Christians and also for the detestation of popery These beginnings of faith of hope of love of amendment of life the Papists doe not acknowledge to be graces infused but the fruits of nature assisted with Gods special helpe by which they being holpen of God doe prepare and dispose themselves to the grace of justification which is given to man according to their owne preparative dispositions But forasmuch as these beginnings of faith and other vertues are not the fruits of nature for in our flesh there is no good thing and that which is borne of the flesh is flesh the very disposition of our nature being enmity against God but of the regenerating spirit the weake Christians therefore though the graces of God in them are weake and small even as a graine of Mustard-seed yet if they bee true and unfained they are to be perswaded that the Lord who in his children accepteth the will for the deed will accept of them as the fruits of his spirit seeing hee professeth that hee will not quench the smoaking flaxe nor breake the bruised reed And surely if the Spirit of God bee the author of no charity but that which is perfect then is he author of none in this life wherein wee receive but the first fruits of the Spirit 2. The Papists doe not hold themselves to bee justified untill perfect charity bee infused into them by infusion whereof all sinne is expelled So that in any one of them being justified no sinne remaineth And therefore whiles sinne remaineth in them as it doth alwayes even in the best during this life they are not justified No marvell then that Papists cannot be assured of their justification seeing they may bee assured that they are never justified because they never attaine to perfect righteousnesse in this life and because sinne doth alwayes remaine in them § VIII Our third argument I propound thus None that is a child of wrath and an enemy to God can love God whiles he continueth in that estate But untill their reconciliation and justification all men are children of wrath and enemies to God Therefore before reconciliation and justification no man can love God Bellarmine answereth that a man may love God though God be angry with him which is in respect of Gods children who are justified and reconciled unto him but the question is whether those that are not yet reconciled and justified can love God wee know that Gods anger may stand with reconciliation For God is angry with his dearest Children when they sinne against him and in his anger hee doth also correct them with whom notwithstanding he is reconciled for he doth correct them in love and for their good Gods children therefore may love God where they know him to be justly angry with them but they that are enemies as all are untill they be reconciled doe not love God but the very disposition of their corrupt nature is enmity against God § IX His fifth disposition is Penitencie which as he saith is a sorow for sinne and a detestation of it which I deny not ordinarily to be a disposition in the children of God to repentance But this is to be understood of the godly sorrow which some call contrition which is not to be found in naturall men which is a sorrow conceived not so much for the punishment deserved as for the offence of God whom they have displeased and dishonoured being so gracious a God unto them This proceedeth from faith and from love Of this it is said 2 Cor. 7. 10. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 godly sorrow worketh repentance never to be repented of As for that sorrow which is conceived not for the offence of God but for the shame and punishment which follow sinne which some call attrition it is of the same nature with servile fearâ—… which though in it owne nature it rather driveth from God than draweth to him as we see in Iudas yet God is pleased sometimes to use it as a meanes to draw his elect unto him But though contrition dispose men to repentance and attrition be used sometimes as a preparative to faith because humiliation is the way to exaltation yet neither of both justifie and therefore for all them faith alone doth justifie § X. But let us examine his proofes wherein though his premisses be very weake yet his conclusion as allwayes is very confident His proofes are these Act. 11. 18. Therefore God hath given to the Gentiles penance unto life 2 Cor. 7. 10. The sorrow which is according unto God worketh penance to salvation that is stable Ezek. 18. 27. when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall quicken his soule What can be more cleare if penance be given of God unto life that is to obtaine life if sorrow for sinne undertaken for God worke penance to salvation if he which doth penance doth quicken his owne soule how doth faith alone justifie or how doth penance not justifie Answ. When I consider your arguments I wonder at your confidence The word which in the vulgar latine is in the two first places translated poenitentia and by the Rhemists penance in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not sorrow for sin but repentance it selfe which importeth a change of a mans mind and disposition and is not a forerunner but a consequent of justification before God which in the first place is called repentance unto life because though it bee no cause but a consequent of justification yet it is the way to life and a necessary forerunner to glorification The godly sorrow in the second place is commended as an excellent disposition to the renewing ofrepentance in the faithfull not to bee repented of The third Bellarmine readeth thus when a wicked man shall turne himselfe from his wickednesse hee shall make alive his soule as if a wicked man could either turne himselfe from his wickednesse or quicken his owne soule or as if a dead man could restore himselfe to life But then is the wicked turned when God doth turne him and then is his soule quickned when God doth quicken him The words are when the wicked turneth from his wickednesse hee shall preserve his soule from death that is as it is expounded in the next verse he shall live Howsoever this place speaketh not of any foregoing disposition but of repentance it selfe which in order of nature never goeth before justification though many times it be discerned before it as the cause many times is knowne by the effect But not whatsoever is necessary to salvation doth justifie All the graces of sanctification and namely repentance have their necessary use But justification is ascribed onely to faith because it is the onely instrument ordained of God to receive Christ who onely is our righteousnesse § XI His sixth
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
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
viz. if wee be not justified by good workes nor saved for them are they therefore to be neglected No saith the Apostle they that are justified are the workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath prepared that we being justified and regenerated should walke in them And therefore the Apostle speaketh manifestly not of workes going before grace but of such good workes as are consequents of our justification and fruits of our regeneration wherein we being regenerated and justified are to walke as in the way to our glorification § XIV The next place viz. Tit. 3. 5. which is like to the former Bellarmine shifteth off with the like common answere that it speaketh of workes going before faith But hee may not carry it so For the Apostle having as hee had done Eph. 2. signified that all of us before our conversion lived in all manner of sinne But after that the kindnesse and love of God our Saviour to man appeared not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done but according to his mercie hee saved us c. Where as in the former place he useth the phrase of saving unto which as I said Bellarmines distinction cannot bee fitted And secondly the workes which he excludeth hee doth expressely call the works of righteousnesse which terme cannot agree to the works of such men as the Apostle describeth vers 3. and such are all men unregenerate § XV. The sixth and last testimony whereunto Bellarmine answereth is Phil. 3. 8 9. Where the Apostle in the question of justification renouncing his owne inherent righteousnesse which not onely hee had in his Pharisaisme but which then hee had according to the Law desireth to bee found in Christ having that righteousnesse which is through the faith of Christ. Bellarmine answereth according to his distinction formerly used that by the righteousnesse which is of the Law are meant workes done through the knowledge of the Law by the onely strength of nature which I have before confuted Neither would Paul make any question of his justification by his works done before his conversion For before his conversion notwithstanding his Pharisaicall proâ—…ession of righteousnesse hee doth confesse that he was a blasphemer and injurious and of all sinners the chiefe 1 Tim. 1. 13 15. And whereas Chemnitius objecteth that Paul rejecteth not onely his workes before his conversion which he siâ—…nifieth speaking in the time past ver 7. but what things were gaine unto me I counted losse for Christ but also the workes of his present condition which hee noteth speaking in the present tence and using particles of amplification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea doubtlesse and â—… doe count all things but losse c. As if he should have said nay more than that I even now doe count all things as losse and I doe count all but as dung c. Bellarmine answereth that as the Apostle in the beginning of his conversion had counted them losse so hee did still But if the Apostle had spoken of the same workes whereof he spake ver 7. the amplification used vers 8. would have been but an idle repetition and the exposition which we give was long since delivered by Chrysostome The Apostle saith hee having said these things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I counted losse for Christ he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea that which is more I doe count all things losse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he said all both past long since and also present § XVI But here Bellarmine thinketh he hath Chemnitius at a great advantage as if hee had spoken blasphemy for saying that the Apostle calleth his workes done after his calling which were the fruits of the Spirit and for which he expected a reward 2 Tim. 4. 7. even a Crowne of righteousnesse c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dung Whereunto I reply in the question of sanctification wee doe highly esteeme of good workes but in the question of justification if they shall be obtruded as the matter by which wee stand just before God by which we are both freed from hell and entituled to heaven if affiance or trust be put in them for our justification before God then seeme they never so glorious they are to bee esteemed as things of no worth yea as losse And in the like cause as hath beene shewed the godly have compared their most righteous works to menstâ—…uous clouts And in this sense Chemnitius speaketh that the Apostle quod attinet ad articulum justificationis did thus speake of his workes done after his renovation Immo saith he si fiducâ—… justitiae cor am Deo ad vitam aeternam illis operibus assuaâ—…ur pronunciat ille esse stercora detrimenta But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated by the vulgar Latine stercora offend Bellarmine hee may translate it quisquilias as Hierome doth meaning thereby things of no value such things as use to be cast to Dogges or Swine according to the notation of the word For as Suidas saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or as others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is cast to swine And from hence is the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to bee rejected as a thing of no worth Chrysostome and Theophylact upon the place by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chaffe Photius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 straw or stubble But Heâ—…ychius expoundeth it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dung I conclude as Bellarmine doth against Chemnitius Eat nunc Bellarminus queratur c. Let him complaine that wee are enemies to good workes because in the question of justification when men trust to them to bee justified before God by them and so make Idols of them which the holy Ghost calleth Deos stercoreos wee esteeme them not onely as things of no â—…alew but also as losse § XVII To these testimonies I added others out of the same Chapters or Epistles no lesse pregnant than these unto which more might bee adjoyned as Rom. 3. 24. being justified freely by his grace which text affordeth two arguments from the words gratis and gratia From the former I argue thus Those that are justified freely gratis are justified without workes All the faithfull are justified gratis freely Therefore all the faithfull are justified without workes The assumption is proved out of the text The proposition because the word gratis is so expounded by all sorâ—…s of Writers both old and new both protestants and Papists gratis id est siâ—…e â—…ueribus sine meritis as I have shewed heretofore Gratis saith 〈◊〉 quia nihil â—…perantes nec vicem reddentes sola fide justificati sunt dâ—…ne Dei by which words hee excludeth all workes as well following after as going before Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou art saved freely without any good workes of thine which words exclude all merits as well from salvation as from justification And so doe
but the question is of justification Now many things are required to salvation which doe not concurre to justification as namely confession holinesse of life patience perseverance c. which though they goe before salvation yet they follow after justification and therefore cannot be causes thereof In all this discourse therefore Bellarmine is farre from concluding the point in question Notwithstanding it will not be unprofitable if I shall make a short excursion to follow him in his discourse but not to answere every particular which is not worth the answering That therefore he may confute our most pernicious errour as he calleth it he saith he will prove three things first that in the Gospell is contained the doctrine of workes and divers Lawes and that the promises thereof require the condition of fulfilling the Law Secondly that the just are not free from the observation of the Law of God Thirdly that good workes are simply necessary to Salvation § III. His intent in the first is to disprove that difference which we make betweene the Law and the Gospell from whence he had collected in the former Chapter that we deny the necessity of good works The difference was this That the Law propoundeth justification and salvation upon the condition of our fulfilling the whole Law But the Gospell promiseth justification and salvation upon the condition of faith only excluding works as the causes by which we are justified or for which we be saved which difference if it be true as it is most true plainely proveth justification by faith only and disproveth justification by workes For the better understanding whereof wee are to distinguish the termes both of the Law and Gospell which are used sometimes more largely sometimes more strictly and properly More largely Thorah the Law signifieth the whole doctrine of the old Testament whether written and contained in the bookes of Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes or Preached Written thus it is said to have beene written in the Law Ioh. 10. 34. which is written Psalm 82. 6. so Ioh. 12. 34. which is written Psalm 110. 4. so Ioh. 15. 25. which is written Psalm 35. 19. The Law saith those things Rom. 3. 19. which are cited out of the Psalmes and out of the Prophet Esay vers 10 11 12. Thus 1 Cor 14. 21. out of Esai 28. 11. thus Gal. 4. 21. out of Gen. 21. 10. And thus by the Law in many places is understood the whole doctrine of God contained in the Scriptures of the old testament and is often used in the same sense promiscuously g with Gods word insomuch that the Septuagints sometime translate Dabar which signifieth the word by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preached as Esai 30. 9 10. Psalm 78. 1. Ier. 18. 18. Prov. 28. 9. 29. 18. In this large sense the Evangelicall promises made in the old testament are contained in the Law though properly belonging to the Gospell as Bellarmine confesseth the promises of remission of sinnes though they be in the Prophets they doe not belong to the Law but to the Gospell And so the covenant of grace it selfe which the Lord made with Abraham in making whereof he is said Gal. 3. 8. to have preached before the Gospell to Abraham Of the Doctrine of the Gospell which was to begin at Ierusalem Luk. 24. 47. it is said Esai 2. 3. Mic. 4. 2. out of Sion the Law shall goe foorth So more largely the Gospell is taken for the whole Doctrine of the new Testament whether written by the Apostles and Evangelists or preached Mark. 13. 10. Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 2. 5 14. Ephes. 6. 19. Col. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 27. 2 Thes. 1. 8. Thus the histories of the life and death of CHRIST are called Gospels Mark 1. 1. Mat. 26. 13. Preached Rom. 2. 16. 16. 25. 1 Cor. 4. 15. 9. 18. Gal. 2. 7. 1 Thes. 1. 5. 2. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 8. In respect of this large sense it is truely said that the Precepts Promises and Comminations of the Law are contained in the Gospell § IV More strictly and properly the Law signifieth the Covenant of workes which is also called the Law of workes Rom. 3. 27. which upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience promiseth justification and salvation to the observers thereof Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Levit 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11. Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 20 28. Likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gospell which importeth good tydings signifieth more strictly and properly the Covenant of Grace which is also called the Law of faith Rom. 3. 27. and the word of faith Rom. 10. 8. which freely promiseth justification and right of salvation to all that beleeve in Christ Ioh. 3. 15 16 36. 6. 47. 11. 25. 20. 31. Act. 16. 31. Rom. 3. 24. 10. 6 9. Eph. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. 1 Ioh. 5 13. This doctrine of God concerning Salvation by Christ through faith which properly is the Gospell Luk. 4. 18. Matth. 11. 5. Rom. 1. 16 17. Act. 15. 7. Gal. 1. 6. 3. 8. Act. 10. 36. is called the Gospell of grace Act. 20. 24. the word of reconciliation 2 Cor. 5. 18. the Gospell of peace Ephes. 6. 15. the Gospell of salvation Ephes. 1. 13. the Gospell of glory 1 Tim. 1. 11. the Gospell of the glory of Christ that is the glorious Gospell of Christ 2 Cor. 4. 4. the Gospell of the Kingdome Matth. 4. 13. 24. 13. This doctrine teacheth us that our gracious God out of his meere grace having elected his children in Christ before all times did in the fulnesse of time send downe his Sonne to save us and that the benefit of the Messias might be applyed unto us vouchsafeth unto us the Gospell of grace by which according to the purpose of his grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times he calleth us working in us the grace of faith being endued with faith hee imputeth unto us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ making us partakers of redemption reconciliation justification and adoption and so freeing us from hell and from all the enemies of our salvation hee entituleth us unto the kingdome of heaven And that wee may be fitted and prepared for his Kingdome into which no unholy thing may enter Apoc. 21. 27. hee hath promised to them that beleeve that being redeemed reconciled justified adopted and so entituled to the kingdome of heaven hee will give them grace to worship him without feare in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of our life that is in the voluntary upright and constant obedience of his Law Luk. 1. 73 74 75. It is true that the things which God in this Covenant of grace hath promised to give as namely faith and new obedience are also required of us Deo dante quod jubet God giving to us what he requireth of us the one as the antecedent condition
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
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
what we were and not what we are that seeing from what wee are fallen we might seeke to bee repaired in Christ who is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. The covenant of workes God made with man in his state of integrity when he was able to keepe it But after the fall because it was not possible that man should performe that covenant in and by himselfe he in great mercie made with man the Covenant of grace in Christ. But lest any man should either through ignorance or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias it pleased God to renew the Covenant of workes not to that end that men should be justified or saved thereby but that it might bee a meanes to drive them unto Christ. And fo Bellarmine himselfe hath taught Lex non data erat ut justificaret sed ut morbum â—…stenderet ad quaerâ—…ndum medicum excitaret The Law was not given to that end that it should justifie but that it might shew the disease and stirte up men to seeke to the Physitian Againe a distinction is to be made as in the answere to the second reason of the parties to whom the law is given For to the wicked and reprobate who are Gods rebellious subjects the law is indeed impossible through their owne default and yet God exacteth most justly that righteousnesse in which hee did create them hee requireth most justly an accompt of those talents which hee committed to them though now they be not able to pay The debt is duely exacted of the debtour though through his own default hee bee not now able to make payment As for the elect whom the Lord hath before they were loved in Christ hee hath given his law to them not to this end that either by the observation thereof in their own persons they should bee justified or by the breach thereof they should bee condemned for then who could be saved But the use of the law to them before their conversion is that it might bee unto them a Schoolmaster unto Christ and after their conversion and justification it might bee a rule whereby to frame their lives and conversation aspiring alwaies towards that perfection which the law prescribeth though they cannot fully attaine unto it Why then saith Augustine should not this perfection bee enjoyned to man though no man in this life have it Non enim rectè curratur si quò currendum est nesciatur quomodo autem sciretur si nullis praeceptis ostenderetur For men cannot runne well if they know not whither they must runne and how should they know that if by precepts it be not made known to them And worthy is that saying of Bernard to be repeated againe and againe Neither was the commander ignorant that the weight of the commandement doth exceed the strength of men but hee judged it profitable that hereby they should be admonished of their owne unsufficiencie and that they might know to what end or perfection of righteousnesse they should aspire Therefore by commanding impossible things hee did not make men transgressors but humble that every mouth may bee stoppod and the whole world made obnoxious to God For by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight For receiving the commandement and feeling our defectivenes wee shall cry to heaven and God will have mercie on us And wee shall know in that day that not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee have done but according to his mercie hee hath saved us § X. His fourth reason is collected out of three places of scripture Rom. 8. 4. Mat. 6. 10. Heb. 5. 9. In the first it is said that Christ suffered that the justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us In the second we are taught to pray that Gods will may bee done upon earth as it is in heaven In the third that Christ is made to all that obey him the cause of eternall salvation But saith hee if we canâ—…t fulfill the Law then Christ misseth of his end For notwithstanding his sufferings the justification of the Law is not fulfilled in us neither is our prayer ever obtayned of fulfilling Gâ—…ds will and commandements on earth as in heaven neither is Christ the authour of salvation to any because none obey him Answ. As touching the first place because it is often alleaged by Bellarmine I will somewhat insist upon it The place is two wayes expounded either of sanctification or of justification Ifit be to be understood of sanctification as the Papists commonly expound it we acknowledge that our sanctification is the end and fruit of our redemption by Christ and that this end is atchieved iâ—… all those who live not after the flesh but after the Spirit that is in all true believers I say it is archieved 〈◊〉 in this life and perfectly in the life to come But as I suppose it is rather to be understood of justification For the Apostle having assured the faithfull vers 1. that notwithstanding sinne and the body of sinne and of death wherof hee had complayned chap. 7. remayneth in them yet forasmuch as we are delivered from the same by Iesus Christ our Lord vers 25. there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ as his members whom hee describeth by this character that they walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit In the verses following he confirmeth the same conclusion showing how Christ hath delivered us For saith hee vers 2. the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath delivered me from the law of sinne and of death Whereby the law of the Spirit of life we understand the virtue and power of holynes or sanctification not in us but in Christ Iesus for so hee saith though they doe not observe it who understand this place of sanctification and righteousnesse inherent who by his righteousnesse and merits hath delivered us from the power of sinne and of death But the Apostle as in the former chapter vers 24. so here in the singular number speaketh of himself teaching by his owne example every true Christian to apply the benefits of Christ to himself For that which was impossible for the law to doe that is to justifie us in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his owne sonne in the likenes of sinfull flesh that is in the humane nature subject to passions and infirmities and that for sinne that hee might take away the sinne of the world for so saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemned sinne in the flesh that is exacted the due punishment of sinne in his humane nature that the guilt of our sinnes being taken away by his alsufficient satisfaction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which the law requireth unto justification might by Christ bee fulfilled in us who are his members which walke not as also hee had said in the first verse not after the
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
But to this allegation I have answered twice before To conclude in these six places wee have seene scarce any colour of proofe either of justification by workes or of increase of justification and yet these besides Iam. 2. are all the testimonies which he hath alleaged out of the Scriptures which being compared with those plentifull and pregnant Testimonies that plainely deny justification by workes doe manifestly shew the cause of the Papists to bee most desperate But it may bee you will say that although the Scriptures faile him yet hee hath store of testimonies of the Fathers and plenty of reasons Out of the Fathers he produceth not one testimony Neither doth he give any reason but such as have beene already confuted § XXIV To these testimonies saith he two reasons may be added out of those things which have been proved in the former Chapters concerning the possibility of the Law and the truth of actuall righteousnesse for saith he if a just man can fulfill the Law as before it hath beene demonstrated then â—…ay he also without doubt be justified by workes Againe If a just man can performe workes truly good which are polluted with no vice as we have shewed before then he may worke righteousnesse and consequently may by multiplying of just workes increase his justice Answ. He should say his justification But in both hee disputeth a posse ad esse it is possible for a man to fulfill the Law and consequently to be justified by workes it is possible that a righteous man may performe some workes truely and purely good by multiplying whereof he may increase his justice But the question is not whether some choise man one of a million can fulfill the Law and bring forth workes purely good but whether every one that is justified doth fulfill the Law that is doth continue in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them Whether the workes yea all the workes of every one that is justified be purely good For if he should transgresse in any one particular though it were but by omission he hath not fulfilled the Law If any of his workes were not truely and purely good or if all his workes be not pure then hee cannot be justified by workes But he is so farre from proving these things as it were the esse that he is not able to prove the posse that any one mortall man is able to fulfill the Law or that any one action of any one regenerate man is purely and perfectly good The contraries of both which I have plentifully proved before A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICATION THE EIGHTH BOOKE Concerning the Merit of good Workes CHAP. I. Setting downe the state of the Controversie and propounding our arguments against the merit of good Workes § I. THere remaineth the last though not the least errour of the Papists in this controversie which is concerning the efficacie of good workes For the Papists not contented to affirme that good works doe justifie doe also teach that at the hands of God they doe merit or deserve the reward of eternall life And this in effect is the same with that which Bellarmine laboured to prove when he disputed of the necessity of good workes unto salvation not onely necessitate praesentiae as the way to Gods kingdome which we confesse but also necessitate efficientiae as causes thereof For by the Efficiencie which they ascribe to workes they meane no other but morall which is as they say by way of meriting Howbeit the former assertion of the necessity of efficiencie seemeth to containe a further degree of damnable errour viz. that not onely good workes doe merit or deserve salvation but also that none can be saved without their owne merits for so much is implyed in the terme of the necessity of efficiencie § II. But first we are to set downe the state of the controversie in setting downe whereof the Papists are very sparing because in this point they differ much among themselves But yet in this they do agree that all the good works of the regenerate are truly meritorious of eternall life Now for the explacation of the termes by good works which they say are meritorious they meane all such works as are qualified according to those seven conditions which Bellarmine requireth First that they be materialâ—…y good or good in their kind Secondly that they be done in obedience to God Thirdly by such as are viatores way-faring men in this life Fourthly that they be free that is as they expound it voluntary proceeding from their freewill Fifthly persormed by men who are in the state of grace Sixthly having the promise of eternall reward Seventhly proceeding from the virtue of Charity Secondly by all such workes they doe not onely meane all joyntly but every one in particular affirming omne opus bonum that every good worke proceeding from Charity is meritorious of eternall life Thirdly by truely meritorious the word used by the Councill of Trent wee understand that which properly and absolutely and for it selfe deâ—…erveth the reward thereby excluding first merita ex congruo merits of congruity which indeed doe not deserve and therefore are not veri nominis merita truely and properly merits Notwithstanding Bellarmine and others retaine the name giving it chiefly to those dispositions and preparations going before justification according to which grace is given wherein they have rewarded the old assertion of Pelagius gratiam secundum merita dari For if those dispositions be merits and if according to them grace is given as the Councill of Trent in plaine termes defineth doe they not hold that grace is given to men according to their merits Secondly by this phrase truly and properly meritorious are excluded these workes which arâ—… said to merit onely ex pacto which ever happeneth when there is a great disproportion between the worke and the promised reward As if a man should for a daies labour which in commutative justice deserveth but denarium diurnum the day-penny promise an hundred pound this reward were due ex pacto but yet not deserved by the labourer The halfe of Herods Kingdome was due to the daughter of Herâ—…dias ex pacto if shee had asked so much but no way deserved by her By truely and properly meritorious therefore is meant that which is condigne merit or merit of condignity that which is absolutely meritorious and not onely ex pacto by reason of the promise which happeneth when there is an equall proportion betweene the worke and the promised reward sed ratione â—…peris ipsius for the workes sake and for the worthinesse thereof § III. This point is duely to bee observed For there are some tergiversators that dare not professedly take upon them the defence of condigne merit who notwithstanding would seem as stiffe defenders of merits as the best of them As for that qnestion whether works deserve heaven â—…x condâ—…gno or not and such
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 from
the merit of Christ. This assumption may thus bee demonstrated That which a man hath already he needeth not to merit For to merit is to obtaine by desert that right which a man hath not yet Nullus meretâ—…r saith Thomas quod â—…am habet and againe meritum non est nisi ejus quod nondâ—…m habetur Therefore the faithfull if they have already right to Gods kingdome they need not merit it or if they must merit then have they not as yet that right by Christ but must purchase it by their owne deserts which is greatly to derogate from the merits of Christ. But the faithfull before they produce any good works have right to Gods kingdome Nâ—…m hoc ipsâ—… saith Bellarmine quòd incipiâ—… esse filiâ—… Dei 〈◊〉 jus habere ad hareditatem falicitatis â—…ternae Rom. 8. 17. Gâ—…l 4. 7. 〈◊〉 â—…utem esse filii Dei â—…ntequam incipiâ—…mus benè operari Igitur jus habemuâ—… ad aternam bareditatem per gratiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 benè operari For in that very respect that wee bâ—…ginne to bee the sonnes of God wee beginne to have right to the inheritance of the eternà ll feliciâ—…y Rom. 8. Gâ—…l 4. Now wee beginne to bee the sonnes of God before wee beginne to bring forth good workes Merâ—…it igitur Christus saith hee Christ therefore merited the inheritance it selfe whiles he merited the grace of adoption and againe unto him who is the Sonne of God by grace the inheritance is due by the right of adoption before all workes In which place Bellarmine teacheth another point of doctrine whereby is excluded the merit of good workes Ex eo quod aliquis saith hee est filius Dei per gratiam meretur ex condigno haereditatem vitae aeternae sine alio pacto sed merito personae non merito operis By this that any man is the sonne of God by grace hee doth merit condignely the inheritance of everlasting life without any other covenant for if sonnes then heires but hee doth merit it by the merit of his person not by the merit of his worke what needeth then the childe of God bring forth good workes with purpose to merit heaven by them seeing before hee produceth any good workes hee hath right unto the kingdome of heaven by the merit of his person in that hee is the Sonne of God Why forsoooth as it is an inheritance hee meriteth it by the merit of his person but as it is a mercenary reward or stipend or wages hee must earne it by the merit of his workes which is absurd for if it bee a free gift intended in our election without any relation to our desert a free inheritance purchased for us by Christ and freely promised to all that beleeve and free reward of our obedience which is therefore by Augustine and others called Gratia because it is freely given it cannot without absurdity be made the mercenary reward or wages of hired servants Thirdly to attribute that honour to every member of the body which is peculiar to Christ alone the Head is to derogate from the honour of Christ our Head But to merit eternall life is an honour peculiar to Christ alone our Head For eternall life in heaven being of infinite worth as being the eternall fruition of God who is infinite cannot be condignely merited but by that which is of infinite value and price Such are the merits of Christ and of him alone such neither ours nor any meere creatures are or can be For the infinite merit of eternall life dependeth on the infinitenesse of the person who meriteth it such an one is Christ such are none of his members Therefore to Christ alone it belongeth to merit heaven for his members and not to his members who are not to merit but by faith to apprehend the merit of their Head Fourthly that which taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of salvation doth greaâ—…ly detract from the al-sufficiency of Christs merits The Popish doctrine concerning the merit of workes taketh from Christ the glory of being the onely meritorious cause of our salvation Therefore it doth greatly derogate from the al-sufficient merit of Christ. Fifthly they who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne good workes and to salve the matter doe faine that Christ hath merited for their good workes that they may condignely merit heaven doe indeed robbe Christ of the honour of meriting for us eternall life and doe arrogate it unto themselves Thus doe the Papists who ascribe the condigne merit of heaven to their owne works and to bleare the eyes of the simple they faine that Christ merited for our workes that they might be meritorious of eternall life for neither by the Scriptures nor Fathers nor any sound reason doe they so much as goe about to prove this fiction this novelty Christ did not save us to make us our owne Saviours but in his owne person and as the Apostle speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by himselfe he performed the worke of our redemption and the merit of our salvation Object 1. But you will say did Christ merit for us that we should be idle I answere wee are the Workemanship of God created unto good workes which God hath preordained that we should walke in them not to merit by them but to glorifie God by them to testifie our thankefulnesse and to make our calling and elâ—…ction sure and for many other reasons which I delivered when I proved the necessity of good workes Object 2. It is not fit that Christs merits should bee applyed to men without workes Answ. The merits of Christ are applyed to us that is wee are justified by them without workes as the Apostle teacheth howbeit in them that are justified good workes doe follow but not as causes of justification or as merits of salvation Object 3. But it is necessary we should be like unto Christ. Answ. Wee must bee like to him in the graces of sanctification which we receive from his fulnesse even grace for grace Rom. 8. 29. 1 Ioâ—…n 3. 3. 1 Pet. 1. 16. But wee cannot bee like unto him in office of Mediation or in the power of meriting which is proper to the Head § III. This argument that the doctrine of merits is derogatory to the al-sufficient merits of our onely Saviour is worthy to bee insisted upon and defended against all exceptions and cavils of the Papists which indeed are many but may be reduced to these three heads for either they serve to shew that their doctrine doth not derogate from Christs merits or that their doctrine setteth forth the glory of Christs merit no lesse than ours or that wee by denying their doctrine doe extenuate such is their impudency the merit of Christ. To the first purpose Bellarmine hath foure evasions The first that The merits of just men are not opposite to the merits of Christ but spring from them And what commendation soever our
God then are they fooles who repose affiance in their owne workes And no doubt but they are fooles who trust in their owne heart as Salomon saith Prov. 28. 26. For as Adrian saith who after was Pope Our merits are like astaffe of reed which not onely breaketh when it is leaned upon but also pierceth the hand of him that leaneth on it To trust in a mans owne righteousnessâ—… is the property of a proud Iustitiary and hypocrite Ezec. 33. 13. Luke 18. 9. and of one that is accursed because hee removeth his heart â—…rom God and putteth his trust in man that is to say hâ—…mselfe for as Bernard well faith for a man to trust in himselfe Non fidei sed per â—…dem est nec confidentiae sed diffidentiae magis in semetipso habere fiduciam But the true and upright Christian renouncing all confidence in his owne righteousnesse as being a beggar in spirit Matth. 5. 3. resteth wholly on the mercies of God and merits of Christ Psal. 130. 3 4. 143. 2. Dan. 9. 18. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Phil. 3. 8 9. according to the advice of our Saviour Luk. 17. 10. If it be objected that the godly in many places of Scripture doe alleage their owne innocency and integrity as seeming to put some affiance therein 2 King 20. 3. Nehem. 5. 19. Psal. 18. 21 24. 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. I answere first it is one thing to place affiance in our good works as causes of our salvation as merit-mongers use to doe another from our good workes as tokens and signes of our election vocation justification and as presages of our glorification to gather comfort assâ—…rance and hope to our selves of our justification and salvation which the faithfull use to doe and to that end are they commanded to practise good workes that they make their calling and election sure 2 Pâ—…t 1. 10. This distinction is acknowledged by Bellarmine Sciendum est saith hee aliud esse fidâ—…ciam nasci ex 〈◊〉 aliâ—…d fiduciam esse ponendam in meritis It is one thing out of our good workes to gather assurance and affiance in God which the faithfull doe as they are exhorted in the Scriptures 2 Pet. 1. 10. Iob 11. 15. Rom. 5. 4. Probation worketh hope 1 Ioh. 3. 21. If our heart condemne us not then have wee confidence towards God and it is another thing to place affiance in our merits which none but proud Iustitiaries and Pharisaicall Hypocrites use to doe Secondly we must distinguish betwixt the innocency and justice of a mans cause and the innocency and justice of his person For the same men in the Scripture who for the justification of their persons desire the Lord not to enter into judgement with them for the justification of their cause have not feared to appeale to Gods judgement § XIII Our sixth reason those who cannot fully discharge their duety much lesse can they merit For they that merit must doe more than their duety For they that doe but their duety though they doe all that is commanded must acknowledge themselves to be unprofitable servants But if they faile in their duety and come short of that which is commanded then can they merit nothing but punishment at the hands of God But no mortall man is able fully to satisfie his duety Our duety is to abstaine from all sinne yea to be 〈◊〉 from all sinne and to doe the things commanded to doe all and to continue in doing all and that in that manner and measure which the Law requireth But those things no mortall man is able to doe as hath beene proved heretofore So farre is every mortall man from meriting any thing but punishment at the hands of God Our seventh reason If good workes doe merit salvation then wee are saved by them but we are not saved by good workes Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. therefore they doe not merit salvation Eightly the last reason The heavenly Canaan is a land of promise as the earthly Canaan was which the Lord gave to the Israelites not because of their merits Deut. 9. 5. Nor for the merit of their forefathers Iosh. 24. 2. but because he loved them and that for no other cause but because hee loved them Deut. 7. 7 8. In which love as hee freely promised it so in the same undeâ—…erved love he did freely bestow it And yet hee was just in giving it because hee had promised it Nehem. 9. 8. The same wee are to conceive of the heavenly Canaan whereof the other was a Type that it is a land of promise and noâ—… of merit freely promised and freely bestowed on the heires of promise CAP. IIII. Testimonies of Fathers disproving merits and first those which Bellarmine hath sought to answere and then others § I. TO the former testimonies and proofes I will adjoyne the testimonies of Fathers and other writers And first those which Bellarmine hath endeavoured to answere of which Hilarie is the first Spes in misericordia Dei in sâ—…culum in seculum seculi est Non enim illa ipsa justitiae opera sufficient ad perfectâ—… beatitudinis meritum nisi misericordia Dei etiam in hac justiâ—…ae voluntate hâ—…manarum demutationum motuum vitia non reputet hinc illud Prophetae dictum est melior est misericordia tua super vitam In tantum misericordia Dei muneratur ut miserans justitia voluntatem aeternitatis quoque suae justum quemque tribuat esse participem His intendement is that the hope of salvation is to bee placed in Gods mercy which is better than our righteous life For the workes of righteousnesse without Gods mercy in forgiving of sinnes will not suffice to obtaine the reward of blessednesse which the mercy of God pitying our will of righteousnesse bestoweth on the just But Bellâ—…mine maketh him speake what pleaseth him for to omit that for sufficient hee readeth Sufficerent Hilary saith hee doth teach that with our goodworkes are mingled certaine sinnes which though they make not a man unjust as being light â—…nd veniâ—…ll yet they need pardon and mercy because nothing that is defiled can enter into the kingdome of heaven Bellarâ—…ines meaning is that at the day of judgement the faithfull shall need Gods mercy for the pardoning of veniall sinnes as heretofore â—…ee hath taught But there is no such matter in Hilary neither is it tâ—…ue as I have shewed beforâ—… that at the day of â—…udgement the faithfull shall need remission of veniall or any other sinnes neither doth Hilary say that the sinnes which are forgiven by the mercy of God are light and such as the Papists call veniall Neither is it true that there bee any sinnes which doe not make them sinners in whom they are seeing Bellarmine here confesseth that men are so defiled by them that they being not remitted exclude them from heaven neither doth hee say with good merits are mingled sinâ—…es neither doth he
Tim. 4. Heb. 6. I shall answere in their due place Unto this Testimony Bellarmine might have added another out of the same Sermon It is necessary first of all to beleeve that thou canst not have remission of sinnes but by the indulgence of God then that thou canst have no good worke unlesse he also give it lastly that by no good workes thou canst merit that is obtaine eternall life unlesse it also be freely given thee nisi gratis detur illa § VII The other three places are these First Totum hominis meritum est si totam spem suam ponat in eo qui totum hominem salvum facit Secondly Proinde meritum meum miseratio Domini Thirdly Fateor non sum dignus ego I confesse I am not worthy neither can I by mine owne merits obtaine the Kingdome of heaven But my Lord possessing it by a double right the inheritance of his Father and the merit of his passion contenting him selfe with the one hee giveth mee the other To these three together Bellarmine frameth two mis-shapen answeres First that Bernards meaning was that our merits are not of our selves but from Gods mercy and that hee would prove out of his 68. Sermon on the Canticles Merita habere cures habita data noveris And therefore say I his meaning was that our good workes doe not merit For being his free gifts they make us indebted to God as he teacheth and not him to us But indeed Bernard doth not speake of our workes or merits either as from us or as in us but of the mercy of God in pardoning our sinnes for the merit of his Sonne And therefore whiles God aboundeth with mercies in Christ he saith hee cannot want merits For mans justice is Gods indulgence and therefore blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne O solus verè beatus cuinon imputavit Dominus peecatum omnes enim peccaverunt sufficit mihi ad omnem justitiam solum habere propitium cui soli peccavi Omne quod mihi ipse non imputare decreverit sic est quasi non fuerit Nâ—…npeccare Dei justitia est hominis justitia indulgentia Dei His second answere is conjecturall that perhaps Bernard out of humility and perhaps not was ignorant of his merits and out of the uncertainty of his owne grace did not trust in his merits but in the mercie of God alone Reply He knew that he had no merits but Gods mercies in Christ because he was not ignorant that he had many sins which notwithstanding he was confident in the mercies of God and merits of Christ. Neither was he so uncertaine of such inherent righteousnesse in himselfe as whereby he might hope to be justified and saved as hee was certaine of the contrary As for his allegation out of the 68. serm in Cantic It is evident thâ—… Bernard by merits understandeth nothing but good workes and not merits properly so called as appeareth by that before alleaged ex serm 1. de annunciat and out of the same 68. serm in cantic Non est quod jam quaeras quibus meritis speremus bona presertim cum andias apud Prophetam Non propter vos sed propter me ego faciam dicit Dominus which is no lesse than to deny merits and in one of the places by Bellarmine cited Meum proinde meritum miseratio Domini Non planè sum meriti inops quandiu ille miserationum non fuerit quòd si misericordiae Dei multae multâ—…s nihilominusâ—… ego in meritis sum But that famous Testimony of his I may not omit though I have mentioned it before in the end of his booke Degratia l. arbitr where he distinguishing the gifts of God into merita and praemia and therefore speaking of merits as proceeding from grace hee saith those things which wee call our merits that is to say good workes spei quaedam sunt seminaria charitatis incentiva occulta praedestinationis indicia suturae faelicitatis prâ—…sagia viâ—… regni non causâ—… regnandi they are certaine seminaries of hope motives of Charity tokens of secret predistination presages of future felicity the way of the kingdome not the cause of reigning and therefore no meritorious cause of salvation § VIII And these were all the Testimonies which Bellarmine taketh notice of as alleaged by us out of the Fathers But I have not so done with them For as in the question of justification by faith alone I produced a multitude of Testimonies to proveâ—… the consent of the ancient Church with us So in this place that good workes are not truely meritorious of eternall life I doe prove not onely by all those Testimonies for if we be not justified by them wee are not saved for them but also by a new supply of Testimonies which by divers learned men have been collected but chiefly by our most learned Primate whereof I will recite so many as his adversary hath meddled with that I may briefly and as it were in transcursu vindicate them from his cavils Of these the first is Origen I can hardly perswade my selfe that there can be any worke which may of duty or debt require the remuneration of God Seeing even that that we are able to doe to thinke or to speake wee doe it by his gift and bounty What debt then shall there be of his whose grace hath gone before from whence I reason thus To no gifts of his God is a debtour or oweth reward as due All our good workes are his gifts therefore to none of our good workes is God a debtour or oweth reward as due Wherof the reason being because they are the gifts of God proceeding from his grace which precedeth our good workes hee is proved to bee ridiculum caput who answereth that Origen speaketh of such workes as are done by the sole power of mans free will without grace § IX Hilarie writing upon the parable of the Workemen Matth. 20. having said that the Gentiles who upon the preaching of the Gospell were to bee saved by the justification of faith were meant by those who being called at the eleventh houre were the first that in the evening received the gift of the wages appointed for the labour of the whole day he addeth these words Merces quidem ex dono nulla est quia debetur ex opere sed gratuitam Deus omnibus ex fidei justificatione donavit Wages indeed by gift there is none because by the worke it is due but to all by the justification of faith God hath given the same free Whence I argue No wages is of free gift Why because it is due to the worke Eternall life is of free gift which God giveth to all that beleeve by the justification of faith Therefore eternall life is not wages Mat. Yea but Hilarie elsewhere saith that the kingdome of God is the wages of such as live well Answ. It is merces indeed non
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
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
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 that
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 third