they bid their owne workes of the Law adiew and do no more dreame of iustification by them Secondly that GOD for the cure of their weak consciences tells them in the Gospell that if they beleeve in Christ this beleeving shall bee as good as a perfect compleat righteousnesse by this hee would make GOD a pure Socinian one who takes the Crowne from Christ and the righteousnes from GOD and man and sets it on the head of mans Faith which in the best beleevers and even in Abraham himselfe was mingled with much doubting and many infirmities In a word though all Orthodox Divines doe according to the Scriptures acknowledge that upon a mans beleeving truly in Christ GOD doth impute to him the perfect and compleat righteousnes of Christ which is made his before he can truly apply it by Faith Yet it can never enter into the heart of a true Christian but his soule will abhorre to thinke that any mans beleeving should bee to him as good as perfect compleat righteousnes or that GOD should accept it in stead of perfect righteousnesse and rather then the righteousnes of Christ GOD and man who is made unto us of GOD righteousnes 1 Cor. 1.30 and in whom we are found to have the righteousnes of GOD by faith Philip. 3.9 To conclude this passage let me adde this as a foule absurdity For if hee speake by experience that conscience leads men naturally to thinke that there can be no iustification without righteousnesse which is a perfect fulfilling of the Law Which I confesse my conscience and my reason tell mee and GODS word teacheth mee plainely Then what is become of his conscience who contrary to all truth and reason and the common conscience of all men will teach iustification without any true righteousnesse at all either of Christ or our owne and will crowne mans weak Faith with the Crown of righteousnesse which onely belongs to Christ and his perfect obedience Socinianisme SO that now the state and drift of the question is not either First whether Faith without an object or as separated from Christ bee imputed for righteousnesse for such a Faith doubtles in the point of justification was never dreamt of by any man that kept his 〈◊〉 company men may as well fancy a living man without a soulâ— or a wise man without his witts as a Faith without an object much lesse was such a Faith conceived by any man to bee imputed for righteousnesse Christianisme IN the fourth part or passage he first propounds five foolish quaeres which he denieth to concerne the state of the question Secondly he propounds a sixt quaere and that in plaine and precise termes hee affirmes I will first particularly answere the 5. quaeres and after lay downe the â—iâ—t at large and addresse my selfe to the confutation of his discourse upon it And first whereas he pronounceth him a mad man who dreames of faith without Christ the object or thinks that faith which believes not in Christ should be imputed for righteousnesse Here I must be bold to put him in mind that thus he dreames in the next Chapter where he boldly affirmes and by divers arguments laboureth to prove that the Faith of Abraham which was imputed to him for righteousnes was not a beleeving in Christ neither was Christ and his righteousnes the object of it And therefore by his owne confession and his owne wordes hee doth there play the mad man and keepes not his wits company but his fancy runs wild while he strives to prove that Abrahams Faith imputed to him for righteousnesse was not a beleeving in Christ. The second Quaere NEither is it any part of the intent of the question to enquire whether Faith bee the meritorious cause of a mans justification For both they that affirme and they that deny the imputation of Faith for righteousnes deny the meritoriousnes of Faith every way how ever it is true that they thaâ— would seeme most to disclaime it and cast it further from them doe yet in some of their most beloved tenets draw very neare unto it as will afterwards appeare Answer HEre behold either grosse ignorance or wilfull lying against knowledge and conscience For all the learned know that Faith and beleeving are held by the Church of Rome to be a principall part of mans righteousnesse and workes which GOD imputes and accounts meritorious of justification and of eternall life ex condigno Yea he himselfe in the passage next before hath plainely affirmed that Faith to him that beleeveth as Abraham did is as good as perfect and compleat righteousnes which if it be true then Faith must needs be as perfect and compleat righteousnesse is the meritorious cause of justification And therefore that which he here saith is verified in himselfe though he would seeme most to disclaime the merit of Faith and to cast it furthest from him yet in some of his most beloved tenets hee drawes very neare to it yea hee embraceth it with his heart in his whole discourse the maine drift whereof is to exalt Faith into the place of Christs most meritorious righteousnesse and to put the Crowne upon it For what can be imagined more meritorious of justification then that which GOD in a proper sense judgeth and counteth for righteousnes and for which he doth justifie men and counts them righteous The third Quaere NEither is it the question whether faith be the formall cause of justification that is whether GOD doth justifie a man with his faith as a Painter makes a wall white with whitenes or as a Master makes his Scholler learned with knowledge or learning conveyed into him for both parties make the forme of justification to be somewhat really different from Faith which is the genuine tenet of Arminius Answer THis quere is very ridiculous for to imagine a quality or act in man to be the formall cause of justification which is GODS act is the fancy of a distempered braine and the conceit of a mad man His exposition of his quaere shews his want of Logicall skill For the whitenesse wherewith the Painter makes a wall white is a forme introduced into the wall it is not the formall cause of his action of painting and so learning produced in a scholler is forma docti the forme of a Scholler as hee is made learned not the formall cause of his masters teaching surely his expounding of his quaere by such dissonant similitudes sheweth that hee had need of a Master to teach him some better knowledg and learning and to set on him some better stamp and superscription of rationall authority His phrase of learning conveyed is somewhat improper for learning is not conveyed into a Scholer but produced and begotten in him Let him not therefore condemne tropes of speech seeing he himselfe can and doth often speak tropically and improperly But to come home to his quaere If by justification hee meanes imputative justification in which GOD justifies a man by imputing
righteousnesse to him and man is justified by believing that GOD counts him righteous in Christ then wee deny not that faith in some respect is the formall cause of justification For in this justification taken passively as it is mans receiving by faith that which GOD imputes to him that is as it is a mans believing that God reckons him among the righteous and counts him to be in the state of a justified person so his actuall faith and believing is the forme of his justification But take Justification according to his owne opinion for GODS imputeing faith in a proper sense for righteousnesse Then is faith that somewhat by which a man stands in the state of a person Justified before GOD even his formall righteousnesse or that at least which is in stead of formall righteousnes Thus he is every way taken and entangled in his owne words Lastly what that is which hee saith is the genuine tenet of Arminius hee doth not expresse whether it be that faith is really different or not different from the forme of Justification for his words are included in a parenthesis which might very well be left out onely this I know that Arminius professeth this to be his genuine tenet That faith is imputed to the beleever for righteousnes sensu proprio non mâ—tonymico in a proper sense without a trope In Epist. ad Hippolitum de Collibus If elsewhere hee alters his tenet and writes otherwise It is but the common disease the vertigo and giddinesse of the Socinian faction to doe as here their fellow disciple doth in this his hovering and wavering discourse that is to say and gainesay affirme and deny the same things through the inconstancy of their windy braines and mindes unsetled The 4 Quaere NOr yet doth the question make any quaere at all whether Christ be the sole meritorious cause of justification of a sinner for both they that goe on the right hand of the question and they that goe on the left hand are knit together in the same mind and iudgment concerning this Answere WHosoever denyeth such a Spirituall union communion between Christ and the penitent and believing sinner iustified as doth make Christs righteousnesse and satisfaction to become his ransome and righteousnesse and to be imputed by GOD to him and to make him accepted by GOD as one cleane from the guilt of sinne and righteous in his sight This man denyeth Christ to be the meritorious cause of the Justification of a sinner For till Christ with his satisfaction be communicated and appropriated to the faithfull yea till his righteousnes be so made theirs and set on their skore that they have a right and interest in it Christ is no more meritorious of Justification to them then hee is to Infidels and reprobates for it is as impossible for Christ to be actually meritorious of Justification to any man who hath not an interest in him as for one mans money to ransom another who is a captive upon whose skore it was never set noâ— so much interest therein given to him that it is paid for him and accounted for his ransome 5 Quaere NEither doth the question as it is here propounded intâ—nd any dispute at all whether the active obedience of Christ falling in with the passive and considered in coniunction with it be that whereby Christ merited the Justification of sinners or that which GOD hath a principall respect and recourse unto in the Justification of sinners for this also is acknowledged on both sides at least by the greater partie of both Answere BVt while he denyes GODS communicating and imputeing Christs whole obedience hee denies the merit of them in our Justification and when hee affirmes that faith and not Christs righteousnesse is the thing imputed for righteousnesse to iustification he denies Christs obedience active and passive to be that which GOD hath a principall respect and recourse unto in the iustification of sinners and therefore here he contradicts himselfe and saith untruely that all sides hold the merit of Christs whole obedience when in his Doctrine he utterly overthrowes it The 6 Quaere which he alloweth and affirmeth BUt lastly the question in plaine tearmes is this whether the faith of him that truly beleeves in Christ or whether the righteousnesse of Christ himselfe that is that obedience that Christ performed to the morall Law consisting of all those severall and particular acts of righteousnesse wherein he obeyed in the letter and propriety of it bee that which GOD imputes to a beleever for righteousnesse in his justification so that he that beleeves is not righteous onely by account or by GODS gracious reputing and accepting of him for such but is rigidly literally and peremptorily righteous constituted and made as perfectly and compleatly and legally righteous as Christ himselfe no difference at all betweene them quoad veritatem but onely quoad modum the justified every whit as righteous as the iustifier both righteous with the selfesame individuall righteousnes onely this difference betweene one and the other the iustified weares iâ— as put upon him by another by imputation the iustifier weares it as put upon him by himselfe or by inherency That the Scriptures no where countenance any such imputation of the righteousnes of Christ I trust the spirit of truth directing and assisting to make manifest in the sequele of this discourse and to give good measure of truth to the Reader heaped up by testimonies from the Scripture pressed downe by the weight of many arguments demonstrations running over with the cleare approbation of many Authors learned and sound and every way greater then exception Multa fidem promissa levant Answere TO this question laid downe in plaine and precise termes I answer First that to move this question except with purpose to discover and oppose Socinus and his followers who affirme it and stand for imputation of faith in a proper sense for righteousnes is not to be tolerated among true Christians but to dispute for that damned errour which takes the Crowne from the all-sufficient righteousnes of Christ and sets on the head of mans weake faith is most hereticall impudency as in my whole answere I shall prove aboundantly Secondly his absurd expounding of Justification by Christs righteousnes imputed and how in this question the righteousnes of Christ and the iustifying of men by it are to be understood is a notable point either of calumny in slandering our doctrine and reporting it corruptly or of subtilty that when his opinion is proved to be blasphemous hee may have some starting holes through which hee may shift away and make an escape pleading that hee mistooke our Doctrine of being righteous by Christs righteousnesse imputed and ignorantly did oppose it First no man standing for the imputation of Christs righteousnes doth affirme that every particular act of Christ which hee performed was necessary to make up a perfect and sufficient righteousnes but that his righteousnesse containes in it all his acts
against the invincible rocke of the holy Scriptures and seekes to turne them like a rowling stone against a barke they rowle and rebound back and tumbling upon him grind him to powder· For if hee had ten thousand instances of Scripture wherein the fruite and benefit which men receive are signified by the names of the things which are the causes and meanes of them yet still it will appeare that the fruite is not received except men have first an interest and propriety in the causes and meanes of it And thus you see his fift part or passage proved to bee a rotten heap of stinking lyes absurdities and grosse errors Socinianisme WHerefore to draw towards the close of this first Chapter and withall to give a little more light that it may bee seene to the bottome cleerely both what wee affirme and what we deny in the question propounded First when we affirme the faith of him that beleeveth to be imputed for righteousnes The meaning is not either 1o. That it should be imputed in respect of any thing it hath from a man himselfe or as it is a mans owne act nor yet in respect of any thing it hath from GOD himselfe or from the spirit of GOD producing raising of it in the soule though it be true it requires the lighting downe of the mighty arme of GOD upon the soule to raise it Neither 3 o is it imputed for righteousnes in respect of the object or as or because it layeth hold upon Christ or his righteousnes though it be also true that that faith that is imputed for righteousnes must of necessity lay hold upon Christ and no other faith is cable of this imputation besides because if faith should justifie or be imputed as it layes hold upon Christ it should justifie out of the inhaerent dignity worth of it and by vertue of that which is naturall and intrinsecall to it there being nothing that can be conceived more naturall and essentiall to faith then to lay hold upon Christ this is the very life and soul of it and that which gives it its specificall being and subsistence Therefore to make the object of faith as such the precise and formall ground of its imputation is to make hast into the midst of Samaria whilest men are confident they are travailing towards Dotha◠It s the giving of the right hand of felowship to the Romish justification which makes faith the meritorious cause of it in part But lastly when with the Scriptures we affirme that faith is imputed for righteousnesse our meaning is simply and plainely this that as GOD in the first covenant of workes required an absolute and through obedience to the whole Law with continuance in all things for every mans justification which perfect obedience had it beene performed had beene a perfect righteousnesse to the performer and so would have justified him So now in the new covenant of grace GOD requires nothing of any man for his justification but onely faith in his Sonne which faith shal be as availeable effectuall to him for his justification as a perfect righteousnes should have beene under the first covenant this is that which is meant when faith is said to bee imputed for righteousnes which is nothing but that which is taught generally by Divines both ancient and moderne Sic decretum dicit a Deo ut cessante lege solam fidem gratia Dei posceret ad salutem Ambrosius In Rom. 4. that is that the Apostle saying that to him that beleeveth his faith is imputed for righteousnes affirmeth that GOD hath decreed that the Law ceasing the grace of GOD will require of men onely faith for salvation and again upon Chap. 9. of the same Epistle Sola fides posita est ad salutem onely Faith is appointed to salvation Calvin writing upon Rom. 10.8 hath wordes of the same importance and somewhat more cleare and full ex hac distinctionis nota colligimus sicut lex opera exigit Evangelium nihil aliud postulas nisi ut fidem afferrent homines ad recipiendam Dei gratiam that is from this distinction we gather that as the Law exacted workes so the Gospell requires nothing else but that men bring faith to receive the grace of GOD. If GOD requires faith in the Gospell for that same end for which he requireth workes or perfect righteousnes in the law it necessarily followes that he shall impute this faith for that righteousnes that is accept from men upon the same termes and bee countable unto them the same favours rewards and priviledges upon it that should have beene given unto men in regard of that righteousnes had it beene performed or fulfilled otherwise he should require it for such an end or upon such tearmes as hee would refuse to make good unto it when the creature hath exhibited and tendered it unto him To require it for righteousnes or in stead of righteousnes and not to accept it for righteousnesse when it is brought to him should bee as apparant a breach of Covenant with GOD as it would be in a rich creditour that should compound and agree with his poore debtors for 1. in the pound or the like but when they brought the mony to him should refuse to take it upon any such tearmes or to discharge them of their debt and give them out their bonds Christianisme IN this last part or passage which is a meere confusion and distraction of wordes hee gives more then a little light that his Socinian heresie in this point of justification maintained with much non sense may bee seene to the bottome cleerely First hee takes upon him to shew that faith is imputed and how it is imputed Secondly hee strives to shew that Christs righteousnes is not imputed The first is in the wordes before recited The second followes hereafter First I will sift his wordes already rehearsed And after proceed to the second The summe of his speech last recited may be reduced into a Syllogisme of non sense without forme mood or figure The proposition and assumption whereof are contradictory And the conclusion damned Socinian heresie so that here I may say with the Poet. Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici His proposition runnes thus Faith is neither imputed for righteousnes in respect of any thing which it receives from man the proper subject of it nor as it is mans act who useth it and performes the acts of beleeving nor in respect of any thing which it hath from GOD or his spirit in the production of it nor in respect of the object Christ and his righteousnes nor in respect of the life and soule of it which gives to it the specificall being and subsistence to wit the application of Christ and laying hold on him The Assumption BVt faith is imputed to men and is counted and accepted as sufficiently for justification and upon the same tearmes under the Gospell as perfect righteousnes of workes and of obedience to the whole Law
their owne consciences by the inward testimony of his spirit and the inward sense and experience of inward grace and outwardly in this life before men and publiquely in the last judgements by their good workes which are evidences of their faith and of their union and communion with Iesus Christ and of their regeneration by his spirit and adoption unto GOD in him First GOD the father is the primary efficient cause of our justification Rom. 3.26.30 and 4.5 and 8.33 Secondly the inward moving cause is GODS owne free grace favour and love Rom. 3.24 Tit. 3.7 The outward moving or impulsive cause is Christs mediation Isa 53.11 Iohn 1â— 21 1 John 2.2 The instrumentall cause is Christ the mediatour communicating his whole obedience to us when by the spirit which GOD sheds on us through him wee are made one body with him 1 Cor. 12.13 Tit. 3.6 The meanes by which wee come to bee justified are either principall viz. the lively operation of the spirit spirituall union with Christ the pure and holy humanity of Christ or lesse principall the word and ministery thereof the Sacraments faith and the like as appeares Rom. 3.25.28 and 10.14 Gal. 3.8 Heb. 9.14 1 Iohn 1. â— Dan. 12.3 The materiall cause that is the righteousnesse it selfe by which they are justified that is made counted and declared to be righteous is Christs perfect righteousnes obedience and satisfaction which he GOD and man performed in our nature in the state of humiliation Rom. 3.24.25 Rom. 5.19 and 8.4 The formall cause of justification is that communion between Christ and us and that reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to Christ and of his righteousnes and full satisfaction to us which communion ariseth and floweth from the spirit which GOD sheds on us through Christ which spirit dwelling in us in some measure so as he dwelleth in the man Christ from whom hee is derived to us doth make us one spirituall body with Christ and works in us faith and all holy graces affections by which we adhere and cleave to Christ and apply and inioy his righteousnes so that it is our formall righteousnes not inherently but imputatively and by spirituall communion for it is that which doth constitute and make us righteous Rom. 5.17 18 19. and 8.4 and â—0 4 and 2 Cor. 5.21 The immediate fruit and benefit of our iustification is the state of righteousnes and of cleanenesse from the guilt of sinne and acceptation with GOD Rom. 3.25 and 4.2 also peace with GOD Rom. 5.1 The end and use of our iustification is the satisfaction and declaration of GODS iustice in that he iustifieth us by the full satisfaction of Christ and not otherwise neither by it till he communicates it to us and makes it ours Also the manifestation of his mercy free grace and bounty in that he would give his sonne to become man and to make satisfaction to the full when no other could bee found able to satisfie for us neither could his iustice by any other meanes be satisfied also in that hee would give us his spirit to unite us to his sonne and to bring us to a true communion of his righteousnes and to worke faith in us by which we receive and enioy Christ with all his benefits Rom. 3.24.26 Tit. 3.4 Ephes. 1.6.12 The contrary Doctrine of Socinus and his faction THough they grant that GOD is the chiefe efficient cause and his free grace mercy and love the inward moving cause yet they erre in the impulsive and instrumentall cause and make Christ and his righteousnes no otherwise meritorious but by procuring that GOD should count faith in a proper sense for righteousnes to them that beleeve neither any other way an instrument of iustification but by bringing faith to this honour to be accepted for or in stead of righteousnes Secondly they deny all causality of Christs righteousnes in justification except onely by way of efficiency whereas indeed and in truth it is the matter about which justification is exercised for what is justification but the communicating of that righteousnes to men and the imputing of it and declaring of them to be thereby righteous the very name of justification signifies so much and what is the forme of a justified man as he is righteous but righteousnes to imagine a righteous and justified man without righteousnes is as if one should dreame of a living man without life or soule Thirdly they deny the principall ground of justification to wit spirituall union and communion with Christ which cannot stand without imputation of Christs righteousnes for communion and union doe necessarily bring with them imputation If wee have communion of Christs satisfaction and righteousnesse GOD must needs judge and count them to be ours for his judgement is according to truth And faith which is an inferiour and subordinate meanes they set up in the place of Christs righteousnes Fourthly as they deny the materiall cause of iustification by reiecting Christs righteousnes from being the proper matter about which it is exercised so also the forme or formall cause even the mutuall communion and reciprocall imputation of our sinnes to Christ and Christs satisfaction and righteousnes to us whereby it is made our formall righteousnes not inherently but spiritually and imputatively for they acknowledge no formality but inherency Fiftly they deny the immediate fruit and benefit of justification to wit that state of righteousnes cleannesse from the guilt of sinne and acceptation with GOD wherein the justified are firmely established before GOD and stand in his sight which is the chiefe honour and prerogative of GODS Saints and their greatest comfort in all their afflictions and temptations Lastly they take away the true end and use of justification to wit the revelation of GODS infinite justice mercy bounty and free grace for they overthrow his infinite justice while they teach that GOD by his soveraign power puts his justice to silence and without Christs full satisfaction made to it for us and made ours by communion and imputation doth accept our weake faith in stead of it and makes himselfe as countable for it in all rewardes as hee would doe for the perfect fulfilling of the Law by our selves or by Christ in our stead They extenuate and vilifie GODS mercy bounty and free grace by setting up faith in stead of Christs perfect righteousnes and making it the condition of the new covenant For whatsoever is given or promised to us upon a condition to be on our part performed is not a gift of free grace and bounty And when justice may bee turned out of doores without a compleat satisfaction there is nothing left for mercy wherein to shew the power of it The infinite mercy of GOD doth appeare in this that when his infinite iustice required that wee should all be damned without a full satisfaction which none could make but the sonne of GOD in our nature and that performed for us and made ours Hee would give his onely sonne
disdaine to take up for his constant dwelling the earthly tabernacles of mens bodies and to worke in them all graces needfull to conforme them to Christ and to make them sensibly to enjoy him with all his benefits This most wonderfully shewes GODS infinite mercy bounty and free goodnesse And all these meanes which are manifested and maintained by our Doctrine of justification this wicked opinion of the Socinians doth utterly take away First it denies GODS justice to require mans communion of such an infinite satisfaction made by Christ for him it treads GODS justice under foote by his soveraignty of power and maugre justice it makes mans imperfect faith to go current for righteousnes and to be accepted for perfect righteouses to justification Secondly if GOD by soveraignty of power can beare downe justice and make any weak and imperfect thing such as mans faith is serve in stead of Christs full satisfaction and perfect righteousnes Then hee might by the same power have appointed the sacrifice of a Lamb or any cleane beast or the satisfaction of any mere man and so it will follow that the giving of his son to bee made man was no point of wisedome but a going farre about and spending much even Christs blood when lesse might have served the turne As for GODS goodnesse mercy and bounty they are hereby made painted shewes and shadowes yea needlesse prodigality and Christs satisfaction is made vaine and superfluous Therfore this opinion which brings in such impious consequences is blasphemous and hereticall Fiftly that opinion which overthrowes the sacraments of the Gospel and takes away the true use of them is heriticall prophane and impious This opinion that Christs righteousnesse is not imputed to the faithfull doth so For the sacraments are seales of our union and communion with Christ Baptisme seales our engraffing into Christ in our new birth by which we become one with him The LORDS Supper is such a lively seale of our communion with Christ in the benefits of his death passion and full satisfaction expressed under the termes of eating his flesh and drinking his blood that it is commonly called the communion of the faithfull when it is rightly received But these Hereticks while by imputing faith in a proper sense they exclude the imputation of Christs righteousnes to the faithfull they deny their communion and union with Christ they take away the truth and the use of the Sacraments for if the faithfull are regenerate and by one spirit ingraffed into Christ and united unto him as Baptisme signifieth and sealeth and if they have spiritual communion with Christ of his righteousnes and all other benefits which the LORDS Supper signifieth and is thereof a seale to them Then GOD whose judgment is according to truth cannot but impute Christs righteousnes to them and accept it for them and account it theirs They who deny GODS imputing of it do either charge GOD with injustice and error of judgment in not counting and iudging that to be theirs in which they have communion and interest or else they deny the union and communion of the faithfull with Christ and make the sacraments lying signes and seales of false things and things which are not Therefore their opinion is most abominable profane impious and blasphemous argument 6 Sixtly that opinion which is invented and maintained by Heretiks who deny the eternall Godhead of Christ and tends mainely to perswade that there is no use of Christs being GOD and man in one person is Hereticall and blasphemous Such is this opinion of the Socinians it is an invention of Haretiks and tends to take away the use of Christs being GOD and to perswade men that there is no necessary use of his being GOD and man in one person For all Orthodox Divines give this reasō why it was necessary that Christ the mediator should be GOD in our nature even that the obedience suffering which he did under goe in mans nature might be the obedience and suffering of GOD and so of infinite value and though of him alone and but for a time yet of more worth then if all men in their owne persons had obeyed as much as hee did and suffered for ever in Hell They teach also that first for the removing of so great evils as the infinite wrath of GOD eternall death and torment in Hell and secondly for purchase of so great a good as is the state of righteousnesse and of grace and also of eternall glory in Heaven GODS justice could require no lesse satisfaction and righteousnes nor be satisfied with any other but that which is performed by him who is GOD and man in one person that is the perfect righteousnes and satisfaction of Christ which alone by the infinite value which it receives from his God-head is fit to remove so infinite an evil and to procure so infinite a good to men But the maintainers of this Socinian opinion by denying that GODS infinite justice stands in strength to exact such a satisfaction being over-ruled and oppressed by absolute soveraignty of power and by teaching that mercy and bounty run beyond reason freeing men from all need of such an infinite satisfaction to be communicated imputed to them and justifying them freely without righteousnes they do take away the use of Christs God-head in his mediation and the causes and reasons for which it was necessary that he should be GOD as well as man And in conclusion in places where they dare be bold to disclose the secret thoughts of their hearts they roundly deny Christ to be the Sonne of GOD of the same substance with GOD the Father Therefore this their opinion is most impious blasphemous and Hereticall And indeed it is never found in Histories to have been maintained by any but Samosatenian Heretiks deadly enemies to Christs deity Lastly that opinion which is builded upon an Hereticall and blasphemous ground and is upheld and maintained by blasphemous arguments which do shake and even raze the maine foundations of true Religion must needs be most wicked and blasphemous and such is this opinion for it is builded upon this blasphemous ground that GOD by his soveraigne power may do and will things contrary to his justice that is count and accept that for righteousnes which is no righteousnes nor worthy to be accounted an act of perfect righteousnes for such is the faith of fraile man taken in a proper sense The arguments by which it is commonly maintained are also blasphemous and wicked to wit First they argue that Christs righteousnes is not imputed to true believers neither can be made or counted theirs by GOD. Because Christs righteousnes is the righteousnes of another far different from them and GOD cannot iustify one by anothers righteousnes and therefore we are not iustified by Christs righteousnesse neither is it imputed in iustification Now what is this but a denying of the union of the faithfull with Christ for if he be one with us and we one
with him then are our sinnes made his by communion and in him satisfied and his righteousnes and satisfaction is made ours and we thereby are pardoned and iustified by it as it is made ours and is not the righteousnes of a stranger nor of one who is another so different from us but that he and we are one spirituall body and all his benefits are ours and we have an interest in them and possesse them and enioy them so far as every one hath need of them As this argument tends to overthrow our union with Christ so A. Wotton in a manuscript of essayes doth professe that our union with Christ is onely metaphoricall Secondly they argue that the righteousnes of Christ cannot be sufficient for the elect nor counted to them for all righteousnesse which is in effect a denying of Christ to be GOD and man in one person for if they acknowledg him to be GOD they must needs hold that his righteousnes and fulfilling of the Law is of more worth and value then if all men in the world had fulfilled the Law in their owne persons without failing in one point Thirdly they argue that if Christ his righteousnes and satisfaction be so made ours and imputed to us that the Law may be said to be fulfilled in us we may said to have satisfied GODS iustice in him our head and by him our surety then is there no place left for pardon and free forgivenesse of our sinnes for pardon and satisfaction are contrary By which they overthrow the Doctrine of redemption and of Christs satisfaction for us and deny Christ to be our redeemer and to have paid our ransome and made a full satisfaction to the justice of GOD for our sinnes contrary to the Scriptures and the judgement and beliefe of all Christian Divines who teach that Christ hath paid our ransome is our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our redeemer And though GODS justice exacted of Christ our surety a full ransome and did not abate him the least farthing of our debt yet we are freely pardoned and have free forgivenesse and are freely iustified by GODS grace because hee did freely give his owne son to satisfy fulfill the Law for us doth freely by his grace and the free gift of his spirit unite us to Christ and make us partakers of his satisfaction imputing his satisfaction freely to us doth for it freely forgive our sinnes and justifie us Fourthly while they argue that faith in a proper sense is all the righteousnes which the faithfull have for justification and yet faith is not any formall righteousnes by their owne confession yea they deny that any formall righteousnes is required in justification hereby they deny the Saints justified to be righteous contrary to the Scriptures which call them the righteous and the generation of the righteous Psal. 1.6 and 14.5 and the righteous nation Isa. 26.2 and in many other places which title GODS spirit would never give to them if they were not formally righteous by righteousnes communicated to them after a spirituall heavenly manner For to hold as they doe that men are justified and counted righteous without any formall righteousnes which doth constitute and give being to a righteous and justified man as he is righteous and justified is a monstrous opinion contrary to reason Fiftly while they deny that the faithfull are constituted and made formally righteous by the obedience of Christ communicated and imputed to them which the Apostle in expresse wordes doth affirme Rom. 5.19 and 8.4 and Rom. 10.4 they in heate of argument fall into the Pelagian heresie and are forced to deny that Adams sinne and disobedience is communicated and imputed to his posterity so as that they are formally sinners by it And rather then they will yeeld that infants which dye before they commit actuall transgression in their owne persons are punished with death because they are guilty of Adams sinne they doe blasphemously affirme that GOD being offended and moved to wrath by the sinnes of parents will out of the magnificence of his judgement and rage of his iustice destroy innocent babes with their sinfull parents for terrour to others which is contrary to GODS word and Law which teach that children shal not dye for the sinnes of their parents unlesse they bee partakers with them either by communion and imputation or by imitation and approbation Whereas they bring for instance that the children of Korah were destroyed with their father though they were innocent and not partakers in the sinne herein they contradict the Scriptures which expressely affirme that the children of Korah dyed not numb 26.11 For they undoubtedly upon Moses his threatning of sudden destruction fled from their fathers tents and escaped and onely they perished who would not be admonished by Moses to separate themselves from the congregation of Korah but adhering to him were partakers of his conspiracy and sinne of rebellion Sixtly when they to colour their heresie proclayme Christs righteousnes to bee the meritorious cause of iustification and yet deny communion and imputation of it to true beleevers what is this but to hold that Christs righteousnes is meritorious to them who have no interest in it which being granted it will follow That Christs righteousnes doth merit for infidels and damned reprobates and doth as much for the justifying of them as it doth to justifie the Elect and faithfull For true reason can conceive no cause why Christ doth merit more or conferre more to the justification of the elect and faithfull by his righteousnesse then hee doth to Infidels and reprobates but onely this that he communicates it to the elect gives them a proper interest in it and makes them truely partakers of it so that it is imputed to them and made their meritorious ransome this while these men deny they deny Christs righteousnes to merit any more for the faithfull then for damned reprobates And thus their bent is to set up Pelagian and Arminian free will and to make this the onely difference betweene them that are justified and them that are damned that whereas both alike have equall share in Christs merits and Christ hath merited as much for the one as the other and given as much grace for iustification the one having power of free will doth use it and will beleeve and so is iustified by his faith imputed for righteousnes the other will not use the universall grace given to him nor beleeve which he might doe if he would and therefore is damned which is a most horrible and abominable Doctrine and hereticall opinion Lastly they argue that as in the first Covenant GOD required workes of the Law performed by every man in his owne person and this was the condition which man was to performe for iustification and eternall life and so that Covenant was not free but conditionall So in the new Covenant GOD requires faith
one Anselme on Rom 5. saith that by the righteousnes of one comming upon all the elect they come unto justification that they may bee justified by participation of Christs righteousnesse These with many other testimonies which might easily bee gathered out of the Ancients from the primitive times untill Luther doe abundantly shew the impudency of this man who so peremptorily affirmeth that the communion and imputation of Christs righteousnesse for iustification was never dreamed of among ancient writers but onely faith imputed for righteousnesse in a proper sense all these Ancients before named testifie the contrary But to descend to Orthodox writers of this last age since Luther It is well knowne that they generally hold imputation of our sinnes to Christ and of Christs satisfaction and righteousnesse to us for iustification to bee the forme of iustification by which beleevers are iustified Luther acknowledged that it was the doctrine of Saint Bernard concerning iustification by Christs righteousnesse imputed and not by our owne workes which moved him to suspect the popish doctrine and to grow into dislike and loathing of their religion And in his commentary on Galat where he doth debase the righteousnesse of workes and doth most highly extoll the righteousnesse of faith he telleth us that faith being weak in many of GODS children cannot be accepted for righteousnesse of it selfe that is in a proper sense and therefore there is necessarily required imputation of righteousnesse for iustification on Galatians 3.6 In editione Jenensi Tom. 1. pag. 32. hee saith faith obtaines what the Law commands and what is that but obedience and righteousnesse and againe by faith Christ is in us yea one bodie with us but Christ is righteous and a fulfiller of the Law wherefore wee all doe fulfill it while Christ is made ours by faith Also Tom. 3. p. 539. when Paul ascribes iustification to faith wee must of necessity understand that hee speakes of faith laying hold on Christ which makes Christ of efficacy against sinne and the Law Also Tom. 2. pag. 515. Faith settles us upon the workes of Christ without our owne workes and translates us out of the exile of our sinnes into the kingdome of his righteousnesse And Tom. 1. pag. 410. Sinne is not destroyed unlesse the Law be fulfilled but the Law is not fulfilled but by the righteousnes of faith and page 437. To keepe the Law is to have and possesse Christ the fulfiller of the Law And Tom. 4. pag. 44. Faith iustifieth because it comprehendeth and possesseth that treasure to wit Christ and page 45. wee say that Christ doth forme faith or is the forme of faith And Tom. 2. upon Genesis The laying hold on the promises is called sure and firme faith and doth justifie not as it is our work These speeches shew plainely that Luther conceived Christs righteousnes to be after a sort the formall righteousnes of the believer though not formally inherent yet formally possessed and enjoyed by faith Concerning this justifying righteousnes Luther also teacheth that it is not in our selves but in Christ even his fulfilling of the Law for us made ours and imputed to us Tom. 1. pag 106. By faith saith hee are our sinnes made no more ours but Christs upon whom GOD hath laid the iniquities of us all and he hath borne our sinnes And on the other side all his righteousnes is made ours for he layes his hand upon us And pag 178. The righteousnes of a Christian is the righteousnes of another and comes to him from without It is even Christ who is made unto us of God righteousnes so that a man may with confidence glory in Christ and say Christ his living doing and suffering is mine no otherwise then if I had lived done and suffered as he did as the married man possesseth all that is his wives and the wife all the goods which are her husbands for they have all things common because they are become one flesh and so Christ and the Church are one spirit by faith Christs righteousnes is made ours and all his are ours yea himselfe is ours And Tom. 2. pag 86. The righteousnes by which we are justified before GOD is not in our owne persons but without our selves in GOD because man shall have no cause to boast of his owne proper righteousnes before GOD. And Tom. 2. pag 385. A Christian is not formally righteous by reason of any substance or quality in him but relatively in relation to Christ in whom hee hath true righteousnes Melancthon in Epist. ad Rom. 8.4 saith wherefore Pauls meaning is thus to be taken that Christ is given for us that we may be counted to have satisfyed the Law by him and that for him we may be reputed righteous Although we our selves do not satisfie the Law anothers fulfilling of it is freely given to us and is imputed to us and so the Law is imputatively fulfilled in us And so when the Apostle saith that Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes that is hee who hath Christ is righteous hee is reputed to have satisfied the Law and hee imputatively hath that which the Law requires And on chap. 10.4 upon these wordes Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnes c hee saith this is the simple meaning Christ is the fulfilling of the Law to the believer and hee who hath Christ that is believes in him is righteous and hath imputatively what the Law requires The Booke of concord subscribed by so many hundreds of Evangelicall Ministers of the reformed Churches in Germany in the Articles of justification saith that when we speak of justifying it is to be knowne that these three objects concurre which are to be believed 1. The promise of the benefit that is mercy for remission of sinnes and justification 2. That the promise is most free which excludes our merits 3. The merits of Christ which are the price and propitiation and a little after faith doth not justify because it is a worke worthy by it selfe that is in a proper sense but onely because it receives the mercy promised And againe How shall Christ be our mediator if in justification we do not use him for our mediator that is if we do not feele that for him we are reputed righteous The Divines of the Augustane confession condemned Osiander who held that the righteousnes of faith was the essentiall righteousnes of GOD and also them who taught that Christ is our righteousnes onely according to his humane nature And in the Epitome of the Articles controverted by some they with one consent affirmed that the righteousnesse of faith is remission of sinnes reconciliation and adoption to be Sons of God for the obedience of Christ onely which by faith alone of meere grace is imputed to all beleevers Artic 3. de fidei justitia And this obedience of Christ which is imputed for righteousnes they affirme to be the obedience which hee performed both in his death and passion and also in his
fulfilling of the Law for our sakes Ibid. Artic 3. And concerning faith they teach that in justification before God it trusteth neither in contrition nor love nor any other vertues but in Christ alone it is the onely meane and instrument which receives the free grace of GOD the merit of Christ and remission of sinnes and resteth on Christs most perfect obedience by which hee fulfilled the Law for us which obedience is imputed to beleevers for righteousnes Ibid Artic. 3. Calvin is so zealous and so plaine and perspicuous in teaching and maintaining the doctrine of justification by the communion and imputation of Christs perfect obedience to the Law even his full satisfaction and righteousnes that among Christians who read Calvins institutions one would think the very Father of lyers the Divel himselfe should if not blush and be ashamed yet in policy and subtilty be afraid to call Calvin for a witnes on his side in this point least the most simple should see and discerne him for an open lyer and forger and abhorre and hisse him out with derision The Doctrine of Calvin concerning justification I will lay downe in certaine Articles gathered from his owne writings especially his Institutions Lib. 3. cap. 11. and 12. First hee affirmes in plaine wordes that justification consists in remission of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousnes cap 11. ss 2. As for the word remission of sinnes hee useth it two wayes somtimes in a large sense for that act of GOD by which he doth communicate and impute the full satisfaction of Christ unto his elect and faithfull so that the whole guilt of all sinnes both of commission and omission is thereby taken away and they are no more accounted nor appeare in his sight as sinners In this sense he calls remission of sinnes in his comment on Rom. totum justificationis and in his Instit. 3. cap. 11. sect 4 totam justificationem For indeed when the guilt of all sinnes of omission and commission are taken away by that part of Christs satisfaction imputed which is called his passive obedience or voluntary suffering of the penalties of the Law and the defects which come in by the sinnes of omission supplied by his active obedience in fulfilling the righteousnes which the Law requires which is the other part of Christs satisfaction imputed so that now the elect are reputed and esteemed as righteous men who have the defects which came by omission supplied and have no more the sinnes of commission or omission imputed the guilt being taken away this is perfect and whole justification and is very fitly called by the name of remission to distinguish it from justification by our own workes and by our owne inherent righteousnes But sometimes hee useth this word remission in a more strict sense for that part of GODS act of communicating and imputing Christs satisfaction which respects the passive obedience of Christ which takes away the guilt of sinnes committed but doth not supply the omission of righteousnesse and in this sense he makes remission of sinnes but a part of justification And GODS imputing of the active part of Christs satisfaction and counting the faithfull righteous by it imputed hee makes the other part of iustification in the wordes before cited Lib. 3. cap. 11. ss 2. Secondly he constantly teacheth and affirmeth that there is no righteousnesse by which a man can stand before GODS tribunall and bee accepted for righteous in his sight but onely the full satisfaction of Iesus Christ and his perfect righteousnesse which he GOD and man performed in our nature For that which is not intire and absolute and without all staine and spot of sinne such as never hath beene nor shall bee found in any meere man can never be accepted of GOD but is with him sleighted and vilified beyond all measure And whosoever prate of any righteousnes in mens owne workes or doings they have no true thought nor least sense of the justice of GOD but make a mock of it Instit. lib. 3. cap. 12. ss 1.3 and 11.16 Thirdly he affirmeth that man is justified by faith when hee is excluded from the righteousnesse of workes and by faith layeth hold on the righteousnesse of Christ with which hee being cloathed doth appeare in the sight of GOD not as a sinner but as a righteous man Instit. 3. cap. 11. ss 1. And the same chap. ss 11. This is that admirable way of justifying that being covered with Christs righteousnesse men doe not feare the iudgement of which they are worthy and while they deservedly condemne themselves they are reputed righteous without themselves Fourthly concerning the office of faith in iustification he teacheth that faith being in it selfe weake imperfect and of no dignity worth price or value is never able to iustifie us by it selfe but by bringing Christ unto us who is given to us of GOD for righteousnesse it is not our righteousnesse but it makes us come with the mouth of the soule wide opened that we may bee capable of Christ. And it is as a vessell or pot for as the pot full of money enricheth a man so faith filled with Christ and his righteousnes is said to iustifie us and to bee counted for righteousnesse It is a foolish thing to mingle our faith which is onely the instrument of receiving righteousnesse with Christ who is the materiall cause and both the Author and minister of this great benefit cap 11. ss 7. And againe ss 17. Faith is hereupon said to iustifie because it receiveth and embraceth righteousnesse offered in the Gospell Fiftly hee affirmeth that the righteousnesse by which beleevers are iustified and stand righteous before GOD is not in themselves but in Christ even his perfect obedience and righteousnesse communicated to them by imputation ss 23. Lastly hee sheweth how this righteousnesse comes to bee the righteousnesse of beleevers and to bee so communicated to them that GOD doth justly impute it to them for justification and accepteth it as if it were their owne to wit by meanes of their spirituall union and conjunction with Christ by which they are made partakers of Christ and with him and in him possesse al his riches Sect. 10.20.23 This is the summe of Calvins Doctrine concerning iustification briefly comprised and collected out of his wordes in the places before cited where the Reader may bee fully satisfied Beza in the doctrine of iustification by faith doth fully agree with Luther and Calvin in all the former articles First he saith that faith is not any such virtue as doth iustifie us in our selves before GOD for that is to set faith in the place of Christ who alone is our whole and perfect righteousnesse But faith iustifieth as it is the instrument which receiveth Christ and with him his righteousnesse that is most full perfection and we say that wee are iustified by faith onely because it embraceth Christ who doth iustifie us with whom it doth unite and couple us that wee may bee
City to whom as yet I was unknown that I was a green headed novice carryed away with anger and passion rather then zeal yet divers of you my learned Brethren did judge otherwise of me and my labours and God blessed them and made them and your assistance of me therein powerfull and effectuall to the quelling of those errors and to the suppressing of them at that time by putting the Author of them to silence And now for 20. yeares and more they have been buryed in oblivion untill this new Adversary hath raked them up as coales out of ashes and out of a surreptitious Booke which the First Adversary had composed Printed beyond the Seas and procured to be brought in by stealth and sold underhand did bring them into the pulpit and from thence with a tumultuous noyse proclaymed them most confidently Now because I have sufficiently acted my part heretofore in opposing these errors and also divers of you have entered into the lists and with zeale and courage have begun to fight against the reviver of them I should have refrayned my selfe from further medling but because this common adversary hath singled me out and provoked me by a proud challenge to answere his writings I have once more undertaken to answer his challenge which Answer being sent to him privately might there have restâ—d if his most reproachfull and rayling reply full of lyes absurdities contradictions blasphemies and intollerable scoffes and reproaches had not forced me to send it abroad into the world to justifie it selfe from the rayling and slanderous clamours which he and his disciples and factious followers have raised against it I here commend it to your grave censure in hope that the goodnesse of the cause which herein I maintaine will cover mine infirmities and will stirre you up to perfect and finish what I have begun The Truth for which you shall fight is strong and will prevaile all power might glory and victory is Gods for whose cause you stand and our Lord Jesus Christ on whose perfect rigteousnesse you strive to keep the Crown hath all power given him in heaven and in earth To this God eternall and omnipotent and to his eternall Sonne our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to the most holy and blessed Spirit three persons in one God I commend you and your holy and faithfull labours in my dayly Prayers humbly supplicating to his Majesty for this Grace that I may continue till death Your fellow Soldier and labourer in his Vineyard GEORGE WALKER THE ANSWERERS PREFACE To the first Chapter THE question which is propounded and the state and drift thereof laid down in this first Chapter is in the Authors own words this whether the faith of him that truely beleeves or the righteousnesse of CHRIST be imputed for righteousnesse in the act of justification In this question the imputing of Faith is opposed to the imputing of Christs righteousnesse for righteousnesse to justification which no Orthodox Christian durst attenâ—â— to doe at any time for the godly learned in the Scriptures and acquainted with the writings of Orthodox divines both ancient and Moderne from the time of the Apostles to this day doe alwayes joyne Faith with Christs righteousnesse in the act of justification and do never account them such opposites as doe the one exclude the other and cannot both stand together and be reputed for righteousnesse to beleevers in justification Though the Apostle doth oppose justification by faith to justification by works of the Law performed by every man in his owne person as two opposites which cannot stand together in GODS justification of sinners And this all true Christians receive imbrace and hold for a solid truth and a fundamentall article of Christian Religion Yet they abhorre and detest the opposing of Faith and Christs righteousnes in GODS imputing of righteousnes to beleevers and doe with an unanimous consent teach that in this justifying act of GOD Christs righteousnesse of which all true beleevers have communion is that which GOD in a proper sense is said to accept and repute for righteousnesse and Faith as it receives and applies Christs righteousnesse is said to be imputed but in an improper speech the name of the act being used to signifie the object which we see frequently in Scripture as for example Gal. 3.2.25 where the name Faith is used to signifie the thing beleeved that is the doctrine of the Gospell and Coloss. 1.5 where the name Hope is used to signifie the thing hoped for that is the inheritance and reward laid up for us in Heaven of which kind many more instances may be produced But as for them who have called into controversie the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and having propounded this question whether Faith or the righteousnes of Christ is imputed in the act of justification have set up Faith and thrust out Christs righteousnesse they have ever beene branded by all true Churches of Christ for pestilent Heretikes and enemies of GODS saving truth The first mover of this question was one Petrus Abilardus a pestilent and blasphemous Heretick who being full of the spirit of pride and error did in disputing and writing deny the communion of Christs perfect satisfaction obedience and righteousnesse and the imputation of them for righteousnesse in the justification of true beleevers This filthie wretch was gelded for corrupting and defiling of a Maid and for his blasphemous heresies Saint Bernard and the Bishops of France caused him to be excommunicated and condemned for an Heretike and his blasphemous books to be burned publikely The next instrument of the Devill after him mentioned in former Histories was Servetus that blasphemous Heretike who for heresies and blasphemies which hee dispersed as a vagabond in several Countries in divers books was by Master Calvin discovered apprehended at Geneva condemned and burned and dyed blaspheming Christ most horribly as Beza testifieth in vita Calvini The third notorious Heretike who in writing and bookes published did maintaine this wicked errour and by his Disciples dispersed it in Transilvania Polonia and other adjoyning Countries was Faustus Socinus whose blasphemous faction and sect still continueth and infesteth those Countries at this day The fourth Grand Master and propagatour of this heresie who brought it into Holland nearer unto us was Arminius He did first secretly teach and instill it into the eares and hearts of many disciples and afterwards did openly professe it as we read in his Epistle ad Hyppolytum de collibus wherein he confesseth that he held Faith to be imputed for righteousnesse to justification not in a Metonymicall but in a proper sense And although this and other errours held by him are condemned in the late Synod of Dort yet his disciples the Remonstrants doe obstinately persist in this errour though some of that sect would seeme to decline and disclaime it The fift perverse publisher of this heresie who first openly professed it in England and in manuscript Pamphlets and Printed Bookes